The Process of Formation of Meritocracy in Transforming Public Services

The Process of Formation of Meritocracy in Transforming Public Services
The Process of Formation of

Meritocracy in Transforming Public
Services
1
The Process of Formation of Meritocracy in

Transforming Public Services
2012
Author:
Tamar Charkviani Research Leader, Ilia State University PhD Candidate
Ana Chelidze Senior Researcher, Ilia State University PhD Candidate
Scientific Expert: Prof. Emzar Jgerenaia
Research Assistants: Salome Khinikadze, Nino Tabagari, Sopho Margvelashvili, Ana Kitoshvili
Translator: Lia Sanikidze
Proof-reader: Lawrence Faulstich
ISBN: 978-9941-18-085-9
The study was conducted with the support of the Academic Swiss Caucasus Net (ASCN). ASCN is a programme aimed
at promoting social sciences and humanities in the South Caucasus (primarily Georgia and Armenia). Its different
activities foster the emergence of a new generation of talented scholars. Promising junior researchers receive support
through research projects, capacity-building training and scholarships through the programme. This programme focuses
on the advancement of individuals who, thanks to their ASCN experience, become better integrated in international
academic networks. The ASCN programme is coordinated and operated by the Interfaculty Institute for Central and
Eastern Europe (IICEE) at the University of Fribourg (Switzerland). The programme is initiated and supported by
Gebert Rf Stiftung.
Table of Contents
The Basic Findings ................................................................................................................... 5

1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 7
1.1 Bureaucracy ..............................................................................................................................8
1.2 Meritocracy.............................................................................................................................10
1.3 The Aim, Objectives and Hypothesis of the Research ......................................................11
1.4 Methodology of the Empirical Sociological Research .......................................................12
1.5 Instruments of Empirical Sociological Research ................................................................14
1.6 Processing and Analysis of Sociological Research Data ....................................................15
2. Managing Public Service .................................................................................................... 16
2.1 Strategies and Principles of Managing Public Service .......................................................16
2.2 Principles of Human Resource Management in Public Service .......................................19
3. Mechanisms for Career Development in Public Service.................................................... 24
4. Criteria for Assessing the Quality of Performance and Effectiveness of Civil Servants..... 30
5. Methods for Encouraging and Expressing Initiatives......................................................... 34
6. Professional Development and Widening/Enlarging Competences and Scope of Work ... 35
7. Motivational Systems in Public Service ............................................................................. 38
8. Compliance of Positions with Knowledge and Experience of Civil Servants .................... 39
9. Criteria for Evaluating Civil Servants ................................................................................ 41
10. Teamwork in Public Service ............................................................................................ 45
11. Changes Carried Out in Public Service since the Rose Revolution ................................ 48
12. The Decision Making Process in Public Service .............................................................. 52
13. Monitoring of Public Service Performance by Civil Society ........................................... 54
14. Paternalism vs. Partnership ............................................................................................. 61
14.1 Relative Ties and Clans .......................................................................................................62
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 64
The Basic Findings
The contemporary managerial system of public service is seen as a system based on

particular personalities rather than a non-personal, non-unified system.
Civil servants awareness of the principles of managementtheir theoretical knowledge as well

as practical experience in the fieldis quite low.
While discussing management principles, civil servants focus on human relations. In

public service, the human, collective nature of relationship is considered very important.
The human, collective nature of relationship of a departmental head toward employees and
citizens is understood as an absence of the feelings fear and punishment.
Georgian public service practises senior public official replacement, thus supporting the
argument that there is an increased bias in the evaluation process and leaves no
sustainable and predictable development environment for public servants.
The practice of employee evaluation creates an environment that is mainly defined by

external factors and varies in circumstances. Institutional management strategy is weak
and poorly developed. The environment is created by a newly appointed head and not by an
open, formal, well-established system of public service. It demonstrated that there is a lack
of structure and a dominance of personal and circumstantial approaches in public service.
Survey results demonstrate that career development is based on unwritten rules;

accordingly, discussion of this issue is taboo and limited to very general and stereotypical
answers. While discussing career development criteria, employees often refer to the issue of
showing off in front of a head person.
The criteria for career progression and success conforming to meritocratic principles are
not clearly formed in public service, and discourse on it shows that public servants
reflection on the subject is superficial.
Giving a recommendation is a modern form of favouritism
A direct supervisor mainly assesses the performance of a civil servant. Assessment of a supervisor
is not monitored and cannot be appealed by an employee.
The civil servant performance evaluation system is a closed systemit is not publicly
discussed. Similar to other closed systems, relevant discussions are held in lobbies and
behind closed doors.
Absence of formal criteria to assess performance extends the role of a head and exaggerates
it. Civil servants have a good understanding of this situation and find interference by a
departmental head in their work a regular occurrence.
Civil servants are reluctant to name cases of rights violations. Moreover, they do not see
any effective mechanism through which one may react to these violations. The only
optimal outcome, therefore, is to quit.
The fact that civil servants consider inter-monitoring activities in a negative light increases
the intensity and occurrence of informal mechanisms in public service.
Civil servants are more interested in maintaining their positions, rather than transferring
to a model of merit-based management, with a system of promotions that are determined
by the demonstration of practical skills and experience.
Professional education is not considered important or decisive for successful performance

at work.
Civil servants are not aware of the meritocratic principles of teamwork; team spirit is
interpreted and understood in a clan context.
While evaluating their supervisors, civil servants often refer to them as guardians.
Power is concentrated in the upper echelons of employment where decisions are left solely with high
officials. Accordingly, the decision-making process is closed and opaque. Escaping responsibility is
beneficial for both the civil servant and the head. Principles of centralised management dominate
in public service institutions.
1. Introduction
According to researchers and experts from post-communist countries, Georgian society is in a post-Soviet
state. The terms transitional/transforming society and country of young/beginner democracy may also
apply. In a transitional society, the weakening of various systems brings about the necessity to transform and
institutionalise social institutions and practices. This process is reflected in all spheres of social life. One of
the main parts of this transforming space remains with state/public institutions, which determine working and
living conditions and the ability of the population to adapt to new conditions.
After the Rose Revolution of 2003, Georgia began to reform many of its state institutions. The reform of
public institutions is one of the most salient for ensuring efficiency of the state. All social groups are
interested in making public services more effective, active and transparent. Despite the ongoing changes,
public service institutions still retain, in their form and essence, the qualities of autocratic management
characteristic of Soviet institutions. This is extremely damagingespecially in the present situation, when
state institutions are being formed. It is necessary to create modern structures, use non-traditional methods of
management and make appropriate decisions at this point in time.
A need has
emerged for
organisational structure
modification
of
public
institutions
and reconsidering HR policy at the first stage of reform. A new revolution against bureaucracy has to happen
in Georgia. The people have effected the Rose Revolution, and if up to now bureaucracy has been making
laws for these people, now people will make laws for the bureaucracy said President Mikheil Saakashvili
(Khorbaladze, 2005). Dismissing officials of the former government and bringing fresh blood to state
institutions has been the approach of the new government.
The issue of developing and implementing a single policy for the management and functioning of public
services is especially acute in Georgia. This problem is directly connected with the process of establishing a
modern bureaucratic system and the development of a new type of public servant: The introduction of
meritocrats and the principles of meritocracy.
The level of state development depends on the reforms that are carried out in the countryon the norms,
standards and game rules functioning formally or informally. Effective reforms in all areas are an important
priority, but, unfortunately, the incompetence of human resources and lack of social capital hinder both their
understanding at a strategic level and their practical implementation. This undermines the political, economic
and social stability of the country, and the trust accorded to government and its reputation in society.
In a jural state, the mechanisms for operating and managing state/public institutions have a strategic
importance for the institutionalisation of state policy and laws. The quality of state machinery and public
institutions largely determine the institutional potential of the state. Public service is one of the main elements
of state government, as the performance of its internal and external functions depends on how effectively it
works. Public services represent an important way to demonstrate the political vision of the government and
state regarding its development. They should result in the creation of a common goodcommon game
rules and a guarantee of their protection.
It is extremely important for a transforming country to adapt to global changes in regard to economic
and meritocratic principles. This requires a high level of professionalism, contemporary knowledge,
leadership skills, a wide range of strategic thinking and ethical norms in the fields of managing both state and
public institutions. It should be pointed out that the political-economic systems of most countries in the
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) are based on meritocratic values. In
order to integrate with developed western countries and establish standards corresponding to the norms of
Euro-Atlantic structures, Georgia has to choose a strategy based on meritocratic principles, which will help
the improvement of the economic, political and social environment of the country.
1.1 Bureaucracy
Otto von Bismarck
The optimal model of public service organisation

and HR policy determines how flawlessly and
effectively they function. Even the best initiatives
will not be realised if their implementation is
entrusted to the incompetent, corrupt, or those
disinterested in the reform. According to
Bismarcks famous quote With bad laws and good
civil servants it's still possible to govern. But with
bad civil servants even the best laws can't help (von
Bismarck, 1884).
For a certain period of time, the word bureaucracy acquired a pejorative connotation. At the same time, we
know that a bureaucrat is an absolutely neutral term that denotes a civil servant, e.g., a person whom the
state has
employed
to do
certain
work. This person, unlike a
representative of
the Soviet bureaucracy/nomenclature, is a positive character, as he/she helps us with the issues within his
competence. But in Georgia the reality is often different and the functions of bureaucracy are distorted
(Margvelashvili, 2005)..
The term bureaucracy was first used in 18th century France, and later in England in 1918. Initially, the term
retained a more negative, somewhat humiliating, connotation that is even felt nowadays when generally
applied1. Max Weber was the first scientist to find positive meaning in the term. He argued that bureaucracy
is a form of organisation found in modern society; its work implies a vertical/hierarchical division of roles
that are established based on clearly defined rules (instructions) and procedures. Weber defined the ideal
Dictionary/Directory of Social and Political Terms /Editors: Eduard Kodua, etc. Publisher: Lasha Beraia/ Tbilisi, Logos Press, 2004-351 p. Series of
Social Sciences, Editor: Marine Chtashvili.
type of bureaucracy. The characteristics that are attached to it are used to measure the level of bureaucracy in
any given organisation:
Hierarchically organised system of official roles;

Vertical system of authoritystarting from the functions of organisation heads to the responsibilities
of the rank and file;
Roles are linked to rulesthey define legal boundaries of what officials can and cannot do. Rules
also regulate work regime;
Procedures are defined for all theoretically possible situations that an organisation might face;
Officials are under strict disciplinary boundaries;
Chancellery, where written documents are extremely well organised;
There is a clear division between official and private.
Most academic works on bureaucracy mainly elaborate ideas developed by Weber. The Bureaucratic
Phenomenon (1964), by Michel Crozier, is one of the major pieces among them. This text identified the
myriad of different motivational factors behind the actions of senior and junior officials in bureaucracies. The
rank and file are mainly interested in an easy/peaceful life that can be achieved through strict adhesion to
supplied rules (no matter the rule). Senior officials have greater interests, though often unachievable as it is
difficult to make the rank and file digress from established rules. Enterprise work processes are faced with the
similar challenges. The Weberian framework of analysis can be applied to public offices as well as
enterprises. Weber argued that bureaucracy is the most efficient form of organisation. In this context, critics
argued that bureaucracy is most suitable in cases where prediction (estimation) is possible, e.g., production of
a mass consumption good when demand for the good is stable. Bureaucracy is less efficient in (post-modern)
cases when demand is placed on special, non-standard, goods.
Weber argued that the bureaucratic coordination of human work is a distinctive characteristic of modern
social structures. He noted that bureaucracy is superior to all other forms in terms of preciseness, stability,
strict discipline and reliability. Hence, it gives organisational heads, as well as civil servants, the possibility to
clearly assess/appraise their achievements. According to Weber, the formal structure of bureaucracy follows
three characteristics: The division of responsibilities, hierarchy and rules. These are necessary aspects of
any functional bureaucracy. Appointing someone to a position (. . .) implies attachment of certain work
related functions to the position and not to a person (Weber, 1997).
Barry Bozeman (1999) noted, The strength of bureaucracy lies in its focus on standardized relations.
Favoritism, nepotism, bribery and other forms of corruption should not be acceptable in modern
bureaucracy; this is more pathology rather than its natural characteristic. Standardization is often rejected
by people, as their majority, whether private person or representative of an organization, tries to express its
individualism and its special needs. In fact, each of us is distinct and we all have our own needs.
We do not love bureaucracy, but we need it at least to the point, when we come up with alternative
functional organization scheme, that will maintain all characteristics of bureaucracy that is acceptable for us
predictability and stability, rationalism, competence, non-partiality and will be free of those, that we
dislike so much rigidity, inability to manage non-standard situations, creation of invincible obstacles
between high officials and citizens. One of the reasons for this is that the wider society does not appreciate
the positive effects of a hierarchical system of positions and bureaucratic organisation. The second reason is
that there are numerous forms of bureaucracy and bureaucracy is more an opportunity to do something
rather than a threat to and uncured wound of a society. Sometimes it is extremely efficient, sometimesless
(Bozeman, 1999).
Gyorgy Gajduschek, in his last research paper, Bureaucracy: Is It Efficient? Is It Not? Is That The Question?,
concluded that though de-bureaucratisation might be desirable, bureaucratic organisation ensures more
stability and reduces uncertainty, which is extremely important for new member states. One of the main
advantages of a bureaucratic structure is that it is predictive and reliable (Gajduschek, 2003).
This statement agrees with the argument developed by Jacques Ziller in that bureaucracy is associated with
the concept of a legal state (Rechtsstaat). Ziller notes that the concept of legal state and law, as such, does
not prevent administrative reform and establishment of management: it is a set of opportunities, that can be
used well or badly and it depends on legal awareness of those people who are responsible for establishing
and implementing new forms of management. (Ziller, J. 2003)
1.2 Meritocracy
What does the creation of meritocracy mean for
sociology? The cover of the first edition of the
book The Coming of Post-Industrial
Society, by American sociologist Daniel Bell
(1973), displays a wall with the inscription
Knowledge Rules - OK: A slogan of a society
where ability and knowledge rule i.e.
meritocracy. The 21st century marks the
establishment period of a new type of society;
the knowledge society. In this society, the
measure for personal success is the maximal
realisation of individual potential.
The issues of degree of success and career advancement have been sufficiently studied in sociology. Peter
Blau and Otis Dandly Duncan have conducted research on the social origins of individuals and the factors
determining their status. The study has revealed that education and professional success are parts of an
interconnected process: On the one hand, the processes which determine ones aspiration to status and which
influence this aspiration; on the other hand, processes transforming this aspiration into a new status. The
researchers have once more confirmed that the social class of parents (social origin, education, etc.) influence
the childrens future career and status.
Prioritising education and intellect has once again made the ancient idea of meritocracy pertinent.
Meritocracy is a form of government in which posts and responsibilities are granted to people according to
10
their skills and abilities. In meritocracy, the society rewards (through wealth, rank and social status) those that
demonstrate their skills and competence through their experience and succeed in competition. Systems of
evaluation, such as formal education, have a direct connection to meritocratic views.
The model of meritocratic government is an evolved form of democracy and is opposed to social practices
common in Soviet and post-Soviet Georgiaplutocracy (acknowledging a person according to their career
success and wealth), nepotism (family connections), oligarchy (class privileges), cronyism (friendly
relationships), clientelism (patron-vassal relationships).
1.3 The Aim, Objectives and Hypothesis of the Research

Establishing meritocratic values is important for Georgia. In the new, ever-changing environment, with the
inherited general mistrust of Soviet-type institutions, and at a time when formal democratic social institutions
(formal and moral criteria of success) are still in the process of development, informal factors (protectionism,
nepotism, etc.) still largely determine socio-economic success. This is inconsistent with the route declared by
the state. In electronic and printed media, as well as in everyday life, we encounter people who have achieved
certain level of professional success, but the factors that determined their progress and success have not yet
been studied.
Modern bureaucracy in Georgia is facing a challenge: To allow reforms to create a healthy system based on
the principles of meritocracy, or to find alternative ways of functioning, which will hinder its development
into an open, democratic system. In order to study the factors that determine the principles for managing
public services and the success of public servants, the specific state of our society should be taken into
consideration. In the transforming post-Soviet, Georgian, society, the socio-economic, legal and knowledge
systems are changing: They are being filled in with new systems and containing content alien to our
experience. It is a transition from a totalitarian society to an open one. This situation, followed by the painful
process of changing values, presents individuals with a challenge: To transform and find ways of adapting to
the new environment.
Commonness in Soviet and post-Soviet ways of government and informal practices is especially problematic
in state institutions, as the state is the first guarantor of the protection and regulation of legal norms. This
research presents the hypothesis of prevalence of informal relationships over meritocratic principles in
the system of public service management, which hinders the process of institutionalisation of
meritocratic principles.
Therefore, one of the main aims of this research is the description/study of strategies for public service
management and identification/analyses of factors assisting/hindering the formation of the new type of
managementmeritocracy. Consequently, to enable adequate understanding of the process of
transformation of public services, the aims and objectives of our research relate to several topics:
Patterns/practices of transformation of management strategies and the adaptation of civil servants in

public services;
11
Factors assisting and hindering the development of meritocratic management principles in Georgia;
The role of informal relationships in institutionalisation of meritocratic principles in the public service
management system;
Factors determining success in public services (social origin, level of education, loyalty to the ruling
party, contribution to the Rose Revolution, etc.);
What the formal norms are for selecting personnel and promotion in public services and how much they
coincide with common practice there.
The sociological research studies the dominant discourses and practices of public servants in Georgia
according to the following indicators:
Awareness of principles, forms and directions of meritocratic management;

The degree of certainty of public servants regarding the positive role of meritocratic management
principles in public services;
Activities performed towards the institutionalisation of meritocratic management principles;
Identification of the readiness of public institutions to implement meritocratic management principles,
and future plans in this direction;
Identification of the correlation between informal practices and meritocratic principles:
o
What form of relationship with management is acceptable/unacceptablepaternalistic/of

partnershipand what are the public servants arguments for choosing this approach; what form of
relationship with management does one consider acceptable;
How the public servants view career development, i.e., whether they consider personal connections,
patronage or loyalty to management more important when holding a position in public services, as
opposed to education and professionalism;
How loyalty to management influences career prospects, i.e., whether it is beneficial to demonstrate
loyalty if the public servant does not agree with management decisions, what solutions they
normally find in such situations and what their arguments for this are;
Probability of career advancement without the help of informal routes and through appropriate
execution of ones responsibilities (i.e. observing formal norms). Apart from the correlation of these
two factors, the study will reveal to what degree involvement was forced, how much it was
determined by lack of choice etc.
1.4 Methodology of the Empirical Sociological Research

A sociological approach to the issue of managing state/public services involves a review of social institutions
and management principles in the context of a transforming state and society. A sociological research
methodology has been developed for the implementation of the aims and objectives of this research and for
the acquisition of exhaustive/objective information on the subject under study.
12
The object of this empirical sociological research is public services and the public servants employed there.
The selection of public servants included those of different rank and those employed in different public
institutions (ministries, the State Chancellery, the Public Defenders Office, etc.).
The sociological research was based mainly on qualitative research methods, although a quantitative
research method was also employed. The qualitative research method enables in-depth analysis of the
subject, which is reflected in making it possible to identify the problem. Qualitative sociological research
involves working with a small group of people. Its conclusions are connected with studying the problem from
inside and attempting to find possible solutions to the problem. By contrast, interpretation of quantitative
research data describes the present situation, outlining the main issues and problems. It is important to
observe the principle of triangulation, which involves the logical use and combination of various quantitative
and qualitative research methods in order to ensure the validity of both approaches.
A. The Analysis of Theories include the following: Conceptions of the bureaucratic system, social networks
and social capital, sociology of management, the formation and functioning of social institutions, typology
and routinisation, management systems, communication processes and information circulation etc.
B. Analysis of Documents involves the study of any relevant written sources. These include both documents
connected with public services (ratings, administrative documents) and those connected with job markets
(CVs, HR department materials, etc.). Information about the professional and labour activities of public
servants was discovered through the analysis of these documents, which enabled a study of general
tendencies, and the classification of similar or homogeneous facts, etc. This would, in turn, allow for the
identification of public servant career progress and the criteria met by public servants that permitted career
advancement. It should be pointed out that the analysis of documents was carried out using both quantitative
(traditional content analysis) and qualitative (content analysis, discourse analysis, etc.) methods. It is possible
to study the CVs of public servants from both qualitative and quantitative angles. Qualitative analysis
involves the evaluation of each CV according to profession, career progress, etc. Quantitative analysis
involves recording the extent of experience, likely value of salary, length of work within the same
organisation in the same position, etc., for each candidate.
According to this method, the main difficulties connected with the topic were revealed, the research subject
was determined more precisely and the questions for the questionnaire-guidethe instrument used during our
in-depth interviewswere selected.
C. Qualitative Research Using the Interview Method: Two target groups, totalling 52 respondents, were
identified in the research:
o
o
Public servants occupying leading public positions (mainly departmental heads);

Public servants occupying senior or junior public positions (mainly departmental workers).
This model of selection for qualitative sociological research enabled us to determine the situation connected
with the subject under study in different public institutions. It also made it possible to compare the
experiences and discourses of representatives from these two groups.
13
Different criteria were taken into account while selecting respondents relevant to the aims and objectives of
the research: Education, work experience, profession, sex, age, origin (nationality, place of birth
town/village), social activity, connection to political or business elite, etc.
Two types of interview methods were employed in the research; in-depth interviews and narrative
interviews:
A. In-depth interviews involved one-on-one conversations with respondents (face-to-face interviews),
which were carried out according to a strategy using methods that encourage lengthy, meaningful,
answers to the proposed questions. They gathered respondents evaluations of, and ideas about,
specific situations and events, the reasons for their occurrence and the subsequent consequences
resulting from these occurrences. Apart from the general topic of conversation, the in-depth
interviews included a specific selection of questions to be answered. The wording and specificity of
the questions, topic development, conversation length, question development and logistical structure
depended on the interviewer.
B. Narrative interviews provided a deeper and more encompassing understanding of public servant
careers and the various affecting factors. During the narrative, the respondent could recount his or her
work biography in a free form, step by step. According to S. Whiston and D. Rahardja, short simple
life episodes should be taken as an adequate realisation of this method. This helped to better
understand the cultural, historical and organisational contexts within which the individuals career
had been realised (S. Whiston, D. Rahardja, 2005).
Interview Transcription Disclaimer: The quoted excerpts from our interviews are translations from
Georgian left in their original, unedited state. The use of grammar may not always be correct. Any use of
bold text within quotations represents author-added emphasis.
1.5 Instruments of Empirical Sociological Research

Instruments of qualitative research, i.e., sociological research questionnaires, were developed within the
sociological research. Both types of interviews were based on unstructured sociological research
questionnaires. This involved a conversation without strict specification regarding the questions, but
according to a single plan. Questionnaires were organised thematically and divided into sections relevant for
the research.
With the help of the questionnaire-guide, the interviewer attempted to assist the respondents in recollecting
their experiences and recounting them in a well-rounded, structured, fashion in order to acquire all the
information necessary for the research. The interviewer used the guide minimally to avoid breaking the
natural flow of the interview and to prevent the limiting of responses.
Different methods were used in acquiring different types of information when compiling the questionnaire:
The questionnaire included open-ended, direct/indirect and control questions. In addition, for a better
14
understanding of the subject under examination, both types of interviews involved different projection
methodology (using unfinished sentences, pictures of the career ladder, picturing life strategies, etc.).
1.6 Processing and Analysis of Sociological Research Data

The material acquired through the primary sociological research (documentation sources and interview
transcripts) was processed using both quantitative (traditional content analysis) and qualitative (qualitative
content analysis, discourse analysis, etc.) approaches. After acquiring the information, it was classified and
analysed using the computer program QDA Miner.
The analysis of the sociological research results was based primarily on a descriptive procedure. However, as
the grouping of data, data interpretation, conceptualisation, typology, and correlation analysis methods were
used as well.
15
2. Managing Public Service

2.1
Strategies and Principles of Managing Public Service
A new concept of Georgian public service is aimed at establishing effective mechanisms in state institutions.
The main objective of public service reform is the development of modern state institutions based on the
fundamental principles of new public management. The main aspects of these principles pertain to the
establishment of flexible and effective managing structures and the improvement of public service quality:
Flexible and effective management of public service, is defined as active, transparent and discrete
organisational control that ensures accountability and clear division of power and responsibilities;
Improvement of public service quality is defined as evaluating productivity based on preliminary

identified standards, aims and indicators; thus transferring focus from process to results.
In the framework of public service reform, implementation of flexible and functional managerial strategies
will ensure efficiency in public institutions. Implementation of managerial strategies is based on two basic
principles:
The extending administrative management functions;

The decentralisation human resource management methods.
Modernisation of public service through implementation of new managerial practices is based on

transparency and accountability. Ensuring these two principles in public service increases transparency,
public accountability and public trust. In addition, public service should simultaneously guarantee fair and
equal treatment of all citizens. Establishment of a politically neutral bureaucracy is crucial for ensuring better
planning and implementation of different activities, which benefits the overall efficiency of public service.
Civil servant awareness regarding the strategies and principles of public service may guarantee effective
implementation of public service reform and the establishment of new public management principles.
Discussion among civil servants over strategies and principles of public service reveal their perceptions of
public service. Analysis of discussions over strategies and principles of public service show that different
directions of discourse can be identified:
Groups of civil servants that identified themselves as having no information about general strategies
and principles of public service.
I do not have any direct links to that issue (one of the respondents).
I do not know what are the principles and strategies at the moment, there might be some strategies
developed, but I do not know exactly what (one of the respondents).
The lack of public service principles and strategies is primarily visible due to several factors: (1) a low rank
of service, (2) a lack of participation in the process of developing strategies, (3) a lack of awareness
16
participation in the implementation of these strategies, (4) a lack of relevant formal written documents, and
(5) alack of common strategy for public service. Examples are as follows:
I am not holding a high enough position to work on management and strategies, I am just a
consultant/specialist, accordingly identification of strategies and later on their implementation is not
my direct responsibility (one of the respondents).
Where is a strategy and how should it be managed? . . . You know what: it is not clearly identified
and written down. Accordingly it is not formalised. And in general, the strategy is not universal for
everyone (one of the respondents).
I have an experience of working in different public service offices and it is different everywhere. In
some cases strategies are well defined, in others - not so well (one of the respondents).
The question of what are the management principles and strategies is quite difficult. In different
fields all managers have their own different strategies. Unfortunately in Georgia and in our case no
special management exists, there are only rare exceptions (one of the respondents).
I think that principles of public service management are developed now, there is something new for
us in system management (one of the respondents).
Discussion of the strategies and principles managing public service, in a group of civil servants that
have no information about general strategies and principles of public service, is not in accordance
with the conceptual model of administrative reform:
Strategy in future should be learning, development. There should be relevant training. As for
principles, I think one should be sincere and genuine, taking work close to ones heart. These are the
principles I see (one of the respondents).
Principles? You know what? First of all, principles should be hard work, responsibility and positive
relations between co-workers (one of the respondents).
have no information about general strategies and principles of public service, is similar to a
discussion over the structure of a particular ministry:
Management principles are followingpublic service office is established within a ministry.
Minister, deputy ministers, other structural units. Ministry is build based on these units that have
own functions (one of the respondents).
discussion over objectives of a particular ministry:
17
Government makes particular decisions, identifies priorities and government structure is adapted to
these priorities. For instance, nowadays the main priority is to attract foreign investment;
accordingly, the ministry tries to attract investments and ensure that foreign money as much as
possibleenters Georgia and creates employment opportunities (one of the respondents).
As for the strategy, our particular ministry has an action plan as its strategy. The main priorities
and activities are defined in this strategy; in particular, what is a priority this year, what should be
implemented, how it should be implemented and what results should be achieved. Thats the form [of
strategy] (one of the respondents).
The main strategy of this ministry is to protect the rights of internally displaced people (IDPs) from
territories of Georgia that have been occupied, improve their social conditions, take care of their
placement, etc.; discuss cases of foreign nationals, refugees, procedures of defining their status, etc.
(one of the respondents).
discussion over internal regulations of a particular ministry:
Management principles and strategies are defined and described in internal statute and
regulations (one of the respondents).
This process is quite open. Each of us is aware what one should do based on the statute. For
instance: what are the competences and scope of work of particular departments; and everything
happens around it [in accordance] (one of the respondents).
are more or less aware of general strategies and principles of public service, cover a number of
relevant elements from the conceptual model of administrative reform:
Everything that happens in public service should be accessible for all citizens. Accordingly
transparency and accessibility of information, not confidentiality, have primary importance (one of
the respondents).
Management principles are basic principles identified in the Law on Public Service. These are first
of all publicity, transparency, fairness and these are the fundamental ones (one of the
respondents).
A merit based principle should be implemented and widely spread. This principle focuses on the
knowledge and dignity of a person/co-worker and does not encourage friendship and relative
relations (one of the respondents).
18
In general [it] is based on a single ruler principle, in other words any institution has a head
person. In our case it is a minister who manages the work of the ministry and everyone is
hierarchically subordinated to each other (one of the respondents).
Management principles and strategy in a public service are as followssubordination to upper
level; relevant units, including my direct supervisor, head of the department, deputies and head of
administrative department are informed about all steps I take, all events and tasks I fulfil (one of
the respondents).
A contemporary managerial system is seen as a system based on particular personalities rather than a nonpersonal, non-unified systemThe contemporary system is adapted to particular personalities. A ministry
should not be based on one person. No one is irreplaceable, immortal. When one person leaves it should not
destroy the system. Accordingly it is important to have well defined written functions, rights and
responsibilities and system should be operational. It is better for a system to be managed itself rather than by
personal characteristics of a particular person (one of the respondents).
2.2 Principles of Human Resource Management in Public Service

The organisational structure of public servicethe inter-linked management levelsplays an important role
in the prompt and effective achievement of state or public service aims. Human resource management in any
organisation, including public service, should be in accordance with the achievement of strategic goals and
objectives. In other words, it should be in accordance with desirable outcomes. Sharing strategic goals and
objectives with civil servants makes them part of a common activity.
Management can be effective only when it is implemented based on strictly/clearly defined principles.
Although old organisational system personalitiesin particular, managersplayed a major role in the
process, contemporary effective management is based on the establishment of a rigid managerial system. The
main principle of effective management is the realisation of aims and objectives in a certain time frame
defined through previously established rules. Achievement of objectives is considered a success not for a
particular civil servant, but for the position this person holds. Each and every position in a structure has predefined written rights and responsibilities.
Rank and file civil servants, as well as those holding high managerial positions, have difficulty in clearly
defining and assessing the basic characteristics of a formally established system while discussing principles
of public service management. Civil servants awareness of the principles of managementtheir
theoretical knowledge and practical experience in the fieldis quite low.
Two basic trends can be identified in this regard:
1. A lack of theoretical management principle knowledge;
2. A general and superficial understanding of management principles in practice.
19
I do not have one distinctive principle, all depends on circumstances. I have very general managerial
approach, in other words I manage division of tasks. I do not have any particular principle. Manager is
just an ordinary head of an organisation (one of the respondents).
Management principlesthere are no special principles as such. Principles have nothing to do with it
My principleswe do not have special principles as such. Person should be a hard worker,
professional, well organised that is the principle. We do not have any other principles (one of the
respondents).
While discussing management principles, civil servants often refer to the Law on Public Service and an
organisations internal regulations. No difference can be found between principles of management and the
rule of law in describing types of management.
Discipline in the ministry is controlled based on the internal statute. Each head of department has
his/her own method to manage staff. Their method can be strict/rigid or loyal/liberal. It seems all
managers have their own individual approach (one of the respondents).
There is no doubt that legislation, and the rights and responsibilities identified by the law, are a foundation
for work in any field. Rights granted by law can take different forms when put in practice. In order to achieve
effectiveness in public service, it is important to formalise, structure and ensure universality in these forms.
Reference to law is either too general or contains elements of misinterpretation. Below is an example of the
interrelationship between law and management principles. According to the citation presented below, a public
servant that follows the law does not need a manager:
There is a law, and you do everything in accordance. In other words you have a statute. There is a law
on petrol and natural gas, there is a law on energy, license and etc. Imagine a citizen addressing [the
organisation], citizens address does not need to be managed. He/she is just asking to cancel a debt/bill
for energy consumption. We re-direct the request to a relevant company that can solve the problem. In
case we have to address the government, we draft laws and present to the government according to
legislation . . . in other words law and administrative law in particular, tells you what to do in detail. So
there is no need for management (one of the respondents).
I do not have a special education and I am not familiar with a term management principles as such.
There is the administrative code and law on public servantsmaybe there is a mistake in their official
names. These are the principles for management. Of course, managers, heads of department give their
own touch to this law, special understanding that are guided by a psychological school and they manage,
and there are managing schools. It is difficult for me to further generalise (one of the respondents).
While discussing management principles, civil servants focus on human relations. In public service, the
human, collective nature of relationship is considered very important. The human, collective nature of
relationship of a departmental head toward employees and citizens is understood as absence of feelings of
fear and punishment:
20
There is this human, collective nature of relationship between us and I am also actively involved. I also
apply the same principle. First of all no one should be afraid to look in here, when you give assignments
while making a stressful face . . . when you give tasks using collective nature it always gets done in time.
There is no need for a strict regime . . . everything that has to be done can be done with a good will and
smile (one of the respondents).
Our main principle is that an employee should work in a psychologically healthy environment that is
free of stress. Their human needs should be met. Management should necessarily be based on respect and
not fear or anything else. We try to avoid punishment, we try to forgive rather than punish (one of the
respondents).
The human, collective nature of relationship is a set of formal and non-formal relationships. One may
connect the two, though the boundaries between cooperative/formal relations and friendly/non-formal
relations are quite vague. Work-related issues, of course, are mainly discussed in work-oriented relationships
via offices in addition to informal settings located outside of the office; it is difficult to draw a strict boundary
between the two. Accordingly, it creates a space for doubt regarding the impartiality of a head when
evaluating employees.
There are formal and non-formal principles of management. Formal ones are applied in a work
process, but outside work environment he/she can be your manager as well as your friend. It means
that we do not absolutely [always] follow subordination (one of the respondents).
Everyone here has a good understanding that subordination has to be followed. But there are
personal relations where you can again follow subordination as well as have quite open and hearted
relations. Behind that, there are friendly relations that affect the work process (one of the
respondents).
Public service management is based on merit in developed countries. As a result, public service structure is
developed in accordance to this principle. Human resource recruitment is also based on it in the expectation
that quality professionals will be hired for different positions, fulfilling all responsibilities attached to the
position while maintaining high professional standards.
Managing Georgian public service based on this principle is quite challenging. Based on how managers
describe the work process in their offices, it is obvious that they are quite sceptical about the compliance of
their employees (skills and knowledge) with the requirements of the position they hold. At the end of the day,
every new manager initiates a repeated evaluation of employee skill, competence and work experience.
After I started my work here, at the initial stage I observed employees to identify their skills in
different fields and better understand how to assign tasks. I know the background of each and every
employee, in other words, where they come from, what they have done, what experiences they have
etc. Accordingly I try to fully utilise their experiences and contacts, as I consider that very important
21
Every new head/manager pays much attention to observing and re-evaluating employees, thus questioning the
impartiality of a previous heads recruitment policy. This proves that partiality prevails in the process of
employee evaluation and creates ground for developing distrust toward recruitment policy.
Georgian public service practice typically replaces senior public officials, thus supporting the argument that
there is an increased bias in the evaluation process and there remains no sustainable and predictable
developmental environment for public servants.
First of all, I try to meet all my employees. And when I say meet I do not only mean to know their
names and surnames. I have to know their personalities, their interests, needs and desires, how they
see themselves in the office. When assigning tasks I try to do it in accordance with their interests. In
short, I try to know everything about the capacities of all employees so that my approach is relevant
and adequate (one of the respondents).
These ideas are shared by a number of their employees; they also realise that the public service principle,
stating that a civil servants performance should be in accordance with a predefined description, is not
realistic. Accordingly, it is the task of a manager to match employee capacity with assignments so that the
work gets done at the end of the day.
First of all it is important to distribute tasks and ensure that the distribution is optimal. A head has
to observe and understand if an employee has enough capacity to do what he or she is assigned to; if
needed, the head has to decide how to divide tasks. If there is a lawyer, this person can do other
assignments better, so it is the task of a head to notice and identify skills, capacities and strength. So
when giving assignments, the strength and weaknesses of employees should be considered (one of
the respondents).
This practice of employee evaluation creates an environment that is mainly defined by external factors and
varies in circumstances. Institutional management strategy is weak and not well-developed. The
environment is created by a newly appointed head and not by an open, formal, well-established system of
public service. It demonstrated that there is a lack of structure and the dominance of personal and
circumstantial approaches in public service.
The absence of an institutional strategy for human resource management in public service was confirmed by
50% of respondents participating in the 2011 survey conducted by The Bureau of Public Service2. Only 10
out of 21 public service institutions have a general human resource management strategy.
It should be noted that the researchers responsible for the survey have had some doubts regarding the validity
of results because the existence of complex (written) documents covering strategic approaches and aims has
not been double-checkedresults are only based on answers that have not been double-checked.
Respondents that confirmed the existence of a human resource management strategy in their offices gave a
negative response to the question regarding the existence of a strategy for internal communication and human
resource development.
2
Systems of managing human resources in Georgian public service. The Bureau of Public Service, March 2011.
22
Chart 1. HRM Strategic Planning

Parliament o f Georgia
Administration of President
Ministry of Environ ment Protectio n
Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Internal Affairs
Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development
Ministry of Finance
Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of In ternally Displaced Persons
Ministry of Agriculture
Ministry of Culture and Monument Pro tection
Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure
Ministry of C orre ctions and Legal Assistance
Ministry of Education and Science
Ministry of Youth and Sport
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
State Minister's Office for EU-Atlantic I ntegration
State Minister's Office for Reintegration
Government's Chancellery
Ministry of Labor, Health and Social Affairs
The survey proved the critical relevance of managing internal communication, as only six (30%) of the
Georgian public service offices have an internal communication strategy.
Chart 2. Internal Communication Strategy

Parliament of Georgia
Ministry of Environment Protection
Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Finance
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons
Ministry of Culture and Monument Protection
Ministry of Corrections and Legal Assistance
State Minister's Office for EU-Atlantic Integration
Absence of an internal communication strategy decreases employee awareness of the activities and future
plans of the organisation. It challenges development of managerial capacity, as there is a lack of mutual
communication and mechanisms for effective feedback. It also diminishes positive attitude and increases
resistance toward change.
23
3. Mechanisms for Career Development in Public Service

One of the pillars of public service is the development and implementation of an optimal model for human
resource management. Implementation of modern principles for human resource management can increase
administrative effectiveness, decrease costs and improve service delivery. General principles and strategies
for managing human resources in public service are in the process of development. Systems for sharing
databases and information about services, methods and decisions necessary for managing human resources in
public service are not perfect. The optimal model for human resource management in public service implies a
formal and flexible system for career development.
The open and effective operation of public service may be ensured through merit-based career development
practices based on clearly and formally predefined criteria.
One of the pillars of public service management strategies is the establishment of a set of clearly defined
criteria for measuring success. The establishment of success-measurement criteria, and their existence made
evident to employees, determines the effectiveness and development of public servants and public service as
a whole.
Survey results demonstrate that career development is based on unwritten rules; discussion of this issue is
taboo and limited to very general and stereotypical answers. While discussing career development criteria,
employees often refer to the issue of showing off in front of a head person:
There is no practice of giving scores to employees based on their performance and documenting
those scores for use in promotion. Career development depends on the relationship with and
observation of a department head. There are no written rules. It is the task of a department head to
observe the performance of employees: who is more competent, qualified etc. It depends on an
evaluation and appraisal done by the head (one of the respondents).
Meritocratic principles of management, as mentioned above, do not just involve the formalisation and
general adoption of criteria for success; the main indicator is the existence of a model for the identification
and measurement of knowledge, experience and professionalism that is open and obvious for public service
employees. The research revealed that the criteria for career progression and success conforming to
meritocratic principles are not clearly formed in public service; discourse on it shows that public servant
reflection on this subject is superficial:
There are no formal norms. I think they are mostly selected spontaneously, probably based on their
qualifications, experience and on how much they show their expertise in the process of work.
Promotion is decided on the strength of this. No documents are created stating that the employee can
be evaluated in such-and-such a way; it does not happen this way, but as I said, on the basis of
observation by and relationship with the manager. The manager can make observations: Who does a
certain job better, who is more competent, etc. (one of the respondents).
24
Clearly defined criteria for career progression and success? I dont know, I certainly dont know.
Of course there is career success in general! Based on how the person works, how theyve
demonstrated their abilities and how they are evaluated and valued by their manager (one of the
respondents).
I think that is something more within HR competence... I dont really know... It is not a question for
me... Im sorry, this is being recorded and I really apologise, but I think this is more of a question for
Human Resources. I generally imagine it like thissince these questions are not to be asked in the
Operations department. Well, as one of the elements, one of the cogs in this system, Im for a public
servant who conscientiously fulfils their duties, fully understands their responsibilities, all this, after
a certain period is essential for promotion (one of the respondents).
Clearly defined criteria for career progression and successno, they dont exist! I cant tell you
how promotions occur, competitions are held and you have to take part in the competition if there is
one for your profile, but if there is no competition for your profile... without a competition its rather
difficult to get promoted. Of course it can always happen on the decision of the manager, but the
manager decides. In my experience, Id supervised a ministry department for seven years, then the
ministers started changing, little by little they drew me further and further backwards and now Im
not part of the permanent staff at all (one of the respondents).
Unlike common employees of the ministry, officials occupying higher positions (deputy ministers,
departmental heads) better realise the importance of formalising the criteria and admit their absence in the
public service at this stage:
There isnt a career development plan for each employee but just at the moment the HR department
is working on this: Working out a career development plan consisting of very many criteria. It will
mainly depend on evaluations, the quality of their work, their skills (one of the respondents).
As the extracts from the interviews show, due to the lack of formalised criteria for career success, they are
replaced by subjective manager evaluation, i.e., the commonly accepted selection criteria are very general
and their identification is based on individual interpretation, allowing for a non-objective, informal approach.
Consequently, according to the research results, work quality and efficiency evaluations carried out by public
servants must become more standardised and formalised.
Non-formalised selection criteria are employed not only in the promotion process in public service, but also
at the commencement of employment at the initial stage of ones career. In addition, public service organises
employment competitions, yet our respondents failed to identify public servants employed at their
department as a result of these competitions. The dominant discourse on this topic is as follows:
Not many people have been taken on in our department as a result of a competition. I dont know, I
have no answer for this question... There havent been big competitions during the last two years. I
cannot tell you exactly how it was two years ago; Ive been in this post for two years. For two years
there havent been big competitions so far, in my department. There hasnt been a competition in our
department since Ive been here (one of the respondents).
25
As a result of a competition in public service? In my case, since Ive been here I havent heard of
an employment competition. You mean, a competition to employ people from the outside? There
havent been any external competitions as far as I know, since Ive been working here (one of the
respondents).
Public servants occupying higher positions are much better informed about employment competitions.
Competitions for positions in ministries are rather common:
We have employment competitions three times a month (laughs) if not more [in the Ministry of
Justice]. We record the statistics, in the past year, including December, just the ministryIm not
including legal entities - has announced 44 vacancies during the year. That makes about three
vacancies a month on average, even three and a half. So, our principle is for the competition to be
transparent, and anyone can take part in it (one of the respondents).
Those public servants with limited information about employment competitions, or those stating that their
department contains no staff employed in this fashion, emphasise that employment occurs the following way:
In our department staff are appointed mainly by the manager, based on recommendations... I
havent heard of competitions... (one of the respondents).
You know what? It mainly happens based on recommendations again and again. This is not strange
or unknown to anybody. Staff are not selected from outside, i.e., it happens on the basis of a
recommendation (one of the respondents).
Providing a recommendation is a modern form of favouritism. This practice is considered positive as it is
assumed that the individual granting a recommendation is impartial. An individual granting a
recommendation evaluates professional and personal skills because it is important to consider whether a
person is capable of fulfilling an assigned task or not.
No one will give a recommendation for a narrow-minded person just because of favouritism. Some
managers do not want their own people, because they cannot assign them tasks that need to be
done; they have to consider whether a person is capable of fulfilling an assigned task of not. Of
course one prefers ones own talented person to an outsider (one of the respondents)
As a result of public sector reform in 2005, a number of job openings were announced. Different information
dissemination methods were applied to inform society about available vacancies.
According to the survey carried out from September-October, 2005, vacancies were filled with applicants that
learned about job openings through relatives, friends and acquaintances, rather than through mass media
institutions.
26
Chart 3. Information Sources on Vacancies Available in Public Service (2005)3
The survey results allow us to argue that there is a positive causal relationship between the source of job
vacancy information and the chance of applicant employment.
Comparative analysis of the 2005 survey results demonstrates that this trend persists. Based on these
outcomes, is obvious that 83% of respondents did not participate in an open call. The majority of surveyed
were appointed to their respective positions based on recommendations.
I used to work in a computer [IT] centre that closed down. This centre used to be under the
supervision of the ministry and after it was closed, a number of employees were transferred to the
ministry. I was one of them. I was recommended by the head of human resource department in
2003 (one of the respondents).
The head of one of the departments of the financial police told me that he wants me there (one of
the respondents).
Before Ms. Nino Enukidze was appointed as a Deputy Minister of Energy, she was a head of legal
department at the Ministry of Economy and I was a senior specialist at the department of protocol at
the same ministry. After the new minister was appointed I resigned as Ms. Enukidze proposed to be
her assistant (one of the respondents).
Since I studied at the university I maintained contacts with those who were employed in different
public service offices and that determined my involvement in public service (one of the
respondents).
Tamar Charkviani Influence of Informal Practises on Labour Relations in Governmental Institutions. (12p.) Collection of works Prospects of
Development for Georgia Published by: Caucasus University and Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Tbilisi. 2006
27
Mr. Aleko needed someone for my position. At that time he was the first deputy minister. He needed
someone experienced who also knew [foreign] languages. My wife was working in the same office
and she told me that there is an opening at Mr. Alekos office and I had an interview with him (one
of the respondents).
The chairman himself proposed to take a position. I was on a same position in Chamber of
Control and was transferred here when new parliament was elected (one of the respondents).
I have a long-term acquaintance with the department, since I studied at the university. I
personally knew the minister since I was a student due to activities I was involved in as a student. In
general, they knew about me and appointed me to this position (one of the respondents).
The supervisor of my medical internship introduced me, thats how I was employed at the Ministry
of Health (one of the respondents).
These examples demonstrate that employment in public service also occurs on the basis of unclear criteria
since it depends on the managers decision, as it does in the case of promotion. This manner of employing
staff reinforces the importance of informal connections and their influence in public service. It is important
to emphasise the problem of informal relations, as it is a distinctive indicator of the principles opposing
meritocracy. Public servants, naturally, avoid discussing the subject of employment and promotion on the
basis of friendly or family relationships; we have therefore created projective questions on this topic, which
revealed the following discourse:
In any case no one ever talks about this openly. Nobody talks about who appointed who or where,
on whose recommendation, etc. It is a taboo topic; anyway, it is normally discussed off-stage (one
of the respondents).
A group of civil servants that confirm the existence of formal criteria for career development in public service
note that criteria for promotion are defined, established, assessed and put into practice by the administration.
Of course there are clearly defined criteria. A head should notice what you are doing and make a
decision; who else should assess? An outsider cannot do that! (one of the respondents).
One more important aspect is a lack of interest toward, and information about, this issue among civil
servants. Respondents argue that civil servant indifference toward the absence of clearly defined criteria for
promotion is due the system itself. They think the system is non-competitive.
In order to advance a career, at least, there should be an opening; in other words only the desire of
a head of department is not enough, mainly when there is a general policy of reducing the number of
staff; no one will approve the establishment of a new position. It is morally difficult to fire someone
that is one step above you. There is even not enough incentive as there is no big difference between
positions; the difference between salaries is also minor, thus it is not worth starting a fuss about it
Motivation to move one step up on a career ladder is quite low; it increases in responsibility while positive
salary gains remain minor.
28
Well, it is not clearly defined and written on paper. First of all, there should be an opening. Waiting
for it should be worthwhile. What are the other ways to advance?!! It happens so rarely that we do
not even pay attention (one of the respondents).
Accordingly, there are no major complaints and interest is quite superficial.
Unfortunately our office does not provide any opportunities for career advancement. It took me 10
years to become a senior specialist from a leading specialist position; in other words, I was in the
same chair for quite long time. In general, what are real promotion opportunities for me now?!!
Considering the situation as hopeless is another cause of indifference toward career advancement. One of the
aspects behind this sentiment is the lack of personal contacts necessary for advancement.
Career advancement is difficult due two reasons: on the one hand, there is a competition and, on the
other hand, it depends on who has better contacts. It does not relate to how smart you are and how
much you deserve it. Someone has to push you forward (one of the respondents).
You know what, when a person is hardworking, with good education, has leadership skills, knows
languages, has good contacts, of course, this person gets noticed. After he/she gets noticed, later
starts his/her promotion (one of the respondents).
In the contemporary transitional Georgian environment, with the inherited general mistrust of Soviet-type
institutions at a time when formal democratic social institutions (formal and moral criteria of success) are
still in the process of development, informal factors (protectionism, nepotism, etc.) still largely determine
social-economic success. This is inconsistent with the ideological route declared by the state.
According to U. Becks Theory of Risk Society (1992), modern informality is not intellectual capital from
human and social development; rather it is individual salvation in the conditions of general uncertainty and
fear. Beck wrote that the negative logic of the risk society is motivated by the fear of uncertainty and is
expressed in the formula I am scared! An informal network requires an institute of mediators, which
provides security and retains market value. All activity is directed at transforming the formal/impersonal into
trustful/personal relationships, i.e., the return to archaic forms of social communication. Institutionalisation of
informality is at the same time the process of deinstitutionalisation of the state. The results of the research can
be explained through the prism of this theoretical approach. It becomes possible to logically explain that
public servants artificially create a deficiency of legal opportunities, which, in our case, is reflected in several
ways: The absence of formalised/written criteria for career success, the vagueness of existing informal
criteria and the lack of interest in them on the part of rank and file employees. These legal rights are later
sold in exchange for involvement in informal relations. In this way, a right is transformed into a
commodity, which is monopolised by the elite of state bureaucracy.
29
4. Criteria for Assessing the Quality of Performance and Effectiveness of Civil Servants
Merit-based management is challenged by the lack of clearly defined criteria in the public service domain.
Employee performance assessment is based on both standardised and organised mechanisms in wellfunctioning formalised bureaucraciesit neutralises any impartiality that a manager might have.
In well-established bureaucracies, civil servant performance is evaluated based on the following criteria:
Knowledge/competence, quality of productivity, initiative, leadership skills, supervising skills etc.
Establishment of an effective system of evaluation that is known and shared by employees improves
organisational culture and sense of accountability.
Impartial assessment of performance is directly linked to, and has a positive effect on, motivation.
Establishment of an evaluation system improves communication and identifies factors that support, as well as
challenge, the working process. It also identifies topics for future trainings.
According to the survey carried out by The Bureau of Public Service in 2011, evaluation systems exist in 8
out of 21 public institutions. Evaluation systems vary between public institutions and apply different schemes
of evaluation: Assessment based on competence, assessment of supervisor and self, performance feedback,
interviews, 360 degree assessment, group reflection etc.
As mentioned above, showing off in front of a departmental head is one of the factors that determine career
advancement. Survey results confirm that a direct supervisor primarily assesses civil servant performance.
Assessment of a supervisor is not monitored and cannot be appealed by an employee.
We do not have an evaluation system. We want to establish it, but at the moment we do not have it. It
is done informally based on observation of a direct supervisor and other officials. We do not have a
formalised system (one of the respondents).
There are no criteria to assess the effectiveness of performance in the ministry. We have just started
to explore this. We are starting to work in this direction and hope that in few months we will have
evaluation criteria. There are general evaluation criteria that are based on law. They are very vague.
It says that an employee should get additional payment for overtime, that bonus is a part of a salary,
but the need for evaluation and assessment is not written anywhere (one of the respondents).
There is no evaluation system, accordingly a head of department, a supervisor makes a decision. In
this ministry, employee evaluation is based on a judgment of a direct supervisorhow does he see
and assess performance of a particular employee. Encouragement is based on his judgment (one of
the respondents).
The problem in this context is not only biased judgment of a civil servants performance by a supervisor, but
also a lack of quality control.
It is very easy for us to assess effectiveness and quality. The most important thing is not to fail the
task (one of the respondents).
30
The criterion is to fulfil the task in time; it should not take too long. Any assignment should be done
in time, that is the most important (one of the respondents).
The rank and file do not participate in the quality evaluation process. At the same time, monitoring one
anothers performance is considered unethical and immoral by civil servants. Accordingly, the evaluation
system is a closed system; it is not discussed publicly. Similar to other closed systems, relevant discussions
are held in lobbies and behind closed doors. As long as civil servants do not monitor one anothers
performance, evaluation of performance is not open and is not publicly discussed. However, it must be
mentioned that monitoring one another is one of the more important factors that help to improve a systems
quality of performance. Monitoring and evaluation create a relatively open and impartial system for career
advancement.
There is no monitoring between employees; a head of department monitors your performance, how
well you fulfil assigned tasks. I have never heard of a colleague [standing on a same career ladder
step] doing monitoring (one of the respondents).
Monitoring each other among employees? No! Not between co-workers! Why should co-workers
monitor each other, we have a department head who can monitor better than us (one of the
respondents)?
How? You mean if we monitor each other? It is not our responsibility to monitor each other. I am
responsible for the tasks I am assigned to, and I guess a department head should be the one to
monitor everybody (one of the respondents).
It may happen on a personal and subjective level. Imagine someone thinking that another person
does not perform well, but it is not documented. It is someones personal opinion about other person.
There is no questionnaire to fill, or anything like that, nothing (one of the respondents).
Absence of formal performance assessment criteria extends and exaggerates the role of a head. Civil
servants have a good understanding of this situation and accordingly find interference by a departmental
head in their work a regular occurrence. Discussion regarding cases of unfair interference by departmental
heads in employee duties does not occur. Moreover, concepts of fair and unfair interference are not
differentiated. Any interference by a departmental head is considered fair:
Why should a department head interfere unfairly in my work? There is no way my supervisor treats
me unfairly in the case that I follow the law. In other words I broke the rule or a law? And that is
why he is unfair? I had 25 different supervisors and none of them were bad, none of them intervened
unfairly (one of the respondents).
You know what, I never had a case like that. Any place I worked and any supervisor I had,
everywhere I was loved by co-workers. Because I am not someone who creates intrigue or plots. I am
originally from Khevsureti [mountains] and in case I do not like something I say it directly. My word,
anything I said, never caused any scandal (one of the respondents).
31
As it was difficult for civil servants to present examples of unfair interference in their work, we asked them to
imagine a hypothetical situation and discuss the steps they would take to protect their rights. It must be noted
that our respondents had difficulties even imagining the situation and were quite reluctant to discuss their
reaction. As a result of repeated questioning on this issue, we may argue that civil servants are reluctant to
name cases of rights violations. Moreover, they do not see any effective mechanism through which to react
to these violationsthe only optimal outcome is to quit. Fighting for protection of ones rights is considered
non-effective. In rights violations, adjusting to ones situation is seen as preferable to opposing action.
I never had an experience of violation of labour rights. In other words, if there was a case of
violation of rights, I was unfairly fired or demoted, so what do I do? What do I do in that case?
Where is injustice solved? There might be special departments for that (one of the respondents).
What will I do? Oh, that is so difficult . . . I might quit, no? Yes, I will quit. If I feel that my rights are
violated and my services are no longer needed in public service and I am a redundant cog in the
machine. I will leave before I am fired (one of the respondents).
It depends how serious was the violation and if it is worth closing doors behind me. My rights have
not been violated so that I will walk out the door. I mean, the level of unfairness is low and
environment is quite tolerable. Appealing almost equals walking out of the door (one of the
respondents).
You know what, I have not experienced it, but if my rights are violated I will tell my supervisor and it
is good if he understands, it not . . . Appealing? No, it is not in my character (one of the
respondents).
I never did anything. How it was solved? Naturally, I found a new job and left. It also was in a
public service. I did not use any mechanisms, I left peacefully. I, personally am not like that. I prefer
to leave myself, develop career elsewhere rather than enter into conflict. In general I never enter into
conflict situations (one of the respondents).
The fact that civil servants consider inter-monitoring activities in a negative light increases the intensity
and occurrence of non-formal mechanisms in public service. When a monitoring system is weak and
protection of rights is not considered a relevant issue, it is impossible to manage an office based on merit.
Civil servants do not attempt to protect their rights and neither do they appeal to formal institutions, e.g.,
courts, and do not feel obligated or responsible to react to a co-workers violation made regarding the work
process. One trend can be identified in the answers to the following question: What will you do, if you
become aware that one of your colleagues makes a decision based on his/her personal interests? The
resulting trend reveals that civil servants prefer to react informally. In particular, one of the reactions is to
give friendly advice; if it is not effective, they restrain themselves from further action.
What will I do? I might advise my colleague not to do it. Nothing else (one of the respondents).
Nothing like this happened in our office. I just imagined. I think it is best to advise my colleague to
act differently (one of the respondents).
32
What will I do? Nothing. What should I do? I will advise not to make decisions like that. What
should I do? (one of the respondents).
I will mention it. But in the long run I will think that it is not my business and will leave it alone
What will I do? I might not forgive. I will not forgive and directly say to a person that it was a wrong
decision. What will I do if it [advice] is not considered? I will be so firm that he/she will not do it
again, I will say that this behaviour is not acceptable for a civil servant (one of the respondents).
A number of civil servants think that it is acceptable to inform a departmental head regarding the
ineffectiveness in an informal discussion. At the same time, misbehaviour by a colleague, if it is his/her first
time, is considered forgivable.
First of all, I will tell the person that it is wrong and unacceptable. In case he/she does it again and I
think that it harms the work, then I will tell the department head. Also making sure that the person
knows about it, so it is not behind his/her back (one of the respondents).
I will tell, warn and if he/she does it again I will write; but we are all humans and something can
happen, something might trigger. First of all we should respect our colleagues, see what triggers
them, accordingly I will tell that this time I forgive you, but next time it will not be possible. It
depends what is the reason (one of the respondents).
Based on the situations described above, we may assert that civil servants put their personal interests above
public ones and may misuse the power granted to them by law.
33
5. Methods for Encouraging and Expressing Initiatives

The creativity of a civil servant is demonstrated by their work-related initiatives. The encouragement of
initiatives creates motivation and incentive for effective performance. This encouragement also generates
motivation for professional development and supports effective teamwork.
An open and competitive environment is therefore established and results in the divulgence of opportunities
for promotion and the possibilities of demotion. Capacity transparency of each and every employee is
ensured through structurally established procedures for expressing initiatives.
Expressing initiatives is an important indicator used to assess the effectiveness of an employees performance
and their involvement in the working process. Moreover, it is directly linked to, and has a causal relation
with, expectations and opportunities for promotion.
Civil servants often referred to the concept and importance of showing off in front of a departmental head
when discussing promotion. The survey results, however, demonstrated that the importance of initiatives are
not well understood nor adequately appreciated. In most cases, initiatives are not correctly defined. More
commonly, initiatives are not linked to a particular job assignment or work process, but rather to an
organisation of general cultural and social events. In particular, they relate to the organisation of a New
Years costume party, annual nominations and awards ceremonies for employees, cultural trips, corporate
evenings and other similar events.
For example, we have an initiative to award employees on a day of justice annually. Nominees are
selected through an anonymous survey. Nominations are: Most Productive Employee, Person who
Spends Most Time in The Ministry of Justice, Person Who is Always Ready to Help Others Even if
That is Not His/Her Responsibility. These are the nominations and it is a form of encouragement
It is considered as an initiative in some cases of fulfilling ones own rights and responsibilities.
For example, our department head asks for our opinion, he does not really make us come up with
initiatives, does not impose it. You have a right to express your thoughts in your field of expertise:
What is the best way to do this or that. Of course you have to present arguments. Your ideas might
not be better than others, but it is expression of an initiative (one of the respondents).
Senior officials confirm that they do not organise any special events in order to encourage employee
initiatives from their staff. They do not consider it an important issue. In general, they think that initiatives
are rarely expressed in public service.
If any civil servant has an interesting initiative, of course, it is discussed and in the case that it is in
accordance with the requirements of the ministry, it will be implemented. But so far we have had no
such experience. There was no initiative coming from servants (one of the respondents).
34
According to civil servants, public service is not a place for initiatives. Civil servants are quite careful in
expressing their initiatives:
There is one Russian saying (when initiatives are punished, one
should sit carefully). But if an idea is good and everyone likes it why should it not be implemented?!
Anyway, we are relatively limited to make initiatives, but no one prohibits us from having good
ideas (one of the respondents).
6. Professional Development and Widening/Enlarging Competences and Scope of Work

Understanding the need for enduring professional development and the establishment of a relevant system is
extremely important in improving the effectiveness of public service. Improving professional skills can be
achieved through training, self-education, skill-oriented activities, mentoring, workshops and other
professional meetings.
Assessment of employee knowledge, capacities, potential and needs is part of human resource management.
Public institutions should find financial resources in their budgets and invest them in professional employee
development. When attempting to implement this, a plan for human resource development must first be
developed. According to a2011 survey4 carried out by The Bureau of Public Service, the situation in
Georgian public service, in terms of human resource development, is critical. Only 5 public institutions out of
21 (23.8%) have a human resource development plan:
Chart 4. Personnel Development Strategy
Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Finance
Ministry of Defence
A plan for human resource development must be drafted in public service offices. It is difficult to argue
which training and professional development courses are relevant to the specific needs of civil servants
before this a plan is implemented.
Systems of managing human resources in Georgian public service. The Bureau of Public Service, March 2011.
35
In most cases, a lack of professional development events in public institutions is explained due to financial
and budgetary deficiency.
There are not enough funds to organise training locally. We organise it when we can. We are
looking for donors, already-funded courses and inform our employees at least 2 or 3 times every
month. Then it is up to them to choose and decide which courses to take (one of the respondents).
Based on the survey carried out by The Bureau of Public Service, 5 public institutions out of 21 have a
budget to finance a plan for professional development:
Chart 5. Budget Allocation

Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Finance
Ministry of Defence
The issue of non-existent, established, policies and programs for the professional development of human
resources in public service is left entirely to civil servant-run individual initiatives. Accordingly, it is not
managed in a comprehensive and structured fashion.
We inform all employees about available courses. Anyone interested will address us (one of the
respondents).
In terms of widening the scope of work, it is important that no one imposes limitations. If you want,
you can work on yourself, not can but rather should. First of all, I think that, one should look in
instructions [for the job description] and see all responsibilities applied to the position. If there is
something that one is not good at, he/she should work on it, why not (one of the respondents).
Opportunities for professional development and promotion improve performance and make it more effective
in the long-term. Widening the scope of work for civil servants helps to escape ones daily routine. The
rational organisation of human resources implies a reduction of tasks repeatedly carried out and routinised at
work. Accordingly, it is important to manage the work process in a way that maintains interest and ensures
the professional development of an employee.
36
Professional development is directly linked to the widening scope of work. Moreover, there is a causal
relationship between the two as they are used to measure the quality of human resources in public service.
Opportunities to widen the scope of work are not well-formalised and structured. Accordingly,
opportunities are circumstantial:
It happens when one of the colleagues is on vacationothers fulfil his/her responsibilities. Or, when
a department head is not in the office, his/her responsibilities are fulfilled by a deputy. Functions do
not change easily and/or often (one of the respondents).
When the number of employees is reduced, naturally, one employee has to take responsibility of
another; there is no other way. A head manages that. Imagine I have 10 employees in my department
and 2 had to leave, I have only 8; so I have to reallocate tasks (one of the respondents).
37
7. Motivational Systems in Public Service

The system of motivation for civil servants in public service needs further improvement. Even if
organisational structure is perfect and plans are well-developed, it is impossible to achieve strategic goals
without appropriate human resources. The effective functioning of public service greatly depends on civil
servant motivation levels. The development and implementation of a system of motivation is the part of
human resource management that encourages employees to fully demonstrate their capacities.
This system comprises human resource recruitment, division of responsibilities and a scheme for
employment. Results of the survey carried out by The Bureau of Public Service coincide with our research
results. The research results illustrate that there are different motivational systems in Georgian public service
institutions. The majority of respondents described the following as motivation-raising activities among
employees: Encouragement of professional development, corporate insurance, cultural events and annual
nominations, bonuses, pensions, promotion based on evaluation, letters of gratitude, gifts and awards.
A motivational system develops certain expectations among civil servants; when these expectations are
positive and imply possibilities for promotion, the performance of civil servants becomes more effective.
They understand the outcomes of showing initiative and focusing on professional development and
perfection.
Employees become passive and less productive if the system needs improvement and workers feel that there
is no direct link between labour inputs and received outcomes (remuneration). It is therefore necessary to
establish a solid and fair balance between achievement of objectives/performance and the amount of
remuneration in order to effectively motivate employees. Expected objectives should remain achievable so
that it serves as motivation.
Motivation is necessary for success of any organisation. Generally speaking, when there is no
opportunity for promotion or career development in the office, motivation is very low and is limited
to a salary. In the long run it weakens the office. Accordingly, it is extremely important to keep
everyone motivated. One part of motivation is that, in case you work hard you will get an opportunity
for promotion (one of the respondents).
According to the human resource management theory, people are biased when assessing the amount of
remuneration in relation to labour inputs; they compare it with remuneration received by those working in a
similar setting. Comparison causes psychological stress when it yields imbalance and unfairness through
differential pay for similar or equal assignments. As a result, one anticipates that effectiveness and
performance productivity will decrease.
38
8. Compliance of Positions with Knowledge and Experience of Civil Servants

The foundation of merit-based public service is the employment of civil servants in accordance with their
potential and qualifications. The effective functioning of a public service, as well as any other organisation,
depends on the compliance of a post with its holder.
Through out the research, we aimed to explore detailed civil servant opinions on recruitment and promotion
principles in public service and whether (or not) they perceive them as fair. Consequently, we asked the
following indirect question: Is the status of your colleagues in compliance with the knowledge and
experience they have? The following phrases dominated the discourse on civil servant evaluation in public
service: May be, in most cases, it is in compliance, in some cases yes, in some cases no, probably they
deserve it, depends how we look at it, maybe, there is another way too, etc.
Some civil servants admit that there is some inconsistency between human resources and the positions they
hold, and think that the problem can be solved via constant reorganisation of public service, carried out by the
administration. Others argue that it is reorganisation itself that causes inconsistency.
It is extremely difficult to assess: In some cases there is consistency, and in othersno. That is why
reorganisations are carried out regularly and weaknesses are identified. Anyone that had to leave
during the reorganisation, left due to this exact problem (one of the respondents).
Reorganization took place in our ministry after Rose Revolution and since then, it is done annually.
Sometimes even twice per year. Old civil servants [referring to years of employment] that survived
reorganisation are extremely qualified. We are quite few. Newly appointed ones cannot be good
professionals. They graduated just yesterday; it is too early to talk about their professionalism! I
have been working in the ministry for 30 years and professionals like that are really few (one of the
respondents).
There are cases where there is consistency and there are cases where there is less consistency, also
there may be no consistency at all (lowering voice), that also happens (one of the respondents).
It could have been done differently. I cannot say that there is no consistency/compliance. There are
rare cases when a person is like that (knocking on a table) (one of the respondents).
Relevant work experience is a sort of precondition for successful performance. Unlike well-developed
bureaucracies, the attracting and recruiting of young employees is considered effective in Georgia, as old
cadres are not trusted.
Young people are given opportunities and are encouraged. Young people fulfil tasks faster due to
the energy they have; but they might not have relevant experience. If we hire older people, they might
also lack qualification, have worse memory and outdated experience (one of the respondents).
It was mentioned that there are a number of civil servants that, based on their qualifications, deserve better
positions than they hold, and vice versa. Employees of public service realise that they have a certain bias
39
when discussing these issues and argue that in order to escape the bias there should be a commission to
implement human resource evaluation, which should be established based on the Law on Public Service.
Of course I would try to look at it from both perspectives. This one is also biased. There should be a
certifying commission that will assess compliance of a person with the position he/she has.
Accordingly, whatever I say now, will be full of bias and will have no value. It is better to have a
commission as it is stated in the law, and this commission should regulate issues of compliance. Also,
in that case, there will be fewer questions to ask (one of the respondents).
Answers to our control question demonstrate that it is common practice for a civil servant to fulfil tasks that
are not his/her direct responsibility in public service. This practice is often explained by necessity.
Very often, like half of the time, I have tasks that are responsibility of others. They know that I have
very good working experience. It is difficult to find any task in this huge ministry that I cannot do and
I am not assigned to (one of the respondents).
In order not to fail something, very often I have to do things that are the responsibility of others.
Public service is an organisation in which you have to do lots of different things that are in your own
interest. For instance, it is very important for you that something is done in a short time period that is
a responsibility of another, but this person is not capable of doing it (one of the respondents).
The task has to be fulfilled, there might be some particular things that are not my direct
responsibility, but when we know that it should be done, we all should try to do it and not fail, the
same as a team work. This is very important and it is linked to our departments success, accordingly
we all should do all we can (one of the respondents).
In this regard, the occurring problem is not only related to a lack of qualified human resources in public
service, but also to a rational and effective management of tasks. Mixing up responsibilities causes an uneven
distribution of tasks. Moreover, the allocation of tasks that is not consistent with the system of responsibilities
has a direct effect on the quality of performance.
Based on the dissatisfaction of civil servants with inconsistencies between the qualifications of employees
and the positions they hold, together with low motivation for career development, the denial of civil servant
rights violations cases, restraint from appeals and the carrying out of other employees functions, we can
argue that civil servants are more interested in maintaining their positions rather than transitioning to a
model of merit-based management with a system of promotions that are determined by the demonstration
of practical skills and experience.
40
9. Criteria for Evaluating Civil Servants

The Law on Public Service lists all clearly defined criteria for one to qualify for a position in public service.
Civil servants express controversial thoughts about these criteria, creating a clear dichotomy.
Chart 6. Criteria for Civil Servants
Characteristics
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Special attention should be paid to the following statement: There are no special, distinctive criteria for civil
servantsbecause every person can be a civil servant. A number of civil servants recognised distinctive
criteria that are applied to civil servants: Patriotism, love toward homeland, lack of political engagement etc.
I think that, first of all he/she should love Georgia, be a compassionate human being and then, a
civil servant. Patriotism is to love your own country, state; to contribute to its development. If a
person is not a patriot, he/she cannot do the job (one of the respondents).
First of all, a person should try to stay neutral. Civil servant means that the person does not have
party membership. That is what I learned and believe in: A civil servant should serve people and not
one particular party; they also should have analytical skills, decision making skills etc. (one of the
respondents).
A number of civil servants prefer to speak in general terms while discussing employment criteria. They focus
their discussion around broad values like honesty, humanity and other psychosocial characteristics.
In order to become a civil servant, first of all, one should be an honest person. Honest in its broad
definition. One should be honest at work as well as in personal relationships. Also, one should be
sincere and necessarily have a sense of responsibility (one of the respondents).
One should fulfil many criteria, how can I name all of them? . . . Should be educated, balanced and
steady etc. Also should not have a criminal record, or be a drug addict. There are other similar
41
criteria, and failing to meet them means that one cannot become a civil servant (one of the
respondents).
One of the main criteria that civil servants should meet is professionalism. There are different interpretations
of this term among civil servants. It is widely suggested that professional education is less important in public
service. Professional education is not considered important or decisive for successful performance at work.
Principal attention is paid to general education and work experience (accumulated at the work place).
There are two main factors that help one to become a professional civil servant: General education and work
experience. According to this statement, an employee develops into a qualified and competent civil servant
based on both practical experience accumulated through years of work and general education with relevant
majoring. Prioritising work experience over professional education is in conflict with merit-based
management.
No special requirements are needed for a civil servant, unlike any other profession. One should love
ones job. Being public servants is not a very special thing, so no special talent is needed. One
cannot become a painter when one does not know how to draw/paint. Civil service is not one of these
professions (one of the respondents).
You know what, you can have totally different education, different training, but if you are interested
to work in this field, you can gain necessary qualification, just similar to your diploma (one of the
respondents).
A relatively small number of civil servants noted that being familiar with legal framework, attaining
professional education and relevant work experience are salient criteria that determine the qualifications of an
employee in public service:
Primary is a knowledge of laws and the legal framework of a relevant field. It is impossible to
imagine working in public service without that. Knowledge of a foreign language and good computer
skills are also desirable. Also, professional training in the field or working experience in the field [is
important] (one of the respondents).
I think that, first of all, you should have relevant education; though it depends on a field of public
service that you are involved in. There are different fields: Education, culture, energy [power
consumption] etc. (one of the respondents).
Similar to the discussion on professional education, arguments for work experience are also controversial.
Some civil servants think that relevant work experience is extremely important, while others argue that
gaining experience on the job is enough:
First of all, one should be qualified and have an educational background and base ones work on it.
Other skills are developed in a particular work environment. These are all desirable skills that can
also be developed over time; in other words, qualification is the most important (one of the
respondents).
42
In order for a person to become a civil servant, first of all, they should have much experience; they
should know how to interact with public institutions, this is really important; they should have an
understanding of modern management; they should understand developments in Georgia and be upto-date about the essentials of these developments (one of the respondents).
Graduation diplomas, certificates or other legal training documents issued by Georgian higher education
institutions and universities are not considered sufficient for employment and quality performance in public
service. Civil servants explain that this consideration has been developed based on the anarchy-dominated
process of issuing diplomas in 1990s Georgia. On the one hand, rank and file civil servants and senior
officials distrust diplomas issued by Georgian higher education institutions, while, on the other hand, they
recognise a lack of alternatives regarding the issue.
Of course, a high education diploma is needed, no argument about that. But a diploma does not
necessarily imply that a person has relevant skills. So in our case it is a somewhat controversial
issue. Unfortunately, a diploma is not always linked to capabilities (one of the respondents).
No! Take out this question! How can diploma express knowledge in current circumstances? Have
you seen Son-in-law without a diploma [Georgian movie]? Just take out this question, it is
irrelevant (one of the respondents).
Discussions over professionalism, qualifications, opportunities for promotion and other related issues could
be summarised in following statements: Having experience and having no experience. Debates over
diplomas also confirmed the superiority of work experience over formal education. Trust in the capacity of an
employee is based on experience rather than on a diploma. As work experience is now considered the main
criterion, the problem related to the lack of experienced human resources is becoming more significant after
the Rose Revolution.
In public service, a diploma is considered as just a paper that does not determine successful
performance in any particular position. Besides education, there is work experience, and it plays a
greater role. Though, in addition, to be employed in public service, there is a requirement to present
a diploma (one of the respondents).
I think that a diploma has secondary value when evaluating a persons intellect. I think the
experience and knowledge which that person really has are most important (one of the respondents).
You know how it was in the 90s, right? Many institutions get accreditations even now, and getting
accreditation does not a priori mean that their graduates will have good qualifications. It is not
decisive, but hiring is based on a diploma (one of the respondents).
Distrust informal education and the resulting inadequate attention to specialisation can be explained by the
distrust of higher/basic education diplomas.
43
Discourse analysis of in-depth biographic interviews illustrates that those holding a number of high positions
in public service do not have adequate education. The latter might be an explanation of the fact that civil
servants repeatedly emphasise work experience when discussing relevant issues.
Paying inadequate attention to the issue of specialisation also has a direct impact on the quality of
performance. No special arguments and discussions are needed to prove that experience gained solely at
ones place of work is not enough for successful performance.
For example, we have many employees that have professional training in different fields. In my case,
I have two: I am a philologist and foreign language specialist. Though I work for the ministry of
energy, I try to adapt. Unemployment is very high. When you have a decent salary you do not care
In summation, professional education and specialisation illustrates that one is qualified, though they are not
the determining factors of success. Work experience (gained on location) is much more important than formal
education.
44
10. Teamwork in Public Service

Teamwork is considered an important factor in guaranteeing success in a modern organisation. An entity of
individuals whose employment and skills are supplementary and interrelated in sharing a common goal will
guarantee successful performance. The conceptual definition of teamwork refers to the correlation of
common objectives and member contributions. In other words, common effort guarantees synergy. Different
research results prove that one uses less energy/effort for particular tasks when working in a team. The effect
of synergy is not a simple sum of individual contributions. Synergy leads to new, rich and diverse outcomes
that are the result of different contributions and roles played by team members.
Principles of teamwork in public service are replaced with individual efforts where perception of the concept
(teamwork) does not coincide with its general definition. Collegial and friendly attitudes are considered and
understood as teamwork.
In our case, we have individual tasks. As for creativity, we do not work in teams, as there are no
initiatives here. We mainly get individual assignments (one of the respondents).
Teamwork is a rare exception and is linked to several outcomes: New developments, failure of a particular
employee to fulfil assigned tasks, issues to be discussed in staff meetings, etc.
Teamwork implies, for example, something that you have not done before. In this case, you can ask
for advice from your co-workerswhat should I do? This is how I understand teamwork (one of the
respondents).
Well, if you are interested, teamwork is when we all can help each other if needed. If there is a need,
we will help out a particular person, if not, he/she can handle it himself/herself (one of the
respondents).
A number of senior officials and managers argue that teamwork plays a positive role in the decision-making
process. It is extremely interesting, in this case, to identify their definition of teamwork and the decisionmaking process. They link these concepts with the practice of requesting specific advice from particular
employees and not group discussion, where every member may participate and express ideas.
Teamwork is effective in any field/setting. Imagine a case when a decision has to be made and a
department head discusses it individually with one particular employee and reaches a decision; later
if he/she asks the same question to another employee, this one can put the issue in a radically
different light that contradicts the previous decision. Accordingly, I think that teamwork increases the
chance of a good decision (one of the respondents).
When there is an important objective in front of the department, a staff meeting is organised and we
make a group decision. The issue is discussed, what is acceptable, how; colleagues participate and if
anyone has a logical, convincing idea, our department head decides whether to follow up or not
45
Teamwork prolongs the decision-making process, while a number of issues must be solved promptly, outside
of group participation. Quite often, the latter is used to argue that teamwork is not efficient:
Teamwork is good when you have enough time to make a decision; Individualwhen time is not
enough. In addition, the person has to be competent. Also, the issue has to be specific so that it is
possible to solve it in a group (one of the respondents).
There is an entirely controversial interpretation of group decisions which argues that group decision-making
is more efficient when there is not enough time before a deadline for an individual to make decision.
What are main aspects of teamwork? For example, when there is an important objective, issue to
solve in a short time period. Many things are happening and there is not enough time. In this case,
you might need a help to make a fast decision. Teamwork is very good in this case, when you feel the
presence of colleagues next to you that are ready to help. But in general, individualism is more
important; a person should be noticeable, active, strong (one of the respondents).
Teamwork is a part of working process and not a consciously calculated necessity for effective performance.
It is just impossible to work individually in public service. One should have skills to work in a team;
otherwise it will be extremely difficult. One part of a task is a responsibility of one person, another
of the other; accordingly nothing gets done without a teamwork (one of the respondents).
Discussion regarding teamwork provides an opportunity for one to further expand on the issues of informal
relationships and to illustrate their effectiveness. Apropos civil servants shortfall awareness of meritocratic
principles of teamwork, team spirit is interpreted and understood in a clan context. Respondents use the
latter in a positive connotation while discussing the issue:
There are many cases of a department head leaving the office and taking his/her team along if
he/she trusts them . . . I had an experience when a head told me wherever I go, you have to be with
me, by my side. Unfortunately, he/she had to leave Georgia and, naturally, I could not follow. But
he/she was so much attached to my work, my character and my style of writing that he/she used to
say wherever I go, whatever position I take, you have to be by my side. Accordingly, it is a team
work, it is a human culture, personal characteristics, qualities; how it addresses you, adapts, in some
cases it gets so attached that you cannot imagine your work without it (one of the respondents).
I know many cases of people leaving this place, getting appointed as heads and taking 4-5 others
with them. There were similar cases. It is a good example, it is not just devotion, it is more complex
with a number of factors that I cannot even list (one of the respondents).
Human resource management principles are based on the division of tasks and responsibilities. This exact
principle stipulates a model for teamwork. The optimal functioning of public service is maintained through
contributions made by each and every civil servant. Common task is defined as a clear formulation of roles
and monitoring the performance of each team member in achieving common goals and objectives. The
following principles are deemed salient in managing civil servants: division of labour, team spirit and
46
fulfilment of common task. The interpretation of these three concepts does not correspond to the classic
forms of these terms.
I think, first of all, it is a feeling that should be in every department, every office. On upper levels:
understanding that the task is common. We are assigned to a common task. There should not be a
discussion and calculation over who did 30 percent of work today and who [did] 40 percent. The task
should be fulfilled and that will be everyones achievement. When it fails, it is everyones problem
and everyone should look inside to find the causes of the problem. Contributing to a common task as
one team is a principle, that I think, is the right one (one of the respondents).
May be all of you have already heard the story of an organisation, where there were four
membersEverybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody, and the division of
responsibilities among them was vague. Anyway, it is a good and clear example to analyse
the citation presented above:
There was an important job to be done and everybody was sure that Somebody would do
it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about it
because it was Everybodys job. Everybody through that Anybody could do it, but
Nobody realised that Everybody would not do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed
Somebody, when Nobody did what Anybody could have done.
47
11. Changes Carried Out in Public Service since the Rose Revolution
The period after the Rose Revolution is associated with vast reforms in public service. Though the majority
of current civil servants were not employed in public service before the Rose Revolution, they had previous
experience through interaction with public offices and, based on that experience, were able to discuss
potential changes in public service while assessing the introduction of a new type of civil servant.
The absolute majority of respondents believes and argues that the radical changes in public service were
positive, although the process of transformation and implementation of new developments are ongoing and
requires further improvement and advancement.
First of all, it is obvious that the material/technical equipment of public service has been improved. Salary
payments are well-regulated and elimination of corrupt arrangement cases is also evident.
Many things have changed; I know that people were not getting their salaries at all. Salaries were
extremely low40 GEL. Coming to the office was more costly. There were no conditions at all. I
think that, at the moment, corruption is almost fully eliminated, which did exist before, before the
Rose Revolution (one of the respondents).
The situation is much better. First of all [regarding] technical equipment, we are better equipped
now. We have better salary after Rose Revolution and better computers (one of the respondents).
Effective performance in public service is ensured through stricter discipline and higher employee
professionalism:
There was no discipline before. Anyone could come whenever they wanted. Monitoring was not as
strict as it is now (one of the respondents).
Effectiveness has improved. Professionalism is appreciated more in terms of salaries. During
Shevardnadzes administration, salaries were hilarious, accordingly no one took seriously the work
of civil servants. It is difficult to compare the current situation to the old one, because even the
attitude is absolutely different (one of the respondents).
Even societys view of civil servants has been positively influenced as responsibilities and serious work
attitudes have been accrued.
The nature of civil servants has changed. They have greater responsibility. Respect toward their
work has been raised. In general, civil servants perceive state institutions as important and
responsible [structures]. I started my work here after that period. I would have even laughed if
anyone proposed to work in public service during Shevardnadzes administration (one of the
respondents).
48
First of all, we all know that motivation is driven by salary. Salaries are higherso motivation is
higher. Accordingly, professionals apply. Working in a public service is no longer embarrassing, on
the contraryit is prestigious (one of the respondents).
During Shevardnadzes administration, a civil servant was absolutely discriminated against and
deserved no respect either from society or from the public service itself (one of the respondents).
Nepotism and patronage in public service is no longer as influential as it used to be under the Shevardnadze
regime:
The nature of civil servants has changed radically; civil servants realise that career success and
promotion are based on their personal endeavours. Civil servants understand that they will not get
money for doing nothing any more, etc. (one of the respondents).
Civil servant workers attitudes toward citizens have also changed. Far fewer citizen requests are left
unanswered:
Incoming requests are not put away or hidden under the table. We react to requests whether they
are from citizens, NGOs or any other organisations (one of the respondents).
Internal statutes and regulations of different public institutions have changed and improved:
I am a lawyer and I look at it from legal perspective and see a quality difference between old and
new regulations. The latest one is the best-developed one (one of the respondents).
The demeanour of a departmental head toward employees has become open and transparent. There is no
longer an atmosphere of despotism and/or fear:
I know what the head of our department does all day long, as his office is transparent. It helps to
overcome a psychological barrier. I do not need to knock on a wooden door any more, wondering if
anyone will open it. Is he/she taking a nap? Or is he/she working? There is no more confusion like
this. The door to a heads office used to open with squeak so that one would get scared and enter the
office differently. There is no such feeling anymore (one of the respondents).
Before we thought that a senior official was a bureaucrat and we were not allowed even to say hello,
had to knock at least three times before entering his/her office, etc. Today we have absolutely free
style. The door to my office is always open. I never close it. I have two offices in the ministry and
neither of them is closed; even when I am not theretransparency is the most important [factor].
Nowadays, the working process is absolutely transparent and we look at each other (one of the
respondents).
49
The personality of a senior official has lost its sacred quality and become accessible to citizens:
Unfortunately, I mean fortunately, I had no interaction with public service before the Rose
Revolution. Before this, ministries were non-functional. Often, I have to arrange meetings with the
minister; and I can imagine that before it would have been impossible for a person from a village to
call a hotline and ask for a meeting with the minister on an important issue and for the meeting to be
arranged (one of the respondents).
Human resource management and appointments are relatively transparent; preference is given to youth:
I think that the young people who are employed now think differently. Not because they know more old employees have more experiencebut they have a different mindset. My fathers generation and
previous ones think differently. Young people are always better. They are free from the old mentality
[frame of mind] (one of the respondents).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
Annex 1. Changes Carried Out in Public Service Since the Rose Revolution:
Salaries have been increased
Technical equipment has been improved
Corruption has been eliminated
Discipline is stricter
Professionalism is appreciated
Feeling of responsibility has been increased
There has been a positive change in the attitude toward work
Public servants are no longer discriminated against
Effort is a foundation for promotion
There are less cases of direct job appointments
More transparent
More support-oriented
Knowledge of foreign language and computer skills are necessary
Preference is given to young candidates
Qualifications of civil servants have improved
Practice of patronage has decreased
Incoming requests are not ignored
Transformed into Western style
Citizen-oriented
Civil servants are not constricted behaviourally; they no longer frown
Civil servants speak languages understandable to citizens
They meet deadlines
General attitude toward public service has been changed
Amount of work has increased
Requirements have increased
Requirements for performance have increased
Control mechanisms have increased
50
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Work is better coordinated; use of teamwork evident

Civil servants are more charismatic
Senior officials are accessible to any citizen
Demand for open-minded individuals has increased
Laws and regulations are improved
The system is more flexible
51
12. The Decision-Making Process in Public Service

According to modern management theory, making informed decisions is the main objective of a managerial
unit. In order to achieve this goal, it is fundamentally important to establish mobile and flexible mechanisms
for information exchange and open communication within the organisation.
In order to increase the effectiveness of the decision-making process, it is important to ensure regular and
effective information exchange among all levels of employees. The communication climate (environment)
between them impacts this exchange.
Distrust and confrontation between departmental heads and employees hampers the exchange of required
information. An atmosphere (environment) of trust, on the contrary, increases the flow of crucial
information and supports rising managerial effectiveness. Making impartial decisions is only possible when
one has all necessary information; communication is one of the methods for collecting such data.
A departmental head should study quantitative and qualitative aspects of his/her demand for informationas
well as that of employees so as to be able to regulate its flow. This study will help him/her to identify what is
too much and too little exchanged information. Improvement of the system of feedback ensures prompt
identification of mistakes in information exchange processes and helps to correct them.
Information plays an important role in diagnosing problems occurring in working processes, though it should
be comprehensive and precise. Experience is one of the factors that influence the perception of information.
Frequently, information that contradicts previous experience is partlyor sometimes even fullyrejected or
distorted based on this particular experience.
In the process of communication, information is exchanged to allow for informed decisions followed by the
implementation of these decisions. Objectives are achieved only when decisions are divided into particular
tasks and assigned to particular employees.
According to modern management theories, organisations with a high level of decentralisation retain
relatively open and democratic structuresthe decision-making process is transparent and, in a number of
cases, is more effective than those organisations with a higher degree of centralisation.
A high level of decentralisation between different units is extremely important to ensure a balance of power
and control in public service institutions. A participatory decision-making process supports the involvement
of different units and ensures transparency of the process.
In centralised structures, senior officials rarely monitor everyday decisions made by their subordinate
managers. Evaluation is carried out based on final outcomes. An effective functioning mechanism for control
ensures the prompt identification, response, elimination and prevention of errors in working processes. Those
focusing their research on the importance of human relations in management argue that supervisors and
subordinates alike can effectively monitor the management process.
52
A decentralised, organisational, structure in public service is directly linked to the establishment of effective
monitoring mechanisms and the division of labour: Assigning different tasks to relevant specialists in order to
achieve better results.
Division of labour has a long history. Rational division/allocation of labour is one of the most important
issues in management, which can guarantee the effective performance of an organisation. Allocation of tasks
in public service is achieved via the horizontal division of rights and responsibilities; the hierarchical
character of this division creates a foundation for monitoring one anothers performance. Vertical division of
labour in an organisation creates hierarchical levels of management.
A senior official remains most responsible for the implementation of management principles in public
service. Academics/scientists of contemporary management define a head/manager as a set of behavior roles
that is adequate for an institution or a particular position (Mitzberg, 2004).
Managers, like actors, take on different roles as they are appointed to a particular position in a particular
department; this appointment/position defines their behaviour at work. Naturally, like actors, personal
characteristics influence their acting as managers, but not its content. Accordingly, managers and actors play
predefined roles that they interpret with their own personal touch based on their characteristics. In addition,
managers, unlike actors, fulfil the functions of directors and conductors.
A civil servants interpretation of subordination excludes participation in the decision-making processone
cannot question tasks already assigned.
My subordinate has to fulfil the task that he/she is assigned to and, I think, that it should not be
discussed. Also, when I get assignments from my supervisors, it should be done, no matter what are
the principles (one of the respondents).
Contradictory ideas were also expressed as relevant practices were illustrated: We discuss issues with our
head and accordingly make decisions. Naturally, our head has more information about a number of issues
The decision-making process in public service is not homogenous and is not based on common principles,
which is acknowledged, shared and implemented by all managers.
Delegation of rights and responsibilities in public service should ensure decentralisation of the decisionmaking process. Decentralisation of public service is the foundation for establishing a transparent, open and
merit-based structure in an organisation.
The decision-making process in public service contains signs of centralisation. Though public service is a
hierarchical system, decentralisation here is referred to as making decisions in every unit within the
framework of rights and responsibilities to which it is assigned. Civil servants often try to explain
exclusion from the decision-making process due to hierarchy and subordination.
53
The Constitution of Georgia

recognises the right to access
official documents via Article
41: Every citizen of Georgia
shall have the right to become
acquainted, in accordance with
a procedure prescribed by law,
with the information about
him/her stored in state
institutions as well as official
documents
existing
there
unless they contain state,
professional or commercial
secret (The Constitution of
Georgia)
The same principle is further
elaborated and guaranteed in
The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and the
European
Convention
on
Human Rights.
Importance of freedom of
information is defined in the
1946 Resolution of the United
Nations:
Freedom
of
information is a fundamental
human right and milestone of
all freedoms recognized by the
United
Nations
(U.N.
Resolution)
Decision-making is linked to responsibilitythe prerogative of a departmental

head. Accordingly, when we are discussing the job descriptions of different
positions in public service, elaborating on rights and responsibilities, we are only
left with responsibilities, while all rights de facto are transferred to a
departmental head. The boundaries between rights and responsibilities thus
become vague. This is a factor that may hamper effective performance at work.
Civil servants become mere executors rather than employees responsible for
their actions. Unhealthy business relations are established between departmental
heads and employees.
13. Monitoring of Public Service Performance by Civil Society

In developed bureaucratic systems, monitoring of public service performance is
carried out not only through internal mechanisms, but also by civil society. It is
generally accepted that weak monitoring from civil society results in the
broadening of bureaucratic privileges.
Civil society monitors public service performance through application of the
right to access public information.
The Institute for Development of Freedom of Information5 has collected this
reliable data regarding the accessibility of public information. According to their
data collected from April-August, 2011, statistics for requested information are
as follows:
Chart 7.
Retrieved July 2011 http://www.opendata.ge/#!lang/ka/cat/monitoring_2011_charts
54
In general, 61% of information delivered by public offices is assessed as complete. Only 13% of delivered
information was incomplete. The number of unanswered requests was quite high23%, thus illustrating
gaps in the systems transparency and openness.
According to a declaration by the European Court of Human Rights, information is a product that spoils
easily (Kordzaia). Both centralised models of public service management and large bureaucracies face
challenges in the process of issuing and delivering public information within provided deadlines. It is mainly
journalists that face this problem in Georgia. Forwarding requests to other departments and institutions is a
common practice, thus making the information request process more time and resource consuming. In
addition, the number of cases in which information was delivered in violation of time frames was quite high.
Chart 8.
The percentage of unanswered information requests from ministries remains high in comparison to the total
number of requests applied to public institutions. In some ministries, the percentage of unanswered requests
is as high as 40%. The percentage of incomplete answers is also high at 13%.
55
Chart 9.
If we combine these two figures, it will illustrate that the situation, in terms of accessibility of public
information, is quite alarming. Ministries fail to satisfy more than half (53%) of public information requests.
Violation of time frames is also a common practice. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of public information issued by
ministries is delivered in violation of deadlines.
Chart 10.
The importance of ensuring accessibility of public information through the Internet should also be noted. In
Amsterdam (2004), an international conference was held on issues related to freedom of information on the
Internet. A representative of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), working on
freedom of information, mentioned that laws regulating the Internet should be based on fundamental
constitutional rights and values, including freedom of information and legal practice related to this issue.
56
Moreover, Governments should disseminate information online. It will ensure publicity and create an
opportunity for all citizens to access information from any computer connected to the Internet. Governments
and intergovernmental organisations should support exchange of information online. It is necessary to
implement projects that will increase opportunities, and guarantee citizens to access to disseminate
information about the performance of state institutions online (Kordzaia).
State policy one-governance and electronic transparency of public institutions in Georgia is fragmented.
There is no law that would oblige public institutions to create web pages, define standards for uploading
information on these web pages, or identify the required minimum amount of information to be published.
Due to the absence of a relevant legal framework, information published on official ministry web pages is
altogether limited and selective.
The Institute for Development of Freedom of Information has been monitoring public institution information
resources (Internet resources) since 2010. They selected 48 web pages from sites belonging to ministries and
legal entities of public law established under the supervision of ministries. Quantitative and qualitative
characteristics of information were selected as criteria for monitoring and evaluation: The existence/absence
of information, completeness of information, accessibility of information and relevance of information.
Results from monitoring and research activities illustrate that the Ministry of Finances web page retains the
highest level of transparency (31.8%); the lowest is that of the Ministry of Agriculture (16.49%).
Research demonstrated that in most cases, information about senior officials published on web pages is
limited to names, surnames and biographical data. There is yet to be a description of the spheres of which
such deputies are in charge. A description of their competences can be found only in legal documents, which
are difficult to find and require a legal background to understand, e.g., it was impossible to find a photo of the
Minister of Finance and a description of his rights and responsibilities.
It is often difficult to verify whether a web page is official or not; there is no contact (postal) information
cited for a public institution. The web page of the Penitentiary and Probation Training Centre, for example,
lacks publication of contact (postal) information, building maps or schedules of officials public hours.
Information databases, registries or other information related to a particular public institutions field of work
are rarely published on the Internet. Furthermore, descriptions of procedures and rules for obtaining
information from a particular public institution are also not published.
A budget section can scarcely be found on official ministry web pages; nor are archives of annual budgets.
There is also no information published describing the structural units of ministries. Information about their
rights and responsibilities, as well as goals and functions, is also missing.
In addition, vital information, such as the financial accountability of a public institution, as well as
information about the development, implementation and outcomes of state funded projects, is not published
on web pages.
57
Full texts of legal acts are also not uploaded on web pages. It is difficult to find specimen forms for tax
payments, thus making it impossible to complete them online and subsequently print. The web pages are not
updated regularly.
Research demonstrated that ministries do not recognise web space as an opportunity to improve
communication with citizens. For example, sections like Q and A or FAQs are hardly found on official
web pages.
Additionally, the official web pages of public institutions rarely contain options for newsletter subscriptions.
There are almost no opportunities for a citizen to express an opinion through different types of forums,
questionnaires or blogs.
Annex 2.
2011 Data Current Rating of Monitoring of Information (Internet) Resources of Public

Authorities6
N
Public Authority
Research Results
Ministry of Sport and Youth Affairs
www.msy.gov.ge
www.moe.gov.ge
www.mcla.gov.ge
www.mfa.gov.ge
www.police.ge
www.mes.gov.ge
Ministry of Defence
www.mod.gov.ge
www.mcs.gov.ge
Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the

Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees
www.mra.gov.ge
10
Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of Georgia
www.minenergy.gov.ge
Retrieved August 2011 fromhttp://www.idfi.ge/?cat=monitoring_2011_charts&lang=ka&filter=4
58
- Total Rating
- Information Transparency
- E- accessibility
33.51%
18.92%
48.10%
33.09%
21.58%
44.61%
31.94%
23.51%
40.38%
31.87%
22.13%
41.61%
31.67%
14.81%
48.53%
28.78%
15.58%
41.98%
28.14%
12.54%
43.74%
28.05%
13.17%
42.84%
27.93%
20.51%
35.36%
27.35%
12.45%
42.25%
11
www.mrdi.gov.ge
12
Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of

Georgia
www.economy.gov.ge
13
Ministry Of Agriculture
www.moa.gov.ge
26.28%
12.56%
40%
24.62%
16.17%
33.07%
22.02%
8.68%
35.36%
Results from different research analyses demonstrate that society faces problems related to the accessibility of
information from public institutions, the violation of time frames and gaps in e-governance, as well as the
quality of information that is finally received.
Experts at Georgian Young Lawyers Association believe the following: Representatives of public
institutions should be concerned with the quality of information issued/delivered. Currently, there is a serious
problem with the quality of information; content is never satisfactory and relevant to what we asked for. It is
mainly due to the high level of bureaucracy and ineffective management. And, it is most important that public
service is full of under-qualified cadres. Selection and appointment of employees in public service is done
through personal interests and nepotism rather than based on qualifications. This process is dynamic; this
makes it challenging to see the full picture and has a great impact on the performance of an institution. In
fact, when employees are responsible for particular information, and are regularly changing positions, the
institutional memory is lost. It is difficult to follow frequent transfers and restore memory and experience
gained by civil servants during the working process: most of it is wasted. The reasons for this are
incompetence, the existence of clan system in public service and corruption7.
The Problem of Information Availability in the Process of Empirical Sociological Research
The main problems and difficulties encountered in the process of research were connected with
organising interviews with public servants. As anticipated, ministries and the parliament of
Georgia are difficult to access due to the fact that the decision to participate in the interviews is
taken with caution. The provision of consent to give interviews and the selection of respondents is
carried out under the supervision of high-ranking officials, and the process is time-consuming.
Heads of ministries prefer to designate higher-ranking officials as respondents. In one case, we
were forced to conduct an interview with a deputy minister, despite the fact that political public
servants are not included in our target group; the ministry had insisted on this.
In order to observe the selection criteria of the research, the officials had to be reassured at length.
Despite this, in several ministries, it has been impossible to interview employees of lower rank.
Four ministries have refused to participate in the research:

Ministry of Defence
Retrieved August 2011 from www.gyla.ge/attachments/803_SABIUJ~1.PDF
59
The reasons for the refusals included lack of available time, immediate refusal and, in two cases, it
was impossible to establish any contact. The problem has been overcome by replacing the
ministries with other public institutions.
The parliament of Georgia satisfied our request after the third official letter.
Our interviewers also encountered problems with making audio recordings of the interviews in the
ministries. Consent to record the interviews was granted following telephone requests by the leader
of the project.
Despite the fact that the letters sent to the ministries and parliament included a detailed description
of the aim and goals of our research and interviews, we have repeatedly had to explain the contents
of the interviews both in written and oral form. It is by this method that we have avoided providing
the interviewees with the questionnaire in advance, as they wanted to prepare for the interviews.
In one case, we had to compromise and have a rehearsal interview with an official, as this was
their condition for allowing us to conduct and record the interview the second time around.
Many interviews have been repeatedly postponed due to holidays, sickness and other similar
reasons. We patiently awaited an end to such excuses, finally arriving at a positive outcome.
It has been impossible to contact respondents using official contact mechanisms in some ministries,
forcing us to use personal contacts to establish correspondence.
60
14. Paternalism vs. Partnership

According to the research results, the adaptation strategy dominant among Georgian civil servants is oriented
toward gaining protection and patronage in exchange for subordination, obedience, loyalty and supervisor
dependency. Paternalism is spread in every level of public service. While evaluating their supervisor, civil
servants often refer to an individual as a guardian: A departmental head should be in good relations with
subordinates, should take everyones case close to heart, should care for the well-being of employees,
should be understanding to everyones situation, should be considerate of every employees situation,
should be human, first of all, should have human character, should be philanthropic, should be kind
etc. Focusing on personal characteristics illustrates the dominance of informal relations that is a feature of the
paternalistic relationship between supervisors and subordinates.
Paternalism and partnership are models of attitudes and relationships between supervisors and
subordinates. Paternalistic attitude is to replace formal, contract-based norms with those that are informal
(nepotism, friendship, acquaintance etc.); partnership, on the contrary, prioritises formal regulations.
Paternalism is beneficial for both parties involved. Formal, contract-based legal norms are replaced with nonformal norms based on personal contacts. A subordinates dependence on a supervisor is a crucial aspect of
paternalism. This relationship is beneficial for paternalistic civil servants because it helps them to delegate
responsibility for defining and implementing life strategies; it also aids in the avoidance of decision-making
in difficult situations.
Partnership between subordinates and supervisors is opposite to paternalism. There are the following
preconditions in an ideal setting: Formalisation of working relations (job contracts, strict discipline
standards), consideration of professional qualifications, employee education specialisation and managerial
readiness to consider employee equality (regarding the delegation of responsibilities and rights,
encouragement of participation in decision-making processes, policy of no-interference in the process of
performance and the private lives of employees).
When a supervisor takes all responsibility, they demonstrate distrust toward employees and develop of model
of non-partnership business relations, establishing paternalism. Dependence of a subordinate on a
departmental head is therefore strengthened, empowering the latter beyond the frames defined and granted by
law.
Paternalism is widely seen in the lower levels of public institutions, but it is also practised in business
relations at the higher echelons of their hierarchical structure. Every managerial level that is not able to fulfil
responsibilities assigned and granted to it by law delegates its own rights to an upper level. Power is thus
concentrated in upper levels and only high level officials can make decisions. The decision-making process is
therefore closed and opaque (not transparent). Escaping responsibility is beneficial for both civil servant and
head. Principles of centralised management dominate in public service institutions.
Decisions are necessarily made by the head of a unit in coordination with the head of a department.
The rank and file do not really make decisions (one of the respondents).
61
Questions concerning the decision-making process should not be addressed to me, because, in
general, we do not make decisions, we are just a small section (one of the respondents).
It goes along the hierarchical ladder. First, the head of the unit will look through it and in case
he/she likes it will present it to the head of the department, then to a deputy minister and finally it
goes up to the minister (one of the respondents).
Decisions are solely made by the minister in the ministry. This is the practice here. We are talking
about decisions that are registered as decisions of the ministry (one of the respondents).
14.1 Relative Ties and Clans

One section of the in-depth interviews focused on issues of acquaintanceship and development of relative ties
in public service. Relative ties are mainly developed through baptising.
Many in our department have relative ties. Some of them are godparents, others best friends [from
weddings]. Lately, it has become common practice (one of the respondents).
We will now present a famous and well-known case related to an open call for a vacancy as the head of the
legal department at the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs. Though a competition for the vacancy
was publicly announced, an individual appointed for the position did not participate in the application
process.
The thing is that, Minister Tchipashvili, himself, and current head of department Elza Guliashvili,
were best friends [at the wedding] of Vakhtang Megrelishvili, Deputy Minister of Labour, Health and
Social Affairs of Georgia [author of a famous draft law on pension]. Accordingly, the Minister, the
First Deputy and the Head of Legal Department are close relatives that hold top positions at the
Ministry (one of the applicants).
Similar relative ties reinforce non-formal relations and support the establishment of strong informal networks.
Those that are part of these networks have the advantages of trust and support. Social status in society and
public service is developed based on the impact of these networks.
One argues that social statuses inherited from ancestors are formed with the influence of non-formal relations
whereas the space for non-formal relations is created by relative (blood) ties. Nowadays, social actors have an
opportunity to become participants of non-formal relationship space through gaining relative ties (e.g.
baptism, best friends at weddings).
As a result, social status can be acquired or inherited from ancestors. Though family (blood) relatives remain
very important, the practice of acquiring new relatives through baptisms or weddings is also important. The
significance of relative linkswhether acquired or inheritedis a part of the mechanism that pre-conditions
and keeps non-formal relations functional.
62
Exploring the reasons for the transformation of the non-formal realm in this direction is very interesting. The
process of formation of a new elite could be an impulse of the above-mentioned tendency. It is not, however,
a prerequisite for developing an open system. A clan system is still maintained and changes apply only in
regard to the actors and means of joining a clan. Trust remains the main pillar of the public system, which is
therefore not based on professionalism and qualification. Trust is understood as non-conditional devotion.
Thus, the idea of the structure remains with the notion of successors and the replacement of nomenclature,
rather than a merit-based open system. The formation of a new power-holding elite is similar to the one from
Soviet times; the ideology remains the same while the form is redesigned.
63
Bibliography
1. . (1963) ,
.
2. . . (2004) ,
, .
3. . (1992) , .
4. (2011)
, ,
.
5. . (2005) ,
.: , .: , ,
(CTC)
.
6. . (2006)
, ,
.
7. Beck, U. (1992) Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
8. Bell D. (1973) The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York:
Basic Books.
9. Bozeman B. (1999) Bureaucracy and Red Tape. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
10. Blau P. (1963) The Dynamics of Bureaucracy. Chicago: University of Chicago
11. Blau, P. M. and Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York: Wiley and
Sons.
12. Crozier, M. (1964) The bureaucratic phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13. Gajduschek, G. (2003, January) Bureaucracy: Is it efficient? Is it not? Is that the question?
Administration & Society, vol. 34, 6: pp. 700-723.
14. Khorbaladze T. (2005, April 14) Revolutionary slogans in Georgia are still topical. 24 Saati pp. 1.
15. Kleinig, J. (1983) Paternalism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
16. Kordzaia, T. Freedom of information and internet regulation in Georgia. Institute for Development
of
Freedom
of
Information.
Retrieved
June
2011
from
http://www.idfi.ge/?cat=researches&lang=en&topic=34&header=
17. Margvelashvili G. (2005, February 1) Three descriptions of distorted bureaucracy. Rezonansi pp. 4.
18. Mintzberg, H. (2004), Managers, not MBAs: a hard look at the soft practice of managing and
management development. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
19. Polanyi K (1944) The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. New
York: Ferrar & Rinehart.
20. Smith. K.G., Carroll, S.J., Ashford, S.J. (1995) 'Intra- and interorganizational cooperation: Toward a
research agenda'. Academy of Management Journal, 38,723.
21. The Constitution of Georgia, Chapter 2, Article 41, Part 1. (Adopted on 24 August 1995. Last
amendment 27 December 2006).
22. Tnnies F. (1987) Community and society. New York: Harper.
23. U.N. Resolution A/RES/59(1), para. 1.
24. Von Bismarck, O. (1884, March). Bismarck's reichstag speech on the law for workers' compensation.
25. Voslensky, M. (Ed) (1984). Nomenklatura: The soviet ruling class. Trans. Mosbacher, E. Garden
City, NY: Doubleday.
64
26. Weber M. & Roth, G., Wittich, C (Eds.) (1968) Economy and Society. N.Y.: Bedminster.
27. Weber M. (1947) The theory of social and economic organization. New York: The Free Press
28. Whiston, S. C, & Rahardja, D. (2005). Qualitative career assessment: An overview and analysis.
Journal of Career Assessment, 13, 371-380.
29. Ziller, J. & Peters, B.G., Pierre J. (Eds) (2003) The continental system of administrative legality.
Handbook of Public Administration. London: Sage.
30. , . . (1991) : . :
" " . "".
65

The Process of Formation of Meritocracy in Transforming Public Services

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The Process of Formation of Meritocracy in Transforming Public Services

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The Process of Formation of Meritocracy in Transforming Public Services