With the recent events bringing Infosys back into the spotlight, I can’t help but wonder and give my two cents to the whole issue. Afterall, it is my alma mater of sorts. I will always feel a sort of connection with the company as it was my first official workplace.
Ever since I was a kid, being a software developer at Infosys or Wipro seemed like “the” profession to be in. So, when I got into Infosys through my engineering college, it felt like a huge achievement, never mind the other 157 who were picked from my school for the same job! I had little knowledge about Infosys’s history and its impact on India’s IT services industry. As I entered Infosys and started following the industry, the real impact started sinking in. I gained newfound respect for Narayana Murthy and the 6 other founders. Then I learnt about Sudha Murthy’s contribution to the founding of the company and my respect for the couple doubled. The more I read about the couple and their morals, the more I began respecting them. I wished to be a part of the company that they built on those principles.
I felt unfortunate that Narayana Murthy retired just as I entered the company because I wanted to see if I could feel the impact of such a dynamic CEO on a company from within the company instead of just reading about it. I may have been too young to actually understand anything but I was curious nonetheless. Unknown to myself at the time, I did feel the impact but not the way I expected to. Shibulal took his place and all I saw in the next few months was poor morale among employees. The image of the company began to fall and Narayana Murthy was brought back. This time, he decided to bring his foreign educated son along with him. He had announced upon his return that he would not make any executive decisions but he would oversee the management. When Rohan, his son started making some changes, there was a feeling of acrimony among the employees. I still remember the town halls where people would just not pay attention or comment that Rohan had no right to make changes just because he was the son with a Harvard degree.
Employee morale continued to drop and turnover started rising. Soon, whispers about Rohan began to die down. My own experiences as well as ambitions were pushing me to quit and within 2.5 years I decided to leave to pursue my masters. In the next few months, I heard that Vishal Sikka had taken the reigns and Narayana Murthy decided to step back. In my MBA, I learnt a lot theoretically about management and the various aspects of the decision making process through multiple case studies. But Infosys always stayed at the back of my mind. I wanted to find out, somehow, what happened with Shibulal’s management style that drove the company to call Murthy back. I wanted to know what went wrong. No amount of theory I studied seemed applicable to my queries about Infosys.
News about changes made by Sikka started to appear. Apparently the morale of people had gone up due to the simple changes that Sikka was making like relaxing the dress code of employees. Sikka was a much more dynamic leader who operated out of US as much as he operated out of India. In some ways, it felt like Sikka was more of a brand on his own. He tried to make the IT giant a more modern company from what I hear from my some of my ex-colleagues and the news. And that is probably why he had to go.
Murthy, though not an active member of the senior management, has always been an active board member. He has always kept an eye on Infosys’s moves and its strategies and has always been consulted on every change that has been implemented. He always called Infosys his “middle child” in every meeting he went to and has always treated it that way. With the news of Sikka’s resignation and his acknowledgement of different synergies within the company and a lot of negativity around him being the cause for his resignation, Murthy has gained a lot of negative publicity. The latest one that I came across was an open letter from an ex-board member to Murthy to walk away before destroying his reputation completely.
It saddens me to read such articles. My father has always tried to teach me to look at things from both perspectives and that’s exactly what I am doing but I can’t help but feel bad about the whole thing. I understand that companies need to adapt to changing times and I can see that happening right before my eyes with Ford! Ford is adapting from being a traditional manufacturing company to a much more tech oriented company. But then, how does a founder give up on his company when he sees the company shift directions completely?
I can’t help but wonder if Henry Ford felt the same way when he stepped back from management to give Edsel Ford and later Henry Ford II the reigns. Documentaries that I have com across say that by the time he quit, he had begun to despise the tech revolution that he himself had helped bring about and that made him retire to the life he lived before all the technology advances, in Greenfield Village.
Another article I read on this Infosys issue, said something about Infosys always priding themselves on their full disclosure of decisions and policies to their employees and then Sikka making some confidential decisions which went against what Murthy built Infosys to stand for. How does Murthy let go and watch the company he built move in a direction that he doesn’t believe in? I am sure he wouldn’t mind changes that made the company move forward to adapt to changing market needs. I am sure he is aware of the issues/threats automation and other factors like visa policies in the US are affecting the way the IT Service Industry operates today. I am sure he is also worried about the future and is open to suggestions on tackling these issues.
Having said that, I can’t deny that there may have been mistakes on Murthy’s part when he publicized the Panaya issue. That may have single-handedly caused this whole uproar which could have been handled internally. The company image and his own reputation may have been spared. The fact of the matter is that Infosys gained its market position since Sikka took over and on the whole the company was beginning to gain positive reactions. That would mean Sikka definitely did something right. So who is right in this case?
In my opinion, neither Sikka nor Murthy was wrong. Both of them have different management styles which have obviously worked in their own space. A similar change in leadership happened at Ford recently and we are yet to see how this change plays out. There has to be a balance between approaches for companies that have been operating for many years. It is hard for founders to let go and watch quietly but sometimes, they need to find it in their hearts to let go, not just for the sake of the company, but for their own sake so that their legacy remains a positive one and they continue to be a role model for their strategies that made the company successful during their leadership. This is one management lesson I would love to learn from.
Musings of a confused nut! 