It is easy to advise a future leader to develop humility, but how should a leader develop humility? It is not easy. The reader could watch Nestle Chairman Suresh Narayan’s television interview with Shireen Bhan on his three Is of Inayat, Ibadat, Insaniyat. From my many years of observation and reflection, I have found some ideas to be helpful.
The general perception of and pedagogy on leadership suggest that humility and leadership do not sit well together, though humble leadership is touted as an essential feature of the ‘Tomorrow Leader’. This is not true in my experience.
Humility as a mindset
Power is an asset to be sensibly deployed. Humility is a mindset. A leader is bestowed with power to use it for some larger purpose. Humility is a mindset that requires three intrinsic beliefs—that the leader is not smarter than those who are around him or her, that it is possible for the leader to be wrong, and that vulnerability may be a leadership virtue.
Look at nations and companies. Try to identify political or corporate leaders who display a humble mindset. Don’t be disappointed if your list is miserably small.
Leadership is remembered by others for kindness and affection, and for taking genuine interest in others. I term this as ‘great relationship leadership’, which is as important as ‘great decisive leadership.’
Since the leader is constantly exercising authority that is derived from power, he or she is most likely unaware of the occasions when narcissism or inadvertent offence has crept into his or her behaviour. That is why the leader needs a ‘psychological mirror’ that reflects back the images of his or her narcissistic behaviour.
I brand this psychological mirror as ‘Clementine Mirror’, so named after Clementine, Winston Churchill’s wife. There are some stories that adduce to the calming effect she had on her temperamental and irascible husband. This surely helps a leader improve behaviour and build more durable relationships at work.
Say sorry and move on
Learn from acts of humility by great leaders. Here is a story of yesteryear that Harish Bhat, the former Tata brand custodian, narrated in a social media post, Short Tata Stories.
When JRD Tata was the chairman of Tata Sons, one of the key members of his leadership team was Sumant Moolgaokar, who led Tata Motors (then called TELCO). They met once a week to discuss various issues. During one such weekly meeting, Moolgaokar disagreed with JRD Tata on an important matter. In fact, he expressed his strong reservations about a particular point of view that JRD expressed. When this happened, JRD lost his temper at Moolgaokar, and said a few harsh words.
Moolgaokar went away distraught that JRD was not appreciating his point of view. “What is the use? Jeh does not understand,” he said to one of his colleagues. A few days later, JRD Tata, of his own accord, went across to Sumant Moolgaokar’s office. He spoke to Moolgaokar at length, to understand and discuss his dissenting point of view. Then, he sent Moolgaokar an extraordinary handwritten letter, expressing his deep regret for having lost his temper. A copy of this letter is reproduced below. It said, “Dear Sumant, I apologise for my outburst. I have been under great pressure at home and on my trip to Jamshedpur, and am a bit of an insomniac to boot. So, I am unduly sensitive and was hurt by your criticism that I know was well meant. My affection and admiration for you will never change. Yours ever, Jeh.”
Among the many Tata stories, one pertains to an incident involving group chairman JRD Tata and senior Tata director A D Shroff in the early 1950s (from Six Lenses, 2015).
The incident involved a heated exchange between JRD and Shroff during a board meeting of Tata Sons. It appears JRD referred to a view expressed by Shroff as ‘a dishonest opinion’. Shroff felt offended that he had been referred to as being dishonest. The incident threatened the continuation of his association with Tata.
A D Shroff sent in his resignation but the matter was patched up by JRD with a great sense of egalitarianism and humility. This is what he wrote in a letter to Shroff dated August 23, 1951: “I was surprised and upset at receiving your letter. I do not remember exactly the words I used during the somewhat heated exchange at the meeting, but my complaint to you was merely that an argument you used to score a debating point over me was not an honest one. That is surely a far cry from questioning your honesty and I am surprised that you interpreted it in that way. You have a right to resent my speaking angrily or showing you discourtesy as a result, and for that I sincerely apologise, but if friends and associates decided to part every time they had an argument, life would become very difficult. You refer to my firm. Except that I am personally a relatively minor shareholder. I don’t think there is any difference on that account in any of us. We all work for it and we should think of it as our firm. The trouble with both of us is that we both have a hell of a temper!”
Shroff did not press his resignation. In fact, he served Tata thereafter in his old spirit of trust. Authenticity is the currency one uses to generate trust. Learning to develop and exhibit humble leadership is worthwhile.
(Views are personal)
(rgopal@themindworks.me)
R Gopalakrishnan | Author and business commentator; his new book is Embrace the Future: The Soft Science of Business Transformation