EDITORIAL: Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif while speaking at the launching ceremony of the new fully automated digital performance management system for Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) officials pledged that those who perform well will be incentivised through monetary compensation/promotions/public recognition while those who do not perform well will be subjected to penalties.
Details about the shortfalls in the previous performance evaluation reports and benefits attributed to the new system have been reported and include the following: (i) categories are to be from A to E with 20 percent of the workforce in each category and each official would be judged on the basis of a fully digitised performance management criteria focused on officers’ integrity and quality of work.
In the previous system, almost 99 percent were placed in the outstanding category; (ii) 20 percent of those allocated A grade are already receiving four times the salary, 20 percent Grade-B officers three times, Grade-C twice the salary and Grade-D one extra salary. Grade-E will not receive any extra compensation.
The new system will depend on 45 peers (seniors, juniors civil service colleagues and batch mates) every six months through an anonymous forced-ranking system which would ensure that each of the five categories is limited to 20 percent. While one can fully support such a system, it is relevant to note that it has not yet been clarified as to what would constitute good performance and that definition needs to be unambiguously defined.
Performance will have to be based on different parameters depending on the placement and capacity of the FBR official. Additional questions are: would performance be based on the amount of tax an official collects in which case a comparison with the previous period is necessary, or the amount through widening the tax net be given greater weightage than higher direct tax collections levied by the policymakers? There is of course a persistent complaint by the taxpayers that officials use discretionary powers to compel them to extend bribes in an effort to reduce the tax burden that was overstated in the first place. Or, is it to be based on the number of successful audits, with the audited company/individual not getting a court order?
In addition to the 45 peer reviewers, a rather large number, a technical panel which would include retired FBR officials and other tax practitioners will assess the quality of work of the officers randomly which would be selected by the digitised system. It is unclear whether they have received any training or whether employees were taken on board to ensure buy-in.
Western countries too are using this system which include e-governance initiatives to streamline and improve service delivery, establish clear goals, measure progress and track performance, use digital dashboards to track key performance indicators (necessary for FBR and police action), data security and privacy issues, but one overwhelming issue that they face is that these systems are weak mainly due to political interference, and need to add Pakistan as a case in point struggles with more than its share of such interference, and lack of internal accountability.
To conclude, the focus on digitally enhanced interaction can be supported but with the proviso that enhanced interaction with the general public in terms of service provision, responsiveness, participatory governance and deliberation are also key features of the new system not to mention exploitation of public’s data.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed.