Exploring how the practice of welcoming new officers, VCs, etc. can inadvertently hinder institutional progress and leadership effectiveness

Mohammad Ehsan Leghari

In the culturally rich tapestry of the Indo Pakistan subcontinent, social norms and traditions play a pivotal role in shaping interpersonal and professional interactions. One such practice is the elaborate welcoming of new officers, bureaucrats, technocrats, leaders, vice chancellors, or university presidents upon assuming their roles. While these gestures stem from deep-rooted values of respect, hospitality, and community, they often come at a significant “time cost.” This article delves into the multifaceted implications of these welcoming rituals, drawing on an analysis of how they consume critical time during orientation periods, overwhelm with digital congratulations, and bombard leaders with unsolicited suggestions. Ultimately, it explores how these practices can inadvertently hinder institutional progress and leadership effectiveness.

The Ritual of Welcomes: A Time-Intensive Tradition

At the heart of subcontinental professional culture lies a strong emphasis on honoring new appointees through ceremonial welcomes. When a new leader steps into an institution—be it a government department, a corporate entity, or an academic body like a university—they are often greeted with an outpouring of gestures that, while well-intentioned, demand substantial time and attention.

Consider the typical sequence: Colleagues, subordinates, alumni, local dignitaries, and even external stakeholders arrive bearing tokens of goodwill, such as bouquets of flowers, traditional shawls like the Ajrak (a symbol of Sindhi heritage), or other cultural gifts. Each visit necessitates a reciprocal response—offering tea, engaging in polite conversation, and perhaps posing for photographs. These interactions, though brief individually (lasting anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes), accumulate rapidly. In the initial weeks of a new tenure, a leader might receive dozens of such visitors daily, especially during key orientation days when they should ideally be familiarizing themselves with departmental operations, staff dynamics, and strategic priorities.

If we quantify this, the math is revealing. Suppose a new vice chancellor entertains 20 visitors per day, each requiring 15 minutes on average. That’s five hours daily—equivalent to over half a workday—devoted solely to welcomes. Over a two-week orientation period, this could total 50 hours, or more than six full workdays. Factor in the mental effort required to switch contexts repeatedly, and the true cost escalates. This time could otherwise be invested in reviewing institutional reports, meeting key team members for substantive discussions, or outlining a vision for reform. Instead, it is frittered away on what some might term “pseudo values”—rituals that prioritize form over function.

This phenomenon is not unique to academia; it permeates bureaucracy and leadership roles across sectors. In government offices, for instance, from District Health officer to Treasury Officer faces similar influxes. And many are used to this, if they are not welcomed they mind it! For crucial positions, this will be leading to delaying urgent administrative tasks like policy implementation or crisis management. The cultural expectation of hospitality is rooted in concepts of cultural, social and socioeconomic dimensions. While admirable, often overlooks the opportunity cost in high-stakes environments where time is a finite resource.

The Digital Deluge: Congratulations in the Age of Connectivity

Compounding the physical welcomes is the digital onslaught of congratulations. In an era dominated by smartphones and social media, news of a new appointment spreads like wildfire. A newly appointed institutional head might wake up to thousands of messages across platforms like WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Twitter (now X), and Facebook. These range from heartfelt notes from close associates to generic well-wishes from distant acquaintances or even opportunistic networkers.

While technology has democratized communication, it has also amplified the time burden. Responding to these messages—even with templated replies—requires sifting through notifications, prioritizing responses, and maintaining professional decorum. A conservative estimate might peg this at 1-2 hours daily in the first month, adding up to another 30-60 hours of diverted attention. For leaders in public-facing roles, such as university presidents/ Vice chancellors, this can include public posts that necessitate acknowledgments to avoid perceptions of aloofness.

The irony is stark: These congratulations, meant to uplift, often create a backlog that spills into personal time, leading to burnout. Moreover, the sheer volume can dilute genuine connections, turning what should be a supportive network into a distracting echo chamber. In the subcontinent, where social media penetration is high (with over 500 million users in India alone as of recent estimates), this digital welcome amplifies traditional norms, making escape nearly impossible.

Unsolicited Suggestions: A Barrage of Advice and Its Pitfalls

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of the welcoming process is the flood of suggestions that accompanies it. A new vice chancellor or institutional leader is often seen as a blank slate, ripe for input from all quarters. Scores of people—colleagues, alumni, politicians, media figures, and even unrelated influencers—offer ideas on everything from curriculum reforms to infrastructure upgrades.

But who should truly be providing these suggestions? Not everyone, my analysis simply points out. Valuable input ideally comes from:

• Veterans in the Field: Individuals with decades of experience in the same domain, such as retired professors or former administrators who understand the nuances of institutional challenges.
• Institutional Insiders: Long-term staff or faculty members who have intimate knowledge of the organization’s history, strengths, and pain points.
• Sector Analysts: Researchers or consultants who have conducted impact assessments, problem analyses, or SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) evaluations specific to the sector.
• Leadership Experts: Those with proven expertise in management, such as executive coaches or authors on organizational behavior, who can offer evidence-based strategies.
• Stakeholder Representatives: Elected bodies like student unions, faculty associations, or community leaders who represent broader interests.
• Data-Driven Contributors: Professionals armed with empirical data, such as economists or policy experts, rather than anecdotal advice.

In reality, however, suggestions often pour in from unqualified sources, driven by personal agendas or a desire for visibility. This creates several issues:

• Time Drain: Reviewing and responding to these inputs—via emails, meetings, or calls—further erodes the leader’s schedule.
• Pressure and Misperceptions: Unsolicited advice can foster unrealistic expectations, with people demanding “miraculous” changes overnight for problems that have festered for decades, such as outdated curricula or funding shortages in universities.
• Irrelevant Perceptions: Leaders might form skewed views based on biased or incomplete suggestions, leading to misguided priorities.
• Hampered Progress: The cumulative effect is a distracted leader, unable to focus on holistic betterment. For instance, a new university president might prioritize superficial changes (like campus beautification) over deep reforms (like research funding) due to vocal but uninformed influencers.

This dynamic underscores a broader cultural challenge: In the subcontinent, hierarchy and deference often encourage top-down decisions, but the welcoming phase paradoxically invites bottom-up chaos, diluting effective governance.

Broader Implications for Institutional Betterment

The time cost of welcomes extends beyond individual leaders to the institutions they helm. During critical transition periods, when momentum for change is highest, distractions can stall initiatives. Universities, for example, grappling with issues like declining enrollment, quality or research output, need leaders who hit the ground running. Instead, the welcoming overload fosters inefficiency, potentially perpetuating the very stagnation it seeks to celebrate.

Psychologically, this can lead to decision fatigue for the new appointee, reducing their capacity for innovative thinking. Economically, the lost productivity translates to tangible costs—salaries paid for non-productive hours, delayed projects, and missed opportunities. In a region striving for global competitiveness, such as through initiatives like Education Policies and strategies, these inefficiencies are unwanted for.

Towards a Balanced Approach: Reimagining Welcomes

To mitigate these costs, a reevaluation of norms is essential. Organizations could institute structured welcome protocols, such as consolidated group receptions or digital acknowledgment platforms, to streamline interactions. Leaders might delegate message handling to assistants or use automated responses. For suggestions, establishing advisory committees comprising qualified experts could filter input, ensuring only high-value advice reaches the top.

Cultural shifts are key: Emphasizing efficiency alongside respect could preserve traditions without sacrificing productivity. After all, true hospitality lies not in endless rituals but in enabling leaders to serve effectively.

In conclusion, the “time cost of welcome” in the subcontinent highlights a tension between cultural heritage and modern exigencies. By recognizing and addressing this, we can foster environments where new leaders thrive, driving genuine institutional advancement rather than performative pleasantries.