Principles in Government Rightsizing: 5 Es and an A

Alex B. Brillantes, Jr. and Karl Emmanuel V. Ruiz *

The first state of the nation address of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. included a

number of references to the imperatives of governance reform, specifically the need to

rightsize the bureaucracy. This would be enabled by the proposed National Government

Reorganization Plan (NGRP). While this was not surprising - it was in fact expected -

considering that all Presidents since President Quezon in the 30s up to President Duterte in

2017 - included the imperative to reform government top in their agenda. All reform

interventions, – variously referred to as “reorganization,” “reengineering,” “reinventing,”

“rationalizing,” and “rightsizing” initiatives – underscored the fundamental principles of

economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

Recall for instance, that Manuel Quezon set up the Government Survey Board in

1935. Manuel Roxas, through Executive Order (EO) established a Reorganization Committee

in 1947. Elpidio Quirino initiated the Government Survey Reorganization Commission in

1950 which became a RA 995 in 1954 when Ramon Magsaysay was president. Ferdinand

Marcos, issued EO 281, constituting the Presidential Commission on Reorganization in 1970.

Upon the imposition of martial law in 1972, Marcos Sr issued Presidential Decree Number 1

setting into motion the massive reorganization of the government through the Integrated

Reorganization Plan (IRP). Corazon Aquino in 1986 set up the Presidential Commission on

Government Reorganization in 1986. Fidel Ramos issued EO 149 in 1993 to streamline the

Office of the President. President Ramos likewise described his efforts to “reengineer” and

“reinvent” government taking off from the National Performance Review of the United States

during the time of Bill Clinton. Joseph Estrada reengineered the bureaucracy through EO 165

in 1999. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo issued EO 366 in 2004 callifor a Rationalization Plan.

Similarly, Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino issued EO 18 in 2010 to Rationalize the Office of the

President. President Duterte’s EO 1 in 2016 underscored the imperative to reengineer the

Office of the President and eventually rightsize the bureaucracy. The Department of Budget

and Management under then Secretary Benjamin Diokno initiated several rightsizing studies

1
for the bureaucracy. A number of professors from the University of the Philippines were

involved in these rightsizing studies. There were also accompanying legislative proposals to

rightsize the bureaucracy.

It was therefore not surprising that Ferdinand Marcos Jr – like his predecessors -

underscored the need to reform the government through a rightzing process. Earlier on,

Marcos Jr issued EO 1 reorganizing the office of the President. In his state of the nation

address, Marcos Jr pointed out the urgency of putting the house in order “by rightsizing the

government to enhance its institutional capacity to perform its mandate and provide better

services while ensuring optimal use of resources.”

Indeed, while the goals of reforming organizations, including the government, are

noble, the idea of reforming institutions – in this case referred to as “rightsizing” - is not new.

They are all premised on the fundamental management principles of efficiency, economy, and

effectiveness (known as the classic 3Es on management). The National College of Public

Administration and Governance (NCPAG) at the University of the Philippines Diliman has

been conducting studies on reorganization of governance over the decades. Jose Abueva

published a book on Reorganization in 1969. Gonzales and Deapera provided a historical

view of reorganization initiatives since the 50s in the Philippine Journal of Public

Administration (1987). UPNCPAG convened a series of fora on governance issues including

one entitled “Reinventing, Reengineering and Reorganizing the Bureaucracy in the

Philippines: Why we Should Be More Hopeful” published in Diliman Governance Forum

(2005). It was a double edged question, expressing either that there may be hope in

reorganizing the bureaucracy once more, or exasperation suggesting a cynical view on

reorganization. Is it going to be more of the same? In 2018, together with Calina, we pointed

out the value of reorganizing the state bureaucracy to shed redundancies and eliminate

wasteful use of resources. And lately in 2021, together with Lorenzo in an article published in

the Global Encyclopedia for Pubic Administration, we argued that reform efforts in

government should go beyond the basic principles of reorganization (effectiveness,

2
efficiency, and economy) and suggested the need to consider the principles of equity, and

ethics and accountability to undegird governance reforms such as rightsizing.

Indeed the principles undergirding the processes of reorganization and rightsizing

should go beyond the traditional economy, efficiency and effectiveness as seen in the various

government reorganization efforts since the 50s. As is commonly understood, economy is

about determining the ideal means of carrying out goals and tasks quickly and at the lowest

possible cost. Efficiency is competently finishing tasks (programs, projects, activities) with

the least time and effort. And, effectiveness is accomplishing an organization's goals

following sound processes anchored on its overall mission, with the pertinent national and

local authorities capably providing public goods.

Over the years, based on our studies and interactions with many academics and

practitioners in public administration at the local, national and global levels, we have

concluded that it is equally important - and relevant – to include the principles of equity and

ethics and accountability in any public sector reform intervention. Equity has two

dimensions: one is a preference for the poor and the vulnerable, and the other is a in any effort

to reform governance. Ethics means knowing what is right from wrong. In public service, as

provided for in the Code of Ethics and Accountability (RA 6713), civil servants are expected

to fulfill their duties with responsibility, righteousness, honesty, and impartiality as much as

possible. Finally, accountability – pananagutan - is about an obligation or willingness to

accept responsibility, - and when called for, the consequences - for such actions.

Equity has two major dimensions. Former President Ramon Magsaysay once said in

the late 50s that “those who have less in life should have more in law.” The 2030 Agenda for

Sustainable Development (also the Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs) emphasizes

reaching the poorest and most vulnerable. The Government of the Philippines has adopted a

25-year long term vision to end poverty in the country by 2040 (Ambisyon Natin 2040). It is

within this context that public sector reforms and reorganizations should be aligned to the

principle of equity, more specifically in terms of addressing the needs of the poor and

3
vulnerable in line with the vision articulated by Magsaysay as early as the 50s into the 2030

SDGs and our very own Ambisyon Natin 2040.

The other dimension of equity when it comes to public sector reform, is the concern

for the next generation, inter-generational equity. Rightsizing efforts are not only for the

present, but should consider the long term effects of such interventions. Rightsizing efforts

should not only have long term perspectives, but also should be sustainable. This therefore

may be framed within the broader context of inter-generational equity.

Finally, public sector reforms must always be founded on the non-negotiable

principles of ethics and accountability. Needless to say, graft and corruption continues to be

one of the biggest and long running challenges confronting the Philippines. All

administrations have decried corruption. Inspite of the many reorganization interventions of

all administrations, corruption continues to be a reality. Thus ethics and accountability MUST

be among the principles EMBEDDED in designing and implememting public sector reforms

and rightsizing strategies.

As mentioned above, after Marcos Sr imposed martial law, the very first decree he

signed was PD 1 implementing the Integrated Reorganization Plan (IRP) which restructured

the bureaucracy “to promote simplicity, economy, and efficiency in the government”. This

was to be implemented by the Presidential Commission on Reorganization (PCR) that was

created in 1970. It was chaired by the brilliant technocrat Armand V. Fabella. It was PCR’s

job to effectively coordinate all reorganization efforts emanating from various sector. It

included key agencies such that the Department of Budget and Management and the Civil

Service Commission. The UP College of Public Administration was also invited to assist the

PCR. President Marcos Jr might lift a page from his father’s reorganization strategies by

creating a Presidential Commission on Rightsizing that would shepherd the proposed NGRP.

It would effectively steer, orchestrate and integrate various rightsizing efforts emanating from

all sector of government, in accordance to the fundamental and time honored principles of

economy, efficiency and effectiveness. But as experience has shown, these are not enough.

These have to be further bedrocked upon the fundamental principles of equity, and ethics and

4
accountability. Indeed, governance reform efforts – including rightsizing the bureaucracy -

have to be founded upon the 5Es and an A principles: economy, efficiency, effectiveness,

equity and ethics and accountability.

• Dr Brillantes (abbrillantes@up.edu.ph) is Professor and former Dean of the National

College of Public Administration of the University of the Philippines, and Secretary
General of the Eastern Regional Organization for Public Administration. Mr Karl
Emmanuel Ruiz is a Librarian at the UPNCPAG and part time Researcher at the
EROPA.