There are a couple of reasons why I prefer to call ZenC an experiment.
1. I’m not sure if Sakala have enough teeth
My belief in ZenC’s potential to make a difference is rooted in the Right to Public Services Act. This law mandates that once a citizen submits an application and receives an acknowledgment from the relevant department, the department is obligated to deliver the service within the specified timeframe. If they fail, citizens can appeal to Sakala (in Karnataka), and consequences will ensue. I’m confident that if ZenC can guide citizens through the nuances of submitting an application successfully, the appeal process will manage the rest. I believe Sakala has enough teeth. Let’s find out.
2. I’m not sure if there are enough ‘Hopeful Initiators’, can we convert a significant chunk of ‘Resigned Pragmatists’?
There are three audience segments for ZenC; ‘Convenience Seekers’1 who have zero qualms breaking the law, in general; ‘Resigned Pragmatists’2 who prioritize efficiency over principles, and ‘Hopeful Initiators’3 who are deeply pained by how corruption is the norm now and make sincere efforts to avoid paying a bribe.
We could conduct a sample study to determine the proportion of the population that falls into this category and extrapolate to predict how the population might behave, but we are not; the entry barriers to this experiment are not high in terms of cost. We rather redirect the time and effort to build and implement ZenC 1.0, and discover the results firsthand.
And this is why I consider ZenC an experiment.
1Segment 1 – ‘Convenience Seekers’
These individuals openly disregard legal procedures and are comfortable engaging in corrupt practices to expedite services. Example: getting a driver’s license without taking the test or bribing to expedite services, like obtaining a Khata certificate in a week instead of waiting the mandated 30 days promised by the Government. Convenience Seekers likely comprise the overwhelming majority of the population. By bringing the stigma back to corruption, we hope to encourage this segment to respect the law and avoid bribing officials.
2Segment 2 – ‘Resigned Pragmatists’
These citizens are disillusioned with the system and prioritize efficiency over principles, opting to pay bribes to avoid bureaucratic hassles. This segment is disheartened by the normalization of corruption but is deeply cynical about the system ever changing.
They are aware of accountability mechanisms like RTI but think, “Why go through the hassle when I can pay and get my work done efficiently?” They will do anything to avoid visiting Government offices: “Even if RTI works, I’ll still need to go to the Government office to collect the certificate, and I’d rather avoid the disrespectful attitude of the clerks. An agent delivers the paperwork to my door.”
They would be inclined to use a third-party intermediary that promises not to bribe Government officials, even if it costs more than agents colluding with public officials. We believe this segment comprises the bulk of the population and will require persuasion to try Zen Citizen.However, there will always be those who are willing to take the initiative and file the application themselves. For these individuals, ZenC will remain relevant.
3Segment 3 – ‘Hopeful Initiators’
This segment will be our primary target audience. These are citizens who make an effort to avoid bribery but ultimately feel compelled to give in due to the challenges they encounter.
They are deeply pained by the normalization of corruption and attempt to apply for services directly, without paying a bribe. However, they eventually feel powerless and helpless when faced with obstacles and reluctantly resort to bribing officials or contacting an agent. They made an effort to be good citizens within their influence, but it’s not a hill to die on.