A Great Place to Work: Intuit India's Employee Engagement Journey

● Intuit India ranked first in India in the "Great Place to Work" rankings in 2017, beating out
companies like Google and American Express. This culminated a 9-year journey for Intuit
India to improve its workplace culture.
● Intuit India faces stiff competition from other tech companies in India to attract and retain
talent. Being recognized as a great place to work gave Intuit a competitive advantage.
● Intuit focuses on building a culture of listening to employees through platforms like the
"Ask Vijay" portal and frequent employee surveys. This helps them understand what
matters most to employees.
● Intuit has programs to attract both early career talent and experienced hires. They look
for cultural, skills, and behavioral fit in candidates.
● Performance management at Intuit is an ongoing process of goal setting, coaching, and
feedback. Leaders lead by example and share their own performance reviews publicly.
● Intuit recognizes and rewards employees through events, promotions, spot awards, and
trips.
● Intuit has employee networks to promote diversity and inclusion. Programs like "Intuit
Again" help women technologists restart their careers.
● The role of leadership is seen as necessary in creating a great culture. Leaders show
vulnerability, seek employee input, and empower their teams.
● Employees actively participate in Intuit's transformation through programs like the Great
Place to Work Ambassadors and the Great Place to Work Council.
● While Intuit has succeeded, scaling the business and maintaining a consistent employee
experience remains challenging as we advance.

Insights:
● Intuit India, a subsidiary of Intuit Inc., aimed to build a great place-to-work culture to
attract and retain top talent.
● It participated in the Great Place to Work assessments from 2008 and steadily improved
its rankings over the years.
● Intuit focused on listening to employee feedback, hiring the right talent, effective
performance management, recognition and rewards, diversity and inclusion initiatives,
and infrastructure and benefits to create an enriching employee experience.
● The leadership played a key role in role-modeling vulnerability and empowering
employees to drive transformation.
● Intuit's efforts helped it achieve the number one rank in 2017. However, sustaining this
success as the company scaled remained a challenge.

Common Questions:
What were some of Intuit India's key initiatives to build a great place-to-work culture?
Intuit India implemented several initiatives to create a vibrant and positive work culture. For
instance, they encouraged employees to voice their concerns and queries, even the most
mundane ones. This initiative created a culture of openness and allowed the leadership to
understand what truly mattered to their employees.
Intuit also focused on hiring the right talent. They had introduced an "Assessing for Awesome
(A4A)" framework. This model empowered top employees, called "Awesome Assessors", to
identify the best candidate for a particular role, ensuring that the company hires only the best
talent. They also designed thoughtful internships for students to gain first-hand experience of the
culture at Intuit and the business challenges that employees solved.
How did Intuit India's leadership foster a culture of listening and employee
empowerment?
Intuit India's leadership cultivated a culture of listening by encouraging employees to voice their
concerns and queries openly. This showed the employees that their opinions were valued and
that the leadership was open to feedback and willing to make necessary changes.
Moreover, the leadership led by example in embodying the company's values of humility and
continuous learning. An instance of this is when Anand, a leader at Intuit, decided to set up a
technology environment for QuickBooks Online on his machine to understand the product and
experience the challenges that a developer faced, demonstrating to his employees the
importance of understanding the product they were building.

What challenges does Intuit India face in sustaining its success as it scales?
The document doesn't provide specific details on the challenges Intuit India faces in sustaining
its success as it scales. However, it's reasonable to infer that maintaining the quality of its culture
and employee satisfaction could become more challenging as the company grows. Scaling often
brings about changes in team structures, processes, and communication, which could potentially
affect the company's culture and employee engagement.

Challenges and their solutions:

Attracting Top Talent: Being a late entrant in India's technology landscape, Intuit was not a
well-known brand in the country. This posed a significant challenge when it came to attracting top
technology talent, who were more inclined to join established startups or multinational companies
with more recognizable names. To cope up with this, Intuit India introduced an "Assessing for
Awesome (A4A)" framework, which involved empowering top employees to identify the best
candidate for a particular role. They also focused on building a strong employer brand.
Employee engagement: Intuit believed in the power of listening to its employees, even for the
most mundane concerns. Initially, there were grievances ranging from questions on strategy and
the future of the company to complaints of “no coffee in the coffee machine”. To address this, the
company fostered a culture where employees were encouraged to voice their concerns without
fear or inhibition. This transparency helped the leadership understand what really mattered to
their people and make necessary changes.
Sustaining success: After breaking into the top 10 of the Great Place to Work rankings, Intuit
India faced the challenge of sustaining its excellence and staying in the top five in future years.
As the document doesn't provide specific details on how they addressed this challenge, it's hard
to say exactly how Intuit tackled it.

Mount Everest:
● The 1996 Mount Everest climbing disaster illustrates how the breakdown of team
learning can lead to organizational failure.
● Three factors contributed to the breakdown of learning in the teams: narrowly defined
purpose, directive leadership, and failure to sense an ill-defined problem.
● The teams had a narrowly defined purpose of simply reaching the summit, without
accounting for contingencies and changing conditions.
● The teams relied heavily on directive leadership from the expedition leaders, which
limited team members' discretion and ability to adapt.
 ● The teams failed to recognize and sense the complex and ill-defined problems they were
facing, like changing weather patterns, team dynamics issues, and limited resources.
● When these three factors - narrowly defined purpose, directive leadership, and failure to
sense an ill-defined problem - came together, it led to the disaster and deaths of
climbers.
● Team learning and the ability to adapt to changing conditions is critical for teams facing
complex problems, but in this case the opposite occurred and team learning broke down.

In summary, the 1996 Mount Everest climbing disaster highlights how the breakdown of team
learning - due to a narrowly defined goal, directive leadership, and failure to recognize complex
problems - can lead to organizational failure and disaster, even in teams pursuing ambitious
goals. The lessons from this event have implications for team performance, leadership, and
organizational learning.

SUGGESTED QUESTIONS:
What were the three precursors identified that were associated with the breakdown of
team learning during the Mount Everest disaster?
The three precursors identified that were associated with the breakdown of team learning during
the Mount Everest disaster were a narrowly defined purpose, directive leadership, and failure to
sense an ill-defined problem. The narrowly defined purpose refers to the team's single-minded
focus on reaching the peak, which might have overshadowed other important considerations like
safety. Directive leadership limited the discretion of team members, discouraging them from
voicing concerns or suggesting alternate strategies. The failure to sense an ill-defined problem
refers to the team's inability to recognize and respond to the changing conditions and risks on
Everest.

What factors did the analysis reveal that impeded team learning during the disaster?
The analysis revealed that these three factors combined to halt team learning. The team's
narrowly defined purpose and directive leadership created an environment where team members
were not encouraged or felt unable to express their concerns or suggestions. This, combined
with the failure to recognize the changing and increasingly dangerous conditions on Everest,
resulted in a breakdown of team learning and ultimately contributed to the disaster.

What implications does the study have for learning in short-term project teams?
The study has significant implications for learning in short-term project teams. It highlights the
importance of maintaining an open and flexible approach to leadership, encouraging team
members to voice concerns, and staying alert to changing circumstances. These findings
suggest that even in short-term projects, teams need to be able to learn and adapt quickly to
changing conditions and that leadership styles and team dynamics can significantly impact a
team's ability to do so.
Challenges and their solutions:
Inadequate Decision-Making: The team faced critical decision-making situations under extreme
physical and mental strain. For instance, they had to decide whether to continue climbing despite
the looming danger of bad weather. Some climbers made the tough decision to turn back,
prioritizing their safety.
Physiological Challenges: Climbers faced severe physical challenges, such as extreme cold,
wind, and reduced oxygen levels. In coping with these, climbers used gear like oxygen tanks, but
these were not always sufficient. For example, one climber, Weathers, was left for dead due to
hypothermia and snow blindness but managed to walk back to the camp in an almost
unconscious state.
Rescue Operations: After the disaster struck, immediate rescue efforts posed a significant
challenge due to the harsh weather conditions and the difficult terrain. Helicopter rescues were
attempted for climbers stranded at lower elevations. For instance, Gau was lifted first, and about
45 minutes later, Madan K.C. returned to take Weathers to safety.
Loss of Team Members: The disaster resulted in the death of eight climbers, including three
guides – Hall, Fischer, and assistant guide Harris – as well as climbers Hanson and Nambu.
Coping with this loss was an emotional and psychological challenge for the surviving team
members.
In essence, the climbers coped with the disaster through individual resilience, mutual support,
and external rescue efforts. However, the events also underscore the importance of good
decision-making, leadership, and careful planning in such high-risk situations.

Managing Oneself:
● Knowledge workers must manage their own careers today as companies no longer
manage employee careers.
● To achieve excellence, one must understand one's strengths, values and how one
performs best.
● To identify strengths, analyze feedback from past decisions and actions to see patterns
in results achieved. Focus on and build strengths, not weaknesses.
● Determine how one learns and performs best - as a reader, listener, alone or with others,
as a decision maker or adviser. Work in ways that suit you.
● One's values must be compatible with the organization's values to perform well and avoid
frustration.
● Set achievable but stretching goals within 1.5 years to make a meaningful difference.
● Understand the strengths, values and performance modes of coworkers to build effective
relationships. Take responsibility for communication.
● Develop a second career or parallel career in one's later years to stay challenged and
deal with potential setbacks. Start preparing early.
● Manage relationships by understanding and adapting to how others perform best, and
communicating one's own strengths and goals.
In summary, success in today's knowledge economy comes to those who understand their own
strengths, values and performance style. This self-knowledge enables individuals to contribute
optimally, build effective relationships and manage their own careers and progression.

Insights:
Success in the knowledge economy comes to those who know themselves—their strengths, their
values, and how they best perform. Knowledge workers must manage their own careers. Drucker
outlines questions to ask oneself: What are my strengths? How do I perform? What are my
values? Answering these reveals one's place in the work world. Knowing one's strengths
requires feedback analysis. Different people perform differently as readers versus listeners. One
must leverage strengths while avoiding areas of low competence. Relationships require
understanding coworkers' strengths and communicating one's own contribution. Many will
develop second careers or parallel careers to stay engaged. Managing oneself demands thinking
like a CEO.

Suggested Questions:
What are three questions one should ask to determine one's strengths?
What are my strengths?
How do I perform? (Do I work well with people, or am I a loner? In what relationship do I work
best?)
What are my values?

How does one identify one's preferred way of performing or learning?

To identify your preferred way of performing or learning, you can ask questions like, "Am I a
reader or a listener?" or "How do I learn?" It's important to act on this knowledge, as it's key to
performance. For example, some people learn by talking things through, some learn by listening,
and some learn by reading. Knowing your learning style can help enhance your performance and
productivity.

What are the implications of understanding one's values?

Understanding one's values is crucial to managing oneself. Your values aren't about ethics, but
rather, they define what you see as important in your work and life. Knowing your values can
help you make decisions that align with your true self. It also helps to decide where you belong or
do not belong in terms of work environments or roles. This understanding can help you say yes
to opportunities and assignments that match with your values and no to those that don't.

Challenges and their solutions:

Identifying Personal Strengths: Many people struggle with recognizing their own strengths. To
cope with this, the text suggests using feedback analysis. After making a critical decision, an
individual should write down the expected outcome. After some time, they should compare the
expected results with the actual results to understand their areas of strength.
Determining Work Style: People have different ways of working and learning. Some people
work best in groups, others solo. Some people learn by reading, others by listening.
Understanding your work style can be a challenge. To cope with this, the text suggests asking
self-reflective questions like "Am I a reader or a listener?" and "Do I work well with people, or am
I a loner?"
Aligning Personal Values with Work: Another challenge is finding work that aligns with
personal values. If an individual's values are not in sync with their work, they are likely to feel
unsatisfied and may not perform optimally. To cope with this, understanding your deeply held
values is crucial. It can help you pursue opportunities that align with these values, leading to a
more fulfilling work life.
Managing Career Path: In today's world, individuals are responsible for managing their own
careers. This can be challenging as it requires a deep understanding of oneself, the ability to
adapt to changing circumstances, and the foresight to plan for the future. To cope with this, the
text suggests thinking like a CEO of your own career, being proactive in carving out your place in
the work world, and keeping yourself engaged and productive.
Remember, managing oneself effectively requires continuous self-exploration, feedback, and
adapting to new insights and circumstances.

Google:
● Google has long prided itself on fostering an open and collaborative culture for
employees. However, since around 2017 it has been grappling with issues like sexual
harassment accusations, restrictions on employee speech, and employee protests.
● Google struggled to recruit and retain a diverse workforce, especially women and
underrepresented minorities. There were debates about whether this was due to a lack of
qualified candidates, a hostile workplace culture, or stereotypes about "tech geniuses"
being mostly men.
● Employees protested Google's contracts with the U.S. government and its plans for a
censored search engine in China. Some employees claimed Google retaliated against
them for their activism.
● Temporary and contract workers at Google made up a larger part of the workforce but did
not receive the same benefits as full-time employees. Some Google workers attempted
to unionize.
● Google faced allegations that it fired employees for political speech and union organizing
efforts. The company updated its community guidelines in 2019 to limit political
discussions at work.
● In late 2019, Larry Page and Sergey Brin stepped down from their management roles,
handing leadership over to Sundar Pichai. Pichai now oversees all of Google's parent
company Alphabet Inc.
In summary, Google has struggled to balance its open and collaborative culture with issues
around employee speech, diversity and inclusion, and worker activism. The company has faced
criticism for allegedly retaliating against employees who speak out, while also updating policies
to limit political discussions at work. Leadership changes at the top aim to address these culture
challenges and restore employee trust.

Insights:
The text discusses Google's workplace culture issues from 2017 to 2019. The company prided
itself on an open and collaborative culture that encouraged employee dissent and debate.
However, Google faced challenges related to diversity and inclusion, employee speech, and
retaliation against activists. While Google initially encouraged political speech, it later restricted
political discussions at work. The company also struggled to increase diversity in its workforce
and faced allegations of gender pay discrimination. Google fired several employees involved in
activism, which led to accusations of retaliation. The firings and restrictions on speech marked a
shift from Google's traditionally open culture.

Suggested Questions:
What were some of Google's workplace culture issues from 2017 to 2019?
Google faced numerous workplace culture issues during this period. They include challenges
related to diversity and inclusion, restrictions on employee speech, and allegations of retaliation
against activists. The company struggled to increase diversity within its workforce and faced
allegations of gender pay discrimination.

How did Google's approach to employee speech change over this period?
Google initially encouraged an open culture that fostered employee dissent and debate.
However, over time, the company shifted its stance and started restricting political discussions at
work. This marked a significant change in Google's traditionally open culture.

What challenges did Google face regarding diversity and inclusion?

Google had difficulty increasing the diversity of its workforce. The company faced allegations of
gender pay discrimination and struggled to create an inclusive environment for all employees.
The case of firing employees involved in activism, particularly those advocating for better
workplace conditions and practices, raised questions about Google's commitment to diversity
and inclusion.

Challenges and their solutions:

Diversity and Inclusion: Google struggled to recruit and retain a diverse workforce. This
challenge is not unique to Google; many tech companies struggle with diversity and inclusion.
Employee Speech: Google faced challenges in managing employee speech within the
company. It initially encouraged open debate and dissent, which is part of its innovative culture.
However, this apparently led to issues that made them change their approach and restrict
political discussions at work.
Allegations of Retaliation and Discrimination: The company faced allegations of retaliation
against protesters and activists. There were also accusations of gender pay discrimination and
discriminatory hiring practices.

To cope with these challenges, Google took several steps:

Restrictions on Employee Speech: To maintain a harmonious workplace environment, Google
limited the extent to which employees can engage in political discussions at work.
Improving Diversity and Inclusion: While the case study doesn't provide specific measures
Google took to address diversity and inclusion, tech companies typically invest in various
initiatives such as bias training, mentorship programs, partnerships with organizations that
support underrepresented groups, and diversity recruitment strategies.
Addressing Allegations: Google would need to investigate allegations of retaliation and
discrimination thoroughly and take appropriate action based on the findings. This could include
revising their policies, providing more transparency, and holding people accountable.

Please note that these steps are not necessarily exhaustive or specific to Google as the case
study doesn't provide detailed information on how Google coped with these challenges.

Guide to Limited Company Structure (From the website link shared by Miss):
● A limited company is a legal business structure registered with Companies House in the
UK.
● Limited companies offer limited liability, meaning owners are only liable up to the value
of their shares.
● Common types of limited companies include private limited by shares (LTD), private
limited by guarantee, limited liability partnership (LLP), and public limited company (PLC).
● Private limited by shares is the most common structure. It allows profits to be distributed
to shareholders based on share ownership.
● Private limited by guarantee is used for non-profit organizations. Guarantors are liable up
to the sum of their guarantee, not total company debts.
● Limited liability partnerships combine the benefits of companies and partnerships. Profits
are taxed at the partner level, not the LLP level.
● Public limited companies trade on stock markets and have a minimum share capital of
£50,000.
● Limited companies must adhere to reporting requirements like filing annual accounts and
tax returns with Companies House and HMRC.

Insights:
A limited company is a type of business structure that is legally registered with Companies
House, the Registrar of Companies in the United Kingdom. Incorporation through Companies
House renders a company a legally distinct entity separate from its owners. This separation
implies that the company is responsible for its actions, finances, and liabilities, thereby protecting
the personal assets of the owners.

One of the key advantages of a limited company is that it allows business owners to benefit from
the company's profits while limiting their personal financial liability. The liability is limited
because, in the event of any financial trouble, it is the company's assets that are exposed to any
risk, not the owners'. This structure also allows the company to endure beyond the life of its
owners, providing continuity and stability.