Category: Featured Articles

The 2017 Corruption Perception Index highlights how majority of the countries are making very little progress in addressing corruption. Two-thirds of the 180 countries surveyed scored below 50 (where 100 is very clean and 0 is highly corrupt).  And the most flagrant fact about corruption is that poor countries tend to be the most corrupt.

Photo from Transparency International, https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017
In Asia-Pacific in particular, the average score is 44 which means that the countries in the region are failing in combatting corruption. Even top scorers such as New Zealand and Singapore had experienced their share of corruption scandals in the previous years, while other countries showed very slight improvements. In the public sector, corruption takes so many forms – abuse of power, taking bribes, misappropriation of funds among others. The systemic corruption impacts the entire sector as it undermines the confidence and trust of the citizens to public offices, impairs the delivery of public services, and ultimately deprive the citizens of the services owed to them by their governments. It also adversely affects the private sector because red tape undermines productivity and sustainable growth. Corruption also means additional expenses for the companies to facilitate transactions with governments. Corruption is pretty straightforward in the public sector:

  • It leads to biased decisions in public expenditures. This is apparent in the many “white elephant” projects that costs so much but with little to no output, and public procurement contracts which rests on kinship and kickbacks rather than value-for-money.
  • It gives prime importance to relationships. In public offices, some people may be hired not because of their suitability to the position but because of their relationship with the management and staff. Instead of attracting the best talents, corruption breeds nepotism and favoritism.
  • It hinders the effective delivery of public service. Because of corrupt activities in generating and collecting public revenues, resources that should have been for development projects go to the pockets of some public sector employees.

Governments have been actively pursuing reforms to address corruption. However, the results are varying and are often minimal. Transparency International recommended the following approach to end corruption:

  • Putting in place laws and institutions that will prevent corruption from happening. In addition, government must ensure compliance in its own legislations.
  • Reducing impunity for the corrupt. Political power play must be minimized. The justice system, prosecution, and enforcement force must be independent and professional.
  • Encouraging civil society to actively participate in anti-corruption efforts.
  • Promoting integrity and values in all aspects. The environment as a whole must foster a culture of integrity through a whole-of-society approach.
  • Advancing a merit-based civil service with adequate pay and benefits to discourage public sector employees in engaging in corrupt activities.

The World Bank further added the need to simplify regulations, particularly in business entry to promote a competitive private sector.  It also emphasizes decentralization with accountability within the government, and budget management to include coverage, treasury procurement, and audit. Finally, this comprehensive approach must be coupled with strong political will among the politicians and civil servants. Otherwise, these reforms will only result to marginal improvements or to no improvement at all.

Some of the most common problems at a workplace are inconsistent cleanliness and orderliness, difficulty in retrieving files, inadequate space, and improper storage of files and things. 5S is a systematized approach that helps address these problems. It also helps in achieving greater organization, standardization and efficiency, all while reducing costs and boosting productivity. In 1972, Henry Ford used the CANDO programme (Cleaning up, Arranging, Neatness, Discipline, and Ongoing improvement) and this technique was later popularized in Japan as 5S methodology by Hiroyuki Hirano.

What is 5S? 5S stands for five phases each named after a different Japanese term beginning with the letter “S”: seiri, seiton, seiso, seiketsu, and shitsuke.

  1. Seiri (Sort) – In this step, you sort items that are necessary and unnecessary. Items that do not belong in the working area must be disposed properly. In addition, items that are not needed or may be needed in the future must be red-tagged and placed in a holding area.
  2. Seiton (Systematize) – Here you organize necessary items for easy and fast retrieval

Some seiton practices include:

  • Following the first-in-first-out method for storing item;
  • Assigning each item a dedicated location;
  • Systematic labelling of all items and their locations;
  • Making items visible to reduce searching time; use color-coding;
  • Arranging items so they can be reached or handled easily;
  • Separating special tools/devices from common ones
  • Placing frequently used tools/devices near the user
  • Fixing unstable article for safety; and,
  • Keeping space for safety equipment and evacuation passages clear.
  1. Seiso (Sweep) – Seiso is thoroughly cleaning the work area, including tools, machines and other equipment. Doing seiso ensures that everything is in good condition and is ready to be used when needed.
  2. Seiketsu (Sanitize/standardize) – Seiketsu involves maintaining a high standard of housekeeping and workplace organization at all times. You keep each area consistent with one another and ensure that conditions do not deteriorate to their former state.
  3. Shitsuke (Self-discipline) – This entails doing things spontaneously without being told or ordered and training people to follow good housekeeping rules. Instilling discipline is critical to avoid backsliding.

Some shitsuke practices involves:

  • Greeting people with a smile;
  • Being a good listener;
  • Demonstrating team spirit;
  • Being professional in your conduct and dealings with others;
  • Putting things back in their proper place after use;
  • Being punctual;
  • Always keeping your workplace clean and tidy;
  • Following safety rules strictly;
  • Wearing clean uniform/office attire and shoes; and,
  • Observing proper office decorum.
5S week at the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao government office.

Digital 5s. Implementing 5s is not limited to physical space. Electronic storage areas such as servers and hard disks should also be organized to ensure that everyone can easily access the files that they need. To do a digital 5s, a filing policy must be created to know which documents must be kept for what period of time. Every employee will go through all his/her electronic files to determine which ones can be deleted and which ones can be kept. Next step is to give each file/folder a logical place. There must also be a standardized way of naming the documents. Cleaning of servers and hard disks must be done on a regular basis. It is equally important to make sure that everyone sticks with the system. Apart from these, always keep the office’s electronic storage space user-friendly and easy to navigate.

Benefits of 5S methodology. Among the main benefits of implementing 5S are:

  • Work stations become cleaner, safer, well-organized and more pleasant;
  • Floor space utilization is improved;
  • Workflow becomes smoother and more systematic;;
  • Time for searching tools, materials and document is minimized;
  • Machine breakdowns are reduced since clean and well-maintained equipment breaks down less frequently. It also becomes easier to diagnose and repair before breakdowns occur, therefore extending equipment life;
  • Errors are minimized;
  • Consumables and material wastage are minimized;
  • Morale and satisfaction of employees improves; and,
  • Productivity improves simultaneously with the quality of products and services.

The Philippines as APO Center of Excellence on Public Sector Productivity

The Asian Productivity Organization, an international governmental organization which aims to drive the productivity movement in Asia and the Pacific, has been implementing the Center of Excellence program which designates national productivity organizations in specialized fields in recognition of their initiatives and expertise.  A COE’s role is to share its knowledge and best practices to other NPOs through trainings, workshops, and study missions. There are currently four COEs designated by APO – Business Excellence (Singapore), Green Productivity (Taiwan), Public Sector Productivity (Philippines), and Information Technology in Industry 4.0 (India).

What is the COE-PSP?

In 2015, APO recognized the initiatives of the Philippines in raising the productivity of its government departments and agencies and designated the country as the COE in Public Sector Productivity. As the COE, the Philippines leads the public sector productivity movement in the region. The Development Academy of the Philippines as the country’s NPO works to address common and critical issues on public sector productivity, foster cutting-edge research, facilitate training and knowledge-sharing, and support outreach to raise productivity levels. Currently, the COE-PSP operates under four components: Knowledge Bank, Innovation Laboratory, Capability Development, and Research.

Knowledge Bank develops an online library of pertinent data, information, materials and references on public sector productivity including a database on experts and knowledge products. It accumulates, codifies and publicly disseminates PSP knowledge products derived from APO projects, experiences of NPOs and relevant studies on public sector productivity.

Capability Development offers a range of face-to-face or online training and other learning solutions to develop new capabilities and hone competencies on productivity methods, tools and techniques as applied in the public sector to develop a critical mass of P&Q professionals. In 2017, the COE on PSP conducted the Workshop on Public Sector Leadership, Common Assessment Framework Training, Workshop on Performance Management, and International Conference on Public Sector Productivity.

Innovation Laboratory provides a venue to stimulate strategic thinking and innovation, understand, experiment and obtain first-hand experience in applying new solutions to address critical public sector productivity issues, under the guidance of technical experts.

Research conducts focused studies on contemporary and emerging trends, assessment of productivity performance, best practices, adaptation of P & Q tools, effectiveness of P & Q technologies, etc. A compendium of innovation and productivity initiatives is published annually. The COE-PSP also serves as the hub of ‘web of collaborators’ on innovation and productivity in the public sector.  As the hub, the COE-PSP establishes a network of NPOs and relevant regional and global institutions with knowledge and expertise on public sector productivity. It is partnering with the Institute of Public Administration and Bruce Searles of Global Benchmarking Network and Benchmarking Partnerships. The center is also exploring possible partnerships with the UN Public Administration Network, the EU Public Administration Network, the OECD Public Governance and Territorial Development Office, other P&Q organizations, and academic institutions.

Way Ahead

In the next years, DAP aspires to further expand and strengthen the COE-PSP.  It plans to establish a future center which is aimed to be a creative platform for collaborative innovation on public sector productivity. The center will also serve as a repository for PSP knowledge and information library for civil servants and the public to access PSP-related data, information and resource. It will include high-tech and high-touch facilities to help create innovative solutions for the public sector. The COE-PSP is also working on conducting a demo project on productivity measurement and a technical expert’s service on Knowledge Management for the Public Sector. Further, it plans to undertake comprehensive research on baseline data for better appreciation and sharing of best practice in public sector productivity movement among APO member countries.

To learn more about who we are and what we do, you may watch this video: The APO Center of Excellence on Public Sector Productivity

Productivity is commonly defined as the ratio of output in relation to the input required.  The inputs are labor, equipment, space and energy used, while the outputs are measured by counting the goods and services produced in terms of monetary value.  To raise productivity, the private sector either increases its outputs or decreases its inputs.  However, productivity in the public sector is more complex since its outputs are provided to citizens for free or at subsidized prices, and they are difficult to quantify because of economic and social dimensions. Public sector productivity is defined as optimizing the delivery of services through the efficient use of public funds, resulting in increased citizen satisfaction, public trust, accountability, cost effectiveness, competitiveness, and quality of life.  It also means enhancing the effectiveness of the public sector in creating a conducive environment to increase the total factor productivity in private sector production. In the face of constant financial and economic concerns around the globe, the need to increase awareness and interest in public sector productivity has gained some traction. Raising productivity in the public sector is actually crucial due to the following reasons:

  1. Governments are major employers.

The public sector has a significant share in the total employment figures of any country.  “Public sector” covers all employees working in all branches of the government at the national, regional and local levels, as well as those working in government-owned and controlled corporations.  Data from the World Bank shows that the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has the highest ratio of government employment relative to employment population, in contrast with South Asia that has the lowest ratio in this regard.

Source: World Bank’s 2015 Size of The Public Sector Government Wage Bill and Employment

  1. The public sector is the provider of primary services.

One of the roles of a government is to deliver services in education, health care, infrastructure and social welfare to its citizens, particularly to those who are unable to access them through other means.  It also provides services that are otherwise not available such as justice, diplomacy and defense. Currently, developed countries are expanding their health care and retirement security to accommodate the demand of the rapidly aging population.  This pushes governments to find innovative and better ways of delivering these services.

  1. The public sector consumes tax resources.

A large proportion of government budget, which is derived primarily from tax revenues, is spent on government expenses.  It is channeled towards the procurement of goods and services intended for government use, investments, and transfer payments. In most APO member countries, government expenditures even exceed the revenues.

Source: ADB Key Indicators in Asia and Pacific, 2014 and 2015
Given the share for which the public sector accounts, any changes in the public sector can have significant implications.  Low productivity means wastage and misallocation of resources, while high productivity means efficient use of public funds. High productivity in the public sector benefits a wide spectrum of stakeholders – the government agencies themselves, the private sector, the economy, and, most importantly, the general public. There are huge potential savings and quality improvement that could come from increasing public sector productivity.  More productive public services would also boost the economy’s productivity growth and this will have a positive impact on the national basket of services that are delivered to every citizen.  Ultimately, these will all lead to increased citizen satisfaction and quality of life, and to a restoration of trust in public-sector institutions as well as in the processes of governance, participation, and accountability.

Government agencies are often stereotyped as inefficient, inaccessible and unresponsive, while its employees are overpaid yet mediocre, and less accountable compared to their counterparts in the private sector. The Philippine Government, with President Rodrigo Duterte at the helm, has been highlighting the need to breakaway from these stereotypes. In his message on the National Budget for 2017, President Duterte emphasized strengthening the accountability for results in implementing development programs to ensure its effective delivery of services to the Filipino people. The Results-Based Performance Management System, or RBPMS, is a unified system for monitoring, evaluating, and reporting the performance of national government agencies. It is an effort to rationalize, harmonize, and integrate the various performance management systems and activities. It also incorporates other metrics on performance excellence such as citizen satisfaction, financial stewardship, internal process efficiency, and leadership, learning and growth. The RBPMS also serves as the basis for determining entitlement for incentives of agencies and employees. The Performance-Based Incentive System which consists of the Productivity Enhancement Incentive and the Performance-Based Bonus is adopted in 2012 with the goal of recognizing commendable accomplishments of agencies and employees in the government.  PEI is granted to all public sector employees, while the PBB is a top-up bonus based on the performance of agencies and employees. For the past five years, PBIS has achieved the following:

  1. High participation of agencies

The RBPMS provides a mechanism for government agencies to track their performance in achieving their commitments. From 96 percent in 2012, the PBB participation rate has increased to 99 percent to include almost all national agencies with the exclusion of the Commission of Elections and the Congress (Senate and House of Representatives).

  1. Increased compliance to governance standards

The RBPMS framework challenges government agencies and employees to adhere to existing laws and regulations promoting fiscal transparency and process accountability. The implementation of PBB has encouraged agencies to comply with good governance conditions such as budget and procurement disclosures, liquidation of cash advances, and the Anti-Red Tape program. Meanwhile, the compliance rate on Quality Management System- ISO Certification/Operations Manual, Annual Procurement Plan, and Agency Procurement Compliance and Performance Indicators System slightly declined from 2015 to 2016.

  1. Better understanding of agency roles and mandates

Agencies participating in PBIS have developed a better understanding of their respective roles and mandates. Since the accomplishment of Major Final Outputs is one of the PBB criteria, employees have become more aware of their roles and how it impacts to the achievement of their MFOs.

  1. Improvements in the quality of performance indicators

PBIS has encouraged the shift from measuring quantity in outputs to using quality and timeliness performance indicators and targets which is a more strategic indicator of the impact of public sector services. It has also pushed the agencies to track their performance indicators and their achievements of good governance conditions and post them on their websites.

  1. Improvements in management practices

RBPMS has been a guiding tool to ensure that individual and organizational performances are aligned to the national agenda. It also promotes collaboration and teamwork within the agencies. Between September 2013 and March 2014, the World Bank conducted an evaluation on the effectiveness of the PBB. Particularly, PBB is perceived to improve management practices and promote teamwork within and among agencies. The Bank has recommended restructuring the PBB to provide greater weight to the unit’s bonus, to increase the amount of PBB, to enhance the efficiency and transparency of the PBB process and develop new ideas for the advancement of RBPMS. The implementation of the PBIS, and the RBPMS, in general, has enabled the government to build the foundations of a performance culture in the public sector. Moving forward, an improved PBIS will be implemented with a focus on President Duterte’s directive to streamline the process and make expedient transactions with the public, particularly in frontline services. Further, it will feature enhanced good governance conditions aligned with empowering citizens with access to government information; and increase the responsiveness of agencies in addressing audit recommendations from the previous year.  

Public sector middle managers during the Public Management Development Program graduation ceremony.

More Filipinos are demanding for a government that exemplifies competence, integrity and commitment in public service with every public servant leader expected to embody these utmost attributes. In the objective of producing a cadre of knowledgeable and skillful development executives, the Development Academy of the Philippines implemented the Career Executive Service Development Program (CESDP) from 1974 to 1992.  In 2012, it was revived and renamed as Public Management Development Program. Like its precursor, the goal of the PMDP is to foster careerism in government and promote stability in the bureaucracy by producing a corps of development-oriented, competent, dedicated and honest government senior executives and middle managers. The program specifically aims to:

  1. develop a keen appreciation of the vital role government executives play in the overall development process;
  2. produce competent government leaders committed to the welfare of their constituents and the country’s progress;
  3. foster a spirit of kinship, mutual support and harmony among government leaders working for the common goal of a good life for all;
  4. deepen the bench of successors to the incumbent government office executives to ensure smooth transition in case of promotions or vacancies; and
  5. enhance the image of the Philippine government as an institution imbued with professionalism, integrity, and honesty.

The PMDP is the Philippine government’s response to the need for a corps of ethical, committed and development-oriented officials in the bureaucracy who will drive performance in the agencies and push the agenda for change and sustained progress. It is included in the Philippine Development Plan for 2017 to 2022, primarily contributing to Sub-sector Outcome 5: Civil Service Strengthened, particularly under the strategy of developing and investing in human resources. In honing high-potential and high-performing government officers into transformative leaders and strategic managers similar to an intensive MBA for the public sector, the program involves intensive residential training, experiential learning in their sensing journeys, and implementation of Re-Entry Plans and Capstone Papers.

As of March 31, 2017, the PMDP has produced 610 graduates, many of whom have been promoted to higher positions. It has also benefitted 135 government offices that are now implementing relevant and innovative projects to better serve the public. These results support the establishment of a more competent and committed pool of public servants delivering efficient and value-driven government service to uplift the lives of the Filipino people.

For two years, the Philippines 99th ranking in the Ease of Doing Business Survey remain unchanged. In the “starting a business” criterion, however, the country further slipped from 164th in 2016 to 171st in 2017. Red tape remains a pervasive issue despite continuous reforms in the government. In applying for business permits and licenses, an applicant is bound to encounter complicated and lengthy procedures, and incur high costs. To ease the burden to applicants, a Business Permits and License System (BPLS) Working group was created in 2010 to streamline the BPLS process. It is composed of the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) – the overall coordinator for the implementation of the Nationwide BPLS streamlining for local government units; Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) – agency to provide policy directions in the implementation of the revised BPLS standards nationwide; and, Department of Information and Communication Technology (DICT) – agency to provide capacity/training programs for the implementation and selection of LGUs for e-BPLS/automation projects. The group has since issued two joint memorandum circulars (JMC 2010 and JMC 2016) revising the standards in processing business permits and license systems (BPLS) in all cities and municipalities in the Philippines. Shown on the chart is the overview of the revised BPLS standards. In compliance to JMC 2010, 1,017 out of 1,389 LGUs can currently process new business applications in less than 10 minutes to 2 days while 1,139 out 1,389 can process the renewal of business permits in less than 10 minutes to 1 day. In JMC 2016, LGUs are also encouraged to issue other permits such as sanitary permits, environmental, and agricultural clearances together with the business or Mayor’s permits. They are also directed to employ queuing mechanisms to better manage the applications as well as to provide priority to senior citizens, pregnant women, and persons with disabilities. To support the revised BPLS standards, complementary reforms are being implemented such as streamlining the process of securing Fire Safety Inspection Certificates, establishing Business One-Stop-Shop (BOSS) facilities, and establishing an LGU-based joint inspection team. JMC 2016 also recommends LGUs to automate and computerize business transactions with the help of DICT to further streamline the delivery of frontline services. The automation allows the retrieval of previously submitted information to minimize required forms or fields; consolidation and retrieval of negative lists/positive findings for one-time verification; assessment of business tax, charges and fees; printing of tax order of payment; and, printing of business permit and other permits and clearances. To date, 577 out of 1,389 LGUs have automated their BPLS processes. In the long term, the BPLS working group is hoping to make the entire registration process online. This will significantly improve the speed and efficiency of rendering services and will make it possible for LGUs to process business registration in one day. It will also eliminate corruption, as it will reduce face-to-face interaction. These reforms are aimed to provide the public with quality services with least inconvenience and expense and ultimately, to improve the Philippines’ competitiveness and attractiveness to investors.  

Do public sector employees work less than their private sector counterparts? A simple Google search of “government employee meme” results to hundreds of memes portraying public sector employees as mediocre, lazy, and incompetent. While a lot are exaggerations, these memes reflect how the public perceives civil servants. Government agencies, particularly those that provide frontline services, are deemed inefficient and disorganized. They are also seen as resistant to new technologies and methodologies that can increase their productivity.

Source: reddit.com
There is a preconception that the problem lies with the “government employee” but with careful examination, the root of the problem is really the system under which the government work is done. Working for the public sector is perceived to be quite a sacrifice. Employees get less in terms of compensation and benefits compared to their counterparts in the private sector. At the same time, the organization itself is very bureaucratic and slow to evolve. Meanwhile, the private sector offers more benefits. It is also seen as “cutting edge” and “innovative”. Because of these, many potential employees veer away and choose to work in the private sector. While the private sector has its own share of incompetence and corrupt behavior, it has more self-corrective measures compared to the public sector. For example, a corrupt employee eventually loses the job, or a wasteful company is usually driven out by competition. Civil Service codes and worker unions make it almost impossible to fire poor and bad performers in a government office. This impacts the entire public sector and undermines the respect of the public to government employees. Another issue that is believed to contribute to this perception is that because government employees do not share in the profits made by the organization, they do not feel motivated enough to perform well.  Government employees are also compelled to do significant amount of administrative tasks, thus reducing their time to actually do their work. Not all public employees are bad. In fact, many are doing the best in their jobs despite all the challenges in public sector.  To keep the employees satisfied and thus more productive at work, there should be active and effective leadership, effective two-way communications, setting of clear goals and objectives, elimination of bureaucracy, and creation of teamwork. It is also important to keep the employees happy and it could be done through positive motivation and frequent recognition of employee achievement. Â