Every book on
management, philosophy and politics is brimming with research on change, its requirements, its benefits, yet, perpetuating the status quo remains the most sought after option for humans at all levels. While we preach change to everybody and promote its advantages, we find practicing it ourselves almost impossible. Human behaviour is the most unpredictable thing in the world. The very fact that it is unpredictable is what makes change a constant reality. Yet most human beings resist change religiously. The reasons are plain and simple. Change requires an admission of the fact that what we are already doing is not good enough and most of us have such mega size egos that we would rather die than admit our shortcomings, and, another valid reason is that change requires exit from our comfort zones and the effort required to vacate these zones is painful and preferably avoidable.
Organisations are constantly struggling to come to terms with the changing environment around them. The shifts in the political and socio-cultural scenarios around the world have a global impact. What happens in one part of the world immediately echoes in every part of the world, thanks to the lightning pace of information and telecommunication. For countries and companies to ignore these changes and continue as they are, has and will continue to prove fatal. Laws change, customer preferences change, technologies become obsolete, even climate changes. Thus the success of any individual, organisation or a country is now judged by how quickly they are able to absorb and respond to those changes. If we look at our major industries like textiles, we see the same impact. The textile industry has been subject to some volatile changes due to the shifts in raw material prices, World Trade Organisation (WTO) laws, competition and recession, etc. Domestically, the absence of facilities like electricity and gas has severely hampered production and planning. Most textile firms have gone under due to these consecutive setbacks. However, within the plethora of firms who have just been complaining about the unfair environmental changes, there have been organisations who have been quietly absorbing these changes and making product and market adjustments to not only survive but thrive in this downturn.
Similarly, many countries are going through the anguish of realising that what worked yesterday is no longer valid and workable today. The US took its time to realise that it may have to share its title of the number one country with lesser countries like China and if war and scale was what made them successful a century ago, it may not necessarily lead to the same supremacy in this century. Thus, Obama came with the change slogan and chanted the anti-war chime to win the elections. Similar desire for change was also witnessed in Egypt, Libya and many other countries in recent times. Pakistan has also become a basket case of change. However, the dilemma with Pakistan is that while Pakistanis have clamoured for change for a long time, they have found themselves trapped in choosing the same people who are anti-change. Previously, the change game wrestled between dictatorship and democracy. With half our history overwhelmed by army takeovers, change really meant a desire to rid of the autocratic rule of Ayub Khan, Ziaul Haq or Musharraf. However briefly, democratic changes also meant either the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) or the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) taking turns at government. The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) factor after October 30th has become another option of change for the people to consider.
However, does change only mean a change in party brand names? Does change only mean any new face in political ranks as they are sick of seeing the same old faces? Change actually means a completely new mindset and approach of seeing and dealing with the extremely complex and competitive world that we are all entering. The PML-N is also talking about change and so is the PTI. What is required is not just a slogan of change but a complete new way of behaving where the major problems besetting the ordinary man of poverty, of lack of basic facilities, become possible to address. This of course would require a brave approach of making policies and plans that take on the feudal tilt and perpetuation of the rich getting richer vicious circle that we have experienced in the last six decades. To do so, how do the PML-N and PTI or any other party deal with the electoral system monopoly of the feudals will be the test of the real depth of the slogan of change. If any of the parties can break this dependence on forced voter choices, then only will they have the liberty to exercise policies that can challenge the prevailing abuse of power exercised by the rich and powerful. Thus, change is not only going to come after being elected but the process of change will start with each move that each party exercises to be elected as well.
There is a visible change in the way the citizens of this country are approaching the rhetoric of each party. This change is due to two factors. First, they are so sick of being promised all and delivered nothing and second, the penetration of the media has really created awareness in every nook and corner of this country to a level that may be unique in this region. Thus, for all parties who are still under this comfort level that because the present government has failed people will automatically tilt towards them, they better be aware that this is not enough to make a very hardened and cynical voter actually make the effort to come out and vote for a party. Obama’s inability to live up to his chant for change has made his second term look dubious. He promised a peaceful and prosperous US and has failed to bring a change in the way the White House looks and behaves towards the rest of the world. Similarly, Pakistanis are not going to risk being taken for a ride on the basis of fancy speeches and juicy jalsas (rallies). What each party needs to understand is that change, if treated superficially and used at the expense of people’s trust and faith, will eventually backfire and damage the political core of those who abuse this concept to achieve their own ends.
The writer is an analyst, consultant and Information Secretary of PTI Punjab. She can be reached at [email protected]