Network Past Issues

Economic Development and the Organisational Space

Pradeep Kumar Mishra, FPRM 3

Why do economic development programmes often fail to yield the anticipated results to the desired level? My argument in this essay is that policy makers have been indifferent to the organisational space that exists between the policy direction and its actual delivery. Hence, the policy outcome is not realised to the fullest extent possible.
A policy directive is passed through several agencies before it reaches the target group. For example, a policy for alleviating poverty is first converted into a programme, say, the Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) or the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS). Then it is implemented through some agencies at the village level, such as the gram panchayat, or an NGO, or a government department. At the block level, the taluka panchayat or the block panchayat implements it. At the district level, DRDA (District Rural Development Agency) or the zila parishad implements it. At the state level, the ministry implements it. Furthermore, at every level, several organisations work parallel to each other. Thus, from the formulation stage to the delivery stage, programmes are dealt with by a multiplicity of organisations that are arranged and/or networked both vertically and horizontally.
It should be noted that an economic development programme is related not only to economic issues but also encompasses concerns related to equity, capacity building, and empowerment. Policy makers keep on adding elements to new programmes based on learning from the experiences of programmes that have already been implemented. For example, the Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) incorporated the group-based approach learning from IRDP, and the Drought Prone Areas Programme (DPAP) incorporated the integrated watershed approach after two decades of implementation. Along with these new approaches, policy makers have also suggested setting up new institutional structures to cope with the new challenges. The institutional structure can include the involvement of NGOs, or support through a multidisciplinary team, or the creation of a ‘mission’ office at the state or national level.
While suggesting new institutional structures, policy makers do not realise that the existing organisational space already has its own structure (or a complex meta-structure like that of the bureaucracy). There are also cultural elements and norms associated with it. Moreover, these elements and norms are all embedded in various contexts. By making marginal changes, or by setting up institutional structures, or by creating a new agency, it may be possible to attain short-term micro-level changes but the organisational space is too large to be changed by such policy directions.
Hence, there is an existing organisational space that is not compatible with the policy aimed at addressing various dimensions of economic development. Policy makers are aware that the structure of the organisational space needs to be changed. They suggest the changes and hope for the best. But the changes do not take place. Any change at this level would require a gigantic effort rather than merely making suggestions and recommendations.
The new policy objectives (i.e. the intent of the new programme) pose a challenge to the existing organisational space. How does the latter cope with the situation? It has two choices. It can either change itself by accepting the policy suggestions, or it can try to change the policy objectives to suit its own procedures. If it changes its own structure, the outcome is likely to be uncertainty leading to suboptimal results. On the other hand, if it tries to reorient the policy objectives, the result will be an obvious dilution in the outcomes. In any case, the original intent of the policy will not be achieved at the desired level.
Empirical studies indicate that policy decisions are not adhered to because of organisational procedures (Allison 1971). Selznick (1949) found that organisations have an adaptive structure and that they change their structure according to external pressures. But at the level of a meta-structure like a bureaucracy, things are not so simple. With a strong bureaucracy in countries like India, it is no wonder that the organisational space changes the policy itself. 

Allison, Graham T (1971) Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Selznick, Philip (1949) TVA and the Grassroots: A Study of Politics and Organization. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Pradeep Kumar Mishra can be reached at
f033@irma.ac.in