In the forest, Ram met an old lady called Shabari who invited him to a meal in her house and offered him her meager fare: berries she had collected in the forest. Lakshman who followed his brother was horrified to see the Shabari taking a bite of the berry before passing them on to her brother. Sometimes, she did not even pass the berry; she just threw it away. “How dare you give leftover food to my brother?” Lakshman snarled. “Do you know who he is? He is Ram, king of Ayodhya!”

An embarrased Shabari threw herself at Ram’s feet and apologized for her mistake. Ram, however, hugged the old lady affectionately and reprimanded Lakshman, “She acted in good faith.” He explained that Shabhari’s intention was not to give Ram leftover food. She was only taking a tiny bite of the berry to make sure she offered her guest only the sweetest and most succulent of berries. In her world, it was not considered inappropriate from giving tasted berries to guests. Her biting the berry was a mark of caring, not a sign of insult.

Lakshman had judged the situation from his point of view based on his past experience in the palace. He assumed Shabhari was insulting Ram. Ram, however, refused to be colored by his past experience. He looked at the situation from Shabhari’s point of view and deciphered what she was really up to.

While everyone can see a situation from one’s own point of view, a good leader has the ability to see things from others point of view. A leader accepts that his view is not the only view and certainly not the whole view. There are many people whose point of view matter. When he is about to take a decision he asks: How will this be perceived by other departments? How will it be perceived by the shareholders? How will it be perceived by customers? How will it be perceived by the media?

Why should only Ram be sensitive to Shabhari, why can’t Shabhari be sensitive to Ram? Was it not thoughtless on her part to offer tasted berries to her guest? She should have at least checked if her way was not his way. Or she should have at least explained what she was doing. Such arguments assume that Ram and Shabari are on the same awareness level. They are not.

In the epic, the interaction between Shabhari and Ram has a clear presupposition that Shabari is forest-dweller, unexposed to the ways of the world while Ram is educated, well-traveled, and hence more aware of the ways of the world. The burden of being sensitive to the other therefore squarely falls on Ram, not on Shabari. Sensitivity is a prerequisite to leadership. It can be quite trying, constantly trying to negotiate through the feelings and thoughts of the others. But is there a choice?

Our refusal to see things from others point of view, our need to jump to conclusions by registering only our point of view, stems in most cases from laziness. We just don’t want to make the effort of taking a 360 degree view of the situation. It is so much easier to assume that we know best and our view is the right view. But leadership is not a solitary venture – leadership is not about the self, it is about others. It is about influencing the other’s viewpoint; and that can only happen if one is willing to invest one’s energy into understanding where the other is coming from. All around us, in our teams, are Shabharis about whom we have, as Lakshman, assumed the worst. Look at them again through the eyes of Ram: you will observe the innocence beyond the alleged insult.