So it happened finally on the 24th October, 2016.
What was simmering below the surface, popping up occasionally through news reports and the rare interviews, rare enough to be brushed under the carpet, exploded into full public view.
Barely four years into the job, Cyrus Mistry lost his job as the top gun at the huge Tata industrial and services empire in India.
For the group, it is a rare thing to happen. In fact, in its nearly 150 years of existence, the group has seen only six individuals heading it. That puts it in a league that even the hallowed General Electric can't compete with - GE has had 12 CEOs over 124 years (of course, GE is a single legal entity running multiple businesses, and the Tata Sons holding company is controlling multiple legal entities (separate companies), but that's just a legal difference. For practical purposes, group Chairman is the boss and his word is final). Also, since Mr Mistry belongs to the family that holds the largest chunk of shareholding in Tata Sons (the holding company of the entire group), something must have gone terribly wrong for the Board to resort to such a desperate measure. I try to analyse it from a leadership - management perspective, and hopefully we all have some lessons to learn here.
What was simmering below the surface, popping up occasionally through news reports and the rare interviews, rare enough to be brushed under the carpet, exploded into full public view.
Barely four years into the job, Cyrus Mistry lost his job as the top gun at the huge Tata industrial and services empire in India.
For the group, it is a rare thing to happen. In fact, in its nearly 150 years of existence, the group has seen only six individuals heading it. That puts it in a league that even the hallowed General Electric can't compete with - GE has had 12 CEOs over 124 years (of course, GE is a single legal entity running multiple businesses, and the Tata Sons holding company is controlling multiple legal entities (separate companies), but that's just a legal difference. For practical purposes, group Chairman is the boss and his word is final). Also, since Mr Mistry belongs to the family that holds the largest chunk of shareholding in Tata Sons (the holding company of the entire group), something must have gone terribly wrong for the Board to resort to such a desperate measure. I try to analyse it from a leadership - management perspective, and hopefully we all have some lessons to learn here.
- Times change, Systems usually do not. Well, times had changed in 1991 when the prime minister of India Mr P V Narsimha Rao had thrust an unprepared India into the fires of economic liberalisation. Most corporate groups, accustomed to greasing their way to prosperity, simply fell by the wayside in the raging and unfamiliar storm of global competition. A young Ratan Tata, newly minted Chairman of the Tata Group, set upon radically restructuring the group to stay relevant. He succeeded big time. We have covered that story at length in this Bodhi for our site BodhiBooster.com here. It was the sheer force of Ratan Tata's vision and personality that he carried the group through the most difficult time imaginable. However, Mr Cyrus Mistry was not allowed the same freedom this time round. He was simply removed, as major transformations were afoot. Cyrus was facing the heat of a global slowdown just when the Tata Group had truly globalised itself (65% revenues coming from 100 countries). Was the system not able to cope up with rapid change this time? Obviously not. Was Mr Mistry not able to take the system into confidence? It seems not. For a visionary leader in an important position of power, the quality of communication can mean the difference between pulling it through, and losing it.
