Meerut, an hour’s drive from Delhi and home to a mere couple million people, is what in India’s crowded north is considered a small town. There is not a lot to recommend to visitors, and it does not receive hordes of tourists. Yet, the city’s hotels have been all over the news.
Oyo Hotels, backed by Softbank Group, announced last week that it would no longer allow unmarried couples to check into its hotels in Meerut and might extend that policy to other towns. Bookings could in theory be cancelled if guests could not provide proof of their relationship.
Naturally, the policy has set off something of a firestorm. It has also underscored how companies might increasingly struggle to deal with India’s deepening social and political divisions.
Oyo said it “respected” individual freedoms and personal liberty, but also felt bound to respond to complaints from what it described as “civil society.” Few have any doubt that, in this case, the term is a euphemism for the socially conservative right-wing groups that have claimed growing political influence under India’s Hindu nationalist government.
Companies everywhere must manage local politics. However, corporations that operate nationwide cannot afford to give too much away. Compromises in one part of the country could diminish trust in one’s brand elsewhere. Is branding not, at its core, the promise of a uniform experience?
True, Oyo has thus far limited the new rules to one city. However, activists in the much more prominent tech hub of Bengaluru are now demanding a similar ban there. Would Oyo be forced to give in? Would the company expect couples to keep track of when they need to bring their marriage license as they travel from city to city across India?
When Oyo launched about a decade ago, its promise was the exact opposite. Checking into a budget hotel in a strange town with one’s partner used to be a tense experience; couples never knew if they would be the target of harassment or be denied a room. Oyo, as one Indian columnist put it, “democratized access to private spaces for a burgeoning young population.” That was the company’s core value and the primary source of its appeal.
Oyo is not the first firm to be tripped up by India’s internal divisions. Drivers for food-delivery service Zomato, the first app-based startup to be added to the benchmark BSE Sensex, have sometimes objected to handling pork or beef dishes, on religious grounds. Like Oyo, Zomato sometimes tried too hard: It briefly announced a new segregated service for vegetarians last year before a national outcry forced it to backtrack.
Economists and officials sometimes argue that “mass services” — including hospitality chains and delivery services — could provide the jobs and growth that the country’s lackluster manufacturing sector cannot. Many of these companies have scaled up swiftly, are used by tens of millions of people and include some of India’s fastest-growing employers. They, in turn, tout the vast size of the potential market to entice investors.
With size comes with diversity and, unlike toy makers or sellers of detergent, service companies must deal with customers as people. There is no point achieving scale at the cost of your core appeal.
In any case, companies that attempt to keep up with unpredictable political tides could spend too much time over-correcting. It is ironic, perhaps, that Oyo decided to wade into social policy the same week that Meta Platforms Inc’s Mark Zuckerberg reversed course on eight years of content moderation. Policies begun for political reasons would have to be abandoned for political reasons. The biggest loser is often the company caught in the middle.
Indians expect great things from a startup sector that seems dynamic and world-class. These firms, in turn, are counting on India’s vast scale to ensure their fortunes. However, if they do not learn to manage India’s diversity, it almost certainly will not.
Mihir Sharma is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, he is author of Restart: The Last Chance for the Indian Economy. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
After thousands of Taiwanese fans poured into the Tokyo Dome to cheer for Taiwan’s national team in the World Baseball Classic’s (WBC) Pool C games, an image of food and drink waste left at the stadium said to have been left by Taiwanese fans began spreading on social media. The image sparked wide debate, only later to be revealed as an artificially generated image. The image caption claimed that “Taiwanese left trash everywhere after watching the game in Tokyo Dome,” and said that one of the “three bad habits” of Taiwanese is littering. However, a reporter from a Japanese media outlet
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
RSS