The Aptitude Way

It is very pragmatic of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) to have recommended to the government that the prestigious civil services examination process be changed to replace the preliminary examination with an aptitude test common for all applicants. The recommendation to introduce two objective-type tests instead of the preliminary examination, in which the subject is selected by the candidate, is to create a level-playing field for all applicants and test their decision-making skills in difficult case scenarios — so crucial to the success and efficacy of bureaucracy. As UPSC chairman DP Agrawal rightly said while inaugurating the UPSC Foundation Day in New Delhi last week, ‘‘Public service may be rightly described as a ‘calling’ rather than merely as a profession or a career. The structure and process of governance are crucially affected by the nature and quality of public officials in its service, and while sufficient guarantees of livelihood and career satisfaction need to be built in so as to attract men and women of ability and character, there is simultaneously a need to ensure that ‘aptitude for service’ is also identified among the necessary qualifications.’’ The Agrawal thesis is that emphasis should be on ‘‘testing the aptitude of the candidate for the demanding life in the civil service, as well as on ethical and moral dimensions of decision-making’’.

That it is aptitude — natural ability or propensity — that defines a person’s response to and compatibility with his job, cannot be gainsaid. Without the aptitude for the job, coupled with the right attitude, his can be anything but success. There are a whole lot of IAS and IPS officers, apart from the ones in allied services, who suffer from the crippling mismatch between aptitude and requirements of the job in hand due mainly to an erroneous selection process. Result? A bureaucracy that can serve none but only itself. As the UPSC chairman said, what should matter is the naturalness of ‘‘calling’’ — because civil services should be an extraordinary profession, and not a routine schedule for a good life and financial rewards. How many civil servants are in the business of civil service because of a penchant for facing the challenges of public service and for developing new models of administration? How many of them are charged with ‘‘calling’’? The Agrawal recommendation is especially important and imperative because in the 21st-century India, the bureaucracy ought to have an inherent mandate to serve the public in highly innovative ways — which is a function of aptitude. And it is such aptitude that helps fashion the right attitude too.

At a time when the National Knowledge Commission (NKC) is talking of a knowledge society, the bureaucracy has a larger role to play beyond mere assistantship to ministers. Therefore, it is high time the bureaucracy evolved into a machinery generating new ideas in sync with the changes and progress outside it, which is impossible if the bureaucrats are not spontaneously given to their work portfolio and eager to make a difference in the system. But the question remains: Will the politician ever allow a smart and meaningful bureaucracy to happen? THE SENTINEL