ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Prajapati TrivediSubscribe to Prajapati Trivedi

Performance Agreements in US Government

A performance agreement is a document summarising the understanding between the US president and his cabinet secretary regarding the expected results and performance indicators for the concerned department. This article argues that performance agreements are an effective instrument for promoting a culture of accountability in the government and lauds the attempt by the US administration to introduce them systematically in the highest echelons of the government. However, due to technical flaws in their design, these instruments have proved to be ineffective. This experience provides valuable lessons for developing countries in search of effective instruments of accountability. A well-designed system of performance agreements can be a great instrument for transforming development goals into reality.

Improving Government Performance-What Gets Measured, Gets Done

What Gets Measured, Gets Done Prajapati Trivedi In response to the then prime minister's concern for accountability of top government officials, the Economic Administration Reforms Commission had produced an absolutely superb report on this subject in 1982. Sadly, 11 years after there has been not an iota of increase in the accountability of government officials and departments. This paper examines the reasons for this failure and suggests a practical plan to achieve the goal of increased accountability.

What is India s Privatisation Policy

Prajapati Trivedi The debate on privatisation in India has been more ideological than pragmatic; more dogmatic than analytical and more bureaucratic than technocratic. This study attempts to piece together various policy pronouncements and publicly available documents on this subject to outline what appears to be the prevalent approach to privatisation.

Menu of Financial Indicators Used in MOUs-An Exercise in Clarification

An Exercise in Clarification Prajapati Trivedi M P Vithal Financial performance has moved to the centre-stage of MOU policy. The main issue before policy+makers is to devise ways of internalising this policy goai The best way to do so will be to give clear and unambiguous signals to public enterprises with regard to what is. expected from them in terms of financial performance.

Lack of Understanding on Memorandum of Underdtandung

No one can say that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a panacea for public sector ills, nor can anyone claim it is perfect in its design as well as in its implementation. But it is an improvement over all known previous efforts and represents a step in the right direction. Much work needs to be done to improve it further, notwithstanding the fact that it has achieved a great deal in a short period of time and is regarded to be in the vanguard of such efforts internationally INTRODUCTION THE recent article by Murthy [1990] on the policy of Memorandum of Understanding is a typical 'good news-bad news' story. The good news is that it signals an increase in the level of interest and awareness regarding the existence of the MOU policy' The bad news is that it is, unfortunately, factually quite inaccurate and betrays a surprising lack of clarity regarding the current status of the MOU policy. As we shall see later in this critique, the subtitle of the paper: 'More Memorandum than Understanding' is more true for the article by Murthy than for the MOU policy, if correctly understood.

Performance Evaluation System for Memoranda of Understanding

Memoranda of Understanding Prajapati Trivedi Following the recommendation of the Arjun Sengupta Committee, the government of India decided to adopt a system of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1986, These MOUs were supposed to outline the mutual obligations of the government and public enterprises. As of now, eleven public enterprises have signed MOUs with their respective administrative ministries and six more will be added to this list in the next round. It is fair to say, the policy of MOUs is one of the major initiatives of the government towards the public sector in India. Yet, there has been a certain degree of dissatisfaction, both within and outside the government, over the functioning of the MOU system as it has prevailed over the last two years. It was, therefore, decided that a thorough review and revamping of the system should be undertaken. While performance improvement requires action on several fronts, a proper system to evaluate public enterprise performance is a critical element of any such effort. This paper presents a pro- cedure for fixing performance criteria in MOUs and evaluating the performance of a public enterprise based on these MOUs. The proposed system has been derived after examining the international experience in this regard. According to the available information, the proposed system appears to be the most successful. After discussing the conceptual aspects of a 'desirable' performance evaluation system, the paper examines the MOU of ONGC for illustrating the difference between the existing approach and the one proposed in this paper.

Public Enterprise Performance Information System-A Proposal

Information System A Proposal Prajapati Trivedi This paper examines the much overlooked distinction between a Performance Information System (PIS) and a Management Information System (MIS). The international experience in this regard is examined along with a thorough analysis of the rudimentary PIS that operates in the Bureau of Public Enterprises, The paper makes a strong case for improving the present system after examination of all pros and cons associated with the proposed new system. A blueprint for such a system is also suggested.

Sengupta Report on Public Enterprises-Eloquent Fuzziness at Its Best

A number of major policy initiatives toward public enterprises are being pushed vigorously by the government. Phrases like "MOUs" ''holding companies" and "privatisation" have become a part of the current economic jargon. A closer examination reveals that they have spawned out of a common source

Public Enterprises in India-If Not for Profit Then for What

If Not for Profit Then for What? Prajapati Trivedi Public enterprises should not be evaluated on the basis of the same criteria as private enterprises, though, like private enterprises, they must be evaluated.

Evaluating the Evaluators-Performance of Bureau of Public Enterprises

Performance of Bureau of Public Enterprises Prajapati Trivedi This paper analyses the performance of the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE). It argues that the source of the ineffectiveness of BPE lies in its inability to measure the performance of public enterprises in a way that is both fair to the managers and to the nation. The institutional set up of BPE too significantly contributes to its ineffectiveness. Finding the present system of performance evaluation used by BPE severely lacking, the paper suggests three axioms of public enterprise performance evaluation against which all future efforts of BPE should be judged.
Back to Top