Why India needs big scientific discoveries and not jugaad
"There has not been a single invention from India in the last 60 years that became a household name globally, nor any idea that led to 'earth shaking' invention to 'delight global citizens,' said the Infosys co-founder NR Narayana Murthy recently. This reality check when taken in the wake of launch of Skill India initiative that hopes to train 400 million by 2022 and the buzz of Make in India initiative raises a very important question for future of India: What is India to be like in 2022 or beyond?
At first glance it may appear that bringing in technology templates that can be executed in our country by skilled workers will lead India to wealth. But will this idea of simply skilling people rather than teaching them to think and innovate really fulfil our needs? Will it make us sufficiently competitive and prosperous? A future of permanent dependence on "imported" ideas that may or may not be suitable for indigenous needs may not be our answer to becoming a superpower. Any country that thinks they can advance without creativity and innovation is gravely mistaken.
Why is modern India so reluctant to adapt system wide innovation in its practice? Indians at this juncture of time appear to be in a hurry. They do not have the patience to implement innovation in their socioeconomic fabric. May be it is our decades of poverty or perhaps it is centuries of lack of rewards for individuals that has removed the essential incentives for creativity.
Innovation is quite likely the most abused term in India. First we established an irrelevant organisation called Innovation Council and then the National Innovation Foundation. World now equates Indian innovation with the term "jugaad". The concept has gripped people's fancy because it showcases ingenuity in the face of lack of resources and skills. Creativity researchers distinguish everyday creativity from those of substantial creative contributions in a variety of ways. Gardner, in his book Creating Minds, describes range of creativity as "little C" creativity as opposed to "big C" creativity. According to Gardner, while efforts of Einstein and Van Gogh can be said to possess "big C" creativity, small creative efforts in everyday life are examples of "little C" creativity. Jugaad is at best "little C" and when we talk about innovation we talk about the "big C", that reaches and multiplies for the masses. Hence, there is little cause for celebration for jugaad until we devise means for it to translate into benefit for larger mankind.
Multinational organisations often open innovation centres in India which are basically operations designed to strip Western products off features to make their product "affordable" for the Indian masses. However can cheapification of technology, in the name of affordability, really pass off as innovation? Do Indians really want cars, consumer electronics and medical products that are stripped off and cheap replicas of western counterparts? Even with the much celebrated Mars Mission, one may argue we simply made the technology cheap - we didn't actually innovate or invent anything.
One of my favourite stories on innovation comes from a Nobel Prize-winning author Selma Lagerlof. In her novel, Gösta Berlings Saga, a wood nymph grants a hardworking knight a wish to create something new but with one caveat. He won't be able to replicate his creations. The knight creates three things one after another: an automatic carriage, a flying machine, and eventually a perpetual motion machine. The first he crashes into a wall out of his own ego unwilling to part with it. The second is burnt by him in a frenzy. He is disillusioned when he realises no matter what he creates he won't be able to use for the benefit for the mankind. Driven by the same haplessness, he also ends up destroying the perpetual machine. Eventually, he gives up creating and goes in search for the nymph to avenge for the curse. When the two meet, he begs her to take back her "gift" which she does. But she laughs right out, saying "Madman, I never forbade you letting others copy your works; my sole desire was to spare the man of genius the artisan's labour".
Selma Lagerlof, in a way, describes frustration and the grim fate of a creator in a society that does not support innovation. Universally, creativity is defined as making of something new and useful. It is a step taken off the beaten path but to some purpose. Innovation is implementation of creativity. If one creates a new product, a system can guarantee innovation by ensuring standardisation and accessibility of knowledge. Innovation is spread of the genius through regularised system. So if the knight created a perpetual motion machine, an innovative society would ensure that the new technology is adapted and put to use for general mankind.
The need of the hour is therefore to define the concept of Indian innovation. The modern success stories of innovation hinge on the successful efforts of the individual but we also cannot ignore the philosophy of communal knowledge and the need for systemic support. India right now is facing the challenge of defining a system-wide functional approach to the construct of innovation. The construct that we shall end up with will influence the role our society shall play in promotion and sustenance of creativity. Our government is fixated on the important task of skilling India and Make in India and employing India but maybe they are missing the boat on realising skilling India will only be sustainable with a programme on "Innovate in India".
How do we make innovation feasible in the context of our past, what we are now, and what we feel we should be? Besides what is useful to us in this land? Innovation by its nature should not require poetic strength. In a society that lacks understanding of innovation and does not have enough science, individual geniuses are bound to suffer and their creations will meet the same fate as that of Lagerlof's knight. Science of creativity and innovation has made significant headways in last few years. With sufficient political will, innovation can become part and parcel of our culture.