ETHICS OF THE CHAIR

When I started working, I did not know where my manzil was. I did not know what kind of job I would be getting or capable of getting. After a little struggle, I got a job. Once the initial euphoria of getting the job was over, work started to sink in. How time flies! It has been almost five decades since I started working. Each day has been a new day for me, every experience a new experience.

From abecedarian ignorance that precedes knowledge, I graduated to doctoral ignorance that comes after it.?The theory of evolution says that species get used to their new environment. I learned this fundamental of evolution very early in my life.

Work is connection, engagement, and commitment. For some people work is a job, for some it is a career, and for some it is a calling. To give meaning to work, one is required to vitally engage himself with the work. The concept of 'vital engagement' is about our relationship to the world that is characterized both by the experience of flow (enjoyed absorption) and meaning (subjective significance). It simply means that competent and dedicated persons are necessary, but not sufficient to achieve vital engagement. A complimentary environment is required to achieve vital engagement.

Vital engagement is possible in an organisation which has conscience as well as spirit. An organization that fulfils the monetary, security, social and ego needs of its people can only hope to achieve commitment of its people.

The leader of a vitally engaged organisation knows that he is as much for himself as he is for his people. He knows how to agree, how to disagree, how to differ, and also knows how to express emotions, feelings, knowledge and attitude. It is helpful if he knows how to utilize mediocre and minimal resources optimally.

There is sometimes a conflict between a person's values and the values of the organisation. What one does well may not fit with the organisation's value system. There can also be a difference between 'actual' and 'organisationally required' emotions. A leader understands the implications of this difference.

Learning is an important component of the development of an organisation. In learning organisations people continually discover their own reality. We often don't notice changes, until they become threats, and then there is not much left to do. We are good at dealing with sudden changes, but not so good at dealing with slow gradual changes.

The longevity of an organisation depends on its learning capability, sense of identity, tolerance to non-core activities, and frugality. Learning means preparation to accept continual change, and the change will be meaningful only if people change.

A good organisation behaves, in many respects, like a healthy living organism. The logic behind this argument is that organisations have faced, and are likely to face in the future, many situations which living things have already experienced during their four billion years of evolution.

An organisation, like a living organism, uses inputs and feedback to grow and produce. It responds to external stimuli. It maintains internal stability in spite of continuous exchange with the environment.?A living being is made up of many atoms and molecules, and there is a certain relationship among them. When the desired relationships are broken, life becomes lifeless.

In living beings, cells die by another mechanism. They commit suicide. Some cells die purposefully to ensure the proper development of the remaining cells. If these cells remain in the system, the integrity of the organism may get spoiled. It is thus essential to remove them.

The primary goal of life is survival and reproduction. It does not like extreme conditions. It can, however, evolve or can be designed to adapt to extreme conditions.

Competition is natural for an organisation. Organisations are learning from life sciences that most severe competitions, and thus most rapid changes, result from environmental pressures, and also when the time is too short to respond to those pressures. An organisation that is not under the threat of competition has little chance to evolve. Organisations have learned from life sciences that competition is essential for their evolution and survival.

An organisation is selfish. It only allows long-term changes to occur if there is a reproductive advantage. The traits which give a push to survival or reproductive advantage to the organisation are expensive to acquire as these require either costly resources or are vulnerable to threats.

Organisations are open systems. They influence the environment and are also influenced by the environment. The environment of the living systems are highly variable. In this there is a message for organisations: capacities to produce (or diversify) and actual production (or diversification) are two different things. Our agility and rapidity decreases after a certain size. It points to the fact that mere growth is not enough. How much one should grow depends on how much one can metabolise. An organisation should know how much it can metabolise.

The biological structure of living organisms and social structure in human communities are emergent structures. Designed structures are always created for a purpose. The designed structures are the formal structures of the organisation. The emergent structures are created by the organisation's informal networks and communities of practice. Designed structures provide stability. Emergent structures provide novelty, creativity and flexibility. Organisations are learning from life sciences that it is in need of both emergent and designed structures. The challenge is to find the right balance between the creativity of emergence and the stability of design.

We know that the continuance is the ultimate goal of an organisation. When we talk of flexibility, adaptability, change, etc., they are meant only to meet this objective. An organisation can run, even when a part of it is closed. This is also possible in the case of living beings, but living things being more integrated and complex, the chances of survival of remaining organisms are comparatively less likely.

Programmed cell death teaches us several lessons. Try to stop it, development goes awry. Similar argument holds good for organisations. If something destroys everything, it is so orderly that the process is called 'programmed cell death' (PCD). Programmed cell death is important for an organism to be able to eliminate unnecessary or damaged cells from its body, as it has to generate healthy new cells.

Our hand has five fingers, and that is only possible because the cells that lived between them died when we were embryos. PCD also allows the body to eradicate destructive cells. If there was no PCD, we would face 'runaway cell replication'.

A somewhat similar thing happens in organisations. It is a common occurrence; new kills an old one. Economist Joseph Schumpeter called it 'creative destruction'. He said that innovation replaces (destroys) the established organisations, and makes way for new organisations.

This is an age of innovation. We are in a hurry to take away resources from the losers and relocate them to the winners. The weak performers, if replaced, are yielding better results. In this environment, outperforming upstarts is not uncommon, and 'built to last' organisations are becoming a rarity. Innovations are destroying obsolete technologies, only to be assaulted in turn by newer and more efficient rivals.

Another thing that we need to remember is that followers are as vital as leaders are. We need to remember that “good leaders have good followers” and “vulnerable leaders have susceptible followers.” If we follow and tolerate a bad leader, we will get the leadership we deserve. On the other hand, a manipulative follower intensifies a leader's vulnerability.

It is rare to find a good leader who was not an efficient learner and a good follower. Being a follower must not stop one from thinking critically and impartially. A good follower tells palatable as well as bitter truths to the leader candidly and sensitively.

If I must lead, I must also follow. The winners of the real world are made of “global genome, innovative mind and democratic spirit.”

The real winners know that graceful entry is as essential as graceful exit. Graceful exit means leaving what's over without denying its value.

The truths that have guided me to maintain the ethics of my chair are:

(1) Intention and outcome are not always the same, though we wish them to be,

(2) Life is not merely following the rigid rules,

(3) Half-truths are more dangerous than complete falsehoods,

(4) 'Higher Laws' can't be explained through worldly laws,

(5) Small is beautiful is as relevant as Bigger the better,

(6) To become world-class, one must have the desire to become world-class,

(7) Connect science with money, but don't always approach science with the soul of a money lender,

(8) Intellect is an essential part of any makeup, and?

(9) Respect the chair you are occupying.