Bureaucrats ... In Injias Sunny Clime
...
Rudyard
Kipling notwithstanding, how could the British government
expect to control many millions of people in 750,000 square
miles of territory in 19th century India with a relatively
small number of British civil servants and
soldiers?
For
a hundred years the British Raj ruled India, changed many
aspects of its culture and managed to keep relative stability
there as well as in the rest of its far-flung worldwide
empire.
Queen Victorias reign ended in
1901. At that time, there were 300 million Indians ruled by a
civil service of 1,500 people, and an army of Indian soldiers
commanded by 3,000 British officers and several British
regiments. There were fewer than 20,000 British civilians in
the country. The British period of rule involved 600 sovereign
territories in India with British advisors. Despite a mutiny
in the mid 19th century and a huge array of increasingly
complex issues, it was a century of continued colonial
rule.
There are certainly many factors
and insufficient time in a short article to review the
dynamics of colonial rule, but there is one that deserves
special attention. In part, this is because it involves such a
curious phenomenon of bureaucracy, which was called the "note
and file" system of communications. It was a tool of the
bureaucrats that resulted in centralized decision making
control.
The
real reason for focusing on this note and file system is that
one of the HR Doctors favorite mentors, whom I have highly
respected for more than 20 years, once served as civil service
advisor to the Kingdom of Nepal. William F. "Bill" Danielson
is a past president of the International Personnel Management
Association, and former HR director of Alameda County and
Oakland, Calif.
In
a letter earlier this year, Bill remembered the intricacies of
that system. Those recollections are very definitely worth
sharing with the HR Doctors colleagues. With Bills
permission, if not forgiveness, here are some excerpts.
Consider this a history lesson and a public administration
lesson from a master teacher:
"When I was a Ford Foundation
consultant in the then peaceful Kingdom of Nepal in 1969 and
1970, no one had the ability to communicate the way we do now.
No one was permitted to communicate the way we do now. His
Majestys Government of Nepal was completely hierarchical.
There were about 10 (as I recall) ministries; each was a small
universe unto itself. Communications went the route of the
note and file system. I had never heard of the note and file
system before I went to Nepal. The way it worked was that a
lower-level civil servant might write a report (e.g., The
Bagmati River is dammed by debris). The report would go to
his supervisor, who would read it, initial it and pass it up
the line to the next level, who would read it, initial it, et
al, until the top administrator found it on his
desk.
"The decision-maker then would
make a decision, or perhaps ask a question (Where is the
Bagmati River dammed by debris?) and then send it down the
hierarchical line, being noted and filed at each step, to the
originator of the report. This note and file system could
require many days, weeks or moons.
"Communication was vertical
within a given ministry among gazetted employees.
Communication between ministries, below the top administrative
level, was extremely rare and hazardous to do. Horizontal
communications between, say, a mid-manager in the one ministry
with a counterpart in another ministry did not take place
without the knowledge and approval of the people at the
top.
"With cell phones and e-mail
today, it is routine for workers within a department or agency
to be able to talk among themselves about work issues. The
extreme case of the Nepal note and file system (which His
Majestys Government borrowed from the Republic of India, and
which in turn inherited it from the former British Raj,
enabling a very small number of Englishmen to administer a
very large colony) simply does not exist today." (Danielson,
2006)
The
note and file system is still alive in many bureaucracies.
Requirements that all information go to a certain director or
a certain manager for personal attention can stifle the
individual productivity of experienced employees and
colleagues. It may have worked in the 19th century with an
objective to resist change, but it hardly works effectively in
an era of e-mail, cell phones, rapid information exchange and
fast moving events.
The
note and file system is not the basis that any of us would
want for communications when we are making a 911 call or
determining if Child Protective Services should be dispatched
to deal with an abused child.
To
those colleagues who still persist in believing that the best
pathway to power is by hoarding information, please know that
you might have been promoted in the civil service of 100 years
ago, but in modern public administration in the United States
you would drive other colleagues crazy. Take a lesson from the
wonderful Bill Danielson, "power hoarded is opportunity
wasted." Give bright people the opportunity to excel to make
amazing things happen and you wont be
disappointed.
Thank you, Bill, for the
professional lessons you have taught me over the years. You
have helped me in my career and my life.
The
HR Doctor wishes you all the best,
Phil Rosenberg The HR
Doctor http://www.hrdr.net/
|