Shailaja Chandra's Blog

IAS interviewees – better off unbeautiful

The IAS interviews are presently in progress and thereby hangs a tale. The Economist (April 2012) has reported a research study “don’t hate me because I’m beautiful.” It describes research conducted by two Israeli academics who examined the end result of 2500 job applications after sending similar resumes, (one with photo and one without) in response to real-life vacancies.

For women, they found that attractive females were less likely to be offered an interview if the resume had a photograph; also a plain-looking woman would get called far sooner than her attractive rival. First the “dumb blonde” hypotheses was investigated assuming that beautiful women are generally considered brainless. But no correlation was found between perceived intellect and comeliness. In this particular study since those responsible for issuing the interview letters were predominantly women, the inevitable conclusion drawn was that old-fashioned jealousy had led the women screeners to discriminate against pretty aspirants.

I was tempted to probe this a little further for the IAS related “juicy” reason I give at the end of this article. But first let’s also see what another research study “Beautiful people have higher IQs”- has to say – this time investigated by Satoshi Kanazawa at the London School of Economics. Published in 2011 in the Journal Intelligence, the study was conducted on 52,000 individuals from the UK and the US. It strongly suggested that men and women who are physically attractive generally have dramatically higher IQs than their less attractive counterparts!

More specifically, attractive men had IQs which were more than 13 points above the mean and attractive women had IQs which were more than 11 points above the mean.

This news bothered me – having watched all kinds of women in all kinds of managerial positions succeeding occasionally, but mostly failing as their careers were blocked for a variety of reasons. The LSE study made me wonder whether lots of pretty women might indeed have missed the bus despite being more intelligent than their competitors-simply because they were attractive. I also wondered whether the converse could also be true – whether the interview boards in fact preferred ugly women with lower IQs.

Let me come now to the juicy bit – (if the Chief of Army Staff can do it, why not me?) It was some 5 years ago when this unfortunate episode transpired. I instantly took a vow never to join the IAS interview panels set up by the Union Public Service Commission. On that day as a member of the IAS interview board, I was captivated by the charm and quick-wittedness of a cheerful young woman who smiled her way through the interview as she gave articulate, confident responses to most questions asked.

That included “I do not know the answer” which she said with aplomb, adding “what I do know is …” with equal panache. I pencilled 80 per cent for her interview, happy to do justice to a deserving candidate. Her perfect equanimity, bright eyes and fashionable hair cut were unruffled by a volley of technical questions fired at her by the Chairman of the Board, something he had not done to anyone else over the preceding four days.

But imagine my shock when he announced stodgily that she was worth only 47 per cent even before asking the other members what they thought! It was unbelievable! I used all the persuasion at my command arguing why the candidate was really sound material for holding public office- but to no avail. “She was just bubbly and she could not answer my questions,” he said, pushing his spectacles above his forehead with visible annoyance.

“Oh but this interview is not expected to be a test of knowledge”, I persisted. It is to assess the candidate’s overall personality and fitness to join a premier service,” I argued. “I have given her 80 per cent.”

The Chairman looked at the other two advisers. Their pencils were hovering over the single sheet of white sheet of paper we were given. “45 per cent”, they said in predictable unison.

I doubt whether the young lady made it into the IAS which was her first preference. She had been beaten by her beauty and poise – provocative for elderly men accustomed to the behenji look in the women they had known through their own careers. The kati bal appearance and the winsome smile had been this candidate’s undoing; clearly she did not know her place in life and deserved low marks in the interview to unquestionably shear her chances of making it into the IAS!

Recalling my own batch, I remember two oddities perfectly. A woman without much pulchritude (Economist’s long word for beauty) got 96 per cent by singing her way through the IAS interview – an unsurpassed record to this day! Slightly off the point, but in a new-found zeal to put down colonial symbols of public school education, a male candidate with an ICS pedigree who later rose to become Minister Economic in the Indian Embassy at Washington, was given 45 per cent by the same Board!

Is it not time that research was done into the predisposition of UPSC interview boards to plump for certain types of candidates to the exclusion of others?

Citizens’ right to public space

There’s limit to sacrificing it for personal security

We live in a country which treats public space as charity for its citizens. Most urban areas are overtaken by congestion, pollution and chaos. But the few exceptions still left were the immaculate green spaces of Chandigarh and Delhi celebrated for their elegant tree-lined avenues. Over the years these too have been degraded with tents and porta cabins that house security personnel guarding politicians, judges, the police brass itself and bureaucrats. But recently the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which has been hearing a PIL, has successfully overseen the removal of a majority of such encumbrances on public space. Unfortunately in Delhi, the phenomenon of security personnel occupying sidewalks meant for pedestrians and cyclists continues, despite numerous solutions having been proposed.

To be fair, let us hear the version of the main protagonist — the security police. Indeed, if there is a threat perception and the individual falls into the XYZ categories the police has no option but to post the posse of policemen outside his house, as prescribed. When the “protectee” (in police parlance) disallows habitation inside the boundary of his bungalow, (notwithstanding a 2-3 acre expanse being available where umpteen personal offices have been built,) the only option available to the security boss is to locate the guards outside the perimeter. And that explains why most options are closed.

Now let us consider it from the point of view of the citizen. In other countries, the man on foot is treated like God. Pedestrian walkways and street furniture are specially designed for smooth, uninterrupted walking. Benches are placed conveniently where one can eat a sandwich or read a book. There are no tents and porta cabins anywhere. That is because the citizens guard their open spaces fiercely and place a high value on easy access to sidewalks. But consider just one sidewalk on Tilak Marg, New Delhi — the address of the Supreme Court of India. It is the main artery for international visitors driving to Rajghat, to the Red Fort and Jama Masjid. A third of Delhi’s population destined for ITO and old Delhi drive through Tilak Marg. Even so, for the last 20 years a porta cabin with its line of washed underwear strung between two trees is one of the sights on view.

Certainly it is not the fault of the five police personnel who have no option but to eat, sleep, bathe and wash their clothes on the sidewalk of Tilak Marg dressed or undressed. With temperatures soaring beyond 43 degrees Celsius, it must be a torture. When asked why the ‘protectee’ could not be relocated in a gated complex with adequate space for security guards, a senior police friend said, “None of them will agree to move to such complexes. And should there be a terror attack, the sentry on duty will shout and four men will immediately leap in and crush the intruder.”

A former police commissioner of Delhi, Mr T R Kakkar, was fortunately more realistic. “It is possible to house security guards within the nearest police station. The police stations in the NDMC area have the space. One sentry could be stationed for two hours at a time with modern communication systems to alert the security guards at the police station. Where foliage is not a problem CCTV cameras can be used. PCR patrolling can do the rest. It would be a boon for the boys.”

Security obstacles also include the stacks of unsightly sand bags that have sprung up all over Delhi. Roosevelt House (American Embassy) is one of the most emblematic buildings in Delhi’s diplomatic enclave surrounded by tree-lined streets. But every nook and corner is dotted with ugly sand bags intended to protect the security personnel as they fight picketers and terrorists. In other countries they use barricades and stainless steel bollards which move up and down to prevent vehicles from gaining entry until screened. Setting up such bollards might be a better answer than stacking heaps of sand bags to conduct warfare.

The good news reported by police friends is that the majority of the people who once refused security guards inside the perimeter of their houses have begun co-operating — at last. The second good news is that the NDMC is not permitting new security structures on their roads. The third good news is that the number of non-entitled persons who had earlier grabbed security cover has declined considerably; not comparable perhaps to the Punjab government which has slashed security cover from several entrenched hangers-on.

The bad news at least for Delhi is that the quest for personal security is no longer confined to police protection. Porta cabins stand outside most homes in South Delhi blocking footpaths and forcing the elderly and children to walk on the main road. While many private security guards gamble, drink, smoke and play cards, their presence has become indispensable. But when residents engage private security not just to guard the house but to pilot their masters much like ‘Z’ category security guards it becomes cause for concern. The SUV carcade flashing a string of lights (strictly prohibited under the Motor Vehicles Act) zoom through the colony creating a huge ruckus. The accompanying security guards wearing black bandanas have barred residents from entering their own apartments. Such was their hooliganism that an aggrieved resident of Delhi’s prestigious Defence Colony approached Delhi’s Public Grievance Commission to intercede. He received the commission’s support but if this is the shape that private security takes, citizens have a brand new problem on their hands.

In a democracy, of all freedoms, the freedom to move without hindrance in public and private space is among the most highly regarded. Public order is critical for stability but in the zeal to maintain public order those in authority must strike a balance between individual security on the one hand and important public freedoms on the other. Citizens have a right to determine acceptable levels to which their rights should be sacrificed in the name of personal security. It is time all agencies put their heads together to ensure that the citizens’ interest remained uppermost.n