Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-28T00:15:36.800Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Plan, but Do Not Over-plan: Lessons for NITI Aayog

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2020

Santosh Mehrotra
Affiliation:
Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sylvie Guichard
Affiliation:
Université de Genève
Get access

Summary

plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose

—J-B. Alphonse Karr

One of the early acts of the Narendra Modi government, announced from the ramparts of the Red Fort on 15 August 2014, was the dissolution of the Planning Commission and its replacement with a new entity – the NITI Aayog. The intent was made amply clear – old-style central planning was out; new-style reforms agenda was in. With this step, India, supposedly the last surviving bastion of central planning, would join the rest of the world in embracing a market-led process of growth and development. It was certainly a bold vision, but unfortunately ahistoric. But be that as it may, it was quite clear even at the outset that the NITI Aayog would eventually have to be mandated to develop a formal strategic plan for the country, even though the nomenclature may be changed.

The inevitable has happened. The NITI Aayog has been charged with developing a 15-year vision, a 7-year strategy, and a 3-year implementation framework. Although expectedly the term ‘plan’ is scrupulously avoided, it is quite obvious that planning is back. This is a good thing. After all, the principal function of planning is to evolve a shared commitment to a common vision and an integrated strategy not only in the higher echelons of government but among all stakeholders. No development strategy can be successful unless each component of the system works towards a common purpose with the full realization of the role that it has to play within an overall structure of responsibilities. The NITI Aayog mandate meets this requirement admirably.

However, for this to happen, it is not sufficient that the vision and the strategy are clearly articulated in a formal document which is communicated and is readily available to everyone in the government, and appropriate orders are issued for compliance and implementation. Nor is it enough that all other stakeholders, in the states and in the public at large, are kept abreast through a well thought-out communications strategy. The process through which the vision and the final strategic plan are evolved and implemented can be at least as important as both the product (that is, the strategic plan) and the communication strategy.

Type
Chapter
Information
Planning in the 20th Century and Beyond
India's Planning Commission and the NITI Aayog
, pp. 264 - 282
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ansoff, H. I. 1991. ‘Critique of Henry Mintzberg's “The Design School”: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Planning.Strategic Management Journal 12 (6): 449461.Google Scholar
Ansoff, H. I. 1994. ‘Comment on Henry Mintzberg's Rethinking Strategic Planning.Long Range Planning 27 (3): 3132.Google Scholar
Chenery, H. and Strout, A.. 1966. ‘Foreign Assistance and Economic Development.American Economic Review 56 (4): 679733.Google Scholar
De Geus, A. P. 1988. ‘Planning as Learning.Harvard Business Review (March–April): 7074.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. 1990. ‘The Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management.Strategic Management Journal 11 (3): 171195.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. 1991. ‘Learning 1, Planning 0: Reply to Igor Ansoff.Strategic Management Journal 12 (6): 463466.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. New York: Free Press and Prentice Hall International.Google Scholar
Planning Commission. Various issues. Approach Paper to Five Year Plans. New Delhi: Government of India.Google Scholar
Planning Commission. Various issues. Five Year Plans. New Delhi: Government of India.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×