'the Best Place To Work/' The Iisc Director On The 100 Years Gone ...
'The Best Place To Work'
The IISc director on the 100 years gone by and the 100 years ahead
Sugata Srinivasaraju interviews Prof P. Balaram
How does it feel at 100? What thoughts pass your mind?
I think a hundred is a very special milestone for an Indian institution, because
100 years encompass
the most important period of modern Indian history. It encompasses several
decades before and after
Independence. Therefore a century of the Institute is in many ways a century of
science and
technology development in India.
What are those factors in these 100 years that has made IISc a premier
institution of science?
The most interesting thing about IISc is its history. Its origins are set at a time
when there was no
scientific research of note in India.
"The absence of a nobel winner isn't worrying. One would like to raise the whole
level of
performance."
This was the very first decade of the 20th century. The institute evolved very
slowly. In
a sense, if one uses a biological analogy, it has been shaped by environmental
pressures. IISc has
responded to the changing environment in a gradual manner. It has been
invested with a degree of stability and solidity which may not be always available
to institutions that have grown
rapidly over a short period of time.
Can you elaborate on these 'environmental' pressures?
For example every dept of the institute in the early days was set up as a
response to some need of
the surroundings. The institute itself began with one department of chemistry
and one department of
electrical technology. So, it had one science and one engineering department.
This was to serve the
needs of the growing chemical industry at that time and also the increasing need
for power. This was
a 100 years ago. The bio-chemistry department was set up later, when it became
apparent that research
in nutrition and on food was critical. The physics department came to being when
C V Raman became the
first Indian director and he brought in this component of basic research.
Before Raman was it a technology-oriented place?
It was not technology-oriented, but it was an institute that was oriented towards
research, which had
applications in the immediate surroundings. The early bio-chemistry work that
was done for example
was done on sandalwood, which is of great importance in Karnataka. But during
the Second World War,
when it became apparent that there was a great need for industrial growth in
India, as well as the
recognition that Independence was not far away, the board of scientific and
industrial research was
set up in India. The institute actually grew in a dramatic manner with many
engineering departments
being established at that time. So, if you look at most engineering departments
here they were set up
in the 40s and some in the early 50s.
So, a new nation was creating new pressures?
Yes. Significantly, this was long before the IITs were conceived. If you look at the
history of
development of engineering education you will find, the true source of the
intellectual capital for
setting up the IITs came from the institute. Although they were set up with foreign
aid, the people
who went to man them were from here. Prof. J.C. Ghosh, the first director of IIT
Kharagpur, the first
IIT to be set up, went from here. He was the director here. He was the one who
set up many of the
engineering departments here. The first director of IIT Kanpur, P K Kelkar, was an
alumnus of the
institute. All the national laboratories that came up -- the CFTRI, the Dept of
Atomic Energy and
ISRO among many others -- have either been conceived, or in their genesis been
helped, or during
their gestation period maintained from the institute.
In the 100 years of its life is there something that the IISc should have done, but
didn't do?
When you look back at a lifetime for individuals, you can have a regret. You might
have done this or
you might have done that. But I don't think that institutions look back the same
way.
Institutions shape differently, they evolve differently. Institutions do not make
conscious
decisions. The decision or directions are many times made by external factors. So
I don't think
institutions can look back on their history with any regret and say this should
have been done and
that should have been done. In fact, what institutions should do is look ahead and
ask what should be
done. We are using the centenary year in many ways not only to reflect on the
past but also to think
a little bit about the future.
The environment in Bangalore in recent years is filled with technology, do you
see pure science
surviving?
I take somewhat a more detached view with respect to this apparent loss of
interest in pure science.
This is largely because in urban centres people sense opportunities in others
directions. The flame
of pure science must be kept burning only by a relatively small group of people.
The phenomenon you
are seeing is really an urban phenomenon. It is not the phenomenon of small
towns. Certainly not a
rural phenomenon where there is no exposure to either science or technology. I
think we have a very
large resource in our population. It is a matter of how innovatively we tap this
human resource.
A student today, given a choice between an IIT and the IISc, would want to join an
IIT, although they
know getting into the IISc is very big. How do you look at this?
IITs and the IISc are not competing institutions. They are in many ways
complementary institutions.
IISc is unique in the sense it is primarily a postgraduate institution. We don't
really offer
undergraduate degrees here as yet. While the IITs are predominantly
undergraduate institutions,
although they do have a significant postgraduate presence in some departments.
We are in some ways a
more research-oriented institution. We look at other institutions as a source for
our students. We
would like to attract students who have graduated from colleges, universities and
also IITs.
Is there a crisis of finding good students?
I don't really know if there is a crisis of good students or if there is a crisis of
appropriately
trained students. Human beings, if looked at as raw material, don't vary
enormously. They are
reasonably good people. They must be trained properly. The real problem is that
training in schools
and colleges has deteriorated, essentially because the teaching profession has
not been well regarded
or rewarded, both in terms of respect and remuneration.
Is this because of some lopsided development of some technology industries that
has taken away all
the talent?
I may be in the minority on this, but I wouldn't call it lopsided development. When
an industry
explodes, as the IT industry has exploded, it obviously means that they are on to
a good thing. It
provides enormous sources of employment and improvement in economic
conditions for large sections of
populations. Therefore I will not grudge the explosion of any sector of industry at
all. I would say
more power to them. But I would think that the education sector must look at
itself with a
significant degree of introspection. They should ask the question if they have
been attractive
enough. Do they make things exciting enough for students?
Does the IISc have any plan in place to attract good teachers and students?
We are thinking of some initiatives. We would like to get college and university
teachers to come
here and spend time and become familiar with the research activity that takes
place here. This will
enable the researchers and teachers to have some connection with one another.
This is very important.
In the old days the UGC would run a lot of summer schools. We ourselves used to
run a lot of them
here. Over the years many of these have fallen into disuse.
There are many attempts to revive them with fresh inputs and by giving fresh
names.
There is a very humanising aura about the IISc, how has it come about?
I spent all my adult life in IISc. You can't find a better place to work. It has a
wonderful
ambience. People are free to do what they want. By and large the discourse here
is gentle. Many many
people in IISc are involved in their work. They like what they are doing. They are
completely
involved in it. They are happiest when they are pursuing their research. If more
number of people are
happy, their happiness contributes to the ambience of the place. An academic
research institution is
a wonderful place. However lowdown in the academic hierarchy, there is nobody
telling you what to do.
You are really in many ways marching to your own tune.
Did the involvement of people like J N Tata, Vivekananda or the very benevolent
Mysore Maharaja at
the inception of the institute alter its course? Did it make a difference to the way
the institute
shaped? Did these great men set the tone?
I don't think individuals matter. In fact, if you look carefully at the archival
material, you will
realise that the institute has gone through a very turbulent phase. It is just that
that turbulence
has vanished into history. People don't know about it. Newspapers and magazines
remember turbulence
that are current. The mandate of the institute is to provide an environment in
which people do their
research and work in areas of interest to them. This gives them a freedom that is
unparalleled. I
don't grudge anybody's high salary, because for all you know he may be doing
something he does not
like. He may be really earning his salary. Here you are paid to do what you like to
do. That is not
very common.
Without the intellectual capital of IISc do you think Bangalore would have become
a IT hub or would
so many public sector industries flourished here?
The institute has contributed to the growth of Bangalore in a very imperceptible
way over a long
period of time. Let me give you an example. We had the country's first aerospace
department. Now, HAL
grew from people who went from here. NAL came later and lot of people there,
past and present, were
alumini of this place. If you take the space department, Prof. Dhawan made ISRO
what it is today,
because Vikram Sarabhai died prematurely. But Sarabhai himself was associated
with the institute. The
same is true for electronics industry and many aspects of IT industry.
Does it hurt you that Bangalore's reputation as a science city has been
submerged by the tag IT city?
People in the scientific community get rankled about this?
No, I don't get rankled. If tomorrow Bangalore acquired the tag of film city or
something else, why
should I worry? A city must have growth in all directions. The institute is quite
secure that way.
The institute is part of the old tradition of the city and I think the old tradition of
the city
would survive.
The Nobel Prize is not a criterion to judge an institution, but still, it is pointed out
that the
IISc has not produced a Nobel-laureate.
I can only tell you my personal views. I wouldn't worry about it at all. Although
the Nobel prize is
the best known among scientific recognitions, it is given to very few people.
There are a lot of
people in the US who should have got the Nobel but have not. There are some
people in India who
should have got a Nobel prize but did not get it at a time they should have got it.
The question is,
suppose they had got a Nobel prize, would India have been tremendously
different today? May be not.
It may have provided us with an immediate burst of energy and enthusiasm. I still
hope it will happen
someday. Someone in India will get the Nobel prize. It would be a little like Abinav
Bindra getting a
gold medal at the Olympics. You can ask, now in general will it lead to Indians
doing well in sports?
Will it lead to getting 50 gold medals in 20 years time? I would say I don't know. I
wouldn't worry
about the Nobel prize. When you are talking about the Nobel prize you are talking
about peaks. You
can have peaks over pretty barren landscape too. On the other hand, what one
would want to do is to
raise the level of this landscape itself.
Where does the institute go from here? Also, you are presiding over a historical
moment.
I am conscious of one thing. These sorts of anniversaries put a great deal of
pressure on individuals
and sometimes I think you happen to be present at an anniversary by accident.
As far as the institute
is concerned, we would now like the institute to modernise in a major way. We
have begun the process
of modernising our laboratories. We want the next generation of researchers to
be doing research in
laboratory surroundings that are distinctly more competitive from what we have
had till now. We are
also investing in new areas. We are making investments in areas of nano
electronics, nano science,
and areas of biology. We are constructing new buildings for the aersopace and
physics departments. We
are also putting into motion programmes that will bring many more international
scientists to come
and work here for reasonable periods. We want to increase international presence
here and make it
more heterogeneous. And we would like to expand in some other areas too. We
are looking at the
possibility of creating an inter-disciplinary research centre where we hope
biologists, physicists,
computer scientists, electronics and electrical engineers and people from other
fields would all work
together on some important problem of great practical use. One area that has
been identified is
energy and materials. Also synthetic biology. Last year, we created a centre for
earth sciences and
are in the process of creating a centre for neuroscience. My personal hope is that
we should be able
to expand the component of bio-medical research. Another programme that is
still being talked about
is if we should actually create an undergraduate programme as a bridge between
science and
engineering and try to create a unique programme that is not available
elsewhere.
Is there some scope for humanities and social sciences in the institute's plans for
the future?
This is again my personal view. Every place which is devoted predominantly to
science and technology
would vastly benefit by having a small section that dealt with humanities and
social sciences. In
fact, the setting up of the archives at the institute is itself an attempt to hope
some historians of
science would come and spend time here. We started a centre for contemporary
studies sometime ago to
bridge this gap, but these are still small efforts. I hope we will be able to do more.
