You are on page 1of 55

ABSTRACT

The Make in India program is an initiative under the Department


of Industry Policy & Promotion, Ministry of Commerce & Industry.
Primarily devised to transform India into a global design and
manufacturing hub it also aims to facilitate investment, foster
innovation, enhance skill development, protect intellectual property,
build best in class manufacturing infrastructure.
The authors’ recent research and assessment of implementation of
many of India's public programs showed that the 'Make in India'
initiative scored less from a project management perspective. The
assessment was done based on a set of ten parameters at the project
management and organizational level.
What are the reasons for the low score and what can we do to
improve upon it? This will be the focus of the current paper and will be
an extension of the earlier study.
This paper will critically examine the following.
a) an analysis of the policy and vision and whether this has been clearly
laid out amenable for implementation.

b) review of current progress in the Make in India program.

c) Suggestions and steps needed to implement the program in a better


way.
This will be done in the context of the challenges faced and the
strengths and opportunities in the country. In final analysis, this will find
ways and means to make the 'Make In India' program work from an
implementation perspective .
There are several public projects currently being implemented in
India which are of large size and having potentially significant impact
and outcome. The analysis in this paper could serve as an example to
understand and evaluate if project management knowledge and practice
is being applied in many of such projects.
CHAPTER:-1
INTRODUCTION
EU Market in China is somewhat similar to Chandni Chowk of
Delhi. It is spread across 48 square meters and has 80 to 90 shops. Daily
15ooo containers of finished products are exported to India. During
Christmas 60% of the goods are exported across the world. All varieties
of goods from soft toys, clothes, Indian Gods etc. are available to be
exported in India. China made Lord Ganesh is in very much demand in
Indian market that cost around Rs. 800, (thrice the price).Around 2 cr. of
Chinese Ganeha are sold in Indian market per year , but interestingly
Incenses stick for the God are being imported from India and are sold
again thrice the price. A flying doll is very much a center of attraction in
the toy market. The cost incurred in the production might be just Rs. 10
but is sold for around Rs.700. It is just the technology that is making it
expensive. A news channel correspondent asked an Indian shop keeper
why do India doesn‘t have such market. The shopkeeper replied that the
Chinese government just provides us all facilities to do business, but in
India the government just wants tax, tax and tax.

Research Methodology: For writing this paper secondary data has


been used. The data has been used from various websites, newspapers
and reports.
Objective: The objective of this paper is to
1. Analysis the ―make in India ―initiative of the Indian Government.

2. Scope and challenges in this campaign.

3. Present global market.

4. Reforms and suggestion to make this campaign a success.

Can India repeat the magic of China? Make in India


―campaign was launched by the Government of India on 25 September
2014. India has targeted to create 10-15 millions of jobs per year, which
cannot be achieved just by service sector. So it is high time that
manufacturing sector should be focused. Can make in India recreate the
magic of China, a country which is world famous for low cost
production? China is responsible for half of the global growth. India is
one fourth to one fifth of China‘s economy. According to the latest data
of World Bank GDP of US is $17 trillion, GDP of China is $10 trillion
and India $ 2 trillion. India will take long to overtake China. Even in the
slow down the country was able to produce 13.2 million of jobs, where
else India was struggling even for a million. China is a special
combination of state owned enterprises, currency control and one party
rule which will be tough for India to emulate. Countries like Vietnam
and Bangladesh from the emerging market has come up in the
competition. Economic liberalization and a revolution in information
and communication technologieshelped to flourish manufacturing sector
and India at present do not have any revolutionary technology and even
the domestic demand is weak. The demand can be increased if the real
wages of middle class is increased, which China did long back in
1995.the real wages increased by 400% and poverty declined from 50%
and latter to 18.6% in 2011. China accounts for 95 percent of global
output of rare earths, 17 chemically similar metals used in hybrid cars
and wind turbines.

Based on statistics from the International Monetary Fund‟s


World Economic Outlook Database, China‟s total Gross Domestic
Product amounted to $17.632 trillion in 2014. Therefore, exports
accounted for about 13.3% of China‟s totaleconomic output.
According to KPMG report India has the potential to reach USD 1
trillion in manufacturing sector by 2025 and can contribute 25-30% in
GDP just like China, Germany, US, Japan. At present its contribution is
2.2% in the world‘s manufacturing output which is equivalent to
developed countries like UK and France.

Why do we need Make In India? India has a demographic


dividend where more than 50% of population is of working age of 15 to
59, and by 2020 the percentage will be 69%. The demographic dividend
offers an economic opportunity to India to be utilized for fast tracking its
growth, particularly in the manufacturing sector. This becomes all the
more important when 12th Plan envisions creation of 50 million non –
farm employment opportunities. However, creating jobs for the youth is
a biggest challenge faced both by developed and developing economies
around the world. India has targeted to create 10-15 millions of jobs per
year, which cannot be achieved just by service sector. So it is high time
that manufacturing sector should be focused. According to Labour
Bureau's "Third Annual Employment & Unemployment Survey 2012-13
unemployment rate amongst illiterate youth is lower than educated
youth. A comparison with the earlier report by labour bureau shows that
the unemployment level has increased during 2012-2013 over 2011-
2012. The report on ‗Youth employment- unemployment scenario,
2012-13 said that one out of every three persons in the age group 15 to
29 years who have completed at least their graduation is unemployed.
Where else illiterate was the lowest with 3.7 per cent without work.
Challenges in Make in India.
India has dropped its ranking from 140th to 142thin the World
Bank‗s recent report „Doing Business 2015: Going Beyond
Efficiency’ its ranking is even lowest in the BRIC.
1.Commencement of Business: Starting up a business in India is
yet again a big problem;India stands 137 in the ranking 189 according to
the ―ease to do business‖. 11.9 procedures, takes 28.4 days, costs 12.2%
of income per capita and requires paid in minimum capital of 111.2% of
per capita income. On an average, a manufacturing unit needs to comply
with nearly 70 laws and regulations. 89 days to start a business in India,
compared to 41 days in China. 67 days to register property in India,
compared to 32 days in China. 425 days to enforce contracts in India,
compared to 241 days in China.
2. Crony bureaucracy: Political fights between central and state
government, inefficientbureaucracy, Red tapism is a big hurdle. The
decentralization of authority was a main reason of success of SEZ in
China, Provincial and local authorities were made partners and
stakeholders, by delegating to them powers to approve foreign
investment. . The SEZ authorities in China can approve foreign
investment proposals up to $30 million. In India, only State governments
are allowed to set up SEZ and the powers for foreign investment
approvals are vested with the Development Commissioners, who are the
representatives of the Central Government and the delay in paper work
continues.

3. Acquisition of Land: Most of the Sez land is fertile land which


the owner is reluctant to give. Lack of clear land title, fragmented
holding and multiple legislation are a hindrance in business. They are
overcrowded and have insufficient logistical links with ports and
airports. The present NDA government has brought revised land
acquisition bill which is again stuck in political hassles. The TATA
Nano‗s incident in Singoor (West Bengal) is alive example of land
problem and political chaos. India‘s main export processing zones or
EPZs (Kandla, Santacruz, Noida, Madras, Cochin and Falta) have not
done much, The SEZ size in China is more than 1000 hectares, far more
than India. These SEZ are located near ports and are in proximity with
cities like Taiwan and Hong Kong, with strong vendor base. China‘s five
main special economic zones (Shenzen, Zhuhai, Santou, Xiamen, and
Hainan) proved to be very successful in attracting FDI, boosting exports
and creating large-scale employment.
4. Logistic cost: State border check points tasked primarily for
carrying out compliance procedures for the diverse sales and entry tax
requirements of different states, combine with other delays to keep
trucks from moving during 60 percent of the entire transit time.
Unpredictability in shipments add to total logistics costs in the form of
higher-than-optimal buffer stocks and lost sales, pushing logistics costs
in India. The average manufacturer in India loses8.4 per cent a year in
sales on account of power outages as opposed to less than 2 per cent in
China and Brazil.Utility costs: Power costs vary across regions in India
and China, Indicative power cost per 1000 kwH in China is around USD
73 compared to USD 97 for India. Moreover quality of power in terms
of power outages is poorer in India than in China Water costs for
industrial use in China are in the range USD 0.19 – 0.9/ kl compared to
USD 0.175 – 1.5 /kl in India.

5. Tax Regime:For majority of critical components say for eg.in


consumer durables and toys .The import duty in India is higher in
comparison to China. Further, since India does not have a well-
developed componentmanufacturing base, most of the components are
imported. The effective import duties in India are in the range of 4 –
31.7% while Chinese effective duty rates are in the range of 0– 6%. The
indirect tax in China is low, it has single VAT which is flat 17%, where
else in India there are excise duty, custom duty, cess etc. Indian
government charges 33.99% corporate tax to domestic companies and
42.23% to foreign companies. On the contrast Chinese government
provides tax holidays, tax concession for the transfer of technology.
6. Poor infrastructure: China had diverted its FDI flow into
infrastructure developments of roads, water, transport, electricity and
into social welfare sectors like health, education, wholesale and retail,
where India ranking is low.While most of the manufacturing locations in
India are spread out due to location specific tax benefits, manufacturing
locations in China along with the vendor base is clustered(with most
located near the east coast. Average freight cost in China is USD 0.013
per tonne per km comparedto USD 0.2 in India.

7. StringentLabour Law:China has just one paragraph simple


labourlaw. They follow hire and fire policy andmake fresh contracton
new assignment.No such policy is followed in India, the units bears the
cost of ideal Labour.
Productivity Growth (%) for the year 2000-2012 [Average
annual growth rate of GDP at constant prices per worker at 20011
PPPs] idle workers.China v/s India.
Country 2000-2005 2005-2012 2000-2012
India 2.6 6.9 5.1
China 8.6 9.5 9.1
Source: Compiled from ―APO Productivity Data Book 2014‖
The most problematic factors for doing business in India.

Source:The global competitive Report 2014-2015


Scope for India.
India has it all, this we proved by sending a mission to Mars most
economically. According to theIndex report released by Deloitte Touche
Tohmatsu Limited‘s (DTTL), India happens to the fourth most
competitive manufacturing nation in the next five years. We are the
leaders in information technology, sciences, pharmaceuticals,
biotechnology and food production. It is a right time for India to encash
the population dividend, as majority of the population is young. Looking
at the global prospects, apart from United States and United
Kingdomwhere the recovery is visible, other countries like Japan, Euro
Zones, Brazil and Japan are in recession zone because of low growth,
low inflation, excessive debt, deflationary pressure. Crises in Greece.
Chinais decelerating at the same time. Emerging market will face
problems like dollar going strong; higher interest rate. The economy is
in its fragile state. The best thing that has happened is the crashing of
crude oil prices, which will help government in curtailing subsidies and
diverting the money to some other productive work. Many Indian
companies likeHavells, home appliance likeGodrej,Micromax, auto-
parts maker Bosch and stationery manufacturer ITC have shifted their
manufacturing units back in India.According to BusinessToday 16
companies have shifted their production from China to India; even
Chinese companies are entering into joint ventures to set up business in
India. The reason is that cost of production has increased as the labour
cost has risen. Nokia has set up its manufacturing hub in Tamilnadu, as
cost of production is 12 % less than China.Same ways LG and Hyundai
has its export hub in India. Manufacturing of Tata Nano itself shows
the talent of Indians showcasing its engineering skill. The country
should leverage this competitive advantageasmany US, European and
Japanese companies are shifting production from China to lower-cost
locations such as Southeast Asia. India has a largeyoung population of
engineers and scientist etc. India since the inception of economic
reforms has followed capital intensive technique and China had been
labour intensive. It is high time to tap labour intensive like toys, apparels
and footwear, food processing, gems and jewelry.India needs to tap its
manufacturing potential by tapping the LCC countries (Low Cost
Countries). These LCC countries with wage rate less than a third of the
US. India, China, Thailand, Poland, Mexico, Turkey, Brazil, Indonesia,
Russia, Philippines, South Africa, Malaysia and Taiwan.UNIDO has
identified textiles; chemicals; basic metals; machinery and equipment
and electrical, Machinery, as sectors in which India leads among
developing countries. Capital goods like machine tools; heavy electronic
equipment; heavy transport, earth moving and mining equipment; high
technology equipment like telecom, power, ICT and electronic
hardware. Strategic industries like aerospace; shipping; IT and electronic
hardware; renewable energy; solar, wind etc, defense equipment are
some of the area where the concerned need to work on.

Current Global senerio.The China‟s Crunch plunging into


recession.

On 24th August 2015 the global market tumbled down as it


observed a “Black Monday” in stock market plunging the Chinese
economy into recession. The global market is marching towards
financial crises like 2008 and 2009. The Chinese government devaluated
their currency yuan. The global market is rattled and India will be no
exception, but the fundamentals of India are strong and it should take
this as opportunity as a growth engine as the world is looking upon
Indian economy in the Asian market. The dwindling China and
recovering India, can grow if the Indian government takes proper
reforms. Due to fall in crude oil prices Indian Foreign exchange has
increased by 13% in past year.Current account deficit declined by 97%.
While exports to China accounted for only 5.2% of India's total last year,
the figures for Singapore, Vietnam and Indonesia were more than twice
as high This recession has come as boon in disguise for five sectors in
India namely Consumers goods, automobile, banking, fuelretailers, and
technology and drugs exports. But industries like Steel will suffer as
China‟s exports have will be cheaper and they will dump their steel
products abroad.

Advantages of India over China.


 Currency: Fall in Rupee making its export more competitive and
rising Yuan.
 Shortage Labour: Chinese does not have enough workers for low
value added industries as they now want to work in Hi Tech
factories.
 Labour cost: has risen 10% per year.
 Shipping cost: Freight charges in India are low. Charges from
Shanghai to UK are higher as compared from Chennai.
 Inventory Risk. Local manufacturing helps Indian companies
manage inventory better at a time of high economic volatility.
 Local Demand.Domestic demand in India is itself very large,
which is 600, million rural consumers where else China‘s focus
was on export.
 Single country risk. Many countries do not want to bet just on one
country, Japanese are looking for other options, due to political
risk.

Potential Industries.

Apparel Industry: India is the second largest in apparel industry


after China, it exports were $274 billion in 2013 out of which 40% was
contributed by apparel and 60% by textile, while Indian exports were
only $36 billion dollar out of which 40% were from apparel and 60%
from textile. The Brandix India Apparel City in Visakhapatnam is
emerging as a hub for apparel companies. India can focus on manmade
fibre based textile product; branding India as a T&A hub, creating new
T&A manufacturing hub etc. At present 45 million work forces are
employed, to achieve $ 70 million dollar export we need to employ an
additional 10 million work force.
Chemical Industry:The chemical industry has witnessed a growth
rate of 13%- 15 % in the past 5 yrs. India has a strong domestic
consumption.The chemical industry is among the fastest growing ones in
India. The bulk of chemicals produced in India comprise either upstream
products or intermediates, which go into a variety of manufacturing
applications including fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, textiles and plastics,
agrochemicals, paints and dyes.Chemicals constitute ~5.4% of India‘s
total exports. India already has a strong presence in the export market in
the sub-segments of dyes, pharmaceuticals and agro chemicals. India
exports dyes to Germany, the UK, the US, Switzerland, Spain, Turkey,
Singapore and Japan.There are good opportunities in segments such as
Speciality Chemicals, Speciality Polymers, for catering to huge
emerging domestic demand as also as a manufacturing hub.India is the
third largest producer of chemicals in Asia and sixth by output, in the
world. India‘s proximity to the Middle East, the world‘s source of
petrochemical feedstock, makes for economies of scale.

Automobile Part: The Indian automobile happens to be the 3rd


largestin the world by 2016, ahead of Germany, Japan and Brazil, and
will capture 5% worldwide sale. India's exports of auto components
increased at a CAGR of 19.6 per cent to US$ 9.3 billion during FY08-
13. Contribution to GDP will account to as much as 3.6 per cent by 2020
from 2.1 per cent in 2009. National Automotive Testing and R&D
Infrastructure Projects (NATRiPs) as well as concessions provided on
excise duties in the Union Budget 2014-15, have helped the Indian auto
components industry achieve considerable growth. LCC countries like
Thailand and China has seen a growth rate of 30% a year, such growth
should be achieved. India‘s Automotive Mission Plan (AMP) 2006-2016
is a collaborative effort between the Indian government, the automotive
industry, and academia.11 The stated vision of AMP is for India ―to
emerge as the destination of choice in the world for design and
manufacture of automobiles and auto components with output reaching a
level of U.S. $145 billion accounting for more than 10 percent of the
GDP and providing additional employment to 25 million people by
2016.‖
Electronic and electrical Industry: Countries like Taiwan, China,
Malaysia and Thailand are already the market leaders in export. India
should aspire to capture 1-1.5% of market share in future as compared to
5% share of other countries like Taiwan and China.The export of
Electronics goods and components from India during the year 2013-14
registered a growth of 5.23 per cent. Some of the reasons to invest in
India are that India has a 3rd largest pool of scientist in the world. We
have skilled manpower available in abundance in Semiconductor Design
and Embedded Software. We have Strong design and R&D capabilities
in auto electronics and industrial electronics and Global demand to reach
USD 94.2 Billion by 2015.
Pharmaceutical Industry:The Indian pharmaceutical industry
was estimated to be worth US$ 12 billion in 2013 and is expected to
touch US$ 100 billion by 2025.The Indian pharmaceutical industry is
expected to touch US$ 100 billion by 2025.A large raw material base
and the availability of a skilled workforce give the industry a definite
competitive advantage. US, European Union and Africa.

Food Processing Industry:India is the second largest producer of


food after China, and happens to be the 5th largest industry in terms of
production, consumption export and growth. It contributes 9-10% of
GDP in agriculture and manufacturing .The confederation of Indian
industry (CII) believes that the industry will create 9 million of
employment and attract US$33 billion of investment in next years.
Cement Industry: It happens to be the largest industry worldwide. Its
current capacity is 370MT and is expected to grow 550MT by FY20.

Reforms taken by Union Budgets FY 2014-2015 for” Make


In India”.
The government plans to create Industrial corridorDelhi-Mumbai
Industrial Corridor (DMIC) as a global manufacturing and investment
destination utilizing the 1,483 km-long, high-capacity western Dedicated
Railway Freight Corridor (DFC).Its advertisement for the campaign tries
to convince the foreign companies that the country‘s environment is
transforming from Red Tape to Red Carpet.

Business environment: All business and investment clearances on


a single online portal with an integrated payment gateway; single
window customs clearance.Infrastructure: Formation of the National
Industrial Corridor Authority and a new institution (3PIndia) to support
mainstreaming of PPPs; launch of tax-favorable Infrastructure
Investment Trusts; development of 16 new ports, new inland waterways,
and new airports in Tier-2 cities funds for metros in Lucknow and
Ahmedabad, and additional funds for railways in border areas .Energy:
Steps to improve coal production and linkages; extension of the tax
holiday on investments in power to 2017; transmission feeder separation
in rural areas.GST bill has been diluted to 27%. The campaign is
already into action for example, after the Increase in the import duties
many mobile companies have planned manufacturing in India.FDI for
Defense worth 1, 10,000 crore out of which 90% are for Make in India
from the French government.Changes in export and import duties:
The government has made amendments in import and export duties of
various potential industries to boost Make in India. Other measures:
14.18 billion have been allocated for Prime Minister‘s Employment
Generation Programme.1.32 million have been allocated for providing
assistance to training institutions and many other funds allocation .

Lucknow Agra Expressway (CASE STUDY): Land acquisition


is a big barrier in the so called ―ease to do business‖ in India and the
land acquisition bill is stuck in the parliamentary uproar, but the
Lucknow and Agra Expressway is an outstanding example of land
acquisition ,where 3000 hectares of land was purchased from farmers in
one year without any litigation .
Traditional Model Uttar Pradesh Model
Land acquisition takes years to 97.6% of land was acquired in less
complete. than a year by using dual purchase
acquisition.
Land is acquired through Land acquired through mutual
litigation which takes years to get agreement.10 cases came across &
settled. verdict in favour of UPEIDA
Compensation is paid normally at Compensation was paid 4 times
a lower rate than market. the circle in rural area & twice the
rate in urban area along with
standing crops, with speedy
payments to farmer.
Suggestion: If the present government wants ―Make in India‖ to
drive industrial growth, Instead ofconcentrating on shrinking of current
account deficit, the focus must be at ground level for those who actually
does manufacture. The focus must be to provide good roads, port, supply
power and water, and provide basic facility like education and health.
India spends less of its GDP on public education and health than its
peers — 4.7 percent, compared to Mexico‘s 8.5 percent and Brazil‘s
10.1 percent, according to the World Bank. The U.S. spends 13.7%. In
2013 the infrastructure deficit was $1 trillion, to fix this the World Bank
suggested to invest in capital expenditure, where the government is
holding itself back. Only 20% to 25% Indian university graduates are
readily employable, according to ParthaIyengar, head of research for
Gartner India, a technology-research firm. So instead of decreasing the
deficit, the focus should be to increase the revenue sources and that is
tax. Reforms should be done to increase the tax baseto broaden the tax
base, reduce tax breaks for the corporate sector, and improve tax
collection and tax administration, as only 3% pay tax in India, compared
to China that is 20%. The tax slab should be increased so that many
contribute.According to NiranjanRajadhyaksha, executive editor of
Mint, a New Delhi business daily, in an article this week India cuts state
spending when the economy is weak and raises it when the private
sector is booming.Instead of rising public spending to cushionthe
economy when private spending is weak, the state tends to track – and
exacerbate – the business cycle.

China and India can complement each other: Even though there
is political distrust among the dragon and elephant, looking at the
geographical location, India and China can bring great economic
changes if both join hands. Both countries can provide favorable
environment for each other‘s competitive industries like textile, where
both countries are leaders. India can allow Chinese telecommunication
to access local market, and likewise Indian pharmaceutical companies in
China. The European Union integration can be lesson for both and can
ultimately create a common market of 2.6 billion people.
Zero Defect products: The country needs to focus on technology
upgradation and skill development to match up the international
benchmark and standards. The government has recently launched
“SkillDevelopment Programme” in this segment.
Other suggestion:The country need to focus on R& D
development, simplified tax regime and FDI system and simplified
legislation.

Quick Decision: China is slowing down very slowing and India is


progressing even more slowing so India has to pull up its socks because
even though, as China's State Council has unveiled a national plan,
―MADE IN CHINA 2025‖ designed to transform China from a
manufacturing giant into a world manufacturing power. Nine tasks have
been identified as priorities: improving manufacturing innovation,
integrating information technology and industry, strengthening the
industrial base, fostering Chinese brands, enforcing green
manufacturing, promoting breakthroughs in 10 key sectors, advancing
restructuring of the manufacturing sector, promoting service-oriented
manufacturing and manufacturing-related service industries, and
internationalizing manufacturing.
CHAPTER:-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Due to rapid pace of technological developments and intensified


competition, small and medium enterprises in India have started
realising the significance of improving their productivity levels more
than ever before. In this context, the present chapter reviews the
literature relating to the study so as to formulate the problem precisely
and develop a rationale for its undertaking. The basic objective is to
indicate in a general way the type of work done in this direction rather
than to give exhaustive review of all the research work done on the
problem. The review of various studies done in this chapter provides a
broad spectrum about the productivity and efficiency analysis of small
scale industrial sector which would be helpful to design the appropriate
methodology for the present study.
Various empirical studies have been conducted from time to time
to examine the different aspects of growth pattern and performance of
small scale industrial sectors in India and in this context, important
studies are reviewed below in a chronological order. For this purpose,
the chapter has been divided into three sections, Section -I highlights the
review of studies relating to the performance evaluation of small scale
industrial sector at All India level, whereas, Section-II focuses on the
studies pertaining to the performance evaluation of the small scale
industrial sector at regional level. However, the last section is
concluding in nature and pinpoints the rationale of undertaking the
present study.
Habib (1972) through his study came to the conclusion that small
scale industries play an important role in the economic development by
providing numerous chances of income generation and improving the
standard of living of the masses. Habib emphasized that it is only the
small scale sector through which economic prosperity can reach the
remotest sections of the society. From the very beginning since the
process of economic development started, the small scale sector has
been providing handsome employment opportunities to millions of job
seekers in the country. Further, small scale industries use local raw
materials, employ local people and thus help in generating employment
opportunities for the community.
National Council of Applied Economic Research (1972)
conducted a study to examine the economies of selected number of small
industrial units operating in different parts of the country. A sample of
159 units spread over 22 industrial groups was selected, of the selected
units, 48 were manufacturing consumer products, 76 capital goods and
35 intermediate products. The study showed that besides other problems,
the under-utilisation of capacity among most of the units was due to the
problems of production as well as marketing. The problems of
production were closely associated with scarcity of raw material and
inadequate finance. The problems of marketing are by and large
attributed to such factors as limited size of operation, practically little or
no control over quality, price and weak financial base, restricting the
scope for engaging in sustained sales promotion. The problem of sales is
more acute where the area of operation is large particularly in case of
consumer products or capital goods, where after-sale service is essential.
In most of the cases the entrepreneurs are found to be dependent on
middlemen for the marketing of their products.
Banerjee (1975) examined the relationship between capital
intensity and productivity in the context of Indian manufacturing
industry. The analysis has been carried out for manufacturing sector as a
whole and five individual industries (viz. cotton textiles, Jute textiles,
sugar, paper and bicycle) by using ASI data for the period 1946-64. The
study highlighted that the performance of the manufacturing sector was
sluggish over the period 1946-64. While labour productivity showed a
significant upward trend during this period, but this sector did not
indicate the presence of any ‘technical progress’. The hypothesis of
constant returns to scale was not rejected. It has been found that
elasticity of substitution between capital and labour is near unity in
almost all the industries.
The Vidarbha Industries Association (1976) made an empirical
survey of sick units in the region and dealt specifically with the major
problem of finance, policies and procedures of credit agencies as well as
the difficulties that were being faced in marketing. The study asserted
that most of the difficulties of small scale sector arise from financial,
administrative control, frequent interest changes and recession in
demand these tends to make the units sick. Further, the requirements of
credit of small scale industries located in far away places are greater
than those located at an industrial centre because the former has to
maintain higher inventories. The study made specific observations on
the low and weak equity base of the units, the unrealistic gestation
period allowed by state financial corporations, inadequate loans by
commercial banks and these factors emerged as the major causes of
sickness in the small scale sector. The study suggested that the moment a
danger of sickness appears, action should be initiated and dues of a sick
unit should be converted into a long term loan. The study also revealed
that financial agencies have not been able to play their role in the
development of small scale sector in the under developed regions. It has,
therefore, been recommended to set up a regional development
corporation which may finance sick units and help them in marketing
their products.
Jain (1980) discussed the increasing role of small scale industries
in industrial structure of the country along with export potential of small
scale industries. The various measures undertaken by the government
agencies such as guidance formation, financial support, export house
scheme etc. to develop the formation of the consortia for the benefit of
the small industries have also been expressed. It has been observed that
the operational results of existing consortia may not be very substantial
but encouraging. Therefore, a potential of growth of such consortia look
immensely favourable.
Mehta (1980) attempted to analyse productivity trends for 27
Indian industries by using ASI data for the period 1953-65. The results
revealed that there was a considerable diversity in the experience of
different industries regarding trends of labour and capital productivity.
Labour productivity was found to have increased significantly in
industries like vegetable oil, chemical, glass and glassware and
insignificantly in matches, iron and steel and cement industries.
However, capital productivity has not increased appreciably, rather the
reverse was true in most industries. The total factor productivity of
Indian manufacturing sector have declined over a period of time. The
study noticed that most industries exhibited the presence of constant
returns to scale and diseconomies of scale had not set in. The study
demonstrated that there were inter industry differences with respect to
ease of capital-labour substitution which primarily explained the inter
industry growth differentials. The elasticity of substitution was found to
be significantly different from zero in many industries.
Papola (1981) studied the impact of concessional finance on
industrial development and emphasised that in order to make
concessional finance effective, it will be necessary to plan and develop a
minimum threshold level of industrial activity preferably with strong
inter-relationship between the financial institutions, promotional
institutions, state and district administration and potential industrial
entrepreneurs, especially for more backward districts. He further
emphasised that almost one half of the fixed and working capital
requirements of the units studied have been met by institutional
financing and most of the fixed capital financing has been met through
concessional finance especially in the backward districts. Units availing
concessional finance have experienced a higher rate of growth in output
than those without it.
Goldar (1983) examined productivity trends in Indian
manufacturing sector and estimated Total Factor Productivity (TFP) by
applying Solow index and Translog index using firstly 1951-65 data
covering all Census of Indian manufacturing industries except “general
engineering and electrical engineering” industry for 1951-58 and Annual
Survey of Industries (ASI) data for 1959-65 and secondly, during the
period of 1959-78 based on ASI data. This analysis shows a rising trend
in labour productivity and capital intensity and a falling trend in capital
productivity during this period. Growth in TFP seems to have been
rather sluggish and its contribution to output growth is quite small. The
observed rise in labour productivity and fall in capital productivity may
accordingly be attributed to increasing capital intensity. Substitution of
labour by capital seems to be the main feature of industrial growth. The
result of Cobb-Douglas function estimation favours the assumption of
constant returns to scale implicit in the TFP indices which is in broad
agreement with the results of TFP indices especially in terms of the
direction of TFP growth. The study has pointed out that the general
industrial situation was not conducive to productivity growth. Under-
utilisation of capacity, shortage of fuels, power and transport facilities
and deteriorating industrial relations had a significant depressing effect
on productivity growth. Moreover, gestation lags in the basic and capital
goods industries, which accounted for a dominant part of investment in
post 1956 period, must have had a depressing effect on productivity
growth. A pronounced rising trend in capital intensity was found, which
implied that the growth in industrial employment has seriously lagged
behind the growth in industrial investment and output. To some extent
this is a result of the changing industrial structure in favour of basic and
capital goods industries. It has been observed that metals, chemicals,
rubber, petroleum and machinery industries are among the lowest ranked
in terms of TFP growth, since these are the industries in which import
substitution has been attempted on a considerable scale. Though the
policy of import substitution contributed much to the objective of self
reliance, yet it has been inimical to productivity growth.
Ethiopia (1984) evaluated the importance of small scale industries
for providing employment and income generation in the African
countries. The focus of the study is on the analysis of efficiency of
production and employment and results showed that the artisan and
small scale industrial sector are important component of the Ethiopian
economy in terms of generation of income and employment. The
empirical evidence of factor intensity and production also indicates that
many small enterprises are efficient in utilizing scarce resources such as
capital and foreign exchange. Small scale industries have also
reasonable demand for their products, but strengthening of the linkage
between small scale industry and the agriculture sector appears to be
necessary. The study revealed that institutional, social and economic
constraints impede the development of this sector.
Khan (1985) highlighted the role of non-traditional small scale
industries engaged in exports from India. The export potentialities of
small scale industries on the basis of various studies conducted by
different government agencies and by the team of European Economic
Community have also been discussed. With regard to export problems of
small scale industries, it has been stated that small size of units, finances,
managerial skills, technical backwardness and export marketing system
are the biggest hazards in fostering the export of small scale units. To
increase the exports, it has been suggested that exhibitions solely
projecting the small scale industries and overseas visits of delegations of
small entrepreneurs should be encouraged. It has been further suggested
that State Trading Corporation, Trade Development Authority and
Export Promotion Councils should provide the information to small
scale industries about the demands of their products in the foreign
market.
Ganpathy (1986) observed in his study that banking and other
financial institutions were not playing effective role in the development
of small scale industries and in removing the problem of sickness. Study
found the causes behind some viable units going sick are bad
management, failure to keep abreast of modern technology, political
interference, general fall in discipline and apathy to work. It has
therefore been suggested that for the removal of problem of sickness not
only the financial assistance required but technical and marketing
facilities also need to be improved simultaneously.
Little et. al. (1987) discover very little regularity in the pattern of
partial and total factor productivity and their relationship with firm size
in five small scale industries when size is measured either by number of
workers employed, or by the value of fixed assets. An analysis of
technical efficiency, based on a three factor translog production
function, reveals that there are wide variations in total factor
productivity. Within each of the five industries, variation in technical
inefficiency (measured by the difference between actual and predicted
output) is substantial and there is no systematic relationship between
employment size and technical efficiency. Only in Machine Tools
industry, technical efficiency is correlated with firm size. As for the
sources of variations in technical efficiency, four variables: the average
experience of the labor force, the age of the capital stock, the experience
of the entrepreneur and the level of capacity utilization, are found to be
significant in one or more industries.
Ganguly (1988) studied the performance, policies, problems and
prospects of the small scale industrial sector. The study explained that
inspite of vigorous efforts being made to promote the small scale
industries as a matter of conscious policy decision, the sector does suffer
from various problems such as inadequate availability of raw materials,
inadequacy of financial assistance, lack of effective marketing and
encroachment of the areas reserved for small scale industries by large
and medium sector. It has been suggested that accelerated development
of the small scale sector would help in a healthy, speedy and vibrant
growth of medium and large scale sector resulting into further
strengthening the linkages between these sectors.
Vepa (1988) examined the association between the growth of
small industries and growth of resources, author viewed that small
industries have strong linkage with the total development of raw
material and human resources. If these natural resources are not
exploited properly, the industrial development can not be accelerated
which will adversely effect the economic growth. For this purpose,
author suggested that the small sector should be developed from the
grass root level, proper development of small units facilitates optimum
use of raw material, infrastructural facilities and human resources,
thereby contributing to the growth of large and medium units in a big
way. Further, author argued that the small sector has been accepted as an
effective instrument in the development of backward areas.
Ramaswamy (1990) estimated the partial productivity of labour and
capital and relative efficiency using unit level data for four industries:
Motor Vehicle Parts, Agricultural Machinery and Parts, Machine Tools
and Parts, and Plastic Products. He uses the same relative efficiency
index as Goldar (1985) does. His analysis indicates that capital intensity
and partial productivity are sensitive to alternative measures of firm size
and there is little regularity in the behavior of capital labour ratio and
employment size. Partial factor productivity of labor and capital do not
exhibit any significant relationship with firm size when size is measured
in terms of employment, however, a positive relationship is observed
between capital-labour ratio and investment size of the unit. Labour
productivityrises while capital productivity falls as the investment size
of the unit increases further, efficiency indexes show neither systematic
nor substantial differences between employment or investment size
classes of units. Ramaswamy’s analysis suggests existence of increasing
returns to scale and thus rejects the assumption of constant returns to
scale.
Sharma and Diwan (1994) provided a comprehensive insight into
the small scale sector of India and observed that over the years, this
sector has exhibited a tremendous amount of resilience, ability to
diversify and improve its performance. Further, the process of
liberalisation and market reforms has provided tremendous opportunities
for growth of small enterprises. This will however, depend upon the
ability of small scale sector to take advantage of its inherent strengths of
quick response, innovation and flexibility. Further in the study, to assess
the response of small scale sector and its ability to reposition itself in the
changed business environment a SWOT (Strength, Weakness,
Opportunity, Threat) analysis of small scale sector was carried out. It
was observed that with the opening up of the economy, there is a big
opportunity for small scale sector to enter into profitable relationships
with large and medium units.
Chattopadhyay (1995) with the help of primary and secondary
data discussed the causes and solutions of industrial sickness in India.
By using various mathematical and statistical tools like financial ratios
and multiple regression, it has been observed that sick industrial units
have been suffering from managerial inefficiency, demand recession,
obsolete plant and machinery and labour problems. Amongst these
problems, it has been found that managerial inefficiency is the most
serious one, followed by demand recession or market constraints.
Further, study observed that causes of sickness of small scale industries
are different from those of large sector. Small scale sector is being
deprived of financial aid by the financial institutions, they lend them
only when the security of their loan is guaranteed. Study made empirical
analysis especially for textile and engineering goods industries and
concluded by suggesting that mere recommendations and enactment of
policies is not enough unless proper implementation is ensured.
Therefore, government should take necessary steps to tackle the
problem.
Jain (1996) observed that liberalisation had compelled Indian
firms to improve product quality, internal productivity and reduce costs
through a combination of organisational restructuring, downsizing,
process re-engineering and computerisation. These measures will be
inadequate in the next century as firms will face different kinds of
competition in globalised era. Global firms move towards creating
knowledge products by using superior human and organisational skills
and state of art technology. Indian firms should use innovation,
entrepreneurship and information technology in strategy and corporate
philosophy to create competitive challenges in global success.
Nath (1996) performed inter-state comparison of relative
efficiency in small scale industry of India using the data culled out from
the reports in second all India census of small scale industrial units
conducted in 1988-89. However, the state level data was obtained from
corresponding state wise volume of the report. The study comes up with
the results that in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, most of the small
scale industries are relatively more efficient than in other states.
However, in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West
Bengal they were relatively less efficient. Use based classification of
industries revealed that consumer durable industries had some of the
highest average efficiency indices and relatively smaller coefficient of
variations whereas, the intermediate product industries and the consumer
non-durable industries had wider variation in their relative efficiency
indices across states.
Justus (1997) pointed out that small scale industry play an
important role in the economic development of a country. The
promotion of small scale industry has been widely recommended as one
of the most appropriate means of industrialising the industrially
backward region or countries. The small scale sector has certain inherent
advantages like low capital intensity, high employment generation, more
equitable distribution of income and wider dispersal of industries. The
author revealed that the growing incidence of sickness in small scale
sector is a matter of concern. Since this sector is a vital part of the
industrial structure.
Kumar (1997) brought out that the small scale sector has played a
vital role in the overall economic development of a country like India
where millions of people are unemployed or underemployed and most of
the entrepreneurs are capable of making only small investment. The
small scale enterprises are also considered as an important instrument
for promoting rapid industrial growth by providing greater employment
opportunities, reducing regional disparities and removal of economic
backwardness of the rural and underemployed segments in the country.
The study concluded that the small scale sector performed extremely
well in all spheres of industrial activities i.e. production, investment and
export during the period from 1973-74 to 1993-94. The small scale
sector achieved all the employment targets of eight five year plan. In the
globalisation era, small scale sector demonstrated its capability to
withstand the forces of competition the results showed that substantial
structural changes have taken place in the structure of employment and
gross fixed capital of small scale sector. The results further indicate that
a significant technological change has taken place in the small scale
sector during 1972-1988 and also process of capital deepening in small
scale sector has been observed.
Gangopadhyay and Wadhwa (1998) analysed the changing
pattern of labour productivity, labour costs and TFP in Indian industries
over the period 1973-74 to 1993-94 at the disagreed level. They divided
the entire study period into two sub periods, 1973-84 and 1984-94. It has
been found that the increase in capital intensity was accompanied by
gains in labour productivity. The rate of growth of labour productivity
was consistently higher in the second sub-period in all industries. The
study also explored that gains in labour productivity have been
associated with falling unit labour costs over the period. In four major
exports driven industries, namely, textiles, leather, metal products and
other manufacturing, the rising labour productivity, capital deepening
and falling labour costs were accompanied by a rise in the rate of growth
of employment and wages. Total factor productivity growth (TFPG)
estimated were obtained by two methods, the growth accounting
approach and the production function approach. The analysis of
estimates of TFPG obtained from Translog index showed that the front-
runner in the TFPG performance is the export driven industries. The
only industry in which TFP fell during the period 1974-93 was wood
and wood products. The most of industries experienced a turnaround in
the early 1980s in respect of TFPG but there seems to be a reversal in
the later years. The results of panel estimation of the Translog
production function with and without industry effects showed: (1) TFP
grew at the rate negative two percent during the period 1973-74, and (2)
technical change was not Hicks-neural, but capital augmenting.
The author mentioned that their results are in contrast of the results
of the Ahluwalia’s (1991) in following respect; (i) the present study
confirmed a labour saving bias in technical change while the
Ahluwalia’s study found a capitalsaving, bias (ii) Ahluwalia found a
structural break in TFPG since 1982-83 while no such structural break in
TFPG from 1980 to 1992 has been noticed.
CHAPTER:-3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Very major country like England, United State, Japan and China
has a very strong manufacturing sector. The global export share of China
is remarkably much higher than India. In India manufacturing
contributes 2% of GDP globally1 . For small countries like Thailand, the
contribution of the manufacturing sector to their GDP is 36%, Indonesia
and Malaysia it is approximately 25%2 . In order to increase the GDP
share, the Make in India campaign was inaugurated by Prime Minister
Narender Modi in September, 2014 to revive the Indian economy. This
wide ambitious campaign gained a wide range of popularity nationally
as well as across the borders. The concept of Make in India is quite
different from the concept of Made in India. Made in India refers to the
goods which are manufactured in India, whereas the concept of Make in
India is of different perspectives. In India, we import more as compared
to export. As a result, a lot of money is going outside the country. India
has a great potential to be a great manufacturing hub as far as the
resources are concerned.
OBJECTIVES
Through Make in India, an open invitation to the foreign
companies is made to invest and set manufacturing units in India. The
main concept of Make in India is to manufacture more in India and
increase the export rate and lower the import rate. To be a potential
manufacturing hub, there are four basic requirements; skilled labor, ease
of doing business, good infrastructure and low manufacturing cost. A
number of students throughout the country enroll themselves in various
technical and job- oriented diploma and degree courses such as
mechanical, engineering, electronics etc. Moreover present government
is also setting and supporting skill development centre in the country to
provide highly skilled workforces- the basic requirement of the Make in
India concept. The creating infrastructure of global standards is possible
in India. Global standards mean creating an environment to operate
technology intensive manufacturing units3 . The main problems which
persist in India for doing business are the strict rules and regulations, a
lot of documentation, getting different types of permissions from
different government agencies and regulators which delay the process of
setting manufacturing units along with a great deal of humiliation and
wasting valuable time. These problems are thoroughly addressed in
Make in India. For ease of doing business, paperwork is reduced to a
minimum, easy approvals from different regulators, minimum human
intervention, and maximum response and help when it comes to support
and grievance redressal. Thus, the role of the government will be a
facilitator rather than a regulator. Another important issue addressed in
Make in India concept is the manufacturing cost. As compared to China,
India is a better option for labor at low cost. Significant tax incentives,
subsidies, enabling the conditions to make industries to do well in
manufacturing will reduce the manufacturing cost, ultimately leading to
increase the rates of export. Through this campaign, there will be a
critical evaluation of selected domestic companies having leadership in
innovations and new technologies for turning them into global
champions, boosting trade and economic growth. The direct and indirect
outputs of the Make in India concept are; more job opportunities
reducing unemployment, high purchasing power to better-living styles,
better state of the art of infrastructure, smart cities etc. The major 25
sectors identified to give a trust and push and the focus centers of the
Make in India campaign are automobiles, food processing, renewable
energy, automobile components, IT and BPM, roads and highways,
aviation, leather industries, space, biotechnology, media and
entertainment, textiles and garments, chemicals, mining, thermal power,
construction, oil and gas, tourism and hospitality, defence,
manufacturing pharmaceuticals, electrical machinery, ports, electronic
systems and railways etc. The Indian government has set an ambitious
target of enhancing the manufacturing output contribution to 25% of
GDP by 2025 along with 90 million domestic jobs4 . According to a
Washington-based development institution, India is going to overtake
China to clinch the position of the world‟s fastest growing, big economy
by 2016-17. According to World Bank, India is going to be Asia‟s third-
largest economy in spite of declining GDP globally.
CHALLENGES IN THE WAY OF MAKE IN INDIA
The concept of Make in India is undoubtedly an inspiring initiative
of the Indian government which has reduced the risk factors for
investing in India for many big foreign industries, but the pace of the
progress is slower as decided and predicted5,6. In this section, the main
hurdles and barriers which are responsible for this slow pace are
discussed.
CHAPTER:-4
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Political stalemate or gridlock is of major concern among the
policymakers, analysts and investors. Session by session the working of
the parliamentary affairs is interrupted and delaying the approval of
important bills in the parliament houses owing to political gridlock. As a
result, the economy and the mindsets of the investors are confused.
Important bills and reforms such as land acquisition and labor and
Goods and Services Tax (GST) are some examples. GST is the most
important and critical reform, required for smooth and efficient business
for ensuring low cost and improve tax revenues. Critical economic
reforms required for the implementation of Make in India programme
still need approvals from both houses of the Indian parliament. Foreign
investors, who are attracted by ambitious promises, may opt for other
options after getting frustrated by this political stalemate. Global rating
agencies are also worried about the slow pace of reforms in India. The
political logjam may lead to uncertainties and low interest of the
overseas investors.
Role of Indian States The role of the Indian states is very crucial
in the implementations and success of the Make in India initiative. India
with a federal political system like the United States has a large and
versatile geographical and demographical distribution. The involvement
and cooperation of state-level decision-makers, political leaders and
authorities in a positive way is the basic requirement for the grand
success of the new initiative. But it seems to be a dream as many of the
now-NDA governed states are hesitating in its implementations. In
contrast, many of the NDA led states have implemented this concept and
even developed some copycat state-led investment schemes such as
“Make in Madhya Pradesh” by BJP led Madhya Pradesh state
government. Thus to make this concept of Make in India a success, a
common consensus among the states is to be made to achieve national
progress.
Basic And Better Infrastructure No business can succeed
without the availability of high quality and modern infrastructure.
Industrial zone equipped with basic needs of modern and high-speed
communication technologies, integrated logistic arrangements, regular
power supplies, connectivity to transporting areas, ease of availability of
raw materials etc. No infrastructure is possible without the availability of
land. This requires a new, transparent, effective and equitable land
acquisition law. However, the approval of such laws is interrupted due to
political gridlock.
Power Supply There are many villages in many of the Indian
states where still there is either the limited power supply or no power
supply. Thus providing the basic need of the industry i.e. power supply
is the major issues to be dealt with. Throughout the country, power
failures and brownouts are very common endemic particularly in
summers, making Make in India a challenge. India is running short of
power with a deficit of ~ 5.1%. The Comptroller and Auditor General
(CAG) recently claimed a loss of $37 billion due to lack of transparency
in the allocation of the coal blocks7 . Under these conditions, the
government first should plan to reduce the nationwide deficit in power
generation.
Skilled Manpower Another hurdle in the path of Make in India is
the shortage of skilled manpower. A nation requires skilled human
resources in order to prosper and move atop in the global scenario.
Indian comes second after China as far as its population statistics are
concerned. In spite of this, India is still in the list of developing
countries. No doubt the power of the India is its youth, but this power is
not utilized in a fruitful manner. The youth is not skilled in a right way
and the major reason for this is our education system. In spite of
mushrooming of educational institutions in the last two decades, skilled
manpower is limited. The curriculum is not updated according to the
needs and demands. Even no skilled trainers, teachers and instructors are
employed in these educational institutions. The students are educated
theoretically rather than practically. The majority of the talented students
passing out from the different universities and colleges move to foreign
countries as the incentives are three to four time in foreign countries as
compared to India. This issue of brain drain and migration is still another
cause of the shortage of skilled manpower in India. The inadequacy of
the skilled manpower has a direct effect on the country‟s GDP and
economic progress. However, in order to tackle this problem Indian
government have started „SKILL INDIA program‟ the main aim of
which is to develop multi-skill development programme with a mission
for better and highly payable employment and entrepreneurship for all
socio-economic classes.

MANUFACTURING
In general, the status and progress in the manufacturing sector has
been less than satisfactory. The rate of growth in manufacturing has
been lower. Exports, a potentially major source of manufacturing
growth, have been on the decline, and so has been the growth in
industrial credit This is across all units, small, medium and large. Capital
formation -- the basis for future growth has been sluggish and growth in
manufacturing employment (inclusive of SMEs) has been below
expectations. (4) Interestingly, data from the Reserve Bank of India
(RBI) has shown that compared to 2014-15, FDI in Manufacturing fell
in 2015-16 to a figure below that in 2011-12. The percentage of FDI
flowing to manufacturing, which has been in the range of 35-40% for the
past four years, dropped to 23% in 2015-16. Rather than manufacturing,
services e.g. e-commerce providers like Amazon, Snapdeal and Flipkart,
ride-sharing services like Uber and Ola seem to be drawing a greater
share of investment.

Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) On this front, the progress has been
literally static since the Rank of 130 continues as seen in Fig 4.
Proposed Best Practices & Recommendations
Moving from Vision to Implementation
1) Currently, the program is being managed as part of DIPP which
in turn is part of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. There is no
dedicated organization for the program. For example, the government
could appoint a minister of Make in India. This project is too important
and too critical to leave it to bureaucrats spread across ministries. (1)
This proposal is also of significant importance because translating
vision into operational details devolves on several ministries e.g.
Company affairs, skill development and labor. (4)
2) Policy statements are not sufficient and should not be just a
slogan. They should be translated into operational plans, sub-strategies,
schemes and programs. At present the policy content is missing or not
clearly articulated and therefore should be worked out (4)
3) Industrial policy in a federal polity is completely different from
that in a unitary structure. The central government has issued numerous
Industrial Policy Statements from time to time. Most are often objective-
oriented political announcements. Further, limiting the states'
involvement solely to EoDB may not be the best way and they must be
co-opted in other areas of the program as well. (4). Talent shortage in
critical areas should addressed and Institution building and their
strengthening is required with technical experts needed in all the
mission-critical areas. (1)
4) Often the Make in India campaign has been reduced to being a
branding exercise under which the government claims credit for it pretty
much for even factories which routinely being set up in the country.
Every factory inaugurated, every defence deal signed, every shovel stuck
into the ground is often accompanied by the hashtag #MakeInIndia. This
is unrealistic and should be avoided. In short there can be no “Made in
India” projects and the entire campaign should be focused on advocacy,
promotion and marketing.

5) There are 10 criteria used in the ‘Ease of Doing Business’


ranking by the World Bank, among them: Starting a Business, Dealing
with Construction Permits, Getting Electricity, Registering Property,
Paying Taxes, Enforcing Contracts etc. There could be therefore 10
departments in the Ministry of Make in India mirroring these with the
task of bringing India to the first rank on all these parameters within the
next 12 months. (1)
CHAPTER:-5

ANALYSIS

This is the organization which is managing the Marketing &


Promotion component of the program . Normally , one would expect this
to be organized using projectized or matrix structures and as a program .

However , from the information available in the public domain it


appears that a functional or hierarchical structure is being followed .This
is also understandable , since government departments generally tend to
have such structures when work is ongoing though clear demarcations as
in a project / program would be more beneficial in this instance .

The Make in India initiative is a good candidate for gainfully


applying organizational project management. The entire program can be
visualized as a number of projects in marketing and promotion for each
of the 25 sectors of focus. In case of EoDB projects would be at
implemented at the State level with the support of the DIPP at the center.
Projects collectively would comprise a program which are implemented
either for each sector or state. Portfolio management would apply when
we are considering selecting and prioritizing and implementing only
some of the projects during a time period.
Legend - Investors : Foreign Direct or Domestic | Abroad :
Countries Foreign Missions | Prof : Professionals implementing
programs / projects | DIPP : Dept of Industrial Policy & Promotion |
Sectors : 25 Manufacturing sectors | States: State Governments
CHAPTER:-6

CONCLUSION

To conclude, the concept of Make in India is a very promising and


innovative initiative started by Indian government. The direct and
indirect outputs of the Make in India concept include more job
opportunities reducing unemployment, high purchasing power to better-
living styles, better state of the art of infrastructure, smart cities etc. The
role of the government is to be a facilitator rather than a regulator.
Through this campaign, selected domestic companies with leadership in
innovations and new technologies are also evaluated for boosting trade
and economic growth and for turning them into global champions. The
campaign is still in its initial stages so it will be very early to predict its
success.

a) The Policy and Vision stated by the Make in India can benefit from
more clarity about its scope and its inter relationships with other
departments and stakeholders.

b) It does not appear that formal program management structure or


methods are being deployed as compared to similar public programs in
the government.

c) It would be beneficial to manage the initiative not just as a department


within DIPP, but give it higher status and accountability by either having
a separate ministry or deploy a mission mode approach.
d) Organizational project management could be deployed for the
initiative in managing programs & projects and using portfolio
management to select or prioritize programs or projects within a
timeframe.

e) The areas which could be of immediate attention from a project


management perspective would the organization structure, revisions or
adaptations in plans while moving from vision to implementation and
analyzing stakeholders. Next steps would include looking at best
practices at project level

REFERENCES
[1] http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-09-
05/news/66241311_1_growth-engine-india-support-jeff-immelt

[2] http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2016-03-
16/news/71573537_1_ireo-conscient-abu-dhabi-investment-authority

[3]http://auto.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/autom
otive-mission-plan-2016-26-unveiled-here-are-the-key-
highlights/48772090.

[4]http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/auto/news/passen
ger-vehicle/cars/toyota-to-invest-over-rs-1000-crore-in-india-doesnt-
rule-out-daihatsusentry/articleshow/48767359.cms
[5] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/boeing-
keen-to-make-f/a-18-fighters-in-india-ceo-dennis-a-
muilenburg/articleshow/50827817.cms

[6] http://indiabudget.nic.in/budget2015-2016/budget.asp

[7]http://indiainbusiness.nic.in/newdesign/index.php?param=indust
ryservices_landing/385/3

[8] http://ndianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/make-in-
india-has-become-a-movement-in-japan-pm-modi/

[9] http://m.arabianbusiness.com/nakheel-seeks-grow-2-5bn-
indian-investment-portfolio-611062.html

[10] http://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/live-mint-epaper-
livemint/make-in-india-key-for-honeywell-arijit-ghosh-newsid-
50908217

[11] http://mfgtechupdate.com/2015/07/make-in-india-challenges-
and-opportunities-for-manufacturing-sector/