Probity in Governance
Probity in Governance: Information sharing and transparency in government, Right to
Information, Codes of Ethics, Codes of Conduct, Citizen’s Charters, Work culture,
Quality of service delivery, Utilisation of public funds
Public service
service that would benefit people at large, driven by welfare motive (not profitability)
eg: healthcare, education
characteristics of public service:
government led
citizen centric
values oriented: transparency, neutrality etc
equality
sovereignty (eg: justice, law and order)
obligatory for govt and other actors (CSOs etc)
delivered to people as a group, not individually
vitality of services (education, healthcare): important for realizing full potential of
individual
Probity
governance based on strong ethical values: integrity, accountability, transparency,
objectivity, neutrality, inclusive and participatory etc
philosophical basis: social contract (people pool together some rights, and in return
enjoy public service from ruler/govt)
thus public service must be guided by probity
why?
Probity in Governance 1
efficient utilisation of limited resources for collective welfare (by checking
corruption)
citizen empowerment through transparency and participativeness
boost citizen-administration trust
improved work culture in administration, efficient processes
welfare of marginalised sections
steps taken:
PCA to deter corruption and punish acts of corruption
CVC, Lokpal to receive complaints of graft, investigate and recommend
punishments
RTI, Citizen Charters: citizens aware and capable of taking actions
independent institutions with security of tenure, appointment by collegium etc
civil servant code of conduct
e-governance
what else to do?
reforms in RTI, citizen charters
public service values made part of code of conduct (ARC2); align recruitment
and training programmes to probity
judicial standards and accountability bill, independent institutions bill
Information sharing and transparency in govt
sunlight is the best disinfectant
significance:
deter misuse of discretionary powers, influence of personal interests in decision
making
people have greater access to information on decision-making → demand
accountability, specific complaints and grievance redressal
Probity in Governance 2
public trust in administration
culture of disclosures and information sharing → improved work culture,
collective learning from mistakes
pre-empt scams early, prevent them
effective utilization of public money
concerns with transparency:
involvement of too many stakeholders in decision-making
slow down decision-making, as civil servants focus on procedural correctness
deter exercise of civil servants' discretionary powers for welfare for fear of
scrutiny
politicians and administration not in a position to take strong decisions, specially
in times of crises
misused for vested interests (political venedetta, media sensationalism,
frivolous demands)
privacy of those holding public offices (eg: judges uncomfortable with disclosing
assets)
requires public resources to compile and publish information; technological
prowess to manage information
dimensions of transparency: data, decision-making, policy outcome
Right to Information
RTI is the master key to good governance (ARC 2)
tool to citizens to demand information from govt, suo moto disclosure of information
by govt
structure: PIO/assistant PIO receives complaints; appeals to appellate authority;
final appeals to CIC/SIC
importance: refer Significance of Transparency
challenges
Probity in Governance 3
misuse: political vendetta, media sensationalism, frivolous RTIs filed
crucial bodies still outside RTI: judiciary, NGOs, political parties, BCCI
lack of clarity over which bodies fall under RTI (section 2(h))
delays, non-disclosures
suo moto disclosures limited
lack of awareness of how to file an RTI query
refer Concerns with Transparency
Also refer Right to Information
Citizen charters
CC shouldn't remain pious declarations of noble ideals (ARC 2)
declaration of core values guiding the organisation, promise of standards in service
delivery (quality, deadline, fees etc)
components of CCs (ARC2): mandate of organization, vision and ideals driving the
organization, responsibility of citizens (documents, procedures), commitments of
service quality (fees, timelines, standards), GRM authority
significance:
drafting CC → examine organisation's capabilities, evolve consensus on values
and goals (useful exercise by itself)
organisations and administrators aware of what is promised; moral pressure to
work towards that
citizens aware of promised standards → can demand accountability, improved
quality of services
citizens aware of exact shortcoming → specific and actionable complaints with
GRM
public trust and transparency
checks corruption: money paid for services goes to govt coffers, not to public
servant's pockets
Probity in Governance 4
manage user expectations → greater consumer satisfaction
challenges:
high sounding ideals and values, with limited practical utility; sometimes sets
impractical targets of service quality (discourage civil servants from trying)
lack legal enforceability and GRM → limited implementation of CC
hurriedly framed and put up; without relevant stakeholder consultation
rarely updated (many organizations using CCs framed in 1990s)
lack of awareness among citizens
written in English language; not displayed prominently
vested interests resist changes to status quo → stall CC implementation
way forward: focus on timely updating citizen charters based on end-user feedback
(ARC2)
decentralized formulation of CC after consultation of relevant stakeholders
(ARC2)
make few promises that can be kept, rather than impractical and lofty
commitments (ARC2)
citizen charter bill: citizens charters with clear declaration of expectations;
grievance redressal authorities in all organisations; state and central
organisations for GRM
DARPG's guidelines to effectively implement CCs
Sevottam model: assessment-improvement framework for excellence in service
delivery; components
proper framing of CC
effective GRM to enforce CC
improvement in service delivery capability based on end-user feedback
Work culture
collective beliefs, ideals that guide decision making within an organization
Probity in Governance 5
examples of good work culture: ISRO (inclusivity, motivation, zero based
budgeting), Google (employee satisfaction and motivation)
attributes: strong vs weak, positive vs negative
sources of work culture:
history of organization
future goals of organization
management style
societal culture
significance:
greater alignment of employee with organization ideals → employee
satisfaction, greater productivity
greater consensus and uniformity in decision-making within organization
lower need for formal processes and regulations within organization
can promote desired ideals: honesty, integrity, transparency, accountability
how to develop?
recruitment
training: on recruitment, mid-career
trickle down effect
conversations, team events
bureaucratic work culture: armchair bureaucracy, self-serving, secretive, red-
tapism, weak accountability, status quoist, nepotism, corruption
professional work culture: integrity, efficiency, inclusivity, meritocracy, innovation
driven
reasons for poor work culture in public sector:
high degree of discretionary powers
limited accountability: delayed and limited penalties under PCA
colonial mindset of elitism
Probity in Governance 6
promotions based on years of service with limited focus on merit and
performance → complacency, will to act dominated by will to not commit
mistakes
focus on hierarchy and top-down orders
govt monopoly over public services → limited incentives to improve and
innovate
job security
limited effectiveness of performance review, civil servants not made
accountable for performance lapse
focus on procedual correctness, implementation of law in letter
resource crunch → limited investment in improving HR capability; ineffective
trainings
govt processes cumbersome and involve too many stakeholders → multiple
avenues to extract bribes
salaries at lowest rungs not commensurate with rising costs of living →
incentive for corruption
political influence in transfers and appointments (ARC2: honest civil servants
rewarded with harsh transfers)
how to improve work culture in public sector?
recruitment: merit, values, motivation
appropriate trainings at entry and mid-career: sensitization, inter-personal skills
etc
foster competition: lateral entry, both performance and seniority for promotions
effective performance appraisal (360º feedback)
check nefarious behavior: streamline enquiry and penalties under PCA (eg:
senior taxmen retired for corruption)
CC, RTI → moral pressure in workspace, citizen awareness
team events, conversations → consensus and permeation of organizational
values
Probity in Governance 7
3 way transparency: management to employees, employees to management,
among peers; decisions should be made in line with organizational values
senior leaders crucial: role model → trickle down culture of integrity,
transparency, objectivity etc
public hearings, civil servants spend time in field → responsiveness, exposure
to on-ground problems (Hota)
compilation of best practices, publicity and felicitation for high performing civil
servants (civil servants day, letters of appreciation from President etc)
recent administrative reforms:
lateral entry, Aarambh
360º appraisal, transparent Annual Performance Appraisal Report (earlier
secretive top-down feedback)
forced retirement for corrupt bureaucrats
break silos within organization (proposed railway services merger)
Civil Services Board (SC, TSR Subramaniam case), Police Establishment
Board (SC, Prakash Singh), State Security Commission (SC, Prakash Singh)
RTI, CC
e-governance
Mission Karmayogi: rules based → roles based
biometric attendance
Features of work culture
Good work culture Poor work culture
unethical conduct: bribery, siphoning
reflection of ethics: integrity, honesty etc
off funds
3-way transparency: management to employees,
limited, delayed communications
employees to management, between peers
tolerance of dissent and diverse perspectives intolerance
Probity in Governance 8
Good work culture Poor work culture
inclusivity of employees irrespective of sex, religion, caste discrimination based on sex, religion,
etc; participative decision making based on consensus caste etc; nepotism and favoritism
lip service to organizational values
alignment of decision-making with organizational values
during decision-making
low employee morale and
high levels of employeee motivation and productivity
productivity
performance review and rectification: objective, effective, biases and prejudices in
without prejudices performance review
stagnation in skills and career
skill upgradation and career advancement
advancement
safety and security in workplace (eg: no sexual threats to employee safety (sexual
harassment) harassment)
no respect for punctuality and
punctuality, respect for deadlines
deadlines
Public sector vs private sector
Private sector culture Public sector culture
driven by profitability driven by public welfare
importance on efficiency, innovation and importance on inclusivity, equality, implementation
disruption of law etc
recruitment, promotions based on seniority, merit,
recruitment, promotions based on merit
values, diversity
flat hierarchy; effective communication both
hierarchical; top down communication
ways
merits: innovation, efficiencies, flexibility and
merits: relaxed work culture, justice and equality
autonomy
demerits: worker exploitation, high stress demerits: complacency and inefficiencies, poor
levels, productivity over principles working environment and red-tapism
Quality of service delivery
qualitative measures to determine standards of service delivery (eg: beneficiary
satisfaction, delay, competitive prices, value for money)
Probity in Governance 9
significance of quality of service delivery:
features of good service delivery:
responsive to citizen's concerns
timeliness
convenience: people should be able to access them without undue
inconvenience (eg: Bihar's sarkar aapke dwar)
quality standards (eg: govt hospitals provide equally effective care)
participative decision making (social audit, public hearings etc)
transparency
equality among beneficiaries, no prejudices
effective and economy
accountability
challenges in service delivery:
lack of direct accountability of administration to citizens
paternalist attitude towards beneficiaries
long delays in service delivery, red-tapism
often poor quality of services
lack of awareness among citizens: service quality to expect, timelines etc
seen as non-responsive to citizen grievances, fail to meet expected standards
prejudices against vulnerable sections: dalits, poor, women
shortage of funds and manpower
poor work culture in administration
recent administrative reforms:
e-governance: evidence based review
Aadhaar, biometrics to curb duplicate beneficiaries
Probity in Governance 10
CC, RTI: awareness among citizens, moral pressure on civil servants better
quality service delivery
citizen grievance forums: CPGRAMS, PRAGATI
Utilisation of public funds
principles of utilization:
efficiency and economy
public welfare
lawful appropriation
accountability for utilization of public funds
openness and transparency in utilization
sustainability (eg: uncapped power subsidy to farmers)
integrity in processes and civil servants handling public funds
ethical issues in utilization of public fund:
non-utilization of funds (hence March rush)
utilization of funds for other than designated purposes (eg: Rajasthan diverting
CAMPA funds)
limited accountability: guillotine in budget
corruption
non-sustainable models (farm loan waivers, power subsidies etc)
running loss making PSEs (like Air India)
Probity in Governance 11