Sabtu, 21 Agustus 2010

Problems of Bureaucracy in Developing Countries

According to Huges (2003), bureaucracy in developing countries could be characterized organizationally, culturally and structurally. Organizationally, it has strict hierarchies’ norm as continuation of colonial government practices. Moreover, the post-colonial government in developing countries tends to be heavy bureaucracy and slow-moving. Culturally, government employee recruited in lifetime basis as a prestigious and “well-paid” career. Structurally, some of bureaucracies were influenced by socialism or Marxism model, that in their economic model many developing countries adopting strong state sector.


However, Weber (in Huges, 2003) stated that principles of traditional bureaucracy as; first, fixed jurisdictional areas that set by regulation, second, principle of hierarchical office, third, management by the written rules, fourth, expertise to operate office management, fifth, demands for full professionalism to operate official activity and sixth, management follows some basic rules. These principles adopted by many post-independence countries in the world after World War II with varying degree of consistency.

Even though some developing countries have long history of their own administration before colonization, however in post-independence they have many weaknesses aspect in their government. Bureaucracy in developing countries, especially in post-colonial era, tends to only continue the system of colonial government without considering the philosophy inside it. Furthermore, many local governments failed to creatively adjust to the new concepts of public management.

Bureaucratization in developing countries equals to losing its flexibility, creativity and responsiveness to fulfil the need of its citizen. Civil servants tend to not well trained, while in the same time spreads favouritism, patronage, and nepotism amongst them as main culture. Moreover, this condition worsened by highly private interest group amongst civil servants. Indonesia during Soeharto and Iraq during Saddam Hussein was the best example for these characteristics.

Continuing almost all important part of colonial bureaucracy, Soeharto’s regime build their power based on loyalty, but by too many employee with low salary, lack of competencies and less professional. Bureaucracy was not neutral from political interests and become a tool of power holder. Because of personalization process of state power in many developing countries, bureaucracy was set up to service the ruling-regime.

In Indonesia during New Order regime, government employees forced to follow Golkar Party and civil servant in Iraq during Saddam Hussein compulsorily become member of Baath Party. In other word, bureaucracy becomes part of an effort by the regime to save its power. As a result, a weak government operating mainly motivated by hypocrisy, ineffective and did not have clear vision other than endemic corruption.

In economic sector, the government failed to rely on the state own enterprise that has dominant rule in many national economy. Cronyism and rent seeking process as a result of undemocratic regime had bad impact on the economic situation. In addition, in some countries excessively centralistic economic planning failed to reach its objectives to reduce poverty and boost economic growth. Economic inequality amongst citizen was become a riel consequence. Organizational, structural and cultural problems still faced by bureaucracy in many developing countries that try to fulfil its independence promise to deliver good service and prosperity.

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar