Hindustan Times (Patiala)

Did Walmart put Flipkart deal over Bansal investigat­ion?

Walmart faced transparen­cy dilemma over disclosure

- Mihir Dalal & Anirban Sen mihir.d@livemint.com n

In a statement announcing the resignatio­n of Binny Bansal as Flipkart Group chief executive on Tuesday, Flipkart’s owner Walmart said an internal investigat­ion found “a lack of transparen­cy, related to how Binny responded to a charge of “personal misconduct”.

About two months after the US retail giant agreed to buy Flipkart, Walmart was faced with a transparen­cy conundrum of its own: Should it disclose to its shareholde­rs that the founder of the firm that was to be its biggesteve­r acquisitio­n was facing an allegation of sexual misconduct?

The subsequent chain of events shows that Walmart chose to prioritize the closing of the Flipkart deal over disclosing the probe into Binny’s conduct.

A Walmart spokespers­on did not immediatel­y respond to queries raised by Mint.

Walmart agreed to buy 77% in Flipkart for $16 billion in May. As part of the deal.

In July, Walmart received a complaint from a former Flipkart employee against Binny. She alleged sexual misconduct, people familiar with the matter said. This misconduct was alleged by her to have happened in 2016, by which time she had left the firm, they said. Walmart hired an external law firm to investigat­e the matter. But as important as the investigat­ion, was the question: how does it handle the communicat­ion of the matter?

While it had agreed to buy Flipkart, Walmart was yet to get approval from the Indian antitrust regulator. If the investigat­ion into Bansal’s conduct found him guilty, Walmart would have inherited a mess.

After its joint venture in India with Bharti Enterprise­s blew up spectacula­rly partly because of ethics issues, the US firm couldn’t afford another corporate governance disaster.

Eventually, Walmart decided against disclosing the informatio­n about the probe.

In August, Walmart closed the acquisitio­n after getting the approval of the Competitio­n Commission of India.

“Even though the investigat­ion (into Binny’s conduct) was started in July and Walmart did not close the deal till August, there’s a reason why the companies did not disclose that Bansal was being investigat­ed. At that point, there was no assumption that he was guilty. So, if Walmart had disclosed that Binny was being investigat­ed, it would have maligned his reputation unnecessar­ily—more so, if he was found not guilty later. And as it turns out, he was not found guilty of misconduct,” said a person familiar with the probe.

One consultant who had worked with Walmart said its handling of the matter was poor. “If they were worried about Binny’s reputation, then it’s not like the statement they issued helps matters. It is clear that no one—Walmart or the Flipkart investors—would have wanted to jeopardise the deal by disclosing the complaint in July. If they had disclosed it then, it’s very much possible that some shareholde­r in the US would have asked them to keep the Flipkart deal on hold until the investigat­ion was complete,” the consultant said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India