Use and abuse of institutional memory

Remember Leonard Woolf's work Village in the Jungle (1913) and Leel Gunasekara's novels Athsana' and Pethsama (1961). Both were people who used their institutional memory to form the backdrop for their creative works that also border on biographical episodes. Woolf was Assistant Government Agent in Hambantota during British rule and Gunasekara, a top Government official in post-independence Sri Lanka serving among rural communities in the dry zone.

The lesser-known memoirs of Dr Peterson, an early 20th Century British medical practitioner in Government service in then Ceylon, was presented to us recently as an edited work. The insights they bring to us of the institutions of their times, ways of life of the people and the social dynamics, are invaluable in our attempts at exploring and understanding the environment of those times.

A fine mix

Then we had Henry Jayasena present his play Janelaya (1962) also revolving around institutional memory he had, of his Government office in the Public Works Department (PWD). The work routine, power assumed by the office peon, many transfers of heads and the travails of being a clerk, all formed the satire he unfolded for us in the theatrical form. There are others like them, who have incorporated their institutional memory in literary and academic work they have authored, while those the likes of Woolf, Gunasekara and Jayasena have made lasting impressions in our minds of their own memories, transforming them into a fine mix of fact and creativity. Gunesakara's latest work Guru Pujawa (2010) where he venerates his teachers of yore with anecdotes of happenings, presents institutional memory of another kind.

Sensitivity and finesse

That in fact, takes us back to our all time great novelist and social analyst Martin Wickramasinghe. His trilogy Gamperaliya (1944), Uganthaya (1948) and Kaliyugaya (1957) are indeed significant literary works that spreads a wider canvass of institutional memory as its backdrop.

Martin Wickramasinghe	Leonard Woolf	Henry Jayasena

From the serendipitous environment of Koggala of his childhood, the township of Galle of his studenthood to the world at work in the City of Colombo, his experiences within various forms of formal and informal institutions are unfolded for us. The transformation of our society from the colonial, feudal to the modern, within the context of an industrious commerce centred Southern ethos, is portrayed with a sense of sensitivity and finesse.

I was curious as to why we do not see many works such as those mentioned earlier in Sri Lanka's literary context of today. Is it because of the rapidity at which things have being changing around us? Is it because of the instability we have witnessed in our midst, that memories of our institutions do not have a chance to take firm root within our social and cultural ethos? Is it the erosion of confidence in the very fragile social and administrative organisations, we have designed for ourselves in the last few decades? Or was it the fears, tears and the losses the many families had, within the context of the lives taken away since the youth insurrection in 1971, Black July of 1983, followed by the 1989-90 era and the intensification of terrorism that saw its birth in the North and the East?

There is no doubt we have had many sociologists and political analysts present serious studies of the ongoing saga of our recent history.

We have also seen many cinematic creations, poetic works and other creative writings based on the pain and the suffering we underwent as a nation in the past few decades. But it is not often we see someone document in a complementary way about this recent past, except for a few anecdotal accounts of Prime Ministers and Presidents by their own secretaries who were top civil servants.

There are also not so complimentary accounts written about our recent heads of State and even the head of the judiciary. These are accounts reminiscing on negative institutional memory by analysts playing their rightful role as social activists.

Seeking definition

To explore this very concept of institutional memory further, I ventured to seek its meaning in the Wikipedia, the virtual encyclopedia. It is given as "a collective set of facts, concepts, experiences and knowhow held by a group of people.

As it transcends the individual, it requires the ongoing transmission of these memories between members of this group. Elements of institutional memory may be found in corporations, professional groups, government bodies, religious groups, academic collaborations and by extension in entire cultures".

It further states that "Institutional memory may be encouraged to preserve an ideology or way of work in such a group. Conversely, institutional memory may be ingrained to the point that it becomes hard to challenge if something is found to contradict that which was previously thought to have been correct". In an organisational sense institutional memory is about 'benchmarking' or 'instituting values', where what is tested and proven to be the right way to do things, may be taken as a way that must be retained and vice versa.

Control and use

Institutional knowledge is defined as the process used by "organisations translating historical data into useful knowledge and wisdom. Memory depends upon the preservation of data and the analytical skills necessary for its effective use within the organisation," it said.

Religion is described as being "one of the significant institutional forces acting on the collective memory attributed to humanity". On the other side of the coin, the evolution of ideas in Marxist theory is presented as "the mechanism whereby knowledge and wisdom passed down through the generations is subject to economic determinism". What is interesting and noteworthy is that "in all instances social systems, cultures and organisations have an interest in controlling and using institutional memories" as we see it being misused so blatantly in our current social, economic and cultural milleu.

Credibility with stakeholders

Take the case of most of our State institutions, where changes occur so often in personnel, both in top management and within the cadres, the few who remain behind, often with political clout and favour, begin to rule the roost with faulty claims of institutional memory. Wrong values are then instituted with wrong practices taking root, victimisation of those that oppose takes place and systems begin to loose its credibility with the public, who are the key stakeholders of the process. It is here that a breakaway change must happen if Sri Lanka is to regain and re-establish a credible institutional knowledge base, thereby leading to setting in place a system of institutional memories we can be all proud of. It takes sound values-based benchmarking, that must come firmly from our political and civil society leadership, to make it work.

Right leadership

Rightfully, our head of State has taken on this task and is redirecting our nation's energies towards social and economic development of all regions, with a special focus on the war affected areas. National reconciliation and building unity for attaining lasting peace must form the base of the new structure of institutional knowledge and memory.

This can only be possible if the leadership can transform the vision now in place into solid action, with each and every member of the team responsible for seeking and making it happen buying into it, with rational understanding, a sense of commitment and without reservation. Cases of dissent of what is good, needs to be dealt with firmly.

When we get that right we can once again look towards major creative works coming into our fore, much like those of Woolf, Gunasekara and Jayasena, transcending the fears, pains and tears of our recent history.