You have 0 items in your cart
During a recent visit to Ronin, a technology manufacturing company in Karachi, I encountered a business asking an important question: how much freedom are we prepared to give the people who work with us?
Its origin story reflects a willingness to question convention.
Founder Jahangir Munawar began helping in his father’s mobile-phone shop while studying chartered accountancy. His interest in improving the business eventually drew him away from the qualification and towards entrepreneurship. Established in 2016, Ronin sought to offer Pakistani consumers a dependable alternative to inconsistent mobile accessories. Initially sourcing products from China, the business subsequently moved into local assembly and manufacturing to gain greater control over quality. That journey makes the culture I encountered particularly interesting.
The willingness to build something different appears to extend to how the organisation treats its people.
You notice this immediately on entering its offices in Korangi. There are snooker and ping-pong tables, free refreshments and, most strikingly, a cafeteria providing meals to order, free of charge, for all staff. These are tangible expressions of care. Yet the most significant feature of my visit emerged in conversation with the executive team.
When I asked them to describe the culture they were seeking to promote, their answer was simple: “freedom and ownership”.
They explained that they try to treat everyone as though they were an owner of the business, allowing people to make decisions. I commended them. In my experience, this is rare. Many modern organisations operate with a strong bias towards control. Employees may be encouraged to take ownership, while the decisions that would make ownership meaningful remain tightly managed.
One executive suggested that their approach might be possible because they employ white-collar workers, whereas more controlling organisations employ blue-collar workers. There may be environments in the technology industry, particularly those influenced by Silicon Valley, where autonomy is more familiar. But I have encountered many white-collar environments that are excessively controlling. The conversation brought a distinction into focus. The extent of control in an organisation is not, in the first instance, simply a reflection of employees’ trustworthiness. It also reflects senior leadership’s ability to trust. These are different things. Essentially trustworthy people can find themselves subject to restrictive controls because their leaders struggle to entrust decisions to others. Giving freedom therefore requires something of leadership: the willingness to let others exercise judgement, including the possibility that they will make mistakes.
Interestingly, the executive team identified accountability as their greatest cultural challenge.
This is understandable. Freedom does not guarantee contribution. When people have discretion, leaders must still address poor performance, unmet commitments and misconduct.
Ronin’s response has been to make contribution visible. Visibility can help clarify expectations and reveal where commitments are being honoured.
Ultimately however, this comes in the form of a work tracking system that is itself a intrusive control measure. Whilst understandable, this is an unfortunate cultural development because this system is, ultimately, a surveillance/monitoring instrument that undermines the freedom that the business values so dearly.
The question I raised was therefore how accountability should function if Ronin is to retain its empowering culture.
This is the crucial question that needs to be addressed if freedom is to remain sustainable.
This becomes a leadership conversation.
Making contribution visible does not, by itself, hold anybody accountable. Someone must engage the person, understand what happened, establish whether expectations and support were adequate, and respond fairly. And, if the whole leadership hierarchy is good at holding people accountable, the control is no longer necessary and freedom can be retained.
That is where my conversation with Ronin currently stands. I hope to continue it.
I found the people inspiring and their willingness to explore a different way of organising work encouraging. Their challenge is one many businesses would benefit from taking seriously: developing leaders who can both trust people with responsibility and hold them accountable for it.
Want to learn more about leadership and how to build your team with greater purpose, strengthen organisational culture, and unlock potential? See: www.schuitemagroup.com
We also offer:
# Executive Coaching
# Diagnostics
# Organisational Culture Transformation
# Leadership Development Programmes