01 of 08
Leadership Always Reduces to Managing People
Though the situations were different, the fundamental principles of administration and leadership remained the same, because ultimately it boils down to managing men and women. That is a principle applicable whichever assignment you are in, especially if you are occupying leadership positions, which I incidentally did as Secretary, School Education and Secretary, Coal.
Trust: first was to gain the confidence of the people that you are working with, and demonstrating to them that you are there to protect them, especially in the coal sector, if there was any bona fide mistake. The context was that, on account of the CAG report, there were officers who were not willing to take decisions on files or even recommend allocations that were supposed to be done. So that was a principle that I cherished during my career: working with a team, trying to convey to them this mutual trust, which was very important.
Delegation: second was to delegate whatever I could to these people, and that was an extension of the trust that I had in them. Such delegation of decision-making left me with a lot of time to plan, and that is another aspect that came in handy, to plan for a variety of activities that were to be taken in the organization, whether as Secretary, Coal or Secretary, Education.
Empowerment: your team had to be empowered so that they could take decisions.
Leading by example: apart from these three, trust, delegation, empowerment, I always believed in leading by example. If I couldn't do something, I could not expect my team members to do that. These are principles that are applicable across the board in whichever assignment that you do.
— Shri Anil Swarup, stated directly
What this means
He collapses two very different jobs, running Coal and running School Education, into a single underlying discipline: leadership is always about managing people, regardless of the domain. His four pillars build on each other in order, trust makes delegation possible, delegation requires empowerment, and none of it holds if he isn't willing to do himself what he asks of his team.
Why it matters
The coal sector detail is specific and telling: after the CAG report, officers had become afraid to even sign off on routine allocations. His response wasn't a new procedure first, it was restoring the belief that a bona fide mistake would be protected. Trust came before process.
Reflect on this
In your own team or organization, has fear of blame quietly made people stop making ordinary decisions, the way it did with coal allocations after the CAG report?
