UPSC Essentials | Expert talk : Is lateral entry a disadvantage for Civil Services?

About our Expert: Ravi Kapoor (Ex-IRS) offers free quality mentorship to UPSC aspirants, drawing upon his ten years of experience to create customised and productive curriculum. Through a free mentorship programme, he integrates tailored educational materials, psychological principles, visual learning techniques, and a strong emphasis on mental well-being into his teaching skills granting aspirants a chance to learn from his expertise.

JUST FYI: What is ‘lateral entry’ into government?

NITI Aayog, in its three-year Action Agenda, and the Sectoral Group of Secretaries (SGoS) on Governance in its report submitted in February 2017, recommended the induction of personnel at middle and senior management levels in the central government. These ‘lateral entrants’ would be part of the central secretariat which in the normal course has only career bureaucrats from the All India Services/ Central Civil Services.

A Joint Secretary, appointed by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC), has the third highest rank (after Secretary and Additional Secretary) in a Department, and functions as administrative head of a wing in the Department. Directors are a rank below that of Joint Secretary.

Q. Why or why not lateral entry disadvantageous/discouraging for aspirants who want to clear the exam and go to higher ranks?

Lateral entry into government positions is not a disadvantage for UPSC aspirants aiming for higher ranks. Firstly, lateral entry is based on specific requisitions from various ministries, and it does not affect the number of seats available for direct recruitment through UPSC.

Moreover, promotions for UPSC recruits are batch-based, ensuring no direct competition with lateral entrants. The purpose of lateral entry is to bring in specialized expertise, often requiring specific technical qualifications and extensive experience. This initiative enhances governance by filling niche roles that demand deep subject matter knowledge, complementing rather than competing with the traditional UPSC route.

Anyone who has read the qualification criteria for lateral entrants in the recent UPSC advertisement will see that the level of expertise required is very high and only the brightest and best in their fields will meet it. That criterion also means no generalist officer is likely to have the experience required for that specific role thereby making lateral entries for those positions not only a good but an imperative idea.

Q. What do you think of ‘lateral entry’ as the core of debate: expertise vs generalist or specialty vs lack of public service experience?

Lateral entry into civil services should be encouraged, especially given the growing need for specialization in government roles. Currently, top posts are predominantly held by generalist officers, but UPSC lateral entry, as seen in the advertisement few days back, targeted specific technical positions that require specialized knowledge. This approach complements the existing career-based direct entry system, rather than replacing it, addressing the need for expertise in fields that are becoming increasingly complex.

However, the debate around lateral entry often shifts from expertise vs. lack of public service experience to concerns about bypassing the reservation system.

The recent recall of the government’s lateral entry advertisement appears to be driven by political interests under the guise of social justice, rather than a genuine assessment of the policy’s merit.

The fundamental logic of lateral entry is sound—when considering roles like pilots or surgeons, the focus is on technical skill and expertise, not reservation status.

There are, however, valid counterarguments. Lateral entrants, often appointed for shorter tenures, may lack the long-term commitment and loyalty that permanent civil servants develop. Moreover, potential conflicts of interest between public service and private sector backgrounds could influence decision-making. To mitigate these risks, the selection process by UPSC must be transparent, and contractual clauses should address conflicts of interest, enforce non-disclosure agreements, and ensure accountability.

In conclusion, lateral entry for specialist positions should prioritize efficiency over equity. An efficient bureaucracy is ultimately more effective in delivering social justice than reserving specialized jobs for particular categories. The focus should remain on bringing in the best talent to serve the public interest effectively.

Q. Should we not think of strengthening the bureaucracy rather than hiring the ‘outsiders’?

Strengthening the bureaucracy can actually be achieved by bringing in ‘outsiders,’ especially those with technical specializations. For instance, when dealing with policy matters related to genetically modified seeds, the input of a microbiologist is invaluable. Diversity in perspectives is crucial. Research consistently shows that diverse teams outperform homogeneous ones in problem-solving and innovation. Lateral entrants, particularly those from the private sector, can infuse the bureaucracy with fresh ideas and innovative approaches, which are often lacking in government institutions.

Moreover, countries like Japan have successfully integrated lateral entry into their bureaucratic systems, demonstrating that such a model can work effectively.

The private sector’s emphasis on efficiency and innovation is something the public sector can benefit from, and lateral entrants bring that much-needed perspective.

A permanent bureaucracy, on the other hand, can often lead to red tape, entitlement, and entrenched corruption—a legacy of the colonial era. Moving away from this rigid structure and embracing lateral entry can help modernize our bureaucracy, making it more dynamic, responsive, and efficient. Therefore, hiring ‘outsiders’ is not a threat to the bureaucracy but a means to strengthen it by introducing new expertise, fostering innovation, and breaking the cycle of bureaucratic stagnation.

Q. What is needed to make civil services efficient other than lateral entry?

The question has been extensively addressed by the Administrative Reforms Commission, Finance Commission, and various expert committees. What is needed is to implement these suggestions effectively not just in letter but also in spirit. Political will and bureaucratic competence should go hand in hand to make civil services robust. Constant evaluation of the system is essential and bringing changes which suits the time is necessary not just for the good of civil services but ultimately for the good of India. This should be the vision of everyone, including Civil Services Aspirants.

🚨 The Indian Express UPSC Essentials brings to you the August edition of its monthly magazine. Click Here to read. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com🚨

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.

Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – Indian Express UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.

For your queries and suggestions write at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com.