Does a culture of mis-trust encourage and reinforce corrupt behaviour?

The current fraud at Punjab National Bank highlighted the fact that Public Sector bank employees are typically transferred after 3 years and that did not happen in this case. The message is clear that there must have been collusion even if no one will ever be able to prove it.

I have felt that the policy of transferring was counter-productive. It is nice to go to a branch and be recognised and there is a comfort in dealing with familiar faces.

It does not matter that much anymore as I hardly visit the branch and prefer an email response to any query I may have.

However, it seems to be a part of our (Indian) corporate culture as well that we mistrust employees. There is no issue in having checks. However, should the first impression be that it is assumed that an employee will misuse any privilege given and that must be prevented? Isn't the message we are giving to each young, new employee that misuse the privilege but in a way as not to be detected?

I used to feel that software folks will change our culture. The working environment in these companies was so much better and my hope had been that once the older folks were replaced by the younger ones, who had a lot more exposure to working with US/European clients, we will keep getting better.

From what I can gather, that has not happened. Processes have become more like in the rest of the companies, except with greater reliance on tech-tools.

It is unfortunate as a culture of trust would have helped create software companies that could have been the seeds of a new Indian work culture and a hope for a better future for our children.

I just can't get over the failure of our generation to create processes that we trust you unless proven otherwise. How hard should it have been?

I believe very hard in a society convinced of and obsessed by presumptive and notional losses. So, it is a delight to read the likely winding up of the board for

advising the government on enforcing “a code of conduct and ethics for managerial personnel” in these banks, will expire at the end of March. It is unlikely the government will look for a successor to Rai,

Voting Option: Not This One or Anyone But

I keep wondering if the outcome of elections in first-past-the-post would be any different if we had the option to vote against a candidate instead of just for someone.

There are times when one would find it hard to vote for a candidate though the idea of another candidate winning may be even more worrying.

Even in a binary election, the result may not change but the message to the winning party and the moral strength of victory can be very different.

I hope some psephologist would take that up and we can have a better understanding of people's voting intentions.

The goal, of course, would be that can it succeed in politicians avoiding polarising voters and creating a more just society for all.