Tuesday, November 17, 2015

For a saner world that can overcome terrorism effectively


The Paris attacks that have mirrored the 2008 Mumbai attacks are acts of extreme inhumanity perpetrated against unarmed and innocent civilians. They cannot be justified by any arguments, and there can be no mercy for their perpetrators. There is great urgency for the nation states of the world, none of which is immune to terrorism, to unite honestly to put out this menace, without any selective tolerance for terror depending on where it occurs and without regard to differences in their own competing ideologies.  There should be zero tolerance towards terrorists and those who harbor and help them.

Passions are running high, with print media and airwaves filled with war cries demanding all types of widespread retaliation that may only shower violence and misery on even a larger number of innocents. Caught in the middle are also many helpless refugees driven away from their homes by poorly thought out deeds of some nations and their short-sightedness.   Mahatma Gandhi’s words, “An eye for an eye turns the whole world blind” takes an even greater significance today than ever.

Words of humanitarians like Father Jonathan Miller of the Archdiocese of New York ring a bell of reason that needs to get louder a lot more. As correctly stated by him, the immediate menace may need to be bombed out, but ideologies, good or bad, cannot be bombed out. When they are misguided, one needs to understand and acknowledge the underlying pathology and find lasting and stable solutions.

It is obvious that religion and justice are invoked as an alibi by sociopaths. But part of the blame for the increasing level of terrorism and escalation of repeated violence does lie in the deafness shown by powerful nations in proportion to their own quest for world domination and ability to destroy.  No longer can the world afford the hypocrisy, arrogance, or unchecked avarice of large powers.  History has seen much harm done to peoples of the world through Western colonialism, imposition of despots, and economic exploitation.  Much of it may well be water under the bridge, but there is definitely a need to repair some of the serious ills of the past to let the victims gain some semblance of economic and political stability and hope.   No longer is this a mere act of altruism; even self-interest of rich nations would dictate that.

It cannot be denied that a fundamental source of the problems is world poverty and inequality. Yes, there are aberrations among the rich like Bin Laden who become extremists. It is also obvious that the terrorists are helped by many who have had much schooling (not education, mind you). But by and large, people who are educated and have something to lose do not indulge in violence. The fundamental cravings of humans are the same irrespective of their color, nationality, or avowed religion.

A long term and sustainable control of what is now dubbed Islamic terrorism by a minority of Muslims cannot be achieved without addressing the root causes of poverty and injustice all around. This is a time when all nation states should introspect their own contributions to the instability of the world by their mindless exploitation and political machinations of all sorts. The so-called leaders of the world have an obligation to be human and humane first, even more than just being leaders of their own nations.  Even as they put out the terrorists, they need to win over the hearts of large sections of peoples who can serve as the first line of defense for humanity.  Therein lies the long term security of their peoples and the whole world.


This is a time when there is much heat. Let us hope some light does emerge, and that light does not get obliterated in the smoke and dust of greater indiscriminate destruction.

Saturday, April 4, 2015

DETAILED REPORT ON OUR SURVEY ON BIAS AGAINST ASIAN INDIANS

You may download the pdf by using this link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_YwcDddMAsYanM2UExKS3BhQkU/view?usp=sharing


Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Tribute to a Legend

R. KRISHNASWAMI
1936 - 2015
An Heir to th­­e Grand Tradition 
of the Chennai Legal & Cultural Elite

Connoisseur and cognoscente Kalaimamani Mr. R. Krishnaswami, Secretary, Narada Gana Sabha, Chennai, was a worthy heir to the grand tradition of stalwarts like Sangeetha Kalanidhi Justice T.L. Venkatarama Iyer, Justice M. Ananthanarayanan and Justice V. Krishnaswamy Iyer who adorned the legal, cultural, and intellectual milieu of Chennai and left an indelible mark on many fields.  A senior counsel of the Madras High Court, Mr. Krishnaswami was acknowledged to be a walking encyclopedia of civil law.  In addition, he was an erudite scholar of literature and religious texts in a multitude of tongues - English, Tamil, Hindi, and Sanskrit – with a masterly grasp of Hindu religion and philosophy.   He had put his silver tongue and tremendous scholarship to good use through his prolific speeches and writings on law, the performing arts, and Hindu religion and philosophy.  His numerous contributions to magazines like Thuglak, Bala Jyothitam, Gnana Bhoomi, Idhayam Pesugirathu, and Saavi displayed his scholarship, and compilations of these have appeared as books.  

     Above all, what shines through is Mr. Krishnaswami’s illustrious service as a volunteer administrator shepherding many institutions.  Besides being the Secretary of Narada Gana Sabha for over five decades, he served as President of Asthika Samajam; Chairman of the Vidya Bharathi Trust founded by Sri Sri Bharathi Theertha Swami; Managing Trustee, Gnanananda Ashram Trust; Managing Committee Member of the P.S. Educational Society; Committee Member, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan Chennai Kendra; and President of the Federation of City Sabhas.  Instrumental in founding the RAK Trust, a philanthropic organization of his family members, he organized the Kumbhabhishekam of the Gajendra Varadar Temple built by the Pallava Kings at Athalanallur, Tirunelveli, and brought it back from ruins into a vibrant place of worship.  He also played a pivotal role in constructing the magnificent Panduranga temple at Thennagur, which embraces the North and South Indian styles of temple structure (see http://shanthiraju.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/visit-to-thennangur/ ). This temple also houses the Guruji Medical Center (a multi-specialty hospital), a home for the aged, and a cow shelter, all of which remain popular establishments devoted to working for the greater good of the community.    Mr Krishnaswami’s philanthropic spirit has helped improve the lives of many needy persons and institutions. He has not only offered them pro-bono legal help but has also rescued many ill-fated artists and their dependents as well as a large number of bhagavatas and religious scholars from both professional as well as financial predicaments. Several famous performers of today will willingly acknowledge that Mr. Krishnaswami’s helping hand and encouragement did play a pivotal role in their rise to stardom. Mr. Krishnaswami has indeed enriched Chennai and Tamil Nadu through his tireless service and numerous significant contributions.

     Born in 1936 in Harikesanallur, Tirunelveli, which is famous for the great Carnatic composer Sri Muthiah Bhagavathar, Mr. Krishnaswami lost his father, Sri Ramasubbaier, within three weeks of his birth.  He was raised by his elder brother Mr. R. Surianarayanan (Gnanodaya Press Suri) and and his mother, Soundaram. Young Krishnaswami went to school in Madras and, eventually, graduated from Law College, Madras. After a brief apprenticeship with Justice K.S. Ramamurthy, Mr. Krishnaswami joined Solicitor General V.P. Raman’s flourishing practice.   Later on, he set up a private practice of his own with an extensive practice particularly in the areas of trial law, insolvency laws, and movie related laws.   He served later as a Senior Counsel of the Madras High Court.  He and his wife Srimathi Rajam lived in Alwarpet, Chennai, and  are the proud parents of two successful sons.

     Mr. Krishnaswami’s interest in music began at an early age through his brother, Mr. Suri, and his mother, Mrs. Soundaram, who both took him to several concerts and introduced him to several artists. This interest, eventually, led to his involvement with the Narada Gana Sabha ever since its inception in 1958. Thanks to his determination, energy, and untiring efforts, the Narada Gana Sabha has grown from very humble beginnings into a leading institution of high repute.  Today, it is recognized as one of the most notable sabhas in Chennai not only for its success in serving the performing arts in diverse and notable ways but also for its role as a pioneer in introducing many novel endeavors.  For instance, the Narada Gana Sabha Trust provides a pension to several aged artists who are in dire need.   The sabha, which is a citadel for Indian classical dance, conducts a dance wing called “Natyarangam” (with Srimathi Sujatha Vijayaraghavan and other volunteers) to support upcoming dancers and annual thematic dance presentations on a variety of subjects (see http://www.thehindu.com/arts/dance/article595991.ece ).  At an annual dance camp conducted by the sabha at Thennangur, many young dancers and gurus get advanced training and guidance from senior luminaries in Bharatanatyam (see http://www.kutcheribuzz.com/features/column/kiranrajagopalan.asp).  The sabha hosts many namasankeertan programs and religious discourses emphasizing the intertwining of our fine arts with the Hindu ethos.   Indeed, as noted by Sruti, the efforts of the sabha under Mr. Krishnaswami’s guidance and the leadership of Swami Haridoss Giri through the namasamkeertan programs have played a significant role in reviving the interest of the public in both namasankeertanam and in Carnatic music.
Mr. Krishnaswami continued to chug along almost to his end as a karma yogi, and his ability to do so stemmed from his deep religious faith and faith in his gurus, Swami Gnanananda and Swami Haridoss Giri.  May his soul rest in peace !

V. Ramaswami

Thursday, March 5, 2015

BIAS AGAINST ASIAN INDIANS IN USA - A SURVEY BASED WHITE PAPER

By most accounts and given the high positions some of them occupy, the story of Asian Indians in the US is  a success story in America, and the US can indeed showcase its Asian Indians proudly as an example of how openly USA embraces diversity.  On their part, Asian Indians in the US have much to be thankful for as well.  But how well are they accepted in mainstream America ?  Are they subjects of any bias, or do they sense bias agains them?  We wanted to find out.  Ours may be the first such attempt through a survey.

SUMMARY:  An anonymous internet survey using SurveyMonkey was conducted by data scientists Drs. Vaidyanathan & Soundaram Ramaswami. Over the period 2/14/15 to 2/20/15, it yielded a sample of 99 valid cases.  The sample, though not representative of all Asian Indians in the USA, is still interesting in that most of its participants are college educated Asian Indians who are citizens of the USA.  The group had an adequate representation of both genders.  It was obtained through postings on three major social networks and direct mailings to several hundred contacts in the Asian Indian community.  Given these and the fact that response rate was low, there is no reason to suspect any systematic bias in the way respondents were generated. Data show that a non-negligible percentage of participants encountered incidents of "discrimination" in 2014, and that an overwhelming majority of them considered Asian Indians in the USA as being subjected to "discrimination". The term discrimination was deliberately left undefined so as to give latitude to the respondent to include any act they consider as such.   That, however, limits our ability to assess if reported instances of "discrimination" are properly classified as such by the respondents.   In spite of this limitation, one irrefutable conclusion that comes out of the survey is that bias against Asian Indians in the US is certainly  a serious topic for research especially given that our sample comprises mostly of college educated Indians who are US citizens, and even they feel "discriminated."  It appears entirely fair to ask:  Is this the tip of an iceberg? Would the results be a lot worse if one were to get a set of representatives from other sub-groups with less education, income, English Proficiency etc.? Here are some highlights.  A pdf copy of a detailed paper can be obtained by sending an email to vramaswami@gmail.com with subject line SURVEY REPORT.

STUDY SCOPE & LIMITATIONS:  Be careful in drawing definitive conclusions from this study, and do not quote its results selectively. The inferences here are preliminary and need to be re-examined with a larger study .  Such a study should be with a representative sample which involves collection of national level data and the inclusion of many additional variables like income, English proficiency, and geographic information.  Also, clear definitions of bias and discrimination should accompany any future survey.  It is also preferable to ask the participants if any of a  specific list of problems were encountered so that difficulty in interpreting results is minimized.  Survey results should also be corroborated by interviews, case studies, and the like.  None of this was possible in this modest pilot which, to the best of our knowledge, is the first of its kind.  This survey was intended for the main purpose of determining if there is even a need for a larger study and to obtain a list of important questions to pursue.  To that extent, it has certainly proved its value.  We hope some researchers in US and Indian universities will embark on a more detailed research.

PARTICIPANT PROFILE: Total 99 valid responses; Males 53; Females 46; US Citizen 87; Permanent Resident 7.  Four  (4) under 25; 55 in the age group 26-55; 40 above 55.  Ninety six (96) college educated.  Thus, the sample comprises predominantly of college educated Asian Indians who are citizens of the US with a fairly even gender distribution.  It has also given adequate counts in  age groups 26-55 and Over-55.  

ANALYSIS OF DATA/A BIRD'S OVERVIEW:

Experience of Discrimination in 2014: Claimed to be incurred by 24 of the 99 respondents, of whom 22 are citizens, all are above age 25, and college educated.  A 95% confidence interval based on the data would indicate that anywhere from 17% to 35% of Asian Indians (of the type studied) may have had at least one  incident in 2014 that they would call an act of discrimination.  Questions for a future study: Would these statistics still hold if discrimination and bias are clearly differentiated, and participants are asked to choose from specific lists of acts falling in the two categories? Would the number alleging discrimination or bias be much larger if the survey were to become more representative of all Asian Indians in the USA and included others like those who may not have adequate English proficiency or the level of income one would expect for the sample profile we have?

Sources of Bias in 2014: The 38 responses received in the survey (note that a person could have become subject to more than one event) broke up as follows by source: Police (9), Boss/Employer (11), Other (18).  Treating these 38 as a random sample, among bias incidents that happen to Asian Indians of the type studied, an estimated fraction (based on a 95% confidence interval) of 11% to 40% happen at the hands of police. Question: Is this high value a result of discrimination not being defined and a matter more of perception than reality ? Or can the real situation be worse if the survey were to include less educated Asian Indians than those represented by the sample?  Similar comments hold for other sources of bias as well.  We need a much larger survey to confirm or refute the estimates given here and to make generalizations to all Asian Indians.  Given the profile of the sample, and since managing perceptions is also important, the results cannot be totally brushed aside, but need to be followed up with a deeper examination.

Are Asian Indians discriminated in the USA? About 75% of both males and females assert that there is "discrimination" in the USA against Asian Indians.   Similar caveats as stated in the previous paragraphs hold.   The high percentage (75%) of those under 25 who assert the presence of discrimination  deserves highlighting since we hold the hope that those born in the US and growing up with their peers in the US will not be subject to as much bias as the older generation of mostly first generation adult immigrants.  But we have only a sample of size 4 from this subgroup.  Again, a much larger study is needed for the reasons stated above.  Age specific bias perceptions is an important topic for a future study.  A pertinent variable in this context may also be the number of years the participant has been in the US.

Are Asian Indians Doing Enough? 74% of all survey participants, and 91% of those who would not assert that there is no discrimination, consider that the Asian Indian community in the US is not doing enough to prevent discrimination of its members.  An exploration should be made into what inhibits the Asian Indian community from actively participating in efforts to curb bias against their community ?

Ability to Stop Discrimination: 80% of even those who would not affirm the absence of discrimination feel that they have the ability to stop discrimination against their community.  We find this reassuring of the confidence of the community, and indirectly also their faith in the US.  Does this hold at large, or only among the types of Asian Indians represented in this study ?

BOTTOM LINE:   A non-negligible fraction of Asian Indians surveyed believe they have suffered "discrimination" in the year 2014, and a  majority consider themselves as being "discriminated."  But at this time, we do not know what each one understood by the term "Discrimination."  Suppose that instead of being given such an open ended question without clear definitions of the terms, participants are given a specific list of discriminative or bias related acts to choose from.  Then would statistics similar to those in this survey continue to hold, improve, or get worse ? We do not know. Nevertheless, the fact that most participants are college educated US citizens makes many of the findings particularly important in that they belong to a group most of whose members have done well in the US professionally and financially, and one would expect them to think that they are not discriminated.   It also raises the more troublesome question whether the numbers would be even more inflated if a more representative sample of Asian Indians were to be considered.   What is really the source of the angst and how pervasive is it ?  Those deserve an in-depth study.  The real contribution of this survey is that it firmly confirms the need for a national study and has helped to identify a set of important questions to explore.

INVESTIGATORS:  Dr. V. Ramaswami has a Masters in Statistics and Ph.D. in O.R.  As a researcher in probability he recently retired from AT&T Research and was previously Chief Scientist at Bellcore.  Dr. S.  Ramaswami is a faculty member at the Educational Leadership department of Kean University teaching Research Methodology & Statistics to doctoral students.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:  We thank all the participants and SurveyMonkey.

DISCLAIMER:  This is a strictly private effort.  No comments of any sort should be attributed to employers or groups the authors are affiliated with.

INQUIRIES: For comments or inquiries, contact vramaswami@gmail.com

WHITE PAPER: Obtain a 19 page White Paper with references, many data tables, and analysis by sending a request to vramaswami@gmail.com with subject line SURVEY REPORT. The report should be useful particularly for sociology faculty and students looking for important topics for research.

OTHER RELATED BLOGS:

http://veeraam.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-terrible-apathy-of-indian-in-america.html

http://veeraam.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-burden-of-asian-indian-ethnicity-in_21.html




Monday, March 2, 2015

HOW GOOD IS THE 2015 INDIAN ECONOMIC SURVEY? VIEW THROUGH A CHAPTER ON "MAKE IN INDIA".


For those not familiar with the report, the background material is given after my critique.

Summary Review
     This chapter is noteworthy for its poor preparation, lack of credible content, and absence of even a semblance of novelty.  Given the importance of the topic as an agenda of the new government of India,  this chapter should be viewed as an embarrassment to the government and to India for the poor quality of its content and presentation.  This evaluation is based on the following and will be elaborated on below: (a) the document gives an impression of having been put together in a hurry and abounds in grammatical and semantic errors which even make some key sentences unintelligible; (b) the chapter rests mostly on a crank-through with a "one shoe fits all" attitude of the Rodrik model which is more descriptive than prescriptive; (c) to cite two inaccessible and unvetted working papers (with A. Amirapu) to provide support for key ideas should be unacceptable in a document of this importance; (d) this is IMF-think slightly modified, and ignores many challenges and opportunities specific to India.

Conceptual Criticism
     I will divide my criticism into two parts - those at a fundamental conceptual level, and those at stylistic and presentation levels.  The latter are certainly less important, but only relatively so since no new idea can succeed without it being sold successfully to stakeholders by creating a good understanding of it.
    First and foremost, "Make in India" is a means to some ends and not an end by itself.  What are those ends?  The primary goals of "Make in India," and the parameters within which one can operate have not been articulated.  Is it mainly to increase exports and shore up the rupee?  Is it to achieve greater economic security for the masses?  Is it to decrease dependence on foreign technology and products, particularly in key areas like defense procurement?  What can give, and by how much, in areas such as environment, foreign ownership? Should one not spell out the goals and constraints as the first order of business given that you may not get there if you don't even know what "there" is?
     The Rodrik model [the main analysis tool of the chapter] is at best descriptive serving to provide one of many explanations of the economic history of some developing economies.  It is not prescriptive by any means and does not say how to effect a transformation.  Like all equations and models, it is subject to the major problem of "Garbage In, Garbage Out" in terms of data quality.  Technically, estimation of derivatives (rates of growth) is the hardest and subject to a lot of data problems.  The model predictions are not very illuminating without detailed sensitivity analysis that will shed light on how it is affected by minor perturbations of its assumptions or input.  Can the future of 1.25 billion humans be hung on cranking that one model, however much it may be adored by certain segments of the economics community?
     Is labor productivity the only metric of concern?  Many economies have increased this at the expense of the health and well being of labor in environments resembling indenture.  Shouldn't  "Make in India" occur with a balanced approach, and if so what is it?
     The disparity in labor productivity in the subsectors of manufacturing  cannot all be attributed to skill levels alone.   There are many more important factors like lower idle times through better organized procurement of orders, possibly better quality of life of labor, more mechanization and use of power tools, etc., that are more common in the registered manufacturing, for example, as compared to the unregistered.  Why is no attention paid to identifying the specific factors that account for the advantage of those sectors of manufacturing that have done well, and to see if in some way these factors could be manipulated in the other sectors?  The success of the dairy industry in India happened as a result of such innovative thinking, did it not?
     Is export the only focus or the main focus ?  What about the vast internal market? In many areas, it operates as a sellers market providing no incentive for quality and productive improvements to facilitate speedy convergence.  Should we not be adding more to the supply to change that?  Should we not increase the overall demand side by spreading the benefits of economic growth to larger segments of the population so that the overall economy is driven to higher gear?  Should we continue the status quo where wealth accumulates with only a few and gets spent on foreign luxury goods, gold ornaments, etc. at the expense of precious foreign exchange reserves and national strength?
    One must disagree very strongly with the assessment that "focus must be exclusively on registered manufacturing."  Even in a highly developed economy like the USA, a very large set of providers of employment is the small business sector and not the large multinational (which is busy downsizing and outsourcing to increase profits and reducing labor by all means of automation).   Betting on big multinationals has an inherent risk; as labor costs go up, as they indeed will in a growing economy, there is no guarantee that they won't flee to where cheap labor is more plenty and that India's growth becomes but a flash in the pan and not sustained.  The success of Gujarat (and Gujarati NRIs) did not come from participation as labor in the registered manufacturing sector, but as entrepreneurs and businessmen.  In the USA, the row of millionnairs has a large share of small business owners like laundraumat owners (see the book "The Millionnaire Next Door"), and the bulk of the middle class is made up of blue collar workers.  Unfortuantely, policies are made in India by white collared babus who probably have poor appreciation of the potential at the other end of the spectrum and the bottom of pyramid.
     Skill building is viewed from the traditional Indian white collared point of view or as generating employees for large businesses only.  If there is one thing that has kept India backward, it is the retention of the Macaulay model of school education which was certainly good for turning out clerks for the Raj but not for building a modern India.  Its "one shoe fits all" philosophy has thrust upon all a set of curricula relegating many to low paying jobs albeit a high school diploma, while those very people as entrepreneurs or small businessmen on their own would have done a lot better if only they had been redirected and trained to be so based on their aptitudes and ability.  A system that enables many entering jobs as electricians and plumbers and other workers to become better trained not only technically but in terms of the rudiments of running a small business would make a marked change in the lives of millions, and that too in a relatively short period.  Indian problems need Indian solutions, and the assessment of Indian strengths need the involvement of not only ivory tower researchers and white collared babus but also some real "chaiwallas" if some great opportunities are not to be missed.
    There is little given in the paper on the service sector except that it compares favorably, and some sub-parts even more so, with the registered manufacturing sector.  One issue glaringly not addressed is whether the most profitable part of that sector comprising of IT and BPO are reaching a plateau and how they can move forward.  Also, as the current US experience shows, can an economy prosper for long only as a service economy relegating all manufacturing to others?
     Finally, there is no attention paid to innovation and intellectual property generation and protection. Without innovation in India increasing enormously both in size and quality, "Make in India" can degenerate easily into replicating the worst of the Chinese model in terms of low level jobs, high pollution, and social discontent.  From the individual post-doc going abroad as an intern to scientists at government laboratories on collaborative research, no systematic effort is made to secure the intellectual property benefits for those who create the intellectual property, and these get signed away as small print in some contract or the other often to a non-Indian entity.  India needs to not only generate more intellectual property and marketable innovations, but also move aggressively to reap the benefits of the intellectual property generated by Indians. 

Presentation Issues
     The chapter is unfortunately poorly and hastily written, pretentious, and incomplete.  Honestly, this would not merit a passing grade in a graduate course in a reputed university.
     The equation of Rodrik is given without even a simple explanation of the notion of the frontier. We view the inclusion of the equation and the greek as an attempt "to baffle with baloney" in the absence of an ability "to dazzle with brilliance" at least in the context of the topic of the present chapter.
     This chapter smacks of a monopoly of wisdom as resting only in one subset of developmental economists, and hangs too much on an unpublished working paper that cannot be accessed.
     In many places, the typographical errors and certain sentences make it hard to even understand what is intended.  Two examples are: (a) the footnote of page 1 of the chapter "They suggest and increased in the level" which probably should read "They suggest an increase in the level" ; (b) Page 3, 2A: "That is, productivity growth should be faster in richer than poorer parts.  Otherwise, severe within-country regional inequality may arise."

CONCLUSION: A topic of utmost national importance has been given a shallow and poor treatment.  The exclusive reliance on mostly the authors' work, some of which is unpublished, and of a small coterie of developmental economists who may not fully understand the opportunities in India and may see it from a purely "foreign" market/investment seeking optic compromises not only its merit as a scholarly document but its value as a basis for policy.

============================
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
============================
     The Government of India released recently The Economic Survey 2014-2015, a daunting document of 296 pages with a statistical appendix of yet another 148 pages, making it impressive certainly by its size if not by the quality of its content.  Though it is claimed to be written in the tone of an editorial or a blog as opposed to an academic economics paper, the digestion of such a document is nevertheless bound to be a daunting and time consuming task given the multitude of tables and the various economic theories that form the backbone of interpretations of data and evolution of policy.  

     But no sooner than the document is put out, news media is busy both showering bouquets and throwing bricks, and one wonders if either camp has a real basis of understanding for their hype and hysteria.  Given that the survey drives policy impacting 1.25 billion humans whose hopes have been raised very high, I have decided to embark on a careful reading and review of at least a few chapters. I start here with Chapter 7 (13 pages) titled "What to make in India?  Manufacturing or Services?" since that is one of the flagship initiatives of the new Prime Minister and since it also tickles my own imagination as an Indian.

     I have one axe to grind.  People like my grandfather gave almost all of theirs for the freedom of India.  Many others, like the heroes of Jalianwala Bagh, even gave their lives.  Almost 70 years have passed since we won independence, and India is still and forever only arriving.   I may not have a decade left and definitely not a decade of patience.  So, I want to do my part, and that is to be the court jester who will not shy from calling it the way it is.

My Synopsis of Chapter 7 

     It is well-known that structural transformation of an economy from low productivity to high productivity areas pays dividends that could be accelerated further by two additional facts: (a) the higher productivity difference becomes applicable to an increasing fraction of the labor force over time due to migration; (b) high productivity sectors move to optimal performance more quickly than the others.   (This is Rodrik demystified without the mumbo jumbo of an equation.)

     Structural change need not be into manufacturing (of physical goods) alone, but could be from agriculture and low efficiency manufacturing into the service sector (like insurance, IT services, etc.). It is appropriate to ask if one should not include transformation into the service sector as well or remain focused mainly on manufacturing.

     Structural transformation needs to be such that it absorbs resources (labor, specifically) so that benefits percolate to the masses.  For this, there should be congruence between skill requirements of the expanding sector and what is available or could be developed quickly.  Exports are a key to rapid growth.

    The Indian reality is that in manufacturing productivity is very low in general.  Unregistered manufacturing productivity is much lower than that of the registered. Indian industries converge (come up to international levels in productivity) at a slower rate than average.  Indian states have been unable to achieve more than 6.2% of employment from registered manufacturing over 30 years.  Secular growth is geographically spotty within India.  The sector to be pushed higher should be at least initially one that can absorb considerable amounts of unskilled labor, but the manufacturing entities that can be accelerated are also those that mostly use skilled labor.  Manufacturing thus fails to satisfy some critical desiderata for becoming the sole agent of transformation.

     Indian service industry - like transport, real estate and construction, IT -  have shown substantially faster employment growth and are becoming an important source of wealth.  But they have a limited capacity to use India's most abundant resource, namely, unskilled labor.

    In the area of manufacturing, India must concentrate transformation exclusively in the area of registered manufacturing.  However, registered manufacturing has nothing "distinctive or superior" when compared to certain service sub-sectors.  Both are skill intensive, however.  The construction sector, though not skill intensive, is not tradable [I interpret this as meaning that it does not support exports.]  "Skilling Inida" is therefore important.

     The challenge of India is either to make it possible to utilize its unlimited supply of unskilled labor or to make the supply of skilled labor more elastic in the sense of being able to adapt to demand and other conditions quickly.  The future trajectory of Indian economic development could depend on both.
============

Dr. V. Ramaswami, the blogger, is the author of the book, "Innovation by India for India, the Need and the Challenge" widely available from Amazon and Flipkart.



Saturday, February 21, 2015

THE BURDEN OF ASIAN INDIAN ETHNICITY IN AMERICAN CORPORATIONS

This is an edited version of my article that was published in the  Divesity Newsletter of my company  and also in some ethnic Indian newspapers a few years ago.  The present set of news items on violence against Asian Indians in the USA has drawn focus on certain acts of overt discrimination against them.  Lost in the noise, however, may be the subtle bias many suffer on a day to day basis which is the subject of this article.  Much as some new age corporations  (wonder why talent flees to these?) and even the U.S. federal government seem to have moved on to a new paradigm embracing diversity honestly, it is fair to say that classic corporate America has remained stagnant in this arena paying only lip service to diversity.  The anecdotes are based on real life stories although some names have been altered to protect the identity of certain individuals.  In Part 2, we will discuss how the Asian employee may deal with bias. 
 
In the mid Seventies, working a summer job as a door-to-door book salesman in rural and suburban Georgia, I sometimes became the recipient of an unsolicited advice  that went something like, "Son, them people are colored; they don't need no books."  Sometimes a stronger term emphasizing African descent replaced the more sophisticated epithet "colored" in describing the neighbor I was advised to pass, and irked me even more.  For us,  Indian students who had sought this unusual employment to augment our graduate fellowships, these were indeed our war stories. We indulged in protracted discussions about race relations, typical of some Indian living rooms even today, displaying all the way from intellectual snobbery - "How come, these idiots don't even know that white is a color too?" - to unabashed opportunism - "Hey, at least he didn't call you that and did buy from you, right?"  Not all were cynical, of course. One of us had even ventured to show outrage once by saying, "You sure love them, don't you?" only to get a prompt repartee, "Sure son, I love 'em. I sure love 'em.  Would love to own a couple of 'em."
  What is described above is blatant racism and bigotry in its ugly form that is easily recognized and unequivocally condemned by all decent people.   We have come a long way since the mid Seventies, and I doubt if even in rural Georgia such things as described above occur, at least with the frequency with which they did long ago.  Across America, the power of the railway track, highway, or creek to cruelly divide towns into racial subcultures is suffering a slow but sure decay.  Along with those sweeping social changes, the work place of the white collar Indian or Indian American has also become increasingly characterized by policies that do not tolerate discrimination. In the rare occasions when  failure does occur to implement corporate policy or the mandate of law, recourse is available in several forms both within one's corporation and within the legal system [although the latter gets steadily abridged by the USC].  This two part article is thus not about discrimination as defined in legal texts or as arouses mass protests, but about the subtle ways in which one's ethnicity affects one's work life and, more importantly, some thoughts on dealing with it.

The Faces of Bias
Lest one should doubt the existence of a subtle ethnic bias in Corporate America, let us begin by considering some real life stories.

A Rose is a Rose ...?
 Soon after joining an employer, I was asked by a colleague and former acquaintance, let's call him Tom, who the head of my  new department was.  The name, Raj Devaprakasam, was predictably unpronounceable to Tom, but his spontaneous reaction, "Whatever happened to the Americans?" was a total shock to me, given especially that Tom is a strong believer in the virtue of immigration as a catalyst for U.S. economic and scientific growth.  
The story above exemplifies a peculiar position the employee of Indian (and similar other Asian) origin finds himself repeatedly.  As of this moment, I do not yet know if Dr. Devaprakasam is or is not American, in the legal sense of being a U.S. citizen.  And if he indeed were a U.S. citizen, then what would make him less of an American than the many other types of Americans that we run into in our day-to-day lives who would not invite such a question?  Indeed, when I recently hired an American of Indian origin, I had to consciously correct colleagues who kept referring to him as the Indian who had  been hired recently, or more particularly those offering 'innocent' jibes, "The Indians are takin' over."  The common and unchallenged tendency to see a colleague of Asian origin as nothing other than "Indian", "Chinese", etc., and the inability to ponder over the possibility that he or she may well be an American are  irrefutable realities of corporate life in America.  To me, this attitude is as absurd as considering everyone wearing a yarmulke an Israeli or everyone speaking English a Britisher. Yet, it represents the mind set of even some of the most fair and intelligent among us as my friend Tom.  If Tom had to decide on the promotion of an Asian American, could he bring himself to act in his favor, or would he be searching for his brand of American?  I cannot help wonder!

Guilt by Association?
One may debate whether Tom's remark is indicative of  a subconscious bias or is just an inadvertent gaffe.  But, consider the following true story.
Anand is asked by two of his superiors to take into his group, temporarily for evaluation, an Oriental woman whose performance  ability, to them, is suspect. Instead of giving the employee a fair opportunity to be evaluated independently by Anand, Anand is, however, told that the employee may have been overrated by her own supervisor "whose objectivity could have been affected by the fact that the supervisor is also an Oriental woman. " Had this suggestion not come from two managers whom Anand genuinely respects for their demonstrated track record of promoting deserving minority employees and encouraging them actively in their career development, Anand would conclude right away that this is an instance of blatant bias and racism.   Yet, he finds it hard to accept that two bright, and more importantly otherwise upright, managers failed to recognize the unfairness of their innuendo, which had it been aimed at members of some other minority group would have immediately brought on them labels as racist, anti-Semite, etc.
Thanks to the efforts of NAACP, ADL and similar organizations, some communities are spared the indignities that one of Asian origin still has to bear. The success of these organizations and their efforts also underscore the important role ethnic organizations can play in creating the necessary sensitivities with respect to such issues.
By the way, the two Asian females of our story vindicated themselves subsequently with the subordinate moving on, under the same Asian, female supervisor, to earn an interim raise as a reward for quality service to customers beyond the call of duty.  That also helped to restore Anand's confidence in the two superiors, for, they had  to approve that raise.  But, the incident has left him often wondering if he, an Asian, enjoys the same trust from his superiors that his more fortunate colleagues can take for granted.

Not for the Store Front?
A recurrent complaint of Asian employees is that the pleasure of presenting the results of their hard work and innovation, be it a proposal or a final report, often goes to white colleagues even when the latter have contributed least to their development.  Their best subordinates, recruited, nurtured and developed by them, are sought after for work on key projects, but the projects themselves are assigned to other managers, white of course.  Instances also occur when such assignments are made without even consulting the immediate Asian supervisor.  When the latter protests on grounds of unfairness or points out the potential impact these actions could have on the morale of his group and his ability to lead and maintain the necessary chains of command, he or she is typically brushed away as overreacting and given a ton of advice on team work and co-operation, which, had it been applied in the first place to the erring raider, would not have become necessary for the victim.  The injury is sometimes also compounded by the insult of a condescending explanation that this is a "cultural" problem.

Generalizations and Stereotypes
Sometime ago, a wire line news story on the computer bulletin board, reported how a handful of fans of a movie-actor-turned-Chief-Minister in India had committed suicide upon his death.  Included was a gratuitous remark, "It is customary in India to self immolate oneself upon the death of a leader."  I was amused at the level of ignorance that characterized this statement, and could even laugh loudly.  In case this looks far fetched, ask yourself how relevant is the ethnicity of the driver in reporting the tragic accident that took the life of  Bob Simon, the great reporter of CBS?
Just as in the media, so also in Corporate America, does one see a tendency to make unfounded generalizations and offer outlandish explanations (for even legitimate concerns) based on unknown custom or culture.  Such recurrent appeals to culture as a giant carpet under which every questionable act of bias can be swept or the generalizations that result in the stereotypes of ethnic minorities are unfortunately not amusing.  In fact, a course on Diversity Management offered in our corporation was totally built around "culture" and made it appear as though all difficulties come simply from not understanding the "cultural background" of the minority employee.  Ironically, most often, difficulties seem to appear from not ignoring the irrelevancy of one's cultural background!
The above should suffice to exemplify the existence and nature of the subtle bias towards Asians in general, and the double jeopardy it creates for them. They lose if they suffer it silently, but also lose if they complain.

Acts of Omission 
One must note that the above are what one may call acts of commission, capable of discernment and correction by a perceptive superior.  The more insidious form of bias that almost always goes unseen, however, is manifested as acts of omission whereby meritorious employees are not selected for key projects with high visibility or recognized and rewarded for exemplary performance.  This also happens to be the most frequent complaint of the Asian employee.
     In today's impersonal corporations, to reap a reward, outstanding performance needs to be aided by the presence of a superior who has the imagination, courage and, above all, fairness to take initiatives to let one's special deeds known to those who collectively decide upon the selection of recipients for awards, be they raises or other rewards.  To the best of our knowledge, there is no effort undertaken (even by the minorities) to determine the efficacy with which reward processes work in the case of minority employees or to train superiors to be particularly sensitive to watch out for such acts of omission. The significantly large attrition rates among Asians, and particularly Asian managers, may have much to do with this sad state of affairs.

Certainly, many more examples than the few cited here could be given to exemplify the conscious and subconscious bias against Asians, but these columns are better spent discussing some solution approaches.  That then will be the subject of our Part 2.

Saturday, February 14, 2015

THE SUICIDAL APATHY OF THE INDIAN IN AMERICA


These are thoughts provoked by the police attack on the innocent grandfather in Alabama -  a ghastly attack that took more than a week to hit the media and result in some action on the part of the authorities.








It keeps happening too often, somewhere or the other in America.  An innocent, unarmed, peaceful person of Indian origin being attacked or harassed, sometimes even by uniformed officials.  Go to any Indian party, you will hear someone complaining of being targeted in some way or the other.  But ask them even to sign a petition, they will shrink, however.   That is how scared they are of a backlash.   Sometimes, at an individual level they will rationalize by even saying they themselves have not suffered anything (so far). Does it  then surprise you that these things continue happening and get ignored by the media and the authorities  who act as though race problems in America are only incurred by African Americans and Jews (and now Muslims) ?


Image result for Gandhi three monkeys

Will it change if the community suffers silently ?  If we are to settle for this, then what type of a place are we leaving our children and their children in ?  Are we really better off for having made the USA our home ? How do these change perceptions of America itself ?  How much cynicism will it grow in our own kids ?  Does it occur to you that this is the only country they know and can't run back to India like you and me if things get worse ?  They didn't ask us to bring them and leave them here.  Are we being good parents and grandparents if we continue our apathy ?

In case you wonder about the level of apathy, please just read the older blog of mine from some years back repeated below.  PLEASE ACT FOR YOUR CHILDREN.  No, you need not demonstrate on the street.  But at least participate in written appeals and  donate to organizations like the NAACP, The Southern Poverty Law Center, and the like that work to alleviate racial problems.  And above all stand up for your individual rights as a tax payer !

In the least, please share this in your own pages or mail a link to your contacts !!!
Also, if you are an Asian Indian in the USA, please take this absolutely anonymous survey of 10 multiple choice questions. It is a pilot study on racial bias, if any, towards Asian Indians in the USA. Please help the community with your unbiased responses !!!

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2526JL8

==================

A touching memorial

I went, as did my wife to the memorial. Neither of us knew Dr. Divyendu Sinha, nor had we seen him before. But we went, for, it could very well have been either of us, or YOU the reader. After all, Dr. Sinha was brutally killed by five teenagers right on his street in Old Bridge, NJ and right in front of his wife and children when the family was taking a walk. For just fun or some gang initiation or because he was brown, no one seems to know yet.

We were a bit late and I got worried that parking would be a problem. But thankfully, it was not.
Or should I say thankfully? A graffiti on a synagogue would have filled up the football field in the Old Bridge High School but the murder of an Indian brings but a few hundred. Indians? Aren't we, after all, Bengalis, Tamilians, Telugus, Malayalees, Gujaratis, ... ? I thought I knew a good 400 Indian families in Central Jersey alone but could recognize only three faces in the assembly. Let me hope they came and left early before me. Otherwise, I must dread at the thought that unless we learn to show a large presence at such important gatherings, we will be easy victims, and police and law enforcement will take the easy way out and not seek full justice as we would like them to. But that is a different matter.

There was a large portrait of Dr. Sinha. Obviously he was a very kind and harmless man with a scholarly and kind countenance. A number of people sang Bhajans in a soothing voice cultured in Hindustani. They asked for only little: shanti (peace) and forgiveness for one's lapses. The speeches that followed were short and the tributes genuine and heart wrenching. The FIA
(Federation of Indian Associations) president noted that their inquiry had found that many complaints had been made to school authorities and police in Old Bridge during the previous year by community members but no action was taken. They called for action and said they are watching. The town council, mayor, school board members all came and said sweet things. But like the FIA president asked: what are they really going to do?

That aside what are WE going to do? Let us just hope that there is no next time.

============================
email comments to: vramaswami@gmail.com