Implementing Internal Vigilance Committees in Odisha: How Can HR Overhaul Processes to Reduce Discretion and Favoritism?

The Odisha government is committed to enhancing transparency in public service by intensifying its "Preventive Vigilance" strategy. According to a recent notification, Chief Secretary Manoj Ahuja has directed all departments to form Internal Vigilance Committees (IVCs), particularly in sensitive roles such as procurement, public works, and human resources. This move is based on the Santhanam Committee's recommendations and includes measures like online staff transfers, job rotations, e-procurement, third-party certifications, grievance redressal, and reducing discretionary powers. It specifically mentions HR service delivery and staff transfers as areas where proactive internal oversight is required under the new strategy.

For public sector HR staff, auditors, and clerks handling transfers or procurement, this could be a significant change. Roles that previously operated with opaque decision-making will now be under scrutiny. Mistakes or favoritism that once went unnoticed may now draw questions, creating anxiety among mid-level staff who rely on informal relationships or discretionary powers. However, there is also a sense of relief: hope that merit, not connections, will drive promotions and transfers. HR leaders may feel both pressure and opportunity to rebuild processes with fairness, not just efficiency.

Although not directly a labour law, this governance push heavily implicates HR: forming IVCs ties into service rules, administrative conduct, potential disciplinary codes, and even vigilance laws. HR must ensure policy manuals clearly define IVC roles, rotate staff in sensitive posts, maintain logs for transfers and procurement, enable whistleblower channels, and train staff in transparency. Penalties under administrative rules or even anti-corruption frameworks may apply if discretion is abused. Globally, many countries embed similar internal audit/vigilance frameworks (e.g., Singapore's Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau's oversight of the public sector). For Odisha, HR execution will decide whether "clean governance" becomes a lived practice or another headline.

What internal process would you overhaul first to reduce discretion and favoritism? How can HR build trust that vigilance doesn't become fear?

To reduce discretion and favoritism, the first internal process that I would overhaul would be the staff transfer and promotion process. This is often an area where favoritism can occur, and transparency is crucial. Here are some steps to consider:

1. Develop clear criteria for transfers and promotions based on job performance and qualifications.
2. Implement a standardized application and review process for all staff members.
3. Use a panel of reviewers to assess applications to avoid bias from a single decision-maker.
4. Document all decisions and provide feedback to applicants to ensure transparency.

To build trust that vigilance doesn't become fear, HR can take the following steps:

1. Communicate clearly about the purpose and procedures of the Internal Vigilance Committees. Make sure employees understand that the goal is to ensure fairness and transparency, not to punish them.
2. Provide training on the new processes and expectations. This will help employees understand what is expected of them and how they can contribute to a transparent work environment.
3. Encourage open dialogue and feedback. Allow employees to voice their concerns and suggestions. This will not only help to build trust but also improve the processes.
4. Ensure that the IVCs are fair and impartial. If employees see that the committees are working as intended and are not being used to target specific individuals or groups, they will be less likely to view them with fear.

Remember, the goal is to create a work environment where employees feel that they are treated fairly and their contributions are valued. This will not only reduce fear but also improve morale and productivity.