These Are the Real Reasons Behind the Paralysis of Bureaucracy: Jayaprakash Narayan
Lok Satta founder Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan expressed anguish over the declining standards and efficacy within India's bureaucratic system, pointing out that in earlier times, even an individual who joined government service as a lower-division clerk could, based solely on competence and performance, rise to the highest levels—eventually becoming a District Collector.
He recalled that during his entry into the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) around 1980, such upward mobility was a reality for meritorious officials. “The fact that a clerk could become a Collector is evidence of how talent was once valued. But in today's India, the idea of a clerk becoming an IAS officer and Collector is inconceivable,” said Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan.
He alleged that over time, under the guise of ‘Socialist Japam’, the system has degenerated to the point where automatic, time-bound promotions are granted to everyone, irrespective of performance, diligence, or even corruption. “Whether someone works or not, takes bribes or not—promotions and increments are guaranteed,” he stated.
Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan identified three core reasons for the bureaucratic inertia, despite IAS officers being selected from among the most talented individuals through a highly competitive process involving lakhs of aspirants.
First, he pointed to the lack of domain expertise. “Today, an officer may be in education, tomorrow in defense, the day after in finance, and later in technology. This peculiar trend exists only in the Indian subcontinent and nowhere else in the world,” he stated. He emphasized that no individual can be an expert in all fields.
Second, he criticized the monopolization of all key positions by bureaucrats. Despite the presence of capable experts outside the system, their services are not utilized, which he identified as a major flaw.
Third, he highlighted the disconnect between performance and promotion. “Whether one performs or not, promotions happen automatically. Everyone eventually becomes eligible for the Chief Secretary level. This has led to an inflated number of positions,” he said. He illustrated this by saying, “Earlier, there was only one Inspector General (IG) for an entire state. Now, there are several IGs. Since not all can become Chief Secretaries, we now have dozens of Special Chief Secretaries and Special DGPs.”
He sharply remarked that if a private company operated with such an approach, it would shut down within three years. He added, “Since the government pays salaries with public money, there is no concern whether work gets done or not.” In contrast, in the Armed Forces, individuals who do not demonstrate competence at a certain level are retired from service, he noted, whereas in government administration, everyone continues irrespective of performance.
For meaningful reform, Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan suggested that meritorious individuals should be identified and given elevated opportunities, while those lacking capability should be let go if necessary. He lamented that even forward-thinking initiatives like ‘lateral entry’, which aim to introduce competitive elements and bring in external experts, are facing strong resistance. “If our bureaucracy were functioning exceptionally and providing services unmatched anywhere in the world, one might question the need for such experiments. But is that really the case?” he asked.
He emphasized that public servants are appointed to serve the people and must recognize that their salaries come from taxpayers. He stated that the perception of government jobs as privileges or entitlements must change. “Bureaucrats are meant to serve the public. The only benchmark should be whether they are serving effectively. Those with a service-oriented mindset should be encouraged. Those with relevant skills must be trained, and capable individuals in society should be given opportunities,” he concluded.
He recalled that during his entry into the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) around 1980, such upward mobility was a reality for meritorious officials. “The fact that a clerk could become a Collector is evidence of how talent was once valued. But in today's India, the idea of a clerk becoming an IAS officer and Collector is inconceivable,” said Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan.
He alleged that over time, under the guise of ‘Socialist Japam’, the system has degenerated to the point where automatic, time-bound promotions are granted to everyone, irrespective of performance, diligence, or even corruption. “Whether someone works or not, takes bribes or not—promotions and increments are guaranteed,” he stated.
Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan identified three core reasons for the bureaucratic inertia, despite IAS officers being selected from among the most talented individuals through a highly competitive process involving lakhs of aspirants.
First, he pointed to the lack of domain expertise. “Today, an officer may be in education, tomorrow in defense, the day after in finance, and later in technology. This peculiar trend exists only in the Indian subcontinent and nowhere else in the world,” he stated. He emphasized that no individual can be an expert in all fields.
Second, he criticized the monopolization of all key positions by bureaucrats. Despite the presence of capable experts outside the system, their services are not utilized, which he identified as a major flaw.
Third, he highlighted the disconnect between performance and promotion. “Whether one performs or not, promotions happen automatically. Everyone eventually becomes eligible for the Chief Secretary level. This has led to an inflated number of positions,” he said. He illustrated this by saying, “Earlier, there was only one Inspector General (IG) for an entire state. Now, there are several IGs. Since not all can become Chief Secretaries, we now have dozens of Special Chief Secretaries and Special DGPs.”
He sharply remarked that if a private company operated with such an approach, it would shut down within three years. He added, “Since the government pays salaries with public money, there is no concern whether work gets done or not.” In contrast, in the Armed Forces, individuals who do not demonstrate competence at a certain level are retired from service, he noted, whereas in government administration, everyone continues irrespective of performance.
For meaningful reform, Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan suggested that meritorious individuals should be identified and given elevated opportunities, while those lacking capability should be let go if necessary. He lamented that even forward-thinking initiatives like ‘lateral entry’, which aim to introduce competitive elements and bring in external experts, are facing strong resistance. “If our bureaucracy were functioning exceptionally and providing services unmatched anywhere in the world, one might question the need for such experiments. But is that really the case?” he asked.
He emphasized that public servants are appointed to serve the people and must recognize that their salaries come from taxpayers. He stated that the perception of government jobs as privileges or entitlements must change. “Bureaucrats are meant to serve the public. The only benchmark should be whether they are serving effectively. Those with a service-oriented mindset should be encouraged. Those with relevant skills must be trained, and capable individuals in society should be given opportunities,” he concluded.