Published on June 7, 2018
My Case Analysis that was published in Business Manager – June’18 issue
Case Study
Power Pack Corporation is a MNC doing its business of electric generation equipment and engines in India. They have acquired one manufacturing facility in Maharashtra and produced indigenous products to cater to the needs of Indian market.
PP Corporation as popularly known, has its corporate office in Gurgaon. The office has IT, Finance, Marketing and Sales and HR departments. Kanwaljit Singh head of Finance known as CFO sitting in corporate has its own leadership style. He has next line of one General Manager – Finance and then four Dy. Managers responsible for different functions. Out of these four Dy. Managers one was qualified CA, another was qualified cost Accountant and rest two were MBAs in finance. Below these four Dy. Managers two each were having executives with B.Com or M.Com degree. This was official reporting structure of finance department.
But Kanwaljit Singh used to encourage one executive out of four to report him directly on all matters as what was happening in the department in his absence and who was doing what. This executive named Ratan nicknamed as Narad Muni in office was reporting to Viplav, CA Dy. Manager who only joined last year and was youngest in the department in terms of length of service. Whenever, Viplav asked him on certain tasks given to him, Ratan used to avoid, overlook and disobey him on many occasions. His reply used to be that he will brief the CFO boss and you need not to worry.
Two days before, Viplav asked to work on certain MIS reports that were to be sent to HO Japan, but when Viplav asked him about the progress, Ratan’s reply was shocking. He said, don’t give me orders, I am not your subordinate. I will do only what boss CFO will tell me. Viplav felt humiliated as it was an open conversation and Ratan tone was also not conforming to the office decorum.
Viplav went to CFO and reported the matter about Ratan’s attitude and behaviour. Kanwaljit said, “He will see to it and talk to Ratan and will take reports from him”. But even after two days there was no revert from CFO to Viplav though he called Ratan and what conversed between the two, nobody knew. After two days, Viplav wrote an e mail to CFO :
“Dear Kanwal San,
As I reported about the behaviour of Ratan four days back, he has consistently been refusing to listen to me. He says openly that he only values Kanwal San and will listen to his instructions only and nobody else.
I request you Sir that pl. take him out from my reporting and put else where you feel appropriate.
I assure you that no work will be suffered because of his absence in my section.
With warm regards
Viplav”
Kanwaljit Singh slept over this mail. He continued to meet and discuss all matters with Ratan. Viplav stopped giving tasks to him and took over all his responsibility. Everybody was keen to know the outcome but nothing apparent happened.
Since it was month of March, Viplav received the performance evaluation request in respect of Ratan from HR. He responded to HR and CFO that since he hardly reports to him functionally and was not aware what he did during the year as he was not reporting to him, so better would be that his evaluation should be done by the person to whom he reports.
CFO did not like this conversation of Viplav. He called Viplav and asked what was going on.
Viplav : It would not be fair Sir, if I evaluate Ratan whereas I am not aware what he did whole the year and he also practically did not report to me.
Kanwal : But only you can evaluate him since he in your reporting line as per organisation chart.
Viplav : Then I will write what I know about him and his conduct.
Kanwal : Ok. Do it.
Viplav informed Ratan to be with him next day for evaluation discussion. When Viplav reminded Ratan of discussion next day, Ratan refused to come for discussion and said, write whatever you want. You are not the GOD. I will talk to Kanwal san.
Viplav assessed his performance and evaluated him. He commented “Ratan refused to join performance evaluation discussion. Needs improvement in behaviour and conduct. Below expectation in performing though know his job.”
After few days, on coming to know about the remarks of Viplav from Kanwaljit Singh, Ratan came to Viplav seat and said, how dare you to write this nonsense about me without my consent.
Viplav replied with calm and said, “Ratan, I requested you twice to join discussion, but you refused, I wanted to discuss and share my observations but you did not allow that to happen. Now I wrote what I felt. There is nothing to shout about.”
During appraisal discussion with Kanwaljit Singh, Viplav responded, when asked about the expectations, “Sir, I should be promoted as promised to me last year at the time of joining. Moreover, as far as job competency is concerned, I don’t think, I have ever let you down. You also agree on my performance aspect.”
“That’s fine. There is nothing negative about your capabilities and competency. Rather you have streamlined the department and cleared all pendency. You exceeded our expectations.” Kanwal Continued,
“But there is no point in promoting CAs. They just get promotion and leave. They only look for their career and not the organisation. Look at me; I am here since last 12 years. Ratan is here from last 10 years. I want retention. The person you replaced was also CA, worked only for two years. The moment, I promoted him, he left within six months.”
“What about Ratan”? Then Kanwal sought Viplav’s opinion.
He replied, “It is for you to decide Sir, because whole the year he was reporting to you functionally and administratively, so what, if I was passing his expenses bills as mere formality. I am not aware, what he does and did. I evaluated about what I knew only.”
“Ok. Viplav let me give a thought and decide about,”
Kanwal concluded the discussion.
After about one month, HR informed Viplav that he was given a raise of 13 %. Ratan was promoted to assistant manager with 27% raise. Others also get raise between 13% to 18 %.
Viplav could not sleep overnight. He was trying to recollect as to what went wrong. Was it the hard work with commitment and staying long hours to clear the pendency and putting all processes in line was wrong or was his straightforwardness or inability to become “yes” man of his CFO boss was wrong as Ratan was successful in “managing” boss in spite of poor performance?
-BM Editorial Team
Case Analysis – First connect, then correct
1- From the data provided in the case study, Viplav appears to be a typical Manager who was desperate to correct someone without connecting.
Respect, they say is to be commanded and not demanded. You command respect by being worthy of respect. First and foremost, being a newcomer, he should have earned the trust of an old timer who has been in the system for 10 long years. For doing that, he could have found some genuine positive points about Ratan to win him over and/or sought support for understanding the culture. Once he would have earned some trust, earning respect as the next step is relatively easier.
Did Viplav make Ratan understand any new concepts or did he reach out to him and offered his support for any issues that Ratan may be facing. Did he try to encourage Ratan to enhance his qualification by enrolling to some online courses? In short, what is the value add Viplav did to a non – qualified subordinate?
Moreover, CFO supposedly knew Ratan’s caliber beforehand, as he must be doing the extra service even before Viplav joining. Then why did he put Ratan under a new comer? All this data points to the fact that Viplav also somewhere failed to act as an effective boss to an old but dis-confirming and non – cooperative employee.
Viplav seems to have succumbed to the circumstances by not giving any work to Ratan and also by taking over all of his responsibility. When CFO conveys that he (CFO) will take reports from Ratan – Viplav does not disagree or put across his point to make CFO understand that if Ratan was reporting to Viplav then Ratan should be asked to give reports to Viplav only and not to CFO – to put records straight.
Even his conversation with CFO speaks only of what is happening between Viplav and Ratan and not what could be the consequence of the situation. Also, there is no data to speak on a desperate Viplav’s efforts to approach the CEO or/& HR Head. It is difficult to comprehend that the HR & CEO are not aware about whatever is happening in an important department.
The way things are, CFO obviously doesn’t care about Viplav’s feelings – in a way CFO is not bothered whether Viplav (by giving him the lowest increment despite some sweet talk earlier) stays back or leaves. It was, therefore, in the interest of the organisation that Viplav should have had a one to one with the higher ups and apprises them of what’s happening. In case their reaction is also lackluster – Viplav should know what to do next.
2- Kanwaljit Singh, CFO appears to be a timid person with huge sense of insecurity. The reason he had to put a mole to spy on his own subordinates, speaks volumes of his managerial style.
He is a biased manager (and not a leader by any standards) who is desperate to survive and is not bothered about the basic hygiene factors like –
a) Respecting the hierarchy in the department
b) Communication
c) Conflict Management
He is also lacking to sort out differences between Viplav and Ratan and instead plays safe by (perhaps falsely) acknowledging Viplav’s performance levels.
The case study does not point out his relationship with GM – Finance and other Deputy Managers. So, from the data available it is safe to construe that he has a fixated approach to manage things – he has pre-conceived notions on longevity of CAs, as an example. He appears to be having issues with managing different situations.
However, he must be doing few things right to have survived for 12 long years in the system. Either he has few secrets up his sleeve so as to demand the respect from his higher ups &/or is delivering the results despite issues within his department. He also had his way of promoting Ratan and giving minimum increment to Viplav.
3- It is important to understand that such situations of organisational politics do occur and one needs to learn to deal and manoeuvre to remain in the game or gain. It is extremely vital for a new comer to gauge the culture of the organisation and then play accordingly. Having said that, there is no denying the fact to acknowledge the core competence of the employee. He/she should be able to achieve his KRAs and showcase what difference does he/she brings on the table.
In this case study, if Viplav was doing some extraordinary work, neither CFO nor Ratan could have afforded to put him in any sort of discomfort. When CFO tells Viplav that he has exceeded the expectations – it shows the mentality of timid leaders like him, who are afraid to confront their Managers and have instead a goody – goody relationship on the surface level. There is no data to show if the actual performance rating was ever shown to Viplav.
It is therefore crucial for the employee to continue to exceed the performance levels but at the same time be smart enough to stand out and get noticed by the higher ups.
On the other hand, any progressive organisation can not afford to let leaders like Kanwaljit Singh flourish who continue to encourage nepotism and disregard professional working culture for their own small gains. HR needs to play a vital role and have a hawk eye along-with adequate tools like Skip level meeting, 360 degree, Stay & Exit Interview and a whistle blower policy in place to ensure no harassment takes place. Even a performance management system that has a valid reviewing mechanism could have prevented this occurrence.