Salaries and Performance Appraisal

Tags

Demotivator, HR, Hygiene, Motivator, Performance Appraisal, Salary

Talk to people in most companies and one common villain that most people have is HR. Probe deeper and the villain would turn out to be an unfair or unjust performance appraisal. If we go down another level, it would be unhappiness with history of increments.

The objective of performance appraisal system is to provide a feedback to an employee on his or her performance. The appraisal process is a feedback on factors affecting performance. The inputs from performance appraisal system along with guidance and mentoring are supposed to help a person shape his or her career.

Linking performance to appraisal leads to distortion of the process. The employees are keen to get a better rating, than hear the feedback. The discussion shifts from feedback to debate on rating between the employee and supervisor and what is written on the paper. The supervisor and supervisee in most cases are also not able to bring in instances, attitudes or behaviours that do not conform to format of appraisal but do affect the final rating. A poor rating is not seen as reflection of performance but an outcome of inter-personal relationship between supervisor and supervisee. The companies tried to address it by bringing in super boss into the equation but did not help anyone as the underlying assumption was not addressed.

Despite all the efforts of HR to make the system work and to make the process more fairer and agreeable to all, the supervisee who gets a bad rating mostly leaves the table with a feeling that I got a poor appraisal as my boss played favourites. Companies have tried experiments and methods like 360 feedback but they all backfire. This is because of lack of trust. A closed 360 degree means that people feel the feedback was taken from people who have connived with the supervisor.

Linking performance appraisal to increments may defeat exercises like bell curve as people may not like to take smart people in their team for that will squeeze them to centre of the bell curve. This affects competence of the team and would breed mediocrity.

The only way the damage can be undone is by delinking performance appraisal from salary. The performance appraisal is a continuous exercise and should be retained that way with both formal and informal components.

This would surely shock most of my colleagues from business school who believe good performances should be rewarded and bad performances should be punished. The underlying assumption still being that money or salary is a motivator or it can be both carrot and stick. This world view still comes from industrial revolution where the assumption was people are lazy or do not want to work unless they are provided incentives or penalised for not working.

Bell curve ensures that people just do not have to give their best but just be ahead of rest of the team mates. This breeds a feeling of competitiveness where colleagues do not like to pass on knowledge or play in team. This also leads to situations where people can only show a better performance by downplaying someone else’s performance leading to sub-groups and office politics. This does nothing to raise standards in office.

In this age of knowledge workers, organisations that do well are organisations that are able to tap intrinsic motivation in their employees. Companies need to figure out what kind of employees it wants. People who need money to excel or people who want to excel. The latter would pull up their peers and raise the standard of company and in the process make money. Money is an outcome and not an input resource.

This is why, we at Srijan delinked our salaries and performance appraisal.

What is more important, gender empowerment or empowerment of women?

Tags

development, Gender, Political Power, Women

I was introduced to the word Gender and Gender Empowerment in CARE. CARE worked with another international NGO (ICRW) to ensure that all its staff, read it as male staff, are sensitised to gender. The workshop was about empowerment of women. After some years, I joined a British Charity for a short assignment. So in my orientation meeting, I was told that the charity believes that gender empowerment was one of the main pillar to achieve development. Within Gender Empowerment, it believed that including women in political process was key to gender empowerment. Inclusion in political process not only meant that women participate in elections as voters but also women becoming political leaders and assuming key positions in the political setup. The assumption was that women in power, will influence policies and processes and make them more women friendly or add women’s perspective to legislations.

The evidence on the ground was contrary to assumptions of the team. Indian Sub-continent was one of the first to include women in political process and had women leaders in position of power. Sri Lanka was the first country to have a woman President. India had women Governor, Chief Ministers and in Indira Gandhi had one of the longest serving Prime Ministers. There are only two players in musical chair for the post of President in Bangladesh, that is Begum Khalida Zia and Begum Hasian Wajed since 1991. Pakistan also has had a woman Prime Minister in Benazir Bhutto. All the ladies were head of political parties and won elections to achieve their positions. That is they had popular support. So it is still surprising that status of women is lowest in these countries. India even know has a law that bans testing of sex of foetus and has very poor sex ratio. Honor killing of women is still a norm in most of these countries. In Kabul, one of my colleague told me story of one of his cousin who was married off to a distant relative in Pakistan even though the boy was illegal immigrant in England and there was no chance of two living together as husband and wife for the simple reason, boy’s family used to supply old cars for sale in Kabul and the girl’s family wanted to ensure that they sell all their cars to (girl’s family) them only. The practice using marriage to seal strategic relationships is not confined to Afghanistan only but is prevalent in whole of sub-continent.

The only explanation, I could think of the contradiction (in theory and practical) was that women who rose to power in Indian sub-continent did not promote or champion women rights for they did not see it as constituency. They did not fight for women issues or tried to tilt balance of power in favour of women as it would not have won them elections. These women in power had become Sanskritised or had acquired masculine traits such as courage, toughness etc. These women were tough with their opponent and would not pity or go easy on their opponents like men. Worst is that some of these women were or even more corrupt than men. Some of the current or ex women chief ministers are notoriously corrupt and have cases of disproportionate assets just like their male colleagues.

If we really want to ensure that our policies and laws become more women friendly, we need more than women in powerful positions. We need parliamentarians, legislators, and bureaucrats who are sensitive to and push gender and women related issues. Most importantly we need to make “women issues” a constituency. We need discussions in society on rights of women. And this includes mothers who , That includes raising them in discussions in society, discuss rights of women and giving confidence to women. More importantly it means that the mother realises that it her daughter is important as her son and she has right to get educated, choose a husband and live her own life. Males understand a woman has right to say NO, just like they have right to say no. Daughters have right to inheritance just as sons have.

But more importantly we have to bring back feminine characteristics that is patience, tolerance, empathy, love and care and forgiveness back into the society to make it a better place. We need to bring back honesty and good governance. We need leaders who are caring and not corrupt. Leaders who can forgo personal comfort for people. Leaders who will work selflessly for the people of this country and do what is good for the people, not what gives them more money or power. This is more important and difficult than women empowerment.

Sex, Gender and Sexuality

Sex, Gender and Sexuality

The other day, I was applying to an international development organisation for a job. The online application form had me stumped when it asked for my gender. Thinking back, I realise that’s the way it has become with most development agencies. Today gender empowerment is construed as empowerment of women. Say there is a gender training and everyone takes it as it would be about women empowerment.
I think its high time, we revisited basic definitions of sex, gender and sexuality.

SEX – was meant to define body type and the three sexes were Males, Females and Transgenders. The body characteristics of males and females were very clearly defined. The transgenders were different matter but physically people could differentiate the three sexes clearly.

GENDER – Gender were characteristics or qualities. Being masculine or feminine was distinct from being male or female. Femininity was characterised by gentleness, sensitivity and empathy. While masculinity was characterised by courage, independence and assertiveness. Females could also be independent and courageous just like there could be males who could be sensitive and could empathise.
Similarly tasks and jobs were also associated with feminine and masculine characteristics. For example, driving trucks was considered a masculine job and raising kids was considered feminine.

SEXUALITY – Sexuality is physical attraction and sexual preferences. A person could be homo sexual ( love somebody of same sex) , hetero sexual ( love someone from opposite sex) or pan-sexual ( someone who has sex with males, females and transgenders).

Conflict as indicator of Development

Tags

HDI, India

Conflict can be used as an indicator for development of a society or country. Conflict reflects fight for resources where the players perceive it as a zero sum game. Conflict could be both inter-specie and intra-species. Shrinking forests and loss of bio-diversity is reflection of inter-specie conflict, a conflict in which human beings are crowding out other species from the Earth. We are all familiar with intra-specie conflict between two individuals, within families, groups, religions, countries etc.  It assumes various forms such as crime, riots, acts of terror and wars between countries.

The primary driver to conflict is desire to control resources or access to resources and services. Take India for example, the rich can afford a quality of life which is similar to or better than their counterparts in west. Cost of human labour is cheaper and hence can afford drivers, maids etc. The quality of medical services, schools are same as western countries, albeit at a cheaper cost. They can afford 24*7 electricity supply and can eat authentic Italian, French or Japanese cuisines. Compare this with quality of life of poor. They have to rely on government infra-structure for transport, health facilities etc. The government facilities are inadequate both in numbers and quality of services provided. It’s a constant struggle to get resources. I remember my own visit to Safdurjung Hospital in Delhi when my father in law had met with an accident and was taken there. The doctors did not have tourniquet and I had to hold arm of the patient on the next bed while the doctor administered IV injection. The conflict is not about quantity of wealth but in differences in life styles or services and an aspiration to live that lifestyle.

At the society level, most of the crime is reflection of aspirations to live the lifestyle or frustrations of not being able to live the lifestyle or struggling to live. At the level of countries it leads to wars. For example, US would not hesitate to fight to in Kuwait to safeguard its interests in oil as the availability of oil affords it to maintain its lifestyle. And somewhere in between are naxalites in India, or protestors in Hongkong or Thailand who want more control in Governance, indirectly more control on allocation of resources. No wonder countries with poor governance see higher crime rates and/or conflict.

Level of conflict in a society can be a good indicator of development in the society. HDI does not include environment and only captures economic growth without capturing cost to environment. The other factors being health and education. Life Expectancy or Average age in a country is also a good reflection of conflict. People with poor access to health facilities, or countries with high level of conflict or man-made or natural disasters which result in shortening of life. For example, life expectancy increased from 44 years in 2001 to 63 years in Afghanistan.

Since it may be tedious to measure conflict, some of these surrogates may help to determine level of development of a country. These surrogates could be the factors that may lead to conflict over resources.For example, a society with very skewed distribution of resources would lead to growing frustration or stress and may result in crimes or a revolution as described by Karl Marx. So a surrogate could be wealth distribution within the society or income distribution within the society. There could be multiple indicators to capture these inequalities. For example, Gini’s Index, ratio of wealth owned by top 10% in the society and bottom most 10% in the society. Intra-specie conflict would be reflected in bio-diversity. Since forests are home to or part of eco-systems that sustains a wide variety of species, that can be taken as an indicator

1. Forest cover in a country – more forest cover would mean more land and more eco-systems for other species to survive
2. Corruption- Corruption and nepotism compromise merit and thus deny the rightful claim. Most often than not, people with resources are able to bend the system to enrich themselves or benefit themselves at the cost of worthyTransparency International already has an index for corruption in countries and ranks them on basis of level of corruption. More the corruption, higher is the cost of goods and services and higher is distortion in access to services. The rich will be able to afford better quality goods and services or would be able to jump queues.
3. Distribution of wealth or assets in the society. Percentage of wealth held by top 10% of the population. Distribution of income levels in the economy.

Interestingly some of the the countries which are ranked high in HDI also show low levels of conflict.

http://www.ask.com/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index?o=2802&qsrc=999&ad=doubleDown&an=apn&ap=ask.com

http://www.happyplanetindex.org/data/

And the key differentiators between countries with high HDI/ High Happiness and high HDI and low happiness are

1. Quality of governance

2. Higher taxes on the rich

3. Welfare state, where government ensures quality education and health to most citizens besides safety and security.

Add to it personal freedom and the list is complete.

Sets the agenda for Indian Government or Mr. Narendra Modi as well.

India Vision

Tags

development

My management course had a mandatory course on strategy where the first few lectures were only focused on vision and vision statement of the company. We were explained that vision or purpose guide the company. When I started appearing for interviews, one of the first question I was asked was what do you want to do or what is your vision? When I was working with CARE, we developed a vision for the organization. We spent the first day, writing our own visions. Then we came in groups of twos to merge visions of two individuals in one. The groups of twos became groups of fours and eights till we had two groups with two visions. Then these two groups merged their vision into one. Finally after going into semantics, the vision that emerged was Quote We seek a world of hope, tolerance and social justice, where poverty has been overcome and people live in dignity and security. CARE International will be a global force and a partner of choice within a worldwide movement dedicated to ending poverty.  We will be known everywhere for our unshakable commitment to the dignity of people. In India, CARE seeks a society which celebrates diversity, where rights are secured, citizenship realized, and human potential fulfilled for all Unquote The strategy course, I had talked of competitive advantages of individuals, companies and also of nations, but somehow when we came to vision, the country level vision was missing. I wondered why we did not need vision  for countries and I started actively looking for countries that have written a vision for themselves. Within India, I discovered Gandhiji had written a vision statement which was published in September, 1930 in Young India. His vision for the country was Quote I shall work for an India, in which poorest shall feel that it is their country n whose making they have an effective voice; an India in which there shall be no high class or low class of people; an India in which all communities shall live in perfect harmony, There shall be no room in such India for the curse of untouchability or the curse of intoxicating drinks anddrugs. Women shall enjoy same right as men. Since we shall be at peace with all the rest of the World, neither exploiting nor being exploited, we should have the smallest army imaginable. This is India of my dreams. Unquote Further research took me to website of Bhartiya Janta Party It was a pleasant surprise to see its pledge for in it was contained BJP’s vision for the country. At a national level, only Malaysia has tried to develop a vision in its Vision 2020 ( Wawasan 2020). Malaysia’s vision calls for the nation to achieve a self-sufficient industrialized nation by the year 2020, encompasses all aspects of life, from economic prosperity, social well-being, educational world class, political stability, as well as psychological balance. Peggy Liu was trying to create a “China Dream” which has now limited its mandate to economic progress with least damage to environment. Visions are typically rooted in culture, beliefs and value systems of a person. If we extend the same thing to nation. Its vision should also be rooted in its culture. For example, the culture of India is characterized by

1. Vasudhaiv kutumbakam
2. Balance between Dharam, Arth, Kaam and Moksha.

Vasudhaiv Kutambakam means the whole earth is a family. It is inclusive approach and also means that man is a product of nature and is part of nature. It has to live in harmony with it and with all the species in the world. The key family unit in India was also a joint family. The inheritance in the family is joint, unlike west, and the head of the family ( or the eldest son/ person) is “karta”. The work within and outside home is shared and family members cooperate with each other. The resources in the family are shared. To enrich their lives, human beings are advised to maintain a balance between following their duties, law, ethics and responsibilities ( Dharam), possession of wealth and materials (Arth), desires which could be biological, physical or materialistic ( Kaam) and, spirituality and self-actualization ( Moksha). The culture in the America and Europe is function of their evolution as societies. The values and ideas such as freedom and equality have been taken and contextualized based and the lifestyle have evolved. We in India have to build our vision of society and have to discover our own lifestyle based on our culture and value system. India has to define its own goals and has to develop its own indicators for its own development. The lifestyle and vision of India has to be based on Tolerance, Sharing of resources and cooperation, values that were preached and valued in Indian society. India also cannot afford level of automation like US. India has to build on the cheap labour (due to size of its population) and cannot afford loss of jobs unlike west. Our ambition for growth has to be tempered with our desire to protect environment. We have to build a society where people have access to quality services in education, health, shelter, food and nutrition. The assets may be owned privately or publicly but the assets are shared or accessible. For example, car sharing is becoming a popular concept in many countries. As per an estimate, there are 1.7 Mn sharers in 27 countries. Car sharing reduces need for car ownership with estimates suggesting that one rented car replacing 15 owned cars. Part of the reason for this change in heart was also economic downturn in some countries, making ownership of cars expensive. Instead of reaction, the government can be pre-emptive in facilitating these kinds of models in other spheres of life. For Government to achieve it will have to spend lot of effort in educating people. So for a change, the Government will have to take on tougher courses instead of taking path of least resistance. Should we be working on an India Dream? Who should drive it, Government or a private citizen?

Need for an India Vision

Tags

development professionals, India Vision

Need for an India Vision

It was during my MBA that I read the book Poverty by late Dr. Maqbul Ul Haq. The book moved me enough to look for a job inDevelopment. After my MBA, I started exploring the field and went and met with NGOs to understand their work. And with one of the NGOs, I went and stayed in a village for 4 days. That was my first overnight visit to a village. Till then it had always been day visits to my grandfather’s village. This was also the first time, I stayed on the other side of the village amongst “Chamars” or leather artisans as the NGO used to call them. During days, I would go with them from village to village mobilizing people to form a cooperative. The NGO used to work primarily in area of income generation.

As I chatted and spent time with villagers, I realized that immediate priorities or needs of most of them were to own a pucca house, a motorcycle and a tubewell for fields. A pucca house also meant significant investment in making that house livable such as round the clock electricity, fans and coolers. There was a village school and no medical facilities. While the group was willing to come together and form a cooperative for income generation, they were not keen to extend the cooperative for some of the other necessities like building common irrigation facilities for fields etc. Over the years, and after taking up job in one of the large international NGO which was also one of the largest NGOs in the country, I discovered that most development professionals only concentrate in one sector. There are very few cross sectoral projects. Also the projects that it had in different sectors were not layered on top of each other.

As I spoke with and interacted with many development professionals, I realized that most of them do not see beyond their sectors ( either as an individual or as organizations). The organizations do not have a collective vision of what a developed society will look like.  Interestingly, even at the global level, there is no collective vision or definition of what a developed society should or would look like. There are indicators which are spread across sectors.

In absence of this collective vision, for most villagers, progress in life was living life style of city people. For the development professionals and for people in cities, growth and progress in life meant living lifestyle of US and western world. While it was never a stated objective, it was always implied. There seems to be no common vision of Indian lifestyle or Indian way of life.

Since US lifestyle is looked up to by other parts of the world, especially, (so called) developing countries, this has affected choices in consumption in other countries. For example, the trend is getting increasingly replicated in urban India with the ratio of number of TVs in house/ number of bedrooms slowly creeping to 1. With the population  like that of India, it is a huge strain on environment. It also leads to huge demand for natural renewable and mainly nonrenewable resources. While researching for Montreal protocol, I had discovered that per capital consumption of CFC gases in US was 3 kg which was much higher than 0.003 kg in India and China. However a major concern of US and Western countries was that a ten time increase in the consumption factor in India and China would be catastrophic for Earth due to the population of these two countries.

Equating “development with American Lifestyle” is distorting the pecking order of investments in rural areas and amongst urban poor. Bulk of the investment goes in creating physical infrastructure or in consumer durables and non-durables instead of health, education, sanitation and other non-tangibles.

Thus, people in ‘developing rural India  have easy access to mobile phones, TV’s, cars , Maggie, Chips, Pepsi and other tangibles, but they do not have similar access to quality education, health services and potable water. There is also element of belittling traditional wisdom for sake of western ways which are considered modern way and hence better way of life.

Increase in the consumption with the so called development leads to increased demand for natural resources which has a cascading effect. There is increased demand for land for mining, for setting up manufacturing plants etc. This creates conflict with existing owners.

The present version of development is also leading to increased conflict in the society where the asset ownership is skewed. The rich continue to get richer and poor continue to lose out and get poorer. This has been very well explained by HouseHold model in Economics.

This has multiple implications:

1. Poor do not want to part with their assets such as land as they will lose their future income. Also they are not sure if they will get a share in increase of asset price in future as the rich would see increase in value of asset (due to their investment ) as return for their investment.

2. The disparity between the quality of life increases. The rich can afford to live a better quality of life on the assets and services of poor. Rich in India are able to create their own infrastructure and able to access same or better level of healthcare services, education etc. as in America. While the poor are dependent on state infrastructure which is inadequate in both quality and quantity.

Thus, accessing basic facilities becomes a struggle leading to anger and frustration. Also there is aspiration to live a lifestyle of consumption, leading to increased crime. Either way, it leads to increase in violence or class struggle in the society which could range from pickpocketing to Naxal movement.

The need of the hour

The need of the hour is, India Vision. Mahatma Gandhi wanted Ram Rajya in post independent India. The key characteristics of which were lack of conflict and crime, prosperity for everyone, that is, everyone either owns or has access to goods and services. Unlike US, we have to base our system on cooperation and sharing instead of owning. These are values that are taught and cultivated in East. Unlike US and West, we have to develop our own lifestyle and develop our own definition of a developed society.