1

Upgrading Engineering Education in India – 2: HRD as part of

Institution Building: by Raju Swamy: July 07, 2009 (3 pages)
(This is a follow-thru on my earlier article “Upgrading Engineering Education in India –
1: New Role for the Professional Teacher: by Raju Swamy: May 10, 2009”. In this final
instalment, an attempt is made at providing a Management and HRD Strategy for
institutes of higher learning, like engineering colleges, in terms of a specific Action
Plan. The original version was published in ‘THE HINDU’ of Tuesday, November 13,
1990.)

1. Before an action plan for organization development can be initiated, certain ground
rules have to be set:
1.1. Heads of Departments and teachers at all levels in the college must accept that the
responsibility of an engineering educational institution which caters to both
undergraduate and postgraduate education will encompass Teaching. Research,
and Consultancy.
1.2. That involvement in Research and Consultancy will enrich the quality of teachers
and teaching.
1.3. Teachers have to be “accountable” like any other working professional.

2. Once the Ground Rules have been understood ‘The Action Plan’ can be initiated:
2.1. To incorporate and promote Research and Consultancy as key functional areas in
each department in addition to teaching, senior HODs need to be given the
additional responsibility of overseeing one each of the above for the purpose of
monitoring progress. They could be designated Dean of Teaching, Dean of
Research, and Dean of Consultancy.
2.2. The Deans, as a first step, wIll work with each HOD and their respective teams on
establishing the most rational priority or weightage to each of the objectives in each
department keeping in mind the capacity of the department and felt-needs of the
environment in which they work.
2.3. Once the priorities are fixed for each functional activity, the HODs of the respective
departments will be required to allocate down the line “weighted” roles to each of
the teachers in their department again based on aptitude and other personal factors.
This marks broadly the initiation of “accountability” in departments.
2.4. The next phase of the “accountability” programme would be for the HODs to initiate,
first within their departments and later among themselves, a broad, mutually
agreeable, monitorable job description (job expectation) for different levels of
professors, lecturers, and other teaching and research staff.
2.5. It is advisable for the job description to evolve from within as such a step would
ensure not only an improvement over the past but at the same time ease
implementation. Also since external formula will always be “suspect” – or prone to
resistance ---- an internal formula will carry with it a degree of self-motivation to
succeed.
2.6. To accomplish this task, the Deans/HODs will have to modify their style of
functioning where required – become less hierarchial and more motivational.
1
 2

3. Since the realization of the institution’s ambitions depends to a large extent on the
effectiveness of HODs, it is suggested that they may be exposed to a Leadership
Development Programme (or a series of such programmes) which will enchance
their academic standing with managerial capability. Such a programme (or
programmes) will include Financial Management in addition to Leadership and HRD:
3.1. Financial Management Principles (with special reference to HODs).
3.2. Recognizing Departments as Cost Centres: Planning and Budgetting: Monitoring.
3.3. Leadership and Human Resource Management:
3.3.1. Motivation of teachers.
3.3.2. Motivation of students.
3.3.3. Formation and Motivation of high performance teams, and of exceptional
individuals.
3.3.4. Setting personal example in enhancing performance standards.
3.3.5. Performance Appraisal System for teachers.
3.3.6. Career Planning and Counseling.
3.3.7. Training and Development.
3.3.8. Innovation and Talent Planning.
3.3.9. Succession Planning.
3.4. The faculty for the above programmes can be drawn from academic as well as
industry professionals with a global track record of performance milestones,
particularly in promoting productive and mutually beneficial interaction
between educational institutions of higher learning and industry.
4. The traditional and truly outdated belief that whatever is applicable to industry is
not applicable to an educational institution is contrary to facts when the situation is
understood in the proper context:
4.1. A private, aided educational institution has to work effectively with limited
resources: hence planning and budgeting are imperative.
4.2. When resources are limited (whatever the magnitude) and have to be allocated in
the most efficient (or economical) manner, the concept of “Cost” and “Cost-Benefit”
becomes important.
4.3. Understanding the concept of “Cost” also leads to an understanding of the concept
of “productivity” : when one recognises that a lecturer costs X, or an assistant
professor Y, are we not interested in ensuring his effective utilization at least to the
extent that he costs something?
4.4. When an HOD says he does not have enough staff, does he know what it will cost
extra to have all the staff he needs, and how will he justify these additional costs
through “output”? In fact, most of the teaching world has not thought of such
concepts, and even a little progress in this direction would be good progress.
4.5. Managing “salaried” people to get effective performance from them: this is a
problem common in all sectors including government, industry, banks, public and
private sectors and so on. Is there no need for “managing” people to perform in
teaching institutions? Teachers today are salaried professionals. So they are as
much driven by motivations of money, recognition, etc., as those in industry and
elsewhere.
4.6. One has necessarily to worry about those that do not have these motivations and at
the same time have a low output: how can such people contribute to the institution,

2
 3

college, or department? How to tackle them if they cannot be fired? How does one
deal with a person who is just not satisfied but is very good at work? Are such
people not found in educational institutions?
4.7. Therefore, as part of the Action Plan and in fact to facilitate change to an
“input-output” based culture, association with professionals of proven
performance in industry must be made a rule rather than an exception. In the
final analysis, this step would certainly also promote research and
consultancy and possibly open avenues for teachers to be deputed to
industry for short terms as part of their training and development process.
5. HRD implementation at department levels will not succeed unless unconditionally
supported by the Director/ Principal and the Governing Board. Ultimately, of course,
the Director/ Principal and the HODs are the primary HRD agents, with assistance
from the ‘Dean of HRD’ as the facilitator.
5.1. The successful operation of a Performance Appraisal System is the key to effective
HRD---many institutions in public and private sectors, in Business and Industry, and
in Government have not yet succeeded in implementing effective systems
5.2. Accordingly, a Performance Appraisal System should be evolved once the
“accountability” phase is established in terms of implementation of planning and
budgeting exercises, creation of job descriptions through internal brainstorming,
and formalizing training to develop management capability at HOD and other senior
levels.
5.3. In fact, a simple P.A. system must be evolved first for the Deans of Teaching,
Research, and Consultancy and the HODs. Once they understand its implications, a
format for appraisal of other teachers can be evolved. Personal example setting
from the top is the easiest way to pass on effective messages down the line.

An engineering institution in our country, like leading institutions in other parts of the
world in the advanced countries, has to learn to play the role of a knowledge bank to
industry: take much but give back more with interest.

Raju Swamy
Principal Consultant
& Advisor to Entrepreneurs & Family Business
PROMAG Consultancy Services
Apt. 206 Brigade Rathna
42 Ranga Rao Road
Shankarapuram
Bangalore - 560004 INDIA
Tel. +91-80-26676298/ Cell: 9845271498
Email: rajupromag@hotmail.com

Promoting Management Action for Growth . since 1985