Good governance means that the processes implemented by the organization to produce favorable results meet the needs of its stakeholders, while making the best use of resources – human, technological, financial, natural and environmental – at its disposal. Public sector workers are professional, well-trained and well-equipped enough to carry out the services they are responsible for.

Formal and informal accountability mechanisms impose constraints on public power and encourage officials to act in the public interest. Without such measures, limited public resources may be wasted and mismanaged, and public benefits may be unfairly distributed by unelected elites.

Parties give governments a degree of stability and coherence, especially if the members of the government are drawn from a single party or a stable coalition.

This can make policymaking and implementation more efficient and effective since there is more unity around policy goals and more coordination between those actors who are implementing them.

Parties can also provide a vital source of opposition and criticism that ensures that government policy is more thoroughly scrutinized and therefore more likely to be effective and efficient.

Some examples of specific measures that political parties can advocate for to promote effectiveness and efficiency include:

• Public sector reform

• Decentralization (if capacity of local government is adequate)

• Training and capacity building of local government and the public sector

Examples of Effectiveness and Efficiency as an Aspect of Good Governance

Malaysia

Public sector reforms for improving productivity and quality included:

(1) The New Remuneration System, which provided a more flexible civil service pay structure linked to performance appraisal

(2) The Modified Budgeting System entailing budgetary devolution and accountability

(3) Client’s Charters. There are also efforts to combine entrepreneurship and ethical values in remolding the civil service culture

Indonesia
Indonesia’s Supreme Audit Agency found US$ 40 million missing from post-Tsunami emergency funds and massive irregularities, including that the bulk of materials bought went unused and many purchases were made long after the emergency period was over.