Zuhaib Dawar
Looking into the deep-rooted policy implementation problems in public sector organizations in Pakistan, it is imperative to dwell much on the isomorphism and transplantation of organizational ecosystem from the outside world. In other words, the isomorphic mimicry and transplantation of ideas, rules, and procedures and the resulting institutional monocropping (highly stylized “Anglo-Saxon Model) besets the effectiveness and efficiency of public sector organizations in developing countries. For instance, Pakistan has sound and strong budgetary processes accompanied by exemplary budget documents, the execution largely remains in black-box, information about execution risks is minimal and poor, with apparent deficiencies in internal as well as external control, audit, and in-year monitoring system. Again, the isomorphic mimicry plays its role in pushing the public sectors to simply copy rules and procedures of developed countries; an important source of legitimization and flowing of foreign funds/aids. The transplantation of ‘best practices and distorting/discouraging the local initiatives lead to intuitional monocropping. The resulting consequences of institutional monocropping affecting both the notions of representation and effectiveness of public sector organizations. Assessing the ecosystem in which public sector organizations is working, we must first embark on the most important questions of whether the ‘system is open or close’ to outside and whether it endure novelty (new ways and methods, might be devoid of effectiveness) and agenda-conformity? For instance, the reforms in Police Department of Pakistan (PSP) merely introduces novelty without innovation which besetting the effectiveness in curbing and regulating crimes and criminality, let alone providing efficient public services. As with Pakistan, developing countries faces acute threat from organizational perpetuation (elite capture) as in Sri Lanka’s economy and from mimicries as with the ‘successful failure’ of Indian agro-business sector, the demonstrated success of Western public organizations in implementation of policies pertained to different and diverse context in Western organizations (open to novelties and innovations) is simply resulted in wastage and failure in developing countries. As there is no quick fix, no textbook solutions, no best practices (institutional monocropping), solutions to the problems of post-conflict developing societies by itself turned into problems. The coercive pressure for isomorphic mimicry in which external (global agents) demanded compliance with the globally recognized rules and procedures further attenuated the problems for developing countries, a trap within a trap. For instance, the ill-planned and mimetic infrastructure development in KP development administration programs (Peshawar and Mardan district) and projects only wasted the resources and hence time in compliance with the external agents (donors) expectations. To the detriment of local initiative and lack of coordination among development administration organizations, amalgamating into ethnically diverse context, producing long policy fissures in the input-activities-outcomes equations. Another factor which harming the organizational harmony and coordination aimed at decoupling of de jure (national) and de facto (global) ‘best practices’ of doing job. The loss of normative traction in the application of best practices in low-capability environment leads to decoupling of national practice (de jure) and actual practice (de facto). Organizations are like a living organism facing threats and opportunities in times of growth and recession. The de facto practices push the organization into a tug of war between enhanced functionality and legitimization. The enhanced functionality and legitimization further propel organizations to transplant de facto practices, devoid of functionality, but imparting legitimization on the capability continuum for the inflow of foreign aid and funds. In such circumstances, organizations are overwhelmed with tasks it cannot perform, with complexities it cannot comprehend, and such an urge is strong to retire to isomorphic mimicry to justify one’s action and to sustain the flow of resources. The issues of poverty, underdevelopment, autonomy, and national building are still on the agenda; however, the preferred solutions have simply avoided and relegated the agenda and entirely producing different agenda – “market friendliness”- ignoring the fact that institution do more in real life. The two adages go as “if at first you don’t succeed, try and try again” and “insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results” can be combined as “if you don’t succeed, try something different” The only way forward for curbing institutional monocropping and monotasking is to encourage local initiatives and devising a robust system of coordination and development hubs aided by modern technologies among different tiers of government. By simply transplanting the leg of Ronaldo will not make you a good footballer as Ronaldo, same is true for the transplantation of external agents’ rules and procedures will not make an organization effective, capable, and efficient. A trap is trap and can be avoided to fallen into it, but once in it, it is difficult to get out.
