Who is responsible or who is irresponsible? And if you are irresponsible, will you be responsible? That is the question we will examine from here on in!
On June 2nd, 2023, three trains collided near Balasore in the state of Odisha in eastern India. The accident killed over 275 people and injured hundreds (nearly a thousand) more; people who were going about their lives, planning for a tomorrow based on their present. They received a rude present. Some were fortunate not to be present. They were on the waiting list, or they cancelled or travelled by other means!
They were travelling accompanied by sadness, happiness, indifference, and/or apprehension of what awaited them at their destination. Little did they expect that all these mundane emotional manifestations of daily events were about to change forever and be replaced by just one. Shock. And then the usual psychological certified Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and Acceptance. In the end, acceptance is all that we will have left for closure. Of course, there will be compensation in the form of money, words, jobs, and a new scheme, but what they had, was not bad, and the alternative, is just a placebo compared to the real thing; the docs (not the documents) know the difference!
An Odisha government press release said that, in total, 17 coaches of the two passenger trains were derailed and severely damaged. The rescue personnel worked for 18 hours to rescue passengers and pull out bodies. They were guided by senior personnel and even the minister concerned. Their presence oiled and moved the rescue machinery, and the cameramen were in tow, or towed (not clear at this point) to bear witness, for in their opinion it was newsworthy! Hopefully, their presence made a difference (don’t read it as a synonym for subtraction, that would be an insult to the mathematical priority BODMAS)
Prelim inquiries suggest an unexpected locking of the Signalling System. Minister for Railways Ashwini Vaishnaw said a “change made in the electronic interlocking and point machine” led to the accident.
But Machine Learning, the rage today, because humans have refused to learn, despite all the advancements in pedagogy, was never a possibility it appears. On Sunday, June 4, the Railway Board recommended a CBI investigation as its preliminary probe identified “signalling interference” as the main cause of the accident.
Someone responsible to ensure that there is no interference, was irresponsible enough to let it happen, making him/them responsible! And the announcement by the PM after an in (on – not sure, there were pics though) camera review, they won’t be spared! suggests that there will be no leniency or mercy shown towards the individual or individuals in question. Ah! The question still lingers. Even after many such disasters – like the Bridge collapse in Gujarat and Bihar or even the pothole and flooded underpass deaths in Bengaluru.
While the Bard is being asked for an answer to that question, another question raised was: was it an accident? An accident typically involves a negative outcome or harm caused by unintended circumstances or a lack of foresight. Accidents can happen due to several factors such as human error, mechanical failure, environmental conditions, or a combination of these. They are generally considered unfortunate and often require investigation to determine the cause and prevent similar incidents in the future. But don’t war and similar accidents, happen repeatedly? Maybe machines learn better than Humans? Recent evidence suggests so!
Or was it an intentional accident, which is an accident in a planned sort of way? This phrase suggests a deliberate act that is disguised or made to appear as an accident. In such cases, someone intentionally causes an event but tries to make it seem unintentional. The motivation behind such actions could vary widely! Much like conspiracy theories! Are these accidents or are they visionary accidents?
A criminal investigation is underway to find those responsible for their irresponsibility! This investigation will perforce start at the bottom, unlike good governance which historically has always started at the top! And how we love history! Especially recently, ancient rather than recent though! This system is locked and no one can interfere with it! The signals are clear, so no investigation is necessary!
Anyway, someone, somewhere is responsible. Has to be. And those responsible will not be spared! That we know. That the victims’ families, and the injured too, say the same thing, as do people in general, but it does not make the headlineS! Because presumably, they make it irresponsibly, without knowing the facts. Who else can blame others without facts?
In an organizational context would mean, that, the organization really can’t do without them. But in this context, it would mean the opposite and then some. More like those responsible would be pared! And perhaps rightly so. So, they can be responsible elsewhere?
Remember that old explanation for responsibility?
Person 1: “Who is responsible for the broken window?”
Person 2: “I am responsible.”
Person 1: “Well, I’m glad you finally admitted it!”
Funny as it may sound, all this raises many questions. Consequently, I must act responsibly and raise them in your minds too. Put you in two minds so to say! else I wouldn’t be doing justice to my responsibility, would I? Am I being irresponsible? It’s a conundrum I am unable to resolve amicably within me – so I put it on you.
This responsibility conundrum is like those alcohol ads that advise us all to “drink with responsibility”! Most people drink to wish or wash away their responsibility and how does “Drink with responsibility” sync with that? Have you tried drinking with responsibility? It often leaves midway because it does not enjoy the company, and loneliness can make you irresponsible. However, you won’t be spared for your irresponsibility. That is the conundrum. Even when irresponsible, you are responsible!
A tangential but connected news story that also appeared in the news, because really it is news, is fascinating for it holds many lessons from which we can learn. But then we are human and not machines, and recently we have found machines learn better than we do, despite our new education policy!
Calvin McDonald, the CEO of Lululemon, decided to terminate two employees who had chased burglars away from a store! For he valued their safety more than anything else. He stood by his action despite criticism.
He addressed the situation on CNBC, emphasizing that Lululemon has a zero-tolerance policy regarding employee involvement during theft incidents. The company refers to its store workers as “educators” and trains them to prioritize the safety of both the team and customers.
McDonald explained that educators are taught to step back, allow theft to happen, and rely on technology, such as cameras while cooperating with law enforcement. In this particular case, the terminated employees knowingly disregarded the policy by engaging with the thieves and even following them outside the store.
McDonald emphasized that the decision to terminate was based on the post-investigation findings and the company’s well-known zero-tolerance policy. Lululemon takes this policy seriously due to previous instances, not only within their company but also in other retailers, where employees who intervened were injured or even killed.
The safety of pax and employees must be the lighthouse for all actions, even if the shore is rocky and un-sailable or unassailable. And being responsible for their safety is the bottom line of the captain of the ship that sails those waters!
In normal parlance, the relationship between being responsible for something and being irresponsible can be seen as opposites on a spectrum of behaviour and accountability.
Being responsible for something means taking ownership, demonstrating accountability, and fulfilling obligations or duties associated with a particular task, role, or situation. It involves acting in a manner that is reliable, trustworthy, and conscientious. When someone is responsible, they understand the importance of their actions and strive to meet expectations, make informed decisions, and consider the potential consequences.
On the other hand, being irresponsible refers to a lack of accountability or negligence in fulfilling one’s obligations or duties. It involves behaviours or actions that disregard or neglect the consequences or impact they may have on others or the task at hand. An irresponsible person may fail to meet deadlines, neglect their duties, or act in ways that are careless, thoughtless, or reckless.
Hopefully, the investigation will focus on this aspect of (irr)responsibility both up and down the value (value-add we presume) chain of governance. But we must be responsible when we are irresponsible, and we must not be irresponsible when we fix responsibility. But then again, we must strive for responsibility while also considering the potential consequences of being irresponsible – that we will be held responsible!
Then perhaps, these incidents, that become accidents, intentional or otherwise will not recur. While hope lies eternal, we are often told lies about our eternity! Accidents like these, bring us back down to earth!
Disclaimer
This Article is written in a lighter vein. It hopes to bring a smile to your face, and you must not ascribe motives to its contents. There is no connection to events and characters in real life and if perchance you find, or make a connection with any such real-life event or character, rest assured it’s purely coincidental.
