The APO Center of Excellence on Public Sector Productivity
Philippine Standard Time:
Category: Featured Articles
The Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), in cooperation with the Asian Productivity Organization (APO), through the Center of Excellence on Public Sector Productivity (COE-PSP) Program Management Office, implemented this year’s first run of the APO Development of Public Sector Productivity Specialists (APO DPSPS).
The course was conducted online and ran from 16 to 20 May 2022. It was attended by 50 participants from APO member countries such as Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, the Republic of China, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Turkey, and the Philippines. It trained the participants in the relevant concepts, approaches, tools, and techniques to develop their competencies as productivity specialists in the public sector.
The course predominantly featured Dr. Shin Kim, Senior Research Fellow with the Division of Regulatory Innovation Research, Korea Institute of Public Administration, Republic of Korea, and Dr. D. Brian Marson, President of the Public Service Excellence Institute, Canada, as its two main speakers. They were supported by presentations from DAP officers Mr. Arnel D. Abanto, Vice President and Managing Director of the Productivity and Development Center, and Ms. Maria Rosario A. Ablan, Program Director of the AO 25 Secretariat, as well as case presentations from key Philippine government officials.
Productivity Trends and Concepts
NEDA Undersecretary Jose Miguel de la Rosa, the APO Director for the Philippines, during his opening remarks
The opening day began with a message from National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) Undersecretary Jose Miguel de la Rosa, the APO Director for the Philippines, who emphasized the need for more individuals capable of transforming the public sector to become more innovative, agile, and impactful. This was followed by the first session of the course, The Role of the Public Sector and Global Trends in Improving Productivity, in which Dr. Kim discussed the importance of productivity in governance. This was further enriched by the day’s final session on Public Sector Leadership. Dr. Marson used this session to clarify the differences between leadership and management, especially in the context of the public sector, and how each can contribute to productivity.
Dr. Shin Kim discussing key concepts in public sector productivity
Dr. Marson opened the following day’s sessions, beginning with the topic Citizen-Centered Service and Opportunities for Improving Public Service Delivery in the New Normal. Much of the discussion revolved around the experiences of the Philippines, Singapore, New Zealand, and Canada in measuring client satisfaction with government services and addressing the gaps and problems that were highlighted by the public.
Dr. Kim followed with a session on Performance Management, particularly on its relation to productivity, accountability, and, ultimately, results. One of his insights was that, in the past, organizations approached this by first thinking about how to manage their resources. But now, the thinking has shifted to first identifying goals and objectives before determining the required actions and resources.
To close the day’s sessions, Dr. Marson facilitated a group exercise on citizen-centered services. Participants were divided into four groups to brainstorm service improvement plans based on their group’s assigned case study. Afterwards, each group’s representative presented their findings and discussed with the larger group.
Participants presenting their outputs from the exercise on citizen-centered services
Assessing, Measuring, and Improving Productivity
The third day of the course opened with the session on Development of Productivity Improvement Plans, where Dr. Marson discussed the key steps needed to devise an initiative that would increase an organization’s productivity in a systematic way. These include conducting baseline performance assessments, establishing clear objectives, and selecting the appropriate components that would ensure the effectiveness and quality of the resulting action. He highlighted the use of the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) as a basis for developing a thorough and well-executed improvement plan.
Dr. Marson discussing how to improve productivity using the Common Assessment Framework (CAF)
The next session, Measuring Public Sector Productivity, was covered by Mr. Abanto, who began by discussing the key considerations in estimating public sector productivity, such as the effective communication of productivity information for policy, decision-making, and improvement action. He then proceeded to demonstrate index-based productivity measurement, highlighting the use of cost-weighing and deflating to ensure the accuracy of the resulting productivity estimates.
Mr. Abanto conducting an exercise on index-based measurement of public sector productivity
Dr. Marson led the fourth day of sessions with his discussion of Change Management in the Public Sector. This particular session included mini-case studies and group discussions on theories of and best practices in change management specific to the public sector. The participants’ questions centered on the change management process, its challenges, and the solutions needed to overcome the said challenges.
The following topic, Approaches for Improving Organizational Productivity, was covered by Ms. Ablan. She discussed a range of practical tools and techniques to improve productivity such as the 5S Methodology or Practical Industrial Engineering (IE). She also highlighted the importance of understanding the underlying principles in choosing the right tools and techniques and employing the appropriate solutions for the problems at hand.
Ms. Ablan sharing her insights on continuous improvement in the public sector
The Application of Technology in Public Sector Productivity
The last day of the course began with two presentations of local projects showcasing how their initiatives and leadership strategies concretized the concepts and tools of productivity, particularly in the use of digital technology.
First to present was Ms. Maria Luisa Khristina C. Oliveros, Supervising Labor and Employment Officer for the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) CAMANAVA Field Office. She demonstrated how her project on virtual site inspections proved to be a safe means of conducting labor inspections, especially given the difficulties brought by COVID-19.
Ms. Oliveros sharing her presentation on adapting on-site inspections to the risks associated with COVID-19
Second was Dr. Edward E. Baña, Education Program Supervisor for the Department of Education Schools Division Office of Antique. He presented how his project on using RFID technology for student monitoring helped prevent children from dropping out and also provided more efficient workflows for the school’s employees.
Dr. Baña presenting on the use of RFID technology to better monitor the attendance and performance of schoolchildren
These presentations flowed directly into the final session of the course, which was on the topic of E-Government. Dr. Kim discussed how best to understand the concept of e-government, and showcased some best practices in the use of ICT across different public sector cases from various countries.
DAP President and CEO Atty. Caronan giving his closing remarks.
To formally close the five-day training, APO Alternate Director for the Philippines and DAP President and CEO Atty. Engelbert C. Caronan, Jr., delivered a message that thanked the APO and DAP teams for their efforts in hosting the course and commended the resource persons for sharing their knowledge and guiding the participants. He added that he is looking forward to the innovations that the participants will implement to help public sector organizations improve their productivity.
The DAP, through the Center of Excellence – Public Sector Productivity, held this year’s first batch of the Development of Public Sector Productivity Specialists Foundation Course (DPSPS FC) from 16 to 20 May 2022. The five-day course was designed to equip staff and officers of public sector organizations’ management divisions with competencies in measurement, analysis, planning, and troubleshooting to increase their respective organizations’ productivity.
Twenty participants from the Department of the Interior and Local Government – National Capital Region (DILG-NCR), Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) – Regional Offices 1 and 5, Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA), Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PHIC) Regional Office – CAR, and Department of Education (DepEd) – Ignacio Villamor Senior High School completed this training program.
During the course, the participants listened to lectures and applied their learnings by measuring their organization’s productivity and diagnosing existing problems, and developing productivity improvement projects. A week after the training, the participants are expected to submit their respective Productivity Improvement Plan.
Improving public sector productivity
In her welcome remarks, Imelda Caluen, Managing Director of the DAP-Center for Governance, acknowledged how the present interlocking challenges put pressure on the Philippine public sector to continuously perform internal and external tasks more efficiently and effectively. To meet the changing demands of stakeholders and the public with limited resources, governments and organizations around the world are pushed to shift to more productive means of doing their job.
Ms. Imelda Caluen delivered the welcome remarks.
Mr. Peter Dan B. Baon, Program Manager of the COE-PSP, served as the speaker for the first session, entitled Understanding Public Sector Productivity Concepts and Principles. He talked about productivity as a technical, social, and management concept and its importance in the context of the public sector.
Mr. Peter Dan Baon talked about the role of the public sector in improving productivity.
The session entitled, “Measuring Productivity in the Public Sector,†tackled the Productivity Measurement Framework and the key considerations and challenges in measuring Public Sector Productivity. The resource persons, Ms. Rose Ann Camille Caliso, Mr. Philip Ryan Junginger, and Ms. Jenifer Camilon expounded on how PSP measurement allows leaders and policymakers to assess productivity trends within the public sector, improve accountability over the use of resources, determine where to allocate resources where they are used most effectively, and provide feedback on policy initiatives. For their session activity, the participating agencies were tasked to compute their productivity using the productivity measurement tool provided to them.
Session 3 resource persons, Philip Junginger, Camille Caliso, and Jenifer Camilon discussed PSP measurement.
The third session, entitled Diagnosing and Analyzing Productivity, was facilitated by Ms. Elena Cruz, Former Vice-President of the Development Academy of the Philippines and Managing Director of the DAP Center for Knowledge Management. Ms. Cruz discussed how to diagnose productivity problems in the public sector using the PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) Cycle and the Lean Management principles and concepts based on the Toyota Production System (TPS).
Ms. Cruz shared about diagnosing and analyzing productivity problems.
The session, entitled Identifying Productivity Improvement, discussed how to identify and plan productivity improvements that will address productivity problems identified in the previous session. Ms. Niña Estudillo, international resource person in productivity and quality courses of Tokyo-based Asian Productivity Organization (APO) introduced tools and techniques for productivity improvement, zeroing in on Quality Circle and Business Process Re-Engineering (BPR).
Ms. Estudillo facilitated problem-solving activities during breakout sessions.
For the final session, presenters from different public sector organizations shared their PSP best practices and experiences. Kenjave Mark Parlero, Designated Head of HR Academy Human Resource Management and Development Office at the City Government of General Santos, together with his colleagues, Jose Amagan Jr. and Teodoro Barcelona Jr., shared their experience in planning and implementing the project entitled “High-Personal Effectiveness Through Resources Allocation (HI-PERA). Dr. Juliet J. Balderas, Management Service Department Head of Office of Strategy Management at the Philippine Heart Center presented about Sustaining Business Excellence through Unit Scoreboards as Execution Mechanism for Increased Individual Performance and Breakthrough Results. Lastly, Dr. Teresita A. Tabaog, Assistant Regional Director at the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) – Region 2 shared about DOST’s Performance Excellence Team and Initiatives during the Pandemic.
To formally close the program, DAP President and CEO Atty. Engelbert C. Caronan, Jr. left a timely reminder to all the participants. He noted, “in an increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous world, you being considered the future public sector productivity specialists are expected to strengthen your organization, while also contributing to the sectoral and the national productivity improvement. This is a reminder for all of us to do much good; bear in mind that policy decisions that are data-driven alongside citizen needs make a government future-ready.â€
The Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) held a webinar on Public Sector Productivity Concepts and Tools last 22-24 March 2022 as the first installment of this year’s of Public Sector Productivity (PSP) Webisodes, a year-long initiative to raise awareness on productivity and innovation topics in the public sector through the virtual space. Speakers for the three-day webinar were Director Samuel Rosal of DAP’s Technology Management Office, Director Mary Ann Vilchez of the Internal Audit Service of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), and Niña Marie Estudillo, an Asian Productivity Organization (APO) productivity practitioner, technical expert, and trainer.
Director Rosal opening the webinar series with his presentation.
Understanding the concept of productivity in the public sector
The webinar started with an overview of productivity, as Dir. Rosal aimed to provide the participants with a foundation of the concept. He defined productivity as a “formula between the quantity of output versus the quantity of input in the production process,†and it is seen as “a ratio between the goods and services produced versus the resources such as labor, materials, machinery, and energy.â€
He then expanded the discussion from productivity to effectiveness, which looks at the ratio of outcomes to inputs, instead of looking at just the ratio of outputs and inputs (i.e., productivity). Crucially, he notes that outcomes are different from outputs in the sense that the dimension of outcomes is more significant.
Dir. Rosal also framed productivity in the public sector as the capacity of an organization to fulfill the desired societal outcomes as mandated in the most efficient, effective, and economical management of public goods and services provided. He pointed out that public servants work hard to achieve goals and desired outcomes to purposefully benefit their clients—the citizens—especially since the resources that make the public sector run actually come from them.
Productivity Improvement Project (PIP) as a tool for improving public sector productivity
On the second day of the webinar, Dir. Vilchez focused on the importance of a productivity improvement project (PIP) as a tool for improving public sector productivity. She introduced the PIP as the final output of trainees from the Developing Public Sector Productivity Specialist (DPSPS) course by the APO which focuses on drawing out from the trainees “practical and effective ways of utilizing the knowledge gained from the course.†She further explained that “a Productivity Improvement Project is an organized, comprehensive, and long term intervention that involves the use of innovation to enhance and sustain high productivity levels and performance of organizations or target systems.†The PIP can even be considered an innovative tool because it is something that has not yet been done, or at the very least, an improvement of what is already being done.
Dir. Vilchez discussing an actual project implementation document.
Competencies of a productivity specialist
To conclude the webinar series, Ms. Estudillo shared the competencies of a productivity specialist, which she defines as a highly skilled individual whose work concentrates primarily on applications of productivity-related solutions and activities in consultancy, training, promotion, and research assignments. Given this definition, a productivity specialist’s roles in productivity improvement initiatives are as a promoter, a consultant, a trainer, and a researcher.
Ms. Estudillo explaining the different roles of a productivity specialist.
A participant asked, “How is a PSP specialist placed in an organization—is it under HR, internal audit, or a separate team? What specifically is his or her role in an organization?†The speaker did not specify any level in the relative hierarchy or structure of an organization, but she did mention that while there is no widely accepted job description for one yet, a PSP specialist’s role is to encourage change to achieve a more effective and efficient system.
This webinar series is available for replay on Facebook and Youtube. Stay tuned for more upcoming webinar series in the coming months.
PDC Broadens its Internal Pool of Innovation Facilitators
As the nation finally moves towards life after the pandemic, the PSP-InnoLab sets measures to ensure that the DAP responds to new demands and challenges facing the nation. In anticipation of disruptive changes, especially in the new way of doing things, the Facilitators’ Course on Innovating the Public Sector was conducted for 14 members of the Productivity and Development Center (PDC).
This activity marks the first step in producing new facilitators who will aid the DAP in spreading the innovation culture in the government. On March 21-25, 2022, the team underwent an in-depth workshop on the Co-Creation Innovation Process (CCIP) as an ideation tool for addressing various issues and conceptualizing innovation projects. Furthermore, the participants were immersed in the new workshop designs and given a glimpse of the various online tools and practices pertinent to executing the new modules of PSP-InnoLab. Aside from the concepts, tools, and the CCIP process, coaching on Miro, Zoom management, Canva, and other online productivity tools, was introduced to capacitate the participants with new techniques and mindsets.
The workshop is only the starting point of the participants’ journey to becoming bonafide innovation facilitators. Aside from the practice facilitation conducted after the activity, the attendees will be invited to sit in actual activities of the PSP-InnoLab to hone their skills further. Hand-holding and shadowing techniques will be done to ensure that they become efficient, effective, and confident facilitators in no time.
The PSP-Innolab is set to spread its wings outside the PDC. It aims to capacitate more innovation facilitators as it sets out to extend the said endeavor to other DAP centers in the year’s second and third quarters.The Facilitators’ Course is also a public offering of the PSP-InnoLab. If you wish to know more about the program, please email pspinnolab@dap.edu.ph. — Mariel R. Mañibo
(Filipino voters casting their ballots on the 2016 Philippine National Elections. Photo: The Philippine Star)
The Philippines will have its general elections this May 2022, along with other governments such as South Korea, India and Germany. Elections, or the process of selecting leaders to represent the interests of its citizens in policy-making and public administration, are a central institution in democratic governments. A truly democratic election’s end goal is to establish a representative government which focuses on the protection and promotion of its citizens’ rights, interest, and welfare.
Elections and public sector productivity
(Vote counting machines being used in the 2016 Philippine National Elections. Photo: The Philippine Star)
The administration of elections can be considered as a public service catering to its citizen’s right to vote. Thus, like other public services, it is a fruitful exercise to periodically re-evaluate its efficiency and effectiveness, as well as explore ways to improve it — much more in a service so crucial to good governance, and consequently, to a productive public sector.
This article presents different practices in the conduct of government elections, in an attempt to stimulate re-evaluation and a possible re-thinking of our current election-related practices.
A Framework for Evaluating Productivity
Before we present different electoral practices, it would be beneficial to start with a definition of productivity, as well as a framework which will guide us in our exploration.
Productivity is usually explained in the context of organizations producing a product or a service paid for by clients; technically, it is the rate of outputs per unit of input. Putting it in the context of the public sector, it is efficiently using public resources (i.e. tax paid by citizens) in producing quality outputs (i.e. policies and public services). Public sector productivity is about doing more with less, producing quality outputs, restoring public trust, and fostering good governance.
Productivity can be broken down into these components: Input, Process, Output, and Outcome. Analyzing productivity boils down to looking at each of these components, in relation to how they all contribute to the whole process.
In the case of administration of elections, a lot of factors are to be considered. The government uses public funds (input) to provide electoral services to its citizens (process) in order to have a set of newly elected officials, or sometimes, a public decision on a policy (output). The desired outcomes of elections could be an increased trust in the government, more representative policies, leading to better citizen participation, a more competitive business environment, and an over-all better performing economy — the list goes on. It is fair to say that there is a strong relation between the efficiency of the election process and the increase of public trust in the government and its institutions. In this article, we would try to explore the electoral process by looking at different practices classified under 4 different themes: voter registration, scheduling of voting date, accessibility of polling stations, and means of voting. For the purposes of this article, we will be dealing with the relation of these elements to an output indicator: voter turnout. While voter turnout is not an all-encompassing indicator to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of the electoral process, it can serve as a proxy measure.
Here are some election-related practices around the world:
Voter Registration. Citizens are compulsory to vote in 22 countries in order to increase voter turnout. Non-voters are penalized in some countries such as in Australia and Singapore. In Australia, non-voters are notified by the government through email, text message, and snail mail seeking an explanation for non-participation in the election. If non-voters have no valid reason, they will be fined $20 for first time offense while $50 for succeeding offense. Also, the government can suspend the driver’s license of non-voters who did not respond to the notice or did not pay the fine. In Singapore, non-voters are removed from the certified register of electors of the electoral divisions in their area but their names can be restored by submitting an application to the registration officer with valid reasons for not voting, such as working overseas (including being on a business trip), studying overseas, living with their spouse overseas; overseas vacation; and illness or delivering a baby. A penalty of $50 will be imposed to non-voters if no valid reasons were presented. Nowadays, governments in some countries such as Italy, Norway, Romania, South Korea, Switzerland, Belgium, and Sweden linked voter registration with their national database (e.g. civil registry) hence, eliminating the need to register for the elections. In South Korea, the list of voters is linked with the national ID database which is updated periodically while qualified citizens registered in the public census are automatically eligible to vote in Norway.
(Voting booths in Sacramento, California on March 5, 2018. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty)
Other countries such as Canada and France initiated multiple options for registration to make it easier and more convenient for their citizens. In Canada, citizens can opt to register online or on the election day itself. In France, citizens can register in person at their local town hall, through mail, online, or by sending a third party to deliver their application to their town halls. Before election day, countries like Norway, Germany, and Belgium send election details to their citizens to prevent unnecessary hassle in the precincts. In Norway, they receive a notification card stating the election time, date, and the location of their polling station. In Switzerland, voting papers, including polling card or voter identification card will be mailed at least three weeks before election day.
(Voting documents of Switzerland arrives by mail. Photo: Thunabrain)
Scheduling of voting date. The schedule of the election also affects voter turnout. In countries like Australia, Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, and Peru, elections are held on weekends so that working people have time to vote. Advanced voting is usually conducted for absentee voting – voters who are away from the area (e.g. employment) or are confined to institutions through illness or disability; but in some countries just like Estonia, Canada, Sweden, and Norway, advanced voting is applicable for all citizens. Norway is considered as the country with the longest advanced voting period which takes place for maximum of six weeks before the actual election day. The municipalities receive the advanced votes and they decide on the location and dates of election. In the case of Estonia, 7-10 days before election day, at least one polling place in every country center is open where citizens can vote regardless of their voting district of residence; all polling stations are then opened 4-6 days before the election. In Canada, advanced polls are held every 10th to the 7th day before the election day; in Sweden, citizens can vote in advanced at any voting location, 18 days before the elections.
(Polling place in Australia on its Election day. Photo: Andrew O’Connor)
(Porters carry Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines and Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) through Buxa tiger reserve forest to a remote polling station, in Alipurduar district in the eastern state of West Bengal, India, April 10, 2019. Photo: Reuters/Rupak De Chowdhuri)
Accessibility of polling station. The accessibility of the polling station can affect the turnout of voters as well. India is considered to have the world’s biggest election, hence, the government mapped out the location of polling stations to make it accessible for the citizens living in far-flung areas such as those located in the forests and mountains. According to the Election Commission of India guidelines, a polling station must be less than 2km from a voter. In the case of Australia, citizens can vote at any polling place in their home state or territory while citizens in another state or territory can vote in their interstate voting centers.
Means of voting. Many countries already shifted from paper voting to electronic voting because of its efficiency. There are different types of electronic voting: Optical Ballot Scanning Machine (Philippines), Direct-Recording Electronic Voting Machine (India and Venezuela), and Internet Voting (Estonia).
(e-Voting in Estonia. Photo: Liu Wei/Xinhua Press/Corbis)
One type of electronic voting is optical ballot scanning that reads and scans marked ballot papers. The voting machine releases ballot receipt after reading the voters ballot which serves as their tangible record. In addition, it can also store voting data through memory card or upload the data then, connect through internet access. The Philippines started to use this type in 2010. Another type is the direct-recording electronic voting machines that records votes through computer hardware such as buttons and touch screen output. The machine produces a tabulation of the voting data stored in a removable memory component and/or as printed copy. One of its advantages is that it can be used as advanced voting device in polling stations.
The last type of electronic voting is internet voting, considered as more radical departure from tradition methods, refers to the use of the Internet to cast and transmit the vote. It can take various forms depending on whether it is used in uncontrolled environments such as remote internet voting, polling site internet voting, or kiosk voting. With remote internet voting, neither the client machines nor the physical environment are under the control of election officials. Voters can cast their vote anywhere (at home, at the workplace, at public Internet terminals etc.). This type of e-voting has an advantages such as reduced costs and greater convenience, cutting the time spent for voting ritual, increased political participation and turnout, and opportunities for innovation. However, it also has downsides such as security risks, digital divide, insufficient transparency, unsecured built systems, and insecure software downloads. In 2005, Estonia became the first country in the world to adopt internet voting. The i-Voting system allows citizens to vote at their convenience because the ballot can be cast anywhere with internet connection. The system only takes 3 minutes and brings votes from all over the world. It is being used only during advanced voting, from the 10th until the 4th day before election day. The system allows re-vote or repeated voting but only the last vote cast will count. Some countries employ several voting processes in order to accommodate all its citizens and increase voter turnout. In Canada, one can vote through paper voting, mail voting, mobile voting for seniors and persons with physical disabilities, and voting at home with the presence of an election officer and a witness for special cases. In Australia, citizens can vote through paper voting at any polling place in their home state (inter-state voting), electronic voting machine, mobile voting for sick people in hospitals, nursing homes, prisons and remote areas, and telephone voting for people who are blind or having low vision. In Belgium, aside from voting in person and by post, some citizens can vote by proxy where citizens can appoint someone to vote on their behalf. Citizens who have illness, business reasons, residents on holiday outside Belgium, students involved in examinations, those with religious convictions, and prisoners are qualified to use the said process to vote.
Citizen-centered Elections. By eliminating the usual roadblocks such as limited access to a specified voting precinct, limited availability of time to vote, limitations on mobility due to physical disabilities and restrictions, these election-related practices aim to increase voter turnout by making the elections more citizen-centric.
However, as the table above would show, a particular practice does not guarantee a high voter turnout rate. While Australia and Belgium may have benefited from its mandatory voting policy, Netherlands, which does not implement the same rule also have a high voter turnout. The top countries in voter turnout rate do not use electronic means of voting either. It is important to bear in mind that each country has its own context, and what works in another may not work in another.
Investing in Democratic Institutions. Aside from electoral participation rate, some of the other issues to be considered are the extent by which citizens actually feel that their vote counts, as well as their confidence in the integrity of the election results. While it is a good aim to make the whole process more convenient for the citizens, governments also need to work in strengthening its institutions. It all boils down to one thing: public trust.
(Swedish Polling Station. Photo: CC BY Härnösands kommun/Newsdes)
Falun, a city in Sweden, works on increasing its citizen’s trust in public institutions by encouraging active citizenship. Swedish government works year-round to engage its citizens to make them know and use their rights, not just during election season. For example, they have developed a Democracy passport – with the size and shape of a national passport, it describes all the political powers of its citizens and all the forums where they have the right to weigh in, at the city, state, country, and European level. Other programs such as opening a Democracy center, which is a free space for democratic education and dialogue, as well as having a full-time Democracy Navigator to assist individuals and groups to make their voices heard, all help send a message to the citizens: that they are not just consumers of programs but are direct participants in the community. This sense of being involved has generated significant trust in their public institutions; thus, when election season comes, citizens have an active awareness to participate. We could learn a thing or two from this Swedish city by not only working on the efficiency and convenience of the electoral process, but by investing more in democratic infrastructure. And perhaps that’s the feature that sets the electoral process apart from all other public services – unless trust is the bedrock, that’s the only time when productivity will matter. And when productivity sprouts, trust becomes a by-product. The cycle goes on.
Government offices present citizen-centered improvement initiatives during DAP-hosted forum
On 7 December 2021, the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), as the Center of Excellence on Public Sector Productivity (COE-PSP), conducted a Sharing Session for participants from its Designing Citizen-Centered Public Service Improvements (DCCPSI) program from 2020 and 2021. The agencies who presented their projects during the event were the Department of Health (DOH), the Department of Tourism (DOT), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice), the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG).
The DCCPSI program assists government agencies in developing means for their services to address their clients’ needs and expectations and result in greater organizational productivity. It uses innovation methods and techniques to identify issues affecting service delivery and prepare proposed concepts for implementation. Despite the diversity in scope and mission among the participating agencies, the presented initiatives had similar strategies in working towards citizen-centered public service improvements. They mostly relied on technology-based improvements such as digitalizing processes and introducing online functionality in order to provide citizens with faster and more convenient transactions.
Technology as a driver for improving services
Many of the participating agencies found that technology has become the key driver for improving public services. Eloida Flores of DOH shared that this could be seen in the new process for accrediting health facilities implemented by the Health Facilities and Services Regulatory Bureau. This project uses communications technology to facilitate pre- and post-inspection coordination as well as conference calling tools as an alternative to walking through a facility. Their test runs using this new approach resulted in the inspection of 500 facilities and monitoring of 104 facilities. These results meant that the project led to improved compliance with the Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act of 2018. The Bureau was also able to significantly reduce their backlog, reach their quota for the number of facilities to be monitored, and create venues for fast communication via a variety of mobile apps.
Charmane Dalisay of DOT shared a similar story, as their team created a system for accreditation of tourism enterprises where clients could submit their requirements online while also enabling employees to process these requirements online, along with other features for both clients and employees. The DOT launched this project last September 2021 and have since been able to register 14,287 accounts registered, receive 6,908 applications, and process 4,720 of applications received. Of these applications, 2,188 were still being processed and only 229 were disapproved. Public reception for the project has been excellent, with a reported average satisfaction rating of 100% based on a client satisfaction survey they conducted from January through September of 2021.
Citizens’ Convenience at Heart
Although technology has been the driver for many of the projects, citizens’ convenience has remained the goal above all else. Ivan Limjap of DSWD shared their plan to make the issuance of clearance for minors traveling abroad fully available online, which would reduce the need for face-to-face interaction and eliminate waiting time for applicants.
Their project is being developed in coordination with the Department of Science and Technology Advanced Science and Technology Institute (DOST-ASTI), and Bizooku, a private computer software developer. And even if it has not been fully implemented yet and is still in testing, it shows great promise for improving citizens’ convenience, having already received positive feedback from clients. Another example was shared by Ida Miape of TESDA, who discussed the Program Registration Certification Office’s planned online tracking of applications for registration of TVET programs. While this has not yet been implemented, the project will lessen the need for face-to-face customer interaction while making them easier and faster.
Janette Cruz of BIR presented another similar project, an online system that facilitates the end-to-end process of registering new corporations. With this new system, applicants will only have to take three steps to register as a corporate taxpayer, with the whole process only taking about half an hour to complete. Once the project is implemented, it will elevate taxpayers’ registration experience which should hopefully lead to an improvement in the country’s tax compliance. It would also completely remove the need for time-consuming face-to-face interaction with taxpayers, transforming a problematic process that has been problematic yet necessary into one that is convenient for both citizens and BIR staff.
Change Management Speed Bumps
Despite the great potential these improvements can bring, there are still some hurdles to implementing them. Lucita Dela Peña of DILG encountered several challenges with one of their projects aimed at reducing the processing time for authorizing local government units’ purchases of motor vehicles. They changed their plan from focusing on policy changes to automating the process after initially consulting their stakeholders. But as of the sharing session, their team was still setting up meetings with regional focal persons to present their project and gather recommendations. In this case, they are demonstrating that there are still many people that must be involved before a change is made, and the reliance on technology for this change also presents as a major factor in this process.
Another example is evident from the sharing of Chona Suner-Narvadez of the PhilRice Business Development Division. Their e-Punla Rice Seed Information Systems project digitalizes and automates operations related to selling seeds such as fulfilling forms, conducting surveys, providing information to buyers, monitoring inventory, and many more. They started beta testing their project with their current buyers’ last planting season. Through this project, they eliminated the need for seed growers and rice farmers to manually input their details through the use of QR codes, creating a database which facilitated the verification of their seed growers and ultimately removed the need for physical masterlists. However, some clients needed assistance using the kiosks because they were not as familiar with touch screen technology. In this case, the challenge came from people’s adoption of new technology rather than problems with the organization or its internal processes.
Niña Deniña from the PDEA Compliance Service Division also encountered challenges in implementing their Regulatory Compliance System, which is designed to allow medical practitioners to electronically submit their applications for various PDEA services and enable employees to process these applications. Currently, the project still needs a final system check before testing it with their internal and external stakeholders and eventually launching it. The system’s launch may also be delayed because of unstable internet connection. In this case, the challenge is with limitations to the available technology and technological infrastructure, particularly internet connection speed and reliability.
The progress displayed by the participating agencies show emerging patterns in the delivery of citizen-centered services in the country. Technological enhancements are at the forefront of most service improvements, and these are focused primarily on the convenience and user experience of citizens. Many of the projects aim to reduce processing times and the necessity of face-to-face interactions. However, it seems that there are many challenges to implementing changes in the way agencies operate, specifically with implementing technology-based improvements: limitations of pre-existing technology, reliability of partnerships, and administrative delays. Despite these speed bumps, the reports of the sharing session’s attendees showed that there is great promise in the drive to introduce more and better citizen-centered improvements in the government as well as in the significant steps that their agencies have already taken since their participation in the DCCPSI program.
The Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), as the Center of Excellence on Public Sector Productivity designated by the Asian Productivity Organization (APO), held a multi-country training program to develop public sector specialists from 6 to 10 December 2021. With the Philippines as the hosting country, 43 representatives from APO member countries learned concepts, issues, challenges, tools, frameworks, and strategies related to public sector productivity (PSP) improvement.
Throughout the course, the participants listened to various presentations from Dr. Brian Marson, Dr. Shin Kim, Ms. Maria Rosario A. Ablan, and Mr. Arnel Abanto on PSP measurement, performance management, leadership, change management, citizen-centered services, and organizational productivity. There were also group discussions on case studies and exercises on the tools provided to practice what they learned throughout the program.
The course is the first step towards certification as public sector productivity specialists. After their training, the participants are tasked with developing action plans to raise the productivity of their respective agencies using the tools and skills they have gained.
Building the foundation for understanding PSP
Dr. Kim of the Korea Institute of Public Administration discussed first the role of the public sector and global trends in improving productivity. He explained that the role of the public sector in economic development is crucial, and thus a careful strategy is required to promote the social and economic well-being of the people through efficient and effective public sector management. He also discussed the evolution of public administration and provided different case examples to support transforming government.
Dr. Marson of the Institute for Citizen-Centered Service discussed the importance of leadership in achieving key results focused on the 3Ps: purpose, people, and performance. He also showed how the organizing principle around which public service delivery is designed and planned can be conceptualized through identifying and addressing the citizens’ needs. Dr. Marson recommended that responsive government services can be implemented through listening to citizens, meeting their needs, and providing efficient, honest, and integrated service delivery. “To improve citizen satisfaction scores, we need to actively listen to the people we serve,” he told the trainees.
Regulatory reform is also crucial in improving productivity. Dr. Kim defined regulatory reform as changes that enhance the performance, cost-effectiveness, or legal quality of regulations. He explained that while the public perception around regulatory reform focuses on deregulation, it should also include reregulation, smart regulation, and regulatory management. Comprehensive reform is thus recommended over a piecemeal approach, provided that governments must first identify objectives and weigh its options before any reform is implemented.
Dr. Kim then discussed result-oriented performance management, particularly as it is used in South Korea to improve organizational, sectoral and national productivity. He also showed how e-government can improve the efficiency, effectiveness, transparency, and accountability of governments while bringing forth new concepts of citizenship, both in terms of needs and responsibilities, by engaging, enabling and empowering citizens. Governments can use the UN’s E-Government Survey to assess their performance and develop policies and strategies.
Improving organizational productivity was then classified by Ms. Ablan into four approaches: doing more with less, doing more with the same, doing much more with more, doing the same with less, and doing less with much less. Government units that face productivity issues can diagnose and solve them through the Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle, but for productivity improvement projects to be successful and long-standing, they have to manage political, technical, and behavioral conditions. Ms. Ablan also recommended striving for continuous improvement and innovation to ensure continued productivity.
Operationalizing productivity improvement
To open the session on the development of productivity improvement plans, Dr. Marson discussed models, frameworks, and thematic approaches that are the focus of the management excellence agenda in APO member countries. He also discussed steps to improve overall organizational performance using the CAF (Common Assessment Framework) Model, which uses self-assessment to generate and prioritize possible improvement plans, and the APO Business Excellence Model.
Mr. Abanto followed with a presentation on measuring public sector productivity, discussing key considerations in estimating public sector productivity such as the level of analysis, the availability and quality of data, the information needs of the user of productivity information, and the productivity measurement framework being used. He also explained how to calculate public sector productivity indexes to prepare participants for a breakout session that would allow them to try their hands at productivity measurement.
On the last day of the training, local presenters from the Philippines shared their best practices and experiences to illustrate the concepts and approaches at work. Mr. Joel Mendoza, of the City Government of Ormoc, Leyte shared the city’s improvement and intervention for better service through the in-house development of systems for business and franchising permits that enable small enterprises to easily process their permits. Ms. Marizza Grande, of the Philippine Statistics Authority, also shared the agency’s improvement with the Decentralized Copy Annotation Process (DeCAP) project, which provides seamless processing of documents at regional centers.
GQMP Kicks-Off with 13 Beneficiary Agencies for 2022
The goal of realizing meaningful results in Quality Management System (QMS) sets forth revitalized efforts of the GQMP as it integrates new tools, new offerings, and new approaches in the delivery of services to beneficiary agencies. This year, the GQMP incorporates other concepts such as Improving Service Quality, QMS harmonization and strengthening QMS-Risk Management Capability in the roster of its technical assistance packages.
Starting off with 13 beneficiary agencies (BAs), the program aims to enrich the landscape of government service, especially in enhancing the social fabric of the public institutions through effecting improvement in public sector performance. It will ensure the consistency of products and services with quality processes that can be achieved through an effective QMS. Thus, this year’s BAs will be presented with various assistance packages in establishing and enriching their QMS.
Five agencies will receive assistance on the establishment of QMS Certifiable to ISO 9001:2015 Standard, namely: Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development, Department of Agriculture, Anti-Red Tape Authority, Southern Philippines Development Authority, and Department of Transportation. In a clustered approach, the same assistance in QMS establishment will be given to the following: NGA cluster – National Council for Children’s Television, Film Development Council of the Philippines, and National Book Development Board: and SUC Cluster – Marikina Polytechnic College and Sulu State College.
The National Library, on the other hand, will be extended assistance on strengthening QMS-Risk Management Capability; the Insurance Commission, on Improvement of Service quality; and, the Department of Education, on the Harmonization of its separate certification into a national QSM.
The abovementioned efforts are just initial steps in the quest for excellence in 2022. A second call for beneficiary agencies is underway. For inquiries please email gqmpo@dap.edu.ph
The Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) successfully held its webinar series on Futures Thinking last 8-9 November 2021. The online lecture is part of the second season of Public Sector Productivity Webisodes, an initiative to raise awareness of public sector organizations on relevant productivity and innovation topics. Dr. Alan Cajes, vice president of the DAP Corporate Concerns Center, was the resource person for the two-day series.
Cajes presented the concepts and principles of futures thinking during the first day of the webinar series.
The first day of the webinar was mainly an overview of futures thinking and its related concepts. Cajes defined futures thinking as the use of divergent and creative thinking in creating multiple scenarios about what might happen to one’s organization given the critical uncertainties or drivers of change today. He explained further, “we can view futures thinking as a kind of wind tunnel to ensure that our respective organizations will survive and complete their respective missions, despite the uncertainties of the future. This process boosts our immune system as a civilization. It increases our inner capacity to deal with risk, uncertainties, and other drivers of change. It makes us more prepared and ready.”
Cajes quotes Cascio to describefutures thinking as “an immune system for civilization.â€
Change can be seen as a threat, but it can also be advantageous if one learns to adapt faster. Futures thinking makes this possible, even considering the increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world—the prices of commodities fluctuate, global competition in the market becomes tighter, and many other variables take place with no precedents. There is also the additional challenge presented by other kinds of drivers of change, such as wildcards and black swans. The former refers to low probability events and developments that can affect the future significantly, for instance, the past world wars and the ongoing pandemic, while the latter refers to events that are not on the radar or are unlikely to occur and can only be identified after it has happened, for example, the emergence of personal computers and the 9/11 attack. Other factors, such as individual biases, blind spots, and finite resources and capacities, also contribute to the difficulty of futures thinking.
Cajes then went on to discuss the typical responses people have to future uncertainty, which may include denial, oversimplification, linear thinking, false confidence, and paralysis by analysis. Futures thinking would allow leaders to avoid these pitfalls and equip them with a more strategic response to uncertainty.
Past successes show the value in employing methods such as scenario development to deal with uncertainty, as seen for instance in a study conducted by DAP and the University of the Philippines during the mid-1970s, which probed the future of the Philippines over a 30-year time horizon. In the said study, scenarios were defined as perspectives of the future, to be used for defining potential actions in the present. As Dr. Onofre Cruz, founding president of DAP, said in the report, “if we can identify many possible futures, and reduce this to probable futures, then we can select our preferred futures.”
Cajes maintained that planning a range of futures by coming up with multiple scenarios is key to avoiding traps of prediction. Scenarios help make sense of the complexity of today’s reality, where critical uncertainties are more pronounced and disruptive than ever. By analyzing observable trends, events, and driving forces, those who practice futures thinking can then play out and choose multiple futures or scenarios.
Four types of futures are imagined in the scenario development process. First are possible futures, the widest range of possible future scenarios. Narrowing down the possibilities, there are plausible futures, which refer to scenarios that could happen given the bounds of uncertainty, and probable futures, which refer to scenarios that are likely to occur. Lastly, the preferred future, which is the ideal future state, is the type of future that is based on the aspirations of a certain individual or organization.
Cajes also elaborated three principles that must be considered in the scenario planning process. First is outside-in thinking, which entails looking at one’s organizational processes and operations from the perspective of the stakeholders, in particular, the citizens. He emphasized that, in scenario planning, it is important that decisions are made based on the customers’ needs, requirements, and expectations. Another principle is to embrace diverse perspectives. A healthy planning process can be attained when people value the perspective of one other, even ones that are contrary to one’s own. He added that having participants with diverse perspectives when embarking on scenario planning would also substantially contribute to ensuring a rich discussion and exchange of ideas. Finally, participants in the process ought to take a long view as scenario planning is designed for planning about ten to twenty years’ horizon.
Cajes discussed three principles of Scenario Planning.
On the second day of the series, Cajes’ presentation delved deeper into the process of strategic foresight using scenario development. Here, he outlined seven steps in depth.
Adopting a process akin to problem solving, the first step is to state the strategic challenge or the adaptive types of problems an organization faces which require complex solutions that are dependent on an uncertain future. The strategic challenge serves as the basis for the framing question which, given a set time horizon, defines the scope and limitation of the scenarios. The next step is to identify the driving forces, which refer to the factors that drive a possible result, impact, or outcome of critical uncertainty. Examples of this include infectious diseases, environmental risks, weapons of mass destruction, and livelihood crises, among others. These critical uncertainties, or those driving forces that are considered highly important to the strategic challenge of the organization yet highly uncertain in terms of how they might unfold in the future, serve as the basis for constructing the scenarios. Other factors such as predetermined elements (i.e. demographic information, occupation of people, the location, the migration patterns, their age, the increase in population, among other things) and wildcards are also determined in this step.
After all the important information has been gathered, the third step is to construct a quadrant of the building blocks, consisting of the critical uncertainties, predetermined elements, and other secondary elements, arranged by their level of potential impact and uncertainty. This step is then followed by the creation of a matrix scenario with vertical and horizontal lines representing critical uncertainties and quadrants for each of the four types of futures to be identified.
Once through with the scenario framework, the participants may now proceed to storytelling. Cajes underlined how powerful the role a story can play in the scenario development process. As he put it, “[stories] can affect us because they can be so powerful and so clear and, therefore, vivid and they can move us into thinking about possible solutions in order to prevent them from happening.â€
Moreover, the final steps are to determine the implications and options in terms of key activities and robust strategies and, from these, name the indicators and signposts to be tracked along the way.
To better explain the relevance and application of scenario development in the public sector, Cajes illustrated a matrix of hypothetical future scenarios for a provincial local government unit (PLGU). In his example, the critical uncertainties that he identified were about their adaptive capacity and their stability in terms of global, regional, and national economic performance. The image below shows the given scenarios A, B, C, and D, which represent the preferred, ideal, business-as-usual, and better-than-current scenarios, respectively.
Cajes shows a hypothetical scenario matrix for a provincial local government unit.
Towards the end of the lecture, Cajes laid down the main difference between the scenario planning process and the traditional planning approach. Overall, the traditional planning approach zeroes in on the partial reality, while the scenario planning process takes on a wider lens in analyzing the dynamic VUCA reality. The former assumes that the future is simple and certain, while the latter views the future as having multiple dimensions and a high level of uncertainty. Scenario planning, thus, entails active and creative imagination of the future.
Furthermore, what lies ahead may be unclear yet but one thing for certain is that one can do his or her part in preparing for future challenges. Strategic foresight may hence prove to be one vital gear to ensuring that organizations, especially the public sector, can thrive in this VUCA world.
Trust is one of the foundations upon which the legitimacy of public institutions is built and is crucial for maintaining social cohesion. Lack of trust compromises the willingness of citizens to respond to public policies and contribute to sustainable economic recovery from COVID-19. And in the fifth installment of the World Bank’s Disruptive Debates, conducted last 29 September 2021 via Zoom, the question of citizens’ trust in general and its possible effects on government productivity were raised in the discussions on the theme of the Future of Government.
To begin with the discussion, Raj Kumar, President & Editor-in-Chief of Devex elaborated that trust has been the frequent issue arising during the Disruptive Debate series and to retort that issue, panelists will address that during the forum discussion.
How will the citizen’s trust in the government be affected?
A screen capture of all the speakers and the host in the middle of a discussion
Aidan Eyakuze, Executive Director of Twaweza East Africa, a civil society group, shared that governments should respond to two fundamental questions that are always being asked by their citizens. The first asks whether governments have the best interest of their constituents at heart—“does the government really care about me, or are they more interested in staying in power?†The second inquiries into the capacity of the government to deliver services that benefit their citizens—“does the government have the competence to make good on your good intentions?â€
Eyakuze also shared other considerations previously raised by Tim Besley of the London School of Economics and Political Science, particularly that there are three capacity components. First is fiscal capacity, which pertains to the ability to raise the necessary resources. Second is legal capacity, which is simply the legal ability to perform. He then framed the third not as a concept but as a question: “do you have the ability to provide citizens with what they need and when they need them?â€
Discussing how distrust can lead to corruption, Michael Muthukrishna, an Associate Professor of Economic Psychology and STICERD Developmental Economics Group Affiliate at London School of Economics identified the role of the dynamics of smaller social units in feeding back into even greater distrust for government. He shared that when trust in the national government fails, that’s when citizens fall back on family, friends, ethnic groups, religious communities, and even local government. This tendency results in the necessity of relying on trading favours with friends and family, effectively creating a kind of vicious loop from which a corrupt society emerges.
Jamie Boyd, National Digital Government Leader and Partner of Deloitte Canada, then shared how trust is reinforced by making citizens aware of what the government is doing. She mentions that trust has changed in the internet age and with it the context for government serving the people has as well. Trust can be cultivated through digital services and it can even be a facilitator of access to government services. For instance, Canadians can use video calls or FaceTime with government officials to validate their identity. Even in such a mediated interaction, the presence of a human element can reinforce citizens’ trust—that there is an actual person behind the management of citizens’ data, and that, ultimately, the government exists to serve people. She also points out that the digital age we are living in has brought us an unprecedented suite of tools for providing trustworthy services while maintaining transparency and accountability from the government.
How can the government rebuild citizens’ trust?
Screen capture of poll results from webinar attendees
Results from a poll conducted during the forum showed that most of the attendees trust their local government more than their national and regional governments. When asked how trust in the national government could be rebuilt, most respondents cited the need to deliver quality services.
In response to the poll results, Sonia Cooper, a member of the Ipswich City Council in Queensland, Australia, shared that it is not surprising that citizens trust their local governments more as citizens’ engagements with the government are often through the initiatives of their local government rather than any other body of government. Local government activities tend to be more stable and easier to sustain because citizens tend to trust people they know and interact with regularly, and local government has control over citizen interaction in a way that the national government does not.
