Quality of public administration

Quality of public administration
See also
Quality system in local government Innovative systems Quality management principles Culture and QMS implementation Organizational culture and project management Bureaucratization Quality of work Statutory obligation Quality policy

Quality of public administration is defined by the degree of meeting customer needs. The client is the final and ultimate verifier of service quality. It can be concluded that customer satisfaction is certainly the most important factor in services. Customers of public administration are all citizen of a country or region, which assess quality of services provided by the state.

It should be noted that there is a relationship between the needs, expectations and satisfaction. Needs create expectations, based on perception, as well as on direct experience. If the needs and expectations are properly understood, the actions taken up adequate and realistic expectations, which have the target of closing the gap between expectations and experience.

The services provided by public administration

Formation and assessment of quality of public administration services include:

• type of service,
• level of emotional involvement,
• attitude to the rulings of administration,
• level of knowledge about public administration services,
• local taxes and fees,
• standards of service described in law and actually provided.

Quality of service in public administration also depends on:

• economic factors,
• social factors,
• organizational and legal factors,
• technical and environmental considerations.

Organizational culture present in public administration offices plays a key role. It is an indispensable part of quality awareness, the ability to think for the benefit of external customers. Continuous quality improvement can undoubtedly contribute to a lasting change in culture.

In the public administration, we can distinguish three levels of the development of quality services:

• normative level relating to the development of detailed procedures for quality
• effective level involving the study of effectiveness and efficiency of the quality system,
• satisfactory level guarantees high quality of services.

Quality management in public administration

We should pay special attention to the quality management, which is a set of interrelated and interacting processes. In many offices, the problem is poor information flow, slow flow of documents and poor cooperation between organizational units. Frequently it can be observed in the absence of a proper leadership, leading to autonomization of the organizational objectives. With the use of electronic tools, the many good offices can cope with this phenomenon.

Effective government action is vital, but should also be strengthened by addressing the interests of the general public. A new concept, which relates to the functioning of public administration in modern times, is called ethical management. Well, it largely to rebuild public confidence in the state, its elites and public administration. Confidence to public administration nowadays is reduced. Rebuilding it will be possible through the cooperation of politicians and officials.

Nowadays, more important than gaining a competitive advantage is to achieve customer satisfaction. It is extremely important for the administration and even in the literal sense, it has not competition. Thanks to his professionalism, it may contribute to the confidence of citizens, while in the case of local administration - support the local community by building its competitive advantage (e.g., attracting investment, fund-raising assistance, increase the legal awareness of citizens). The administration needs to move away from the concept of "doing business" in the direction of solving problems. Effectiveness and efficiency of the public sector should learn from business. But keep in mind that the success and credibility of the administration, can not be measured by the same standard, which are measured to achieve commercial objectives.

See also:

• Organizational forms of local public sector entities

Examples of quality in public administration

• Responsiveness: This is the ability of public administration to provide services within appropriate timelines. It means that government must respond to citizens’ requests and complaints promptly. For example, the government of India has set up special toll free helplines and online complaint portals for citizens to register their grievances and get timely responses from public administration.
• Transparency: This is the ability of public administration to provide information and data related to its operations and decisions. Citizens must have access to the information they need to understand how the government works. For example, the government of India has introduced the Right to Information Act which allows citizens to access information related to government operations.
• Accountability: This is the ability of public administration to accept responsibility for its decisions and actions. It means that government must be held accountable for its performance and the results achieved. For example, the government of India has established independent bodies such as the Central Vigilance Commission to investigate corruption and other irregularities.
• Efficiency: This is the ability of public administration to deliver services at optimal costs with minimal wastage of resources. It means that government must strive to make the best use of available resources and minimize wastage. For example, the government of India has implemented e-governance initiatives such as the Goods and Services Tax (GST) to reduce bureaucratic red tape and improve efficiency.
• Accessibility: This is the ability of public administration to ensure equitable access to services for all citizens. It means that government must ensure that services are accessible to all, irrespective of their social, economic, or geographic backgrounds. For example, the government of India has established special free health clinics in rural areas to provide health services to those who do not have access to private health care.

Advantages of quality in public administration

Quality of public administration is an important factor in ensuring the optimal functioning of a state. It can greatly influence the lives of citizens by providing them with reliable and efficient services. The following are some of the advantages of having quality public administration:

• Improved efficiency: Quality public administration can streamline the process of providing services and ensure that processes are completed in a timely manner. It can also reduce the amount of paperwork and bureaucracy needed to obtain services.
• Enhanced trust: Quality public administration can build trust among citizens and organizations, as it demonstrates a commitment to providing fair and transparent services. This trust can lead to increased collaboration between citizens and the state.
• Improved service delivery: Quality public administration can ensure that services are provided in a timely and efficient manner. It can also reduce the amount of bureaucracy involved in accessing services.
• Increased accountability: Quality public administration can increase accountability by instituting measures to monitor and review services. This can ensure that services are being provided in an equitable and effective manner.
• Reduced corruption: Quality public administration can reduce corruption by providing clear guidelines and policies to ensure that services are delivered efficiently and fairly. It can also establish measures to enforce these policies and ensure that they are followed.

Limitations of Quality in public administration

Quality of public administration can be limited in several ways. These limitations include:

• Lack of resources: It is difficult for public administration to provide high-quality services when resources are limited. This can be due to lack of funding, lack of personnel, or lack of technology.
• Bureaucratic red tape: Bureaucratic red tape can slow down the process of providing services. This can lead to delays and inefficiencies, which can decrease the quality of services.
• Inadequate training and education: Poorly trained and educated personnel can lead to a lack of understanding of the needs of customers and a lack of knowledge of best practices. This can lead to mistakes and low-quality service.
• Poor communication: Poor communication between public administrators, the public, and other stakeholders can lead to misunderstandings and miscommunication, which can affect the quality of services.
• Lack of accountability: Without proper accountability measures in place, public administrators can be less likely to provide quality services. This can lead to poor results and decreased customer satisfaction.

Other approaches related to quality in public administration

• The quality of public administration can be assessed from a variety of perspectives. These include:
• Governance: Governance is the way in which a government or other authority exercises its power and authority to manage public resources and affairs. Good governance is characterized by transparency, accountability, participation, and responsiveness.
• Leadership: Leadership involves setting a vision and inspiring others to work together to achieve it. It also involves establishing a culture of excellence and setting an example of good behaviour.
• Integrity: Integrity is the adherence to a set of moral and ethical principles. It is also the ability to maintain a consistent set of values and behaviour.
• Service delivery: Service delivery involves the provision of services to the public in a timely, efficient, and effective manner, with a focus on customer satisfaction.
• Innovation: Innovation involves the introduction of new ideas, processes, and products to improve public service delivery.

In summary, quality of public administration can be assessed from a variety of perspectives, including governance, leadership, integrity, service delivery, and innovation. All of these elements play an important role in ensuring the quality and effectiveness of public services.

References

• Donnelly M., Wisniewski M., Dalrymple J.F., Curry A.C. (1995) Measuring service quality in local government: the SERVQUAL approach, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 8 Iss: 7
• Mulgan, R. (2000). ‘Accountability’: An Ever‐Expanding Concept?. Public administration, 78(3), 555-573.
• Osborne D. (1993) Reinventing Government, Public Productivity & Management Review, Vol. 16, No. 4
• Sanderson I, (2001) Performance Management, Evaluation and Learning in Modern Local Government, Public Administration, 79(2)

Author: Ewa Sak