And unfortunate side-effect of the Gaurav Sabnis – IIPM episode is the message it sends on the relationship between an individual and his or her employer.
From the beginning it seemed very strange that IIPM dragged IBM into the matter, in spite of being told (by IBM) that what Gaurav had to say was entirely his personal opinion which neither reflected the views of the company he worked for nor touched any area of business the company was involved in. This unreasonable strategy worked – Gaurav offered to resign, IBM accepted his resignation and IIPM thought they achieved what they set out to do.
What if Gaurav had not resigned? Or if IBM had encouraged Gaurav to stay on, asking him not to worry about IBM’s reputation ? Would IIPM really have got down to burning laptops? Very unlikely, because that would have attracted the attention of mainstream media which would have led to more scrutiny of all of IIPM’s claims. IIPM’s strategy has revolved around bullying weak targets (it assumed bloggers were in this category), and I doubt if it has the stomach to bring the matter into the view of the larger public. Even the legal notices were mere threats – they would not think of following up with legal action. As Dr.Amit Kapoor says, " If IIPM actually goes ahead with a legal recourse against Sabnis, they will end up axing their own foot. A defamation case eventually puts the truth to test."
But Gaurav did resign, which showed that despite dragging his employer into a matter completely unrelated to the employee’s role or the employer’s business, IIPM’s pressure tactics succeeded in severing the relationship between Gaurav and IBM.
As employees, we have a contract with our employers. Breach the contract, and you are likely to be fired. But the corporate-individual contract has its borders, beyond which the individual is free to do as he or she wishes. What one does in personal life should not, normally, intrude into the official sphere and have an effect on the organization one works for (There are exceptions of course – a CEO’s action in the personal sphere can have an impact on the organization he leads). By artificially linking the employee and his employer in an unrelated matter and succeeding in severing their relationship, IIPM has set a bad example. And coming from a management institution – which probably teaches business ethics to its students – this act cannot be condoned. Let us hope others do not follow the example set by IIPM.
3 thoughts on “The employer-employee relationship”
It’s not just IIPM who has set a bad example. In my mind, IBM has done that too by not encouraging Gaurav to stay on.
If IIPM sent legal notice to Gaurav, i wonder why the ‘students’ had to give threat to IBM. Should IIPM not have given a contract-severance-no-further-business kind of notice to IBM ? [ what about effect of placements at IBM ? ]
How much of the ‘students’ involvement is directed or otherwise by IIPM ?
Incidentally parmanu, are your employers traceable through your Blog ?
Rash: IBM took the easy way out, which wasn’t surprising. But it would have set a very good example if it had encouraged Gaurav to stay on.
Loosemuse: I don’t know if my employers are traceable, but I wouldn’t worry too much ‘coz they don’t produce anything that can be burned!!