Hong Kong Civil Service is one of public sector organizations in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong civil service is managed by 11 policy bureaux in the Government Secretariat, and 67 departments and agencies, mostly staffed by civil servants. The Secretary for the Civil Service is one of the Principal Officials appointed under the Accountability System and a Member of the Executive Council. He heads the Civil Service Bureau (CSB) of the Government Secretariat and is responsible to the Chief Executive for civil service policies as well as the overall management and development of the civil service. His primary role is to ensure that the civil service serves the best interests of the community and delivers various services in a trustworthy, efficient and cost effective manner. The CSB assumes overall policy responsibility for the management of the civil service, including such matters as appointment, pay and conditions of service, staff management, manpower planning, training, and discipline (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki).
The core values of the civil service which all civil servants are expected to share and uphold includes commitment to the rule of the law, honesty and integrity, accountability for decisions and actions, political neutrality, impartiality in the execution of public functions, and dedication, professionalism and diligence in serving the community (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki).
The Hong Kong civil service provides a wide range of services, which in many countries are divided among various public authorities, for example, public works and utilities cleansing and public health, education, fire services and the police force. Hong Kong civil servants therefore do a wide variety of jobs. As of September 30, 2004, the civil service employed about 160,100 people or about five per cent of Hong Kong's labor force. The civil service is a unified service in the sense that all its employees are subject to common appointment procedures and similar disciplinary codes (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki).
Performance management is an integral part of a comprehensive human resource management strategy. Its objective is to maximize individuals' performance and potential with a view to attaining organizational goals and enhancing overall effectiveness and productivity. A staff performance management system aims Performance management is the handy umbrella term for all of the organizational activities involved in managing people on the job.
Public sector organizations are often conceptualized as monopolistic entities facing captive demand, enjoying guaranteed sources and levels of financing, and being relatively immune from the influences of voters, stakeholders, and political institutions such as legislatures and courts (Etzioni-Halevey, 1983; Litan & Nordhaus, 1983; Stein, 1995; Weidenbaum, 1992). Not only are most of the components of this stereotype inaccurate, but the contemporary public sector organization faces unprecedented demands from a society that grows more complex and interdependent by the day (Lewis, 1980; Mitchell & Scott, 1987; Skoldberg, 1994).
The external environment of public sector organizations can be characterized as highly turbulent, which implies an increasingly dynamic, hostile, and complex set of environmental conditions (Nutt & Backoff, 1993; Miller & Friesen, 1983; Osborne & Gaebler, 1992). Competition is arising from entirely new sources, technological change is continuous, costs are rising faster than the general rate of inflation, those who cannot pay must be served, and skilled labor is in short supply.
Through the performance appraisal process, staff at different levels is made aware of the standard of performance expected of them. Performance appraisal systems hope to achieve higher productivity outcomes by delineating how employees meet job specifications. A major challenge for performance appraisal systems is to define performance standards while maintaining objectivity. Proper management of the process helps maximize individual performance and enhance the corporate efficiency and effectiveness of the civil service as a whole. As an integral part of the overall human resource management functions, it is a major tool in human resource planning, development, and management. Performance appraisal of staff is an on-going process. While appraisal reports would normally be completed annually, regular communication between managers and staff on performance is essential. Transparency and objectivity of the appraisal process are also emphasized. To improve the system, department management is encouraged to put in place assessment panels to undertake leveling and moderating work among appraisal reports, identify under-performers/outstanding performers for appropriate action, adopt other management tools including target-based assessment and core competencies assessment, and ensure supervisors do an honest, objective and timely assessment of their subordinates. The performance management system ensures good performance and exemplary service are rewarded and given due recognition, whilst under-performers are managed, counseled and offered assistance to bring their performance up to requirement. For persistent substandard performers who fail to improve, action will be taken to retire them in the public interest. In recognition of long and meritorious services, there are the Long and Meritorious Service Travel Award Scheme, the Long and Meritorious Service Award Scheme and the Retirement Souvenir Scheme. A commendation system also exists to give recognition to exemplary performance.
Disciplinary action is taken against an act of misconduct to achieve a punitive, rehabilitative and deterrent effect. All disciplinary actions are handled promptly and in accordance with established procedures and the principles of natural justice to help enhance management credibility and staff morale.
There is both central and departmental staff consultative machinery. Centrally, there are the Senior Civil Service Council, the Model Scale 1 Staff Consultative Council, the Police Force Council, and the Disciplined Services Consultative Council. Through these channels, the Government consults its staff on any major changes, which affect their conditions of service. At the departmental level, there are Departmental Consultative Committees which aim to improve co-operation and understanding between management and staff through regular exchanges of views. There are established channels to deal with staff grievances and complaints. Individual members of staff with problems can receive counseling, advice and help. A Staff Suggestions Scheme is run by both the CSB and departments to encourage staff to make suggestions for improving the efficiency of the civil service. Awards are given to those whose suggestions are found useful. A Staff Welfare Fund caters for the interests of staff. A Staff Relief Fund provides assistance to meet unforeseen financial needs to staff.
Modell (2005) states that there have been a number of developments in research into performance management in the public sector. Four research approaches are becoming increasingly influential. These are multidimensional stakeholder approaches, the balanced scorecard approach, institutional approaches, and the radical learning approach.
Balanced Scorecard remains very relevant to the not-for-profit sector because organizations therein need to address management issues that are generally very similar to those seen in commercial entities. From its origins in the private sector, Balanced Scorecard has evolved to become a useful tool equally applicable to not-for-profit organizations, state owned companies, government departments and even internal functions within commercial organizations.
The Balanced Scorecard is a revolutionary tool that motivates staff to make the organization's vision happen. It does more than just measure performance. It is a management system that focuses the efforts of people, throughout the organization, toward achieving strategic objectives. It gives feedback on current performance and targets future performance. Simply, the Balanced Scorecard converts an organization's vision and strategy into a comprehensive set of performance and action measures that provides the basis for a strategic measurement and management system.
The objectives of a public sector organization will center on the satisfaction of external stakeholders in a similar way to those of the commercial sector organizations. The dominant stakeholder requirement for a commercial sector organization is usually simple financial returns on investments made. In public sector organization is usually more complex because the requirements of stakeholders are usually comprise of an extensive set of mostly non financial objectives addressing social, political and economic in equal measures. The customer of the organization often are represented in the stakeholder group and so are likely to present demands to the non profit altogether more complex and open ended. The application of Balance scorecard is relatively important to both public and commercial sector but more complex on the public sector organization. That is because the primary goal of commercial sector is financial return thus it is easier.
Quality management in public administration is geared towards government that is efficient, transparent, accessible and provides excellent quality service to customers. As a result of quality initiatives, number of governments developed comprehensive strategies to improve public service delivery. To implement such strategies, a number of organizations/organizational divisions have been set up at the central or local levels to facilitate quality management in the public sector. Moreover, private sector is actively involved in government quality initiatives through consulting, training and professional services.
The EFQM Excellence Model is a practical tool that can be used in a number of different ways. This model can be used as a tool for Self-Assessment, as a way to Benchmark with other organizations, as a guide to identify areas for Improvement, as a basis for a common Vocabulary and a way of thinking and as a Structure for the organization's management system.
The EFQM Model is a non-prescriptive framework based on 9 criteria. Five of these are "Enablers" and four are "Results". The "Enabler" criteria cover what an organization does. The "Results" criteria cover what an organization achieves. "Results" are caused by "Enablers" and "Enablers" are improved using feedback from 'Results'.
The EFQM Model, which recognizes there are many approaches to achieving sustainable excellence in all aspects of performance, is based on the premise that excellent results with respect to performance, customers, people and society are achieved through leadership driving policy and strategy, that is delivered through people, partnerships and resources, and processes.
Six Sigma is a data-driven, high-performance approach to analyzing and solving root causes of business problems. It ties the outputs of a business directly to marketplace requirements. As a result, Six Sigma projects lead to reduced costs, process improvement and reduced business cycle times. Six Sigma is a way of increasing efficiency. It is similar to TQM in its focus on techniques for solving problems and using statistical method to improve processes. Six Sigma approach is to train experts who work on solving important problems while they teach others in the company.
A first way to look at sectoral differences is to focus on the way outputs are measured. In the business world, owners seek to maximize their return on investment by creating firms that will generate profits. Money generated by business activity is routinely distributed to those who have ownership status in the firm and who have taken on risk in investing. Performance is measured by profits, share price, earnings, or market share or through other metrics that allow owners including shareholders to measure how well management is furthering their interests. Managers who perform poorly are routinely dismissed, and shareholders are increasingly aggressive in asserting oversight and control, especially when performance lags (Useem 1993). Although there is some argument over which metric is the best predictor of firm success, there is little doubt that common quantitative measures of firm performance are fairly clear and easily interpreted. Regulatory agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission ensure that data on firm performance are consistently reported to all. Given these arrangements, owners and investors are in a very strong position indeed when it comes to oversight and measurement of organizational outputs.
The situation of nonprofits and government agencies is more complicated because there are neither owners who have a material interest in the organization nor easily interpretable output measures. Both public agencies and nonprofits operate under what has been called the "nondistribution constraint" (Hansmann 1980). Whereas business firms are able to distribute earnings to shareholders, government agencies and nonprofit organizations are not permitted to make such distributions but, rather, must retain any earnings. This means that there are no actors who have a direct financial interest in the organization, and thus no actor has a material stake in monitoring its operations.
Outputs in public sector organizations are often more difficult to measure. The public sector management literature has consistently acknowledged that performance measurement is rendered more difficult given the nature of the goods and services produced (Moore 1995). Often the outputs are indivisible; rarely is funding available to serious efforts at performance measurement; there are no large, mobilized groups pushing for a greater level of program assessment in government; sometimes benefits cannot be measured until far into the future; and considerable information asymmetries may be present. All of this makes performance measurement extremely difficult (Gormley and Weimer 1999).
In Hong Kong Civil Service, the Chief Executive's authority to appoint, dismiss and discipline public servants; to act on representations made by public servants; to make disciplinary regulations; and to delegate certain powers and duties under the Order.
Clarkson (1995) defines stakeholders as persons or groups that have, or claim, ownership, rights, or interests in a corporation and its activities, past, present, or future. Such claimed rights or interests are the result of transactions with, or actions taken by, the corporation, and may be legal or moral, individual or collective. Stakeholders with similar interests, claims, or rights can be classified as belonging to the same group: employees, shareholders, customers and so on.
Moreover, a stakeholder may also be defined as any individual or group who can affect or is affected by the actions, decisions, policies, practices, or goals of the organization (Carroll 1993). In the broadest sense, stakeholders may include a host of entities, including trade associations, competitors, government, customers, employees, suppliers, activist groups, customer advocate groups, unions, and political groups. It is safe to assert that effective managers consider all relevant stakeholder interests and are proactive when responding to those of highest priority. Managers must not only have a good understanding of key stakeholders' expectations but also be able to shape these expectations through engagement.
From a stakeholder perspective, an organization consists of a collection of groups and individuals who form a coalition to achieve mutually desired outcomes. Anyone with an investment in an organization's success is a stakeholder. Organizations benefit when the active and positive participation of all stakeholders is achieved. Arguably, stakeholders have a right to participate in organizational decision making because they have an investment in the organization, which may be financial or non-financial in nature.
The importance of heeding broader stakeholder interests is increasingly being put forth as being critical to long-term business success (Freeman 1994; Freeman and Evan 1990; Henriques and Sadorsky 1999). There has been increased stakeholder influence that is due to several developments. The Internet and wireless technologies provide stakeholders with better access to timely information, the means to publish their views to an international audience, and greater capacity to form alliances. This not only facilitates their involvement in decision making, but greatly enhances their ability to "shame and blame" large firms.
In a Hong Kong Civil Service, the stakeholders have the right to participate in management and governance of the organization. The stakeholders need to know on quality and effectiveness of service provision, and donors and/or funders on what the organization's resources are used for and the effectiveness of the services provided. Public involvement is crucial to the success of the projects of the Hong Kong civil service. Better communication between different community stakeholders enhances work efficiency and creates consensus and has contributed to smooth implementation of projects.
No comments:
Post a Comment