On December 29, 2025, Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya (DAVV) in Indore publicly attributed a sharp drop in Chief Minister Helpline complaints to its own grievance app, e-Samadhan, reporting that 70 of 80 grievances received over three weeks were resolved. The reporting described a simple outcome: when people see action inside the institution, they stop escalating outside it. That is the entire story in one line, but the operational implication is bigger. Many organizations spend heavily on engagement surveys and culture campaigns while their grievance plumbing remains slow, opaque, and personality-driven. DAVV's claim - quick resolution volume in a short time window - is a rare, measurable case study that HR leaders can borrow without needing a vendor pitch.
Emotionally, grievance systems fail in one predictable way: they make the complainant feel like a nuisance. Not always through hostility - often through silence, delays, and "we are looking into it" loops that erase dignity. When an employee has to knock repeatedly, the complaint stops being about the original issue and becomes about respect. A visible, time-bound grievance workflow does something powerful: it tells people, "You will not be punished for speaking." It also reduces the gossip economy inside workplaces, because employees do not need backchannel power to be heard. For managers, it lowers the fear that every complaint will become a public spectacle - because there is a credible internal lane that actually moves.
From a compliance lens, e-Samadhan is basically a controls model: intake, acknowledgement, assignment, SLA, closure, and audit trail. HR should read this through statutory risk: Payment of Wages issues, Shops & Establishments working hours complaints, contractor wage disputes, and even POSH-related non-sexual grievances often start as "small" tickets that metastasize when mishandled. A serious system needs classification (what is urgent, what is sensitive), escalation (who gets notified when SLA breaks), and governance (weekly dashboards reviewed by leadership, not buried in HR). If you cannot produce a grievance ageing report on demand, you do not have a system - you have inboxes. The organizations that win in 2026 will be the ones that treat grievance redressal as infrastructure, not empathy theatre.
What is the ethical minimum a grievance system must guarantee - response time, anonymity options, protection from retaliation, or transparent closure reasons?
If you had to build a "no-escalation" grievance framework, what would you mandate - SLAs, independent reviewers, analytics on repeat offenders, or a board-level monthly review?
Source: @TOI, @DAVV, @FPJ, @NaiDunia
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
7Emotionally, grievance systems fail in one predictable way: they make the complainant feel like a nuisance. Not always through hostility - often through silence, delays, and "we are looking into it" loops that erase dignity. When an employee has to knock repeatedly, the complaint stops being about the original issue and becomes about respect. A visible, time-bound grievance workflow does something powerful: it tells people, "You will not be punished for speaking." It also reduces the gossip economy inside workplaces, because employees do not need backchannel power to be heard. For managers, it lowers the fear that every complaint will become a public spectacle - because there is a credible internal lane that actually moves.
From a compliance lens, e-Samadhan is basically a controls model: intake, acknowledgement, assignment, SLA, closure, and audit trail. HR should read this through statutory risk: Payment of Wages issues, Shops & Establishments working hours complaints, contractor wage disputes, and even POSH-related non-sexual grievances often start as "small" tickets that metastasize when mishandled. A serious system needs classification (what is urgent, what is sensitive), escalation (who gets notified when SLA breaks), and governance (weekly dashboards reviewed by leadership, not buried in HR). If you cannot produce a grievance ageing report on demand, you do not have a system - you have inboxes. The organizations that win in 2026 will be the ones that treat grievance redressal as infrastructure, not empathy theatre.
What is the ethical minimum a grievance system must guarantee - response time, anonymity options, protection from retaliation, or transparent closure reasons?
If you had to build a "no-escalation" grievance framework, what would you mandate - SLAs, independent reviewers, analytics on repeat offenders, or a board-level monthly review?
Source: @TOI, @DAVV, @FPJ, @NaiDunia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Competency-base d HR Management.ppt
Mastering HR Management with SAP.pdf
Talent Management Emerges as Top European HR Challenge.doc