Indian management is generally believed to be autocratic with subordinates closely supervised by their superiors and only a limited degree of participation is allowed to the subordinates.
However, the real situation in this context can be appreciated only when a detailed account of various practices is taken into consideration. Fortunately, some empirical studies are available in this context which does not necessarily support the traditional view rather they present a mixed note.
Since, managerial styles are determined by a host of factors such as forces in superiors, subordinates, and situations; it is unlikely to expect a uniform leadership style. Indian work organizations, from this point of view, can be classified into three parts which have some distinctive features and consequently different leadership styles.
The review of various studies fails to give a generalized result. The findings are too diverse, sometimes even contradictory. It indicates the absence of a clear-cut direction in managerial behaviour thereby reflecting a lack of managerial conviction and values.
Such classification may be:
(i) Family-managed traditional organizations,
(ii) Public sector organizations.
(iii) Professionally managed Indian organizations and foreign-owned organizations
In many such organizations, a certain amount of paternalistic attitudes prevails. The proprietary character of the business and the large-scale participation of family members in it has made the attitude of the head of the business, which is also the head of the family, highly paternalistic.
In family-managed traditional organizations, the most prevalent style is autocratic. Sons and grandsons of the entrepreneurs are automatically promoted without any consideration for efficiency or overall suitability. Thus, there is management by inheritance or management by chromosomes with the result that their organizations are highly centralized in their organizational structure and are authoritarian in their approach.
On the other hand, there are many organizations in the private sector owned by Indians or by multinationals that have an appreciable degree of participation or democratic leadership. The reason is that multinationals bring not only their technology but also the work culture which is more permissive and conducive towards the application of the modern approach to management. As such, the degree of participation is greater in such organizations. The third categories of organizations are in the public sector.
Here, the bureaucratic style is more prevalent owing to the work culture inherited by public sector managers. Initially, public sector organizations were manned by civil servants who brought a lot of bureaucratic culture with them.
The same paternalistic attitude extends to the employees and has developed a set of values in an employer vis-a-vis his employees. At the initial stage, the authoritarian style is more suitable which these organizations have followed. However, such style has also been inherited by successors without any appreciable change or modification.
The net result is that the entire organizational processes are governed by a bureaucratic model. Its implication is status differentials, class distinctions, and impersonal relationships which work against the participative style.
Comments