Why is protocol prioritized over actual work in civil service?

Question

Accepted Answer

Protocol Over Substance: A Deep-Rooted Issue in the Malaysian Civil Service

The prioritization of protocol, precedence, and hierarchy over substantive work within the Malaysian civil service is a deeply embedded cultural issue that predates the current administration. This phenomenon is characterized by an excessive focus on outward appearances, such as the order of arrivals and departures, vehicle parking arrangements, and even adherence to specific attire, which often overshadows the actual tasks and responsibilities of public servants. The origins of this entrenched culture can be traced back to the expansion of the civil service system, particularly from the 1980s onwards, where the establishment of numerous training institutions and monitoring units, often under the guidance of the Public Services Department and the Chief Secretary to the Government, inadvertently integrated court-like protocols into bureaucratic functions.
Historical Entrenchment of Protocol

The emphasis on protocol within the civil service began to integrate significantly around the 1990s. This was exemplified by instances where elaborate arrangements were made for the arrival of high-ranking officials, such as the Chief Secretary to the Government, even when the occasion was meant to receive the remains of a deceased ambassador. Such events highlight how the ceremonies and status associated with hierarchy became more prominent than the actual purpose of the gathering. This tendency for officials to focus on the "pecking order" and ceremonial aspects, rather than the core duties, has become a normalized aspect of the service's operational framework.
Perpetuation Through Systemic Expansion

The expansion of the civil service, often masterminded by the Public Services Department, played a crucial role in fostering this protocol-centric environment. While privatization in the 1980s aimed to streamline government roles, the subsequent creation of more government positions, along with specialized units and training establishments, provided fertile ground for the proliferation of bureaucratic rituals. These entities, sometimes described as "little empires," often prioritized adherence to established procedures and the maintenance of a hierarchical structure, contributing to a system where form often superseded function.
Influence of Retired Senior Officials

Furthermore, the culture of prioritizing protocol has been perpetuated by senior civil servants who transitioned into leadership roles within Government-Linked Companies (GLCs) and Government-Linked Investment Companies (GLICs) after retirement. In these organizations, which ideally should be focused purely on business objectives and the efficient provision of goods and services, these former officials have reportedly continued to enforce a culture of "bowing and scraping." This transference of bureaucratic norms to the private sector can hinder business efficiency and detract from the core mission of these companies.
Impact on Public Service Delivery

The ultimate consequence of this deeply embedded culture of protocol, flattery, and fawning is that the trappings of hierarchy and outward displays of respect have become more important than the actual business at hand. When such a mindset prevails, it can significantly impact the efficiency and effectiveness of public service delivery. For instance, during visits by VVIP civil servants to essential public facilities like districts, schools, hospitals, or clinics, the focus can shift towards managing the visit's protocol rather than addressing the operational needs or issues of these institutions.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Why is protocol prioritized over actual work in civil service?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends