Third world strives to carry out bureaucratic reform

Third world strives to carry out bureaucratic reform

By Raphael Lengesa Nombo

YOGYAKARTA (JP): There is a distinction between bureaucratic
systems found in advanced Western countries and those available
in developing countries. Although it is viewed that this
dichotomy oversimplifies a complex administrative reality, it is
asserted that these ideal types are useful for formulating some
general observations of how bureaucratic systems operate within
various socioeconomic and political environments.

In the contemporary democratic perspective, for instance,
bureaucracy is largely reflected as a Weberian rational legal
model. The proponents of this model argue that administrative
states are rationally structured in the sense of seeking to
maximize efficiency in the use of limited resources.

Responsibility and authority are hierarchically arrayed and
balanced throughout, with lines of responsibility being clearly
defined to avoid the incidence of overlapping jurisdictions and
duplication of functions. Rules are specific in content and
universal in application. Civil servants are recruited and
promoted exclusively on the basis of objective standards of merit
or achievement.

Descriptions of the public administrator in this paradigm
involve the aspect of civil servants as citizens in the
employment of society's government, duty-bound to perform their
work in the service of the public. As it would be improper for a
politician to sacrifice the country's welfare for personal gain
or for a judge to decide a particular case on the basis of
personal bias instead of the principle of rule of law, so too
would it be improper for the civil servant to sacrifice the
public good for service to personal interest in the conduct of
official duties.

The reason bureaucrats in modern administrative states are
sensitive to legitimate political authorities and to public
service is that specialization divides more clearly political
from administrative functions and that political institutions are
too strong to keep civil servants under control.

Gilbert Siegel in his study (1978) reported that under a
system guided by civil service ethics, standardization and of
work practices, a legalistic orientation and impersonality are
expected when performing the duties of one's position. Public
servants similarly are expected to faithfully follow rules and
regulations; civil servants are to be "on tap but not on top".
They are supposed to be servants of the people. This is an
important lesson to our bureaucrats in developing countries.

On the other hand, public bureaucracies in developing
countries fall under the prismatic society: transitional
societies which are between traditional and modern socioeconomic-
cum-political development. These kind of societies have inherited
modern administrative states in form but retain elements of
traditional social structures. They lack the norms of observing
public organizations as impersonal instruments for the
accomplishment of tasks. Bureaucrats do not behave as impersonal
and politically neutral public servants. They behave in personal
and political ways related to their own culture, traditions and
expectations.

In reality, many analysts see public bureaucracy in most
developing countries as partly constituting a serious stumbling-
block to economic growth and development. Such systems of
bureaucracy have been explained as separated from the masses, top
heavy, elitist, blindly observing absurd regulations, creating
redundant organizations, indifferent to efficiency, having more
people than needed, betraying trust, multiplying red-tape,
blocking each other, retaliating against others, suppressing
democracy, cheating superiors as well as subordinates and taking
bribes and accumulating personal wealth.

Many weaknesses are commonly identified and encountered in our
public administration systems. Such weaknesses are a shortage of
skilled manpower, poor incentives, a low level of commitment to
achieve planned goals, corruption and many other conditions that
pave the way for low standards of living in the society.

Gerald Caiden (1982), who has done extensive research on
administrative reform describes bureaucracy in developing
countries as too often reflecting the aspect that "public
administration is administration of the public, not
administration for the public".

Against this background, the belief that bureaucracy
contributes to building up a government's ability to formulate,
implement development policies and ensure that essential services
and facilities are provided dependably and equitably is well
understood. Therefore, inefficiencies in the bureaucracy can mean
high government deficits and poor quality of public goods and
services.

Charges of serious impediments in our bureaucracies are very
common and widely reported. One important objective of the
bureaucratic reform in developing countries is to bring about
change and efficiency in the public sector in delivering public
services. While it may be true that developing countries are
seriously striving to carry out bureaucratic reforms, it is also
necessary to review the historical weaknesses in our
bureaucracies.

The writer is currently Postgraduate Student in Public
Administration Program at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta. He
is a civil servant with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
International Co-operation in Tanzania.