Greetings of the day Seniors,
I have been to one of the interviews recently. The interviewer posed me a question which I could not answer. Here it goes: "When a Director of a company is rude to employees and does not allow them to work by entertaining parties, and who is completely unprofessional, and apart from this, he has a sound political background so that he cannot be removed from the company, but the management has decided to remove him, what action should be taken?"
Please share your views on the above discussion, Seniors.
Thanks & Regards,
V. Vikram Kumar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
2I have been to one of the interviews recently. The interviewer posed me a question which I could not answer. Here it goes: "When a Director of a company is rude to employees and does not allow them to work by entertaining parties, and who is completely unprofessional, and apart from this, he has a sound political background so that he cannot be removed from the company, but the management has decided to remove him, what action should be taken?"
Please share your views on the above discussion, Seniors.
Thanks & Regards,
V. Vikram Kumar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Vikram,
My affirmative reply is that I would love to say that, "when the management has decided to remove him, let them do their job because they are the authority and have the right to make appropriate decisions. They have not approached me seeking my views or opinions. Otherwise, allow me to play the role of management; I will show you how to remove him along with the right actions to be taken."
Let's practice effective thinking skills. Whatever is applicable and proportional to the scenario of the location or circumstance, considering you were in the interviewing process. You should reply in a way that does not lead to an argument and be polite at all times.
I hope other members of this forum may be interested in posting their suggestions or views, etc.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My affirmative reply is that I would love to say that, "when the management has decided to remove him, let them do their job because they are the authority and have the right to make appropriate decisions. They have not approached me seeking my views or opinions. Otherwise, allow me to play the role of management; I will show you how to remove him along with the right actions to be taken."
Let's practice effective thinking skills. Whatever is applicable and proportional to the scenario of the location or circumstance, considering you were in the interviewing process. You should reply in a way that does not lead to an argument and be polite at all times.
I hope other members of this forum may be interested in posting their suggestions or views, etc.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
elegant initiative to distinguish people mentality for political use and formulate employee in unpleasant character on management view. Best of luck
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Skhadir and Jaweed,
Sir,
Thanks much for your response. I hope, for sure, I will think in an effective manner and answer the questions posed to me in the coming interviews.
Thanks & Regards,
V. Vikram Kumar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sir,
Thanks much for your response. I hope, for sure, I will think in an effective manner and answer the questions posed to me in the coming interviews.
Thanks & Regards,
V. Vikram Kumar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Since the management has decided to remove him, I don't see a dilemma. Surely the decision is not frivolous. They must have considered all aspects before choosing to dismiss him, regardless of the potential political fallout and related consequences.
Good riddance of bad rubbish.
Col Gahlot
'TRURECRUIT'
09810081197
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Since the management has decided to remove him, I don't see a dilemma. Surely the decision is not frivolous. They must have considered all aspects before choosing to dismiss him, regardless of the potential political fallout and related consequences.
Good riddance of bad rubbish.
Col Gahlot
'TRURECRUIT'
09810081197
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vikram, In fact, the question was to check your knowledge about company law. So, it was not so simple to answer as suggested by some members. The appointment and removal of directors is controlled by the Companies Act 1956 and by company articles. In some respects, the Companies Act cannot be varied by company articles, but in other respects, it is indicative only, and its provisions may be amended or overridden by the articles. Your reply in that case would have been, "If the management has decided to remove a Director, they may remove him by ordinary resolution passed by a simple majority by following the procedure laid down in Section 284 of the Company Act 1956, provided he is not a director appointed by the Central Government in pursuance of section 408."
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friend,
This is really a very dicey question. A professional HR may have the best chance to use his skills here. As you know, management wants to get rid of this person, but at the same time, that person has good political backing, and his immediate removal may invite a few troubles for the organization. In that case, I would suggest creating circumstances so that the person himself will leave the company. Now, what kind of circumstances we should create again depends on the situation.
Regards
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is really a very dicey question. A professional HR may have the best chance to use his skills here. As you know, management wants to get rid of this person, but at the same time, that person has good political backing, and his immediate removal may invite a few troubles for the organization. In that case, I would suggest creating circumstances so that the person himself will leave the company. Now, what kind of circumstances we should create again depends on the situation.
Regards
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vikram,
In fact, the question was to check your knowledge about company law. So, it was not so simple to answer as suggested by some members. The appointment and removal of directors are controlled by the Companies Act 1956 and by company articles. In some respects, the Companies Act cannot be varied by company articles, but in other respects, it is indicative only and its provisions may be amended or overridden by the articles.
Your reply in that case would have been, "If the management has decided to remove a Director, they may remove him by an ordinary resolution passed by a simple majority by following the procedure laid down in Section 284 of the Company Act 1956, provided he is not a director appointed by the Central Government in pursuance of section 408."
Greetings of the day Seniors,
I have been to one of the Interviews Recently. The interviewer posed me a question which I could not answer. Here it goes, "When a Director of a company is rude to employees and if he doesn't allow the employees to work by entertaining parties and who is completely unprofessional and apart from this, he has a sound political background so that he cannot be removed from the company, but the management has decided to remove him, what action needs to be taken?"
Please share your views on the above discussion Seniors.
Thanks & regards,
v.vikram kumar
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In fact, the question was to check your knowledge about company law. So, it was not so simple to answer as suggested by some members. The appointment and removal of directors are controlled by the Companies Act 1956 and by company articles. In some respects, the Companies Act cannot be varied by company articles, but in other respects, it is indicative only and its provisions may be amended or overridden by the articles.
Your reply in that case would have been, "If the management has decided to remove a Director, they may remove him by an ordinary resolution passed by a simple majority by following the procedure laid down in Section 284 of the Company Act 1956, provided he is not a director appointed by the Central Government in pursuance of section 408."
Greetings of the day Seniors,
I have been to one of the Interviews Recently. The interviewer posed me a question which I could not answer. Here it goes, "When a Director of a company is rude to employees and if he doesn't allow the employees to work by entertaining parties and who is completely unprofessional and apart from this, he has a sound political background so that he cannot be removed from the company, but the management has decided to remove him, what action needs to be taken?"
Please share your views on the above discussion Seniors.
Thanks & regards,
v.vikram kumar
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Correctly said by Mr Dhingra, so far as legality of Removal of Director is concerned provisions of Companies Act, 1956 will be followed. Regards
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friend,
The question is not at all diplomatic. It was, in fact, asked by the interviewers to test your knowledge about the relevant provisions relating to the appointment and removal of a director of a company. P.S. Dhingraji has very rightly explained the correct procedure to be followed for the removal of a director of a company. The answers given by a few others are far from the truth, and I do not know what made them give such suggestions for your question.
Thanks,
PS Dhingraji.
From India, Bhopal
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The question is not at all diplomatic. It was, in fact, asked by the interviewers to test your knowledge about the relevant provisions relating to the appointment and removal of a director of a company. P.S. Dhingraji has very rightly explained the correct procedure to be followed for the removal of a director of a company. The answers given by a few others are far from the truth, and I do not know what made them give such suggestions for your question.
Thanks,
PS Dhingraji.
From India, Bhopal
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Kuljit Pal Singh and SK070707,
Thank you for the compliments. In fact, none of the questions from the interviewers are irrelevant. There is always some objective hidden behind them, aiming to test the candidate's knowledge and to assess whether they would be helpful in complex situations upon appointment.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for the compliments. In fact, none of the questions from the interviewers are irrelevant. There is always some objective hidden behind them, aiming to test the candidate's knowledge and to assess whether they would be helpful in complex situations upon appointment.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. SK070707 and Mr. PSDINGRA,
There are many ways to respond to a query, and it's up to the respondent how he perceives the world. Even the interviewer (HR) should have the courtesy to explain the process if the applicant has no idea about the query asked. Don't expect the applicant to have every piece of information on hand; otherwise, he would have been in a better position.
I have no idea why you people are reacting in a foolish way. Everyone has the right to respond at their will. Check the way IIM's are responding to such queries. For your kind information, there are many queries raised by HR that are truly irrelevant and have nothing to do with the hiring process.
Having knowledge about the appointment and removal of directors is different from the current practices happening in many organizations. In most organizations, HR is not allowed to be involved in any board matters, as it is taken care of by the company-appointed lawyer and CA.
Those who have worked in organizations have better information/knowledge and bitter experience than those who are offering their services as consultants.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There are many ways to respond to a query, and it's up to the respondent how he perceives the world. Even the interviewer (HR) should have the courtesy to explain the process if the applicant has no idea about the query asked. Don't expect the applicant to have every piece of information on hand; otherwise, he would have been in a better position.
I have no idea why you people are reacting in a foolish way. Everyone has the right to respond at their will. Check the way IIM's are responding to such queries. For your kind information, there are many queries raised by HR that are truly irrelevant and have nothing to do with the hiring process.
Having knowledge about the appointment and removal of directors is different from the current practices happening in many organizations. In most organizations, HR is not allowed to be involved in any board matters, as it is taken care of by the company-appointed lawyer and CA.
Those who have worked in organizations have better information/knowledge and bitter experience than those who are offering their services as consultants.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please review the corrected text below:
---
Have a look at this link to understand how relevant the query posed by HR is when it comes to hiring a candidate based on their requirements: https://www.citehr.com/345853-interview-skills.html.
With profound regards,
---
If you need further assistance, feel free to ask.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
---
Have a look at this link to understand how relevant the query posed by HR is when it comes to hiring a candidate based on their requirements: https://www.citehr.com/345853-interview-skills.html.
With profound regards,
---
If you need further assistance, feel free to ask.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Skhadir,
I agree with your views and withdraw the following part of my earlier answer to Vikram's question: "The answers given by a few others are far from the truth, and I do not know what made them give such suggestions for your question." I hope this is okay. I hope you will not call my way of answering as "foolish" now after this deletion.
Thanks and best wishes. We would love to get your positive comments and answers always.
From India, Bhopal
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with your views and withdraw the following part of my earlier answer to Vikram's question: "The answers given by a few others are far from the truth, and I do not know what made them give such suggestions for your question." I hope this is okay. I hope you will not call my way of answering as "foolish" now after this deletion.
Thanks and best wishes. We would love to get your positive comments and answers always.
From India, Bhopal
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Khadir,
Thank you for your wise advice, which I appreciate, especially as someone who may sometimes act foolishly. However, it is essential to recognize that there is no separate unit designated to perform overlapping tasks alongside the HR department in any organization. All functions related to appointments and terminations ultimately go through HR, regardless of where the decision originates, even if it is at the board level.
For my own understanding and to avoid providing misguided responses in the future, I would like to request feedback on what specific errors or offensive content you identified in my previous reply.
Furthermore, could you clarify why an interviewer should be obligated to disclose the questions in advance and their intended purpose, unless the interviewee seeks clarification? Should an HR interviewer be expected to provide classes to prospective candidates daily regarding the nature of their questions and expected responses before making a selection? Would this not be a waste of time and hinder the selection of qualified candidates?
It's worth noting that the original question was posed to solicit input from more experienced individuals, assuming it was a diplomatic inquiry. Your birthdate indicates you have around 8 years of work experience out of your 34 years of life. In contrast, I have over 40 years of practical experience, in addition to 10 years as a consultant post-retirement, with involvement in hiring up to the GM level. My response aimed to provide clarity based on company law without labeling the question as diplomatic or not. If my response aimed to educate both the questioner and the community, how could it be considered foolish by someone with your expertise?
If you found the interviewer's question or my response irrelevant, it would have been clearer to specify the reasons for such judgment.
If you struggle to accept informative feedback, it reflects poorly on your own understanding, as evident in your current response.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your wise advice, which I appreciate, especially as someone who may sometimes act foolishly. However, it is essential to recognize that there is no separate unit designated to perform overlapping tasks alongside the HR department in any organization. All functions related to appointments and terminations ultimately go through HR, regardless of where the decision originates, even if it is at the board level.
For my own understanding and to avoid providing misguided responses in the future, I would like to request feedback on what specific errors or offensive content you identified in my previous reply.
Furthermore, could you clarify why an interviewer should be obligated to disclose the questions in advance and their intended purpose, unless the interviewee seeks clarification? Should an HR interviewer be expected to provide classes to prospective candidates daily regarding the nature of their questions and expected responses before making a selection? Would this not be a waste of time and hinder the selection of qualified candidates?
It's worth noting that the original question was posed to solicit input from more experienced individuals, assuming it was a diplomatic inquiry. Your birthdate indicates you have around 8 years of work experience out of your 34 years of life. In contrast, I have over 40 years of practical experience, in addition to 10 years as a consultant post-retirement, with involvement in hiring up to the GM level. My response aimed to provide clarity based on company law without labeling the question as diplomatic or not. If my response aimed to educate both the questioner and the community, how could it be considered foolish by someone with your expertise?
If you found the interviewer's question or my response irrelevant, it would have been clearer to specify the reasons for such judgment.
If you struggle to accept informative feedback, it reflects poorly on your own understanding, as evident in your current response.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear PSDHINGRA,
Thank you for your reply. Firstly, kindly avoid underestimating anyone in this world. Please refrain from equating the number of years of experience with knowledge gained. I must say that your way of assuming things sounds truly foolish.
Being a "senior" does not imply being an older person with decades of experience. I only value and respect the knowledge held by an individual, which is worth millions of dollars. Age is not a factor of concern for me.
Everyone has the right to suggest as they wish, but it is up to the end user whether to accept or reject those suggestions. Please do not undervalue others' suggestions solely based on your experience and age. Procedure and process are two different things.
Can you define how young is too young?
Most processes are routed through HR, but to my knowledge, HR is often seen as a rubber stamp in many organizations, regardless of size, with no authority or power to make major decisions. They often cannot even do justice to their employees, despite being employees themselves.
For your information, I do not claim to be a wise man. I believe that both a barber and a chef are professionals in their respective trades and should stick to their roles. A barber cannot be assigned a chef's job and vice versa. However, it is possible for a barber to have knowledge related to the chef's trade and vice versa.
1) What is your opinion of HR? Do you see them as individuals with wide knowledge of human psychology and well-defined recruitment procedures?
2) How do you perceive the current functioning of the HRM industry in most organizations? To understand this, one needs to study the problems and issues faced by many employees.
3) To what extent is HR empowered to make major decisions?
4) Can you prove your statement that none of the interviewers' questions are irrelevant? There is always an underlying purpose to test the candidate's knowledge and ability to handle complex situations.
"Effective time spent on selecting the best candidate by understanding their psychology through relevant queries specific to the role is invaluable compared to recruiting a candidate who may perform well during interviews but lacks productivity and capability in the workplace."
I have served as an Ex-Secretary General of Khaja Education Society, Gulbarga, Karnataka, where I recruited Deans, Principals, and IT specialists. This does not make me a great personality; it simply reflects my experience and understanding of human psychology.
I strive not to be a "frog in a well."
Have a nice day.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your reply. Firstly, kindly avoid underestimating anyone in this world. Please refrain from equating the number of years of experience with knowledge gained. I must say that your way of assuming things sounds truly foolish.
Being a "senior" does not imply being an older person with decades of experience. I only value and respect the knowledge held by an individual, which is worth millions of dollars. Age is not a factor of concern for me.
Everyone has the right to suggest as they wish, but it is up to the end user whether to accept or reject those suggestions. Please do not undervalue others' suggestions solely based on your experience and age. Procedure and process are two different things.
Can you define how young is too young?
Most processes are routed through HR, but to my knowledge, HR is often seen as a rubber stamp in many organizations, regardless of size, with no authority or power to make major decisions. They often cannot even do justice to their employees, despite being employees themselves.
For your information, I do not claim to be a wise man. I believe that both a barber and a chef are professionals in their respective trades and should stick to their roles. A barber cannot be assigned a chef's job and vice versa. However, it is possible for a barber to have knowledge related to the chef's trade and vice versa.
1) What is your opinion of HR? Do you see them as individuals with wide knowledge of human psychology and well-defined recruitment procedures?
2) How do you perceive the current functioning of the HRM industry in most organizations? To understand this, one needs to study the problems and issues faced by many employees.
3) To what extent is HR empowered to make major decisions?
4) Can you prove your statement that none of the interviewers' questions are irrelevant? There is always an underlying purpose to test the candidate's knowledge and ability to handle complex situations.
"Effective time spent on selecting the best candidate by understanding their psychology through relevant queries specific to the role is invaluable compared to recruiting a candidate who may perform well during interviews but lacks productivity and capability in the workplace."
I have served as an Ex-Secretary General of Khaja Education Society, Gulbarga, Karnataka, where I recruited Deans, Principals, and IT specialists. This does not make me a great personality; it simply reflects my experience and understanding of human psychology.
I strive not to be a "frog in a well."
Have a nice day.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
I think we forgot to ask the poster which position he has applied for. If it is for a legal role, then the response must be purely technical, based on the provisions of company law. In the case that it is for HR, then the interviewee is definitely looking for HR skills to be applied in such situations.
Furthermore, I would like to humbly request Mr. Dhingra and Khaled to engage in a healthy and positive discussion.
Regards
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think we forgot to ask the poster which position he has applied for. If it is for a legal role, then the response must be purely technical, based on the provisions of company law. In the case that it is for HR, then the interviewee is definitely looking for HR skills to be applied in such situations.
Furthermore, I would like to humbly request Mr. Dhingra and Khaled to engage in a healthy and positive discussion.
Regards
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Shaik,
Your earlier answer, "why you people are reacting in a foolish way," itself suggests that you consider yourself the wisest man on earth, while you consider others as mere fools. On the other hand, your own answer, dated 22.06.2011, gives a clear inkling that you consider your answer, "They haven't approached me seeking my views/opinions etc., else ALLOW ME TO PLAY THE ROLE OF A MANAGEMENT, I WILL SHOW YOU HOW TO REMOVE HIM ALONG WITH RIGHT ACTION TO BE TAKEN," as the wisest answer. As a 'candidate,' you have shown nothing except extreme foolishness and an egoistic attitude by providing such a childish answer. Your answer, being a Sheik, may be valid in the Sheikdoms of Qatar and UAE, where expatriates have no chance of getting good managerial jobs, regardless of how talented they may be. Even in your own country Qatar, where more than 80% of the population is made up of expatriates (Qataris being less than 20%), they are placed at the lower and lowest rungs of employment.
Through your latest post, dated 27.06.2011, you have done nothing except giving your real introduction, showcasing how much you know and how wise you are in HR and Corporate affairs. Of course, you are well qualified in arrogance. Clearly, you seem to be an enemy of knowledge. While you consider yourself to have the world contract of knowledge about HR, thinking that others like me know nothing about HR, your own answer, dated 22.06.2011, did not even have any remote relevance to HR.
I advise you to TRY YOUR ABOVE ANSWER in a country like UK, USA, and India, and you will know where you stand in your wisdom and HR knowledge.
In your arrogance-filled answer, dated 27.06.2011, instead of replying to my questions, you preferred to justify your little experience in HR or the corporate world. YOU TOTALLY AVOIDED REPLYING TO ANY OF MY FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1) What type of foolishness could you notice from my earlier reply where I suggested an answer with reference to the provisions of company law?
2) Why is an interviewer obliged to explain what he intends to ask and for what purpose, unless the interviewee (candidate) seeks any clarification?
3) Do you feel that the interviewer (HR) should start taking classes for a huge lot of prospective candidates on a day-to-day basis before selecting a candidate for a single job, just to explain to them what his question would be, why and for what purpose he would ask such questions, and what should be the candidates' answers?
4) If I post my answer to enhance her knowledge as well as that of the other community members, how could that be a foolish answer for you, a wise person like you?
Skipping a reply to any of the above questions clearly indicates that you had nothing to justify your answer, dated 26.06.2011, as well as to justify your claim about my foolishness, except showing your own foolishness and arrogance.
Thanks for your reply. At the outset, kindly avoid underestimating anybody in this world. Try not to calculate YEARS OF EXPERIENCE = KNOWLEDGE GAINED. I would love to say that your way of assuming things sounds TRULY FOOLISH.
A "SENIOR" does not mean "AN AGE-OLD PERSON HAVING DECADES OF EXPERIENCE." I only value and respect knowledge held by an individual that is worth MILLION DOLLARS. AGE IS NOT OF MY CONCERN.
Everyone has the right to suggest at their will, but it is up to the end-user whether he wants to accept or reject. Try not to undervalue others' suggestions based solely on your EXPERIENCE and AGE. PROCEDURE and PROCESS are two different things.
Can you define HOW YOUNG IS TOO YOUNG?
Most processes are routed through HR, but to my knowledge, HR is more or less a RUBBER STAMP in many organizations (irrespective of size) with NO AUTHORITY to make major decisions. They can't even do justice with their employees, while they themselves are employees.
For your information, I am not claiming to be a wise man. I believe that a BARBER and CHEF are both professionals in their trades, and they have to do their jobs falling within their trade. A BARBER CANNOT BE ASSIGNED A CHEF JOB, and VICE VERSA. A barber can have knowledge pertaining to a CHEF'S TRADE and vice versa.
1) What do you think about HR? A great personality having wide knowledge about HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY and WELL-DEFINED RECRUITMENT PROCEDURES?
2) Do you have any idea HOW THE CURRENT HRM INDUSTRY IS FUNCTIONING IN MOST ORGANIZATIONS? You have to study the problems/issues faced by many employees.
3) To what extent is HR blessed with POWERS TO MAKE MAJOR DECISIONS?
4) Can you prove what you wrote, "In fact, none of the questions of the interviewers are irrelevant. Some object is always hidden behind that to test the knowledge of the candidate to judge whether on appointment he or she would prove to be helpful or not in some complex situations."
"EFFECTIVE TIME SPENT FOR SELECTING THE BEST CANDIDATE BY UNDERSTANDING HIS PSYCHOLOGY BY ASKING RELEVANT QUERIES RELATED TO THE ROLE OF AN APPLICANT IS WORTH MILLION DOLLARS THAN RECRUITING A CANDIDATE WHO WAS ONLY WORTH RESPONDING TO VARIOUS QUERIES AT THE TIME OF INTERVIEW BUT NOT PRODUCTIVE AT THE WORKPLACE AND UNABLE TO HANDLE MUCH MORE."
For your information, I am an EX-SECRETARY GENERAL of KHAJA EDUCATION SOCIETY, GULBARGA, KARNATAKA. I have recruited DEAN and PRINCIPALS of educational institutions with Ph.D.'s and better qualifications, as well as IT SPECIALISTS catering to SPECIFIC SEGMENTS. It doesn't mean that I am a great personality. I started working and earning my bread and butter even before securing my admission to college. I am not interested in praising myself, but I know who I am because I have spent most of my time understanding HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY correlating with this world.
I don't want to be a "FROG IN A WELL."
Have a nice day.
With profound regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your earlier answer, "why you people are reacting in a foolish way," itself suggests that you consider yourself the wisest man on earth, while you consider others as mere fools. On the other hand, your own answer, dated 22.06.2011, gives a clear inkling that you consider your answer, "They haven't approached me seeking my views/opinions etc., else ALLOW ME TO PLAY THE ROLE OF A MANAGEMENT, I WILL SHOW YOU HOW TO REMOVE HIM ALONG WITH RIGHT ACTION TO BE TAKEN," as the wisest answer. As a 'candidate,' you have shown nothing except extreme foolishness and an egoistic attitude by providing such a childish answer. Your answer, being a Sheik, may be valid in the Sheikdoms of Qatar and UAE, where expatriates have no chance of getting good managerial jobs, regardless of how talented they may be. Even in your own country Qatar, where more than 80% of the population is made up of expatriates (Qataris being less than 20%), they are placed at the lower and lowest rungs of employment.
Through your latest post, dated 27.06.2011, you have done nothing except giving your real introduction, showcasing how much you know and how wise you are in HR and Corporate affairs. Of course, you are well qualified in arrogance. Clearly, you seem to be an enemy of knowledge. While you consider yourself to have the world contract of knowledge about HR, thinking that others like me know nothing about HR, your own answer, dated 22.06.2011, did not even have any remote relevance to HR.
I advise you to TRY YOUR ABOVE ANSWER in a country like UK, USA, and India, and you will know where you stand in your wisdom and HR knowledge.
In your arrogance-filled answer, dated 27.06.2011, instead of replying to my questions, you preferred to justify your little experience in HR or the corporate world. YOU TOTALLY AVOIDED REPLYING TO ANY OF MY FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1) What type of foolishness could you notice from my earlier reply where I suggested an answer with reference to the provisions of company law?
2) Why is an interviewer obliged to explain what he intends to ask and for what purpose, unless the interviewee (candidate) seeks any clarification?
3) Do you feel that the interviewer (HR) should start taking classes for a huge lot of prospective candidates on a day-to-day basis before selecting a candidate for a single job, just to explain to them what his question would be, why and for what purpose he would ask such questions, and what should be the candidates' answers?
4) If I post my answer to enhance her knowledge as well as that of the other community members, how could that be a foolish answer for you, a wise person like you?
Skipping a reply to any of the above questions clearly indicates that you had nothing to justify your answer, dated 26.06.2011, as well as to justify your claim about my foolishness, except showing your own foolishness and arrogance.
Thanks for your reply. At the outset, kindly avoid underestimating anybody in this world. Try not to calculate YEARS OF EXPERIENCE = KNOWLEDGE GAINED. I would love to say that your way of assuming things sounds TRULY FOOLISH.
A "SENIOR" does not mean "AN AGE-OLD PERSON HAVING DECADES OF EXPERIENCE." I only value and respect knowledge held by an individual that is worth MILLION DOLLARS. AGE IS NOT OF MY CONCERN.
Everyone has the right to suggest at their will, but it is up to the end-user whether he wants to accept or reject. Try not to undervalue others' suggestions based solely on your EXPERIENCE and AGE. PROCEDURE and PROCESS are two different things.
Can you define HOW YOUNG IS TOO YOUNG?
Most processes are routed through HR, but to my knowledge, HR is more or less a RUBBER STAMP in many organizations (irrespective of size) with NO AUTHORITY to make major decisions. They can't even do justice with their employees, while they themselves are employees.
For your information, I am not claiming to be a wise man. I believe that a BARBER and CHEF are both professionals in their trades, and they have to do their jobs falling within their trade. A BARBER CANNOT BE ASSIGNED A CHEF JOB, and VICE VERSA. A barber can have knowledge pertaining to a CHEF'S TRADE and vice versa.
1) What do you think about HR? A great personality having wide knowledge about HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY and WELL-DEFINED RECRUITMENT PROCEDURES?
2) Do you have any idea HOW THE CURRENT HRM INDUSTRY IS FUNCTIONING IN MOST ORGANIZATIONS? You have to study the problems/issues faced by many employees.
3) To what extent is HR blessed with POWERS TO MAKE MAJOR DECISIONS?
4) Can you prove what you wrote, "In fact, none of the questions of the interviewers are irrelevant. Some object is always hidden behind that to test the knowledge of the candidate to judge whether on appointment he or she would prove to be helpful or not in some complex situations."
"EFFECTIVE TIME SPENT FOR SELECTING THE BEST CANDIDATE BY UNDERSTANDING HIS PSYCHOLOGY BY ASKING RELEVANT QUERIES RELATED TO THE ROLE OF AN APPLICANT IS WORTH MILLION DOLLARS THAN RECRUITING A CANDIDATE WHO WAS ONLY WORTH RESPONDING TO VARIOUS QUERIES AT THE TIME OF INTERVIEW BUT NOT PRODUCTIVE AT THE WORKPLACE AND UNABLE TO HANDLE MUCH MORE."
For your information, I am an EX-SECRETARY GENERAL of KHAJA EDUCATION SOCIETY, GULBARGA, KARNATAKA. I have recruited DEAN and PRINCIPALS of educational institutions with Ph.D.'s and better qualifications, as well as IT SPECIALISTS catering to SPECIFIC SEGMENTS. It doesn't mean that I am a great personality. I started working and earning my bread and butter even before securing my admission to college. I am not interested in praising myself, but I know who I am because I have spent most of my time understanding HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY correlating with this world.
I don't want to be a "FROG IN A WELL."
Have a nice day.
With profound regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whatever you felt, it's good for you. I am not interested in wasting my time by replying to you, Mr. psdhingra, because it's just a debate where concrete conclusions can't be drawn. You will find answers to your queries on this website.
Do more research before you talk about expatriates, and don't underestimate anyone on this earth the way you are doing now. You have no idea which nationality is managing GCC BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. When you are trying to impart or share knowledge, please don't point out whether others have given an easy reply or a difficult one because maybe for you, everything sounds easy to handle.
Have a nice day.
With profound regards.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Do more research before you talk about expatriates, and don't underestimate anyone on this earth the way you are doing now. You have no idea which nationality is managing GCC BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. When you are trying to impart or share knowledge, please don't point out whether others have given an easy reply or a difficult one because maybe for you, everything sounds easy to handle.
Have a nice day.
With profound regards.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
May I make a sincere appeal to all. We should not engage in a debate or make statements that would create an exchange of messages going beyond the topic in question. If we have to make critical comments about other bloggers, then we should resort to writing PRIVATE messages or emails. This will help to keep the discussions in the thread free from emotions.
There is a saying in English, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words do not hurt me." If we follow that, then I am sure we will avoid reacting to people's comments. We all can do with a bit of self-reflection as to why we make critical comments in the first place. Also, there is an old Sanskrit saying which states:
Please tell the TRUTH
Please say that is PLEASING
Do not tell the TRUTH if it is UNPLEASANT
Never tell a LIE just to PLEASE.
I am not perfect as I also violate the principles that I have quoted. Have a nice day.
Simhan
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is a saying in English, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words do not hurt me." If we follow that, then I am sure we will avoid reacting to people's comments. We all can do with a bit of self-reflection as to why we make critical comments in the first place. Also, there is an old Sanskrit saying which states:
Please tell the TRUTH
Please say that is PLEASING
Do not tell the TRUTH if it is UNPLEASANT
Never tell a LIE just to PLEASE.
I am not perfect as I also violate the principles that I have quoted. Have a nice day.
Simhan
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"Add to this discussion. Keep your conduct professional & polite."
Yes, Mr. Simhan, we are losing sight of the basics! The above tagline is posted above every posting window. Yet in our hurry to display our knowledge, we fail to read and implement it. Your advice is appropriate, valuable, and noteworthy.
Regards. Aye. Colonel Gahlot
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, Mr. Simhan, we are losing sight of the basics! The above tagline is posted above every posting window. Yet in our hurry to display our knowledge, we fail to read and implement it. Your advice is appropriate, valuable, and noteworthy.
Regards. Aye. Colonel Gahlot
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sheik,
It was your post "why you people are reacting in a foolish way," which sparked off the row, and you tried to give further air when you posted another scornful message addressing me. I only wanted to know what foolishness you could find in my original reply so that I might avoid that in the future. However, you are still silent on that.
Regarding my research, you can access official statistical figures of your country from the official websites, which are not secret. You may also try to research your own country to find the facts. A non-native lady even posted on this forum about her concern for not getting promotion or a salary enhancement due to discrimination by her bosses in a Gulf country.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It was your post "why you people are reacting in a foolish way," which sparked off the row, and you tried to give further air when you posted another scornful message addressing me. I only wanted to know what foolishness you could find in my original reply so that I might avoid that in the future. However, you are still silent on that.
Regarding my research, you can access official statistical figures of your country from the official websites, which are not secret. You may also try to research your own country to find the facts. A non-native lady even posted on this forum about her concern for not getting promotion or a salary enhancement due to discrimination by her bosses in a Gulf country.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Psdhingra,
It's time for me to help you understand the facts.
In your first post, you wrote: "In fact, the question was to check your knowledge about company law. So, it was not so simple to answer as suggested by some members." There is nothing like simple or difficult; it's all about how we handle it, when we handle it, and why we handle it. As such, there is no single fixed method to handle XYZ thing. Procedure and process are two different words with different meanings.
It's not the knowledge that comes first in our lives, but the ability to do anything or XYZ thing, i.e., our willpower. Whether we are capable of doing it or not is secondary, but "are we ready to do it or not" matters a lot and demonstrates our self-confidence levels.
The current generation is surviving on confidence levels and technology, which help them gain information and acquire knowledge for survival reasons. Logic is given more importance because many people lack critical thinking skills, decision-making skills, leadership skills, entrepreneurship skills, and much more besides soft skills.
In your second post, you wrote: "In fact, none of the questions of the interviewers are irrelevant. Some object is always hidden behind that to test the knowledge of the candidate to judge whether on appointment he or she would prove to be helpful or not in some complex situations." Can you prove that during the interview process every query raised by HR is relevant? Do you think how many HR professionals, including senior/top management, are trying their best to appoint a candidate by identifying the right candidate with the right talent, right attitude, and many more relevant skills needed to get along with the kind of assignment expected to be assigned?
This made me quote, "Why are you people reacting in a foolish way?" Most individuals are underestimating this world. Instead of understanding reality, they love to imagine something or whatever comes to their minds. However, being straightforward in life has value, and being knowledgeable has even more value.
Henceforth, I even wrote to you stating, kindly study and understand the current HRM industry, professionals involved in it, and their capabilities.
If an interviewee fails to respond to a query raised by HR, HR has a responsibility to make them understand why such a query was asked. Interview questions are prepared by HR, not by the interviewee. Can the interviewee ask questions to HR to understand how capable they are of holding XYZ position in HRD? Because it's not just the HR who has to understand the interviewee, but the interviewee needs to understand the whole organizational culture and much more before dreaming to apply for a specific position/job.
Allow applicants to learn during the interview process rather than just making them frustrated. I know time is a big constraint, but don't hold knowledge to yourself; the more you share, the more it grows.
Regarding expatriates, I would be glad if you do more research and find out how international organizations are functioning compared to those in India. If you haven't noticed any differences, kindly approach me, and I will make you understand in-depth.
I don't like nor wish to hurt anyone's feelings, but I always love to be straightforward. By the way, I always consider myself a fool, love to explore more than my limits, and I have written this in many posts.
Have a nice day.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It's time for me to help you understand the facts.
In your first post, you wrote: "In fact, the question was to check your knowledge about company law. So, it was not so simple to answer as suggested by some members." There is nothing like simple or difficult; it's all about how we handle it, when we handle it, and why we handle it. As such, there is no single fixed method to handle XYZ thing. Procedure and process are two different words with different meanings.
It's not the knowledge that comes first in our lives, but the ability to do anything or XYZ thing, i.e., our willpower. Whether we are capable of doing it or not is secondary, but "are we ready to do it or not" matters a lot and demonstrates our self-confidence levels.
The current generation is surviving on confidence levels and technology, which help them gain information and acquire knowledge for survival reasons. Logic is given more importance because many people lack critical thinking skills, decision-making skills, leadership skills, entrepreneurship skills, and much more besides soft skills.
In your second post, you wrote: "In fact, none of the questions of the interviewers are irrelevant. Some object is always hidden behind that to test the knowledge of the candidate to judge whether on appointment he or she would prove to be helpful or not in some complex situations." Can you prove that during the interview process every query raised by HR is relevant? Do you think how many HR professionals, including senior/top management, are trying their best to appoint a candidate by identifying the right candidate with the right talent, right attitude, and many more relevant skills needed to get along with the kind of assignment expected to be assigned?
This made me quote, "Why are you people reacting in a foolish way?" Most individuals are underestimating this world. Instead of understanding reality, they love to imagine something or whatever comes to their minds. However, being straightforward in life has value, and being knowledgeable has even more value.
Henceforth, I even wrote to you stating, kindly study and understand the current HRM industry, professionals involved in it, and their capabilities.
If an interviewee fails to respond to a query raised by HR, HR has a responsibility to make them understand why such a query was asked. Interview questions are prepared by HR, not by the interviewee. Can the interviewee ask questions to HR to understand how capable they are of holding XYZ position in HRD? Because it's not just the HR who has to understand the interviewee, but the interviewee needs to understand the whole organizational culture and much more before dreaming to apply for a specific position/job.
Allow applicants to learn during the interview process rather than just making them frustrated. I know time is a big constraint, but don't hold knowledge to yourself; the more you share, the more it grows.
Regarding expatriates, I would be glad if you do more research and find out how international organizations are functioning compared to those in India. If you haven't noticed any differences, kindly approach me, and I will make you understand in-depth.
I don't like nor wish to hurt anyone's feelings, but I always love to be straightforward. By the way, I always consider myself a fool, love to explore more than my limits, and I have written this in many posts.
Have a nice day.
With profound regards,
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Shaik,
When you consider yourself as a fool, I wonder why you consider others as fools as well?
I still find a lot of evasiveness in your reply. I wonder how you view the interview process for selection. Is it a knowledge delivery class or a forum for the candidates, with the interviewer acting as their individual tutor for each candidate?
An interview is not held to disseminate knowledge among the variety of participating candidates; rather, it is held for the specific purpose of selecting a candidate from the entire pool. Regarding the relevance of questions during any interview, only a few interviewers like to rely solely on questions prepared by HR. The questions often depend on the company's current challenges or are used to eliminate candidates who lack critical thinking skills or presence of mind. Therefore, the purpose behind any question is always present, whether positive or negative.
The functioning of international organizations in your country cannot serve as the sole criteria or example, as these organizations follow their own culture, rules, and traditions. It would be more beneficial to review native organizations, including government organizations. My comments are not baseless but are rooted in more than two years of recent research on Gulf/Arabic countries.
As for straightforwardness, had you seen all of my replies, you would have recognized my straightforwardness from my answers.
In your first post, you mentioned handling situations and the importance of willpower over knowledge. You emphasized the significance of self-confidence, logic, and critical thinking skills in today's generation.
In your second post, you questioned the relevance of every query raised by HR during interviews, highlighting the importance of identifying the right candidate with the necessary skills and attitude for the job.
It seems that many individuals underestimate the world around them, preferring imagination over reality. However, being straightforward and knowledgeable holds great value in life.
In conclusion, I encourage you to explore the current HRM industry and the professionals within it. Interviews should be a learning opportunity for applicants rather than a source of frustration. Sharing knowledge during the process can lead to mutual growth.
Regarding expatriates and international organizations, further research on their functioning compared to those in India might provide valuable insights. I believe in being straightforward without intending to hurt anyone's feelings.
By the way, I always consider myself a fool, as I love to explore beyond my limits as expressed in many of my posts.
Have a nice day.
With profound regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
When you consider yourself as a fool, I wonder why you consider others as fools as well?
I still find a lot of evasiveness in your reply. I wonder how you view the interview process for selection. Is it a knowledge delivery class or a forum for the candidates, with the interviewer acting as their individual tutor for each candidate?
An interview is not held to disseminate knowledge among the variety of participating candidates; rather, it is held for the specific purpose of selecting a candidate from the entire pool. Regarding the relevance of questions during any interview, only a few interviewers like to rely solely on questions prepared by HR. The questions often depend on the company's current challenges or are used to eliminate candidates who lack critical thinking skills or presence of mind. Therefore, the purpose behind any question is always present, whether positive or negative.
The functioning of international organizations in your country cannot serve as the sole criteria or example, as these organizations follow their own culture, rules, and traditions. It would be more beneficial to review native organizations, including government organizations. My comments are not baseless but are rooted in more than two years of recent research on Gulf/Arabic countries.
As for straightforwardness, had you seen all of my replies, you would have recognized my straightforwardness from my answers.
In your first post, you mentioned handling situations and the importance of willpower over knowledge. You emphasized the significance of self-confidence, logic, and critical thinking skills in today's generation.
In your second post, you questioned the relevance of every query raised by HR during interviews, highlighting the importance of identifying the right candidate with the necessary skills and attitude for the job.
It seems that many individuals underestimate the world around them, preferring imagination over reality. However, being straightforward and knowledgeable holds great value in life.
In conclusion, I encourage you to explore the current HRM industry and the professionals within it. Interviews should be a learning opportunity for applicants rather than a source of frustration. Sharing knowledge during the process can lead to mutual growth.
Regarding expatriates and international organizations, further research on their functioning compared to those in India might provide valuable insights. I believe in being straightforward without intending to hurt anyone's feelings.
By the way, I always consider myself a fool, as I love to explore beyond my limits as expressed in many of my posts.
Have a nice day.
With profound regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear PSDHINGRA,
I haven't called you "a fool" and did I ever address you as "fool"? Moreover, I never considered you or anyone as "fool," but why are you assuming that I am considering others as fools when you wrote this statement... ISN'T?
One thing is evident here. According to you, "reacting in a foolish way" - does it mean that it's a job for fools or that only fools react in a foolish way? It's not the same according to me. Henceforth, kindly realign your perception and interpretation level. Please remember that a wise man can also react or behave like "a fool," and vice versa because we are all humans, and nothing can be predicted or controlled.
Research cannot be concluded as constructive by just gathering information from various resources unless you have experienced it in reality and a practical way. If you haven't worked abroad and experienced the work culture, living style, operational strategies, and much more of local countries, I would like to say, kindly refrain from commenting solely based on gathered information. For your information, I have worked in Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, and now in Qatar, besides my home country.
I don't know if you have succeeded in gathering this information through your two years of recent research, but let me reveal this to you. Please pay attention. GCC work culture is being affected by **; they are none other than Indians. NO ONE CAN DENY THIS FACT, AND I AM NOT SPEAKING WITHOUT REASON. There are many other communities from India as well. LOCAL ARABS are running successful businesses, and in fact, they are performing better than India. Kindly research Indian operational strategies overall and compare them with the GCC, consider how you can change the Indian mentality and make India a much better nation or the best nation compared to the GCC, who are considered the best in everything as of now.
Have a nice time and please continue your research... The current HR industry is evolving, and we need to adapt ourselves based on the current market trends.
Last but not least, you seem to love underestimating others, and you have underestimated nations.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I haven't called you "a fool" and did I ever address you as "fool"? Moreover, I never considered you or anyone as "fool," but why are you assuming that I am considering others as fools when you wrote this statement... ISN'T?
One thing is evident here. According to you, "reacting in a foolish way" - does it mean that it's a job for fools or that only fools react in a foolish way? It's not the same according to me. Henceforth, kindly realign your perception and interpretation level. Please remember that a wise man can also react or behave like "a fool," and vice versa because we are all humans, and nothing can be predicted or controlled.
Research cannot be concluded as constructive by just gathering information from various resources unless you have experienced it in reality and a practical way. If you haven't worked abroad and experienced the work culture, living style, operational strategies, and much more of local countries, I would like to say, kindly refrain from commenting solely based on gathered information. For your information, I have worked in Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, and now in Qatar, besides my home country.
I don't know if you have succeeded in gathering this information through your two years of recent research, but let me reveal this to you. Please pay attention. GCC work culture is being affected by **; they are none other than Indians. NO ONE CAN DENY THIS FACT, AND I AM NOT SPEAKING WITHOUT REASON. There are many other communities from India as well. LOCAL ARABS are running successful businesses, and in fact, they are performing better than India. Kindly research Indian operational strategies overall and compare them with the GCC, consider how you can change the Indian mentality and make India a much better nation or the best nation compared to the GCC, who are considered the best in everything as of now.
Have a nice time and please continue your research... The current HR industry is evolving, and we need to adapt ourselves based on the current market trends.
Last but not least, you seem to love underestimating others, and you have underestimated nations.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Kindly refrain from using foul language on a public forum. Your level of professionalism will be gauged by the words you choose - so choose wisely.
I would suggest everyone to debate on the discussion at hand instead of calling each other names.
Regards,
CHR
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I would suggest everyone to debate on the discussion at hand instead of calling each other names.
Regards,
CHR
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello,
I am making a few assumptions, and within these parameters, I will respond.
1. We are talking about a company registered under the Indian Companies Act 1956 and is bound by compliances under the act.
2. There are more than two Directors, and if the number is even, the chairman will have the casting vote on resolutions.
3. The organization is making good business.
4. There are more reasons for his exit than his misbehavior with employees and his political connections.
Having set out the premises, let us look at other facts:
1. The organization is an economic organization being propelled by bottom-line compulsions.
2. Employee grievances cannot be the sole or primary cause leading to his removal.
The procedural part of the removal will have to be stipulated by a good and competent Company Secretary, and none of us are up to advising the procedure.
Removing a Director (and especially such a one) is tricky business as it will entail "costs and calamities" that cannot be fully estimated. My concern will be to take a good and as accurate as possible a stock of these factors before proceeding with terminal action.
If the organization is a Private limited one, the Articles of Association will have provisions to buy him out on the basis of the "fair value" of his shareholding (which a good CA and/or CS can provide). If it is not possible for existing remaining Directors, it is possible to bring in an outsider and settle a "negotiated price" for his shares.
If the organization is a "Partnership Firm," similar provisions will exist in the registered partnership deed.
But whatever the matter, the question asked to you in the interview and shared by you is an involved question that demands deep scrutiny, legally and operationally. It is impossible to provide "the" answer on this forum.
Even I have shared just a few pointers. The ultimate answer is, "Yes, by following a stipulated procedure only he can be removed." But more important than this aspect is the aspect of "costs and calamities" need near accurate assessment and the necessary willingness and ability to face these. Such removal decisions cannot be taken or implemented in an unholy haste.
I suppose the interviewers were not expecting "the" answer but wanted to look at your general knowledge, approach, and maturity! And this comes by experience.
Regards,
samvedan
July 05, 2011
---
Greetings of the day Seniors,
I have been to one of the Interviews Recently. The interviewer posed me a question to which I could not provide an answer. Here it is: "When a Director of a company is rude to employees, doesn't allow the employees to work by entertaining parties, and is completely unprofessional, and apart from this, he has a sound political background so that he cannot be removed from the company, but the management has decided to remove him, what action needs to be taken?"
Please share your views on the above discussion, Seniors.
Thanks & regards,
v.vikram kumar
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am making a few assumptions, and within these parameters, I will respond.
1. We are talking about a company registered under the Indian Companies Act 1956 and is bound by compliances under the act.
2. There are more than two Directors, and if the number is even, the chairman will have the casting vote on resolutions.
3. The organization is making good business.
4. There are more reasons for his exit than his misbehavior with employees and his political connections.
Having set out the premises, let us look at other facts:
1. The organization is an economic organization being propelled by bottom-line compulsions.
2. Employee grievances cannot be the sole or primary cause leading to his removal.
The procedural part of the removal will have to be stipulated by a good and competent Company Secretary, and none of us are up to advising the procedure.
Removing a Director (and especially such a one) is tricky business as it will entail "costs and calamities" that cannot be fully estimated. My concern will be to take a good and as accurate as possible a stock of these factors before proceeding with terminal action.
If the organization is a Private limited one, the Articles of Association will have provisions to buy him out on the basis of the "fair value" of his shareholding (which a good CA and/or CS can provide). If it is not possible for existing remaining Directors, it is possible to bring in an outsider and settle a "negotiated price" for his shares.
If the organization is a "Partnership Firm," similar provisions will exist in the registered partnership deed.
But whatever the matter, the question asked to you in the interview and shared by you is an involved question that demands deep scrutiny, legally and operationally. It is impossible to provide "the" answer on this forum.
Even I have shared just a few pointers. The ultimate answer is, "Yes, by following a stipulated procedure only he can be removed." But more important than this aspect is the aspect of "costs and calamities" need near accurate assessment and the necessary willingness and ability to face these. Such removal decisions cannot be taken or implemented in an unholy haste.
I suppose the interviewers were not expecting "the" answer but wanted to look at your general knowledge, approach, and maturity! And this comes by experience.
Regards,
samvedan
July 05, 2011
---
Greetings of the day Seniors,
I have been to one of the Interviews Recently. The interviewer posed me a question to which I could not provide an answer. Here it is: "When a Director of a company is rude to employees, doesn't allow the employees to work by entertaining parties, and is completely unprofessional, and apart from this, he has a sound political background so that he cannot be removed from the company, but the management has decided to remove him, what action needs to be taken?"
Please share your views on the above discussion, Seniors.
Thanks & regards,
v.vikram kumar
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Shaik,
When your native organizations don't prefer to promote Indians to management levels, how can you blame Indians for destroying work culture? If the work culture at lower levels is deteriorating, it indicates the incompetence and incapacity of those at managerial and leadership positions. Therefore, it would be beneficial for you to review your own systems.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
When your native organizations don't prefer to promote Indians to management levels, how can you blame Indians for destroying work culture? If the work culture at lower levels is deteriorating, it indicates the incompetence and incapacity of those at managerial and leadership positions. Therefore, it would be beneficial for you to review your own systems.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Psdhingra,
Again, you are mistaken. There are many expats (Indian nationals) serving at top management level in various nations. Please understand that the upper hand in any international organization belongs to the locals because it's their country and they rule.
Now, compare the same with India. You will find foreigners having the upper hand in our country, though they just hold a stake in that organization. Now let me ask, "What is the value of an Indian in his own homeland?"
1) Regarding leadership, which you are relating to incapability and incapacity in Indians, it is due to the British rule. They made us "just listen and do whatever they said."
2) How many CEOs/MDs in India are able to prove their effective leadership?
3) I would suggest you study Indian work culture and compare it with Western work culture. You will find better leadership, open work culture/working style, better pay/compensation levels, and much more in international countries.
4) Kindly teach and educate Indians "what is true leadership." You know very well in which direction our country is heading.
Please get in touch with Mr. Dinesh if you want more information about leadership, as I feel he is the best to shed light on this subject.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Again, you are mistaken. There are many expats (Indian nationals) serving at top management level in various nations. Please understand that the upper hand in any international organization belongs to the locals because it's their country and they rule.
Now, compare the same with India. You will find foreigners having the upper hand in our country, though they just hold a stake in that organization. Now let me ask, "What is the value of an Indian in his own homeland?"
1) Regarding leadership, which you are relating to incapability and incapacity in Indians, it is due to the British rule. They made us "just listen and do whatever they said."
2) How many CEOs/MDs in India are able to prove their effective leadership?
3) I would suggest you study Indian work culture and compare it with Western work culture. You will find better leadership, open work culture/working style, better pay/compensation levels, and much more in international countries.
4) Kindly teach and educate Indians "what is true leadership." You know very well in which direction our country is heading.
Please get in touch with Mr. Dinesh if you want more information about leadership, as I feel he is the best to shed light on this subject.
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Gathering data for an AI comment.... Sending emails to relevant members...
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Hello Seniors.doc
Campus question papers.zip
Managment - The Performance Appraisal Question and Answer Book.pdf