Onwards to Lasting Transformation
in the Philippine Bureaucracy:
THE CSC STRATEGIC REFORM AGENDA
SETTING THE CONTEXT
•Public Act No. 5
•Republic Act No. 2260
•Presidential Decree No. 1
•1973 Constitution
•1987 Constitution
• Executive Order No. 181
• Executive Order No. 292
(Administrative Code of 1987)
The Commission is constitutionally
mandated to promote morale,
efficiency, integrity,
responsiveness, progressiveness,
and courtesy in the Civil Service.
Core Functions:
Merit Protection
and Promotion
1
Capabilitybuilding or
Human Resource
Development
2
Quasi-judicial
Functions
3
Organizational
Development
4
OUR REFORM AGENDA
• From organizational perspectives to citizens’
needs
• From operational to strategic policies
•From concerns on process and procedure to
results-orientation
•From direct service interventions to a steering or
enabling role
•From traditional management to an entrepreneurial
management culture
Preparatory Meetings
OUR CHANGE PROCESS
May 12, 2010
May 26, 2010
October 7 & 8, 2010
October 18, 2010 (1st TWG)
Initiation Working Sessions
November
15-18, 2010
Handholding/TWG Sessions
(2nd
November 22, 2010
TWG)
November 30, 2010 (3rd TWG)
December 6, 2010 (4th TWG)
December 16, 2010 (5th TWG)
December 20, 2010 (6th TWG)
March 2, 2011 (7th TWG)
March 9, 2011 (8th TWG)
March 16, 2011 (9th TWG)
Internal Meetings
January 19-24, 2011
(PGS Bootcamp)
February 7, 2011
(Director’s Conference)
Initiation Revalida
March 30, 2011
HEDGEHOG CIRCLES
Best in Asia
as the center
for strategic
HR and OD
Passionate at
Developing high performing,
competent and credible civil
servants to improve
the lives of the Filipino
people
Known as
Policy formulation,
implementation and standardsetting institution for public
service excellence and
integrity
CORE IDEOLOGY
Love of
God and
Country
Integrity
Excellence
CORE IDEOLOGY
VISION BASECAMPS
2030
CSC shall be Asia’s leading center of
excellence for strategic HR and OD
2022
CSC shall be Southeast Asia’s leading
center of excellence for strategic HR & OD
2015
The strategic HR center for the
Philippine bureaucracy.
2010
Laid the foundations for 2015
CSC 2030 AGENCY VISION
Recognized as a Center for Excellence
High performing, competent and credible civil servants
PEOPLE
Ensure effective and
efficient
performance of QuasiJudicial functions
Enhance the competency of our workforce
FINANCE
Provide excellent HR
processes
Ensure efficient management of financial resources
PARTNERS
PROCESSES
CORE PURPOSE
STAKEHOLDERS
CSC shall be Asia’s leading center of
excellence for strategic HR and OD
Cultivate partnerships with local and international institutions
CORE VALUES
• Love of God and
Country
• Excellence
• Integrity
B
Recognized as a Center
for Excellence
High performing,
competent , and
credible civil servants
Owner
Commission
A
Objectives
Commission
STAKEHOLDERS
Perspective
Measures
Enhance the competency of
our workforce
Commission
Commission
Commission
E
F
G
Ensure efficient
management of financial
resources
Cultivate partnerships with
local and international
institutions
Commission
D
Ensure fairness and
efficiency in
performing Quasi-Judicial
functions
Commission
PARTNERS
FINANCE
PEOPLE
PROCESS
C
L
A
G
Base
2011
2013
2015
0
.70%
(14)
40%
(843)
80%
(1686)
1
Percentage of agencies* with functional Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS)
2
Percentage of CSC Accredited Agencies
N/A
N/A
20% (422)
40% (843)
3
CSC Client Satisfaction Rating
N/A
S
VS
E
4
Number of agencies with “Excellent” rating under the Anti Red Tape Act Report Card Survey
(ARTA-RCS)
9
18
36
72
5
Average rating of agencies under the Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS)
(of those agencies with SPMS)
N/A
S
VS
O
Exam System
Appointments
Processing Legal
Processes
6
9
6
Provide excellent HR
processes
L
E
A
D
7
8
9
Number of ISO certified processes
Percentage of agencies/units under Anti Red Tape Act Report Card
Percentage of decisions implemented
Percentage of cases decided within 40 days from the time the case is ripe for resolution
O
3
0.01%
10%
30%
50%
(50/4200)
(420/4200)
(1260/4200)
(2100/4200)
70%
85%
90%
95%
N/A
30%
50%
70%
10
Percentage of CSC employees meeting their job competency standards
N/A
80%
90%
100%
11
Percentage increase of net income from 2010 figures
N/A
10%
50%
100%
12
Percentage increase in MOOE from 2010 figures
N/A
0%
25%
50%
13
Amount of funds from partners
5M
10M
15M
25M
14
Number of priority programs implemented through partners
4
6
9
12
1
5
Number of technical cooperation with local and international partners
4
5
6
7
Recognized as a
Center for
Excellence
High
Performing,
B competent,
and credible
civil servants
Owner
Commission
STAKEHOLDERS
A
Objectives
Commission
Perspective
Measures
L
E
A
D
L
A
G
Base
2011
2013
2015
1
Percentage of agencies with functional Strategic
Performance Management System (SPMS)
0
.70%
(14)
40%
(843)
80%
(1686)
2
Percentage of CSC Accredited Agencies
N/A
N/A
20%
(422)
40%
(843)
3
CSC Client Satisfaction Rating
N/A
S
VS
E
9
18
36
72
N/A
S
VS
O
Number of agencies with “Excellent” rating
4 under the Anti Red Tape Act Report Card Survey
(ARTA-RCS)
5
Average rating of agencies under the Strategic
Performance Management System (SPMS) (of
those agencies with SPMS)
Provide
excellent HR
processes
Ensure
fairness and
efficiency in
D
performing
Quasi-Judicial
Functions
Owner
Measures
L
A
G
Base
2011
3
Exam
System
Appoint
ments
Processi
ng Legal
Process
es
2013
6
2015
9
6
Number of ISO certified processes
7
Percentage of agencies/units under
Anti Red tape Act Report Card
8
Percentage of decisions implemented
70%
85%
90%
95%
9
Percentage of cases decided within 40 days
from the time the case is ripe for resolution
N/A
30%
50%
70%
0
0.01%
10%
30%
50%
(50/4 (420/42 (1260/4 (2100/4
200)
00)
200) 200)
Commission
PROCESS
C
Objectives
Commission
Perspective
L
E
A
D
Owner
E
Objectives
Enhance the
competency
of our
workforce
Commission
PEOPLE
Perspective
Measures
10
Percentage of CSC employees
meeting their job competency
standards
L
E
A
D
L
A
G
Base
2011
2013
2015
N/A
80%
90%
100%
Ensure
efficient
management
F
of financial
resources
Owner
Objectives
Commission
FINANCE
Perspective
Measures
L
E
A
D
L
A
G
Base
2011
2013
2015
11
Percentage increase of net income from
2010 figures
N/A
10%
50%
100
%
12
Percentage increase in MOOE from 2010
figures
N/A
0%
25%
50%
13
Amount of funds from partners
5M
10M
15M
25M
Objectives
Owner
Perspective
Measures
Cultivate
partnerships
G with local and
international
institutions
Commission
PARTNERS
14
15
Number of priority programs implemented
through partners
Number of technical cooperation with local
and international partners
L
E
A
D
L
A
G
Base
2011
2013
2015
4
6
9
12
4
5
6
7
B
Recognized as a Center
for Excellence
High performing,
competent , and
credible civil servants
Owner
Commission
A
Objectives
Commission
STAKEHOLDERS
Perspective
Measures
Enhance the competency of
our workforce
Commission
Commission
Commission
E
F
G
Ensure efficient
management of financial
resources
Cultivate partnerships with
local and international
institutions
Commission
D
Ensure fairness and
efficiency in
performing Quasi-Judicial
functions
Commission
PARTNERS
FINANCE
PEOPLE
PROCESS
C
L
A
G
Base
2011
2013
2015
0
.70%
(14)
40%
(843)
80%
(1686)
1
Percentage of agencies* with functional Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS)
2
Percentage of CSC Accredited Agencies
N/A
N/A
20% (422)
40% (843)
3
CSC Client Satisfaction Rating
N/A
S
VS
E
4
Number of agencies with “Excellent” rating under the Anti Red Tape Act Report Card Survey
(ARTA-RCS)
9
18
36
72
5
Average rating of agencies under the Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS)
(of those agencies with SPMS)
N/A
S
VS
O
Exam System
Appointments
Processing Legal
Processes
6
9
6
Provide excellent HR
processes
L
E
A
D
7
8
9
Number of ISO certified processes
Percentage of agencies/units under Anti Red Tape Act Report Card
Percentage of decisions implemented
Percentage of cases decided within 40 days from the time the case is ripe for resolution
O
3
0.01%
10%
30%
50%
(50/4200)
(420/4200)
(1260/4200)
(2100/4200)
70%
85%
90%
95%
N/A
30%
50%
70%
10
Percentage of CSC employees meeting their job competency standards
N/A
80%
90%
100%
11
Percentage increase of net income from 2010 figures
N/A
10%
50%
100%
12
Percentage increase in MOOE from 2010 figures
N/A
0%
25%
50%
13
Amount of funds from partners
5M
10M
15M
25M
14
Number of priority programs implemented through partners
4
6
9
12
1
5
Number of technical cooperation with local and international partners
4
5
6
7
STRATEGY-DRIVEN CSC
MEASURE
SPMS
HR mechanism that
measures office
performance and
serves in setting
standards for
alignment of
individual and
organizational
objectives
MEASURE
MEASURE
ANTI-RED TAPE
ISO CERTIFICATION
Massive conduct of
the
Report Card Survey
and
Conferment of the
Seal of Excellence
Certification of
CSC Exams,
Adjudication of cases,
and
Training Programs
MEASURE
RESTRUCTURING
Functional
Competencies-based
reengineering
Resource Generation
and Management
ICT
MARKETING
HR ACCREDITATION
Generate financial
resources through
non-traditional means
Strengthen ICT:
Computerized Exam
Program, Digitization
of SALN, IT-based
reporting system, Call
Center ng Bayan,
Website enhancement
Branding for CSC
through marketing its
programs: Honor
Awards Program, Civil
Service Academy,
Computerized Exams,
and the ARTA
HR Plan, Competencybased Standards,
Regional Training
Enhancements, and a
Comprehensive
Wellness Program
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
MEASURE
Strategic
Initiatives
Four
initiatives
alone hit
more than
ten of the
total 15
measures.
14 out of 15
measures
have an
average of
four
initiatives.
PGS EARLY GAINS
Reviewed our roadmap,
vision, and mission from
another perspective
Define and refine our strategies
so that the Commission will be
more relevant
Fresh insights and inspiration
to propel CSC beyond its
traditional mandates and
relationships
Opportunity to revisit
and reaffirm our personal and
organizational values
PGS NEXT STEPS
Institutionalization
(Jan. 2013 – Dec. 2013)
Documentation and validation of
Breakthrough Results
Proficiency (Dec. 2011 – Dec. 2012)
Presence of a fully-functional OSM
& MSGC and Results from 2nd Level
Scorecards alignment
Operations and Strategy Review by
OSM and Presence of emerging
breakthrough results
Compliance (May – Oct. 2011 )
Formulation
and Alignment
through Second Level
Scorecards
Initiation
(September 2010 March 2011)
Charter
Statement
Strategic
Roadmap
Alignment through
Key Messages
Alignment through
Initiatives and Budget
Governance
Scorecard
and
Measures Profile
Key Initiatives
and
Initiatives Profile