Cricket batting and management theory

In management theory, there are two duelling approaches to how incoming leaders should manage their initial days. 

On the one hand, some emphasise the first 50 or 100 days as the time for the leader to make his mark. The leader should seize the initiative from Day One and lay down priorities, get some quick wins, and establish credibility. Another approach is to wait and watch, and gradually ease oneself in. Under this approach, the leader should start imposing him/herself only after having settled down.

The first approach can be compared to a T20 cricket match batting, while the second compares with a Test match opener’s batting. 

This comparison is also appropriate for the posting tenures of the officers of the Indian Administrative Service (this might be true of many other occupations).

The career of IAS officers starts with field postings in sub-divisions and rises along local governments, districts, corporations and public sector units, and state and central governments. These postings cover program/policy implementation and policy/program formulation. Their tenures in a post range from 2-4 years. Needless to say, most of their postings are deeply enmeshed in the political economy. 

Let’s discuss the cricketing analogy for IAS posting tenures. 

A good classical test match opener displays some of the following attributes, especially at the beginning of the innings. He tries to leave as many balls as possible. He plays close to the body and late to adjust for the movement of the ball. He plays the forward defensive to straight balls. He generally plays in the V, driving along the ground with a straight bat. He avoids horizontal bat shots. He prefers singles instead of boundaries. He rotates the strike. Generally, he’s technically correct.

The range of his stroke play will be determined by his assessment of the pitch, the weather conditions, the bowler, the team batting strength, the match situation, the innings score, and his own form. 

He waits for the cloud cover to lift, the morning moisture to disappear, the pitch to ease up, the bowlers to get tired, and get some runs on the board, before he starts to attack the bowling. 

On the same lines, the IAS officer must account for the nature of the post (pitch), the political economy (weather conditions), the opponents of all kinds (bowlers and fielders), the team of officers available (batting strength), the organisational or departmental capabilities (bench strength or team depth), the stakeholder support (the team score), and his/her own credibility (form and class). 

While starting, he must avoid abrupt changes and critical decisions (leave balls), keep his cards close to the chest (play close to be body and late), continue following precedents (forward defensive), go strictly by rules (play in the V), avoid any new initiatives (avoid horizontal bat shots), prefer incremental changes (singles over boundaries), studiously avoids media glare (rotate strike), and generally follow the rules (technical correctness).

Just like the opener, the IAS officer too could use the initial weeks to build confidence among colleagues and credibility among external stakeholders, before he starts to open up with his policy decisions and actions. 

Further, just as the test opener varies his approach based on the types of bowlers, the IAS officer too should bat differently against pace (populist opposition), seam and swing (opposition from experts and opinion makers), and spinners of all kinds (internal saboteurs). 

In contrast, the T20 batsman/officer adopts an opposite approach. He goes hard at the ball from the start. He charges the bowler. He’s loath to give away a dot ball. He’s unafraid to take the aerial route. He plays horizontal bat shots. He prefers boundaries over singles. He arouses the stadium. He’s generally unorthodox. 

He shows no respect for the bowler, pitch, weather, score, and his own form. He displays no fear and does not worry about the reputations of bowlers. Painstaking accumulation is not his forte. 

On the same lines, the T20 batter equivalent IAS officer enters and immediately initiates changes (goes hard at the ball), transfers and suspends officials (charges the bowler), throws aside conventions and precedents (takes the aerial route), goes after big bang changes or disruptions (boundaries over singles), courts the media (arouses the stadium), and exhibits a willingness to stretch the rules (unorthodox).

He’s also indifferent to the opponents and critics, adopting the same approach of unbridled aggression against all. 

He’s in a hurry to establish himself, no matter the department, political conditions, opposition (or lack of support), capabilities of colleagues and organisation or department, and his own inexperience. 

So which could be the right approach for an IAS officer?

It’s easy enough to argue that certain batsmen are instinctive hitters who are suited to the T20, and certain technically correct accumulators are best suited for the test match opener’s role. To an extent, there’s some nature, but as the history of cricket shows, it’s about adapting. 

In any case, in the case of IAS officers, I’m inclined to argue that it depends. Generally, but not always, field postings may require the cavalier attitude of T20 batting whereas policy-making roles demand the caution and restraint of test match opening batting. 

In the field postings, you are thrown into the deep end of a pool and there’s most often a need to establish credibility quickly. By their very nature, implementation and work exigencies are immediate and there’s little time to settle down. 

Besides, in weak state capability environments and given the enormous implementation challenges, there’s a case to galvanise the organisation by imposing the officer’s personal stamp. The sincerity, hard work, inspections, rigour of reviews and follow-up, and discipline of the young officer can paper over the institutional weaknesses and personnel deficiencies to ensure effective implementation. It’s most often like how Brian Lara used to carry the West Indian batting on his shoulders and win matches on his own. 

In contrast, policy-making roles in state and central government require understanding the context and the issues, mobilising stakeholder support and coalitions, deliberating the proposal, ensuring procedural correctness, finding the opportunistic Overton windows, and so on. All these require the learnings from the initial caution and restraint of the opening batsman. 

But just like the test opener who goes on the offensive after having watched and assessed the match situation, playing conditions, and opponents, the policy-making IAS officer should start to hasten with policy ideas, decisions, and approvals after having done the hard grind of assessing and creating favourable conditions. Like with a settled batsman who finds scoring easier with time (starts to see the ball big), the officer too would have established credibility to push ahead faster with his/her reforms. 

In conclusion, like with the good all-format batsman, the IAS officer too should adapt to the nature of the posting and the conditions and strike a balance between restraint and caution and breakneck-paced execution.