Nokia and Research In Motion and put Microsoft on the defense.
Or going back in time, how Japanese firms challenged Detroit and consumer electronics
giants like GE, Phillips, and Thompson. In a similar way, companies like Samsung,
Hyundai, Cummins, JCB, Nestlé, Schneider Electric, Unilever, and Standard Chartered
Bank are quietly creating new growth engines and unassailable leadership positions
in places like India and paving the way for industry leadership. 8
Because the changes we are talking about are deep and affect the DNA and operating
system of companies, to have any chance of success at all, they cannot be delegated
to leaders who operate within rigid frameworks. In most companies, globalization is
the responsibility of a president of sales or a senior vice president for international
business. The mandate of these leaders is simply to grow the business by selling more
stuff around the world. It is not within their remit to challenge the investment process
or the innovation process. The only place where it all comes together is the corner
office, which is why the CEO has to champion the strategy to win in India and other
emerging markets and the board has to explicitly support it. Leadership in emerging
markets becomes a defining choice for today’s CEOs.
The prognosis is not good. Most senior leaders in multinational companies have their
experience base in the developed world; they lack a feel for and understanding of
emerging markets. Many don’t even like emerging markets—noisy, chaotic, corrupt places
that don’t play by Western rules. It’s a tall order to expect a CEO who brings his
or her familiar food on the corporate jet to see the potential of these markets.
CEO tenures are also declining. According to a recent Conference Board survey, tenures
are now shorter than seven years. Very often, building leadership in India can take
a decade. It’s a rare CEO who is willing to pay the price by investing on his or her
watch, knowing that the credit might well go to a successor.
Obsession with China at the expense of India is another major issue. While every CEO
acknowledges that it’s all about China and India, the reality is that the rise of
China has caused many CEOs to overlook India. In the short term, China looks like
a much greater opportunity. However, a comparison of the profitability of foreign
companies in China and India suggests that on a risk-adjusted basis, the differences
may not be quite as large.
To be fair to today’s CEOs, they have an incredibly tough job, with the world’s major
economies in trouble, more regulatory challenges, more competition, more pressure
from Wall Street, and so on. In the middle of all that, we are asking them to prioritize
winning in emerging markets, with India as a lead market, at a time when India is
presenting itself in a spectacularly poor light.
The Levers of Success
CEO commitment is the starting point. In India, winning requires a very different
business leader—an entrepreneurial general manager rather than a salesperson and,
ideally, a senior and trusted insider with credibility and influence. It requires
a different organizational structure or model, where India is managed like a geographic
profit center, with the ability to make important operating decisions without enormous
negotiations and persuasion. It needs a willingness to make long-term investments
in developing capabilities on the ground and the willingness to sustain these through
the inevitable vicissitudes. Therefore, escaping the midway trap requires the commitment
of the entire leadership of the company to pull multiple levers before the whole organization
flips to a new high-growth trajectory.
In the rest of the book, I will delve into issues that determine a company’s success
in India. The single most important determinant of success over time is the choice
of the country manager. What is the