One of the most challenging tasks in growing an organisation is developing a culture. Culture is something that is very important to us in hiring. Shivram Apte, 1995 batch Bulls Eye, runs the IT back office for a big US based pharma company. He put this post on his blog, which I reproduce:

We know exactly what we are looking for. The three must-have traits we seek in our recruits are that they be (i) Driven, (ii) Curious and (iii) Fun to be with. The last is extremely important to us. Before the final offer is extended, the panel members ask each other of every finalist, “Will you give him/her the seat next to yours in the office?” If the answer is a negative, then we are willing to pass up an Einstein. The No-***hole rule rules.

And there are a few people in the organisation who define what Bulls Eye culture is. Two people who come to mind, as our cultural pace setters, are Shaila and Ravneet. Shaila, who has been our colleague at Ambala, is joining Mindtree School this month. Ravneet, our Chandigarh colleague, is switching over from a full time role to being an associate. Attrition is good for any system, but at times it hurts. I was chatting with Shaila about the reasons for the move and she said that she needs more time for herself. That set me thinking – what is more important for us nowadays: Time or Money?

We have traditionally focussed on getting in juniors as associates or part timers in order to judge whether they have the academic skills and cultural fits. We usually see their becoming a full timer as a promotion for them. Are we seeing a reversal of this trend? Should a person work less as she becomes more senior? What makes you more happy: Time or Money?

Just had a haircut today. Difficult to imagine getting one without either the barber physically coming over to my home or me going to his shop. We have imagined so far that education is like a barber shop – a service which can only be delivered when both the customer and service provider are in physical proximity to each other. Sometimes I think, does that need to be the case. Just read an article yesterday about a pilot project at AIIMS – where the doctor does a follow-up with epilepsy patients on phone. Is the future of Bulls Eye a platform where we allow students and teachers to be in their own homes – and meet in virtual classrooms? How happy would you be if you are spared the social niceties of coming to work – instead the work comes to you?

If we look at business models of the US coaching industry – they rely a lot on people who come in only for sessions. Come to think of it – the new generation cab services: the Olas, the Ubers of our world – are also following a model where drivers are not salaried employees – but are owners of cars, who hop onboard and share revenues with the company. So they are in a sense part-owners of the company.

But what happens to the sense of camaraderie that comes when working together in the same physical space? Can we develop an organisational culture when the organisation is purely virtual? Are we moving on to a stage, where we need to start rewarding competent people with more time instead of money? Worth a thought. And how should we award this extra time? 5 day week? 1 month vacation? 6 hours a day working? Work from home? And how do you manage a system if everyone is on flexi-hours and flexi-place? As Arnab Goswami would say, India wants an answer.