• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

BureaucratONE

Learn like a bureaucrat

  • Home
  • Blog
  • About & Contact
  • YouTube

Public Administration

Importance of Human Resource Development

October 4, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated October 4, 2020

The organization is made up of methods, material and men. Therefore personnel administration is a core of organization management.

Importance of Human resource

Even classical thinker Taylor realised human resource importance but they overemphasised structure and process - simplistically assumed that given the right incentive, technical training, hierarchical supervision, leadership, management and using principles of management would be sufficient. But Human relation schools offered insights into behavioural aspects and the power of informal organisation or groups i.e man responds both as an individual as well as the part of a group. i.e individual motivation and collective or group dynamics.

Even though modern market-oriented philosophies (NPM, PC) tend to blame Bureaucracy for Public Sector inefficiency - yet they also acknowledge that ultimately he is the man who is the key to solve the problem and not just money or methods. Funds are valuable only when used by trained experienced and devoted Human resource. Committed Human resource can work even with minimal resources and compelling conditions (even without basic infra).

Human resource is a strategic differentiator among the organisation. The world public sector report treats Human resource as a key variable. In Africa and Latin America, the reports speak about lost decades (post-independence era) where the emphasis is on structural adjustment and transplanting institution and less importance was given to Human resources - Knowledge, Skill and Attitude.

On the contrary, India could successfully emerge through the transition period since political leadership empowered civil services and they responded by demonstrating commitment and continuity with change. Even though the apex political leadership wanted to wind up ICS and start Indian development service, deputy PM Patel was more pragmatic and realised the criticality of having civil service. The faith was proved right with Civil service playing an important role in integration of princely states, they adapted, showed resilience and contributed to nation-building. Even in the current context where admin has become a shared space / multi-actor model civil service continues to be important as ever but in a different manner.

HDR - Human development Report 2013 pointed out the importance of investing in Human resources leading to exponential returns and triggering a virtual cycle, there is growing consensus worldwide that public sector capacity building should be people-centric not just process-centric. Human resource is the 1st customers. Therefore motivated Human resource leads to a contingent/tipping point leadership/ripple effect. World Bank studies indicate a high correlation between the quality of governance, Human development and Human resource management policies of the country. As demonstrated by Riggs, just by transplanting structure and functions objectives can't be achieved. Governance deficit is a creation and a reflection of weak Human Resource management.

Importance of Human resource management

  • Attract, train and retain the best talent
  • Ensure ideal job fit - Right Person for the Right Job
  • HRM + HRD established an organisational climate which enhances productivity, motivation, job satisfaction, promptness, professionalism and stimulates every employee to achieve his full potential
  • Synchronise self and organisational goals
  • Achieve work-life balance
  • Transform the organisation into learning entities - 360*, 365 days

Human Resource Development

  • Sum total of KSA and organisational values of employees - Definition
  • Acquisition of capabilities required to do present Job effectively and prepare for failure responsibilities. Therefore HRD helps in
    • Increased sharpen capabilities
    • Develop potential
    • Individual and organisation Potential
    • Organised learning experience
    • Team Work
    • Collaboration and synergy - employees take pride in organisation and organisation take pride in their employees.
  • At individual level HRD contributes to Role clarity, goal clarity, Job enrichment, interpersonal trust, confidence and competence
  • At group level - strengths team behaviour, coordination, multi-disciplinary talent pooling, quality interactions, symbiosis.
  • At organisational level - better productivity, Industrial relations and transformations.

Paradigm shift from conventional management and Human resource management

DimensionsConventional ManagementHRM / HRD Approach
1.StructureHierarchical, Centralised, ClosedLess Hierarchical / matrix/centralised,
Open, even, virtual(tech based),
multi-disciplinary / project approach
2.DesignPyramidicalGrid, Flatter
3.Management Style or Management Assumptiontheory XTheory Y, Z, Management by Objective
4.Exepected BehaviourRule Compliance, process-centric, discipline, obedience, doing things rightly(admin behaviour)Goal Oriented, people centric, performance driven, change oriented, innovative
5.Motivational AssumptionsAdam - Monetary incentives, lower needs of Malow's HierarchyAbraham - Job enrichment, satisfaction, challenging, assignment, creativity
6.CultureCommand and ControlCollective Decision Making, Shared vision, employee engagement, stakeholder involvement
7.HR practices
a) RecruitmentRecruitment is based on merit system but lifetime employment, Generalist ApproachMerit System but focused on performance, need-based, task orientation, specialist driven, including lateral recruitment
b)TrainingInduction training (entry-level)365 days, 360*(exposure visit hands-on)
c)Performance AppraisalAnnual Confidential Report by Hierarchical Superior360* appraisal (holistic approach) and potential appraisal
d)PromotionSeniority, time-bound, no-penalisation for non-performancePerformance-driven
e)PayFixedFixed + performance-related payment

Filed Under: Public Administration, UPSC

Simon's decision making theory

September 20, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 25, 2020

Herbert A. Simon is an American economist, political scientist, sociologist and cognitive psychologist. He was awarded Nobel price in Economics in 1978  for his work on organizational decision making. He was known for his interdisciplinary research across the fields of cognitive science, computer science, public administration, management, and political science. He was also a pioneer of modern-day Artificial Intelligence and Information system. He is best known for his research in decision-making within an organisation and the theories of bounded rationality and satisficing. He considered decision making as the core of Administration. To him, the administration is nothing but decision making.

Simon's criticism on classical theories

Simon was inspired by

  • Follett's ideas on group dynamics in organization,
  • Mayo's Human relations approach
  • Bernard's Functions of Executive (Simon mentioned Bernard's name 37 times in his theory)

According to Simon classical theories as mere "proverbs, myths, slogans and pompous inanities ". Because he claimed that classical principles appears to be logical and nicely argued, but when applied to reality they are contradictory to each other. Therefore he remarked, " When these principles of administration Confront evidence they fail. "

For example, he highlighted the contradiction between the following principles

  1. Principle of Span of Control vs Principle of Communication
  2. Unity of Command vs Division of work as per principle of Specialization
    • He argued how can different aspects of job be supervised by a single superior
  3. Concept of Departmentalization based on 4 P's
    • Simon says purpose and process are hardly different
    • In fact, people and place can be a purpose in itself

Simon even went to the extent of criticizing classical theories as unscientific and based on rule-of-thumb. He argued anything to be science should be based on observation, empiricism, and inductive analysis rather than being based on casual approach experience and deductive analysis. Moreover, everything in science is provisional and permanently provisional.

Theories of Herbert Simon

  • Decision-Making Theory
    • Facts and Value
    • Stages of Decision Making
    • Nature of Decision Making
    • Types of Decision Making
  • Modes of Influence

Decision Making Theory - Facts and Value

According to Simon every decision (choice) has two components

  • Facts
  • Values

To explain facts and values he used means-end paradigm. The factual component is the means and value component is the end. This means-end process is a never-ending process. The means become end when the goal is achieved, while the end becomes a means for a new goal and thus this means-end process is a never-ending process.

Simon was interested only in the factual component of decision making while he avoided the value component in decision making. He believed ' Science of administration ' could be build only over the factual premise and not on the value or ethical premise of decision making. So he remarked " An administrative science, like any science is concerned purely with factual statements. There is no place for ethical statements in the study of science".

So many argued his fact-value premise is very similar to classical politics-administration dichotomy where the administration should only focus on facts or instrumental role and not on the values or ethics or political questions which are part of politics. But Simon actually challenged dichotomy and observed " Administration deal in a range of values ". Here the values mean broader philosophical value and constitutional value and not the policy values.

Stages in decision making

According to Simon, decision making is a 3 stage process

  • Intelligence - gather intelligence on problematic situations that need a fresh decision or action
  • Design - Create multiple alternate courses of action based on gathered intelligence
  • Choice - choose the best course of action from among the multiple courses of action
  • Feedback stage (was added later)

Nature of Decision making (bounded rationality)

He included the idea of rationality in decision making. But he rejected the classical concept of absolute(total) rationality in decision making. Instead, he proposed his concept of bounded rationality.

He argued the absolute rationality(only best) in decision making are made under the following assumptions.

  • The decision-makers know all the alternatives
  • He knows the consequence of all the alternatives
  • He has the ordered preference among all alternatives

For the above assumption to be a reality. He needs the following four things

  • Access to Infinite data
  • Capacity to process infinite data
  • Capacity to generate all possible alternatives

But in reality, the data and capacity are limited by men, material and money. Therefore absolute rationality is a myth and what is possible is bounded rationality.

Bounded Rationality

According to bounded rationality, decisions are taken with limitations. He explained the bounded rationality with three models of decision-maker

  • Economic Man
  • Administrative Man
  • Social Man

To be continued........

Previous years Public Administration Questions and answers from Simon's decision-making theory

2018 - "Herbert Simon's book Administrative Behavior presents a synthesis of the classical and behavioural approaches to the study of Public Administration:' Explain. (Administrative Behaviour

Herbert Simon presented his theory of " bounded rationality " and " satisficing model " in his book " Administrative Behaviour ". As a behavioural scholar, he took the behavioural approach to achieve the classical goal of E3 - Efficiency, economy and effectiveness in administration. He said classical theories assume human being as " economic man " with his " absolute rationality " takes " the best " decision but in reality, he is an "administrative man " who is limited by information and cognition capacity to analyse the info and takes a decision that is " good enough " that is satisfactory(satisficing) in nature. Which he described as the bounded rationality.

At the same time he claimed this good enough decision can be made as good as " the best " decision by overcoming the shortcoming of information and analysis by providing the two things

  • Information Management system (solves info problem)
  • Information processing model and Artificial Intelligence (force multiplier to human cognition and analysis)

Although he criticized principles of administration as proverbs that occur in pairs. In the 2nd chapter of his book " administrative behaviour," he identified the problems in principles of administration and provided solutions to make it better. He said administrative efficiency can be increased by

  1. Limiting the span of control
  2. Specialization of task group
  3. Grouping of worker
  4. Establishing members in a hierarchy of authority

Thus his theory of administrative behaviour presents the synthesis of the classical and behavioural approach to the study of Public Administration because he corrected the principles of administration in addition to his behavioural theory.

2013 - Decisions are not made by " organizations ", but by " human beings " behaving as members of organizations. " How do Bernard and Simon conceptualize the relations between the decisions of the individual employee and the organizational authority?

Simon is a behavioural scholar who rejected the machine and structural model of organisation theory in favour of human, behavioural and psychological aspect of organisation theory. Therefore he defined organisation as a collection of human beings and not some mechanical construct and decision made by an organisation is nothing but human being behaving as members of the organisation. In classical theory, there was an artificial segregation between organisational authority and individual employees. Simon debunked it as the face behind the organisational authority is nothing but another individual employee.

Bernard introduced the idea of " Inducement-Contribution " net balance to align decisions of the individual employee with the expectations of organisational authority. Simon took this idea to next level by prescribing organisation to be magnanimous and offer more than fair inducement for the given contribution. As for tipping, the scale of inducement-contribution net balance in favour of individual employees will bring them into the " zone of acceptance " (similar to Bernard's zone of indifference). Only when the individual employee and the organisational authority are one the same page decisions of the organisation (read manager level employee) can be in sync with decisions of individual employees(esp lower-level employee).

2012 - " Three features characterize Simon's original view of bounded rationality: search for alternatives, satisficing and aspiration adaptation. " Elucidate

Simon proposed that there are four stages in decision making - Intelligence, design, choice and feedback. In which, the design is the stage where a search for an alternate course of actions takes place. Because of certain limitations, these alternate course of action will be satisficing in nature rather than the optimum and best course of action. He called these limitations as bounded rationality.

BOUNDED RATIONALITY: Simon also gave the example of an administrative man(bounded rationality) who unlike economic man will settle (satisficing) for a course of action that adapts to his aspiration. While an economic man(absolute rationality) settles only for the best course of action suitable for his aspiration. But in reality economic man doesn't have access to infinite data and the capacity to process this infinite data and to come up with the best course of action. Such situations are hypothetical and are limited by cognitive impediments, external impediments and informational shortage.

2010 - " Simon's identifying decision - making as the core field of public administration appears logically acceptable but his positivist underpinning is problematic ". Critically examine the statement.

Simon claimed that there are two components in decision making - value and fact. So he argued an administrative science or science of decision making, like pure science, should be concerned only with the facts and not values. This is the positivist approach of creating a value-free science of administration.

Critics like Chris Argyris questioned his positivist approach to have the science of administration validated like pure science although sounds logical, is problematic because public administration always deals with values.

To put this criticism in correct perspective Simon actually challenged dichotomy and observed: " Administrators must deal in a range of values ". Values here means broader philosophical and constitutional values. So, in reality, the positivist underpinning is not problematic.

2006- " Simon's work has had major implications for the study of public administration and the practice of public administration professionals. " Comment.

Implications of bounded rationality: In bounded-rationality, Simon proposed the rationality of decisions are bounded by limitations like information, analysis and cognition. In legal-rational authority, Weber proposed the rationality of decision are limited by the legality of the decisions i.e rules and regulations that govern the decisions.

Value-Fact Premises: Simon's quest for value-free administrative science not only gave the muscle and flesh but also the soul to Weber's bureaucratic model. As Weber also wants his bureaucracy to deal with just factual aspect of administration and not deal with the value aspect of administration which is a question of the political executive.

Stages of Decision Making: Simon proposed there are three and later four stages in decision making - Intelligence, Design, Choice and Feedback which also the SOP of the bureaucratic decision-making process - Intelligence is the stage Bureaucrats identifies areas of interest or that need government focus (e.g economy), the design is the stage they come up with alternatives(e.g capitalism, socialism, communism), the choice is the stage where political executives decide based on values enshrined in the constitution (e.g socialism) and feedback is the stage bureaucrats gives policy feedback(e.g 1991 economic reforms).

2001 - " The ' decision-making scheme ' and ' satisfying model ' of Herbery A Simon is the major component of administrative theory. Comment

Simon is a behavioural scholar who in his book " Administrative Behaviour " wrote about his research he conducted on decision making in organisations. In his attempt to come up with an administrative theory he claimed decision making is the heart of administration theory and nothing else is more important than decision making in an organisation. But unlike decision making in classical theories where there is an assumption of absolute rationality, his decision-making scheme is based on " bounded rationality " i.e decisions are taken with limits in the three stages of decision making

  • Intelligence - use of cognition and info in search for situations that need decisions
  • Design - of alternate and various decision
  • Choice - between various decision

He claimed that the limits is due to impediments to rationality because of info shortage or info overload and cognitive impediments to process the info available. Therefore the decision-maker whom he called as " administrative man " resorts to a good enough satisfactory decision(satisficing model).

2000 - " Administrative efficiency is enhanced by keeping at a minimum the number of organisational levels through which a matter must pass before it is acted upon " - (Herbert A. Simon). Comment

Although Simon criticized principles of administration as proverbs that occur in pairs. In the 2nd chapter of his book " administrative behaviour," he identified the problems in principles of administration and provided solutions to make it better. One such solution is he said administrative efficiency can be increased by keeping at a minimum the number of organisational levels through which a matter must pass before it is acted upon will increase efficiency because

  • Reduce red-tapism
  • Because too many cooks spoil the broth i.e too many decision maker will spoil the decisions
  • Reduces any potential loss in information(affects quality of decision) when they are passed through many levels

According to him this can be achieved by delegation and keeping the chain of command short and in Modern day Management by exception i.e get involved only when there is a exceptional need to involve else just delegate.

1999 - " The basic question in the relationship between political and permanent executives is the separation of facts and values at the operational level." Comment

Simon proposed that there are two component in decision making. - Facts and Values. He aimed to create a science of administration on par with the applied science like physics and chemistry. So he approached administration from a positivist perspective and wants the science of administration to be validated like applied science. So he proposed science of administration should focus only on the facts and not values. At the same time, he challenged dichotomy and observed: " Administration must deal in a range of values ". By this, he meant values like broad constitutional values. But when it comes to operations or execution permanent executives should only focus on facts not the values like emotions, loyalty ..etc, which are the prerogative of political executives.

1995 - " The study of decision-making is proceeding in so many directions that we can lose sight of the basic administrative process that Barnard and Simon were trying to describe and that so many men have been trying to improve." Elucidate

To be compiled. please leave your best answer or any other best answer you came across to this question in the comment section. Thank you

1994 - " As March and Simon point out, there seems to exist a " Gresham's Law " of decision-making." Explain

According to Gresham's Law " Bad money drives out good money " in economics. When applied to Simon's decision-making theory, March and Simon point out that " Bad Info drives out good Info " and therefore " Bad analysis drives out good analysis " and thus " Bad decisions drives out good decisions ".

Therefor to avoid bad decisions good info is necessary, so Simon proposed Information management system that filters out only good info from bad info. This good info is passed on to next stage i.e Information processing system like Artificial Intelligence which uses the computational power of modern super computers and simulation test will give a "satisficing" result that is good enough.

1993 - " Though somewhat unwittingly, Herbert Simon and James March have provided, the muscle and the flesh to the Weberian (bureaucratic) skeleton." Comment.

Weber's bureaucratic model aims to create a " legal-rational authority " which is very similar to " Bounded-rationality ". In bounded-rationality, Simon proposed the rationality of decisions are bounded by limitations like information, analysis and cognition. In legal-rational authority, Weber proposed the rationality of decision are limited by the legality of the decisions i.e rules and regulations that govern the decisions.

Value-Fact Premises: Simon's quest for value-free administrative science not only gave the muscle and flesh but also the soul to Weber's bureaucratic model. As Weber also wants his bureaucracy to deal with just factual aspect of administration and not deal with the value aspect of administration which is a question of the political executive.

Stages of Decision Making: Simon proposed there are three and later four stages in decision making - Intelligence, Design, Choice and Feedback which also the SOP of the bureaucratic decision-making process - Intelligence is the stage Bureaucrats identifies areas of interest or that need government focus (e.g economy), the design is the stage they come up with alternatives(e.g capitalism, socialism, communism), the choice is the stage where political executives decide based on values enshrined in the constitution (e.g socialism) and feedback is the stage bureaucrats gives policy feedback(e.g 1991 economic reforms).

1992 - Argue for and against the Simon perspective that the " decisional science envelopes decisional structure, decisions and their feedback not in an integrated manner but anything other than that. "

To be compiled. please leave your best answer or any other best answer you came across to this question in the comment section. Thank you

1988 - Discuss the Simonian concept of " Satisfying " as a bridge between rational and non-rational perspectives on organisation.

According to Simon Study of an organisation is nothing but the study of decisions taken by the organisation. According to classical theories, Organisation takes a rational perspective while taking a decision because of the assumption that they have perfect information and they performed a perfect analysis of alternatives and thus final choice from the existing alternatives is bound to be perfectly rational.

And there is another end of the spectrum where decisions are made based on thumb-rules or certain values like emotion and loyalty. At this end of the spectrum, the organisation take a completely non-rational decision, which he called as the non-rational perspective.

But according to Simon, in reality, perfect information, analysis and cognition to zero down on perfect decision is not available and therefore in reality organisation take a decision that bounded by limited info, analysis and choice which he calls as " satisfying " decision in his " bounded-rationality " model. This his bounded-rationality model is a bridge between absolutely rational and non-rational organisations.

1987 - The first stage (in administrative decision-making) is what I call "Intelligence", the second represents " Design " and the last stage is " Choice ". Critically examine the Simonian Model of Rational Decision - Making in Administration.

According to Simon Study of an organisation is nothing but the study of decisions taken by the organisation. According to him, there are three stages to decision making

Stages of Decision Making: Simon proposed there are three and later four stages in decision making - Intelligence, Design, Choice and Feedback.

  • Intelligence - gather intelligence on problematic situations that need a fresh decision or action
  • Design - Create multiple alternate courses of action based on gathered intelligence
  • Choice - choose the best course of action from among the multiple courses of action
  • Feedback stage (was added later)

The above stages are also similar to the bureaucratic decision-making process

  • Intelligence is the stage Bureaucrats identifies areas of interest or that need government focus (e.g economy)
  • the design is the stage they come up with alternatives(e.g capitalism, socialism, communism)
  • the choice is the stage where political executives decide based on values enshrined in the constitution (e.g socialism)
  • feedback is the stage bureaucrats give policy feedback(e.g 1991 economic reforms).

Filed Under: Public Administration, UPSC

Police Reforms and problems of Police

September 18, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 18, 2020

Before we understand police reforms and need for reforms, we need to understand problems of police in India. It can be categorised under

  • Structural Problems
    • Goal Clarity
    • Role Clarity
    • Dual accountability
  • Operational problems
  • Infrastructural problems
  • Behavioural Issues
  • Police Public Relationship - Past, present and ideal

Structural Problems

  1. Goal Clarity
    • Police a force or service?
    • Is it an L&O agency or people-friendly law enforcement authority
    • Who owns police - state or society?
    • What is their fundamental vision and mission?

As per SC in Prakash Singh Judgement 2006 - commitment and devotion of police is only to the rule of law. The supervision and control has to be such that police serve people without any regard to status and position of person. During investigation / preventive measures

  1. Role Clarity
    • Role overload - no sense of prioritisation (it includes core and non-core responsibilities)
    • L&O maintenance - Ideally police should be bifurcated into
      • prevention and protection
      • Investigation and prosecution
    • because these two macro functions requires different skill and attitude
    • Police to population ratio - UK - 1:290 and India - 1:690
    • 87% of police personnel is constabulary (no FRI or no arrest)
    • Teeth to tail ratio = SI: Constables
      • Ideal - 1:7
      • India - 1:15
  1. Dual Accountability

In 1996 petition - The present distortion has its roots in colonial past (1861 Act) and it completely sub-ordinates police to executive and even to political executive which was designed originally to protect British Raj - Indian police groomed by British on military ethos and their model was Irish police instead of British constabulary ( Br. police is known for their efficiency and effectiveness )

SC in 2006 Prakash Singh case gave 7 direction on Police Reform

  • Create state security commission to insulate police
  • Create police establishment board to give functional autonomy - recruitment, training and posting
  • Selection of DG from a panel of three senior-most panels and tenure of two years, similar tenures for other officers
  • Create police complaints authority (to investigate police against police)
  • Separate prevention from Law and order.

However L&O is a state subject and states are highly reluctant, lack of political will to reduce control on police. Although directions were supposed to be implemented by 2007. Justice K Thomas committee observed that most of the states have not implemented and are indifferent to police reforms.

Centre came up with a draft model police act and drafted by Soli Sorabjee Committee but states have not yet made the changes in true letter and spirit.

Maharastra recently filed an affidavit asking SC, if these are guidelines or order or encroachment on states power while some other states have expressed practical in-ability in implementation as observed by CHRI - Common Wealth Human Rights Investigation. Bigger the state greater seems to be the defiance on Judiciary's order of police reforms.

Why should law be separate from order

Police should report to political executive. They argue that uncontrolled and unregulated police force undermine democracy, uniform service having to access and authority to use force but without Checks and Balance, Control and Accountability. Who will guard the guards?. There would be danger of abuse - coercive power can extinguish the flame of liberty unless it is tempered by responsible political direction

Extraneous pressure and vested interest prevent police from objective action. Therefore separate L&O. Even J has directed for separation and insulation of police from political pressure, Since police force is frequently misused by political masters for

  • Spy on political rivals
  • Going slow on investigation
  • Selective pursuit on politically sensitive cases. e.g closure and reopening of cases
  • Influencing police during investigation, riots, communal clashes, conflict resolution and election related violence
  • Impact of CPPC
  • Failure to identify chain of command e.g in the proposed communal violence bill, civil society wanted clarity on chain of commands. i.e who should be ultimately held responsible and accountable for action /inaction

Ideally, police should be brought under political executive for preventive aspects but in the investigation, they should be completely insulated. e.g SC observed apex agency like CBI is subject to political pressure. CBI is like a parrot speaking his master's voice

The politicisation of police leads to loss of objectivity and credibility, police will continue to be a state force or state machinery in the eyes of citizens if this segregation does not happen.

to be continued...

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

Law and Order

September 17, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 18, 2020

Framework

Meaning of Law

Law is that portion of established thought which has got a distinct and formal recognition, in the shape of a uniform Law which is backed by the government

Meaning of Order

Faithful and peaceful observant of law

Importance of Law and Order

  1. Rule of Law - It is the sovereign function of the state which is as important as defending the county form external aggression, it is the rule of law that we have sought to avoid the danger of unfettered (without limit) executive discretion and ensure all citizens have their rights.
  2. Yogashema
  3. For greater good - ensure that one's freedom does not come in the way of other person enjoying liberties and at the same time implement policies for the general good, which may have affected parties but their interest is also taken care by the law.
  4. Need for social discipline - without the sanctity of law, there will be danger of anarchy
  5. Development requires peaceful L&O. The reinforce each other
  6. States with a better perception of L&O attract greater investments
  7. Need to have an effective criminal justice system. To serve as a deterrent against violation of law
  8. Preventive mechanism - Maintain social peace - if a violation occurs, then conduct investigation
  9. Prepare grounds for prosecution and oversee enforcement of punitive mechanism

Functions of Police

  • Promote and preserve public order
  • Identify problems and situations that are likely to result in crime. (Intelligence collection and prevention)
  • Aid and cooperate with other relevant agencies in implementing appropriate measures for creating and maintaining a sense of security
  • Aid individuals who are in the danger of physical harm
  • Provide relief to people who are in distressed situation
  • Preserve legitimacy of governance
  • Sanctity of law
  • Maintain internal security
  • Facilitate orderly movement of people and vehicles
  • Conflict resolution
  • Promote brotherhood - fraternity
  • Crime investigation
  • Reinforce the feeling of safety and security

Challenges in maintaining Law & Order

Balancing between
Liberty of IndividualRule of law and state security consideration
FreedomControl
Public AgitationPublic resignation (suppression of rights)
Hard stateSoft state
PermissivenessAuthoritarianism
Tolerating people's dissent when expressed democratically and peacefullySuppressing people's voice and participation
Challenges in maintaining L&O

Read more about DC and Law and Order

Read more about Police problems and Police Reforms

Read more about Police-Public Relations

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

District Collector and Law and Order

September 17, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 17, 2020

Traditionally DC has been entrusted with the ultimate responsibility of maintaining peaceful L&O in a district. In 1861 the police act creates a reporting relationship between DC and SP. It was commented for law go to courts, for order got to police, for L&O come to us. This was true pre-1947 when DC performed both executive magistracy and judicial magistracy. But post-1947, a separate hierarchy of district judges have come up. Therefore DC looks after only executive magistracy. E.g power to impose section 144, issue arms licenses. Inspection of Jails and other activities in which he is assisted by District police headed by SP who works closely with DC. Though Dc and SP have a reporting relationship DC is not expected to interfere in day to day working of police machinery which is SP's domain. SP is also accountable to his own police h'y which ultimately ends at DG at state level. Therefore to some extent, it is a violation of unity of commands. However, this relationship may lead to problems.

  • Police traditionally oppose reporting relationship with DC stating the 1861 act as colonial legacy
  • Generalist(DC) vs Specialist(SP)
  • Politicisation - SP
  • No consensus w.r.t use of force and quantum
  • Personality clashes

1861 act is a colonial legacy and since SP is a specialist different national police commission had consistently advocated changing over to SP lead L&O system in the district. They draw parallel with a commissioned system in metros where police commissioner is ultimately responsible for L&O. This overlooks the fact that a police commissioner is a highly experienced officer ( 25-30 years). Who has to deal with diverse situation quickly. While is a typical district SP is a rookie and the nature of L&O requires combined efforts of SP and DC. It is not possible to separate regulatory admin from development admin. Both impact and influence each other. Also, L&O management is not just about using force, it requires root cause analysis and authority to diffuse crisis and effectively redress grievances. Therefore commissions like 2nd ARC have suggested status quo between SP and DC but should operate more as colleagues.

Contemporary problems in Law and Order

  • Complex L&O - Changing nature of crimes
  • Pressure on admin to deliver quick results
  • Change in the scale of violence
  • Civil Society vigilantism - mob justice
  • Balancing human rights and national security consideration
  • Political pressure
  • Impact of technology - presence of instant reporting mechanism
  • Waiting for orders syndrome
  • Cynical attitude of society towards constructive engagement
  • Increasing horizontal social, micro, control and accountability
  • Power of media - esp. social media
  • Problems of communal riot in a fragmented society with historic fault lines - uneven development
  • Lack of employment opportunities
  • Politicization
  • Exploitation for electoral gains - triggers social unrest. Ideally, it requires concerted efforts from stakeholders (everyone) - DC and SP will have to create consensus and restore normalcy and peace esp. by persuading and cultivating key decision-makers / opinion influences of civil society
  • Political executive too should play a constructive role in diffusing tensions and avoid polarization
  • Internal security and external security are intricately linked esp. in border areas, disturbed regions and LMN affected areas.

Read more in Law and Order Administration

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

Relationship between DC & LSG – Bureaucracy and Decentralization

September 17, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 17, 2020

For almost 200 years District Collector enjoyed unchallenged omnipotence but with the creation of LSG, it creates a kind of a reporting relationship between District admin and LSG but in most states, there is no clarity w.r.t relation between DC and LSG.

Why is B'y against LSG

  • It establishes control and accountability - which goes against the traditional relationship between DC and local body/people.
  • Creates horizontal, lateral, diagonal social micro accountability of DC to Local Bodies
  • Vested interest - Loss of patronage
  • Shifting the balance of power - inverting the power pyramid - goes against the typical colonial regulatory mindset of treating citizens like subjects
  • Not yet reconciled to the idea of LSG as the primary vehicle of development
  • Fierce loss of power - In many states, DC is still an inspector of PRI's. Has the power to suspend PRI resolution
  • Even the states support DC instead of LSG due to lack of political will to empower LSG

Should District collector exit from developmental scene ?

  • For
    • DC does not have the skillset and mindset for development. Therefore separate regulation and development admin
    • CEO of Zilla Parishad - Can look after development while DC can be restricted to the regulation of L&O
  • Against
    • Can't artificially segregate regulation and development. Both reinforce each other, share a complementary relationship, not practically possible
    • DC as an area officer is strategically placed to coordinated and generate synergy among officers and staff belonging to different director/development. No other official is equipped to create consensus and to generate outcome as much of DC who can use his power (hard and soft) to bring about integrated development (ripple effect)
    • DC can interact with both LSG and State - act as an interface and identify real needs rather than stated demands. e.g - LSG at times may be guilty of being too parochial and myopic rather than looking at the macro, big picture / long term due to lack of E3 - Exposure, Experience and Expertise. But DC can unlock, discover real neds during his field tours/inspection one to one interactions with people and LSG but he needs to become more of a friend philosopher and guide helping LSG to take a more holistic decision.
    • DC in some cases has to play the role of staff officer instead of playing the traditional line role. But different districts in different states are at various stages of development or lack of development. Therefore there can't be a standardised model of development. It has to dynamically evolve, to suit the specific local needs taking into consideration, local conditions, resources and constraints. DC should align himself as per district needs. This requires attitudinal transformation

As observed by former PM - DC's role has not diminished, it has transformed into a more powerful role of coordinator, which he is well suited to play because of E3.

Even 2nd ARC while speaking of a district government has recommended that DCs role should not be diluted but re-aligned to include

  • Land revenue
  • L&O exercise
  • transport
  • elections (chief returning officers) - (Receive nomination, result announcement)
  • Facilitating PPP & PPPP(Punchayat Public pvt Partnership)
  • disaster management
  • protocol
  • census
  • treasury
  • General Administration GAD
  • public service delivery
  • PURA - Provision of urban amenities in rural areas
  • RTS - Right to Service
  • E6 - Efficiency, Effectiveness, Economy, Experience, Expertise, Exposure
  • SMART
  • VFM - Value for Money
  • Quality
  • C3 - Choice, Convenience, Customisation
  • PDS
  • Civil Supplies

Civil society Interface - NGO, Voluntary Organisation - need to engage with civil society - Practice Outreach - tap social capital. Use community strengths and voluntarism.

Facilitate entrepreneurs. Get feedback on policies schemes projects programmes, cultivate goodwill (esp in LMN areas). All these initiatives winning hearts and minds. - (admin help during crisis times will generate or create a +ve image of the state in the eyes of citizens).

National Civil Service Day Awards are given

  • Gulshan Bambra - Balaghat District - LMN affected area. Imaginative use of MGNAREGA. Outreach to rural haats. Assembled a team of officials at one place. Provide Goods & Service in one place. On the spot grievance redressal.
  • Krishan Kumar - Kanjam District Odisha - Disaster Management during Falin
  • Vineel Krishna - Malkangiri Odisha - LMN pocket outreach. The goodwill ultimately released him from abduction by LMN.

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

Democratic Decentralisation – LSG – Local Self Government

September 17, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 17, 2020

1995-2000

  • Global reaction to privatisation. " market-driven growth is rootless and jobless growth " - Amartya Sen
  • Growth ≠ Development - Human development Approach - life expectancy, literacy, poverty, IMR, MMR - Development was equated with freedom. i.e expanding choices access and more qualitative improvement
  • Even in governance Good governance was stressed upon - Rule of Law, transparency, accountability, consensus, participation, free and fair election
  • Focus was on equity and empowerment rather than on efficiency
  • Along with LPG, LSG took place. It added 3rd tier to federalism with the following feature with the following features
    • Structural Uniformity - 3 tier - Zilla Panchayat, Taluk Panchayat, Gram Panchayat, Gram Sabha
    • Elections conducted by state election commission - 5 years terms for PRI's and elections to be conducted within 6 months it prematurely dissolved.
    • Separate SFC - State Finance Commission for recommending allocation between state and LSG
    • Reservation - 1/3rd reservation for women even in a leadership position
    • Separate 11th and 12th Schedule (29 & 18 subjects) for PRI's (11th Sch & 73rd CAA) and ULB's(12th Sch & 74th CAA)

However, the most important provisions i.e giving autonomy to PRI is optional (States are reluctant to empower PRI's with F3). Therefore LSG has had limited success, that too in states like Kerala, W.B, Karnataka, AP, Rajasthan, MP and MH

Case studies of some Villages

  • Gangadevipalli - Telangana - 100% literacy, prohibition, toilet coverage, free Wifi and cable
  • Sachin Tendulkar adopted Puttamraju Kandriga under Sansad Adarsh Gram Yojana
  • Hiware Bazar - Village with 60 Millionaires
  • Punsari in Gujarat - Smartest Model Village
  • Chhavi Rajawat - MBA turned surpanch - Rajasthan - has lead the village in Rural Development esp. in sanitation, Hygiene programme
  • Gadchiroli in of MH was able to resist LMN impact through community and panchayat activism
  • Fatima Bewi in Kurnool District - Illiterate surpanch got UN race against poverty award
  • Cawzingirikhaning Gram panchayat in Sikkim launched Dharavikas programme - Spring shed development and has become self reliant
  • Sanur Gram Panchayat in Karnataka has got google award for Best panchayat - It reviwed traditional water bodies, rationed it and is least dependent on state for its developmental needs.

Post 73rd and 74th Amendment

  • Welfare to empowerment approach - Spice - Sustainable, participative, inclusive, comprehensive, empowerment oriented
  • State-led development to LSG / Community lead
  • RBA - Rights based approach - Statutory Entitlements .e.g - MGNAREGA, RTE, FSA - Food security Act
  • Citizen as an active collaborator. e.g Swatch Bharath Abhiyan, Kudumba Shree project in Kerala ( Poverty Elevation ), Bhakyadhari in Delhi
  • JAM approach - Jandan Adhaar and Mobile - Financial Inclusion, monetisation of the economy
  • Aadhar identity infra - Better targeting of beneficiaries, it checks leakages and pilferages, DBT - Direct benefit Transfer. Mobile - Tech-driven, better identification, verification and facilitation
  • Direct Outreach - Crowdsourcing, mygov.in
  • Smart City Approach
  • Digital India - E-governance, sansadh aadharsh gram yojana
  • Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gramin Kaushal Yojana - youth employment scheme

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

Development Administration and DC

September 17, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 17, 2020

Development is currently understood as an expansion of access and choice to goods and services. Making a qualitative difference in people's life. DC performs the development administration at the district level.

Before 1847, the developmental role of DC was highly limited. Development efforts were more due to charitable disposition rather than any welfare motive since the colonial state was exploitative in nature. Dc's role was regulatory - Maintain and preserve existing order - status quo (greater L&O orientation)

Post-1947

Post-1947 - Innovation of welfare state, adoption of socialistic philosophy - Objective was to establish just and equitable society avoiding the concentration of wealth and resources in the hand of few.

Centralised planning and modernisation was the chosen path i.e Harrald Dommar Model / Nehru - Mahalanobis Model - Key industries / heavy industries / Basic industries.

Bureaucracy's role in such a paradigm was PF at HQ and PI at the field. The then PM wanted to wind up ICS and create Indian Development Service so that there is role and goal clarity and development would be the prime objective instead of regulation. But leadership like Patel were more pragmatic / impressed by the role that ICS played during the integration of princely states. Favoured continuation of ICS turned IAS putting faith in their capacity to adopt and adapt to the changed philosophy i.e from regulation to welfare. Therefore at the field level, the historic pattern of DC being the overall in charge of DA continued but now with the inclusion of developmental responsibilities. DC's role thus becomes critical at field level.

His duty list included land reforms, L&O, revenue, food and civil supplies, relief and rehabilitation. Thus the state depended on DC as the deliverer of G&S for people. DC or District administration become the state in action

Alternate models i.e community lead and bottom-up model of development visualised by Gandhiji in the form of gram swaraj, power flowing from villages to elsewhere. It was not popular with the political leadership of the day. Which emphasised industrialisation and modernisation. Leaders like Ambedkar too were critical of Gram / Panchayat Centric models considering them as dens of communalism and ignorance. However keeping the Gandhian spirit alive, panchayats were made a part of DPSP (A40) and local admin was made a state subject. All this indirectly re-inforced the inevitability of Bureaucracy / DC in development admin.

Some attempts were made to involve people through community development programmes (NES - National Extension services 1952 - 1954 ) but people's participation was highly limited. Their interaction with the government was infrequent and Bureaucracy was awe-inspiring. Citizen's suffered from dependency syndrome. While Bureaucracy continues to suffer from a colonial hangover.

Later the government realised the need for having an institutional mechanism for people's participation in PES - Political, economic, Social developmental process. Therefore as recommended by Balvantharayan Mehta Committee, the government created a 3 tier Panchayat Raj System. - Gram Panchayat, Taluk Panchayat & Zilla Panchayat.

But this model was limited success and it had no correlation with DC i.e the relationship between DC and PRI's was never clarified after the initial hype. These 1st gen panchayats failed to take off. India eventually got caught in the -China War, monsoons failed, famine situation, food scarcity, attention was diverted towards food production, agriculture and green revolution. Most of the PRI official shifted to the ministry of agriculture. DC's office became more powerful. Since he was now coordinating and monitoring Agri production, relief management, civil supplies distribution....etc

Last 1960's and 1970's

  • Focus shifted to minimum needs programme - Poverty elevation, employment generation.
  • Large no of CSS
    • e.g DPAP - Drought prone area programme
    • DVP - Desert Development Programme
    • DQCRA - Development of women and children in Rural Areas - Which increased discretionary power of DC / B'y in terms of patronage e.g identification of beneficiaries. B'y was firmly entrenched in development administration
  • Later DRDA - District rural development agency. A nodal authority for district development was created with members drawn from different technical directorates, project heads, who met under the chairmanship of DC. Some R&D programmes later combined as IRDA - Integrated Rural Development Programme. This model was state lead and B'y implemented - had its limitations due to structural/conceptual weakness and implementational constraints

Weakness in B'y implemented and centralised model of Development

HQ Level

  • No customisation - one size fits all approach
  • Arm Chair PF - Remote sensing
  • Union ministries interested in mechanically releasing funds rather than monitoring and evaluation
  • No independent PE. Therefore incorrectness of developmental data - no comparable reliable verifiable information
  • Ministries concern with expenditure - Budget Maximisation, no mission mode approach, no deadlines, no smart targets. Specific, measurable, actionable, realistic and timebound - sunset legislation
  • Too much of centralisation - state government is critical of this approach
  • Focus on outlay rather than outcome
  • Long channel of distribution - prone to pilferage, transmission and distribution losses
  • Former PM Rajeev Gandhi commented out of every Rs spend only 15 paise reaches the beneficiary.

Field Level

  • Huge discretionary power
  • No SMART & No E6
  • Poor quality of work
  • Concentration was on new assets (new schools, new hospitals) rather than maintaining existing assets
  • Focus was on foundation stones and not on finishing stones
  • Rent seeking-corruption
  • Even though there were exclusive offices. e.g Block Development Officer. DC was the overall in-charge. e.g Knapur DC identified 167 schemes to operated at the Block level.
  • Lack of technically trained personnel
  • Poor skills, motivational level - Rural postings are treated as a punishment posting
  • DC suffered from a colonial hangover - the developmental role was overshadowed by his historic regulatory role. Always been a collector and never a giver. (Functional fixedness in psychology)
  • Developmental admin requires a different kind of mindset and skill set. The state-led developmental model, simplistically assumed that DC's rich experience in regulatory admin will automatically take care of developmental responsibility also. This was no always not true.
Required MindsetActual Mindset
Goal-OrientedGoal displacement
Change OrientationStatus Quo
InnovationStereotype, Conservative, precedent
People centricProcess centric
ParticipativeExclusivist
IntegratedFragmented, Differentiated, Diffused
Temporal dimension - time-bound
mission mode - sense of urgency
Work expands to the maximum time available
Citizen as an active collaboratorPassive recipient
Mindset needed for DC

Late 1980's - Rajivi Gandhi Phase

Ashok Mehta Committee was appointed in post-emergency period by Janata Government recommended two-tier panchayat also termed as 2nd Gen Panchayat.

State-led developmental model questioned by various committees like L.M.Singhavi, Dantevala Committee....etc and there was a renewed emphasis on Panchayat Raj Institution.

Pm's meeting with DCs convinced him the need for LSG as the 3rd tier of government and more importantly as the chief vehicle of development. The success of decentralised planning model in Kerala demonstrated the benefit of Bottom-up approach instead of the traditional top-down approach. However, states were reluctant to yield space for LSG and proposed constitutional amendment on LSG did not materialise.

Lateral entrants entered the developmental domain and lead mission mode projects (telecom, S&T) but it was at a macro level, at district level, D.Cs power continued to increase.

1990's

  • Change in global philosophy - NPM, Public Choice, Thatcherism, Reaganism, (Role back of State, pro-market). Neo-Taylorism. Search for efficiency. B'y seen as a budget maximiser. Demand for de-bureaucratisation and replacement by market forces - Outsource to the private sector. In India, BOP crisis triggered NEP - New Economic Policy / LPG
  • Changes in Indian developmental paradigm due to adoption of LPG
  • D4 - Disinvestment, de-licensing, de-regulation, de-reservation
  • Movement from imperative planning to indicative planning
  • Focus was on GDP growth
  • Assumption of trickle-down effect / Down-ward filtration i.e growth will eventually reach grassroots. Dismantling of licence permit Raj
  • Reducing Discretionary powers of B'y
  • Increased consumer choice
  • Negative growth in agriculture - no investment

Read LSG and Relationship between DC and LSG

Should District collector exit from developmental scene ?

  • For
    • DC does not have the skillset and mindset for development. Therefore separate regulation and development admin
    • CEO of Zilla Parishad - Can look after development while DC can be restricted to the regulation of L&O
  • Against
    • Can't artificially segregate regulation and development. Both reinforce each other, share a complementary relationship, not practically possible
    • DC as an area officer is strategically placed to coordinated and generate synergy among officers and staff belonging to different director/development. No other official is equipped to create consensus and to generate outcome as much of DC who can use his power (hard and soft) to bring about integrated development (ripple effect)
    • DC can interact with both LSG and State - act as an interface and identify real needs rather than stated demands. e.g - LSG at times may be guilty of being too parochial and myopic rather than looking at the macro, big picture / long term due to lack of E3 - Exposure, Experience and Expertise. But DC can unlock, discover real neds during his field tours/inspection one to one interactions with people and LSG but he needs to become more of a friend philosopher and guide helping LSG to take a more holistic decision.
    • DC in some cases has to play the role of staff officer instead of playing the traditional line role. But different districts in different states are at various stages of development or lack of development. Therefore there can't be a standardised model of development. It has to dynamically evolve, to suit the specific local needs taking into consideration, local conditions, resources and constraints. DC should align himself as per district needs. This requires attitudinal transformation

As observed by former PM - DC's role has not diminished, it has transformed into a more powerful role of coordinator, which he is well suited to play because of E3.

Even 2nd ARC while speaking of a district government has recommended that DCs role should not be diluted but re-aligned to include

Roles of DC
  • Land revenue
  • L&O exercise
  • transport
  • elections (chief returning officers) - (Receive nomination, result announcement)
  • Facilitating PPP & PPPP(Punchayat Public pvt Partnership)
  • disaster management
  • protocol
  • census
  • treasury
  • General Administration GAD
  • public service delivery
  • PURA - Provision of urban amenities in rural areas
  • RTS - Right to Service
  • E6 - Efficiency, Effectiveness, Economy, Experience, Expertise, Exposure
  • SMART
  • VFM - Value for Money
  • Quality
  • C3 - Choice, Convenience, Customisation
  • PDS
  • Civil Supplies

Civil society Interface - NGO, Voluntary Organisation - need to engage with civil society - Practice Outreach - tap social capital. Use community strengths and voluntarism.

Facilitate entrepreneurs. Get feedback on policies schemes projects programmes, cultivate goodwill (esp in LMN areas). All these initiatives winning hearts and minds. - (admin help during crisis times will generate or create a +ve image of the state in the eyes of citizens).

National Civil Service Day Awards are given

  • Gulshan Bambra - Balaghat District - LMN affected area. Imaginative use of MGNAREGA. Outreach to rural haats. Assembled a team of officials at one place. Provide Goods & Service in one place. On the spot grievance redressal.
  • Krishan Kumar - Kanjam District Odisha - Disaster Management during Falin
  • Vineel Krishna - Malkangiri Odisha - LMN pocket outreach. The goodwill ultimately released him from abduction by LMN.

Contemporary issues of DC

  • Politicisation - Loss of neutrality, objectivity, fairness
  • Misplaced priorities - danger of becoming a glorified clerk - If there is no culture of delegation, MBE - Management by Exception, principle of subsidiarity. DC is a field officer and it should continue to be one
  • Problems with PRI is a reflection of the embedded problem between B'y and D'y esp at grass root level - needs role and goal clarity
  • DC's role is development needs to be redefined with proper KRA, KPI clear cut deliverables in priority sectors and with proper technical support
  • ARC has recommended a 3-year tenure for DC and that the civil servant should be posted as DM early in his career and his 1st decade he should handle only field responsibilities(non-secretariat). Even SC recently called for the constitution of civil services board to handle transfers and postings in a transparent manner. Currently, in politically volatile states, there is high dissatisfaction among civil servants w.r.t length of posting. Frequent transfers in the name of admin convenience create problem of discontinuity and lack of consistency as per 2010 civil services survey, lack of stability contributed to loss of morale and motivation.
  • External pressures - e.g of victimisation and harassment of honest bureaucrats whistleblowers, sending wrong signals down to the line. Converting DC's post into a spoiled post is a huge disservice to admin and country

ARC concept of District Government

As per this model, district is to be governed rather than administered there will be true LSG in the sense that an elected government would direct the POSDCoRB activities in the district with A3 by CEO / DC. It would have a representation of both rural and urban bodies and ARC calls it as a district council.

While theoretically, the arrangement may be ideal, practically and politically, it might encounter, certain challenges and constraints

  • District in-charge ministers will lose their informal control
  • Fundamentally redraw political equations among MP's, MLA's and LSG members
  • It would become more of a political body, rather than a chief vehicle of development.
  • It will require a constitutional amendment if this has to be standard practice across states
  • B'y role and responsibility is such a setup have to be properly placed and positioned
  • The idea looks more feasible in Urban areas (mayor in council) rather than in rural areas - where the mayor works with corporation commissioner providing A3 than in a regular district with DC having diverse roles to play. DC with diverse roles reporting to a district council is not practical.

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

District Administration

September 16, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 16, 2020

History

If there is one British institution that has survived the test of time and continue to play a +ve role, it is district administration. It has shown tremendous amount of resilience, strength of character to adapt to changing scenarios. It symbolizes, continuity with change

District Administration in one form or the other has been there since ancient times. The Mauryan Rajuka / Ayukta (Commissioner) / Pradeshika performed duties similar to the modern day DC. During Mughals, he was the district in-charge responsible for revenue, L&O. However it was the British which made DA the fundamental unit of governance.

Post battles of Plassey, Buxar (1764). EIC was vested with Diwan Rights. ( Revenue collection Rights) which necessitated creating an institution for revenue collection and thus emerged one of the long lasting institutions i.e DC subsequently as and when the company expanded (geographical and functional) correspondingly DC's scope, function (quantum & quality) and importance also increased. Governor General like Warren Hastings, Corn Wallis, Bentaik Wellesly, Dalhousie and Curzan shaped the institutional ethos. It ultimately became omni-potent and omniscient state combining revenue, L&O, Judiciary and developmental Roles. DC became the vital cog of steel frame (ICS) and the eyes,ears and hands of the British Empire.

Post 1919 act, dyarchy was introduced which brought some kind of accountability towards elected institutions. But DC continued to be unchallenged in his domain, symbolizing the might of the state.

Even post 1946, the institutional impact has been such that it is still conceived as the primary unit of governance. A tortoise on which, the elephant of Indian admin is mounted, reflecting its resilience, slow,steady and stable character. This colonial legacy has survived not because of the hangover but due to its functional utility and elasticity.

Importance of District Administration

  • Certainty, dependability, sustainability, consistency and convenience - 1st ARC considered district as most convenient geographical unity where the entire admin apparatus can be concentrated - neither too big not too small, making it an ideal functional unit.
  • Local finality - Local problems gets solved at local level itself. District HQ is mini state in action. Since most of the state department have their presence and district level.
  • Cutting edge - Public comes into close and day today contact with governance at district level. It is the interface where citizens satisfy their needs wants, articulate their demand and get their grievance redressed.
  • Image maker - Public perception of governance is created or lost during the service encounters, which leads the moment of truth - a litmus test for PI - Even the best policies of HQ requires E6, smart delivery of Goods and service. Therefore DC's efficiency has a spin off effect on the success of policies.
  • Leadership - Copy from chief sec - Ripple effect
  • Area Officer
    • Interacts closely with people - can sense public mood, judge policy reactions
    • Gets 1st hand information w.r.t public needs, wants grievances and communicates into the other levels of governance - Plays a dual role government to citizen and citizen to government
    • Gives feedback - facilitates policy evaluation
    • During public visits, he can do on the spot grievance redressal, address governance deficit. Bring a sense of urgency and outreach. MBWA - Management by walking around. Tent is mightier than the pen. DC is an outdoor field officer.
    • Conflict Resolution - Can identify fault lines - flash points, diffuse crisis at the earliest. SIDA - Sense, interpret, Decide, Act
    • PR - Public Relation - DC is an area officer and not a glorified clerk
    • Crisis Management - Copy from disaster management

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

Planning Commission

September 16, 2020 by BureaucratONE Leave a Comment Last Updated September 16, 2020

Definition of Planning

Planning is a process which involves the determination of the future course of action. It is the responsibility of the executive and it involves anticipating influencing and directing the nature and degree of change

Importance

Increases organisational ability to adapt to future changes eventualities - future is uncertain and organisation operate in a dynamic context. Therefore need a road map defining macro goals and strategies. Planning involves choosing among competing alternatives by looking at the long term impact. It requires a 360* perspective and synthesis of individual and organisational goals and efforts. Leads to greater productivity. It requires monitoring, supervising, measuring and correcting.

Planning Commission

  • Role of Planning Commission
    • Resources identification
    • Prioritization
    • Plan formulation
    • Identify growth retarding factors
    • Have institutional mechanisms to achieve objectives
    • Do plan evaluation
  • Changes in Planning post LPG era
    • Centralised to decentralised planning
    • From imperative to indicative (giving promotional stimulus to stakeholders - Pvt sectors and states)
    • From national plans to sectoral / regional / holistic plans
  • Criticism against PC
    • Highly centralised approach
    • Less involvement of states
    • NDC - National Development Council (PM + CM) failed to become an effective body and there was more D3 on politics rather than on development and economics (Sarkariya Commission recommended NDC into NEDC - National Economic Development Council)
    • Armchair Planning - Remote sensing
    • Less focus on PI
    • Artificial Plan and non-plan distinction - missing line of sight between PC, FC and Budgeting
    • States were critical of PC getting into the role of an allocator. Since its grants were discretionary and even discriminating
    • Outlived its utility - it was conceived in an era when public sector dominated. Post LPG it failed to adapt and major focus continued to be plan formulation and project evaluation

Ideally PC should have played following roles post LPG

  1. Investment planning
  2. Interest mitigation (between C&S, among ministries )
  3. Coordination
  4. Systems change role - Innovation-driven
  5. Culture of productivity
  6. Consultancy
  7. Think Tank
  8. Scenario-based planning. e.g 12th plan, PC had compared to a flotilla - where boats are independent but paths are interdependent and when the captain of the lead boat (centre) gives the signal to change direction, other following boats need to capture the signal and act.
  9. RADAR Role
    • PC's role need to change from an input allocator to a strategic guide/councillor, it itself observed " Even the smaller states want PC to tell them how to spend money better and not where to spend money.
  10. Strategic Role
    • Facilitate and mainstream reforms
  11. Push decentralised planning and principle of subsidiarity
  12. Provide independent monitoring and evaluation of government policies, programmes - in fact, IEO - Independent evaluation office was started in 2014 but was discontinued after the new government came in and is expected to be replaced by DMEO - Directorate of monitoring and evaluation Organisation

Read more about NITI AAYOG

Filed Under: Polity, Public Administration, UPSC

  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to Next Page »

Copyright © 2022 BureaucratONE