Month: February 2020

There had been confusion about the concept of Varna and it is identified with Jati although Varna is far from having the same meaning as the Jati. The Varna system was conceived not as caste but as a class organization.

Varna is from the root ‘vri’ which means choice according to inherent traits. Varna seems to have been the division of the society in the Rig Vedic times when there were four classes. These classes were Brahmin. Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudra. It is found from the Vedic literature that Varna meant the color of the skin according to which society was divided into four classes. These classes were based on the distinction and differences between the white or the Aryans and the black or the Dravidians.

Another view point means to acceptor to profess. In this senses Varna represents the occupational groups into which Hindu society was divided. So we can have at least two interpretations of the concept of Varna: First Varna has been used as colour of the skin and it been means the classification of society on the racial differences: second, Varna means the division of society on the occupational differences. The functional of each Varna were specially laid down.

Varna in Classical Literature

There are passages in Vedic literature regarding the Varnas. There is a hymn in ‘Purusha Sukta’ of Rig Veda which says that the Brahaman Varna represents the mouth of the Purusha or the universal man, Kshatriya Varna forms his arms, the Vaishya forms his thighs and the Sudra, his feet. The division into four Varnas is related to the duties assigned to each Varna. Accordingly, each Varna had to pursue a particular vocation. It appears that the original part of the Vedas did not know about the caste system and the caste system came latter on. In Rig Vedic society there was no restriction on an individual regarding a particular occupation. Persons belonging to a particular Varna could accept and practise any profession they liked. A Brahmin could take the profession of a physician. Similarly, there was no restriction regarding food, drinking or diet among Varnas. Besides, there were no restrictions on inter-marriage between the different classes of the Aryan race. Hence, the Varnas w’ere “open classes”. The classes were not water­tight compartments. These classes were based on individual traits and not on birth.

Views of Sociologists on Varna

View of J. H. Hutton

Hutton says that the concept of Varna is often confused with the concept of caste or Jati although caste and Varna have different meanings. The Varna seems to have been originally the four classes. In Vedic times, the line of demarcation between the various classes was not considered essential. A Kshatriya could become a Brahmana. At the time of Vedic invasion, the four Varnas represented a division of society into four classes, namely the Brahmanas who acted as priests, the Kshatriyas who were rulers, the Vaishyas who acted as priests, the Kshatriyas who were the servant class. Certain colours are associated with the four Varnas. The Brahmanas have white colour, the Kshatriyas red, the Vaishyas yellow and Sudras black.

View of G. S. Ghurye

Varna means distinction. In the beginning we find that there are two classes in Hindu society, the Aryas and the Dasas. Ghurye has written, “In the Rig Veda, the word Varna is never applied to any one of the classes (Brahmana, Kshatriya etc.). It is only the Arya Varna or the Aryan people that is contrasted with Dasa Varna. The Satapatha Brahmana, on the other hand, describes the four classes as four Varnas. Varna means colour and it is in this sense that the word seems to have been employed in contrasting the Arya and the Dasa, referring to their fair and dark colour respectively. He is of the opinion that the distinction between the Arya and Dasa was latter responsible for the distinction between Arya and Sudra.

In the Vedic age we find the division of society into three classes, namely Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vaishya. Only in the later Vedic period, a mention has been made about the fourth Varna of Sudras. In the Vidic age, there were only four Varnas and untouchables had no place in the Varna system.

The three classes of the early portion of the Rig Veda were latter solidified into four groups, more or less compact, with three or four other groups separately mentioned.

According to Ghurye, the term Varna has been used to denote the colour scheme of the different sections of the society. Since the Aryans came from outside India and conquered the indigenous population in India, they occupied a higher social status and the people who were defeated got the lowest position in the society. In this way, Ghurye has adopted the racial theory of the origin of the Varna system.

View of ML N. Srinivas

Prof. Srinivas is of the opinion that the caste system is a very complex organization and it should not be identified with the Varna system. There are only four Varnas but there are above three thousand castes. The distinction between the caste and Varna system is that the caste is a local group, whereas the Varna system has an all India basis. Similarly, there is no mobility in the caste system, whereas the Varna system is mobile. According to him, the Varna system conceals the diversity between the caste system of one region and that of an other.

Different Varnas

Although the different Varnas were open classes and were based on the individual traits, there were distinctions between various Varnas on different grounds. The distinctions between the four Varnas can be shown on many grounds. The four Varnas were addressed in different ways and different degrees of politeness. For example, when»welcoming a person, different terms were used, namely. Agachehha, Adrava etc. Similarly, the Gayatri mantra was to be recited by the three Varnas in different ways. The Brahmin started the mantra with ‘Bhuh’, the Kshatriya with Bhubah and the Vaishya with Swah.

We also find distinction between Varnas on the basis of type of wood for sprinkling purposes as a sacrifice. The Kshatriya us Nyagrodha wood and the Vaishya uses Aswattha wood. In this manner, the distinction between the different Varnas in terms of different rites and privileges can be seen in the Rig Vedic literature to Brahminic literature, that is to say, transition of society from the Vedic age to the Samhitas, from the Brahminic to the Upanishadic age.

As far as the Sudras were concerned, they still held the position of the menial labour or slave because they were still non-Aryans. In the late period, the four Varnas have been mentioned. Although the Sudra was accepted as belonging to the fourth Varna, he was not quite free from disability because he could not perform a sacrifice which the higher Varnas did.

The Origin of the Varnas

There are different theories regarding the origin of Varna. We shall mention some of them.

1. The Theory of Parasara

According to Parasara, the vVhole of mankind has emerged from the Brahmana. It is the law of nature that the children share the common nature of their parents and therefore all the men have been of the same Varna when they were created. The question arises as to why there is distinction between the various Varnas. Parasara replies. It is true that the offspring begotton by one is none else than the begetter himself, but if the soil and the seed are inferior, the offspring born of these will be inferior. Parasara says that mankind has originated from the great Brahmana himself but all sections of society did not emerge from the same parts of the body. The Brahmana have emerged from the mouth, the Kshatriya from arms, the Vaishya from thighs, and the Sudra from the feet. Originally, the four Varnas were created and the other classes were the result of inter – mixture. Parasara has given a list of fourteen subclasses.

2. Theory of Mahabharata

In the Mahabharata, the origin of the Varna has been described from the various parts of the body of the creator. The Brahmana originated from the mouth of the Brahma or the creater, the Kshatriya from his arms, the Sudra-from his feeUhe Brahmana was created to preserve the Vedas, the Kshatriya to rule the world and to protect it, the Vaishyas to support the other two Varnas and himself by agriculture, and the Sudras to serve the other three Varnas.

3. Theory of Manu

According to Manu Smiriti, the four Varnas have been created from the limbs of the creator. To protect the universe, different duties and occupations were assigned to the different Varnas. Brahmana Varna has been regarded as the supreme creation of God. Manu has asserted that the Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaishya and the Sudra are the only Varnas in existence and there is no Pancham Varna.

The Indian social system rests on three pillars: the caste system, the joint family system, and the village community. Among these, the caste system appears to be the most significant feature of the Hindu Society due to its interdependence upon the social, economic and political systems. In fact, the Hindu Society has been described as the caste society par excellence. The caste system in India is in vogue from time immemorial.

As a traditional basis of stratification, caste is a distinctive category in the Indian social system. Though it had its beginning in the Hindu philosophy of four varnas corresponding to four functional divisions, it has resulted in the perpetuation of several caste groups among the Hindus.

Of course, every society is caste-ridden and the caste system exists even among the most advanced societies of the world, in one form or the other. But the irony is that the caste system became so rigid in this peninsular sub-continent of India that its impact was felt even by other religious communities, such as the Muslims and the Christians, and its regeneration became a subject of criticism throughout the world.

The division of people into various caste also existed among the Egyptians. With them, as with the Hindus, the law assigned an occupation to each individual, which was handed down from father to the son. Apart from this, from the available records one can come to the conclusion that the caste system also existed among the Mexicans, the Persians, the Peruvians, the Medes, the Iberians and many other societies.

Before we discuss the caste system in the Indian society in detail, we should look into some of the basic principles underlying the system of stratification. Social stratification stands for the placement of individuals and groups on the basis of social differences in income, occupation, status etc. The term denotes an arrangement of people in a society into various layers on the basis of social status.

Social status may either be ascribed (given at birth) or achieved. Caste in India is an ascriptive group. It is a hereditary group. Caste is a community as it is based on kinship and primordial affinity. As an institution, “caste illustrates the spirit of comprehensive synthesis-characteristic of the Hindu mind with its faith in the collaboration of races and the cooperation of cultures.”

The term ‘caste’ is derived from a Portuguese word ‘caste’ meaning breed, race or group. The castes are ascriptive groups. Thus basically caste refers to people belonging to the same breed. An individual is born into a caste, and this status is usually permanent. Though the elements of castes are found outside India, it is only in India that numerous castes are found. Apart from general features like endogamy, castes also have specific features which are the outcome of regional, linguistic or other variables.

The term ‘caste’ has been defined differently by different people. According to G.S. Ghurye “Castes are small and complete social worlds in themselves marked off definitely from one another though subsisting within the larger society.” According to MacIver “when status is wholly predetermined so that men are born to their lot without any hope of change in it, then the class takes the extreme form of caste.”

The caste system in India can be viewed from two angles: first, from the structural point of view and secondly, from the cultural angle. As regards the structural aspect of caste it is explained by accepting it as a general principle of stratification and caste, as a cultural system, is understood in terms of prominence of ideas of pollution-purity and notions of hierarchy, segregation, and corporations. The structural view explains the stratification as a universal reality and caste is, therefore, an aspect of this reality.

A.W. Green, while defining caste says: “caste is a system of stratification in which mobility, movement up and down in the status ladder, at least ideally, may not occur.” Sociologists have given so many broad and varying definitions of caste that it is more or less impossible to arrive at a common definition. It has also become still more difficult because caste is a very old institution-an institution that has always added something to it.

Ethic is a “system of moral principles, rules and conduct.” Ethics is a “science of morals.” The words ethics has emerged from Latin ‘Ethicus’ or in Greek ‘Ethicos’.

The origin of these two words is from ‘ethos’ meaning character. Character unlike behaviour is an intrinsic or basic factor which derives from inner most. Ethics in simple words is a treatise or science of morals, moral principles and social conduct rules.

Nature of Ethics refers to the normative standards of behaviour pertaining to the ideal code of conduct of human beings. This is substantially different from that of our feeling.

The ethical choices get affected significantly by our feelings. Highly developed habits of some people make them feel guilty after doing something wrong while others might seem unperturbed by any form of wrongdoing.

The nature of ethics also cannot be associated with the influence of religion. Ethics is like a common rule which is applicable to everybody irrespective of his/her religion. Most religions advocate a high level of ethical standards.

Nature of Ethics refers to the normative standards of behaviour pertaining to the ideal code of conduct of human beings. This is substantially different from that of our feeling.

The ethical choices get affected significantly by our feelings. Highly developed habits of some people make them feel guilty after doing something wrong while others might seem unperturbed by any form of wrongdoing.

The nature of ethics also cannot be associated with the influence of religion. Ethics is like a common rule which is applicable to everybody irrespective of his/her religion. Most religions advocate a high level of ethical standards.

KAUTILYA

Kautilyas Arthashastra is a unique treatise on the art of statecraft or governance, wherein every single aspect of human life is subject to the jurisdiction of the state. His detailed work clearly laid down an organizational set-up, and there was a clear-cut division of ethics and politics. However, he was of the opinion that politics devoid of ethics is dangerous to the prosperity and security of the entire kingdom.

In all matters of state, dharma should be the guiding factor. In many ways, Kautilya was compared to Machiavelli in certain matters of statecraft.

The following is a brief explanation of various issues that are part of the entire state machinery:

1. The Saptanga Theory

According to Kautilya, a state has seven elements or constituents, namely, Swamin— the King, Amatya—the Minister, Janapada—the Land, and the People, Durga—the Fortress, Kosha—the Treasury, Danda—the Army and Mitra—the Allies. This entire set-up of the kingdom was described as Saptanga theory in ancient India.

The Swamin refers to the king, regarded as the indispensable, integral and inseparable part of the state in ancient India. King in all cases belonged to the noble and royal family who possessed qualities of both head and heart. Amatya or the minister refers to all the officials involved in the functioning of the government. It is their responsibility to ensure that the government runs smoothly. Janapada implies the land and the people and, according to Kautilya, must be fertile.

The term ‘Durga’ in the ancient India means fort, which is considered an extremely important element. Usually, forts were constructed on the borders of the territory. Kautilya, in fact, divided these forts into water, hill, desert and forest forts. The fifth element is Kosha or the treasury. Kautilya opined that a king must amass wealth to promote the welfare of the people and also maintain his army.

Danda referred to the armed forces to protect the state from aggres­sions and maintain law and order within the state. Kautilya suggested that it is the responsibility of the king to see that his army is content with its role in the state. Finally, Mitra refers to a friend or allies.

A king must have certain dependable friends who help him in all calamities. A king’s immediate neighbour becomes an enemy and an enemy’s enemy becomes a friend of the king. The Saptanga theory was, in fact, famous all through the ancient period.

The state was regarded as a physical organism and its elements as the parts of the body. It was stated that king was considered the head, ministers as the eyes, and treasury as the face, army as the mind, fort as the hands and country as a whole as the legs of the human body.

2. King and Council of Ministers

Kautilya attached great importance to the council of ministers or the Mantriparishad. He was of the opinion that it is the king who has to decide on the number of departments his kingdom should have. Kautilya also made it clear that in all important decisions, the king must consult his ministers and then decide upon a particular policy. Kautilya further prescribed certain essential qualities to become a minister.

They are a minister must be native of the territory, born in high family, influential, highly trained in arts, must have foresight, wise, bold, eloquent, skilful, intelligent, pure in character, firm in loyalty towards the king, excellent conduct, strength, health and brave, and free from all the six vices.

According to Kautilya, after the king, it is Amatya who is of chief importance. The term refers to the official involved in state machinery and sometimes, the chief minister is in charge of the entire administration. Kautilya suggested that a king must appoint not more than four ministers to function as a consultative body to the king.

Apart from this, there has to be a cabinet or the council of ministers or the Mantriparishad to undertake activities like taking up a new task, continuing the task, improving the work, implementing the orders issued by the king and the like.

On important and urgent issues, the entire Mantriparishad and the mantrins have to be summoned for their suggestions. Kautilya also stated that the king must have a thorough check on the activities of all the ministers.

3. Village Administration

According to Kautilya, the village administration is a hierarchical set-up with five layers, viz.. Grama, Sthamya, Dronamukha, Kharvatika and Samgrahana. A Gopa was made in charge of nearly 5-10 villages. Above Gopa there was a Stanika. Over four Stanikas, there was a Smaharta.

Both the Gopas and the Stanikas are responsible for the urban administration and they have to work under Nagarikas. Apart from the above officials, the village elders were given a special place. They were made in charge of the properties of the temples and temple lands. There was no element of elections in this position.

4. Law and Justice

In the ancient Indian political process, it is the Dharma Shastra that served as the guide for justice. According to Kautilya, whenever there is a conflict between the sacred law and the law that is in practice, it is with the reason that a king must give a judgment. Kautilya, further, supported the rule of law. He was of the opinion that when a king abides by the rules, he would one day conquer the entire world. On the other hand, if he misuses the power, he would be bound to go to hell.

As regards the qualities of a judge, Kautilya viewed that he must be a person of high calibre, self-restraint, balanced and must be well-versed in all the basic principles of law. It is binding upon him to familiarize himself with the people and also have thor­ough knowledge about the customs of the people as it would enable him to give the correct judgement.

Further, the judge should not be corrupt, greedy and contemptuous. By being kind at heart and capable of giving judgments, he must give punishment as per the magnitude of the crime committed. Kautilya also emphasized on eyewitness.

A person who becomes an eyewitness for any crime committed must be a person of integrity and character, and be given due protection against injury or insult. Kautilya, however, could not allow the following section of people as eyewitness: wife’s brother, co-partners, prisoners, debtors, enemies, etc.

With reference to crimes and punishments, Kautilya suggested a wide range of punishments for every single crime committed. For instance, if the husband is of bad character, or likely to endanger the life of his wife, or has fallen from his caste or lost his vitality, his wife may abandon him. In his opinion, those who propose, or assess, and act as witnesses must be fined if they have entered into false agreements. Kautilya, further, provided two types of courts to deal with civil and criminal cases.

The civil court is called Dharmasthiya and Sodhana is the criminal court. It was widely believed by the entire ancient Indian society that Dharma and customs cannot be violated and the king’s commands are nothing but application of those sacred laws. To convey the royal decree, a group of secretaries and clerks were maintained and precautions were taken to prevent any error.

MANU

We may conclude with a sketch of the ethical overview of Manu which has had an incalculable measure of influence on literature and on the conduct of men through the ages.

The content of dharma (the moral code) is not fixed once for all, but must be learned in each generation from what is observed or allowed by learned men who are good and ever free from hatred and inordinate affection.

Ten virtues are particularly commended to the brāhmaṇa, i.e. contentment, forgiveness, self-control, abstention from appropriating others’ property, purity, restraint of the senses, wis­dom, knowledge, truthfulness and abstention from anger.

A foolish and greedy brāhmaṇa is condemned in no uncertain terms and gifts to him deprecated as likely to hurt even the giver.

Flesh-eating and drinking liquor are recognized as natural, but abstention from them is praised as very meritorious; evidently this marks a transitional stage in the practice particularly of the brāhmaṇas.

Anyone who would instruct others for their welfare must follow the rule of ahiṁsā (not causing pain) and use sweet and gentle speech towards them; the commentators take this to apply particularly to the relation between a teacher and his pupil.

Wealth, kinship, age, achievement and learning are entitled to social respect in an increasing order; wealth, it will be noticed, gets the lowest place and learning the highest.

Personal freedom is highly prized as the source of real happiness, and one is advised to undertake work that he can put through on his own and find satisfaction in doing so.

Elsewhere, service is condemned as a dog’s life. Incredible as it may seem, Manu advocates full employment for the Vaiṣya and Śūdra for the sake of social peace.

Elsewhere, he permits a starving man to take food from wherever he finds it, though not with a view to hoarding it, and roundly affirms that a man who takes wealth from the wicked and distributes it among the good and needy makes himself the means of redemption for both.

There is no virtue higher than truth; truth purifies the mind and speaking the truth is nobler than silence.

At the same time: “let one say what is true, let one say what is pleasing, let one utter nothing disagreeable, and let one utter no agreeable falsehood; that is the eternal law.”

To lie in a court of law in cases where it was a question of life or death was, however, considered excusable.

The rule of good conduct on all occasions was more binding on the higher classes than on the common folk and deviations from the right called for higher pains and penalties in their case, as their responsibility was in proportion to their status and knowledge.

Confession and repentance are held to be of value in restoring one’s peace of mind and keeping one from repetition of the same errors.

The ancient Aryan rulers of India were confronted by political, economic, and social problems in many ways similar to those with which modern British statesmen and social reformers are struggling, and their solutions of them, according to all the evidence of history, were much more satisfactory to the people at large than any which modern Europe has found. The freedom and general happiness attained by the people of Great Britain with the help of Parliamentary institutions and the richest revenues of the world can hardly be compared with that which Indians within the Aryan pale enjoyed both before and after the fifth century A.D.—the time which we regard as Dark Age. The Indo- Aryan constitution, built up by the highest intelligence of the people upon the basis of the village communities, and not wrung from unwilling war-lords and landlords by century-long struggles and civil war, secured to the Indian peasant-proprietor not only the ownership of the land, but very considerable powers of self government. From 300 A.D to 1192 A.D India is said to worlds most developed country, its GDP was equivalent to 25% of worlds GDP, followed by China which had 15% share in World GDP. This tremendous development is impossible without very sound justice dispensing system during that Golden age, to the contrary some Historians and Foreign Jurists opined that there was no ‘rule of law’ in ancient India, if so what was the system of Justice Administration that was in existence during that day and which ‘norms’ (Laws) of ancient Indian society contributed to attainment such highest stage of Human Civilization. To answer these prepositions it is necessary to go beyond western distortions about India and conduct impartial inquiry of surrounding social facts recorded in old texts.

History of Judicial system in India can be classified in to III stages,

(i) Judicial System in ancient India i.e Pre-Islamic invasion

(ii) Judicial System in Medieval Age

(iii) Judicial System in British Rule. For our discussion we shall take first stage.

India has the oldest judiciary in the world. No other judicial system has a more ancient or exalted pedigree. But before describing the judicial system of ancient India I must utter a warning. The reader must reject the colossal misrepresentation of Indian Jurisprudence and the legal system of ancient India by certain British writers. I shall give a few specimens. Henry Maine described the legal system of ancient India “as an apparatus of cruel absurdities”. An Anglo-Indian jurist made the following remark about what he called “the oriental habits of life” of the Indians before the British turned up in India: “It (British rule in India) is a record of experiments made by foreign rulers to govern alien races in a strange land, to adapt European institutions to Oriental habits of life, and to make definite laws supreme amongst peoples who had always associated government with arbitrary and uncontrolled authority.” Alan Gledhill, a retired member of the Indian Civil Service, wrote that when the British seized power in India, “there was a dearth of legal principles.” For Bernard Cohn, the ancient constitution rendered Indian history as antique, static and theocratic.

These statements are untrue. It is not for me to guess why they were made. They may be due to sheer ignorance, or imperialist self-interest, or contempt for Indian culture and civilization which was a part of the imperialist outlook which dominated British Jurists, historians, and thinkers in the heyday of imperialism. But the effect of this misrepresentation, which has few parallels in history, was to create a false picture of the Indian judicial system both in India and outside. These are the words of Hon’ble Justice S. S. Dhavan High Court, Allahabad; it is true that Legal System in ancient India was much better and matured that, impartial English Historians themselves admitted its superiority. Whereas others as mentioned above, in their utter ignorance or with a view to defy Indian culture and thereby dominate Indian civilization distorted, by creating false impression as to social conditions of pre-British India.

Judicial System in Ancient India

The concept of Dharma that ruled Indian civilization, from Vedic period up to Muslim invasion from King to his last servant everyone was bound by Dharma, The word Dharma is derived from “dhr” to mean to uphold, sustain or nourish. The Seers often use it in close association with ‘rta’ and ‘satya’. Sri Vidyaranya defines ‘rta’ as the mental perception and realization of God. The Taittiriya Upanishad also uses it with ‘satya’ and ‘dharma’. It exhorts students to speak the truth and practice dharma (Satyam vadha: Dharmam chara). According to Sankara Bhagavatpada ‘satya’ means speaking the truth and ‘dharma’ means translating it (Satya) into action.

In this regard, the explanation given by Sri.K.Balasubramania Aiyar is relevant: “An analysis of the significance of these three words (rta, satya and dharma) brings out clearly to us the fundamental basis of dharma as the ideal for an individual. While ‘rta’ denotes the mental perception and realization of truth and ‘satya’ denotes the exact true expression in words of the truth as perceived by the mind, dharma is the observance, in the conduct of life, of truth. In fact, dharma is the way of life which translates into action the truth perceived by the man of insight as expressed by him truly. In short, ‘rta’ is truth in thought, ‘satya’ is truth in words and ‘dhrama’ is truth in deed.”

Manusmriti written by the ancient sage Manu prescribes ten essential rules for the observance of Dharma: Patience (dhriti), forgiveness (kshama), piety or self control (dama), honesty (asteya), sanctity (shauch), control of senses (indraiya-nigrah), reason (dhi), knowledge or learning (vidya), truthfulness (satya) and absence of anger (krodha). Manu further writes, “Nonviolence, truth, non-coveting, purity of body and mind, control of senses are the essence of Dharma”. Therefore dharmic laws govern not only the individual but all in society

Dharma is generally mean ‘principle of righteousness’ or ‘duty’, principle of holiness and also the principle of unity. Yudhishthira says in his instructions to Bhishma that whatever creates conflict is Adharma, and whatever puts an end to conflict and brings about unity and harmony is Dharma. Anything that helps to unite all and develop pure divine love and universal brother hoodness is Dharma. Dharma advocates if the Paramatman is to draw us unto himself we must, without fail; perform our duties to him as well as to the world. It is these duties that constitute what is called dharma. Again, it is dharma that serves us when we dwell in our body and when we cease to dwell in it. It serves us in life and afterlife. There need be no doubt or confusion about the dharma we ought to follow. We are all steeped in the dharma that our, great men have pursued from generation to generation. They have inwardly realized eternal beatitude and we know for certain that they lived without any care, unlike people in our own generation who are always discontented and are embroiled in agitations and demonstrations of all kinds. All we need to do is to follow the dharma that they practiced. If we tried to create a new dharma for ourselves it might mean trouble and all the time we would be torn by doubts as to whether it would bring us good or whether it would give rise to evil. It is best for us to follow the dharma practiced by the great men of the past, the dharma of our forefathers. It does not mean that ‘Dharma’ is immutable; ‘Dharma’ has to two aspects one ‘Sanatana Dharma’ another is ‘Yuga Dharma’ later is valid one for an age. The Smiritis themselves recognize this principle of social change, Manu says, “There is one set of dharma for men in the kritayuga; a different set for each of tretayuga, dvapara and kaliyugas; the dharma change according to the change of yuga. “The Hindu (i.e Sanatana Dharma) view makes room for essential changes. There must be no violent break with social heredity, and yet the new stresses, conflicts and confusions will have to be faced and overcome; while the truths of spirit are permanent the rules change from age to age”.

Dharma is unique blend of rigidity and flexibility it protects eternal principles and accepts continued valid traditions, Shurtis stands for universal, eternal, and fundamental principles and Smiritis stands for a group of values derived from these principles and finding their expression in limited, temporary and relative field of social life. Swami Vivekananda said, “We know that, in our books, a clear distinction is made between two sets of truths. The one set is that which abides forever, being built on the nature of man, the nature of soul, the souls’s relation to God and so on. The other set comprises the minor laws, which guide the working of our everyday life…… They belong more properly to the puranas, to the Smiritis, and not the shruti…..custom of one age, of one yuga, have not been the customs of another, and as yuga comes after yuga they will have to change”.

Henry Maine classified Indian Society and its legal system as ‘Static’, this is because of his utter ignorance he might have relied his counterpart’s explanation (distorted) rather than understanding Indian Society as it stood, in India the King himself was subject to the law; that arbitrary power was unknown to Indian political theory and jurisprudence and the king’s right to govern was subject to the fulfillment of duties the breach of which resulted in forfeiture of kingship; that the judges were independent and subject only to the law; that ancient India had the highest standard of any nation of antiquity as regards the ability, learning, integrity, impartiality, and independence of the judiciary, and these standards have not been surpassed till today; that the Indian judiciary consisted of a hierarchy of judges with the Court of the Chief Justice (Praadvivaka) at the top, each higher Court being invested with the power to review the decision of the Courts below; that disputes were decided essentially in accordance with the same principles of natural justice which govern the judicial process in the modern State today: that the rules of procedure and evidence were similar to those followed today; that supernatural modes of proof like the ordeal were discourage; that in criminal trials the accused could not be punished unless his guilt was proved according to law; that in civil cases the trial consisted of four stages like any modern trial – plaint, reply, hearing and decree; that such doctrines as Res Judicata (prang nyaya) were familiar to Indian jurisprudence; that all trials, civil or criminal, were heard by a bench of several judges and rarely by a judge sitting singly; that the decrees of all Courts except the King were subject to appeal or review according to fixed principles; that the fundamental duty of the Court was to do justice “without favor or fear”.

Rule of Law in Ancient India

The British while justifying their colonial rule in India claimed Indians lacked civilized system of self rule and their presence in this country gave India a sense of justice and Rule of law. Many Indians today held these views in their heart. These views are not only incorrect but they are blatant lies. In fact there was no match for Rule of law that existed in ancient India; even Englishman’s Rule of Law looks too conservative before that lofty ideal of ancient Indian rule of law. In the Mahabharata, it was laid down “A King who after having sworn that he shall protect his subjects fails to protect them should be executed like a mad dog.”

“The people should execute a king who does not protect them, but deprives them of their property and assets and who takes no advice or guidance from any one. Such a king is not a king but misfortune.” Kautilya describes the duties of a king in the Arth-shastra thus : “In the happiness of his subjects lies the King’s happiness; in their welfare his welfare; whatever pleases him he shall not consider as good, but whether pleases his people he shall consider to good.”

It is ironical, that in a country where ‘King can do no wrong’ principal is in existence, how dare they may be to conclude Indian ancient legal system is full of absurdities,

The so-called progressive politician, who treats Indian history as a book no longer read, tells us that we must look forward and not backward; that we can no longer build as Akbar built; that India can gain little or nothing by studying her own past; that East must be west and forget that she was East. Pretending to be a real with a scientific political programme based upon actualities, he is ignorant of the fundamental economic and social conditions by which a prudent and far-seeing State policy must be governed and blind to the things of everyday Indian life which pass before his own eye. The logic of history, ancient or modern, Indian or European, is lost upon him. The British factory-hand and dweller in city slums sings when he goes to war because war is for him a release from servitude and misery often far more degrading than the Indian caste system at its worst. He does not sing in times of peace. He is then chained down to a daily life in which there is no joy or freedom—the slavery of modern industrialism. He struggles vainly to free himself from it by the organization of trade unions, and only adds to the political machine another form of tyranny which often is a menace to the whole imperial fabric8. This what the observation made by great English Historian E.B. Havell.

In the heyday of imperialism defying observation were made about Indian Legal system by some the European Historians, Prof. J.S.Patil in his discourse always reminds us, that Historians of Europe always used to see India through their English glasses, for this reason there observations remained far from reality. In India, the concept of Rule of law can be traced to Upanishad. It provides that the law is the king of kings. It is more powerful and rigid than the kings. There is nothing higher than law. By its powers the weak shall prevail over the strong and justice shall triumph. Thus, in monarchy, the concept of law developed to control the exercise of arbitrary powers of the monarchs who claimed divine powers to rule. In democracy, the concept has assumed different dimension and means that the holders of public powers must be able to justify publicly that the exercise of power is legally valid and socially just.

Judiciary in Ancient India

Sacred law (Dharma), evidence (Vyavahára), history (Charitra), and edicts of kings (Rájasásana) are the four legs of Law, of these four in order: the later is superior to the previously mentioned. Dharma is eternal truth holding its sway over the world; Vyavahára, evidence, is in witnesses; Charitra, history, is to be found in the tradition (sangraha), of the people; and the order of kings is what is called sásana (legislations). These principles of were administered by Court, in ‘Sangrahana’, ‘ Karvatik’, ‘Dronamukha’, and ‘Stháníya’, and at places where districts meet, three members acquainted with Sacred Law (dharmasthas) and three ministers of the King (amátyas) shall carry on the administration of Justice. ‘Sangrahana’ is centre for 10 villages, ‘Karyatik’ for 200 Villages, ‘Dronamukha’ for 400 villages and ‘Sthaniya’ for 800 villages. This arrangement of judiciary suggests that there were sufficient number of Courts at different levels of administration, and for district (Janapadasandhishu) there were Circuit Courts. My

In villages, the local village councils or Kulani, similar to modern panchayat, consisted of a board of five or more members to dispense justice to villagers. It was concerned with all matters relating to endowments, irrigations, cultivable land, punishment of crime, etc. village councils dealt with simple civil and criminal cases. At higher level in towns and districts the Courts were presided over by the government officer under the authority of King to administer the justice. The link between the village assembly in the local and the official administration was the head man of the village. In each village, local head man was holding hereditary office and was required to maintain order and administer justice, he was also a member of village council he acted both as the leader of the village and mediator with the government.

In order to deal with the disputes amongst member of various guilder or association of trader or artisans,(sreni), various corporations, trade bills, guilds were authorized to exercise an effective jurisdiction over their member. These tribunals consisting of a president and three or five co-adjutors were allowed to decide their civil cases regularly just like other Courts. No doubt, it was possible go in appeal from the tribunal of the guild to local Court, then to Royal judges and from this finally to the King but such situation rarely arises. Due to the prevailing institution of joint Family system Family Courts were also established, ‘puga’ assemblies made up of groups of families in the same village decide civil disputes amongst the family members.

The British while justifying their colonial rule in Indian claimed Indians lacked civilized system of self rule and their presence in this country gave India a sense of justice and rule of law. Many Indians today hold these views in their heart. These views are not only incorrect but they are blatant lies. The British supplanted ancient Indian law and introduced in its place their own system of law. One has to understand that this was not a simple change of laws but was the imposition of a totally alien philosophy, understanding of human nature, belief system, and way of life and concept of polity. This was and is a mismatch. Both Civil as well as Criminal Law administration during British regime is worse and blind observance of which even after independence is more than worse.

There were multiple reasons why British Legal System is not suitable to India,

Present Legal System

Present Legal System had its origins in the dominant philosophy of Britain of those days. It is based on the notion of an Austinian state, where a single monarch or a power had all the power which was indivisible. All powers devolved from top down. That was the structure of the modern nation state that the British were familiar with. So there was centralization of legislative authority and executive authority. Seeing a region with multiple states was itself a shock to them having come from a unitary one. On top of it to have multiple legal systems, where different castes and religions had their own institutions was quite alien to them. So one of the things they tried to bring is certainty and uniformity in the law; certainty and uniformity in the judicial and legal institutions they created. That homogenization itself was a major shock to Indians. The judicial system is one part of the legal system. A legal system would involve all the laws, norms, standards that are laid down to determine what is right or wrong, correct or incorrect. It would also involve all that goes to enforce the legality: that is the Courts, police, jails etc.

It was profoundly disturbing to the Indian masses that they set up these specialized Courts manned by people trained in law with so called independent judges. That itself was a cultural shock for the people of India, because till that time, if you look at the existing dispute resolution systems, typically at the village level, one had the Panchayat system. Panchas would be notables who would be known locally. They were not appointed by state as we understand today. By the British yardstick they would not be ‘independent’ as they would be members of the community. The idea of an independent judge comes from Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence and it requires that the judge’s mind is a tabula rasa, a clean slate, with respect to the dispute and he only allows his mind to register that which is ‘relevant’ to the dispute. The medium by which the judge appreciates facts or the evidence is through the two lawyers representing either side. What they bring into the Court largely determines the final outcome. So who should be allowed to address the Court; complex rules of evidence concerning who could step into the witness box; what matters can be addressed and so on, became very important. For example, unless one’s own eyes or ears had seen or heard the transaction, one could not testify and one could testify only with regard to that particular transaction. Whereas in the panchayat, which was held in the open, anybody who had even fringe knowledge could speak. They did not have to go through this filter of ‘is this relevant, are you worthy’. Therefore you had a sense of participation and anybody could speak. With the new system however, one had a judge who was not known to the parties, which was seen as virtue in the English system but was alien to Indians; it goes without saying that the language of the Court was English and one had to hire a lawyer and so on. The new Courts had very strict rules of relevancy. Many of these continue till today. Thus new Courts with their very specialized rules of evidence which were manned by very technical judges, and where you would have to place your full faith in the vakeel, who alone would be the voice that would speak in the Court, made the system inaccessible to Indians. Thus, in all these area: the choice of the judge, who could testify, regarding what they could testify, the location of the Court and so on, all these things were alien and the process alienating. In the old panchayat, even if you were not of the ‘high caste’, you could sit or stand up. Further Judgment today’s Courts is in ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ form, whereas, the panchayats always negotiated, with no clear winner or loser. Panchayats were willing to find a mid-ground so that all could save face. People were used to that system, where you would not lose everything but some form of justice would be done. So that you did not have a win-lose but a win-win situation. In Panchayat system the solution gave a lot of discretion to the decision makers to decide what would best serve the ends of justice. So long as their decision was not out of sync with vyavahara as practiced, they had a whole range of flexibility. In contrast, for the British, the ‘certainty of law’, that it was fixed before the dispute came into being, was seen as a major virtue.

The administration of Criminal Justice was not also well founded in India, the police can oppress with impunity. During British rule the visit of a police darogah (officer) to a native villager is a calamity. If a robbery is committed, the poor are afraid to complain; if anyone is wanted as a witness, he is taken for several days from his labor and treated as a prisoner; if a criminal, or suspected criminal, is arrested, he is at once presumed to be guilty, and is very probably tortured to confess…. The insecurity of property induces all who can afford it, to hire watchman, in fact, bludgeon men, of their own; and these, whenever occasion requires, are of course used as agents of any amount of violence and oppression. The people sink under the weight of fear, and their natural cowardice is increased by a sense of hopelessness of resistance. Justice is to a large extent, practically denied them; the land-holders and the police are chief powers they know; and they are hunted by both, till they surrender themselves to servility, to despair. Even after 65 years of Independence Justice Administration of justice in India never satisfied the aspiration of people, this is because wrong selection of foreign made legal structure, application of discontent laws, discarding indigenous system of justice administration.

Social and cultural factors affecting business include belief systems and practices, customs, traditions and behavior’s of all people in given country, fashion trends and market activities influencing actions and decisions. Socio-cultural perspective is one of the most important factor influencing decision of marketing managers and strategic goals of companies entering new foreign markets. It should be noted that legal factors affecting business is also considered as one of the major socio-cultural factors that can influence companies. Proper identification of this factor during strategic analysis (PEST analysis, STEEP analysis, SWOT analysis, TOWS analysis) could lead to better strategic alignment of company to society (during international development).

Your business doesn’t operate in a vacuum, especially if you do a lot of work overseas. This means societal and cultural changes can have an impact on your company based on how your target audience’s attitudes and moods shift over time. Socio-cultural factors can involve social attitudes, beliefs, education, legal structure and political ideology.

You don’t have to overhaul your company’s mission statement and values based on the whims of your audience. However, as society and culture change, your responsibility as a business owner or leader is to adapt and stay ahead of your competitors and remain relevant in the minds of your consumers.

Socio-Cultural factors influencing businesses

(i) Changing Preferences Require Adaptation

One of the major socio-cultural factors influencing businesses and business decisions is changing consumer preferences. What was popular and fashionable 20 years ago may not be popular today or 10 years down the road. Different styles and priorities can undermine long successful products and services. For example, a clothing company must constantly be aware of changing preferences when creating new products or it will quickly become outdated.

Another example is the marketing industry. Ten years ago, consumers wanted businesses to market their products and services on TV, radio and in newspapers. But after the introduction of the iPhone and the emergence of social media, consumer preferences changed. Audiences have now become more mobile, which means that to reach them, companies have had to develop mobile marketing strategies.

(ii) Changing Demographics Affect How You Target Your Audience

Changes in demographics are also a significant factor in the business world. As populations age, for example, markets for popular music and fashions may shrink while markets for luxury goods and health products may increase. Additionally, changes in the proportion of genders and different racial, religious and ethnic groups within a society may also have a significant impact on the way a company does business.

This is especially true when it comes to marketing products and services to a younger generation. For example, clothing styles are always changing, but the most significant change occurs in the demographics of prospective buyers. It used to be that business owners in the clothing industry could cast a wide net and reel in customers, but with audiences so segmented, understanding the growing power of Generation Z, for example, is vital. This audience is often categorized as buyers born in 1995 onwards, and they have emerged over the past five years as a motivated consumer group.

(iii) Gender and Racial Attitudes Impact Internal Work Environment

In addition to a company’s interactions with the market and its customers, socio-cultural factors also impact a company’s internal decision-making process. For example, changing gender roles and increasing emphasis on family life have led to increased respect for maternity and paternity leave with organizations. Additionally, attitudes toward racial discrimination and sexual harassment have changed drastically over the years as a result of a socio-cultural change.

More recently, sexual harassment has become an explosive issue, driven by the countless number of powerful corporate leaders that have run afoul of harassment charges. As a result, societal attitudes about how women should be treated in the workplace have dramatically shifted. In the past, an “old boys network” was tolerable if only because women didn’t feel empowered to push back against entrenched ideas about their work roles. But as women have begun speaking up and telling their stories regarding harassment, company leaders have taken note.

Social factors affecting business

• Social classes and their influence on the society,
• Average disposable income level,
• Wealth of people,
• Economic inequalities,
• Level of education,
• Access to education (free, paid),
• Level and access to health-care,
• Health consciousness in society (smoking, drinking, drug use, safe driving, etc.),
• Buying habits and consumer preferences,
• Average retirement age (for men and women),
• Personality of average consumer,
• Reputation of company in society,
• Conflicts within society,
• Susceptibility to influence,
• Social organization (communities, social groups, gangs, ad-hoc gatherings, etc.),
• Uncertainty avoidance dominating in society (or other G. Hofstede socio-cultural factors),

Cultural factors affecting business

• Fashion trends,
• Lifestyle,
• Social media influence (blogging, etc.) vs traditional media (press, TV, radio),
• Dominant communication technology in social groups,
• Participation in cultural events,
• Willingness to pay for tickets,
• Popular actors, music styles, design forms, etc.
• Creativity of people,
• Relative population of local (folk) artists vs. global imported culture,
• Various other determinants of culture.

Sreni, in the context of Ancient India, was an association of traders, merchants, and artisans. Generally, a separate shreni existed for a particular group of persons engaged in the same vocation or activity. Shrenis have sometimes been compared with the guilds. However, persons engaged in life destroying activities like hunting and fishing did not form any shreni.

Ancient Indian guilds are a unique and multi-faceted form of organization, which combined the functions of a democratic government, a trade union, a court of justice and a technological institution. The trained workers of the guilds provided a congenial atmosphere for work. They procured raw materials for manufacturing, controlled quality of manufactured goods and their price, and located markets for their sale. Though seen through the Eurocentric blinkers they have been misunderstood. It was believed that the Indian Guild system also followed the European feudal or the manorial system of the high Middle Ages, due mainly to sudden increase in trade. These European guilds identified as Merchant Guilds and Craft Guilds lasted in some places until the nineteenth and the twentieth century, though probably their golden age was in the thirteenth and the fourteenth centuries. The Craft Guilds being the direct producers were more important than the Merchant Guilds. But the Indian guilds were far more important and complex institutions than the European examples.

Guilds (Shreni) role in business promotion in Ancient India

Besides serving the purpose of keeping the members of a trade together like a close community, the Guilds undertook many useful roles such as administrative, economic, charitable and banking functions. Thaplyal reports that the powerful Guilds performed judicial functions as well. The guilds had a good deal of administrative control over their members. Looking after the interests of their members making things convenient for them was their prime concern. The trained workers of the guilds provided a congenial atmosphere for work. They procured raw materials for manufacturing, controlled quality of manufactured goods and their price, and located markets for their sale. Although the Arthasastra does not contain any reference to guilds loaning money to the general public, yet there are references suggesting that the king’s spies borrowed from guilds on the pretext of procuring various types of merchandize. This shows that guilds loaned money to artisans and merchants as well. Guilds established their efficiency and integrity, and epigraphic evidence shows that not only the general public, even the royalty deposited money with them. However, the guilds had limited scope in banking in comparison to modern banks. Thaplyal refers to a few epigraphs here. A Mathura Inscription (2nd century AD) refers to the two permanent endowments of 550 silver coins each with two guilds to feed Brahmins and the poor from out of the interest money. Of the two Nasik Inscriptions (2nd century AD) one records the endowment of 2000 karshapanas at the rate of one percent (per month) with a weavers’ guild for providing cloth to bhikshus and 1000 karshapanas at the rate of 0.75 percent (per month) with another weavers’ guild for serving light meals to them. Apart from these more epigraphs and inscriptions are mentioned as evidence in this regard. In addition to this the guilds engaged in works of Charity as well. Guilds worked to alleviate distress and undertook works of piety and charity as a matter of duty. They were expected to use part of their profits for preservation and maintenance of assembly halls, watersheds, shrines, tanks and gardens, as also for helping widows, the poor and destitute.

The guilds beginning from 6^th B.C., gradually gained importance in economy. They became crucial factor in organisation of production. The vast major­ity of artisans joined guild, since it was difficult for them to compete as individual against the guilds. With increasing demand for particular commodities and the consequent necessity to raise their output some guilds began to employ hired labour and slaves.

Leading guilds were those of potters, metal work­ers, carpenter etc. Their size can be gauged from the fact that one wealthy potter named Sadalaputta had owned five hundred potters shop. In addition he organised his own distribution and owned large num­ber of boats which took pottery from workshops to various parts on Ganges. With increase in trade and commerce the major guilds grew even larger.

Guild fixed rules of work and quality of finished product and its price to safeguard both the artisan and customer. The guilds also controlled ‘the prices of manu­factured articles and these either depended on quality of work or were calculated according to fixed scale.

Many guilds operated at local as well as on larger country level. Certain guilds were also involved in for­eign trade. ‘Ayyavdle’ a guild from South India oper­ated at longer long distance trade. ‘Manigramam’, an­other guild composed of multiple nationalities under took foreign trade.

The ‘Royal connection’ of the guild was also a significant factor which influenced the role played by guild in economy. Royalty had a financial interest in guild. Investment in commercial enterprise brought larger returns. Royalty thus had interest in ensuring well being of guild.

Another fact which emerges from inscription is that guild could act as banker, financer and trustee as well. Generally these functions were carried out by different category of merchants known as Sreshthin in North India and Chettyars in South India.

Indians are strongly guided by their respective religions and their shared values. Respect for elders and hierarchy are core values that permeate all aspects of Indian society. Indians also place huge importance on family and community. And as in many Asian cultures, the concept of saving face – avoiding blame or any type of shameful situation can influence decision-making processes and affect your business dealings in India.

Building good business relationships and trust are important in India, so you should expect to spend plenty of time at meetings, dinners and social clubs with potential business partners. In a first meeting, let the Indian host guide the initial stages of the conversation. As in some other Asian cultures, Indians like to develop a personal connection first. So expect to be asked and prepare to ask your own questions – about family.

Role of Indian Culture in Business Promotions are:-

1. Greetings and titles

A handshake is the standard way to greet men and women in a business setting, whatever their age or seniority. When meeting with small independent retailers in non-urban areas, you may be greeted by your potential partner with the word namaste (pronounced nah-mas-tay). You may reciprocate by repeating the word, with the palms of your hands together and a slight bow or nod of the head. Often people will slightly nod or bow their heads when shaking hands, particularly with senior figures. The left hand is considered unclean and as such, should never be used alone to offer or accept a handshake, drink, food, money, gifts or business cards.

2. Body language

Indians tend to value their personal space and are generally not prone to making much physical contact. However, it is not uncommon for Indian men to engage in friendly back patting. This is a sign of friendship and a positive signal for your working relationship. Indians are generally expressive and use body language to convey messages that are not always verbal.

Showing the soles of your feet or your shoes, or pointing your feet towards anyone, is considered highly disrespectful and insulting in India, as is stepping on or over papers, books, religious offerings on the ground – and especially people.

It is rude to touch anyone’s head. Pointing with fingers is also disrespectful; if you must point, use your thumb, with the rest of your fingers curled into a fist, palm facing upward.

3. Business cards

These are essential when conducting business in India and must be handled with respect. Make sure your card includes your name, company name, position and email address, all in English. If you have a higher degree such as a masters or a PhD, you may wish to disclose it on your business card, as it will earn you greater respect in India.

When presenting your card, do so with both hands holding the card at the top in between your thumb and index finger with the writing facing the recipient. After receiving a business card, spend a few moments examining it, providing positive feedback with a smile, before placing it either in your chest pocket or in front of you at the table.

4. Corporate culture

Depending on the type of Indian business you are dealing with, it is not common for middle management to have decision-making autonomy. Make sure the person you are negotiating with is senior enough to commit to business and partnership decisions. Do not begin business meetings by getting straight to the heart of the negotiation. Take a short time to ask personal questions about your contact’s family and background, covering topics such as how long they have worked in the company or industry and where they grew up. Make a concerted effort to be on time for formal business meetings, but be aware that they will not always start on time. Indians are less constrained by time than Australians.

5. Dress code

Conservative, professional attire is expected in the business setting, although this can differ depending on the season and the city. Men should generally wear a suit (with tie) and women should wear a business dress or a suit with a blouse (not low-cut and, in the case of skirts, not too short). In summer, however, it is more acceptable for men to not wear a jacket. Women should avoid wearing short outfits or exposing their shoulders.

6. Indian Business Meetings and Negotiations

Give as much warning as possible of your intended dates of travel and try to schedule your meetings well in advance. If you require help with your India trip our business advisors based in both the UK and India can help source qualified leads, set up introductions, and arrange business meetings as well as plan productive business trips to India. Do bear in mind that the arrangements may change several times and may not be confirmed until the day of the meeting itself. Although punctuality is expected, be prepared for meetings to start and finish late and for interruptions to occur on a regular basis. Negotiations can be slow by UK standards. Be patient and demonstrate good character; forcefulness will likely drive your contact away.

7. Understanding Business Relationships in India

Business relationships are of the utmost importance. Indians will base their decisions on trust and intuition as much as on statistics and data, so be mindful of the importance of a good working relationship. Take the time to engage in small talk and get to know your prospective partner. Rushing straight into the business issue could be perceived as rudeness.

8. The Role of Hierarchy in Indian Business

Indian businesses are often very hierarchically structured. In negotiations, decisions are generally made at the highest of levels. Therefore, unless the company director, owner or a very senior manager is present at a meeting, a decision is not likely to occur at that stage. Roles are well defined and tasks such as manual labour will only be carried out by a specific person. An Indian manager is typically not expected to carry out tasks that could otherwise be undertaken by someone at a lower level in the organisation.

When you choose to set up an India based office you will need to take into account these cultural differences. If your office does not follow a vertically structured hierarchy, with closely defined responsibilities, it will be important to create a dynamic feedback and communication mechanism between your UK and Indian employees to encourage collaboration. Interactions between UK and Indian staff may at times cause miscommunication. For example junior staff in India may not be used to making decisions or questioning senior staff with the same level of freedom as their UK counterparts.

You may well find that your Indian operations are much more flexible than your UK operations. Indian’s are often prepared to take on time sensitive and important tasks at the last minute.. Likewise your Indian staff may find the rigidity of timelines on the part of UK staff challenging and inflexible. Sensitising your UK and Indian employees about the cultural differences is therefore important for smooth day to day operations.