My Job is my Life…

The gentleman is taking a well-deserved break. And the one across the floor

has opted to pursue more challenging options elsewhere. Having contributed

greatly to scaling the operations of this company, yet another senior executive

has decided that it is time to move on… The slowdown may have gobbled up

scores of baby companies, but it certainly spawned a new genre of euphemisms.

Firing people was called anything but that–rightsizing, downsizing, clearing

the bottom 5%, and so on. It also gave birth to immortal ‘parting speech lines’

like the ones mentioned above.

No emotional outbursts, no showdowns… nothing dramatic that would make it

to the annals of company history. The truth is, most professional departures in

the slowdown were clean, dignified affairs–which is just as good. For a lot of

those asked to leave were respected, often rather senior-level professionals

whose contribution to their companies could not be denied.

Then why were they asked to go, while many others asked to stay on? Well, it

would be safe to say that a majority of the people who lost their jobs during

the slowdown cannot be held responsible for it. In fact, in most cases, being

asked to leave was a fallout of the poor health of the company itself, not a

reflection on their competence. The IT boom had seen the emergence of several

companies banking on faulty revenue models for success. This, coupled with big

time salaries and perks that ate into venture capitalist money, had resulted in

unrealistic expectations that could never have been met. Not surprisingly, when

the bad times came, those with huge salaries, fancy cars and homes on the

company’s account, were the first to go. A professional of this profile would

have been hired during boom time, possibly because he was the god and not

because he was badly needed. When it came to cutting costs, the ‘must have on

board talent’ seemed like an avoidable expense that had to be curtailed. So

who stayed back? A colleague of the hot shot who could take on the same duties

at nearly half the cost.

The 1999-2000 boom also saw anticipatory hiring in huge numbers, especially

among software services companies and body shoppers who deployed consultants on

overseas projects. Given the rate at which projects were coming in and the quick

turnaround expected, these companies started hiring talent in hoards. There were

teams being hired and put through training courses while they waited for the

project to begin. Unfortunately, the downturn came and several projects never

materialized. Benched, professionals with quick fix diplomas, piggybacking on

the ‘hot technology’ of the day, had nowhere to go. The right qualities

ensure that a person has the flexibility to be assigned alternative functions

within the company. This could well relate to marketing a new technical concept

or training the marketing team in its nuances, who could do this better than a

techie who understands how it works? And the biggest draw for any employer, is

an employee who willingly takes on a function which the company needs at that

point of time, even if it is beyond his or her assigned role. After all, it is

time to consolidate assets, even human assets, and utilize them to the fullest.

The dot-com culture of splurging before the company breaks even is dead.

Managers and even CEOs turning up at work in a T- shirt and shorts with a single

ear-ring is not cool anymore. The events of the past year have seen companies

embrace some Old Economy ideas in a big way. Sound fundamentals, domain

knowledge and prudence have emerged victorious. For whacky ideas, let’s wait

for another boom in the future.

Manjiri Kalghatgi in New Delhi