In the last ten years, the economy of Bangladesh has progressed at an incredible rate. The average growth of GDP has been 6- 7 percent. Exports have reached above $50 billion. Annual Development Programme is now more than Tk 2.5 trillion. Its digital penetration has grown exponentially with over 120 million accounts of mobile financial services. The connectivity of infrastructure has been enhanced and the enterprise of the private has grown and the middle-income ambition has become confident.

However, the administrative culture which rules this fast-paced economy frequently has a different pace of operation. This is procedural, cautious and highly layered. Once the economy is expanding quicker than the administration can adapt to it, structural disconnect develops that undermines competitiveness, investment and eventually slows the overall development of the country.

Talent is not really the issue. The civil servants in Bangladesh are recruited after one of the most competitive merit-based examination in the region. The intellectual capacity of entry level is seldom questionable. The problem is in institutional conditioning. Eventually, even competent officers learn to live in a culture where process security is praised more than outcomes. The files are transferred to different desks. Accountability is decentralized in notations. Responsibility is group but inefficient. Caution seems to be logical in a system where retrospective examination might appear several years in the future. Little by little initiative is ousted by defensive habits.

The economic impacts are obvious. Cost increase and time delay is quite common in development projects, which decreases the economic returns. The investors (local and international) are not only considering fiscal incentives, but also regulatory predictability and the speed of approval. Administrative responsiveness is a key competitive edge in a competitive area. Bangladesh needs to change its file-based and defensive mode of governance to performance-based mode to maintain growth. This needs institutional change in several dimensions.

First, the performance must be a fact that can be measured. Key performance indicators that should be adopted by ministries and agencies should include approvals turnaround time, project completion within cost and schedule, budget efficiency, digital file disposal rates and satisfaction rates among the citizens. These indicators cannot be kept as a secret.

Second, honesty in decision making should be safeguarded. The fear of retrospective punishment will not encourage initiative. There must be clear institutional difference between corruption and innocent mistake of judgment. Hindsight bias should not be applied to officers acting within their delegated authority and one acting without ill intent. A panicky administration is incapable of being nimble.

Third, the decentralisation should be practical and not symbolic. Congestion at the top and passivity in the field are some of the effects of over-centralisation. Small problems grow out of proportion just to prevent self-disclosure. Real world implementation of financial and administrative realities should be adjusted appropriately. The intelligence-based supervision rather than the paper-based one should be used. Micromanagement is not as effective as centralised strategy with empowered execution.

Fourth, there should be process re-engineering. Efficiency is not assured by digitisation. Automation of the processes that are inefficient only increases inefficiency. Structural process audits should be conducted by the ministries to remove the unneeded approval levels. In case there are five signatures which responsibly may be condensed to two. Urgency can be institutionalised with rules that the decision maker sets regarding time-bounded decisions, such that files that are still pending after a set time limit automatically escalate.

Fifth, transparency and not intimidation should enhance the integrity mechanisms. The experience of Bangladesh in electronic government procurement shows that electronic systems can minimize risks related to discretion and enhance efficiency. Other similar transparency models can be applied to licensing, land administration and regulatory approvals. The institutional credibility can be reinforced by mandatory declaration of all digital assets, enhanced internal audit, periodical rotation in sensitive posts and ethics training that is incorporated in career development.

Lastly, reform is based on leadership signalling. Top policymakers must come out clearly and defend reform-minded officers and promote performance. Promotion rules ought to focus on results and contributions and not experience alone. When initiative is not discouraged, cultural transformation takes place. Structural reform will not be effective without regular signals of the top. Administrative agility in Bangladesh has been shown on many occasions throughout crises; whether through disaster management, speedy digital financial growth, or massive implementation of infrastructure projects. As soon as officers are empowered in an institutional ability to exercise honest judgment, performance is automatically enhanced.

The speed of administration has a direct effect on economic performance of competition within a region. The cross-border approval timelines are compared by the investors; the responsiveness of the services among the platforms is compared by the citizens. The national competitiveness relies not only on the national procedure but also on the role of public offices as its facilitators. Reform does not mean giving up control; it means replacing excessive control with smarter control.

Unless the economic growth is balanced by reforming governance, the implementation gap will increase. However, provided the Bangladesh manages to refocus its people administration on performance that is measurable, systems that are transparent and that are led by responsible leaders, the current economic benefits can be reduced into institutional strength that is sustainable. The state cannot afford to lag in a fast-paced economy. Performance based governance is no more optional- it is the next inevitable step of sustainable national development of Bangladesh.

Major General (Rtd) Md. Nazrul Islam, Executive Member (Planning and Development) BEZA