At an event where corporate governance was viewed through the lens of dharma, service and responsibility, Padma Shri awardee Arundhati Bhattacharya offered a grounded view: governance, she said, is about how institutions empower people through everyday decisions that make work and life more human.
Speaking at the ‘Dharmam Chara’ programme at the BSE, the president and chief executive officer of Salesforce South Asia said governance is not just a set of rules, but a reflection of choices made within organisations. “Values are not posters on walls. They are the decisions you make when no one’s watching,” she said.
She drew on her own journey from a modest background to leadership roles in major institutions as an example of how support systems can shape outcomes. Empowerment, she suggested, begins in small but consequential ways, in the flexibility given to employees, the policies that help families cope, and the culture that allows people to stay productive without losing their humanity.
“Dharma is a practice, not a destination. Values are lived, not proclaimed. Empowerment is action, not aspiration,” she said, drawing a direct link between ethical intent and organisational behaviour.
Bhattacharya illustrated this through decisions taken during her tenure as chairperson of the State Bank of India. Moving from a six-day work week to two Saturdays off each month and introducing a two-year sabbatical policy were, in her telling, governance interventions as much as HR reforms. By addressing childcare and eldercare challenges, these policies sought to remove structural barriers that often force employees, particularly women, out of the workforce.
The underlying idea is that governance frameworks are meaningful only when they translate into enabling systems for employees, she said.
Biz with responsibility
That principle extends to corporate social responsibility. She contrasted traditional CSR, often seen as “writing checks,” with approaches that embed responsibility into business models. Citing Salesforce’s “1-1-1 model”, she described governance as aligning capital, products and employee time with community outcomes.
“When you practice dharma consistently, you don’t pick and choose who deserves to be enabled. You enable everyone,” she said. “Dharma is weaving the act of enabling into the fabric of how one operates every single day.”
R Shankar Raman, whole-time director and CFO of Larsen & Toubro, echoed this through a more operational lens. He said the company’s CSR efforts are anchored around communities near its project sites, factories and offices, an approach that ties governance directly to local impact.
“It was a perfect example of mutuality and interdependence,” he said. “It not only gave us an opportunity to tap into the resources of the neighbouring community but it also helped us and gave us a chance to promote their livelihood.” Governance is not just about oversight, but about integrating “service” into business decisions, he said.
Beyond numbers
M Damodaran, former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Board of India, said governance must extend its lens beyond balance sheets. He cautioned against equating development solely with physical infrastructure. “Of course, we need these. But far more important is social infrastructure, better education, healthcare and all that improves the quality of life,” he said.
The Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam, Shri Shankara Vijayendra Saraswathi Swamigal, said that while business can embody dharma, it should not reduce it to a transaction. “व्यापार में धर्म होता है। धर्म में व्यापार नहीं होता है,” he said.
He also said that independence would be meaningful only if dharma is safeguarded, particularly as India enters a phase of economic and institutional stability.
If there was a common thread through the discussions, it was the idea that governance is not static. It evolves through policies, leadership choices and institutional intent, and is ultimately measured by its impact on people.
Bhattacharya summed it up in a simple daily test: whether one has enabled or empowered someone. In corporate terms, that question may well define the next phase of governance — one that moves from compliance to consequence.