Is your Management poisoning your Company

A blog some months ago had a post by someone who had recently been handed the pink slip.  He was ranting about the  Managers responsible for his termination.  The post was tailed by several comments posted from other employees who at different times had been removed by the same Managers.  The organization shut down recently and while that may or may not be related to management glitches but it is worth a think.

The worth of any organization, large or small, is always the sum total of the worth of its individual members and particularly its leaders. A bad leader is a pain but a toxic leader is poison.

 A large organization may host a dozen toxic leaders and not notice the difference for a while until it gets caught up in frauds, malpractices, employee harassment suits and the like.

But the smaller the organization the more significant is the presence of a toxic leader because even one can lead to its disintegration in a very short while.

Toxic leadership is indeed very common even in large well run institutions like the Army or the Church and even there, is difficult to eradicate.

What is toxic leadership and why is it so difficult to spot and remove a toxic leader particularly in organizations which are people oriented?

Marcia Whicker defines a toxic leader as a leader who is “maladjusted, malcontent, and often malevolent, even malicious.”   Every leader, good or bad, is a person with vision but a toxic leader has a vision for self rather than the organization.  Such a leader will seek to rise above the team rather than with the team. Such a leader is successful but the toxic leader’s success is not the company’s success and more often achieved by clawing the company’s back.

Toxic leadership is the more difficult to spot because at first look such leaders come across as intelligent and very performance oriented.  They project an attitude of confidence.  On the job, they are often to be seen ordering, commanding, rushing around, their reprimands, praises, communications very public and visible; and their presence very much felt.  They may not always be loud though. A toxic leader may be soft spoken and quiet too.  But loud or not toxic leaders display a common characteristic. With the boss they are compliant.  A toxic leader will never argue with the boss. They are the “yes bossers”, the  essential “babus” the ones who are always assuring the boss  “the job will be done.”

And indeed initially the job is done.  The toxic leader will deliver value by making sure there are enough intelligent, performing   people on the team to provide value. If there are mistakes, there will be elaborate cover ups and scapegoats firmly in place.

But any value provided by such leaders will be strictly short term. In the long term toxic leaders do not add value to the organizations even if the unit performs successfully under them.

This is because toxic leaders succeed by tearing others down. They are fiercely protective of their territory and will go to any extent to stop anyone encroaching on what they see as their turf.   They are completely in control of their team but they rule by intimidating rather than uplifting. The most lethal characteristic of a toxic leader is the tendency by the leader to weed out more intelligent members of the team.

A toxic leader is always wary of anyone who is smarter and will immediately remove anyone who could be a threat. Such a leader is intelligent enough to be able to pick out the persons on his team who although capable, have low levels of confidence and esteem and are prepared to work without threatening the leader’s position.  If any member of the unit threatens to overshadow the leader, there will be no hesitation in using any weapons, even a resort to criminal practices in an attempt to eliminate the member.

This is the chief reason why such leaders cause the downfall of the organization they serve.   At some point the performing unit members will wake up to the reality, that there is no scope for them to grow. There is always a higher rate of attrition in an organization, with such a leader.  Moreover, toxic leaders in the long run do not engender the level of confidence in their team that is necessary to lead to an esprit de corps.  The team becomes dysfunctional because the members will seek every excuse to escape either out of the team or if that is not possible out of the organization itself.

An organization would do well to be on the watch for tell tale signs which betray the presence of a toxic leader-a general sense of dissatisfaction among the team members, a tendency for the more intelligent to leave the organization, a reluctance among the team members to speak out freely, signs of fear.  The best way to spot toxic leadership is to get the team assessed by an independent manager.  Invariably the team members whose qualities have been played down by the toxic leader will turn up trumps.

However, despite spotting one, companies very often find it difficult to remove such a leader, usually because such leaders are spotted too late and by then have so much influence and control over their teams that it is hard to break the bond.  Such a leader often engenders with his team one of  two states of relationship-one where the team consists of entirely sub standard employees who know they will survive only under the aegis of their leader and the other where there has developed a poisonous bond between the leader and the follower- a bond which the followers their spirit too long broken- lack the courage to break.

(Until next time,then and hoping to post more often. Also just noticed the new followers. Welcome.)

Medical Insurance in India

The Central Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum recently directed the Oriental Insurance Company to pay Rs. 64223/- that had been deducted from the hospital reimbursements made by it. The refusal to pay was based on the fact that the amounts for which reimbursement was claimed -the fees charged by the surgeon, the anesthetist and the operation theater; together with Rs.293/ -charged for cologne, blade and a blanket -were “too high. The company claimed that their policy promised to reimburse only “reasonable customary and necessary” expenses. Held that the company had not proved that the fees charged by the hospital were not reasonable, customary and necessary.

In India, mere production of the hospital bills is usually proof sufficient that the insured had incurred that expense.

It is completely plausible that the fees charged by the subject doctors, may have been excessive. In India, in a single area it is common to find different facilities charging varying amounts for similar services. An ultrasound test can cost anywhere between a few hundreds to thousands, or is even free. A specialist in nuclear medicine, a friend of mine, who I visited for a medical check up, asked me if I had insurance coverage. If so, he said, I should go ahead and perform a few tests, but if not, no need, because they were really quite expensive and unnecessary. In the cities, if the patient has medical insurance, he is invariably subjected to a battery of tests and spends weeks admitted in the hospital, after which he is generally recommended treatments which would not have been done, if he was not covered.

To prevent arbitrary charging of fees for medical services, we should, like the US, design CPT Codes. CPT (current procedural terminology) codes are numbers given for different types of medical services and supplies provide all over the country. What this means to the US citizen is that the insurer is going to reimburse the treatment provided under that code at a fixed rate. This generally results in physicians and medical providers restricting their fees to the amounts prescribed under the CPT codes. Similar coding procedures in India, with variations for rural and urban areas; would, at the least, prevent overcharging for services rendered, although it would not prevent hospitals and doctors from prescribing unnecessary treatments and providing medical supplies even for very minor complaints merely to collect insurance benefits, which is what happens in the US. In the US, insurance companies do not squeal “overcharged”, they scream “lack of medical necessity.”

Insurance law in the US is very highly developed and the processes extremely sophisticated and streamlined. Both providing insurance and claiming it, is seriously, big business. Medical treatment is usually provided by companies formed by physicians and providers who get the patient to assign insurance benefits in their favor. These companies then send in their claims to the insurer and hire law firms to sue the insurer, if the claims are not paid.

In India, insurance law has a long way to go. Here, insurance cover is mainly taken by people in bigger cities and metros. Insurance companies still project themselves as benign entities aiming to protect the innocent consumer. However, it will not be long before the real face of insurance emerges-that of a giant Midas, whose ‘protective’ touch turns everything into money.

Indian Law- Business or Profession?

Knee deep in recruitments, I find that all applicants without exception are senior practicing lawyers some with a practice of 20+ years. Irony. Because these are the very same people who had declared that working for a legal process outsourcing company is not the “real” practice of law ; that lawyers working for legal outsourcing companies were not “real lawyers;” that outsourcing is stripping the profession of its nobility. However, this dramatic change in attitudes is not surprising. It was just a matter of time before lawyers woke up to the fact that the practice of law in India had long ceased to be a profession and that just like any other business, law too was a business,the processes of which could be successfully outsourced. Neither globalization nor outsourcing can be blamed for this change in the face of Indian law from profession to business, which occurred long before outsourcing came on the scene.

In the early 20^th century and immediately post-Independence, the practice of law in India was as noble a profession as that of a priest. 50 years post-Independence, that changed. There was bred a whole generation of literate youngsters spoiled for a choice of profession. With the educational system in India giving seats in medicine, engineering and management strictly on the basis of grades, those who could not make it, turned perforce to law. Consequently courts teemed with young lawyers and in the resulting competition the nobility of law took a toss. (In the clawing climb to success, ideals tumble fast.)

One reason for so many Indian lawyers, even senior ones, opting now to work in LPOs, is because nowhere is corruption as rife as in our courts. No one with dreams of idealism and nobility can last long in the legal system. The last decade did see stringent measures taken against corrupt public servants and although matters have improved vastly, it is not yet completely clean. The judiciary has a handful of judges who are really, truly dedicated. Unfortunately, in our bureaucratic system virtue is rarely rewarded. Many of these “good” ones are often passed over for promotions and never make it beyond the district level and retire in bitter frustration. How long can one regard a profession which dances to the rustle of rupees as noble?

Another reason for the sudden influx is the current economic situation. While India is not facing the same degree of recession as the west, the spending on litigation is far less than before. Potential litigants prefer to settle matters out of court rather than "feed" lawyers.

Legal process outsourcing has come to Indian lawyers as manna from heaven. It is, if you are qualified, easy money. Many of us are as familiar with foreign lifestyles, movies, music and art as we are with our own. Even more so. Some of the younger lawyers I interviewed were completely familiar with foreign law-they could tell me about US patents relating to animal euthanasia; all about US no -fault litigation and bankruptcy practices- but had no idea whether we had any similar provisions in India.

There are those who argue that LPOs will change the face of Indian law; that our judiciary will languish for want of good lawyers and judges. I doubt it. Life has a way of balancing things out. Not everyone is cut out for practicing foreign law which is essentially desk practice. I believe that more lawyers working in LPOs will mean that those practicing in courts will get more elbow room to grow, hopefully, into better practicing lawyers and in turn make for a stronger judiciary. Then maybe, our traditional practice of law will return to its past noble state. For now, law is a business and I am, as they say, cool with it.

Quality in LPOs

Greetings,

Having read a lot about the concern about quality deficient work that would result from outsourcing work to India and elsewhere, I am convinced that that is one hurdle that can, and has been, easily overcome.

Training young lawyers in an LPO firm, I was amazed to find that they knew more about US and UK laws than the laws in India. They could tell me about euthanasia provisions for animals in the UK but had no idea if similar provisions existed in India. They knew all about insurance law in the US, but asked if we have anything like this here, they were unsure. This will be the trend henceforth if globalization and outsourcing legal jobs goes as predicted. Indian lawyers, especially the fresh graduates will have a degree in Indian law and be practicing US and UK law.

Having seen work done by young lawyers in the US and similar work done by Indian lawyers here, the mistakes that young trainee solicitors make both sides of the pond are similar. Here as there, they need proper training and strict supervision, at least initially. Having tried that in an LPO here, I can vouch that provided with both, Indian lawyers are performing as well and in some cases better than their US counterparts.

What is really dampening is that where both US and Indian lawyers happen to be working on the same matter, the US lawyer automatically assumes that any error in the case is the work of the India team. Maybe he has reason. But what is worse is that the Indian team is quite willing to assume that somehow it must be their fault. This, I think, is the effect of years of British rule which has left us with a definite inferiority complex.

It took some time and a lot of training to build up enough confidence in employees so they would finally be able to say, “Hey look, you’re doing it wrong. This is the way to do it.” Fortunately outsourcing law firms are businessmen first and foremost. If the work is good, they do not have a chip on the shoulder admitting that it is good and paying for it.

There are some concerns expressed abroad that their trainee lawyers, might not have any work to train on if it was being outsourced. A similar concern is expressed by the Indian judiciary which is worried about young legal talent being absorbed into LPOs and the Indian Judiciary which is already famishing for lack of good judges regressing still further. (LPOs are not the reason we do not have good Indian judges, but that is another story. )

In my opinion, these concerns are insubstantial. First of all, not all legal work is going to be outsourced. Second, most of the work is going to be back office work. Thirdly, in India at least, only those lawyers join LPOs who realize that they do not have the required canniness which is absolutely necessary, and indeed the only perquisite, for practicing in Indian courts.

And anyway, the world, as we all know by now, is flat and there is nothing to stop us all from moving where the money is, without falling off it.

Swine flu in the LPO

Greetings!

In India, the H1N1 epidemic continues with it being twice as bad here as in the rest of the world with the infection being viciously rampant in my city-Pune . Almost all the deaths due to the flu occurred in Pune. To date we have a death a day, total toll from August 2009, when the first death occurred, being 82.Considering that Pune has a population of approximately 50 lacs which is spread over an area of 450 sq.kms, it was a difficult task to control the flu; and while city schools and colleges were shut down, commercial establishments and offices continued to function and deal with the epidemic any which way they could.

This post is inspired by an interesting post on the legal and workplace implications of H1N1 which went on to speak of the challenges faced by employers in dealing with swine flu and how to deal with them.


The article referred above spoke of the legal affects of swine flu and how to deal with it in the workplace. Here's a tongue-in-cheek, albeit very truthful look at what we did in office to combat the infection:



1. For a week or so everyone came in with masks. A few wrapped their faces in scarves. This however, made communication impossible and so the masks and scarves came to be gradually discarded during the course of the day.(Pic courtesy @devakishor on Twitter)

2. Anyone with a cold refused to attend work. Sometimes even someone who sneezed more than thrice pleaded social responsibility and went home.

3. At regular intervals the air conditioning was turned off and windows and doors opened to let in sunlight and fresh air which hopefully would destroy any lurking germs.

4. Someone heard that eucalyptus oil helped prevent H1N1 and one 50 ml bottle of oil was brought in by the office, which was rapidly emptied by the end of the same day and never replaced.

5. The drug store opposite made a few thousands selling eucalyptus oil tablets, to which I, who anyway had a predilection for the oil, have now got addicted to.

6. The only pregnant staffer was segregated but whether it was as a precaution against swine flu or because she no longer fit into the cubicle, I am not very sure.

7. After a while everyone decided what the hell, if it was going to happen it would happen and stopped all pretense at precautions.

TO BE NOTED is that almost everyone in the office at some point suffered from sore throats, cold sand cough during this period. This includes me who never gets a cold. This is in itself unusual. My theory is that everyone must have suffered a mild form of swine flu and recovered which means we all are now immune.

Hurrah.

Pins in Underwear & Quality Set-Ups Part II

To continue with the previous post.

One way a small firm can save on costs is to hire cheap at production level. and splurge at the higher level, praying that good management will control quality. But this does not work. At least not for long. Good project managers are not necessarily good at providing quality work. Nor should project management be expected to deal with quality assurance.

To ensure quality deliverables the firm must have a good quality set- up in place. Introducing quality set- ups in small firms which have never heard of them before is like taking a toddler to the dentist for the first time. She doesn't know what she's in for and eagerly toddles along, so the introduction is not too bad. But the next time you want to her to toddle, she tears your hair out.

The first step in introducing quality procedures is to introduce the team to the concept of "errors".

The reason errors occur is that at production level, the team is often not aware what exactly is the error they are alleged to be making. The client's mails listing mistakes, are sheer babble. (What is she talking about? What error? Isn't that just what we did?)

Asking a direct question therefore: What is an error- draws a blank. Yet in order for the quality procedures to be put in place, this first step of getting the team to recognize what is an error for that particular process, is vital.

This can be solved by getting the team to relate what part of the process seems to them to be the trickiest. Remember, it is always at that part of the task that one finds the most difficult that one is likely to make the most mistakes.

In one instance while applying this strategy, I realized that the team was not really aware of what the process was all about. They were merely performing the tasks told like automatons without the faintest idea of why they were doing it.

An explanation of the whys and wherefores of client requirements serves to bring the team to an understanding of why a particular document needs to be done in a particular manner.

Once the team sees the reason and logic in the work they are engaged in, they can then see for themselves what the client means when she cries "error".

And so thus, the first step in introducing a quality set up- defining an error is taken. For the rest, wait for my next post.

In parting. As I always say a knowledge of the English language is essential if you are going to work on US or UK legal documents. Recently an EBT submitted (deposition) in a personal injury case, read: She cannot put pins in her underwear.

Pins in underwear. Why would anyone put pins in underwear? Do American women now put pins in underwear the way Indians used to pin purses into their underwear to deter thieves?

A little investigation revealed all.
The EBT should have read: She cannot put pants on, her underwear.

Yeah, even legal outsourcing has its lighter moments.

Startups and Quality Set-Ups. Part I

Despite recession swamping the globe the legal process outsourcing industry exulted. LPO gurus both sides of the pond confidently predicted that the industry would flourish.

With several LPOs in the city which had apparently been doing well downing shutters precipitately within six months of that prediction, and even the larger companies- the multi-storeyed, shiny KPOs and BPOs which had wasted no time joining the mad LPO boom, still struggling to establish their legal outsourcing units, one is left looking for the reason why.

The main reason seems to be that our once- magnanimous American attorney, now in the unfamiliar position of having to economize like any rural Indian housewife, when he seeks to outsource, is looking for two things and two things only -cost savings and quality.

Time was when confidentiality was a major issue and the subject of much discussion in the US legal fraternity but in India at least, this is no longer a concern.

So we have here the client who wants to pay the least but expects the best. Unfair? No.

The Indian market is seething with LPOs, and who can blame Big Daddy for wanting to shop for bargains? Here is where the smaller LPOs have a distinct advantage over their richer cousins-the larger companies. Small firms spend far less on infrastructure and facilities . They operate on bare bones infrastructure and hire freshers who work for a pittance. They can afford to quote ridiculously low prices .

But this has its flip side too. Consistently hiring cheap labor results in deliverables that are of poor quality and ultimately the client goes elsewhere.

How to save on costs and yet deliver work of the highest quality is a dilemma all firms-big and small- face. How to deal with I shall leave for my next post.

For now, suffice it to say that the LPOs that will flourish will be the ones that can deliver real value. And real value in every case would be work of the highest quality, within the given time and cost parameters, and with confidentiality as a bonus.

See you soon.

Rosemary