Mass promotions : Helping better governance or creating an unhappy government administration ?
Saturday, 12 September 2009
Enayet Rasul Bhuiyan
Some 494 government officials were promoted to the next higher posts at one go on last Monday. Indeed, this action was without a parallel in the history of the civil services of the country. The justifications for the large scale promotions could be giving a stimulus to the promoted ones to work with greater flair and dedication. Other implied objectives would be attaining fitment in postings by matching the job descriptions at the higher posts with the caliber, capabilities and experiences of the promoted officers. Obviously, the move must also should have been inspired to meet the legitimate and rightful expectations of due promotions among the promoted officers . The aim of these promotions should have been to create a happier government administration on the whole after satisfying the motivational requirements of the officials and getting a streamlined administration to acquire greater capacities to be able to work as a tool for improved governance.
But these objectives are likely to remain quite unmet. It may be that the large scale promotions, instead of promoting the above goals, have created only great dissatisfaction among those who are perceiving it, and also correctly, that the promotion process has bypassed them when they deserve the promotions and not the ones who have been promoted. In that case, the decision of mass promotion could be creating the grounds for more logjams in the administration when the outlook should be getting a harmonious and happy administration for its smooth functioning.
As it is, the promotions will be creating a gross imbalance in the number of posts available and those promoted with designated ranks to fill them. This imbalance would be particularly manifest at the mid levels of the administration. The promotions were given at the level of additional secretaries, joint secretaries and deputy secretaries. But at each of these levels promotions have been given to a greater number than the available posts .
One way to face up to this odd situation could be to keep these large number of officers with the higher ranks after promotion but no vacant posts for them to occupy, as officers on special duty (OSDs). Alternatively, some of the ones already serving in such posts could be made OSDs to make way for the promoted officers to fill their positions. But both ways would be highly wasteful for the administration. OSDs with nothing to do draw uselessly salaries and perks from the public purse. Therefore, it makes no sense to increase their number. Unnecessary creation of posts to take care of a large number of promoted officers would lead to overstaffing, a phenomenon that is very inconsistent from the standpoint of having a lean and cost efficient administration.
Murmurings are also heard that the promotions in most cases have not been given to those who would be most suitable for the same. Those who would otherwise be considered most deserving for such promotions from the standpoint of seniority, efficiency and integrity, they were largely excluded from the promotion awards. Allegedly, the normal criterion for promotion in government administration such as the above were ignored and the promotions were guided mainly by considerations of how subservient and loyal the newly promoted ones would be to their political masters. However, it cannot be said absolutely that the allegations carry credibility. Nevertheless, there is hardly any need to explain why, if these allegations have any basis, the same could severely undermine the morale of officials who have been working with reasonable honesty and efficiency in the government administration. Not only they would be feeling frustrated under the present scheme of things, members of the administration-generally-- could be demoralized from sensing that no matter how deserving they are for promotions and other advances, the same will simply not come their way as they are not the lackeys of the ruling quarters or because of their non identification with their political bosses and for their discharging their duties as they should---selflessly in the public interest.
What the country needs, above all, is a dynamic government administration to work devotedly for the well being of the people and the country. The incumbents in power today in Bangladesh when they were in the opposition, were very critical of the then ruling party for its most unethical activities of politicizing the administration or putting persons only loyal to them in high positions of responsibilities in government offices. But on coming to power they are inviting criticisms for trying to establish their political dominance over the civil administration in just the same manner as their predecessors.
Some 494 government officials were promoted to the next higher posts at one go on last Monday. Indeed, this action was without a parallel in the history of the civil services of the country. The justifications for the large scale promotions could be giving a stimulus to the promoted ones to work with greater flair and dedication. Other implied objectives would be attaining fitment in postings by matching the job descriptions at the higher posts with the caliber, capabilities and experiences of the promoted officers. Obviously, the move must also should have been inspired to meet the legitimate and rightful expectations of due promotions among the promoted officers . The aim of these promotions should have been to create a happier government administration on the whole after satisfying the motivational requirements of the officials and getting a streamlined administration to acquire greater capacities to be able to work as a tool for improved governance.
But these objectives are likely to remain quite unmet. It may be that the large scale promotions, instead of promoting the above goals, have created only great dissatisfaction among those who are perceiving it, and also correctly, that the promotion process has bypassed them when they deserve the promotions and not the ones who have been promoted. In that case, the decision of mass promotion could be creating the grounds for more logjams in the administration when the outlook should be getting a harmonious and happy administration for its smooth functioning.
As it is, the promotions will be creating a gross imbalance in the number of posts available and those promoted with designated ranks to fill them. This imbalance would be particularly manifest at the mid levels of the administration. The promotions were given at the level of additional secretaries, joint secretaries and deputy secretaries. But at each of these levels promotions have been given to a greater number than the available posts .
One way to face up to this odd situation could be to keep these large number of officers with the higher ranks after promotion but no vacant posts for them to occupy, as officers on special duty (OSDs). Alternatively, some of the ones already serving in such posts could be made OSDs to make way for the promoted officers to fill their positions. But both ways would be highly wasteful for the administration. OSDs with nothing to do draw uselessly salaries and perks from the public purse. Therefore, it makes no sense to increase their number. Unnecessary creation of posts to take care of a large number of promoted officers would lead to overstaffing, a phenomenon that is very inconsistent from the standpoint of having a lean and cost efficient administration.
Murmurings are also heard that the promotions in most cases have not been given to those who would be most suitable for the same. Those who would otherwise be considered most deserving for such promotions from the standpoint of seniority, efficiency and integrity, they were largely excluded from the promotion awards. Allegedly, the normal criterion for promotion in government administration such as the above were ignored and the promotions were guided mainly by considerations of how subservient and loyal the newly promoted ones would be to their political masters. However, it cannot be said absolutely that the allegations carry credibility. Nevertheless, there is hardly any need to explain why, if these allegations have any basis, the same could severely undermine the morale of officials who have been working with reasonable honesty and efficiency in the government administration. Not only they would be feeling frustrated under the present scheme of things, members of the administration-generally-- could be demoralized from sensing that no matter how deserving they are for promotions and other advances, the same will simply not come their way as they are not the lackeys of the ruling quarters or because of their non identification with their political bosses and for their discharging their duties as they should---selflessly in the public interest.
What the country needs, above all, is a dynamic government administration to work devotedly for the well being of the people and the country. The incumbents in power today in Bangladesh when they were in the opposition, were very critical of the then ruling party for its most unethical activities of politicizing the administration or putting persons only loyal to them in high positions of responsibilities in government offices. But on coming to power they are inviting criticisms for trying to establish their political dominance over the civil administration in just the same manner as their predecessors.