This project has a long history. After completing my MBA from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, I joined Procter and Gamble's marketing department in 1989. I was a great believer in the dominant paradigm that is often taught at business schools: firms maximize profits, those that do not are punished by the market, and managers can objectively pursue profit maximization by employing tools of investment appraisal. So, armed with technocratic knowledge and naive enthusiasm, I joined Procter and Gamble that was (and continues to be) a well-regarded and profitable company. One of the things that really struck me was the role of organizational dynamics in affecting a firm's tactical and strategic decisions. The neoclassical economic theory and the various sophisticated financial and marketing techniques that I had learnt at my alma mater did not seem to have the desired relevance. I had always thought that only the functioning of governmental bureaucracies was impacted by organizational politics. How wrong I was! As I exchanged notes with my fellow MBAs across firms and functional areas, I realized that they too were having similar experiences. Broad structural factors external to firms indeed outlined a framework within which firms made decisions. Firms also seemed to pursue a loosely defined objective of “high” levels of “profits.” However, internal politics – inter-personal, inter-departmental, etc. – was important in shaping outcomes. Many projects that were pursued were clearly wrong and many “sensible” policies were not adopted. The strategies and power of key individuals mattered in shaping organizational outcomes.