Dear colleagues,
This topic has really created a huge interest factor for me which in turn, after extensive net-research found fruitful when I found this excellent write-up. I hope this might be of wonderful reading to you all. West has given us so many good theorists, researchers and practitioners in almost every field of human existence that we invariably tend to look in that direction for answers every time something new turns up. How many of us know, for example, that the advanced science of military rocketry as we know it today finds its origins in "Taghrak", the small rockets/missiles used by Mysore's Tiger, Tipu Sultan's armies in defiance of the mighty British and in defense of their motherland. The intelligent, observant and scheming British, after the debacle of Srirangapattinam, took all the "Taghraks" away to the British mainland for study and we lost some 150 years on rocketry, before ISRO was established in free and modern India.
However this article is about management and not military achievements. Yes it is. But this incident was narrated just to show how ignorant we are of our own history that has always been ahead of others' future. Let us talk, of one more example, before we enter the realm of management and show that quite a few, if not most of the present day management fundamentals were mentioned and practiced in India at least more than 2,500 to 3,000 years ago.
1000 years before the renaissance thinkers of Europe gave the theory that earth is round and goes around the sun, our scientific thinkers had already proved it.
Coming to our research topic - modern management and ancient India, the teachings of "Kautilya's Arthashastra", let us first briefly introduce "Kautilya". "Kautilya" was none else but "Vishnugupt Chanakya" of the "Nanda" and "Mauryan" period. He was the teacher to the first Maurya emperor - "Chandragupt", and also served as Chief Minister for him till he was established in the "Magadh" polity. Magadh was the largest, richest, and most powerful kingdom in India in those times (300 BC). He was the best-known professor in the whole of ancient India (teaching at the "Takshshila Gurukul") for politics and "Arthashastra" (Economics). Disturbed by the Greeks' invasion (Alexander), he led Indians to a bloody victory to throw over the foreign yoke when all others were either vanquished or annihilated. Later he was instrumental in cutting short the reign of the powerful "Nanda" emperors in "Magadh" and the designer of the idea of a great union of all the princely states into a unified INDIA. And we all know that a later Mauryan emperor - Ashok ruled over such a great region in India that no emperor ever did, a region in size almost as big as the present day India.
The question here is how are these political and military conquests related to management. Well, we know that all modern concepts have been borrowed in one form or the other by the practices of modern armies. The trend started in US to be followed everywhere else. Whatever is mentioned in "Kautilya's "Arthashstra", is based on human behavior. The way things have been mentioned in the book, no student of modern behavioral sciences can doubt, that it has been done with a deep and an extensive knowledge of human behavior. For example, the book gives in detail what motivates, drives, and identifies people who are enraged, frightened, greedy, and proud - possible trouble creators in any organization, whether of commercial or political nature.
So our endeavor is to present here through this articles, not just what is prevalent these days and existed in those times, but also what is mentioned in that epic wrote by perhaps, the greatest politician who ever walked this earth, that can teach us a few good new things.
Here we discuss the topic of Head Hunting or Body Shopping. This will be of great help not only to those who are in the profession of body shopping, or those managers who desperately need a replacement, it will also help any organization to firewall itself from this very concept of head hunting. In a nutshell it helps both - the hunter and the hunted. On one hand we can use the situations under the influence of which a person exhibits behaviors as described by "Kautilya" to head hunt and on the other we can see to it that we have sound policies in place to make sure that we are unaffected by this. This can further assist us in separating certain people from the organization.
THE TOPIC OF HEAD HUNTING
- Winning over the seducible and non-seducible parties in enemy's territory.
The Context
"Kautilya" has described certain behaviors of people who can be won over in case of need. There are four behaviors that he feels which make a man seducible. They are - anger, fright, greed, and pride. The moot point here is why these four. Many of "Kautilya's" teachings and policies are influenced by the teachings of "Vedas", which tell us that a human being is made up of mind, body and intellect (brain). Out of these the body acts either at the command of the mind or at the instance of intellect. Intellect is defined as the capacity to control mind and comes from study and reflection. Mind is a collection of our feelings, emotions, thoughts etc. While intellect rationalizes, mind tells the emotion.
Further, mind exhibits three characteristics - it is insatiable, it wanders (perhaps even faster than the speed of light), and it gets attached. All these things make one dependent on the world. A person feels stress when his mind rules over his intellect. This is the state of unfulfilled desires. Whereas when intellect rules over the mind the desires become aims and ambitions. Coming back to our discussion, unfulfilled desires could lead one to the following states: Anger - mind experiences this as an obstruction to what one desires. Greed - When the craving or the desire becomes very strong. This further leads to arrogance, which with passage of time becomes envy. Envy leads to fear. Fear - of loosing what one has. The fourth state that "Vedas" talk about is "Moha" - delusion. But "Kautilya" lays stress on pride as the fourth seducible element in a man that relates to arrogance.
Now the problem that we face is how do we identify these people? Well, "Kautilya" has an answer for this.
The group of enraged:
Anger is exhibited when one's desires are obstructed.
- One who is cheated/denied after being promised certain rewards (increment in pay, status etc).
- The one of two or more persons, who is equally competent but is humiliated because the other is assigned a job requiring those competencies that the other one also possesses.
- One who is in disfavor because of a favorite of his superior.
- One who is unable to deliver results on account of being challenged to a particular assignment. This will particularly happen in the organizations, which have a focus just on the results and not on the efforts that a person puts.
- One who is distressed after being transferred to a far-flung area, or an area of his dislike. Here one possibility is that a person is willing to take on the transfer but is not remunerated properly, and another possibility is that the person is not willing to take on such a transfer but is forced to do so.
- One who is on an assignment not by his choice and not of his choice. That is, being put on an assignment without even being motivated for it. It could be something, which is away from the promised career path of an employee - something that definitely adds value to the organization but not to the employee as such (as perceived by the employee) - quite true in case of knowledge workers.
- One who has not achieved his objective in the organization even after trying hard and giving his best. This could be because of a fault in the culture of that organization. For example at times we see that even after being trained for a purpose the employee is not able to add enough to his function - the answer could lie with the fact that the employee hasn't learnt much, his fault. But what concerns us here is that even though willingness is there to perform but the culture hinders that performance.
- One who is hindered from doing his duty. Maybe because of paucity of time, or because responsibility given is not complemented with required authority.
- One whose remuneration (financial and non-financial) is incommensurate with the efforts he puts in.
- One deserving but deprived of an office he aspires. This could especially happen if there is delayed or no promotion (job enrichment), and/or delayed or no inter-functional or to that extent even intra-functional movement (job enlargement).
- One held back by his peers or superiors in an organization for their own interests. Remember Hawthorne's bank wiring experiment.
- One who is reprimanded and/or punished, (whether such reprimand/ punishment is justified or not) after serving the organization loyally.
- One prevented from indulging in conduct, not in conformance to the organization's Code of Conduct.
One, the credit of whose work is stolen by others. The group of frightened:
Fear of loosing something.
- One who has thwarted someone. That is, one who has pushed himself up by pulling other(s) down.
- One who has committed a serious wrong - a deliberate act detrimental to the organization.
- One who has become known for a wrongful act. This act might be done in a personal capacity and not a professional one.
- One frightened by the punishment meted out to another for a like offence.
- One who has seized someone else's work/credit.
- One who is subdued by authority.
- One who has suddenly amassed a lot of wealth at the expense of the organization?
- One disliked by his superiors.
- One who entertains hostility towards superiors or the organization itself.
The group of greedy:
State of overwhelming desires.
- One who is impoverished (for money/respect/opportunities). Such people want to grow really fast in their organizations.
- One in a calamity. Calamity generated out of one's own recurring actions.
- One indulging in vices. Again, this could be both personal and professional.
- One indulging in rash transactions. Rashness of transactions apparently involves a financial loss or expectation of a great gain. Such a fellow will accept challenges rashly - without even thinking whether they are achievable or not, greedy of being noticed.
A person who believes in personal gain by withholding information.
The group of proud:
Relates to arrogance that follows greed.
- One who is filled with self-conceit (self-importance, pride, vanity, snobbery, arrogance).
- One desirous of honor.
- One resentful of the honor done to a colleague (who is perceived a competitor or rival).
- One placed in a low position, but is convinced that he is capable of being at a higher position in the hierarchy.
- One fiery in temper.
- One given to violence (physical, verbal or non verbal in nature).
-One dissatisfied with his emoluments i.e. one who thinks that he is getting much less than what he deserves.
Now that we have identified such people who can be targeted for the purpose of head hunting, following is the manner prescribed by "Kautilya" to approach them.
To lure the enraged
Reinforce perceptions that such people hold about their organization by telling them, how their organization & managers lack the eye of knowledge, commonsense and also the experience to see what one is worth. Also explain to them the 'detrimental effects' that such a behavior of their organization & managers can have on the organization. Invite them then to join another organization to realize their potential.
To lure the frightened
These people already have a sense of insecurity. Reinforce this sentiment by warning them of a possible 'harm' that they stand from their organization due to its own (incorrect) apprehension of being harmed from them. Show them a safer haven where they can grow.
To lure the greedy
Reinforce their desire by amplifying the fact that their organization rewards those who are devoid of spirit, intelligence, and eloquence, but not those endowed with qualities of the self, reinforce the 'fact' that our organization has a culture of acknowledging & rewarding persons of distinction, join us.
To lure the proud
These people need to get their ego massaged. Approach them by impressing upon them that their organization is fit for and is of benefit to only people with lower qualities and people of little or no intelligence or conviction or abilities; not for people of their standing. Invite them to join an organization that 'knows' how to honor persons of distinction, come to us. Professionals with years of experience can build on the knowledge provided and use it to their good. It however goes without saying that a lot of networking is required to identify such people who display the behaviors described above.
Awaiting for your views & comments on this unfolded wonderful topic...
Source: Dr. R.P. Kangle's Kautilya Arthashastra Cheers Kamal |
