Issues of administrative restructuring and service delivery improvement

In Nepal, there have been more than two dozen attempts to restructure the administration. It is alleged that despite many efforts by forming various commissions/commissions/empowered committees for the reform of the bureaucracy, there was no meaningful and effective change in the lives of the common people. Is administrative restructuring impossible in Nepal? Can the existing bureaucracy improve service delivery as expected? It is necessary to understand these topics deeply.

Bhagirath's efforts but little return

If we look at the summary of the report of the high-level administrative reform implementation and monitoring committee from the 'Buch Commission' formed for administrative reconstruction within two years of achieving democracy in 2007, the suggestions given for reform are almost 60 percent the same. Looking at the list of suggestions, the number of ministries and departments should be reduced, the salary of employees should be improved, the number of employees should be based on needs, transfer management, capacity development and training of employees, strengthening of the Public Service Commission, sectoral reforms of public administration, administrative decentralization and clear job description of civil servants.

There are no efforts from the political level to improve service delivery and make the bureaucracy agile and efficient. From every political leadership, you can see fighting efforts and hustle to improve service delivery. Nepal's bureaucracy also went through many ups and downs from Weberian bureaucracy to the use of the latest concepts such as new public administration and public service. But the administration did not have to suffer the shock of the political upheaval that happened in this period. Let's say, the extensive restructuring did not happen as expected.

There is a common understanding that even in its seven-decade long history, the bureaucracy has not adequately addressed the expectations of the common citizens. Our efforts so far have not resolved solutions that focus on the root problem. All previous efforts focused only on employee empowerment. Discussions were held on staff capacity development. A number of reform options that needed to be done could not be prepared. Dozens of reports keep pointing to the only option being 'reformed bureaucracy'. The report's recommendations focused only on strengthening staff and organizational components. Looking at the summaries of the reports from the beginning to the present, it seems that the space for discussing and debating other solutions is narrow.

If we say that the result of a school is not good enough, the only option is to develop the ability of the teacher. But if the main problem is focused on the poor results of the students, there may be many options for improvement. In addition to teacher capacity development, the use of the latest technology in the study, teaching and learning process, abundance of resources, school infrastructure, timely curriculum, teaching methods and practical education, the role of parents and improvement in the examination system should be given attention to overall management. It is difficult to come up with solutions without getting to the root of the problem. The same fact applies to improving public service delivery. So how to improve it? In the question of administration reform, if we look for solutions by keeping citizens at the center, many options can be thought of. The main question today is that the citizens could not get quality and reliable services on time, many difficulties arose in getting government services.

Small effort but big impact

changes or restructuring. It always starts with small efforts. Be it a train or a car. Its smallest 'nutbolts' must be tightly tightened to run at high speed. Attempting to drive with loose nutbolts may lead to accidents. Even in Nepal's administration system, big restructuring should be started with small efforts. But let those small efforts have a big impact. Although the citizens of the 21st century are aware, the question of reform in the context of Nepal is still behind.

We don't need anything big to be happy. Nepal's 'happiness index' was the highest in South Asia during and after the epidemic like Covid-19. We are happy to have a seat in public transport. We thank the government even if the municipal garbage truck comes with sirens and picks up the garbage without any hindrance. We are also happy to remove encroaching parking on the street and make walking easier. For us, these efforts at happiness fall within the minimum standards in developed countries. Which is considered as the basic function of government. All these examples show that any change or restructuring in our context should start with small things.

should be administratively restructured from an effort that sounds simple but has great meaning. An office website should be made customer friendly in many ways. A website is like a mouthpiece of an office, which can show the overall management of the office in just one click. Due to limited information to get necessary information in a timely and convenient manner, citizens have to face difficulties in getting services. Simple as it sounds, website management can make a huge difference in service delivery. We have an example where the online service system at the labor office has greatly improved labor permit acquisition. But not all government offices have implemented online system in service delivery. Online service is incomplete even though there are limited offices. An example is the process of getting a driver's license. There is an arrangement to fill the form online. But the compulsion to stand in line to get a license from paying the revenue has not been removed. Not only the form, but the service should be able to be provided from submitting the revenue to getting the license at home. We only provide online service for filling the blank form. But when it comes to digitization, we have not been able to provide the overall service associated with it as an online service. It is necessary to change the service delivery of such public bodies.

Another important but unsettled topic for improving Nepal's governance system is records management. The then General Administration Minister Bhesh Bahadur Thapa has pointed out in his report that there has been a problem in record management since before 2032. In the practice of records management, it seems that there is still a need for extensive improvement in government offices in Nepal. Whether it is during the distribution of citizenship or in the matter of making a national identity card. Still, there is no paperwork in the government headquarters. Scientific records should be managed in all offices in order to end the tradition of asking where the employee has such and such file even after the employee has been transferred, promoted or retired.

There are some excellent employees in Nepal's administration system. A research has also shown that Nepalese employees are the best in the world based on their personal abilities. But those employees are seen as weak in the performance of the organization. In order to provide reliable and quality services to the citizens, the performance of all employees must be of a high standard. When a competent employee retires, his knowledge and institutional memory also retires with him. In the absence of a reliable and scientific succession plan, more investment and time has to be spent on new employees along with their capacity development. Hence the need for succession planning in administrative structural transformation.

Although there are efforts to increase the capacity in the bureaucracy, it is not enough. The regulatory body has also pointed out that the job description of most of the offices is unclear. If you are going to take service from the civil level as well, you should be clear in advance what documents you need and go with preparation. We are not able to introduce the bureaucracy to the latest technology. Currently, there is a lack of practical efforts, even though there is a discussion on how to transform the capabilities of individuals into institutions. It is necessary to improve it at the policy level.

If there is an extraordinary employee, the organization is not able to manage how to keep it in the institutional memory and use or transfer their knowledge to the new generation in the future. It is important to pay attention to the ordinary things in service delivery. Bureaucracy everywhere seems sluggish because bureaucracy focuses more on process. In comparison, the level of activism in the bureaucracy of developed and developing countries may be low. Even if the process is not focused, the wrong character is likely to destroy the system tomorrow. But that process should focus on how fast and how fast or slow the service delivery is to our end result. The process should be focused on how to facilitate work, how to make service delivery quality and reliable. In a less developed country like ours, there is more focus on how to stop the process rather than reversing it. This is not only Nepal's problem. It is a common problem of least developed countries. Diversity management remains equally important in

service delivery. For example, language, a dimension of diversity, also affects service delivery. When employees go to Madhesh, if they know the language there, the Himalayan region or the language in Kathmandu, it will be easier to provide services.

It's not that the employees didn't work, it's that the employees put themselves in the political vacuum yesterday. But it may not work as expected. Capacity should be developed practically from the lowest level of employees to the leadership level. The training provided by the staff college should be made not only theoretical but also practical. Similarly, there should be extensive changes in the examination system conducted by public services. The examination conducted in this way should be made more practical. Age appropriate examination system is essential. Rather than on the basis of general knowledge, it seems that courses and questions should be created to build creative thinking and critical thinking. At least monetary to non-monetary incentives for employees to fulfill their needs should be considered as a major part of overall improvement and focused on service delivery. Rewards and punishments should be made scientific. If we can pay attention to small things in the bureaucracy, we can bring about a big change.

Similarly, there is a complaint that most of the structures of Nepal's government offices are not citizen-friendly. Due to the structure of such offices, the employees are not able to provide services on time even if they want to, and the customers are also confused. If a customer enters the office to receive service, then the office structure can be built thinking that he does not have to ask for a room until the work is completed. Instead of going from one room to another, the office structure should be designed in such a way that starting from one door and exiting from a certain place without hassle after receiving the service. So that the customer does not have to face the service problem. Service delivery can be made effective if the building structure is disabled-friendly, women- and children-friendly. It may sound normal, but the bureaucracy has to listen to various accusations from the citizens due to not being able to fulfill these things. In the

service flow, frontline offices can be classified separately and transformation can be started from those offices. Agencies like Hello Government can be very effective in initially listening and addressing complaints. Regulatory bodies should be the last resort of reform. Therefore, in order to solve the problem of service delivery, it is necessary to think from a multifaceted perspective of creating a system rather than simply improving the staff.

Nepal's administration system, which is on the verge of structural transformation, must be changed according to the current environment. Along with political change, small-scale transformation in bureaucracy is essential. Since the work done by the bureaucracy is connected with the success of federalism, there is no alternative to its overall transformation. In the absence of a federal civil service law, what needs to be done immediately at the policy level is to resolve the disputes in the federal civil service bill and get it passed by the parliament as soon as possible.

In addition, small and impressive work like the above example should be done in parallel. Starting from the local level, which is the laboratory of democracy, for the administrative restructuring at the provincial and federal levels, the destination can be reached only if the citizens' problems are kept as the main problems and the blueprint for the overall transformation is drawn. For that, there is a need for constant vigilance from the civil level.

– Pariyar is the chief administrative officer of Kathmandu Metropolitan City.

(Not only politics, industry, business, agriculture, education, health, tourism, banking, cinema, literature, there is disappointment everywhere now. The country cannot bear the weight of this disappointment for a long time. To promote lively faith, Kantipur has started a series of ideas- A 'starting point' where different experts will write proposals for reform, continuously.)