Governing in modern day society requires good public administration.  The duties of government officials and public administrators are multi-faceted and complex. Meeting the demands of public administration requires a balanced combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviors.  This is captured in the word competence.

In an article at the Cambridge University Press by Elizabeth Fisher and Sidney Shapiro, they state the following reality. “Competence is not exactly a concept that gets the heart racing. To call someone competent is often faint praise. To be competent is not to be exciting, even dullness about it. But it is essential for a good government… Government must be able to act competently – sensibly and effectively – if collective action problems are to be addressed and mitigated.”

Government must be seen as capable and effective in carrying out its activities. Competency is the capability to apply or use the set of knowledge, skills and abilities required to perform critical work functions or tasks in a defined work setting.  It is a measure of both proven skills and proven knowledge. Competency management will help in clarifying the abilities needed for a given position. Competency management creates the standards against which we can measure effective employee performance.

An OECD article notes how competency management is a high priority in six of the nine Southeast Asian (SEA) countries surveyed.Countries adopt competency management approaches in recognition that both hard and soft skills are crucial to civil service performance.  The key question is how the civil service maps out the skills and knowledge needed by central government.

Several SEA countries have a single government institution in charge or a national school of government. In the Philippines, like Brunei and Singapore, responsibilities for civil service training are shared by several government institutions centrally. While monitoring and evaluation of training investment is a top priority in 34% of OECD countries, this is not yet the case in SEA countries.

The most frequently mentioned competencies in SEA countries (including the Philippines) suggest that civil servants are expected to be leaders and professionals with strong ethical values. Leadership, values and ethics, and strategic thinking are prominent in competency frameworks. These countries prioritize training and coaching for the executive leadership as well as for middle managers.

The Philippines is one of the six countries with a specific competency framework for senior managers. However, while all SEA countries have identified coordination mechanism for civil service training, the OECD survey noted an exception in the Philippines.

In competency management, assessment and verification are critical first steps. Assessment is the formal process of collecting evidence of the competencies (skills and knowledge) a worker has developed through a structured learning environment, off-the-job training, on-the-job training and other relevant work experiences. Verification looks for evidence of prior learning as well as current competencies. As a rule, the evidence supplied must be valid, sufficient, current and authentic.

The importance of having a competent government is most important today as we are still on the recovery mode from the pandemic. We are on the threshold of electing new leadership at both in the national and local levels. When we evaluate who we will vote, do we check out and assess their competencies? Is the process we follow on verification fact-based and evidence-based?  If competency management is a prerequisite in the selection, development and promotion of civil servants, shouldn’t we apply the same principles to political leaders?

The Economist has noted, “government failures are often the consequence of hasty ministers listening to civil servants too little, not too much.”  Because even if we succeed in improving the competency level at the civil service level, poor choices in the political leadership will create dysfunctions. The public administration system must be able to do its job well within the institutional and political culture. Political leadership will matter. We need leaders who realize that to listen is not to follow blindly. It is carefully understanding what is being said and its implications. We need clear transparency and accountability.

This also extends to appointments in the boards of government corporations and departments. If the political leadership is indiscriminate in said appointments, prioritizing friends, cohorts and supporters, we will have political appointees who will wreak havoc on institutions. There are sad stories like this in some institutions. The same focus on competency management should apply when the new government fill in vacancies in various posts, which will include a clear vetting and validation process.

Dr. Jess Estanislao asked, “How do we govern our national affairs such that in 25 years, we shall be complaining less about the state of Philippine affairs and celebrating more of our solid accomplishments as a people?”  The answer, I believe partly lies in an across-the-board competency in the bureaucracy, not just the civil service but the political leadership as well.

(Benel Dela Paz Lagua was previously Executive Vice President and Chief DevelopmentOfficer at the Development Bank of the Philippines.  He is an active FINEX member and an advocate of risk-based lending for SMEs.  The views expressed herein are his own and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of his office as well as FINEX.)