Public Management Innovations and Administrative Capacity

1
Public Management Innovations and Administrative
Capacity

• Tony Verheijen
• Senior Public Sector Management Specialist
• The World Bank

2
Context

• New Member States move to a next phase in their
  membership with the 2007-2013 financing framework
• Three further CEECs in an advanced stage of
  preparation for membership
• Administrative capacity is a key issue in
  determining the quality of fiscal management,
  competitiveness and ability to use the benefits
  of EU membership
• Key question how to improve administrative
  quality beyond core EI functions (transposition
  etc.)?

3
Context ctd.

• Two years after accession some doubts remain on
  administrative quality in CEECs
• Low fund absorption capacity does not bode well
  for the 2007-2013 period
• Fiscal management issues remain in several states
• Also Competitiveness issues (and their linkage
  with administrative quality) will gain importance
  as economic development parameters continue to
  converge

4
The Bank Study

• Follow-up to the 1999 Ready for Europe Study
• Focus on innovations and best practice combine
  with review of basic parameters of administrative
  capacity
• Using a benchmarking approach based on accepted
  indicators of administrative capacity
• Combining in-depth studies with desk review

5
Main Findings

• Some interesting and advanced innovations, in
  particular on performance management and
  e-governance
• Reversals of earlier progress in several states
  on basic aspects of civil service development
• Concerns on policy coordination capacity

6
Benchmarks

• Strategic planning and performance OECD and CAF
  best practice indicators rated according to the
  CAF scale
• Policy coordination Metcalfe Scale
• Civil Service SIGMA baselines
• E-Governance advancement in terms of phase of
  development

7
Benchmarking performance management and
strategic planning

• Systems in Latvia and Lithuania are advanced, and
  would rate above EU average, though individual
  appraisal is a weak link
• Other states (especially SK) show some agency
  based innovations, but no systemic approach
• Introducing an overall strategic planning and
  performance agenda is crucial for successful
  structural fund implementation

8
Benchmarking on strategic planning
9
Performance Management
10
Policy Coordination

• Most states would meet healthy minimum levels
  on specialized EI coordination (levels 4-5 on the
  Metcalfe scale)
• Most states would rate with the weakest among the
  old member states on overall coordination

11
Overall Coordination
12
EI coordination
13
Civil Service

• Focus on four aspects
• Legislation
• Horizontal Management
• Politicization
• Incentives

14
A Case of General Backsliding?

• A SIGMA assessment now would show reversals on
  key issues
• Legislation in many cases revoked or dressed
  down
• Horizontal management remains weak, and in many
  cases is being eliminated
• Politicization continues to be an issue
• Limited progress in reform of incentive systems
• The scope for the establishment a classical
  civil service model is questionable for a number
  of states

15
Key Issues

• How to create a high quality administration if
  political will to create a classical civil
  service is low?
• Incentive systems how to go beyond seniority and
  opaque and ad hoc bonus systems?
• Can politicization be managed??
• Are horizontal management structures at all
  viable? If not, what is the alternative?

16
Service delivery

• E-Governance innovations in Estonia continue to
  be a best practice
• However, for fiscal and other reasons
  replicability would be difficult
• Less comprehensive and incremental approaches
  need more encouragement

17
Can best practices provide inspiration for reform?

• Review of replicability systemic and agency
  specific innovations
• Performance management and strategic planning
  systems are generally home-grown and can be
  adapted
• Linkage to individual performance and rewards
  needs to be established
• Investment in such systems will pay off in terms
  of improved fiscal management, improved
  structural fund absorption and a more attractive
  investment climate

18
Service delivery

• Estonia as an exception or a model?
• More scattered innovations in other states show
  the potential of e-services
• Investment and infrastructure considerations may
  make full replication very difficult

19
Agency specific reforms

• Problem of roll out, seen in both Latvia (late
  1990s) and Slovakia (recent years)
• Could provide thoughts on how to move from
  institutional performance to individual level

20
Lessons and Agenda

• Interesting best practices have grown up, and
  should inspire other states
• Foundation issues remain and will affect state
  performance on crucial aspects of public
  management if not addressed
• Classical approaches to civil service development
  may not stick and alternatives may need to be
  found to address stability and incentive issues