Get into the mind of the man who's always on the move — Analjit Singh talks about his work and the desire for maximum impact

The year was 1999 and had you been in England at the time, you might just have come upon a Sikh gentleman quietly going about his business. At first glance, you might have taken him for a man of leisure as you watched him in the garden of his home in Surrey, saw him get his son settled into college at Harrow or walk with friends along the Thames in London. You might even be forgiven for thinking that this well-dressed gentleman-at-large had achieved his life’s ambitions, hungs up his boots and taken time out to smell the flowers. And you could almost have been right. Almost — because 45 year old Analjit Singh was far from being done with grappling with life and the opportunities it had to offer. While he had spent most of the year in contemplation, it was simply the calm before the sizeable storm of activity that would follow. But the story gets ahead of itself. We must retrace our steps to the year 1983, when a young man, newly returned from his studies abroad, took his first steps as an entrepreneur. Singh was no stranger to big business as he was the youngest of the three sons of Bhai Mohan Singh, patriarch of the leading family in Indian pharmaceuticals. When it came time for the division of assets, Analjit Singh found most of the ‘family silver’ going the way of his brothers. This was a defining moment for the young man who found himself on the fringes of the family business. As he puts it, “At that time, the sole mission was to establish a company, attain some financial independence from the family and get going in life.” And get going is exactly what he did; building, selling and partnering in ventures at a dizzying speed, prompting some observers to dub him a serial entrepreneur. Max India Ltd, incorporated in 1984, set up the first three US FDA approved plants and went into bulk pharmaceuticals. Singh concedes that this was an “opportunistic” phase as he took his chances where he could — his businesses ranged from electronic components, to plastics packaging and eventually to telecom and VSAT. In an era where most organisations were celebrating the dawn of liberalisation by consolidating their businesses, Max seemed to be heading in the other direction by being what Singh calls an “almost peculiarly diversified company”. In 1998, he cashed in a 41 per cent stake in one of his most successful joint ventures with Hutchison Whampoa for mobile telephony. He ended up with `561 crore in the bank and the dilemma of figuring out quite what to do with it. Then came the defining moment of epiphany in 1999. As Analjit Singh says, “I had a switch of sorts and thought that life had got to be about more than setting up businesses, running businesses and becoming profitable. That inner passion was to find things to do that had a cause and were about permanence. Because at the end of the day, there was no lasting impact of the businesses that I was in to the Life of a person. But I did nothing and kindof knocked around for that year, because I thought these things — trying to contribute to society, making some sort of a dent in other people’s lives – were very high-falutin’ aspirations and could not be translated into something tangible and certainly not a business!”

FROM THE FRINGES TO THE FORE

Knowing his own mind, but not quite seeing the way to achieving his goals, Singh did what he does best — he reached out to experts. Cloistering himself with consultants and reaching out to friends and associates, he hammered out the new face of the Max India Group of companies. In 2000, they exited nine of the 10 businesses they had built from scratch in order to free up capital and management time. They also articulated a ‘Vision 2000’, which was to operate in the four areas of insurance, health care, education and hospitality, with the first two getting off the ground almost in tandem. Finally, it was time for Analjit Singh to put his ideas to the test and prove his doubters wrong. “The reputation I had ended up with after the first few years was that Analjit can’t sit still (which is true), if he sees another opportunity, he’ll go after it and then what will happen to these long gestation, capital intensive businesses that need sustained focus? I absolutely resisted and to this day, I have not branched out into any unrelated area.” An old hand at joint ventures, Singh went looking for partners in insurance and found them in New York Life, an American company that brought with it more than 165 years of experience in the sector. With capital and partners in place, all that was left was finding a ‘world class CEO’. The search ended with an old school friend and trusted adviser, Anuroop ‘Tony’ Singh. As Analjit Singh says “At every such turning point in my life, I have felt an invisible hand that comes to put things in place that then become building blocks for a business. I regard my CEO coming in at that time as one such move.” Now the Vice Chairman of the company, Tony Singh played an executive role for five years before he stepped off into governance. Starting at a time when insurance was largely the preserve of the government and smaller than most of its competition at the time, 10 years have seen Max New York Life (MNYL) emerge as the third largest life insurance company in the country. Last year, when most Indian insurers were licking the wounds suffered due to regulations imposed by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, MNYL was one of only two companies that grew their business. Thumping the table to emphasise each point, Analjit Singh puts their success down to pure strategy, tenacity and good governance. Asking a top consultant from McKinsey to “get his shaving kit and live with us for three months”, the senior management operated out of a ‘war room’ in the Gurgaon office and essentially restructured the whole business. In the process they shut down 250 offices, cut expense lines by `500 crore, moved their target segment and went back to the basics of selling saving and protection products. As Tony Singh puts it, “When we started in insurance, we took a unique approach and went for long-term products, whole life insurance policies, etc. We were the only company that took this purist attitude to life insurance and wanted to build a life insurance company on a life insurance balance sheet, not a mutual fund business on a life insurance balance sheet, which is what a lot of people did. The regulators came down very hard on that but for us, it was the path we had wanted to take. It was tough for us, but very good news directionally and strategically and we capitalised on that.” The healthcare business was a very different animal that posed challenges of its own. It took some convincing to get the right physicians and clinicians on board. Singh says that people were initially hesitant to jump onto his bandwagon. “Who are you, Max? You don’t even know how a hospital is run; you don’t even have a hospital. Why should I chuck 20 years of my practice and come work for you?”‚ was an attitude that Singh says he and his team worked hard to overcome. But these are distant memories now as Max Healthcare has a network of 11 hospitals and more coming up. The builder of this empire is a study in contrasts. He has no qualms about taking credit where it’s his due; but ask him who his mentors and icons are, and he is quick to point to his colleagues — Dr S.S. Baijal, Ram Charan and Tony Singh. If not an entrepreneur, he would have wanted to be a gymnast because of “their pursuit of perfection” or an army man, because of their impeccable turnout. A dapper dresser himself, he looks embarrassed at the notion of having a favourite designer — “Gosh! No such thing”. He puts his achievements down to a basic attitude of service and humility, “though of course when you say you have humility, you have lost it right there and then!” Disarmingly straightforward, he is also a perfectionist. That is apparent the minute you walk into his office-cum-residence on Aurangzeb Road in Delhi. The expansive gardens and various rooms are spotless. While there is an army of caretakers, Singh is passionate about “the colour green” and knows “the height of every hedge in the house”. You could say that of all the properties of the man who admits, “homes and houses are my most extravagant buys”, as he aligns a napkin more precisely on a tray.

We Can’t Sit Still

The `7,250 crore Max India Group has crossed more than a decade in existence and change is in the air once again. Last year, Max took its first steps into the world of Health Insurance, tying up with Bupa Finance PLC of the UK, a move that ties in nicely with the rest of their package. In another recent shift, Max Healthcare sold 26 per cent stakes to South African hospital operator Life Healthcare Group for debt repayment and a carefully planned expansion. One fallout of these changes was the departure of Dr Pervez Ahmed as CEO, a move that Singh explains quite candidly. “Max Healthcare has changed. In the last few months we have gone from 900 to practically 17,00 beds. In this complex organisation, I was saying to Pervez that he must take himself up more into governance like I have. I made Pervez alternative offers and discussed it extensively. He still wished to stay in the operating role and we could not agree. Again, it’s not about just carrying on as we have been. In a business, you have to get proactive and fix or change things.” Singh has been ‘getting proactive’ in the leadership structure of the company as well. Working with key advisors, he is in the process of putting in governance models that will ensure that the companies remain professionally run. Closely involved with the process, Tony Singh says, “We are institutionalising processes so they are not dependent on individuals. For example, they are board managed companies, not Analjit managed companies any more. We can see the success of these processes in all the places where they are well tenured.” Analjit Singh’s first step towards the new governance model: firing himself as the Managing Director. Rahul Khosla, who stepped into the role earlier this year, says “He is clearly an evolved and mature individual who understands himself and the context of what he is doing. And he does this not by being prescriptive of how things should turn out, but collaborative in how we take the journey together. Even though Analjit is the significant owner of the enterprise, he is not someone who would compromise the quality of management, professionalism and governance in the company.” Question Analjit Singh about the secret to his success and he says “My God-given gift is not finding the solution. It is not necessarily to always execute and deliver it. But my God-given gift is to read a situation, see the problem and put a system in place which I can administer well to get the right person to do the job.” That explains the management structure in his companies, but where do his three children fit into that model? Though two of his children are involved in the private businesses — son Veer in hospitality and daughter Tara in senior living — they do not have operational roles in the publicly listed companies. While his children are being guided by stalwarts like Ram Charan and other seniors, Singh is clear that this is the time for them to earn their stripes and develop their capabilities. Having experienced first-hand that succession can divide families, he has put plans in place to forestall that by setting up a Trust to administer the family assets. “On 12th November last year, I guess I was personally the owner of 98 per cent of our net worth, and today I own nothing. It’s all in that Trust so nobody can question ownership because it has been transferred in my lifetime. And the trustees’ duties in all scenarios have been laid out. So if the children agree, very well. If they don’t agree, they have a few months to sort it out, after which the trustees are directed to liquidate something and share it between them. So they can’t hijack Max India through indecisiveness between the three of them. They can be given their shares, told to do what they wish and Max India continues unaffected.” Clear-headed when it comes to business, Analjit Singh also takes “his role as mentor-father” very seriously, according to his daughter, Tara. It’s important to him that his children work in collaboration with him wherever possible so they can interact more frequently, something that Tara appreciates. “It wasn’t always the situation where he would pick up the phone and chat to us. We don’t really have that relationship. But he always made sure that he knew what was going on. He does have a hectic schedule, but the minute we needed him and called him he was always available (short of when he was in the air on a plane).”

Of Lists and Legacies

“I would be lying through my teeth if I said they didn’t mean anything to me — of course they do. But am I doing what I do to get on that list or be a part of that legacy? No. My motivation is to bring change and add value — to my company, colleagues and family.” Analjit Singh made it to the Forbes list of 100 Richest Indians. And even though he was not in the top half of the list, he is reportedly the highest tax payer in the country. Senator Hillary Clinton, on behalf of The Indian American Center for Political Awareness (IACPA), awarded him for his ‘outstanding achievement’ in presenting the international community with an understanding of a modern and vibrant India. This was followed by an invitation to be a Member of the Prime Minister’s Joint Indo-US CEOs Forum. Singh has become something of a business ambassador for the country, a role he doesn’t take lightly. “With a turban on my head and a beard on my face, there is absolutely no doubt where I come from. My family and I are on our best behaviour when we are outside India because I believe we carry the flag for the country. It is the same when it comes to my business. Because of our operating principles and image, we sometimes give a little firangi picture of ourselves. We are what I call an Indian international company, not a multinational. I get very hassled when people say that Max has got built through its foreign partners as I don’t want anyone to compromise the view that Indians can do it.” One would think this would be more than enough work for one man, but education is a topic that is in keeping with his notion of leaving a lasting impact. He is currently Chairman of the Board of Governors of his alma mater, the Doon School, and brings his trademark involvement to the job. As he laughs it off himself, critics tend to see him as ‘too active’, while supporters call him ‘the most active chairperson’. When it comes to ISB Mohali, he and the group have reportedly committed `50 crore to setting it up and he visits the site “religiously every 16 days to ensure that it is ready to open by the 12th of April, 2012”. Some time in the course of the conversation, he excitedly opens his i-Pad to show the pointers he has ready for the new Director of IIT Roorkee. From the vision and function of the planned IIT Roorkee at Greater Noida to ideas on how to attract faculty, it is all in the list. When plans were afoot to make the new campuses into copies of their namesake, Singh came up with his own ideas. “IIT Roorkee has a 10 acre campus in Greater Noida. So we are going to convert that into one centre of excellence — most likely on urban development. We’ve got 45 acres in Saharanpur. I am going to introduce two specialities in that school. We are going to try and transform a little bit how IIT works. The point still is that don’t sit still in life and keep pushing the envelop.” It is the day before Diwali and as the time with Analjit Singh draws to a close, you can see his mind has moved on to the next meeting. Working off his trusted i-Pad and a simple phone — “my assistant is my blackberry” — he is already engrossed in the details of the latest project. It is obviously a pace that suits him for as he puts it, “If you think of healthcare as a business, it’s a bad life. If you think of it as a good life, it’s a great business.”

Panel focuses on women’s role in peace efforts

World Politics\\ It was all about wonder women at the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize ceremony held in October 2011. For the first time in seven years, three women, two from Liberia, were conferred the honour. The award was given jointly to the President of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf; Liberian peace activist Leymal Gbowee; and Yemenese journalist and pro-democracy campaigner Tawakkul Karman for their “non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women’s rights to full participation in peace-building work”. Tawakkul is the first Arab woman to win a Nobel Peace Prize. Sirleaf, the first woman President of Liberia, has played a key role in establishing peace in the region and in working towards social and economic equality. Gbowee was lauded for her work in bringing about peace in the war-stricken Liberia. Substantiating the importance of women in the peace-building process, the Nobel Panel’s statement read, “We cannot achieve democracy and lasting peace in the world unless women obtain the same opportunities as men to influence developments at all levels.”

Greek and Italian Prime Ministers submit resignations

International\\ The European Sovereign Debt Crisis took a new turn with the Prime Ministers of Greece and Italy offering their resignations. Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou declared his resignation from the post to make way for the former European Central Bank Policymaker Lucas Papademos. Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi resigned to let former European Commissioner Mario Monti take charge of the country. The Greek economy is heavily in debt to all eurozone countries and owes a grand sum of $74 billion to Germany and France alone. The country’s total debt, $329 billion, is 165.6 per cent of the country’s GDP. Given the crisis, the new government in action introduced major austerity measures to bail out the country. While austerity measures were also brought into force in Italy, traders were troubled by signs that the unending debt crisis was enveloping eurozone’s third largest economy, a nation too big for Europe to bail out. The euro made strongest gains against the dollar and Italian bond yields, that had raced against sustainable levels, fell in relief at the prospect of improvement under a new government. European shares also saw a rise, with Italian banks rallying. Eurozone’s fourth largest economy, Spain, was another country facing trouble with the bursting of its housing bubble. This left the country, half the size of America, with an equal number of unoccupied homes. While the storm was brewing in Europe, the people in America continued with the Occupy Wall Street Movement which first started on September 17 at the New York City’s Zucotti Park, spread to 70 major cities of the USA and then to 1500 cities round the world. “We are the 99 per cent” was the chosen slogan of the “Occupy Wall Street”protesters who were protesting against the influence of money over the government and its representatives in Washington, capitalism and government corruption. With the growing rate of unemployment in America and the spreading dissatisfaction amongst the masses over the gross disparity with the upper and the lower classes, the crowd refused to bow down and started making preparations for winter. Huge military-style canvas tents designed to withstand plunging temperatures sprung up, flu shots were being offered and women were being provided with safe spaces of refuge. As the entire West is trying to fight this financial crisis Asia seems to be doing better than its American and European counterparts. But if Europe and America fail to bail themselves out, trouble will soon enter the Asian market due to its trade ties with the western nations.

Miss Venezuela is Miss World 2011: In a grand ceremony which took place at the Earls Court Two in London, Miss Venezuela, Ivian Sarcos, was crowned the 61st Miss World. She is the fifth Venezuelan to have won the title. India’s Kanishtha Dhankhar was unable to make it to the top 15.

Michael Jackson's doctor found guilty of manslaughter

judgement\\ King of Pop, Michael Jackson’s physician Dr Conrad Murray was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the matter of Jackson’s death, which happened in 2009. Murray had administered a powerful surgical anaesthetic to the singer hours before his death. The verdict came out at the end of a six week long trial which was headed by a jury of 12 members. Murray was slammed for his “unconscionable” professional practice and neglect of his patient, Michael Jackson. The doctor maintained his innocence to mediapersons even after the judgement. Michael Jackson’s family, which was present at the trial, greeted the verdict as a triumph of justice while fans who had gathered outside the courthouse and had spent the entire morning chanting “Justice for Michael”, screamed with joy as the jury gave their unanimous verdict on the cardiologist from Houston, Texas. Murray now faces up to four years in prison and his medical licence has been suspended. Ever since the verdict has been delivered, the doctor has been put on suicide watch in a Los Angeles prison. He has been assigned special protection by prison authorities to prevent him being attacked by other inmates.

Sports \\ In October 2011, India successfully hosted its first Formula One Indian Grand Prix at the newly laid-out Buddh International Circuit in Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh. The circuit was built at an approximate cost of $315 million and was designed by the famous F1 circuit designer, Hermann Tilke. The track that covers a length of 5.14 km and an area of 875 acres has 16 largely medium speed corners allowing race cars to lap at an average speed of 210 kmph and speed upto 320 kmph making it one of the fastest Formula 1 tracks in the world. At the event the man of the moment was the double world champion, Red Bull’s Sebastian Vettel, who won with the race’s fastest time of 1:27.249, breaking the record of most laps led in a season, held by British driver Nigel Mansell. The German Vettel bagged a total of 374 points followed by Britain’s James Button who bagged 240. Force India’s Adrian Sutil, who finished ninth, also cemented India’s future in the sport. The starry event also hosted racers Lewis Hamilton of McLaren, Fernando Alonso of Ferrari and the legendary Michael Shumacher.

Petrol prices rose for the fourth time in a year, then backed down to strong opposition

Political\\ The three state-owned oil giants — Indian Oil Corp (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corp (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corp (HPCL) — increased the price of petrol by ` 1.82 per litre on the 4th of November, the fourth such hike in a single year. The move caused a furor as opposition parties called it a “midnight massacre”. The most vocal opposition came from West Bengal Chief Minister, Mamata Banerjee. Her party, the Trinamool Congress, threatened to withdraw support if petrol prices were not rolled back, though she later, retreated from her strong stance. Initially, the government maintained a firm stand on the issue. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh not only backed the price hike but also refused to guarantee against a future increase in prices. However, in an unprecedented move on November 16th, the government declared a reduction of ` 1.85 a litre. This more than neutralises the previous hike, which was announced barely a fortnight before. It is generally believed that political compulsions are responsible for the rollback, but the government says it is due to globally falling crude prices as well as the marginal climb in the rupee-dollar exchange rate.

Hamid Khan: I came to the US 32 years ago and realised that for immigrants, there were always issues of identity, race and adjustment that kept popping up. At a structural level, however, US policies became more anti-immigrant in the ’80s and ’90s. There was demonising of certain communities. On the other hand, the size and number of the South Asian community also began to leave a greater impact on American society. These factors led us to examine ourselves and try to deal with matters as a community. To begin with, I reached out to friends and acquaintances — at that time, Greater Los Angeles had no forum for the South Asian community. Initially, these were simple conversations that had a multiplier effect. Along the way, we widened our scope and an organisation developed. That was the South Asian Network. The early days were interesting. You see, there is a certain level of expectation within immigrants. People largely migrate for economic reasons. There is always the question, “Why are we here?” We needed to talk about that collectively and create a common sense of South Asian identity. To do that, we had to forget homeland politics, regional identity and faithbased spaces. Initially there were reservations between people from different countries and backgrounds, but it was not a hard bridge to cross, because people were open to dialogue and working with a common cultural identity — whether it was language, food or celebrations. We realised early on that we could not operate in silos. Our approach had to be inter-sectional. Workers’ rights were a big part of what we focussed on: issues like minimum wage, fair working hours and compensation. Then there were cases of people being targeted because of race and religion, what was loosely called “hate crimes”, and other sorts of discrimination. In the 1980s there was a group that called itself Dot- Busters (from the bindi on the foreheads of Indian women), who went around targeting people of a certain community. Then, there were issues within the community such as domestic violence and homophobia (with people being rejected by family members for being gay). Over time, we have managed to influence some change. For example, earlier a survivor of domestic violence and abuse had to file a report in a public area in the police stations — there was little sensitivity in the process. We advocated for reform and as a result, the police department changed their policy and set aside a separate area. At a national level, we got really active post 9/11. There was a law that required young men over 16 years from some countries (especially Pakistan and Bangladesh) to register themselves. This led to massive deportation and disruption within families. So we advocated for change and the law was withdrawn. To me, it is important that South Asians, as a community, draw parallels with other “people of colour”. For the longest time, we had trouble thinking of ourselves as “non-white”. In the process of adapting, we took on some of the more negative aspects of the culture here. The term we used jokingly was “Honorary Caucasian”. Post 9/11, a lot of that changed. Looking at the social and institutional reaction to South Asians, a lot of people woke up and said “Oh God, we’re not white!” At SAN we have always interacted and worked with people from other races. It’s critical to broaden the scope of that bond which all immigrants share, and learn from each other. SAN has been around for 21 years and I have retired now. When I look at the South Asian reality now, I can’t say if things are better or worse. However, I feel that US history is steeped in the twin issues of economics and racism — take slavery as an example. And immigrants need to think about these issues. Looking ahead, I would love to see a multi generational sharing of our experiences and for it to get passed down as oral history. I feel that the biggest opportunity — and challenge — is for us to show “This is what a global community looks like”. There might be a universe of differences, but there is also a universe of similarities and we have to build on that.

Binna Chahal: I came to America right after I got married. From the beginning I had an interest in the immigrant community. I remember I was helping with a film, Roots in the Sand, based on the Indian-Mexican community. That was the first time that I got actively involved with issues of the diaspora. I’ve been involved with SAN from its inception. We tried to deal with basic issues in the community: language barriers, how to manoeuvre around the system, etc. The first meeting we had was open to the whole community and attendance slowly started going up. We’d have lively discussions between family members and individuals on issues that impacted them. For example, teenagers often wanted to know why they couldn’t date, and would ask their parents, “What is the point of you coming here if you have to follow the exact rules as you did back home?” Basically, it was an attempt to establish a new identity while keeping our roots intact. At SAN our basic belief was that there should be no discrimination — whether on the basis of gender, nationality, sexual orientation or religion. We had Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, Nepalese and Bhutanese volunteers. As a group we stayed away from the complications of homeland politics, and I would say we’ve worked well so far. We work mainly within Southern California, but have partners in other states. Barring a few people, everybody volunteered their time. For example, in helping people understand the system on how to get medicare, we had a number of doctors who would give free time — I was one of them. Today we have three main programmes: a Civil Rights Unit (CRU), a Community Health Action Initiative (CHAI) and AWAZ, which deals with cases of domestic violence. SAN developed a solid reputation and so got a lot of funding (which has been tight since the global meltdown) from sources, including the government. Initially, government funding was allotted for ‘Asians’ and so was distributed between all Asians and Indians hardly got any. This was for a number of reasons, but also because people didn’t really show up for the census that was done routinely. So the question always was, “Where is your community? Who are you going to get funding for?” So we got people to take part in the census and then got funding. One of the stipulations of government funding was that we had to collect an equal amount from the community, which we managed. Since I first came here, I see more awareness within the community and more youngsters volunteering. There are people coming into public life as well and it was important for us to enter the political arena. Otherwise, there was this post-colonial attitude that kept us thinking “Gore ko chedo nahi”, (don’t mess with the white man) and keep doing your own work. Recently, we had a couple of people come down to talk to us from the White House, and they were Indian women. After 21 years, I retired from SAN this year, but will always be a volunteer. Mental health stays a priority for me and we have tried to educate the community about this issue. When I think about the future, it is with hope. Our aim was to change the way our younger generation thinks about the needs of the community. I think that has happened.

A blend of the real and virtual worlds A space where the crowd exchanges its ideas, voices its opinions and imparts its wisdom

World leaders are suddenly taking a big shine to social media. Digital marketers may have been shouting themselves hoarse over the big three networks for years now, but those who have so much clout in the “real world” have been wary, steering clear of the rambunctious animal called social media. It’s easy to see why. They just didn’t see it coming. And when it came, they didn’t understand it. And when they understood it, they couldn’t control it. Kingdoms are easy. Social media isn’t. But things are changing. In July of this year, a country crowdsourced its Constitution. And you can’t get more “social” than that. In Iceland, a group of ordinary citizens put forward the draft of a Constitution which is to be ratified by referendum. The draft took in feedback from hundreds of other citizens, who gave their inputs online. This is an example of the dramatic shift in power from institutions, governments and corporations to the people. This shift has happened for many walks of life. When it involves an open call to get specified content from people in general, they call it crowdsourcing. The term has been around for five years now, but the true meaning and impact of this shift is today being understood forcefully after ordinary people have gone and put heads of state out of home and palace. Few people would question people power in Egypt, for example, where Hosni Mubarak lies hospitalised today, awaiting his fate. Crowdsourcing isn’t just about revolutions and constitutions, of course. It’s also about businesses getting great ideas from “the crowd” rather than just from the select few suits inhabiting their swanky innovation centres. In social media circles, Starbucks is today as well-known for its crowdsourcing as it is for its coffee. What it did was to put up a website, mystarbucksidea, to call for ideas from customers. This caught on like wildfire. Ideas — and pretty good ones, at that — began pouring in by the thousands. Not only were many of these actionable and useful, but they made Starbucks customers feel their opinions counted — which they did. Many others subsequently used variations of this crowdsourcing, tying the ideas to various rewards. Drop in on the mystarbucksidea site to see the sheer variety of ideas coming in on any given day. I see a suggestion to make sugar-free frappes, another to sell Starbucks branded clothing, to support upand- coming artists, and to make steamed coconut milk drinks. Sometimes, it’s a negative event that leads to the crowdsourcing itself. Poor customer service or shoddy products, for example, will get a crowd going. Irate Dell customers coined the term “Dell Hell” for their problems as they posted them online. Sensibly, Dell responded positively and with action to these comments and even went on to be an example of how to use social media positively for its customers. An example of the crowd making its opinions known was when Gap, the apparel maker, changed its logo. Believing that it was time to modernise, they had their creative team make a new logo and proudly presented it online. The result was an unexpected backlash. People hated the new logo, en masse. So much noise and sarcasm over the new logo took place, that after a few missteps with their reactions, Gap reverted to the original — and all was quiet again. It was a nasty lesson for the company, which would have done well to ask people in the first place; except that no one quite realised that now, it’s the crowd that owns the logo. Since the Gap story, many companies and even individuals have gone to the crowd for logo and other design ideas. Crowdsourcing has now moved on to nuanced forms. Crowdsourcing.org describes a format with which an advertising agency goes to the crowd for creative ideas and storyboarding, but reserves the right to final selection and approval based on what their clients have to say. In a sense, the crowd becomes a virtual ad agency. Another way crowdsourcing has been used is to generate authentic brand content. That’s content you can’t get any other way but from the crowd, in fact. Some start-ups are creating websites and apps built wholly on the concept of crowdsourcing. Brazilian startup, Ledface, has set up a platform to crowdsource or use the “collective intelligence” to solve problems. Ledface wants to go beyond being a Q&A site to being based on social interaction to generate answers. Here, the answers aren’t even attributed to any one person, unlike with Quora or LinkedIn’s or even Facebook’s question pages. Whether Ledface will work or not remains to be seen. Crowdsourcing is being used for everything from fund raising to video creation, disaster management to music composition. Unsurprising then, that those in power are figuring out that it’s wise to turn to the wisdom of the crowd.

India’s liberalising economy is creating a marked shift in its political culture

Even as India’s growth story marches on unabated, policy makers continue to struggle with the modalities of how to address the needs of the poorest sections of society, especially communities living in rural areas. As debates on how to measure poverty, the country’s runaway inflation, etc., fly fast and furious, the epicenter of debates over “inclusive growth” remains the “land question”. The issue of land acquisition has a long and checkered history in India. Over the past few decades, the corporate sector has found itself at the receiving end in discussions about land rights of the marginal and poor sections of the population. This pattern has been dramatically punctuated through many government decisions, the most visible being the rejection of Vedanta’s mining plans in the Niyamgiri Hills last year, and in a different context, the Tatas’ misadventures in West Bengal over the Nano plant. At the heart of such cases is the tug-of-war between corporate interests seeking to maximise returns and the livelihood aspirations of social groups, described variously as Adivasi, Dalit, tribal, etc. The socio-cultural values of these communities are spatially bounded by land, often interwoven with their economies and ecosystems. Further exacerbating the sense of mistrust between big industry and indigenous communities has been the rise of Left-wing extremism in the central Indian tribal heartland. In all of this, the changing character of the Indian state has been a key variable and has shaped the vagaries of the “land question”. In 50 years, India has moved from the age of Nehruvian institutions that were products of a top-down planning paradigm, to a phase in which the language of “bottom-up” planning and economic liberalisation has led to key legislations that empower “local bodies”. Described as panchayats, gram sabhas, or for the urban areas, municipal bodies, these are being brought into the mainstream discussions of India’s natural resources, land, water, etc.This paradigm adjustment (it’s too soon to call it a paradigm shift) has put the state under pressure in ways that it had not experienced earlier. The top-heavy political order of the Nehruvian years — with state-led planned development negotiated by what Rajni Kothari called the “Congress System” has — via the Indira and Rajiv Gandhi years, given way to the recognition that Indian society is entering the phase of “bottom-up democracy” with a mobile “middle”. In the past two decades, this newly emerging political configuration has manifested itself in several ways, from the growing role of civil society organisations in shaping legislations (e.g., the Right to Information campaign), to the passage of the 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992), the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA) 1996, and the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2008. It has also led to the growing power of Dalit and Adivasi politics. These developments, in the larger context of India’s liberalising economy, signal a marked shift in India’s democratic culture, which will again be tested when the Parliament debates Jairam Ramesh’s Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill (LARR). Cynics would perhaps lament these developments as populist gestures, but it would be a mistake — the genie is out of the bottle. As we look to the future, it is vital that India’s institutional apparatus finds ways to engage local bodies and communities in a systematic, meaningful manner. The legislations referred to above highlight the fact that India’s grassroots democratic forms have been formalised and institutionalised in an accelerated fashion over the past two decades. This is entirely in the fitness of things, as India’s diverse and still predominantly rural population makes its presence felt in the political mainstream. Of course, this has created serious challenges of governance, as the growing tensions over land and mining rights in virtually all parts of the country demonstrate. The primary reason for this is that those directly impacted by legislations like PESA and FRA, i.e., those who wish to acquire land (who are largely in the private sector), and those who currently occupy it, are still uncertain about the full implications of these Acts. This requires urgent attention. The sense of mutual mistrust between these two groups, compounded by the inadequacy of governmental facilitation on these matters, underscores the need for the creation of space for meaningful engagement between all concerned. Such a deliberation must address, firstly, the operational contours of the legislative frameworks provided by the 73rd and 74th Amendments, PESA, and the FRA. Secondly, it should evolve a shared understanding that inclusive development and inclusive growth can go hand in hand when the people being displaced from their land and environment are given some agency in shaping their future, perhaps even a stake in any new enterprise. Last, but not the least, such a dialogue can also serve to de-mystify the challenges that the state and big industry face in a globalising economy. (To illustrate this point, one could perhaps imagine a scenario in which organisations like FICCI and CII engage directly with representatives of groups who fear displacement and marginalisation due to the mining cartels. If necessary, neutral civil society groups or government representatives may be invited to facilitate such a dialogue.) Such a space is necessary for the fullest realisation of what anthropologist Arjun Appadurai describes as “deep democracy”. For India’s growth story to have any real legitimacy for the majority of its citizens, dominant groups in the political and corporate classes must forge meaningful alliances with the people living in urban neighbourhoods, towns and villages. The majority of Indians are in the throes of a tectonic shift as their economies transform from being unorganised to organised; and local to global (via regional and national hubs mushrooming all over). Dominant groups must recognise that they need to listen, and learn to engage with people active at the grassroots level; indeed, with regard to the “land question” no one should have choice in the matter since such engagement is the law of the land. This recognition should be built on an abiding respect for the kinds of laws currently enshrined in India’s Constitution, i.e., PESA and FRA, which are built on the principle that the challenges of inclusive development will require the direct participation of local bodies, through which the majority of India’s people express themselves politically.