If our Civil Service is to be reformed it cannot operate in a separate labour market with a remuneration system that is only loosely related to individual performance, writes Frances Ruane.
Should we be cynical about productivity gains in the civil sector? Perhaps, but not just yet.
No one would dispute the importance of productivity to our economic well-being, recognising that increased productivity means that we get more from the resources we have.
Ireland has enjoyed significant productivity growth during the last decade, but if we are to continue to prosper, we need productivity growth to continue.
Productivity growth in the enterprise sector is essential if we are to remain competitive with rising living standards. So also is productivity growth in the public sector if we are to have a competitive tax system and improved social services.
The recent productivity action plans associated with the payment of the benchmarking awards to the Civil Service within the framework of Sustaining Progress received much criticism in this newspaper following their approval by the Performance Verification Groups on August 12th.
Your readers were advised of "obscure language", "jargon and unspecific commitments", and an absence of "firm new commitments to specific changes, or clear targets for improved performances and productivity".
There is little doubt that very close scrutiny is required to determine whether the action plans on the Department of Finance's website (www.finance.gov.ie/news/aug03) actually represent real additional productivity gains in return for benchmarking.
The plans do not make for easy reading and, while their transparency through publication on the web is commendable, they are not designed for accessibility by the average taxpayer.
It allows us to see, as pointed out by your correspondents, that some items in the plans were well in train before benchmarking awards ever came into the picture.
It is also clear that key issues for Civil Service reform, such as reducing structural barriers to internal staff mobility, more open recruitment at senior levels, and performance-related pay do not figure as prominently as might be expected by the taxpaying public.
However, it is important to recognise that, while some of the material may sound like "waffle" to your journalists, some of it does constitute action that will genuinely increase productivity.
Take, for instance, one of the examples specifically noted by your correspondent with regard to the Central Statistics Office (CSO): "Action: CSO to prepare a report on the statistical potential of administrative records for key policy purposes of departmental data holdings of six Departments." Your correspondent could be forgiven for thinking that such an action might sound like waffle - but nothing could be further from the truth.
This action derives from the recommendation of the Steering Group on Social and Equality Statistics that systematic use be made of the large data holdings in Civil Service departments to generate statistics which can be used for policy analysis and policy evaluation.
Its implementation, which was approved by Cabinet in March, will alter fundamentally the way in which Government Departments make use of administrative records, allowing these to generate statistics which can be shared across Departments and help to develop policies which are more effective in terms of both costs and outcomes.
The CSO, which has been asked to lead this effort, is firmly committed to its implementation. The immediate effect will be to increase the efficiency of producing official statistics for evidence-based policy-making.
There will be significant potential for productivity gains in store for the Civil Service. These gains include: lower costs of policy analysis due to systematic availability of statistics, less need to undertake special surveys, and reduced dependence on consultants for analysis that can be carried out instead by civil servants.
The availability of such statistics will also facilitate the more efficient evaluation of policy actions (as required under the National Development Plan) and minimise the risk of policy mistakes (such as the abolition of college fees as a means of increasing access to those from disadvantaged backgrounds).
The possibilities for this proposal yielding benefits turn on using technology and expertise to match data records and developing better systems-planning within Government Departments.
In the future, data will have to be collected in a more rational fashion than at present and a more integrated cross-departmental approach to information sharing will have to develop.
While there will be set-up costs, and certainly the jobs of individuals will change, the stream of benefits will continue indefinitely.
This is just one example of a real productivity gain in the action plans and there are undoubtedly many more. It is ultimately the responsibility of the Performance Verification Groups (PVGs), working on behalf of taxpayers, to verify that all of the actions involve genuine productivity gains.
It should also be the job of the PVGs to seek progress in the very contentious areas of increased open recruitment to the Civil Service, greater internal mobility and the introduction of performance-related pay.
If our Civil Service is to reform in line with civil services in other jurisdictions, it cannot continue to operate in a separate labour market with a remuneration system that is only loosely related to individual performance. Indeed, performance-related pay is inescapable, given that the basis for substantially increased Civil Service pay is comparison with the private sector, where it is the norm.
So with regards to productivity gains in the Civil Service, the jury should still be out. It is therefore somewhat disconcerting to find that, in line with much of the media, this newspaper appears to be already resigned to there being little productivity benefit from these action plans.
For example, the editorial on August 16th stated: "The public will be paying more for services which will at best remain at their current standard."
It is not reasonable that, when all other sectors are expected to participate in the growth process through increasing their productivity, the Civil Service should be excused.
The last thing Ireland needs at the moment is a media that is cynical about and dismissive of the Civil Service's ability to increase its productivity. Rather our media should monitor the reform of the Civil Service closely and seek evidence that the promised productivity gains are being realised.
Frances Ruane is Professor of Economics at Trinity College Dublin and a former chairwoman of the National Statistics Board