Executive Capacity Building in the Public

Service for Better Governance: The Case of the

Philippine Civil Service

Brillantes, Alex B. Jr*, Fernandez-Carag Maricel**,

Kim, Pan Suk***

I. Introduction

Investing in public servants, specifically the career executives, to

develop and strengthen the leadership in the bureaucracy is critical. The
improvement of leadership qualities became the focus of public service
reform around the world. In particular, the role of senior public officials is
significantly changing in an era of governance (Kim, 2007). This is what
Cornell Hooton (1997) calls “executive governance” where the executives
are at the heart of ‘permanent’ government (Hooton, 1997). Politicians

*
Alex B. Brillantes, Jr. is a Professor of Public Administration in the National
College of Public Administration and Governance at the University of the
Philippines, Diliman and he is currently a Commissioner of the Commission on
Higher Education in the Philippines. He can be reached at
abbrillantes@gmail.com.
**
Maricel Fernandez-Carag is a doctoral student in the National College of Public
Administration and Governance at the University of the Philippines, Diliman.
She can be reached at maricel.fernandez88@gmail.com.
***
Pan Suk Kim (Corresponding Author) is a Professor of Public Administration in
the College of Government and Business at Yonsei University, Wonju Campus,
Wonju, South Korea. He can be reached at pankim@gmail.com. This work was
supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the
Korean Government (NRF-2013S1A5B8A01055336).
may come and go but the executive service officers remain at the helm of
bureaucracy. Hence, according to Stanton (2001), it is necessary to make
government manageable which means that responsible government
departments and agencies are expected to carry out their missions
effectively and the public shall judge the results. Capacity building or
development for career executive officers is necessary to respond to the
demands of the public.
Building the capacity of the public administration system is both a
process and a goal (United Nations, 2004). How the public sector is
structured, how it operates and the role it performs within a country plays
an important part in economic and social progress. In particular, the quality
of government leadership has a great impact on the quality of governance,
which in turn affects the level of development of a region. Reforming the
public sector in both developed and developing countries is not an easy
task and the difficulties to be overcome are many. In the past twenty years
a number of national and international forces have contributed to
significantly changing the role of the state, which has resulted in the need
for new skills, attitudes and behaviors among public officials at all levels.
In fact, the core competencies for the public sector of the 21st century
differ in many ways from the past, especially as the demands placed on
public servants, in terms of skills, knowledge and competency, are rapidly
increasing and becoming more complex. Top government leaders in
developing countries are still facing old challenges, while at the same time
they also have to address new ones, which have resulted from the many
social, economic and political changes sweeping throughout the world
(UNDESA, 2005).
The evolution and development of the Civil Service System of the
Philippines must always be appreciated within its particular historical
context. The influence of the Spanish and the American colonizers must be

322 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
recognized. Through time, since the country attained its political
independence from the Americans in 1946, various administrations
continued to reform the civil service – mostly through government
restructuring intervention. Accordingly, this paper examines a brief
historical context of the evolution of the Philippine Civil Service and
zeroes in on the Career Executive Service (CES). It discusses the
Philippine Career Executive Service and the role of the Career Executive
Service Board (CESB). The paper discusses the training and capacity
development programs for career executive service officers (CESOs) in the
Philippine Civil Service. It then identifies contemporary issues and
concerns confronting the civil service, in general, and building executive
capacity in particular.

II. The Philippine Civil Service

The country went through a long period of colonization by Spain and the
United States, hence, its political and administrative systems were
dominantly patterned after its colonizers. Filipino political economist and
historian Onofre D. Corpuz (1957) asserts that the Spanish colonial
government introduced the bureaucracy as a social institution consisting
mainly of Spaniards. The colonial administration was bankrupt in
constructive policy, as the bureaucrats were corrupt in their motivation and
either incompetent or oppressive in their actions (Corpuz, 1957). Jose
Endriga (1997) echoes the same contention and claims that the Spanish
colonial rule bequeathed four things to the Philippines. First, the idea that
everything should be rigidly run from Manila – others would consider this
as the “Imperial Manila.” Second, the emergence of bureaucratic
techniques best summed up by the Spanish expression “obedezcopero no

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 323
cumplo” (I obey but don’t comply). Third, is a profound distrust of
government on the part of the indigenous people, and fourth, the notion that
it is somehow patriotic to subvert the bureaucracy (Brillantes and
Fernandez, 2009).
The American occupation on the other hand was a significant phase in
the evolution of the modern colonial policy and administration of the
Philippines. The political institutions of the country were in accordance
with the democratic and republic character of political institutions in the
United States. The civil service system introduced to the Philippines was
said to be a “finished product” where efficiency, economy, and merit were
dominant values. These values were reflected in Act No. 5 (Civil Service
Act) passed by the second Philippine Commission in 1900 (Endriga, 1985).
This Act formally established the civil service in the country. If the
Philippine Civil Service was patterned from the American model in terms
of form and substance, its application, according to Heady (1957), is more
accurately described as a fusion of east and west, with local flavour,
transforming considerably its original Weberian principles (Endriga, 1997).
The Bureau of Civil Service (BCS) was established in 1900, with the
mandate that the greatest care should be taken in the selection of officials
for civil administration. To head the various executive and line agencies,
the Philippine Commission preferred American civilians or military men
who had been honorably discharged. All recruits, both American and
Filipino, were to be men of the highest character and fitness who could
conduct their duties unaffected by partisan politics (Philippine Commission,
1900).
In 1916, the Civil Service Law was embodied in the new Administrative
Code. The BCS was, however, to continue under the control of an
American director until Jose Gil was appointed in 1920 as the first Filipino
Director of Civil Service. American leadership, coupled with Filipino

324 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
cooperation made possible good government service throughout the period
of 1899-1920. The period 1913-1921 marked the rapid “Filipinization” of
the Civil Service. In 1913, there were 2,623 Americans and 6,365 Filipinos
in the government services. By 1921, the services consisted of only 614
Americans as opposed to 13,240 Filipinos (Brillantes and Fernandez, 2009).
The 1935 Philippine Constitution firmly established the merit system as the
basis for employment in government. The following years also witnessed
the expansion of the bureau’s jurisdiction to include the three major
branches of government: the national government, local government, and
government corporations. On 4 July 1946, the Philippines was left on its
own after the US granted its independence. The early republic, according
to Corpuz (1957), was characterized as one vulnerable to nepotism and
exposed to the spoils system. Among the other features that marked the
early Philippine bureaucracy, its highly centralized nature was included
(attributed to the influence of Spanish colonization), as were a civil service
whose systems and procedures were patterned after that of the American
civil service (upon its establishment after American colonization), and a
bureaucracy highly vulnerable to attacks from politicians, from the
executive and legislative branches of government who meddled with the
merit system (Brillantes and Fernandez, 2009).
The Bell mission of 1950, which studied the conditions of the newly-
independent country, noted, among many other things, that the government
inherited a reasonably well-organized administration and a well-trained
civil service (Endriga, 1985). The report made a general recommendation
that "a special effort must now be made to improve the public
administration in order to give the people confidence in the government. It
is particularly important at this time because the economic development
program will, of necessity, place even greater responsibility on public
administration. The success of the development program may depend

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 325
more on the efficiency and honesty of the public service than on any other
single factor" (Endriga, 1997). On 19 June 1959, Republic Act 2260,
otherwise known as the Civil Service Law, was enacted. This was the first
integral law on the Philippine bureaucracy, superseding the scattered
administrative orders relative to government personnel administration
issued since 1900. This Act converted the Bureau of Civil Service into the
Civil Service Commission (CSC) with department status. In 1972,
following the declaration of martial law, President Ferdinand Marcos
promised the most extensive and wrenching effort at reform in the history
of the Philippine republic. He implemented Presidential Decree No. 1,
which activated the Integrated Reorganization Plan (IRP) initially set up by
the Reorganization Commission, thereby setting in motion the most
extensive reorganization scheme ever in the Philippine government
(Endriga, 1985). During the time of Aquino, the government had to
contend with a bureaucracy that had become militant about guarding its
own interest and was slowly venturing to make executives more
responsible. Its more articulate and critical elements rallied against
unequal treatment, the lack of political neutrality, and irresponsible
performance (Cariño, 1992).
Today, the CSC’s mandate is derived from Article IX-B of the 1987
Constitution, which was given effect through Book V of Executive Order
No. 292 (The 1987 Administrative Code). The Code essentially reiterates
existing principles and policies in the administration of the bureaucracy and
recognizes, for the first time, the right of government employees to self-
organization and conduct collective negotiations under the framework of
the 1987 Constitution. An interesting pattern in the politico-administrative
system of the Philippines is the fact that all administrations since 1946 have
placed high on their agenda the reorganization of the bureaucracy upon
their assumption of office. Among the more dramatic and visible

326 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
reorganizations implemented were those by President Elpidio Quirino in
the 1950s (through the Government Survey and Reorganization
Commission), the Presidential Commission on Reorganization and the
implementation of the Integrated Reorganization Plan (through Presidential
Decree Number 1 of Marcos upon the proclamation of martial law), the
Reorganization Plan of Corazon Aquino in 1986 (by the Presidential
Commission through Government Reorganization); the reengineering and
reinventing of the bureaucracy of President Ramos in the late nineties, the
Presidential Commission for Effective Governance of Estrada, and, finally,
the rationalization program of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The Philippine
bureaucracy has essentially been shaped and influenced by the different
periods it underwent, including a colonial heritage and legacies inherited
from different administrations and innovations. Now, with over a hundred
years of history, the civil service system continues to respond to the
challenges and demands of nation-building and development, yet continues
to be adversely affected by the political system of the country. Among the
major contemporary initiatives of the civil service system is the
formulation of a Civil Service Code that essentially would attempt to define
a Philippine civil service system resulting from, and operating within the
context of, the unique Philippine politico, administrative, and cultural
history.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 327
 III. Building Executive Capacity: The Career
Executive Service

According to Lodevico (2009), career executive service began during the

Marcos’ Integrated Reorganization of 1972. Marcos’ New Society called
for “a reorientation of the country’s civil bureaucracy in order to enable it
to carry out more effectively the development goals of the New Society.”
Among the provisions in the Plan was the creation of a Career Executive
Service which would form “a continuing pool of well-selected and
development-oriented career administrators who shall provide competent
and faithful service.” The Reorganization Plan created Career Executive
Service which would form a continuing pool of well-selected and
development-oriented career administrators who shall provide competent
and faithful service. Criteria for membership are the following: the
acquisition of CES eligibility, appointment to CES rank and assignment to
a position in the third level of the civil service (Lodevico, 2009; Career
Executive Service Board, 2014).
On 14 November 1973, the Career Executive Service Board was
organized to serve as the governing body of the CES by virtue of
Presidential Decree No. 336. Also in that same year, the Development
Academy of the Philippines (DAP) was tasked through Letter of Instruction
146 to assist the CES Board and to develop and conduct the training
program which was called the Career Executive Service Development
Program or CESDP. The CESDP is an “educational program” to “produce
a corps of development executives who would carry out the development
tasks of the New Society and to create public understanding and acceptance
of the CES as a new profession.” During the Board’s first meeting in
November 1973, its main agenda was the design of the CESDP and the
process and standards for selection of officials who will undergo the first

328 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
sessions of CESDP. Initially, the Board identified 701 positions in the
bureaucracy as falling under CES. From 22 April- 30 June1974, the first
CESDP was held. Fifty two officials were admitted to the first CESDP
session (Career Executive Service Board, 2014).

Growth of the CES

The CES constitutes the executive class in the civil service. The
positions embraced in the CES include positions of Undersecretary,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau Director, Assistant Bureau Director, Regional
Director, Assistant Regional Director, Chief Department Service and other
executive positions of equivalent rank as may be identified by the Board.
The Board conducts position classification studies in agencies continuously
to identify positions of equivalent rank for coverage in the CES. At the
time of its inception in 1973, there were only 700 CES positions in the
service. Within a decade, the number grew by almost 60percent from that
level to a total of 1,100 positions in 1982. When it was reactivated in 1988,
the size was pegged at 1,324 positions (Lodevico, 2009; Career Executive
Service Board, 2014).
Until 1986, CES eligibility and ranks were tough and competitive. Since
this was the only route, competition for priority admission to the ten-month
program was stiff. Agency heads made their nominations based on a list
provided by the Board. The six-month implementation of the Re-Entry
Plan (REP) was subjected to strict and regular monitoring by CESDP staff
after sixteen weeks of residential training which included a two-week
barrio immersion.
In 1990, through the CESB Circular No. 2, the Board has covered
positions in government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs). This
expansion of coverage has opened the gates for increased CES coverage

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 329
and by 1993 the CES population was placed at 2,600 posts. Today, there is
almost a one-to-one ratio of CES positions in line agencies and in GOCCs.
Another crucial point in the expansion of the CES came in 1994 with
Memorandum Circular No. 21. MC 21 was a blanket act declaring all
positions above division chiefs in line agencies and GOCCs or those with
salary grade 25 and above, as under the CES. This issuance more than
doubled the CES population. From 1994 to the present, the number has
steadily but not significantly increased. Today, there are a total of 6,260
positions embraced by the CES –nine times bigger than the initial
population three decades earlier (Career Executive Service Board, 2014).

Political Support

The history of the Career Executive Service seems to have been woven
into the political fabric of the times. The political mood tended to define
its “highs and lows.” In the first four years of the institution, presidential
support was absolute. President Marcos personally handed out certificates
to and addressed the graduates during CESDP’s closing rites.
Appointments to ranks were issued by him as a matter of course. The
CESB also appropriated Philippine Peso 1.5 Million beginning 1974. This
changed course when in 1977, the President suddenly stopped appointing
graduates to CES ranks from Session XI onwards. There was speculation
at that time which surmised that Marcos had become disenchanted with
some CESOs. Even the draft charter on the CES which the Board worked
on for two years and submitted to Malacanang in 1982 gathered dust on
the Presidential desk.
When President Corazon C. Aquino took over in 1986, a widespread
reorganization of the bureaucracy took place, purging a thousand civil
servants including CESOs. There was a general distrust of CESOs at that

330 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
 time.1 This was largely because the CES was seen as a Marcos program. It
did not help that Marcos, right before the EDSA 1 Revolution, appointed
to CES ranks the CESDP graduates whose appointments he had sat on for
nine years. The mass appointments took on a political color with what
looked like a last-ditch effort by Marcos to build up his eroded support
base. The appointments that were long denied to around 500 deserving
CESDP graduates were overlooked amidst the prevailing anti-Marcos
sentiment during those times (Career Executive Service Board, 2014).
If there was a period in the history of the CES that was considered by a
lot of CESOs as the dark ages, it was from 1986 to 1988. For those two
years, the institution was virtually moribund. Displaced CESOs had
nowhere to run to for protection or redress. The Board members did not
meet, and no new Board Members were appointed. During this period, the
CESB did conduct the Managing the Bureaucracy for Results or MBR
which was to give new entrants to executive positions in the bureaucracy a
common frame of reference in governance. Also, no new CESOs were
being appointed. In June 1988, during the closing ceremonies of an MBR
session, President Aquino announced the reactivation of the CES. She
subsequently issued Memorandum Order No. 206 to formalize the
reactivation. The reactivation was made possible through the initiative of a
former executive director and DAP president who was at that time serving
as one of the President’s trusted advisers. A display of Presidential

1
There was a general thinking then among those who took over the government to
demarcosify the bureaucracy. This obviously runs counter to the fundamental
role of the bureaucracy, one that contributed stability and continuity in the
politico-administrative changes in spite of changes in political leadership. This
attitude displayed ignorance and a simplistic appreciation of the capacity of the
bureaucracy to remain neutral and be professional, which is really at the core of
any bureaucratic system.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 331
influence struck again in 1993 until 1994 when then President Fidel V.
Ramos did not appoint any new CESO for almost two years. This delayed
the assumption to CES ranks of these CES eligible managers.

Carrying the Torch, Steering the Institution

The personalities that provided leadership, direction and focus for the
CES have naturally changed over the past thirty years. The Integrated
Reorganization Plan (IRP) provides that the President appoints the
members of the Board from the government and private sector who are
familiar with principles and methods of personnel administration. There
were six appointive members with a six-year term. In 1988, the CSC chair
and the DAP president became ex-officio members.
The law is silent on the selection of the Board’s chairmanship. Since
1973, the members elected the Board chairperson from among themselves.
The CES Board has had seven chairpersons in three decades: DAP
President, Onofre Corpuz (1973- 1978); CSC Chairman, Jacobo Clave
(1978-1981); Commission on Reorganization Head, Armand Fabella
(1982-1986); CSC Chair, Patricia Sto Tomas (1988-1995); then PEA
General Manager, Luis Lagdameo (1995); CSC Chair, Corazon Alma de
Leon (1995-2001); and CSC Chair, Karina Constantino-David (2001-
2008) and Bernardo Abesamis (2008- present). The following Table 1
reflects a list of the indicative accomplishments of each CSB Chair within
the context of building executive capacity in public service.

332 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
 <Table 1> Former Chairpersons of CESB with their
Accomplishments
Onofre D. Corpuz (1973 - Conceptualized the CES for the Philippines,
1978) drawing from systems already in place in certain
bureaucracies around the world. His original
concept of the CES as a service that includes all
executives in government from Assistant
Directors to Undersecretaries with ranks
designated by a number and characterized by
mobility in the service, still holds true up to now.
Jacobo C. Clave (1978 - Signed a performance evaluation system to
1981) measure the CESO’s significant contributions to
national development.
Armand V. Fabella (1982 Focussed on developing the managerial skills of
- 1986) career executives through the Career Executive
Service Development Program (CESDP), a ten-
month training program run by the Development
Academy of the Philippines that included sixteen-
week residential training and a two-week barrio
immersion program. The program was
intentionally crafted to develop camaraderie
among the participants which will enable them to
establish lasting networks cutting across the
bureaucracy.
Patricia A. Sto. Tomas Initiated the shift from a training-based to
(1988 - 1995) examination-based system for the acquisition of
the CES eligibility and rank, which broadened the
base from which eligible managers and CESOs

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 333
 may be sourced. The examination-based system
ensured two-features of a good recruitment
system: open competition and intense selection.
Complementing this shift provided for shorter
training courses focusing on leadership, values,
interpersonal relations and administrative
efficiency
Amado Luis S. Lagdameo Short stint. Transition from the integration of
Jr. (1995) CESB to CSC and then nullification of the
integration in 1995. Corazon Alma de Leon
immediately took over.
Corazon Alma G. De Leon Established the Career Executive Service
(1995 - 2001) Eligibility given by the Civil Service
Commission. It was created in order to assist the
CESB in coping with the growing number of
government executives seeking third level
eligibility, since it was made a requirement for
appointment to third level positions.
Karina Constantino-David Unified the third level eligibilities given by the
(2001 - 2008) Career Executive Service Board and the Civil
Service Commission. Essential to this
achievement was the clarification of the concept
of the third level and its adaptation to existing
realities and current limitations of law. A new
instrument for the Career Executive Service
Performance Evaluation System was also crafted
and rolled-out.
Bernardo P. Abesamis Pursued an integrated CES human resource

334 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
 (2008 - Present) development framework through the
development in 2008 of the Continuing
Professional Development Program based on the
CES Competency Grid. Encouraged continuous
conversations with the public for the
promulgation of new policies, programs and
innovation.
Source: Career Executive Service Board (2014).2

Policy Development

From a training based program, the Career Executive Service Board

(CESB) shifted to an examination-based selection to employ a system
based on merit and open competition. This approach enabled the
institution to speed up the process in granting eligibility while ensuring
that high standards for selection are met. Introduced in 1990, a
Management Aptitude Test Battery (MATB) is conducted in the regions,
in the CESB office on a monthly basis, and twice a year on a nationwide
basis. After 1990, the Board also adopted other modes for officials to
acquire CES eligibility and rank. This included the testimonial eligibility
route and accreditation of the Executive Leadership Management Program
(ELM), Masters of National Security Administration (MNSA) and the
Masters of Public Safety Administration (MPSA) courses as equivalent to
passing some stages of the four–stage screening process. The route via
testimonial eligibility has since been suspended. The ELM, MNSA and
MPSA graduates were set to meet the requirements set by the Board to

2
Data were provided by the CESB website. For more details, visit the Career
Executive Service Board’s website at http://121.96.41.242/cesbweb/.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 335
qualify. In keeping with its mandate to form not only well-selected but
also development-oriented officials, the CESB designed a shorter, three-
pronged core training program called the Executive Leadership Program
(ELP) for its CESOs and those eligible. Shorter in duration compared to
earlier training programs in the CES and comprising three separate
modules, namely Salamin, Diwa, and Gabay, the ELP was launched in
1993. From the time it was piloted in 1993 to date, the ELP has produced
1,257 graduates ((Lodevico, 2009; Career Executive Service Board,
2014). Part of any HR system is performance evaluation. In the CES, a
performance evaluation system was already in place as early as 1978. The
CESPES then was designed to measure the CESO’s significant
contributions to national development. When the CES was reactivated in
1988, a new instrument was developed and adopted to measure not only
the accomplishments but managerial competence as well, along five major
dimensions. This instrument would be used from 1990 to 2001 to evaluate
the performance of all officials in the CES, whether CESO/Eligible or
non-CESO/Eligible. In 2002, the present Board suspended the
administration of the CESPES and moved to design a new one to measure
not only subordinate and superior’s evaluation but also peer and client
assessment.

Bold Moves

For so many years, an eligible CES manager was appointed to a rank at

the level of his position. As early as 1990, there have been efforts to adopt
a ranking system that is not based on position but rather on personal
qualifications, demonstrated competence, level of responsibility and other
performance-related criteria, as originally envisioned in the IRP where
Members of the CES shall be classified according to rank based on broad

336 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
levels of responsibility and on personal qualifications and demonstrated
competence. In a bold move in 2002, the present Board adopted a revised
policy (CESB Resolution No. 453) on original and promotional
appointment to CES ranks which provides for the appointment of an
eligible CES manager to the initial rank of Rank VI, regardless of his
position and for the CESO to work his way up to higher ranks, even
without being promoted to a higher position, through demonstrated
competence, sustained performance level, completion of prescribed
training programs in the CES, and passing a screening process for
promotion to Rank III and higher. To ensure rigorous selection, the
present Board also restored the Assessment Center to be hurdled by all
MATB passers, as was the standard in the early 1990s (Lodevico, 2009;
Career Executive Service Board, 2014).

IV. Designing, Implementing and Sustaining

Programs to Build Executive Capacity

In the Philippines, the Career Executive Service (CES) is the ‘third level’
or the managerial class in the group of career positions. Created by
Presidential Decree No. 1 to "form a continuing pool of well-selected and
development-oriented career administrators who shall provide competent
and faithful service,” it is considered as the highest in the career service as
determined in the Position Classification and Compensation System. The
CES is also a public personnel system separate from that of the first two
levels of position in the Philippine civil service. The first level includes
clerical, trades, crafts and custodial positions whether in a non-supervisory
or supervisory capacity; and the second level is composed of professional,

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 337
highly technical, scientific or other highly specialized positions in a
supervisory or non-supervisory capacity requiring at least a baccalaureate
degree or its equivalent as determined by the Civil Service Commission.
The CES operates on the “rank concept.” Career Executive Service
Officers (CESOs) are “appointed” to ranks and ‘assigned’ to CES positions.
Hence, they could be re-assigned or transferred from one CES position to
another and from one office to another but not more often than once every
two years. The CES is like the Armed Forces and the Foreign Service
where the officers are also appointed to ranks and assigned to positions.
Positions in the CES are the career positions above the Division Chief level
that exercise managerial functions. Positions in the Career Executive
Service include: Undersecretary, Assistant Secretary, Bureau Director,
Bureau Assistant Director, Regional Director, Assistant Regional Director,
Department Service Chief, and other executive positions of equivalent rank
as maybe identified by the CESB.

The Career Executive Service Board

The Career Executive Service Board is the governing body of the CES.
It is mandated to promulgate rules, standards and procedures on the
selection, classification, compensation and career development of members
of the CES. The CESB is composed of eight (8) members, namely: the
Chairperson of the Civil Service Commission (CSC) and the President of
the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) as ex-officio members,
and six (6) others appointed by the President of the Philippines for a term
of six (6) years. Day-to-day operations are handled by the CESB
Secretariat headed by an Executive Director and a Deputy Executive
Director. Five (5) operating divisions are tasked to handle specific program
areas. Eligibility to the career executive service starts with an exam. In

338 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
order to be part of the CES, the aspiring candidate has to undergo the CES
eligibility examination process. It has four (4) stages, namely: (1) Written
Examination; (2) Assessment Center; (3) Performance Validation; and (4)
Board Interview. Upon the inclusion of his/her name in the Roster of
eligible CES managers after the conferment of CES eligibility and
compliance with the other requirements prescribed by the Board, an
eligible CES manager who is appointed to any CES position or appointed
by the President to a CES rank upon the recommendation of the Board
becomes a member of the CES. There are six (6) CESO ranks in the CES
ranking structure. In the ranking structure (see Table 2), Career Executive
Service Officer I (CESO) shall be the highest rank with an equivalent
salary grade of 30, while Career Executive Service Officer VI (CESO)
shall be the lowest rank with an equivalent salary grade of 25 (see Table 2).

<Table 2> CEST Rank and Salary Grade

CESO Rank Salary Grade

CESO Rank I SG 30

CESO Rank II SG 29

CESO Rank III SG 28

CESO Rank IV SG 27

CESO Rank V SG 26

CESO Rank VI SG 25

Source: Career Executive Service Board (2014).

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 339
 Training and Career Development Program for CES

A crucial program in the CESB is its training and career development

programs for career executives. The CESB, through Board Resolution No.
812, enacted on 17 August 2009, approved and promulgated the Omnibus
Rules, Guidelines and Standards on the Continuing Professional
Development System for the Career Executive Service (CPDS-CES). The
CPDS-CES serves as the overall framework of policies, rules/ guidelines,
standards, systems, tools and processes for the development,
implementation, review and evaluation of all capacity building programs to
be developed, offered, accredited and prescribed for career/professional
development, continuous/ lifelong learning and capacity enhancement of
CESOs and third level eligible managers of the civil service.
These capacity building programs include training and career
development programs that are premised on the need for men and women
in the CES who are not only good managers but effective leaders as well.
The CESB has lined up a range of training and other career development
interventions intended to provide a range of perspective, experience,
attitude, knowledge and skills necessary for their effective performance on
the job. Career development in the CES follows a framework that responds
to the CES officials' career development needs from the time they enter the
CES up to the preparations for retirement from the service. Thus, it aims to
complete their "total person development" as a CESO.
CESB training programs are envisioned to raise the level of competency
not only of the CESOs but also the third level eligible managers, develop in
them a deeper sense of commitment to public service, and help them
understand the CES as a program of government, as a service, a culture,
and a way of life. However, in the case of third level eligible managers,
only those occupying at least a Division Chief position or its equivalent,

340 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
unless otherwise provided, may participate in the training and human
resource development programs of the CESB. These training programs
include the following:

1. Executive Leadership Program (ELP)

The ELP is currently the foundational training program for the CESOs
and third level eligible managers. It follows a three-pronged leadership and
management framework of: ‘knowing one's self’, ‘relating with others’
and ‘leading the organization’. This framework is translated into three (3)
training courses, namely: SalaminngPaglilingkod or SALAMIN which
focuses on the ‘self’, DiwangPaglilingkod or DIWA which focuses on
‘others’, and GabayngPaglilingkod or GABAY, which focuses on the
‘organization’. It also includes the Community-Organizational Attachment
Module (COAM), a terminal learning integration course.

2. SalaminngPaglilingkod (SALAMIN) Training Course

SALAMIN, the course on self-examination, is anchored on the premise
that the best leaders are those who have a very good knowledge of
themselves, their values and their leadership styles. Learning modules are
built around and enhance the identified Competency Standards for CESOs.
Learning outcomes of SALAMIN include making participants: (1)
reflect on their values given their primary roles as family members,
members of the community and government executives; (2) examine the
leadership requirements of the bureaucracy and their organizations and
how they would fit into these; (3) re-learn the struggles and aspirations of
the common tao towards increased responsiveness in government policies
and programs; and, (4) from this experience, articulate and refine their
values and leadership style and regain a renewed commitment to public
service.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 341
 3. DiwangPaglilingkod (DIWA) Training Course
DIWA, the course on Interpersonal Relations, is built on the premise that
good leaders are those who have a deep understanding and appreciation of
how they and other people inside and outside the organization affect or
influence each other in their behavior and interpersonal relations. It gives
importance to participative management and effective teamwork in
achieving organizational goals and objectives. It also aims to address one
of the main concerns of executives which is how to deal with the public
and other stakeholders more effectively as well as how to deliver the
highest service possible. Learning outcomes of DIWA are aimed at: (1)
eliciting productive behaviour from subordinates / teams to achieve public
service excellence; and (2) positively influencing superior’s and peers’
behaviour for cooperation and support.

4. Gabay ngPaglilingkod (GABAY) Training Course

While the first two courses of the ELP namely, Salamin and
DiwangPaglilingkod, focus on enhancing the “self” and “managing
interpersonal relations”, respectively, GABAY provides learning modules
aimed at addressing the executive’s need to remain effective on-the-job and
to impart a deeper appreciation of the government’s policies and programs.
Gabay seeks to provide an enhanced awareness and better appreciation on
the demands and challenges facing a public manager; a wider perspective
on the environment of public management around which leadership and
managerial responsibilities are exercised; familiarity with the planning and
organizing processes and the Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) governance and management concepts, essential in the
development of organizations; additional knowledge on how to optimize
the government's administrative support systems for effective decision-
making and management. GABAY also exposes participants to a

342 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
laboratory community/organization that will enable the sharing of
competencies, insights and managerial experiences and to be able to work
on governance and development concerns with the local officials, civil
society and community stakeholders.
The COAM is the terminal module of ELP. Together with the other
SALAMIN, DIWA and GABAY modules, it contributes to: (1) widening
the scope, increasing the level of, and strengthening key leadership and
managerial competencies of career executives via real-life and structured
immersion in a laboratory community or attachment in a laboratory
organization; (2) spawning an environment and cultivating partnerships for
learning where executives can share their competencies, insights and
experiences in managing organizations and work on governance and
development challenges and imperatives with local government officials,
civil society/ private sector leaders, and other community stakeholders; and
(3) encouraging executives to individually and collectively explore, adopt
and advocate meaningful, innovative and results-focused approaches and
tools for re-examining governance and leading reforms in the public sector.

CESB Accredited Training Programs

Obviously, the CESB is not the sole agency that designs and implements
executive development programs for the civil service. Other agencies also
have their own tailor made programs. To complement CESB learning
activities and further provide CES executives with a continuing executive
development program, the CESB in partnership with reputable training
institutions offer several training programs that address specific leadership
and managerial competencies of CESOs and those eligible. These trainings
cover a range of topics to adapt to the current environment such as,

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 343
communication skills, improving personality, change leadership, strategic
thinking, and policy appreciation, among others.

1. Creative Innovations and Reforms for Committed Leadership

and Effectiveness (CIRCLE) Forum Series
This is a series of monthly, multi-sectored fora conducted nationwide
showcasing exemplary, pioneering and influential leaders from the CES
and various fields of governance and development who interact with
government executives in “hands-on” and interactive learning experiences
while dissecting current and important issues and concerns in governance
and development. These leaders distil and share their innovations, insights,
lessons, practical know-how, and relevant experiences in achieving
strategic institutional and sectors’ outcomes and in realizing their personal
goals from a professional and personal perspective while confronting day-
to-day executive challenges.
As a major career/professional development program of the CES Career
Development and Life-Long Learning Strategic Framework, the series
earns credits for an executive who attends and completes it. It also
promotes the CESB’s core objectives of providing meaningful, innovative
and effective mechanisms for: (1) the personal and professional
development of members of the CES, and for; (2) strengthening strategic
networks and engagements with key sectors who share the same mission of
improving governance, managing partnerships, and promoting
development and change.

2. CES Executive Leadership and Wellness Camps

The CES Executive Leadership and Wellness Camp is part of CESB’s
advocacy to promote total wellness, work-life balance and sustained
productivity among government executives. It provides learning activities

344 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
on maintaining healthy lifestyle and relationships, sessions to enhance
longevity and increase productivity at work, and holistic stress
management that not only deals with the physical and emotional, but also
spiritual, social, and well-being aspects as well. Follow-up sessions are
also conducted to equip participants with further motivation, knowledge
and practical tips.

3. CES Thought Leadership Congress (CES-TLC)

The CES-TLC is a thematic and scholarly forum showcasing exemplary,
pioneering and influential citizen-leaders from the Philippines and other
nations who have excelled and made meaningful, valuable and enduring
contributions in various disciplines and brought honor and pride to their
chosen fields and countries. This program immerses government
executives in “hands-on”, “face-to-face” and “life-based” learning
encounters with these champions, exemplars and luminaries who distil their
ideas, insights and lessons; impart their wisdom and inspiration; and share
their visions and stories of struggle, discovery and hope. It is planned and
regularly conducted by CESB in cooperation with its partner
institutions/sectors as a whole-day symposium/conference every semester
in Metro-Manila and in different regional capitals nationwide.

4. CES Leader’s Enterprise Attachment Program (LEAP)

LEAP is a structured immersion-attachment program open to all CESOs
and those eligible and of good standing in the CES. The program exposes
these public sector executives to new organizations and work environments
in purposely selected private sector enterprises/corporations. In partnership
with the chosen enterprise, CESB facilitates the immersion-attachment
with the professional guidance of an enterprise-based volunteer

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 345
mentor/learning partner within a fixed period of time, hence interfacing the
private and public sectors in developmental synergy.
LEAP builds and harnesses a dynamic learning environment involving
career executives/ managers from both sectors partnering in the creation
and application of knowledge, skills, values and new technologies, and in
sharing lessons, insights and experiences in leading people and institutions
and in jointly addressing vital corporate governance problems and issues.
As a key element in the vision of a strengthened CES, the LEAP’s primary
goal is improved levels and quality of productivity, mainly demonstrated in
high value, efficient, and sustained levels and quality of work performance
achieved by developing, institutionalizing and harnessing vital technical
competencies among CESOs and eligible managers resulting in optimal
organizational effectiveness. Leading to these goals are the expansion of
the scope, upgrading of proficiency levels in, and nurturing key leadership
and managerial competencies of career executives through actual structured
immersion in/attachment to model institution(s)/organization(s).

5. CES Management Apprenticeship Program (MAP)

MAP is a two-year, government-wide, residential/on-the-job, and multi-
modal leadership and managerial capability development program which
prepares third level eligible managers for entry into the CES. The program
incorporates the development, installation, implementation, and monitoring
of standardized in-service immersion/attachment modules by the Board in
partnership with various government agencies, clustered into
sectors. These modules, which candidates are required to undergo, include
the: MAP Foundation Course Series (MAP-FCS); Continuing Professional
Education Program (MAP-CPEP); corporate policy making and strategic
planning activities; international study visits, exchange programs,
conferences, symposia and other overseas professional development

346 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
activities; fixed-term cross-sector postings in the government sector; and
the formulation of the MAP Terminal Report. Completion credits earned
are considered as partial fulfilment of pre-requisite requirements for third
level eligible managers to qualify for recommendation/endorsement by the
Board for initial appointment to the appropriate CES rank.

6. CES Fellows Program

The CES Fellows Program is a development-oriented, off-site learning
program which seeks to provide opportunities for CESOs to explore new
avenues and apply tools for their career and professional development,
while working on leadership and governance challenges outside the agency
work environment. The program is primarily envisioned to strengthen
CESO core professional competencies and improve their executive
performance. It is a management intervention granted as a reward or
privilege, which allows CESOs to engage in external development work
(with pay) as an alternative to the performance of regular /standard office
functions.
Under the program, CES Fellows have the option to work as volunteer
workers, development facilitators, technical experts-consultants, educators,
program-project managers/coordinators, among several roles in various
fields, on a part-time or full-time basis through: 1) Postings/attachment in
selected organizations/institutions, whether local or international; and/or 2)
Immersion /attachment in other government agencies; local governments;
non-government, or community-based organizations, either in the
Philippines or in another Third World country. Fellows may also engage in
self-initiated or existing institutional/academy-based development work on
strategic and urgent socio-economic or ecological development issues.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 347
 7. Executive and Placement Programs
The Executive Placement Program of the CESB aims to promote the
placement of CESOs and third level eligible managers to CES positions. It
is classified under two major sub-programs as follows: (1) the Executive
Placement Program; it aims to match the placement participants’ career
options with the needs of the bureaucracy as determined by the Agencies
and/or the Office of the President Search Committee; it requires a strategic
and continuing partnership with the Agency, and gathering and maintaining
information regarding agency-specific requirements, and the expertise and
competencies and career options of the placement participants to enable
job-matching; and (2) the Placement Assistance and Referral Program
aims to assist CESOs/CESEs requesting short term or one time
endorsement.
The performance of CES Officials are evaluated annually through the
CES Performance Evaluation System (CESPES) developed and
administered by the CESB, and installed in all departments and agencies as
part of their performance management system focusing on third level
executives. The CESPES is implemented in various departments/agencies.
It was developed in such a way that it can reflect the significance of one
percent of the entire bureaucracy represented by the third level as the
determining factor of the quality and type of service that the rest of the
bureaucracy offers to the public. Like its predecessor, the existing CESPES
measures the level of accomplishments of CES Officials using the
Performance Contract (PC) as well as their behavioral competence using
the Behavioral Competency Scale (BCS). This time, however, the
accomplishments (referred to as milestones) are to be categorized either
under Leading and Innovating or Regular/Routine.
Leading and Innovating (LI) milestones are policies, programs, projects,
processes or procedures that the CES Officials conceive for the

348 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
department/agency. They are purposive innovations and reforms which aim
to improve the quality of the department/agency's structures, systems,
operations and resources. They are "value adding" measures which are
developed and implemented within a given period of time – with a definite
start and end. On the other hand, regular/routine (RR) milestones are the
output of tasks, functions or activities within the accountability of and
performed by the CES Officials on an established and regular basis in the
work setting. These may include outputs resulting from the performance of
technical and administrative functions needed to conduct and sustain day-
to-day work operations in an office.
The percentage of the LI vis-à-vis the RR milestone depends on the
position level of the CES Officials and is determined by the
department/agency. With the higher position levels, the prescribed
percentage range for LI also correspondingly increases. The CES Officials
are encouraged and expected to perform increasingly more innovative and
pioneering functions as their position levels goes higher, which, in a way,
describes and justifies why they deserves the status and salary received. At
rating time, their superior rates the CES Officials on the basis of their
accomplishments using a rating scale of 1–7, with 7 as "Exceptional", 6 as
"Commendable", 5 as "Above Average", 4 as "Good Solid Performance", 3
as "Solid Performance", 2 as "Below Average" and 1 as "Unacceptable".
Superiors and subordinates alike rate the CES officials on the basis of their
behavioral competence using the Superior and Subordinate Rating Form of
the BCS, respectively. They are given a questionnaire of 30 statements
indicating qualities and attributes of government executives. They rate the
CES Officials depending on how often these qualities are observed using a
scale also of 1–7, with 1 as "Never" and 7 as "Always".
The energies and potential of graduates of the CES Program are
harnessed though the National Union of Career Executive Service Officers

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 349
(NUSECO). CES executives are treated to a variety of interventions
designed to promote effective networking and better camaraderie that is
seen to have a positive effect on government programs. The NUCESO is a
merger of two CES organizations, namely: the NCCESO and the ELP
Alumni Association. The NUCESO aims to: (1) keep alive and dynamic the
ideals and purposes of the CES; (2) enhance the competencies of CESOs as
public managers and leaders and encourage them to advocate programs for
their agencies and communities in the pursuit of CES objectives; (3) to
promote and strengthen camaraderie between and among the career
executive officers in government; (4) to extend assistance to individual
CESOs in the recognition and protection of their rights as career
executives; (5) to provide a forum for discussion of issues and solutions
concerning national interests; (6) to implement projects that will contribute
to the attainment of the government’s goals; and (7) not to engage in any
government unionism activities.

V. Issues, Gaps and Challenges in Career Service

and Executive Development

The Philippine bureaucracy has been beset with problems that need to be
solved to sustain a class of honest, transparent, accountable and responsible
civil workers who deliver public service in the most effective and efficient
way possible. Some challenges adversely affected the bureaucracy so much
so that poor public service practices and negative bureaucratic behavior
have been embedded in Philippine culture and incorporated in the system
of governance. The executive development intervention and the career
executive service have had their share of challenges and problems in the
bureaucracy.

350 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
 Policy Issues. Unfortunately, some major policy reforms that would have
strengthened the institution never gained ground. Policy proposals have
been formulated, designed, packaged, proposed, lobbied, advocated over
the past decade and half since the reactivation in 1988, but most of them
were shelved due to lack of political support. In 1993, the National Council
of CES Organizations (NCESSO) began the arduous task of lobbying for
the passage of a proposed bill strengthening the CES. Even the Association
of ELP Alumni consolidated its forces to push for the same bill. However,
it never went further than a Committee-level hearing in both Chambers.
The same fate was suffered by the proposal for a premium on the rank
designed to grant a significant premium to CESOs which would set a
material difference between a CESO and non-CESO. The proposal was
shot down early on for lack of funding. The initiative to develop a
mechanism for a performance-based tenure started in 1989 but never went
beyond the proposal stage because it was considered too unfeasible.
Ambitious plans to establish a CES Training Center or a CES College
never got further than the drawing board. Sadly, the pieces of legislation
governing the Philippine Civil Service in general remain scattered in
different laws, decrees, and letters of instructions and executive
orders. The absence of a comprehensive civil service law has sometimes
caused confusion among civil servants, to say the least. Many laws overlap
and some have become obsolete.

The Politicization of the Career Service has been one of the long
pressing problems of the bureaucracy. The politicization of the
bureaucracy remains because civil service appointments continue to
succumb to political pressures. It destroys the principle of merit and fitness
in the Philippine bureaucracy, undermines security of tenure, and creates
demoralization among career civil servants. For instance, even with the

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 351
presence of various programs for executive service to maintain the
standards of attracting the best and the brightest in the bureaucracy who
have the capability to lead, the Philippine bureaucracy is marred with the
practice of politicization. No less than the President of the Philippines,
particularly during the time of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, has
exercised presidential privilege by appointing 10,000 CS personnel mostly
in the executive positions without even passing through the merit and
fitness stages (David, 2005).

The Challenge to Professionalize the Civil Service has to be confronted.

The prevailing culture of political patronage remains a big stumbling block
to efforts of the government to professionalize the bureaucracy and
improve the capabilities of government workers to serve the public
effectively and efficiently.

The Issue of Ethics and Accountability among the Career Service

Executives. This issue continues to permeate the government and the
bureaucracy on a massive scale despite the profusion of laws and the
existence of numerous agencies designed to curb corruption. With the
concept of good governance as the prevailing dictum in effective public
administration, people now demand more accountability from civil servants
in the performance of their duties. Never before in the history of its
administrative system has Philippine society deeply questioned the issue of
public accountability as today. Survey results indicating a very high public
perception of corruption in the public sector as well as the high ranking of
the Philippines among the world’s most corrupt countries seems to indicate
that civil servants are expected to tell the people truthfully how they have
been performing their tasks now more than ever. Accountability is seen not
only as a key to good government but also to good governance.

352 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
 The low compensation package for executives including salaries hinders
the government from recruiting and retaining the best and the brightest
minds. The pay scale in the civil service fails in comparison to that
received by their counterparts occupying technical and high supervisory
positions in the private sector.

Outdated systems and procedures in many agencies result in inefficiency

because people in government are primarily concerned with adherence to
rules than with the attainment of intended results and job productivity. The
problem is also caused by the inability of agencies to keep up with the
latest trends in information technology.

Public service delivery continues to be a criticism of the bureaucracy.

Unfortunately, civil servants are generally viewed as incompetent, slow,
rude and inefficient in rendering public service. They are viewed as
influence peddlers and products of political accommodation and therefore
do not possess the highest degree of excellence, professionalism,
intelligence and competence needed to be able to serve the public well.

Weak public service values are evident among government workers.

They lack the dedication and commitment to provide public service. It has
been observed that the civil service has lost much of its service
development orientation. Government service is no longer considered as
“public service” but as a job which public officials and employees need to
support themselves and their families, forgetting that the public is the
reason for the existence of the bureaucracy. However, in spite of such a
negative perception, we are aware that there are many gems and jewels in
the bureaucracy; unheralded but committed and dedicated public servants.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 353
 Issues on Training and Career Development
Programs

Quality versus quantity of training programs. There were numerous

training and career developments programs currently employed by the
Career Executive Board but the question whether these programs are
effective or not needs answer. Perhaps, an evaluation on the effectiveness
of implementation of the career development programs is imperative.
Another would be an evaluation on whether these programs have made an
impact in the careers of the recipients vis-à-vis improvement of
performance in particular and in contributing to the improvement of
performance of the institution as a whole. However, another issue that
would come in is the difficulties or rather challenge to measure the
effectiveness of the program. How are programs assessed? Is there one
best way to measure a capacity development program? Does CESB
conduct an ex-post evaluation of the training and career development
programs? If it does, how often and are the gaps being resolved and
answered for the next training programs? Is there a tracer study for former
training program alumni? Are there any success measures and
accomplishments directly related to the programs that they have had in
terms of individual accomplishment and organizational accomplishments.
On new training programs, what are the drivers for the offering of such and
where these made on evaluation of previous training and capacity
development programs? In terms of training providers, what are the
requirements in order to be accredited? What about trainings provided by
various institutions such as Development Academy of the Philippines,
University of the Philippines-National College of Public Administration
and Governance, and other training provider institutions such as the Ateneo
School of Government? Are there collaborative efforts in order to provide

354 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
synchronized training programs or they have to make their own branding of
training that invites competition. Funding for capacity development
programs. What are the source of funds for training and capacity
development of CESOs? Are there enough funds for quality training
programs? In terms of attracting the best and the brightest in the
bureaucracy, are there programs that encourage young graduates to pursue
a public service career? In Japan for instance, one major distinction of the
Japanese Civil Service is that there is prestige in working in the
government. Prestige carried out from meritocracy and expertise in the job
along with lucrative compensation packages with pay that is at par or even
better than the private sector. Another feature of the Japanese civil service
is that regular personnel transfer is commonplace. Career civil servants are
not hired for specific posts but are assigned new posts every two or three
years by the initiative of human resources department in each ministry.
Lastly, there is no “revolving door” since recruitments are typically done
by examinations for new graduates, and mid-career entrants are limited.

Sustaining Meritocracy as against Seniority and Life-time employment.

There is longevity and security of tenure in the public service in general,
but what about maintaining the efficiency and effectiveness of the
organization as a whole. There is a need to sustain competitive exam-
based selection of third level government officials to assemble a cadre of
outstanding personnel and to do away with the spoils system but what
about the so-called presidential prerogative or discretion that is provided in
the 1987 Constitution? The same with countries like Korea, Japan and
China, seniority is seen as a criticism since this is seen as a detriment to
meritocracy and complacency borne of protected status.
Capacity Building and Policy Capacity. A concern that should be
confronted by CESB is that there is no official training course for high-

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 355
ranking officials. The CESB, however, conducts regular training for new
and middle level government officials. Aside from being exposed to
managerial training, there is a need to explore trainings in policy capacity.
This is also to address “knowledge gaps and information problems,” that
explains to a great extent policy weakness (World Bank, 1998 as cited in
Aguilar, Galindez and Velasco: 2005: 21).
This is what is lacking in the Filipino civil servants. There is a need to
expose them in the international arena through overseas training offered by
developed countries like the USA, UK, France, Germany, Canada,
Australia, & China. The government should likewise open doors to young
leaders on trainings provided by international development agencies like
the ADB, World Bank, JICA, KOICA, among others.

VI. Lessons Learned and Concluding Remarks

Mindful of the need to address these issues and concerns with utmost
priority, the following lessons learned and strategic directions/reforms are
needed to build executive capacity and transform the Philippine
bureaucracy into a model of excellent, reliable, efficient and desirable
public service. First, it needs to formulate the civil service code and codify
laws and relevant issuances governing the civil service into a single,
comprehensive statute as sought in Senate Bill Number 162 of Senator
Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. This is to finally have an ultimate legal authority on
the Philippine Civil Service System. Other bills on proposing the adoption
of a Civil Service Code have been filed by Senators Panfilo Lacso and
Jinggoy Estrada. Second, periodic evaluation of the capability-building
programs is needed. It is necessary to evaluate the impact of the capacity
building training programs periodically. Third, it is necessary to enhance

356 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
partnership with non-government actors. Cooperation is needed between
and among providers of executive training schools – within the context of
the town and gown approach to capacity building. Finally, it is necessary to
continue recognition of Outstanding Civil Servants – like Gawad CS. The
Gawad CS is a motivational approach for CESOs to excel in the field of
public service and good governance. This Presidential award recognizes
members in the Career Executive Service (CES) for exemplary
performance and significant contribution, particularly in the areas of
innovation, information and communication technology, social services,
administrative reforms and public policy.
Indeed, building executive capacity is part of the over-all vision of
reforming public administration for good governance. The four elements
namely, (1) reforming institutions, structures, processes; (2) leadership; (3)
reforming behaviors and mindsets; and (4) citizens’ engagement are needed
to attain the overarching goal of attaining not only good governance or
good enough governance (Grindle, 2007) but better governance. Taking
off from a discussion of the historical context, this paper discussed the
various capacity development programs, including executive development
training programs for the civil service, specifically for the career executive
service level. The primary strength of the Philippine Career Executive
itself is the people who are in it who have undergone the rigors of merit
and fitness to be able to serve in the bureaucracy. On the other hand, with
the identified challenges like the politicization of the Philippine
bureaucracy, among others, there is a need to re-examine the policy
directions and standards, program values and priorities, and the process and
procedures.

In order to improve the capacity development programs for CES, there is

a need to re-examine the programs though monitoring and evaluation. In

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 357
this way, the training programs whether internally or externally provided,
shall be objectively evaluated in terms of their effectiveness and efficiency
or even affordability. The CESB must continue its efforts to try to employ
more aspiring career executives through a compensation package that
would attract them to work in the public service. Apart from the monetary
rewards, the government should continuously motivate the CES with
awards such as Gawad CES (awards for outstanding career executive
service officers.)
The CESB, in order to maintain justness and equality should continue its
informal regulatory function by defining how the training providers are
chosen. This will improve the training programs in the future especially
when it eliminates poor training providers. The Board should also have to
continue enhancing its own regular training programs and see how they can
be improved in the future. Thus in all of the above conclusions and
recommendations, it is hoped that it will contribute in building the
executive capacity of the Filipino career executive service in public service
for better governance.
Indeed, as we suggested earlier, one of the challenges of training is
whether or not the training has made an impact in the CES. The reform
framework particularly the second and third quadrant i.e. developing
leadership, and reformed mindsets, paradigms and behavior is the ultimate
objective of any training and capacity programs. It is only when we have
changed paradigms, reformed mindsets and behaviour, including those at
the executive level, that we can say the training programs, which, as
suggested earlier, are really components of broader capacity building and
capacity development interventions, have truly been effective and
sustainable.

358 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
 < References>

Aguilar, Luis F. Aguilar, Cristina Galíndez, Ernesto Velasco. (2005).

“Public policy and human resource development” in Human
Resources for Effective Public Administration in a Globalized
World. UNDESA Report. pp 20-24.
Bekke, H. A., Perry, J. L., and Toonen, T. A. (1996). Civil Service Systems
in Comparative Perspective. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University
Press.
Brillantes, Alex B. and Fernandez, Maricel T. (2010). “Toward a Reform
Framework for Good Governance: Focus on Anti-Corruption,”
Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 54 (1-2): 87-127.
Brillantes, Alex B. and Fernandez, Maricel T. (2009). “Philippines” in Pan
Suk Kim (ed.) Public Administration and Public Governance in
ASEAN Member Countries and Korea. Seoul, Korea:
DeayoungMoonhwasa Publishing Company.
Brillantes, Alex B. and Fernandez, Maricel T. (2008). “Is There a
Philippines Public Administration? Or Better Still, For Whom is
Philippine Public Administration?” Philippine Journal of Public
Administration, 52 (2-4): 333-363
Career Executive Service Board (CESB). (2007). 2007 Annual Report.
Quezon City, Philippines: Career Executive Service Board.
Career Executive Service Board (CESB). (2009). 2009 Annual Report.
Quezon City, Philippines: Career Executive Service Board.
Career Executive Service Board (CESB). (2010). 2010 Annual Report.
Quezon City, Philippines: Career Executive Service Board.
Career Executive Service Board (CESB). (2011b). The Public Manager. 23
(1). January-March. Quezon City, Philippines: Career Executive
Service Board.

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 359
Career Executive Service Board (CESB). (2011a). The Public Manager. 23
(4). April. Quezon City, Philippines: Career Executive Service
Board.
Career Executive Service Board (CESB). (2014). Report of the Career
Executive Service Board. Accessed the Career Executive Service
Board’s website at http://121.96.41.242/cesbweb/. Quezon City,
Philippines: Career Executive Service Board.
Cariño, Ledevina V. (1992). Bureaucracy for Democracy. Quezon City,
Philippines: UP College of Public Administration.
Condrey, S. E., and Maranto, R. (2001). Radical Reform of the Civil
Service. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Corpuz, Onofre D. (1957). The Bureaucracy in the Philippines. Quezon
City, Philippine: UP Institute of Public Administration.
Endriga, Jose N. (1985). "Stability and Change: The Civil Service in the
Philippines," Philippine Journal of Public Administration 29 (2):
132-154.
Endriga, Jose N. (1997). "Comparative Studies of National Civil Service
Systems Country Paper: The Philippines." Paper presented at the
conference organzied by Indiana University in Bloomington,
Indiana, USA.
Fernandez, Maricel. (2014). "Learning from Japanese: Meritocracy in the
Japanese Civil Service and the National Personnel Authority."
Governance Review 1(1): 10-11.
Grindle, Merilee S. (2007). "Good Enough Governance Revisited,"
Development Policy Review 25 (5): 553-574.
Hays, S. W., and Kearney, R. C. (2003). Public Personnel Administration:
Problems and Prospects, 4th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

360 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
Heady, Ferre. (1957). "The Philippine Administrative System: A Fusion of
East and West," Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 1 (1):
27-45.
Hooton, C. G. (1997). Executive Governance: Presidential Administrations
and Policy Change in the Federal Bureaucracy. New York, NY:
M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
Kim, Pan Suk. (2007). "Transforming Higher-Level Civil Service in a New
Age: A Case Study of a New Senior Civil Service in Korea." Public
Personnel Management 36(2): 127-142.
Lodevico, Blesilda V. (2009). "Thirty Years: The Story of the Career
Executive Service" accessed in http://www.oocities.org/vynkeziah/
frontpage1.html.
National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) (2011) Philippine
Development Plan 2011-2016. Pasig City, Philippines: National
Economic Development Authority.
Philippine Commission. (1900). Report of the Philippine Commission.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Rhodes, R., and Weller, P. (2001). The Changing World of Top Officials:
Mandarin or Valets. Buckinghum, UK: Open University Press .
Smith, M. J. (1999). The Core Executive in Britain. New York: MacMillan
Press.
Stanton, T. H., and Ginsberg, B. (2004). Making Government Manageable:
Executive Organization and Management in the Twenty First
Century. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Theakston, K. (2000). Bureacracts and Leadership. New York, NY:
Macmillan Press.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).
(2005). Human Resources for Effective Public Administration in a

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 361
 Globalized World. New York, NY: United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs.
United Nations (UN). (2004). The Role of Human Resources in Revitalizing
Public Administration: Report of the Secretariat. New York, NY:
United Nations.

362 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
국문초록

좋은 거버넌스를 위한 고위직 공무원의 역량구축:

필리핀 공무원조직 사례연구

브릴란테스, 알렉스 주니어

(필리핀대학교 딜리만 캠퍼스)
페르난데즈-카락, 마리셀
(필리핀대학교 딜리만 캠퍼스)
김판석
(연세대학교 원주캠퍼스, 교신저자)

필리핀의 현대 공무원제도 역사는 100 년을 넘는다. 필리핀의 현대

공무원제도의 근간은 미국이 필리핀을 식민통치하면서 시민들에게
공공서비스를 제공하고 정책집행을 책임감있게 추진하기 위해
전문관료제를 설치하면서부터라고 할 수 있다. 정부운영의 안정과
지속성이라는 기반을 유지하고 급격하게 변화하는 사회의 수요에
대처하고 변화와 혁신 등을 도모하기 위해서는 정부관료제 틀 안에
있는 공무원 특히 고위공무원들의 역량을 지속적으로 개발하는 것이
필수적이다. 이러한 맥락에서 이 논문은 다음과 같은 차원에 초점을
맞추어 논의를 전개하고자 한다: 고위공무원 리더십개발과 강화,
공공관료제 속의 사람들의 마인드와 행동 그리고 가치의 변화 등에
주목하고자 한다. 특히 이 논문은 필리핀 공무원제도의 고위공무원
개발프로그램과 그 역할 등에 초점을 맞추었으며, 그러한
프로그램들이 공무원교육훈련기관 혹은 교육훈련 제공자들에 의해
어떻게 집행되고 운영되는지 등에 대해 분석하고자 한다. 또한
고위공무원 교육훈련 집행과정에서의 여러 이슈들과 관심사항 등을
따져보고, 공무원교육훈련과 리더십개발차원에서 얻을 수 있는

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 363
교훈을 도출하고자 한다. 끝으로 필리핀 공무원제도의 고위공무원
역량강화라는 사례연구를 통하여 향후의 공무원 교육발전방향 등을
모색하고자 한다.

주제어: 역량구축, 고위직공무원 역량, 공무원제도, 필리핀, 교육훈련,

경력직 고위공무원

364 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호
ABSTRACT

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for

Better Governance: The Case of the Philippine Civil
Service

Brillantes, Alex B. Jr
(University of the Philippines, Diliman)
Fernandez-Carag, Maricel
(University of the Philippines, Diliman)
Kim, Pan Suk
(Yonsei University, Wonju Campus)

The Philippine Service is over 100 years old. Its establishment has
largely been the result of the efforts of the American colonial government
to establish a professional bureaucracy that would be responsible for the
sustainable design and implementation and delivery of services to the
people. Experience has shown that it is imperative to continuously develop
the capacities of those in the bureaucracy, if it is to be the bedrock of both
stability and continuity, coupled with change and innovation, considering
the demands of a rapidly changing society. This paper focuses on the
several levers: developing and strengthening leadership, and transforming
mind-sets, behavior, and values of the people in the public bureaucracy. It
is within this context that the paper will discuss the role of executive
development programs in the Philippine public service and how they have
been implemented either directly by offices of the civil service or by
training providers. It discusses some of the issues and concerns with regard
to their implementation, draws out some lessons that can be learned given

Executive Capacity Building in the Public Service for Better Governance:

The Case of the Philippine Civil Service 365
the Philippine experience in public service training and leadership
development, and suggests some next steps that can be considered within
the context of building executive capacity in the Philippine public service.

Key Words: capacity building, executive capacity, public service,

Philippines, training, career executive service

▸ 논문접수일 2014.07.06

▸ 논문심사일 2014.08.21

▸ 게재확정일 2014.09.12

366 東南亞硏究 24 권 2 호