RAY pharmaceutical company from North India approached DSD consultants in Bombay (Mumbai) and requested them to identify a general manager for their Africa operations. DSD asked Chatterjee, the RAY personnel director, to fill out the standard personnel requisition form, and pay the retainer fee. “No problem,” said Mr Chatterjee, “What is important is speed. That is why we have come to you. With your wide contacts in the pharmaceutical field, you should be able to headhunt someone for us quite easily and fast. We will sign the form and send the retainer fee from Delhi, but please start the work immediately.”
Roy of DSD went into the assignment with full vigour. After 15 days, he identified a potential candidate who fit most of the requirements. He couriered the CV to Mr Chatterjee and phoned him to reconfirm that he had received the envelope. “Oh yes,” he said, “seems to be a good candidate.”
However, for nearly six weeks, there was no news. Strange, thought Mr Roy, considering that Mr Chatterjee was in such a hurry. No news from Ram, the candidate, either. Every time he rang up Ram‘s house, he was not in!
Eight weeks later, by a strange coincidence, Mr Roy met Mr Ram at Bombay airport. “Oh, where have you been? I have been trying to contact you, but you were never available,” said Roy. Ram seemed apologetic. “In fact, all is going well,” he said “I have been selected last week and given the appointment letter. In fact, I am going to Delhi just now to have a look at their factories. I have agreed to join them next month in Lagos.”
“But you did not keep me informed,” blurted Mr Roy.
“No, I thought the company would have told you - or they should have,” said Mr Ram.
Mr Roy thought all these goings-on to be very strange. He got his office to write to Mr Chatterjee that he had heard that Mr Ram had been selected- and now could he raise a bill for DSD services? No reply, even after two reminders.
When the third reminder was sent, there was a curt reply from Mr Chatterjee’s assistant, to say that Mr Ram‘s biodata had been sent by two agencies, DSD and one other, and since the other agency had sent it a few days before they received the same one from DSD, it would be right to pay the other agency (whom they would not name) and not DSD. They hoped that Mr Roy would understand the company’s predicament, and hoped that they would continue their relationship in the future.
It was indeed a complex scenario of half-truths. Who was justified? Was Mr Roy justified in proceeding with the assignment without receiving the retainer fee? Was Mr Chatterjee justified in asking Mr Roy to push ahead, without the formalities being complied with? Was Mr Ram justified in not disclosing to Mr Roy that he had also given his CV to another agency, and that he was trying all avenues available to him, to get a new assignment? Was Mr Ram justified in not keeping Mr Roy informed? Was Mr Chatterjee justified in not responding until the third reminder?
Each one gives their own version of why they did, what they did - and are happy in the knowledge that they are right!
Or take the case of Desai and his dilemma. Mr Desai was the marketing manager of one of the divisions of a large multinational. He was an engineer, with a degree in business administration, and had worked abroad for four years before returning to India; and had been with the CORY Corporation for six years.
He was getting a little frustrated because he felt that there was no possibility of upward mobility in the foreseeable future, and he felt he deserved to move up. When an advertisement appeared for the position of general manager (marketing) in a smaller multinational, the NATY Corporation, Mr Desai applied and was selected. The week after he joined, NATY was having an international marketing training session in France, and the managing director of NATY insisted that Mr Desai go and attend the three-week programme and spend another two weeks visiting four other subsidiaries on the continent. Mr Desai returned to India after six weeks, which included a one-week holiday in the UK.
A week after returning, he resigned. Mr Desai had been appointed president and chief executive of another company, smaller in size, but with good growth potential- the TINY Corporation.
The managing director of NATY was very upset. He had spent such a lot of money on Mr Desai. What was worse, he lost face with the staff, as well as the corporate headquarters, for having hired a person at such a senior level, who left within two months of being appointed and after having a five-week orientation programme at company expense - and without having contributed anything towards the progress of the company.
Mr Desai’s argument is that he had applied to TINY two weeks before applying to NATY. TINY took a long time over the selection process. They finally made an offer to Mr Desai a week before he returned from Europe. Mr Desai says that obviously he could not turn down an offer to become the chief executive. Such opportunities come rarely. Mr Desai feels he was completely justified in taking up the new assignment.
Rino left a large advertising agency, where he was working for the last eight years, to start his own advertising agency. He takes with him three of the largest and most prestigious clients of the earlier agency. The DINA agency management is furious. By all means, leave if you like, but don’t take our clients with you.
Mr Rino’s argument is simple. He says these three accounts wanted him, more than the agency. They wanted the service that only he could provide. If Mr Rino had not to take them on, they would have left the DINA agency in any case, and looked for another advertising agency. Mr Rino, therefore, justified his action.
All of us have come across such dilemmas time and again. The mind says it is justified. Does the heart say this also? Do the two always have to work in tandem?
(Walter Vieira is a Fellow of the Institute of Management Consultants of India - FIMC. He was a successful corporate executive for 14 years, capping his career as Head of marketing for a Pharma multinational, for India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka- and then pioneered marketing consulting in India in 1975. As a consultant, he has worked across four continents. He was the first Asian elected Chairman of ICMCI, the world apex body of consultants in 45 countries, in 1997. He is the author of 16 books, a business columnist, international conference speaker and has been visiting professor in Marketing in the US, Europe, and Asia for over 40 years. He was awarded Lifetime Achievement Award for Consulting in 2005, and for Marketing in 2009. He now spends much of his time in NGO work - Consumer Education and Research Centre, IDOBRO, and some others.)
