Implementation of the Thai Public Sector Development Plan
The Thai Public Sector Development Strategic Plan (2008 – 2012) seeks to
Strengthen the capacity of the public sector in 4 challenging dimensions: adaptability to change; high performance organization; merit-based principles; and participatory governance. To move the Thai Public Sector forward in each of these dimensions, the Office of the Public Development Commission has undertaken a number of activities, described below. 2.2.1 Improvement of Service Quality In 2008, the OPDC encouraged and supported government agencies in improving the quality and effectiveness of their services through several means: 1. Delegation of Authority: In accordance with the Royal Decree on Delegation of Power of 2007, those in positions of authority must abide by laws, regulations, and other legal directives in the delegation of their respective authority to others in order to: better facilitate the interests and needs of the people; enhance effectiveness and efficiency in providing services; ensure the proper delegation of decision making authority and accountability; and reduce time and processes in the exercise of power. 2. Reduction of Time and Work Processes: In FY 2008, improvement in work processes and reduction of time expended were specified as key performance indicators of all government agencies, which were required to specify their core work processes and to standardize service times for their completion. The Cabinet Resolution of May 19, 2003 specified that time and steps in all work processes were to be reduced by 30-50% by FY 2007.
In FY 2008-2009, this performance indicator was
continued, with a focus on maintaining service times at the standardized levels. During FY 2003– 2008, an average of 66 agencies applied annually for Service Quality Improvement Awards, having improved their procedures, reducing processing time in 1,259 work processes.
In 2008, 47
government agencies applied for awards, and received recognition for improvement in 61 work processes. (See Table 2-19). 3. Establishment of Service Links and Government Service Counters (GSCs): A Cabinet resolution in 2006 induced relevant agencies to pilot Government Service Counters (GSCs) and develop new service delivery models via mobile units.
The OPDC has
maintained the establishment of Service Links and Government Service Counters as a performance
indicator for government agencies since then, and in FY 2008 all government agencies were expected to meet basic standards in offering these approaches to service delivery. In 2008 - 2009 the evaluation of performance focused on developing GSCs to sustain quality in the delivery of services. In 2008, there were 102 Service Links and 17 GSCs; of these, 19 Service Links and 9 GSCs were certified, and 10 Service Links and 7 GSCs received Service Quality Improvement Awards. Table 2-19: Government Agencies Improving their Services and Applying for Service Improvement Awards during 2003-2008
Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Agencies Processes 50 48 62 68 53 69
169 285 250 250 133 172 1,259
Agencies Processes 19 7 12 7 31 47
25 16 21 11 46 61 180
4. E-services: e-Government services have been made available through the Public Sector Information and Technology Networks System since 2007, to ensure that Thai citizens have faster and more channels to access public services. The Network System connects 247 central government agencies, 35 provinces, and 210 agencies, providing 14 e–services in 18 ministries and 75 provinces. Services such as e-Citizen, e-Government, and One-Stop Services have been developed from different channels of communication, for example, e-Revenue and e-Customs, etc. This new service mode enables single-point access to services from various government agencies through the Public Sector Service Center (e-citizen.go.th), bringing about easier, faster and cheaper transactions. In addition, 20 ICT communities have been established to tackle ‘digital divide’ issues, to provide improved access channels, and to serve as a knowledge center of local wisdom and community information technology. The Government Contact Center, GCC 1111 (www.1111.go.th) was initiated to provide fast, convenient, 24-hour access to information, knowledge, and services, and to facilitate the verification of personal information, including citizen registration, identification cards, military service registration, passports, social security, etc.
Citizens are also able to exercise their right to vote in elections, and
to report births and deaths from both within and outside Thailand. www.khonthai.com provides a channel for studying project reports, viewing statistical data and analyses, as well as for reviewing the outcomes of focus group discussions.
There are also several channels through which citizens can file complaints, report matters of concern, and provide information on activities. These can be summarized as follows:
Government Contact Center: GCC 1111 http://www.1111.go.th/Default.aspx
Report drug-related matters http://dais.oncb.go.th/
Report on money laundering issues http://www.oag.go.th/Call/CallServlet
Report/ File complaints regarding Police Administration http://www.police.go.th/cpl/cpl_ktr.html
File complaints to the Bangkok Municipality Administration: BMA 1555 http://www.bma.go.th/formmail/cgi-bin/formmail.html
Report on Customs Misconduct http://www.customs.go.th/feedback/feedback_center.jsp
Report/ File complaints to the Ministry of Interior http://www.mahadthai.com/html/index.html
Provide information to the Police http://www.police.go.th/new/complant.php
Direct Call to the Minister of Interior http://www.mahadthai.com/html/index.html
File complaints/Provide information on health care products http://www.fda.moph.go.th/prac/complain/complain.shtml
File complaints/ Provide information to the Metropolitan Police Command Center http://www.police.go.th/cpl/cpl_n.html
Complaint Center of the Secretariat of the House of Representatives http://www.parliament.go.th/help/index2.php
Complaint Center of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment http://petition.mnre.go.th/ePetition/web/index.jsp
Complaint Center of Ministry of Foreign Affairs http://www.mfa.go.th/web/2301.php
Bangkok Mass Transit Authority http://www.bmta.co.th/thaiversion/subpages/feedback_thai.htm
Complaint Center of the Office of the National Counter-Corruption Commission http://www.nccc.thaigov.net/nccc/call.php
5. International Recognition: The OPDC has encouraged the improvement of service quality through a number of activities focusing on the international arena, including: -
a meeting co-organized with the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce, and the World Bank in 2008, on the “Improvement of Doing Business in Thailand”;
a meeting organized for high level officials of relevant government organizations and agencies regarding the improvement of doing business in Thailand;
a meeting organized via teleconference from Washington D.C, U.S.A., on doing business in 2009;
encouragement of government agencies that have received the OPDC Service Quality Improvement Awards to apply for United Nations Public Service Awards, so that outstanding Thai examples of service quality improvement are showcased on the international stage.
As the improvement of service quality has become embedded into the culture of Thai government agencies, the number of agencies applying for Service Quality Improvement Awards from the OPDC and Public Service Awards from the United Nations has increased. (See Table 2-20) Table 2-20 Status of Applications to the “United Nations Public Service Awards” Government Agencies Years 2007
1st Round 7
Results *Yasothorn Hospital received a Finalist Award in the Category, ‘Improving the Delivery of Services’ from the United Nations
Officials of Yasothorn Hospital receive the United Nations Public Service Award in 2008, in the category, “Improving the Delivery of Services” on June 23, 2008, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, U.S.A
Table 2-21 Government Agencies applying for a United Nations Public Service Award in 2009 Government Agencies applying for First Round Competition
Agencies entering Second Round
Agencies entering Third
1. Department of Consular Affairs
1. Department of Consular Affairs
2. Department of Provincial Administration
2. Department of Provincial Administration
3. Department of Land Transport
3. Department of Land Transport
4. Cooperatives Auditing Department
4. Cooperatives Auditing Department
5. The Office of the Insurance Commission
5. The Office of the Insurance Commission
6. Office of Land Transport,
6. Office of Land Transport,
Waiting for results
7. Faculty of Medicine, Maharaj Hospital, Chiang Mai University
7. Faculty of Medicine, Maharaj Hospital, Chiang Mai University
8. Government Services Counter, Ministry of Science and Technology
8. Government Services Counter, Ministry of Science and Technology
9. Government Services Counter, Ubonratchatanee 10. Department of Export Promotion 11. Special Branch Police Command 12. Bukkalo Police Station 13. Pichit Hospital 14. Vachira Phuket Hospital 15. Loei Hospital 16. Laemsomthi Hospital, Lopburi 17. Khai Suranaree Hospital 18. Faculty of Political Science
Chulalongkorn University 19. Ramkhamhang University 20. Government Services Counter, Chiang Mai
The improvement of service quality in the public sector has brought about a greater competitiveness of the country, as can be seen in the World Bank report comparing the ease of doing business in different countries around the world through the measurement of regulations and their enforcement in supporting the ease of doing business.
Thailand’s rankings have improved since
2005. In 2008, Thailand ranked 15th out of 178 countries, the highest ranking it has achieved. This improvement may be the result of cooperation in improving services and sharing objectives among 47 public agencies with high quality service standards. The OPDC and the Ministry of Commerce served as core agencies in establishing 9 work teams to effect improvements to meet World Bank standards and measurements. (See Table 2-22)
Table 2-22 Working Teams on the World Bank’s Doing Business Measurements Work Teams 1. Starting a business
Key Agencies Department of Business Development
2. Dealing with construction permits 3. Employing workers
Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Department of Labour Protection and Welfare
4. Registering property
Department of Land
5. Getting credit
Fiscal Policy Office
6. Protecting Investors
Securities and Exchange Commission
7. Paying taxes 8. Trading across borders 9. Enforcing contracts and closing a
The Revenue Department Department of Customs Office of Judicial Affairs
2.2.2 Participatory Governance The OPDC has developed various methods, models, mechanisms, and work processes to promote participatory governance, a concept that allows the civic sector, the general public, and other sectors to participate in administering the country. In 2008, a number of activities and projects were implemented:
Improvement of public service delivery through citizen participation:
To ensure that
local needs are truly met through a participatory approach in service delivery, this project was piloted in 3 service units in Pathumthani Province: the Office of Land Transport; the Office of Employment; and the Social Security Office.
Strengthening Citizen Networks:
This activity, implemented in all 4 regions of the
country, was aimed at building capacities and strengthening people networks in governance, as well as at improving the network management system. Project objectives also included the provision of understanding and knowledge related to effective coordination with and participation by the public sector that resulted in knowledge-sharing between citizens and public agencies.
Development of participatory governance models: This study sought to create
innovations in governance and to extend the scope of citizen participation at the ministerial,
departmental and provincial levels.
Models of participatory governance at the ministerial and
provincial levels were studied.
Development of models of participatory governance at the ministerial level: This project
focused on developing models that would support inclusive policy making. An essential element was the creation of understanding among ministry officials, the key players in changing policy-making mechanisms and bringing about participatory governance. The study was conducted in cooperation with Thammasat University; the pilot agencies were the Ministry of Public Health, the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security and the Department of Public Relations. (See Figure 2-15) Figure 2-15 Citizen Participation in Public Administration
5. Development of participatory governance models at the provincial level: This project was aimed at creating an understanding of participatory governance among provincial government officials and at strengthening citizen participation mechanisms at this level. The King Prajadhipok Institute, along with all 75 provincial agencies, worked with the OPDC on this project.
An Award for
Excellence in Participatory Governance was established to provide incentives for provincial agencies to successfully meet the objective of community learning via citizen participation.
Yasothorn provinces received first place Excellence Awards; Outstanding Awards were given to Khon Kaen, Chainat, Chiang Rai, Tak, Nakornratchasima, Payao, Pattalung, Lampoon, Sakaew, Nongkhai, Ang Thong, and Uttaradit provinces; and Good Awards winners were Nakorn Nayok, Nakornsawan, Pang-nga, Sisaket, Samutsakorn, and Surin provinces. (See Figure 2-16)
Citizen Participation Approaches of Agencies Winning Excellence Awards in Participatory Governance
โครงการ “อนุรักษแหลงน้ําธรรมชาติ แบบมีสวนรวมบานโพนทัน ตําบลโพนทัน เภอคําเขื่อนแกว ”
In addition to the projects described above, in 2008, the OPDC also organized a number of activities promoting citizen participation in governance, among them: the organization of dialogues on the topic, ‘The Next Steps of the Thai Public Sector Development’; knowledge-sharing sessions on Paradigm Shift, Work Process Improvement, and Governing by Networks; a seminar on the Improvement of Public Management Quality; as well as a conference, ‘Public Sector Reform: What Works and What Doesn’t’, held in cooperation with the World Bank. 2.2.3 Development of the Performance Agreement System and a Pilot of the Performance Management System in Agencies within the Same Ministry. The Cabinet Resolution of September 30, 2003 supported the development of performance agreements in all central government agencies beginning in FY 2004 to enhance efficiency and high performance in the Thai public sector.
The performance evaluation framework of central and
provincial government agencies for FY 2008 consisted of measurements in 4 dimensions; Effectiveness (45%), Quality of Service (20%), Efficiency (10%) and Organization Development (25%).
(See Figure 2-17).
Measurements of the dimensions of ethics, the promotion of
transparency and public participation, as well as the prevention and suppression of corruption, were also included as performance indicators in the FY 2008 performance agreements. A study conducted by the OPDC in 2008 resulted in the development of a performance management model and guidelines piloted in selected agencies later that year. The pilot project comprised the following: 1) Objectives of the pilot project were to develop a tailor-made performance evaluation system and to create a sense of ownership in each ministry. Each of the pilot ministries was to craft its own evaluation framework and means of measurement, discuss with intra-governmental agencies the scope of the performance evaluation, ministry-wide targets, as well as evaluation methodology and practices. The OPDC undertook monitoring and oversight, and at the end of 2008, audited the processes. 2)
The agencies selected to pilot the project consisted of three ministries and the 22
departments under their respective supervision: the Ministry of Finance and its 9 departments; the Ministry of Energy and its 5 departments; and the Ministry of Industry and its 8 departments Each pilot ministry, in accordance with OPDC guidelines, identified the performance evaluation frameworks, determined agency-wide measurements, crafted performance agreements of each department, monitored and evaluated performance, and allocated annual performance incentives. Departmental agencies negotiated their targets and the measurements, and signed mutual performance pacts. Self-assessments were conducted regularly and performance reported to the ministry. The OPDC provided guidelines and timelines; monitored implementation in the pilot ministries, verifying information and overseeing the target negotiation process; and evaluated the performance of the pilot agencies, both at the ministry and the cluster levels. In addition, the OPDC provided consultation and guidance on project implementation; organized workshops on the promotion of good governance for the pilot agencies; developed good governance promotion manuals; verified information on performance; and reported results to the Public Sector Development Commission and to the Cabinet. 3) Guiding Principles: The pilot ministries assumed full accountability for the entire process of development of the performance agreement and evaluation system, which consisted of the following steps: (See also Figure 2-18) - Ministers of the pilot ministries appointed a Ministry Steering Committee and a Committee for Intra-agency Target Negotiation.
Performance system work teams were appointed by the
Permanent Secretary of each ministry.
Figure 2-17 : Alignment of Good Governance Principles and Performance Agreements
กรอบคํารับรองการปฏิบัติราชการของสวนราชการ 2551 คํารับรองการปฏิบัติราชการของสวนราชการ
Financial Perspective ประสิทธิผล (ผลลัพธ)
•เสริมสรางขีด สมรรถนะ (เกง) และจริยธรรม (ดี) ของขาราชการ
ภ าย นอก
Financial Perspective ประสิทธิระดั ผล (ผลลั พธ) าเร็จ บบ ความสํ ระดับความสําเร็จตามแผนปฏิ บัติ ระดั ความสํ าเร็ ระดับความสําเร็กลุ จตามแผนปฏิ ตามพั ธกิ จจ หรื อจ ราชการของกระทรวง มภารกิบจัติ ระดั บบความสํ าาน เร็เร็จน นนธหรื ตามพั ธกิ ระดั ความสํ จตามพั ธ อ ราชการของกระทรวง กลุมภารกิจ จหลั กตามพั ของกรม กิกิจภารกิ จจหลั จหรื หรืออภารกิ ภารกิจ หลักกของกรม ของกรม ภารกิ หลั ก ของกรม และกรมและกรม
มิมิตติดิดาานคุ บบริริกการ นคุณ ณภาพการให ภาพการให าร คุคุณณภาพ Customer CustomerPerspective Perspective ภาพ
ระดั บบความพึ งพอใจ ระดั ความพึ พอใจ ระดับระดัความสํ าเร็เร็ จ ระดั บบ ความ บบความสํ ของผู รรับับบริบริกงการ/ ระดับ ความสํ ความ ความสํสาเร็าเร็วจาจในการ ในการจ ของผู พึพึ งระดั พอใจของ เปรเประดั ระดั บบความเชื ่อ่อมัาร/มั่น่น ของการมี ของการมี สน วามามี พอใจของ ใหปปสระชาชนเข ระชาชนเข านมามี วดรดใหมของ ผูผู รงับ บริ ก าร ระดั ความเชื ว นร ว ม ของประชาชน ว มของ รับบริการ ส ว นร ว ม ประชาชน ของประชาชน ประชาชน
20% 20% ความโปร งงใสและ ความโปร ใสและ ความโปร ปราศจากทุ จจริริตต งบใส ความโปร งัตใส ปราศจากทุ ในการปฏิ ิ ประพฤติ มมิชราชการ ในการปฏิ ประพฤติ ิชอบในการ อบในการ บัติ ปฏิปฏิบบัตัติริราชการ ราชการ าชการ
Internal Process Internal Work ProcessPerspective Perspective ประสิ ประสิททธิธิภภาพาพ 10% มิติดานประสิ ทWork ธิภาพ ระดั บ ความสํ า เร็ จ ในการ ดด ประสิ ท ธิ ภ าพการบริ ห าร ระดับความสําเร็จในการ การประหยั ประสิทธิภาพการบริหาร การประหยั บบ ความสํ าเร็จ ปรัปรับบปรุปรุงงกระบวนงาน ประสิ ทท ธิธิ ภภ าพการบริ หห าราร การประหยั ดด การเบิ กกจจาายงบประมาณ ระดั ความสํ พลัระดั งงงาน กระบวนงาน การเบิ ยงบประมาณ ประสิ าพการบริ พลั งาน การประหยั การปรั บปรุงาเร็จ การเบิกจายงบประมาณ พลังงาน
ภ า ย ใน
•อํานวยความสะดวก และตอบสนองความ ตองการของประชาชน
การปรับปรุง กระบวนงาน กระบวนงาน
Learning Learningand andGrowth GrowthPerspective Perspective พัพัฒฒนาองค นาองคกการาร
มิติด านพัฒนาองคการ การพัฒนาทุนดาน
การพั ดดานาน การพัฒนาคุณภาพ การพัฒนาทุนดาน การพัฒฒนาทุ นาทุนนห การพั นาคุณภาพการบริ ารจัดการการพัฒนาคุณภาพ มนุมนุษฒ ษยยฒ ความรู การจั การพั นาคุณภาพการบริ หารจัดการ การจัดดการองค การองคกการาร ความรูแและสารสนเทศ ละสารสนเทศ
(การจัดการความรู,ระบบสารสนเทศ,ระบบ (การจัดการความรู,ระบบสารสนเทศ,ระบบ บริหารงานคคล ( HR Scorecard, Individual บริหารงานคคล (Strategy HR Scorecard, Individual ScorecardMap )) / Balanced Scorecard Scorecard ))
•ความโปรงใส •ปองกันการทุจริต ประพฤติมิชอบ • การเปดเผยขอมูล ขาวสาร
•ปรับปรุงระบบการ ทํางานใหทันสมัย และมีประสิทธิภาพ
25% การพั การพัฒฒนานา กฎหมาย กฎหมาย การ การ
พัพั ฒฒ นา นา กฎหมาย กฎหมาย
Strategy Map / Balanced Scorecard
Each Ministry Steering Committee developed a common performance evaluation framework
for the ministry departments, while the Target Negotiation Committees identified the performance indicators, measurement basis and weights, and performance targets; and also monitored and evaluated the achievement of targets for each department’s indicators every 6 months. -
The Ministry Work Teams analyzed the appropriateness of performance indicators,
targets and measurements, which led to a constructive negotiation process. The OPDC supported pilot agencies with guidance and consulting teams to ensure that the performance agreements actually reflected the achievement of the pilot ministries. -
At the end of the fiscal year, the Public Sector Monitoring and Evaluation Committee of
each ministry verified its organization’s annual report. Once the Public Sector Development Commission approved the verification, annual performance incentives were allocated to each ministry for distribution to the various departments based on the results achieved. - The OPDC reported the outcome of the pilot project to the Public Sector Development Commission and then to the Cabinet for further implementation in other ministries.
Figure 2–18: Processes of Performance Agreement and Evaluation Development in Pilot Ministries
ขัน ้ ตอนการดําเนินการตามระบบการจัดทําคํารับรองและการประเมินผลการปฏิบัติราชการ ตามคํารับรองระหวางสวนราชการระดับกระทรวงและสวนราชการระดับกรมในสังกัด กระทรวงนํารอง สํานักงาน ก.พ.ร.
กําหนดกรอบการ ประเมินผล ของกระทรวง
กําหนดกรอบการ ประเมินของกรม ใหสอดคลองกับ กรอบของ สํานักงาน ก.พ.ร. •กรอบ 4 มิติ •ปฏิทิน •ขั้นตอน •แบบฟอรม
•กําหนดยุทธศาสตรของกรม •เสนอ KPI ตามแผน ยุทธศาสตรของกรม
6 คณะกรรม การเจรจา ขอตกลง ของ กระทรวง เจรจา KPI, คา เปาหมาย และเกณฑ การให คะแนนกับ ผูบริหาร กรม
ติดตามประเมินผล รอบ 6,12 เดือน ระดับกระทรวง
เจรจาขอตกลง และจัดทํา คํารับรองฯ ระดับ กระทรวง
เตรียมการ เจรจากับกรม วิเคราะหความ เหมาะสมของ kpi , จัดทํา เอกสาร ประกอบการ เจรจา, แตงตั้ง กก.เจรจา
7 จัด ทําคํา รับ รอง
ตรวจสอบ KPI Template
ตรวจสอบ ความถูก ตองของ คํารับรอง
9 ผูบริหาร ของกรม ลงนาม คํารับรอง กับ กระทรวง
สงผลคะแนน ให ก.พ.ร.รับรอง
10 จัดทํา รายละเอียด ตัวชี้วัด (KPI Template)
ประเมินผล •วิเคราะห SAR รอบ 6,12 เดือน •Site visit 6,12 เดือน •ประเมินผล 12 เดือน
12 ปฏิบัติ ราชการ ตามคํา รับรอง
จัดสรรสิ่งจูงใจ • กําหนด หลักเกณฑ และ จัดสรรสิง่ จูงใจให สวนราชการ ระดับกรม
13 รายงานผล •กรอก e-SAR-Card รอบ 6, 9, 12 เดือน •สงรายงาน 6,12 เดือน
จัดสรร สิง่ จูงใจ ใหแก ขาราชการ ในสังกัด
4) The Evaluation Framework of the pilot ministries consisted of the following dimensions: Dimension 1: Effectiveness: focused on the end results to be delivered by the ministry. Each ministry had to specify its strategic plan and targets, giving primary importance to the greatest benefits to the public, to the needs and interests of the people, and to economic and social prosperity. Dimension 2: Quality of Service: focused on the findings that had to be taken into account of citizen surveys on the quality of public sector service delivery.
Each ministry had to improve the
quality of its services, emphasizing responsiveness to citizens’ interests, public participation, prevention of corruption, and an increased level of transparency. Dimension 3: Efficiency: focused on the standardization of process improvement.
example, each ministry was expected to improve the efficiency of its budget management process, reduce costs, and maximize the usage of energy.
Dimension 4: Organization Development: focused on human resource development, quality management, information technology management, and regulatory management.
emphasis in this dimension was on internal development, which was the key enabling factor for the achievement of ministry strategies. Apart from Dimension 1, wherein each ministry had to measure its achievements against its strategic plan, the pilot ministry and its agencies had to negotiate the proper measurements for Dimensions 2, 3, and 4 as well. Results of Pilot Implementation • Results of the development of a performance management system in the pilot agencies can be summarized as follows; (1) Following the OPDC development guidelines, the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Energy and Ministry of Industry appointed relevant committees and work teams, negotiated appropriate measurements, and signed performance agreements.
The performance indicators
identified were the same as for other government agencies; i.e., level of citizen satisfaction, efficiency in budget management; and quality improvement in public sector management.
month self-assessment was conducted in May 2008; 12-month self-assessment reports were to be submitted in accordance with the timelines set by the ministry. (2) The Ministry of Energy identified public sector management quality improvement as a performance indicator at the ministerial level, and added a new indicator with a weight of 1%, measuring the ‘increase in the number of Ministry proposals that were implemented’.
This is in
accordance with the Cabinet Resolution of November 6, 2007. •
Findings and Recommendations -
Ministry Negotiation Committee members were careful not to create conflicts of interest
concerning their roles both as members of the committee and as ministry executives. -
Because the Work Teams play a significant role in moving the evaluation process
forward, it was important that team members studied and understood the guidelines for correct, effective, and efficient implementation. -
Information-sharing sessions should be organized among the pilot ministries to share
guidelines and practices and provide mutual support in coping with problems that arise. The OPDC should facilitate and coordinate with the 3 pilot ministries to ensure adherence to the same standards in implementing the system. •
Next steps - the 12-month assessments should be conducted and activities undertaken as given in the
- the scope of pilot implementation should be expanded to Social Sector ministries, for example, the Ministry of Public Health, which has strong potential in developing strategic plans. 2.2.4 Public Sector Management Quality Award (PMQA) Strategic Issue 3 of the current Thai Public Sector Strategic Plan (2008-2012) highlights the ‘high performance organization’ concept, targeting improvement in the quality of public sector management by the year 2012, with all government agencies achieving an average of 80% improvement in their management quality, in accordance with their organizational plan. In order to achieve the goal set, in 2008, the OPDC crafted the ‘Basic Success Levels’, a performance evaluation framework providing a step-by-step approach to improving management quality for use by government agencies in assessing their organizations and drafting their organizational plans. Once an agency meets the basic level requirements, it can set its organizational development targets toward the Public Sector Management Quality Award, the standard for international management quality improvement. (See Figure 2-19) Figure 2-19 : Public Sector Management Quality Improvement Roadmaps
“ รางวัลการพัฒนา องคการดีเดน”
“รางวัลมุงมั่นพัฒนาองคการ ดีเดน หมวด ........”
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 รอยละ ของการ ผานเกณฑ
เกณฑคุณภาพการบริหารจัดการภาครัฐระดับพื้นฐาน (Fundamental Level)
หมวด 1 หมวด 2
หมวด 3 หมวด 4 หมวด 5 หมวด 6
The Basic Levels Framework concretely indicates the level of quality improvement in approach, deployment, and results in the management of government agencies: - Approach (A): Systematic implementation exists, showing fundamentally required activities of the process; -
Deployment (D): Implementation has begun in some, but not all, units;
Result (R): Results of implementation have begun to appear.
In improving management quality, each agency has to implement its organization plan to meet basic levels of success in six criteria: leadership; strategic planning; customer and market focus; information and analysis; human resource focus; and process management. The OPDC’s roadmap specifies a focus on 2 criteria per year, with all 6 criteria to be completed by 2011. (See Figure 2-20) Figure 2-20: Public Management Quality Improvement Roadmap for 2009-2011
Customer focus and emphasis on ensuring that staff are efficient and service-minded in their duties
Focus is on strategy development and implementation with systematic evaluation procedures
Focus is on developing an information database to push strategies for efficient citizen-centered organizational development
Focus is on the setting of clear directions and development of human resources to emphasize learner-centered approaches
Criteria: c 1: Leadership d 2: Strategic Planning e 3: Customer and Market Focus f 4: Information and Analysis g 5: Human Resource Focus h 6: Process Management The Basic-Level Framework is thus a critical tool for government agency development during 2009-2011, supporting development of high performance, visionary, and socially responsible organizations as set out in the Strategic Plan of the Thai Public Sector (2008-2012).
government agencies will focus on citizens and stakeholders, making their work processes more adaptive. Their human resources will be encouraged to work towards continuous self-development, initiative and learning; applying IT for logical decision-making and result-based performance.
Policy on Organizational Governance In 2008, the OPDC conducted a study on Organizational Governance (OG) Policy for central
and provincial government agencies and public organizations.
Guidelines were disseminated and
explained during a meeting organized to help executives understand the concept and formulate their own OG policy as relevant, taking into consideration: 1) the country, the society and the environment; 2) the customers and stakeholders; 3) the organization itself; and 4) its staff. The guidelines enable agencies to then draft OG action plans and activities, and effectively monitor them in relation to the 4 considerations.
The OPDC plans to further develop and upgrade OG policy
development by initiating an OG Evaluation Framework, to ensure that government agencies have appropriate implementation guidelines consistent with international standards.
Framework will also help concretely assess implementation, and government agencies will be able to meet the objectives as stated in their OG policy. At the same time, an evaluation of the OG policy formulated will be conducted for interested organizations.
The OPDC plans to organize a workshop for government agencies to
ensure that the OG concept and implementation guidelines are acknowledged and correctly implemented in the coming years. 2.2.6 Development of Continual Knowledge and Innovation Creation in the Public Sector To sustain public sector development, a number of activities should be undertaken on a continual basis: reengineering work processes; developing the capacities of government officials to enable them apply their knowledge for future public sector improvements; sharing knowledge and practices among officials; and disseminating implementation guidelines and concepts relating to organization management.
The OPDC has organized various activities and channels to access
information and learning, including the following: • Knowledge-sharing Forum:
The OPDC has encouraged government officials to gain
knowledge and create innovations through knowledge management tools. The Forum was organized as a stage for officials to exchange ideas, and to share and discuss best practices. Such dialogues will lead to idea creation for future development of the organization and increased competition towards the evolution as a learning organization. In 2007, three Knowledge-sharing Forums were organized on the following topics: - Shift of Paradigm, Culture and Values in the Public Sector - Improvement of Service Delivery Processes - Governing by Networks
Approximately 600 people joined the 3 forums. A participant survey indicated satisfaction with the overall organization of this approach to knowledge sharing.
More than 70% of the
respondents suggested that the forum should be organized monthly, in Bangkok and in the provinces, and that the number of participants be reduced to between 70-100 persons to encourage participation in the sharing and dialogue sessions.
It was also recommended that highlights of
successful cases be presented during the program. Those who could not attend the Forum were able to access an online version on the OPDC Website: www.opdc.go.th. In addition, the OPDC published proceedings of the forum for reference of in the future development of government agencies.
E-learning: The OPDC initiated a project to offer a mini-Master of Public Management
and a mini-Master of Business Administration in an e-learning format, and has collaborated with several universities so that the graduates of these programs can continue their studies at the master degree level without re-taking basic courses, thereby facilitating the self-development programs of government officials. The partner institutions are: the National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA); Rajamangala University of Technology of Thanyaburi; Rajamangala University of Technology of Phra Nakhon; Suan Dusit Rajabhat University; Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University; and Srinakharinwirote University. Academic memoranda of understanding will confirm the academic cooperation and collaboration with these institutions at a later date. In 2008, courses introducing new management tools and techniques were added to the syllabus; for example, a course on High Performance Organizations. In addition, the international standard SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model) has been applied to the current elearning system. 2.2.7 Cooperation between the OECD Asian Center for Public Governance and the OPDC With an elected government in place in 2007, Thailand was able to work with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an international organization providing assistance to governments in tackling the economic, social and governance challenges of a global economy. The OECD membership, comprised initially of European countries with developed economies, has been expanded to include economically developed countries outside Europe, with South Korea and Japan currently the only two member countries in Asia. In February, 2008, Thailand and the Korean-based OECD Asian Center for Public Governance co-hosted a conference in Bangkok, “Enhancing Citizen Participation in Public Governance”, as a forum for member countries to exchange knowledge and experience relating to public sector development.
This international conference demonstrated Thailand’s readiness to join the OECD in the future and its commitment to work collaboratively on the international stage, especially in the areas of citizen participation and public sector modernization; and provided an opportunity to share knowledge essential for sustainable development, while at the time enhancing the image of the Thai public sector and the Thai government abroad. Dr. Thosaporn Sirisumphand of the OPDC and Mr. Hee-bong Lee, Director of the OECD Asian Center for Public Governance in Korea sign a Memorandum of Understanding on February 28, 2008, agreeing that the two organizations would co-host an international conference, “Enhancing Citizen Participation in Public Governance in Thailand”, during May 28–29, 2008 at Amari Watergate Hotel in Bangkok.
16 speakers from more than 10 countries were invited to share knowledge and experience in public sector development in their fields of expertise As the central agency responsible for promoting and initiating public sector development in Thailand, the OPDC recognizes its status as the hub for proactive dissemination of information to raise awareness of the overall achievements of Thai public sector reform, not only among the Thai people, but among other countries as well. Creating good relationships with other countries has facilitated the exchange of knowledge and learning, and demonstrates the leadership of the OPDC in initiating new tools for sustained public sector development in Southeast Asia.
2.3 Next Steps of Public Sector Development 2.3.1 Preparation for Regulations related to State Administrative Law 1. Integrated administration in provinces and provincial clusters: The OPDC will strengthen the administrative capacity of provinces and provincial clusters and their capability to propose their own budgets, consistent with the National Economic and Social Development Plan as well as with the needs and interests of local residents, as stated in a 2007 revision of the State Administrative Act of 1991. According to Section 52, Paragraph 3, Sections 53/1 and 53/2 of the Act, a Royal Decree on Integrated Administration of Provinces and Provincial Clusters is to be drafted to outline the approaches for the new administrative model.
Important tasks in this connection include:
formulating a policy framework and work system on aspects of integrated administration; drafting guidelines for the development of strategic and annual plans of provinces and provincial clusters; drafting guidelines for conducting local citizen opinion surveys; determining the scope of participation by other civic organizations; and identifying the number and selection process of representatives from various sectors to serve as members of committees at both the provincial and cluster level. In addition, a hub province and a leader of each provincial cluster need to be identified; and, most importantly, preparation must be begun to disseminate knowledge among governors, district officers, and government officials, as well as the provincial private, local, and civic sectors 2. Provincial Governance Committees (PGC): The OPDC will draft the Regulations of the Office of the Prime Minister on Provincial Governance Committees, and will strengthen the capacity of these committees to enable them to serve as units through which citizens can participate and monitor implementation of provincial activities. This is in line with Section 55/1 of the State Administrative Act (No. 7) of 2007, which states that the PGC will oversee and provide guidance to provincial government units in applying good governance principles to their work to enhance transparency and accountability. At the same time, workshops and meetings will be organized to create understanding on the matter among officials of the Office of the Prime Minister, auditors, governors, district officers, and as well as those in the private, local and civic sectors. 3. Dispute Resolution: The OPDC will create an additional public service mechanism to provide better access to justice and to ensure that peace and order is maintained in Thai society, through support of the role of the district office in resolving conflicts that arise.
mediation at the district level will result in cost savings and greater protection of citizens’ rights, and will increase social and economic equity for the disadvantaged, ensuring their security and opportunities for peaceful and self-sufficient lives, as stipulated under Sections 61/2 and 61/3 of the
State Administrative Act (No. 7) of 2007. The OPDC will prepare drafts of a Ministerial Regulation on Conflict Mediation and Dispute Reconciliation on Civil Matters, and a Ministerial Regulation on Offense Mediation in Criminal Matters, in cooperation with relevant agencies, including the Office of the Attorney General, the Royal Thai Police, the Ministry of Justice, the Courts of Justice, the Ministry of Interior, the Department of Provincial Administration and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration. 2.3.2 Development of a ‘Single Window’ Service system Over the past several years, government agencies have been successful to some extent in upgrading and improving efficiency in delivering services. However, changing demands and increased expectations require new approaches, with service delivery that is not only convenient, fast and transparent, but integrated into a ‘single stop’ format as well. The OPDC has therefore supported government agencies in upgrading and integrating the delivery of their services to achieve increased efficiency and citizen satisfaction. In 2009, the OPDC will bring about service innovation through a project focusing on the delivery of services at the district and local levels. In implementing this project, a number of public services will be selected and integrated into an electronically implemented Single Window Service. The project’s pilot areas include 25 provinces, 15 districts and 10 municipalities. Also, connected networks will be systematically organized among the provincial, district and local agencies to develop a model of service delivery substitution that can be adapted for future implementation. This innovation of the Single Window Service will provide better services with savings in cost and time, and will increase the overall capacity of public service delivery. 2.3.3 Review of the Roles of the State While the public sector has successfully extended its scope of service delivery to various groups of citizens during the past several years, that extension has now created a preponderance of roles and missions, which may lead to inefficiency, ineffectiveness, inequity, or failure in the delivery of services. Such outcomes can result not only in financial burdens for the country, but also in corruption and misuse of discretionary power. In addition, the participation of other mechanisms and sectors in governance is limited, jeopardizing transparency and responsiveness to stakeholders’ needs and interests. For these reasons a review of the roles of the state is necessary, to ensure that the concept of ‘state minimalism’ is truly implemented through the market mechanism and citizen participation, and that the remaining roles of the state will be developed efficiently and in line with principles of good governance. The OPDC will undertake research in this matter to seek models that appropriately revise and position the roles of the state, and reduce excessive power in one particular sector of society that is creating imbalance and conflicts.
Research will also be conducted to:
determine the appropriate redesign of administrative systems of public agencies that correspond to their new and existing roles; and identify new relationship models that enhance balance among the state, local administration, the private sector, the civic sector, communities, and other sectors. In addition, tools and mechanisms that will bring about participation from sectors other than the public sector will be studied for application in meeting the new model of administration; for example, drafting laws, imposing taxes and funding, and collaborating with others. 2.3.4 Revision of the Public Sector Monitoring and Evaluation System The key objectives in revising the state administration auditing system are: to strengthen the capacity of the Public Sector Monitoring and Evaluation Committee; to create collaborative networks at various levels; to report audit results; to ensure auditing guidance; and to monitor the implementation of actions specified in relevant cabinet resolutions. To realize these objectives, the OPDC will recommend that the Public Sector Monitoring and Evaluation Committee report results and provide appropriate recommendations to the Cabinet twice a year. Moreover, a six-month report should be required to enable relevant agencies to use the findings to improve their work. Guidance in monitoring and evaluation is to be provided so that various auditing committees will have common working guidelines related to the examination of general and special case audits, and to making improvements in reporting effectiveness. Additionally, to ensure that every government agency will have an appropriate and efficient internal audit and control system, action plans will be formulated covering a number of activities, including: the specification of an internal audit as an indicator in a performance agreement; allocation of the appropriate number of auditors; design of capacity building programs for internal auditors; and strengthening of the internal audit system. 2.3.5 Development of Joint KPIs Performance agreements of government agencies have been under development for several years, with key performance indicators (KPIs) of each ministry being cascaded to relevant departments within the same ministry. However, because the state administration guidelines require inter-ministerial work integration, the OPDC will develop a new performance agreement system that attaches great importance to the development of joint KPIs among relevant ministries and departments to ensure that the objectives of the State Administration Plan will be met. To encourage the integration of work between and among ministries, the OPDC will revise the current performance agreement system and add a new indicator, the development of joint KPIs, to the performance agreement of each ministry. Relevant ministries will develop shared objectives, and departments under those ministries will support, collaborate with, and assist each other in achieving the stated
Prioritization of economic and social strategic issues of the country will be an important
element of the system.
Key economic issues include those relating to Thai rice and substitute
energy. Among the strategic social issues to be considered are: security in the Southern border provinces; Phrea Vihear Temple; road accident prevention; drug abuse prevention; and crime fighting and prevention. 2.3.6 Revision of the Public Organization Act of B.E. 2542 (1999) In the enforcement of the Public Organization Act of 1999, problematic issues have arisen due to the imprecision of and restrictions in the Act; for example, government missions that are to be incorporated into public organizations (PO) to be established, along with the composition and qualifications of members of the boards and committees and executive directors, working guidelines,
etc. The OPDC has attempted to revise the PO Act since 2005, beginning with a study on the limitations of the Act that echoed a study undertaken by Thammasat University. The results of the study were presented to the Public Sector Development Sub-commission and the Commission, as well as to the Cabinet on 5 occasions: on October 4, 2005, September 25, 2007, November 27, 2007 and April 22, 2008. However, because of the changing political climate, a draft revised Act has not been proposed to the Parliament. In order to resolve the limitations in enforcing the Act, the OPDC will present a draft revision to the Cabinet.
The major changes include: establishing a committee to promote and
develop public organizations; amending the composition and qualifications of the board members of public organizations; determining qualifications of executive directors, permanent and temporary staff; providing working guidelines consistent with good governance principles; and formulating an evaluation and monitoring framework, which should be overseen by the minister assigned by the Royal Decree of Public Organization Establishment. 2.3.7 Development of a ‘Virtual Office’ System To be ready for the changes accompanying the era of globalization and the advances in information technology and modern communications, a study by the OPDC relating to the improvement of work processes in the form of a ‘Virtual Office’ would be appropriate, a new approach that will change the public sector’s working behavior. Government officials would be able to work productively anywhere, at any time, and would be expected to deliver outputs in the quantity and quality mutually agreed upon between the office and the official. To do this successfully, an information technology system would have to be designed so that images, sounds and information are efficiently connected and shared. Moreover, regulations relating to different types of work need
to be redesigned and piloted, to derive mutual benefits among the organization, the officer and the citizens. For instance, the organization will save on the costs of water, electricity, and space rental fees, while the officer will have a higher quality of life with a better balance between work and personal life, saving on travel costs and other expenses, as long as this does not negatively impact the public sector and the citizenry. 2.3.8 Development of a Public Sector Development Network In previous attempts to promote participatory governance the role of citizens in administrative participation was found to be limited and reactive. The OPDC will expedite the process by inviting relevant parties to become involved in the work of the public sector through the creation of networks, both within and outside individual organizations, including those focusing on public sector development; service delivery; collaboration; and information dissemination.
Also to be
undertaken is capacity building for local community networks, including civic sector networks and citizen networks, to strengthen the community’s ability to solve problems, such as education issues, for example. The creation of knowledge and understanding about public sector development will be strengthened through these networks. The ‘learning by doing’ approach will be emphasized so that these networks will have the potential to enter the process of participation as a partner with the public sector, as well as on the level of monitoring and assessing public sector administration and management. Moreover, working mechanisms, models and systems will be redesigned so that the civic sector and citizens can participate fully; for example, in providing guidelines for organizing consultation forums between a public agency and the citizens, etc. The OPDC will also promote the establishment of a citizen advisory board at every level and encourage cooperation among volunteers from the civic sector. Additionally, participation in planning and budgeting will be promoted. Channels of communication and interaction among networks will be increased to ensure the lively dialogue and sharing of knowledge and experience. Activities to be undertaken include: a capacity-building project for public sector development networks targeted at Chief Change Officers (CCOs) and change agents in central and provincial government agencies; a network management development project, comprising networks from each region; and the development of a Website, e-newsletters, and conferences as channels for communication among networks.
Conclusion Even though political changes took place that affected stability in 2008, public sector development received continual support from all government agencies, resulting in a strengthened administration with the capacity to efficiently serve the people. The Public Sector Development Commission formulated the Public Sector Development Strategic Plan 2008 - 2012, a guideline for government agencies to bring about a public sector characterized by high performance, strong ethical values, participatory principles, responsiveness to change, and adherence to good governance principles and guidelines. In addition, the OPDC promoted various activities in pushing forward Thai public sector development, among them: reporting on achievements in performance implementation in accordance with agreements in central and provincial government agencies, academic institutions and public organizations; increasing the quality of service delivery; promoting participatory governance; piloting a self-evaluation system at the ministerial level; initiating an organizational governance policy; and strengthening the capacity of government agencies to innovate and engage in continuous self-development. For its next moves, the OPDC will work on: preparing regulations relating to state administrative laws on integrated administration of provinces and provincial clusters; establishing provincial good governance committees; and implementing conflict mediation at the district level in accordance with the intent of the State Administrative Act of 1991, as revised by the 2007 State Administrative Act (No. 7).
Moreover, in order to prepare the system for future
challenges, emphasis will also be placed on: -
development of a single window service system;
a review of the roles of the state;
revision of the public sector monitoring and evaluation system;
development of joint key performance indicators;
revision of the Public Organization Act of B.E. 2542 (1999);
development of a virtual office system; and
the establishment of a public sector development network.
The OPDC leadership will continue to strive to bring about the objectives of a Thai public sector that demonstrates high performance, strong ethics, participatory governance and responsiveness to change, as stated in the Thai Public Sector Development Strategic Plan (2008 2012).