The Policy of Push

There has been a noticeable rise in suicides among bankers in India. Many of these cases are attributed to the immense pressure to meet unrealistic targets and the stress of handling large financial responsibilities. The demanding work environment, coupled with the fear of repercussions for not meeting targets, has been a significant factor. Instances of harassment by superiors and unrealistic expectations have been frequently cited in suicide notes. Let us call this pressure tactics as the “Policy of Push”, which has emerged as a strategy where top management exerts increasing pressure on junior employees to enhance performance. Initially, this approach can yield impressive results, but over time, it often leads to diminishing returns and a loss of trust and acceptance among employees.

Consider the case of a mid-sized bank that implemented the Policy of Push to boost its quarterly performance. The top management set ambitious targets and demanded that junior employees meet these goals through extended working hours and aggressive sales tactics. In the first quarter, the results were remarkable. The bank saw a significant increase in new accounts, loan approvals, and overall revenue. The management celebrated these achievements, attributing them to the boosted morale and best work culture in the bank.

However, as the policy continued, the initial enthusiasm began to wane. Junior employees, who were once motivated by the challenge, started to feel the strain of constant pressure. The relentless demands led to burnout, decreased job satisfaction, and a rise in passive-aggressive behavior. Employees began to resent the management’s approach, feeling undervalued and overworked. The once collaborative and supportive workplace culture deteriorated. Junior employees, feeling the weight of unrealistic expectations, became less engaged and more resistant to directives. The quality of customer service declined as employees, overwhelmed by their own stress, struggled to maintain a positive demeanour. The bank’s reputation suffered as customer complaints increased.

As the negative effects of the Policy of Push became more apparent, the top management faced a backlash. The initial gains were overshadowed by the long-term damage to employee morale and productivity. Trust between the management and junior employees eroded, leading to higher turnover rates and difficulty in attracting new talent, and the result;

Siyaram Prasad, a Chief Manager at one of the public sector bank, committed suicide due to the pressure of achieving loan disbursal targets Similarly, Sandesh Malpani, a manager, ended his life after facing pressure related to a significant loan transfer

This is just tip of the iceberg, NCRB’s data shows more than 500 suicides by bankers in last decade in India. Which is very disturbing, for such a job, which was once considered to be a rewarding carrier options among youths. A Study on Stress among Employees in the Banking Industry done by Dr. Sanjukta Mishra of RCM, Bhubaneshwar, which was published in 2023, shows 93% of the respondents facing work related stress. Major reason for such stress is work overload, amounting to 30%, job difficulty, stress due to technological problems and impatient customers among other reason for such stress.

Although, as per Gallup Global Workplace Report 2024, compared to global average there is a higher overall stress among employees in India, which is 86%. But stress among bankers is much higher, and there are many contributing factors for such stress, like insufficient staff, lack to technical support, high competition from private banks, and lack of empathy among top management.

To compete with private banks, top management in PSBs are following the footsteps of their private peers of applying more and more pressure on subordinates to obtain desired result. Moreover, private banks are facing consequences of this policy as in the form of 25% attrition rate as per data released by RBI in2024.

We should not forget, working conditions in private and public banks are different, policies which are giving result to private players, not necessarily give result to public banks. The psychological toll of the Policy of Push on junior employees cannot be overstated. Constant pressure to perform can lead to chronic stress, anxiety, and even depression. Employees may feel trapped in a cycle of high expectations and fear of failure, which can erode their self-esteem and overall mental health. This environment fosters a sense of helplessness and resentment, further exacerbating passive-aggressive behaviour.

A Call for Balance

The experience of this bank highlights the need for a balanced approach to performance management. While setting high standards and encouraging employees to strive for excellence is important, it must be done in a way that supports their well-being and fosters a positive work environment. Sustainable success in banking, or any industry, relies on a motivated and engaged workforce, not one that is driven by fear and pressure.

Effective leadership is crucial in mitigating the negative effects of the Policy of Push. Leaders must recognize the signs of employee burnout and take proactive steps to address it. This includes providing adequate support, offering opportunities for professional development, and fostering an open and communicative workplace culture. Leaders who prioritize the well-being of their employees are more likely to build a loyal and productive team. To achieve sustainable performance, banks must adopt a more holistic approach to employee management. This includes setting realistic goals, providing regular feedback, and recognizing and rewarding employee achievements. Additionally, promoting a healthy work-life balance and offering mental health resources can help employees manage stress and maintain their well-being.

Employee engagement is a key factor in achieving long-term success. Engaged employees are more likely to be motivated, productive, and committed to their work. To foster engagement, banks should create a supportive and inclusive work environment where employees feel valued and heard. This can be achieved through regular team-building activities, open communication channels, and opportunities for career advancement.

Addressing passive-aggressive behavior

in the workplace requires a combination of effective employee engagement tools and strategies. Here are some specific tools and approaches that can help:

Strategies for Managing Passive-Aggressive Behavior

• Open Communication: Encourage a culture of open and honest communication. Train supervisors to address issues directly and constructively, rather than allowing passive-aggressive behavior to fester.
• Conflict Resolution Training: Provide training for employees and supervisors on conflict resolution techniques. This can help individuals address issues directly and constructively, reducing the likelihood of passive-aggressive behavior.
• Regular Check-Ins: Implement regular one-on-one meetings between managers and employees, but care should be taken to prevent such meetings becoming review meetings. These check-ins provide an opportunity to discuss any concerns or frustrations before they escalate into passive-aggressive behavior.
• Clear Expectations and Accountability: Ensure that job roles and expectations are clearly defined. Hold employees accountable for their actions and provide constructive feedback to address any issues promptly.
• Anonymous Reporting Channels: Provide a way for employees to report issues anonymously. This can help identify passive-aggressive behavior that might not be openly discussed.
• Team-Building Activities: Organize team-building activities to strengthen relationships and improve communication among team members. A cohesive team is less likely to engage in passive-aggressive behavior.
• Leadership Development: Invest in leadership development programs to equip managers with the skills needed to handle passive-aggressive behavior effectively. Strong leadership can set the tone for a positive and open workplace culture.

By combining these tools and strategies, organizations can create a more engaged and harmonious work environment, reducing the prevalence of passive-aggressive behavior and fostering a culture of open communication and mutual respect.

Conclusion: A Path Forward

There is a famous English saying, “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” This approach assumes that pressure and aggressive targets are the only tools for achieving success. However, this narrow perspective overlooks the diverse needs and motivations of employees. Just as a hammer is not suitable for every task, constant pressure is not the right solution for every performance issue.

The Policy of Push may offer short-term gains, but its long-term consequences can be detrimental. Banks and other organizations must recognize the importance of employee well-being and create a culture that values and supports their staff. By adopting a balanced approach to performance management, fostering employee engagement, and prioritizing mental health, banks can achieve sustainable success and maintain a loyal, productive workforce.

In conclusion, the Policy of Push is a double-edged sword that can initially drive performance but ultimately leads to burnout and disengagement. To build a thriving organization, banks must shift their focus from pressure-driven tactics to strategies that promote employee well-being and engagement. Only then can they achieve lasting success and maintain a positive workplace culture.

Authored By:

Rohtash Singh

Faculty (ZLC Hyderabad)

Union Bank of India