"Principled Leadership Negotiating and Influencing: Lessons From Mahatma Gandhi"
By Brad McRae

Mahatma Gandhi became one of the world's most famous leaders, advocates, and negotiators. The story of how Gandhi came to understand and apply these skills in the context of his philosophy of militant non-violence is fascinating reading for anyone who wants to develop these skills. Three examples, one from very early in his career in South Africa, one from the cotton mill strike in India and an example of Gandhi consoling a tormented man, illustrate the development of Gandhi's remarkable philosophy.

"Gandhi never sought to humiliate or defeat the whites in South Africa or the British in India. He wished to convert them." In the first example, "The South African [government] threatened to arrest all Indians who did not carry registration passes". Gandhi and the other Indians in South Africa resisted by refusing to carry the registration passes. "The South Africans arrested so many that it became untenable for South Africa to carry out this policy." As a negotiator, Gandhi knew he could reduce the power of the other side by submitting to their pressure tactic rather than resisting it. This was the beginning of militant non-violence. "His method was deliberately to break the law, and to organize his followers into a mass movement."

The second story illustrates the power of allowing all of the parties to save face and the power of creative solutions that satisfy all parties' interests to resolve what was seemingly an intractable problem.

For Gandhi, the process or the manner in which the strike was conducted and the manner in which the strikers conducted themselves was as important, if not more important, than the outcome of the strike. After a short period of time, however dedicated to Gandhi and their cause, things were desperate for the strikers. Many of the workers were starving; they had to sell their furniture, lose their homes, and borrow money at high rates of interest. Gandhi felt he was in an untenable position. He did not want to compromise the principles such as decent wages upon which the strike was based, nor did he wish to see the worker suffer by paying such a high price for their principles. He thought and meditated for a long time until he came up with a viable solution.

The labor strike had become very positional. Both sides were dug deeply into their positions and were absolutely unwilling to move or compromise their positions. The workers were asking for a 35% increase. The mill owners had agreed to a 20% increase. There seemed no way out of these positions until Gandhi made the following suggestion.

Let the arbitrator meet us and come to a decision right now, and let us announce the way fixed by him; this is, 35 percent on the first day, 20 percent on the second and, on the third what the arbitrator decides.

It is clear, 35 percent on the first was meant to keep the workers from feeling that they had broken their pledge; and twenty per cent on the second was to reassure the owners likewise.

This solution would help both the workers and the mill owners save face. Both sides would be able to be "true" to their positions, even though it was only for one day. By saving face and being true to their positions, even for a short period of time, both the workers and the mill owners could be flexible and accept the arbitrator's decision for the settlement the arbitrator chose for the remainder of the contract.

The settlement forced the mill owners to accept the principle of having an arbitrated settlement.

On the first day, an increase of 35 percent will be given in keeping with our pledge; on the second day, we get 20 percent in keeping with the mill-owners'. From the third day till the date of the arbitrator's award, an increase of 27 and 1/2 per cent will be paid and subsequently, if the arbitrator decides on 35 percent, the mill-owners will give us 7 and 1/2 per cent more, and, if he decides on 20 percent, we will refund 7 and 1/2 percent.

It is important to note that Gandhi looked at the strike as but a moment in time, he also knew that his job as leader was to insure good relationships between the workers, and between the workers and the mill owners, in the future. The ultimate outcome for Gandhi was that "All men are brothers." He now had a powerful, principled way to settle disputes, which worked for positive substantive outcomes and positive relationship outcomes.

One of the major differences between this strike and most of the strikes we have witnessed in North America is that one of Gandhi's fundamental principles was that no one should be forced to act against his or her will and/or beliefs, that no one should have to do anything under duress. Therefore, all workers who wanted to work would be guaranteed safe passage to work and they would not be harassed. No worker was forced to behave in any way that was against his or her will. Gandhi guaranteed this personally. Gandhi's deep respect for all of the individuals he negotiated with was one of the factors that made him such a successful leader, advocate, and negotiator. North American Management and Labor Leaders could learn a lot from Gandhi's example.

The third story relates to one of the most memorable parts of the film "Gandhi" which takes place when a Hindu man whose son had been killed in the riots between the Hindus and Moslems asks Gandhi for help after a riot in which the man killed a Moslem child in revenge. The Hindu man is overwrought with grief at his son's death and abhorrence for his having killed a Moslem child in revenge. Gandhi suggests that the Hindu man find an orphaned Moslem boy and raise that boy as a Moslem. This is another example of Gandhi's use of the power of a "wise" solution to help resolve seemingly irresolvable problems. There are other examples of Gandhi's use of his leadership, negotiating, and problem solving skills such as his advocating to bring an end to India's caste system. To learn more about Gandhi, see the references at the end of this newsletter.

When he died, Gandhi was what he has always been: a private citizen without wealth, property, title, official position, academic distinction, or scientific achievement. Yet the chiefs of all governments, except of the Soviet government, and the heads of all religion paid homage to the thin brown man of seventy-eight in a loincloth.