Once I went to buy a laptop in ( 1st yr of my under-graduation ). The shopkeeper showed different laptops - HP, LENOVO, DELL, etc. Finally my requirements matched up with a DELL model and I started negotiating for the final price. But the shopkeeper kept on insisting ( with the amazing screen quality, superior graphic card - blah blah ) for a HP model ( 8k on a higher side than the chosen DELL model ).After 15 min of negotiating, the final bait which the shopkeeper threw - was an ANTIVIRUS worth 1.5 K free along with the HP model.I finally got convinced, bought the same and returned home.
6 yrs down the lane if I revisit that instance, I can surely say that it would have hardly mattered if I would have opted for DELL and not HP.
#Reasons - My expectations - was for a Laptop with all the relevant features within a price range. Shopkeeper augmented my economic expectations with his SALESMANSHIP skills and made an immediate AMENDMENT to my initial choice of DELL to an HP laptop.
Fair enough since there's an equilibrium between my premise of expectation ( economic ) and his offering over the same. i.e - ( ECONOMIC VS ECONOMIC )
But... if I or anyone else would have been into a Hospital for an emergency or any public utility source and the receptionist might have dealt with the earlier ( laptop ) SALESMANSHIP approach, then things would have been totally different.
WHY ? ... > > since here my/else's expectations will NOT always be from an ECONOMIC perspective, it would have rather many other socio-geographical overtones too. ( Or a mix of both ). Hence, therefore the counter offering must be a well-matured and thought of one.
Therefore State shouldn't act as a SALESMAN !! ( Public Disinvestment isn’t the context here, that’s altogether a different subject. Concern is regarding the SALESMAN APPROACH !! )
STATESMANSHIP is a major missing these days ( at-least on major policy shifts ) !! ( CAA, FARM LAWS, DEMONETISATION ... )
The proponents of the AGNIPATH scheme ( Young demography of defence forces, ⬇ Expense on Exchequer , etc ) must have +ve connotations for an aspiring state like India, but in Democracy - the process is more important than the results.
Also if it would have been a well thought of decision -- WHY SO IMMEDIATE ( within 2 days raising the age bar to 23 ) AMENDMENT INTO IT ?? ( alike what LAPTOP SHOPKEEPER did it immediately )
An initial pilot project must have run to see the initial outcomes.This is important because we need to understand and internalise ( with a systemic review of Data ) that WHY ANY INDIVIDUAL OPTS FOR A DEFENCE SERVICE ? You need to design such policy by keeping in mind the motivational, behavioural and socio-economic nuances which goes at an individual level.Lest the policy is ought to be questioned !!
This isn't a first time.Frequent arm twisting behaviour ( bringing ordinances, depriving division of votes in Rajya Sabha and recent multiple examples of blurring of the spirit of federalism seen) by the STATE is not something to be appreciated on a faster result based notion. Rather to be countered and made accountable for NOT following a Process based approach.
Discuss ➡ Deliberate ➡ Deliver : should be the basic approach (conveyer belt) on which any policy decision (of such a vast democracy) should move on.
No comments:
Post a Comment