When an executive decides to leave a firm for any reason, attempting to hinder their employment elsewhere proves ineffective. Either such executives should be compensated for an extended garden leave, including full performance pay, or they may resort to utilising opaque corporate structures, such as consulting contracts, to work for the company they had intended to join. If the entity fails to persuade the employee to stay back, such pressure tactics are counterproductive, conveying a negative message and implying to potential employees that they too will be constrained in their ability to leave, when they so decide. <\/p>\n
Amid the competition to attract top-tier talent, companies must provide more than just financial incentives. They need to emphasise their capacity for growth, ensuring that talent is not only suitably employed but also duly rewarded. Furthermore, in the tech industry, the expectation is evolving towards wealth creation and its distribution among employees, albeit not in the conventional manner. One may even see that for critical tech talent in the era of AI, wealth creation may include the sharing of IP royalties. <\/p>\n
The escalating margin pressures from global clients on Indian ITES firms underscore the critical importance of retaining key employees. As clients demand cost-efficient solutions and increased value for their investments, the significance of skilled and experienced personnel becomes paramount. In this competitive environment, retaining key employees who possess domain expertise and contribute to innovation is vital for sustaining service quality and meeting client expectations. <\/p>\n
It is indeed the right time for Indian tech giants to consider diversifying their talent pool and, more crucially, expanding the expertise they provide to clients. The diminishing effectiveness of Indian ITES as a talent magnet suggests that organisations need to be genuinely meritocratic, free from the founders firm grip, outdated organisational designs, and living on past legacy. A hard question is whether these companies are perceived as relevant in the broader client mindset. <\/p>\n
Srinath Sridharan is a policy researcher and corporate adviser. X: @ssmumbai. <\/p>\n
(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH). <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Excerpt from:<\/p>\n
Tech majors must refrain from outdated protectionist measures - Deccan Herald<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When an executive decides to leave a firm for any reason, attempting to hinder their employment elsewhere proves ineffective. Either such executives should be compensated for an extended garden leave, including full performance pay, or they may resort to utilising opaque corporate structures, such as consulting contracts, to work for the company they had intended to join. If the entity fails to persuade the employee to stay back, such pressure tactics are counterproductive, conveying a negative message and implying to potential employees that they too will be constrained in their ability to leave, when they so decide. Continue reading