A:Dr. Udai Pareek and I coined the term Integrated Human Resource Development System in 1974 and implemented in Larsen & Toubro in 1975. The department and the function aimed at building competencies, commitment (through happiness at work) and creating a culture for development of individuals, dyads, teams and the organisation. Six subsystems performance appraisal, feedback and counselling, potential appraisal, career planning and development, training and organization Development. Later it was integrated into larger HR function. If you read our original report to L&T (later published as Pioneering HRD in Larsen & Toubro) it will clarify the large vision we had about HRD as a system that integrates work and organizational excellence with life and living. It required a large heart with empathy, human touch, participative values, trust, openness, collaboration, autonomy, and authenticity. It does not come by merely changing the name “personnel” and or “training’ to HRD. My journey witnessed many challenges and name changes without genuine values and understanding of philosophy we articulated originally in L&T. A few organizations practiced these even without name changes. Covid-19 brought us back to the importance of Human in HRD.

A:I carried a lot of TAT stories written by Indian Managers to work with David McClelland of Harvard University to understand and adapt his psychosocial maturity scale developed with Abigail Stewart (now at University of Michigan). Our analysis of the depiction of leaders in these write-ups focussed on social power and psychosocial maturity to Indian leaders. I quickly adapted and formulated three leadership styles (Benevolent (charismatic or paternalistic), Critical and Developmental) and developed tools for self-assessment and reflection in India. Testing of the three leadership styles is the first exciting movement. After discovering the inadequacy of self-assessments on psychometric tools, I experimented with a methodology of anonymous assessment by known people to test out if what is known to self is also the same as perceived by others. This resulted in what the Americans called as 360 Degree Feedback.

Our conducting a series of programs for top management at IIMA very successfully on leadership styles and organizational effectiveness is the next milestone. Third significant point was after reading about assessment centres in the USA in mid-seventies we tried out this methodology in selecting project leaders for entrepreneurship development. These are some of the events that shaped my journey. I tried to practice what I preached in every administrative position I held at IIMA I as Chairman of the Public Systems Group, Chairman of the PGP Review committee and Chair of the PGP, the Doctorial program etc. My greatest learning was from my interactions with Ravi Matthai in Jawaja project and observing him as professor and Institution Builder after he stepped aside as Director of IIMA.

A:Over dependence on systems and consultants without application of the mind is the first problem. Many corporations seem to appoint big consultancy firms and consultants and leave things for them. The moment we discover a new concept we tend to treat is as a panacea for all problems. We tend to depend on it – maybe a new theory like Management by Objectives, TA, or Stephen Covey’s seven habits or Robin Sharma’s leadership wisdom or Norton and Kaplan’s Balanced Score card or 5-S framework or anything. We forget that everything has limits and ultimately the user and his/her personality and commitment matters.

We have often ignored the power of chemistry between people (policy makers and implementers etc.) and circumstances. We also ignored the need for exploring multiple solutions and experimentation. We over focus on results and under focus on effort. We are classificatory and divisive in nature. We compete where we need to collaborate and collaborate where we need to compete. We think structures and systems will solve all problems. We are also over dependent on tons of leaders and try not to use our own leadership qualities from within. A lot of talent is hidden and gets submerged with all these complexities. We easily rationalise and attribute failure to outside factors rather than searching within. Means become new ends and original purposes get distorted or forgotten.

A:Continuous learning on the part of every employee and all internal stakeholders should become organisational value. It should become one of the parameters of our performance management system. Every day is a learning opportunity. There are multiple sources of learning like bosses and seniors, colleagues, juniors, young children, parents, books, magazines, newspapers, media, internet, training programs, visitors and even strangers etc. People should be helped to experience learning and the joy of learning. This can be done by focusing on learning culture. It should be combined with openness.

I am a strong believer in creating OCTAPACE culture (Openness, Collaborations, Trust and Trustworthiness, Autonomy, Pro-action, Authenticity, Confrontation and Experimentation). I have added three dimensions to it; Purpose, Learning and Discipline and made it POCTAPLACED. Keep measuring the climate and keep reviewing your culture. Get self-renewal started for all employees and stake holders. Every leader and manager should periodically have an annual self-renewal program or a retreat where he/she can be joined by others to give feedback, coach each other and plan actions for change. No change will occur if you don’t have intentions to change. Create more intentions and more conversations around these intentions. It is HR’s job to create such culture and values in every organization. They can’t do it merely by systems and their administration but can do it by focusing on the Human part of HR. If you focus on R of HR then targets, goals, results become life and distract people from maximising the use of H or Humanness.

A:In VUCA work everything is uncertain as change is taking place at a fast pace. Technology is disrupting life. What worked till now may not work in future. It therefore requires a mind-set of perpetual change and the mind should become as volatile as the VUCA world. You cannot meet the unpredictable world with predictable actions. We need to change constantly. HR largely follows set rules and patterns and they don’t work in the VUCA world. Every human being is complex and like an institution to manage. You can’t have the same policy to apply to everyone. People with different profiles have different needs and bring different talents to the work place. The only way HR can manage is respecting people as possibilities and giving scope to be as volatile as the world is. HR is a continuous builder of practices than policies. Polices get applied to all. They won’t work. Practices can be multiplied and built around the needs of people. This needs imagination, respect for humans as a possibility rather than merely as a measurable resource, and relentless promotion of creativity and experimentation.

A:The most important paradigm shift required is to focus on managing self by constantly seeking feedback on the impact of one’s thinking, actions and styles. The C-suit leaders should be constantly learning about people, and through them about themselves for better self-management. I would strongly recommend a 360 Degree Feedback on a regular basis. I agree that all such feedback is subjective but it will enormously help to understand the changing expectations of employees and others around.

Just as we keep surveying and sensitising ourselves and spend enormous amounts of our resources to know the customer and the impact of our new products etc. on the customers. We also advertise enormously communicating our intentions and product features, uses. C-suit executives should focus on knowing their impact on the employees and other stakeholders, have more conversation with them, listen to them and use 360 feedback to know their mind. Many misunderstand 360 assessments as tools for deciding the leadership talent among others. This is wrong. It is a tool for self-reflection and sensitisation to the differential impact you are making on different people. That is the best way to understand others and manage self. Most HR people are insecure and shy of such feedback. That is the reason why they don’t promote upward feedback. I know of HR leaders who advised their CEOs and top management against 360 Degree Feedback. HR should prepare the C-suit leaders to hear the bad news and analyse the outcomes dispassionately.

A:It is important to recognise that there is a potential leader in every one irrespective of the social and financial background and education. As a nation we should recognise this and facilitate the bringing out of the leadership potential and talent and make it available to the society. This is also the agenda for corporations. If you treat every human being as a leader, the job then is to create a climate to exploit this talent and direct the use of this talent to organisational and societal goals. My books are my legacy. Everyone is born with capabilities to be a leader. You have to have faith in yourself. Parents and teachers matter a lot in this, next in line are the managers and supervisors in your work settings. If you did not join the work settings then the world is wide open. Have faith in yourself. Constantly search for opportunities. Learn from people like Srikant Bolla, a visually impaired industrialist who made a mark. If he can make it, why not you. Faith in one self is most critical. Don’t hang on to one solution. If one does not work, move on to another. Never give up. Take help from others. Have clear cut goals. Change where necessary.

I like to draw lessons from four of my books. I urge people to read them and take lessons: Effective People is the first recommendation. Everyone can be effective if you use your talent to make a difference in the lives of others. Managers who Make difference outlines the limitations of achievers. We should graduate from high achievement culture to higher level thinking of community, society and larger goals. We need more visionaries and missionaries. In our book on Leaders in the making we demonstrated that leadership is a long term journey. It can be shortened to day as we learnt a lot from previous generation leaders. Earlier you needed to be a senior citizen or older than 50 years to be called a leader, now you can be a leader in your twenties and thirties.