Book review- “Crossing Frontiers by Tarun Das”
The author is the former CEO of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), now known globally as the voice of Indian Business. The flap of the book has a short description of the author and characteristically tells the reader very little about the author apart from highlighting that he has been associated with the organisation, and its predecessor, for a total of 46 years. Of course, one has also to understand that when one reaches a certain degree of eminence and recognition nationally and globally, the mere name is sufficient to gain attention. It is superfluous to set out academic and other credentials in such cases.
Picture shows a media briefing with the President CII on May 20, in Kolkata. From left – A.K.Verma (Retd), Chairman, CII Eastern Region; Sumit Mazumder, President, CII and Chandrajit Banerjee, Directoor General, CII. Pic courtesy CII.
What exactly is the CII? One could perhaps be as ignorant of the CBI in the UK? Both institutions perform the same range of functions for the business community and are widely regarded by the cognoscenti as key institutions in their countries and admired by all for their high level of reliability and professionalism. The book itself sets out in a simple and straight forward manner what the organisation does and what objectives spur it on. It is not surprising to find messages which reflect the importance the CII has in the eyes of the leaders of India and also other countries. Messages include commendations from Prime Ministers of India as well as the UK and Singapore.
How did this organisation achieve such greatness given the fact that in South Asia organisations representing business interests are usually at the mercy of political forces and have very little influence? The author points out that post-independence the situation was one of mistrust between the government and industry. This is usually the situation in most developing countries as the government tends to use it as its guiding philosophy the cause of the underdog as represented by the poor and strives to do what is populist and likely to keep it in power. The author defines the period between 1974 and 2004 as a story of economic development and reform, in the evolution of which the ClI’s own development ‘is interwoven and deeply connected’. The book therefore focuses mainly on the period commencing from the 1970’s till 2004. The story underlines the truth that governments which support private initiative and labour market flexibility, can reap the political benefits associated with industrial growth and the expansion of the job market.
Post-independence policy
The Indian policy post-independence has been based on what is referred to as the “Bombay Plan” and the key drivers had been self reliance and employment generation. Das observes that the grand plan did not bring the anticipated benefits as the “the teamwork and trust between the political leadership and business leadership completely disappeared”. The period which followed was one of reliance on the, public sector and central planning. When one reads Das’s account, one almost feels that he is in fact talking about Sri Lanka, as we followed a similar ideology and economic philosophy commencing from the late fifties and until 1977.
Both the Engineering Association of India (EAI) and the Indian Engineering Association (lEA) were distressed by the over-regulation of industry and the strangling of entrepreneurship. The fact that the principal employers’ associations were unable to see eye to eye due to leadership and cultural issues, exacerbated the problems of entrepreneurs. However, these two organisations did the sensible thing of starting a dialogue to find a common platform for lobbying.
The strategy adopted was to enhance lobbying strength by combining resources. In fact if one traces the origins of the organisation there were predecessors going all the way back to 1895. The real turnaround came with the merger of the EAI and lEA in 1974 and the name CII was adopted in 1992. The Confederation of Indian Industry is a name which commands attention. To the world it demonstrates diversity and comprehensiveness, which would want any international organisation to work with it. And it is not only the name, as powerful names are often in fact an embarrassment when the organisation gets found out for the lack of effectiveness. However, the CII has lived up to its expectations in delivering the goods!
An interesting historical fact is that Calcutta had been the hub of industry and commerce and both the organisations which merged to form the CII eventually, were based in Calcutta. As the country progressed economically questions came to be asked about the domination of Calcutta. The Chairman of the lEA, Sanjoy Sen, initiated a dialogue to craft a national structure that could help to appease all interests. It is perhaps significant that the leaders of the lEA were more interested in the national cause and strengthening the organisation and had no personal agendas which prevented taking the next pragmatic step of a merger with the EAI. It is mentioned that the leaders of the lEA knew that a merger was going to affect their own positions of leadership but this did not bother them at all. The author states that to many, it was unthinkable that such a merger could be a reality given the affiliations the two organisations already had. The lEA had British links and the EAI local interests which were in several respects not compatible. Even the cultures of the organisations were different with the lEA having a decentralised structure and the other a centralised regime. Even the negotiation of a suitable name had taken a year! There had been some issues in relation to delinking from associations to which they were affiliated. Some chambers had considered it arrogance that a new organisation could do without them. The Association of Indian Engineering Industry (AlEl) was formed through a merger of two existing trade organisations, just prior to the Emergency in 1975 which was a serious setback for India.
Establishing credibility
What drove the new organisation and quickly established its credibility? It is said that its first President P.K. Nanda had much to do with the new image of the AIEA through a building-up of professionalism and a reputation for solid facts, data-based representation, and building relationships. These three cornerstones of the CII have given it the stability that a world class organisation need. To return to the issue of where the headquarters should be located, it appears that with the desire to be a truly national organisation talking direct to the government was imperative and it became critical that the headquarters should necessarily be in the capital Delhi. This no doubt would have been an expensive move for the organisation but was worthwhile in terms of being more visible to the decision makers.
The greatest challenge as Das puts it was to get the “Goliath’ which was the government to see the danger of not accepting the need to co-operate with a seeming ‘David’ who was still puny enough to push around? The CII adopted an approach of listening with respect and tolerance to the voice of the politicians and bureaucrats at all levels in order to first get a foot in the door through a working relationship. Interestingly Das states that the approach in building relationships was both top-down and, as much, bottom-up. This lesson in building relationships with bureaucrats is worth flagging. At times lower level bureaucrats resent being pushed around by their superiors and working on them as a first step in achieving change can be vital to bringing out change which can get implemented at their levels.
The approach was not a role of trying to help but to establish a commitment to be ‘junior partners’. Again an important lesson, namely, that the government is not always ready to share power and is comfortable with ‘junior partners’ rather than those well meaning interventions based on what they might see as an effort to show their incompetence or incapacity. The government gave information to this private sector body, purely because there was no feeling of a threat and an acceptance of the ability of the private sector to contribute to what the government wished to achieve in development. Another key lesson is that the CII found difficulties initially in engaging with the government in any type of partnership but was steadfast and did not give up its resolve to stay in the game for the sake of building a relationship. The CII adopted the approach that one does not go in and talk generalities. The organization must know where it can start to prove itself. What the CII did was to select a department where they could make an important contribution and prove its competence. The CII had a project based on a dream which could excite the officials without any threat to them but which would enhance their own images. The lesson; start within your area of competence and do not venture into areas where at best one expresses opinions – is clear.
The CII was convinced that unlike many organisations which are event and incident conditioned that its involvement with public issues and business related matters should be a continuous service. The data collection and activities with members needed to be focused on a vibrant approach to representation. Das aptly remarks: “this was not a 100 metre race. Solving industry problems was a marathon cum steeple-chase, so stamina was required”. He says it was not about making press statements on an ad hoc basis, but a continuing dialogue and demonstrating to the powers that be that CII had its finger on the pulse and was proactive. When data was needed by the planners and decision makers, the CII either had the required data already in hand or had the ability to respond effectively.
Changing gear
Very appropriately, in the chapter entitled ‘Crossing Frontiers’ Das gives us an idea how CII changed gear and made its credentials known to a wider spectrum of business, nationally and globally. The first trade fair organised by the AIEI and called the Indian Engineering Trade Fair has been a water-shed in its growth and Das calls it a new frontier in the existence of the organisation. The need for new skills to organise an event of that magnitude must have been a challenge but the end result seems to have established the ability of AIEI to project itself as a professional body which could stand side by side with the best elsewhere.
There are many internationally known business names which figure in this history of the organisation and the conclusion which could be drawn is that good organisations derive support from people who matter. In this regard what is left unsaid is the tremendous contribution made by Tarun Das whose involvement from the birth of the organisation for so many decades must have been a factor which was indispensable for its sustainability and growth. I once knew a famous business leader in India, who was very prominent in an international organisation and a fellow Indian referred to him as a great Banyan Tree — he gave shelter and support to many but didn’t allow anything else to grow beneath it! The legacy left by Das is that he not only built the organisation but built a structure and an organisation of people who could sustain it through generations to come.