Different regimes and many reformers have promised to reform the public services to make them productive over the years, both under colonial rule and after independence. They have enquired and enquired, reported and reported and the vision they have given us has been paved with good intentions. The results, so far, have not been inspiring. Part of the problem is that while the reformers, no doubt took their task seriously, their proposals were almost universally couched in highly idealistic and generalised terms. Eloquent and ponderous, at the general level, they failed to devote the necessary attention to the task of how the goals would be implemented and what the obstacles would be that they encountered. In short, they failed to address the difficulties which regimes everywhere else have had to face in attempting to reform their public services.
They remained for too long at the level of mantra and exhortation. Few would disagree with the goal of having a more productive civil service but there would be fierce argumentation about how to measure that productivity; productivity, understandably, would normally face difficulty of measurement since the outputs of different government departments would vary. Judicial departments from licensing departments and registration and births and deaths and passports departments would correspondingly differ from a revenue department. Arriving at a consensus as to what constitutes the productivity over a period of time, however, can be arrived at by discussion and consent. It is also important to be clear about the goals of the organisation. It is not enough to pontificate about national goals. Different departments and ministries will have different goals.
It is therefore important to be clear about their nature and how they should be measured. Account must also be taken of short term as against long term evaluation. Much has been heard of on a whole of government approach to problems-very much along the lines of the one-stop shopping approach that was advanced some years ago. The records suggest that there was some difficulty with this kind of approach. It is nevertheless, important to recognise that governmental activity must be evaluated as a whole since policies in one area are likely to have consequences for other areas of governmental activity.
For instance, what seems to be the practice of WASA coming and digging up a road soon after it is freshly paved seems to dramatise the problem identified. Similarly, the educational system and its outputs should be geared to the social and economic needs of a country and therefore the skills that a country will require in the future should be taken into account when the education system is being reformed.
For very similar reasons, human resource departments in all ministries should be required to do a needs assessment of their various ministries for a particular period so that educational and training programmes could fit into the overall plan. For the same reason, a transport policy should take into account demographic movements and changes within the country as a whole. Much has been said and written about organisational cultures. There can be no doubt that the culture of a customs organisation is essentially different from that of an academic organisation. In an academic organisation,hierarchy is based largely on academic achievement. In a number of governmental organisations hierarchy is largely based on the criterion of seniority. Some organisations have their own conventions and rules, for instance, how many vehicles will be inspected per day. Reformers could address their attention to enquiring to whether they could increase the number of vehicles inspected per day. In police departments, police officers instead of being on the streets spend their time on clerical work and therefore the output and productivity of the police force could certainly be increased if clerical workers are employed instead.
The role of leadership is also a very critical factor in the success or failure of organisations. In the past, it was assumed that a change at the very top would solve all problems and enhance the productivity of the organisation. This was the thinking that informed the removal and appointment of governors, CEOs, chairmen of boards and commissions, and a host of other organisations as well as corporate entities.
It is important however, to recognise that leadership is a major factor at all levels in an organisation. As leaders everywhere are finding out, the people below have the capacity and at times the power to frustrate an overzealous leader. Leaders, if they are to succeed also have to convince those below them that they are committed to protecting their interest and turf. The humble messenger in the Warden's Office under Colonial rule had the power to frustrate the Warden when he attempted to report a delinquent officer to the Colonial Secretary by simply refusing to take the letter to the post office and simply threw it into the waste bin.
Recent advances in technology has changed the situation but rules and regulations and amount and nature of evidence required to discipline an erring officer is now so complicated that it is not surprising that some supervisors have counselled others to let "sleeping dogs lie." It is no wonder that sometimes the delinquent officers are promoted to higher positions in other departments to get them out of the way. It also explains why newly created departments often become the dustbins for those who are rejected elsewhere. These are the obstacles on the ground that high ideals must confront if they are to deal with reality and these are the kinds of issues which unfortunately reformers and enquiring experts have so far failed to address as regimes elsewhere have finally discovered.