Learning when a useful safeguard becomes a barrier

The internal application process required a manager's approval before a colleague could interview for another role. I had supported that condition because manufacturing teams needed continuity. In a 2022 review, nine of twenty-one eligible applicants had been stopped at that point. Their managers described them as too important to release. The reason sounded complimentary, but the effect was to make their value in the current job a barrier to development. It made me question a policy I had helped preserve.

I began in personnel administration after completing sociology studies at Terqashi Social Studies College in May 1996. Orqelvi Factory Services supported industrial sites, and my first work involved maintaining employee records and coordinating authorised personnel actions. I did not have authority to decide a client's staffing arrangements or interpret every employment question independently. I learned to distinguish a manager's request from a decision the employer had actually approved, and to explain an unresolved issue without inventing an answer to keep a form moving.

Promotion to HR officer in April 2002 gave me four colleagues and a wider role in recruitment coordination, employee queries and manager support. Industrial supervisors often wanted a quick resolution because work was waiting. Employees needed to understand what was being asked of them and where to raise a concern. I learned that a process could be administratively complete while remaining unclear to the person affected. That distinction stayed with me when I later helped design internal career arrangements.

I joined Pelqethi Industrial Gaskets in April 2009 as factory HR manager. Seven people-function colleagues supported an organisation making industrial gaskets and converting sealing-sheet materials. Technical work required assessment by qualified colleagues; HR could arrange training and explain role expectations but could not certify a person's ability to perform a specialist task. I worked with production leaders to connect recruitment, development and staffing plans. I also accepted the argument that current managers should decide whether an employee could apply elsewhere inside the business.

As head of people operations from April 2016, I led ten colleagues and became more involved in job structures and career discussions across functions. I saw how a familiar employee's experience could influence the way a role was graded. Experience mattered to individual contribution, but it did not automatically change the job's requirements. I began asking whether we were describing the position or rewarding the person through its title. Those questions became more pressing as the company grew and different managers used the same grades in different ways.

I became CHRO in April 2021, reporting to CEO Sonal Derqathi. Today I lead fourteen colleagues through three leads, with ₹3.9 crore annual function expense. The company employed 360 people in March 2026 and recorded ₹148 crore revenue and ₹11.2 crore operating profit for FY 2025–26. Founders own sixty per cent, an industrial investor thirty per cent and employee shareholders ten per cent. I own no shares and have no statutory directorship. Board presentations about people plans remain executive exposure rather than director service.

The internal-mobility review required me to reconcile a legitimate production concern with an employee's access to assessment. We did not promise immediate release or disregard technical staffing requirements. We removed the manager's power to prevent the interview and made transition planning a separate, visible decision after selection. Five of seven selected colleagues moved within the review period; two still needed an agreed transition. Reporting those two cases mattered because a policy change alone had not completed their move.

I also learned to give my own team room to question an apparently finished proposal. A colleague who brought an unresolved transfer to the review was helping the programme succeed, not undermining its announcement. That expectation needed support from me when senior managers preferred a simpler completion message.

The technical progression case raised a different question. Some experienced technicians wanted deeper technical responsibility without becoming people managers. We defined two senior technical role types and assessed the evidence with operating specialists. Five appointments followed, while two colleagues needed further demonstration. I want this record to show opportunity with its conditions and incomplete outcomes intact. For an outside board, I would bring questions about how career promises operate in practice, while learning the receiving company's workforce, obligations and governance arrangements rather than assuming our internal model should be copied.

Open to Board appointments · Executive opportunities

Languages / Hindi · English