Performance appraisal of civil servants in the public administration of Romania.
Stefanescu, Aurelia ; Turlea, Eugeniu ; Calu, Daniela Artemisa 等
1. INTRODUCTION
Performance is a broad concept with various meanings for various
audiences in various contexts (Kouzmin et al. 1999). The literature
contains numerous approaches on this concept. Performance in the public
sector, as defined by OECD, is "the ability of a government
organisation or authority to acquire resources economically and use
those resources efficiently (input-output) and effectively
(output-outcome) in achieving the output and outcome targets or
goals" (Ketelaar et al., 2007).
The definition of "performance measurement" poses
difficulties, too. The literature comprises several different
definitions of "performance measurement" in the public sector,
explained by Greiling (2006). Firstly, in a narrow sense, the term
refers to the process of applying various techniques for generating
qualitative and quantitative performance data. Secondly, performance
measurement may refer to performance reporting, considered to be a
control and monitoring tool. Third, performance measurement is more and
more seen as a steering instrument. Our research is mainly conducted in
accordance with the first approach.
The introduction of a performance measurement system in the public
sector is in accordance with the "new public management" (NPM)
trend (Sevic, 2005). According to this trend, the traditional
bureaucratic model of public service (currently present in Romania, too)
is to be gradually replaced. The administration should be focused on
performance, oriented towards the citizens (the "clients"),
and should have enhanced flexibility, strengthened accountability and
control, as well as increased capacity for developing strategy and
policy.
On this background, the researchers' end objectives are to
develop and test an enhanced model for performance measurement in
Romanian public sector entities. The purpose of this model is to
contribute to increasing the performance of this category of entities
and the quality of the services provided by them, in the spirit of the
previously described "new public management" trend.
This paper presents a part of the first results of this broader
research. It focuses on a subset of public sector entities, namely those
from the public administration and on a category of performance, namely
that of human resources. The research leads to the improvement of the
model for performance appraisal of civil servants working in the
Romanian public administration. Methodologically, the research steps
were: analysis of the main traits of the model; identification of the
model's weaknesses; review of the main international perspectives
on this topic; and proposals for the improvement of the model.
2. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OF CIVIL SERVANTS IN ROMANIA
In the Romanian literature, there is an increased interest for
performance measurement in the public sector, especially in the context
of the current financial and economic crisis (Stefanescu, 2009). The
current section presents the model for individual performance appraisal
in the Romanian public administration.
National regulations (Government Decision no. 611/2008) set the
methodology for measuring the individual professional performance only
for civil servants. The reason is that human capital is the main factor
of performance creation in public administration entities. The appraisal
of civil servants in Romania is performed annually and answers two
questions: to what extent the individual objectives set in the job
description were attained, and to what extent were the performance
criteria achieved.
Performance criteria are selected depending on the characteristics
of the activity. These criteria are: implementation skills, ability to
solve problems efficiently, ability to assume one's responsibility,
capacity of self-perfection and making use of the gained experience,
capacity of analysis and synthesis, creativity and initiative, capacity
to plan and act strategically, ability to work independently, ability to
work in a team, and competence in managing allocated resources.
Civil servants are classified at national level, depending on their
education level: class I comprises civil servants with long-term higher
education; class II--civil servants with short-term higher education,
and class III--civil servants with high school level education. For each
category of civil servants, the performance criteria are explained
slightly differently. Moreover, depending on the characteristics of the
public institution and the activities performed by the civil servant,
that institution can establish other performance criteria. The appraisal
procedures comprise, in accordance with the GD no. 611/2008, the
following steps: filling in the appraisal report, interview, and
countersigning the appraisal report.
The analysis of this performance appraisal model points out its
limits: there are criteria for performance appraisal exclusively for
civil servants; the appraisal is subjective; there is no correlation
between professional performance of civil servants and the quality of
services offered to citizens; conciliation of divergences between the
civil servant and the assessor affects the objectivity of performance
appraisal; the qualitative nature of the criteria and the lack of
explicitly defined indicators generate subjective interpretations;
neither of these criteria contain the words "performance",
"result", "cost", "quality"; there are no
criteria for assessing performance by citizens, as final consumers, or
by tax-payers, as well as other external collaborators; managing
financial resources and materials allocated is not a comprehensive
criteria for performance appraisal.
3. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OF CIVIL SERVANTS AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
In order to properly analyse the system of performance measurement
in the public sector of a certain country, it is first of all necessary
that the public policy, the political processes and its administrative
structure are understood (Sevic Z., 2005). Moreover, the external
factors and the country's interactions with other countries and
international bodies can directly or indirectly influence the system of
performance measurement of the entities in the public administration, in
general, and of the human resources of these entities, in particular.
Due to the complexity of these factors and the specificity of each
country, a comparative study between Romania and other countries is
difficult to carry out and, to a certain extent, not feasible due to
comparability issues.
However, the analysis of each national performance measurement
system used in the public administration is, in the authors'
opinion, salutary for identifying models and practices regarding
performance measurement that can be adapted and implemented in the
Romanian space, too. For instance, a broader research carried out under
the auspices of OECD analyses the representative cases of some
countries, chosen precisely because of their differing characteristic
features in the field of performance measurement systems, respectively:
Belgium, Brazil, Canada, France, Netherlands, U.K., U.S. etc.
Authors analysed the results of that research carried out at
international level (Ketelaar et al. 2007) and used it for comparison
with the situation at national level. Of interest were the performance
measures. This international research shows that performance is to be
measured depending on certain objectives from the single results area
(such as policy goals, input usage per policy goal) or from the business
processes area (such as: promoting/preserving values, leadership
effectiveness and impact, facilitating learning and change management
etc.). In the single results area, the measures may be: resources used,
delivered products and services, their quality, goals achieved
(intermediate and final outcome). In the business process area, the
measures taken into consideration are legal responsibilities complied
with, strength of governance and leadership, quality of work
relationships etc.
Moreover, the comparison shows that, at international level, there
is a shift of perspective regarding the public sector. Thus, the citizen
is seen as client and the public administration entity as supplier of
services/products. At the same time, a limited use of ratio indicators
(effectiveness, efficiency or productivity) can be noticed at
international level, similarly to the state of facts at national level.
However, instruments such as: benchmarking analysis, citizen's
charters, quality awards etc., mentioned in the international literature
more than a decade ago (Kouzmin A. et al., 1999), are not part of the
Romanian performance measurement system used in the public
administration.
4. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
The previous sections pointed out the main results of the analysis
of the model for performance appraisal of civil servants in Romania, as
well as the results of the comparison of the performance measurement
system in the public administration at national level with the systems
at international level. The research findings consist in the limits of
the national model, since in Romania, a traditional bureaucratic public
service is still prevailing. Based on the limits thus identified,
authors make a series of suggestions for improving the national model of
individual performance appraisal in the public administration. Our
proposal is that the model comprises criteria defined clearly by
numerical indicators, in connection with the responsibilities set in the
job description. The suggested criteria and performance indicators are:
(a) Criteria: qualitative performance, with the indicators:
*absenteeism rate, *rate of medical leaves, *number of conflicts with
internal and external collaborators, *number of identified cases that
could generate conflicts, *deviations from the codes of conduct, *number
of cases in which deadlines were not met, *number of complaints from
citizens; *communications skills in the relationship with citizens,
*average time for responding to citizens' requests, depending on
the degree of complexity, *rate of answering to citizens' inquiries
correlated with the total inquiries, *results of the internal and
external audit engagements, *value added by internal audit
recommendations through the way in which they are implemented,
*improvement in the quality of services offered from the last
performance appraisal of the employees.
(b) Criteria: financial performance, with the indicators: *ratio
between the added-value of human resources due to continuous training
courses and the cost of the courses, *ratio between the quality of
training courses and their cost, *percentage of salary expenses in the
total expenses, *additional costs for the entity due to the errors of
personnel, *additional costs generated by loss of trials initiated by
citizens or external partners as a consequence of the errors of
personnel.
Moreover, in our opinion, an essential condition for the
performance of civil servants is the optimal initial selection of
appropriate personnel for the public administration. Personnel should be
appointed mainly on professional criteria, such as competence and
experience in the field.
In conclusion, the model of performance appraisal applicable for
civil servants working in the public administration of Romania requires
further improvement, as proposed above. Future research plans include:
to assess the performance measurement system in Romanian public health
care institutions and to develop and test an enhanced performance
measurement model in this field.
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by CNCSIS-UEFISCSU, project number
PNII--IDEI code ID_1827/2008, no. 955/19.01.2009, Panopticon on the
performance connotations in the public sector entities in
Romania--creation versus dissemination.
6. REFERENCES
Greiling D. (2006). Performance measurement: a remedy for
increasing the efficiency of public services?, International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management Vol. 55 No. 6 448-465, ISSN 1741-0401
Ketelaar, A., N. Manning & E. Turkisch (2007).
Performance-based Arrangements for Senior Civil Servants OECD and other
Country Experiences", OECD Working Papers on Public Governance,
2007/5, OECD Publishing
Kouzmin A., Loffler E. & Klages H., Korac-Kakabadse N. (1999).
Benchmarking and performance measurement in public sectors. Towards
learning for agency effectiveness, The International Journal of Public
Sector Management, Vol. 12 No. 2 121-144, ISSN 0951-3558
Sevic Z. (2005). Measuring performance on a local government level
in a transitional country: the case of Serbia, International Journal of
Public Sector Management Vol. 18 No. 7 582-603, ISSN 0951-3558
Stefanescu, A., Calu, D.A., Turlea, E., Gherghina, R., Duca, I.
(2009). New cognitive valences regarding the performance concept into
public sector entities in Romania, within the context of the current
economic recession, Metalurgia International, Special Issue 7 160-162,
ISSN 1582-2214
***(2008) Government Decision no. 611/2008 for approving the norms
on the organization and development of the career of civil servants
