CASE STUDY
Old Habits
Die Hard!
BY DR. PRAGEETHA G RAJU
I
n 1982, Ramachandra Shah, the
Managing Director of Gopal
Cotton Mills in Ranchipur, went
to Japan on a trade mission.
On his way back to India, he visited
several South East Asian countries
for a survey on Indian textiles. In
the course of his conversations with
many merchants and customers, he
learnt that they preferred Japanese
as against Indian products, owing to
their flawless weave. Customers
were not interested in buying
Indian goods which were
manufactured on non-automatic
looms, and were therefore
repeatedly flawed. Shah decided to
introduce automatic looms in his
mills.
50 N March 2019
Upon his return to Ranchipur,
Shah drew up a plan to build a new
loom shed for automatic looms to
replace one of the existing loom
sheds. This otherwise obsolete shed
was hot, humid, poorly illuminated,
and very noisy. The machinery was
old, encountered numerous
breakdowns, and caused accidents.
He consulted the weaving
superintendent about the plan.
Later, he summoned Shankarlal, the
supervisor of the shed due for
replacement, and explained the new
system to him. He also told
Shankarlal that he would be
considered for promotion as soon
as operations commenced in the
new automatic shed.
The loom shed to be replaced
was the smallest of the three in the
company compound. It had a
hundred looms running in two
shifts. All the weavers working in
this shed pertained to the Gujarati
Patel community. In line with
tradition, each jobber (mechanic or
first line supervisor) selected his
own workers. So, a jobber brought
workers from the rural areas of his
own community. All the weavers in
Shankarlal's department lived in the
same locality, and almost all of
them had been working in the shed
for at least ten years, and some
even for 25 years. Shankarlal
belonged to the Patel community
himself. Although he lived in a
www.humancapitalonline.com ◆

different part of the city, he joined
the weavers during festive occasions
when they held sing-songs or
performed dramas. Weavers from
the other sheds stayed away since
they hailed from different
communities.
Irrespective of the old
machinery, the numerous
breakdowns and accidents, the
workers were proud of their loom
shed. They boasted that even with
such old looms their production
was higher than that of the other
sheds with newer looms. Each
worker minded two looms and was
paid according to his output. He
had no helper to assist. When he
had to leave his looms running
while he went to bring bobbins,
carry cloth, visit the washroom,
drink water, or talk to people, his
neighbours would look after them.
In fact, the workers took turns to
go out for a break, and a group
could always be found outside away
from the noise, talking, smoking,
and drinking water. Although the
management was not in favour of
such a practice, it had survived all
despite all efforts.
Shankarlal made it a practice to
make two rounds in the loom shed
every day, and to talk to any
worker in duress. Several times on
each day, he stood outside the door
of the shed and chatted with
workers who were coming in or
going out. Many weavers consulted
him about their personal problems.
◆ www.humancapitalonline.com
When the Managing Director or the
Superintendent were seen
approaching on their rounds,
Shankarlal passed the word to the
workers so that they could go back
in time to their looms. When any of
his workers were summoned to the
folding department due to poor
work, Shankarlal went along to
plead for them, to minimise the
fines imposed on them by the
folding clerks.
The erection of the new loom
shed was completed in September,
1983. It had the latest lighting and
humidification equipment along
with comfortable washrooms and
toilets. The machinery consisted of
looms driven by separate motors,
and was spaced more generously
than in the old shed. The plan
specified one weaver to 8 looms.
Each weaver would be assisted by a
helper to take care of all the
auxiliary work, so that he would
not have to leave the looms at all.
The weavers were to be paid as per
their output. The helpers would be
paid a fixed wage lower than the
weaver's pay. All the workers from
the old shed were needed in the
new shed, so the question of
retrenchment did not arise. They
would be either weavers or helpers.
Those having the longest service
with the company would be
weavers. All these points were
covered in an agreement made by
Shah with the labour union to
which 60 percent of workers in the
shed belonged.
Shankarlal went around and
talked about the new plan to the
workers individually and in small
groups. He told them about better
working conditions and assured
them that their earnings would be
higher than before. He also told
them that helpers would be given
weavers' positions as soon as the
older weavers retired. But, even
after devoting an entire week to
convince the workers on the
advantages of working in the new
shed, only 16 workers agreed. This
number was too small to start the
new section. For two more weeks,
Shankarlal kept up with his efforts
to persuade the workers, but he
received a rather poor response.
CASE STUDY
At the end of this period,
Shankarlal was called to the
Director's office and asked to
explain the situation. Shah told him
that the workers would be given an
ultimatum - if they were unwilling
to abide by the agreement made
between the company and the
union, new workers would be
recruited.
Back in the shed, Shankarlal told
the workers regarding the Director's
decision. As far as he could judge,
the workers were adamant in their
refusal, and were unafraid at the
threat of losing their jobs. They
hardly stayed to listen to what he
had to say. They raised no
questions, and were altogether silent
in his presence. This silence became
characteristic of the relationship
between the workers and
Shankarlal. They no longer came to
him with their problems, and if
they saw him outside the shed, they
would either stay away from him or
go inside.
After a week of his conversation
with Shah, Shankarlal summoned a
meeting with the workers, and
spoke about the importance of the
new shed. He told them that
foreign competition forced the
company to have automatic looms,
and whether they liked it or not -
they should try out the new idea.
He finished his talk by asking them
for any questions related to the
change. Nobody spoke and the
meeting broke up. The next day,
Shankarlal put a notice signed by
Shah. It stated the terms of
agreement with the union, and set a
limit of seven days for the workers
to agree to work the new looms.
During that week, the workers
were persuaded by the union
leaders to work in the new shed
and they finally agreed. At the same
time, the company proceeded with
all arrangements to start the new
section.
On the eighth day, after the
notice was put up, work
commenced in the new section. The
changes went according to plan.
Shankarlal was promoted as
Assistant Weaving Master and was
made the section in-charge. He was
very satisfied to notice that the
March 2019 N 51
CASE STUDY
production climbed steadily. Within
two months, the shed had reached
the target of 88 percent efficiency.
He cut down his rounds in the
loom shed, and spent as much time
as he could with the expert
technician from the firm that had
supplied the looms.
But an increasing amount of his
time was consumed in listening to
complaints from the workers. The
complaints were mostly about bad
working conditions: the walking
distance between looms was too
great, the yarn breakage rate was
too high for automatic looms, the
light was too glaring, the toilet and
drinking place were in the same
room, and so on. Production
dropped to 84 percent efficiency.
Shankarlal made it a practice to
check the production of individual
workers and to call those whose
production was lowest to his office.
He asked them to explain the
decline in production. In reply, the
workers stated more grievances.
One day, three representatives of
the workers came to his office.
They told him the mills profited
enormously from the automatic
loom weaving, but the workers
were not getting their due share.
Shankarlal replied that installing the
52 N March 2019
new shed had cost a lot, and the
company could not pay higher
wages. The representatives left
without any argument. A week later,
the workers went on strike. When
Shankarlal arrived at the mill at 7:00
a.m. as usual, he found all the
workers entering the old shed.
Shankarlal saw that the
management had removed the
unused looms from the old shed.
The workers sat down on the
empty floor, where each one's loom
had previously been and refused to
move. They said that the old loom
shed should have been kept intact,
so that they could have gone back
to their old jobs if they wanted.
They threatened not to leave the
floor until all the old looms had
been replaced.
At the end of the third day of
the strike, Shankarlal fell ill. He
complained that the humidity of the
loom shed had affected his lungs
and took a month's leave. When
Shankarlal returned to work after a
month, he learnt that the strike had
ended through the persuasion of
the union leaders, and the
assurance from the company of
higher rate of pay for the workers.
But, production was down to 80
percent, and at this level, the
earnings of the workers were less
than before, in spite of the rise in
the rate.
One week later, Shah replaced
Shankarlal as Assistant Weaving
Master. The new man was a
technical graduate with four years'
experience in automatic loom
weaving. Shankarlal was offered a
new job - Assistant Weaving Master
in charge of 'Labour Control' for all
three sheds. He readily accepted it
and assumed charge of hiring and
firing workers, taking disciplinary
action, carrying out drives for
higher production, and keeping the
superintendent and the director
informed on all the labour-related
issues.
About the Author
Dr. Prageetha G Raju is an Associate
Professor of Business Management at
Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad Campus,
a constituent of Symbiosis International
(Deemed University). She can be contacted
at dr.prageetha@gmail.com or
prageetha.raju@slsh.edu.in.
www.humancapitalonline.com ◆

Analysis by Ravi Mishra
I
t is indeed a wise decision by
Ramchandra Shah to switchover
to automated looms, a thought
driven by good intent and right
content. This is an important business
call to move forward with the times
and sustain the business in terms of
market requirement, and at the
same time, enhance the quality of
life at the workplace. This validates
his leadership quality to take a
wholesome decision, keeping the
purpose of business endeavour in
mind to make heed. The quality and
capability of such decision-making
puts him in a distinct position. Shah
took that call decisively in the
interest of the organisation, but he
underestimated the challenges to
drive the change management.
Initially, he was largely dependent
on Shankarlal to persuade the
workmen on the benefits of this
change. Here lies the difference
since many salesmen are unable to
sell good products and vice versa.
The organisation needed to have a
robust strategy of communication to
influence and engage all interested
parties and stakeholders to drive the
change successfully.
Upon scrutiny, Shankarlal
indicates a lack of assertiveness on
his part in being unable to put forth
his viewpoints strongly, when the
workers shared their apprehensions
◆ www.humancapitalonline.com
behind the change initiative. At
times, he gives the feeling that
though he had been given a
supervisory role, his intellect
remained that of a conservative
weaver. When a person is given
bigger responsibilities he must adapt
to the needs of the role very fast.
One of the critical success
factors that Shah failed to focus was
to work out a formula to combine
the rate and productivity in such a
way that the earnings of the weavers
were not lesser than what they were
getting previously. Shah should have
understood the fair expectations of
every employee, and addressed it
with sensitivity and sincerity.
Employees at the bottom of the
pyramid should be taken care of
with due perspective.
It would have been better if
Shah had initiated the first
communication at the organisational
level to address the rationale behind
the proposed changes, and its
impact on the future. He needed to
emphasise the compelling situations
for him to take this call in every
one's interest, else the organisation
would go the "Kodak" way. Shah did
not compromise when the workers
were initially non-supportive while
taking the route to strike and
displayed their muscle power. The
management was also liberal in
terms of promoting Shankarlal, and
providing sufficient time and
opportunity to take the workers/
weavers to align with this change
initiative. Once it did not work, Shah
churned out a Plan B to implement
the management objective.
It is always a challenge to drive
employees so that they get convinced
of a change initiative. In many cases,
workmen always see most change
initiatives with the apprehension
that their job may be at risk, or will
require new skill sets - a challenge
to learn at that stage. It is normal to
CASE STUDY
take some time to pursue and build
confidence among employees during
such change initiatives.
It would have been appropriate
for the company to come about
with a robust plan and to take
proactive communication tools to
build confidence among the
employees - particularly the
workmen - that irrespective of the
consequences, they will not lose
anything in terms of their job or
earnings in the new system. Sec-
ondly, they needed to emphasise
the fact that it is high time for
change, else they would be deci-
mated like many of their competi-
tors. Change is meant to benefit
every stakeholder to sustain and
thrive upon. We need to explain
employees with the real-life data of
the organisation regarding the
benefits and the need for change
initiatives.
About the Author
Ravi Mishra is the Sr Vice President /
Regional HR Head - Birla Carbon, South
Asia and Middle East.He has worked in
diversified organisations such as UltraTech
Cement, Aditya Birla Chemicals, Nova
Petrochemicals, Mardia Group of
Industries, and Nicholas Piramal. Ravi has
good exposure of working in a cross
cultural environment, with capabilities of
building teams and understanding business
perspectives, linkages and strategic
orientation with regard to people
management.
March 2019 N 53
CASE STUDY
R
amchandra Shah's leadership
is a combination of Laissez-
faire and an autocratic style.
He is not shy to adopt new measures
and make decisions to improve the
business, but his ability to take the
team along and create a buy-in is
questionable. And he expects
Shankarlal to drive his vision to the
last man on the ground.
Here are a few things that he
could have done to bring about a
better transition.
Connect not communicate: Shah
needs to understand his people and
look at them as more than
employees. The workers are rooted
to their community and look at the
workplace as a place beyond their
daily living. These are people who
may not exactly be holding high
aspirations or excitement to work
on new technologies. Hence, instead
of selling them the automation and
insights, he should have articulated
as to how it can help them spend
quality time with their family, and
improve their quality of life.
Flat-Tyre leadership: Instead of
relying on Shankarlal, Shah could
have taken the lead, and made the
effort to personally explain that
everyone in the community would
grow. The novelty of the Managing
Director reaching out to his people
personally would have a significant
impact. Ideally, both of them should
have come together to drive this
change, since Shankarlal's connect
with workers could nicely gel with
Shah's finesse and conviction to
create a smoother transition.
Poor management led the union
to play the critical role of securing
the worker's interests and distancing
54 N March 2019
Analysis by Rohit Hasteer
the management and the people on
the ground. Dissatisfaction, low
motivation among workers, and the
feeling of being disassociated from
the mill led to the creation of a
'Labour control' department, which
only did the job of solving people
grievances. However, if change was
well-managed, automation and the
company's growth should have
brought more prosperity, engagement,
and lesser grievances.
That said, one cannot deny the
challenges that Shah and Shankarlal
had to face due to the deep-rooted,
inherited, and old-school mindset of
the workers which are extremely
difficult to combat and change. The
resistance to change due to the
workers' inability to get out of their
comfort zone was another roadblock
for a smooth change. Even though
the old loom shed was inhospitable
and the machinery old, the workers
were proud of the place, and boasted
about better productivity than the
other sheds with newer looms.
Resistance is the initial reaction
to any transition. In this case, the
transition was not merely about
process automation, it was more
about changing the mindset and
belief of a group of people by
sharing clearly the 'WIIFM - What is
in it for me'. It was required that
they were spoken to in a language
understood by them.
Leadership: Leadership was the
biggest piece missing here. A leader
needs to have the smarts to know
their audience, and create a
narrative that appeals to a larger
group and makes them feel included.
Creating opportunities for people to
speak their mind and be a part of
the change as against being observers
or impacted by the change is not
sufficient. A powerful story that
gives people the reason to change is
the biggest tool to any transition.
Person first, Process later: Any
transition needs to be focussed on
people who will drive the change.
Shah should have first spent ample
time with the union leaders and
Shankarlal, and made them advocates
of change. Involving high influencers
within the worker community can
also be a good idea. The moment
they witness one of their own
advocating the change, there is a
greater acceptance. Breaking
barriers and connecting with people
on the ground is paramount for
such transitions.
Uncertainty and Grapevine: It is
crucial that there is ample space
and time for changes to kick-in, and
people get opportunity to digest the
change, that there are people at
responsible positions to answer all
queries, and there is communication
to ensure that there is no negativity
among the people. As the Managing
Director, conducting a town hall, or
meeting people through informal
channels to promote transparency
and clarity will ensure there is no
negativity due to uncertainty and
grapevine.
Finding a common ground: One of
the most critical elements of change
from a people perspective is finding
a common ground to secure a win-
win for both parties. Clearly
demarcating points that help people
in areas that matter to them can
work wonders in making a smooth
transition. Organically, change can
blind people of the benefits because
the process of change can be taxing,
and hence it requires someone at
the leadership level to bring their
focus back on the benefits that they
value and receive as an outcome.
About the Author
Rohit Hasteer is the Group CHRO for
Housing.com, Prop Tiger.com and
Makaan.com. He has an experience of
more than 20 years in the domain on
Compensation Benefits, Talent
Acquisition and Talent Management,
Training & Development. He has worked
with companies like CITIBANK, Make My
Trip, Aviva Life Insurance and UT
WorldWide. He takes keen interest in
building Organisation culture and People
Development. He is an MBA from IMT,
Ghaziabad.
www.humancapitalonline.com ◆