'Reinventing' is ideologically neutral

JAKARTA (JP): The concept of "Reinventing Government" appears to be closer to the Republican's goal of less government, but Democratic President Bill Clinton wholeheartedly adopted the concept the moment he came into the White House in 1993.

The concept is free from ideology, says Ted Gaebler, the co- author of the best seller 1992 book Reinventing Government -- How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector.

"That's the reason why governments of Indonesia, Singapore and elsewhere are interested in the concept."

"If it came with American baggage, it would be of little value here," Gaebler says.

Alternative systems of government, such as that in Australia, authoritarian governments, and even former dictatorships, either have found, or will find the idea valuable, he argues.

"The commonality is how to improve bureaucracy, not how to improve politics," he says. "Reinventing government provides a neutral set of strategies to do that."

In the United States, the idea has led to a reduction of 300,000 people from the federal government's payroll; in the Department of Defense, the rule book for personnel has gone from 8,000 to 400 and finally to 40 pages in length.

Privatization and the downsizing of government, concepts that were very much associated with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and U.S. President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, are but two tiny strategies in reinventing government, Gaebler says.

"They are not an overall driving force. Having governments look at what they are doing, the role they play in society, these and all the other institutions is what reinventing is about."

The key word, in Gaebler views, is "entrepreneurial management".

In the United States, Gaebler says Oregon is the most "reinvented" state government, and it is followed by Florida, Massachusetts, Utah, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

"Unfortunately, California, my home state, is not," says Gaebler, a resident of San Rafael, California.

Among city governments that were most reinvented, he cites Hampton in Virginia, Charlotte in North Carolina, and Santa Clara in California.

These were assorted Democratic and Republican controlled governments.

What makes one government more successful than others?

"They have had relatively consistent focus on changing the bureaucratic structures, to be much more outcome-oriented," Gaebler said.

In Oregon, he said the people there set "benchmarks" -- what the citizens wanted as the end products of their institutions. On health care, they quantified their targets of their expectations, not from the government, but from the health care system.

In other states or cities, they have put up many services that were traditionally provided by governments, on competitive bids. Some services were retained, but only after public employees won the bids.

"This means that they have lowered costs by having public employees compete for retention of their jobs. Costs are lower, and morale goes up.

"It's a marvelous changing-the-consequences. If you don't compete, you'll lose your job. This comes in with the consequences-strategy. It's a very powerful strategy," Gaebler says.

The popularity of his book has meant extensive foreign traveling for Gaebler, to discuss his ideas and to offer his services in the application of the "Reinventing Government." strategies.

He has been invited to Australia and New Zealand, Russia, South Africa and Latin America. In this part of the world, he has worked in Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, and is currently involved in a project in Singapore.

Gaebler recalls a meeting with Philippine President Fidel Ramos in Manila. "He gave me three books that he had written on reinventing the Philippine government. He wanted me to validate what he was already doing," he says.

Ramos however may not get the chance to apply the concept himself, given that the Philippine constitution bars him from serving a second seven-year term.

What about Indonesia, which has been deregulating and debureaucratizing since the mid-1980s?

"I had a discussion in 1994 with some government officials, but there was no follow up," Gaebler says. (emb)