Why Do Global Firms Prefer INDIAN CEOs ? Pakistani Reactions

[ziaulislam]

1.4 billion Indians

Hundreds of millions of dirt poor hungry slum dweller's

Celebrating a handful of Indian origin people who escaped india

Hard work

Chinese and indians work very hard
Chinese usually due to language barrier less often come to USA but indians do

Bengalis are just starting to come so you will see them in future ..pakistani nada..we cant work 9-9 for 6 days a week
Unless you are doctor but even then you will see paksitanis less in leadership role that requires alot of ambition and sacrifice

This is my view seeing things in USA directly

 

[MultaniGuy]

The idiot is you. Mughal Empire is part of Indian history, not Uzbek history. Same for Delhi Sultanate. Likewise, Indian origin CEO and workers of American corporations do not make them Indian companies.

The idiot is you.

Mughal Empire is part of "Islamic civilization" not "Indian civilization."

India is not a civilization you moron.
Nehru was being dishonest by calling his country "India."

India is a political term cooked up in 1947 for "Bharat."

Mughal Empire was an empire in South Asia.

Hard work

Chinese and indians work very hard
Chinese usually due to language barrier less often come to USA but indians do

Bengalis are just starting to come so you will see them in future ..pakistani nada..we cant work 9-9 for 6 days a week
Unless you are doctor but even then you will see paksitanis less in leadership role that requires alot of ambition and sacrifice

This is my view seeing things in USA directly

But Chinese invest in their own country more than Indians do.
But then why compare slumdog India to China?

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

I agree with you
Due to assimilation they became Hindustani Muslim empires- only babar was Uzbek or maybe his second child

Thier are records of Akbar cursing in Punjabi for crying out loud, his capital was in Lahore cammunicate with his public in Punjabi and Urdu/Hindi
he didn't spoke Persian in day to day life, his wife was Rajput and the whole Mughal bloodline was basically made up of political marriages in India
They didn't look Uzbek just light skinned south Asians
We don't call light skinned people foreign do we?

Only thing foreign about them was using Centeral Asian Persian as court language
But modern India, Pak, Bangal, Sri Lanka still use English as state languages

But that doesnt make them English?

So yes they had centeral Asian origins but so do many many countries/empires throughout history

For example Anglo-Saxons are part of English history eventhough they had foreign origins
Because they settled in England not Thier native lands

Uzbeks don't claim Mughal Empire. They have little to no curiosity in it. Babar was brought by Sher Shah Suri, a Hindustani Bihari Pathan born in Bihar of Afghan ancestry. In those days Afghanistan did not even exist as an independent identity or country. In contrast, Britain can claim British Indian empire as part of British imperial history and they do.

 

[newb3e]

Do you mean Indian born CEOs who left India to pursue better future because Infia had nothing to offer them ?

but most of them got their education in India and then rose to the highest position based on their talent and education they got back home!

does Pakistan has 1 institution that can nurture such talent? No sir!

 

[GumNaam]

as an industry insider, I can tell you that there is one and ONLY one reason: indians are obedient, the board of investors want to make money while the nonindian CEOs want to take on new challenges and innovate thus naturally taking risks. board members don't like that, they want minimal risks with maximum profits. that results in an almost constant tug of war between the CEO and the board members and more often than not, the CEO wins out which the board members don't like. indian ceos on the other hand, are practically glorified project managers who will obey the dictates of the board of investors like a well trained slave. they never push back nor take risks, they never innovate nor question anyone on the board of investors. if the board says jump, indian ceo asks "how high my lord" while any other ceo will ask "what the hell for"? it is literally as simple as that.

 

[tower9]

The best Americans went to the United States Army.
The best Chinese have entered the Chinese government.
The best Indians have gone to work for foreign companies.

The Best Americans went into private industry and Wall Street, they are the tech and finance titans.

 

[Paitoo]

This constant harping about Indian CEOs is actually a disservice to the massive IT talent in India, who continue to work in India. It focusses lopsided attention on a few international achievers whereas the fact is that India has many many tech companies inside India with extremely competent leaders. They may not be household names, but in their holistic talents are up there. We in India are hustlers and can do multiple things with ease. In contrast I have found goras reluctant to move out of their defined areas. The west no doubt has its merits, but every time we lionise these CEOs we are second-grading our own people back home.

 

[tower9]

as an industry insider, I can tell you that there is one and ONLY one reason: indians are obedient, the board of investors want to make money while the nonindian CEOs want to take on new challenges and innovate thus naturally taking risks. board members don't like that, they want minimal risks with maximum profits. that results in an almost constant tug of war between the CEO and the board members and more often than not, the CEO wins out which the board members don't like. indian ceos on the other hand, are practically glorified project managers who will obey the dictates of the board of investors like a well trained slave. they never push back nor take risks, they never innovate nor question anyone on the board of investors. if the board says jump, indian ceo asks "how high my lord" while any other ceo will ask "what the hell for"? it is literally as simple as that.

Well, I don't think it is as simple as them being obedient. Indians are just hard wired to understand social ladders, social castes and how to network and ingratiate yourselves into power. In this way, they are natural allies of the Jews, who rule corporate America. This is why the Jews and Anglo elites have largely entrusted the management of Silicon Valley to the Indian Americans. The Indian Americans have become the preferred managerial elites in the US, even if they aren't the ultimate power brokers in the end.

This constant harping about Indian CEOs is actually a disservice to the massive IT talent in India, who continue to work in India. It focusses lopsided attention on a few international achievers whereas the fact is that India has many many tech companies inside India with extremely competent leaders. They may not be household names, but in their holistic talents are up there. We in India are hustlers and can do multiple things with ease. In contrast I have found goras reluctant to move out of their defined areas. The west no doubt has its merits, but every time we lionise these CEOs we are second-grading our own people back home.

I agree. I think India will start to produce a number of major tech titans in the next ten years. It is inevitable. There will be massive Indian equivalents of Amazon, Doordash, Uber, Facebook, Tencent, Alibaba, etc.

 

[Bilal9]

I have never seen a people so proud of one of the largest brain drains in history.

If overseas Sanghis see one Indian Brahmin making it to C level suite in a US corporation then all of them start gleefully cawing like Kauas in unison, even if they are themselves meagre IT coolies barely making ends meet. Slavish mentality. I mean who cares?

Some brownie made it to the top because some high level Goras in the board thought these are compliant people and threw one of them a bone, so that the rest of the hired coolies in the company have high morale. These dehati idiots are just something else...

I see no Microsoft no facebook no google coming out of India, neither owned by India.

No Intel or AMD either. Some of the Indian back-office companies have been around since the mid seventies...and all they offer is third rate IT coolie labor who can't write even one line of code without a mistake. Takes five of them hovering around a cubicle to produce anything meaningful. This is today's Indian "talent".

Contrary to popular belief, Indian genius are not a dime a dozen in India. Most of the Backoffice-Coolies just went to a four month "IT course" at the corner bazaar "IT classroom" to learn QA basics. These are then sent to work with US IT managers - claimed as "talent".

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Infiltration of US executives in US companies has been going on for good 15-20 years but it is a multi decade transition
It's not like you had a Indian executive he made a company from scratch

The shareholder group , who make choices based on political interest to choose who will be "in Director group" or CEO role, the 4-5% rich people group or inner circle decides who get to run top corporations in USA that is why they buy the stocks of such companies

• Arabs are heavily scrutinized if they attempt to buy such decision making shares as Israelis often expose their attempt to buy stocks , and make big fuss on local Media that arabs are out to steal American freedom

• Similarly Chinese have been stopped to be in such exclusive group even after they kept American economy afloat by buying their debt

At one point there were Indian companies looking for local interest but why Indian executives have made it to US corporation leadership as more to do with political interest

Most of times these people come in to replace local American Leaders who may not be on board with idea to move Jobs overseas


It's a easy way to do it . share holder voting happens and they change the head of company (CEO etc) who is more open to offshoring stuff or Jobs

 

[GamoAccu]

Because the Global Firms know the Indian CEOs will work like a slave for their master FOUNDERS AND OWNERS of the company.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The companies India are all India centric so they have a very strong base as they have worked with other none USA countries, if Indian foreign policy changes they can kick USA out of picture

The executives in USA of Indian origin in USA is a new thing in last 20 years out of need to find cheap labor
Most of cake was already backed by Local Executive they just brought brownie CEO to bring in cheap offshore model
who introduced hiring model hire 2 jobs in USA and hire 100-150 jobs in India argument used was of course cheap labor.

Because there was a obvious backlash in elections against this model of hiring , they now focus on diversity and inclusion which is just another phase to force local workers to accept their offshore work buddies (Donald Trump came in tried to reverse at least this offshore hiring to some degree)

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Like pakistani british tinda khan gets UK ministry has got to do anything with how fast and deligently naans are being put in a gwalmandi tandoor.

 

[GamoAccu]

I think the low iq Indians are confused with CEO with Founder and Owner.

CEO= worker, employee of company
Founder and Owner= own the company

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Corrections "Shareholders" own public corporations only a Private Company is owned by Founders , the founders can own substantial share of a corporation

IPO time a company goes from privately own hands to hands of shareholders at such time normally Founding members of company may retain 51% of shares and sell the remaining shares to outside share holders

Sometimes the original founders , get Bought out or they sell their shares to others and leave with 200 million dollar money in bag deal

For companies which range in 1-5 Billion dollar valuation