Infidelity, Orphaned Organisations & Managing Inadequacies

Fidelity : The Elementum ultimum?

Man or woman, whosoever first associated, infidelity with vice and fidelity with virtue, either was ignorant of basic human nature or a management expert. In reality, fidelity totters precariously between truth and lies while infidelity rages rampant. While professional counsellors wield fidelity as elementum ultimum for ‘marital success’, head hunters make a living, enticing the ambitious to look beyond existing relations. Ironically, both for marriages and career, parameters of success remain vague.

Choice?

Humans, polygamous by nature, are compelled to deploy monogamy to improve chances of all males finding mates. This benevolent practice, conceptualised by smart social engineers prevents violence inherent to sexual rivalry. Fidelity, the primary characteristic of monogamy is socially acceptable and infidelity, a taboo. Despite its adverse consequences, men and women of all cultures engage in emotional or physical infidelity. Amidst talks of fidelity and associated morality, infidelity silently rages rampant. Increasing incidences of ‘live-in’ relations, separations and divorces indicate that even conservative societies are coming to terms with peoples’ choice of being ‘happily together’ over length of laboured marital existence. Fidelity gets a better chance, albeit for shorter duration.

Grabbing Opportunities

Two decades ago, one joined an organisation, grew with it, grew in it and retired from it. Individual aspirations remained confined to opportunities afforded by the organisation. Leaving the organisation for another was akin to blasphemy. Those were yester years of pre-liberalised economy, when opportunities were scarce, steady job dreams come true and homes ran on single-income. Then the economy boomed, opportunities exploded, and incomes skyrocketed as even the remotely eligible found jobs. Headhunting became a rewarding profession. It thrived, enticing professionals to jump ship. Organisational infidelity is now the surest growth-hormone, for an individual’s career growth.

Rationale

The fidelity-infidelity divide can be best understood through the prism of Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy model. It is man’s quest to bridge gaps between ‘felt’ and ‘fulfilled’ needs. When efforts to offset real or perceived deficiencies are made while existing in one relationship, by attempting to forge another, the effort acquires colour of infidelity. 

Orphaned Organisations

In a cruelly competitive environment, everyone in the hierarchy, is focused on growth and movement up the ladder. In situations where impractical, unassailable target is the norm, comparison of results an accepted performance evaluation tool, individuals tend to fudge data, exaggerate efforts, inflate severity of challenges overcome and create obstacles for rivals to steal the march over them. In such situations, uncertainty reigns supreme and everyone eyes for the first available ‘better’ opportunity and at the first possible chance they jump ship remorselessly. Organisational interest and growth have become by-products subordinated to individual success and glory. Individuals flaunt and use organisational infidelity as chips to bargain their way up the ladder. With so many suitors wooing the eligible, infidelity has become acceptable and rewarding, attrition has become an epidemic and retention of assets a challenge. Effectively, each individual orphans the organisation in favour of better pastures.

What an irony! In a society that considers fidelity as the bedrock of relationships, infidelity is an honourable option of growth. Is fidelity just hyperbole?

Exceptions

It is not that all relationships bound in fidelity are steeped in drudgery. Even in conditions of the rampant ship jumping, there are organisations which seem to enjoy a culture of long-term associations. Most individuals who join these organisations do not feel the need to jump ship. They necessarily do not pay their staff more than their competitors or contemporaries and may not even provide fancy designations and virtual ladders to climb.  These organisations few and far, still exist, grow and make profits. People on the rolls seem to be happy just being there. Surely, they too are human and have needs. What is it that makes these organisations different? HR practices of these organisations seem to liberate them from attrition worries. If lure of money, growth prospects and designations have been overcome and fear of asset attrition cast away, then companies can actually focus on competency building and save the huge outflow associated with recouping attrition losses.

Certainly, there cannot be a panacea prescribed.

Each organisation should have to discover the magic potion for itself.

AMBULANCES – SHOULD IT RUN AMOK?

Outrunning Death

Sirens wailing, lights flashing, ambulances zip through traffic as if nothing else exists in their way. Mortals admire his ability to turn traffic chaotic and even negotiate through it. It seems that his heroics alone, in carting the afflicted to hospitals at lighting speeds, is enough to prevent ‘the end’ and ensure survival of the patient. To us the public, he our saviour can outrun death.

What happens in the hospital at the emergency room or casualty is something different. Lightning speeds and driver’s daredevilry notwithstanding, the patient becomes one amongst many medical emergencies and receives a very informed and calibrated response, often mistaken by the near and dear ones as heartless apathy and callous complacency.  

Hailing Ambulances

Ambulances are used to evacuate accident victims or patients in emergency. It is common belief that, if a patient is ‘somehow’ ferried to the intended hospital fastest, survival and recovery stand better chances.  Thus, it has become a norm for drivers to fly ambulances over omnipresent potholes, ricocheting over unmarked humps on a ‘surface’ called road, chock-a-block with unyielding traffic and unruly people poised to strike at the slightest provocation. Knowing how emergencies are managed in hospitals, it is time to consider the need for ambulances needlessly rocketing all over.

Evacuation Woes

The maximum damage inflicted upon a victim after an accident happens during extrication from the wreckage. Unfortunately, the first respondents are inevitably people who have no clue of handling trauma. While many happily film the event, others shamelessly slip away. The few who dare, in their exuberance to extricate, drag the victim out holding whichever limb or part thereof they can first reach. In most cases rescuers, ignorant of the injury already suffered by the victim, unintentionally aggravate the condition. The victim’s ordeal doesn’t end there. Whatever damage is left to be inflicted or can be inflicted occurs during the reckless ride to the hospital.

Other medical emergencies are no different.

Imagine the state of a patient being evacuated in a medical emergency involving heart attack or asphyxia.  The speed with which an ambulance covers crowded and winding roads negotiating heavy traffic worsens the patient’s condition.

Mistakenly, speed seems to be the ultimate response.

Speed or Care?

Speed seems to be necessitated because it is important to provide medical attention without loss of time. Ambulances without requisite medical expertise on board resort to speed. If the requisite quality of medical care can be provided on board the ambulance, speed becomes inconsequential. An ambulance should ideally be moving the fastest to reach a victim or patient. Having reached the patient, its movement to hospital must be deliberate and with medical attention on board. Ambulance must have trained doctor or paramedics, adequately equipped to manage such emergencies. Ambulances should transform from merely being carriages to mobile intensive care units capable of providing medical support to stabilise the patient so that required medical interventions can happen immediately on arrival.

Timely medical support is of essence, not speed.

Role of First Respondents

Modern automobiles provide high degree of survivability and protection to occupants if safety instructions, like fastened seat belts or well secured helmet, are adhered to. With most of the impact absorbed by inbuilt crumble zones, many occupants escape from crashes with minor injuries. However, with the scant regard we have for safety norms, most individuals involved in accidents sustain grievous injuries. In such cases people who arrive first at the site become rescuers. Unaware of how crash victims should be rescued and prepared for evacuation, first respondents in their eagerness unwittingly aggravate injuries causing irrevocable damage to the victims. This can be avoided.

Enablers

NGOs, governmental bodies and organisations involved in social work must launch awareness programs to educate people on how to respond to medical emergencies and accidents. Various audio visual and print mediums of mass communication, including social media tools and street meetings must be employed to prepare the society to handle emergencies individually and collectively.  Simultaneously, ambulance services be mandated to upgrade on-board capabilities. Government must create a medical emergency response grid and all hospitals must be mandated to be part of the grid.

SUCCESSION : TAIL GATING VERSUS TRAIL BLAZING

Succession, ideally should be one of the key issues a CEO must deliberate on, if he is an organisation’s man.  Each ‘growth-thirsty’ organisation in its life-cycle will have to grapple with the question of succession many times over.

After me, who?

Options

Succession dilemma may not bother governmental organisations since someone would invariably move up on seniority or be picked up on considerations that might have nothing to do with organisational health and growth. Business entities that crave longevity and profitability can ill afford such complacence. Growth oriented organisations often have well charted systems and practices for succession. Deciding who in the hierarchy moves forward to critical positions is not limited to the CEO’s chair alone. It applies to every key organisational position. In all these conditions, choice between ‘Tailgating’ and ‘Trailblazing’ assume importance.

Tailgating

Tailgating is a practice where an individual high in the hierarchy consciously or otherwise allows creation or creates a chain that owes allegiance to him or her. Members of this informal, extra constitutional entity are conspicuous by the official and personal freedom they enjoy with each other. Cared for by those ahead and supported by those below, members in the chain rise in ranks and often succeed the one ahead in chain. These individuals normally wag  and tag along with the boss in their journey up the hierarchy besides being insulators. These closed-circuit, symbiotic interpersonal and group relationships are demi-professional arrangements built up over a period of time. Convenience and not competence is the bond keeping them together. Being part of the clique, growth of individuals within the organisation is catalysed and assured. While bonhomie and convergence in opinion characterise such arrangements, considerations other than organisational interest take precedence, eventually turning detrimental to organisational interests

Breeding Grounds

Fortunately, such chains mostly breed and thrive in bureaucratic organisations where numbers don't necessarily have to speak. These extra constitutional entities overwhelm formal channels and effectively snuff out meritocracy. Incompetence and inefficiency can be compensated with subservience, performance and accountability overlooked by favouritism. Many proprietary entities tend to nurture this culture eventually paying the price.  Corporate houses that accept and promote tailgating also end up being penalised by the market.  When crisis hits such organisations, the chain with the tail intact, aware of the fact well in advance, manages to jump the ship lock, stock and barrel, only to infect another organisation.  

Trailblazers

There are always a few in every organisation who stand out with their individuality and performance. These people are characterised by originality of thoughts and sincerity of purpose.  Innovative, firm and fearless, they are generally outspoken and are mistakenly considered, rash and difficult. The ideology driving them is openly known and they rarely deviate from what is professed. Characterised by their skills and expertise they become backbones of their organisations. Though they may not be quick to accept failures and mistakes, they are usually open to reason and ready to mend ways. They can effectively spearhead change, explore new avenues and venture into the unknown with equal zeal. They blaze the trail as they move and in whatever they do, leave their characteristic stamp of quality.

Difficult Choice?

On the face of it, the choice between the two is not difficult to make.  But in practice it is not so. Many placed high in the hierarchy normally tend to pack their work space with people who conform to their thought process. This helps them enlarge their comfort zone and provide a false sense of security. They do not realise  that they by encouraging a coterie are effectively insulating themselves from environmental dynamics. Trailblazers normally do not belong there. It takes a high degree of organisational tolerance and belief in oneself to accept trailblazers in one’s company. 

Outcome 

Fortunately, there are many bold organisations and individuals who take that risk. The result? Products and services galore that one never ever imagined.

The choice is not difficult.

But  questions remain ! 

Are you willing to groom a trailblazer to hold the reins?

Is your organisation trailblazer compliant?