PIF System Level Findings: Clientism

1/10/2019

This leads me to describe the fifth quirk in our system.

I am still exploring this quirk using a combination of political theory and research on institutions. So far, it seems that either Ministers are incredibly powerful in the current system (possibly too powerful), or the chief executive’s fixed-term contracts have weakened senior officials’ place in the system.

Consider this.

First, the system is better at delivering in the short term than at delivering its core business effectively and efficiently over the medium-to-long term.

Second, there is no correlation between how an agency engages and works with its Minister and outcomes. But doing just that is where almost every agency gets a green rating (see below). Said differently, there is a disproportionate amount of effort and attention placed on working well with Ministers and meeting their needs.

I am not saying this is a bad thing. A good relationship with a Minister is proactive. It helps a Minister and a government refine their goals and preferences to expand their options, identify the right priorities, and mitigate risks. Additionally, a good relationship is an aide to good decisions as officials (and others) are more likely to offer free and frank advice inside a good relationship than in a deteriorating one.

However, it is possible to hypothesise that Ministers and officials are focused on a short-term and urgent game at the expense of the medium-term and more extended view in the public interest.

I am still musing about this one.

Disclaimer

These are my evolving thoughts, rhetorical positions and creative provocations. They are not settled conclusions. Content should not be taken as professional advice, official statements or final positions. I reserve the right to learn, unlearn, rethink and grow. If you’re here to sort me neatly into left vs right, keep moving. I’m not the partisan you’re looking for. These in...

Ahakoa he iti kete, he iti nā te a …

Kia ora, and welcome I’m starting a blog. I’m as surprised as you are. This is a place to jot down my evolving thoughts about public administration, policy, and delivery in Aotearoa: beneath the surface and between the relays of elected and unelected officials. It will be about the undercurrents. Not the tired critiques or the glossy promises, but the patterns, tensions, compromises,...

Time to Retire “Bad Apples …

A plea from Ōtautahi. Can we stop using the phrase "bad apples" when discussing institutional problems? It is a tired cliché that has outlived whatever usefulness it might have once had. The idiom "one bad apple spoils the whole barrel" initially warned about how quickly rot spreads. Yet in contemporary discussions about institutional accountability, we've flipped its meaning to isolate and ...

Getting Regulation Right: Being Res …

Regulation often gets a mixed reputation. Some see it as unnecessary red tape, slowing things down and making life harder for businesses and communities. Others worry that it's too weak and fails to properly protect people and the environment. What both views have in common is frustration with regulation that seems disconnected from the real world. But good regulation doesn't have...

The Implosion of the US Administrat …

The collapse of the US administrative state is not just an American problem, it carries important lessons for Aotearoa New Zealand. As Washington grapples with political dysfunction and the erosion of public institutions, we should pay attention to how a weakened state apparatus invites economic instability, political turmoil, and diminished democratic control. For Aotearoa New Zealand, th...