The government is mandated to implement policies that bring a greater good to the public. Government policies are implemented by people who work in the public service. These are better known as the civil servants. Public administrators have a wide scope of roles that they are supposed to execute. However, their major objective is to ensure that the government is functioning properly.
Therefore, most of the activities that the public administrators carry out are concerned with the management of governmental programs, making decisions on behalf of the government, as well as analysing government policies before they are implemented. Public administration faces a number of problems that affect proper functioning of the departments that public administrators head.
In addressing the problems, it is important to first analyse the factors that cause these problems. This article is an assessment of the factors that are the main source of the problems of public administration in the “conflict of loyalties” case study.
The paper describes the problems faced by A.J. Stewart as a public administrator in the Department of Defence. The paper ends by recommending how issues in public administration should be resolved.
Case factors
The author of this case mentions about A.J. Stewart who was employed as a public servant in the Department of Defence Production and the challenges he was facing in administering his duties. Stewart was working in the electronics branch. The Department of Supply and Services was later established within the larger department where Stewart worked. Stewart was the head of the Union in 1975.
The department had up to 8,100 members. It is indicated that the Union did not have any certification to work as a bargaining agent on behalf of the Purchasing and Supply Group. Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) was the certified agent for the group. This Union was, however, a founding member of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, which Stewart was a member, and the Civil Services Association of Canada.
Stewart constantly complained about the state of affairs in the Department of Supply and Services. The management of the department did not consult with the Union to restore order. This led to further problems that greatly affected the performance of the department negatively.
The efforts by Stewart to meet the President to resolve the problems were all in vain. He made efforts to reorganize the department, but nothing fruitful came out of his efforts. This made him frustrated, especially with the management that was supposed to attend to his concerns.
From the case, it is observed that one of the major factors that lead to the problems in public administration is poor communication because communication is very important in any setup. It facilitates success and has a positive effect on job performance and execution of activities. The poor communication system in the department deterred any efforts by Stewart.
He wrote letters to the concerned parties, but they were all ignored. It is difficult to solve any problem without dialogue. On the other hand, identification of problems that affect an organisation is always easier when there is effective communication.
In addition, it is easier to make decisions because all the concerned parties are involved in the process. Policies are not implemented effectively when there is poor communication. Therefore, it is the obligation of all the concerned parties within the Department of Supply and Services to improve the current level of communication so that the current problems can be addressed comprehensively.
There is an extent to which the government employees are expected to express views publicly. There is information that public servants are not supposed to release because it can expose the government and may affect its functioning and effectiveness in serving the public. The public service union should make it clear to the employees the information that they are not supposed to release to the public.
It is also the role of the Union to inform the employees which information is safe for release to the public. Stewart expressed his views publicly through the newspaper called, “The Citizen” when he realised the issues that were affecting the public service union. This was a move that could greatly affect the reputation of the Union. Therefore, Stewart should have found other ways of trying to find a solution to the problem.
For instance, he should have identified the employees of the Union who would support his idea and engage them in the process. He would have communicated with these individuals about the possible solutions to the problems affecting the Union at the time.
Since the top management seemed not to listen to him, he would then use his supporters to exert pressure on the top officials and influence other employees. In the long run, someone would have listened to him and his grievances would have been taken into consideration.
Bureaucracy is the other factor that is leading to problems in the Department of Supply and Services. The purchasing process is slow due to the many protocols that are put in place. In the past, it has been observed that the department has no intentions of speeding up the process.
The purchase costs have also increased rapidly. Every additional senior management post is accompanied by an additional staff. The cost of maintaining these workers is added to the purchases, further making operations of the department more expensive. Doing away with the Department of Supply and Services could be an option, but this will only affect the lower staff members who are likely to lose their jobs.
The rest of the senior members have the power and the ability to quickly create another department, meaning that scrapping the Department of Supply and Services would hurt them less.
The complex bureaucracy could affect the flow of information. The minister should open consultations with the Department of Supply and Services to address the bureaucracy issue, but he has failed to do so. This has led to the persistence of the same problem. Unfortunately, the problem is escalating as a solution continues to delay.
Stewart took it upon himself to expose the issues in his department through an article in the newspaper. This was a move that put him in trouble. He was summoned by the Deputy Minister and ordered to take corrective measures for breaching the loyalty and discretion required to be exhibited by a public officer. Mr. Roches, the Deputy Minister, was right about the issue.
However, the right decision was not to seek for a suitable problem resolution technique that would engage Stewart in a respectable and non-threatening manner. He was not supposed to threaten Stewart by stating that he would likely lose his job position. Instead, he would have called Stewart in private and discuss the issue with the aim of coming up with an amicable solution.
He would have asked Stewart to express his mind to him while listening attentively to identify the problem and the cause of the problem. This would build a platform where both of them would agree to find a solution to the problems affecting the Department of Supply and Services.
Mr Stewart has the option of making an apology to the public or privately apologizing to the board as stipulated under the Public Service Staff Relation Act. Otherwise, the board has the powers to check whether he failed to carry out his obligations and take action against him. The action taken should be guided by the need to restore discipline when communicating departmental issues to the public.
Recommendation
It is normal for organisations or departments to experience issues that are likely to affect performance. How the problems are resolved is what matters for such organisations. One of the major factors that should be considered in such cases is communication. The employees should have a clear line through which they communicate their issues to the top management.
On the other hand, the top management and officials should be ready and willing to listen to the employees. In a public service union, it is against the regulation to express views to the public without consulting. Any employee who does that should face the right actions against him.
However, the actions should be justified and not seen to be discriminatory. The aim of taking any action should be restoring sanity of public service administration and not cowing public servants.