One of the key challenges that continue to confront governments, worldwide, with regard to development management, other than the obvious limited resources to meet the overwhelming and competing needs of the constituencies, is the efficiency and effectiveness of the state machinery. Within state machinery itself the major issue that is viewed as a primary shortcoming is the process of translating sound development policies into implementable programmes and projects. Within the processes of policy implementation the key weaknesses appear to lie on planning processes. As such, governments continue to cite poor alignment between policies, plans and priorities across various spheres of government, a challenge that manifests itself in a lack of integrated service delivery, duplication in application of resources and efforts, lack of sustainability of development initiatives, slow pace and poor quality of services provided to communities. This study was aimed at evaluating the nature and extent of alignment between the Strategic Performance Plans of selected Eastern Cape provincial government departments and the Provincial Growth and Development Plan (PGDP): 2004-2014. The main objectives of the study were to gain insight into the nature and extent of alignment between the Strategic Performance Plans of selected Eastern Cape provincial government departments and the PGDP objectives, indicators and targets; identify the new service delivery mechanisms, policies, procedures and change management plans that have been introduced, if any, to ensure the successful implementation of the PGDP programmes; and indentify risks and challenges that pose a threat to the successful implementation of the PGDP programmes and provide preliminary risk response strategies. Of paramount importance is that this study was not limited to assessing the nature and extent of harmony or strategic fit between a macro-provincial plan, known as the PGDP, and sector specific plans, called Strategic Performance Plans, but it sought to determine the bases of alignment, where it exists, and sources of misalignment where planning disjuncture are found. To this end, the study was intended to generate a conceptual framework for assessing alignment of plans within public institutions across all levels of government. Ten provincial government departments drawn from the four provincial administrative clusters that feed their work into, and hence accountable to various Cabinet Committees and, ultimately, Cabinet, participated in the study. Key issues that emerged, and remained unresolved, during the direct engagement of provincial government departments were consolidated and verified, later on, with the public entity that supports the Office of the Premier on matters of macro-policy and strategy development and socio-economic research, known as the Eastern Cape Socio Economic and Consultative Council (ECSECC). This study followed a qualitative research methodology approach. Strategic Performance Plans of selected provincial government departments were analysed to establish linkages with the PGDP. A standard Alignment Evaluation Matrix was utilized to provide the results of content analysis of departmental plans. This Matrix was developed based on extensive literature study conducted that yielded a working Strategic Planning Alignment Model. The results of analysis of departmental plans and the key features of the Planning Alignment Model formed the basis of engagement of selected government departments during field study. Managers and officials working in components such as Strategic Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, Special Programmes, infrastructure Planning, Demand Management and Research, Budget Planning and Control, Municipal Support, Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Planning, participated in the focus groupdiscussions. This study revealed both positive and negative factors on how provincial government departments have, over time, attempted to give effect to the intentions of the Provincial Growth and Development Plan; 2004-2014. Firstly, the study demonstrated that the PGDP was viewed in the same light as any other planning framework generated at national and local government level, with its priorities and targets found in the same basket of policy issues that are competing for limited resources. Secondly, it was found that the PGDP has, over time, degenerated in terms of its strategic significance in the planning environment, with new priorities that have emerged at a national government level securing more attention of politicians and senior administrators at the detriment of the PGDP intentions. Political championing of the PGDP was viewed as having dwindled from one term of government to the next. As such, the PGDP was not found to be having the level of significance and traction that the regionalist-planning paradigm is beginning to suggest within the global policy development discourse. Thirdly, the study revealed that while plans of selected government departments had a sound articulation of the PGDP goals, this did not translate into well-costed operational plans with clear targets and timelines that link to the 2014 targets. Organisational structures and service delivery models of the selected government departments had not fundamentally changed since the PGDP was introduced in the Province. Incremental changes to departmental processes have been seen since the PGDP came into effect. The changes were more influenced by new priorities that emerged at national government level. As such, provincial government departments continued to be more inclined towards sector priorities which could be viewed as unfunded provincial priorities. As such, budget allocation to PGDP programmes was limited from department to department, due to competing national priorities. One argument advanced for this disjuncture in planning was that the PGDP itself should have, from time to time, been reviewed to consider priorities that might have emerged at national and local government sphere, including conditions that have changed in the socio, economic and political environments. This seemed not to have happened, despite a Planning Coordination and Monitoring Unit being established within the Office of the Premier, during PGDP inception, for this explicit purpose. Fourthly, the study noted the challenge of different planning cycles between the provincial and local government spheres, which was viewed as promoting planning disjuncture within the two spheres. This was pointed out as of critical importance in alignment since provincial government departments are expected to respond to community needs that are embodied in Integrated Development Plans of municipalities. For this vertical integration to happen, the study revealed that there has been over-reliance in inter-governmental structures which were relatively weak in various municipalities. In the same vein, horizontal integration at provincial government level seemed to be a challenge also due to the ineffectiveness of the cluster system introduced since 1999. While part of a Cluster system, and submitting plans and reports to Clusters, provincial government departments continued to work in silos. Priority setting, spatial targeting and resource allocation has remained a competency of individual provincial departments. The cluster budgeting and programme implementation envisaged in the PGDP was still to be seen, and it appeared that there was no Treasury tool to give effect to this noble intention. In fact, this intention was viewed as contradictory with the spirit of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 that places single financial accountability on Heads of Departments, as individuals rather than a group or cluster. Fifthly, the study further revealed that the PGDP itself had design deficiencies that created a challenge for implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The PGDP was viewed as straddling between being a strategic framework that guides socio-economic planning, with a longer-term focus, and being a provincial plan. The PGDP was also found to be an all encompassing plan that contains a basket of everything that a provincial government would be expected to do. A viewpoint advanced herein regards international experience which suggests that being strategic means being selective, sorting the critical few from the important many, and giving that selection a ‘bite’ by shifting resources and demanding performance sufficient to make the desired impact. The latter was viewed as a fundamental shortcoming of the PGDP. In fact, the study revealed that some of the PGDP programmes were underway within provincial government departments even before the PGDP was formulated. Whether those programmes would serve the province achieve the few outcomes it set itself for 2014, is a matter the PGDP design could not confirm. It also transpired that a number of provincial departments were not adequately consulted during the determination of PGDP targets. Furthermore, it has emerged that the province lacks coherent competency at a level higher than provincial departments, which is capacitated with a pool of analysts possessing a deeper appreciation of various government sectors and the provincial economy. This competency would include development planners, spatial planners, sector policy analysts, researchers and other technical skills.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:8253 |
| Date | January 2012 |
| Creators | Mbanga, Sijekula Larrington |
| Publisher | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Faculty of Arts |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Doctoral, DPhil |
| Format | xxx, 495 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0033 seconds