When leadership skills and characteristics are compared in the private and public-sector companies, globally the scenarios could be different than that in India. A hundred years back the difference may have been high as the public sectors was dependable and ethical. Through the years with a lot of insights into work processes, methods, controls and help from other sectors like engineering, IT, social science etc. there has been a great change in the ways companies are managed. Increased knowledge of metrics and its use across companies for measuring performances meant that those companies adopting novel methods, process and operational controls were able to do better compared to those who did not upgrade in any areas of corporate efforts. Slowly external factors led to internal factors and major developments and changes in companies were pegged to team leaders and department heads. As companies practiced management by objectives, management by exception and various ideas as propounded by consultants and research groups the responsibility of results fell with the various leaders within the company. Especially with teams and team leaderships.
The manufacturing sector in India has always lagged and depended on overseas companies to lend, sell or tie-up for better and faster production efficiency. Along with the need for technology came the technical training associated with it. These came at a price and a need for more competent executives was felt. This process was defined and had kept industries in the throes of sluggish growth and low competition and few companies dominating. The small-scale sector relied on manpower and traditional processes. The production norms were depended on the human factor and pressures exerted by the management for better productive efficiencies were met with resistance and unionism. The human development aspect in companies were accepted or rejected more than by the company by the union and those who could influence the labor in a major way. As technology became a paramount aspect to change the fortune of companies and with unionism giving way to more proactive work groups, companies felt the need to change the nomenclature of Personnel and Industrial relations to Human resources development and in the present days it is called Talent Acquisition, Talent Management, etc. The need for training the human personnel in areas other than technical and in the areas of HR itself was seen essential. With more research in the areas of inter departmental skills etc. the leaders of teams had to transform from a more goal seeking and result oriented person into a more inclusive who could transfer teams into higher productive units and with continuous training, evaluation, rewards or even to dis-engagement of services ensure the teams are lean, mean and keen.
