Monday
Musings 194: Revolutions from above or within
The
notion of a revolution is quite a romantic one. The Arab spring, the south East
Asian uprisings and closer home the AAP juggernaut appears to be cut from the
same cloth - the revolution that was murmuring a while ago but simmered soon,
only to erupt one fine day. Across histories the notion of revolution comes
along with the narrative of popular discontent reaching a stage where it is
difficult for the powers to be to hold on to the status quo any further.
Dipankar
Gupta in his book 'Revolution from above' argues that that "at every
historical juncture when democracy made significant advances, it was the
citizen elite or the elite of calling who led the charge often going against
the grain of popular demands and sentiments". I was just past the preface
when it struck me that how does this sociological theory pans out in modern organizations.
The notion that the elite, often the beneficiaries of the status quo in a
system bring forth reforms that furthers the cause of progress and emancipation
in a democratic society is borne out time and again - I am sure I will read
about it as I progress in the book. How does it play in organizations?
Does an
elite in modern organizations, who hold the seat of power and influence go
about furthering their own self interest, reinforce their power structures or
do they systematically go about bringing down structures that have outlived their
utility, are harmful to the future readiness of an organization, even if it
means this will weaken their own turf. Do organizations have such reformist
idealism? Do organizations offer space for such reformist zeal? Most
critically, do organizations tolerate such reformist initiative?
In the
Industrial relations space, puritanically speaking at least, the trade union
movement still allowed negotiations to better the system. However in the white
collared world, it is the secular forces of systems and processes which are
supposed to make the system self correcting. However these systems, non-human
as they are, are subject to the usual machinations at the hands of the person
who controls it. It that elite wants, it shall reform - however if that elite
does not want, then god bless the system.
Organizations
are usually political spaces where competing worldviews, views and interests
vie for legitimacy, validation and survival. They are fuelled by intelligence
and analysis but are always subject to human failings. Ultimately pure
rationality is a myth. There is a lot of premium that is put on judgment of
leaders - and who is to say in the extreme short run if a decision is governed
by pure objectivity or colored by the person involved. Would reforms be pushed
by the elite in modern organizations if at the end the system is strengthened
but leaves him without power or the strapping’s of it? Quite unlikely - would
be the common responses.
If this
is true, does it mean that sociologically speaking, organizations are far less
evolved than society at large in its instinct to better itself - an orangutan
amidst Homo sapiens!!
Guru
