Abstract
Key
Words: Annual Confidential Report (ACR), Annual
Performance Agreements (APAs), Public service, Performance Appraisal,
Efficiency, Accountability.
Introduction
Administration is the oxygen for the Government. To operate
government activities smoothly administration play vital role. Civil servants
are the driving power of the administration. They have to be more cautious,
knowledgeable, responded, hard working, healthy, and public oriented, well
behaved and so on. They work on service delivery of the civil service to the
public becoming civil servants. Performance of civil servants and institution
both have important contribution in public service delivery. To ensure
successful public service delivery with skill and professionalism public sector
should impose on the Performance ability of officials and administration. To
measure officials performance administration follow Annual Confidential Report
(ACR) and to measure organizational performance Annual Report (AR) has to be
submitted. Though ACR is confidential but not neutral. Nepotism and stand high
in favor are the common error of ACR and to make it useless through wrong
judgments. Another measurement tool AR also has lacking because of the absence
of monitoring and evaluating organizational performance in terms of output and
outcome indicators in the public service.
Lack of accountability, transparency, administrative
inefficiency, criticism of red tape, mismanagement, miscommunication,
corruption and misuse of power, administrative performance is now a volley of
questions. Main purposes of introducing Annual Performance
Agreement are: (a) moving the focus of the ministry from process-orientation to
result-orientation, and (b) providing an objective and fair basis to evaluate
overall performance of the ministry/divisional the end of the year. ([1])
Ten annual performance agreements (APAs) were
signed between the Cabinet Secretary and the Secretaries and Senior Secretaries
of 10 ministries and divisions concerned, aiming to improve the performance and
accountability of public servants. [2]
Problem statement
Administrative
Performance is more than something of administrative duty and responsibility.
Following the Rules of Business 1996 and revised up to July 2012, “Policy
regarding Performance appraisal, its countersignature, preservation,
representation on adverse comments, its use and all references thereto”- is an
indication about administrative performance of individuals and organizations of
administration.
The impact, response
and outcomes of performance appraisal strategies such as- Annual Confidential Report
(ACR), Annual Performance Agreement (APA) and Performance measuring tools on
civil servants of administration.
Literature Review
Administrative and individual performance both are needed to
measure following the performance appraisal tool to make sure if performance is
good or bad. Not only that where should pay more focus and in which area
performance is lacking can be found out through performance appraisal tool.
In the public sector in Bangladesh the prevailing performance
appraisal system is known as the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) which has
eight parts including Medical check-up report; Bio-data off the appraised;
Personal traits and task accomplishment; Pen picture; Recommendation;
Countersigning; and Role of the ministry.
The Annual Performance
Agreement seeks to address three basic questions: (a) what are ministry’s main
objectives for the year? (b) What activities are proposed by the ministry to
achieve these objectives? (c) How would someone know at the end of the year the
degree of progress made in implementing these activities? That is, what are the
relevant performance indicators and their targets which can be monitored? [3]
From the circular of Civil service examination to promotion
in every stage performance based activity must be monitored and evaluated. That
is possible if performance assessment tools are strictly followed. But
unfortunately ACR and AR have flaws which are the obstacle of proper
performance assessment. To eradicate those flaws Government of Bangladesh
imitated the new performance appraisal system called APAs under the Government
Performance Management System (GPMS).
Objective of the study
-
To
identify the tools used for measuring performance of officials and
administration.
-
To draw
the picture of practicing performance appraisal tools
-
To find
out the outcome of performance measuring system in administration
-
To find
out the response of civil servants on the performance measuring assessment
Methodology of the study
Sources of Data collection: writing materials are collected from the secondary sources.
Secondary sources were articles, reports, newspaper, books and journals. Along
with government rules and regulations, guidelines, publications and the
websites of the Ministry of Public Administration.
Study area: Performance appraisal system of civil service
of Bangladesh and its outcome.
Research Question
a) To what extent performance appraisal system of
Bangladesh is effective or ineffective?
b) What are the outcomes of performance appraisal system
in administration?
c) What are the potential outcomes of performance
appraisal system?
d) To what extent Bangladesh civil service
achieved from performance appraisal tools?
Limitation of the study
-
There
were some limitations off completing this paper. Among them resources
constraints is need to mention. There were limited writings on this area and
there was less up-to-date information for using.
-
Another
constrain was time. Time was too short to complete this kind of paper.
Conceptual framework of the Discussion
ACR
which is used to assess the individual performance of the administration
improved first in 1982 with the addition of pen picture which had to be signed
by the officer reported upon. The Annual Confidential Report was first
introduced in 1934 under the Miscellaneous Rules. Before that 1834 in the
British colonialism performance measurement was just writing note by the
superior officer to the new officer about his subordinates. Then that was
familiar in the name of “Note to the Successor”. During Pakistan
period, Graphic Rating Scale (GRS) along with a pen picture was introduced to
measure both the personality and the performance traits (BPATC, 1989: 21).
After independence, the Administrative and Services Reorganization Committee
(1973) reviewed the inherited ACR system and recommended to use a similar form
for all types of employees for the sake of comparability and equality. The Pay
and Service Commission (1977) recommended measuring the potential of an
employee as to make better promotion decisions (BPATC, 1989: 22). In 1982, the
then government formed a Martial Law Committee to review the ACR. The committee
was heavily influenced by the system of appraisal used in the defense services.
Following its proposal, a new ACR was introduced in 1982, which was a
significant break from the past (Hossain, 2004). [4]
Parts
of ACR
Part-1: Medical
Check-up
Part-2: Bio-data
of the appraised
Part-3 & 4:
Personal traits and task accomplishment
Part-5: Pen
picture
Part-6:
Recommendation
Part-7:
Countersigning
Part-8: Role of the ministry
In 1990, the ACR
format was again changed. In the following table fundamental differences between
the post-1982 and the post 1990 ACRs are highlighted. [5]
Criteria
|
ACR 1982
|
ACR 1990
|
Evaluation
|
Measurement factors
|
Total 20
factors: 8
personality
and 12
performance
factors
|
Total 25
factors:13
personality
and 12
performance
factors
|
Personality
has been
given more
emphasis
which is
difficult to
measure
|
Rating scale
|
Ranged from 1
to 5;
each with
generalized
anchor
definition, e.g.
anchor 5 of
punctuality
trait was
defined as
Never
late in office
|
Ranged from 1
to 4; no
anchor
definition
|
Without anchor
definition,
ACR became
more
prone to subjectivity
|
Summary scale
|
Top 2 grades
thresholds
were
91 and 81
|
Top 2 grades
thresholds
were
95 and 85
|
Getting of top
grades
became
stricter
|
There is a flaw
that civil service is unresponsive to the needs of the citizens as a whole and unfriendly
to private sector business. Making civil servants truly
responsive to the needs and demands of the citizen and change their mind-sets
in a way that they serve the citizens-the way citizens want to be served rather
than the way the civil servants want to serve them.
Performance of
civil service has dramatically declined over last 15 years. [6] The reason of declining is the lack of
accountability. Civil servants were not responsive to the citizens and not
accountable for their responsibility to the superiors. There was a trend that
performance appraisal only needed when civil servants nominated to the
promotion. To get promotion they want to ACR certificate from the superiors by
anyhow. This attitude is the main problem of ACR which can have an influence on
the ACR along with superiors to be influenced. Then it is not become
confidential. It is become favor of
influence.
There are some
flaws in the fundamental section of ACR which are mentioning below-
-
In
the medical check-up report there is no section of describing any type of bad
disease. So if officers have any disease and they want to hide they can doo
that easily.
-
25
parameters are set for measuring performance but those are all about
personality traits rather than about performance. As an example, intelligence,
cooperation, public relation and so on are the criteria of personality not the
measuring point of performance.
-
ACR
is given once a year. There is a tendency among officials that they work had in
the end of the year to get ACR but whole the year they become indifferent and
unresponsive about their task accomplishment.
-
Officials
can get recommendation from the report writing officer easily if only they know
each other well and officials do something for the officer. Then ACR measuring
does not matter of getting recommendation.
On the other hand the Annual Report of organizational
performance reflects the activities of the organization perform the whole year.
But it also has some problems in structural foundations. Those ares-
-
Absence
of strong monitoring culture and evaluating organizational performance in the
public service.
-
Absence
of departmental information system to provide performance information in the
annual reports
-
Lack
of agreed framework of organizational performance criteria and other
deficiencies in the formal reporting requirements in Bangladesh.
Annual
Performance Agreement is essentially a record of understanding between a
Minister representing the people’s mandate, and the Secretary of a
Ministry/Division responsible for implementing this mandate. A Performance Agreement
provides a summary of the most important results that a ministry/division
expects to achieve during the financial year. This document contains not only
the agreed objectives, but also performance indicators and targets to measure
progress in implementing them. APAs is a turning point of administrative
development With the implementation of the
performance management system, it is expected that the efficiency and
accountability of the government offices would enhance while the implementation
pace of government policies and programs through intense monitoring would be
expedited.
Aiming at the performance and accountability of civil
servants APAs is signed recently between the
Cabinet Secretary and the Secretaries and Senior Secretaries of 10 ministries
and divisions. The 10 ministries and divisions which signed the APA are Road
Transport and Highways Division, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Textiles
and Jute, Energy and Mineral Resources Division, Ministry of Industries,
Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Housing and Public Works, Bridges Division,
Ministry of Social Welfare and Economic Relations Division. [7]
The Annual Performance Agreement should contain a preamble and
following six sections - [8]
Section 1 :
|
Ministry/Division‟s Vision,
Mission, Strategic Objectives and Functions
|
Section 2 :
|
Strategic Objectives,
Priorities, Activities, Performance Indicators and Targets
|
Section 3 :
|
Trend values of the
Performance Indicators
|
Section 4 :
|
Description of Performance
Indicators, Implementing Departments/Agencies and Measurement Methodology
|
Section 5 :
|
Specific Performance
Requirements from other Ministries/Divisions
|
Section 6 :
|
Outcomes of the
Ministry/Division
|
Findings of the study
Following the objectives of the study and the research
questions the findings are given sequentially-
Administration use ACR for individual performance assessment
and for administrative performance assessment APAs is a new initiative and
which is already started its work. It is also seen that ACR is very old
performance measuring tools which is practicing and following every time. There is no significant dimensional change or
reform in ACR after the 1990. Outcome off ACR is very poor in the question of
individual performance. But government is more concern about civil servants
performance for ensuring good governance through e-governance system. That is
why government is now operating their techniques of performance appraisal under
the Government Performance Management System (GPSM) through providing Public
Administration awards for the civil servants and APAs for the ministries and
divisions. Award is considered as a social recognition which can make a
official as valuable and respected ideal person. Public Administration award
policies 2015 is working for selecting and electing responsible official for giving
awards on the basis of his performance and accomplishment of duty and
responsibility. This award is one kind
of motivation and inspiring factor to make officials more responsive and public
oriented. At the same time more responsiveness will play important in the
implementation of e-governance process. Already this e-governance concept gets
more attention and implemented in a large scale on various field of public
service.
Though ACR is not properly effective and slightly ineffective
it should be reformed to make it more confidential and neutral. Administrative
accountability should include in the AR to make sure that administration being
government institution will do not do anything illogical and illegal through
misusing the power.
The potential outcomes of existing performance appraisal are
the overall successful accomplishment of public service delivery with quick
response, transparency, accountability, citizen oriented administration.
Administration of Bangladesh still now trying hard to reach in success point. But
it should be agreed that administrative work is more responsive and more
participatory then before concerning the matter of performance delivery. It
will improve day by day with the new performance appraisal tool of APAs.
Conclusion
Performance is not only done for the public but also it is
important for the administration and civil servants. For a successful
performance administration need to maintain a powerful performance appraisal
technique so that with the good performance ability good governance can be
ensured. The more important thing is to ensure fairness in ACR and strong tools
should be added to ensure productivity in performance assessment report through
so that eligible officials can get what they deserved. Eligible persons should post
in their right position.
Recommendation
The urgent recommendation on the discussion of this paper is
to bring change or take reform initiative for performance appraisal system of
administration in Bangladesh. Exiting system is too old to adapt in recent demand.
Major changes should include in the ACR to define properly
the performance indicators not only the personality indicators.
Confidentiality should maintain strongly so that the chance
of biasness could be avoided.
References
BPATC, (1989).
Performance Appraisal System of Class
I officers of Bangladesh Civil Service. Savar: Bangladesh Public
Administration Training Center (BPATC).
Hossain, A.,
(2004). Civil Service Management. Unpublished
Doctoral Thesis, University of Dhaka: Bangladesh.
Haque,
Mohammad Ashraful (2012). Performance Appraisal System of Bangladesh Civil
Service: An analysis of its efficiency. International
Public Management Review, 13(1)
Jahan,
Ferdous (2006). Public Administration in Bangladesh. Center for Governance Studies, WP1
Kim, Pan Suk
and Monem, M. Civil Service Reform in Bangladesh: All Play but Hardly any work
Public
Administration Award Policies 2015
The News
Today (26 February 2015) P-8
The Daily
Sun (24 February 2015) [Back page]
[1]
Guidelines for Annual Performance Agreements (APAs) 2014-15. Cabinet Division.
Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
[2]
The Daily Sun (24 February 2015) [Back page]
[3]
Guidelines for Annual Performance Agreements (APAs) 2014-15. P-3
[4]
,5Haque, M. Ashraful (2012). Perfromance Appraisal System of
Bangladesh Civil Service: An analysis fo its efficiency. Ipmr. P-45.46.
[6] Kim, Pan Suk and Monem,
M. Civil Service Reform in Bangladesh: All Play but Hardly any work. P-18
[7]
The Daily Sun (24 February 2015) [Back page]
[8]
Guidelines for Annual Performance Agreements (APAs) 2014-15. P-4
No comments:
Post a Comment