Delegation is empowerment, not abdication

Once, in the flourishing state of Vijaynagar, there reigned Raja Narendar, a ruler known for his dedication and desire to personally ensure growth and prosperity of his kingdom and every subject.

Picture Courtesy: Google Gemini

Initially, his Durbar (Royal Court) was highly efficient, guided by his Panch Maharatnas (Five Great Jewels): Ami Grihapati, Raj Senapati, Nirma Vittapati, Arjoo Nyaypati and Jagat Aryogyapati. They were the pillars, and their coordinated work ensured peace and progress.

However, as Vijaynagar grew, Raja Narendar, fearing that delegation might dilute his authority, insisted that every new officer, minister, and department head report directly to him. He wanted to be the single point of contact for everything, believing, “A king must hold all the threads of his realm in his own hand.”

Slowly, everyone including the chief of estate, head of handloom, water manager, and granaries and other minions began reporting to him. The Durbar, once a place of thoughtful consultation and contemplation, descended into chaos, though organised.

Picture Courtesy: Google Gemini

The situation became like trying to manage a Big Fat Indian Wedding where the same person—the overworked father of the bride—insists on personally approving the menu, the guest list seating, the band-baaja, the flower arrangements, the pundit’s timing, and the joota churai (stealing the groom’s footwear) negotiations.

Raja Narendar was overwhelmed. His days were a blur of back-to-back darshans: Jahgirdhar seeking approval for a new revenue scheme. Shiva Krishipati presented complex plans for the monsoon reservoirs. Piyu Vanijyapati needed permission for a border trade, Jyotish had an urgent calendar correction, Maali was requesting new fertilizer for the palace mango trees etc.

The King, buried under mountains of tasks, became a bottleneck for progress. Strategic decisions about defense or economic reform were delayed for weeks because he was preoccupied with minor logistical issues, like deciding the color of the ceremonial elephant’s saddle cloth.

His once-trusted Panch Maharatnas felt sidelined. They couldn’t coordinate with each other efficiently, as everyone’s priority was now only to secure a brief, rushed audience with the Raja. Decisions were often contradictory—Narendar would approve a new road project requested by the Vanijya mantri, forgetting it would run right through the protected forest area managed by the Vana Adhikari he’d seen an hour before. Things came to such a pass he was even unable to recall his own Anna Bhandar Adhikari when he saw visible cracks in once upon a time perfect Vijayanagar – all because he wanted to be the Dhuri around which every other spoke revolved.

He sighed, “I have been so focused on counting every grain of rice that I have forgotten to manage the entire harvest. My administration is behaving like a crowded Bombay VT railway platform—busy, noisy, and nowhere near its destination.”

Raja Narendar finally went back to the old proved and trusted model, delegated authority to his Panch Maharatnas, making them responsible for serveral functions and the numerous people within them. He focussed and guided to strategic, focused core.

Thus, freed from the mundance Raja Narendar could once again concentrate on his true role of setting the long-term vision (drishti) for Vijaynagar, ensuring justice, and allowing his kingdom to truly flourish.

A strong King need not manage every detail, but guide the those who do. Growth of a kingdom brings new roles and responsibilities and his insistence on direct oversight is a certain recipe for disaster. Strategic vision goes for a toss and gets blurred by operational noise. A kings job is to chart the course, not steering every oar. In other words, focus on strategy, not operations. It is not about doing everything—it’s about enabling others to do their best.

Bridging Skills for 2047: The PM-SETU

The Pradhan Mantri Skilling and Employability Transformation through Upgraded ITIs (PM-SETU) scheme represents a landmark initiative by the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship (MSDE) to reimagine vocational education in India. Rooted in the vision of a “Viksit Bharat 2047”, the scheme seeks to modernize and elevate the Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) and National Skill Training Institutes (NSTIs) into aspirational, industry-aligned institutions that produce highly employable youth.

Background: The 2008 Craftsmen Training Scheme and Its Limitations
The genesis of India’s formal vocational training ecosystem lies in the Craftsmen Training Scheme (CTS), operational since 2008 under the Directorate General of Training (DGT). While the CTS offered 169 trades aligned with the National Skills Qualification Framework (NSQF), it was largely government-managed, with limited industry participation. The infrastructure remained outdated, curricula were slow to adapt to evolving industry needs, and placement outcomes were inconsistent. Despite the presence of 33 NSTIs (including 19 for women), the system lacked the agility and responsiveness required to meet the demands of a rapidly transforming economy.

Introduction to PM-SETU: A Paradigm Shift
PM-SETU introduces a transformative model that is government-owned but industry-managed. With a total outlay of ₹60,000 crore over five years—shared among the Central Government (₹30,000 crore), State Governments (₹20,000 crore), and Industry (₹10,000 crore)—the scheme is structured into two components:

  • Component I focuses on upgrading 1,000 Government ITIs through a Hub-and-Spoke model, where 200 ITIs serve as hubs managing 800 spoke ITIs.
  • Component II aims to augment five NSTIs (Bhubaneswar, Chennai, Hyderabad, Kanpur, Ludhiana) into National Centres of Excellence (NCOEs), with global partnerships and advanced training capabilities.

The scheme is co-financed by the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank through result-based loans, ensuring accountability and performance-linked funding.

Operational and Governance Model
The scheme introduces Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) to manage clusters of ITIs. These SPVs can be industry-led or state-led, depending on the availability of credible Anchor Industry Partners (AIPs). Industry-led SPVs hold a 51% share, with the remaining 49% equally divided between the Centre and State. SPVs have full autonomy over curriculum design, trainer recruitment, financial operations, and infrastructure upgrades. Governance is ensured through a tripartite agreement comprising a Shareholders’ Agreement (SHA) and a License Agreement (LA).

At the national level, a Steering Committee chaired by the Secretary, MSDE, provides policy direction, while State Steering Committees oversee implementation, approve Strategic Investment Plans (SIPs), and monitor progress. Independent Monitoring Agencies (IMAs) verify milestones and ensure transparency.

Pitfalls Identified in the Scheme Design
Despite its robust framework, PM-SETU could have several potential pitfalls:

  • Complex Governance Structure: Multi-tiered committees and overlapping responsibilities may slow decision-making and create bureaucratic bottlenecks.
  • Dependence on Industry Participation: The success of clusters hinges on credible AIPs. Lack of interest or capacity could derail implementation.
  • HR Integration Challenges: Coexistence or deputation of government staff with SPV personnel may lead to role ambiguity and resistance to change.
  • Monitoring Burden: KPI-based fund release and performance tracking require sophisticated systems, which may strain under-resourced states.
  • Equity and Access Concerns: Risk of urban-centric clusters and exclusion of remote regions if not carefully planned.
  • Digital Divide: AR/VR tools and Learning Outcome Management Systems (LOMS) may not be accessible in low-connectivity areas.
  • Curriculum Fragmentation: Excessive customization by SPVs could lead to inconsistency in training quality and certification standards.
  • Sustainability Post-Scheme: Long-term viability depends on continued industry engagement and revenue generation.

Mitigation Strategies in the New Scheme
To address these challenges, PM-SETU incorporates a comprehensive mitigation plan:

  • Strengthening SPV Governance: Clear role definitions, onboarding programs for ITI staff, and change management training are mandated.
  • Ensuring Timely Fund Flow: Streamlined KPI tracking and technical assistance for SIP and AOP preparation are provided.
  • Standardizing Curriculum Framework: A core curriculum is mandated across ITIs, with flexibility in specific modules. All course approvals are routed through CSTARI and NCVET.
  • Planning for Sustainability: SPVs are encouraged to develop revenue-generating activities such as production centers, fee-based courses, and consultancy services.
  • Bridging the Digital Divide: Infrastructure grants and digital literacy programs are planned for ITIs in underserved regions.
  • Promoting Inclusive Cluster Selection: Clusters in NE, hilly, and tribal regions are prioritized, with relaxed hub-spoke definitions and gender/social equity targets.
  • Monitoring Industry Commitment: Performance-linked clauses in SPV agreements and multi-industry consortia are encouraged to ensure sustained engagement.

Conclusion
PM-SETU marks a bold and strategic shift in India’s skilling landscape. By integrating industry-led governance, modern infrastructure, flexible curricula, and robust monitoring mechanisms, it aims to create a future-ready workforce aligned with national development goals. While the scheme is ambitious and complex, its design reflects a deep understanding of past shortcomings and a commitment to inclusive, sustainable, and high-impact transformation.