Contemporaries often spoke or wrote about the East Indian problem or question, but in 1766 this meant many different things to different people. Indeed, an initial failure to identify and define the scope of the problem in precise terms led to a confusion of purpose which lasted until 1772. Until then, the Company and the ministry tackled very different sets of Indian priorities. They often failed to agree as to what exactly was on the political agenda; they often worked at cross purposes; and they were often forced into positions of confrontation and conflicting interest. There is little evidence to suggest that the ministry and the Company ever worked for long in close harmony towards a common goal or aim during this period. Instead, a prolonged war of attrition developed between the two parties as they both sought to protect their own position and interests.

Following the Company's acquisition of the Diwani, the directors sought immediate reform of their administrative, judicial, and commercial affairs in Bengal. They held this to be imperative if recent gains were to be consolidated. In particular, they needed to establish new trading and revenue collection systems in order to maximise corporate investment and secure the return of as large a revenue surplus as possible to Britain. These were essentially practical problems, but the solutions often required support and reinforcement in the form of parliamentary legislation. Ministers, however, neither wished nor sought to be drawn into new areas of imperial legislative activity or responsibility.