Foresight and innovation for #NextGenGov champions in Sri Lanka

Similar to other countries in the region, Sri Lanka has experienced rising urbanisation, technological innovation, deepening inequality, vulnerability to disasters and dramatic environmental risks. A new generation of government leaders is imperative in ensuring Sri Lanka can effectively respond to the challenges of our time.

The ‘Foresight & Innovation for #NextGenGov Champions’ program responds to this need by equipping a new generation of public sector officials with the tools necessary to implement creative solutions to complex challenges in our country. Following the success of the pilot program conducted in 2018, two capacity-building workshops for two more cohorts were launched this week with participants from over 35 public institutions in Sri Lanka along with international participants from Maldives, Bhutan, Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone, Turkey, Gambia and Tanzania.

The program is co-developed as a joint initiative between Citra Social Innovation Lab, the Presidential Secretariat, the Ministry of Public Administration, and the Sri Lanka Institute of Development Administration (SLIDA).

Speaking on the added value of the program Minister of Public Administration and Disaster Management Ranjith Madduma Bandara stated, “A strong and efficient public service is a crucial segment of the enforcement of policies for an effective nation. The Ministry of Public Administration and Disaster Management is pleased to have worked with Citra Social Innovation Lab and the Presidential Secretariat and SLIDA to co-develop a comprehensive program on ‘Foresight and Innovation for Public Sector Excellence’, being conducted for the second time, having had a very successful pilot run. Building on the conversations around improving the efficiency of the public sector, this workshop will equip the selected officials with the tools required to approach challenges in an innovative way. We look forward to continuing our engagement with Citra to further strengthen the public sector of Sri Lanka.”

As Sri Lanka’s first social innovation lab, Citra is a proven leader in using foresight and innovation tools in prototyping and testing development solutions to ensure they are agile and holistic. As a joint initiative between the Ministry of Science, Technology and Research, and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Citra facilitates creating an environment that is conducive to looking at problems from different perspectives, building capacities, and strengthening institutions.

Speaking on the program, Minister of Science, Technology and Research Sujeewa Senasinghe stated, “Public sector officials are the backbone of any government and have a crucial role to play in ensuring countries achieve the targets they set for themselves. This year we’re happy to welcome over 55 public sector officials from Sri Lanka along with their counterparts from several other countries for the #NextGenGov program. The 2019 cohort of this workshop is a testament to the global significance of these tools for public sector excellence.”

The five-day residential workshops require participants to implement these tools in their offices and departments within a three-month mentorship period and report back on their experiences. The continued engagement of the ‘#NextGenGov Champions’ will contribute towards a sustained, long-term integration of foresight and innovation for public sector excellence in Sri Lanka.

Source: Daily FT

Read the full article here.

Content-2---feature-image

BFR Untold: Delivering Big Fast Results – a PEMANDU experience

Beginning as a delivery unit tasked to assist the government of Malaysia in pushing forward a nation-wide transformation, PEMANDU Associates has spent the last ten years helping governments and corporations across the globe to deliver results. Applying their proprietary Big Fast Results (BFR) – 8 Steps of Transformation ™ methodology, the firm believes in getting everyone from government units, ministers and the private sector on board and motivated to make transformational change happen quickly.

In this month’s episode of BFR Untold, we sit down with PEMANDU Associate’s Sivaram Superamanian, Siti Nathrah Johar Salim, and Mohamad Ridzwan Hamzah to discuss what it is like to be on the ground both working in and establishing effective delivery units.

Content-3---Feature-Image

Delivery Units 101

All citizens expect governments to make choices that are in our best interests, improve the quality of life within the country, and be transparent and upfront about the changes they would be making. The difficulties faced today by governments (and organisations alike) isn’t in the crafting of policies or plans but in implementing said policies to ensure that results or outcomes are delivered.

Several governments have begun utilising the idea of delivery units to overcome this implementation gap. In the UK for instance in 2001, the Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit (PMDU) was set up under then-Prime Minister Tony Blair’s cabinet to provide support and scrutiny across issues in the education, health, transport and justice sectors. Its efforts produced strong results. For example, dropping the number of patients waiting in emergency rooms for longer than four hours from over 23% to 2.3% in just two years. PMDU became a pioneer of the delivery unit model, starting a trend of delivery units being founded by governments seeking to enact and implement transformations of their own. The past two years alone have seen delivery units spring up in multiple countries in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa.

Figure 1: Locations of delivery units in Latin America, the Caribbean and the world[1]

What is a delivery unit?

Delivery units are teams that concentrate on developing, implementing and monitoring transformational projects. Typically deployed by governments, they can operate at the state, local or national level to help ministries and government units monitor high priority policies and ensure the performance of these policies are on track.

These teams are small and highly skilled, able to gather and analyse a constant stream of performance data and watch out for any roadblocks. In the event that the desired results are not materialising on the ground, the teams will investigate and intervene. Some also scrutinise policy proposals to see whether implementation plans are feasible, and address delivery capability gaps in the public sector workforce through activities such as training and co-designing implementation plans.[2]

Do delivery units work?

Today, delivery units are an effective government implementation support that delivers measurable outcomes. While there is genuinely global appeal around the delivery model, as with any unit tasked to effect change, criticism is sure to abound – most of which surrounds sustainability of such units. Reports show that many of these new units have limited timescale of operations and in doing so, much of the criticisms are on “what happens next?” Like any other tool, understanding both the origin of delivery units and the value they bring will enable governments and organisations alike to use them to the best of their ability.

Below are the top four criticisms of delivery units and how to make them work for instead of against you.

1. Delivery units don’t last.

A report from consultancy firm Acasus points out that every delivery unit established more than ten years ago has been closed down, including those in the UK, the Netherlands, Indonesia, Australia (Victoria, Queensland and Canberra), Sierra Leone and Maryland.[3]

Figure 2: Location of past delivery units[4]

The thing to remember is that delivery units are not designed to last for years or ad infinitum. These units aren’t government departments; they’re formed specifically to work on a particular programme and should or will be disbanded once the project is done. Part of the mandate of delivery units is to build capacity and transfer their knowledge to existing government units who can carry on the methods and mindsets instilled. In this way, the results-oriented culture continues even after the unit has been disbanded.

In light of this, the measure of success for delivery units shouldn’t be in their continued existence or the length of their service, but the outcomes they deliver. For example, a delivery unit in Pernambuco, one of Brazil’s most violent states with 4,000 deaths a year, introduced the ‘Pact of Life’, a strategy improving data-gathering for decision-making used in weekly meetings organised by the delivery unit.[5] As a result, there was a 27.1% drop in the number deadly and violent crimes between 2007-2014. In contrast, the number of homicides in neighbouring states increased.

2. Delivery units are overly dependent on political backing.

Delivery units are often established by and report to the highest tier of governance; because of this, they depend on the authority invested in them by the leadership to function effectively. In Sierra Leone, the delivery unit introduced periodic reviews and increase accountability as part of its mandate to improve the ministries’ monitoring and follow-up capacities. Due to the unit’s location in the president’s office, they were able to substantially improve coordination amongst ministries and improve their ability to promptly identify bottlenecks and problems requiring presidential intervention and to adjust their strategies accordingly.[6]

Critics have pointed out that the delivery model falters when there is an administration change or when a transition of power occurs. In actual fact, there are delivery units who have survived transitions of power; it’s just the direction or the programme that changes. For example, Australia’s Cabinet Implementation Unit became the Strategic Co-ordination Unit after ownership was transferred to the Prime Minister’s Office.[7] Ownership aside, its responsibilities remain the same: to provide high-level, strategic policy advice and coordination. Delivery units are there to ensure that whatever was already planned would be implemented. They assist governments and organisations to deliver on the high-impact socio-economic outcomes which benefit both the public and business community. Transitions of power aside, the agenda to deliver impactful results should always be paramount.

3. Delivery units overpromise

Claudio Seebach, from the President’s Delivery Unit in Chile, remarked that “on one side, stretch targets help persuade people to work hard to get things done. But on the other side, you can aim too high and miss, or if communicated badly, people take what you achieve for granted so it is a fine line to tread. This means that you also need clear accountabilities – so everyone knows who is doing what.”[8]

Once the true north has been broken down into manageable, achievable parts, it is easier to see what progress has been made so far and how much is “too little”.

The Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU) in Malaysia became a globally recognised and acknowledged expert in addressing Claudio’s comment. During their time within the Prime Minister’s Department of Malaysia, they had utilised their proprietary “lab methodology” to ensure that all stakeholders, from ministers to private sector and subject matter experts were brought together into a lab to discuss and collectively resolve issues at hand by implementing a 3ft programme geared at achieving outcomes.[9] The lab allowed these key people to pool their knowledge together, find solutions and agree collectively on how to move forward. This model is today adopted in several countries.

4. Delivery units are just a form of government propaganda

One of the greatest challenges facing governments is keeping up with public expectations of transparency and accountability. When the transformational agenda is not credible in the eyes of the public, it is seen as political propaganda and the veracity of the data produced during the project is questioned. Thus, even if positive results are achieved, the delivery model becomes discredited in the eyes of both the public and heads of governments. Wales’ First Minister’s Delivery Unit – now defunct – was regularly criticised for being “shrouded in secrecy” due to a lack of public awareness of its activities other than just giving Welsh leader Andrew RT Davies “a heads-up when he’s about to face criticism”.[10]

Regular progress updates are critical. Few countries publish annual reports on what has been done during the year or invite external review of progress made which does little to encourage transparency. Understanding this, many units today are proactively publishing information on the projects and providing stakeholders – including the public – with access to delivery plans and performance data. This has been done through mechanisms such as:

Table 1: Transparency initiatives undertaken by delivery units[11]

In Malaysia, PEMANDU overcame this by developing a public sector communication programme, holding several open days where citizens were exposed to the strategies and initiatives for the country’s National Transformation Project. Delivery unit members as well as policymakers were present during these events to answer questions and collect feedback from the public. PEMANDU believed that by doing this, the public would be fully informed of the plans made on their behalf and could keep the government accountable should progress on these goals falter. Furthermore, after a full annual cycle of implementation, annual reports illustrating the achievements, challenges and way forward are published to demonstrate greater transparency and accountability. Today, open days and annual reports are recognised as important steps in their Big Fast Results (BFR) – 8 Steps of Transformation™ Methodology when working with international governments and businesses.

On the value of delivery units

Acting more like policy SWAT teams deployed to expedite results, delivery units aren’t meant to change a whole country overnight. Their value lies in getting specific policies implemented and changing the culture of a government towards one that is results-driven, accountable and transparent. They can be used to break stakeholders out of their silos and bring them together to work on one common goal. Used correctly, the delivery unit can be a government’s best tool to bridge the implementation gap.

  1. Mariano Lafuente & Sebastián González (2018) Do Delivery Units Deliver? Assessing Government Innovation, IDB Technical Note [1]
  2. The Mandarin, 2017 [2]
  3. Acasus, 2017 [3]
  4. Institute for Government, Tracking Deliveryreport [4]
  5. Mariano Lafuente & Sebastián González, 2018 [5]
  6. Ibid. [6]
  7. Institute for Government, Tracking Delivery, 2017 [7]
  8. Centre for Public Impact, 2016 [8]
  9. To read more about PEMANDU’s lab methodology, read the World Bank report here: http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/malaysia/publication/driving-performance-from-the-center-malaysias-experience-with-pemandu.[9]
  10. Andrew RT Davies, 2015 [10]
  11. Institute for Government, Tracking Delivery report, 2017 [11]
Content-1---feature-image

Transformation on the Street: Delivering transformation to Malaysia’s public transport system

When the idea to build a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) in Malaysia was first put on the table in 2010, it was met with varying degrees of both resistance and cynicism – resistance from pockets of community where the rail system would pass through, and cynicism that it would take the government of Malaysia a lifetime to get its act together.

They were wrong. It took Malaysia only six years to build and develop an entirely new rail line and integrate it into the existing system. The MRT is one of the country’s largest single investments and was intended to radically improve and transform Kuala Lumpur’s inadequate public transportation coverage. It was meant to propel the Greater Kuala Lumpur metropolitan area to be on par with that of developed cities around the world. Today, the MRT has managed to deliver both and has quickly become a popular mode of transport to get in and out of the city centre for residents and tourists alike.

Historically, public transport systems in Malaysia functioned largely as part of the social safety net for those with no other means of getting around. These included people from low-income households (B40) as well as those with lesser means to get around. This is slowly beginning to change with the growing demand amongst city dwellers wanting to go carless. The transit system of the future will be for people across the board. And today, the MRT moves an estimate of 196,000 people daily.

Malaysians already have access to a range of public transportation in the Klang Valley, from several bus operators, three light rapid transit (LRT) lines, two commuter rail lies, one monorail line, to an airport rail link. But as the city grows, so does the number of commuters travelling between the city and surrounding suburbs. Delivering a reliable and modern mass rail transit that elevates the current public transport system could not have come soon enough.

Meeting a need

It was estimated in 2017 that about 1.1 million people travel by public transport every day, most of them travelling in, out and around the Greater Klang Valley area. The Klang Valley itself is home to about 725 million people; it’s a rising urban hub and the site of one of the worst traffic jams in the country. A study by Boston Consulting Group showed that Malaysians spend an average of 53 minutes in traffic and 25 minutes to look for parking each day.[1] That’s a significant portion of time of the day spent stuck in a traffic jam and this adds up depending on how far Malaysians have to travel for work or to school.

In an attempt to ease traffic congestion and offer more transport options to commuters, the government made urban public transport a priority area. Prior to this, the last major upgrade to Malaysia’s public transport infrastructure was the introduction of the LRT in the late 1990s and the monorail in 2003. The LRT is still one of the more popular railways in the country but limited stations and overcrowding during peak hours makes the line inaccessible for many Malaysians.

The MRT was launched to address these concerns. The first line, stretching from Sungai Buloh to Kajang, connected 44 shopping centres, 11 education centres and several hospitals and was completed in 2016. In terms of integration, the MRT has been seamlessly connected to the existing public transport system, with paid-to-paid walkways and connections linking the MRT Line 1 to LRT, KTM and monorail lines. As the other MRT lines are built, more stations will be integrated into the overall Klang Valley rail network.

Providing an alternative choice of commute

Introducing the MRT extends the public transport coverage to more neighbourhoods and suburbs who, prior to the MRT, did not have easy access to a train station. It has given more people more choices on how to get in and out of the city centre and made public transport equally accessible for all.

A study by the Centre of Governance and Political Studies (CENT-GPS) pointed out that many of the MRT stations were built adjacent to higher-income neighbourhoods, arguing that this was why the MRT was not as popular as anticipated.[2] However, the study assumed that only middle- and lower-income households take public transport; this isn’t necessarily the case. More Malaysians from all backgrounds are choosing not to drive to work[3], whether to avoid the city centre’s infamous traffic jams, because they’re becoming more environmentally conscious or simply because there are more options now.

It’s also pretty cheap to ride the MRT. The price of MRT fares is comparable to the LRT and is actually lower than the Sunway BRT, with concession rates for senior citizens, students and people with disabilities. There’s also a second option, introduced early this year. Understanding that the concession cards cater to only a fraction of the population who take public transport, the government introduced two monthly travel passes, one at RM100 and another, just for buses, at RM50. The cards were extremely well received by the public; ridership on all rail lines surged by 40% surge in ridership after the travel cards were introduced.

Is the MRT for everyone?

One of the key characteristics of good public transport is accessibility – stations must be accessible for everyone, especially for people with disabilities or senior citizens with mobility needs. In 2017, over 450,000 people registered as Persons with Disabilities (PWD) with the Department of Social Welfare. 35.2% were PWDs with physical disabilities. Earlier stations were not built to cater their needs, causing disabled commuters to feel marginalised.

However, focus was aimed at increasing public convenience for all – including the disabled community. The government ensured that all MRT stations were constructed to be disabled-friendly and upgraded LRT stations along the Ampang and Kelana Jaya lines in July 2011. Today, most if not all stations are equipped with features like elevators and tactile paving. The gap between the train doors and MRT platforms has been designed to ensure that a wheelchair can roll in easily.

The Challenges – Today & Tomorrow

Urbanisation is on the rise as a truly global phenomenon as more people around the world are living and working in cities. This growing trend makes it even more important that cities transform to support the greater mobility requirements of urban dwellers. But creating the perfect public transportation network isn’t easy. Designing urban transportation for today’s cities has become highly complex; planners must balance the different modes of transport and a multitude of stops, while ensuring that the network can handle the amount and variety of traffic a good-sized city sees every day. While the focus of urban transportation traditionally is on residents, cities today are becoming hives of commerce and economic activity with residents, non-residents and travellers alike converging into one place. This makes having that public transportation network even more important for convenient mobility.

Malaysia’s public transport system is still a work in progress. One of the more valid criticisms in recent times given by Malaysian users on the urban transport system has been the poor first and last mile connectivity, with stations lacking safety measures such as dedicated pedestrian walkways on the streets closest to the station. This doesn’t just affect the MRT but also can be said of the other rail stations in Malaysia – a common complaint describes crossing the last 100 metres to get to a train station as “a nightmare”.[4] The government has addressed this by introducing a feeder bus system to provide that last mile connectivity between MRT stations and neighbourhoods. The fares for all MRT Feeder Buses have been set to RM1, making them a very affordable option for commuters. However, more could be done to improve the efficiency of this feeder bus system and increase safety standards for pedestrians.

Another common perception is that few people take the MRT. As evident, MRT ridership is still growing. As of March 2019, the MRT operator reported that January’s passenger traffic for the MRT surged by 40%.[5] Even if the increase rate drops back to the 28% yearly increase, it’s very likely that the MRT would reach the 250,000 ridership target before 2021. Moreover, the MRT is doing better than the LRT and Monorail lines who are both experiencing a decrease in ridership.[6]

Integrated public transit systems are a big investment to build, operate and maintain to remain relevant to urban mobility. Introducing travel passes, electronic tickets and cashless systems have made Malaysia’s public transportation more convenient, but there are still more ways to encourage regular uses. For example, the rising demand for loyalty rewards programme and incentives, like the use of a point system based on trip miles, for commuters could be a way to promote the use of public transit and to influence consumer behaviour. Another thing to think about is using technology like phone apps to give commuters live traffic updates of the train and bus schedules for each line.

And this doesn’t have to come at the cost of taxpayers’ money; a study noted that for every USD$1 invested in public transportation, approximately USD$4 in economic returns are generated, and for every USD$1 billion in investments in the sector, 50,000 jobs are created and supported. [7] The reasoning is that as more people cluster in a city centre, more jobs are created which would ultimately boost both wages and economic productivity over time.

Looking ahead

The MRT system is only two years old; it would take a few more years and the addition of the other two planned lines for it to reach its full potential. Cent-GPS concluded its report by stating that “the project was in the right place, it was in keeping with a greener future, it had the right idea for a sharing community.”[8]

We agree. The MRT project was designed to provide a cheaper, greener, more convenient alternative to driving and it has delivered on its promise. Effective transportation makes cities more liveable by easing residents’ commute and transportation needs and increasing accessibility. For those who can’t or don’t drive, public transportation allows them to go to work, to school, to buy groceries or seek medical help, or just visit friends without having to ask for a ride or spend more to take Grab.

Moving forward, perhaps the time has come for the Ministry of Transport to conduct a country-wide stock -take of user needs, compatibility, trends and incentives to drive the next wave of urban public transport initiatives. It is after all almost 10 years ago, since this agenda was put under the microscope of the BFR Lab Methodology.[9]

  1. Straits Times, 2017 [1]
  2. Cent-GPS, 2018, p.56 [2]
  3. The Malaysian Reserve, 2018 [3]
  4. Malaysiakini, 2018 [4]
  5. Malay Mail, 2019 [5]
  6. Cent-GPS report, 2018, p.52 [6]
  7. National Express Transit, 2017 [7]
  8. Cent-GPS report, 2018, p. 57. [8]
  9. The BFR Lab Methodology is a trademark of PEMANDU Associates, which was tasked with helping the government of Malaysia conduct its National Transformation Programme (NTP). The lab is designed to bring all stakeholders into one room to discuss issues and brainstorm solutions. To find out more, visit: https://demo.pemandu.org/8-steps-of-transformation/[9]

IMF lauds Oman’s Tanfeedh programme

The National Programme for Enhancing Economic Development (Tanfeedh) — the Sultanate’s signature initiative for sustaining economic growth amid the ongoing global downturn — has come in for praise from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The Executive Board of the specialised UN agency, which had concluded Article IV consultations with Oman last month, noted the Tanfeedh programme’s contribution to the Sultanate’s national developmental objectives.

“(The) Directors commended the ongoing implementation of the Tanfeedh Programme with a focus on economic diversification and job creation,” said the Washington DC-headquartered multilateral institution in a summary of its discussions with Oman’s authorities.

Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country’s economic developments and policies.

While lauding the Tanfeedh initiative, the Executive Board nevertheless called for “further reforms to address labour market rigidities including by better aligning public sector compensation with that of the private sector and by addressing skills mismatches through higher quality education and training”. The Board “also encouraged further SME development including through better access to finance, to raise productivity”.

Initially unveiled in 2016, the Tanfeedh programme is a government initiative that links the strategies of vital business sectors, such as Manufacturing, Tourism, Transport & Logistics, Energy, Mining, Fisheries, Financial Services, and Labour, with each other with the aim of diversifying national income resources. A series of ‘labs’ focusing on each of these sectors have generated a substantial portfolio of projects and initiatives that are currently in various stages of implementation and operation. The Implementation Support and Follow-up Unit (ISFU), set up under the auspices of the Diwan of Royal Court, is tracking the speedy delivery of these projects.

The IMF Executive Board also noted Oman’s policy efforts since the 2014 oil price shock which, it said, have aimed at strengthening the fiscal position, enhancing private sector-led growth and employment, and encouraging diversification. “Economic activity started to recover last year, and the overall fiscal and current account deficits improved somewhat, reflecting mainly higher oil prices,” it stated.

The report noted in particular growth in real non-oil GDP in 2018 – an uptrend that reflected “higher confidence” driven by the rebound in oil prices. “Non-hydrocarbon growth is projected to increase gradually over the medium term, reaching about 4 per cent, assuming efforts to diversify the economy continue,” it said, noting that an uptick in oil and gas production had also boosted hydrocarbon GDP growth in 2018.

Oman’s overall fiscal balance had also improved last year, according to the report. “The fiscal deficit is estimated to have declined to about 9 per cent of GDP from 13.9 per cent of GDP in 2017, reflecting higher oil revenues. However, gross government debt increased by 7 per cent of GDP last year (to 53.5 per cent of GDP),” it noted however.

Also accentuating the brightening economic picture for Oman was the “substantial pickup in exports, primarily hydrocarbons”, said the IMF. This growth, combined with an estimated decline in imports, “helped reduce the current account deficit by about 10½ percentage points of GDP (to 4.7 per cent of GDP)”, the report said.

Source: Oman Observer

Read the full report from IMF here.