Saturday Nov 23, 2024
Saturday Nov 23, 2024
Thursday, 5 October 2023 00:34 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
Lowest common denominator thinking and the abandonment of meritocracy have contributed to growing mediocrity, in most, if not all, aspects of Sri Lankan society, in the past half century.
The policies, strategies and tactics adopted by Sri Lankan leaders since the 1950s smack of lowest denominator thinking. The expression “lowest common denominator” describes, usually in a negative manner, a plan of action, a rule, proposal, or opinion that is deliberately simplified or watered down from the optimal, to appeal to the largest possible number of people. A glaring example of this is the Sinhala Only Act introduced in 1956 which, in my view, was introduced for political gain with little consideration of its negative consequences. While damaging, and disrupting at unimaginable costs the harmony which had prevailed among the ethnicities of the country up to then, it destroyed the education system of the country. The Act was purely a political response to educated youth who, though benefiting from mother-tongue driven free education since the mid-1940s, lacked the social and economic connections to obtain the more lucrative private-sector employment. They saw English as an obstacle to their employment prospects. This sentiment prevails even today, albeit at a lower intensity, through a widespread nationalist belief, though relatively narrower than originally, that private schools and the English language are symbols of elitism. Education and training, both the curricula and facilities, are the greatest leverage available to leaders and governments, to upgrade the quality of life of its citizens. Despite this obviousity, there is great reluctance on the part of political parties and political leaders in Sri Lanka to introduce reform. While the misplaced thinking, and the negative corollaries of the Sinhala Only Act were beginning to be felt, and be visible since the early 1970s, and while there have been many opportunities since then, for appropriate change in the best interest of the country, our national leaders have shied away from making it happen through fear of losing power. They have preferred, and still prefer, to take the easy path of least resistance than rock the boat. I believe, reasoned debate, dialogue, and discussion with the masses leading to an inspired shared vision are very possible if leaders are willing to face up to the inevitable ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of the chosen path. It is just that politicians drunk with power and having a bloated view of their knowledge, and expertise, do not want to take a collaborative and participatory approach on such matters. They have missed, and are still missing, the opportunities to y improve the productivity of the nation, and thereby, the quality of life of the citizens by providing more relevant forms of education. Rather than taking steps to ameliorate the situation, successive leaders have, instead, been content in maintaining the backward and outdated status quo with a view to pleasing a section of the electorate, preventing ambitious students, professionals, workers, and citizens to develop, prosper, and flourish. The net result has been a noteworthy diminution of the skills repository, and therefore, the productive capacity of the country because of migration, the seeking of foreign employment, et cetera. The lack of high-quality learning institutions and English based education in the country have resulted in affluent citizens sending their children overseas for schooling and training and thereby, still, creating resources which are superior in knowledge, and exposure, to the citizens who do not possess such means. It is, therefore, ironic that the very phenomenon which the Sinhala Only Act was expected to redress has emerged in a different form and made matters worse in terms of social equality and social mobility.
Meritocracy, bedrock of a free and prosperous society
Meritocracy reigns supreme in my realm of social ideals. I am an advocate for a society where individuals are given the opportunity of fulfilling their aspirations, and dreams, through their sweat, blood, tears, toil, and their abilities rather than through birthright or privilege. It is my unshakeable belief that meritocracy, if adopted sincerely, and strongly, will go a long way in ensuring that competent individuals lead. When leadership roles are based on merit, the most qualified, skilled, and effective leaders rise to the top, naturally, and will facilitate, and promote better decision-making and effectiveness, thereby, enhancing performance in both public and private sectors. This would in turn, lead to an overall improvement in the key facets of society. Meritocracy is, undoubtedly, the bedrock of a free and prosperous society where commitment, talent, ethical risk- taking and innovation are rewarded. Meritocracy depends greatly on the existence of genuine equality of opportunity and, in this context, I am aware that there are schools of thought who strongly believe that genuine equality as it relates to the securing of a job, or for that matter in accomplishing challenging tasks, is a mere mirage. Inequality can, in extremely broad terms, be divided into two categories. One is the inequality emanating from discrimination against a particular group on grounds unrelated to merit, such as, race, gender, religion, beliefs, or disability; the other is the inequality arising out of advantages or disadvantages inherited by birth. Discrimination against specific groups is “man-made” and can be and must be, removed by ‘man’ himself. However, redressing of the inequality arising from the advantages and/or disadvantages inherited at birth is more challenging. It may be addressed through instruments such as inheritance taxation, et cetera. Whatever the plusses and minuses and whatever the measures taken, I believe, we as Sri Lankans, must allow merit to prevail over any other factor if we are to climb out of the abyss we have fallen into. It does not require much intelligence or imagination, to understand the grave damage caused to Sri Lanka’s economy and society by the gradual abandonment of meritocracy. At political and public service levels, we have, through our disinterested behaviour and servility, enabled nepotism and cronyism to hold sway in the appointment of leaders. We have preferred to turn a blind eye even when we know that such appointments have been blatantly influenced by personal relationships rather than professional competence. We have repeatedly elected leaders who have lacked the skills, abilities, credentials, and the emotional intelligence to lead a nation and we continue to do so. All this for our temporary appeasement and in the name of peace, rather than satisfying the long-term, collective needs of the country. Thus, the inevitable outcome is the erosion of public trust in our leaders and a further contribution to the fickleness of our political system.
Economically, we have regressed significantly, especially in the last three decades, allowing factors other than merit and objectivity, to be the determinants of national decision-making. The overall productivity has declined rapidly in the past several years because of the inefficient allocation of resources arising from appointments, recruitments, training, and promotions that are not based on merit and potential. The abandonment of meritocracy has also raised many questions about fairness and social mobility. Meritocracy, at least in theory offers a more equal playing field than the unequal playing fields created by the discriminatory Sinhala Only Act of 1956. Even now, the privileged few, including the nouveau riche, some of them through ill-gotten wealth, continue to have an unfair advantage over the ordinary folks. While social inequality has increased, the width of upward social mobility has decreased. It is clear therefore, the abandonment of meritocracy is a significant contributor to our current political and economic ills. We must reinstate the principles of merit as a matter of utmost urgency if we are to prevent the country rushing to ruin, obscurity, and mediocrity.
Lowest cost denominator thinking, and the gradual abandonment of meritocracy have spawned systemic mediocrity in Sri Lankan society. Our passion for excellence, our will to win and succeed, were at their zenith in the mid- 20th century. We were in awe of the world with our prowess in many fields at heights positively disproportionate to the size of the country. Our scholars, professionals, sportsmen and the public service were as good as, and able to hold their own against the world’s best. However, in recent times, our determination to excel has waned rapidly. The spark of excellence has dimmed, and in defeat, we are often heard to say; “we also played.”
Mediocrity in every nook and corner in the country
Mediocrity has insidiously worked its way through every nook and corner in the country and permeated the fabric of our society. From a blame game and offering of excuses to time wasting commissions of inquiry, missed deadlines and disasters from atrocious change management to an extreme reluctance on the part of leaders to confront individual underperformance, the list is unending. Underperformance is most evident at parliamentary and Cabinet levels where leaders are loath to enforce accountability through fear of losing the majority vote. If one cannot enforce accountability at the highest level of governance in a country, what can we expect at lower levels? It is sad to note that the tone, and the role modelling, of Sri Lankan leaders in the past five decades have not been in keeping with leadership traits that promote democracy, safeguard human freedom, ensure equality in the application of law and order, encourage constructive challenge and drive prosperity.
Productivity, key to nation’s standard of living
It is our political and social policies that have contributed to the killing of our spirit to excel and the will to win. Lost in their self-centricity, our national leaders have forgotten that the central goal of government policy is to deploy a nation’s human and capital resources with high and rising levels of productivity. Productivity is, as stated earlier, the key to a nation’s standard of living. Increased productivity can be enabled sustainably, only by the continuous upgrading of the economy by improving the general education system, aligning education curricula with current and emerging trends, placing the strategising and implementation of education policies in the hands of competent persons, increasing government expenditure on research and development, establishing government programs to fund new enterprises and most importantly, creating environments and mechanisms that recognise and reward human endeavour. Human capital is a spur to economic growth. When human capital abounds in areas such as education, sports, science, the arts, and leadership, to name a few, it leads to increases in innovation, social well-being, equality, productivity, improved rates of participation, all contributing to economic growth.
In the guise of addressing an anomaly in opportunity, let us not starve the aspirations of the ‘elitists in ability’ in placating an ordinary, or lazy, majority. Let us not forget that in a normal distribution there is a majority who meet expectations, some who exceed expectations and others who perform below expectations. We must not allow brilliance to be watered down to normalcy, nor should we desist from providing opportunity for the ordinary, and below ordinary, to develop and excel. Aware of its pros and cons, I am an advocate of a market forces driven economy, and in this regard, I am deeply influenced by the Adam Smith inspired “invisible hand” theory which states that if all individuals in the economy act in their best self-interest, the result is automatically in the best interests of the economy and the outcomes will always be better than those of a centrally planned and regulated economy. In his Wealth of Nations, Smith articulated that free trade among members of a society inevitably leads to an outcome that is good for the society, taken as a whole, even though everyone pursues only his own selfish gain. He noted- “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard for their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages.” The role of government is enablement of enterprise, and the establishment of overarching checks and balances which prevent the abuse of the concept of laissez-faire. This has not happened as it should in Sri Lanka.
Time to chart our own destinies within the framework of democracy
It is time that we realised that we must not depend on leaders and governments to act in the best interest of the country and/or the citizens. We must chart our own destinies within the framework of democracy. Democracy flourishes when the citizens are alert and responsive. As Sri Lankans, we have failed in these respects because of fundamental problems in our disposition. We are too often taught to abide by the norm, not to shake the boat and not to buck the trend. We are persuaded to be content with the status quo and are influenced to think we are happy when we are not and want to improve on where we are. We are conditioned, and to a great degree, brainwashed to accept average outcomes. We must come out of our reverie of this lowest cost denominator thinking if we are to develop ourselves in line with the ‘Maslowian’ hierarchy of needs. It is important that we constantly remind ourselves that we live in a democracy and we have the constitutional right and opportunity to make a positive difference to the country, to the world and to our collective attitude towards upscaling, upgrading and development. We do that by electing leaders who inspire a shared vision. As an individual, I have pursued and continue to pursue, things I believe in. I establish goals, objectives and milestones and diligently work towards achieving them despite the roadblocks, obstacles, and other impediments which I encounter, and/or perceive to be there, from time to time. I am not dissuaded by the possibility of failure. I believe in failing after trying rather than failing without trying. It is noteworthy that my family, friends and associates frequently tell me that my utterings just fall on deaf ears and that I am wasting my time flogging a dead horse. Similar are the occasions when I hear our voting citizens observing, - “What is the point in voting, -the contenders are all the same.” This is typical of our defeatist attitude, the attitude which has contributed to our current state of mediocrity. I take to heart the words of Mark Twain, - ““Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you did not do than by the ones you did do. So, throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.”
In my coaching, I meet many young people who have hopes and dreams of doing great things. But only a handful fulfil their dreams because of their over-dependence on government and/or company and an under-estimation of their inherent God-given abilities and skills. Irrespective of who we are born to and where we are born, we must discover our innate talents through intellectual curiosity. No one is brilliant at anything at the outset. Brilliance comes from self-belief, practice, and commitment. Be curious. Be relentless. Believe in, - “If I dare, I will win.” This is the approach we need to take as citizens if we are to climb out of the quagmire of mediocrity. We cannot bow to a state of helplessness and attribute our travails and tribulations to our fate, destiny, and karma. Such acceptance would inevitably result in our resignation to a lower quality of life.
Mediocrity at a national level is an agglomerated reflection of the choice of individual citizens to be satisfied by a minimum acceptable effort. These are citizens who choose not to discover, try, challenge, not to do something to address problems and not to take risks. Therefore, the fight against mediocrity must start within us, as individuals. Let us embark on such an adventure in the following ways:
Today, Sri Lanka, as a nation, has become a mediocre society where we never seem to strive for excellence in anything that we do. Mediocrity is comfortable, easy, and contagious. It is in a way a conspiracy where we join our fellow citizens in not admitting that we could be doing better. Finding out how far we are from our true potential and ascertaining what we must do, what we must start and stop to bridge the gap, require levels of courage, a trait we have underused in the past five decades. The spell of mediocrity can only be broken if we recognise what went wrong and take meaningful steps to redress it. Mediocrity, which has, in recent times, been touted as an instrument of stability, is the breeding ground for certain decline. Decline is what we will, as a nation, if we do not make immediate changes to our individual attitudes. As stated by Robin Sharma, the Canadian writer, - “You are born into genius. But have you resigned yourself to mediocrity?”
