One of the most important reasons for the dismal performance of the government sector is that of feudal perspective for treating the institution  of the government in which one is seen as the master and the other set of people are viewed as servants-meaning thereby such people are recruited to serve the government and so they are supposed to serve the interests of the government of the day without questing it. This feudalistic perspective has done and continues to do pernicious damage to all stakeholders.

     First the phrase "master-servant relation" sounds hubristic and arrogant and damages the sense of allegiance of both "master" and "servant".

    Second, this attitudes creates a sense of complacency among "servants" as , as soon as the sense of servitude appears loylity goes to back sit and it's place is occupied by sense and acts of sycophancy on the part of the servant.

     Thirdly, the closely related reality to these first two is that as soon as perspective of servitude enters into a relationship system of rewards and punishments are viewed as tools to win the favour and to punish the devience in terms of fulfillment the desires of masters.

      Fourthly, "master -servant relationship" perspective is fundamentally opposed to the essence of mutual respect and trust. As soon as one becomes master the others become master's servant place of respect and trustbis taken by fear and in this situation allegiance is equated with total surrender.

     Fifthly , since the  servant is fearful of the master chances for innovations on the part of the servant extinguish . In such a situation even a highly qualified servant is hesitant to speak his or her mind fearlessly and in its place he/she prefers to win the confidence of the master by way of flattering and/or by means of corrupt practices.

      Sixthly, "master-sevant relation " douses  the spirit of belongingness in the heart, mind and actions of the servant. A servant treats himself as a victim of servitude despite doing all good things. This lack of sense of belongingness compels the servant to do the work with minimum risk and innovation.

       All these consequences of "master-servant relationship" in a government service are not exhaustive but only indicatives and many more may further be discussed. But all these discussions establish one fact without any doubt that this feudalistic characterization of a government service in terms of "master-servant relationship" is antagonistic to governmental dilevery potential and so we need to ponder over something different sort of model which can replace the servitude based relation to partnership based relation in which both partners , that is erstwhile masters and servants are bound to democratic rules and committed to democratic ways of administrating and governing the institution of government with shared responsibilities.

Comments