Timeliness: An important Performance Indicator in Improving Local Governance in the Philippines

Timeliness: An important Performance Indicator in Improving     Local Governance in the Philippines

Time is like air. People are aware of its existence, but few stop to think about it. In the English language, some of the verbs that are usually associated with “time” include the following: have, get, use, kill, beat, buy, waste and save (Oxford Online Dictionary, 2010). Cultures and people interpret time differently. However, one common point is that time flies very fast. Clearly, we are invited to not take this with a grain of salt. William Rogers once said, “Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there." This statement reminds us that time is something valuable that it should not be wasted.

While it is true that time is an indispensable thing, yet the Philippine local government units’ awareness of time in the execution of any tasks is not well defined. Despite the country’s fundamental responsibility in representing the interests and the future of the citizens, delays and procrastinations remain obvious in the operations of the local government units. As a result, there have been many complaints about the difficulties in measuring local government’s performance.  Some obvious factors have to be considered in this context: its diversity and contradictory views in addressing its too bureaucratic procedures resulting to red tape and procrastinations. Because of these factors, the LGUs have become tolerant to invest in management techniques.

In some certain degree, it has been a question why do we like to exercise procrastination in the framework of scarcity.  Is this something intentional or culturally instinctive of Philippines?  “Never do today what you can put off for tomorrow.” has become our habit. Or is it because of the gigantic tasks to be done which spawn the macabre of hopelessness and anxiety, thus we consider procrastination as the means to temporarily bring us some relief?  But we eventually wake up the next day and find that no magic lamp has done our work for us.  We began to lose control of ourselves and we failed. 

In the Philippines, no serious effort has been made to institute a performance measurement system designed to evaluate the extent to which local governments have been performing these functions and responsibilities (Stiftung 2004: 3). While it is true that Performance Indicators and Standards for Development Administration (PISDA) and Local Governance Performance Management System (LGPMS) are designed to evaluate the performance of governance of the Philippine local government units, yet both have not explicitly emphasized the value of time to effectively and efficiently deliver what the constituents need.  This obviously tells that something has to be done in the performance measurement system indicators to make it more aggressive to a greater clients focus in the context of timely delivery of services.

Urgency in the Context of Scarcity

 In the case of America, when President Clinton signed the Government Performance and Results Acts of 1993 (GPRA) into law, this commitment to quality was immediately institutionalized (Gore 1997: 1).  Federal agencies were required to develop strategic plans for how they would deliver high-quality products and services to the American people.  In this regard, timeliness creates efficiency. Thus, the formulation of its annual program goals is an obvious indication that timeliness is always considered with utmost importance in measuring the agency’s performance in America.

As policy makers, to be timely in delivering the services to our constituents is our prime duty. The reality is, the community have immense needs for us to attend to.  However, in many complex range  of attempts to address the herculean problems of the community, it is the threatening shadows of scarcity that stop us.  In doing so, we have not seen ourselves bit by bit plunging into the sea of procrastination draining time as an important resource.

Studying the American concept of promptness, I found a commonly held belief that the impetus to move, or to move more aggressively, to a greater clients focus is the very real sense of urgency. In this case, the LGUs have to insistently build their own sense of urgency.

It may be painful to accept but it is true that procrastination especially in most of the Local Government Units in the Philippines is already a practice and we feel it is just a part of ourselves. It becomes an automatic response to say, “An hour late is understandable and nobody will upset me.” or to just laugh it off as a character flaw.

In some cultures like Japan, time is seen as a limited resource  which is persistently being used up. It is like having a bathtub full of water which can never be put back, and is running down the drain. You have to utilize it as it runs down or it is washed out totally.  

The Value of Time in Local Governance

United Nations through Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) explains that the concept of "governance" is not new. It is as old as human civilization. The Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) (2004) states that governance measures the LGU’s performance through the effectiveness of the  following areas: guidelines, structures, and systems for accounting, internal control and procurement; information dissemination for the public; effectiveness of procedure for regular public consultations; policies, plans, and resources resulting in promotion of equity; legislative mechanisms. As mentioned in the Local Government Code,  a set of criteria for evaluating the performance of local governments in the delivery of basic services and in helping them meet the requirement of accountability consists of appropriateness, efficiency, effectiveness.  Another reference describes the following factors that may be included in the assessment of the performance of local governments would be productivity, quality, and timeliness (Stiftung 2004: 16-17).

Indeed, performance measurement has become an established means by which local governments worldwide strive to improve public services. In Australia, most local government units have adopted performance indicators to measure their performance in the delivery of services to their constituents. The administration of local government units are made through a council and it is reported that such councils have their own set of performance indicators and service standards (Stiftung 2004: 5).

In the United States of America, performance measurement is frequently combined with benchmarking. Benchmarking presupposes comparability of services and performance metrics (Mikovsky
2010: 5).

Take a look at  how Great Britain presented its performance indicators below.  This presentation is taken from Sabine Kulmann (2010: 333) who clarifies Great Britain’s scope and intensity of a performance measurement.

1       Process indicators record the decision-making and implementation procedures (for example, coordination, management and transparency).3

2       Output indicators measure the quantity and quality of ‘production’ and administrative decisions (for example, the number of decisions, the quality of services).

3       Input indicators monitor the resources used (for example, personnel, costs, the time required).

4       Impact indicators record the reception by the beneficiaries (for example, customer satisfaction, the acceptance of measures and offers, compliance with bans and commands).

5       Outcome indicators focus on the societal effects in a more global context, the degree to which objectives have been achieved and the long-term consequences of policy measures (for example, reduction in social inequalities, economic growth, environmental effects).

           

It is very obvious that “Timeliness”  has been emphasized as part of its “Input Indicators”.  Indeed, the “time required” to deliver the services is utterly important in assessing the performance.

This is an example of the performance indicators in Germany which illustrated by the management chart for the citizen services authority. Sabine Kulmann  (2010:339) only selected a few of the proposed 66 performance indicators. 

·       Average waiting time for identity papers.

·       Average waiting time for an income tax card.

·       Average waiting time to reach the required administrative department on the telephone.

·       Average waiting time for visitors/at windows (in minutes).

·       Time required to register at the town hall.

·       Proportion of visitors going to the incorrect administrative department.

·       Cost of producing an income tax car

·       Proportion of costs covered for the  production of identity papers.

·       Proportion of costs covered for the production of identity papers.

·       Proportion of costs of services covered.

Time is indeed the fundamental issue here. Government should immediately implement the programs and put into effect the laws. Against the issues on red tape and too bureaucratic procedures in the Philippine local government units, this set of indicators of Germany is an enlightening means to be efficient and productive in delivering our services. Clinging on with our traditional and tedious bidding practices face to face with time constraints will never set off good governance. It is high time now for our authorities to move fast and establish significant reforms to reduce the number of practices in the bidding process and make it more responsive to time.