The Government Transformation Programme in Malaysia: A Shining Example of Performance Management in the Public Sector?

AbstractThis paper reviews the Government Transformation Programme—the most recent performance management reform in Malaysia. Drawing on the findings of in-depth interviews and review of available literature the paper argues that while it represents an improvement over earlier reforms and has already made a promising start, the GTP it is not without detractors and controversies. The paper highlights some of the strengths and accomplishments of the GTP as well as key pitfalls and prevailing concerns surrounding it. In its conclusion the paper identifies some of the factors that explain the early success of the programme and comments on major lessons and implications.Keywords: Performance ManagementPerformance ParadoxGTPPEMANDUNKRAsMalaysia Notes[1] It was in fact an extension of the KPI system introduced in the government-linked companies (GLCs) a year earlier. The impressive record of the KPI experiment within GLCs encouraged the government to extend KPIs as a tool for measuring performance of the senior executives of the public service.[2] In addition, PEMANDU has set up separate sub-units in each of the NKRAs and one unit to cover all 26 ministries. It has also created parallel delivery management offices in each and every ministry. The sub-units at PEMANDU and corresponding delivery management offices at the ministry level work together to implement initiatives specified in the GTP roadmap and facilitate coordination.[3] Members of the panel included Michael Barber from the private consulting firm McKinsey & Co., Michael Hershman, co-founder of Transparency International (TI), Steven Sedgewick, the Australian Public Service Commissioner, and two senior figures from the IMF.[4] Conceptually, the GTP and PEMANDU have parallels elsewhere, especially in the UK. The success of the Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PMDU) of Tony Blair's government in UK inspired Najib to imitate the UK model. Thus in the hindsight the GTP is a policy transfer from the UK rather than a local policy innovation in service delivery.[5] In 2012 Malaysia's ranking fell for wastefulness of government spending from 21st to 25th position; ranking fell from 12 to 19 for business cost of crime and violence from 63 to 69, organised crime from 54 to 60 and quality of roads from 17 to 20 (Ming, Citation2012).[6] See O'Shannasssy (2013) for details of how political imperatives have forced Najib to retreat from his core promises.