Adam Smith opposed the idea of government meddling with market mechanism. He proposed that rather, government should concern itself with "provision of security," "exact administration of justice" and "erecting and maintaining those public institutions and those public works which may be in the highest degree advantageous to a great society". Great economists and management gurus have backed up these ideas agreeing that profitable ventures should be left to private citizens while government provide the infrastructure and enabling environment. With these in place, it a nation’s development is sure to be driven by its organized private sector.
Governments, especially in developing countries have been stagnated or have made little progress because they do not have strategic models for their economic development. This may be due to the fact that at independence, most opinion leaders who eventually became presidents and prime ministers of their countries were bereft of economic ideas. All that was on their mind was “liberation and independence from colonialists and the desire to control the wealth of the land [often for self-driven purposes]”. A colleague made this point in a light discussion about the development of Africa recently. I could not but agree with him. This myopic thinking is still exhibited in the “seat tight” mentality of a majority of African leaders and the lack of commitment to objective developmental programs of most African countries.
I look with pity how most African governments buy “already packaged economic development solutions” from International donor organizations and their developmental agencies. These packages come as under various names as “SAP”, “Development Policies”, “Reforms”, etc. Whatever name is branded, they are all aimed at the same solution, i.e government has no business in running the economy. President Olusegun Obasanjo, the immediate past president of Nigeria persistently made a case and implemented various reforms. His usual point appeared to mean, “It is expensive to run government and its agencies”. The best solution as we saw in the implementations of the various Reform Programs was to reduce the staff strength in Public Service. Cutting down on the number of personnel is not only supposed to reduce government spending, but also to improve its efficiencies. Though people were laid-off, system efficiency did not report a commensurate increment. It is sad to observe that no exact statistical objectives were set out in from the start. Since the program was sold as a model that had worked for other developing countries, it seemed like there was no need to ask questions.
Corporate organization, like governments engage in right sizing from time to time. Right sizing, simply means downsizing a company's workforce to the point that employees remaining are deemed fit to support its changing processes and current realities. By so doing, there may be the need to prune down on non-value added activities also. Unfortunately for a system that runs on unnecessary bureaucracy characterized by inefficient processes, this might be a useful approach in itself. Redundant personnel may also be retrained to perform other duties, transfer to units or departments where their skills are most relevant to the new process or worst case scenarios, laid off. Empirically, there are usually setout objectives from the start, which one expects to see at a given period in its implementation. It is a known fact that other governments (in developed countries) have run reform programs that did not lead to labor losses, instead newer positions were created and process improved. African leaders can learn from such success stories
Lean (very similar in implementation to Six Sigma), a business term, which amongst other things is expected to minimize waste and improve efficiency of a process, is synonymous to a Reform. After a system has been identified and analyzed, tools and other aiding measures are put in motion to cause a change, breed system thinking and power up the performance of a system or process for efficient function and maximum benefit. Ford has used Lean and now Toyota, another auto giant is using this concept to achieve greater results and improve their bottom line. China and other industrialized economies use various economic models including this concept to achieve results.
Lean is not a concept that works on lip service. The low hanging fruits of Public Service Reforms especially by Government of Nigeria (GON) are riddled so much by mass lay-off while the expected efficiencies are no where to be found months after lay-offs. Public infrastructures are still in a perpetual state of decay and those who bid the highest exploit the system. While Lean may literarily be taken as loss of weight (to justify lay-offs), systems are supposed to improve and run efficiently. The implementation of the process improvement or Reform should also be taken to all arms of government. Number of federal ministries and ministers, special advisers, aides, special assistants and senior special assistants, domestic and personal staff and other political appointees should be reduced to a sizeable number that permits for free-flow of information and harmonious working relationships not belabored by mass employment of people party loyalists as a means of compensation for their roles during elections.
Looking at the banking sector reforms for example, the Central Bank of Nigeria set out from start to achieve specific aims. At the expiration of the proposed time, the set objectives were achieved. These gains and model were immediately transferred to the insurance sub sector, though observers have their reservations, the reform still achieved its objectives. One wonders why the same government that record gains in the implementation of reforms as it affects private sector would not put its house in order to attain similar result in public service. The result of “Lean” in the financial sector today is much better than what skeptics predicted at its inception. There were expected job losses as banks prepared for re-capitalization, but today, many more jobs are been created, banks are becoming stronger and are introducing newer and more enticing services. Also, their performance in the Stock Markets is an indication of their profitability.
The Reform Agenda which the current administration has promised to continue with should be carefully examined to reduce waste and inefficiencies. The true implementation of Lean is not expected to cause job loss, rather, to make processes run efficiently and smoothly while eliminating waste. Any reform project or program that does not satisfy these basic conditions is in itself a waste of public funds and resources and it is undesired.
Governments, especially in developing countries have been stagnated or have made little progress because they do not have strategic models for their economic development. This may be due to the fact that at independence, most opinion leaders who eventually became presidents and prime ministers of their countries were bereft of economic ideas. All that was on their mind was “liberation and independence from colonialists and the desire to control the wealth of the land [often for self-driven purposes]”. A colleague made this point in a light discussion about the development of Africa recently. I could not but agree with him. This myopic thinking is still exhibited in the “seat tight” mentality of a majority of African leaders and the lack of commitment to objective developmental programs of most African countries.
I look with pity how most African governments buy “already packaged economic development solutions” from International donor organizations and their developmental agencies. These packages come as under various names as “SAP”, “Development Policies”, “Reforms”, etc. Whatever name is branded, they are all aimed at the same solution, i.e government has no business in running the economy. President Olusegun Obasanjo, the immediate past president of Nigeria persistently made a case and implemented various reforms. His usual point appeared to mean, “It is expensive to run government and its agencies”. The best solution as we saw in the implementations of the various Reform Programs was to reduce the staff strength in Public Service. Cutting down on the number of personnel is not only supposed to reduce government spending, but also to improve its efficiencies. Though people were laid-off, system efficiency did not report a commensurate increment. It is sad to observe that no exact statistical objectives were set out in from the start. Since the program was sold as a model that had worked for other developing countries, it seemed like there was no need to ask questions.
Corporate organization, like governments engage in right sizing from time to time. Right sizing, simply means downsizing a company's workforce to the point that employees remaining are deemed fit to support its changing processes and current realities. By so doing, there may be the need to prune down on non-value added activities also. Unfortunately for a system that runs on unnecessary bureaucracy characterized by inefficient processes, this might be a useful approach in itself. Redundant personnel may also be retrained to perform other duties, transfer to units or departments where their skills are most relevant to the new process or worst case scenarios, laid off. Empirically, there are usually setout objectives from the start, which one expects to see at a given period in its implementation. It is a known fact that other governments (in developed countries) have run reform programs that did not lead to labor losses, instead newer positions were created and process improved. African leaders can learn from such success stories
Lean (very similar in implementation to Six Sigma), a business term, which amongst other things is expected to minimize waste and improve efficiency of a process, is synonymous to a Reform. After a system has been identified and analyzed, tools and other aiding measures are put in motion to cause a change, breed system thinking and power up the performance of a system or process for efficient function and maximum benefit. Ford has used Lean and now Toyota, another auto giant is using this concept to achieve greater results and improve their bottom line. China and other industrialized economies use various economic models including this concept to achieve results.
Lean is not a concept that works on lip service. The low hanging fruits of Public Service Reforms especially by Government of Nigeria (GON) are riddled so much by mass lay-off while the expected efficiencies are no where to be found months after lay-offs. Public infrastructures are still in a perpetual state of decay and those who bid the highest exploit the system. While Lean may literarily be taken as loss of weight (to justify lay-offs), systems are supposed to improve and run efficiently. The implementation of the process improvement or Reform should also be taken to all arms of government. Number of federal ministries and ministers, special advisers, aides, special assistants and senior special assistants, domestic and personal staff and other political appointees should be reduced to a sizeable number that permits for free-flow of information and harmonious working relationships not belabored by mass employment of people party loyalists as a means of compensation for their roles during elections.
Looking at the banking sector reforms for example, the Central Bank of Nigeria set out from start to achieve specific aims. At the expiration of the proposed time, the set objectives were achieved. These gains and model were immediately transferred to the insurance sub sector, though observers have their reservations, the reform still achieved its objectives. One wonders why the same government that record gains in the implementation of reforms as it affects private sector would not put its house in order to attain similar result in public service. The result of “Lean” in the financial sector today is much better than what skeptics predicted at its inception. There were expected job losses as banks prepared for re-capitalization, but today, many more jobs are been created, banks are becoming stronger and are introducing newer and more enticing services. Also, their performance in the Stock Markets is an indication of their profitability.
The Reform Agenda which the current administration has promised to continue with should be carefully examined to reduce waste and inefficiencies. The true implementation of Lean is not expected to cause job loss, rather, to make processes run efficiently and smoothly while eliminating waste. Any reform project or program that does not satisfy these basic conditions is in itself a waste of public funds and resources and it is undesired.
No comments:
Post a Comment