Ever thought about this? What if the Satyam revelation had happened way back in 1965, assuming that there was the concept of a Public Ltd. Co. even then?
Lets start in a phased manner. Ramalinga Raju, an ambitious youngster then, wanted to make a lot of money. his foresight and vision led to the establishment of a multi-national software services giant named Satyam.
As time went by, Satyam went public to the people, money came in from the general public, FIIs, FDIs etc. However, I'm sure everyone would agree that Satyam as what it is today is defnitely Raju's baby & brainchild. There is albeit a huge ownership that Raju exercises over Satyam and its' resources. However, when this ownersip he had, the effort that he put in and the expectation that he had in (in rupees/dollars!) making money did not tally, Raju put his hand inside the Money Box. Quite natural for an owner. In a small company, most of the Boss's expenses are written off as the Company's expenses.
Over a period of time, Raju dug deeper in the boxes, he reached out for more.. some more and a little more than what could be accounted for. Assuming that it was HIS Company.. (BAAP ka Maal in chaste Hindi), he started doing this on a regular basis. Everyone in the Company is definitely involved and informed in this entire melodrama and is also well fed in this entire operation money-drain, though officially denied and veiled for evident reasons. The operations guy in my company who handles finance can tell me from the Balance Sheet, the divesture of funds, you think CFO @ Satyam was a nitwit to get there?!
What upsets me and half the world associated with Satyam is not what and how Raju did but the manner in which he did it. However, I have a very interesting perspective to share...
When Raju put in his sweat, toil and tears into making such a huge company, there was no one to reward him. People think that by buying shares in a company with a few meagre rupees, ownership is bought.
Ladies & Gentlemen, Ownership comes from within, not from wallets and pursestrings. No doubt, Raju has flouted norms of Corporate Governance to the limit untendable, but he isn't a criminal of immoral stances. It might eb a crime, legally to siphon out money from one's OWN company, but not a sin of the highest order.
The point I'm trying to drive home is not problem oriented nor perspective oriented.
I am trying to drive a solution home...
The solution to this would be compelling the Founder directors of any Public Ltd company from not owning more than 1% shares in toto thru individual or family holdings when the Company goes Public. The ownership feeling should remain without doubt, but should not percolate into a drain out of personal interest in the company.
While the Satyam Fiasco has just settled down, all discussions lead to one single question: Will the likes of Infosys & Wipro also in the time to come show such shockers?
What is the guarantee that they have been having a clean slate all the while? Also, what is the guarantee that they are not busy now, re-writing their books of accounts to be sure that they aren't pitted in the time to come?
Penned by
2 comments:
Everyone r out there to make money for themself, afterwards comes the country, ur relatives and so on........
First things, you said that satyam was the baby of Ramalinga Raju...i agree..But the moment he made the Public issue he have kinda of Sold it...but still held the topnotch position...He has every right to earn money as he want to but cannot acquire it through means...den u saying all those politicians are also not doing a sin of the highest order who bring in some change to create a Wave but later get into money laundering....Also, not to forget the Land deals wherein he bribed state machinery to acquire whatever land he want to acquire....
Post a Comment