India’s ‘Steel Frame’ And The Challenge Of Accelerating The Pace Of Inclusive Development

Bharat Ratna Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, our first Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, aptly described the country’s civil servants as the ‘Steel Frame,’ highlighting their critical role in upholding the nation’s governance and unity.

Patel envisioned bureaucracy as the backbone of administration, providing stability, continuity and impartiality in governance, thereby underscoring the importance of a strong, efficient and accountable civil service to implement policies, maintain law and order, and ensure the nation’s inclusive progress. None of us will disagree with the fact that the metaphor ‘Steel Frame’ reflects the crucial contribution of bureaucrats in steering the nation’s development, safeguarding its democratic ethos, while simultaneously addressing the aspirations of its diverse population.

At a time when India is striving to become a developed nation by 2047, the need for a more inclusive, accountable bureaucracy is being felt. Infosys co-founder N.R. Narayana Murthy, while speaking at a global leadership summit in Mumbai on November 18, proposed a reshape of the civil services system and recommended that the government should select Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and Indian Police Service (IPS) officers from business schools rather than only relying on the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) examinations.

Murthy suggested that such a shift would help create a more dynamic, management-oriented approach to governance. The “management mindset,” he said, will boost economic progress and help achieve the goal of a $50 trillion economy by 2047.

“It is time for India to move from an administrative mindset to a management mindset. Administration is all about status quo. On the other hand, management is all about vision and high aspirations. It’s about achieving the plausibly impossible,” said Murthy, adding that the current system of competitive UPSC examination can only produce civil servants trained in general administration. To match up to the changing demands of governance, Murthy suggested a management-based approach that focuses on vision, cost control, innovation, and rapid execution.

Given the wide respect Murthy commands in the country and abroad, one would love to be humble enough while decoding his words. I found his observations far from being rooted to the country’s ground realities.

A large number of students, who clear UPSC examination, are from science, medical science and engineering background. Many of them are found to have studied in IIMs and IITs.

For example, the 2024 Civil Services Examination (CSE) topper Aditya Srivastava is an Electronics Engineering graduate from IIT, Kanpur. Ananya Reddy, the 2024 female topper, is a B Tech graduate from IIIT, Hyderabad, while P.K. Sidharth Ramkumar, the fourth-ranked candidate, is a Mechanical Engineering graduate from SRM Institute and Pooja Yadav, an IPS officer of the 2018 batch, completed her M Tech in India and moved to Canada for a steady and respectable income. She then relocated to Germany where she was earning a decent salary, which she quit and returned to India to prepare for UPSC.

Where does the challenge lie so far as India’s bureaucracy is concerned? It is, indeed, a major challenge and not everyone can decipher it honestly. To start with, all stakeholders must come together to ensure the inclusivity of Indian bureaucracy.

Even after so many decades of Independence, we have not been able to create a more inclusive bureaucracy where the candidates from various social groupings such as SCs, STs and OBCs have their representation at every level in proportion to their population. An inclusive ecosystem produces better results.

By embracing inclusivity, we leverage the strengths of varied experiences, ideas, and skills, resulting in more creative problem-solving and resilient solutions. Diverse and inclusive teams outperform their counterparts. In an inclusive ecosystem, every individual feels empowered to contribute, ultimately leading to better outcomes for all.

Similarly, we have not been able to set result-oriented targets for the country’s ‘Steel Frame.’ As a result, people get the impression that they don’t work since the people see a lot of gaps between what is hyped and what is eventually delivered. Without clear, measurable goals and accountability mechanisms, the gap between lofty promises and actual delivery becomes glaring. This disconnect fosters a widespread impression that bureaucrats are not contributing sufficiently to national progress, even if individual efforts are made.

The absence of tangible outcomes further diminishes trust and leaves citizens disillusioned, which emphasizes the urgent need for reform to align intent with impactful execution. It is an opportunity to be grabbed by all those who are holding key positions in the public sector establishments – whether civil administration, managing PSUs, banks, any other bodies or organizations.

We must also acknowledge the excessive constraints that bureaucrats often face due to the intricacies of our political structure. These limitations hinder their ability to act efficiently and decisively, as they are frequently burdened by complex regulatory frameworks, conflicting directives, and the influence of competing political interests. Such an environment not only stifles innovation and proactive decision-making but also creates a risk-averse culture where adherence to procedure often takes precedence over achieving impactful outcomes. So, we need a governance model that empowers bureaucrats with greater autonomy while ensuring accountability, enabling them to navigate challenges with agility and purpose.

I don’t foresee such things happening as the desire to draw a bigger line for the society and the country is still too fickle for those who matter so much in driving the country’s inclusive development.

Last but not the least, can Murthy and his friends in the corporate world convince the Central and state governments to introduce the kind of working ecosystem they have in their companies for senior executives and functionaries for IFS, IAS, IPS, IRS or IFoS officers as well and pay them accordingly? Perhaps, not!

The challenge before our ‘Steel Frame’ is to work in sync with the contour of powers-that-be. We have not yet been able to create a mechanism where people’s grievances are genuinely addressed within a stipulated period of time.

It is said that the Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) handled over 1.16 lakh grievances in October alone. Is the number in consonance with the ground realities? Certainly, not!

It is, therefore, high time for us to be true to ourselves first. Only then, can there by real change. Otherwise, words will continue to sound louder than real actions.

(The writer is a senior journalist, author and columnist. The views expressed are strictly his personal)