Innovations for Successful Societies
		


AN INITIATIVE OF
THE WOODROW WILSON SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 
AND THE BOBST CENTER FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE



		

Series: 		Civil Service
	
Interview no.:		P 1

Interviewee: 		David Adom			

Interviewer:		David Hausman

Date of Interview:	27 January 2010

Location:		Accra,  Ghana
					
		



Innovations for Successful Societies, Bobst Center for Peace and Justice
Princeton University, 83 Prospect Avenue, Princeton, New Jersey, 08544, USA www.princeton.edu/successfulsocieties






HAUSMAN: 	This is David Hausman and I'm here with Mr. David Adom, former commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service in Ghana. Mr. David Adom have you agreed to be recorded for this interview?

ADOM:	Yes.

HAUSMAN: 	Thanks so much. I'd like to start by asking you about your career and how you came to be Commissioner of the IRS and jobs that brought you to that place.

ADOM:	In the first place I'm a Chartered Accountant by profession, trained with Coopers and Lybrand, now PricewaterhouseCoopers. I worked for ten years for that firm and moved to Nigeria to work with another accounting firm.  I returned to Ghana in 1986 during the period that revenue agencies were being reformed in Ghana. So I joined the Internal Revenue Service as a Deputy Commissioner in charge of research planning and monitoring. New departments were created. Tax audit, tax examination, and I was the pioneer Deputy Commissioner to develop systems and procedures for these newly created functional units. Research Department was also added in. 

	After two years, or two and a half years, I was transferred to be Deputy Commissioner in charge of Finance and Administration. There the main functions were basically two, human resource management and financial maintenance. In 1996 when the then Commissioner, Professor J.E. Atta Mills moved into politics, I became the Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service.   

HAUSMAN: 	Great, thank you so much. I'd like to ask you a bit about each stage of change in the IRS but before I do that can I ask you about some of the issues and challenges that were facing tax collection when the IRS was first formed as an autonomous agency in 1986. What were some of the biggest problems that you faced? 

ADOM:	The problems before the change?

HAUSMAN: 	Before the change.

ADOM:	Generally, before a success--I wasn't part of the tax administration but from literature available it was part of the Civil Service of Ghana and for that matter the conditions of service were not the best. So tax administration had a problem of recruiting professionals, professional accountants, lawyers and so forth to work with that institution. The institution therefore suffered from quality personnel to run the service. As a civil service organization, the procedures were also civil service procedures, not autonomous. So I'd say forward-looking institution that will reform the systems and procedures for that administration of taxes. So for this reason there was a need for a change.      

HAUSMAN: 	Could you describe some of the civil service procedures that held the agency back?

ADOM:	Basically it is recruitment of staff. You needed to go through the Public Service Commission where those who do the recruitment are basically not tax personnel who know exactly the caliber of person to be recruited. As a civil service organization there were transfers being made between the general public service. So a person could be transferred from an institution that had little to do with taxation 7to the tax office. That was a problem. Reforms were slow. Improvements of condition of service for the revenue agencies was almost impractical, was almost not practical. So those challenges, actually hampered the development of tax collection in Ghana.  

HAUSMAN: 	Could you talk about the goals of the reform program when it began in 1986? 

ADOM:	The goal, the primary goal was to modernize tax administration in this country. To re-look at the procedures, redesign the procedures and processes, re-engineer the whole system, provide adequate funding for running of the administration. So, in a nutshell, to run it like a business entity with clear-cut vision, mission and objectives. These were blurred in the civil service days.

HAUSMAN: 	Was there an effort at the beginning to sit down and plan the process or the order in which things would be done or who would be involved in the process?

ADOM:	Sorry, ask the question again.

HAUSMAN: 	Sorry, many questions in one. Was there an effort to sit down and plan the process at the beginning and the order in which things would be done?

ADOM:	Definitely. After the initial diagnostic studies of the existing system a team was put together to plan the transformation and to prioritize or put in logical order the reform system. That began with looking at the law because every activity should be governed by the law. So the law was reformed, then the law was enacted. That gave the authority for the new creation, the new institution. It already involved the Internal Revenue Service, it also involved customs. Internal Revenue Service reforms were made first. Then the implementation process where recruitments were initially made with the appropriate complement of staff. The systems and procedures were looked at and new design of systems and procedures for implementation.

HAUSMAN: 	Great, let me ask you in a bit more detail about those recruitment and redesign of systems and procedures. First, in terms of recruitment, what changes did you make and how did you go about making them?

ADOM:	In terms of recruitment this is an autonomous body which had power to sign contracts. To recruit first the needs were identified and competitive recruitment process adopted to get the right complement of staff. Conditions of service were determined before the actual recruitment exercise started to make it attractive and I think it was a lot more attractive than the civil service and therefore the interest of people to work where there were many agencies.

HAUSMAN: 	Could you describe the competitive recruitment process in more detail?

ADOM:	It basically involved advertising. People showed interest. When people have shown interest they wanted to know the role they will be playing. That is to say they had the job schedule. Job satisfaction is important and the condition of service is also important. So that is how it went. 

HAUSMAN: 	Was there a particular group of professionals that you were targeting for hiring at that time? 

ADOM:	Yes, basically accountants, lawyers and graduates. At that time a lot of recruitment of graduates. It was easy for the recruitment to be done because there had been an exodus of Ghanaians to Nigeria and that was the time Nigeria was getting bad and Ghanaians were returning home, so it was easier actually to get the right complement of staff. As I said, I was also in Nigeria and I was moving back home.  

HAUSMAN: 	Were some staff let go in order to make room for the new complement of staff or did the staff simply expand?

ADOM:	The transition was a difficult moment because of the infusion of new staff. That mix of old attitudes and new ones created a lot of problems. Some staff lost their jobs. They identified non-performing staff and they exited them and new staff came in. So there was, at that time, two groups, new and the old and sometimes it proved to be acrimonious, yes.

HAUSMAN: 	About how many staff lost their jobs?

ADOM:	It is difficult to tell, I don't know.

HAUSMAN: 	Can you say more about the acrimony between the new and the old groups? Do you know any examples? 

ADOM:	I particularly was taken as the leader of the new recruits. There was another Deputy Commissioner who was leader of the old groups. So we found ourselves, even at management meetings arguing about unnecessary things, things that were not important to the progress of the institution. People had a fear the new guys had come to take up their jobs. Invariably the new ones had maybe better qualifications and so on and they were younger. I mean, this existed. Many of them had risen through the ranks. Civil service you don't lose your job, it is taken as a permanent for life except in such as our cases. So yes, this is what actually was the initial problem.

HAUSMAN: 	Were there any ways in which you got around this tension? 

ADOM:	Though difficult, there was constantly the assurance that we've come to partner you, to grow revenue collection for the improvement of this country. Along the line, with time, those fears were dispelled. 

HAUSMAN: 	You mentioned before that you attracted new professional staff with improved conditions of service.

ADOM:	For all.

HAUSMAN: 	For the civil servants who remained as well.

ADOM:	For everybody, not only for the new recruits.

HAUSMAN: 	How dramatic were those improvements?

ADOM:	I wasn't part of the old system but I do believe that these conditions increased about three-fold. 

HAUSMAN: 	Salaries?

ADOM:	Salaries and other allowances. Bonuses were established, performance bonuses were introduced, raised allowances. Also vehicles were made available to staff of a certain category for use for both business and private. So there was a remarkable improvement. If you want to compete with the private sector for the same staff, then you need to meet them in the commission of service. But gradually along the line we slid back to the civil service level. Of course those who remained in the civil service were jealous of the improved conditions of service. The tax or revenue agencies were part of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and had the same conditions. 

	After having the revenue institutions, I mean the civil servants in the ministry were very jealous and sometimes they'd take the decision, they'd convince the ministers and so on about conditions of service. What we did that was successful actually is that they created an autonomous ministry for revenue collection.   

HAUSMAN: 	Is that the National Revenue Secretariat?

ADOM:	Yes. And with a very dynamic Minister of State?

HAUSMAN: 	Was that Ato Ahwoi?  

ADOM:	Ato Ahwoi who was desirous in seeing that the reforms succeed. But gradually as that ministry was abolished and the revenue agencies went back to the Ministry of Finance, that's where the problem started. 

HAUSMAN: 	So did that happen in the early 1990s, is that right? 

ADOM:	I'm not very sure of when that happened but I think the special Ministry for Revenue lasted about three years. It was about '90, I'm not very sure. 

HAUSMAN: 	You mentioned that performance bonuses were introduced?

ADOM:	Yes.

HAUSMAN: 	Was there a system of performance evaluations?

ADOM:	Very simplistic. The institution is given a budget, a target to collect. You exceed it and you earn the bonus. Within the institution it was just a flat percentage of your income. So it is not based on the individual's performance but the collective performance of the whole entity.

HAUSMAN: 	How many-was the IRS divided into several such entities or was it-? 

ADOM:	No I mean, entity means IRS, the performance of the IRS. It was not departmentalized. So once IRS has reached its target and the target is collection, no more research is carried out. No more audits and so on. 

HAUSMAN: 	About how large was the percentage?

ADOM:	I believe sometimes it could be, normally around 15% of the annual salary.

HAUSMAN: 	How would you describe the effect of these bonuses on performance? Do you think they improved performance or do you think it wasn't a major factor?

ADOM:	I think staff were very much aware of the reward and therefore improved performance. 

HAUSMAN: 	Can you describe the procedure you put in place for promotion?

ADOM:	Yes. The inception, policies were put in place on promotion. Most of these were carried from the civil service. Under normal circumstances, the regular promotion was after service in a particular grade for three years. You were invited for an interview and when you passed then you were promoted. But the promotion depended largely on availability of vacancies. For the general round they wrote exams instead of interview. So those who passed exams were promoted. But along the line it was difficult to keep to the rules and policies. So sometimes promotions were delayed until instead of three years, five years, before the interviews are held and so on. On a few occasions there were out-of-turn promotions. Say a staff acquires a higher qualification, that can be the basis for the promotion. Exceptional performance also can be the basis for promotion. 

HAUSMAN: 	You mentioned before the functional reorganization of the IRS. Could you say more about how it was reorganized at first?

ADOM:	Well, the reorganization brought into the system functional departments. Previously the distinction wasn't very clear but then with the reorganization we had the core activity made operations department. Then we had research planning and monitoring, then finance and administration. These were the three core, there were some other peripheral departments.   

HAUSMAN: 	Sorry, what did you say the first department was?

ADOM:	Operations, operations involved the core activity, assessment and collection of taxes. 

HAUSMAN: 	How did the reorganizing affect staff? Were they actually physically moved around the building? Did they get different things to do? How did it change the life of the organization?

ADOM:	It changed the life of individuals a lot. Some moved physically from where they were working to other areas, departmental movements, regional district movements. People were moved from one district to another and so on and so forth.  

HAUSMAN: 	Can you describe some of the benefits of the reorganization.

ADOM:	Specialization was introduced. Core departments like tax audits whereby you moved out to the taxpayers premises and carried out an audit. That brought in substantial sums of money because of evasion practices by taxpayers.  

HAUSMAN: 	How did that work, actually moving the collectors out?

ADOM:	Sorry?

HAUSMAN: 	How did those audits work? Did the auditors actually go to firms?

ADOM:	Yes. The auditors-well one department was established, audit programs were designed, procedures were written out and the auditors, after their initial training moved to taxpayers' offices to carry out an audit. That is like external auditors too. The move to carry out-that is not the only audit. There is the desk audit carried out by operations department. We receive your assessment-I mean it goes through an examination, then the tax officer will write for further information, inform you whether he agrees or disagrees with the assessment and so on, this different. But this one involves going to verify the facts behind the figures that have been produced. 

	Research was introduced to go into areas and to find out what is against compliance with the law and also to recommend what action to take to improve compliance, make it easier for the taxpayers to honor their tax obligations.  

HAUSMAN: 	As this functional reorganization took place and some staff became auditors who went to taxpayers offices, were the new professional staff more useful than the staff that were already around, or were both sets of staff able to take part and be useful in this?

ADOM:	Basically what was done was not to pack a particular department with new staff. So it was a mixture of old and new in various departments. The internal examination, that had old and new. Even tax auditors, field auditors had both old and new, but there were more of the new officers because of the specialized nature of the assignment. 

	In the research department there were old hands. These are people who are trained or had previous experience in research work. So it was a combined old and new. 

HAUSMAN: 	How would you say, this is a more general question, but how would you say the old and the new attitudes merged over the years?

ADOM:	Well, the initial apprehension evaporated because of the goodwill of both parties. The suspicion of the old did not materialize. So after all we are all Ghanaians, we have common destiny, common purpose and so on. Once reward is fair, once allocation of assignment is fair, it is natural that people will get together and work in a more congenial atmosphere.  

HAUSMAN: 	Can I go back for a moment to the functional reorganization and ask you for a few more examples of the changes that were made.

ADOM:	I talked about tax audit. Tax examination were a team, goes out to their own offices to find out whether they are compliant with the internal rules and regulations, a sort of internal audit, but it under the operations department. Have you assessed? Have you collected the monies? Is the filing done rightly? And so on. That was the first Assistant Commissioner who worked on that, it is Mr. (Sam) Sallas-Mensah who is now the Executive Secretary of the Revenue Agencies Governing Board. I believe you've met, the Executive Secretary of Revenue Agencies Governing Board.  

HAUSMAN: 	That is Mr. ?

ADOM:	Sallas-Mensah. He was first in tax examination. So the effect is that he kept the present department on its toes because they knew that their work will be audited by other people. I mentioned about research. We had also a department or a unit in research and monitoring called statistics. They analyzed the data collected from the field collection and so on. They provided recommendations for implementation. Statistics department also played a major role in budgeting for the ensuing year having received parameters from the Ministry of Finance. 

	Internal audit, financial internal audit department was also created to monitor the activities of the finance department. As we said, now the institution, IRS, had its own human resource management department called administration. Previously it was done centrally by institution that was responsible for recruitment and administration for the whole Ghana civil service.    

HAUSMAN: 	What sort of training did you offer new recruits?

ADOM:	The basic training was basic professional that was called. That was for people who are being promoted from junior ranks to senior ranks, recruit of graduates. This is basically to train you in taxation basically. So all recruits entering the senior rank go through that basic professional course. Re-training wasn't similarly carried out, so they concentrated on the basic professional course. Before I left I felt the training department didn't have the capacity to handle the training needs of the institution. So I arranged with GIMPA (Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration) to collaborate with us, redesign the syllabus and jointly would run the training program on their campus. 

	So wherever the Internal Revenue is from, we provided the lecturer. Where they were strong they provided and new subjects like IT (information technology) were introduced. Economics and other subjects were introduced. That went on for some years and this was actually canceled after I left. The reason of costs. It was expensive. It was a superior program. It was expensive. The reason that people improved their market position and therefore could easily move ahead in IRS was superior qualification. Sort of a postgraduate diploma. So they were losing most of them after spending a lot of money to train them. 

HAUSMAN: 	When did this joint program begin?

ADOM:	I'd say when I became commissioner, let me guess, maybe 2000. No, in 1997, until I left in 2001, February. 

HAUSMAN: 	How long did that course last compared to the course that was previously offered at the IRS?

ADOM:	The original period, let me say it that way, for basic professional training, was eighteen months after recruitment.

HAUSMAN: 	Was that full time?

ADOM:	Yes, that was full time. After that reorganization it was felt the period was maybe too long to have the type of salary required in the new dispensation so it was reduced to nine months. This new program I'm not very sure, went on for about a year, all full time. So the early part of the reorganization there was a crash program actually to turn people out. A lot of people had been retired and so on and we needed replacements quickly.

HAUSMAN: 	About what was the ratio of new recruits to old employees at that time, at the beginning? 

ADOM:	I don't have the data but if I should guess, for those moving into, immediately into the senior category, I would say over 90%. 

HAUSMAN: 	And overall?

ADOM:	Overall, I'm just guessing, maybe 30-40% because the new recruits were basically senior officers, not junior officers. 

HAUSMAN: 	I read somewhere 28%, does that sound believable?

ADOM:	Yes, I'm not sure. 

HAUSMAN: 	You mentioned also that where the IRS had good people they would provide the lecturers and GIMPA provided the lecturers in other subjects. 

ADOM:	Yes.

HAUSMAN: 	Which subjects were which?

ADOM:	We had basic taxation, they were handled by us. Office procedures were handled by IRS. What else? There was a third subject-that subject was handled by IRS officers. I cannot remember. As I said IT, economics, those were handled by GIMPA. 

HAUSMAN: 	Great. Let me sort of move forward in time if I can and ask you about what changes happened later in the 1990s, apart from the new course that you initiated.

ADOM:	In respect to trade unions?  

HAUSMAN: 	Overall.

ADOM:	Okay. Later in the 1990s, there were reforms like preparing the ground for later integration. So in the Internal Revenue Service we created the Large Taxpayers Office which was made up of all financial institutions, banks and so on, mining companies and big players in the market. So that is what was started. Also the integration law was passed establishing what we call Revenue Agencies Governing Board, that took place. We now also started critically to look at the informal sector. They had been problematic, to us, indeed to every tax administration. 

	So we designed simplistic way of taxing the informal sector. We dealt with associations like transport unions, hairdressers and so on, business associations and empowered them, authorized them to collect taxes on our behalf. That was a way of creating tax consciousness and also machinery to reach every taxpayer, a very expensive exercise. The tax, the cost of collection is so high sometimes we wonder whether we shouldn't just use the limited resources.      

HAUSMAN: 	That leads me to my next question which is eventually about the Large Taxpayers Office but first let me ask you about some of the efforts to improve district taxpayer-the tax offices in the earlier period. 

ADOM:	Some of the efforts to improve-yes, one thing that we didn't feel, and was on the drawing board was computerization. I don't know why. When the President, now President was commissioner, this was on the drawing board and it remained. It just remained to today. I can't understand why the government or successive government didn't think that it is important to adequately provide the input that is necessary for tax administration. That I think is a major failure in the tax administration of the country.   

HAUSMAN: 	Were there efforts to decentralize the administration of taxes at the beginning of your work?

ADOM:	Another major introduction of the reform was the decentralization of tax administration. That is important, very important. Regional offices with more powers were created of course. Generally regional offices coincided with particular regions and also in Accra. In Accra there are two regions because of the mere size of the taxpaying population. You take Accra, the Internal Revenue Service probably you would have accounted for 80% of the taxes. So and another regional offices were the district offices. 

	Previously under the district offices were collection points. So you have the head office, regional offices, district offices and collection point. Previously the head office was involved in assessment and collection of taxes. That ceased with the reorganization. Regional offices didn't have any role in the direct assessment and collection. It was done at the district level. But the law is such that certain issues would have to be referred to the head office through the region. So the decentralization was a major achievement of the reorganization. 

HAUSMAN: 	And do you think that that improved revenue collection?

ADOM:	Yes. Because, I don't know how to say, but what I thought there is no undue interference though there was the control. That was done through the badges that were sent to them. That was done through the monitoring of region and head office of the performance of that district.  

HAUSMAN: 	Given that 80% or around 80% of the taxes come from Accra, how is it possible to achieve major gains in revenue by decentralizing?

ADOM:	Decentralizing was also in Accra, it wasn't only outside Accra. This system also existed-the head office is different from the two regions in Accra and this is in Accra. I can't recollect, though they collect 80%, maybe the number of districts was about 20% in Accra. 

HAUSMAN: 	When the Large Taxpayers Office was established, how did that affect the contribution of decentralization? 

ADOM:	The staff didn't like it in a way because juicy cases were taken from them to a central point. But, many of these big cases are multinationals, sophisticated and so on. So we needed to give the Large Taxpayers Office some of the best staff to be able to handle the cases of using ingenious accounting system to cheat the system. This is the idea. So I was going to pass a comment but it is not necessary, I'm not, you're recording, this looked like an extension of the Internal Revenue Service. The man who just walked in was in charge of training. He is retired. The man who was sitting there was head of Ashanti region.    

HAUSMAN: 	When was the Large Tax Office established?

ADOM:	I'd say it was about '87.

HAUSMAN: 	'87?

ADOM:	Yes, I think so. 

HAUSMAN: 	So did it happen at about the same time that the decentralization happened?

ADOM:	This came, the decentralization started first and this was added later. 

HAUSMAN: 	But only a year later or so.

ADOM:	Yes, about a year later or so. 

HAUSMAN: 	And about how much of revenue did the Large Taxpayers Office account for?

ADOM:	So I would say maybe 55%. So when you are considering your collection and the Large Taxpayers Office resource, you are not sure how you are going. 

HAUSMAN: 	You mentioned before that the decentralization improved tax collection both in Accra and outside of it.

ADOM:	Yes.

HAUSMAN: 	How did the revenue collection actually improve? Why do you think it improved by allowing the regional offices to collect their own taxes?

ADOM:	How did they improve? Without allowing the regional offices-. 

HAUSMAN: 	Why did it make revenue collection improve to allow this autonomy for regional offices?

ADOM:	Decentralization actually meant the offices were closer to the taxpayers and therefore were able to penetrate areas that were hitherto overlooked. With the system of giving you a projection and holding you to it made the people conscious of their responsibilities and they are conscious and therefore want to succeed, to achieve the target. 

HAUSMAN: 	So if you were to assess the relative role of the different reforms in increasing revenue, human resource reforms, decentralization and the Large Taxpayers Office, and functional organization, of those four things which do you think had the largest role in increasing revenue or is it impossible to say?

ADOM:	It is difficult to say, but I think decentralization is key. Of course, the increase in audit also had an effect. 

HAUSMAN: 	And the Large Taxpayers Office?

ADOM:	Generally the audits were carried out throughout but concentrated in the Large Taxpayers Office.

HAUSMAN: 	About how many taxpayers were taxed by the Large Taxpayers Office?

ADOM:	At that time probably in the region of just about 100 at that time. All financial institutions were there were there. All mining companies were there. It started with petroleum and mining. When it was created financial institutions including insurance companies and so on. Around 100.   

HAUSMAN: 	So given the success of decentralization let me ask you a little more about it and how it actually worked in practice. Did you move staff to regional and district offices? Did you simply change procedures? How did it actually work in practice?

ADOM:	Oh, functions and roles were changed. So the head office concerned itself with policy procedures and monitoring. The regional offices ensured the implementation of these policies and so on, a sub head office actually. Regional office would because of there sub head office. Then the action was at the district level and with the eagle's eye overlooking everybody was working hard. 

HAUSMAN: 	Of course a common problem with giving autonomy to smaller offices is monitoring. What were some of the things you did to keep a close eye on regional and district offices?

ADOM:	I said targets have been set. Monthly returns are received and, as I said, functional unit of statuses had been created. So the actuals compared with targets. Try to get answers for deviations. This is constantly done. If it is getting alarming. If you are doing well, we will call you and say, oh, thank you. If you're not doing well you'll be reprimanded. So that alone-and it affects your stay at that position. If we believe you're not doing well we'll move you. 

	As I said I think the Large Taxpayers Office was supposed to be the elite office and people want to go and work there. Those who were doing well were sent there, so all those things. 

HAUSMAN: 	How did you actually chose the people to staff the Large Taxpayers Office?

ADOM:	During promotion interviews, staff are identified, high flyers are identified so recommendations are made for them to take higher responsibilities apart from being promoted. Take challenging responsibilities. So that's how we identified them.

HAUSMAN: 	And about how many staff were in the Large Taxpayers Office?

ADOM:	I'm not sure if I remember, about 25 or 30.

HAUSMAN: 	About how many staff did the IRS have overall?

ADOM:	2500. 

HAUSMAN: 	Great, thanks. Before we stop let me ask you a couple more general questions the first of which is, if you were writing a handbook for someone in a similar position, someone taking over and organization and reforming it, not necessarily a revenue service but also other kinds of public organizations, what are some of the management or organizational issues that you would emphasize most?

ADOM:	First is modernization, keeping abreast with development in management of business organizations, computerization. Another, know revenue, the use of the banking system and tax payment. You don't want everybody to walk to your office to come and pay tax, electronically transfer their money, then electronically file. So your returns, the human contact should be reduced to the barest minimum. So copy an organization that is well managed. The systems and procedures and equipment and so on will have to be provided. 

	I think we also have to look at work attitude, which is, in the public service in particular, not up to standard. So there should be a system that enables productivity to be measured, a system that ensures that people come to work when they have to come to work. That they utilize their time efficiently for what they are paid for and do not leave, do not loiter. So measurement of productivity I think. Start development, recruitment and training I think also is another--it should be a continuous program. Orientation, then retraining, especially when you are taking new and different responsibilities, then just assume that the person will be capable. There should be systems and procedures clearly defined, clearly defined systems and procedures and should be monitoring of activities.    

HAUSMAN: 	Did you have problems with tardiness among your own staff for example and did you find ways of dealing with them?

ADOM:	Sorry?

HAUSMAN: 	Did you have problems with your staff being late or absence?

ADOM:	Yes. I think it is a public service problem in this country, public service. It would better be solved when it is tackled holistically. I am actually surprised that that is not being done. I know our President is on time for every function, others are not. So I think it needs to be tackled holistically and the message will have to be passed on clearly to those who are responsible. 

HAUSMAN: 	How did you deal with it in your own organization?

ADOM:	I would say I failed in that area. You introduce an attendance book when you arrive and so on. There are supervisors who have to ensure the implementation who are not doing it so it broke down completely.  

HAUSMAN: 	How do you explain some of the successes you had in spite of that?

ADOM:	I would say that expectations are based on circumstances of the environment. Performance could be far better, I believe, could be far better. So maybe the targets themselves have problems.

HAUSMAN: 	Okay, thanks so much. Is there anything you'd like to add before we stop?

ADOM:	No, thank you for coming. Thank you for identifying me as one of the people you want to talk to and if you require any further information or assistance in this regard please call me. 

HAUSMAN: 	Thank you so much. 

Innovations for Successful Societies				Series: Civil service  	
Oral History Program						Interview number: P-1
______________________________________________________________________




12



Use of this transcript is governed by ISS Terms of Use, available at www.princeton.edu/successfulsocieties