Public administration is not recognized in Poland. It is considered inefficient, politicized, devoid of ambition, corrupt, overgrown, badly paid monster. The assessment of the state apparatus according to experience is more or little harsh, but the general social feeling is negative.
The opinion expressed, although powerfully generalized, is not entirely incorrect and I am not amazed that the public administration does not have a good reputation. I have worked in offices at different levels and I am a zealous critic of our authoritative staff, but unlike most, I believe that there are large opportunities for building solid state structures at both central and local level. However, I mention to the officials of the fresh generation who argue the rigid strategy and their frequently partisan methods of trying to change or counteract it. Unfortunately, their actions are insufficient and yet lose to the strategy by becoming mostly officials they have criticised or left the public sector.
A well-functioning state is based on “average officials” building, caring and implementing laws in the state. And changing the functioning of the management model will let to heal the Polish administration, which, not only can become friendly and effective, will be cheaper and attractive. I besides wanted to break down the demagogue claim of “the inexpensive state”. A country inexpensive can be as inert and pathological as overgrown and expensive. We request to look into the root of the problem here, the way administration operates and its rules of operation.
I was sad to see how the next governments underestimated the problem. I am peculiarly amazed that the erstwhile Government of Law and Justice, which based its policy on a more centralist model of governance. alternatively of strengthening the authoritative structure, it continued to weaken and expand. The administration has so not become a solid foundation, but another political spoil.
Will changing the neglected administration strategy be easy? Of course not. A possible reformer is facing not only the pathological habits of the officials themselves, but besides the managers, directors, department heads due to conscious ignorance and fear of revealing their incompetence or even corruption or nepotism. We can either accept the weak state with all its negative consequences or want to fix it and build solid foundations for the future.
I choose the other.
Apublic administration “Professional and effective”
The administration, as I mentioned earlier, is crucial in the management of the state, but besides in the implementation of any reforms. Without these average officials and their managers, all the top changes will be stuck in a bureaucratic black gap flooded with incompetence. The possible improvement must put different accents on it, align affirmative changes with the essential but hard ones, but support all those who want to build a fresh model of administration. It's not about cleaning, it's about change.
Thinning of administration and increases in officials
A popular and simplified populist postulate is that we have an overgrown administration that needs to be reduced. I agree, however, the specified weight failure of the administrative apparatus can, contrary to appearances, consequence in other effects from expected. Officials are improbable to a broken system, so they adapt to it. They are sluggish, lazy, highly conservative and frequently unpleasant (especially erstwhile citizens request the implementation of their rights in the inefficient bureaucratic Moloch system). Given that they are underpaid, operating in a rigid, ineffective strategy with frequently fewer competent directors, without more motivation to look for better solutions, it is not amazing that officials do so. In specified a case, the “weaning” of the administration would consequence in his complete paralysis, and at best, further weakening of the efficiency of the office's operation, or longer-run cases and deepening frustration among officials. A recipe for disaster.
Let's start with the salary. An authoritative in my opinion must be and feel professional. However, if wages are importantly lower than in the free market, people with potential, cognition and aspirations frequently do not choose administration as their career path. The consequence is that people who desperately request work take work, but have less competences, expectations or ambitions. Currently, the “average work of an official” is not a dream job, but it is stable, undemanding and repetitive. Consciousness of low wages means reducing requirements and expectations during recruitment, which creates a vicious ellipse of “low wages – low competences”. If wages increase, the pool of competent people will increase, but more can besides be expected from specified officials. Money is 1 of the main motivations for employees, especially those who are aware of their capabilities. I am incapable to give the exact mark percent increases that should be introduced, as it is simply a substance of observing wages in the free market, especially corporations. The definition of wage forks must be aligned with positions of akin competence in the private sector. In my opinion, the public administration has a lot to do with corporations, although the motives of activity are importantly different.
In addition to increases for officials, unfortunately, there must besides be cuts. It's not that easy for all administration. An overgrown strategy of bureaucracy has it in common that it begins to make a occupation for itself, which is de facto not needed by anyone, but due to the pathology, individual has to do it. Another harmful vicious circle. It is essential to link 2 elements: deep computerisation of offices and evaluation of all procedures, guidelines, arrangements and rules. Simplify everything to an efficient and time-saving strategy of the flow of documentation within the office and the efficient resolution of current cases by uncovering information and decision-making bottlenecks. Thanks to specified procedures, many officials will simply not be needed, which will bring affirmative effects of faster decisions and the flow of documentation. This involves expanding the structure of IT departments and writing intuitive client support systems from scratch as well as the circulation of documentation inside, and between offices.
Definitely expensive, but it's a essential investment.
The professional improvement strategy of officials
The professionalisation of administrative staff should besides concern the change in the culture of office work. Many young and ambitious people want to develop, get fresh competences, skills, participate in training and projects. These are highly crucial and valuable qualities that should be given a chance. The administrative strategy should let the improvement of specified competences. This means developing career paths that can be selected, e.g. Executive, specialist, IT, personnel, financial, training and workshop facilities. This naturally involves changing the structure and tasks of the fresh authoritative HR (Human Resources) to a more committed and encouraging staff to make and measure progress. This could bring 2 fundamental benefits, first it will attract people with ambitions, those who want to make and build a professional authoritative staff from the real event. Officials in specified a strategy could then hold higher positions within the interior promotion strategy and have an educated another resonating approach for their subordinates and associates. It is simply a way for people to want to keep and make the strategy themselves, due to the fact that it will be beneficial to them. The seemingly negative and truly healing effect will be the large opposition of those who see a “warm and safe job” in the office, and in the effective implementation of reforms over time pushing them out of administration.
Annual in-depth audit of the effectiveness of elder management
Each person, even in a higher position, should be aware that he or she will be accounted for in the performance of his or her tasks, competence and management of the institution. It is highly damaging in the administration to believe that despite errors or inefficient work there will be no consequences. specified an attitude motivates us to hide the weaknesses of ourselves and of the office and to manipulate decently the documentation presented to the superiors. Almost like in the russian system, where effects were inflated or no problems were reported to meet excessive expectations and avoid responsibility.
An audit and an environmental interview, peculiarly rigorously, should be drawn up annually in the proposal for changes to public administration against elder and middle-level officials, but besides average administrative staff. The evaluation should cover:
- performance of tasks
- percentages of correct and incorrect decisions
- the appropriateness of spending money (if applicable)
- working cultures within the office and relationships with employees subject to anonymous surveys.
These elements will show to the full whether a individual is fit to be in a managerial position or whether he or she needs to step aside or make changes in his or her conduct under the rigor of failure or change of position. Ultimately, specified a study should be available to all private authoritative in the facility.
An crucial question will be “who would carry out this audit” – A peculiar cell should be established, which will operate in the administration liable for supervising the institution. This task will require robust procedures, effective enforcement and well-defined evaluation objectives. In my opinion, specified a strategy should be developedInand centrally through an independent institution specified as the advanced Audit Chamber, which would besides measure the effectiveness of procedures and make the essential improvements each year within its competence.
I could be accused of creating an administration in the administration – however, in this peculiar case there must be a tool of control and execution, otherwise any established rules will apply only in theory. If we build a strategy that motivates the administration to work effectively, we will build the foundation of our state.
Finally, I would like to stress that although my experience with the administration is definitely negative, I have seen the hidden possible destroyed there by an inefficient, stiffened and pathological system. As with Polish entrepreneurship, it is adequate not to suppress our potential, and we can truly accomplish a lot.
Cezary Skwarło
