This past week, the thinking and the chattering classes got neatly split into two. Is Modi the face of a new India, or has his victory pushed us back into the divisive abyss of hate politics? Reams have been written and hundreds of hours of airtime have been spent in attempting to analyse his feat through the prism of ideology.

Few have considered that victory and defeat in an election isn't just about vindication of the winner's ideological plank. It is as much about managerial efficiency, ability to plan and the sheer stamina to work hard, a work ethic cherished the most in corporate India. An ethic that distinguishes a profit-making corporate from a sick PSU.

The fact is, almost all pundits have either under-estimated or ignored that Modi has proved to be more of a corporate while contesting elections. And has also won them because he is pitted against an opponent which is increasingly behaving like a sick PSU. One where there are no ideas to face new market challenges, where senior-most leadership is never held accountable for declining performance, where merit is not the criteria, worker morale is low and one where there are too many non-performing assets.

In 1996, a little known but firebrand and a rather sectarian leader called Baikunth Lal Sharma Prem used to rule the roost in East Delhi, the second largest constituency in India. He had successfully dislodged the once powerful HKL Bhagat. While covering his campaign, most reporters like us couldn't help notice how everything about his campaigning was brisk and efficient. You could see how Prem was out-smarting his rivals in organisational skills, building relations with people at the mohalla level and displayed sheer stamina and dedication in his task.

The fact was Prem didn't just repeatedly win because he was perceived as a Hindu bigot, who was out to save the country from so-called pseudo-secularists. He won because his election agents had past data of voting patterns of every single ward in the sprawling constituency, knew every block level leader by name, knew their children and their birthdays and could guide you through every single lane without asking for directions. They worked on the fence-sitters, calculated their weak and strong spots well and carved an effective strategy around it. He won because Prem used to make it a point to attend every wedding and birthday celebration of his party workers. He had a bond, a hold over them.

Prem won handsomely, not once but twice, despite the constituency having nothing substantially communal about its electorate. But for the fact Prem bowed out of politics for inexplicable reasons a couple of years later, he would have continued winning.

Three years later, South Delhi presented a contrast, from where Manmohan Singh, now our Prime Minister, was fielded by the Congress. He was a man of impeccable credentials, a known reform-oriented ideological bent and honest. In a constituency, populated extensively by the thinking classes he should have won hands down against BJP's Vijay Kumar Malhotra. We all know what happened. What many of us reporters saw all along how his campaign was a near disaster, plagued by an unenthusiastic cadre, devoid of any strategy. That Dr Singh knew virtually no party worker and had little idea of political strategising made it worse and ensured he got a drubbing at the hustings. His campaign managers repeatedly took him to areas like Gautam Nagar, Rajiv Camp and Sonia Camp, all known Congress strongholds. The positive response led him to believe he was doing well. Little did he realise during campaigning you visit your strongest areas last. They will vote for you in any case. His election was sabotaged (one of the prime saboteurs is a minister in the current UPA government), and no amount of his charisma and persona got converted into votes.

In 2004, a young politician like Ajay Maken, someone with no known ideological conviction, was able to trounce a man of impeccable reputation like BJPs Jagmohan in New Delhi, simply because Maken strategised his campaign better. And worked harder in the field. In a constituency dominated by government officials (who have long admired and supported a man like Jagmohan), the BJP should have had a cake-walk. They didn't. Ideology lost. Political strategy and hard field work won.

So while getting the caste combination right, using an emotive, ideological plank maybe critical in winning elections, it isn't the only thing. Mayawati won Uttar Pradesh not just because she created a new revolution by uniting Brahmins and backwards in the state. Her victory also became impressive because she began working two years before the National parties did. She carved a strategy and worked hard at it. Just like a corporate does after they have figured a way ahead during a brainstorming session and where they work as if they have a target to achieve. Leaders were given targets, her days would begin at 6 am and she connected with her block and taluka level leaders, who would be her corporate house like workforce.

If managing caste equations alone was enough, Udit Raj's Indian Justice Party and the Jan Sangh would been the ruling classes. Paswan, too, would have been ruling Bihar; he seemingly had the right combination in Bihar. He came a cropper in the elections, as he did not have the efficient workforce to back his ideological position. In elections, you need to get the nitty-gritty of poll management right.

It needs a dedicated and efficient cadre to distribute voters' slips amongst your supporters. It needs dedicated workers to ACTUALLY man tables outside polling booths, it needs workers to fan out in areas where response is lukewarm and coax them into coming out to vote for you. It needs an enthused cadre, correct feedback from them and data on areas to target. It needs the leaders to get the pulse right and the workers who believe it. Along with charisma and caste and ideological equations, it needs dollops of organisational skills, motivated workers and the art of political management.

Many of us believe politicians don't work hard. Tragedy is, parties like Congress have not only begun to believe it, they now practice it, too. They begin their job too late, and work too less at trying to win it.

Fact is, while Modi's stunning performance may symbolise some sort of a victory of a particular thought process, it as much exposes the simple lack of work ethic by his principal rivals. A lot like a PSU, whose management is content in letting extraneous elements be responsible for whatever they do. One, which does not believe in the principle of accountability, has the wrong men (and women) for the wrong job, lacks sheer energy and the drive to perform and is singularly involved in chasing narrow self interests.

Corporates don't blame market rivals for a clever pitch or idea. They don't blame them for their competitors' tactics. They come up with their own clever counter strategies and then work their guts out to match it. They create new markets, expand their connect with the consumers and work hard. While Modi may well have still won his third term, as charisma and ideology still has a role to play in India, at least he would have done so with a smaller margin.

Maybe, that would have dimmed some of the decibel on the victory of ideology and the so-called heralding of a New India leadership. In this age of market forces, the Congress has proved to be a sick PSU. What they need is a bit of a corporate work ethic.