Loyalty in Relationships: Navigating the Spectrum Between Convenience, Commitment, and Market Power

Human relationships are complex ecosystems, shaped by emotional bonds, practical needs, and subtle power dynamics. At the heart of why people stay connected lies a fundamental tension between two distinct modes of loyalty: the loyalty of convenience and the loyalty of commitment. These modes reflect not only the emotional depth of a relationship but also the underlying motivations that sustain it. When viewed through the lens of “market power” - a concept that encapsulates the exchange and influence inherent in relationships -we gain a richer understanding of how and why relationships endure, evolve, or dissolve.

Loyalty of Convenience: The Ease of Staying

Loyalty of convenience is a pragmatic form of connection. It’s not driven by deep emotional investment but by situational ease. People remain in relationships because it’s simpler than disrupting the status quo. This type of loyalty is often sustained by external factors, ie; shared environments, mutual acquaintances, or overlapping responsibilities. It’s the kind of loyalty that thrives in low-effort zones.

Characteristics of Convenience-Based Loyalty

• Situational Dependence: These relationships are often tethered to context. Colleagues who remain friendly because they share an office, neighbors who exchange pleasantries but never go deeper, or couples who stay together because of shared leases or children.
• Minimal Emotional Investment: There’s little effort to nurture or grow the relationship. The bond exists, but it’s thin; more like a thread than a rope.
• Routine Over Resonance: The relationship becomes a way of life, a habit rather than a choice. It’s easier to stay than to leave.

Examples

• Friends who continue meeting because of a shared social circle, even though the emotional connection has faded.
• Romantic partners who cohabit for convenience, avoiding the discomfort of separation despite a lack of intimacy or shared vision.

Convenience-based loyalty is not inherently negative. In fact, it can serve as a stabilizing force in certain phases of life. But it lacks the resilience and depth required to weather storms. When external conditions change; say, a job relocation or a shift in social dynamics the relationship often dissolves.

Loyalty of Commitment: The Depth of Staying

In contrast, loyalty of commitment is rooted in emotional investment and mutual respect. It’s a deliberate choice to stay, even when it’s hard. These relationships are built on shared values, trust, and a long-term perspective. They require effort, vulnerability, and a willingness to navigate conflict.

Characteristics of Commitment-Based Loyalty

• Emotional Depth: Time, care, and energy are poured into the relationship. There’s a sense of responsibility and genuine concern for the other’s well-being.
• Resilience Through Challenges: Committed individuals don’t flee at the first sign of trouble. They work through disagreements, misunderstandings, and external pressures.
• Future Orientation: There’s a shared vision of what lies ahead. The relationship is not just about the present; it’s about building something lasting.

Examples

• Lifelong friendships that survive distance, career changes, and personal evolution.
• Couples who support each other through illness, financial hardship, or personal growth, anchored by love and shared purpose.

Commitment-based loyalty is the bedrock of meaningful relationships. It’s what allows people to grow together, to evolve without growing apart. But it’s also demanding. It requires emotional labor, patience, and the courage to confront discomfort.

Market Power: The Hidden Currency of Relationships

To deepen our understanding of these two modes of loyalty, we turn to the concept of “market power” in relationships. This term, borrowed from economics but repurposed for human dynamics, captures the dual forces of exchange and influence that shape every connection.

The Market Element: Exchange in Relationships

Every relationship involves some form of exchange. This could be emotional (love, support), material (money, gifts), social (connections, status), or intellectual (ideas, mentorship). The “market” reminds us that relationships are rarely one-sided. There’s a giver and a taker, and often, both roles are fluid.

The Power Element: Influence and Imbalance

Power in relationships refers to the ability of one party to influence the other. This could stem from personality, resources, position, or emotional leverage. Power dynamics are not inherently toxic, but when unchecked, they can distort the relationship’s equilibrium.

The Two Drivers of Market Power

1. The Person Factor: This is who you are, your character, empathy, integrity, and emotional intelligence. Relationships driven by the Person Factor tend to be more enduring and meaningful.
2. The Possession Factor: This is what you have; money, status, connections, or authority. Relationships driven by the Possession Factor can be influential in the short term but often lack depth and sustainability.

Mapping Market Power to Loyalty Modes

When we overlay the concept of market power onto the loyalty spectrum, a compelling pattern emerges.

Loyalty of Convenience and the Possession Factor

Convenience-based relationships often lean heavily on the Possession Factor. They’re sustained by what one party brings to the table; be it access, resources, or social capital. These relationships can be transactional, and while they may offer short-term benefits, they’re vulnerable to shifts in relevance.

For example, a junior executive may maintain ties with a senior officer because of the latter’s influence. But if the senior officer retires or loses clout, the relationship may fade. Similarly, friendships built around shared perks; like travel, parties, or business deals; may not survive when the perks disappear.

Loyalty of Commitment and the Person Factor

Commitment-based relationships, on the other hand, are anchored in the Person Factor. They thrive on authenticity, shared values, and emotional resonance. These relationships are less dependent on external possessions and more on internal qualities.

A mentor who continues to guide a protégé long after formal ties have ended, or a friend who stands by you during a personal crisis, exemplifies this mode. Even if circumstances change, the relationship endures because it’s built on who you are, not what you have.

The Evolution of Relationships: From Possession to Person

Interestingly, some relationships begin with the Possession Factor and evolve into Person Factor-driven bonds. A business partnership may start as a strategic alliance but deepen into a genuine friendship. A romantic relationship may begin with attraction and shared lifestyle but grow into a committed bond through shared experiences and emotional growth.

This evolution is crucial. It’s what transforms convenience into commitment. But it requires intentionality, self-awareness, and a willingness to invest beyond the surface.

The Risks of Possession-Driven Relationships

While the Possession Factor can offer leverage, it comes with risks:

• Demand Inflation: The more valuable the possession, the higher the expectations. This can lead to imbalance and resentment.
• Exploitation: If one party feels trapped or obligated due to the other’s possessions, the relationship can become manipulative.
• Loss of Authenticity: People may say what you want to hear rather than what you need to hear. Feedback becomes filtered, and growth stagnates.

Senior leaders, for instance, may fall into the trap of expecting loyalty based on their position. They may lose the ability to receive honest feedback or nurture genuine connections. Over time, this erodes trust and isolates them from reality.

Building Balanced Relationships: A Strategic Skill

Recognizing the drivers of loyalty and market power is not just a philosophical exercise; it’s a strategic skill. Whether in personal life or professional settings, the ability to assess and manage relationship dynamics is essential.

Practical Steps

• Audit Your Relationships: Reflect on which relationships are convenience-based and which are commitment-driven. Are you investing where it matters?
• Cultivate the Person Factor: Focus on being a person of value; empathetic, reliable, and authentic. This builds sustainable market power.
• Balance Exchange and Influence: Ensure that your relationships are not overly transactional or power-skewed. Mutual respect is key.
• Welcome Feedback: Create space for honest conversations. This keeps relationships dynamic and prevents stagnation.
• Be Realistic in Expectations: Not every relationship will be deep or lasting. Accept the spectrum and invest accordingly.

Conclusion: Choosing Depth Over Ease

In the end, the choice between loyalty of convenience and loyalty of commitment is a reflection of our values. Convenience offers comfort, but commitment offers meaning. Market power can amplify relationships, but only when grounded in authenticity.

By understanding these dynamics, we become better navigators of human connection. We learn to build relationships that are not just functional but fulfilling. We move from being passive participants to intentional architects of our relational world.

And in doing so, we honor the deepest truth of relationships: that they are not just about what we get, but about who we become through them.

“True power in a relationship is not in being heard, but in being open to hear what wasn’t said.”

AI, Culture & Trust: Why Relationships Still Matter in a Digital World

 

Economic activities all over the world are heavily influenced by profit motive except in case of affirmative actions by government or philanthropy. However, these transactions are stitched together by relationship among the participants. The extent of this  varies across the cultures

• High-context cultures (e.g. China, India, Brazil) rely heavily on personal relationships, where trust and loyalty are built over time and often precede formal agreements.
• Low-context cultures (e.g. U.S., Germany) prioritize efficiency and clarity, where relationships may be helpful but are not prerequisites for business.
• Hybrid cultures (e.g. Japan, UAE, South Africa) blend formal structures with relational depth, often requiring cultural sensitivity and patience.

As the world is moving towards proliferation of AI in more and more domains especially where human interfaces are heavy, the adoption is significantly going to be influenced by the cultural context.  In this context, the leadership driving this need to keep in mind that

• Relational trust can unlock innovation and speed.
• Cultural fluency helps navigate power dynamics without compromising integrity.
• Ethical clarity ensures that influence remains constructive, not corrosive. 

In cultures where personal relationships are central to business, like India, China, Brazil, and much of Africa, the adoption of AI faces unique friction and adaptation curves:

Trust Is Earned, Not Assumed

• AI systems, especially those that automate decisions (e.g. hiring, lending, procurement), may be met with skepticism unless they reflect human-like empathy, transparency, and cultural nuance.
• In high-context cultures, relational trust often trumps algorithmic efficiency. Leaders may hesitate to delegate sensitive decisions to AI unless the system is explainable and aligned with local values.

Adoption Hinges on Relational Gatekeepers

• Influential individuals—mentors, senior executives, family business heads—play a key role in shaping attitudes toward AI. Their endorsement can accelerate trust and uptake.
• In public-private partnerships, relational capital often determines access and influence. AI must be positioned as a complement to human judgment, not a replacement.

AI Must Learn the Language of Relationships

• AI tools that support personalized recommendations, emotionally intelligent communication, and context-aware negotiation are more likely to succeed in relationship-driven environments.
• For example, AI-mediated communication has shown to improve cross-cultural understanding by 31% and negotiation satisfaction by 24% when transparency is built in.

As AI becomes embedded in business workflows, it will inevitably reshape how trust is built and maintained:

From Intuition to Insight

• AI can surface patterns in behavior, preferences, and risk that were previously inferred through intuition. This can enhance trust by making decisions more consistent and data-backed.
• However, it may also erode the informal, emotional cues that underpin trust in many cultures; especially if AI is perceived as cold or opaque.

Hybrid Trust Models Will Emerge

• The future lies in hybrid trust: where AI handles routine tasks and pattern recognition, while humans manage nuance, empathy, and ethical judgment.
• Businesses that blend AI’s precision with human warmth will build deeper loyalty and satisfaction, especially in customer-facing roles.

Transparency Will Be the New Relationship Currency

• AI systems must be designed with explainability, consent, and cultural sensitivity. In relationship-driven contexts, people want to know not just what the AI decided, but why.
• This is especially true in sectors like digital finance, where personalization must be balanced with ethical clarity and data integrity.

In this context we  could:

• Frame AI as a trust amplifier, not a trust substitute.
• Design DPI systems that embed relational logic—e.g. community-driven feedback loops, culturally adaptive interfaces.
• Mentor young leaders to navigate the dual fluency of algorithmic and interpersonal trust. 

 As we move forward, let’s deepen our understanding of how relationships shape power, influence, and trust. I explored this in an earlier reflection on “Market Power & Relationships”—still relevant today:

📖 Read the blog post

“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.”Albert Einstein

(I had posted a summariesed version of this as a lined in post. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/koshy89_market-power-relationships-activity-7374399657952628736-_-2t?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAAHWSYQBQXp5IHBAbmYtmy0QTDr2QMLjsi8)

Friends and Then There are Friends

 Leadership Reflections from the Edges of Trust

In the landscape of leadership, where transformation is often the goal and collaboration the vehicle, the journey is shaped as much by people as by ideas. Over time, you come to appreciate that some individuals bring clarity, courage, and commitment to the missio while some others bring complexity. And within this complexity lies the most delicate thread in leadership: trust.

In my own journey, through large-scale initiatives and system shaping collaborations, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside many capable, passionate individuals. Some inspired me through their quiet excellence, others through their bold conviction. Yet what’s stayed with me most are not just the accomplishments, but the relational dynamics that informed them.

We often speak of leadership as if it's a solo act. In reality, it’s more a relay that is passing batons, ideas, responsibilities, and vision to those who come next. That handover moment is pivotal. It tests not just our planning, but our perception of the people we entrust.

At times, it’s exhilarating. You watch someone rise, bring fresh energy, and take the mission forward in ways you couldn't have imagined. Other times, it’s sobering. The initial warmth starts to feel performative. Support flows freely when incentives align—but when they don’t, you notice the subtle distance. Advice once sought becomes an afterthought. And ideas you offered (some hesitantly received, some outright rejected) later resurface, confidently repurposed, yet curiously detached from their origin.

Is it betrayal? Not always. Sometimes, it’s just a different style. An ambition that's impatient, a recognition that remains unspoken. But in leadership, silence too is a signal.

These moments taught me that trust isn’t binary. It exists in degrees, and it evolves. Respect may be immediate, but trust requires time, consistency, and reciprocity. One can admire someone’s competence yet remain cautious about their integrity. And that’s okay.

Especially in transformational projects, where stakes are high and vision runs deep, the emotional cost of misalignment can be significant. You don’t just feel let down; you fear for the potential of the work itself. You’ve seeded something with care, nurtured it into possibility, and then watched as its trajectory bends; sometimes away from purpose, sometimes toward personal optics.

Yet even in such moments, bitterness helps no one. I've come to view these experiences not as indictments of character, but as invitations for reflection. On leadership maturity. On alignment. On how we prepare those we trust to carry forward what we've built.

Here are some principles that have helped me navigate these transitions—calmly, constructively, and without losing heart:

---

🔹 Trust is contextual.

Don't assume alignment just because you share objectives. Probe deeper: into motivations, methods, and mindsets. True alignment includes shared values; not just shared goals.

🔹 Be generous, but not naive.

Support people fully, but remain observant. Enthusiasm isn't always sincerity. Neither is politeness. Time reveals true intent.

🔹 Let ideas go, but honour their roots.

Innovation thrives on building over what came before. But integrity means acknowledging origins. Credit isn’t vanity but, it’s continuity.

🔹 Transitions need care, not just process.

It’s easy to document handovers. Much harder to shape culture in the process. Leadership continuity needs emotional intelligence, not just operational readiness.

🔹 Protect potential, not just plans.

If the vision matters, so does how it's carried forward. Sometimes safeguarding it means challenging ego, entitlement, or misdirection = gently, but firmly.

🔹 Legacy is relational.

What remains after your tenure isn’t just the systems you built. It’s how people felt under your guidance. And how they choose to continue what you began.

As we build systems, scale platforms, and strive for lasting impact, we must remember: leadership isn’t about control; it’s about coherence. It’s about trusting others wisely, framing succession thoughtfully, and always choosing the mission over the moment.

Friendships in leadership can be deeply nourishing. But when ambition outpaces humility, they can become transactional. The key isn’t to retreat, but to recalibrate with grace.

We all play different roles at different times. Advisor, collaborator, challenger, successor. What matters is that in each role, we remain honest with others, and with ourselves.

And if you're ever in doubt about how to lead when you're no longer in charge, remember: integrity echoes louder in absence than in presence.

 “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.” — Abraham Lincoln

Friends, and Then There Are Friends

 

Leadership Reflections from the Edges of Trust

In the landscape of leadership, where transformation is often the goal and collaboration the vehicle, the journey is shaped as much by people as by ideas. Over time, you come to appreciate that some individuals bring clarity, courage, and commitment to the mission while some others bring complexity. And within this complexity lies the most delicate thread in leadership: trust.

In my own journey, through large-scale initiatives and system shaping collaborations, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside many capable, passionate individuals. Some inspired me through their quiet excellence, others through their bold conviction. Yet what’s stayed with me most are not just the accomplishments, but the relational dynamics that informed them.

We often speak of leadership as if it's a solo act. In reality, it’s more a relay that is passing batons, ideas, responsibilities, and vision to those who come next. That handover moment is pivotal. It tests not just our planning, but our perception of the people we entrust.

At times, it’s exhilarating. You watch someone rise, bring fresh energy, and take the mission forward in ways you couldn't have imagined. Other times, it’s sobering. The initial warmth starts to feel performative. Support flows freely when incentives align—but when they don’t, you notice the subtle distance. Advice once sought becomes an afterthought. And ideas you offered (some hesitantly received, some outright rejected) later resurface, confidently repurposed, yet curiously detached from their origin.

Is it betrayal? Not always. Sometimes, it’s just a different style. An ambition that's impatient, a recognition that remains unspoken. But in leadership, silence too is a signal.

These moments taught me that trust isn’t binary. It exists in degrees, and it evolves. Respect may be immediate, but trust requires time, consistency, and reciprocity. One can admire someone’s competence yet remain cautious about their integrity. And that’s okay.

Especially in transformational projects, where stakes are high and vision runs deep, the emotional cost of misalignment can be significant. You don’t just feel let down; you fear for the potential of the work itself. You’ve seeded something with care, nurtured it into possibility, and then watched as its trajectory bends; sometimes away from purpose, sometimes toward personal optics.

Yet even in such moments, bitterness helps no one. I've come to view these experiences not as indictments of character, but as invitations for reflection. On leadership maturity. On alignment. On how we prepare those we trust to carry forward what we've built.

Here are some principles that have helped me navigate these transitions—calmly, constructively, and without losing heart:

---

🔹 Trust is contextual.

Don't assume alignment just because you share objectives. Probe deeper: into motivations, methods, and mindsets. True alignment includes shared values; not just shared goals.

🔹 Be generous, but not naive.

Support people fully, but remain observant. Enthusiasm isn't always sincerity. Neither is politeness. Time reveals true intent.

🔹 Let ideas go, but honour their roots.

Innovation thrives on building over what came before. But integrity means acknowledging origins. Credit isn’t vanity but, it’s continuity.

🔹 Transitions need care, not just process.

It’s easy to document handovers. Much harder to shape culture in the process. Leadership continuity needs emotional intelligence, not just operational readiness.

🔹 Protect potential, not just plans.

If the vision matters, so does how it's carried forward. Sometimes safeguarding it means challenging ego, entitlement, or misdirection = gently, but firmly.

🔹 Legacy is relational.

What remains after your tenure isn’t just the systems you built. It’s how people felt under your guidance. And how they choose to continue what you began.

As we build systems, scale platforms, and strive for lasting impact, we must remember: leadership isn’t about control; it’s about coherence. It’s about trusting others wisely, framing succession thoughtfully, and always choosing the mission over the moment.

Friendships in leadership can be deeply nourishing. But when ambition outpaces humility, they can become transactional. The key isn’t to retreat, but to recalibrate with grace.

We all play different roles at different times. Advisor, collaborator, challenger, successor. What matters is that in each role, we remain honest with others, and with ourselves.

And if you're ever in doubt about how to lead when you're no longer in charge, remember: integrity echoes louder in absence than in presence.

 “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.”

— Abraham Lincoln

 

ONDC – Big Bang moment for eCommerce

 

The universe after the Big Bang evolved and is still evolving continuously. Not as a centrally controlled and managed process. But, as an ecosystem with each component in its trajectory, impacted by, and impacting, the other ecosystem building blocks. Zooming in further, the lifeforms also evolved from the single-cell wonders in the primordial soup to the atomic-age man through continuous innovation by nature what we know as mutation across the ecosystem. Every new innovation adds or subtracts functionalities and capabilities, with some succeeding to sustain and some failing and perishing. The technological progress we made as a human race from wheel to spacecraft also followed this incremental innovation across the ecosystem. That is the “Order of Nature”.

 Very often, success in the natural order arises in a simple yet fundamental paradigm shift, and successful players are those who quickly adapt to the evolving paradigms, cooperating and collaborating with the ecosystem. Thought leaders from Darwin to Schumpeter to Niall Fergusson in the modern era, have argued that, “This is the age of digital Darwinism, in which it is not the strongest or most intelligent that survives, but the one that most successfully uses technology to adapt to change.”

When it comes to eCommerce w can see that it has evolved out of line with this natural order of the nature. Two or three giants with deep pockets building up stranglehold in each domain tuned to maximise their shareholders’ interest.

There is extensive innovation in this model. But limited to innovation to maximise their self-interest through a centrally managed process, to meet the requirements of their typical user group and/ or enhancing their user group through a cookie-cutter approach.  Any outside innovation has no chance to survive unless it is subservient to or sold out to the biggies. [1] It is an uncontrolled that is engulfing commerce, eventually taking control of it all and leading to stifling diversity. Much like the magma chamber of a dormant volcano, this keeps the lid on growth and evolution. This has already set alarm bells ringing across the world, with many developed countries trying to mitigate through regulation, be it the America Innovation and Choice Online Act in the US, the Digital Markets Act in the EU or UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill,

It is here that the idea of ONDC has come in with a big bang. Encouraging innovation and specialisation across the ecosystem with all of these building blocks communicating among them and interoperable through an open-source protocol. This allows and encourages lots of people to work on different building blocks and come out with a plethora of solutions for diverse user groups and not to straight jacket users or shape the users into a straight-jacket. As Howard Moskowitz observed in his research paper; there is no single optimum, but there are multiple optima for every use case. Some will fail and some will succeed and the winner is society, as a whole and not shareholders of a few enterprises.

This will address the challenge of market concentration and associated practices that are a challenge in the platform-centric world today.  This will encourage a natural order of continuous innovation with some succeeding and some failing with the overall ecosystem marching forward.

The Build for Bharat Hackathon organised by ONDC recently in collaboration with Industry demonstrates this. 100,000+ participants in 2,100+ teams from across the country coming together with outstanding solutions with most of them having a working model and monetization plan shows. This shows how Open Model will unleash creativity across a wider cross-section of big and small enterprises and individuals. This is what excited representatives from 20 VCs who attended the hackathon final.

Now it is clear why I have the audacity to term ONDC as the Big Bang Moment of eCommerce that can totally transform the world of commerce in the near future.

 

“When money, rather than innovation or value, is your competitive advantage, that’s when things get boring and stagnant, and monopolies take root.” —Hank Green

Redefining Customer Acquisition Cost in Open Network.

 

Whenever a new product or service is launched in the market, the product manager often plans for triggers like incentives, free samples and so on to act as a catalyst to stimulate product trials. When ecommerce companies launched their service, they took this idea to its next level. With a platform, based on proprietary protocol, the incentives became a tool not just to stimulate trials, but also to build a committed userbase of significant magnitude that it will be practically impossible for many competing platforms to evolve resulting in few walled gardens in each domain who eventually not in the best interest of the industry and economy.

Towards building these walled gardens, the early entrants blew billions of dollars. This was neither charity nor helping the merchants to establish themselves in the digital space. But with the idea of stifling competition which will help them to extract return on this investment through monopolistic / oligopolistic practices like rent- seeking.

This is not just an Indian phenomenon, but seen all around the around the world and the world is worried. The developed countries like USA and EU are attempting to address the challenges of this market concentration through regulation. America Innovation and Choice Online Act in USA and Digital Market Act of EU are attempts in this direction. The UK has also a bill (Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill)  under consideration by the parliament.

We in India have now taken a bold step in resolving this conundrum through the power of technology and markets with enabling policy support. It is in this direction that ONDC has been established with a mandate to democratize commerce. In first two years since the ONDC was was incorporated, it has managed o achieve a merchant base of 450,000 with a daily transaction level of more than 250,000 transactions at less than one tenth of the cost of the other ecommerce players blew up in the same time period after they launched. 

More importantly, this removal of the stranglehold by the platform providers is ensuring that these efforts, initiatives and incentives are also from the collective of sellers, brand owners and buyer and seller NPs and not from the select group of platform providers who use this as a tool for market share concentration and not to help to expand the market. The participation is wide spread ranging from multinational giants like Google, Meta, HUL , ITC, McDonald, Dominos to Philanthropic Organizations like BMGF and Wadhwani Foundation, Government Departments like Agriculture, Fisheries, MSME etc . Each of these entities are figuring out and rolling out innovative interventions to help broad-basing of the market with participation from big and small enterprises alike. Advertisement and hoardings with “Buyer App”-agnostic ONDC QR codes is another powerful idea in the hands of merchants and brands.

Clickable PDFs and social media post taking the reader directly to the product to place and order and make a payment is an interesting innovation that agencies like SFAC have already attempted with demonstrable outcome. Many direct marketing companies are now evolving interesting solutions around this idea.

On the other hand, with ONDC enabling every catalogable products and services to be available in the network, diverse enterprises with large digital consumer base like media organizations, fintech etc. are also developing strategies to offer related products and services to their clients. Each of them with their loyalties primarily to their customers, will find innovative means (may be drawing the power of AI and ML) to help their customers what is relevant for them more. Foray into ONDC network by medial giant Dainik Jagran is a case in point which many others have initiated.

If you let your imagination run wild, you will be surprised at the possibilities for innovation exploding on your face which in the current platform centric model is unthinkable. Let me dare you to be innovative in this new paradigm.

“Without leaps of imagination or dreaming, we lose the excitement of possibilities. Dreaming, after all is a form of planning.” Gloria Steinem

 

Who is your Mentor ?

 

Mentor is a person who can make a significant impact on your career or on your company, drawing on the expertise and experience that person has. Whom you choose as or who gets thrusted upon you to play a mentorship role can be a game changer for you.

It will be fun and also useful to be aware of the nuances with respect to mentor and mentorship to help you choose and benefit from mentors. The role of the mentor is not standard or same in all context. There are different roles that a mentor can play.

The mentor could bring superior subject matter expertise to help you to solve a problem or guide you through corporate web. For example, if you are trying raise funds for your new venture and if you have no prior experience in this, a mentor who may have had extensive exposure as a venture capitalist can be a great help in dealing with multiple service providers and to get the best possible deal. Or if you are considering organisation wide computerisation, someone who have lived through this transformation could help you to be ready for challenges on the way.

The mentor could offer references and endorsements with people of influence and relevance for your growth through his/her network. For example, when you are raising funds, some one who have dealt multiple investors and have had the experience to understand the agenda of the diverse players could help you to refine your investment pitch and may even give reference to different investors.

The mentor could be someone could act as a sounding board for your ideas and provide a philosophical foundation for your initiatives and decisions.  For example, someone who has had good experience in guiding organisational growth could help you in your process of developing alternate growth strategies, evaluating them and make a choice.

While a good mentor may be a mix of all, very often the larger focus may be in a few roles based on their comfort and your priorities.  A genuine mentor with appropriate experience and right intention can make a big difference to you and your company. They can add significant value in helping you to evolve strategies, guide your team, select better tools, turbocharge your marketing and magnify your public relation. Therefore. it will be great for any company to have a mentorship program established as it can contribute to its overall development through development and retention of good managers.

While we give due attention when working with a mentor there is another important dimension, we should be conscious of when choosing and or working with a mentor.

Ideally a mentor would be a person who has achieved certain stature and/ or position that he plays the role of a mentor as a giver and not a taker. Let us go a little deeper on the difference between giver and taker. The giver is a person who has more to give to the mentee. They are self-confident and will work with you to bring the best out of you and also not try to usurp the credit for your achievement, but help you to grow in your role. They will spent time to understand your context, the opportunities available, challenges you face, the strategies your following and proposing and identify your weaknesses and will give you considered advice. They will help you to track progress and act as a sounding board to help you to continuously refine your way forardy

The takers are those who act or pretend to act as your mentor, primarily to enhance their agenda. They will manage to make you doubt yourself and make it look like you are surviving on their ideas. The worst is when often they have nothing really to offer. They are too impatient to understand your context, your challenges, your option and their merits and weaknesses.  They will ask you about all your thoughts and make general comments and motherhood statements with no real value addition and at best may keep goading you to up your aspirations with no suggestions or input or support to make it happen. If you end up succeeding, they will go around announcing to the whole world that your success is courtesy their idea.

You have to be mindful of such people when you choose your mentors independent of their stature and position so that you don’t end up with the latter category. Very often they are in this position because they are better at managing their environment and more than willing to sell their souls for a price. For them end justifies the means with ‘end’ defined as maximising personal agenda. They are too happy to live off the hard work of the doers and smart in edging out the doers in due course like the pirates. (Read this post https://rollingstone-revelations.blogspot.com/2012/05/some-people-all-time-humour.html for a light hearted depiction of such mentors)

Sometimes they are thrusted upon you as advisors, or consultants or directors with you having no choice. Then you will have to have your strategy to protect you from them or manage them and may be the  support of another genuine mentor who will help you in your attempt for self-preservation.

C’est la vie!

“A mentor is someone who allows you to see the hope inside yourself.” Oprah Winfrey – Host, Producer, Author & Philanthropist