Manifestation of Power (Government) vs. Restraint in the use of Power (Government)

Analysis of an Issue Sample Topic

GRE

Some people are of the view that, of all the manifestations of power, restraint in the use of that power impresses people most. On the other hand, it can be noted that the restraint in the use of power in that place, where maelstrom of mismanagement is already creating havoc, is disastrous. I shall present my arguments refuting the former statement and favouring the latter one.

It is a hard fact that we humans only capitulate to someone who manifests his authority and power. We are neither docile nor meek to the vulnerable. In both public and private sectors, the manifestation of power is necessary to drive the machination of success. People will resort to shirk from work if there is no authority to forestall their sluggishness, by its manifestation of power. I would like to quote the examples from both the private & public sector.

If we look at the incumbent condition of governance in Pakistan then it will become quite obvious that lack in the inclination of government in terms of manifestation of its power have created a whirlpool of chaos. Look at the issue of sugar hoarding, the prices have jumped up to Rs.55 per kg in this month, from Rs.35 per kg of previous month. Where was the government slumbering all the time? Was there no one on the guard? Its poigent to note that government was alive to the situation but it was not ready to foil the scheming of hording or in other words it was not inclined to manifest its power because all the big wigs have their hands red in the plot of sugar hoarding. Now the price controlling magistrates under the supervision of sagacious executives of Punjab have started manifestation of government's power by raiding the havens of hoarders. On the other hand, the sugar mill owner have started complaining against the raids because they are the ones who think that of all the manifestations of power, restraint in the use of that power impresses people most.

Now i would like to quote the example of private sector industry where all the staff works under the command and control of a single chairman. If the chairman doesn't manifest his power, by carrot and stick policy, then the people will only shirk work. A cogent example is from one of the world's second largest IT enterprise where the former virtuoso CEO, manifests its authority by vituperating the sloth software engineering of his organization.

It is quite obvious from these examples that the adamant human nature can only be controlled by the manifestation of power and authority by the controlling authority, invoked at the right time and tide of the social circus.

"Quality vs. Quantity of Bureaucracy!!!"

TOWARDS A BETTER ADMINISTRATION

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE ISSUE TOPIC (GRE)

A democratized government is responsible for safeguarding the collective rights, privileges & interests of the people. Unlike dictatorship, democracy enables all and sundry to directly question the administrative authorities of the government. On the other hand, dividing the public departments into discrete units and increasing the density of bureaucracy will sharply dampens the direct approach of the people towards their representative government.

It's a matter of fact that bureaucracy is perhaps an important pillar of government and it's efficacy & dexterity should be increased by consolidating and revitalizing the inner structure, instead of increasing the number of officials that will create more burden on budget and hampers the direct approach of the people towards their representatives. I would like to quote an indigenous example over here, pertaining to the government of Pakistan. We have more than 100 ministries in Pakistan and these ministries are again sub divided into sub-ministries, divisions and parliamentary committees. As we know that the increase in the number of ministries and departments have a directly proportional effect on the number of officials. For example, Communications ministry is now divided into the four discrete independent ministries such as Postal ministry, telecommunications ministry, Ministry of IT & Ministry of Community & Works. If we just say by example that the parent ministry had 100 officials then now the four ministries have at least 300 officials because the number of officials increases with the number of ministries. According to the reports of transparency international and "Dawn August 3rd,2009", the government is reconsidering of joining the four again because of the degrading managerial environment.

Another and perhaps more elucidating example is of Local Government System of Pakistan. Before the local government system there was only one seat of Assistant Commissioner in a district but after the LGS, the post of Assistant Commissioner was divided in discrete parts such as DDO(R), DDO(Coordination), DDO(Finance) & DDO(judicial Magistrate). The result was quiet alarming as the International Crisis Group (ICG) named the Local government of Pakistan as the most corrupt local government system of the world. This shows how the alacrity of the dexterous officers is being marred by the division of bureaucracy.

If we look at the administrative setup of other countries then it would be quiet visible that the countries which have small administrative setup, with less number of officials have better quality of administration. It shows how the increase in the number of officials decreases the quality of administration and degrades the symbiotic relationship between the government and the people.

ONE MAN'S AUTHORITY VS COLLECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE SETUP

Analysis of an Issue Sample Topic (GRE)

A successful and productive administration of any company or even a state requires the collective and progressive participation of all the incumbent elements involved in the fortification of it. It is quite difficult or somewhat impossible for one central authority to look after all the matters pertaining to a company or a state, without the involvement of any other elements of the enterprise. I shall present arguments favouring the idea of collective involvement of teams in which everyone makes decision, shares responsibilities and duties by refuting the idea of one man’s authority.

Collective decision making can solve many problems as different types of responsibilities are shared among different groups. It also enables the companies and states to think out of the box & to open new vistas of opportunities. One person’s authority can only think in a particular way because the thinking of a person is secluded or confined by the environment in which he lives. I would like to quote the example of “District Government System of Pakistan”. This system comprises of a person having all the central authority called “District Nazim”. He has the responsibility to look after all the aspects of a city’s life including; planning, development, education, general administration, budget, human resource management etc. How come a person can manage such mammoth tasks with a rudimentary education of only “Matriculation” & with no prior experience of administration? There is no authority in this “District Government System”, which can question the authority of these demigods. The result is in front of our eyes i.e. “complete anarchy”. According to a report of ICG (INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP), district government system is blamed to be the most corrupt system among all the incumbent local government systems throughout the world (ICG report 2003) .

On the other hand, if we look after the example of collective decision making then we can see a much efficient administration setup. I would again like to quote the example of Pakistan in a different way. Before the advent of “District Government System”, Deputy Commissioners were responsible to look after all the districts along with their team of professional officials, trained to perform their well specified tasks. DCs were accountable to Commissioners. Commissioners were accountable to Chief Secretary and chief secretaries worked in coordination with Chief Minister and so on everyone was responsible in that system. I would not say that the system was infallible but I can say one thing for sure that even a small official was somewhere involved in decision making with its hierarchal setup. Due to its efficiency & a setup of accountability, the government is again thinking to replace the “District Government System” with this “District Management Group” system.

If we look at a small business or a private enterprise then we can see that the collective efforts of all the members can enhance the company’s profile and hampers the top management to enforce its dictatorial views. It is a matter of great surprise that many engineers left Microsoft & joined Google because in Microsoft they were not included in decision making despite of the fact that they were given quite handsome pays.

In a nutshell, we can say that the active and progressive involvement of all the stake holders of a state or an enterprise is necessary for the state or an enterprise and even the employers themselves because it opens new vistas of creativity, boost the morale & working of the employs.