Dear Editor,
In an analysis undertaken by the IDB of the state of the Guyana Public Service in 2017, there is a series of ratings in relation to an Index of Performance indicators prepared by a section of that agency.
The results would hardly offer satisfaction for the decision-makers of the time, and certainly their several categories of senior officials who are still in action. More troubling, however, is the fact that the poor to indifferent ratings have been compulsively inherited by the successor administration.
Tables A and B respectively attempt to summarise the ratings for easy reference.
The revived Ministry of Public Service should use this reminder to resort to the actual documentation* for the most focused attention to be directed by selected representatives of all Ministries, with the view of strategising the appropriate reconstruction. It would do no harm if the required reconstruction is undertaken within a Caribbean context.
Taxpayers, particularly those who pay attention to the mediocrity so substantively portrayed in the analyses referred to, deserve better. And perhaps there should also be a more public debate about the validity or otherwise of these ‘distanced’ ratings. But in such circumstances what leadership can possibly be expected from untutored new Permanent Secretaries.
Very conveniently the rating for each Performance Attribute ranges from 0-5. The following are summary Tables.
The new leaders of the Public Service Ministry would do well to reflect on these realities.
*The documentation referred can be found at (https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/document/Building-State-Capacity-in-the-Caribbean-The-State-of-the-Civil-Service-in-Guyana.pdf), where the definition of each performance attribute is included.
Yours faithfully,
E.B. John
