Marina Gorbis's Blog, page 1332
December 22, 2014
Overcoming the Peter Principle
Management journals would not exist if managers were always perfect, so it’s no surprise that HBR has long been exploring the reasons behind manager incompetence and whose responsibility it is to compensate – the boss or the subordinate.
Nowhere was the problem stated more acutely, it could be argued, than in the wicked 1969 satire, The Peter Principle. Taking the form of a serious work of business research, complete with entirely fake examples, it purported to have discovered the root cause of manager incompetence: Everyone in an organization keeps on getting promoted until they reach their level of incompetence. At that point they stop being promoted. So given enough time and enough promotion levels, every position in a firm will be occupied by someone who can’t do the job. The book struck a chord with the general public, staying on the New York Times bestseller list for over a year, and it’s still in print 45 years later.
HBR took it seriously enough to offer up two straight-faced contemporary responses, both of which were remarkably quick to accept the book’s premise.
The first, from 1973, “A Postscript to the Peter Principle,” suggested that certain groups of managers – notably women and minorities — were exempt from the insidious effect because they often weren’t promoted despite their competence and so didn’t get the chance to reach their level of incompetence. The second, from 1976, ”The Real Peter Principle: Promotion to Pain,” argued that what really happens is that managers are promoted, not to their level of immutable incompetence, but to their level of anxiety and depression, which overwhelms their ambition and desire to succeed.
These two pieces were squarely in line with HBR’s focus on improving the practice of management by focusing on the managers. It wasn’t until 1979 – a full decade later – that that HBR addressed the question of managerial incompetence from the subordinates’ point of view.
This seems surprising since of course every manager is a subordinate as well. And indeed in The Subordinate’s Predicaments, Case Western Reserve management professor Eric Neilsen and then-doctoral candidate Jan Gypen make that point explicitly. But, they observe, most managers address the bad boss problem by getting out of the subordinate role as quickly as possible and, by improving their own leadership skills, becoming a good boss. This, one might argue, is a sort of reverse Peter Principle, in which people learn to rise above their incompetencies (or at any rate other people’s) as they move up.
But the message here is still that incompetence is rife, and for Neilsen and Gypen subordinates inhabit a very dangerous world. The heart of their argument is this: In dealing with superiors, subordinates must navigate through a minefield of potential disasters by continually asking themselves six questions.
Is my boss interested in my welfare or does he see me as a competitor who needs to be neutralized?
Can I correctly work out what my boss wants or am I stuck second-guessing from what he’s actually saying?
Will my boss reward — or punish — me if I make improvement suggestions?
Am I capable of doing my job?
Do I want to emulate this boss, or should I distance myself from his poor example?
Should our relationship be friendly or strictly professional?
Guess wrong, and calamity may ensue, so subordinates spend a lot of energy in self-protection. The analysis resonates powerfully: Who’s never had to consider these questions in the course of their career? But what’s to be done? Recognizing the tensions is certainly the first step, but then Neilsen and Gypen do just what they say previous thinkers and managers always do – address their suggestions to the boss. Why? Because the boss is the one with the greater power to act.
You and Your Team
Managing Up
Best practices for interacting with your boss.
It is in this context, the next year, that HBS professor John Gabarro and a young associate professor, John Kotter, come up with what will become a powerfully enduring response that for the first time recognized that subordinates could do something to help themselves. Managing Your Boss, published first in 1980, remained fresh and relevant when it was reprinted in 1988, 1995, and 2005, and is still well worth a read now.
They too recognize that ultimately it’s the boss who has the power to change things. But they don’t accept the premise that the subordinate-boss relationship is at its heart adversarial. They start with an assumption of good will and argue that subordinates have a responsibility to help the boss help them. That starts with taking into account the boss’s goals, strengths, weaknesses, and organizational pressures. And it means falling in with the boss’s preferred style of working – Does he or she like to get information through memos or formal meetings? Does your boss thrive on conflict or try to minimize it?
But critically, the wise subordinate recognizes that the boss can’t magically know what he or she needs. It’s up to the employee, then, to speak up if expectations aren’t clear, to keep the boss informed, to fulfill commitments dependably, and to ask for help when needed. “It is not uncommon,” Gabarro and Kotter say wryly, “for a boss to need more information than the subordinate would naturally supply, or for the subordinate to think the boss knows more than he really does.”
Subsequent discussions begin to recognize that problematic bosses aren’t so much utterly incompetent as so good at something that their failings are overlooked. The ultimate expression of this idea is Michael Maccoby’s Narcissistic Leaders: The Incredible Pros, the Inevitable Cons, and the upside of their insight is extensively explored in Making Yourself Indispensable, which offers up a step-by-step guide to making the most of your strengths, so that your weaknesses don’t matter.
These kinds of analyses go a long way toward explaining why poor bosses persist, and they also put the onus of dealing with them squarely on their subordinates, since it’s not entirely in the organization’s interests to weed them out. And so to balance out the narcissistic leader we have the Toxic Handler: Organizational Hero and Casualty, a clear-eyed look at those people common to so many organizations who repair the damage a bad boss does by voluntarily shouldering “the sadness, frustration, bitterness, and anger that are endemic to organizational life.”
What underlies these later discussions is the assumption that if most leaders are also subordinates, most subordinates are also leaders, with power of their own that they can bring to bear on their bosses. This view was anticipated back in 1988, when in In Praise of Followers, Robert Kelley found that the traits of good followers are nearly the same as the traits of good leaders. They “manage themselves well; are committed to the organization and to a purpose, principle, or person outside themselves; build their competence and focus their efforts for maximum impact; and are courageous, honest, and credible.” Of course if everyone were like that, the Peter Principle would probably never have been written.
[image error]
An Alternative to Health Care M&A
[image error]
One of the main justifications for the mergers and acquisitions sweeping the health care industry is greater integration between the physicians and teams that care for patients. But consolidation does not ensure integration. While M&A may improve the efficiency of shared services such as human resources and finance, it may actually make it more difficult to improve the coordination of care. The challenges of combining and managing the resources and operations of the different organizations and aligning their cultures may actually make the goal of integrated, patient-centered care much harder to achieve.
What’s the alternative? A high-quality clinical affiliation where providers share best practices and easily consult with each other about patients even if they are independent.
We at Mayo Clinic believe remaining independent and forging a clinical affiliation is a powerful alternative means for integrating care. It complements local expertise and helps ensure that a particular service is delivered at the place where its value is highest. It allows more patients to stay close to home with greater peace of mind and fosters collaboration between physicians and health care organizations to improve the delivery of care.
In 2011 Mayo elected to follow this course. We chose to support independent medical centers by creating the Mayo Clinic Care Network. We offer scalable and comprehensive services that help providers keep more care local, making it less fragmented and less costly for patients. In addition, this approach helps to stem the migration of patients to other providers.
As the Mayo Clinic Care Network was developed, we decided to include only those knowledge-sharing tools and clinical services that were tried and tested internally at Mayo Clinic. It was felt critical that Mayo Clinic caregivers be comfortable with the same tools extended to caregivers at member sites. When a request arose for a new service that was not operational within our own system (e.g., electronic tumor conferences), the service was developed and operationalized internally and then extended to members.
The challenge was to create delivery processes that would support the sharing of knowledge and expertise beyond our walls. The members of the network have helped us in this regard, and our model continues to evolve.
To date, clinical collaboration is delivered via information-sharing technology that includes:
eConsults to allow network physicians to connect electronically with Mayo specialists and subspecialists when they want additional input regarding a patient’s care. This formally documented consultation allows the network physician to bring that additional expertise to the patient within the current care continuum.
AskMayoExpert to provide point-of-care medical information compiled by Mayo physicians on disease management, care guidelines, treatment recommendations, and reference materials for a wide variety of medical conditions. The web-based information system can deliver Mayo’s clinical knowledge to desktop computers or mobile devices.
eTumor Board Conferences to allow physicians to connect via live videoconferences to present and discuss management of complex cancer cases with a Mayo Clinic multidisciplinary panel and other members of the network.
Members also have access to additional services through the network, including business and operational consulting and an extensive library of patient education materials developed by Mayo Clinic. Archived Grand Rounds allow network providers to view presentations by Mayo Clinic physicians and scientists from various internal medical conferences.
To be admitted to the Mayo Clinic Care Network, prospective members must be quality organizations that have a patient-centered culture, a desire to remain independent, and an interest in establishing a clinical collaboration. They go through rigorous due diligence — a formal, detailed review that includes a thorough assessment of the organization’s governance structure, clinical practice (including patient safety), quality and service, as well as an evaluation of business practices such as legal, compliance, finance, human resources, and information technology. Some network members have described this evaluation process as similar to the accreditation process of Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.
At first, we believed members would be located near Mayo’s campuses in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida. But we quickly discovered that there was an appetite for this type of collaboration across the country. The network currently has 31 members located across 18 U.S. states as well as Puerto Rico and Mexico.
To date, physician collaboration through the network is proving beneficial both to Mayo Clinic and network members. Network physicians are able to keep more care of their patients local while providing them additional peace of mind, and it has helped stem the migration of their patients to other providers for second opinions. The collaboration helps keep Mayo Clinic’s expertise relevant and allows it to be an option for patients needing specialty care not available in their communities. We also see the network as a source of revenues — both from the subscriptions paid by members and the patients they refer to us.
In 2014, network members have submitted nearly 2,000 eConsults, and the volume is rapidly increasing. Each request represents a physician who believes that collaboration will best serve the patient. Of these eConsults, less than 15% of those patients were referred to Mayo Clinic for additional assessment or specialty care. The remainder — the vast majority — have been able to receive high-quality, cost-effective care close to home.
Academic medical centers like Mayo Clinic can and should foster a collaborative environment that promotes integrated, patient-focused care. When care givers can address the needs of the patient and provide the right care at the right place and the right time, everyone benefits.
[image error]
The Year in Management, Told in 20 Charts
One of the great pleasures of my job is thinking about, creating, and publishing charts in partnership with our amazing designers. And you all seem to quite like them, too. So as is required among most all digital editors at the end of each calendar year, I’ve gone through the entirety of 2014’s charts, tables, and other visuals we’ve published for HBR.org – hundreds in all – to highlight 20 that tell particularly interesting stories.
What smart products do people actually want? Do employees like negative feedback? And what’s the strangest educational background for a member of the Fed (this is my favorite)?
Enjoy.
1. Sure, flextime is OK. But high performers would rather just get paid more.
[image error]
2. No one wants a smart, connected wine bottle.
[image error]
3. Patent trolls really do stifle innovation.
[image error]
4. This is what phone calls look like today (though the world still isn’t all that flat).
[image error]
5. Men still aren’t into the idea of quotas for boards.
[image error]
[image error]
7. Yes, your employees want negative feedback (even though it’s hard to give).
[image error]
8. Companies aren’t exactly prepared for climate change risk (but at least most believe it’s real?).
[image error]
9. Respecting your employees can go a long way.
[image error]
10. Love math? Love people? Lucky you.
[image error]
11. Will your employees embrace data? It depends.
[image error]
12. It’s pretty important to have a conscientious spouse.
[image error]
13. CEOs get paid too much, according to pretty much everyone.
[image error]
14. We’re getting more control over when we take breaks at work, but job sharing and sabbaticals are out the window.
[image error]
15. Here’s how old Silicon Valley’s top founders really are.
[image error]
16. There’s a big difference in the composition of top management teams when a company has a non-native CEO.
[image error]
17. There was once a member of the Fed who had a master’s degree in dairy science.
[image error]
18. Men apply for jobs they don’t feel qualified for; women don’t.
[image error]
19. Here’s what leaders are made of.
[image error]
20. Absolutely no one knows if a robot will take your job.
[image error]
[image error]
How to Keep Your Team Motivated
As a manager, motivating employees is one of the most important things you do for your company. After all, engagement is linked to firm profitability, customer satisfaction, and employee retention. Yet garnering loyalty and commitment from employees can be a challenge.
Recently, HBR ran a series on engaging employees, asking different experts to weigh in on specific angles. These articles provide a good refresher on how to keep your team focused and motivated.
Where to start? First, you need to know what you’re working with. Develop a baseline understanding of how engaged your team members are. Many companies do that with an annual engagement survey asking employees to report their own satisfaction levels. But, the results don’t give you objective data on how engaged people actually are. Instead, you can use people analytics to understand what drives your employees, perhaps even better than employees understand themselves.
Then, consider whom you’re trying to engage. Of course, one size does not fit all when you’re coming up with an engagement strategy and what you do should depend on the specific group you’re working with, whether they’re older workers or younger ones, your star performers or your b-players. And some people can be tougher to motivate than others. Take government workers or middle managers, for example. Or people who have a lot of other opportunities available to them, like data scientists. Or consider the very real challenge of trying to motivate someone you don’t like. Tailor your approach to meet each team member’s needs.
Next, keep in mind what works and what doesn’t. Here are some of the things that have been shown to motivate people:
The freedom to choose when, where, and how they work
The ability to perform at the highest levels, even beyond their own expectations
Feeling connected to others
A well-designed workspace
Aspirational, but achievable, goals. Try this helpful trick: a range of goals (“land 4-6 new clients”) may be more motivating than a single one (“land 5 new clients”).
And here are a few that have the opposite effect, demotivating people:
Having to pretend they’re someone they’re not
Working for a micromanaging boss
Unfortunately, managers who are truly good at motivating are few and far between. This is partly because it isn’t something you can learn overnight. Rather, research shows that the most engaging leaders have had early stretch experiences that shaped them and have deeply-held beliefs about what it means to be a leader. You can’t go back and change your past but you can focus on doing some very basic things that make a big difference, such as listening, showing respect, and remembering that happiness matters, even at work.
[image error]
When a Private Message Ends Up in the Wrong Place
When Alan* heard the email “ping” from his new boss’s nearby desk, his quiet laughter turned to a sinking feeling in his stomach. Was that a notification that she’d received the email he’d just sent, mocking how she’d criticized the mess left in the office kitchen? He swore he had hit “forward” before writing his scathing response… but it turned out he hit “reply” instead. And what he wrote, intended as a private joke between buddies, was not going to do him any favors with the boss.
Seeing that his boss was not at her desk, he hovered in panic over her keyboard to see if he could get into her computer and delete it. But the machine was locked. In desperation, he sprinted down two flights of stairs to the IT department — passing his boss, who was on her way up the stairs. He somehow managed to convince a sympathetic IT staffer to go into her email box and delete the offending missive. “Having made this horrible mistake,’’ Alan says now, “The best advice I can give someone else, is always make friends with the IT guys!” To this day, however, he’s not sure if she saw the email before it was deleted. Which was, in some ways, the worst possible outcome, because he lived in fear of reprisal, but didn’t have the courage to come clean in case she hadn’t seen it.
For most of us, undoing such a faux pas is not possible – as Sony and many members of the Hollywood elite have been painfully finding out with the seemingly unending exposure of embarrassing emails throughout December. (This wasn’t the worst part of the hack for Sony, but presumably it was a very big deal for the individuals involved.) And it’s a problem that many of us have faced, whether it’s accidentally hitting “reply” instead of “forward,” forwarding an email without thinking about what’s been written below, or toggling clumsily between including and excluding someone in a group email. A much-loved former boss accidentally revealed my pregnancy before I was planning to share the news, after he unwittingly forwarded an email exchange we’d had that had started with my telling him I’d be out of the office for a doctor’s appointment. Mark Zuckerberg’s early instant messages were revealed in 2010, in which he mocked early Facebook users for trusting him with their data. Each of the experts I consulted for this article offered one of their own mistakes as an illustration. ”No matter how many times we’re reminded that electronic communications stick around long after we’ve sent them and that they’re often not as secure as we think, many of us are still remarkable indiscreet in what we communicate via email, text, chat, and social media,’’ says Monique Valcour, a professor of management at EDHEC Business School in France.
So, having made the mistake, what now? There’s only one option. Own it. Approach the offended colleague quickly and directly, advises Jeanne Brett, Director of the Dispute Resolution Research Center at Kellogg School of Management. How do you word an apology when you’ve been a jerk? “I’m sorry I did it and even more sorry that I hurt/embarrassed/humiliated/showed disrespect for you,’’ Brett suggests. “I spoke/wrote without thinking and if I could take it back I would. I can only ask you to forgive me.’’
The last sentence, she points out, is particularly important because it turns the situation back on the other person and seeks forgiveness. This assumes, of course, that your communication was merely offensive and inappropriate, as opposed to libelous or a violation of company policies. Legal experts often caution people not to apologize when there is risk of litigation, but even then, recent research indicates the potential power of a sincere mea culpa. For instance, research suggests that physicians have a significant opportunity to deflect medical malpractice suits if they offer sincere apologies, taking responsibility for their mistakes.
In any apology scenario, advises Valcour, avoid insincere language of the “mistakes were made’’ or “I’m sorry if somehow you were offended…’’ variety. Make the apology in person or by phone, especially considering that email leaves tone to the imagination of the reader. You don’t want to risk getting it wrong again.
“There’s a saying in politics that you only have three options about what to say when it comes to crisis communications,’’ advises Dorie Clark, who earned her stripes as a communication director for the Howard Dean presidential campaign. “One, you didn’t do it; two, you did it but you were justified; and three, you did it and you’re sorry.’’ For most leaked or forwarded emails, options one and two are out the window, Clark says. For instance, “It would look pretty foolish for Amy Pascal to defend her badinage about which black movie stars President Obama might like best.’’
As awful as you’ll feel having to make an apology, recognize that you may well have done real damage and an apology may not be enough. “You may need to take additional steps to show that you actually care about the issues at hand and are taking it seriously,’’ Clark advises. (For example, if Pascal manages to retain her job at Sony, she’ll probably need to make diversity a focus on subsequent hires.)
“And it goes without saying, you can’t be an idiot in the same way twice,’’ Clark says. If you’re lucky enough to get a reprieve, don’t make the same mistake again.
*Not his real name.
[image error]
How U.S. Businesses Can Succeed in India in 2015
[image error]
On January 26, 2015, President Obama will become the first sitting U.S. President to visit India twice. Ahead of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington last September, the U.S.-India Business Council found that its large company members were prepared to invest $40 billion into India by 2017. This at a time when Brazil’s economy is stuttering, Vladimir Putin’s expansionism has made Russia a pariah, and the rich world is looking for someone other than China to love. In the hyperbole of online media, one headline reads, India is the last BRIC Standing.
The U.S.-India love first peaked in July 2008 when India’s government of the time risked its very survival in support of a nuclear energy deal led by Washington. But both trade and political alignment lumbered slowly forward until the current quarter and many American executives had become flustered with their India initiatives.
Until now.
Today there appears to a second gold rush to India. Silicon Valley venture capitalist, Douglas Leone of Sequoia Capital, told the Economic Times of India in October, “We could not be more thrilled. We don’t have 25-30 category leaders in the United States; we don’t have [as many] in China right now, but we have it in India.” In the same month SoftBank of Japan committed to investing $10 billion into India over the next several years and CEO Masayoshi Son proved his seriousness by pouring the first billion into an Indian e-commerce company (Snapdeal) and a car-sharing service (Olacabs).
It’s not just frothy internet startups that are doing well in India today. Boeing India’s Dennis Swanson told Business Week that he expects to sign a new strategic partnership with an Indian company in 2015. Boeing is America’s largest exporter and the only American defense contractor to have crossed $2 billion in sales to India. America’s largest insurer, Allstate, announced plans to invest $1 billion in its India operations. Domino’s Pizza declared that they sell more pies in India than any other country other than the United States.
Federal and state government officials have also lined up to promote their respective causes in New Delhi, from Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, to South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. Hundreds of lesser known companies, organizations and officials have joined the scramble. And we expect that President Obama’s visit will spark a further acceleration of business interest in India.
While some companies will do very well in India, we expect many others to be disappointed. But it won’t be “India’s fault,” in our view. In June 2013, Dallas-based Mary Kay exited from India after six years and over $20 million invested. At the same time Amway and L’Oreal thrived in the same market and personal care sales boomed across most of India. Earlier, GE found that it could not make a go in the appliance business in India. Abbott Laboratories of Illinois acquired Piramal Healthcare Ltd.’s branded generic-medicine unit in India for $3.7 billion in 2010, predicting it would grow at 20% a year for a decade. Two years later sales were stagnant in dollar terms.
We believe that American companies have a huge upside in India over the next several years. But they need to be alert to the following four signposts.
Choose the right India country manager: The role of country manager for India can mean many things depending on the scope of operations and the structure of an organization. First of all, headquarters needs to be clear about their vision of their role in India over the next 2-5 years and recruit to match that vision.
Sometimes, we see companies enter India with an executive who is the rough equivalent of a regional sales manager in the United States when their visions of India are much grander; he or she is typically not empowered to seize transformational opportunities in India while at the same time, his or her voice is not heard loudly enough at global headquarters. We’ve also seen the reverse, where a retained search firm convinces an American company with very modest goals for India to hire a leader used to running a thousand-person organization. In India’s class-conscious culture, such a person might struggle at having to personally perform tasks that they routinely delegated two or three layers down. They will definitely find themselves under-challenged. When they quit, the American company’s brand and reputation takes a hit in India.
We cringe at hiring processes that emphasize the ability to “communicate effectively with headquarters” over the skill of dealing with Indian companies and government officials. Of course it would be ideal to hire a manager who is equally adept in Peoria and Pune, but there is a paucity of such talent in a growing emerging market. While India is complex, it is an open society and an expatriate sent to India can learn to be effective in India, provided they have an open mind, a sense of humility, and the tenacity to manage the Indian operation for four years or more. David Mulford, U.S. Ambassador to India from 2004 to 2009, was more successful in part because his long tenure enabled him to gain trust, respect and apply his learning effectively. Many other recent ambassadors have returned to Washington in two years or less.
Prepare to adapt: Muhtar Kent, the Turkish-American CEO of the Coca-Cola Company, lived in India as a boy and now oversees a business where India is a top 10 market in case volume and where his company is investing another $5 billion. “… In India, appearances can be deceiving,” he wrote earlier this year in an essay in Re-Imagining India. “For outsiders there is always a hint of mystery. Even if you live and work there, you can never be entirely sure you understand. It is best to assume that you do not. If you come to India with some grand, pre-determined strategy or master plan, prepare to be distracted, deterred, even demoralized.”
While flexibility is important in any new market, India stretches the assumptions and belief systems of many seasoned international business people. If you and your company are not prepared to be humble and open about dealing with India, it may be best to stay home. We don’t mean to suggest that you compromise your integrity or core values or that you tolerate any corruption, but be ready to do things in India that you may not need to do in other markets. Kent goes on to say that the key to their success in India “has been learning to see the Indian market as it is, not as we wished it to be.”
In our conversations, we hear this yearning to see the Indian markets as American executives “wish it to be” from the trivial to the substantial:
• “Why can’t Indian Standard Time be nine or 10 hours ahead of EST? What is this business about nine and a half hours?”
• “What is a crore of rupees? Why can’t they count in millions and billions like everyone else?”
• “Why are there so many levels of duties, taxes and “cesses” in India?”
• “Reserve Bank permission? I never have to deal with the U.S. Federal Reserve, what is this all about?”
• “I have one distributor for all of Australia. Why do I need five in India?”
Take India as it is and you can learn to thrive. Complaining about why it is different will gain neither friends nor sales.
Value, not price: The common wisdom is that India’s buyers seek the lowest possible price and are prepared to compromise on quality. And rarely is an American product or service the low-price leader in India’s market. Add up Indian taxes and channel costs and the price of American products looks worse compared to a local player.
The reality is that usage assumptions of many imported products are not attuned to the Indian market. For example, interest rates are higher in India than the USA and credit is not easy to come by. So cash flow is king in most Indian businesses and if you can document how your product or service can improve your Indian customer’s cash flow, a high ticket price becomes much less of a factor. In the United States, a machine may be used six hours a day for five days a week. An Indian executive may want to buy the same machine and run it 16 hours a day for six or seven days a week. Low-cost Indian repair and maintenance crews can tune up the equipment at night.
American equipment is often sold bundled with a host of features, accessories and services that may have no relevance to the market in India. Many times, the product can be unbundled thoughtfully and the final configuration offered in India may not be lower cost but can preserve or even improve gross margins.
Don’t ignore governments as a customer: Other than in the defense sector, American companies have generally hesitated to engage with India’s government, fearing corruption, long sales cycles and the pressure of a low-bid tender process. Today, however, there is opportunity in government sales.
India has 29 state governments in addition to the union (central or federal) government. Some of the states and their cities have more nimble and forward-thinking officials who are committed to modernization and rapid growth and they should no longer be ignored by new entrants. These sales are decided in state capitals across the country and most American companies should choose no more than four states as initial targets. Buoyed by economic growth, New Delhi also has a lot of money to invest in infrastructure, in medical services, in technology and more. By March 2015, the Modi government will announce its new budget for fiscal year 2014-2015 and this will affect many policies and procedure followed by the central government. This will be a good time to re-assess whether India’s federal government will be a more promising market for foreign companies.
With Obama’s upcoming visit, we expect the conditions for U.S.-India activity to continue to be favorable. If you’re not rethinking your India goals, now is a good time to do so.
[image error]
December 19, 2014
Marina Gorbis's Blog
- Marina Gorbis's profile
- 3 followers
