top of page

By:

Divyaa Advaani 

2 November 2024 at 3:28:38 am

When agreement kills growth

In the early stages of building a business, growth is often driven by clarity, speed, and conviction. Founders make decisions quickly, rely on their instincts, and push forward with a strong sense of belief in their methods. This decisiveness is not only necessary, it is often the very reason the business begins to grow. However, as businesses cross certain thresholds, particularly beyond the Rs 5 crore mark, the nature of growth begins to change. What once created momentum can quietly begin...

When agreement kills growth

In the early stages of building a business, growth is often driven by clarity, speed, and conviction. Founders make decisions quickly, rely on their instincts, and push forward with a strong sense of belief in their methods. This decisiveness is not only necessary, it is often the very reason the business begins to grow. However, as businesses cross certain thresholds, particularly beyond the Rs 5 crore mark, the nature of growth begins to change. What once created momentum can quietly begin to create limitations. In many professional environments, it is not uncommon to encounter business owners who are deeply convinced of their approach. Their methods have delivered results, their experience reinforces their judgment, and their confidence becomes a defining trait. Yet, in this very confidence lies a subtle risk that is often overlooked. When conviction turns into certainty without space for dialogue, conversations begin to narrow. Suggestions are heard, but not always considered. Perspectives are offered, but not always encouraged. Decisions are made, but not always explained. From the outside, this may still appear as strong leadership. Internally, however, a different dynamic begins to take shape. People start to agree more than they contribute. This is where many businesses unknowingly enter a critical phase. When teams, partners, or stakeholders begin to hold back their perspective, the quality of thinking around the business reduces. What appears as alignment is often silent disengagement. What looks like efficiency is sometimes the absence of challenge. Over time, this directly affects the decisions being made. At a Rs 5 crore level, this may not be immediately visible. Operations continue, revenue flows, and the business appears stable. But as the organisation attempts to grow further, this lack of diverse thinking begins to surface as a constraint. Growth slows, not because of lack of effort, but because of limited perspective. On the other side of this equation are individuals who consistently find themselves accommodating such dynamics. They recognise when their voice is not being fully heard, yet choose not to assert it. The intention is often to preserve relationships, avoid friction, or maintain a sense of professional ease. Initially, this approach appears collaborative. Over time, however, it begins to shape perception. When individuals do not express their perspective, they are gradually seen as agreeable rather than essential. Their presence is valued, but their input is not actively sought. In many cases, they become part of the process, but not part of the decision. This is where personal branding begins to influence business outcomes in ways that are not immediately obvious. A personal brand is not built only through visibility or achievement. It is built through how consistently one demonstrates clarity, confidence, and openness in moments that require it. It is shaped by whether people feel encouraged to think around you, or restricted in your presence. At higher levels of business, this distinction becomes critical. If people agree with you more than they challenge you, it may not be a sign of strong leadership. It may be an indication that your environment is no longer enabling better thinking. Similarly, if you find yourself constantly adjusting to others without expressing your own perspective, your contribution may be diminishing in ways that affect both your influence and your growth. Both situations carry a cost. They affect decision quality, limit innovation, and over time, restrict the scalability of the business itself. What makes this particularly challenging is that these patterns develop gradually, often going unnoticed until the impact becomes difficult to ignore. The most effective leaders recognise this early. They create space for dialogue without losing direction. They express conviction without dismissing perspective. They build environments where contribution is expected, not avoided. In doing so, they strengthen not only their business, but also their personal brand. For entrepreneurs operating at a stage where growth is no longer just about execution but about expanding thinking, this becomes an important point of reflection. If there is even a possibility that your current interactions are limiting the quality of thinking around you, it is worth addressing before it begins to affect outcomes. I work with a select group of founders and professionals to help them refine how they are perceived, communicate with greater impact, and build personal brands that support sustained growth. You may explore this further here: https://sprect.com/pro/divyaaadvaani In the long run, it is not only the decisions you make, but the thinking you allow around those decisions, that determines how far your business can truly grow. (The author is a personal branding expert. She has clients from 14+ countries. Views personal.)

England’s Swashbuckling Swagger Sinks into a Snooze-Fest

How the mighty have fallen—or rather, how the mighty have been forced to sit down, sip some chamomile tea, and play like it’s 1995. England’s Bazball revolution, that testosterone-fueled, chest-thumping, boundary-bashing philosophy, got a proper spanking at Lord’s this week in the India vs. England Test. On a slow, dry pitch that looked like it was plotting to turn into the Sahara by day five, England’s batters were reduced to prodding and poking like nervous accountants at a tax audit. Three runs an over? Is this cricket or a funeral procession?


Let’s set the scene. Lord’s, the so-called Home of Cricket, was dressed up in its Sunday best, ready to host another chapter of Bazball’s Greatest Hits. Except, someone forgot to tell the pitch it was supposed to be a flat belter for England’s cavaliers to plunder. Instead, it turned up like a grumpy uncle at a family reunion—dry, uncooperative, and ready to make everyone miserable. India’s spinners, led by the wily Washington Sundar, who probably spent the night whispering dark spells into the turf, licked their lips and got to work. The result? England’s batters, usually swinging like pirates in a rum-soaked tavern brawl, were tamed into submission, crawling along at a run rate that made Geoffrey Boycott look like Glenn Maxwell.


The Bazball faithful in the stands must have been gutted. They came expecting pyrotechnics—Joe Root reverse-scooping Jasprit Bumrah for six, Ben Stokes charging down the track to loft Ravindra Jadeja into the Mound Stand. Instead, they got Zak Crawley poking at deliveries like he was defusing a bomb, and Ben Duckett playing with the intensity of a man choosing wallpaper samples. Three runs an over? I’ve seen faster scoring in a chess match. The Long Room probably started serving decaf just to match the vibe.


Let’s talk about the culprits. The pitch, for one, deserves a stern talking-to. It was so slow and dry it could’ve doubled as a set for a Mad Max reboot. Every ball seemed to take an eternity to reach the batter, giving India’s spinners enough time to solve a Rubik’s Cube between deliveries. Jadeja, with that devilish grin, was tossing up deliveries that spun like a politician dodging a question. Poor Ollie Pope looked like he was trying to read Sanskrit while facing him, his bat waving around like a white flag.


Then there’s England’s own Bazball bravado, which, let’s be honest, has always been one bad day away from looking like a midlife crisis. The philosophy—attack everything, fear nothing—works when the pitch is flatter than a pancake and the bowlers are spraying it like a toddler with a garden hose. But on a Lord’s track that’s turning like a corkscrew? Good luck, lads. Stokes, the ginger general, tried to rally the troops with his usual “let’s smack it and see what happens” vibe, but even he ended up playing a forward defensive that would’ve made Alastair Cook shed a tear of pride. The irony? England’s most aggressive captain since Douglas Jardine was forced to channel his inner tortoise.


India, meanwhile, were loving every minute of it. Shubman Gill, sipping chai in the slips, was probably composing a victory poem in his head. Bumrah, with that slingshot action, was unplayable, sending down yorkers that had England’s batters questioning their life choices. And don’t get me started on Jadeja, who was spinning the ball so much it looked like it had its own GPS. India didn’t just outbowl England; they outsmarted them, outfoxed them, and probably out-tangoed them in the team hotel’s dance-off the night before.


So, where does Bazball go from here? Do they double down, come out swinging, and risk looking like lunatics on a pitch that’s crumbling faster than a digestive biscuit? Or do they admit that sometimes, just sometimes, a bit of old-school Test cricket nous might be the way to go? Knowing Stokes, he’ll probably try to reverse-sweep a bouncer on day four just to prove a point. But for now, Bazball’s been muted, its volume turned down from 11 to a whimpering 2. Lord’s, that grand old stage, has spoken: even the brashest of revolutions can’t always bully a pitch into submission.


And as for India? They’re probably back at the hotel, toasting their dominance with mango lassi and plotting how to make England’s batters cry again. Bazball, you’ve been served. Time to dust off the old textbook and remember how to grind. Or, you know, just pray for rain.


(The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai.)

Comments

bottom of page