The Philippine Bureaucracy: Incentive Structures and Implications For Performance
The Philippine Bureaucracy: Incentive Structures and Implications For Performance
The Philippine Bureaucracy: Incentive Structures and Implications For Performance
=.50)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
% CESO occupying CES
positions
Public approval
14
Pulse Asia data, 19992007. No other civilian agency in the Executive branch had a complete (or nearly
complete) series of ratings.
22
DOH (
=.69)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
DSWD (
=.37)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
V. Implications
This essay set out to help illuminate why eight decades after the first of many surveys and
diagnoses on Philippine education, the same issues of access, quality, and relevance
continue to persist. What could explain the inability of the education sector to get its act
together? Is it a matter of shortfalls in material inputs or is there something else?
The essay zeroed in on the civil service in its capacity as repository of expertise and
institutional memory and implementer of policy and defined institutions as the incentive
systems that structure human interaction - the formal rules, informal constraints and
enforcement characteristics, which together generate regularity in behavior and allow
people to get on with everyday business. Have incentives embedded in the Philippine
civil service been impinging on the performance of agencies such as the Department of
Education?
It was observed that incentives, both monetary and non-monetary have affected the
quality of the bureaucracy in the Philippines, especially over the last several years.
External and internal distortions now weigh down the 20-year-old government
compensation system. The increasing number of ad-hoc bodies, presidential
23
consultants/advisers and political appointees is also a source of demoralization. The
latter, which pertains to non-monetary disincentives, is far more critical in government
than in the private sector because the link between money wages and agent performance
in government is, by definition, relatively weak.
On the whole, trends in the profile of personnel across all levels of the corps indicate a
deteriorating quality, especially at the 3
rd
level comprising executive and policy/highly
technical personnel. This seems to be accompanied by an increased vulnerability to rent
seeking. Positive correlations observed between shares of CESO eligible people
occupying executive posts in human services agencies and corresponding agency public
approval ratings, also provide some evidence that better bureaucracy quality is associated
with better agency performance in the Philippines.
What does this imply? If country shortcomings in human development are to be
addressed, then institutions (incentives) impinging on the civil service and on the
performance of the bureaucracy need to be reformed or, at the very least, contained.
Three proposals are worth considering.
The first is to strengthen 3
rd
party enforcement as regards personnel hiring in order to
reduce or check ineligible, political appointments. This would require clarifying the
extent of the Presidential prerogative identifying which positions are subject to it and
which should be based solely on merit and fitness - as well as clarifying the role of the
CSC in enforcing the same. Provisions to this effect are currently proposed under House
Bill No. 3956 or Senate Bill No. 270 which seek to establish a Career Executive System.
Third party enforcement as regards the creation of new agencies which is currently the
jurisdiction of the DBM and Congress also needs to be clarified and strengthened.
Second is the reform of monetary incentives, which is long overdue. The framework of
the current SSL is more than 20 years old and there lessons in the field of human resource
management should be integrated in order to better link government compensation to
agent contribution. The proposed Government Classification and Compensation Act
designed by the CSC in 2006 tries to innovate in this regard.
Third is an official policy of transparency as regards the role and authorities of
presidential consultants/advisers. While any president is entitled to his or her advisers,
the question is who they are, what their terms of reference are, and whether and how they
are held accountable to entities other than the president. Currently, regular Cabinet
officials undergo a Congressional confirmation process in order to officially assume
office. They are also subject to public scrutiny not to mention administrative laws that
(theoretically) help ensure that power is not abused. Presidential consultants/advisers -
who are considered cabinet-level positions however undergo no such confirmation
process, yet enjoy a great deal of authority.
24
References
Banzon-Bautista, C, A. Bernardo, D. Ocampo [2008]. When reform does not transform:
a review of institutional reforms in the Department Of Education (1990-2008). 12 J une.
Background paper for the 2008/2009 Human Development Report.
Constantino-David, K. [2007]. Politics, Perils and Pains of Building Institutions.
Keynote address to the HDN General Assembly. March..
Greif, A. [2006]. Institutions and the Path to the Modern Economy, Lessons from
Medieval Trade. Cambridge University Press.
GOP, ADB and World Bank [2002]. Improving Government performance: Discipline,
Efficiency and Equity in Managing Public Resources. Report No. 24256-PH, 28 J une
2002.
Kaufmann, D. [2005]. Governance Empirics. Background for Presentation at State
Department, 19 April 2002, and Governance Empirics: Some methods, findings and
implications, presentation at the 4th Session of the Committee of Experts on Public
Administration of the United Nations ECOSOC. 5 April.
Kaufmann, D. and A. Kraay [2002]. Growth Without Governance World Bank Policy
Research Working Paper 2928. November. The World Bank
Kaufman, D., A. Kraay, and M. Mastruzzi [2005]. Governance Matters IV: Governance
Indicators for 1996-2004. The World Bank. May.
Luz, M. [2008]. Governance of the Education Sector. 4 October. Background paper for
the 2008 Human Development Report
North, Douglas. [2003]. The Role of Institutions in Economic Development. Discussion
Paper Series No. 2003.2. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
Wilson, J ames Q. Bureaucracy. New York, Basic Books, 1989.
Government documents
Career Executive Service Board . Occupancy Reports for the years 1992 2000, 2003-
2005, and 2007.
Civil Service Commission [2006]. Various background documents for the Government
Classification and Compensation Act (based on Compensation and Benefits Study
undertaken from 2002-2006).
_____ [2004]. Inventory of Government Personnel.
25
_____ [1997]. Qualification Standards Manual.
Department of Budget and Management [2007a]. Actions Taken on Agencies Under the
Office of the President (as of November 30, 2007).
_____ [2007b]. Directory of Government Officials 1994, 1997-1999, 2001-2004, 2008.
NEDA [undated]. ICC Approval Process.
26
Annex 1. Types of public agencies and DepEd as coping agency
Wilson [1989] discusses four types of government agencies depending on the extent to
which outputs and outcomes are observable and a different mix of incentives may be
required to motivate staff depending on type of agency (Figure 1). Outputs are defined as
the work the agency does on a day-to-day basis while outcomes are the results of the
agency work, that is, how (if at all) the world changes because of the outputs. Outcomes
may be hard to observe because of the difficulty in gathering information (with and
without scenarios), because they appear after long delays, and because of difficulties in
attribution.
For instance, the output of postal workers (letters sorted, delivered) is relatively easy to
observe while the output of a physicist (developing a theory) or forester (usually
performed out of view of manager) is not. Outcomes of BIR agents are relatively easy to
observe while outcomes from police work (changes in level of security, safety and order)
are not.
Annex Figure 1: Typology of government agencies
The BIR is an example of a production agency. Its outcome is to maximize taxes
collected per employee and the activities of clerks and auditors and the amount of taxes
collected as a result of those activities can be measured. Production agency orkers can be
evaluated on the basis of their contributions to efficiency.
Craft agencies include investigative, research or engineering agencies. Although outputs
are less observable, outcomes are more so making them goal-oriented rather than means-
oriented. Craft agencies are likely to rely heavily on the ethos and sense of duty of staff to
motivate and control behavior and can be procedurally self-regulating. Managers can
evaluate and reward staff on the basis of results they achieve.
Outcomes more observable
Outcomes less observable
Outputs more observable
Outputs less observable
Production Organization
Procedural Organization
Craft Organization
Coping Organization
27
Management becomes means-oriented in procedural organizations (juvenile detention
centers, barangay health centers). Basically, since activities of staff can be watched
(while results appear after long delay), it will be watched all the time. Consequently,
morale is likely to suffer and work biased by surveillance.
Finally effective management is almost impossible in coping agencies, where both
outputs and outcomes are less observable. Public school systems, local police forces, and
diplomatic corps are examples. In public school systems, teachers work on their own
away from the sight of managers on a daily basis, education outcomes are long delayed
and difficult to attribute, and resourcesare rarely under schools control. Management
has a strong incentive to focus effort on the most easily measured and controlled
activities of staff (e.g. lesson plans, attendance records, forms completed) and there is
likely to be a high degree of conflict between managers and teachers. The same may not
hold for private schools since they must survive by attracting clients and they face far
fewer constraints in the use of capital and labor.
DepED as a coping agency
The DepEd is an illustrative case. The focus on inputs at the expense of outcomes, or on
standard operating procedures rather than standards can be precisely explained by the
fact that education outcomes require a long-term time horizon, both in terms of planning
and implementation, while the demands are immediate and can be strident [Luz, 2008].
Congressional requests and pressure raised by annual budgeting forces the
bureaucracy to look at the input-side rather than outputs (much less outcomes). In
three years of defending budgets before Congress [from 2002 to 2005] not once
have the interpellation by congressmen been on education outcomes. Every year,
the attempt by the Department to present school outcomes was cut short by
requests of legislators to answer questions on school needs in their own districts.
[Luz, 2008, p. 16.]
The choice of which processes matter? is likewise influenced by the nature of outputs
and outcomes. Processes include curriculum design, in-classroom teaching, testing,
guidance and counseling, student extra-curricular programs, and the like, and the
methodology or delivery mechanisms reflect differing interpretation of standards and
policy [Luz, 2008].
In curriculum design, for example, should the Department of Education prescribe
a platform of desired learning competencies expected of all children or minimum
learning competencies based on what the average student can achieve? For
DepED, the debate is often shaped by the pressures of growing enrolments that
are straining the system, as a whole, and leading to overcrowding of schools, in
particular. In the effort to meet the growing demand for education services (more
from population pressure than from actual household appreciation), DepED tends
28
towards a one size fits all rule as the most efficient way to try to address need
all over thecountry. This has tended towards the minimum learning
competencies mode. [Luz, 2008, p.8]
A culture of obeisance [Bautista, et. al, 2008] or of no memo, no action is also
described. Despite, the Basic Education Act of 2001, which provides for school-based
management and principal empowerment, DepED and the public school system is still
very much a top-down bureaucracy [Luz, 2008]. In Luzs account [2008, p19]:
Instructions flow from the central office to all schools through the time-worn
DepED Memo, a written set of instructions that may be as important as the
announcement of a new direction, policy or program (e.g. on the new Basic
Education Curriculum) to the mundane (e.g. dress code of teachers) to the purely
informational (e.g. announcement of declared holidays) to the reiteration of past
and current policies and practices still in effect (e.g. reminders of existing rules on
school fees and the manner and timing of these collections). In a given year, as
many as 400 DepED Memos may be issued by the central office either by the
secretary of education or one of the undersecretaries, in the name of the
secretary.
The DepED bureaucracy lives (and dies) by the DepED Memo and this is so
ingrained in the system that administrators and school heads will wait for these
rather than act on their own. A common joke: A principal will wait for a DepED
Memo on principal empowerment before he will act on an issue.
From coping to craft agency
Luz outlines a way forward based on school based management (SBM) and community
involvement. Using Wilsons framework, making the shift to school-based management
(SBM) can be viewed as moving the DepEd and the public school systemcloser to being
a craft agency where the possibility of motivation and effective management is greater.
J ust as craft agencies rely heavily on the ethos and sense of duty of staff, the intention of
SBM is to enable and empower all schools with their communities to manage their own
affairs for improved delivery of education services in a sustainable manner With SBM
the ownership of schools and of education outcomes are given primarily to those at the
frontline, primarily principals together with teachers and local communities.
The visible effect or impact of empowered principals to effect or observe outputs and
outcomes was demonstrated by the relative success of SBM experiments, as described in
Bautista et.al. [2008]. For instance, under the J BIC/WB-supported Third Elementary
Education Project (TEEP), schools learned how to focus on education outcomes. Among
the improvements observed: higher participation and promotion rates, lower dropout
rates, narrower gaps in completion rates, more TEEP schools (by proportion) placed
among the countrys top 1% schools in terms of the National Achievement Test (NAT),
TEEP schools with a larger share of schools at the 75% mastery level and 60% near-
mastery level (NAT).
29
Annex 2: The ICC Process
Consultants and advisers hired represent a parallel process of project evaluation,
indicated by [1], effectively undermining the ICC process. While this parallel process
may not affect the quality of the official project evaluation report produced in [2], what
could is the signal that the project is policy, that is, it is already pre-approved [3].
Source of base figure: NEDA [undated]
[3] approved
[2] PER
Project Proposal
Submission Requirements
(FS, endorsements by
concerned agencies)
ICC Secretariat
Project Evaluation
ICC-Technical Board (TB) Review)
ICC- Cabinet Committee (CC) Review
NEDA Board confirmation of ICC approval
The Proposed project is endorsed for
funding and implementation
Projects deferred for
endorsement/approval are
remanded to the ICC Secretariat
for review
[1]
Brokers,
consultants,
advisers
Proponent Agency