How institutions build credibility and sustain it

Institutions endure, but their character is shaped by those who lead them, and those leaders are shaped by the circumstances of their appointment

- Rajat Kathuria

Without credible institutions, rules lose force and contracts lose meaning. If one looks around in India and globally today, there is a growing sense that what we once accepted about institutions has been eroding and not without reason.

(SHUTTERSTOCK)

In the iconic BBC TV series, Yes, Prime Minister, Sir Humphrey Appleby once remarked, “We mustn't let daylight in upon magic (episode: ‘The Smoke Screen’).” It was not only a defence of discretion, the abiding trait on which he thrived, but also a justification of something deeper and close to his heart.

Institutions work best when their inner workings are not examined too closely.

Without credible institutions, rules lose force and contracts lose meaning. If one looks around in India and globally today, there is a growing sense that what we once accepted about institutions — their credibility and public legitimacy — has been eroding and not without reason. The shift has not come as a shock. It has been gradual, almost undramatic. It has accumulated over time — one compromised appointment at a time, one overlooked violation, until it was there for all to see. The question is whether the damage is reversible and, if so, how?

But first, has the disregard for institutions always been so? Or was there, at some earlier point, a greater degree of adherence, even if only to the appearance of rules? One is tempted to think that even when rules were bent, there was some reluctance to be seen as abandoning them altogether.

There was, in that sense, a veneer of compliance. People may not have followed the spirit of the law, but they cared about how it looked. There was a sense that ignoring rules openly could carry a cost, if not always in punishment, then at least in reputation.