Human kind with over centuries and with civilisations growth and decay, has progressed to entertain ‘dissent’ with tolerance and grace. There are pockets here and there where the guillotine for disagreeing is still active and in use. In the corporate world it is handled with greater grace, with the introduction of best practices of good governance.
COMMENT
Human kind with over centuries and with civilisations growth and decay, has progressed to entertain ‘dissent’ with tolerance and grace. There are pockets here and there where the guillotine for disagreeing is still active and in use. In the corporate world it is handled with greater grace, with the introduction of best practices of good governance.
At the apex of any hierarchy, a manager is invariably called upon to mould the team, into a cohesive unit in spite of their varied talents and temperaments. Individuals, as your reports, would subscribe to being recognised in their personal capacity, while the job of a manager is to give these personal aspirations into being the team’s goals and objectives. In this milieu are confusion, confrontation, discord, dispute and opposite pulling by all and sundry.
Having been on the apex of an organisational hierarchy for well over a decade, I too have often been called upon by my direct reports, to intervene. The demand invariably relates to suppressing egos, aggression, personal agendas and the unharnessed human instinct to demonstrate being better by making others look bad. It is a delicate job.
The task is to create harmony through the granular expectations of the team, to the wholesome vision of the organisations. I have experienced that most day to day operational disputes get settled, if these are allowed to be voiced. Stifling opinion is always dangerous. An intelligent supervisor would never shy away to encourage discourse or debate.
In this piece, I am attempting to exhort those who are reports (and all are including the CEO by whatever other name called) to gather the use of their spine and stand up to express, views, opinions and suggestions for the wellbeing of their institutions.
In ensuring harmony, I oscillate between the orient-based management culture of consensus to highhandedness of the western way of management- but is always balanced properly in terms of equity and justice. Either consensus or diktats cannot be used with unannounced motives, for if it is undertaken with negative bent of thinking it is bound to blow up on your face someday. Avoid consensus and dissent that does not have at its roots, positive outcome for the organisation.
Power like the diamond, dazzles the beholder and also the wearer, it dignifies meanness, it magnifies littleness; to what is contemptible, it gives authority; to what is low exaltation (Charles Cotton). Lust for power is essentially an indication of major weakness. Yet the bold, the brave and the honest don’t succumb to any authority. If you lack conviction to your thought best not to express it, you can’t pretend to be lion when you are an ostrich or a fox.
In dissenting, express you have a different point of view, seek permission to state it, begin by recalling the original point of view or decision to make sure that what is being said is clearly understood. State your opinion which with doubt at least to yourself must be fact based; it should not have emerged from the dense fog of hearsay, suspicion, doubt etc. Having done so, be mentally prepared for a dialogue.
In the course of conversation, don’t use judgemental words or even gesticulations- such as hasty, foolish, wrong, incorrect, etc, or throw up hands in exasperation or even worse thump the table. All this will only upset and incite the ‘powerful’.
Always engage slowly in low tones with calm and serenity exuding your persona- this will bring calmness to the proceedings. Position your idea in terms of benefits the audience stands to gain. Never attempt to overwhelm the conference room audience with dramatics or theatrical performance of the data analysis results- never overload the listeners to a mine of data and information. Speak with direct relevance to the issue. Don’t walk the ‘powerful; through the maze of your thoughts.
Never get into a state where you begin to develop inner appreciation that your views, thoughts and explanations thereof will be liked. They may not. Prepare for that too. Avoid being defensive, especially when your view is challenged.
To the listening, powerful manager, it is good to recognise that tolerance to diversity of views, is imperative, because without it, life would lose its savour. Progress in the arts, in the services, in the pattern of social adjustment, and in management practices, springs from diversity, and depends upon a tolerance of individual deviations from conventional ways and attitude.
To bolster your confidence, while voicing disagreement never fall prey to the thought that by disagreeing you damage your career prospects or even relationships- the consequences are always less dramatic than are assumed. To play safer, it is never a bad idea to engage and meet up with the most important (powerful) stakeholder before. In provocation, do not lose grace launching your view in the formal meeting. In dialogue, answer questions, precisely and concisely.
Let me turn to managers who face dissent. A manager gathers better knowledge and understanding if dissent is listened to and is accepted, if it is worthwhile. A manager with unlimited power is a manager to be distrusted. No manager worth his salt would be scared of debate and dissent. The voice of dissent must be heard if the organisation is to achieve corporate longevity...
Positive dissent over time gets enshrined in policies, processes, procedures, rules and regulations. Dissent, sometimes does not require immediate corrective action, but if it is productive, can be left on the back burner to bring on to the blazing front burner when it is considered proper to use and implement it.
Never equate debate and discussion with unacceptable dissent. In Sallust’s ‘Company of Catiline’, Julius Caesar is quoted to have said, ‘all men (replace and read manager) who reflect on controversial matters should be free from hatred, friendships, anger and pity’.
To ensure healthy progress of the institution, the chief executive officer cannot rely on uniformity of opinion. It is diversity that opens new vistas on the manager’s imaginative horizon. In dealing with critical issues of dissent, answer to yourself first, not to the adversaries. A manager who argues using authority and not understanding will find himself to be in ultimate loss. Never consider a contradiction to be your defeat.
When I walked into the present assignment, I was completely taken aback at the lack of response by teams to either the presentation or my views. All were reluctant to speak. But individually, they began to speak and speak beyond necessity, sometimes! I realised that we did not have collective answer to issues and challenges, but individually each team member had! It took time for me to bring home upon them the view that it is not a matter of weakness to bring to table, ‘critical issues’ but that it is more a matter of managerial maturity to do so; to get better results through dialogue and exchange of information.
I therefore personally encourage and am in favour of offsite meetings so that the over-hanging dominance of corporate titles, dissipates in a friendly environment- only then there is free and no holds barred discussion possible. As manager, inspire and improve yourself by seeking dissent and contradictory views. A compliant team is your future bier carriers!
Only, ‘Birds in the little nests agree’!
The writer is a senior banker and freelance columnist
