Points to be included:

1. Our intro (common for all the profs)

a. We are a group of young people determined to make some positive changes in
our society (we will attach a small bio for each of us)
b. Having observed the state of our political system and mainly the​ quality of our
representatives​, it was clear to us that it warrants many fundamental
corrections. (Elitism; Corruption; Fake promises; Criminalization; Vote bank
politics including identity politics; Asset hoarding; Mistrust; Institutional gap)
i. The kind of political elitism entrenched into our polity, the way how
representatives consider themselves as kings and how common people
like us consider ourselves as being ruled upon. The way how an MLA’s
son is destined to become an MLA after him/her. How can this still be an
ascriptive role in a 21st century democracy?
ii. Why aren’t the representatives held accountable for bailing out on their
electoral promises? How did this moral lapse become the normal state of
affairs?
iii. Why do we see criminals enter the politics and more often than not, win?
iv. Why is everyone taking the easy way out for electoral gains? Why does
the identity of a person matter for representing us?
v. Why do the assets of leaders multiply when in power?
vi. Why is there a deep mistrust between the people and their
representatives?
vii. Why are representatives positively reinforcing the gap between the public
and institutions, when they should actually be doing the opposite?
c. One of the key reasons for this bad state of affairs is, as we understand, lack of
standards for leaders.
d. So we asked ourselves: Why don’t we actually set the leadership standards and
gradually build a political system based on ​trust, transparency and
accountability?
2. Our idea (mostly common for all the profs)
a. Our idea
i. To create a Leadership Index (as a weighted index of some factors) to
assess a person’s political leadership potential
1. To do this, first, we try to understand what Leadership is and come
up with some broad factors (7-10 may be) that constitute good
leadership. This may be done by questioning in different angles
like:
a. What do people expect from a leader?
i. Like say, people may expect good ​Commitment
and ​Populist tendencies​ like granting loan waivers
b. What is actually good for people?
i. Like say, ​Commitment ​may be good for people but
Populist tendencies may not be ​good for long
term
2. Secondly, we try to give weights to these factors based on your
guidance; other experts’ feedback, people’s response and our
inclinations
a. Like say, a factor like ​Commitment ​which is common to
both the angles above, may have more weight
b. If a person has a factor, which is ​expected by people​ and
also ​do good to them​, then he must be assessed as a
better leader
ii. Then, we set a fair value for each of these factors in order to consider
them as standards.
1. Like say, there are two factors F1 (Commitment) and F2 (People
skills) of values ranging from 0-10, we wish to set a standard of
say 6 for F1 and 4 for F2
2. If a certain leader attains that level, he can be said to be standards
compliant
3. These fair values will be based on your guidance; other experts’
feedback, people’s response and our inclinations
iii. We also wish to build ​practical mechanisms​ to enable the leader in
achieving those standards
1. Like say, a leader has a value of 2 for F2 (People Skills), we wish
to develop mechanisms to enable him, become a 4 on F2 (People
Skills)
2. Care must be taken that these mechanisms shall not divert the
representatives’ attention away from people. They should in fact
enable him to become a better leader, while continuing his work
alongside people
b. Our intention is to achieve strong ​Theory to Practical ​correlation
i. A person with an Index value of 7 must ​also be perceived​ by the people
as a better leader than a person with value 4
c. Other major intention is to also achieve ​Standards to Electoral Gains
correlation
i. A person with an Index value of say 8 must also be able to gain better
electoral gains than a person with a value of 4
ii. This, we feel is the most important criterion.
1. What good happens, when a better leader (high value on index) is
unable to represent people on-ground?
3. Reasons for asking him/her (custom message for each prof)
a. We strongly believe that the project, if rightly executed, will have a meaningful
impact on our political system
b. We don’t have the experience nor the expertise to take on a project like this. All
we have, is a resolve to make a difference.
c. That is why we need the best, guiding us (we really mean it, when we say, the
best).
i. To be frank with you, madam, we worked on an assignment to search for
a suitable guide for our idea from the top universities in India. Our focus
was to search for an experienced professor adept with grasp on
on-ground reality of Indian Politics. We wanted to find someone who
understood people’s choices, worked on real political data. Because, end
of the day, there needs to be strong ​Standards to Electoral Gains
correlation​ as discussed above
ii. We were delighted when we saw how your publications were entirely
based on real scenarios like
1. analyses on elections​ (How did Women Vote in Elections 2009?;
Electoral Choices and Political Opinions: Comparative Study of
Maharashtra and Gujarat);
2. social bases of political parties​ (Locating the Local Bases of
Politics: Collection of District Level Sources of Political Action;
Electoral Competition and structures of Domination in
Maharashtra);
3. role of identities like caste, religion influence political
outcomes​ (Garv Se Kahon Hum Lingayat Hain!: Caste
Associations and Identity Politics in Maharshtra);
4. focus on women’s political participation​ (The Missing Women:
Gender Representation in Indian Politics;).
5. Other amazing aspects about your publications, we learnt were,
about the ​balance between identity and developmental politics
( Role of Caste Associations in Contemporary Indian Politics vs
Politics of Welfare: Comparisons Across Indian States) and your
focus on specific area studies(Life and Politics in Pune’s Slums)
which lead to more powerful insights
d. We don’t claim to have read your research nor understood it completely, but we
have tried to read and understand the abstracts wherever possible
4. Conclusion
a. We will be grateful if you can guide and supervise our efforts in bringing this idea
to fruition.
b. We know that your schedule is an exceptionally busy one. Even if you find it
difficult to work this type of commitment into your other activities, we will still keep
on imploring you to consider our request in all possible ways. That is how
committed we are to this project and you guiding us!
Short E-Mail Message for Prof. Rajeshwari
Deshpande- SBP
Madam,
We are a group of young people determined to make some positive changes in our
society. Having observed the state of our political system and mainly the​ quality of our
representatives​, it was clear to us that it warrants many fundamental corrections. Political
Elitism; Corruption; Fake promises; Criminalization; Vote bank politics including identity politics;
Asset hoarding; Mistrust; Institutional gap are only a few of the many ills. One of the key
reasons for this bad state of affairs is, as we understand, lack of standards for leaders.
So we asked ourselves: Why don’t we actually set the leadership standards and
gradually build a political system based on ​trust, transparency and accountability!

Our Idea is:​ (An elaborate explanation is provided in the attachment and please give us a
chance to explain ourselves, if you find it unclear)
1. To create a ​Leadership Index​ (as a weighted index of some factors) to assess a
person’s political leadership potential and set a fair value for each of these factors in
order to consider them as standards.
a. Like say, there are two factors F1 (Commitment) and F2 (People skills) of values
ranging from 0-10, we wish to set a standard of say 6 for F1 and 4 for F2
b. If a certain leader attains that level, he can be said to be standards compliant
2. We also wish to build ​practical mechanisms​ to enable the leader in actually achieving
those standards
a. Like say, a leader has a value of 2 for F2 (People Skills), we wish to develop
mechanisms to enable him, become a 4 on F2 (People Skills)
3. Our intention is to achieve strong ​Theory to Practical ​correlation
a. A person with an Index value of 7 must ​also be perceived​ by the people as a
better leader than a person with value 4
4. Other major intention is to also achieve ​Standards to Electoral Gains​ correlation
a. A person with an Index value of say 8 must also be able to gain better electoral
gains than a person with a value of 4
b. This, we feel is the ​most important criterion.
i. What good happens, when a better leader (high value on index) is unable
to represent people on-ground?

We strongly believe that the project, if rightly executed, will have a ​meaningful impact​ on our
political system. We don’t have the experience nor the expertise to take on a project like this. All
we have, is a resolve to make a difference.

That is why we need the best, guiding us (we really mean it, when we say, the best).
We will be grateful if you can guide and supervise our efforts in bringing this idea to fruition.
We know that your schedule is an exceptionally busy one. Even if you find it difficult to work this
type of commitment into your other activities, we will still ​keep on imploring you to consider
our request in all possible ways​. That is how committed we are to this project and you guiding
us!

Attachments:
1. Small bio
2. PPT

Bio:
1. Mounika
a. Educational Background: IIT Madras | [Link]. in Computer Sciences
Engineering
b. Current/Previous Company: Google
c.
2. Sumanth
a. Educational Background: IIT Delhi | [Link]. in Computer Sciences Engineering
b. Current/Previous Company: VMock and ClearMyDues
c.
3. Charan
a. Educational Background: IIT Madras | [Link]. in Electrical Engineering
b. Current/Previous Company:
c.
4. Jayanth
a. Educational Background: IIT Madras | [Link]. in Computer Sciences
Engineering
b. Current/Previous Company: Walmart Labs
c.
5. Bharath
a. Educational Background: IIT Madras | [Link]. in Electrical Engineering
b. Current/Previous Company: Envision
c.
Madam,
We are a group of 5 young people determined to make some positive changes in our
society….
We asked ourselves: Why don’t we actually set the leadership standards and slowly
build a political system based on trust (and not indifference)?...
We don’t have the experience nor the expertise to take on a project like this. All we have
is a resolve to make a difference….
We strongly believe that output will be impactful, if rightly executed. That is why we need
the best, guiding us ( we really mean it, when we say, the best)....

i. To create a Leadership Index (as a weighted index of some factors) to

assess a person’s political leadership potential and also set a fair value
for each of these factors.
1. Like say, there are two factors F1 and F2 of values ranging from
0-10, we wish to set a standard of say 6 for F1 and 4 for F2
2. If a certain leader attains that level, he can be said to be standards
compliant
3. All of us are Engineers and strongly believe in the objectivity,
numbers bring to the table
a. What can be measured, can be managed
ii. We wish to do this by understanding what leadership is, at two levels
1. What do people expect from a leader?
2. What is good for people?
iii. We also wish to build practical mechanisms to enable the leader achieve
those standards
1. Like say, a leader has a value of 4 for F1 mentioned above, we
wish to develop mechanisms to enable him, become a 6 on F1
iv. These mechanisms involve developing sustainable solutions to the
problem of​ institutional distance between the state and it’s people​,
thereby reducing their dependence on the so-called elites in the times of
need.
c. Our intention is to achieve strong theory to practical correlation
i. A person with an Index value of 7 must ​also be felt​ to be a better leader
than a person with a value of 4