INNOVATION IN GOVERNMENT
Mission-Driven Government: Transforming Rule-
-By providing governments with a menu of innovations
and tools to adapt to their own context, the international
community can play a critical role in promoting good
governance and the creation of new democratic spaces.
-Innovations must similarly be institutionalized to ensure
that they will not fade away with a change in leadership.
-Things to consider in innovation: environment; capacity
of the organization to adapt, implement, and
institutionalize innovations.
Why Should Governments Innovate?
THREE MAIN DOMESTIC CHALLENGES:
1.they need to operate and provide more far-reaching
and higher quality services with reduced resources
and limited operational capacities
2.they need to make public institutions more
accountable, responsive and effective by promoting a
more citizen-oriented public administration.
3.they need to respond more adequately to the
demands from citizens for greater participation
Citizens no longer perceive themselves as passive
“consumers” of government services, but as part of
the solution to deal more effectively with emerging
issues.
- governance is not the sole prerogative of governments,
but that civil society and the private sector also have an
important role to play in this sphere
Benefits of Innovation
1. it can help maximize the utilization of resources
and capacities to create public value as well as
encourage a more open/participatory culture in
government,
2. it can help governments regain people’s trust
and restore legitimacy.
3. can boost the pride of civil servants working in
the public sector, as well as encourage a culture of
continuous improvement.
4. innovation in one sector can open the door to
innovations in other areas.
Models of Public Administration Reform
-REINVENTING GOVERNMENT (
-BUSINESS PROCESS REENGINEERING (Hammer
and Champy, 1993)
-NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT (Hood 1995-96, Kickert
et al., 1997)
1. Reinventing Government
 Suggests that governments must act in entrepreneurial
ways…
 Osborne and Gaebler, 1993- Reinventing
Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is
Transforming the Public Sector (1993) they argue for a
paradigm shift in the basic model of governance used
in the US.
 Introduces “entrepreneurial” management (market-
oriented) that utilizes its resources in new ways to
maximize productivity and effectiveness;
10 Principles of Reinventing Government:
1. Catalytic Government: Steering Rather than
Rowing – catalyzing all sectors (public, private and
voluntary) into solving community problems;
2.Community-Owned Government: Empowering
Rather than Serving – empowering citizens by
pushing control out of the bureaucracy into the
community;
3.Competitive Government: Injecting Competition
into Service Delivery – promoting competition
between service providers;
4.
Driven Organizations – being driven by goals and
missions not by rules and regulations;
5.Results-Oriented Government: Funding Outcomes,
Not Inputs – measuring performance, focusing not on
inputs but on outcomes;
6.Customer-Driven Government: Meeting the Needs
of the Customers, Not the Bureaucracy – redefining
clients as customers and offering them choices;
7.Enterprising Government: Earning Rather than
Spending – earning money rather than simply
spending it;
8.Anticipatory Government: Prevention Rather than
Cure – preventing problems before they emerge,
rather than offering services afterwards;
9.Decentralized Government: From Hierarchy to
Participation and Teamwork – decentralizing
authority and embracing participatory management;
10. Market-Oriented Government: Leveraging
Change Through the Market – preferring market
mechanisms to bureaucratic ones.
CRITICS OF REINVENTING GOVERNMENT
 It focuses so much on the bureaucracy that it neglects
the role of congress (policy-making).
 Entrepreneurial government may result in socializing
the risks while privatizing the profits.
 The accounts of success stories cited that helped
improved governance are perceived to be anecdotal
(circumstantial).
 Political risks and economic costs as well as
organizational and personnel implications entailed in
being an entrepreneurial government may be too high
for political leaders and public managers to take.
2. Business Process Reengineering
Forces that Encourage Reengineering:
 Customers take charge
 Competition intensifies, and,
 Changes become constant
Key Themes of Reengineering:
 Process Orientation - looks at the entire process
 Ambition - aim for breakthroughs
 Rule Breaking - specializations, sequence and timing
are deliberately abandoned
 Creative Use of Information Technology - IT allows
organizations to do work in radical ways
Characteristics of the Reengineering Process:
 Several jobs are combined into one
 Workers make decisions
 Steps in the process are performed in a natural
order
 Processes have multiple versions
 Work is performed where it makes the most
sense
 Checks and controls are reduced
 Reconciliation is minimized
 A manager provides a single point of contact
 Hybrid centralized/decentralized operations are
prevalent
Some Criticisms to Reengineering:
 gained less ground in the public sector;
 Efforts entail large budgetary/economic cost
 Unions anticipate/assume that this is a ploy for
downsizing the bureaucracy or to hire political
appointees;
 Employees are displaced or laid off;
 It may also be difficult to get a consensus of all
stakeholders who will be affected by the changes;
 Policy-making in government may be
incremental and are influenced by views of extraneous
or external sources, i.e. congress, media, pressure
group, etc.
 Disrupt the overall governmental process;
 Entails political risks which may be too high for
our leaders and public managers;
 Radical changes in service and product delivery
systems may be problematic.
 Government political nature may not allow it to
succeed considering the pluralist nature of most
government systems; and,
 There is a danger of having a government that
will become less responsible to citizens.
3. New Public Management
 Emerged as a new managerial approach in the
public sector to correct inadequacies of traditional PA
models (paradigms);
 These reforms featured elements of
privatization, deregulation and reorganization to
encourage competition among government agencies
such as the use of “customer” as a metaphor for users of
government services, huge emphasis on performance
management, public-private partnerships, reduction of
role-based management, measurement of outcomes,
and mission-driven management.
Reform Targets of NPM:
 Reduction of the role and extent of the State to
enhance to participation of the private sector.
 Facilitation of acquisition of entrepreneurial skills
and activities in society.
 Prevention on the future expansion of the Public
Sector (campaign for a lean government).
 To ‘depoliticize’ many (mainly economic) policy
decisions that must be entrusted to experts and
professionals instead of politicians.
 Inculcation of public sector organizations with
private sector management practices and techniques;
and,
 Entrench distinctions between public and private
to protect and preserve civil liberties and property
rights.
Reengineering and Reinventing Government through
Federalism
Reinventing involves radical changes, a change can
trigger more changes or disruptions which may not be
easily tractable. It may also be difficult to get a
consensus of all stakeholders who will be affected by the
changes. The political risks and economic costs as well
as organizational and personnel implications entailed in
being an entrepreneurial government may be too high for
political leaders and public managers to take.
The 1987 Philippine Constitution reestablished the
democracy halted by decades of Martial Law under
former dictator Ferdinand Marcos. Now, lawmakers in
Congress are once again attempting to change the
nation’s highest law.
Critics and defenders of the Constitution know it is not a
perfect document. There are several provisions that
need to be clarified – including Article XVII, which
outlines the process of amending or revising the Charter
and which has spurred contentious debates between
the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Past administrations touted Charter Change as a means
to address these flaws and “improve” the country.
President Rodrigo Duterte likewise pushed for a federal
form of government during his campaign.
Definitions of Best Practices and Innovations
-UNAIDS, focusing on “best practice” means
accumulating and applying knowledge about what
works and what does not work in different situations
and contexts.
In general terms, innovation in governance is a
creative idea which is successfully implemented to solve
a pressing public problem. It is the act of conceiving and
implementing a new way of achieving a result and/or
performing work.
Public sector management innovation may also be
defined as the development of new policy designs and
new standard operating procedures by public
organizations to address public policy problems. Thus,
an innovation in public administration is an
effective, creative and unique answer to new
problems or a new answer to old problems
There are different types of innovations in public
administration, including:
• Institutional innovation, which focus on the renewal
of established institutions and/or the creation of new
institutions;
• Organizational innovation, including the introduction
of new working procedures or management techniques
in public administration;
• Process innovation, which focuses on the
improvement of the quality of public service delivery;
and,
• Conceptual innovation, which focuses on the
introduction of new forms of governance (e.g., interactive
policy-making, engaged governance, people’s budget
reforms, horizontal networks).
. Some believe that if innovations are sustainable,
they become successful practices. From this
perspective, the difference between the two concepts
lies in the time frame. Others instead maintain that one
of the defining criteria of an innovation is sustainability.
The difference between an innovation and a successful
practice could also lie in the element of novelty that is
part of the latter concept but not always the former.
Characteristics of Best Practices and Innovations
Karmack, 2003- many of the world’s nation states are
involved in major efforts aimed at reforming
and improving their governments.
(Albury, 2005- innovation is used ever more
frequently in the rhetoric and discourses of public
service improvement” as a result of the “positive
resonances” associated with this concept
Moore (1995)- innovation is not an end in itself but a
means to an end. Innovation must be judged by its
ability to create what describes as “public value.”
Moore (2005) introduces two very different models to
understand innovative processes in the public
sector:
1.based on specific breakthrough innovations
2. focuses on innovative organizations and
continuous improvement.
Improvement versus Innovation
To achieve widespread improvements in governance
and service performance, including efficiencies, in order
to increase public value (Hartley, 2005), we should not
only satisfy academic rigor but also make sure that the
terminology used contributes in a practical way to
improving democratic governance.
The word innovation is generally regarded as
something positive and conveys images of renewal,
commitment, improvement and progress.
Conceptual clarity is important when undertaking
academic studies on innovation. Because of its positive
connotations, innovation as a concept can be used to
encourage and facilitate improvement and change.
Hence, a public manager who aims to create a learning
organization and who places a high premium on ongoing
problem-solving will instead choose a definition that
facilitates continuous improvement through incremental
innovation – with a groundbreaking initiative seen as an
added bonus.
Effective leadership is critical for the success of any
innovation in governance. Strategic leadership capacity-
building is an important tool to foster innovations in
governance. It has been demonstrated that the type of
leadership affects the sustainability of an innovation. If
an innovation is based on a leader and it is not
institutionalized, the innovation will die as soon as there
is a change in leadership. The role of an effective leader
is thus to build capacity and devolve responsibility and
authority so that the innovation introduced can survive
his/her departure.
What Drives Innovation?
To better understand the opportunities and limitations of
“replication,” it is useful to know why innovations happen.
Borins (2000) tried to provide an empirical
explanation for this question by reviewing the winners of
the Innovations in American Government Program and
identifying the key conditions leading to innovation.
-Initiatives resulting from political process and
system, including an election mandate or pressure by
politicians;
A leadership change,
A crisis, either current or anticipated, particularly with
the potential for negative publicity;
A variety of internal problems,
New opportunities created by technology or other
factors (Borins, 2000).
Problems as Sources of Innovation
According to Yapp (2005), the desire to find a new way
to deal with a problem is a source of innovation.
The Problem Types model highlights two important
issues concerning the transfer of innovation. First, of all
four problem types the last three depend on strong
leadership to support imagination and concept creation
to clarify direction and to design and develop processes
to support improvement and innovation (Yapp, 2005).
Second, the introduction of an outside idea can move
from one of the last three quadrants to the first.
When this point is reached, it becomes important to vet
the new idea or improvement by applying operational
management.
Key Principles and Strategies for Innovation
Innovations occur for different reasons: a crisis, regime
change, new leadership, opportunities or challenges.
Experience shows that key factors in the success of an
innovation include:
 Effective leadership
 Inclusiveness, empowerment and commitment
of all stakeholders (building teams and
partnerships);
 Setting targets and establishing a conducive
environment in which these targets can be
reached;
 Monitoring mechanism to measure change
against established benchmarks; and,
 Reward system that establishes accountability,
enhances creative thinking and unleashes innovative
abilities that erstwhile could not express themselves.
key principles and strategies for innovation in
governance emerge as prominent:
1. Integrating Services - With public sectors
offering an increased number of services, the
focus is shifting from what kinds of services are
provided to how they are provided.
2. Decentralizing Service Delivery - Bringing
services and public officials closer to people
(e.g., from national to regional level) often
ensures a higher level of responsiveness and
customization - and thus increased satisfaction
on behalf of citizens and businesses.
Decentralized service delivery also allows for a
greater involvement of citizens in providing feed-
back on public services and therefore for a
better match between local services and local
needs. In general, recent innovative strategies
include decentralized policy development,
implementation and evaluation; as well as
decentralized budgeting and expenditure
management assessments.
3. Utilizing Partnerships - Public-private
partnerships as well as joined-up government or
inter-agency collaboration are all becoming more
common with the general public expecting
greater participation, better utilization of
resources and increased efficiency in service
delivery.
4. Engaging Citizens - Citizens are being
increasingly engaged in providing inputs to
government’s policy formulation and monitoring
processes. A number of countries have
developed strategies to encourage the active
participation of citizens in, for example,
budgeting and the fiscal processes.
5. Taking Advantage of Information and
Communication Technologies - The use of
internet-based services as a way to cut red tape
or to spread digital infrastructure has
expanded rapidly throughout public sectors in
recent years. ICT applications, in general, have
been introduced to upgrade service delivery in
terms of wider access to services, enhanced
efficiency and timeliness, a more “citizen-
centered” approach to services, and greater
effectiveness, relevance and quality of services.
Everyone is for innovation; yet it is very difficult to
conceive and implement this. Hence, a number of factors
are critical to building an enabling environment for
innovation, including:
 Effective leadership;
 Organizational culture supportive of innovation;
 Promotion of teamwork and partnerships;
 Promotion of lifelong learning;
 Promotion of diversity;
 Monitoring the implementation of innovation;
and,
 Knowledge-sharing and networking.
An established innovation or good practice can be of
value to others in three ways:
 Learning: Learning takes place when the
recipient organization has a good sense of the
nature of the problem to which they seek a
solution.
  Benchmarking: In this case, a country or
agency looks at what it has in place or is
implementing and compares this with other
established practices. Benchmarking is mainly at
the level of results or outputs and focuses on
how the innovation has managed to achieve
them.
 Replication: Based on careful assessment, a
decision is made to introduce the innovation with
minor modifications and customization. The
assessment will include looking at the context,
the nature of the innovation and its suitability.
BEST PRACTICES IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
(Bendixsen & Guchteniere 2003- “best” has strong
inspirational value, and “the purpose of describing and
publishing a successful practice, and calling it a [best
practice], is to make it function as an inspirational
guideline, particularly with regard to decision-making”).
So, best practices carry a tripartite function: 1)
identifying successful initiatives addressing important
issues, 2) learning what works and does not work in
different contexts, and 3) inspirational guidelines for
decision making.
Examination of High Performing Organizations
Peters and Waterman’s (1982) book, In Search of
Excellence, highlights a variation of this approach to
identifying best practices. They set out to identify the
factors that contribute to high levels of
organizational performance. To do this, they identified
high performing organizations. They then studied those
organizations in depth to determine what traits
characterized their management. It was a simple step
from there to the conclusions that the traits they
identified were the cause of high performance by the
organizations. Along the way, they identified eight traits
or attributes that seemed to distinctively characterize
high performing companies.
Osborne and Gaebler’s Reinventing Government,
Peters and Waterman’s work on corporate America.
-set out to identify governments, agencies, and
practices that showed promise in addressing deep
seated problems governments faced in producing
effective, responsive services.
They cast their work in terms of the perceived inability of
bureaucratic organizations to respond to changing
conditions, a gap between the demands made on
government and the resources it has to address those
demands, and a crisis of confidence in government.
Their approach lacks the systematic identification of
high performers, but is consistent with practices public
officials and managers often follow when looking for
better ways to do things.
Like Peters and Waterman, they cast their findings as a
set of general attributes they associated with successful
governance. Like Peters and Waterman, they
characterized those attributes almost as slogans:
• Catalytic government: steering , not rowing
• Community-owned government: empowering rather
than serving
• Competitive government: injecting competition into
service delivery
• Mission driven government: transforming rule-driven
organizations
• Customer driven government: meeting the needs of the
customer, not the bureaucracy
• Enterprising government: earning rather than spending
• Anticipatory government: prevention rather than cure
• Decentralized government: from hierarchy to
participation and teamwork
• Market-oriented government: leveraging change
through the market.
New Public Management: (1990)
-characterized by a drive to reduce bureaucracy,
unburden the regulatory environment that constrained
public managers, emphasize performance rather than
process, and rely on competition and markets to
enhance the delivery of public services.
Government Performance Project Approach
The Government Performance Project (GPP) is an
ongoing effort to assess the quality of management or
management capacity in American federal, state, and
local governments. Project reports do not make clear
exactly how the criteria espoused by the project were
identified, but GPP clearly relied heavily on scholarly
experts to identify the traits that signify high performance
in the areas of budget and finance, capital
improvements, human resources, information, and
managing for results. The collaboration between
academic scholars and journalists led to a set of
standards or measures by which to assess the
management performance of governments. As
elucidated by the GPP, the criteria for the first rounds of
evaluation by the project (GPP, 2002.) were:
Financial Management focuses on budget allocation,
forecasting, budget execution, accounting, financial
reporting, debt management, and investment.
Human Resources Management focuses on workforce
planning, hiring, retention, reward and discipline, and
training.
Information Technology (IT) Management focuses on
uses of IT systems in management: hardware and
software performance, integration with other
management systems, training, cost, and reporting
capability.
Capital Management focuses on long-term planning,
initial construction or purchasing justification, capital and
operating budget interaction, and maintenance.
Managing for Results focuses on strategic planning,
performance measurement, and the implementation of
performance information.
A later iteration of the GPP altered the criteria for
management capacity to subsume them in four
categories: money, human resources, infrastructure, and
information. In both iterations, the project identified
specific criteria and developed a set of indicators for
each criterion. The GPP produces periodic reports
assessing the degree to which federal agencies, state
governments, and local governments meet the various
criteria. These reports grade the units of government.
The GPP has received extensive media attention and,
partially because of that, focused policy makers and
managers on important dimensions of public
management. The one thing remarkably absent from the
numerous reports of the GPP and studies drawn from it
is any evidence that governments demonstrating high
management capacity produce better results or inspire
greater citizen confidence.
Synthesis of Literature and Scientific Evidence Approach
A third approach to the identification of best practices is
to synthesize the literature bearing on a particular
practice or subject. Individual studies are assessed
with respect to such criteria as validity and reliability
and their conclusions are brought into a theoretical
framework that can be used to guide theory,
research, and practice. An excellent example of this is
Rainey and Steinbauer’s (1999) development of the
elements of a theory of effective government
organizations. Their assessment suggests that public
organizations attain higher levels of performance when:
 Oversight authorities are attentive, supportive,
and delegative
  There are favorable relations with other
stakeholders, strong constituencies, and
effective
relations with suppliers and partners
 An attractive mission
 A strong, mission-linked organizational culture
 Stable, effective leadership
 Task design with intrinsic motivation and
extrinsic rewards
 An effective human resource system
 Professionalism in the organization
 Motivation among members of the organization.
A fourth approach relies on scientific evidence from
systematic, focused studies of the policies,
practices, and approaches of interest. The language
that is used with respect to these practices
is evidence-based practice. Medical fields commonly use
such an approach (Timmermans and Mauck, 2005), but
managers, reformers, and policy makers are promoting it
in diverse settings.
Examples abound in criminal justice, mental health,
education, social services, and elsewhere. One
prominent example is the Drug Effectiveness Review
Project (DERP) which generates evidence regarding
drug efficacy or effectiveness by pharmaceutical class
(Hall and Jennings, 2007). Fifteen sovereign states, a
Canadian province, and a foundation have joined
resources to develop this evidence-based
practice measurement system and the states use the
results in the management of their health care
programs. The No Child Left Behind Act provides an
example of a mandate for state and local administrators
to implement evidence-based practices. The legislation
requires that Title I school-wide and targeted assistance
programs use effective methods and instructional
strategies that are grounded in scientifically based
research.
Galing Pook: Recognizing Excellence in Local
Governance
The Gantimpalang Panglingkod Pook, or Gawad
Galing Pook, was launched in 1993 to recognize
innovation and excellence in local governance. Its
mandates include: recognizing innovation and
excellence in local governance; inspiring replication of
these practices; and advocating citizen awareness of
and participation in innovative local
governance programmes. The Gawad Galing Pook
Awards include the following categories:
 Outstanding Local Governance Programme
and Trailblazing Programme: The award for
Outstanding Local Governance Programme is
given yearly to the ten top-ranking local
governance programmes according to the
Galing Pook Foundation’s selection criteria. The
Trailblazing Programme Award is given to the
next ten finalists from the same screening
process;
 Award for Continuing Excellence (ACE):
Every five years, an ACE is given to past
winners of the Outstanding Local Governance
Programme Award that have made the most
significant progress since receiving the original
award; and,
 Special Citations: These are awarded to
programs judged to have accomplished the most
significant achievements in specific areas of
local governance development, such as child-
rights-responsiveness and gender-
responsiveness.
Candidates for the Gawad Galing Pook Awards pass
Gawad Galing Pook believes that the value of harvesting
best and innovative practices is greater when shared
with other LGUs, prompting them to explore their
potential, respond to local needs, maximize their
resources – and realize good governance. This is why
the Foundation works to provide venues and create
opportunities in the form of learning and replication
circles that aid policy discussion, model-building and
cross-fertilization of lessons among LGUs.
Gawad Galing Pook’s replication strategies range from
exchanges of information and ideas to the actual
replication of a particular exemplary practice. Galing
Pook defines replication as a structured learning
process that facilitates sharing and the
development of advocacy strategies across
programs and organizations in order to build the
capacities of individuals, groups and institutions to
improve their situations. Its replication strategies are
characterized by collaboration and partnership, as they
involve making a conscious decision to learn and work
together.
Galing Pook: Learnings and Insights
What prompts innovation?
“Triggering crises”: Innovations may occur in response
to a crisis, such as environmental degradation, floods,
etc. When pushed against the wall and confronted with
a crisis, various stakeholders in society, whether
governmental or civil, become creative and innovative
Dynamic leadership and active civil society:
Inadequate financial resources: Limitations on
financial resources can prompt local authorities to think
of ways to generate revenues in addition to the
conventional means of taxation and allotments from the
national government. Various local financial
initiatives have received awards in the last ten years.
Demand for specific basic services: Local
governments may become creative in response to a
pressing basic need that simply must be addressed,
such as healthcare and housing.
National policies and programs: While the national
government may provide the policy framework for, say,
addressing certain basic needs (housing, healthcare,
infrastructure development, etc.), local governments may
build upon the framework and adapt it to local conditions.
The national government’s policy on solid waste
management, for example, has led some LGUs to
develop their own strategies for implementing this policy
locally.
Replication Insights from the Program
Beyond poverty alleviation and resource mobilization,
LGU exemplary practices considered for replication
include as many of the following characteristics as
possible:
 LGU-initiated: The exemplary practice was
initiated by an LGU at the city or municipal level.
The initiative is sustainable and not dependent
for its success, implementation or resources on
any other program, project or agency;
 Creative use of Local Governance Code
powers: The exemplary practice
demonstrates the creative use of governmental
and/or corporate powers provided to LGUs
by the Local Government Code of 1991;
 Simple and implementable in one year: The
initiative is easily replicable and can progress to
the application stage in a relatively short time;
 Proven and effective solutions to common or
similar problems: The exemplary practice has
proven over a reasonable period to be an
 effective response to the identified needs of its encourage the replicators, sustain their commitment and
target beneficiaries. It has also made a encourage leadership participation in the program.
significant contribution to the improvement of the
beneficiaries’ social and material conditions;
 Demonstrated level of sustainability: This
means that the project has been in place for a
considerable time; it survived the arrival of a new
administration; it has become a permanent
program or structure in the LGU; the community
as well as executive and legislative bodies are
involved in and support it; and related legislation
is in place in the LGU;
 Least possible cost and effort to replicate:
The exemplary practice does not require huge
amounts of resources or funding to replicate and
is easy to implement. It’s a “common sense
idea” as opposed to a capital-intensive project.
Also, the exemplary practice is able to mobilize
and maximize the use of indigenous resources;
 Potential for multiplier effect or further
replication: The processes and approaches
of the exemplary practice have the potential to
address other needs or deliver services beyond
those originally targeted or intended. This means
that the initiative has relatively high potential for
success. The success of the practice in a
few LGUs may incite other LGUs to adopt it;
and,
 Documented exemplary practice: Considering
all other features equal, preference will be given
to initiatives with existing documentation on the
EP’s benefits, key milestones, success and
hindering factors, results, key stakeholders,
processes and mechanisms.

The following factors are crucial to the replication

process:

Availability of institutions and people to facilitate

learning. Replication is a learning process that can be
maximized only if necessary elements and opportunities
are provided, such as a learning facilitator. This facilitator
could come from the exchanging LGUs or a third party,
such as an outside institution.

Tools and guidelines. Host and Recipient LGUs

develop or use tools that can be employed by both LGUs
to facilitate learning and the exchange of ideas.
Adaptation rather than adoption. Tools and processes
to be used in a replication process must encourage
adaptation, not adoption, of the exemplary practice.
Further, the replication must involve not only the transfer
of the solutions or models but also the transfer of the
processes.

Integration of monitoring and evaluation into

program implementation. Because a
replication program is an innovation, monitoring and
recording one’s own experience as well as the
experience of replicating LGUs helps an organization
build its capacity for undertaking similar programs in the
future. It also contributes to the larger goal
of disseminating good governance practices and building
effective programs for replicating these practices.
Cultural considerations. Local cultures are
characterized by considerable diversity of political and
institutional arrangements, cultural conditions, social and
economic conditions, local capacities and so on. Thus,
tools and processes are more effective when adapted to
the local context. In fact, the opportunity to use the
Recipient LGU’s existing or indigenous practices in the
replication process will facilitate its implementation.
Celebrate small successes. It is important to celebrate
incremental successes in a replication process to