Basics: Results, Needs, Accountability(Recap from the e-learning)

Benedict Wauters

Remember this?

2

Which oneperformed better in

the delivery of services to the

citizens?

How do these organizations differ?

April, 2009: Independent report “An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy” delivered at the request of Commissioner for Regional Policy, Ms Hübner

• “The most evident weaknesses which indicate the need for reform of cohesion policy are:A remarkable lack of political and policy

debate on results in terms of the well-being of people, at both local and EU level, most of the attention being focused on financial absorption and irregularities.”

• European Commission’s DG REGIO:

4

“The intended result is the specific dimension of well-

being and progress for people that motivates

policy action…”. …an assessment of needs is required to identify the

results!

the decision on which unmet needs should be tackled is the result of a deliberative social

process (a "political decision")!

7

BASIC

SOCIAL

Includes:• key subjective needs

of autonomy, mastery, relatedness, meaning (contribution to a larger purpose)

• objective conditions like satisfaction with food, housing, income, health, work, physical safety, friends and family, education, neighborhood, ability to help others and spiritual, religious and/or philosophical beliefs

NOTE: Maslow is useful as a categorisation system, less as a strict hierarchy as various needs can co-exist or higher level needs can take precedence over lower level ones

NEEDS?

From needs to results-1

• Applying this to some DG REGIO guidance examples: reduced traffic fatalities = safety need! reduced travel time = • means for parents to fulfill social need e.g. spending more time with the kids?• a way to work more to earn more money? • if we do not know the need we are addressing, we cannot know about well-

being! Exchanging travel time for work time does not increase well-being for those who wanted to spend time with the kids!

CO2 reduction= • safety need (e.g. global warming leads to life-threatening floods)?• economic security need (e.g. business continuity versus floods)? • both...?

RESULTS IMPLY A SHIFT OF OWNERSHIP!

Shift of ownership from supplier to receiver: supplier cannot ascertain change without asking the demand side!

NEEDS are linked to this SHIFT OF OWNERSHIP

Belonging need

Physiological need

Economic security, etc.

If no need is addressed, then an objective cannot truly be a result.

An irrelevant result, cannot be a result!

Conclusion 1: Results in ESIF

• What matters is the end-to-end process:From Euro invested to positive change in the well-

being of the citizens.

• You can spend billions of € in programmes that were well written respecting the partnership principle, have close-to-zero error rate, disburse payments within 15 days and reach all the target values of your indicators and still make no change in the well-being.You can be effectively and efficiently irrelevant.

13

Accountability

• Do you remember the three dimensions of accountability discussed in the e-learning?

Different concepts of accountability

• “honest and fair”: traditional view dating back to Weberian bureaucracy focus is on preventing distortion, bias, abuse of office

and inequityproper discharge of duties in terms of procedures

AND substance is of prime importance:• “how the job gets done” rather than just “getting the job

done with the least possible input”

emanations: • process controls (rather than output)• words like transparency, prevention and detection of fraud,

compliance with rules, etc. fit here

15

Different concepts of accountability

• “lean and purposeful”: This view rises with New Public Management match narrowly defined tasks and circumstances with resources

(time and money) as tightly as possible, cutting any slack it is very important to have “checkable” objectives that are not

overlapping hence the focus on outputs, ideally to be provided by

independent departments emanations:

• words like effectiveness, efficiency, impact, value for money, achieving targets

• approaches like payment by results, just in time delivery and zero based budgeting

17

Different concepts of accountability

• “robust, resilient, adaptive”: „post – NPM“ redirection of attention to complex

nature of society focus is on being able to withstand shocks, to keep

operating even under the most dire circumstances and to adapt rapidly in a crisis

emanations:• back-up systems, maintaining adequate diversity to avoid

widespread common failure (including in the social sense e.g. avoiding groupthink) and building in safety margins (e.g. in planning work or using materials)

• words like diversity, empowerment, sustainability etc.

19

Conclusion 2: Accountability in ESIF

• Any (public) organization involved in the transformation of money into well-being (or inputs into results ) has to balance all dimensions of accountability!

22

What happens if we do not find a balance?

23

Private sector examples of overemphasising lean and purposeful (facilitated by public policy) with wider repercussions

New Synthesis approach

• Public management is a balancing act: in terms of

performance:• “traditional” results

(outputs, outcomes)• civic results

in terms of the use of power:

• government• collective

• …underpinned by the three notions of accountability

J. Bourgon, A new synthesis for public administration

Honest and fair

Lean and purposeful

Robust, resilient,..

Performance and accountability are two

faces of the same coin!

Further reading

28

Problem: Perceived lack of•Performance•Responsibility•Accountability•Transparency•Control•Policy capacity to guarantee results

Another new solution?

• Re-establish Trust (especially WITHIN the public sector)

• Re-equilibrate Trust and Performance

• Performance governance approach

Weberian bureaucracy

Solution

• Creation of agencies• More autonomy• More specialisation• Increase of single policy

capacity• Performance

Measurement Systems introduced

New Public Management

New solution

• Reinvent coordination (or introduce brand new):• Hierarchy mechanisms• Market mechanisms• Network mechanisms

• Guarantee effective policy capacity

• Increase of Audit capacity

Discussion after the NPM

New problem

•Dysfunctional autonomy•Centrifugal agencies•Suboptimal focus on agency outputs, not on policy outcomes

•Considerable transaction costs•"Silos" - disconnected single policy capacities

•Perverse effects of Performance Measurement Systems (gaming and cheating)

Another new problem

•Hierarchical coordination mechanisms lead to pure recentralization

•Market based coordination leads to private monopolies

•Network based coordination mechanisms lead to only symbolic policies and weak networks

•Audit tsunami•New performance approaches triggered Red Tape

•Rise of deep distrust within the public sector

Coming problems

• ?

Adapted from G. Bouckaert