In a decade of inconsistent economic growth, the biggest challenge facing policymakers & practitioners is to ensure ‘inclusive’ growth so that the gains from emerging India are shared by all sections of society. In particular, it is imperative that basic services towards secure water & livelihoods be provided to all citizens, since these are not only ends in themselves, but also play a critical role in enhancing individual capabilities to participate fully in the growth of the economy.

Over the previous decade, public management has been critiqued, ridiculed & pilloried for its so-called apathy, inefficiencies and poor service. Scholars would say much of the critique of the public sector is valid because its service delivery standards could and should be improved by a fair margin. India has adopted multiple approaches encompassing local governance institutions like Panchayat Raj, Village level service institutions, Water User Associations and government service departments at district level. But on the supply side, the existing delivery institution have been ignored believing, as does the World Bank group that of all areas of reform, the most intractable was ensuring reform within civil service. Contrary to this seemingly universal belief of the impossibility of reforming the public sector governance, Tamil Nadu officials launched a voluntary program that led to the formation of the Change Management Group (CMG) in October 2003 as a group of officials working as internal change agents committed to democratizing governance and improving service delivery, so as to reach the unreached.

The fundamental ethos of this paradigm shift was rooted in an understanding that the citizen was not just voiceless but an equal stakeholder with a right to safe and adequate access to basic services with the public manager socially accountable to the last such unreached. The Centre of Excellence for Change (CEC) which was established in 2009, is the outcome of the natural progression of this water governance paradigm to eight multi sector departments. CEC is the expression of a belief many committed public managers hold that first they have a crucial role in critical service delivery, second that the unreached are sorely dependent on the public management of critical resources & services and third they owe it to fellow citizens, as first time graduates from the same dusty villages of India, to deliver the best possible inclusive service, especially for the unreached.

The CEC has provided an unique alternative construct by establishing a broad coalition of government officials, water professionals and civil society actors across sectors and geographical boundaries with a mission to engendering bottom up individual and organisational change. A renewed focus on sustainable, equitable and democratic management of critical resources and providing best possible service to unreached citizens underlines its philosophy. The endeavor being to engage voluntarily with citizen centric service delivery mechanisms so as to create models of effective partnerships with unreached communities. These models could act as beacons for the larger community of public managers and civil society to rethink and rekindle the public service ethos our founding fathers had envisioned. The future task is to create new partnerships within the state and between citizens and the State, managing better quality of services delivered as a trustee of the people.

Governments have recognized this as a priority area, but lot more has to be done in addressing the effectiveness of service delivery. The focus has been majorly on increasing the Spending on strengthening the basic infrastructures related to the critical services but not enough on the question of how effectively the resources allocated transform into services for ordinary citizens. The challenge lies on how we are going to initiate the necessary process towards achieving the effective service delivery goal. How do we rock our public sector boat without falling out? We understand our system needs constructive change, but here’s our dilemma: If we push our agenda too hard, resentment will build within the organization against the agenda.

If we remain silent, dissatisfaction builds inside us. What should a leader do? Become a Tempered radical – an informal leader who quietly challenges prevailing wisdom and provokes cultural transformation. Bears no banners and sound no trumpets yet, creates seemingly innocuous changes barely inspire notice. Like steady drops of water, they gradually erode granite. Tempered radicals embody contrasts. The commitments are firm, but the means are flexible. Yearn for rapid change, but trust in patience. Often work alone, yet unite others. Rather than pressing agendas, start conversations. And, instead of battling powerful foes, seek new friends.

The overall effect? Evolutionary – but relentless – CHANGE. We will be better off choosing transformation from within than an external situation demanding a change forcibly from us. From past experience it can be seen that, decisions taken because of external influences, policy/political mandate, scarcity of resources are sudden, discontinuous, painful and importantly, distortive to the very intention of the service that the department is existing for/ expected of. The solution lies nowhere but within.