If only India had a leader with gravitas who would say, “Let us temporarily bury our political differences and focus on the wellbeing of our voters. Let us act like the rainbow nation that we are.”
If company boards or citizens of a nation do not welcome variation, their eventual homogeneity can pose an existential threat. This can be asserted through both corporate experience and history.
Many crises are leadership failures rather than technical ones. Leaders focus so intently on an agenda that they fail to factor in their team’s social context. A dose of healthy humility and empathy can mitigate the resultant humiliation.
Recently, there have been some commentaries on legality versus morality. The Securities and Exchange Board of India Chairman Ajay Tyagi bemoaned that the regulator and independent directors have failed to mitigate the influence of promoters.
Corporate governance depends on checks and balances among four institutions--Board, Management, Stakeholders and Regulators—just as political governance depends on the four estates of Legislature,
Directors on boards have two distinct roles: a ‘map’ role and a ‘compass’ role. The former is the traditional role. It is about overseeing the short-term with a horizon of a few years.