How to Create a Good Relationship with Your Indian Vendor -

via CIO magazine: "India is a deeply traditional group-oriented society; tightly knit extended families place a premium on harmony. Survival depends on interdependency, on keeping each other happy. “Your first goal is to make sure nobody is upset by what you say,” says Storti. “If the group is not strong, if it is upset by confrontation, you are in trouble.”"

Americans are raised to speak their minds; candor and being plain-spoken are admired. The primary goal of communication typically is to convey information, and this is especially true in a business setting. The primary goal of communication for an Indian, on the other hand, is to protect and strengthen the relationship, and that trumps information exchange, says Storti. An Indian finds it very uncomfortable to say anything you don’t want to hear, anything that would cause you to lose face or anything that would disappoint you. This is not to say that Indians do not communicate difficult information; it’s just that they do it differently. Common cues that difficult information is being sent your way: Your question is mirrored back to you, a postponed answer is not followed through on, or something is conspicuously not said.

You say: “Will that new schedule work for you?”
Your Indian colleague repeats: “Will that work for you?” Translation: “No, it won’t, but I don’t want to upset you.”

You say: “Can you have that ready by the end of the day?”
She says: “I will do my best.” Translation: “I foresee problems delivering the project by then, but I believe that information will make you unhappy.” She assumes you got the message, and you just heard the words. End of the day comes and the project isn’t ready.

“There are many layers to ‘yes,’ ” says Bagla, a native of India. It can mean, “I understand what you said. It can be a simple acknowledgment that I heard you,” he says. You must get further confirmation. This is especially true if you are working by phone. Written clarification and confirmation is crucial.

Giving Clear Instructions

During a workshop for Indian employees of a leading American retailer, Storti posed the question: “When your American bosses tell you about coding they want you to do, and you don’t understand, what do you do?”
The group answered: “We talk amongst ourselves to see if anyone understands.”
Storti: “But what if nobody understands?”
Group: “We would just try something and hope it works.”

Asking Questions

make it easy for your Indian staff to ask you questions. For example, “We’ve covered a lot of territory. I myself didn’t understand it well; I would love it if you asked me questions.” Storti recommends a four-step process for bridging this communication gap: “1. give advice; 2. do it again; 3. wait for them to get comfortable; 4. praise, praise, praise.”

Bagla recommends softening criticism by stating it as a question or speaking about it privately.

Work Propensity - Task vs. Relationship

In India, a contract is but a small part of the business partnership. The relationship and trust are seen as much more important, says Bagla. Your Indian partners may be so focused on strengthening that relationship, including doing unbilled extra work, that they miss the fine print of the contract.

Time Orientation

Americans should also pay special attention to issues of time. “Generally, in the West if we say we’ll be there at 10:00, we mean 10:00. In India, if you are there at 10:25, it’s not the end of the world,” says Bagla. This more elastic view of time sometimes extends to project delivery dates. Bagla recommends being very specific about dates, and getting confirmation that those dates are understood in the same way. In India, “the end of January” could mean anywhere from Jan. 20 to Feb. 3, he points out.

Power Distance - Egalitarianism vs. Hierarchy

Storti says that traditional Indian culture encourages employees to follow instructions to the letter, and discourages deviating from scripts. Despite their talent and competency, they may feel it “not their place” to generate solutions of their own. They are not likely to say, “These instructions are not working for this project,” although younger Indians may, in a very polite way, question what they think is bad advice. [e]ncourage your Indian staff to speak up, and give positive feedback when they do it, using clear, specific examples.

Two Men of Steel : HindustanTimes.com

Two Men of Steel : HindustanTimes.com: "Ratan had seen what other businessmen had not: the days of viceroys and emperors were over. To succeed in the 21st century, you needed a structure that depended more on teamwork than on charismatic leadership."

So it is with LN. Almost all the self-made businessmen I have interviewed tell war stories in which they are portrayed as Napoleonic figures winning a succession of battles to carve out their empires. LN is one of the few millionaires (and he is a billionaire 30 times over) I have met who actually plays down his own role in his success and attributes it to the management of his company. I asked him what his greatest ability was. He did not pick entrepreneurial skill, leadership, an ability to spot trends or any of the things that others brag about. “My success is that I can get along with people and make them work as a team,” he said. “Everybody has the same factories and the same access to information. It is your people that give you the edge. And my skill is that I hire the right people and give them the freedom to work to their full potential.”

Japan for deeper study of Hindu gods : HindustanTimes.com

via HindustanTimes.com:

"Hindu Gods and Goddesses were introduced into Japan in 806 AD by Kobodaishi a Japanese saint who went to China and brought with him Manytrayana text, scrolls and images.

Ganesha is worshipped as god of love by many young boys and girls for achieving success in their courtship. The old worship him for success in business, Dr Chandra said."

I learn something new every day! Interesting cultural adaptation.

India’s genius?

via FT.com : "Subbiah argues that if Indian companies do not understand the roots of India’s culture and genius, they will not succeed despite all the hoopla over 9 per cent GDP growth.

Why have we succeeded in software and pharma research, he asks, and gives the answer: Because in both areas, people can work on their own, figuring out algorithms or molecular structures. The negative conclusion: Indians don’t work well in teams."

Subbiah argues that the Vedic culture developed along the hierarchy of needs defined by Abraham Maslow: the lower levels of need (physiological and safety—like food and shelter) were easily met in the fertile Gangetic plain, so people focused on the highest level of need: self-actualisation.

Hence Indians’ natural inclination to want to figure things out for themselves rather than simply take instructions, to argue a point, and to have different opinions. In other words, regimentation will not work, you have to provide room for creativity and tolerate the hurly-burly of a raucous democracy.

But when it comes to applying some thought and turning out engineered products on the factory floor, the Indian worker is superior.

The idea of situational leadership that is now advocated (you chose the leader for a specific function, rather than have the same leader for all functions) is borrowed from the Mahabharata, for instance. And when it comes to the practice of statecraft, he quotes Chanakya’s prescription of the techniques to use in diplomacy: saam, daam, dund, bhed (persuade, bribe, punish, intrigue).

Subordinating your interests to the group’s does not come naturally to us, he suggests. Nor, he argues, do people plan for their succession. “Have you wondered why we don’t build institutions?”

Japanese lessons for Italy

Bill Emmott - former editor of The Economist:

"western journalists became fond of drawing comparisons between Italy and Japan. In both countries, politics seemed disastrously corrupt, selfish and unproductive, with prime ministers and governments being changed all the time. In both places, government and corporate managements lacked transparency, with hidden networks of influence and power. In both places, there were regular scandals, revealing a lack of respect for the law and a poor record in enforcing it. And in both places the ordinary citizens didn´t seem to mind very much; they shrugged their shoulders, accepted the problems and just got on with their lives. Their tight family structures and community traditions helped ensure that in both countries there was social stability despite economic troubles."

True of India as well.

California Split - New York Times

via New York Times: "A recent study by the economists Alberto Alesina of Harvard and Enrico Spolaore of Tufts demonstrates that the bigger the nation, the harder it becomes for the government to meet the needs of its dispersed population. Regions that don’t feel well served by the government’s distribution of goods and services then have an incentive to take independent action, the economists note."

Explains rise of secessionist movements in India after independence - to break free from the centrally managed disaster.

Harvard University Press: The Scandal of Empire : India and the Creation of Imperial Britain by Nicholas B. Dirks

Harvard University Press: The Scandal of Empire : India and the Creation of Imperial Britain by Nicholas B. Dirks: "The Scandal of Empire reveals that the conquests and exploitations of the East India Company were critical to England's development in the eighteenth century and beyond. We see how mercantile trade was inextricably linked with imperial venture and scandalous excess and how these three things provided the ideological basis for far-flung British expansion. In this powerfully written and trenchant critique, Dirks shows how the empire projected its own scandalous behavior onto India itself. By returning to the moment when the scandal of empire became acceptable we gain a new understanding of the modern culture of the colonizer and the colonized and the manifold implications for Britain, India, and the world."