I HAVE spent many years in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) business, and I have encountered many examples of how the “human factor” has hampered or has affected the implementation of ICT projects that would lead to automation.
Perhaps it could be said that these “people” are just unwilling or unable to support these projects, but it seems that in many cases, “they” do not want to automate anything because that would prevent “them” from exercising their discretionary “powers”.
As much as possible, these “people” would want to preserve the status quo because if everything is fully automated, they would be fully out of the loop.
There is surely a direct correlation between automation and corruption. If there is automation, there is no corruption. That is because if there is automation, there is no discretion.
Going direct to the point, if there is no discretion, there is no corruption.
At the risk of sounding redundant, that is simply how it goes. No corruption if there is no discretion. No discretion if there is automation.
To put this in another way, there is no in-between if everything is in black and white. If everything is in black and white, there are no gray areas. If there are no gray areas, then there is no room for discretion.
While having dinner with a Filipino expat from Malaysia, we talked about the many possible ways of automating the public services of the Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines. After hearing that local government automation is already very pervasive in Malaysia, our dinner host suddenly asked why we have not done it in the Philippines, meaning to say why we have not automated the similar services here.
Not really knowing how to answer him, I simply said that the reason, perhaps the one and only reason is the lack of political will.
Even if I said that however, I did not exactly mean that the situation is hopeless, because I believe that there are some pockets of partial success all over the country where automation is starting to gain some traction, even if it has not reached the point of erasing or weakening corruption.
In theory, it is possible to systematize the information capabilities of the LGUs, even without computerization. Yes, paper records and ledgers could be kept even without computers.
To add to that, corruption could actually be prevented by simply using manual methods. As a matter of fact, not even the use of computers could prevent corruption, especially if there is still discretion in the data entry. As the saying goes, “garbage in, garbage out” and that has not changed yet.
In reality, there is really no need to choose between manual methods and electronic methods, because as it is supposed to be, good paper records are supposed to be the starting point of good electronic records.
Notwithstanding the problems and limitations of these present times, what we should be looking at in the long term future are smarter government agencies and smarter local governments where everything is modernized, everything is computerized and everything is automated.
Setting aside the means of how that could be done, we should just say that the desired outcome is a government that is better and faster, a government that could be accessed all the time at anytime from anywhere, by anyone who needs anything from it, regardless of whether it is a report, a request or a complaint. It goes without saying that the means of access should be electronic or contactless as the saying goes.
What started out as the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) scheme of long ago has apparently evolved into what is now known as the Public and Private Partnership (PPP) approach. As I understand it from my own perspective, one or the other would allow Joint Venture Projects (JVPs) of one form or the other.
Perhaps no one is seeing it from the way that I see it, but JVPs could be an indirect form of Business Process Outsourcing (BPO). In order to clearly define what is what is not however, I should say outright that a JVP could simply be a lesser version of the Joint Venture Corporation (JVC) approach; where there is there is really no need to form a new corporation.
It is said that there are many ways to skin a cat, and on that basis I could confidently say that the BOT scheme, the PPP approach, JVPs and JVCs are simply ways to attract private capital in order to fund public projects.
Using an extreme example, it may already be possible to put up a JVP that will essentially privatize the construction and management of city jails and national prisons. In that example, the government could be spending less money per head per prisoner.
As long as performance targets are met, what is there to complain about? In all likelihood, the use of JVPs and JVCs could be the way to achieve automation and defeat corruption./PN
