I have a couple of serious, specialized questions about Singapore. I'm afraid they may not be very interesting to your general reader, but ... now I just have nowhere to go and no one else to turn to, and I myself lack the ability to search for the necessary information on the Internet. You have a lot of experience, maybe you can help me?
1 question: As far as I understand, the free market in Singapore is largely government-controlled. At least in those areas that provide "basic needs" - housing, medicine, basic education. Those are a complete rejection of libertarianism ("everything is decided by the Market"), the economy is semi-socialist. How is it that it remains effective? How has the size of the administrative bureaucracy changed during the existence of Singapore, and how, acting in accordance with Parkinson's Law, has not yet suppressed the message of the free market with its desire to administer EVERYTHING?
2 question. Lee Kwang Yew was guided by the following when selecting his team: “I came to the conclusion that one of the best systems was developed and implemented in the Anglo-Dutch oil company Shell. Basically, they focused on what they called the currently estimated potential of a person. This assessment was determined by three factors: the person's ability to
analysis, the development of imagination, the presence of common sense. Together, they compiled an integrated metric, which Shell called "helicopter vision", which reflected a person's ability to see facts and problems in a larger context, while highlighting critical details. "
Lee Kuan Yew writes this. He was faced with the problem of replacing aging ministers with people capable of dynamically developing Singapore further. People with special qualities. The question is - what is this system and how is it used?
question 3. In the same book, a point related to water use caught my attention. Lee Kwang Yew cites figures that at the time of the emergence of modern Singapore - even before unification with Malaya, about 100 ml of precipitation fell there per year. And by the 80s - already up to 1000. How can this be? The rains are not associated with any human activity in this particular place? Or did it seem to me? Can you see the dynamics of precipitation over decades? If this is true, how does it come about? You see, I don't know if the answers to these questions will be of interest to the general reader. It will be very interesting to me.
Let me show you what I found about this ...
About the employee testing system SHELL I did not find anything, I think this is somewhat confidential information and is not being disseminated. But it is strange that I did not find statistics on civil servants in Singapore over the years. Who will help?
But what is there ...
Question 1 and question 2.Civil Service in Singapore
The Singapore civil service was formally formed in 1955, but in fact, its history begins with the founding of Singapore by the British in 1819. The acquisition of local self-government rights within the framework of the British Colonial Empire, the acquisition of independence in 1965 did not entail significant changes in the organization of the civil service. Some significant changes took place after 1990, when the first regime of the prime minister, Li, was replaced by a new, democratically created one. Initially, the civil service was small in number and performed routine management functions traditionally characteristic of any civil service.
The civil service includes: the service of the president, the prime minister, 14 ministries and 26 standing committees. The number of employees working in 15 ministries (counting the office of the prime minister) is 65,000, and in committees - 49,000. These committees are characterized as autonomous state agencies created in accordance with parliamentary acts to carry out certain functions. They are not subject to the legal privileges of government ministries, but they are more independent and flexible. As they are the past civil service, the recruitment and promotion of these committees is not handled by the Civil Service Commission, but they have different terms and conditions of service. Their accounts are audited by the Auditor General of Singapore. Standing committees have helped to reduce the workload of the civil service.
Starting in the second half of the 1980s, the Singapore government began to work on the "quality" of the bureaucracy. The incentive to commit corrupt acts among government officials and political leaders has been reduced by providing them with salaries and additional benefits comparable to those of the private sector. However, the government may be unable to raise wages if there is no economic growth. However, the consequences of low wages in the public sector will be unfavorable, as talented civil servants leave to work in private companies, while those less capable stay and engage in corrupt practices to compensate for low wages.
Reporting to parliament in 1985 on the justification of the costs of maintaining the apparatus, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew said: “I am one of the highest paid and probably one of the poorest prime ministers of the Third World countries ... There are different ways of solutions. I propose our way in the framework of a market economy, which is honest, open, justifiable and feasible. If you choose hypocrisy over it, you will face duplicity and corruption. Make a choice. "
Officials were seriously raised their salaries (in the future, this was done every few years), which should have kept them from taking bribes. Now the salaries of the country's top officials are calculated depending on the average earnings in business and reach $ 20-25 thousand per month. Both parliamentarians and the population received this initiative with distrust, but Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew publicly justified its expediency.
He explained that the government needs professionals in their field, so they are paid wages close to their market value. It would be unrealistic to expect talented individuals to sacrifice their careers and families for years to come to meet the demands of an often overlooked public.
If Singapore did not get the best talent at the disposal of the highest political power, it would end up with mediocre governments, unsatisfactory monetary policy, and corruption.
As a result, the Government succeeded in overcoming the notion inherited from the past that civil servants should receive modest salaries, that their position, status and influence are in themselves more than sufficient remuneration. The idea of public service, associated with significant restrictions and the possibility of loss in personal income, with all its external nobility, is fraught with negative consequences.
It does not allow worthy people to hold positions in the state apparatus for a long time and plan their activities for the long term. The principle of continuity in the performance of official duties, which has always been a strong point of many governments of Eastern states, is being violated. Government agencies are limited in their ability to successfully compete in the labor market for the best specialists, and to attract talented people from the private sector to government institutions. The emergence of numerous corruption schemes in order to obtain additional income is inevitable. Cheap government and low-paid employees have destroyed more than one state.
The logic for solving these problems turned out to be quite simple. Political leaders and officials are entitled to receive adequate remuneration, depending on the importance of their position and the results obtained. Their income should be comparable to the salaries of managers of the corresponding level in other areas of activity. These are prerequisites for an honest, incorruptible and effective government.
Therefore, as the economic situation improved and the country reached a steady pace of development, the salary of employees began to increase every few years, and the constant growth of the economy by 7-10% per year for several decades made it possible to switch to a new system of remuneration. It automatically links the wages of employees with the wages of workers of comparable rank in the private sector, increasing or decreasing it depending on the income of entrepreneurs. The salaries of representatives of the public sector are set at the level of 2/3 of the income of workers in the private sector.
Being in captivity of direct causal links, some “great” civil service reformers in other countries, referring to this experience, reduce the number of goals of anti-corruption reform to increasing the salaries of officials. Although it is clear that high employee earnings were not a precondition, but the result of Singapore's colossal historical leap forward in its rapid and sustainable development. Great goals can only be realized by extraordinary people with the help of unconventional approaches and solutions.
Let us refer to one more example, which to this day causes endless controversy in the political and scientific community. The very idea of the existence of an honest government, according to the leadership of Singapore, was undermined by the established practice of electing candidates for government posts. A careful study of the world experience of representative democracy made it possible to see its obvious shortcomings.
The competition of ideas and programs of candidates is often replaced by the competition of their money wallets. This kind of "commercial democracy", the high cost of elections is the bane of many European and Asian countries. It only discredits the government, dissipates public initiative and sets in motion a vicious circle of corruption. The funds spent on a successful election campaign have to be returned to the winners in the form of illegal government contracts and preferences, distribution of lucrative posts. Such people's representatives received the contemptuous nickname “ATMs”.
As a preventive measure, Singapore amended the country's constitution in 1990 and created an institution of appointed rather than elected members of parliament. This allowed well-known people in the country, possessing undoubted merit, independent views, to enter the parliament, to play a constructive role in thoughtful criticism of government policies and improving its activities.
Promotion and recruitment
At the state level in Singapore preaching principle of meritocracy ... First introduced as a principle by the British in 1951, meritocracy became widespread in 1959, when the country's leadership emphasized the dependence of career advancement on a person's ability.
The state identifies promising students at an early age, observes and encourages them throughout their studies. They receive scholarships to enter universities, some go abroad. In return, promising students pledge to work for the government for four to six years.
Thus, the best and most gifted enter the civil service, and government-related companies in Singapore have access to this stock of human resources. Indeed, some senior officials are board members of such companies and may be recruited to work for them on a permanent basis.
Two special government committees are actively looking for talents, employing all professionals, successful entrepreneurs, people of creative professions, highly skilled workers and solving their social problems. At the same time, they organized a systematic search for talented youth around the world.
The Singapore Embassies in the UK, USA, Australia, New Zealand and Canada are organizing numerous meetings with Asian students to get them interested in getting a job in Singapore. Widely used green harvest tactics , which American companies invented by offering students a job even before the final exams, based on the results of their current academic performance.
Several hundred scholarships are awarded annually to the best students from India, China and other countries of Southeast Asia with the hope of their subsequent employment in Singapore or its companies abroad. As a result of active recruitment, the influx of specialists was three times higher than the “brain drain”. Singapore attracts them with a high level of development and quality of life, prospects for a successful career, the ability to easily assimilate into its Asian society.
Thousands of talented engineers, managers and other professionals who arrived from overseas contributed to the development of Singapore, helped it to become a prosperous society and get into the top league of states in the world.
The rate of the leadership of independent Singapore on the principles of meritocracy and canons Confucian ethics in the formation of the foundations of the state mechanism was not accidental. The most valuable asset of any government is the trust of the people. Everyone was well aware of the numerous examples of ineffective governments and corruption in the highest echelons of power in individual Asian countries, which caused the decline of these states. For this reason, concern for the efficient use of human capital based on talent and merit, the introduction of a transparent and credible system of personnel appointments, combined with a well-functioning system of genuine responsibility of officials, made deep sense.
The political and administrative elite are called upon to set high standards of management skills, to show the way by their own example, in order to ensure the development of the country and withstand international competition. Much later, Lee Kuan Yew wrote in his memoirs that it is easy to start by preaching high moral principles, firm convictions and the best intentions to eradicate corruption, but living in accordance with these good intentions is difficult. Especially in a society where corruption was one of the features of the traditional way of life. This requires strong leaders and the determination to deal with all perpetrators without exception.
For most of Singapore's first generation of leaders, “being honest and incorruptible” was a habit and a norm. They had an excellent education, a decent and stable financial position and did not go to power in order to get rich. Their personal impeccability created a new moral climate in society. Public opinion began to view corruption as a threat to the successful development of society and the authority of the state in the international arena. However, the famous American political scientist S. Huntington, in his book Political Order in Changing Societies (1968), not without reason, noted that political institutions do not take shape overnight. This is a slow process, especially compared to the more dynamic process of economic development. In some cases, certain types of experience can be actively transformed under the influence of time, acute conflicts and other serious trials. Therefore, one of the indicators of the level of institutionalization of an organization is its age.
"As long as the first generation of leaders remains at the head of the organization, the procedure is carried out by its initiators, the adaptability of the organization remains in doubt." It is interesting that it was Huntington who later became one of the first critics of the Singaporean model. The honesty and efficiency that Senior Minister Lee instilled in Singapore is likely to follow him to his grave, he said.
In certain circumstances, authoritarianism can produce good results over a short period of time. But experience clearly shows that only democracy can ensure good government remains in power in the long run. The political leadership of Singapore has successfully crossed this milestone. The followers proved to be worthy of their predecessors.
The efficiency of the state apparatus
Singapore's civil service is considered one of the most efficient in Asia. The total number of civil servants is 65,000. The services of the President and the Prime Minister, 14 ministries and 26 standing committees are staffed with excellently trained and educated personnel.
This is achieved by career advancement solely on the basis of human abilities, modern material and technical support of official activities, strict discipline and diligence of officials, their assertiveness and constant striving for excellence. The task of continuous improvement of the quality of work is solved through comprehensive instructions, clear and transparent administrative procedures, careful planning of activities, anticipation of potential administrative problems and elimination of their causes.
For this, each ministry has a department for improving the quality of work, modern information technologies are being actively introduced.
Already today, citizens of Singapore, without leaving their home computer, can receive more than two thousand names of government services within half an hour.
The desire of each employee to achieve specific results is supported by strict work standards and a special system of criteria for evaluating their performance.
Fighting corruption, like meritocracy (merit promotion to key positions), multinational politics and pragmatism, is one of the key factors in Singapore's economic success. Tough laws, adequate salaries for ministers and civil servants, punishment of corrupt officials, effective functioning of the anti-corruption agency, personal examples of senior executives - all these facts make up the anti-corruption program of Singapore. Thus, the success of this state is the result of persistent work to combat corruption in all spheres of life.
An important principle of the organization of the public service in Singapore is the desire of officials to meet the needs of society.
Civil servants of Singapore are obliged to be sensitive to the complaints of the population and to listen to its requests, which come in the form of letters to newspapers and magazines, by e-mail, on television and radio channels, and speak out at annual meetings with the people. In turn, having read the complaint, the official is obliged to give a full answer within a few days after publication, otherwise he will be held accountable.
The following principles are pragmatism and applying the most effective methods, i.e. the Singaporean civil service only recognizes laws that are practically beneficial.
Singapore demonstrates a pragmatism in wanting to learn the most effective working methods from other countries and large companies. Singapore has studied and adopted the experience of government services in Japan and France. The practice of learning the best working methods is applied all the time and everywhere. Singapore promotes the concept of continuing education and training for civil servants.
Public Service of Singapore neutral and not involved in politics... This tradition of neutrality has been inherited from the British and allows for the continuity of the civil service in times of political change. Neutrality has nothing to do with the task of pursuing government policy, but at the same time does not imply a decrease in the quality of services provided when serving the population. The civil service must act fairly, impartially and constantly strive to achieve the goals facing the state, while clearly understanding what the national interests of the country are.
Principle - reform capacity - characterized by the continuous reform of the Singapore Civil Service to improve its performance. Senior officials closely follow the emerging trends and innovations in the field of public administration in the developed countries of the world, analyze them and implement the most worthwhile ideas and methods, taking into account the political, economic, social, parameters of the country. Top-level civil servants put in the first place the need to reform the outlook of officials towards the perception of reforms, making them interested in changes and in achieving their goals. Only after this can we proceed to reforming the civil service. It should not be forgotten, however, that simply setting goals will not yield results without constant monitoring of the change process.
In the public service of Singapore personnel training plays a very important role, passing into tradition and rooted in the Institute for the training of civil service personnel, founded in 1971. The Civil Service College was opened in 1993 with the aim of training senior officials. Educational institutions strive to teach officials five basic skills: to provide the highest quality of service; manage change; work with people; manage operations and resources; manage yourself. The civil service has set a goal - each official must complete 100 hours of training per year. The civil service plays a central role in shaping and revising personnel management policies and decides on appointments and the training and performance appraisal of government officials.
Along with the principles, the properties on which the public service of Singapore is based should also be considered:
1) system analysis in solving complex problems;
2) systematic innovation and performance improvement;
3) a high level of computerization;
4) a constant search for ways to improve the performance of organizations: new ideas are constantly being implemented related to cost analysis and increasing profitability;
5) appointment of young, promising, capable and achieving high results officials to very high positions;
6) emphasis on improving the quality of service to the population;
7) conducting discussions, in which officials and their bosses take part, defining and revising tasks, discussing ways to achieve the intended goals;
8) appointing senior officials to serve on the boards of government-controlled companies to help them understand the needs of the private sector and gain valuable experience;
9) encouragement of innovation and creativity;
10) the principle of public accountability and maintaining "transparency".
Thus, the high efficiency and effectiveness of the public service in Singapore is the result of strict discipline, hard work and assertiveness of officials, their professionalism and excellent training; recruiting the most capable candidates based on the principle of meritocracy, low levels of corruption, high demands from the country's political leaders, relentless striving for excellence and achieving concrete results.
Question 3. The amount of precipitation in Singapore.
Although the rise in sea levels caused by global warming will seriously threaten Singapore only in 50-100 years, the island nation has already begun to prepare for a "global flood." Lee Kuan Yew, a former prime minister and founding father of Singapore and now a mentor in the Lion City government, said the cabinet has already contacted the Netherlands to study in detail the techniques for large-scale dam construction. “We start learning now because it will be too late by the time the waters rise,” he said.
According to expert estimates, the already observed melting of glaciers can lead to an increase in the water level in the World Ocean by the end of the century by at least 18 cm (which Singapore can survive), and a maximum of six meters, which would create serious problems for the island state, the newspaper notes. It is possible that the time given to Singapore by fate is running out.
Neighboring Indonesia has already begun to feel the effects of global climate change.
A study conducted by the country's National Directorate of Meteorology and Geophysics (NUMG) showed that during the 20th century, the climate in the largest archipelago of the planet became much rainy. So, over this century, in the area of the Special Capital District of Jakarta and the adjacent provinces of Banten and West Java, it began to receive 12% more precipitation. The weather became even rainier - by 17% - on the resort island of Bali, where now an average of 360 millimeters of precipitation falls every month. NUMG employees directly link this with the ongoing global warming caused by the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere as a result of human activity.
“This climate anomaly is a harbinger of (future) floods,” says NUMG secretary Andi Eka Sakya. As the State Minister for the Environment of Indonesia Rahmat Vitular said earlier, due to the rise in sea level in less than a quarter of a century - by 2030 - the world's largest archipelago may lose about 2 thousand islands.
Precipitation dynamics
Singaporean Ng Kok Lim wrote an open letter to parliament, arguing reasonably against the official point of view that the flooding was caused by an increase in precipitation.
Dear Dr. Balakrishnan.
I would like to comment on your replies in Parliament on January 9 this year regarding the flash floods on Orchard Road: app.mewr.gov.sg
You explained that the last three floods in the Orchard Road area (Google map) are part of a larger and more prolonged change in rainfall in Singapore. By charting Singapore's average hourly rainfall over the past 30 years, you and your expert team have concluded that Singapore is experiencing a continuous increase in rainfall.
If rainfall intensity is indeed to blame for the recent floods, then shouldn't there have been a much more powerful flood in 1995, with 145 mm of rainfall per hour, up from 130 mm per hour in 2010? Likewise, the average hourly intensity of precipitation in 2007 was 135 mm, which is also more than in 2010. And in 2007, there were no major floods on Orchard Road.
Despite the fact that your graph of precipitation changes is quite steep, in reality, the numbers show that over 11 years (from 1987 to 1998) the amount of precipitation has increased by only 10 mm, which is less than 1 mm per year. Are you claiming that one extra millimeter of rainfall between 2009 and 2010 resulted in the catastrophic 2010 floods? It is not enough to plot a trend line to conclude that we are facing an increase in precipitation intensity. What is the statistical value of such a line? Is there a correlation between the intensity of precipitation and the year?
You asked parliament to agree that similar hurricanes await us in the future, with the same consequences as in the recent three episodes. But have we had other similar situations in history? Your position would be more solid if you could show that the last three episodes have been unique to the Orchard Road area over the past 30 years.
Your conclusions are based on the fact that the weather has changed. There is nothing better than blaming the weather. In reality, while the weather in Singapore can suddenly change during the day, the overall trend does not change from year to year. The weather in 2009 was the same as in 2010, but in 2010 we had powerful floods, and in 2009 there were none at all. I believe that the reason for such sudden changes can only be human activity.
And what else have we read about Singapore: as well as. Well and after The original article is on the site InfoGlaz.rf The link to the article this copy was made from is
The Singapore civil service was formally formed in 1955, but in fact, its history begins with the founding of Singapore by the British in 1819. The acquisition of local self-government rights within the framework of the British Colonial Empire, the acquisition of independence in 1965 did not entail significant changes in the organization of the civil service. Some significant changes took place after 1990, when Prime Minister Lee's first regime was replaced by a new, democratically created one. Initially, the civil service was small in number and performed routine management functions traditionally characteristic of any civil service.
The civil service includes: the service of the president, the prime minister, 14 ministries and 26 standing committees. The number of employees working in 14 ministries (15 if you count the office of the prime minister) is 65,000, and in committees - 49,000. These committees are characterized as autonomous government agencies, created by acts of parliament to carry out specific functions. They are not subject to the legal privileges of government ministries, but they are more independent and flexible. As they are the past civil service, the recruitment and promotion of these committees is not handled by the Civil Service Commission, but they have different terms and conditions of service. Their accounts are audited by the Auditor General of Singapore. Standing committees have helped to reduce the workload of the civil service.
There are 10 principles at the heart of the Singapore civil service. The success and excellence of the Singaporean civil service lies in how these principles and practices are integrated into a single package, which is then intensively and carefully applied and supported by appropriate resources, thoughtful planning, rigorous discipline and comprehensive instruction. Feedback and consistent implementation are important elements of the Singapore System.
First introduced as a principle by the British in 1951, meritocracy became widespread in 1959, when the country's leadership emphasized the dependence of career advancement on a person's ability. The state identifies promising students at an early age, observes and encourages them throughout their studies. They receive scholarships to enter universities, some go abroad. In return, promising students pledge to work for the government for four to six years, and some are lured into joining the Popular Action Party (MHP). During the 1991 general election, of the 11 new IPA candidates, 9 were from the public service and 2 from the private sector. During the 1997 general election, of 24 new candidates, 15 were from the public service and 9 from the private sector. Thus, the best and brightest enter the civil service, and the government-linked companies (GLCs) in Singapore have access to this stock of human resources. Indeed, some senior officials are board members of such companies and may be recruited to work for them on a permanent basis. The civil service is protected from political interference. Competitive salaries ensure that talented employees will not be tempted to work in the private sector. The most unusual thing about the Singapore meritocracy is that it extends to political leaders as well. There are many talented people in the government of Singapore. Under the first generation of leaders, the foundation of a good state was meritocracy.
A Singaporean employee can be described as follows: honest, competent, efficient, well paid, but constantly under stress. Computerization has helped reduce the number of employees. Another limiting factor is the fact that job offers must be substantiated.
There is a shared ideal of integrity in the public service in Singapore. Strict laws and regulations, as well as strict disciplinary measures from the Civil Service Commission and the Bureau of Corruption Investigation, discourage engaging in corruption-related activities. The personal example of political leaders and high-ranking officials also sets the tone for others to follow. Since 1959, the MHP government has emphasized the need to combat corruption in order to achieve the national development goal. The government has resolved issues related to the causes of corruption and the possibilities for its occurrence. It started by strengthening the law on corruption. In 1960, the Corruption Investigation Bureau was established. This bureau was empowered to make arrests, searches, check bank accounts and property of suspects. Singapore is considered one of the least corrupt countries.
Singapore's civil service is considered one of the most efficient in Asia. This efficiency is the result of strict discipline, assertiveness and diligence of officials, low levels of corruption, recruiting the most talented candidates based on the principles of meritocracy, excellent preparation, regular campaigns whose goal is to improve the quality of services provided; high demands from the political leaders of the country, relentless pursuit of excellence. Officials are provided with the necessary equipment, computers, and even air conditioners necessary in the hot and humid climate of Singapore. The effectiveness of government policy implementation is also related to the small size of the country; careful planning and anticipation of those problems that may arise in the future; the country's government has a good reputation that has been earned over the years and makes it even more legitimate to be in power; providing adequate resources; public support sought through educational activities and publicity; the discipline of a people who take tough but necessary measures, such as strict conditions that must be met in order to purchase and use a car. The effectiveness and efficiency of the public service is also explained by the desire to achieve concrete results.
The public service is sensitive to complaints from the population and listens to their requests, which come in the form of letters to newspapers and magazines, expressed at meetings with voters, or directly to ministers and members of parliament who hold weekly "meetings with the people" and also bypass their electoral districts. In addition, e-mail, television and radio channels can be used for citizens' appeals. Each ministry has a department for improving the quality of work. Officials are taught to be polite and responsive to the needs of the community. Ministers read complaints published in the press, and officials are required to fully respond to such letters within days of publication. The population is now educated and expects a lot from the civil service. Since the salaries of government officials are calculated on a market basis, their services must be of no less quality than those provided by the private sector.
The civil service is neutral and not involved in politics. Civil servants are not allowed to go on strike, as their work is considered a vital service. This tradition of neutrality has been inherited from the British and allows for the continuity of the civil service during times of political change. Neutrality does not imply a decrease in the quality of services provided or a decrease in commitment to serving the public. Neutrality also does not lead to a loss of assertiveness in pursuit of the goals of the state. In its work for the good of society, the public service must act fairly and impartially, but neutrality has nothing to do with the task of conducting government policy: the implementation of government policies must be decisive, effective and scrupulous. The civil service must clearly understand what the national interests of the country are.
There is a training tradition in the civil service that has its origins in the Civil Service Training Institute, which was founded in March 1971, just six years after independence. The Civil Service College was opened in 1993 with the aim of training senior officials. Currently, each official is required to complete 100 man-hours of training per year. Two training institutes were renamed: the GCI was replaced by the Institute of Public Administration and Management, while the Institute for Policy Development replaced the CGS. The Institute of Public Administration and Management provides the following courses: initial training of officials who have recently started working in the civil service; basic and advanced vocational skills training and, in addition, enriched training and continuing education. The Institute strives to teach officials five core skills: the ability to provide the highest quality service; ability to manage change; skills of working with people; operations and resource management; the ability to control oneself. The Civil Service Advisory Group helps organizations in the public sector to implement change and improve the performance of the civil service. Together, the Civil Service Commission, Human Resources Group, Policy Development Institute, Civil Service Advisory Group, and IGUM provide the ongoing education and training that officials need. The civil service has set a goal - by the year 2000, every official must complete at least 100 hours of training per year. The Civil Service College, with the assistance of the Institute for Policy Development and the Institute of Public Administration and Management, will continually revise its curriculum to help create the conditions necessary for government and community initiatives. Relations will be established with foreign state institutions and services, which will allow to use the experience of public services around the world, to receive information related to education and training. In addition, the College of Civil Service will offer special courses to help educate government officials in the skills needed to operate in an increasingly demanding society. Moreover, the civil service unit plays a central role in shaping and revising HR policies and decides on appointments, training and performance appraisals for government officials.
Singapore is one of the few countries that uses market-based methods in calculating the salaries of ministers and officials. Therefore, the salaries are quite large. Established standards for the work of ministers and senior government officials. In essence, they boil down to the following: attracting talented people to work in the civil service and at all levels of government, as well as their retraining; reducing the number of factors that stimulate dishonesty and corruption; pursuing a policy of transparency when there are no hidden benefits and privileges such as providing housing, a car, receiving commissions or bribes. The salary of the Prime Minister of Singapore is S $ 1.9 million and is one of the highest.
The main characteristics of the modern civil service in Singapore are:
Striving to involve groups of specialists in systems analysis in solving complex problems;
Constant pursuit of innovation and productivity. To this end, programs such as performance improvement groups, quality control circles, the 21st Century Civil Service program, and a fund to support innovative ideas have been established. Civil servants are assessed according to their degree of participation in such programs;
High level of computerization. The civil service computerization program began in 1981 and ended in 1991. The cost of the program was $ 61 million.
Continuous search for ways to increase the productivity of organizations: new ideas are constantly being implemented related to cost analysis and increasing profitability. An example is the budget planning and programming system, efficient use of the budget, decentralization carried out in April 1996 (14 government agencies became autonomous). Ministries' budgets are allocated according to the macro-incremental factor, a formula that controls public sector spending in line with GDP growth. This reminds ministers to control costs and increase productivity.
Appointment of young officials to very high positions.
The emphasis on improving the quality of service to the population, which is contained in the "Public Service of the 21st Century" program, which sets clear goals for each stage of its implementation. One of the goals is not to make visitors wait for service for more than 15-20 minutes. The Service Improvement Unit, attached to the Prime Minister's Office, monitors the quality of service. Each ministry has its own department in charge of service issues. The overall quality of service is monitored by the Political Audit Council, chaired by a minister. Service Improvement also focuses on minimizing red tape and unnecessary rules.
Appointment of senior officials to serve on the boards of government-controlled companies. This practice helps them "plunge" into the problems and needs of the private sector. In this way, officials gain useful experience. They receive very little remuneration for this work. There are rules to prevent the emergence of a conflict of interest, as well as to ensure the loyalty of officials, primarily the state. Ministers are not allowed to hold the office of directors of public companies, actively participate in any public work, have any relation (formally or as a consultant) to commercial enterprises, or receive any remuneration from them without the permission of the Prime Minister.
1 question: As far as I understand, the free market in Singapore is largely government-controlled. At least in those areas that provide "basic needs" - housing, medicine, basic education. Those are a complete rejection of libertarianism ("everything is decided by the Market"), the economy is semi-socialist. How is it that it remains effective? How has the size of the administrative bureaucracy changed during the existence of Singapore, and how, acting in accordance with Parkinson's Law, has not yet suppressed the message of the free market with its desire to administer EVERYTHING?
2 question. Lee Kwang Yew was guided by the following when selecting his team: “I came to the conclusion that one of the best systems was developed and implemented in the Anglo-Dutch oil company Shell. Basically, they focused on what they called the currently estimated potential of a person. This assessment was determined by three factors: the person's ability to
analysis, the development of imagination, the presence of common sense. Together, they compiled an integrated metric, which Shell called "helicopter vision", which reflected a person's ability to see facts and problems in a larger context, while highlighting critical details. "
Lee Kuan Yew writes this. He was faced with the problem of replacing aging ministers with people capable of dynamically developing Singapore further. People with special qualities. The question is - what is this system and how is it used?
The Singapore civil service was formally formed in 1955, but in fact, its history begins with the founding of Singapore by the British in 1819. The acquisition of local self-government rights within the framework of the British Colonial Empire, the acquisition of independence in 1965 did not entail significant changes in the organization of the civil service. Some significant changes took place after 1990, when the first regime of the prime minister, Li, was replaced by a new, democratically created one. Initially, the civil service was small in number and performed routine management functions traditionally characteristic of any civil service.
The civil service includes: the service of the president, the prime minister, 14 ministries and 26 standing committees. The number of employees working in 15 ministries (counting the office of the prime minister) is 65,000, and in committees - 49,000. These committees are characterized as autonomous state agencies created in accordance with parliamentary acts to carry out certain functions. They are not subject to the legal privileges of government ministries, but they are more independent and flexible. As they are the past civil service, the recruitment and promotion of these committees is not handled by the Civil Service Commission, but they have different terms and conditions of service. Their accounts are audited by the Auditor General of Singapore. Standing committees have helped to reduce the workload of the civil service.
Starting in the second half of the 1980s, the Singapore government began to work on the "quality" of the bureaucracy. The incentive to commit corrupt acts among government officials and political leaders has been reduced by providing them with salaries and additional benefits comparable to those of the private sector. However, the government may be unable to raise wages if there is no economic growth. However, the consequences of low wages in the public sector will be unfavorable, as talented civil servants leave to work in private companies, while those less capable stay and engage in corrupt practices to compensate for low wages.
Reporting to parliament in 1985 on the justification of the costs of maintaining the apparatus, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew said: “I am one of the highest paid and probably one of the poorest prime ministers of the Third World countries ... There are different ways of solutions. I propose our way in the framework of a market economy, which is honest, open, justifiable and feasible. If you choose hypocrisy over it, you will face duplicity and corruption. Make a choice. "
Officials were seriously raised their salaries (in the future, this was done every few years), which should have kept them from taking bribes. Now the salaries of the country's top officials are calculated depending on the average earnings in business and reach $ 20-25 thousand per month. Both parliamentarians and the population received this initiative with distrust, but Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew publicly justified its expediency.
He explained that the government needs professionals in their field, so they are paid wages close to their market value. It would be unrealistic to expect talented individuals to sacrifice their careers and families for years to come to meet the demands of an often overlooked public.
If Singapore did not get the best talent at the disposal of the highest political power, it would end up with mediocre governments, unsatisfactory monetary policy, and corruption.
As a result, the Government succeeded in overcoming the notion inherited from the past that civil servants should receive modest salaries, that their position, status and influence are in themselves more than sufficient remuneration. The idea of public service, associated with significant restrictions and the possibility of loss in personal income, with all its external nobility, is fraught with negative consequences.
It does not allow worthy people to hold positions in the state apparatus for a long time and plan their activities for the long term. The principle of continuity in the performance of official duties, which has always been a strong point of many governments of Eastern states, is being violated. Government agencies are limited in their ability to successfully compete in the labor market for the best specialists, and to attract talented people from the private sector to government institutions. The emergence of numerous corruption schemes in order to obtain additional income is inevitable. Cheap government and low-paid employees have destroyed more than one state.
The logic for solving these problems turned out to be quite simple. Political leaders and officials are entitled to receive adequate remuneration, depending on the importance of their position and the results obtained. Their income should be comparable to the salaries of managers of the corresponding level in other areas of activity. These are prerequisites for an honest, incorruptible and effective government.
Therefore, as the economic situation improved and the country reached a steady pace of development, salaries of employees began to increase every few years, and the constant economic growth of 7-10% per year for several decades made it possible to switch to a new system of remuneration. It automatically links the wages of employees with the wages of workers of comparable rank in the private sector, increasing or decreasing it depending on the income of entrepreneurs. The salaries of representatives of the public sector are set at the level of 2/3 of the income of workers in the private sector.
Being in captivity of direct causal links, some “great” civil service reformers in other countries, referring to this experience, reduce the number of goals of anti-corruption reform to increasing the salaries of officials. Although it is clear that high employee earnings were not a precondition, but the result of Singapore's colossal historical leap forward in its rapid and sustainable development. Great goals can only be realized by extraordinary people with the help of unconventional approaches and solutions.
Let us refer to one more example, which to this day causes endless controversy in the political and scientific community. The very idea of the existence of an honest government, according to the leadership of Singapore, was undermined by the established practice of electing candidates for government posts. A careful study of the world experience of representative democracy made it possible to see its obvious shortcomings.
The competition of ideas and programs of candidates is often replaced by the competition of their money wallets. This kind of "commercial democracy", the high cost of elections is the bane of many European and Asian countries. It only discredits the government, dissipates public initiative and sets in motion a vicious circle of corruption. The funds spent on a successful election campaign have to be returned to the winners in the form of illegal government contracts and preferences, distribution of lucrative posts. Such people's representatives received the contemptuous nickname “ATMs”.
As a preventive measure, Singapore amended the country's constitution in 1990 and created an institution of appointed rather than elected members of parliament. This allowed well-known people in the country, possessing undoubted merit, independent views, to enter the parliament, to play a constructive role in thoughtful criticism of government policies and improving its activities.
Promotion and recruitment
At the state level in Singapore preaching principle of meritocracy ... First introduced as a principle by the British in 1951, meritocracy became widespread in 1959, when the country's leadership emphasized the dependence of career advancement on a person's ability.
The state identifies promising students at an early age, observes and encourages them throughout their studies. They receive scholarships to enter universities, some go abroad. In return, promising students pledge to work for the government for four to six years.
Thus, the best and most gifted enter the civil service, and government-related companies in Singapore have access to this stock of human resources. Indeed, some senior officials are board members of such companies and may be recruited to work for them on a permanent basis.
Two special government committees are actively looking for talents, employing all professionals, successful entrepreneurs, people of creative professions, highly skilled workers and solving their social problems. At the same time, they organized a systematic search for talented youth around the world.
The Singapore Embassies in the UK, USA, Australia, New Zealand and Canada are organizing numerous meetings with Asian students to get them interested in getting a job in Singapore. Widely used green harvest tactics , which American companies invented by offering students a job even before the final exams, based on the results of their current academic performance.
Several hundred scholarships are awarded annually to the best students from India, China and other countries of Southeast Asia with the hope of their subsequent employment in Singapore or its companies abroad. As a result of active recruitment, the influx of specialists was three times higher than the “brain drain”. Singapore attracts them with a high level of development and quality of life, prospects for a successful career, the ability to easily assimilate into its Asian society.
Thousands of talented engineers, managers and other professionals who arrived from overseas contributed to the development of Singapore, helped it to become a prosperous society and get into the top league of states in the world.
The rate of the leadership of independent Singapore on the principles of meritocracy and canons Confucian ethics in the formation of the foundations of the state mechanism was not accidental. The most valuable asset of any government is the trust of the people. Everyone was well aware of the numerous examples of ineffective governments and corruption in the highest echelons of power in individual Asian countries, which caused the decline of these states. For this reason, concern for the efficient use of human capital based on talent and merit, the introduction of a transparent and credible system of personnel appointments, combined with a well-functioning system of genuine responsibility of officials, made deep sense.
The political and administrative elite are called upon to set high standards of management skills, to show the way by their own example, in order to ensure the development of the country and withstand international competition. Much later, Lee Kuan Yew wrote in his memoirs that it is easy to start by preaching high moral principles, firm convictions and the best intentions to eradicate corruption, but living in accordance with these good intentions is difficult. Especially in a society where corruption was one of the features of the traditional way of life. This requires strong leaders and the determination to deal with all perpetrators without exception.
For most of Singapore's first generation of leaders, “being honest and incorruptible” was a habit and a norm. They had an excellent education, a decent and stable financial position and did not go to power in order to get rich. Their personal impeccability created a new moral climate in society. Public opinion began to view corruption as a threat to the successful development of society and the authority of the state in the international arena. However, the famous American political scientist S. Huntington, in his book Political Order in Changing Societies (1968), not without reason, noted that political institutions do not take shape overnight. This is a slow process, especially compared to the more dynamic process of economic development. In some cases, certain types of experience can be actively transformed under the influence of time, acute conflicts and other serious trials. Therefore, one of the indicators of the level of institutionalization of an organization is its age.
"As long as the first generation of leaders remains at the head of the organization, the procedure is carried out by its initiators, the adaptability of the organization remains in doubt." It is interesting that it was Huntington who later became one of the first critics of the Singaporean model. The honesty and efficiency that Senior Minister Lee instilled in Singapore is likely to follow him to his grave, he said.
In certain circumstances, authoritarianism can produce good results over a short period of time. But experience clearly shows that only democracy can ensure good government remains in power in the long run. The political leadership of Singapore has successfully crossed this milestone. The followers proved to be worthy of their predecessors.
The efficiency of the state apparatus
Singapore's civil service is considered one of the most efficient in Asia. The total number of civil servants is 65,000. The services of the President and the Prime Minister, 14 ministries and 26 standing committees are staffed with excellently trained and educated personnel.
This is achieved by career advancement solely on the basis of human abilities, modern material and technical support of official activities, strict discipline and diligence of officials, their assertiveness and constant striving for excellence. The task of continuous improvement of the quality of work is solved through comprehensive instructions, clear and transparent administrative procedures, careful planning of activities, anticipation of potential administrative problems and elimination of their causes.
For this, each ministry has a department for improving the quality of work, modern information technologies are being actively introduced.
Already today, citizens of Singapore, without leaving their home computer, can receive more than two thousand names of government services within half an hour.
The desire of each employee to achieve specific results is supported by strict work standards and a special system of criteria for evaluating their performance.
Fighting corruption, like meritocracy (merit promotion to key positions), multinational politics and pragmatism, is one of the key factors in Singapore's economic success. Tough laws, adequate salaries for ministers and civil servants, punishment of corrupt officials, effective functioning of the anti-corruption agency, personal examples of senior executives - all these facts make up the anti-corruption program of Singapore. Thus, the success of this state is the result of persistent work to combat corruption in all spheres of life.
An important principle of the organization of the public service in Singapore is the desire of officials to meet the needs of society.
Civil servants of Singapore are obliged to be sensitive to the complaints of the population and to listen to its requests, which come in the form of letters to newspapers and magazines, by e-mail, on television and radio channels, and speak out at annual meetings with the people. In turn, having read the complaint, the official is obliged to give a full answer within a few days after publication, otherwise he will be held accountable.
The following principles are pragmatism and applying the most effective methods, i.e. the Singaporean civil service only recognizes laws that are practically beneficial.
Singapore demonstrates a pragmatism in wanting to learn the most effective working methods from other countries and large companies. Singapore has studied and adopted the experience of government services in Japan and France. The practice of learning the best working methods is applied all the time and everywhere. Singapore promotes the concept of continuing education and training for civil servants.
Public Service of Singapore neutral and not involved in politics... This tradition of neutrality has been inherited from the British and allows for the continuity of the civil service in times of political change. Neutrality has nothing to do with the task of pursuing government policy, but at the same time does not imply a decrease in the quality of services provided when serving the population. The civil service must act fairly, impartially and constantly strive to achieve the goals facing the state, while clearly understanding what the national interests of the country are.
Principle - reform capacity - characterized by the continuous reform of the Singapore Civil Service to improve its performance. Senior officials closely follow the emerging trends and innovations in the field of public administration in the developed countries of the world, analyze them and implement the most worthwhile ideas and methods, taking into account the political, economic, social, parameters of the country. Top-level civil servants put in the first place the need to reform the outlook of officials towards the perception of reforms, making them interested in changes and in achieving their goals. Only after this can we proceed to reforming the civil service. It should not be forgotten, however, that simply setting goals will not yield results without constant monitoring of the change process.
In the public service of Singapore personnel training plays a very important role, passing into tradition and rooted in the Institute for the training of civil service personnel, founded in 1971. The Civil Service College was opened in 1993 with the aim of training senior officials. Educational institutions strive to teach officials five basic skills: to provide the highest quality of service; manage change; work with people; manage operations and resources; manage yourself. The civil service has set a goal - each official must complete 100 hours of training per year. The civil service plays a central role in shaping and revising personnel management policies and decides on appointments and the training and performance appraisal of government officials.
Along with the principles, the properties on which the public service of Singapore is based should also be considered:
1) system analysis in solving complex problems;
2) systematic innovation and performance improvement;
3) a high level of computerization;
4) a constant search for ways to improve the performance of organizations: new ideas are constantly being implemented related to cost analysis and increasing profitability;
5) appointment of young, promising, capable and achieving high results officials to very high positions;
6) emphasis on improving the quality of service to the population;
7) conducting discussions, in which officials and their bosses take part, defining and revising tasks, discussing ways to achieve the intended goals;
8) appointing senior officials to serve on the boards of government-controlled companies to help them understand the needs of the private sector and gain valuable experience;
9) encouragement of innovation and creativity;
10) the principle of public accountability and maintaining "transparency".
Thus, the high efficiency and effectiveness of the public service in Singapore is the result of strict discipline, hard work and assertiveness of officials, their professionalism and excellent training; recruiting the most capable candidates based on the principle of meritocracy, low levels of corruption, high demands from the country's political leaders, relentless striving for excellence and achieving concrete results.
question 3. In the same book, a point related to water use caught my attention. Lee Kwang Yew cites figures that at the time of the emergence of modern Singapore - even before the unification with Malaya, about 100 ml of precipitation fell there per year. And by the 80s - already up to 1000. How can this be? The rains are not associated with any human activity in this particular place? Or did it seem to me? Can you see the dynamics of precipitation over decades? If this is true, how does it come about? You see, I don't know if the answers to these questions will be of interest to the general reader. It will be very interesting to me.
Although the rise in sea levels caused by global warming will seriously threaten Singapore only in 50-100 years, the island nation has already begun to prepare for a "global flood." Lee Kuan Yew, a former prime minister and founding father of Singapore and now a mentor in the Lion City government, said the cabinet has already contacted the Netherlands to study in detail the techniques for large-scale dam construction. “We start learning now because it will be too late by the time the waters rise,” he said.
According to expert estimates, the already observed melting of glaciers can lead to an increase in the water level in the World Ocean by the end of the century by at least 18 cm (which Singapore can survive), and a maximum of six meters, which would create serious problems for the island state, the newspaper notes. It is possible that the time given to Singapore by fate is running out.
Neighboring Indonesia has already begun to feel the effects of global climate change.
A study conducted by the country's National Directorate of Meteorology and Geophysics (NUMG) showed that during the 20th century, the climate in the largest archipelago of the planet became much rainy. So, over this century, in the area of the Special Capital District of Jakarta and the adjacent provinces of Banten and West Java, precipitation began to fall by 12% more. The weather became even rainier - by 17% - on the resort island of Bali, where now an average of 360 millimeters of precipitation falls every month. NUMG employees directly link this with the ongoing global warming caused by the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere as a result of human activity.
“This climate anomaly is a harbinger of (future) floods,” says NUMG secretary Andi Eka Sakya. As the State Minister for the Environment of Indonesia Rahmat Vitular said earlier, due to the rise in sea level in less than a quarter of a century - by 2030 - the world's largest archipelago may lose about 2 thousand islands.
Precipitation dynamics
Singaporean Ng Kok Lim wrote an open letter to parliament, arguing reasonably against the official point of view that the flooding was caused by an increase in precipitation.
Dear Dr. Balakrishnan.
I would like to comment on your replies in Parliament on January 9 this year regarding the flash floods on Orchard Road: app.mewr.gov.sg
You explained that the last three floods in the Orchard Road area (Google map) are part of a larger and more prolonged change in rainfall in Singapore. By charting Singapore's average hourly rainfall over the past 30 years, you and your expert team have concluded that Singapore is experiencing a continuous increase in rainfall.
If rainfall intensity is indeed to blame for the recent floods, then shouldn't there have been a much more powerful flood in 1995, with 145 mm of rainfall per hour, up from 130 mm per hour in 2010? Likewise, the average hourly intensity of precipitation in 2007 was 135 mm, which is also more than in 2010. And in 2007, there were no major floods on Orchard Road.
Despite the fact that your graph of precipitation changes is quite steep, in reality, the numbers show that over 11 years (from 1987 to 1998) the amount of precipitation has increased by only 10 mm, which is less than 1 mm per year. Are you claiming that one extra millimeter of rainfall between 2009 and 2010 resulted in the catastrophic 2010 floods? It is not enough to plot a trend line to conclude that we are facing an increase in precipitation intensity. What is the statistical value of such a line? Is there a correlation between the intensity of precipitation and the year?
You asked parliament to agree that similar hurricanes await us in the future, with the same consequences as in the recent three episodes. But have we had other similar situations in history? Your position would be more solid if you could show that the last three episodes have been unique to the Orchard Road area over the past 30 years.
Your conclusions are based on the fact that the weather has changed. There is nothing better than blaming the weather. In reality, while the weather in Singapore can suddenly change during the day, the overall trend does not change from year to year. The weather in 2009 was the same as in 2010, but in 2010 we had powerful floods, and in 2009 there were none at all. I believe that the reason for such sudden changes can only be human activity.
Elena Pavlovna YAKOVLEVA, Director of the Department of Budgetary Policy in the Sphere of Public Administration, Judicial System, State Civil Service of the Ministry of Finance of Russia, Honored Economist of the Russian Federation
The question of the optimal number of employees of government bodies 1 is always in the field of discussion, acquiring particular relevance during periods of economic downturns.
In the sphere of public administration, one of the ingrained myths is the unreasonably high proportion of civil servants in the employed population, its ability to self-growth. Is it really? What should be the number of government employees? What methods of managing this population can be used? To what extent can the number of staff be reduced without compromising the efficiency of the government? This publication is devoted to finding answers to these and other questions.
Analysis of the dynamics of the established number of civil servants shows that in the period from 2008 to 2016 inclusive, there is a steady downward trend (figure). Thus, in federal government bodies, the maximum number of civil servants has decreased by 10%, in government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation - by 9%, in municipal bodies - by 9%.
In world practice, the degree of bureaucratization of the economy is usually assessed by the number of civil servants per 10 thousand of the population. In Russia in 2016, this figure corresponds to 77 officials.
In scientific literature and publications, attempts are often made to compare Russia in terms of the number of officials per 10 thousand of the population with other countries. When making such comparisons, for the sake of objectivity, one should remember the existing intercountry institutional differences in the organization of public service, forms of government, take into account differences in the population of countries, etc. The estimated number of officials per 10 thousand of the population of Russia is lower than in many developed countries. So, for example, in the USA, Germany and Spain this indicator varied from 100 to 110 officials, while in Russia in 2011 it was 86 people. At the same time, in the Russian Federation, the indicator under consideration has a negative trend: from 2008 to 2016, the number of state civil and municipal employees per 10 thousand of the population decreased from 87 to 77 officials, or by 11% (table).
Considering the issues of optimizing the number of employees, one should note another significant indicator that has formed against the background of a decrease in the number of civil servants: the share of those employed in the near-public sector in Russia exceeds the national average (figure). This excess is explained, among other things, by the transfer of certain functions of state bodies to state corporations and institutions. The trend of the "overflow" of the number of employees from the state to the near-state sector reflects the need for the simultaneous implementation of optimization measures in these sectors.
Optimization campaigns
The reduction in the number of civil servants from 2011 to 2016 is due to the relevant decisions adopted by the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation. In 2011–2013, the number of federal state civil servants of federal executive authorities, whose activities are managed by the Government of the Russian Federation, decreased by 20% in general. Since 2016, the number of federal executive authorities has been reduced by another 10%. This method of reducing the number of employees of federal government agencies is usually called frontal, or mechanical, reduction in the number of employees of government agencies, which is not interconnected with their functions or workload.
The specified method is used in all countries, gaining popularity during periods of crisis and post-crisis phases of the economic cycle, when it is required to promptly achieve significant savings in budget expenditures in order to subsequently redirect it to the implementation of other socio-economic tasks of the state.
In the literature, the frontal method is often criticized. The possible negative consequences of its implementation usually include a decrease in the motivation of personnel (including highly efficient employees), an increase in the workload on the remaining employees, a decrease in the productivity of employees and, ultimately, the quality of performance of functions assigned to government agencies.
Such decisions can be implemented most effectively when the head of a state body applies the Pareto principle in the process of reducing the number of civil servants, according to which 20% of employees can give 80% of the result. Thus, with a reduction in the number of personnel, the task of the head of a state body is reduced to finding the most objective methods for identifying employees whose work results are significantly higher than the level of standardized requirements imposed on them.
This approach is consistent with current legislation. Thus, the Federal Law "On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation" and the Labor Code of the Russian Federation established that with a reduction in the number or staff of employees, the preferential right to fill a position is granted to an employee with a higher qualification, a longer length of service or work in a specialty and higher results professional activity.
Optimization of the number of employees of a government agency is a controlled process, which must be accompanied by adequate technology for its implementation. So, the practice of reducing the number of civil servants at the expense of replaced posts while maintaining vacancies in the state body is controversial. In a sense, such technologies have a negative impact on the state of the labor market as a whole.
In search of such a technology, the head of a government agency must remember that the ongoing crisis processes in the economy are the best time and opportunity for a comprehensive full reengineering of the staff structure and ongoing internal management processes. And in this vein, the reduction in the number of employees should become one of the tools, and the reduction of personnel costs should be the most important strategic task in the framework of change management, the key stage of which will be the painless transition of the body from the existing, often losing relevance of technological processes to more optimal ones.
Despite the fact that carrying out frontal reductions entails significant costs for compensation payments and does not significantly reduce personnel costs during the period of implementation of these decisions, the application of the method under consideration leads to savings in budget costs in the medium and long term.
In foreign practice, alternative methods are also used to optimize personnel costs, such as suspension of hiring ("freezing vacancies") and early retirement (Argentina), reduction of working hours, reduction of wages (Estonia, Slovenia, USA) and etc.
One of the variations of the frontal method for optimizing the number of employees in government agencies is the method used in a number of European countries. So, in Germany, since 1992, a decrease in the number of officials by 1.5% has been introduced annually by abolishing vacant rates after officials retire. As a result, over the next 13 years, it was possible to achieve a reduction of almost 20%. In France in 2007, according to media reports, the principle of "one for two" was discussed, according to which every two officials upon retirement should be replaced by only one.
Despite the fact that the practice of such a reduction in the number of employees of government agencies in Russia has not developed, the described approach deserves attention. It allows you to avoid massive one-time staff layoffs, minimizes the cost of compensation payments and reduces moral hazard. Measures for the automatic reduction of the number of government employees, developed in individual European countries, are characterized as proactive, consistent with the principles of strategic planning in the field of public administration.
Promising approaches
It is believed that proactivity is the basis of effective government policy in a particular industry, it allows you to predict and prevent negative trends in the pre-crisis phases of economic development, ensuring effective public administration in the long term. Proactive management of the number of government employees is characterized by the use of methods aimed at finding the optimal composition and functions of government employees. The most popular among such methods are institutional changes in the system and structure of government bodies and the regulation of the number of civil servants.
Institutional changes in the system and structure of government bodies involve the analysis and updating of the functions of government agencies, as a result of which the number of civil servants should decrease and (or) redistribute.
At the same time, in our opinion, attention should be focused not only on identifying signs of duplication of functions of federal state bodies, but also on deciding whether the analyzed activity of a state body belongs to the functions of the state. Thus, at various historical stages, the degree of state participation in the regulation of social relations changes. In particular, certain areas of these relations require closer attention from the state, while others are effectively self-regulating.
In Russia, measures to take inventory of the functions of federal executive bodies a priori accompanied the administrative reform. It is known that one of the key conclusions of the Government Commission for the Implementation of Administrative Reform, made as a result of the analysis of the functions of federal executive authorities, was the recognition of the need to introduce a classification and general principles for the distribution of functions of federal executive bodies. These provisions were enshrined in the decree of the President of the Russian Federation of March 9, 2004 No. 314 "On the system and structure of federal executive bodies". In accordance with this document, all functions of federal executive authorities are divided into functions for the adoption of regulatory legal acts, control and supervisory functions, functions for managing state property and providing public services.
It is also possible to classify according to the principles laid down in the decree the activities of civil servants filling positions in federal executive bodies.
Functional differences
The historical and modern experience of the development of civil service in foreign countries (Great Britain, France, Germany, the USA, etc.) suggests the division of the functions of civil servants into basic (proper state) and supporting ones.
The main (proper state) functions include the functions that have the following distinctive features: these functions are aimed at developing and implementing state policy and are associated with the adoption of managerial decisions that entail the emergence, change or termination of the relevant legal relationship.
Supporting functions do not possess such features, they are, in essence, technical, accompanying and are aimed at creating conditions for the uninterrupted and efficiently effective functioning of the state body. Examples of such functions can be: providing managers with the necessary information on the issues under consideration, office work, organizational and technical support, control over the execution of orders, registration, passage of documents, maintaining automated databases, interaction with organizations and business units, etc. In our opinion , this approach can be adapted in the Russian Federation.
At present, a significant part of the supporting functions is performed by federal state civil servants who fill positions in the category of “supporting specialists” (we will conventionally call this group “specialists performing supporting functions”). The share of specialists performing supporting functions, according to the Ministry of Finance of Russia, is about 20%.
At present, the specialists performing the supporting functions are endowed with the status of civil servants on an equal basis with those who make decisions on the development and implementation of state policy. At the same time, the legislation of the Russian Federation defines differences in the service rights and duties of civil servants who perform basic (actually state) and support functions. In particular, in accordance with the decree of the President of the Russian Federation of September 27, 2005 No. 1131 "On qualification requirements for the length of service in the state civil service (other types of public service) or work experience in the specialty for federal civil servants" qualification requirements for the length of service in the civil service ( civil service of other types) or work experience in the specialty for filling senior and junior positions in the federal state civil service are not required.
As a rule, there is no requirement to provide information about one's income, property and property obligations, as well as information about income, property and property obligations of a spouse and minor children for positions whose replacement is related to the performance of supporting functions.
Obviously, the values of these two types of functions (actually state and providing) in the system of the state civil service are significantly different, and these differences should be reflected in the legal status of the persons performing them, including the systems of motivation for their activities.
In our opinion, persons performing supporting functions can be excluded from the composition of civil servants. A change in the legal status of this category of persons can be made without a significant increase in federal budget expenditures on compensation payments, mainly due to staff turnover. This approach can be implemented, among other things, by excluding vacant posts of supporting specialists from the staffing table of the state body and hiring workers to perform supporting functions on the terms of an employment contract. In this case, the optimization of the number of civil servants can be made not at once, which occurs when
application of the frontal method, but will take a longer period.
In world practice, the supporting functions also include the functions of personnel records management, information support, transport services, building protection, maintenance and repair of premises occupied by state bodies, ensuring the economic activities of state bodies, etc. Such functions are centralized and transferred to specialized organizations that provide the listed services to the maximum number of public authorities. Such practices should not only lead to budget savings, but also contribute to the unification of the functions of civil servants. However, if such an approach is implemented, it will be necessary to rethink the very concept of "state civil service" as a professional activity aimed at performing state functions.
Taking into account the dynamics of the development of public relations in various spheres in order to determine the optimal need for the number of employees of a state body for the effective implementation of the state function, the balance of powers of state bodies and the number of employees performing them should be the subject of permanent observation.
Rationing technologies
Another tool for proactive management of the number of personnel can be the regulation of the number of employees of government agencies. Unified approaches to the standardization of the number of employees of state bodies are currently being developed by the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation.
Obviously, the rationing of the number of civil servants is based on a dynamic assessment of the labor productivity of civil servants and the calculation of labor costs for the performance of state functions by state bodies. For the correct calculation of labor costs, all functional areas of activity of civil servants are classified according to a single criterion. In the absence of a unified classification criterion, areas of functional activity can either be duplicated or not taken into account.
The functions of civil servants can be conditionally classified according to the purpose of carrying out activities, by defining methods for calculating labor costs for each type of function. According to this criterion, the functions of civil servants are divided into three groups.
The first group of functions of civil servants are management functions. The essence of these functions boils down to organizing the process of performing basic functions. The number of workers employed in their implementation is usually calculated on the basis of the standards of manageability, which is understood as the most optimal number of workers reporting to one manager.
The second group of functions includes functions for the direct implementation of the powers of a state body in the established area of activity (main functions). Conventionally, the main functions, according to the degree of their standardization, are divided into unique and regulated ones.
Regulated functions are functions that can be standardized (for example, conducting a tax audit, issuing a license to carry out a certain type of activity, etc.). For these functions, the minimum, average and maximum values of the labor costs required for their implementation, and the standards for the number of employees, can be calculated. The standardization of labor costs for the performance of these functions, in our opinion, should be carried out on the basis of a clear standardization of business operations that make up the performance of the function, in cooperation with the federal executive body and on the analysis of the dynamics of the workload over three years.
When determining the labor costs for the implementation of unique functions (functions, the standardization of the implementation process of which is impossible) of civil servants, as a rule, the main difficulties arise. If you can determine the average labor costs for the issuance of one license using the statistical method, then it is almost impossible to calculate the average labor costs for the development of one bill. The measurement techniques proposed in the literature are very resource-intensive, while not providing reliable results. In the normalization of the number of employees for the performance of the specified type of functions, it is possible to apply an empirical method based on the analysis of the dynamics of the actual number of employees of a government agency employed in the implementation of a specific function over several years.
When using any method of measuring labor costs for performing a state function, the question arises about the effectiveness of organizing the process of performing a service function. It is obvious that the implementation of this approach requires a high level of sectoral and managerial competencies of civil servants.
And the last type of functions is providing, the essence of which was considered earlier. As for the rationing of the number of employees for the performance of this type of functions, the position seems to be reasonable, according to which the number of employees employed in the implementation of this type of function is determined by service standards.
Given the variety of unique functions performed by civil servants, the search for optimal approaches to measuring labor costs and rationing the number of civil servants continues.
Of course, optimization of the number of employees in government agencies is not an end in itself in the process of managing the number of civil servants. Improving the quality of public administration has been and remains a more important strategic goal. However, in the field of managing the number of employees of state bodies, achieving this goal is possible by rethinking the very concept of "state function", its features, types, relevance at this stage of development of Russian society, developing a systematic approach to the degree of state participation in the regulation of public relations and, accordingly, to the number employees of the state and near-state sectors.
Based on OECD data for 2011.
1 In this publication, employees of a government agency are understood as government civil servants and employees holding positions in federal government bodies and government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
Table. Dynamics of changes in the number of state civil and municipal employees, thousand people
|
Dynamics of change (estimate) 2016 to 2008,% |
|||||||||||
|
The established number of state civil and municipal employees |
|||||||||||
|
The number of state civil and municipal employees per 10 thousand of the population of Russia |
|||||||||||
|
Percentage of state civil and municipal employees in the employed population |
|||||||||||
|
Civil servants of federal government agencies, including: |
|||||||||||
|
central offices |
|||||||||||
|
territorial bodies |
|||||||||||
|
Civil servants of state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation |
|||||||||||
|
Municipal employees |
Drawing. The structure of employed in the public sector in 2011,% *
What can the civil service of Kazakhstan learn
from the Singapore experience?
Ainur TURISBEK,
PhD in Law
... Seek the virtuous and appreciate the capable.
They should be titled, rewarded morally,
appointed to high positions and vested with authority in order to
to establish a strict order ...
Mozi, ancient sage (470-391 BC)
Singapore's astonishing transformation from a British colony to a thriving Asian metropolis and city of the future is breathtaking. Few believed in the successful survival of the island city-state, which gained independence on August 9, 1965. This was preceded by a colonial regime, devastation and poverty after the Second World War, unrest caused by the withdrawal of foreign military forces from the country, accession and withdrawal from the Federation of Malaysia due to fundamental differences on political issues.
Singapore not only survived, but got back on its feet thanks to the rule of law, the will of the people, and mainly the political will of the country's first prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who fearlessly initiated reform after reform. Under his leadership, it was possible to withdraw Singapore from the "third world" to the "first".
The model of the organization of the civil service is also indicative in Singapore. Anti-corruption methods are considered to be particularly effective. Today Singapore is the state that has defeated this evil.
The history of Singapore's independence is reminiscent of Kazakhstan's. After gaining independence, the Republic of Kazakhstan had to reform the administrative system, adapt it to the ongoing changes in order to respond to the numerous challenges of many countries of the world.
The period of our state formation at the beginning of the 90s of the last century was characterized by “a dysfunctional economy; empty treasury; an undeveloped political system ... the country lived according to the Constitution of the times of the Soviet Union, having inherited a certain military potential from it. The world was not interested in us, the world community was worried only about our nuclear potential. The socio-economic and political situation was simply critical ”/ 1 /.
The recipe for overcoming a crisis situation, applied by the head of state, which is often called the "Kazakh miracle": first, laws, the economy, and then the political system, according to many foreign analysts, is the only true and universal for the CIS countries. In those countries where this was not observed, we saw "color revolutions", and now there reforms have to start anew.
Kazakhstan not only managed to avoid shocks, but also became a leader in reforming among the CIS countries. The 15th anniversary of the independence of the Republic of Kazakhstan is approaching. During this time, our country has made a rapid leap forward in the socio-economic sphere and now, according to the World Bank classification, is included in the group of countries with an average income level / 2 /. President of the country N.A. Nazarbayev set a new task for the government - to become one of the 50 competitive countries of the world / 3 /.
One of the main directions of administrative reforms, according to which the modernization of public administration is taking place, is the reform of the civil service.
To create an improved civil service, you need to learn the most effective methods of work from other countries, but not blindly copying their experience, but carefully observing, studying the most positive aspects and carefully adapting to the conditions of Kazakhstan during their implementation.
The public service of Singapore includes the office of the President and the Prime Minister, 14 ministries and 26 standing committees. The total number of civil servants is about 65 thousand people / 4 /.
The Singaporean model of civil service organization is recognized by international organizations as one of the best in the world. The main determinants of success are sensitive and professional leadership; governance, where the civil service plays a decisive role, and the inherent positive qualities of people. They are the foundation of an effective and honest public service in Singapore. The experience of some countries around the world shows that a corrupt, incompetent and ineffective civil service leads to bureaucracy, poverty, poverty and a deteriorating economy. Avoiding this requires a political leader who can maintain a good, clean, efficient and responsive public service. The leadership must be responsible, excluding the luxurious life against the background of the poverty of the people / 5 /.
The success and excellence of the Singapore civil service is based on ten principles that underlie its operations, which require intensive and careful application and maintenance.
These principles and practices are integrated into a single package, which is then intensively and carefully applied and supported by appropriate resources, thoughtful planning, strict discipline and comprehensive instructions. Feedback and consistent implementation are important elements of the Singapore system / 6 /.
The fundamental principle of the organization of public service in Singapore is the principle of meritocracy, which is the opposite of the principle (system) of patronage / 7 /. The principle (system) of meritocracy is based on the personal merit of a civil servant and is aimed at the efficient use of human resources.
At present, the current model of civil service in the Republic of Kazakhstan is built mainly on the principle of meritocracy, i.e. evaluating and ensuring official promotion of employees on the basis of merit and personal merit, the principle that guarantees high-quality reproduction of the apparatus, its protection from bureaucratization and caste, which includes the following elements: mandatory competitive selection for admission and promotion in the civil service; legal and social protection of civil servants; equal pay for work of equal value; encouragement of civil servants who have achieved effective results in their activities; correction of the activities of those whose results are not fully satisfactory, and the dismissal of employees whose performance results are unsatisfactory; continuous training of civil servants in order to improve the results of their activities.
The state of Singapore identifies promising university students, monitors their education, encourages them throughout their studies, issues specially stipulated scholarships, and sends them abroad to study foreign experience in the most developed countries of the world. As for promising students, after graduation they undertake to work for the government for 4-6 years. With some of them, work is underway to attract into the ranks of the People's Action Party. So, the best and most gifted students enter the public service. A similar Presidential program "Bolashak" is envisaged in Kazakhstan.
Competitive civil service salaries ensure that talented and competent people do not leave for the private sector. The high level of remuneration for officials is ensured by the principle of frugality. The city-state is well aware of such problems as growing bureaucracy, overlapping functions of officials, declining labor productivity, growing budgets ... modern technology and computers. A civil servant in Singapore can be described as follows: honest, competent, professional, well paid, but constantly under the pressure of losing his position due to the arrival of more professional than himself.
In Singapore's first generation of leaders, honesty was a habit. Our followers became ministers, choosing such careers from among many others, and government jobs were not the most attractive choice. If a talented person holding a position of minister is underpaid, then it will be difficult to expect him to work in such a position for a long time, earning only a fraction of what he could earn in the private sector. Underpaid ministers and civil servants have destroyed more than one Asian government. Adequate remuneration is vital for maintaining the integrity and morality of political leaders and high-ranking officials / 8 /.
The total number of civil servants in Singapore is approximately 65,000, with computers playing an important role in their work. The proportion of 110,000 government officials and government committees to a population of 4 million is 275 government employees per 100,000 population. Computerization helped to reduce the number of employees / 9 /.
Integrity and anti-corruption discipline are among the fundamental principles of the Singapore civil service.
In 2005, Transparency International (TI) published a rating according to which Singapore is the fifth of the least corrupt countries in the world and the first among Asian countries in the corruption index, with a total score of 9.4 points out of 10/10 /.
The fight against corruption is carried out by political leaders and officials, and is also actively supported by the society. To this end, an independent specialized anti-corruption body, the Corruption Investigation Bureau, was established in 1952 to investigate and seek to prevent corruption in the public and private sectors of the Singapore economy.
