top of page

By:

Rashmi Kulkarni

23 March 2025 at 2:58:52 pm

Minimum Viable Digitisation

In MSMEs, digitisation fails when it asks for faith. Start where it offers relief. This is the point where many leaders make the costliest mistake: They treat digitisation like a “big bang”. ERP rollout. Full automation. Everything at once. And then they act surprised when the company rejects it. Let me say it plainly: Most MSMEs don’t fail at digitization because of technology. They fail because of adoption. Which Seat? Inherited seat: you’re under pressure to “make it modern” fast. That...

Minimum Viable Digitisation

In MSMEs, digitisation fails when it asks for faith. Start where it offers relief. This is the point where many leaders make the costliest mistake: They treat digitisation like a “big bang”. ERP rollout. Full automation. Everything at once. And then they act surprised when the company rejects it. Let me say it plainly: Most MSMEs don’t fail at digitization because of technology. They fail because of adoption. Which Seat? Inherited seat: you’re under pressure to “make it modern” fast. That pressure pushes you into big moves. Hired seat: you want to justify your hiring with visible transformation. That pushes you into big moves. Promoted seat: you want to prove you can lead beyond operations. That pushes you into big moves. Different seats. Same trap: overreach. UPI vs core banking Think about how India adopted UPI. Most people didn’t wake up one day and say, “I want to digitize my financial life”. They adopted UPI because it was easier  than what they were doing. It reduced pain: no change needed, no long forms, no bank visits, no waiting, instant confirmation. If you compare that to “core banking software”, you’ll see the difference. Core banking is heavy. UPI is light. Core banking asks for trust and patience. UPI offers relief on day one. That’s your lesson for MSMEs: Digitisation should feel like relief, not religion. Right Target Incoming leaders often say: “We need data.” “We need transparency.” “We need ERP.” All of that may be true. But it’s not the starting point. The starting point is: interfaces. Interfaces are the places where work crosses a boundary and things get messy. In MSMEs, disputes usually begin at interfaces: purchase request → approval → PO production completion → dispatch → delivery invoice → follow-up → collection customer promise → production plan → commitment These are the places where: money moves, blame travels, delays hide, exceptions grow WhatsApp becomes the system. So don’t digitise “everything.” Digitise one interface where money moves and disputes begin. Why Interface-First Two well-known ideas explain adoption clearly. Everett Rogers wrote about how innovations spread: people adopt when they see advantage, low risk, and others like them succeeding. They don’t adopt because you announced it. The Technology Acceptance Model (Davis) is even simpler: adoption happens when people feel the tool is useful and easy. In MSME terms: “Will this make my life easier?” “Will this create trouble for me?” “Will I get blamed if it fails?” “Will it slow me down?” If you can answer these questions well, adoption happens. If you can’t, people will smile and bypass. Viable digitisation Minimum viable digitisation means: small scope, clear benefit, low risk, quick proof, easy rollback. It’s not “small thinking”. It’s smart sequencing. The goal of the first digitization is not perfection. The goal is trust. Once the system sees that digitization reduces pain without creating danger, the next step becomes easier. What to digitise If you want a safe starting point, pick one of these interfaces: PO approvals Why it works: delays, confusion, and “who approved what” disputes are common. A simple approval queue reduces follow-ups fast. Dispatch confirmation Why it works: dispatch is where customers start shouting. A simple dispatch status board reduces panic. Collections follow-up Why it works: cash flow stress is universal. A simple overdue list with follow-up notes reduces chaos. Notice these are not “ERP modules”. They are pain points that people already feel. The one thing you must add: rollback safety This is important: in MSMEs, people avoid new systems because they fear getting trapped. So your pilot must include a rollback rule. Not as a threat. As reassurance. Example: “We will run this for 2 weeks. If it increases cycle time, we will roll back.” “We will keep a backup format for emergencies only.” “We will not punish anyone for mistakes during the pilot.” This reduces fear and increases honest participation. (The author is Co-founder at PPS Consulting and a business operations advisor. She helps businesses across sectors and geographies improve execution through global best practices. She could be reached at rashmi@ppsconsulting.biz)

Kolhapur roads need a ‘third eye’ to ensure quality

With civic polls approaching, fresh road works must be put under independent technical scrutiny to prevent a repeat of past failures

Kolhapur: With the drumbeat of the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation (KMC) elections growing louder, the city is once again awash with digital hoardings of aspirants and announcements of fresh development funds. As is customary on the eve of civic polls, political parties are making lofty promises, while boards announcing allocations for asphalted roads have mushroomed across neighbourhoods. The ceremonial breaking of coconuts for these works is imminent.

 

However, given Kolhapur’s long and bitter experience with substandard road works, citizens must insist on a “third eye” — an independent and impartial oversight mechanism — even before the projects begin. Without this, there is a real danger that the asphalt being laid today will be washed away in the very next monsoon.

 

Bad roads have been a chronic affliction for Kolhapur. Over the past three decades, hundreds of crores of rupees have been spent on asphalting roughly 65 km of city roads. Yet, despite this massive public expenditure, the city has been left with roads of consistently poor quality, many of which fail to survive even a single rainy season. While public money has been splurged, and in many cases allegedly siphoned off, Kolhapur’s residents have borne the cost — in damaged vehicles, daily inconvenience and long-term health problems.

 

Road construction has effectively become a political game in the city. Funds collected through citizens’ taxes are openly plundered, and the lure of these lucrative contracts is one of the reasons many are keen to enter the municipal council. Only a few months ago, Kolhapur witnessed controversy surrounding road projects worth nearly Rs 100 crore. This makes it imperative that before any fresh funds are spent, road works are subjected to independent quality control and technical supervision.

 

There was a time when quality mattered. In 1980, during the tenure of the first general body of the KMC, protests were held demanding better roads, including a gherao of the corporation by auto-rickshaw drivers during the mayoral election. Some of the roads constructed then lasted for decades. Today, by contrast, roads barely last a year. There is neither the use of modern technology nor on-site supervision. A contractor-friendly system ensured that officials rarely visited work sites. The pattern has been depressingly familiar: roads deteriorate, citizens protest, inquiry committees are appointed — and nothing comes of it.

 

Generations suffered

Although legal guarantees are taken on paper for road works, the administration has consistently failed to enforce them or blacklist errant contractors. The result is that generations of Kolhapur’s citizens have suffered, quite literally, from back-breaking roads. With elections around the corner, it is time to demand accountability.

 

There are practical solutions. New roads in Kolhapur can adopt plastic-mix technology on the lines of national highways. For quality monitoring, reputed engineering institutions such as IITs, Walchand College of Engineering and KIT could be invited to take on an independent supervisory role through their civil engineering departments. Citizens should also demand display boards at work sites detailing the materials to be used, their quantities and construction methods.

 

Additionally, engineering graduates living in various localities can play a watchdog role by closely monitoring works and reporting deviations to the municipal commissioner. Ideally, the KMC should create an open web portal for real-time reporting and transparency.

 

If such measures are implemented, Kolhapur could replicate the transformation seen in cities like Nagpur and Thane, where sustained improvement in road quality earned then municipal commissioners widespread public acclaim. In fact, Kolhapur’s citizens may not hesitate to accord their civic chief a similar honour — provided the city finally gets roads worthy of a modern urban centre.


Comments

bottom of page