How is it possible for three of the world's ten richest people[1] to base their fortunes in a country with staggering poverty[2], immense pollution problems, dwindling water supply, stressed (if even existent) infrastructure, and 1.1 billion mouths to feed?
Certainly India's growth is remarkable and global industry leaders are recognized names (ArcelorMittal, Reliance, Wipro, Infosys). Anecdotally, its at hotels where you can most feel the impact of India's rapid shift from exotic tourist destination to must-have experience for any aspiring business leader, and where even four-star rooms can cost $300. Is it sustainable? I don't believe so. At least not in export-related manufacturing, and not the way things run today. Don't get me wrong...I don't doubt for a minute that India will loom large even in the lives of my children, if only because of its already massive and still growing middle class and their consumerism. But India has issues to contend with in order for a) its companies to continue ascending and competing on a global-scale, and b) for the country's growth to not overrun its already overextended capabilities.
In my opinion, companies that chose to source products and services from India are and will have to look elsewhere to satisfy their need for quality, low-cost production. In fact Indian companies themselves will need to do so. I have heard pundits say that low cost production is moving from China to India, but I fail to see what the net benefit of that will be (lack of a supporting, and clustered, infrastructure as China has, matched increases in labor costs etc). In my old industry the period of low-cost advantage and tolerable margins has all but disappeared under quality and reliability complaints, shipping costs and rapidly rising production costs (labor, raw materials, and energy inflation, all of which seemed to increase at higher rates in India than in the higher-cost countries we were manufacturing for). Its at the point where customers and the Indian industry itself, are knocking on China's door. India needs a period of consolidation, and time to optimize processes, systems, infrastructure and beliefs, before it can continue its break-neck pace of growth. What needs to be addressed?
Free & Fast Money
Though debt financing generally is expensive and hard to secure, India's government provides plenty of incentives for anyone to start a business, regardless of expertise. Combined with the massive inflow of foreign investment, they prevent capital discipline, encourage quantity over quality, and create excess capacity. Government subsidies take many forms, and are evident for activities across the value-chain, with some examples following[3].
Volume-based subsidies that encourage production, and export, above all else:
APEDA (Agriculture and Processed Food Export Development Agency) provides a freight rebate for every container exported.[4] The Vishesh Krishi Upaj Yojana (VKUY) scheme provides duty relief equivalent to 5% of the FOB value of exports.
Both APEDA and the MFPI (Ministry of Food Processing Industries) provide construction/cap-ex based subsidies that encourage an almost reckless expansion of capacity. A duty rebate is provided for all imported equipment, and a capital rebate for installing enabling infrastructure like cold-rooms or on-site microbial-testing labs.
Through MFPI and other vehicles, agriculture-based subsidies are dolled to farmers for seeds, electricity, fertilizer, and bank loans. Fertilizer subsidies alone cost over $4.3 billion in 2006-2007 and the central government issues special bonds to oil, food and fertilizer firms to offset losses incurred by selling at lower state-set prices.
J P Morgan expects these, and many other subsidies, to increase the government's liabilities by a staggering 2-2.5 % of GDP.[5] Even the cost of plastic crates, used extensively across the food chain, can be claimed for rebate. Though India's taxation policy is onerous (below), here the government is also generous: export-related profits, for 100% Export Oriented Units, are tax free; and buyers in EOU companies pay no sales tax raw materials purchased from companies that declare all their supply is for ultimate use in only exported products.
In so far as availability of capital, a good indicator of the interest in India is Private and Venture capital. Venture capitalists invested $928 million in 80 deals for entrepreneurial companies in India during 2007. [6] And from January to May of 2008, around 151 deals aggregating to $5.5 billion were concluded. [7] Since the 2005 highly publicized and profitable exit from Bharti Telecom by Warburg Pincus, every mid to large PE firm, and lately even focused small firms, have established presence in India. Consider that India is a $trillion economy, so money is there.
The first problem with this largess is a lack of capital discipline. Management (and even Promoters) is not encouraged to be stewards of investors' money. Almost willingly (see below on corruption) companies over pay for construction / services, have less vigilance on family-dealings, and have fewer demands on quality (since speed to market matters more). The outcome is felt afterwards: inadequate warehouses, lower than expected capacity, excessive down-time, frequent repairs, and ad-hoc work-arounds, all with a knock-on effect to quality, dissatisfied customers, inordinate time spent on problem solving, loss of accounts, and loss of long-term credibility.
The second outcome is lack of quality discipline. Look at the case of Suzlon, India's much ballyhooed wind-turbine manufacturer, in a problem that as been printed twice in the Wall Street Journal, most recently on June 30th. Its own Private Equity owners have said, "[Mr. Tanti] knew the window was open so he charged like crazy." Suzlon's spokesman said, "The product issues notwithstanding, we don't expect any major impact upon our sales." It will cost $30 million to fix problems, on revenues of $3.1 billion. This is no small problem. Edison Mission Energy canceled an order for 150 turbines because Suzlon was unable to determine the cause of blade cracking. The approach is commonplace, in my opinion, in Indian business. First exploit cost advantages to gain market share, then figure out how to make a good product. R&D follows marketing, and sales. Customers will not tolerate this for long.
The final outcome is that it creates artificially low barriers to entry. Promoters are encouraged to enter new businesses at the top of the value chain (from where the greatest hand-out gain can be had). But, rarely is the rest of the value-chain ready, and this forces short-term actions and ultimately sub-par quality as supply-vendors eschew effective processes to pursue volume. At the same time, there is hardly an industry in the world that can, without disruptions to pricing and quality, rapidly absorb the capacity created by these new entrants.
What happens if it all stops? Already, there is significant pressure at the WTO level to resolve the issue.[8] This is not to say that other countries, including the USA, do not subsidize. But, more to the point, just how much can the government afford? India is already forecast to run a crushing budget deficit of 9.4% of GDP.[9] Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has stated that India needs $450 billion in just infrastructure spending to sustain its growth[10] (NB India is a $1 trillion economy).
Waste
Firstly, water is India's most important, and most wasted resource. Farmers in some of the most fertile parts of India pay nothing for electricity, encouraging reckless pumping of water over poorly laid fields that allow much of it to trickle away (India spends twice as much on subsidizing electricity for farmers as it does on education[11]). Yet farmer suicides from the growing debt of larger pumps and failed crops are a serious problem. To quote, "...the ground here in India's fertile breadbasket is beginning to look like Swiss cheese."[4] This is exacerbated by factories that recklessly use ground-well water for housekeeping and production. There is an over dependence on monsoons to fill aquifers and wells (which is never enough), and on intermittent rain to keep crops watered. Poor harvest due to lack of water are not uncommon now in India. It is hard enough to find potable water, what if water can't be found at all? The World Health Organization reported that 31% of households in China lacked appropriate access to water in 2005, compared to a staggering 81% in India (and worse in rural areas).[12]
Secondly, time is wasted to an unimaginable extent in India. Opportunities are lost due to infrastructure, bureaucracy and communications-related issues. India's infrastructure woes are well documented.[13] If you have meetings in opposite ends of Mumbai, book a full day for driving (Shanghai and Mumbai are equal in size yet incomparable in infrastructure). Bangalore's new airport was built on the city's outskirts without a proper highway to get you there (from central Bangalore to the airport, 35km away, will take at least two hours[14]). Some suggest that much is accomplished by mobile phone and laptop. Not so due to frequent dropped calls and reading on pot-holed roads. Aside from this opportunity cost, consider the actual cost of travel with oil above $140 a barrel. Combine inadequate roads with a woeful rail system, fright-full public bus transport, frequent power outages (back-up generators do not suffice), spotty broad-band access (even in Bangalore, India's IT hub), lack of water and poor sanitation and sewer services, and one wonders how long the system can muddle along.
Time lost to bureaucracy is legendary. The World Bank's Doing Business 2008[15] report ranks India 120th out of 178 countries in terms of ease of doing business. (China ranked 83rd).[16] It takes 33 days to start a business in India, and at among the highest costs in all South Asia. It can take 224 days in dealing with procedures related to licensing to build a standard warehouse. There are up to 60 tax payments per year (compared to Sweden's 2) that can occupy 271 hours of work to pay. To export your products there are sometimes 8 documents to be completed (vs 2 in Canada), and it can take over 15 days to receive official documentary clearance to do export. As for exiting a business (and I know this from experience), it can take over a year for even a straightforward sale of shares. If you declare bankruptcy, expect to be in process for up to 10 years.[4]
Communicating in foreign countries always takes more time. But, people incorrectly assume that it is easier in India as most business people speak at least passable English. The common language is not a time-saver. There is a cultural gap that, I think, divides communications far more so than say, in China. In India, either you choose to spend a lot of time, up front, first asking open-ended questions, and then follow-up with leading questions to elicit true answers, or you run the risk of starting or ending a project for all the wrong reasons.
Finally, wasted land. Effective use of arable land has to be high on India's agenda. Yet there has been scant improvement in yields and no systemic upgrading of farmer skills. India's agriculture sector should be a pillar for growth considering India has the world's second largest area of arable land, second only to America.[17] Yet, many of India's staples like lentils, pulses and wheat are imported with substantial trade-deficit implications. Magnify the problem as the middle class grows and more people have access to meat (resource intensive). One cause is that most farming in India is still on acre-scale family plots, on which already impoverished farmers are not able to contend with inflation over 11%. More money is to be made selling land to developers, where values have increased 5 fold in a matter of years. So, arable land, that could be used to feed the world, gives way to hotels and mega-malls. To make things worse, poor farmers lack the skills or fair services to marshal and grow the one-time windfalls from land sales. Rent-seeking developers and corrupt officials ensure the greater benefit accrues their way.
Poor Quality and Reliability
There are two distinct categories of manufacturing to be considered here. Products that absolutely require high-technical competence and equipment to produce vs those where lower-cost production methods and equipment can be used instead of already practiced and robust processes. For the latter, the manufacturer generally: expects product imperfections (that are not immediately obvious to the user); does not compensate buyers when challenged for low quality (or will take so long to acknowledge the problem that the buyer, in frustration, agrees to a pennies-on-the-dollar settlement); and finds capacity relatively easy to add on. Examples of the latter are processed/packaged foods, textiles/garments, and call-center operations. There are indications that India has made tremendous strides in the reliable production of high-value items[18], like pharmaceuticals (though parts of the pharmaceutical industry still rely on high-volume over high quality[19]), and it is promising to note that along side its software industry, India's automotive sector and high-end electronics sectors are receiving global recognition, from Tata's low cost cars to Moser Baer's HD-DVDs and photo-voltaic cells.
But many Indian companies enter new markets with a low-price and rapid-sales strategy and inevitably quality suffers on poorly designed production lines, sub-par (often copied) production equipment, and from using inferior raw materials. In my previous industry, few Promoters gave adequate thought to the quality of raw materials, supply chain, production processes, service metrics etc. I know first hand what shortcuts were available in order to quickly make and ship passable product, and most manufacturers made heavy use of these.
Despite the country's relatively recent opening to the global economy, most Indians are still inward-looking and unable, or unwilling, to comprehend the levels of quality and service expected internationally. Until that changes, I m not sure that Mr. Baba Kalyani (chairman of Bharat Forge, the world's second-largest forging company) should use the past tense when saying, "The concept of quality [used] to be that if it works somehow, it's okay, but it doesn't need to work all the time."1 Not surprisingly, customer's Purchasing Managers rarely confess to being lured by low prices and promises of quality, only to find themselves under an onslaught of complaints for late deliveries and quality. In a feat of self-preservation they will justify the problems and support the vendor by promulgating blame on everything from the weather, to port-congestion in Chennai, to America's thirst for ethanol creating crop shortages in India.
As long as the money flows in, anyone can enter a new market and figure out how to make the products over time. Customers' factory floors and retail shelves are the new R&D ground. Perfect the sale first, the product second.
Opaque Markets and an Un-founded Belief in Legal Recourse
Certainly India's financial markets deserve less criticism than China's. Competition between the Bombay Stock Exchange and the National Stock Exchange (both in Mumbai) has reduced costs and increased ease of trading. But to the extent that markets are efficient from an informational perspective, I remain skeptical. A business associate who is close to one of India's major newspapers, routinely holidays at the paper's villa in Goa. Some how he also manages to garner favorable reports of his companies' activities. His is a mid-sized listed company. If he can peddle influence, it is reasonable to assume that the majors can do far more. In a recent article[12], Mr. Tarun Khana suggests that freedom of press and right to assembly indicate transparency in markets. That people are free to protest on the streets and air their grievances in public forums, does not translate to a market that prices risk and growth correctly. There is a large gap between the information demanded (or peddled) by poor protestors and the information consumed by the media, which is fed to them by well structured and long-standing connections.
Ultimately, how do you police 1.1 billion people in an area one third the size of the United States? Many people believe that India has robust legal and enforcement functions. But consider that in Mumbai it can take 14 months to enforce a contract, which is nearly double that of China, and it can cost you 43% of the debt value to pursue legal action, and in second tier cities enforcement actions can take over 3 years.[20] In fact, it is fairly easy to bring a case against anybody given the right connections. In one tactic to collect on an over-due payment, actually used by a business associate, one can enlist local police to accompany you to the counter-party's home for a "sit down discussion".
Corruption
In a country where most people are desperate for cash and live from day to day, the urge to make a quick Rupee is understandable. Corruption comes from close family members, from trusted friends, from top managers. The patriarch of large family-business empire once said to me, "...corruption is the grease that makes the wheels of Indian business turn". Long-term incentive plans, golden-cuffs, annual appraisals for bonuses and the such work well in the West, but fall apart when your business relies on middling hires from unknown schools (I am not referring to those from IIT and IIM, who, I imagine are 1% of 1% of India). When you live day to day, planning for what will come at the end of the year, or beyond, is ludicrous. Even the word "bonus" is used with care. It becomes an entitlement. Corruption takes many forms, examples of some are provided below (none of these is anecdotal, they all happened).
Supplier Fraud and Intimidation: CFO tells vendors to buy products from his side-line business, and in return ensures payments on well-overdue invoices. MD of a Manufacturing company has a minority interest in, and Board seat at, a supplier of major raw material used by the Manufacturer.
Self-Dealing: Senior Manager forces Supply Chain department to purchase all stationary from his brother-in-law, and conceals the conflict of interest.
Labor Fraud: HR Manager funnels all Labor contracts to one Labor Contractor, at an inflated price, in return for personal payment of a percentage of the contract. Labor Contractor then signs up Laborers only from the immediate vicinity of the plant, thus ensuring that any efforts by Management to address Labor problems are swiftly replied to by protests, calls from the local Panchyat, and overt threats to Staff. Same Contractor uses physical violence to intimidate any Laborers brought in from surrounding areas and housed at off-site company apartments.
Sales Fraud: a Sourcing Broker, representing a large Canadian grocer, approaches an Indian manufacturer to inflate prices charged to the Grocerer, with the excess returned directly to the Broker.
That India has greater freedom of press, judicial independence and property rights than China, makes us feel better in dealing with India, but these don't immediately translate to a better business experience in India. Democracy in India is a career and industry in its own right, with the primary objective to create personal-wealth and party-profits, not to better the lives of those governed.
Much of the problems above have cultural causes. Firstly, selfishness towards anything outside one's immediate family. There is no sense of civic duty or responsibility. Secondly, Hinduism's rigid social strata and belief in reincarnation breeds apathy in those in poor circumstances, and arrogance in those who exploit their surroundings, where in the former believes things will get better the next time, and the latter believes they were destined to do what they do. Finally, a lack of sincerity and honesty, which is otherwise known well as India's "yes, yes" culture.
I am not making a moral judgment. In fact, some combination of these characteristics probably creates India's entrepreneurial drive to succeed. It does have a cost, though. It means there isn't a desire to create robust products and services that can stand the measure of time and international standards. People pursue the fastest route to success where short-term thinking and immediate results matter more. In a 2007 Fortune article, John Elliot puts forward a compelling argument that Indian manufacturing has shed its reputation for poor workmanship, inability to sustain on-time deliveries, and unwillingness to account for mistakes. Yet, even Mr. Elliot had to concede that, "...perhaps only a third of Indian manufacturing deserves these plaudits. The rest is stuck in its old ways, with little care for, or pride in, quality."[18]
So, is it a house of cards? India's domestic market has long suffered and grown accustomed to poor services and quality, so there is already a large, growing and very accommodating domestic market that itself can sustain some level of growth. As an exporter of both high quantity and high quality? I believe the jury is still out.
Labels: Is India's Growth a House of Cards