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.)

How Singh defended 1991 Union budget

Updated: Jan 2, 2025

Manmohan Singh

New Delhi: Manmohan Singh, the architect of India's economic reforms, had to literally face a trial-by-fire to ensure widespread acceptance of his path-breaking 1991 Union budget that saw the nation rise from its darkest financial crises.


Singh, the newly-appointed finance minister in the PV Narasimha Rao-led government, did it with great elan -- from facing journalists at a post-budget press conference to irate Congress leaders unable to digest the wide-ranging reforms at the parliamentary party meeting.


Singh's historic reforms not only rescued India from near bankruptcy but also redefined its trajectory as a rising global power.


Singh made an unscheduled appearance at a press conference on July 25, 1991, a day after the presentation of the Union budget, "to ensure that the message of his budget did not get distorted by less-than-enthusiastic officials", Congress leader Jairam Ramesh wrote in his book "To the Brink and Back: India's 1991 Story" that recounts the fast-paced changes that took place after Rao became prime minister in June 1991.


"The finance minister explained his budget - calling it 'a budget with a human face'. He painstakingly defended the proposals to increase fertiliser, petrol and LPG prices," Ramesh recounted in the book published in 2015.


Ramesh was an aide to Rao during his initial months in office.


Sensing the disquiet in the Congress ranks, Rao called a meeting of the Congress Parliamentary Party (CPP) on August 1, 1991, and decided to allow party MPs to "vent their spleen freely".


"The prime minister stayed away and allowed Manmohan Singh to face the flak on his own," Ramesh wrote, adding that two more meetings took place on August 2 and 3, in which Rao was present throughout.


"In the CPP meetings, the finance minister cut a lonely figure and the prime minister did nothing to alleviate his distress," Ramesh recounted.


Only two MPs - Mani Shankar Aiyar and Nathuram Mirdha - backed budget wholeheartedly.


Aiyar had supported the budget, contending that it conformed to Rajiv Gandhi's beliefs on what needed to be done to stave off the financial crisis.

Bowing to pressure from the party, Singh had agreed to lower the 40 per cent increase in fertiliser prices to 30 per cent but had left the hike in LPG and petrol prices untouched.


The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs met twice on August 4 and 5, 1991, to decide on the statement Singh would make in the Lok Sabha on August 6.


"The statement dropped the idea of a rollback, which had been demanded over the past few days but now spoke of protecting the interests of small and marginal farmers," Ramesh said in his book.


"Both sides had won. The party had forced a rethink but the fundamentals of what the government wanted -- the decontrol of prices of fertilisers other than urea and an increase in urea prices -- had been preserved," he recounted.

"This was political economy at its constructive best -- a textbook example of how the government and the party can collaborate to create a win-win situation for both," he added in the book.

-PTI

Comments

bottom of page