Dr Pervez Tahir Dr Nadia Saleem Ms Saima Bashir

1. Baseline Research on Executive Education in PakistanA study for Governance Institutes Network International (GINI) Dr Pervez Tahir Dr Nadia Saleem Ms Saima Bashir

2. Introduction Report analyzes the state of executive education courses/programs in Pakistan’s • Public sector • For-Profit private sector • Non-Profit private sector

3. Key issues • Executives join the public service with the idea of limitless authority and subordinate to the whim and will of the rulers only. • The idea of an administration being an instrument for ensuring a civilized relationship between the citizens and the state is not embedded in the working of executives. • Officials not trained to deal with the changing roles.

4. Methodology • A survey was conducted in public sector and private sector institutions involved in executive education in Pakistan. • In the case of the Federal Government 24 training institutions engaged in training of civil servants of various cadres. • Another 24 training and skill enhancement institutions cater mainly to the corporate sector and other management professionals and the army.

5. Main Findings • Not many institutions which have a Curriculum Development Approach. • Most of the faculty visiting and without the perspective of training officials in view. • Quality of visiting faculty in training programmes not of high caliber. • No distinction between education and training.

6. Findings (contd.) • Government nominates trainees for various courses and institutions simply accept and train them. • Physical infrastructure in public sector training institutions was found to be good. • All training institutions reported government as their primary source of funding.

7. Findings (contd.) • All officers selected for public service have a certain level of education but lack training. • Training is in a flux because of the system is in a flux. • Training prepares for generalist pursuits: it can enrich the participants intellectually but it cannot change the attitude towards training. • Training fails to develop training circles and professional groups. • No priority sectors have been identified by the top level policy makers

8. Findings (contd.) • Training fails to win institutional pride and officers can’t relate themselves as better officers after completing the training. • Training institutions tend to confuse management with governance. Service delivery is not helped in this train of thought.

9. Findings (contd.) • There is little collaboration between the public or private sector training institutions and the industry. • Private sector training institutions also take public servants as their trainees, but their main intake comes from the corporate sector.

10. No formal training for legislators and media • Rule of law presumes existence of laws made by informed legislators. • But no training other than ad hoc orientation on matters of procedure • Nongovernment sector and donors are left to improvise for legislative training • No formal institution to train media persons

11. Gaps in training • Standardized national policy • Lack of soft skills • No bench mark • No mind training • Failure to relate governance with administration • Training fails to identify the strength and weaknesses of the officers • Failure to differentiate between administration and management • Computer literacy cannot help in developing policies • Lack of understanding of the system • Lack of problem solving techniques • Impact assessment of training on governance • No relation with future job and training • No effective monitoring • Comprehension and analytical ability

12. Conclusions • Training institutions tend to confuse management with governance. • Governance is supposed to be taught through an educational recipe, which is too much information and very little hands-on experience. • The system produces more knowing than doing executives. Service delivery is not helped in this train of thought. • The trainee-trainer relationship that exists fails to produce the desired outcome. • Production of public values, behavioural change and the consciousness that citizens have rights to be respected are missing.

13. Conclusions (Contd) • There is an emphasis on hierarchical control than observance of transparent rules of the game. • Executive education in private and public sectors can longer be driven by blanket views on efficiency and altruism. • The private sector training continues to struggle with social responsibility. • The baseline of executive education in Pakistan calls for continuing reform.

14. Recommendations • Education and training should be separated. • Education should be formal and in world class universities given at appropriate stage. • Training should be related to the effective ways of governing service delivery. • Training should follow a post-training posting plan. • Training must not ignore the obvious. An understanding of rules of business and procedures should not taken for granted. • Research methods, computer applications and courses doing the same under different names, do not serve the purpose they are intended for.

15. Recommendations (Contd) • Consideration should be given to expose public as well as private sector to the same training progrmmes. This mix will catalyze a better understanding of public value to the private sector and efficiency and productivity to the public sector. • Legislators too need training. Consideration should be given to setting up a separate parliamentary training institute. • Media has now enough resources to set up its own training institute. Organizations of proprietors, editors, and working journalists should be encouraged to pool their efforts in this direction. • Post-training impact should be monitored and evaluated in terms of measurable indicators. This will provide the presently missing feedback for future improvements.