Log has written
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2009

But the Bank has held its ground leaving Satyam refusing to deny the Bank’s assertions or providing details under the pretext it doesn’t normally discuss specific clients.

Meanwhile, even before it was awarded the 2008 Golden Peacock, in mid-May, news of a legal battle with British telecom services provider Upaid Systems, became known.

The Upaid case, which had actually started in April 2007, involves allegations by the British company against Satyam of fraud, forgery, misrepresentation of facts and breach of contract.

It stems from a dispute involving transfer of intellectual property rights arising from a joint project that the companies worked on in the late 1990s.

Satyam, which was a technology vendor for Upaid at that time, has denied the allegations made by Upaid but a court in Texas has allowed Upaid to proceed with the suit. A hearing is scheduled in that court for 7 January.

The Golden Peacock Awards Secretariat says its selection process involves a “through” scrutiny of information available about the company, based on publicly available information.

However, the “assessors did not come across a single adverse or uncharitable report of the company,” Raut claimed.

Other winners of Golden Peacock award for excellence in corporate governance for the year 2008 include Swiss pharma company Novartis International AG, Reliance Industries Ltd and Oil and Natural Gas Corp.

As part of the award application process, there is a process fee of Rs24,500 for those applying to the national award category and a fee of £450 (Rs32,040) for those applying to the global award category. The award that Satyam won in 2008 was in the global category, while its 2002 award was in the national category.

Satyam appears to have won at least three other Golden Peacocks in categories such as “innovation” and “training”.

Tags - Find More Articles On:
READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
Rob Said:


The Black Book Of Outsourcing has awarded Satyam a Top 50 "Best Managed" Global Outsourcing Vendor ranking for the past four consecutive years. The Top 50 rankings are determined from the ballots of actual users of Satyam services who rank their leaders on 26 tough and distinct key performance indicators. Its a difficult award to achieve because clients must be validated and their scores are confirmed externally prior to being counted. It appears that workers have a different interpretation of the highly effective leadership team than the client who respect and appreciate the outcomes of Satyam organizations because of their leadership. Perhaps Satyam's board acted out of another phenomenom Black Book pointed out in the 2007 State of Outsourcing report..."Indian Executive Arrogance" which was remarked in the results by many users as possible detriments to keeping well-managed outsourcing organizations on track in 2008. Seems as if it came true...now new management from outside Indian can bring humility and open communications to these Indian firms suffereing from "Indian Executive Arrogance".

Posted On 1/2/2009 8:11:11 AM
Re: Biswashis Said:


I cannot subscribe to this viewpoint. The so-called 'outside Indian' management idea sounds patronising to me. I think we have enough examples of mis-management in the US/Uk, etc. Satyam's example is one of a miscalculation, which was quickly rectified. We should not attempt to read too much between the lines and hunt for malintentions where none exist.

Posted On 1/2/2009 8:14:17 PM
Raghavendra Said:


Excuse me! This is like the pot calling the kettle black!...and assuming that by doing so, it will be considered white! IOD and whosoever is responsible for conducting the reasearch (if any) leading to the award being given are themselves liable for some tough questioning and expeted to give answers. If sthey had decided that satyam was "awardable" a few months back...what was the basis?.....or was there none non-commercial?

Posted On 1/8/2009 9:27:23 AM