How do the Nepali managers fare in terms of self-esteem? A survey by New Business Age finds that while the high level and low level managers score above the average on the self-esteem scale, the middle level managers are lower than the average.

Generally speaking, high self–esteem people are high performers, while low self-esteem causes poor performance, which in turn reinforces low self–esteem. A look at the level of self-esteem among the Nepali managers reveals some startling facts. For example, while the junior level managers exuberate high self-esteem, the medium level managers have low self-esteem. The high level managers, which include the CEOs, are in between them with above the average self-esteem.

Among the 94 persons asked to fill up a form responding to a set of ten questions (see box on page 32), 84 responded, but only 61 forms have been included in the analysis since the rest either did not answer all the questions or the answers were confusing to tabulate. Among the 61 respondents, 18 were high level managers including four who mentioned themselves as CEOs. Thirty-six of the respondents identified themselves as middle level managers while only seven identified as officers which are taken for the analysis purpose to mean lower level managers.

Since the average self-esteem score of all the managers came out to be 313, it is taken as the cut off point with all the scores equal to or above 313 taken to indicate high self-esteem and scores less than 313 meaning low self-esteem.

Altogether 24 managers (40%) scored below 313. Among them eight were from the high level management and the rest from the medium level management. There was nobody among the junior level managers who scored lower in self-esteem than the average. It is quite contrary to the general belief that the more senior the manager the more confident he or she may be, i.e. the higher the position in the organization, higher is his or her self-esteem.

Though the survey has its own limitations owing to the small sample size and lack of scientific methods used in selecting a well representative sample, the findings can serve as the starting points for similar but detailed survey.

The survey findings indicate that while the young Nepali managers start with a high level of self-confidence they gradually go on losing it over the period as the real life situation turns out to be quite different from what they had expected on the basis of what they studied in the business schools. The case with high level managers is different because these people, which include the CEOs, are recruited fresh from outside the organization with sets of terms and conditions that are quite different from those of the other employees. Those CEOs who have spent long period in the same position (above 10 years) have less than 300 as SE score, indicating that the length of period in the job has inverse relationship with the SE score no matter what the position of the manager may be.

The business fields covered by the survey included information technology, manufacturing, banking and finance services, trading, tour operation, hotels, education institutes, insurance companies etc. And the interesting finding is that the average SE score among banking and manufacturing sector managers is almost equal (308 for manufacturing and 309 for banking) which is below the average figure of 313. However, while it is 328 (well above the average value of 313) in case of high-level managers in banking, it is only 295 (well below the average value of 313) in case of middle level managers in the same sector. But in manufacturing sector, the average score is 340 in case of high level managers and 286 only in case of middle level managers.

That means, it can easily be generalized that high level managers in all sectors have higher self-confidence level than that of the middle level managers. Unfortunately there was not a single respondent from the junior level management of manufacturing and banking sectors. Among the respondents who identified themselves as junior level managers, nobody disclosed the sector of their employment, thus making it difficult to make any comparison across the sectors in this level.

The self-esteem is positively related to assertiveness, independence and creativity. It has been observed that the high self-esteem person are very friendly and affectionate and find it easy to form interpersonal attachment and also to find good in other people. Low self–esteem people are unusually critical of others, are generally depressed and blame others for their own failures.

Of the 61 respondents from the different field of the business, 30% were high-level managers, 60% were middle level managers and 10% were lower level managers. Their experience in the present work ranged from six months to 20 years. Analyzing the average SE score by the years of experience of the managers in the same position, it is found that those fresh in the job and also those who have been engaged in the job for a considerably long period show higher self-esteem, while those with medium length of years of experience seem to be low in self-esteem. While the average SE score was 317 in case of those with experience of below five years in the same position, it was 315 in case of those with experience above 10 years. The average score of those in between (5< and 10>) was 291. Since self-esteem is said to have its reflection in low productivity, the findings of this survey indicate that the employers need to change the position of the managers to improve their self-esteem and thereby the organizational productivity. This perhaps also suggests the managers that it would be better to switch over to next job for maintaining their self-confidence level.

Thus, if the employers (or the higher level managers) do not do something to help the middle level managers to regain their self-esteem the consequences are going to be serious for the company whether the manager leaves the job or stays. The reason for higher self confidence level of those who have been in the same job for considerably long period can be that these people have compromised with the real life situation and started feeling satisfied with whatever they have – an example of low level equilibrium. Another factor to explain it may be that the person is a family-member of the owner of the business.

But, this hypothesis is readily rejected when we look at the fact that the SE score of managers in banking companies is not different from that of the manufacturing sector managers. While the manager in the banking sector are likely to be more a professional recruited from outside the family of the owners, those in manufacturing are more likely to be family-members of the owners. However, as the questionnaire used in the present survey did not collect information about whether the respondent was a family-member of the owner of the business, nothing can be concluded with certainty about it.

When we look at the overall self-confidence scale for the managers, only 40% have higher than the normal and the remaining 60% have the lower than normal self-confidence.

Analysis of the responses

When the managers were asked whether they considered themselves as a person of worth, at an equal basis with others, 60% replied that they were sure about it and 40% of them said that they "thought so".

When they were asked whether they thought that there were lots of good qualities in them, 46.6% were highly confident and 50% said, "it is the way that they look at themselves". Those who completely disagreed with the statement that "they have lot of good qualities" were only 3.4% of the total number of respondents.

On the question of whether they thought themselves a total failure, 46% totally disagreed with it, 43% said it was partially true, and the remaining 10% said that it was perfectly true.

Thirty percent of the managers agreed that they were confident of doing things and had equal ability to do as well as most of other people in similar position. Sixty-three percent felt that if given the opportunity, they might be able to do it, whereas 7% felt that they did not think themselves to be capable of doing things or that they were not as capable and talented as others.

About 33% of the respondent mangers felt that they were proud of the things they have. They are satisfied with whatever they have. They think they have good qualities that make them capable to face the situation. Twenty percent of them felt that even though there are things that cannot be changed, they could capitalize on their good qualities. An impressive 43% said that there is nothing to be proud of – neither of money nor property, qualification or organization, while 3.4% felt that life itself is worthless. It clearly indicates that they have made a great mistake by joining the organization.

Only 10% of the mangers said that they strongly advocate positive attitude towards the self. Sixty-six percent believed that they do have positive attitude but it is not always expressed. Some 20% were confused about it and were not sure whether they have positive or negative attitude, and 3.4% said that they did not believe in positive attitude especially in Nepali scenario.

When asked about the satisfaction they had in joining the industry and with their own self, only 23% voiced a strong satisfaction, 63% were not so satisfied but were O.K., and 13% said that they were totally dissatisfied with the post, the situation and their own self.

Nearly 17% of the managers felt that they should have more respect for themselves than they have now. About 33% said that they were not sure whether they have self-respect or not, while another 33% felt that they have self-respect but it is not quite enough. Some 17% others felt that they do have enough self-respect and they can do anything, anywhere.

Only 37% of the respondents said that they felt confident most of the time in any situation, 34% said that they were confident only sometimes, 23% felt that they were rarely confident. Some 4% said they were never confident, which means as long as they could remember they were never confident.

When questioned whether they were good managers, 57% said that they were otherwise they would not have been in their respective positions. But 37% said that they were not quite sure that they were confident especially is making decision, however it did not hamper their work much. Some 7% felt that they were hopeless.

Developing self-esteem

The development of self-esteem begins at birth. Early on, our feelings about ourselves tend to be a reflection of how we are treated by the people most important in our lives-usually our parents or guardians. We learn to see ourselves as we think they see us.

Most people love their near and dear ones and would not knowingly do anything to damage the self-esteem of their loved ones. But people are only human. Sometimes they do not say exactly what they mean. For example, your loved one may say, "I did not like you very much when you told me this". You may take it to mean that he does not like you at all. It would be better if he had said, "I get scared and nervous when you shout". That way, the person can make clear that it is the behaviour that is beings criticized, not the worth of the person. The same applies also in interpersonal relationships at office and workplace. If the boss says, "I don’t like the way you did that", it is more effective.

But all the people are not psychologists. The odds are that most of the people are not aware that their words are so harsh. Most peers and bosses honestly want to support and encourage their peers and subordinates and help them feel loved. They try but they may not do everything perfectly.

How to build your self-esteem

If you have low self-esteem, you can make a new, more accurate, and more positive decision about yourself. You can acknowledge the influence of your past, but resolve to move on. Your self-esteem is now your responsibility. Though it is not easy to raise self-esteem, it is not impossible either. By deciding to take responsibility for yourself and your own self-esteem, you can make big changes in the way you see yourself. You will be delighted when you discover how much more fun and rewarding your life can be when you feel good about yourself.

Accept yourself

Accepting yourself is the most important step in saving your self-esteem. This means learning to appreciate yourself and believing in your worth as a unique and special person.

How can you learn to accept yourself?

First, realistically assess your strength and weaknesses. Do not be modest. No one except you needs to know what you think your strengths are.

A low self-evaluation leads to consistent altitude in many other areas.

Second, try not to judge yourself by unrealistic standards. Do not, for example, compare your looks to the actors or actresses you see on television shows and movies.

Third, decide that you are O.K. as you are, even though there are things about yourself that you would like to change. Remember that even though you are not perfect, you are a unique person with value. No one is exactly like you. No one else has exactly the same gifts to offer to the company. There isn’t a signal person anywhere who is perfect, and it certainly is not necessary that you be perfect.

Finally, expend energy on changing only the things about yourself that you can change. You cannot change your height, for instance. So do not spend time worrying about it.

The more you accept and like yourself, the more others will accept and like you. If you project to others that you like yourself, they are less likely to judge you or to pressure you to conform to their ideas, and even if they do, you are less likely to cave in to their pressure.

Use Positive Self-talk

We are constantly talking to ourselves – not necessarily out loud, but internally. Often this talk is negative. "I’m such an idiot", you might say to yourself, "Why did I do such a stupid thing?" Talking negatively like this can damage your self-esteem.

When you use positive self-talk, on the other hand, you can raise your self-esteem. Positive self-talk is talking in a positive way about yourself to yourself. An example of positive self-talk might be: "I did a great job on this project: I am really good at this".

Surendra usually feels nervous and uncomfortable with other staff around. "They think I’m no fun", he says to himself. "Why can’t I ever think of anything interesting to say?"

Because he feels this way, Surendra appears to be awkward and shy.

Now suppose that Surendra decides to use positive self-talk. He might say to himself "I’m sometimes shy, but I can also be pretty funny, and people usually enjoy my company". As he talks to himself this way and begins to believe what he says, Surendra will be more likely to converse with other staff. As they respond to him more positively, Surendra’s confidence will grow. He will become more comfortable with other people, and his self-esteem will improve.

Be good at something

Everyone has something he or she does well. Make the most of whatever you do well. It might be playing guitar, designing a graphic, dealing with a customer complaint, organizing a staff picnic etc. The possibilities are endless. Even if it is something as trivial as being good at playing cards, you will develop more confidence in yourself if you cultivate your natural ability. Being good at one thing will also make easier for you to try new skills and take positive actions. You know that you are good at cards, so if you try playing tennis and are not so good at all, you would not feel too bad.

Use ‘I’ statements

If you take responsibility for your feelings and words using ‘I’ statements, you will build self-esteem. People with low self-esteem are often afraid to do this because they fear criticism. For instance, when Surendra says, "It is hard to make friends", he is making a generalization that may not be true for other people. By beginning his statement with the impersonal pronoun "it", he is not taking responsibility for his feelings.

He could use ‘I’ statements instead: "I sometimes have trouble making friends". He is then talking about his feeling only.

Another example of not using and ‘I’ statement is when Surendra said to his assistant, "You made me feel terrible when you told me that Raman/Smarter is than I am". Surendra is transferring responsibility for his own feeling to his assistant. He is saying that the assistant is responsible for his feeling. To take responsibility for his own feeling, Surendra could say, "When you said that Anita is smarter than I am, I felt hurt".

Although it is easier to speak in generalities it is important to clearly state what we are feeling and saying.

Develop a support group

Few things can be as helpful in maintaining high self-esteem as having people with whom you can share your joys and sorrows. Such a support group is a group of people who trust each other and are able to talk openly with each other. Your support group can consist of friends you trust or family members who care for you. A good support group will not exert any pressure on you, instead it will make you feel good about yourself.

Take a moment to write down the names of five of your friends who you would like in your support group. Make an effort to spend time with these people. May be your support group can get together at lunch or in the evening to discuss what is going on in their lives.

Self-disclosure

Telling another person meaningful information about yourself plays a central role in the development of a positive self-esteem. This is because when you discuss your true feelings about yourself, it allows others to correct any distortions you express. By self-disclosing, you learn how you are perceived by other as they respond to you, and you can see yourself more accurately. You can also learn to better appreciate similarities and differences – the diversity among people – by sharing you feelings.

Self-disclosure usually happens gradually between people as they learn to trust each other. Make sure you really trust the other person before you disclose anything extremely personal.

Resist peer pressure

Individuals who have low self-esteem usually do not have confidence in their opinions or their decisions. Consequently, they are overtly influenced by peers and by peer pressure.

Learning to trust yourself and your values builds confidence. The more you take your own decision based on what you – not others – believe, the more confidence you will gain. This does not mean that you should ignore the advice or ideas of friends, colleagues or others. It means that you should listen to your inner voice and make decision based on what it is telling you.

When you make your own decisions, you and you alone are responsible for the outcome of those decisions. Have you ever seen people labour over a decision because their gut feelings were different from the advice they received from others? You will notice that they feel miserable afterwards if they followed the advice of others, only to find that their own path would have been better to take.

Although as an executive it may not be under your power to make all the decisions with all the constraints, rules, regulations, and the job you are in, you should take your own decisions whenever possible.

Act with integrity

Once we appreciate our own worth we can begin to appreciate the worth of other people. People with healthy self-esteem do not cause any harm to others. On the contrary, they treat other people with respect and compassion. They act in ways that will help other people maintain high self-esteem.

It is easy to take advantage of those with low self-esteem by manipulating them or bullying them into doing what we want. But it is our responsibility as people of integrity to restrain from doing so.

When you act with integrity and responsibility towards others, you will feel good about yourself, and that will improve you self-esteem even more.

(Adhikari is a psychological counsellor and is currently associated with Campion, a brand in education)

Professionalism & Nepali Managers

After spending more than 15 years in Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) in Nepal, I feel like sharing some thoughts about how far we Nepali managers have reached in our journey on the road of the professional management practice. My thoughts will mainly circle around soft issues, which I have observed and experienced.

Most of big business houses in Nepal with few exceptions have emerged out of protected economic regime that prevailed prior to 1990. Whoever had good rapport and close connection with influential bureaucrats and politicians then got the opportunity to embark on business. Connections and relations were the keys to be in business. Having acquired the knowledge and other competencies was of no use in most of the cases. Profit potential was good due to the protected economy. In other words, monopolistic, or at the most oligopoly, situation prevailed helping the protected ones to grow. Till then professionalism was virtually nonexistent. Therefore, the need for professional employees was not felt – the owner could very well manage the business himself. Employer - employee relations ware based more on conformity rather than challenging and critical thinking. Those employees were rated the best, who were obedient and could carry the order of employers in conformity with the employer’s wish. Nobody talked about professionalism that time.

However, after the dawn of democracy and subsequent economic liberalization, government protection was mostly over. Industry, trade, financial, and other sectors became competitive. Competition emerged in all sectors as many private and public companies entered the scene. Capital started to be raised from the public by issue of shares. The profit potential did not remain as attractive as it used to be due to increased competition. Thus the need for professionalism emerged. As educated and informed employees entered the organization, leading them to achieve organization’s goal became challenging. Just establishing an industrial unit did not justify the successful existence of the organization. Selling the product profitably in long-term became the real challenge. For example the leading business institutions like Janakpur Cigarette Factory (JCF), Rastriya Banijya Bank, Nepal Bank Limited came under tremendous pressure making it hard to give continuity to their existence. Many new players in financial sectors and FMCG entered the market - for example Surya Tobacco Company, Nepal Arab Bank, Himalayan Bank, Nepal Indo-Suez Bank, Nepal Grindlays Bank etc. And their success forced many organizations to think about professionalism. This is when the real need for professionalism was seriously felt in Nepal. Institutions with traditional management style started to lose whereas the new comers with professional approach began to flourish.

As we know, the economic development of Nepal is several decades behind that of many countries in the world including neighbor India. Our exposure and know-how of running business was far limited. As a result of unavailability of specialized manpower, foreign employees got opportunity to work in Nepal prior to 1990’s and till mid-90s’. Expatriate employees soon dominated the top levels of many financial and industry sector companies of Nepal - they held the key positions in most of the leading business organizations. This dominance came in two ways, first the top and middle level managers entering Nepal along with JVC like Union Carbide, Surya Tobacco Company, Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola, Nepal Arab Bank etc., and secondly the managers hired by few leading Nepali industries like Chaudhary Group, Mount Everest Brewery, Himalayan Brewery, Nepal Liquor Limited, Nepal Lever Ltd., Soaltee Hotel, Hotel De L’ Annapurna etc. This dominance of expatriate employees on the top level still exists in the Indian JV companies like Surya Tobacco Company, Nepal Lever Limited etc. However with the increasing professionalism and growing competencies of the local employees, the middle level positions are now being filled up by the locals and in some organizations it is almost entirely local employees who run the show - for example Gorkha Brewery. Credit goes to expatriate employees who initiated the process of professionalism in the business world of Nepal.

The scenario has changed after mid-90’s. Specialized education is not a constraint; many engineers, MBAs, CAs and other highly specialized and experienced employees are easily available within the country. Those who entered the organizations in late 80’s and early 90’s have by now made to senior positions.

Having briefly explained the development of professionalism in Nepal, I have tried to identify few forces, which will be very critical for further development of professionalism (see the *Factors influencing professionalism in Nepal* diagram above).

Ownership structure of the organization is critical for professionalism. In private limited companies, the authorities are confined to a single person or members of the owner’s family. Owners themselves hold key positions (for example the post of MD and finance director). Employees outside the family have responsibility but no authority. In the case of JVs and publicly held companies, the authority and responsibility are more balanced than in privately held companies. However in some JVs, where the foreign partners run the management, the authority is highly concentrated with the expatriates who are in the key positions.

In most of the privately held companies in Nepal the practice of professional management is rare. There is a distinct differentiation between employer and employee. The employee is just to assist the employer, meaning that there is no active participation in decision making process. However the degree of professionalism is much better in JV companies, and their promoters are better aware of corporate governance. This is also supported by the fact that the size of the companies is bigger compared to that of privately held companies.

Nature of operation also plays a vital role for the growth of professionalism. For example, a company having foreign based operation is forced to rely on professional manager. Therefore, enough authority and responsibility is delegated in such companies, whereas in the case of domestic operation companies, the owners can get away with limited authority delegated to the professionals. In Nepal, most of the companies operate within the country, therefore the degree of professionalism is bound to be low as the owner in many cases controls the scene physically and mentally.

Quality of labor force also plays an important role for professional management. Competent employees can easily take the challenge and convince the investors to stick to their roles. As mentioned earlier there was serious shortage of specialized workforce in the country a decade ago. However with the improving quality of education and increasing opportunities to gain real time experience within the country, investors are slowly leaving the command to the professionals. At the same time, the employees too are showing confidence to take up the challenge.

Supply of specialized labor force in Nepal is clearly surpassing the demand, especially in today’s economic stagnation when new jobs are hardly being created. Many MBAs, engineers and other specialized manpower are forced to be unemployed and even those who have got the job are forced to work in lower ranks or for lower wage. For example, fresh MBAs from reputed institutes in India used to start their career as assistant manager. They are now forced to move down to officer or even to supervisor level. Therefore, tomorrow’s employees are going to be more competent and aware of corporate governance forcing the organization to pursue the path which is good for both the employer and the employee.

The competitiveness in the industry is another factor that influences the degree of a company being left to professionals. Team approach becomes essential for achieving results in a highly competitive industry. In Nepal, the pressure is growing as the competitiveness is growing in many FMCG sectors like instant foods, i.e. biscuits, noodles, beer, soft drink, soaps, tea etc. Tough competition exists also in hotel industry, public media (FM, Daily newspaper) etc. and soon there is going to be a fierce competition in financial sector also as many new players have entered the scene recently. Failure to respond to current waves coming from the consumers and the move of competitors can lead to corporate mortality. So even the successful companies of the past are now hunting for right talents.

Economic growth is very much responsible for creating new job opportunities. It also provides liberty to the workforce to choose the best place to work. Employees can grow within the organization or grow by switching the employer. Employers in such a scenario are alert lest they lose the competent manpower. Current economic stagnation is definitely not favourable for employees as new industries are not coming up; even the growth within the organization is jeopardized due to no business growth.

Talking about the future of professionalism, it seems as if the evolution has come to a halt, at least temporarily, after 1995 due to the prevailing uncertainties in the country. The economic growth has decelerated owing to growing political tension, Royal Palace killings, and overall economic recession. No fresh investment is being made and no new foreign investment seems entering the country.

In such a gloomy scenario, it may sound useless to talk about professionalism, but this is the time when a strong bond between the employer and employees is needed to sail the organization through this rough time of recession. Many organizations have already shown true professionalism. For example the staff of Yeti Airlines have agreed to reduce their remuneration by 10% to cope with the situation that has adversely affected the tourism industry.

There is no doubt that the process of professionalism has started in the country but it is still pretty far away from being mature in many organizations. The tension could be seen mounting in all sides. It can be seen in many organizations that the employees are complaining of their company not being professional and employers too complaining of employees not being professional.

The figure in the previous page tries to summarise the perceptions of employers and employees towards each other regarding professionalism. However, it is seen in many cases in Nepal that employers and employees are only concerned with their respective interest. It would be much beneficial towards achieving greater professionalism if both were aware of and sympathetic to the concern of each other.

It is often seen in Nepal that these two parties have failed to acknowledge (or in some cases have ignored completely) each other’s expectations. As a result, many organizations have failed to achieve what they could have achieved. Let us examine why such a simple interdependent dynamics has become complex.

Some of the reasons could be the less competitive manpower, inexperienced (first generation) industrialist, tendency to take the credit for success but shift the blame of failure to the employees, lack of experienced owners (they may have recently switched over from trading business where the degree of complexity is low compared to running an industry or big institution). In other words, many entrepreneurs have failed to understand the nature of corporate governance. Then there is the Jagire mentality of employees.

There could be many reasons responsible for an organization not being professional. However, if both the parties understand each other well and gain the energy from each other, it would lead to a win-win situation. This leads to a conclusion that there is a serious need for opening up dialogue between employee and employer, but such a dialogue should be within the broader framework of the organization’s objective. If both parties agree on broader goal of an organization and work backward to formulate the strategy and other operating details, many conflicts and doubts will be clear. This also demands much more transparency in operation of an organization, which could be unacceptable for some owners today. But there is no other way than accepting this rule of the game in the search of becoming a professional organization. Do not forget that this is a rigorous process and it requires lot of commitment and patience. This could be termed as aspiration based planning or Management by Objectives (MBO). Probably we have now reached a stage where we need to define the nature of relation between employee and employer with higher precision and greater clarity.

(Shrestha holds on MBA from Scandinavion Institute of Management and is Director, Strategic Planning and Innovation in Gorkha Brewery Pvt. Ltd. and CEO, Himalayan Snax and Noodles Pvt. Ltd.)

Send your feedback to the editor: bizline@mos.com.np  
2002 © Mercantile Communications Pvt. Ltd. P.O. Box 876, Durbar Marg, Kathmandu, NEPAL. Tel : 977 1 220 773, 243 566 . Fax: 977 1 225 407. Reproduction in any form is prohibited without prior permission. No part of the articles which appear in the internet version on NEW BUSINESS AGE may be reproduced without the permission of Mercantile Communications Pvt. Ltd. For reprinting rights, please write to us.  Send us your feedback : contact us.