The Infosys drama continues to play out with striking similarities to what tanspired in the Tata group when Cyrus Mistry was ejected out.
Vishal Sikka claims that persistent attempts by N.R.Narayana Murthy to malign the company's Board and top management derailed any move by the company to improve its performance. Murthy counters saying he is focusing on governance and not performance.
Sikka came from SAP, a renowned German company. Financial performance counts for every company and it is so for German companies also. Remember the Volkswagen scam involving tampering with fuel gauge ? Coming from such a background, Sikka puts performance over everything else including corporate governance.
Governance has both legal and ethical dimensions. Most CEOs prioritise the legal aspect over the ethical requirements. Laws are strictly defined. Ethics are not so. That is why people are more confused than enlightened when Ratan Tata boasts about the Tata Culture and Murthy obsesses with his version of Corporate Governance. Significance of ethics in management should not be trivialised. At the same time, we need to bear in mind that there are acceptable ranges in ethical behaviour. Anyone who has a smattering of Mahabharata would appreciate this.
Murthy carries a burdensome baggage. He feels adrift since leaving the company. That is why he made a comeback. Though for all outward appearances he welcomed professionalisation of management with the exit of promoters from management, he did not have a proper understanding of his self. He continues to be possessive about the company he and his co-promoters formed. His intellect which is not very sharp hesitantly accepts the need for professionalisation. But his heart continues to crave for active association with Infosys. He continues to suffer from Founders' Curse.
This dichotomy between what is good for one's creation and what is psychologically comfortable for oneself is not uncommon. The dissonance arising from this has to be resolved in a mature manner. If it is not resolved in time, it leads to street brawls like what we are witnessing in Infosys today.
Issues raised by Murthy are of course not trivial though they could have been sorted out in a less amateurish way. Persons like Seshasayee, Ravi Venkatesan , D.Sundaram and Roopa Kudva are not men of straw and cannot be trifled with. So, Murthy's non-stop allegations against the Board (though he tries to sound a little more pleasant by seeming to accept their proven credentials) are in poor taste and are an inescapable consequence of his own split personality where brain and heart are at war.
Other promoters like Shibulal, Nilekani, Dinesh and Gopalakrishnan have maintained a dignified silence. This is at variance from the cacophonic support extended to Murthy by the former CFOs who were appointed by Murthy. Mohandas Pai has not covered himself with glory by egging on Murthy.
Murthy has been petulant. The Board has been flat-footed and out-manoeuvred by both Murthy and Sikka. Shareholders have learnt a painful lesson that neither promoters nor the management care for the company. If either Murthy or the Board does not exhibit flexibility in dealing with the other, a company that was showcased as an exemplar combining governance and performance would fall between two stools. Both Murthy and the Board owe it to the company and its shareholders to mend their ways.
Vishal Sikka claims that persistent attempts by N.R.Narayana Murthy to malign the company's Board and top management derailed any move by the company to improve its performance. Murthy counters saying he is focusing on governance and not performance.
Sikka came from SAP, a renowned German company. Financial performance counts for every company and it is so for German companies also. Remember the Volkswagen scam involving tampering with fuel gauge ? Coming from such a background, Sikka puts performance over everything else including corporate governance.
Governance has both legal and ethical dimensions. Most CEOs prioritise the legal aspect over the ethical requirements. Laws are strictly defined. Ethics are not so. That is why people are more confused than enlightened when Ratan Tata boasts about the Tata Culture and Murthy obsesses with his version of Corporate Governance. Significance of ethics in management should not be trivialised. At the same time, we need to bear in mind that there are acceptable ranges in ethical behaviour. Anyone who has a smattering of Mahabharata would appreciate this.
Murthy carries a burdensome baggage. He feels adrift since leaving the company. That is why he made a comeback. Though for all outward appearances he welcomed professionalisation of management with the exit of promoters from management, he did not have a proper understanding of his self. He continues to be possessive about the company he and his co-promoters formed. His intellect which is not very sharp hesitantly accepts the need for professionalisation. But his heart continues to crave for active association with Infosys. He continues to suffer from Founders' Curse.
This dichotomy between what is good for one's creation and what is psychologically comfortable for oneself is not uncommon. The dissonance arising from this has to be resolved in a mature manner. If it is not resolved in time, it leads to street brawls like what we are witnessing in Infosys today.
Issues raised by Murthy are of course not trivial though they could have been sorted out in a less amateurish way. Persons like Seshasayee, Ravi Venkatesan , D.Sundaram and Roopa Kudva are not men of straw and cannot be trifled with. So, Murthy's non-stop allegations against the Board (though he tries to sound a little more pleasant by seeming to accept their proven credentials) are in poor taste and are an inescapable consequence of his own split personality where brain and heart are at war.
Other promoters like Shibulal, Nilekani, Dinesh and Gopalakrishnan have maintained a dignified silence. This is at variance from the cacophonic support extended to Murthy by the former CFOs who were appointed by Murthy. Mohandas Pai has not covered himself with glory by egging on Murthy.
Murthy has been petulant. The Board has been flat-footed and out-manoeuvred by both Murthy and Sikka. Shareholders have learnt a painful lesson that neither promoters nor the management care for the company. If either Murthy or the Board does not exhibit flexibility in dealing with the other, a company that was showcased as an exemplar combining governance and performance would fall between two stools. Both Murthy and the Board owe it to the company and its shareholders to mend their ways.
1 comment:
I think there is a subtle difference. In the case of TATA Cyrus questioned the actions of his predecessor with regard to TatavTele services & Sivasankaran whereas in Infosys the other way about.
Post a Comment