Added on Date 24.7.2016:
Exactly 25 years back, Indian Industry was liberalized with the budget presented by the then Finance Minister on date 24.7.1991. This article was first written in the late 1990s. Not much has changed with the Indian mindset of tolerating low quality, particularly with the quality services that we get and expect from the government.

Summary:
Why have Indians developed a pathetic attitude towards quality of products and services, particularly services from the government? How does this attitude impact corruption in Indian society? What does this attitude have to do with the Great Indian Apathy - a belief that "Nothing will ever change in India!"? And the typical Indian mindset of idolizing people? Can we ever change this attitude? How are Corruption and Poor Quality inter-dependent? This article analyses Indian Attitude towards Quality and It's Impact on Corruption.

This article illustrates how there is always a need to re-engineer policies to tune them over time and make them more relevant to the current time and circumstances. Prime Minister Nehru made certain policies immediately after Indian independence suited for his time and conditions. Did the later leaders do their jobs of tuning them to suit changed conditions? We tend to either glorify the past or blame the past. The need is to re-engineer the past.

The same is true about religion - discussed in another article "God in Two Minutes".

Today businesses are going global. The internet and e-commerce are shrinking the world so that the world market is now made available to the consumer. Obviously the consumer has greater choice and would go for the best quality. In this scenario, quality is the key to survival for businesses.

So far India was itself a big market to the Indian producer. Now the country is moving towards open markets.

Indian producers are under severe threat from the global market and unless they produce quality, they will be extinct. When it comes to the issue of quality, we Indians have been fast asleep. We need to be jolted out of our slumber, and that is what this article attempts to do. This article attempts to analyse the Indian Mindset to bring about an awakening for quality. The article also analyses the interdependence of Quality awareness and Corruption - how corruption impacts quality and how demand for quality can cut corruption.

The average Indian has been conditioned to accept anything and not demand quality. Most Indians have resigned to the fact that nothing will change with respect to quality of service and corruption in governments and government offices. This has gone into the subconscious mind of most Indians. The subconscious conditioning is so strong and deep that most Indians are not even aware that their actions are (or rather inaction is) driven by this firm belief. This is so because most of us are not aware of our subconscious conditioning. We are unaware of the fact that most of our actions are driven by the subconscious mind (to know more on subconscious conditioning, read "What is Subconcious Mind? How Does it Impact our Actions?" at https://premkamble.com/subconc1)

Let us dig into India's industrial history to understand what is responsible for this typical Indian mindset.

Three important decisions, which were good for their time but were prolonged beyond their "productive life" have contributed to this pathetic situation. This article also demonstrates how old good decisions need to be ruthlessly dumped and new decisions relevant to the changed conditions need to be made over time. Certain decisions may be good for their time and become so dear to us that we resist to change them. We forget that good decisions which bring about positive change also cause changes which make the same old good decisions irrelevant to the changed conditions.The three important policy decisions were:

1. Protected Market:   We had been living in a protected market where anything could sell. The quality of goods produced has been anything from mediocre to bad. This situation of protected market continued for so long that we Indians got quite used to mediocrity and poor quality. We stopped expecting quality, leave alone demanding quality. Our expectations were low and there was no consumer awareness.
2. Government Monopoly:   Moreover, with most of the services like transport, utilities, etc. under government monopoly, bureaucratic processes led to extremely poor services. Monopoly ensured that the customer was never the king and complaining of poor service was like hitting the wall. We developed a mindset of apathy - the belief that "Things will never improve in India" and that there was no option but to silently suffer firmly took root in our mind.
3. Over employment, Lower pay:   In the formative years, employment of masses was a priority. Large number of people were employed in public sector units. When you over employ, obviously you need to pay lower salaries. As these officers grew in power because of the monopoly, lower salaries and higher power pushed them into corruption. As corruption grew, quality of goods and services dropped.

Write to Me | Comments | Related Articles | Top

When India gained independence, Indian government had to rebuild its economy by supporting the infant industry and building a strong infrastructure. Mr. Nehru, the then Prime Minister, created large public sector firms as the private sector was not in a position to invest in the capital intensive core sector. Most of the services like transport, postal service, railways, etc. were retained in the government sector.

Apart from nurturing the infant industry, the government had a secondary objective of providing employment to the poor masses. As a result, more persons were employed where one was required. The salary was split amongst more people, so obviously each one got low salary. For the poverty-ridden masses, low salary was better than no salary. Each one could at least make a living.

To protect the nascent Indian industry, its market was protected by imposing high customs duty. Otherwise, high quality imported goods would have flooded the Indian markets and nipped the Indian industry in the bud. The policy was appropriate for that time and for the conditions prevailing then. The infant Indian industry needed support, just as a child learning to walk would need hand holding.

Write to Me | Comments | Related Articles | Top

If Nehru's Policy was Right for his Time, What went Wrong?

We should have introduced competition in small doses through imported goods and privatisation long back. This would have let the Indian Industry gradually improve quality and stand the competition. As the consumers would have got a taste of quality, they would have started demanding more quality. In order to survive, Indian companies would have been forced to modernise, to run efficiently, to produce quality goods, to cut costs, improve processes, improve employee productivity, upgrade technology and to improve management style.

Much later, after years of protection, when we suddenly woke up, we have opened the floodgates and allowed foreign goods in. The Indian industry was swept off its feet.

This one mistake of not introducing competition early has cost us dearly. It has had an impact on the Indian mindset and bred corruption in the ranks. This has in turn affected the quality of products that we produce and the quality of service that we Indians have got so used to.

Write to Me | Comments | Related Articles | Top

Great Indian Apathy - Indian Mindset

We saw in the previous sections how an unduly prolonged protection of the Indian market led to deterioration of quality of products and services. Let us see what impact all these developments have had on the Indian psyche and Indian mindset.

Each Indian got used to mediocre quality of goods produced by the Indian industries and poor quality of service from the government (as government was a monopoly service provider). Particularly, people are so used to inferior government service that they don't complain. They know that the protests were falling on deaf ears and have given up. They know that it is absolutely no use complaining against government. That's what I call the Great Indian Apathy!

I remember an incident long back when private bus services were few, and I was travelling in an inter city bus run by the government run state transport. The bus broke down on the way where there was nothing but wilderness. To my surprise, everyone got down quietly and waited on the forlorn road to catch another bus which may (or may not) come. There was not a word of protest. On the contrary, I heard one of the passengers say as he got down, "It is after all a machine, and a machine can fail any time". Can you beat this? Why should a machine fail on the road? Why can't there be preventive maintenance? Why can't the government make immediate alternate arrangement in case of failure?

We have become extremely tolerant. We have stopped demanding. Today I know that the private banks give me much better service. But I shout at the top of my voice for small problems demanding service and teaching them a lesson or two on good customer service. Whereas with a public sector bank, I know I would be a fool if I were to demand service. The average Indian developed an attitude of apathy - a mindset when one resigns to fate and says, "Things will never improve in India." We have stopped complaining, stopped expecting service and obviously stopped demanding. That's the Great Indian Apathy!

Write to Me | Comments | Related Articles | Top

When there is corruption in the ranks, goods are purchased from (and contracts are offered to) parties who can pay and not necessarily those who provide quality. Poor quality of raw material may be accepted and incompetent people may be hired to work as employees or contractors. Survival then is not by quality but by money power. Thus corruption directly proves to be a breeding ground for poor quality of goods and services.

Most of key services in India, like public transport (road, rail, and air), entertainment, power, etc. were provided by only one agency - the Government. There existed no alternative to the Indian consumer. There was no need for service providers to give quality service. The government servant enjoyed such monopoly and such security for his job that he has been extremely rude to the consumer. In fact the consumer has to almost beg to the government servant to get anything done.