Nothing… Just Life…

Apparently, we've discovered the ultimate answer to every question. Just three magical words that say absolutely nothing while pretending to explain everything.

“Doctor, why am I having these terrible headaches?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why did Kattappa kill Baahubali?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why did the chicken cross the road?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why does the Sun rise from East?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why is your work delayed?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why have you changed so much as a person and friend?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why are you not honoring your professional commitments?”

“Nothing… just life…”

“Why do you think EVERYONE but you are at fault?”

“Nothing… just life…”

Brilliant, isn't it? Three words, endless applications, zero clarity.

Who knew avoiding a question could sound so philosophical?

Nothing… just life…

Here We Go Again...

For some reason, it is happening again. 

Though I had promised myself that I would not give unwarranted suggestions, the day before I ended up giving one. It was not to point fingers or rub it in. It was merely out of concern for either party (I am not one of the parties). Like almost always, the suggestions were aggressively discarded. I did not say anything and walked away.

I called up twice that evening. Once to check something and once because I genuinely needed a help. The calls were not received. No message. No call back.

Yesterday, a call was received. It was only to ask me to do something (though I know it would not be accepted, but I know the call was only because of 'business' reasons. I know the tone as well as modus operandi).

Then, no conversations throughout the day. Since my calls had gone unanswered, I was not in the mood either.

I did say bye (I don't know why), but was met with some attitude.

Hmmm.

It is okay then...

When Personal Equations Overshadow Collective Interests

One thing that I have always found difficult to understand is how some people allow their personal egos to come in the way of their professional responsibilities, commitments and relationships.

I find this rather strange and, frankly, extremely unprofessional.

Differences between people are inevitable. We are all individuals with our own personalities, opinions, beliefs and ways of working. It is neither possible nor necessary for colleagues to be friends or get along with everyone. In fact, even two good friends may not necessarily have a cordial working relationship. If two people have an issue with each other, ideally, they should make an effort to resolve it. If that is not possible, the least they can do is ensure that their differences do not affect their work, their commitments or the people around them.

The world of sports offers some interesting examples.  Over the years, we have heard stories about alleged differences between some of the biggest names in cricket. There have been reports and speculation about relationships between Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev, Steve Waugh and Shane Warne, Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma, and even Harmanpreet Kaur and Smriti Mandhana. 

I must clarify that I have no way of knowing how much truth there is in these stories. Some may have been exaggerated, some may have been entirely speculative, and some may have had an element of truth.

But that is not really the point.

What matters is that, irrespective of whatever differences may or may not have existed, these players have made significant contributions to their teams. Their professional achievements remind us that personal equations need not necessarily come in the way of collective responsibilities.

And that, to me, is an important lesson.

There is, however, another example from sports that illustrates what can happen when personal differences come in the way of collective interests. Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi were once among the most formidable men's doubles combinations in international tennis. They brought tremendous recognition to Indian tennis and gave millions of Indians reasons to celebrate. Unfortunately, their partnership was also marked by well-documented differences. Their disagreements contributed to repeated splits, and although they did reunite at different points, the partnership never enjoyed the continuity that one would have hoped for. 

One can only wonder what more they might have achieved together had their differences been managed differently. This is not to question the extraordinary achievements of either player, both of whom have contributed immensely to Indian tennis, but to reflect on what might have been possible had their partnership continued uninterrupted.

The breakdown of such a successful partnership illustrates how unresolved differences can sometimes come at a cost that extends well beyond the individuals involved.

And this is precisely what happens in organizations too.

When two colleagues have differences, the consequences are not always limited to those two individuals. Work gets delayed. Decisions are held up. Communication becomes selective. Other colleagues are sometimes forced to take sides. People who have absolutely nothing to do with the original disagreement find themselves caught in the middle. At times, even commitments made to customers, colleagues and other stakeholders get compromised.

And for what? To prove a point? To protect one's ego? To demonstrate that one person does not need the other?

I find it difficult to understand how any of these considerations can become more important than the responsibilities one has accepted as a professional. What people often fail to realize is that by allowing personal differences to influence their professional conduct, they may end up hurting not just the other person, but the larger team, the organization and, ultimately, their own credibility.

The ability to work with someone despite personal differences is not a sign of weakness or compromise. On the contrary, I believe it reflects maturity, self-confidence and a sense of responsibility.

Of course, this does not mean that people should tolerate disrespect, unethical behavior or an unhealthy working environment. There are situations where differences are serious and need to be addressed formally. But even in such circumstances, there are professional ways of dealing with the situation without unnecessarily compromising the interests of others. There is nothing wrong with deciding to stop working together or even parting ways, provided the decision is handled thoughtfully, at an appropriate time and without unnecessarily disrupting the work or affecting others.

Commitments must still be honoured. Responsibilities must still be fulfilled. And the larger interests of the team and the organization must never become subordinate to personal egos.

After all, the true test of professionalism is not how well we work with people we like, but how responsibly we work with people we do not particularly get along with.

Competence Is Revealed in the Small Things

Poor management or administration is rarely about one big mistake. More often, it shows up in the way small, everyday issues are handled.

Take a simple facilities issue from a fictional office. The air conditioning in one section of the office has not been working since last few days. The section is too warm to work comfortably, but since only 2-3 people are affected, fixing it doesn't seem to be a priority. There are no proactive updates from the administration team either. The only way to know what's happening is to keep asking for a status every day. 

That is poor administration.

To be able to work comfortably, one of the employees - who cannot stand the hot temperature - booked an available conference room through the proper process. However, he is asked to vacate it for a meeting that was never booked (it was requested by the attendees but was never booked by the Admin Manager). He is asked to move to another room, even though that room isn't available for the required duration.  

At that point, the broken AC is no longer the real problem. The conference room isn't either. It is about competence and professionalism...or the lack of it.

Good administration requires promptly addressing workplace issues, adhering to established procedures, keeping everyone posted, and proactively suggesting workarounds. Professionalism is not measured only by how organizations and people respond to major challenges. It is reflected in how they handle the small ones. 

Perhaps that is asking for too much.

Clarity

The future is unclear. It is dark, full of uncertainties. Because of that, most people hesitate to leave one place in search of another. Some, like yours truly, do not even know where to go or whether something good, or even just okay, is waiting on the other side.

I am tired. I am confused. I am scared. 

Still, there is something that makes leaving easier. It is not certainty about where you are headed. It is clarity about where you no longer want to remain. A decision becomes easier when, even without knowing where you will go, you know you do not want to stay.

So today, after sitting with the thought for over a month, I finally got up...to leave. Your company. Your people.

The Voice of Dissent is Not Disrespect

In professional environments, the voice of dissent is often misunderstood. I firmly believe that sometime the most valuable person in the room is the one willing to say, "I disagree." Not because they enjoy conflict. Not because they want to undermine someone. But because they genuinely believe that an alternative point of view needs to be heard.

Over the years, I have had a few situations where I felt it was important to express an uncomfortable opinion honestly. But is honesty always accepted and appreciated? I want to share a couple of examples and also reflect on how people reacted to dissent in each case.

A few years back, I was speaking to an entrepreneur friend and his founding team. They had been working on a venture for the last few years. They had managed to get some angel investors on board, which put some fuel in the tank. The initial funding helped them get started.

But over time, the venture gulped up truck loads of money. The angel investment was gone and the founders themselves had spent more than double that amount from their own pockets.

I had been observing their journey closely. To their credit, they had indeed come a long way. But in MY opinion, they still had miles to go. More importantly, I was not convinced that continuing further made sense anymore.

My concern was partly financial. The venture was becoming financially draining for the founders. But there was another concern as well.

The service they were building was heavily dependent on technology. While the founding team understood the industry and the problem they were trying to solve, they had very limited understanding of the technical complexities involved. It was a tech-heavy business being driven largely by non-technical founders.

In my consulting career, I have seen several entrepreneurs make one common mistake - they fall too much in love with their idea.

There is nothing wrong with passion. In fact, passion is often necessary to survive the brutal journey of building something from scratch. But there is a fine line between believing in an idea and becoming emotionally inseparable from it.

Sometimes good ideas fail. Not because the founders lack intent or work ethic, but because timing, execution, capability, market realities, or a dozen other factors do not align. And at some stage, one must be able to assess objectively whether continuing to invest time, money, and energy still makes sense.

As Kevin O'Leary often says on Shark Tank, sometimes you need to "take it behind the barn and shoot it."

During the discussion, I did not hold back. I felt the founders needed to hear an uncomfortable perspective, so I expressed my thoughts without mincing words.

One person in the team, especially, was deeply attached to the venture. It was his idea. He had spent countless hours building it. Compared to others, he had probably spent 100x more time, emotion, and effort on it.

Imagine someone questioning something that has consumed years of your life. Imagine someone asking you to let go of a dream you built from scratch.

Yet, what stood out to me was the maturity with which the disagreement was handled. The discussion remained calm. He explained his point of view. I explained mine. There was disagreement, but there was also mutual respect. No bitterness. No hostility. No personal attacks.

Now lets look at the second incident, which happened some years after the first incident. I found myself in a very different disagreement.

At a company where I was working, there was an issue regarding the designation of a team member. When the individual had originally joined the organization, there were no formal bands attached to designations. She had joined as Senior Consultant, but due to an error in official records, her designation was incorrectly reflected as Consultant.

Later, when the company introduced structured designation bands, the incorrect designation evolved into Consultant Tier 1 in the system. After spending couple of  years in the system, she finally noticed her designation. Her designation was updated to Senior Consultant Tier 1. Up to this point, there was no disagreement. Correcting an error in records was a no-brainer.

However, one of the fellow leaders - let us call him Person ABC - wanted the designation to be elevated further to Senior Consultant Tier 2. And, he wanted this change to happen without it being treated as a promotion!

That was where I disagreed.

My disagreement was not about the individual employee. In fact, I had no issue (hmmm...lets say - almost no issue) with her performance or capability. My concern was about organizational consistency and the precedent it would create. Promotions had already been announced and a sudden change in someone's designation could have raised eyebrows and led to uncomfortable questions. The argument from Person ABC were not invalid but I did feel that selective points were being considered. Like a defense lawyer.

I also felt there was a practical issue being ignored. This individual wanted to be elevated and if the change in designation was not officially classified and communicated as a promotion, the employee herself could have questioned it. And she would still expect or demand a formal promotion in the next cycle. 

I expressed these concerns openly during the leadership discussion. It was a difference in opinion and nothing more. I was not obstructing the decision, nor was I unwilling to go with the majority view eventually. I simply believed that the implications needed to be discussed properly before a call was taken.

During the course of the discussion, it eventually emerged that Person ABC had already promised the higher designation to the employee. Personally, I felt that should never have happened. Since the promise had already been made, the rest of us agreed to proceed with the change.

In my honest opinion, this was a much smaller issue than the first incident.

In the first case, I was asking someone to reconsider years of effort, passion, sacrifice, and truck loads of money invested into a venture. In the second case, it was merely a disagreement over a designation band in an HR context. No one's dream was collapsing. No existential crisis was involved. The practical impact on the employee was limited.

Yet when I look back at both incidents side-by-side today, what fascinates me is not the disagreements themselves, but the reactions to them.

In the first incident, despite the emotional weight attached to the discussion, the dissent was received with maturity. The entrepreneur heard me out, calmly shared his perspective, and there were no ill-feelings afterwards. In the second incident, despite the issue being relatively minor, Person ABC reacted emotionally, said things rudely, and eventually stopped speaking to me!

And perhaps that is the real lesson about dissent.

Dissent itself is not rude. It is not disrespectful. It is not disloyalty. It is not negativity. It is simply the willingness to express a different point of view honestly and present strong arguments (and not disagree just for the heck of it). 

What truly defines individuals and leaders is not whether they face dissent. Everyone does. What defines them is how they respond to it. Some people can hear uncomfortable truths without taking them personally. Others perceive even minor disagreement as an attack on their judgment, authority, or ego. 

The irony is that the people willing to dissent are often the ones most invested in preventing mistakes.

Healthy organizations, strong leadership teams, and mature individuals do not eliminate dissent. They create space for it. 

Because progress rarely comes from rooms where everyone agrees. 

Leadership is More Than Knowledge and Expertise

Two leadership related statements stayed with me over the past year.

The first was:

“People respect someone and consider them a leader only when they see strong knowledge and expertise.”

The second was:

“There is a thin line between being friendly and being a friend.”

Both statements were made (in separate conversations) in the context of discussing the traits of a good leader. While leadership is far broader and more nuanced than these two perspectives alone, I found myself reflecting deeply on them.

Having observed leaders, teams, and workplace dynamics across a career spanning 23 years, I find myself agreeing with both statements to an extent. Expertise and knowledge certainly matter, and they do contribute to a leader’s credibility. However, I agree far more strongly with the second statement.

In fact, I recently came across a situation where both these statements could almost be analyzed side by side.

A close friend told me about a highly knowledgeable individual who took over a large team in his company. Multiple sub-teams were reporting into him and everyone was communicated the same. The person has robust domain knowledge and is highly experienced, and by the logic of the first statement, respect and leadership acceptance should have naturally followed. Yet, despite formal authority and clear communication structures, the individual continued struggling to gain genuine acceptance from the team.

Over time, it became increasingly visible that the challenge was not knowledge - it was leadership approach. In an attempt to be liked and accepted, the individual gradually became overly agreeable, tried to accommodate every concern, avoided taking firm positions, and focused heavily on staying in everyone’s good books. Last heard, he has also started to push back on few decisions of the management and has now adopted a 'Union Leader' approach, just to get the popularity votes. His leadership style has become less about balanced direction and more about seeking approval.

He also tends to take up the more important and visible tasks himself, possibly in an attempt to lead by example. While that may come from good intent, the way it is perceived by the team matters equally. When routine or less glamorous responsibilities are delegated, it sometimes creates an impression that such work is somehow beneath him. Over time, this can unintentionally weaken team ownership and create a sense of imbalance, because good leadership is not only about taking ownership of high-impact work, but also about demonstrating equal respect for every contribution within the team.

So, knowledge certainly matters. No two ways about it. Competence gives a leader credibility and creates confidence that the person understands the work. But expertise alone rarely guarantees respect or influence. Teams do not follow people only because they are knowledgeable. 

For example, in sports, some of the greatest players have not necessarily become the most successful captains or coaches. Technical brilliance may earn admiration, but leadership in a team environment requires the ability to inspire, manage personalities, maintain discipline, and make difficult decisions for the larger good of the team.

In fact, there have been examples where leaders proved their mettle despite having little or no technical expertise in the domain they were leading. Since I come from an automotive background, I naturally look at examples from that industry.

A fascinating real-world example is Alan Mulally. Before joining Ford Motor Company, he spent most of his career at Boeing and was not an automobile expert. Many within Ford understood the technical side of the business far better than he did. Yet Mulally became one of Ford’s most respected leaders - not because of technical superiority, but because of his ability to bring clarity, accountability, collaboration, and direction to the organization.

Coming to the second statement, I agree that problems begin when a leader crosses the line from being friendly to becoming a friend. In an attempt to be liked, some leaders start agreeing with everyone, validating every grievance, avoiding difficult conversations, and trying too hard to stay in everyone’s good books. While this may create temporary goodwill, it often weakens long-term respect.

Teams usually respect leaders who can maintain balance - leaders who are empathetic without losing objectivity, approachable without losing authority, and supportive without avoiding accountability.

Knowledge may create initial credibility. But leadership is ultimately sustained by maturity, balance, and the ability to maintain that fine line.

The Mirror You Handed Me

You are telling me, “Thanks for showing me the mirror and my true worth.”

First - see how well I know you, because I had already written about this exact reaction.

Second - isn’t this the pot calling the kettle black?

In the last episode we had, I told you very clearly that there was something I did not like. I told you that you insulted me. I told you that I am hurt. And what did you choose after that? Sarcasm. Silence.

So that is MY exact worth in your eyes, isn’t it?

That I should not have a voice? That I do not have the right to feel hurt? After all, who am I?

Moreover, you are telling me that I showed you your true worth - after reading my last blog!! After the episode where you weighed my worth in monetary terms? But Raja Saab ko toh sab maaf hai, isn’t it?

Before the latest episode, I come and hugged you so many times because I missed you. I have told you what you mean to me. I have stood by you. I have defended you. I have categorically refused to throw you under the bus and prevented others from doing that. I have always tried to be there whenever you needed me. I have cried for you. I have cared. I have prayed for you. I have counted on you.

I neither have the intention to tell you your worth nor the right to do that. 

But yes. I am showing you the mirror. Someone needs to. I do not have the right. But its not the first time nor the last time. That is because I care. 

Maafi Hukum 🙏

The Friend You Used to Be

You were once someone rare to me.

Not because you did grand things - though you did, and I don't deny that - but because you noticed me when most people didn’t. It felt that you understood me. In a world where presence is often loud but shallow, yours was quiet and real. That is what stayed with me. That is what mattered.

And it still does.

I’ve thanked you many a time. I still do. And I have meant it each time. May be you won’t understand why, but you mattered to me in ways that had nothing to do with what you could give. I of course never had much. I am not a man of means - I never was - but I have always tried to show up in the only way I knew how: by being there. Emotionally. Physically. Honestly. Consistently.

But now, may be in the last couple of years and definitely in the last one year, it feels that things have changed. I feel that you have changed and I guess you feel that I have changed. 

The person who once felt warm and genuine now feels distant and 'calculated'. I am sure that when you do things for people, you do not expect much. However, now very frequently, I hear that I did 'so much' for XYZ and I did not get anything in return. And invariably, that 'so much' is materialistic, expensive things. I have found it both strange and different. After all, friendship and generosity are not 'investments' and people's emotions cannot be 'returns'.

That shift is hard to ignore.

Another change is in the people you spend time with. They can be put in three broad buckets (and I am not including women; that's a very different subject). 

There are those above you. These are the ones you seem eager to impress, to emulate. I’ve watched you around them. You stop being yourself. You put up a performance. You are often quite fake in front of them. And I really do not think they respect you the way you think they do. I genuinely hope I am wrong.

Then there’s the middle ground - new friends who are similar to you in status. Comfortable, safe, predictable. No imbalance there, so no tension. You like spending time with them.

And finally, the ones who’ve been around the longest. The ones who knew you before all of this. The ones who care. This group also includes people who have not made it and probably never will. At least they would never achieve the definition of success that you have. You meet them but off late, it feels that you do not respect them. Their value seems negligible. Their voices are inconvenient.

Isn't it strange how the people who stood by you the longest now seem to matter the least?

The past couple of years have made this even clearer. You went through difficult times. To a large extent, it was self-created. From one bad habit to another (let us call them that as I really do not want to be specific). When you felt low, sad, depressed, angry - I was there. Not perfectly, not always with the right words, but I stayed. I questioned you when I had to because I am a friend and not a 'Yes Man'. I supported you when you needed it. I didn’t walk away, even when you tried to push me out. 

During this period, you made several choices. Some of them, extremely hard to defend. Harder to watch. I remained by your side.

I tried to be the 'voice of conscience' and told you the right thing to do. You never did. I still remained by your side.

You hurt people. You dismissed them. You subordinated everyone and everything - work, family, friends, me and - above all - your pride and self-respect. That's the part that hurts me the most because I took pride in you and respected you. I tried to stop you. You distanced yourself, proudly declaring that you no longer care what anyone thinks - that you’re finally living life for yourself. 

Well...you are succeeding. And I genuinely hope you are happy.

You pushed everyone away. Even those who once stood firmly beside you. You’ve drawn lines where there didn’t need to be any. And yet, when those same people feel bad and step back, you act surprised!!! Hurt, even!!!

That part is almost poetic.

I can already imagine your reaction to all of this - something along the lines of, “After everything I’ve done…”

And that’s exactly the point.

Not everything can be bought. Not loyalty. Not respect. Not self-worth. Contrary to what you might believe now, not everyone is transactional. Not everyone trades dignity for gifts, or affection for favors. Some people still hold on to things like pride and self-respect. Outdated concepts to you perhaps but they matter to people. 

For what it’s worth - I never stayed because of what you offered. Not the gifts. Not the gestures. Not the things you insisted on giving. Take back everything you have given and more....but return my old friend.

I stayed with you because of who you were. You used to care. You used to listen. You used to understand without needing explanations. That version of you - that’s the one who mattered. This version… now feels unfamiliar. 

I am hurt.

You know that. Not because you understood. Now, I no longer expect that from you. You know that because you asked, "are you mad at me for something"? And I told you. And then what? You chose silence over conversation. I would never do that to you because this is not what friends do.

But ya, it’s an interesting choice - to walk away from someone who doesn’t need to ask if you’re hurting, because they already know. You have said that to me. I understand when you are hurt, sad, angry, depressed, anxious. I get that by looking at you. I get that from your voice. If I have to ask you then I have failed as a friend.

I am someone who stayed. I am someone who cared. Someone who, despite everything, still does.

But I don’t expect anything from you now. Not explanations, not apologies, not a sudden return to who you were. High hopes, isn't it??!! What am I even thinking? I know your reaction if and when you read this would be what I said earlier, "Wow...after everything I’ve done, this is what I get...."

I just hope - genuinely - that whatever path you’re on keeps you as happy as you believe it will. That the bubble holds. That the wonderland doesn’t crack under its own weight.

And that your 'Pursuit of Unrealistic Happiness' turns out to be worth it. Because it did cost something. More than you realize - or may ever be willing to admit.

Take care. I mean that. Even now. 

You have hurt me immensely. You know that - unlike you - I do not have many friends and when I needed anything, I have always turned to you. Thanks for taking that away. You have shown me, with remarkable clarity, how little I matter.

But I still care and...I always will. I have not given up on you. It is not in me at all. I still hope that one day you will stumble your way back to senses and understand your priorities and the people who genuinely care. Will wait...

On Respect, Recognition, Biasedness and Overreaction

Recently, I came across clippings from a television interview of Mary Kom on 'Aap Ki Adalat with Rajat Sharma'. The interview attracted widespread criticism, largely due to the tone she adopted and certain remarks she made while speaking about her ex-husband. As someone who has long admired Mary Kom, I found the interview deeply disappointing.

Mary Kom’s achievements need no reiteration. She is one of the most accomplished athletes in Indian sporting history: a six-time World Amateur Boxing Champion, an Olympic bronze medalist, Asian Games and Commonwealth Games gold medalist, and a recipient of India’s highest sporting and civilian honors, including the Padma Bhushan, Padma Shri, Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna, and Arjuna Award. Beyond boxing, she has served as a Member of Parliament and is widely regarded as a pioneering figure who helped bring visibility and acceptance to women’s boxing in India. 

Several of Mary Kom’s major awards and victories came after she became a mother, and this is widely regarded as one of the most remarkable aspects of her career. Her journey from humble beginnings in Manipur to global sporting acclaim is inspiring enough to have warranted a biographical film. I have been a big fan of Kom.

It is precisely because of this stature that her remarks felt jarring. Publicly discussing personal disputes is rarely dignified, and in this case, it seemed unnecessary. More troubling was the manner in which she questioned her ex-husband’s role and contribution, making statements along the lines of “what kind of man lives off a woman’s money,” alleging that he withdrew money without her consent, and mentioning that he never had a successful career. These remarks were tasteless.

One could argue that this was a case of being caught off guard by the media. People who are not media savvy, can get sucked into a drain in front of cameras. Television seeks headlines and can exploit personalities; Mary Kom did seem to have been drawn into that trap, which did not favor her long-term reputation. However, after watching the clips, it is difficult to attribute everything to lack of media training. The remarks did not seem accidental; they appeared to reflect genuine beliefs. There seemed to be a clear lack of respect for her ex-husband as he did not earn much and, during their marriage, remained dependent on her earnings.

The videos and comments of Mary Kom triggered several thoughts and emotions. For example, it immediately reminded me of a remark made by actor and stand-up comedian Chris Rock that “Only women, children, and dogs are loved unconditionally. A man is only loved under the condition that he provide something.”

It also raised a hypothetical question. What if the comment was made by a successful man for his wife who, quit her job and set aside her passions to take care of home and children? What if the man had said that his wife was not successful and had belittled her contribution? What if the man had questioned her for withdrawing money or spending money without his permission?

All hell would have broken loose. The backlash would have been swift and severe, ...and rightly so.

This also brought to mind a personal anecdote involving two people I know. One of them is an entrepreneur - intelligent, driven, and successful. After a strong career in financial services, she pivoted to start her own business, which is now doing well and receiving media attention. She is married to someone I know, and both are part of a common WhatsApp group. Lets just call her - Sierra Kilo.

On one occasion, Sierra Kilo shared a news item or media coverage related to her business in the WhatsApp group. It naturally triggered a wave of congratulatory messages. Everyone applauded her success. One member of the group – the second character in this anecdote – congratulated her 'and her husband' in his message. In my view, it was a jovial, light-hearted, and seemingly harmless comment, likely sent out of courtesy since Sierra Kilo's husband is also a member of the group...though it certainly could have been avoided.

He referred to the husband as a “sleeping partner,” which, in my interpretation, served a dual purpose: to include the husband and at the same time, not take anything away from Sierra Kilo. I DO NOT believe the term was used in a formal business sense (Sleeping partner (also called silent partner) refers to a person who invests capital in a business but does not take part in its day-to-day operations or management). She, however, did not appreciate the message and objected on the WhatsApp group, clarifying that the business is a 'sole proprietorship'; she is the 'only Founder' and she runs it 'single-handedly'. 

It did not need clarification but its okay.

However, the matter did not end there. She subsequently wrote a 200+ word LinkedIn post on the subject. In it, she questioned why, when a woman entrepreneur succeeds, people say, “Congratulations to you and your husband.” She questioned why “educated, well-meaning individuals struggle to fully acknowledge a woman’s independent professional journey?”. In her words, “I was taken aback. But only briefly. Because, truth be told, this isn’t new. So I did what I always do – tuned out the noise, focused on the work, and kept going.”

The post got some ‘Likes’ and supportive comments, predominantly from women.

I found the <over>reaction immature, over-the-top and reflective of a tendency to frame the situation through a victimhood lens, while simultaneously projecting an image of being brave and unfazed.

What about the common phrase men have heard for generations: “Behind every successful man, there is a woman”. This has been said about business leaders, sportsmen, and almost every man 'who made it'...if he had a female partner. It has even been suggested that gallantry award winners from the military could fight for the country as there was a woman taking care of the home. How many men have posted about it and tried to play the ‘Victim Card’? How many say that why are you taking some credit away?

I feel that whenever it is said that “Behind every successful man, there is a woman”, it is meant as a compliment for the woman, acknowledging their emotional, domestic, or logistical support. I admit it is a big support and must be acknowledged. That is why, most logical men would never take offence, whenever they hear this.

This brings the discussion back to Mary Kom. Was her husband not providing similar support? I cannot claim personal knowledge of their marriage, but in several earlier interviews, Mary Kom herself openly credited her husband, Onler Kom, for standing by her, managing the household, and caring for their children while she trained and competed. She had repeatedly said she could not have achieved what she did without his support.

Why, then, does that support no longer merit acknowledgment? Is it because they are no longer together? Because the gap in their public and financial stature has widened? Or because personal grievances have reshaped her perception of his role? Whatever the reason, it appears that she is no longer comfortable sharing even a fraction of the credit she once willingly attributed to him. That is entirely up to her but she has no business mocking him in front of millions.

Let me make it very clear that the intention of the post is not to bash women (yeah right...too little too late) but I admit that I am getting dangerously close to that territory. I am just sharing my views on avoiding over-reactions, acknowledging your partner (if and wherever possible), being respectful and .....not having the 'Feminism ka Suleimaani Keeda'. (Oh no! I was this close to de-escalating the situation and I screwed up again!!)

On a serious note, my observations are not about any particular gender; I fully acknowledge that men are often insensitive and frequently discount women’s contributions, at times quite blatantly. Another real-life example illustrates this, involving people I know (examples, it seems, are closer than we often think).

A woman I know is married into a family that appears to be well-off (not certain as I am yet to ask them for their bank statements). They are into several businesses - including a two-wheeler dealership, possibly with multiple outlets. She and her husband slogged their asses off to establish and grow the two-wheeler business. While it may have appeared to several people (or they assume) that the husband has done everything, I know for a fact that she also managed several aspects of the business along with managing home and kids. I am not alien to the automotive industry and I had several discussions with her and was always impressed by her understanding and inquisitiveness. They were also planning to expand into a four-wheeler business, and both devoted immense effort over the years to make it happen.

Despite her relentless work and juggling of responsibilities, which included businesses, home, children, husband’s health, in-laws, another person (I know him too) repeatedly made disrespectful remarks. He would often suggest that she is all set, what does she have to worry about, she can chill and enjoy the fruits of her husband’s hard work and enjoy his wealth. 

Highly insensitive (Buddy, you make all of us look bad). In this case, a question similar to the one asked by Sierra Kilo - why educated, well-meaning individuals struggle to acknowledge a woman’s hard work - is entirely valid.

So, stupidity clearly has no gender.

Anyways, much has been said already. Ultimately, this discussion is not about taking sides or keeping score. Contributions, whether professional, emotional, domestic, or logistical, should neither be belittled nor exaggerated to suit a narrative. Acknowledging a partner’s support should not feel like a dilution of one’s own achievement. Genuine insensitivity should be called out but at the same time, if you do not like a comment, do not over-react turn it into a public outrage. 

The real maturity lies in balance: recognizing effort and support where it exists, calling out bias where it is real, and resisting the urge to turn every imperfect interaction into a larger battle.

(NOTE: If you are curious about how the individuals in the two anecdotes responded, here is what followed. The man in the first instance chose not to react to Sierra Kilo’s response; he was taken aback but decided to let it pass. In contrast, the woman in the second instance addressed the remark directly and firmly at an appropriate moment. She is no abla naari - in fact she is quite the opposite - which is precisely why I fondly refer to her as Jwaala Daaku!!)

Dear Romeo Alpha Mike

Dear Romeo Alpha Mike,

I recently left Foxtrot and Sierra after spending over 7.5 years. I thoroughly enjoyed my stint there - except the last few months. It is indeed going through some turbulence and require several changes. Honestly, I was excited about your vision - even though your first mail sent massive shock waves!!! :) 

I felt that you would be able to do the much needed course correction. Naturally, I was surprised and shocked when I heard about your exit. Based on my interactions with stakeholders (though the sample is neither statistically significant nor representative),  I can say that they had high expectations from you and they felt confused later on. Your blogs/articles suggest that things were not handled in a professional manner. 

I wish the organization could benefit from your vision and leadership. And I wish you all the best!! 

Regards, 

Alpha Kilo

Flirting For Benefits

There is this company that I know pretty well. I know several people who have worked over there or are currently employed with the company. It is a global company with offices in several countries (more than 40) across the globe. Though it has a decent name in the industry it operates in, I have heard there are several internal issues. Some people have all the power and they are running the company as a family run business. Well, that is not the reason why I wrote this blog.

I have heard that some key people in the management are known to flirt with women and they shower certain women employees with benefits. These benefits include promotions, increments, opportunities to travel abroad and so on. I have also heard that some women employees have had a unbelievably fast growth trajectory. There is a particular female in the India office; as per some of the people in senior leadership, she has slept her way to an important position in the organization. All this is widely discussed - I am surprised that it neither bothers those people in the top management nor those women employees!! It is extremely unethical and for an old school person like me, it is absolutely disgusting. Well, that is ALSO not the reason why I wrote this blog.

I came to know that one woman employee - who is widely believed to have benefited from these practices - recently acknowledged it. Apparently, she told 2 other employees that it is the fastest way to grow in the company. As per her, the management is full of old lustful men and one can get several benefits by flirting with them or giving them 'some freedom'!!! One of the other female employees - who was part of the conversation - acknowledged it and called her boss a disgusting pervert. For some reason, this brought a smile on my face. I am certainly not under any kind of delusion that it would change such men - at least in that company. May be I smiled because more people came to know about the disgusting practices. May be I smiled because at least these women know what they are doing. May be I smiled because no matter what these men think of themselves, most employees think of them as old, sleazy, lustful, perverted men. And this is the reason why I wrote this blog!!!

Closed Chapter; Now A New One

Ended a long chapter of my life. The journey was mostly enjoyable. Nothing special but for the most part, it was fulfilling. Made some poor decisions. Or may be I am being hard on myself. Lets just say that I went against my own principles on one occasion. It was not a stupid mistake. Like always, choices were there and neither were absolutely clear. I chose to play it 'safe'. Did not know the pitfalls. Things started taking a bad turn. Its all behind me now. Chose to move on.

The new chapter should be interesting as well as challenging. Have mixed feelings about it. But I am determined to do whatever it takes. Lets see. 

Trust???

When he put down his papers, the HR told him that the company would hold to 1.5 months salary, "as per company policy". When pointed that the policy is for 1 month, the HR representative asked to "trust the company". 

You are holding on to salary, you have held back variable component, you have blocked sites like Gmail, LinkedIn etc., you have blocked USB drives and you are asking about trust!!!???!!! Hilarious!!!

Corporate Lessons from 'Titanic'

Situation - There is this company, which is not in a very healthy state. Most of the senior leadership acknowledges that without significant efforts and infusion of capital, the company would be in "big trouble". Employees are worried.

Advise to employees from someone in the Senior Management (lets call this person 'Victor Victor') -

1. Titanic (i.e., the Company) has hit an iceberg. It cannot be fixed by people (i.e., employees) on board
2. There are few options available to passengers and crew members (i.e., employees)
3. Option 1: Wait for someone knowledgeable and resourceful (i.e., investor) to come and fix the ship
4. Option 2: Wait for a big ship (i.e., a large firm in the same domain) and rescue (i.e., hire) you
5. Option 3: Wait for a small boat (i.e., a small firm in the same domain) and rescue (i.e., hire) you
6. Option 4: You have the option of jumping in the water (i.e., leave without a job or leave for a company that does not do justice to your experience, profile etc.). Don't jump in water!!!

Great analogy and all very good suggestions from 'Victor Victor'.

But don't forget.....the ship is still sinking!!! 

Don't wait for too long. Find that threshold beyond which jumping in water and trying to stay afloat is a better option. Else the ship would sink and will take you down with it.

Legal Battle: Team A vs Team B

Team A presented some 'facts'. Charges were found to be partially incorrect and were shot down by Team B as well as some neutral eye-witnesses. 

As per Team A, Team B has been making false allegations. That claim could not be verified.

As per Team A, Team B has been using unparliamentary language. Team B is found guilty.

As per Team B, Team A has always lied. That claim could not be verified.

As per Team B, Team A has always used Team B. That claim could not be verified.

As per neutral eye-witnesses, Team A could have avoided the situation.

-----------------------------------------------

Based on all the facts presented in the case, this self-appointed judge makes the following observations. 

• Team A should avoid such situations
• Team B should try not to overreact
• If there is a dispute in future, Team A and B must try NOT to create a scene in front of others
• Team A and B are rarely on the same page and are rarely cordial. They should steer clear of each other
• Beyond this, the judge does not give a f**k!!!

We met again. Well....not really 'met' but we came together (with several others) on a social media platform. 

I never expected that we will ever be in touch again. All these years, I hoped that you are doing well. It seems you are and I am glad. 

All these years, I thought that if our paths ever cross again, I would apologize. I also thought that it would be really awkward. But I am surprised how calm and normal things have been. That is really mature of you. 

We do not talk to each other and I completely understand that. After all that, I do not expect friendship between us. I have nothing to say except sorry. 

I am glad that you are okay....and happy. There was a lot going on in your life back then and it was overwhelming for you. I would like to believe that you are past those issues. Keep smiling and take care. 

A Special Teacher

Today is Teachers' Day in India. The day always remind me of a 'person', who I used to refer as 'Teacher'. It was not a random name and there are reasons behind it but let us not go there.

I have known the person for close to 24 years. We used to talk to each other, we use to like each other but we were not 'friends'. Our talks mostly revolved around others. Later, for a long period, we lost touch. We were never good friends so neither of us really made an attempt to contact the other.

It was around 10 years back that I contacted the person. I needed to get some details from the person. Nothing else. I was not really looking to have a friendship. Though, it was a phase in which I was not doing too well emotionally and I used to look for opportunities to talk to people just to avoid my own company. When we talked, we struck a chord. Or may be I should say that I liked talking to the person. The person was also not doing too well and we found each other. We used to talk and support each other. There was nothing anyone could do about my situation and I just needed to talk to someone. In case of the person, there were several issues and I would like to believe that I helped in keeping the chin up. At least that is what the person suggested.

We became close and we started talking for hours every day. I was liking it and so was that person. But then, things fell apart. We could not remain friends and all because of me. I abruptly stopped talking to the person and I know that I caused a lot of pain. But I did not mean to. I did what I did partly because I did not want to cause a bigger pain later.

Now, we are not in touch. I know where the person is. I do not know whether my whereabouts are known to the person or not. I truly cared and I still do. I wish the person the best in life.

I wish that we could remain friends. I wish that we can become friends again. Not close ones but just friends. I wish that I can explain to the person that I care and I am sorry. I wish that I can refer to the person as 'friend' or 'teacher' and not as 'person'. 

I am sorry my friend. I hope you always do well. Wish you the best.

A Management Consultant Wonders

"You focus too much on execution and quality".

He wondered if this is a bad attribute. After all, it has not been impacting the profitability, productivity and utilization. Any management consultant should be proud of such a comment. His company, which is perceived as a reports and market research provider but wants to grow in consulting, should in fact give value to such attributes and employees, who possess such attributes. However, that is not the case in his company!!! Here, such employees are required to change!!!

The individual who has been quoted at the beginning had added further, "Focus on getting more business. You should not say NO to anything that the client wants in scope. Do not worry about execution - that we will manage somehow".

'Manage somehow' is not the best approach in an industry where clients pay you for your expertise and project management skills. It is an industry where clients have 'almost zero tolerance' towards low quality and non-adherence to timelines.

The approach of 'get more business and do not say no to anything that the client wants in scope' is extremely risky. He thought that the fact that his management is still a fan of this approach, even after losing some high-profile clients in recent past, is nothing short of BIZARRE. His company lost a client, who had awarded more than 5 projects in that year, as the VP and Director/PM could not say NO to an impossible scope. The client has not worked with his company since then!!! Our management consultant had suggested that they should not touch the project. Still, people refuse to learn from the mistakes!!!

In fact, his 'questionable' attribute had helped in getting repeat business from multiple clients. There was a company which did not award a project to his company as they wanted to work with a more established consulting firm. They went with one of the best consulting firms that is around. However, it turned out that the consulting firm promised too many things (had not said NO to anything) and could not deliver. The next time, the client awarded the project to our management consultant's company and he led the project. And like always, he executed the project perfectly (clearly he is not being modest!!!). Later, the client awarded his company another project and requested him to lead the project. So, his work made a client happy - the same client who was pissed with the quality of work produced by a top consulting firm. Commendable, is it not? It is indeed but such qualities are not valued in his company. He wonders WHY!!!

He points that he does not believe in playing safe. He does not promise only those things which can be 'easily' delivered. Firstly, in consulting, no one pays for things that can be easily delivered. Moreover, in consulting, you are selling an idea and service, which needs to take shape over the duration of the project. Things have to go as per plan and have to fall in place. So everything is a risk. One has to take a risk and plan/aim for whatever can be delivered in the best quality. However, one should not 'gamble' while pitching for a project. One needs to be realistic and practical, which he is (again, no sign of modesty!!!).

Our management consultant wonders....if he needs to change himself and if he needs a change.