OF the many insinuations and innuendoes that civil servants are subjected to, maintaining the status quo is one offence that stands out. No discussion about this mandarin brigade is complete unless repeated reference has been made to its historic lack of initiative and innovation. Many governance ills are blamed on the bureaucrats’ dragging their feet.

Have efforts to end the status quo been positive?

In all fairness, this allegation is not without basis. Trained and groomed to ensure uniformity of treatment in all scenarios, maintaining the status quo readily assumes the proportions of a service tradition. Going by the same set of laws, rules, regulations, notifications etc, generations of civil servants have been conditioned to respond in the same manner to most situations. Predictable outcomes of equally predictable situations is a desirable state of affairs for the civil servant.

Very often, civil servants are asked the awkward question about what changes they’ve introduced. It is presumed that as a result of the actions of a public functionary, things at large ought to change.

In fact, maintaining the status quo can represent the exact terms of reference for field-based civil servants. If a district administrator or police functionary can assure the semblance of a level playing field for diverse actors in a locality, the lives of the citizens can be expected to remain peaceful. Maintaining the status quo through the uniform application of laws and allowing societal forces their natural interaction in a seamless manner appears a desirable option in today’s turbulent times.

Status quo also comes across as positive after the recent efforts at restructuring the traditional governance edifice in Pakistan. Not too long ago, the steel frame of the Raj was jettisoned in favour of what appeared to be an exceedingly people-centric system of local governance. The former was discarded as a lousy pretext for maintaining the status quo while the latter was ushered in with much fanfare for grass-roots empowerment.

Civil servants’ opposition to devolution was seen as the bureaucracy’s machinations to preserve a decadent system. Such views were also held by the leaders of anti-status quo forces as the century-old governance system in parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were tweaked with.

So where have the efforts to end the status quo landed us today? The local government system introduced in 2001 was a major shift away from the status quo; now, it has been completely replaced by variants of systems with little similarity to the original design. We can’t at this stage conclude a causal link between the altered status quo and the poor quality of governance today. But we can say that lessons from such experiences need to be deeply studied to fully appreciate the pitfalls of disturbing the apple cart unnecessarily.

But should the status quo end up as a jealously guarded frontier by civil servants? Or should the latter be encouraged to pursue innovation and experimentation to evolve a better state of affairs in their respective realms? Similarly, in the final analysis, the question of whether altering the status quo lies in the realm of politicians and policymakers alone as the true guardians of public interest or of civil servants should find space in the debate, if we are to deviate from the trodden path.

To the extent that maintaining the status quo in the working of government results from the mindless pursuit of outdated systems and structures, the attempt at innovation should be welcome. A long history of implementing system-wide governance reforms in Pakistan with limited effectiveness points to several stark realities. One needs to admit that introducing massive institutional reforms requires more than noble intentions and the liberal supply of resources.

Much to our dislike, realities such as tenure limitations for civil servants (and even political governments) hardly allow for long-term reform options to be implemented in a meaningful manner. Introduction of innovation at the local level by individual civil servants can be the best strategy for attacking the status quo.

Introducing localised innovations geared towards early impact needs to be seen as a far more efficient tool at the disposal of a civil servant. Leaving wider, systemic interventions, the individual civil servant can target limited aspects of change in a more focused and independent manner.

Innovations (as distinct from piloting reforms) facilitate fast-track progress towards desired outcomes and are geared towards producing better results while staying within the precincts of existing systems. Such a strategy shows that the positive aspects of a prevailing system should not be mindlessly discarded in pursuit of a large-scale reform vision that promises the demise of the status quo. Incremental reforms through governance innovations can ameliorate the wrongs of the status quo far more efficiently.

The writer is a public policy and governance expert.

Published in Dawn, May 19th, 2014