Foster innovative thinking in the IAS by defining KPIs, KRAs

One of the foundational principles of entrepreneurship and innovation is a risk-taking ability. It is this attribute that runs common across the entrepreneurial and innovation universe, holding true for the tiniest of enterprises to the transnational corporations, from the roadside tea vendor to the billionaire business baron.

Enterprise and innovation flourishes in an atmosphere that stokes free-thinking, and rewards lateral thinking.

This holds true not just for the business world, but also in administering a large, and complex country such as India, characterised by layers, and layers to social, economic, political, and cultural identities, frictions, and aspirations.

The corporate world is, of course, dominated by many ills, plagued by instances of favouritism, personal biases, and opaqueness in decision making. That said, however, there are still many features that public administration can draw from the corporate playbook.

One of these is ‘specialisation’. Successful corporations entrust qualified specialists with special assignments and functions. How often will one come across instances of a non-finance professional occupying the position of the chief financial officer (CFO)? Very rarely. How often will one see a non-techie appointed as the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of a group? Seldom.

This is probably what Prime Minister Narendra Modi alluded to while speaking in the Parliament last year.

On February 10, 2021, speaking in the Lok Sabha, Modi  unleashed a broadside on India’s overweening bureaucracy, which has long been accused of stalling growth.

“Babus (IAS officers) cannot do everything. An IAS cannot run a fertiliser factory, a chemical factory or fly a plane. What do we want to achieve by giving the country in the hands of babus (IAS officers).”

Initiatives of the Modi government, much like its predecessors, too have faced delays due to India’s statist bureaucracy. Red tape is often blamed for the difficulties in implementing welfare measures and doing business.

“Babus are as much ours as are our youth. The more we give chance to our youth, the better it is,” Modi had said.

To many from outside, India’s civil service, built on the foundations of a glorious past, appears to be a medley of contradictions that do not inspire confidence.

Former Reserve Bank of India (RBI) governor D Subbarao, a distinguished economist who joined the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), did not mince any words in a recent column in The Times of India, entitled Has IAS Failed The Nation? Subbarao thinks so. “A system that promotes mediocrity and risk aversion rather than innovation and change sinks to a low common denominator as indeed the IAS has”, he wrote in the column.

Risk aversion, as a psychological trait, has both individual and systemic causes. In the case of civil service and public administration in India, the system has evolved, or rather regressed, into one that does not penalise inertia, encourages status-quo and has no in-built incentive mechanism to reward original thinking.

Meritocracy is built on accountability and a well-defined process of key performance indicators (KPIs) and key result (or responsibility) areas (KRAs), sadly are broadly absent in the current system.

The KPIs and the KRAs are critical measures that help organisations gauge the success and progress of their employees. The KPIs/KRAs, regardless of many design flaws, capture and track movement in the direction towards the goals that had been agreed upon. As quantifiable metrics, these give a clear picture of a professional’s annual journey on the ladder of responsibilities and deliverables: Where are they right now, where are they going, how soon can they reach it, and who will help them reach the destination.

Such a performance evaluation system, unfortunately, currently does not exist for India’s civil service and public administration. Incentives, including the salaries and promotions, are largely time bound. This encourages status quo and discourages risk-taking.

In cricket, runs come by and wins happen in tight bowling conditions when the batter moves out of the comfort zone and unsettles the bowler. The fear of losing if targets aren’t met fosters innovation in the corporate world, something that doesn’t come about in a structure of ‘time bound’ promotions, and wage increments.

It may be worthwhile to usher in a change of thinking at the lowest rungs by altering the nomenclature — from district magistrates (DMs) and district collectors (DCs) to District Chief Executive Officers (DCEOs) with clear annual and three-year development and other goals on which their performance will be measured. It will, among other things, trigger a competitive spirit among IAS officers to keep their districts ahead of the rest.