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.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
Taiwan-India relations appear to have been put on the back burner this year, including on Taiwan’s side. Geopolitical pressures have compelled both countries to recalibrate their priorities, even as their core security challenges remain unchanged. However, what is striking is the visible decline in the attention India once received from Taiwan. The absence of the annual Diwali celebrations for the Indian community and the lack of a commemoration marking the 30-year anniversary of the representative offices, the India Taipei Association and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center, speak volumes and raise serious questions about whether Taiwan still has a coherent India
Recent media reports have again warned that traditional Chinese medicine pharmacies are disappearing and might vanish altogether within the next 15 years. Yet viewed through the broader lens of social and economic change, the rise and fall — or transformation — of industries is rarely the result of a single factor, nor is it inherently negative. Taiwan itself offers a clear parallel. Once renowned globally for manufacturing, it is now best known for its high-tech industries. Along the way, some businesses successfully transformed, while others disappeared. These shifts, painful as they might be for those directly affected, have not necessarily harmed society
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
RSS