Dearth of Institution Builders

What is also desirable is to have heads of institutions that understand and imbibe the local culture and sensitivities and do not carry with them the arrogance of the mainstream casteist underpinnings which show up Meghalaya has a number of central institutions with NEHU being the oldest – as old as the State of Meghalaya. Since its inception, NEHU has had its share of problems but those have been resolved, often with the problem being pushed under the carpet only to erupt again. In the late 1990s NEIGRIHMS arrived followed by NEIAH, the IHM, IIM, NIFT and the National Law University among others. These institutions attract students, faculty and staff from across the country since they are centrally funded institutions. They therefore require a campus that supports diversity and where all voices have equal weight. Just because a central institution is located in Meghalaya does not mean that the employment rules should be bent to accommodate only local residents and local interests. The employment rules have to be followed keeping in mind the reservation policy. This requires a climate of transparency on the part of those running the institutions.
Anyone appointed to head an institution in Meghalaya should undergo at least a week’s exposure at the Meghalaya Administrative Training Institute (MATI) so they know the subtleties and pain points of the society and negotiate their way around those without creating unnecessary pin-pricks which slowly accumulate into anger and hatred and from which they earn the tag of being anti-tribal. All institutional heads coming from outside also need an exposure to the subtleties of the matrilineal culture and both its upside and downsides. Tribals coming from a casteless society do not often understand the culture of obeisance towards heads of institutions. Their way of showing respect is different; so too their mode of engagement. Heads of Institution are also institution builders and as such they need the co-operation of all stakeholders to ensure that the Institution has better chances of progressing and serving the needs of society without being embroiled in needless controversies that degenerate into a law and order problem. It takes two hands to clap and conflicts are part of human nature. A teacher in an institution is expected to show patience and acceptance of differences and not to promote extremist political ideologies that cast aspersions on certain religions, faiths and their practitioners.
Not everyone leading an institution is an institution builder. The latter have special qualities such as building a culture of trust and transparency and winning people around to their ideas. They listen to multiple voices and create a safe space for people to share ideas, without shouting anyone down. Institution builders invest time in informal interaction and don’t mind sharing their weak points while acknowledging the strength in co-workers. An institution builder does not claim credit for everything but gives credit to others for every achievement. Above all, institution builders ensure they are not missed by creating a new generation of leaders. The question to ask is – Do we have such leaders an institution builders in Meghalaya?