top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

‘Bharat Ratna to Savarkar will increase its prestige’

Mumbai: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Sarsanghachalak Dr. Mohan Bhagwat on Sunday threw his full weight behind the long-standing demand to confer the Bharat Ratna on Swatantryaveer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, asserting that the Hindutva ideologue’s inclusion would enhance the dignity of the country’s highest civilian honour. Bhagwat, who explained the genesis and growth of the RSS over past 100 years in two lectures at the Nehru Centre here on Saturday and Sunday, replied to several...

‘Bharat Ratna to Savarkar will increase its prestige’

Mumbai: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Sarsanghachalak Dr. Mohan Bhagwat on Sunday threw his full weight behind the long-standing demand to confer the Bharat Ratna on Swatantryaveer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, asserting that the Hindutva ideologue’s inclusion would enhance the dignity of the country’s highest civilian honour. Bhagwat, who explained the genesis and growth of the RSS over past 100 years in two lectures at the Nehru Centre here on Saturday and Sunday, replied to several questions. While replying to one of the questions, he remarked, “If Swatantraveer Savarkar is given the Bharat Ratna, the prestige of the Bharat Ratna itself will increase.” He was asked, why there has been a delay in conferring the Bharat Ratna on Savarkar, in reply to which, Bhagwat said, “I am not part of that committee. But if I meet someone, I will ask. Even without that honour, he rules the hearts of millions of people.” he added. Social Divisions Bhagwat replied to questions that were clubbed in 14 different groups ranging from national security to environment, social harmony, youth, arts and sports. Whenever the questions suggested or expressed expectations that the RSS should do certain things, Bhagwat stressed on the involvement of the society and initiative from the society in resolving the problems. While addressing the critical issue of Uniform Civil Code, Bhagwat stated that the UCC should be framed by taking everyone into confidence and must not lead to social divisions. In the same way while replying to the question related to illegal migrants in the country, Bhagwat urged people to “detect and report” the “illegal infiltrators” to the police. He also urged people not to give them any employment and to be more “vigilant.” Backing SIR He highlighted that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise has already revealed the “foreigners” living in the country. “The government has a lot to do regarding infiltration. They have to detect and deport. This wasn’t happening until now, but it has started little by little, and it will gradually increase. When the census or the SIR is conducted, many people come to light who are not citizens of this country; they are automatically excluded from the process,” he said. “But we can do one thing: we can work on detection. Their language gives them away. We should detect them and report them to the appropriate authorities. We should inform the police that we suspect these people are foreigners, and they should investigate and keep an eye on them, and we will also keep an eye on them. We will not give employment to any foreigner. If someone is from our country, we will give them employment, but not to foreigners. You should be a little more vigilant and aware,” he added. SC Chief Emphasising the inclusivity of the Sangh, he said that anyone can become ‘Sarsanghchalak’ (RSS chief), including the SC and STs, as the decision is solely dependent on the work that any individual put for the organisation. “Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra or Brahmin does not qualify for the Sarsanghchalak position (RSS Chief), a Hindu will become the one who works and is best available. A Hindu will become, and that can also be an SC or ST. Anyone can become it depends on the work. Today, if you see, all classes have representation in the Sangh. The decision is taken on the basis of one who works and is best available,” he said. He pointed out that when the RSS was founded, its work began in a Brahmin-dominated community and hence, most of its founders were Brahmins, which led to the organisation being labelled as a Brahmin outfit at the time. People always look for an organisation that has representatives from their community, he said. “If I were to choose a chief, I would go by the ‘best available candidate’ criterion. When I was appointed RSS chief, there were many best candidates, but they were not available. I was the one who could be relieved from duties and appointed,” he said. He said that to belong to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe communities is not a disqualification, and neither is being a Brahmin a qualification to become the RSS chief. Ready to step down if Sangh asks for Dr. Mohan Bhagwat on Sunday said the Sangh had asked him to continue working despite his age, while stressing that he would step down from the post whenever the organisation directs him to do so. “There is no election to the post of RSS chief. Regional and divisional heads appoint the chief. Generally, it is said that after turning 75, one should work without holding any post,” Bhagwat said. “I have completed 75 years and informed the RSS, but the organisation asked me to continue working. Whenever the RSS asks me to step down, I will do so, but retirement from work will never happen,” he said.

The Hidden Prerequisites for AI Leverage

Multipliers don’t create direction. They amplify what already exists

Over the last two weeks, we’ve done something most AI conversations avoid. We’ve slowed down. First we acknowledged the truth founders don’t usually say aloud: AI isn’t a cure. It’s a diagnostic.


In Week 2, Rashmi took us inside real operations and showed where AI breaks first: SOP gaps, unclear inputs, broken handoffs.


This week, I want to address the question that quietly follows both pieces: If AI is not the engine of change, then what actually creates leverage? The answer is uncomfortable, especially in a year obsessed with tools. Leverage doesn’t come from intelligence. It comes from conditions.


Why tools don’t create leverage on their own

Founders often ask me, “Which AI tool should we standardise on?” But that question skips a more important one: “What must already be true in our business for any tool to help?” Because AI doesn’t generate value in isolation. It multiplies whatever system it is plugged into.


If the system is stable, AI accelerates outcomes. If the system is fragile, AI accelerates noise. This is why some businesses see dramatic gains from very simple AI use cases, while others struggle even after large investments. The difference isn’t ambition or intelligence. It’s readiness.


Condition 1: Stable processes, not heroic execution

In many SMEs, outcomes depend on who handled the work, not how the work is designed. The best performer becomes the process. Everyone else “manages somehow.” Humans are surprisingly good at compensating for this. They remember exceptions. They improvise. They fix things quietly. AI cannot.


For AI to add leverage, work must be stable enough that two different people can do it the same way and get roughly the same result. Not perfect … just predictable. This doesn’t require a consulting-grade process manual. It requires one honest answer to a simple question:


“If someone new joined tomorrow, would they know the one right way this is done?” If the answer is no, AI won’t help yet. It will only surface the inconsistency faster.


Condition 2: Clear decision rights, not more information

Most SMEs don’t suffer from lack of data or ideas. They suffer from lack of closure. Decisions float. Approvals are implicit. Founders become the final checkpoint. AI is excellent at generating options. But options without decision rights create paralysis, not speed.


For AI to create leverage, three things must be clear: 1) who decides, 2) on what basis, and 3) when the decision is considered final Without this, AI increases the volume of suggestions, reports, and analysis—but execution still stalls.


Leverage comes not from knowing more, but from deciding faster once the information is good enough.


Condition 3: Data discipline, not “more data”

Most businesses don’t have a data shortage. They have a trust problem. Ask three people the same question about price, delivery date, inventory and you’ll get three answers. Each answer has a story. Each story feels valid. AI doesn’t resolve this. It confidently responds based on whatever inputs it sees.


So, the question is not, “Is our data perfect?” It’s, “Which data must be right for this decision to work?”


AI leverage begins when a business agrees on:

  • a small set of critical fields

  • a single source of truth

  • and clear ownership for keeping those fields accurate


This discipline is boring. It’s also non-negotiable. Without it, AI becomes a well-spoken guesser and founders return to verifying everything themselves.


Condition 4: Rhythm and review loops, not constant monitoring

One reason founders feel exhausted is that the business has no visible rhythm. Everything is urgent. Nothing is truly reviewed. Issues surface only when they become painful. AI doesn’t fix this. In fact, it can make it worse by creating the illusion that “everything is being tracked”.


Leverage comes when a business has:

  • a weekly cadence for reviewing key work

  • clear checkpoints where output is evaluated

  • and predictable moments where problems are surfaced early


When these rhythms exist, AI becomes useful support … summarising, flagging, highlighting. Without them, AI just adds another stream of activity to monitor.


The reframe that matters AI is not an engine that pulls your business forward. It is a multiplier. Multipliers don’t create direction. They amplify what already exists. This is why two companies using the same tools can experience completely different outcomes. One has conditions in place. The other doesn’t. And this is also why rushing to “scale AI” often backfires.


You can’t multiply chaos into clarity. A grounded starting point If you’re wondering where to begin, don’t start with AI strategy. Start with one workflow. Just one. Stabilise it. Clarify ownership. Define inputs. Install a review rhythm. Then and only then introduce AI into that slice of work. When AI works there, you’ll know why. And when it doesn’t, you’ll know what to fix. That’s leverage.


(The writer works with founders and second-generation leaders to design operating systems where growth strengthens people, not exhausts them.)

Comments


bottom of page