New Public Management: Lean State,
Lean Government
(April 23-
May 1, 2006)
By Ted Francisco
 |
| Ted
Francisco |
Prior to coming to Gummersbach for the Friedrich Naumann Foundation
(FNF) seminar on new public management (NPM), I was preoccupied
with thoughts, most of which were questions, regarding the subject
at hand. Some of the questions I raised during the online phase
of the discussion were focused on the lack of information on the
liberal model of this so-called new public management.
- Could NPM be as effective no matter what kind of government
system a country has?
- Is NPM workable only in democratic-parliamentary countries
that have attained economic success?
NPM could be a silent revolution at the bureaucratic level of
government. It could alter the way our government is run, and
it could change our perception of our political environment. But
then again, Filipinos have become too suspicious of revolutions.
Many believe we have had too much of it.
We have let the momentum of the first EDSA revolution slip out
of our hands, and we missed the chance to rectify the errors in
our political and government system. Twenty years after the famous
EDSA revolution, the call of which was exactly for effective governance,
not much has really changed in our political landscape and in
the bureaucracy. The government continues to be perceived as pathetic,
inefficient and ineffective. Graft and corruption is still rampant,
and people remain poor and hungry. Many lack income-generating
opportunities. Our perspectives are narrow and limited to the
confines of our homes. Nationhood is not our best suit. Indeed,
we have failed to finish the job we started in EDSA I. Would NPM
give us that cure?
Between monitoring the imposition of a state of national emergency
by President Arroyo, the very politically charged discussion on
charter change, and trying to grasp information on NPM, I was
filled with doubts on the effectiveness of NPM, and the essence
behind this much ballyhooed concept. That was basically my NPM
state of mind prior to the seminar. Then there was the Gummersbach
seminar.
Understanding the liberal model of NPM wasn’t that hard after
all. In fact it was comprehensible especially when you discuss
it with other reform-minded people. The ideas of promoting a lean
government and a lean state, the privatization of some government
functions in order to improve services through competition, the
benchmarking of best practices to continuously improve governance,
promoting customer-orientation and the shift from hierarchical
to a flat organization – these are already universal concepts
and ideals. In fact, there are already NPM-like policies which
have been implemented, some of which were successful while others
are still waiting for positive results.
Of course, NPM is not a recipe for government success. Rather,
it is a frame of mind for everyone — a yardstick to measure performance,
structure, dynamics and efficiency in public service. Since this
is a concept, there is no one model for all. NPM offers a new
perspective for looking at governance. It is a paradigm shift
towards attaining higher customer (public) satisfaction.
There are limitations of course. You cannot, and should not, force
a circle to fit in a square. Political culture and political reality
play crucial roles in defining the success and failure of NPM.
Political education of the people is also important. As long as
people do not demand for an overhauling of the government system,
implementation of an NPM approach will remain a pipe dream.
Realizing how NPM has resulted in many good things for New Zealand,
Germany, Netherlands and other parts of Europe, I asked if the
NPM model could be transplanted to the Philippines, and if it
would bear the same fruits.
If it is focused on the structural reform of government, there
is no reason to think twice about cultivating NPM in our political
soil. But would NPM suit the rather unique Filipino culture that
is so deeply interwoven in our politics and bureaucracy? Is the
idea of NPM designed to particularly address a culture-specific
government structure and allow it to work without any kinks? On
hindsight, I see no reason why the Philippines cannot thrive on
a system operating on a liberal foundation. We have embraced democracy
long enough to see the benefits of a liberalized economy – with
the free market and all.
The NPM seminar in Gummersbach was indeed memorable, informative,
enlightening and challenging. It was exhilarating and inspiring
– people from different walks of life, from different professions
and persuasions, representing different nations but equivocally
wanting to institute reforms in government — it was indeed a fulfillment
to have worked with like-minded people committed to a similar
cause.
After the week long seminar, there are still so many thoughts
inside my head, questions still waiting for answers. But these
thoughts and questions only heighten my interest to know more
about NPM and to adopt it at least in my area of work. I have
become more passionate about supporting government initiatives
that will lead to instituting changes in governance style. I look
forward to similar noteworthy endeavors with FNF in the coming
years.
P.S.
The Foundation may want to consider holding similar seminars
locally to further crystallize efforts at propagating NPM and
creating an awareness about this concept to as many people as
possible particularly those in government service.
It would also be interesting to include the academe, where most
of the scholarly discussions are. Many students who want to start
a career in public administration and political science will be
introduced to the concept at an early stage, which might help
them appreciate their field of study even more.
A podcast with the Philippine delegates to the NPM seminar would
also be interesting. NPM is also a good campaign. The Foundation,
along with its political beneficiaries like the Liberal Party,
could take the NPM to a road show and create pilot municipalities
similar to the Burgerservice.
A video-documentary of the German experience of NPM would also
be interesting.
