Administrative Accountability

A Review of the Evolution, Meaning A Review of the Evolution, Meaning and Operationalization of a key and Operationalization of a key

Concept in Public AdministrationConcept in Public Administration

A Report in PA 848A Report in PA 848Prof. Rex B. Buac, CSEEProf. Rex B. Buac, CSEE

(Instructor)(Instructor)

Administrative AccountabilityAdministrative Accountability

An office is a public trust. Public officers An office is a public trust. Public officers and employees shall serve with the and employees shall serve with the highest degree of responsibility, integrity, highest degree of responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency and shall remain loyalty and efficiency and shall remain accountable to the people.accountable to the people.

Constitution of the PhilippinesConstitution of the Philippines 1973, Article XIII, Section 1 1973, Article XIII, Section 1

This study is an attempt to realize This study is an attempt to realize the partnership not only on public the partnership not only on public administration and auditing but administration and auditing but also of public administration and also of public administration and democratic theory where people democratic theory where people have self governing principles.have self governing principles.

If indeed people are the masters If indeed people are the masters of the society, their means of of the society, their means of maintaining that supremacy must be maintaining that supremacy must be scrutinized and sharpened .scrutinized and sharpened .

This means are embodied in the This means are embodied in the forms and standards of accountability forms and standards of accountability which, have not remained static over which, have not remained static over time rather they have undergone an time rather they have undergone an evolution so that one can contrast evolution so that one can contrast “traditional” accountability with new “traditional” accountability with new variants.variants.

o The changes are responsive to the social and The changes are responsive to the social and political forces that vary with a country’s political forces that vary with a country’s development.development.

o As Foster (1981) states: as the public As Foster (1981) states: as the public becomes better educated, they also become becomes better educated, they also become more aware more demanding, less more aware more demanding, less understanding, and less willing to accept understanding, and less willing to accept average performanceaverage performance

IntroductionIntroduction

AccountabilityAccountabilityis a central problem for governments which

are or claim to be democratic. The activities of civil servants and public agencies must follow the will of the people to whom they are ultimately responsible. The publicness of their employment and goals thus prescribes their behavior and circumscribes their choices.

Three Phases of Classical Cycle of Public Three Phases of Classical Cycle of Public AdministrationAdministration

Planningreceived disproportionate attention in traditional public administration

Evaluation - is more of under thought sometimes taught along with

survey methods and rarely transferring from the realm of methodology into substance.

Implementation came into its own much later.

Types of AccountabilityTypes of Accountability

Four standard questions are central to accountability

o who is considered accountable?oto whom he is considered accountable?oto what standard or values is he accountable?oby what means is he made accountable?


Traditional Accountabilityfocuses on the regularity of fiscal

transactions and the faithful compliance to legal requirements and administrative policies (Mckinney1981:144 as cited by Cariño 2003: 808)


– - Traditional Accountability

The standards by which one is judged are those of legality and regularity set by controllers external to the person responsibleodetermining if an act is within the provisions of laws and regulations governing the agency; oif the person/s who performed it have the authority to do so;oeach agency set up procedures for each transactions and following the Weberian rule, expects these procedures to be followed fairly and equitably without regard to individual characteristics of the clients interested in the transactions.


Traditional Accountability

In having to account for detailed use of inputs, official sometimes protect themselves by making they commit no violation, thus little encouragement of initiative and innovative performance

Types of AccountabilityTypes of Accountabilityconcerns with efficiency and economy in the use of

public funds, property and manpower (Tantuico 1982:8 as cited by Cariño 2003:808);

As its name implies, the administrator is responsible to his superiors, and external controllers which provides the resources for the operation of the agency;

It recognizes that government officials are responsible for more than just compliance but the need for the constant concern to avoid waste and unnecessary expenditures and to promote the judicious use of public resources

this promoted by programs which cut the “red tape” of government procedures;

Managerial Accountability


These programs range from attempt at work simplification and revision of forms all the way to systems improvements and agency reorganization;

Operational audits had long been done by agencies concerned with management under such names as management analysis, methods (O and M) studies and systems improvements;

All calling attentions to how government agencies can reduce waste and effect savings in their operation

The main values are economy and efficiency. Leo Herbest 1982 as cited by Carino:2003 provide a useful definition of and differentiation between two standards:

oEconomical operation is the elimination or reduction of needless costs.

Efficient operations includeo holding the costs constant while increasing the benefitsoholding the benefits constant while decreasing the costso Increasing the costs at a lower rate than benefits ando decreasing costs at a lower rate than benefits

Program Accountability is concerned with the results of government operations.Accountability is the property of units as well as the individual bureaucrats whose activities together make the effectiveness of

a programTo secure its attainment, a comprehensive performance audit on the financial and operational performance using the standard

3Es.



A complete performance audits involves inquiry into the following:

Program Accountability

o Whether the government unit is carrying out only authorized activities or programs in the manner contemplated and whether they are accomplishing their objectives.

o Whether the programs and activities are conducted and expenditures are made in an effective, efficient and economical manner and in compliance with applicable laws and regulations.


Program Accountabilityo Whether resources are being adequately controlled

and used effectively, efficiently and economicallyo Whether all revenues and receipts from the

operations under examinations are being collected and properly accounted for

o Whether the entity’s accounting system complies with applicable accounting principles, standards and related requirements ; and

o the entity’s financial statements and operating reports properly disclose the information required (Tantuico 1982:12 as cited by Cariño 2003:810).

Social Accountability


the main inquiry is whether the administrative activities inspire general confidence and secure what are widely regarded as desirable social ends (Normanton 1981:34 and cited by Cariño 2003:911)

Recently the program manager’s arsenal has been augmented by such tools as human recourse accounting, social accounting, and the analysis of economic and social impact of programs

Process Accountability.


It implies emphasizes on procedures and methods of operation and focuses on the black box inside systems which transforms inputs (the concern of traditional and managerial accountability).

This type of accountability recognizes that some goals may not be measurable directly and surrogates, representing how goal directed activity may be performed, are used instead.

Process Accountability


o Both providers and recipients have met together to agree in advance regarding the actions, processes or steps that will be followed prior to delivery of the quality, quantity, time, manner and place of the proposed goods and services.

o Those responsible for providing the service are expected to perform according to agreed upon terms with stipulated use of resources based on specific performance standards.

o Likewise, recipients (participants) must agree to accept in advance specific rewards or sots based on an evaluation of the approximation of planned ends to attained outcomes (McKinney:1981:145 as cited by Cariño 2003: 811).

There is a danger that indirect measurement my degenerate into a number games\ where an evaluator simply counts inoculations and consultations. To avoid this, the concept may be enhanced by using Mckinney’s adaptation of process accountability into specifically democratic and political settings. His suggestion is to



Accountability can then be asked to both provider and recipient and standards of judgment are themselves products of the mutual agreement. Each side may with hold its part of the bargain when the other fails the accountability test.

Program accountability adds the 3rd E which means effectiveness.

Comparison of Comparison of Different Kinds of Different Kinds of

Administrative Administrative AccountabilityAccountability

Comparison of Different Kinds of Administrative AccountabilityComparison of Different Kinds of Administrative Accountability

Traditional Managerial Program Process Accountability Accountability Accountability AccountabilityWho is Accountable? Employees and Administrator Administrator Administrator officials

To whom is he People throughSame as Column 1 Same as Column 1 Same as Column 1

accountable? legislature, Others: Others as in President, professional Column 3

Constitutional standards andDirect accountability to

bodies, hierarchy individual people thru their conscience participation in negotiationTo what standards of values is Regularity, legality Economy and Economy,

3 Es plus decentralization

he accountable? and compliance efficiency efficiency and and participation effectiveness (3 Es)

Comparison of Different Kinds of Administrative AccountabilityComparison of Different Kinds of Administrative Accountability

Traditional Managerial Program Process Accountability Accountability Accountability AccountabilityBy what means is he made Line-item Management Comprehensive Negotiationsaccountable? budgeting, audit, systems audit, program, traditional improvements evaluation, accounting, productivity

standard operating measurement

procedures.

Regularity and compliance

Rules and Laws

Economy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Standards & Values

Traditional Accountability

ManagerialAccountability

ProcessAccountability

3 EsProgramAccountability

Administrative Accountability Standard

The notion of administrative accountability has clearly changed. Much more is expected of the accountable official since his responsibility is not for individual activities but for related sets as these are divided into programs and projects at the same time the means to be used for insuring his proper behavior have become less rigid, and more negotiable.

The Varieties of The Varieties of Public Public

AdministrationAdministration

The discipline of PA has changed The discipline of PA has changed overtime both as response to changing overtime both as response to changing currents of thought within the social currents of thought within the social science community as well as the events science community as well as the events in the country and the world which press in the country and the world which press on both our understanding of the on both our understanding of the discipline and on its practice.discipline and on its practice.

Each of the four varieties of PA offers a distinct emphasis and relates to the people and the society in a different way. They maybe identified as:

1. Traditional Public Administration2. Development Administration3. New Public Administration and4. Development Public Administration. The

last variety has been called by various authors as “Social Science Administration”, Social Development Management”, “ Development Administration for Equity”

Traditional Public Administration Traditional accountability practically demands doctrine of

politics administration dichotomy, where decisions are made elsewhere by policy makers who were not in the bureaucracy

Main Varieties of Accountability Main Varieties of Accountability and Public Administrationand Public Administration


Teaching in traditional PA centered on the inputs to the system. Thus, the main resources became the major focus of subfields – personnel administration, fiscal administration, and organization and management (O & M).

As a discipline, traditional PA constituted the main doctrine until the late fifties. As an actual activity, many of its main features persist to this day.


Development Public Administration The variety that gained currency when colonies called the ThIrd

World got political independence and set their sights on the development of the economy following the examples of the west- With the western experience as the model, DA became involved

in looking for tools that can improve the planning process and the performance of staff functions.

The main task of DA is the search for theories that can describe and explain the management of economic growth. Behavioralism, logical positivism, structural-functionalism and quantification entered the discipline through the influence of the social sciences especially sociology and economics

The Bell Mission ushered DA in the Philippines for use in its own development effort . This included management tools like Planning, Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS).


New Public Administration

NPA was born in the 70’s in United States where restive scholars found traditional PA largely irrelevant to a turbulent technological society crying for equity and social justice.

NPA advocated project management and the modular organization in lieu of the bureaucracy It either moved away from economic to philosophy, or sought a blending of both. Just prior to the birth of NPA, PA scholars discovered implementation and service delivery as just as worthy of attention as planning and the merit system. These blended to make responsiveness and effectiveness of programs as the main foci of concern.


Development Public Administration (DPA)

The product of the 1980’s with emphasis on the goals of social justice, equity and the centrality of the human person and its focus on the problems of the third world. NPA was born in the 70’s in United States where restive scholars found traditional PA largely irrelevant to a turbulent technological society crying for equity and social justice.

DPA locates its bureaucracy not only within its own society but also in context of a global system, not against bureaucracy or the toppling of large scale hierarchical structures but their modification through bureaucratic reorientation.


Development Public Administration (DPA)

DPA searches for smaller possibly ad hoc organization of trying out new approaches for coordinating the activities of similar agencies and for involving those outside of the organization in planning, implementation, and evaluation.

Particularly in the Philippines, an important aspect of DA is decentralization, a value reemphasized by DPA as it seeks harmony between central direction and responsiveness to particular needs.

Accountability and Accountability and Public AdministrationPublic Administration

Traditional PA and Accountability of Regularity

Traditional accountability demands the doctrine of the politics –administration dichotomy where decisions are made outside the bureaucracy and compliance is compelled all through the hierarchy but has its ultimate arbiter in bodies external to the bureaucracy like the legislature and the court. Rules and procedures are set elsewhere and are rigid, thus receiving the checks on performance on a line-by-line and strict pesos-and-centavos accounting

Traditional PA, Development Administration and Managerial Accountability

The first variety of PA has encouraged the start of managerial accountability through its emphasis on the economy and efficiency of organizations.

A number of management tools developed in the United States under the DA period still tended to focus on inputs and the staff functions. Their applicability to a third world country at the first stages of development was hardly addressed. The techniques were regarded as capable of being useful regardless of social conditions

The shift of development goals from simple economic growth to more humanly appropriate objectives. A better suited technique is program evaluation. A better suited technique can also fulfil the NPA need for

equity to the extent that social impact especially on income distribution and poverty alleviation is made part of the framework.

The project checks out its program accountability at the evaluation stage of its life. Its effectiveness and responsiveness as it embraces a learning process rather than a blue print approach

(Korten 1980:450-511 as cited by Cariño 2003: 819).

NPA and Program Accountability

NPA and Program Accountability

Its effectiveness and responsiveness as it embraces a learning process rather than a blue print approach (Korten 1980:450-511 as cited by (Cariño 2003: 819.

Unfortunately, few managers have regarded these works from the perspective of accountability and have not used them for the purpose of pinpointing responsibility for bottlenecks or failures and for improving program attainment. The shortcoming maybe blamed on both sides : on the evaluator or researcher for his inability to disseminate his findings to the appropriate administrator and to write actionable recommendations based on the findings and on the administrator for his tendency to shy away from critiques of his agency and not pass up learning points from the criticisms

Development PA and Process Accountability

Process accountability has practically the same building blocks a lot in common with DPA where the features are reacceptance of the necessity of bureaucracy as long as it is oriented to include the participation of client and recipients in the process of administration and the decentralization of decision making to local areas.

Example ate the LGUs an experiment to classify them according to their administrative capability and which will be the basis for providing funds and technical assistance

Development PA and Process Accountability

Process accountability is not a new concept since it is not a radical departure from previous procedures. What is new is the participation and negotiation by units and the provision of resources based on need, capability and promise, the last backed up by recipient individuals.

The requirement for each local area would differ according to the results of the process and therefore what one will ask from each would be attainable. Each negotiating party can be held responsible for the results and beneficiaries may even participate in the evaluation of performance of the officials.

PA Accountability

Traditional PA Accountability of RegularityTraditional PA and DA Managerial Accountability Traditional PA and DA Managerial Accountability

NPA Program Accountability

Development PA Process Accountability Development PA Process Accountability

The Process of The Process of Regulating BehaviorRegulating Behavior

Four Major Processes of Regulating Behaviour

Control

Influence

Management

Supervision

May be external to or internalized by the regulated. External sources may be laws or bureaucratic rules which are imposed as standards of conduct of subordinates. Disobedience to these rules may result in

sanctions by the controllers. Kernagham (1973:581-584) defines control as the authority to command and direct

Control

Influence

When A is molded by and conforms to the behavior of B without the issuance of a command

The implicit source of influence seems to lie outside the bureaucracy and may be rooted in one’s profession, ethical commitments and organizational affiliations

The influence is predicated not so much on his commands and orders as on the congruence of the commitments of his subordinates and himself which is exerted through moral and other extra bureaucratic modes

Supervision

is more open minded allowing officials greater latitude of their actions Its both regulatory and assistory dimensions The concept can be applied to any pair of agencies where one sets the guidelines within which the other formulates its rules of action Sosmeña :1982:9

Management

The regulator take action as a hypothesis with certainty ruled out and allow the regulated some discretion in his approach to the program.

This would mean an accountability that would face up errors and even embrace them as learning points for later growth

Processes Regulating Bureaucratic Behavior

Control Supervision Influence Management

Source of Power External to the External to the Internalized by

Both external and

regulated regulated regulated internalized

Kinds of rulesDirect Commands General Moral, ethical Process rules

programmed, Guidelinesand other extra-

decisions bureaucratic standards Assumed predictability High Low High Lowof results of decisions

Management

The regulator take action as a hypothesis with certainty ruled out and allow the regulated some discretion in his approach to the program.

This would mean an accountability that would face up errors and even embrace them as learning points for later growth

Accountability and Types of Bureaucratic Power

Traditional accountability“Regularity & Compliance”

Control“command and direct “

Managerial Accountability“Avoiding waste and increasing efficiency

Control and Supervision

Program AccountabilityResults with minimum compliance with control measures


Supervision and management

Discretion and Discretion and AccountabilityAccountability

When bureaucratic rules are deficient , the bureaucrat may be forced to choose between the criteria of his agency or those of his profession

Ex of bureaucratic rules on punctuality, eight hours days as well as targets, and persons to be served per week. While professional norms as well as individual conscience as appropriate judges of a person or agency’s performance

In the computer age, year of the blog, routine cases are machine programmed, the computer being uninfluenced by specific character traits of a client which the rules do not recognize as material and relevant..

The treatment of exceptional circumstances can not be programmed since the rules wood generally provide for the exercise of a discretionary rather than a ministerial function

Bureaucratic Norms versus Professional Norms

Moral decisions are value-based decisions that content and context specific (Foster 1981:31).

In an effort to be more regular and legal bureaucrats may instead become more legalistic, stressing formal compliance with the letter of the law. That in turn may lead to displacement where rules become the master while bureaucrats are reduced to timidry, conservatism, and technicism (Metro et al: 1952). Too much legalism may even become a major factor inhibiting the move towards development (Pye 1966)

Legal and Moral Decisions

Situation: Loose gun control guns illegally circulating or stricter gun control Colorado Movie theater massacre

Extrabureaucratic Standards and Irresponsible Behavior

There are several answers to this question Nature of the human being – when a person wants to please a

person not qualified to receive a service, he may disregard these rules or go around them in order to suit this person (accommodation).

The complexity of the society - its no longer a homogenous mass. The demands and pressures on government can not be easily transformed to SOPs which brook no exceptions.

Inefficiency of the legalistic Approach – A third answer leads to the empirical record: the enactment of one of the strictest sets of laws on record has not been able to hold down the incidents of graft and corruption. The inefficiency stems from a) the systemic nature of corruption, b) the formation in the laws (a society has formalistic laws they are not expected to be fully implemented, and c) lack of political will to implement law vigorously and fairly.

LOGOReporter: Ms. Gretchel G. Magallanes

The Political-Administrative Accountability Continuum in

Philippine Public Service

LOGO

Contents

Introduction1

Political and Administrative Dimensions

Of Public Accountability

Conclusion

2

3

LOGO

INTRODUCTION

This article argues that public accountability implies that there are defined limits to the use of governmental power in any society; and, power holders must be able to explain and answer to a higher authority on how they use power to promote the public welfare.

LOGO

In order to continue search for ways to explain and understand the responsible uses of power and other manifestations of the abuse or misuse of power Dr. de Guzman has authored different books, research reports and articles which led to contributions to the literature on a)bureaucratic corruption and b)the conduct of election, in the Philippines and a number of Asian countries, in the comparative multi-country studies on these topics.

LOGO

The study on bureaucratic corruption identifies and analyzes the causes, control measures, and consequences of the lack of administrative accountability.

The election study with its focus on the administration of elections, the political party systems and the role of the bureaucracy and citizens’ movements in elections, dwells more on the integrity of the process through which citizens in their exercise of the right of suffrage, select and pass judgment on public officials- the concern of political accountability.

LOGO

Bureaucratic Corruption and Elections are theoretically linked through the central concept that underlies them: public accountability, particularly its two interrelated aspects, political and administrative accountability.

OBJECTIVES

LOGO

The above-mentioned study attempts to develop themes in two parts.

First part will seek to show the interrelationship between political and administrative accountability in the context of a representative democracy.

Second part relates the findings of studies on bureaucratic corruption and conduct of elections to support the argument that the nature and the process of political selection inevitably influence the relationship between the political leaders and the bureaucracy.

LOGO

Political and Administrative Dimensions of Public Accountability

Accountability is defined as a condition in which individuals who exercise power are constrained by external means and by internal norms.

It refers to the institution of checks and balances in an organization thru which an administrator accounts for his stewardship of resources or authority.

LOGO

Accountability is a synonym for responsibility. It is a type of relationship that comes to existence when an obligation is taken on by an individual (or entity), such as the responsibility to assume a role or discharge a task.(Timothy W. Plumptre, Beyond the Bottomline, Management in Government, 1988, 182)

LOGO

The Political-Administrative Accountability Continuum

The political-administrative continuum means that elected officials are politically accountable to the electorate or their constituencies who voted them to their positions. These elected officials are held responsible thru regular elections and other means, i.e. recall and referendum. Appointive public officials answer to the people thru the elected officials who appointed them and directly to the public whom they serve.

LOGO

Diagram 1. POLITICAL-ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY CONTINUUM

PEOPLE

ELECTED OFFICIALS

PEOPLE

APPOINTED OFFICIALS

A. ExecutiveB. Legislative

B. CAREERA. CO-TERMINOUS/NON CAREER

POLITICAL

ACCOUNTABILITY

ADMINISTRATIVE

POLITICAL

ACCOUNTABILITY

ADMINISTRATIVE

elect hold

accountable

answers

to

submit forjudgment

appoint,providesupport

holdaccountablefor delivery ofgoods/services/information

Answer to

ReportOn publicprograms

provideservicesand

otherpublicgoodsto the

Holdaccountable

for efficient/responsiveservices

LOGO

Administrative Accountability refers to the extent to which appointed public employees are made answerable for the responsible, efficient and effective performance of their official tasks, while administrators are accountable for their stewardship of the administrative authority, resources and knowledge placed at their disposal as trustees of the public.

LOGO

Political accountability, on the other hand, can be concretized through the accountability of public institutions which must collectively answer for their institution mandates, particularly s they form part of the incumbent government’s development goals. National leadership, specifically elected national officials, must answer for their performance in pursuing their avowed program of government and their use of national resources, given the authority and resources vested in them by their constituency.

LOGO

DIAGRAM 2. FRAMEWORK FOR ENSURING ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE PHILIPPINE PUBLIC SERVICE

Promote Responsible, Efficient People-/and Service-oriented Public Officials

Reward Good Behavior

Prevent Corruption1.Tanodbayan/Ombudsman2.Internal Agency Efforts3.External Links with a. client/public b. other govt. agencies c. Press/Other non- governmental institutions4. Peoples organization

Serve the People

President and CabinetDepartment Secretaries/ BureaucracyLegislative BodiesJudicial SystemAll Elective National and Local OfficialsIndependent Constnl. BodiesMilitary Service

Punish Corruption1.Tanodbayan/Ombudsman2.SandiganBayan3.Internal Agency Efforts4.External Links with a. client/public b. other govt. agencies c. Press/Other non- governmental institutions5. Peoples organization

Church

Educational INstitutions

Press

People/Organized Groups

Indigenous Filipino Values and Norms

LOGO

Factors for Strong Accountability Mechanisms

The following factors help in building capable political accountability mechanisms:

• Political competition, fair distribution of power and informed participation• Legal system with the capability to enforce the law and to make the rulers obey the law.

LOGO

Dilemmas and challenges

One of the hurdles in the practice of social accountability is theinability or unwillingness of the society to call powerful and prominentpeople in their wrongdoings.

LOGO

administrative discretion • corruption • nepotism • administrative secrecy • information leaks • policy dilemmas

The long history of elite-dominated politics in the Philippines attests to how the country’s political leaders have caused a decline in the standards of public ethics and the resulting low levels of political and administrative accountability

Dilemmas and challenges

LOGO

In the recent assessment of the process of participation of the people in the electoral process, the Philippine Human Development Report concludes that suffrage is still not translated into genuine participation of the Filipino People in the process of governance. It cites four reasons for this conclusion:

A. .The dominance of the elite in setting the political agenda

B. The issue of votes not reflecting the genuine preference and will of the people because of vote buying and selling, a reflection of the absence of democratic choice in a society noted for poverty and extreme inequality in wealth and power

LOGO

C. The scarcity of public resources and the vast discretionary power given to those who can exercise this power, and

D. The sad lack of information and meaningful education which may be a means of breaking the “cycle of parochial politics”.

LOGO

Conclusions

The concept of public accountability implies that:

There are defined limits to the use of governmental power in any societyPower holders must be able to explain and answer to a higher force on how they use this power to promote the cause of this higher force.

LOGO

A sense of public accountability cannot exist if those who are entrusted this power do not feel there is a greater force beyond them which can legitimately hold them responsible for their use of this power. By this, we mean that for as long as the Filipino people are unable to exert any form of compelling pressure on their leaders and government officials ti promote and protect their interest, e.g. through formal means like elections, then there can be no effective way of holding these officials accountable to them.

LOGO

Reference:Introduction to Public Administration in the Philippines: A Reader 2003

NCPAGUniversity of the Philippines

Diliman ,Quezon City

LOGO

TO GOD BE THE GLORY FOREVER AND EVER!

Administrative Accountability

Government & Nonprofit

Transcript of Administrative Accountability