Vinayshil Gautam
The understanding of the concept of leisure is fundamental to the designing of interventions for the modern economy. There are various estimates of the business available in the ‘leisure sector’. Leisure business is spread from harnessing visual to audio to gastronomical delights and more. Put simply, catering to the five senses is the business of leisure.
The number five should not be taken too literally. Spiritual and religious practices have progressively emerged as a major factor in filling up leisure space. Spirituality/religosity can also be a big business.
Together, spirituality combined with religious fervor provides livelihood to millions over the world. Consider how all the places of worship are flush with money. That alone is significant but the seminality is further enhanced by a simple fact of civil society: Earnings from spiritual or religious practices are not taxed. Hence every rupee earned in this manner goes farther than earned through other modes .The economists are yet to wake up to this reality and factor it into the prevailing economic model
The consulting firms are full of the manufacturing sector, ‘the transportation sector,’ the telecom sector’- the list is endless. Hardly any one of them has claimed any expertise in promoting efficiency in the spiritual or religious sector.
The proposition being made is simple. Spiritual or religious organisations also have to perform and they have sector-specific efficiency characteristics and traits .They require sector-specific evaluation parameters. Else the comfort of the user will be hit.
I recall having been requested by a religious board to look into the impact of major donations, meriting long-term facilities of “Darshan” and stay facilities at the point of pilgrimage. How this was resolved is another story but I do remember the chief executive officer listening very carefully to my analysis and the managerial implications of any given line of intervention. It needs to be stated that I offered to forego any consulting fees in this regard because the beneficiary of my insight/advice was a manifestation of divinity. The offer was accepted in a manner which showed that they almost expected me to make it. There was no debate and I worked in an honorary capacity. Merits of the case apart, it does outline a very important concern, namely defining characteristics of the sector in some of its manifestations.
Individual choices apart, in principle, professionalism dictates that professional service must be professionally compensated. We sometimes cause confusion of categories because we mix intellect with emotion and emotion with religious fervour .
This confusion is in other areas also. Corporate Social Responsibility is often confused with philanthropy, and both with the “higher purpose of the organisations”.
Even in the corporate world, inputs in the manufacturing sector will be confused with inputs to create a basic infrastructure. In turn, these processes are confused with the social justice and emancipation of the “communities exploited through centuries”. One would think the matter would be closed there but not quite. All this will have an overlay of issues such as gender parity and representation of women.
Each one of these causes is by themselves unexceptionable. No sane person will quarrel with equity or social justice or female representation. But that is not the point.
The point is, growth of manufacturing requires a certain approach, and investment in infrastructure another approach. Investment in manufacturing must lead to profits. Investment in infrastructure very often draws upon tax payer’s money.
How can the organisations in the two categories be evaluated in a similar manner? The consulting firms, individual, national or global need to have an answer.
The tragedy is that most advisories try to sell in overcrowded areas. Clarity of approach and sensitive delineation of the line between category of enterprises is needed. In this manner , everyone would gain, the revenues and the happiness quotient all around would be upbeat.