CAPAM BIENNIAL CONFERENCE CAPE TOWN, 18 OCTOBER 2000
BY GERALDINE FRASER-MOLEKETI MINISTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION
Dr Hope C Sadza
Mr Teo Chan Seng Eddie
Sir Richard Mottram
Honourable Ministers
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen
The year 1994 marked a watershed in the history of South Africa. It ushered in a new democratic order and paved the way for dramatic change in the political and public service environment. This has been most evident than in the public service. During this process it has become increasingly evident that effective leadership both at the political and administrative level is vital in order to accelerate the transformation of the State.
Coincidentally the Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management (CAPAM) was also formed in 1994, and has dovetailed with the South African transformation process in becoming a site and an instrument in achieving excellence in government. Various initiatives including CAPAM's management development programme, have sought to provide international leadership in the area of managing change in government over short timeframes.
In addressing the issue of Public Sector Leadership in the 21st century, my address today explores the issue of globalisation and leadership and will focus on the role of effective leadership in accelerating transformation. I will then highlight current initiatives undertaken to bolster leadership in the South African Public Service.
The South African government is subjected to various pressures that, depending on its response, will influence the way it transforms and at the same time delivers services to citizens. The effects of globalisation; the impact of a strong civil society; corruption and self-centered interest of some civil servants; and the imperatives for social delivery all present challenges and pressures on the state's ability to discharge its mandate as a developmental and coercive instrument in socio-economic transformation.
Notwithstanding this complex environment, senior public servants, and in particular Heads of Department are required to lead the implementation of decisions of the leaders of this country as articulated by Cabinet.
We often found even amongst those who profess to share a common perspective on transformation of our society, defining differently our common universe that is characterized by globalisation. The consequence of this has, at times, been a disjuncture in the strategies and programmes of our own social transformation.
In this regard, Professor Manuel Castells in a paper prepared for the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, in 1998 observed that:
"There is a raging debate in the world on the mixed record of the information technology revolution, and of globalisation…. As it is always the case with a fundamental debate it is most often framed ideologically, and cast in simplistic terms. For the prophets of technology, for the true believers in the magic of the market, everything will be fine, if ingenuity and competition are set free, merely needing a few regulatory fixes, to prevent corruption, and to remove the remnants of bureaucratic impediments in the path of our flight to hyper-modernity. For those around the world who are not ecstatic about surfing the Internet, but are affected by layoffs, lack of basic social services, crime, poverty, and disruption of personal lives, globalisation is but a warmed up version of traditional capitalist ideology: in their view, information technology is a tool for renewed exploitation, destruction of jobs, environmental degradation, and invasion of privacy."
If we are serious about Public Sector Leadership in the 21st century, then surely we need to prepare such leadership within the context of a clear understanding of our world today.
Accordingly, the starting point should be a common understanding of the desirability, the inevitability as well as the form and content of our social transformation. This understanding is important as we travel along the long road of social transformation.
Our public service leadership must be equipped and able to contribute in making the Fancourt Commonwealth Declaration on Globalisation and People Centred Development, a reality. This Declaration in part stipulates the following:
"The greatest challenge therefore facing us today is how to channel the forces of globalisation for the elimination of poverty and the empowerment of human beings to lead fulfilling lives. "Leaders should be equipped to plan correctly, implement those plans accurately, utilise correct tools to audit the path traversed, and also assist to anticipate the future, while at all times ensuring that sight is not lost of the transformation destination.
Our transformation happens within the context of the process of the integration of our Region and the renewal of our Continent in a globalised World. It is therefore important to correctly understand the significance of the debate that Castells refers to.
Our approach to the divide between the prophets of technology and believers in the magic of the market on the one hand, and on the other side, those who are not ecstatic about surfing the Internet and yet are affected by the vagaries of the market, should be to establish the synergies between the advances of technology and the challenges of development, eradication of poverty and the empowerment of the marginalised.
Leaders should master technology, not just for its sake, because technology, by itself, will not necessarily eradicate poverty, nor will it end underdevelopment. Yet, the availability of technology and its dissemination amongst many sectors of society is a critically necessary condition for economic and social development.
Public sector leadership should thus be able to utilise the achievements of information and communication technology to advance the cause of our people, to propel our development forward and defeat poverty and disease.
Given the challenges confronting leaders of the public service, which include a complex and complicated world, the volatility of the environment in which they have to perform the expectations of the public in respect of better quantity and quality service delivery, the public service will require new skills of leadership.
Mandaza (1999:12) has argued that "…the diminished role of national governments in designing rules for global governance indicates the limitations of developing countries in formulating public policies that can solve their unique problems. Consequently, they are always in conflict with the principles of globalisation in designing the rules for global governance".
A critical challenge that confronts leaders in Government, both political and administrative, is how to manage policy instruments and processes such that the efforts of development are expedited and the negative impacts of globalisation are neutralised.
THE ROLE OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP IN ACCELERATING TRANSFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE
Senior managers and high-level professionals must concretise government's vision of a better life for all through effective implementation strategies and the efficient utilisation of resources.
Needless to say, a people-centred and strategically focussed leadership in the public service faces a momentous task in ensuring that the public service is aligned with the priorities of Government.
Given the challenges confronting leaders of the public service new skills of leadership will be required. Technical or functional skills are no longer sufficient. Leaders are required to be strategic, to lead beyond boundaries, and to keep sight of the vision ahead with their feet firmly on the ground.
These demands on leaders of the 21st century call for a strategic leadership development rooted in the framework typical of a learning organisation, an organisation that is able to channel the energy of environmental change into a force for organizational growth and development. In this type of growth and development, organisational dysfunction are identified and resolved in a manner that links to a simultaneous or subsequent modification of the organisation's culture, values, policies and objectives. Thus, old approaches linked to traditional management practices are no longer appropriate in the development of managers and leaders.
Since 1994 significant changes in management practices have been introduced. The inescapable realities of globalisation have placed a particular challenge on public managers to fundamentally change the way they have managed in the past. More importantly, the imperatives for transformation in management styles have been dictated by a new policy context defined by the new Constitution, the RDP White Paper, and the White Paper on Transformation of the Public Service and various other policy initiatives.
Traditional management has been viewed in functional terms such as planning, budgeting, organising and controlling. Experience elsewhere, for example in Canada, has shown that institutional functionalism causes departments to loose sight of their missions. Departments are required to concentrate on ends rather than means. Traditional management practices cannot survive in an increasingly complex environment like our own.
Developments in various parts of the world during the 1990s, especially in developed countries, see leadership to be the key to changing the culture of the public service and establishing alternative management practices. Heads of Department are required to focus on their organisation's mission and direction if they are to be successful. They have to address vision and values in order to instill a basis for culture change. By empowering their employees through decentralisation and delegation Heads of Department are able to lead and focus on service to citizens and clients.
Challenges for public sector management in the 21st century include resource constraints and political and public demands for quality services and improved productivity. There have been improvements in instilling a new management culture and collective responsibility among Heads of Department. Managers are being given more freedom to lead and centralised procedures are being deregulated. The role of the centre is shifting from a point of control to providing a framework of accountability aimed at managerial improvement, especially in the areas of human resources and financial management.
Inter-departmental coherence and co-ordination are being seen as practical and political necessities. In this way Heads of Department become better attuned to the political direction of Government. The new management approach emphasises the articulation of a vision and values with a reliance on communication and involvement to transmit corporate direction throughout the public service and departments. Instead of relying on a hierarchical process of control and regulation, the new management culture centralises and then disseminates this vision as widely as possible.
The transformation and administrative reforms that have been introduced in the South African public service have generally been in line with the world trends described above. Much remains to be done in anchoring and embedding the new values, and of course, leadership has a critical role to play. Unfortunately contradictions such as those found in a declaration of flattening the organization design of departments, but insisting on a hierarchical reporting system, or punishing mistakes made through risk-taking and innovation are definitely stifling the development of this new management culture. Leadership and management development programmes also have to prioritise the understanding and inculcation of these new practices.
Consideration needs to be given to the potential contradiction between the imperatives for a strong centre in order to enhance good governance and a corporate public service on the one hand, and the need for decentralisation and devolution so as to empower managers and bring serviced delivery closer to citizens, on the other.
President Mr Mbeki initiated the development of a Forum for South Africa Directors-General (FOSAD). FOSAD's key role is to ensure coherence and co-ordination in the execution of policy directives of Cabinet. It consists of clusters designed along similar lines and corresponding to Cabinet Committees. The roles and functions of FOSAD clusters include policy development as identified by Cabinet for consideration by Cabinet committees and processing and implementation of directives from Cabinet Committees and Cabinet. This integrated approach to governance should effect a more focussed and dedicated execution of Government priorities. Although it is still too early to expect tangible results from this cluster system, at least the culture of coherence and co-ordination is beginning to settle.
Another noteworthy development is the introduction, in 1999, of a system of integrated management plans in departments. Essentially, these management plans are intended to enhance service delivery. A management plan has four components, namely:
These four components function in an integrated, systematic way.
The strategic plan, which is linked to the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) - a three-year planning and budgeting framework, links directly, through strategic objectives into a service delivery improvement plan. The latter must be realistically determined through the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). The service delivery plan is supported by an appropriate organisational design that would maximise service provision to the public. A human resource plan is determined on the basis of an effective departmental structure. Such a plan would indicate what human resources would be required from the department and from external recruitment, and what actions need to be taken to make these a reality.
It is very clear that these four components are not to be seen as separate "entities". They are part of an integrated plan. Heads of Department are held responsible for the development and implementation of these plans. These management plans inform the performance management of Heads of Department.
In summary it is encouraging that the South African police service, at least at leadership level, is not lagging behind developments in the world. The key challenges we face are appropriate systems and structures and continuous communication to all staff. Above all, a culture of continuous learning is urgently needed. This has the unstinting support of the President and Cabinet. Through their own learning and development programme, Heads of Department are already responding to the challenge of human capital development in the public service.
The MEC Executive Programme was developed by the South African Management Development Institute (SAMDI) following requests by five provincial legislatures for a programme that would be geared to the specific needs of senior political office bearers in upgrading their professional skills. The programme covers areas such as policy formulation, strategic planning, delegation of powers, leadership, conflict resolution, budgeting, intergovernmental relationships, public/private partnerships and change management.
The aim of this programme is to further strengthen the capacity of participating MECs to make informed choices on the complex policy issues that constantly confront them in their provincial legislatures.
Of all key challenges facing the public service today, none can be said to be more central that the need to attract, develop and sustain capable managers.
The Presidential Strategic Leadership Development Programme (PSLDP) is a strategic development programme aimed at increasing the capacity of senior management and leadership in the public service. It is informed by a need analysis conducted amongst Heads of Department. The Presidential Strategic Leadership Development Programme (PSLDP) seeks to achieve, through the development of strong leaders, the President's vision of a highly effective public service, which works to improve the lives of South African people, by providing relevant and practical information to the areas identified by the needs analysis. The aim of the programme is to improve the participant's capacity to:
A study conducted into the senior management and professional echelons of the public service has confirmed that the effectiveness of this group impacts on the overall ability of the public service to deliver on its mandate. Significantly, the study revealed that although 70% of public servants are located in the provinces, 60% of senior managers are located in national departments. In essence this implies that provinces are "under-managed" and require additional high-level capacity.
To professionalise this critical echelon of the public service, Cabinet has endorsed the establishment of a Senior Management Service (SMS). This includes Heads of Department and other senior managerial and technical executives of the public service. The Senior Management Service (SMS) process includes rigorous recruitment and selection systems, competency profiling of senior executives in relation to their jobs, performance assessment systems, training and development regimes, and flexible remuneration systems.
In today's demanding environment there can be no place for mediocrity or lack of commitment. Only the finest candidates, imbued with a spirit of selfless service to the community should be appointed. Their talents should be carefully nurtured, and once well developed, be utilised to the best advantage of the State.
Given the pivotal role of senior managers and high-level professionals in the delivery of public services, the Senior Management Service Programme (SMS) will:
A system of performance agreements was implemented in 1998 for senior managers, including Head of Department, in the public service. However, there has been no systematic and coherent process through which these performance agreements have been assessed. Many Heads of Department have indicated that they do no receive systematic and comprehensive feedback on their performance whilst Government also did not receive systematic feedback on the achievement of its priorities.
The monitoring of the implementation of performance management systems would allow for a more rigorous appraisal of outputs, and thus improve the productivity of the public service. The cumulative impact of this would be that outputs become clearly defined, are measured, and management inventions can take place more expeditiously when performance is at variance from plans.
Against this background, the Public Service Commission was tasked by Cabinet to develop a framework to assist executing authorities with the evaluation of their Heads of Department. The framework was approved by Cabinet in August 2000 and will be implemented immediately.
The framework developed by the Public Service Commission proposes uniform bur flexible structures and processes according to which the performance of all Heads of Department can be evaluated by executing authorities. The evaluation framework aims to achieve the following:
I thank you