by Rajan Philips

Donald Trump is sucking almost all of the world’s political oxygen. Daily he is stealing the headline thunder in all of the western media. The coverage in other countries may not be as extensive but would still be significant. There is universal curiosity over the systemic chaos that Trump is unleashing in America. There is also the no less universal apprehension about what Trump’s disruptive tariffs will do to the lives of people in reciprocal countries. There are legitimate fears of a madman-made recession not only in America but in all the countries of the world. There is even a warning from a respected source of a potential repeat of the Great Depression of the 1930s.

The question of this article obviously shows its Sri Lankan bias. For there is no country in the world that has been so much preoccupied, for so long, on so constitutional a matter – as the pros and cons of a parliamentary system as opposed to a presidential system. And only in Sri Lanka will such a question – whether Trump could be a king in a parliamentary system – makes sense or find some resonance, any resonance. Insofar as the current NPP government is committed to reverting back to its old parliamentary system from the current presidential system, the government could use all Trump and his presidential antics as one of the justifications for the long awaited constitutional change.

A Historical Irony

It is not that every presidential system is inherently prone to being turned into an upstart monarchy. The historical irony here is that America’s founding fathers decided on a presidential system at a time when there was no constitutional model or prototype available in the world. In fact, the American system became the world’s first constitutional prototype. The founding fathers had all the experiential reason to be wary of the parliamentary system in England because it was associated with the King who was reviled in the colonies. Yet the founding fathers were alert to the risks involved. James Maddison reminded that “If men were angels, no government would be necessary;” and John Adams warned that man’s “Avarice, Ambition, Revenge or Gallantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net.”

But for over 200 years, no American president tried to break the country’s political constitutional system for reasons of avarice, anger and revenge, as Trump is doing now. Presidents in other countries with far less traditions of checks and balances have been dealt with both politically and legally for their excesses and trespasses. In Brazil, the system was turned against both the current President Lula and his previous successor Dilma Rousseff. In between them, Jair Bolsonaro imitated Trump in Brazil and even tried to launch a coup after his re-election defeat in 2022, emulating Trump’s insurrection in Washington, in January 2021. But in Brazil, Bolsonaro has been accused of and charged for his crime, while in America its Supreme Court let Trump walk away with immunity and to be back as president for another round.

In Philippines, the current government of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has turned over its former President Rodrigo Duterte to stand trial at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, on charges of crimes against humanity for his allegedly ordering the killing of as many as 30,000 people as part of his campaign against drug users and dealers. In Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa tried to be king, unsuccessfully sought a third term, and set up the system for family succession. But the people have spurned the Rajapaksas and questions as to whether they have been given undue protection from prosecution keep swirling. To wit, the contentious Al Jazeera interview of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe.

In the US, Trump is nonstick and remains untouched. Unlike the prime minister in a parliamentary system, an American president has no presence in the legislature except for the ceremonial State of the Union address. And unlike no other president before him, Trump has created the theatre of daily press conferences, rather chats, before an increasingly hand picked group of journalists. There he turns lies into ex cathedra pronouncements, and signs executive orders like a king issuing edicts. No one questions him instantly, his base hears what he wants them to hear, and by the time professional fact checkers come up with their red lines, Trump and his followers have moved on to another topic. This has become the daily parody of the Trump second term.

No prime minister in any parliament can get away with this nonsense. Every contentious statement will be instantly challenged and refuted if necessary. Parliamentary question periods are the pulse of the political order especially in crisis times. After being in the House of Commons gallery during a visit to England, President Richard Nixon was astonished at the barrage of questions that Prime Minister Harold Wilson had to face and provide answers to. These are minor differences that are hardly noticed in normal times. But the Trump presidency is magnifying even the minor shortcomings of a major political system.

Trump’s cabinet is another instance where the American system is falling apart. The President’s cabinet in America is based on unelected officials approved by the Senate. Until cabinet secretaries or ministers have generally been well equipped academics or professionals and were selected by successive presidents based on their known political leanings. Their ties to corporate America were well known but that was always somewhat qualified by the clear motivation to excel by providing exceptional service to the country.

Trump’s second term cabinet comprises a cabal of self-serving ‘yes’ men with no stellar background in the academia or the professions. They are all there to do Trump’s bidding and to disrupt the orderly functioning of government. Their ineffectiveness is now daily manifested in the drama over Trump’s decisions on tariffs which vary by the time of day and his mood of the moment. The reciprocal countries do not know what to expect, but they have learnt that any agreement that they reach with Trump’s ministers means nothing and that there will be nothing certain until Trump makes his next announcement.

Americans, and others, will have to go through this for the next four years, but in a parliamentary system there could be quicker remedies. A prime minister cannot erratically hold on to power for a full term, and as British parliamentary experience has recurrently shown prime ministers are brought down by cabinet ministers when they have outlived their usefulness to the government and the country. There is no such recourse available in the US. The device of impeachment is simply inoperable in a divided legislature and Trump has demonstrated this twice in one term.

Growing Pushback

Yet after the initial weeks of shock and awe, push-back to Trump is now growing and is slowly becoming significant. Within America the resistance is mostly in the courts, especially the lower federal courts, where the judges are ordering against the stoppage of USAID contract payments, the manifestly illegal firing of government employees, indiscriminate accessing of government data by Musk and his DOGE boys, and the barring by executive order of a law firm that had once represented Hillary Clinton from doing business with the federal government.

Also, in the highly watched case against the deportation order served on the Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian with Green Card status and married to a fellow Palestinian who is a US citizen, the courts have ordered the government to stop the deportation process until the case is resolved. Mr. Khalil was a prominent leader of the student protests at Columbia against the Israeli devastation of Gaza, and the District Judge ordering the temporary ban on deportation is Jesse Furman, an exceptionally qualified American Jew who was appointed by President Obama and was once touted as a potential Supreme Court judge.

The wider push-back is mostly overseas and is predicated on retaliatory tariffs by countries that Trump is imposing tariffs against. In different ways and for different reasons, China and Canada are aggressively pushing back. Mexico is resorting to both flattery and firmness. And the EU is launching a systematic response. Other countries will be forced into the fray if Trump lives up to imposing the much anticipated reciprocal tariffs against all countries that now charge tariffs on imports from the US.

Even without tariffs their uncertainty has been enough to roil markets with stock indices plunging dramatically from the heights reached soon after the November election and the much promised regime of monumental tax cuts. One of the worst stock slumps has been that of Elon Musk’s Tesla. In what is being considered to be the worst such slide in the history of the auto industry, Tesla has lost all of the 90% increase in value it achieved after the presidential election and now gone lower than its pre-election value. Between December 2024 and March 2025, Tesla’s dollar worth fell from $1.54 trillion to $777 billion, a near 50% drop.

Tesla’s misfortune is a schadenfreude moment for those who abhor Musk for his political trespasses. Political aversion is certainly a factor in Tesla’s misfortunes and declining sales, but materially not the main one. Other factors that are more significant are issues with the brand products and stiff EV competition from China. But political distractions catch the eye, and protesters have been turning up at the Tesla dealers in the US. Trump called them the lunatic left and to boost his buddy’s products he even stage managed a sales pitch for Tesla vehicles at the White House driveway. And this is after executively rescinding all of Biden’s initiatives to boost the production and use of Electric Vehicles. What better way to make America great again?

Fighting Oligarchy

Political commentaries in the West are preoccupied with speculations over how, when and where all of Trump’s orders and initiatives will impact people’s lives and their politics in America. One comforting constant is the presidential term limit that will stop Trump’s presidency in January 2029, although Trump will never stop musing about a third term in office. Just like annexing Canada, purchasing Greenland and expropriating Gaza. Mercifully, he has not made any claim to immortality.

The elusive variable is the response of the people. So far, Trump has been able to maintain his hold over his base and he is pulling a tight leash on the Republicans in Congress to toe the line given their narrow margins in both the House and the Senate. The base is indicating support to all his madman initiatives even though Trump has fallen back to his usual negative approval rating (more people disapprove than approve of him) in popular opinion polls. What is not clear is when the public will turn on the president if he actually imposes tariffs on consumer goods, keeps firing government employees, and keeps eroding social welfare.

Trump won the election promising to bring down the prices and cost of living instantly, but everything he is doing now is driving up the costs and people will start registering their dissatisfaction. Unlike in Britain there is no tradition to cheer the monarch and damn the government. Sooner or later, Americans will have nothing to cheer their king for, but everything to damn him, because this ersatz king is also their government.

There are scattered protests in many parts of America, with people showing up at local town hall meetings organized by Republican congressmen. But the protest against the deportation of Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil is likely to gather traction and is already drawing a spectrum of supporters including progressive Jewish and other American citizens. A Jewish organization called Jewish Voice for Peace has organized a sit in protest in support of Khalil in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York. Other high rise buildings may be targeted.

More resoundingly, Senator Bernie Sanders has launched a national tour for “Fighting Oligarchy” and drew a crowd of ten thousand people at his first stop in Michigan. The tour will be a teaser to the Democratic Party leadership that is currently stuck in its tracks like a hare caught in Trump’s headlights. The Party is going by the calendar and waiting for its turn at the next mid-term elections in 2026, and the full election year in 2028 to elect the next president. The old campaign heavyweight James Carville has publicly advised the party to “play dead” until Trump’s systemic chaos turns the people against the Administration. Not everyone is prepared to be so patient.

New York Congress woman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) is not prepared to “completely roll over and give up on protecting the Constitution.” She wants immediate and consistent opposition to Trump and not to play the waiting game according to the electoral calendar. Trump for one does not wait for anything and breaks every rule to advance his indeterminate agenda. Among the Democrats, AOC has the most extensive social media base, and many Democrats are encouraging her to take the next step and announce her candidacy for New York’s Senate seat. She is a shrewd politician and is well positioned to open another front against Trump, paralleling the national tour that Bernie Sanders has launched.

By Anura Gunasekera

Big matches come and go; today they are numerous but the Royal-Thomian, the first of its kind in this country, stands apart as an eternal metaphor for tradition, style, charm, excitement and unpredictability. No other sporting encounter in the country, not even an international event, generates the passionate rivalry, the limitless appeal, the widespread social enthusiasm, the Bacchic revelry or the fervent anticipation, as does the battle between these two tribes. This writer does not mean any offence to other schools or to other sporting encounters, but does not see the need to entertain a dissenting view.

The match ceased to be a mere sporting event many decades ago. It has become a microcosm of the passage of life, mirroring the broader human experience. Over the decades it has shaped a generational continuity, with a new group stepping in to continue the tradition, an honoured legacy, as one generation exits. It fosters growth and change, whilst remaining anchored to a revered tradition rooted, albeit, in a colonial past. As much as individuals inherit legacies, values and expectations from their families and communities, the match has fostered a tradition which has remained a constant for one-and-a-half centuries.

The fact that its original spirit is still very much alive, despite the social and national changes which have evolved around it, and that its founding concept has been embraced and emulated by so many other schools, is testament to its relevance to life today, notwithstanding its antiquity, and its genesis in a British-imposed elitism and exclusivity- the latter an accusation frequently levelled against the event and the institutions which generate it. The Sri Lanka of today is unrecognizably different from the colonial Ceylon which birthed the Royal-Thomian, but that encounter remains the same, as it was 146 years ago. The actors, the locations , the institutions and the scope of the event have changed, but the founding spirit is untouched.

This iconic encounter has come to symbolize healthy competition, nourishing rivalry, the value of determination, preparation and team-work and the will-to-win, but all within an inviolable framework of fair play and sportsmanship. It respects history whilst enriching it with each successive encounter, finding ways, through exceptional individual and team performances , to contribute to and enhance an ongoing fable. It fosters a sense of belonging and pride, not just for individuals but for the larger community. It is no longer the exclusive property of the Royal-Thomian tribesmen but has embraced a massive extended family of supporters, aficionados, enthusiasts and well-wishers. It has become an inclusive feast.

The encounter teaches that despite differences and challenges, unity and collaboration from both competing parties are essential for success and growth. As in life, for both teams there is immense pressure to perform and to succeed in what is a high-stakes encounter, to meet the expectations of a society which has grown around it, and formed special identities linked to the competition- family, school, culture and country.

The match, in essence, is a cauldron which shapes triumph and failure, the joy of victory and the anguish of defeat, and the ability to accept both with grace and equanimity, coupled with the determination to make amends at the next encounter. It reflects the eternal truths of the human experience, that life is not always kind, that nature is not always fair, that despite your best efforts the other side will sometimes do better, even if it is not the best equipped or the more fancied. To use a highly over-used cliché, ” the race is not always to the swift”, and cricket proves it time and time again.

The 146th edition of this celebrated encounter reflected, in a multitude of ways, all the contradictions and commonalities described above.

STC, after winning the toss, sent Royal, the pre-match favourites, in to bat, on what appeared to be a typically friendly and placid SSC wicket. After an initial stutter which seemed to justify a risky decision by STC, Royal settled down and went on to post an imposing 319/7. Rehan Pieris crafted a majestic 158, watched reflectively, from the comfort of the “Mustangs” enclosure, by Ronald Reid, a batting genius of a different era, who compiled the identical score for STC in 1956. In doing so he erased the previous Royal-Thomian batting record of 151 by Norman Siebel of STC, established in 1936.

The writer, who, as a ten year old Thomian watched the Reid enterprise, can now claim the privilege of having seen two brilliant performances, separated from each other by a distance of 69 years; the quality in both so similar, despite the first being an elegant left-hander and the recent edition from an aggressive right-hander, that it was like being in a time-warp.

STC, undeterred by the mountain of runs confronting them, produced a decent response of their own. Dineth Goonewardene, with an excellent century- the first by a Thomian since 2016- scored at a brisk rate, made a major contribution. Royal, in their second essay , seemed very much in control with all features pointing to a comfortable draw, when the unpredictability of cricket reared its menacing head; out of the humid and burning-hot ether, Darien Diego, bowling a steady, but unthreatening line and length all afternoon, suddenly produced the feared hat-trick; according to statisticians only the third by a Thomian in the history of the series. Royal, perhaps compelled, and perhaps slightly befuddled, by the unexpected reversal of fortune, made what was a challenging but sporting declaration, throwing down the gauntlet, as it were.

The target of 233 in 42 overs was daunting but given some measured adventurism, not unattainable. STC did exactly that, achieving it with an over to spare. Jaden Amaraweera and Mithila Charles provided early stability at the top with calculated but quick accumulation and Sadev Soysa, in the middle, with a short but fiery knock, reduced a demanding run-rate to manageable proportions.

One outstanding feature of the Thomian victory was the nerveless batting of 15 year old newcomer, Reshon Solomon, a somewhat disputed inclusion in the team, at the expense of coloursman Abeeth Paranawidana. Solomon, despite having had only two previous outings and both in friendly matches, justified his selection for the big stage with a brilliant half-century, scored alongside the first innings centurion, Goonewardane, matching the latter shot-for-shot. The pair batted with such composure that a seemingly elusive target soon became a certainty.

Irrespective of the reasons which prompted it, the early declaration by Royal made a decision possible. One must not forget that losing three batsmen in three deliveries and with two wickets left, they could have, quite justifiably, opted for the safer option of batting till the end and closing down the game. Royal obviously declared with a different result in mind but cricket is capricious, which is also a feature of its allure.

This writer first attended the Royal-Thomian in 1955, and has witnessed all the matches since, barring a brief hiatus in the early 19-seventies. Memories of individual matches, however exciting, are now vague though, the details lost in the fog of excessive merriment, generated in exclusive but boisterous enclosures like the “Colts”, “Stallions” and, latterly, the more sedate “Mustangs”. However, one Thomian victory which still remains indelible in memory is that of 1964, when STC, under the late Premalal Goonesekera, clinched victory in a nail-biting finish, providing a decision after ten consecutive drawn matches ( ’54-’63). That match is also remembered for Sarath Seneviratne’s brilliant 96, breaking Thomian hearts by falling short of a century, a tragedy he re-enacted in the very next Royal-Thomian as well, losing his wicket at 97. In a parody of fame, Sarath is recalled more often by Thomians for the centuries that he failed to score, than are other batsmen who actually did.

The 2025 Thomian victory too will similarly remain in the writer’s memory, for the much shorter lease of life now left to him. But more than the Thomian win, which will eventually become a statistic, the unforgettable feature of the game was the generous spirit, the fierce but fair competition, and the genuine respect which the competitors displayed towards each other. Those are life-lessons, far more important than the end-result, for all to take away, emulate and cherish.

Lessons from my career: synthesizing managementtheory with practice Part 7

Fitting into a New Culture

There was a massive contrast in the managerial style at the Tyre Corporation compared with my experience at State Engineering Corporation. At Tyre, the top management was more elitist, many of whom had come from the private sector at the start of the Corporation. Most of them were bridge players and would engage in bridge during the lunch break. Even the middle management was more polite and disciplined and would greet each other politely every morning. Phrases such as “please,” “thank you,” and “may I” were frequently used.

In contrast, I recall the time at State Engineering when we would send notes to others and often to the Administration. I would use very polite language; it was seen as unusual behaviour. Once, the Chief Clerk told me, “Your notes are so polite, your language so kind”. So, in a way, I was more at “home” at the Tyre Corporation. I wasn’t a bridge player and hated card games, so getting “accepted” to the elite group took me a while. This was a good lesson on how culture differs vastly from organisation to organisation and how one needs to fit in.

Everything at this Corporation ran smoothly, and the management was more relaxed. In contrast, at State Engineering, it was always a crisis or fire fighting. Initially, while studying each factory unit to understand the process, I also wanted to collect statistics for the past 10 years. Naturally, this meant going to different departments and collecting data, which I would analyse and compile later. Some had watched my bubbling energy in this exercise, and one manager even told me, “No one works so hard here, so just relax”. Thereafter, I decided to be more discreet so as not to engage the wrath of my peers and bosses. I had to fit into the culture.

bias cutting

The performance-based financial incentive scheme

As the Industrial Engineer, my most important responsibility was administering the “Performance Based Incentive Scheme”. Although I had studied financial and non-financial incentive schemes in theory, it was my first experience handling one so complex. My boss, who had a master’s degree in Industrial Management, was the master who had formulated the scheme. I realised how robust the scheme was. Every year, the scheme was reviewed and improved in such a way that the new targets were more stringent in quality standards, higher in productivity, better in safety, higher in machine utilisation, lower in waste and rejects and higher in morale. It was meant to drive performance forever upwards.

Even the administration units were kept on their toes with document flow targets and penalties. The whole system worked with clockwork precision. There was no need to even remind people about deadlines because the penalties for delays were automatic. Even in my subsequent positions in the public or private sector, I never came across any incentive scheme that was more comprehensive than this. Being responsible for administering and improving it, I was very keen to understand the reaction of the workers to any amendments.

Every time a change was made, I would send my faithful peon to the canteen to find what comments were made about the changes. Thereafter, I would visit each section to explain further and clarify their concerns. Adequate communication was paramount without leaving a vacuum for mischief makers and saboteurs to capitalise on.

The new MIS with Japanese expertise

I was fortunate to be involved in an experimental Management Information System (MIS) developed by Japanese experts as a model for Sri Lanka. I believe it was an Asian Productivity Organisation project. The Tyre Corporation was selected as the experimental source for the model because of a recommendation by the Ministry as a well-managed Corporation. The developed model was presented at a workshop to improve the performance of the entire manufacturing sector of Sri Lanka. The Tyre Corporation decided to modify it slightly and use it as a standard MIS. We called it the “The Action Oriented Performance Evaluation & Feedback Report”.

The name is self-explanatory. It would analyse the previous 24-hour production daily, analyse the losses of capacity utilisation and rejects, calculate the loss of contribution to the organisation, loss of incentives and recommend remedial action. This was an eye-opener to many heads of units who were determined to achieve better performance in their own units. Of course, some would disagree with me on the “recommended remedial action”. However, this new MIS scheme became a significant performance improvement factor.

Compound making

Collaboration with BF Goodrich of USA

In 1979 following the new policies of the new government the Corporation signed a technical collaboration agreement with BF Goodrich of USA, a giant tyre manufacturer with factories in many parts of the world. We would retain the Kelani trade mark, but the branding would say something like “in technical collaboration with BF Goodrich”. I had to work with the BF Goodrich agent in preparing the “Inter-firm Comparison report”.

This was my first experience with a comprehensive international inter-firm comparison. My task was to calculate the performance indicators and ratios and submit them. These were then telexed to the BF Goodrich Headquarters. Later in the month, we would receive, by post, the International Comparison Report, a table of performance indicators of all the factories in which BFG was involved. I remember the BF Goodrich agent asking me to compare our performance only with Peru, the Philippines, and Portugal. If you compare with more advanced countries such as Japan, you will get very depressed, he said.

Even looking at Peru, the Philippines and Portugal, I was depressed because we came out badly. The Tyre Corporatioj was a very profitable and well-managed corporation, but there were several areas where we performed below the others. There was a separate report called “Pounds Per Man-hour”, which indicated that our labour productivity in each process was found to be very low. After analysing these reports, we prioritised the action we could take immediately.

An example was our high consumption of compressed air compared with the production of tyre kilograms, which was found to be well above other countries. When I studied why it was so, I discovered that the workers constantly used many compressed air outlets in the factory to dry themselves by inserting the compressed air hose inside their shirts and drying themselves. This was a very common feature. In addition, there were several unattended leaks.

However, perhaps the most interesting use of compressed air was cleaning suede shoes, which was a fashion then. Even I was guilty of it. Almost everyone in the office wearing suede shoes would use compressed air to clean their shoes daily. There was no doubt that compressed air was the most effective method to clean suede shoes. These extra compressed air outlets were closed, leaks were repaired, and other modifications were made, so we were finally similar to the different factories regarding compressed air consumption per kg of tyres.

Storage of tyres

Similarly, many inferior performances were gradually remedied, and we came close to the comparative performance of Peru, the Philippines and Portugal. Unfortunately, the low labour productivity would not improve because over-staffing was not within the control of the management. The Board of Directors decided that the solution was to stop subscribing to the “Pounds Per Man Hour Report” as it would give a negative message to prospective investors.

Even then, I argued that with our low labour wages, where direct labour was only around 10% of the cost of production, we need not have worried. Rather than being a frog in the well, the Inter-firm Comparison opened our eyes to the practices of better companies outside.

The liberalised economy and a new culture

In July 1977, a new Government took over with a landslide victory, and the economy was liberalised. A new Chairman, Mr Justin Dias, arrived. He was a very dynamic person and was also hands-on. The top management initially found this new management culture very unsettling. Earlier, they were the decision-makers and handled all operational matters. The “new norm” was somewhat irritating.

It was a far cry from the D G Dayaratne style. Where Dayaratne hardly crossed the factory gate, Justin Dias would walk through the factory several times a day initially. He did not believe in the hierarchy and engaged with workers directly. He was effective ultimately, and the performance of the organisation improved. Still, for many people, the culture change took some time to digest.

The new open economy created new challenges and also some benefits. I was involved in an exercise to design a new finished goods storage facility with optimum space utilisation because our production was more than the sales. With the economy’s opening, the demand surged, and we were selling up to the previous day’s output, eliminating the need for more storage. The influx of the hi-ace vans with a small rim size caught us by surprise. It took a year to design and test this new size before releasing it. The earlier method of designing new tyre sizes based on the statistics of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles wouldn’t work in this situation.

The workers’ aspirations also changed. Senior officers bought new cars, and motorcycles came in. Milo, Ovaltine, and similar imported products were selling like hotcakes from the Welfare Shop. All this ultimately led to higher demand for pay and incentives when the workers’ standard of life improved.

The next episode will feature my life-changing course in Japan.

Sunil G Wijesinha

(Consultant on Productivity and Japanese Management Techniques

Retired Chairman/Director of several Listed and Unlisted companies.

Awardee of the APO Regional Award for promoting Productivity in the Asia and Pacific Region

Recipient of the “Order of the Rising Sun, Gold and Silver Rays” from the Government of Japan.

He can be contacted through email at: bizex.seminarsandconsulting@gmail.com)