Public Sector Productivity

4 April 2013

A recent development which may be of national significance, and perhaps most of the public is not yet aware of, is the government’s shifting the focus of its productivity improvement effort  from the private sector to that of the public service sector. This I learned from the talk of Development Academy of the Philippines president, Mr. Tony Kalaw, during the General Membership Fellowship of the Philippine Quality and Productivity Movement, Inc., last March 25 at the Metro Club in Makati City.

Our country’s productivity improvement effort was started when the Asian Productivity Organization was formally established in 1961 as a regional intergovernmental organization, and where the Philippines was one of the eight founding members together with China, India, Japan, Korea, Nepal, Pakistan and Thailand (http://www.apo-tokyo.org/about/history.html). The mission of APO, whose membership has now more than doubled to 20 countries, is “to contribute to the sustainable socioeconomic development of Asia and the Pacific through enhancing productivity.”

Here in our country, productivity improvement has, until very recently, been focused on the private sector. I still remember the frequent interaction, in the 1980s, that the Production Management Association of the Philippines (of which I was a member and later on president) had with the DAP’s Productivity Development Center (the implementing agency of the APO in the Philippines) regarding the promotion of productivity improvement programs in the manufacturing sector. The PROMAP then was just one of about 120 or so Productivity & Quality Organizations that mushroomed in the 1980s which helped channel the APO productivity enhancement programs into the agriculture, industry, labor and service sectors.

The efforts made during the decades long partnership between the APO-DAP/PDC tandem and the private sector, however, failed to deliver the “enhanced productivity” objective that could have brought about a sustained socioeconomic development for the Philippines. This is evident in the fact that from being considered as economically second only to Japan in our region during the 1960s, the country has retrogressed into the region’s economic laggard by the end of the second millennium and continued to be by the end of the previous administration’s term in 2010. During the said period, we saw our nation overtaken by our neighbors (namely Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and even Vietnam) whose citizens experience a much better quality of life because of their improved productivity.  It is said that these countries’ accomplishments is attributable to their success in adopting continuously, productivity and innovative strategies to sustain their growth.

Luckily for the Philippines, the current administration’s “tuwid na daan” advocacy and determined drive against corruption seem to have hit the right chords, which resulted to definite positive changes in governance (acknowledged both locally and internationally) and improvement in the country’s competitive rankings as the administration approached the end of the first half of its term.

However, as commented by Tony Kalaw, “…there is still much to be desired” as we face a major challenge with the impending implementation of the planned ASEAN economic integration. We have to enhance further the country’s competitiveness to be able to avail of our fair share of benefits that can be taken from this ASEAN region’s large market base. And in line with this, what needs to be prioritized, among others, are the following: improving the investment climate, improving our infrastructure, and improving our overall regulatory requirements. Addressing these mentioned priorities involves government action.

Since there are already, as mentioned earlier, 120 or so P&Q Organizations helping the private sector, they no longer need the level of help that DAP used to give them. This would allow DAP to shift their focus to public sector productivity, a recommendation the Philippines made to APO, and which, with the backing of Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia and India, was given the approval and included in APO’s agenda.

Hence, DAP (in coordination with the Office of the President, DBM, CSC, DTI, etc.) has started the program to introduce the time tested productivity tools and techniques to the public sector, i.e., government agencies. In line with this, it is also required now for these agencies to have ISO certification for their Quality Management Systems, as well as a Balanced Score Card based Performance Management System.

With the confidence that the P&Q Organizations would continue to do their part in the private sector’s productivity improvement efforts, DAP-DTI-DBM-CSC will do their part in the government and “…concentrate in improving the delivery services in government as part of the APO’s program for Public Sector Productivity”.

To my mind, progress regarding this program, as based on the private sector’s experience, will not be achieved as fast as we want it. However, I believe the government will never go wrong in starting it and even if the public sector’s adoption of the “time tested productivity tools” may be slow in coming, I see the effort alone as an excellent complement to President PNoy’s “tuwid na daan” and would enhance the effectiveness of his advocacy in speeding up the achievement of the beneficial changes that would ultimately be felt by the Filipinos.

Comments/reactions will be appreciated and can be sent through this writer’s email (sl3.mekaniko@gmail.com) or through this writer’s blog (http://mekaniko-sl3.blogspot.com).