After completing post graduation in economics and statistics, Ramana Rao was compelled by family circumstances to join a periodical as assistant to a sub-editor. The periodical specialised in doing racy stories on politics, social scandals, and film stars, with occasional pieces on the economic misery sweeping the society. Ramana Rao carefully studied books on economic journalism and on current state of Indian economy as background knowledge needed for his job. He was conscientious and
worked hard on the economic news items. Having studied in Telugu medium, he found it hard to get rid of certain mannerisms which crept into his writing. Further, his math background made it hard for him to handle woolly generalities and gushy emotions.
His boss Velayudham was from a brash, investigative news background. He scoffed at Ramana Rao’s factual writing referring to it as watery tea or Sambar without masala. Ramana Rao pleaded that it is hard to wring emotion out of economic news. Velayudham dismissed the pieces as lacking in punch and kick. Ramana Rao’s occasional ‘Telugish’ bits, he said, were screamingly hilarious. He often taunted Ramana for his humble origin and rural background. Ramana Rao was miserable and would have quit but for economic compulsions. But his luck changed. Vasanthi, the owner’s niece, returned after graduating from London School of Economics, and became the subeditor. She discussed matters with her uncle and changed the tone of the stories. Though a hard taskmaster, she clearly told Ramana Rao about the slant and the main content of the stories. She made some changes, but after consulting him. She liked the storiesloaded with facts and figures which Ramana Rao wrote.
In contrast to the style of well-educated Vasanthi, what intellectual shortcoming and emotional pathology do you notice in Velayudham as supervisor of Ramana Rao?
1. No deficiency or pathology are evident, Velayudham is only trying to supply what the Indian market with poortaste(generallyspeaking) wants.
2. Velayudham has no grasp of the fact that economic journalism cannot be given the robe and trappings of masala storiesabout socialites or filmstars.
3. As a supervisor he is failing to provide workable guidance. Moreover, oblique reference to one’s family background in business or official environment is crude and distasteful.
4. Both (2) and (3)
As regards answer choice (1) there is substance in the statement that a substantial segment of our readers indeed have poor taste and they are interested in inane and juicy stories. However, economics and the study of an economy are analytical subjects. These matters cannot be put in the same style of narration as done in gossip market – except in certain contexts such as investigation of financial fraud or scandals. But that is a small part of the whole ambit of economic analysis. Velayudham is failing to understand this essential distinction of themes: film story vs. economic analysis. Not only that, he is stepping into the forbidden territory of social and economic background of an employee. This kind of behavior assumes the hue of discrimination and in worst cases will be regarded as human rights violation. All managers need to be careful about these implications of behaviour more so because they occupy position of authority. Thus answer choice (1) is not acceptable.
From the previous discussion, you can easily appreciate that observations in (2) and (3) are valid. It is also the duty of Velayudham to direct efforts of Ramana along the lines that market demands. There may be less scope of doing that in economic journalism, but some avenues do exist. For example, interesting and readable stories can be written on the theme of farmers’ suicide
due to distress in agrarian economy. Aligning efforts of staff towards the goal of the business is a key responsibility which Velayudham is failing to discharge.
Therefore, (4) is the correct answer choice.
Harry Levinson mentions that the work of employees working under a manager should be criticised in the followingway:
Specificity
As we noted earlier, a critic has to be specific. He can use an example or cite an incident to show the area in which the work falls short or the pattern of its deficiency. He should point to the areas which need reworking and the way of going about it. He should not be indirect or delicate, but should call a spade a spade so that others get the message.
Providing solutions
If possible, the group leader should offer a solution. This is the usual counter to critics: If you think that things are in a mess, tell us how to set them right. When subordinates are merely criticised without being told how to mend their work, they get frustrated, disheartened and demotivated. One need not give them a fully worked out solution; they can be told of the other possibilities, alternatives or ways of advance. One may pinpoint the areas of deficiency or the manner of addressing errors.
Face to face contact
Though some people revel in running down others to their face, many others tend to avoid such unpleasant encounters. But it is best to criticise and praise people in their presence. Sending a long note of criticism or praise will not have the same impact as a one to one talk. It promotes dialogue, reduces distance and forces managers to squarely face up to their responsibilities.
Empathy
As we have noted, managers have to avoid a carping or belly-aching note in criticism. Criticism should be based on empathy or on understanding sympathetically the viewpoint of others. Otherwise, it will breed ill-will. Daniel Goleman says of destructive criticism: “instead of opening a way for a corrective, it creates an emotional backlash of resentment, bitterness, defensiveness, and distance.”
Levinson also gives the following advice to those at the receiving end of the criticism:
¤ Look upon it as a means of improvement, and not as a personal attack.
¤ Avoid the tendency to defensiveness, cool down for a few days and discuss matters again withyour manager.
¤ Consider criticism as an opportunity of working with your critic.
Knowledge Workers and Work Teams
We now consider another feature of modern organizations which makes emotional intelligence vital to their working. Emotional intelligence enhances the group IQ of an organization. Any organization represents a pool of talent covering various subject areas like finance, marketing, quantitative analysis
and creative design. Group IQ can be thought of as a summation of the IQs of individual workers. Lack of emotional intelligence can bring down the group IQ. Prof MGK Menon used to say that a single Indian worker matches or exceeds the skills of his Japanese counterpart; but two Indians working together are far less productive than their Japanese counterparts. This shows the importance of emotional intelligence in working together in groups.
Peter Drucker, the doyen among management theorists, coined the term ‘knowledge worker’ and predicted that more than a third of the American work force would soon consist of knowledge workers. He mentions that their productivity consists in adding value to information. Knowledge workers arepeoplesuch as financial analysts,writers andcomputer programmers. Theirknowledge is highly specialized and their productivity depends on their individual work getting integrated into the work of a work team. For example, novelists are not publishers; and nor are hardware designers sellers of computer parts. With knowledge work, team replaces the individual as the work unit. As a result, emotional intelligence which comprises skillsthat promote harmonious group working has become important. Studies have shown that efficiency of work teams is highly correlated with their internal social harmony. Let us look at a case which shows how mutual rivalry and envy can derail projects.