Last weekend was spent with my little niece, so I had to dig into my long forgotten repertoire of stories. I narrated to her one of my favourites- Akbar and Birbal in ‘the jealous courtier’. The courtier complains to Akbar that he doesn’t give importance to anyone else’s suggestion and only heeds to Birbal. So the king sends Birbal, and the courtier to the road, to find out what the commotion on the road is. The courtier comes back to say it is a marriage procession. The next questions on ‘where are they from?’ ‘where are they going?’ stumped the courtier – the king never asked him to find out those details when he sent him out! But obviously, Birbal had those answers and more.
Got me thinking about the workplace, and how every Akbar finds his or her Birbal, and every courtier either succeeds or fails in their efforts to be that Birbal. Can each of us, as leaders, make more than one Birbal in our team? So are some people naturally Birbals, and some doomed to be one among many faceless courtiers? Are Birbals made, or born? It is nature, or nurture……..
My final conclusion, and I would love views and debate, is that it is a bit of all the above. The leader can challenge people and keep pushing them beyond the obvious, out of their comfort zones, so that those who have the potential, can emerge as Birbals. She can create an environment, she can bring such people into the team.
I believe that being Birbal, or a gofer, is an individual’s choice. The responsibility lies squarely in ones own hands. I can stay comfortable, do what is told and expected, and wait for the next move from my boss, live within set boundaries of tasks assigned, respond to stated expectations………. Clearly, there is no way I will emerge taller than the crowd (oops, that is also a physical impossibility in my case!)
It is also safer to remain this way – there is no threat of ridicule or rejection if there is nothing offered, outside the scope of what is expected. There is less of failure too – rather, the responsibility of failure rests elsewhere. There are many people like this around us, and I haven’t yet figured out if it is a lack of wit, or a lack of will!
However, there are individuals, who are keen to exercise their mind and wit, to go beyond the given mandate, and constantly think two steps ahead of the boss. They are looking for newer ways of doing things, better solutions and even anticipate the future and suggest options. They look into the details, and are constantly elevating the quality of the team’s output. It probably started early in the career as a conscious choice, but quickly becomes a habit. Maybe when an eager youngster in the team is encouraged to contribute, a Birbal is born?
These are people I love to have, and people who keep me on my toes. When I have them in the team, I am forced to work hard to be ahead and to remain in charge!
If the team doesn’t have at least one, preferably more, Birbals there is big challenge. The onus then is on the leader to think through completely, all details, to ensure all fronts are covered, and give extremely clear directions. The onus is also on the leader to ensure quality of execution and output. Else, the overall team output is mediocre at best. Great ego trip for the leader because he will always know more and be smarter, and can command complete ‘obedience’! Gofers are great for the ego! However, a poor state to be in. I struggle everytime I am in this situation. I am not good at this. I thrive when the team is better than me.
As a leader though, I continue to be Akbar – sometimes, I veto the wisest of suggestion, I ignore better logic, and just be cussed, simply because I can! And sheepishly come around to the logic that I rejected, a bit down the line, pretending that I always planned it that way 🙂 But I know the value of my Birbals, and I keep them close.
Follow me for more thoughts, tips and tricks that can provoke thought, and can contribute to raising the level of excellence in individuals, leaders, organizations and families. Transformation of countries, organizations, families, all starts with individuals.