Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 2010 54CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC SERVICE [625845]

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 54CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC SERVICE
IN ROMANIA*
PhD Univ. Professor Tudorel ANDREI
Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest
PhD Univ. Professor Ani MATEI
National School of Political and Administrative Studies, Bucharest
PhD Univ. Professor Andreea Iluzia IACOB
PhD Candidate Aura POPA Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest

Abstract
The reform of government’ s institutions must be a priority for the Romanian State. This process cannot be achieved without a proper development of public service. This paper outlines a number of features of the public service related to civil employee satisfaction, features of competitions to occupy and promote employment in the public service and the vertical and horizontal mobility of civil servants. For the purposes of calculating statistical indicators, data series have been utilised, obtained from the application of a statistical survey at the level of a sample from the public administration. Key words: public administration; public service reform; statistical
survey; sample; questionnaire.
***
An important component of public administration reform process
is the reform of public service. In the current context we cannot achieve a wide-ranging reform of the state without an adequate professional capacity of employees from the central and local public administration. To identify some aspects of the civil service, in November 2009 there was held at the public administration level a statistical research based on statistical sampling. To obtain statistical information, this was applied to a statistical survey at a statistical sample level consisting of 550 employees. The maximum permissible error is ± 2%. In the questionnaire have been introduced questions covering the following themes: the management of government institutions, civil service, the transparency in the government institutions, the characteristics of the decentralization in public administration, the quality of public administration reform, corruption and its implications on economic and social development.
* Analysis of the results of statistical surveys organized – random – among employees of central
and local governmentStatistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 55 Within the questionnaire other questions were introduced to determine
some further characteristics for the civil service in relation to features such as: the average seniority of employees, the level of training, the political opinion of the person etc. In the following discussion there will be presented the most important issues concerning: the satisfaction degree of employees from public administration in relation to issues of income obtainable for their work, the respect they enjoy inside the institution, the operating conditions in which they activate and the pressure which they are exposed to from the political environment; the correctness of conduct of the professional competitions for recruitment and promotion in civil service; the identi fi cation of the
characteristics related to public of fi ce.
Thereafter, there are enumerated the questions that the questionnaire contained that were de fi ned for the evaluation of important issues related to
the degree of satisfaction, the organization of competitions for employment and promotion in the public service and employees mobility within the public administration. For each question there are presented the measurement scales used, primary and aggregate variables de fi ned on the basis of questions and
descriptive statistics calculated on the basis of the questionnaire.
Analysis of employee’s degree of satisfaction
To assess the degree of satisfaction of government employees, in the questionnaire were introduced two closed questions to examine their opinion in relation to their satisfaction degree against nine criteria and the quality of service of an employee in relationships with different people. Based on responses to the fi rst question there were de fi ned nine primary
variables, and then, based on the second question, there were de fi ned six other
primary variables. Finally, the de fi ned primary variables are presented and a
number of descriptive statistics are calculated based thereon. The fi rst question concerns the measurement of the degree of
satisfaction of employees from public administration in relation to each of the following nine evaluation criteria: average monthly income, the respect received from colleagues, the respect of citizens, the respect from the direct manager, the respect from the management head of fi ce in the institution in
which they operate, computer desk facilities, internet connection and pressure from the political system. To assess the opinion in relation to each criterion, a measurement scale was de fi ned with the following values: I’m not satis fi ed at
all, I am satis fi ed to a lesser extent, I am moderately satis fi ed, I am satis fi ed to
a great extent and I am fully satis fi ed.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 56 Based on information provided by answers to these four questions there
were de fi ned nine primary variables: B11 – the satisfaction degree regarding
to monthly income; B12 – the satisfaction degree regarding the respect from
colleagues; B13 – the satisfaction degree regarding the respect from citizens;
B14 – the satisfaction degree regarding the respect of the direct manager;
B15 – the satisfaction degree regarding the respect from management institution;
B16 – the satisfaction degree regarding the relation with the of fi ce in which they
operate; B17 – the satisfaction degree in relation to the of fi ce with computer
equipment; B18 – the satisfaction degree in relation to internet connection; B19
– the satisfaction degree in relation to pressure made by the political system.
To de fi ne these nine characteristics a measurement scale was applied
as defi ned by the following values: 1-total dissatisfaction, 2-low satisfaction,
3-moderate satisfaction, 4-increased satisfaction, 5-total satisfaction.By processing the data sets recorded for the nine variables in the sample were obtained the results in the table below. Distribution of responses to these primary variables and their means are presented below:
Characteristics of the degree of satisfaction
Table 1
Variable B11B12B13B14B15B16B17B18B19
Distribution of responses (%)
1 17,80 2,00 6,50 3,30 2,80 2,20 5,00 7,20 20,60
2 27,60 6,10 10,90 5,80 8,70 9,60 11,10 10,80 24,50
3 45,10 35,80 40,10 24,50 29,30 26,70 29,50 21,00 24,50
4 8,20 41,40 34,00 39,90 34,90 37,30 32,70 35,30 17,605 1,30 14,50 7,80 26,50 24,30 23,90 21,20 25,40 11,90
NR 0,00 0,20 0,70 0,00 0,00 0,20 0,60 0,40 0,90
Variables’ mean
Mean 2,48 3,60 3,25 3,80 3,68 3,70 3,54 3,61 2,75
Using the primary variables from above, there are then de fi ned two
aggregate variables of fi rst level, as follows:
• RES variable, for evaluating the respect enjoyed by employees of public institutions. This is a variable which is calculated as an arithmetic average of the primary variables B
12, B13, B14 and B15;
• COL variable, characterizing the satisfaction degree of employees from public administration to the conditions of work (of fi ce, computer and
Internet connection). The two variables of the fi rst level, as in fact as the primary variables
B
11 and B19, are de fi ned on the interval ].5,1[ In order to characterize the overall
satisfaction degree of employees of public institutions an aggregate GSA variable of second level is de fi ned based on application that is described below:Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 57] [41],5,1[ :19 11 B COL RES B GSA N GSA  o
For the two categories of variables there were then calculated the mean,
standard deviation and indicators to characterize asymmetry and kurtosis. The results are presented below.
Indicators for characterizing the variables used to
describe employee’s satisfaction
Table 2
VariableNumber of
valid casesMeanStandard
deviationSkewness Kurtosis
B11525 2,48 0,922 -0,057 -0,386
B19525 2,75 1,297 0,222 -0,103
RES 525 3,58 0,751 -0,489 0,454
COL 525 3,61 0,867 -0,399 -0,210
GSA 525 3,11 0,675 0,182 0,005
Distribution of values for the fi ve variables (B11, B19, RES, COL and GSA) is
shown in the graphs in Figure 1. The graph in Figure 2 represents the means of the fi ve variables used to assess employees’ degree of satisfaction in public
institutions.
Distribution of values used to characterize the degree of satisfaction
Figure 1
Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 58
Variables’ mean used to characterize employee satisfaction
Figure 2
Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 59 For evaluating the quality of service relationships there were
considered six aspects: quality of service relationships with colleagues within the same department, quality relationships with colleagues from other departments, quality relationships with the direct manager, the quality of job relations with the institution’s manager, quality relationships with customer’s service and job quality relationships with employees of similar institutions. To assess the views of employees in relation to the evaluation criteria there was used a measurement scale with four levels: excellent, good, satisfactory and unsatisfactory. Using information obtained through application of the above questions resulted in six primary variables. For these variables the same measurement scales were used as with the following four values: 1-unsatisfactory, 2-satisfactory, 3-good and 4-very good. The six variables are de fi ned as: B
61-characterizing the quality of
professional relationships with colleagues within the same department, B62-
characterizing the quality of professional relationships with colleagues from other departments, B
63-characterizing the quality of professional relationships
with the direct manager, B64-characterizing the quality of professional
relationships with the director of the institution, B65-characterizing the quality
of relationships with clients and B66-characterizing the quality of professional
relationships with employees of other institutions.
Statistical indicators used to characterize the quality of professional
relationships
Table 3
Variable B61B62B63B64B65B66
Distribution of responses (%)
Unsatisfactory 1,70 1,50 2,00 3,30 1,50 3,00
Satisfactory 6,90 12,40 10,80 11,70 8,30 13,20Good 33,40 53,60 33,80 43,20 47,50 50,30Very good 57,90 32,30 53,10 41,40 41,90 33,40NR 0,00 0,20 0,40 0,40 0,70 0,20
Variables’ mean
3,48 3,17 3,39 3,24 3,31 3,15
To analyze the quality of professional relationships at the level of the
government’s institutions, a CRP variable is de fi ned as an average of the six
primary variables de fi ned directly on the answers to the questionnaire:
] … [61],4,1[ :66 61 B B CRP N CRP  o Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 60 For this variable a mean and standard deviation is calculated, but also
the distribution of values of this variable as presented below.
Distribution of values for CRP variable
Figure 3
Hiring and promotion in public administration
An important aspect of the modernization of public service is attracting in public service competent people, capable to respond favourably to competition with the private sector. In this regard, an important role is the proper conduct of the competition for employment or promotion in public of fi ce. In the questionnaire a question was submitted to assess certain
characteristics of professional competitions for employment and promotion in the public service. Thus, we intended to assess to what extent, in a contest, the focus is on each of the following aspects: memorizing the facts, ideas, or methodology from manual or normative acts in order to repeat it in an unchanged form; analyzing the main elements of an idea, an experience or a theory, synthesizing and organizing ideas, information and experiences in new and complex interpretations and connections, determining the real value of information, arguments or methods of analysis (eg, examining how others have collected and interpreted certain data and assessing how strong are their conclusions), application of theories and theoretical concepts to practical problems or in new situations. To assess these issues a measuring scale was utilised with the following values: to a large extent, pretty much, moderate, insigni fi cant extent and not at all.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 61 Based on information obtained from this question were de fi ned fi ve
primary variables: B21 – professional contests encourage memory; B22 –
professional contests encourage analysis; B23 – professional contests encourage
synthesis; B24 – professional contests encourage determining the truth value
of information; B25 – professional contests encourage application of theories.
The measurement scale used to de fi ne the fi ve variables has the following fi ve
values: 1-not at all, 2- an insigni fi cantly degree, 3-a moderate degree, 4-quite
enough, 5- a large degree. After processing the information at the level of the sample there were obtained the results as presented below.
Appreciation of the institution’s budgetary performance compared
with fi ve elements
Table 4
Variable B21B22B23B24B25
Distribution of responses (%)
1 8,90 3,50 3,70 4,80 6,10
2 11,10 15,60 10,80 13,20 12,40
3 30,60 37,10 36,40 39,10 38,40
4 28,40 28,90 29,10 26,70 25,40
5 20,60 14,50 19,30 15,60 17,30NR(99) 0,40 0,40 0,70 0,60 0,40
Variables’ mean
Mean 2,59 2,64 2,50 2,65 2,64
Another important aspect for developing the public service is related
to the right organization of competitions for employment and promotion in the public service. To assess the accuracy of the two categories of competitions in the questionnaire there were included two questions. With these two questions we wished to establish whether or not competition encourages each of the following fi ve aspects: the professional training of candidates, the in fl uence of
persons within the institution, the in fl uence of the political environment, gifts
or money given by candidates and inappropriate conduct of the competition. For the two closed questions was used a scale of values with four possible answers: not at all important, slightly important, fairly important and very important. Based on information from the fi rst question that refers to the
assessment of some issues connected with the competition of employment in public service, there were de fi ned fi ve primary variables: B
31 – the importance Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 62of profession training the candidate for promotion; B32 – the in fl uence of
persons within the institution in promoting the candidate; B33 – the in fl uence
of the political environment to promote the individual; B34 – the importance
of gifts or money offered by candidates for promotion; B35 – the improper
conduct of the contest promotion. The measurement scale used to de fi ne the
fi ve variables has the following fi ve values: 1-not at all important, 2-less
important, 3-fairly important and 4-very important. After processing the information at the sample’s level there were obtained the results as presented below.
The correctness of contests for employing a person
Table 5
Variable B31B32B33B34B35
Distribution of responses (%)
1 2,80 33,60 41,90 69,80 33,40
2 9,80 26,70 26,90 15,20 16,003 32,70 24,90 17,40 9,50 25,20
4 54,50 14,50 13,40 4,30 24,70
NR(99) 0,20 0,40 0,40 1,30 0,70
Variables’ mean
Mean 3,40 2,19 2,01 1,47 2,42
Based on the fi ve primary variables was de fi ned a CCP aggregated
variable for assessing the fairness of professional competitions for employment in an institution of public administration. The aggregate variable is de fi ned
based on the application:

] ) 5[(51],4,1[ :35 34 33 32 31 B B B B B CCP N CCP  o
A high value of the mean of this variable highlights major de fi ciencies
in hiring a person in public administration from organizing a contest. For this variable was calculated the mean and standard deviation, yielding the results as below: • Mean is 1,94; • Standard deviation is 0,692. Distribution of values for this variable is shown in Figure 4.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 63Distribution of values for CCP variable
Figure 4
Based on the information recorded from the question of evaluating
issues promoting fairness in competitions for public of fi ce there were de fi ned
fi ve primary variable: B41 – the importance of professional training of the
candidate for promotion; B42 – the in fl uence of persons within the institution
in promoting the candidate; B43 – the in fl uence of the political environment
to promote the individual; B44 – the importance of gifts or money offered to
candidates for promotion; B45 – the improper conduct of the contest promotion.
The measurement scale used to de fi ne the fi ve variables had the following
fi ve values: 1-not at all important, 2-less important, 3-important and 4-very
important. After processing the sample information there were obtained the following results which are presented below.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 64The correctness of contests for promoting people
Table 6
Variable B41B42B43B44B45
Distribution of responses (%)
1 4,10 30,60 43,00 69,00 35,80
2 9,10 24,50 28,80 18,00 19,70
3 28,40 32,30 16,10 8,50 21,90
4 58,30 12,40 11,90 3,90 21,90
NR(99) 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,60 0,70
Variables’ mean
Mean 3,41 2,26 1,95 1,46 2,31
On the basis of the fi ve primary variables there was de fi ned an
aggregate CPP variable for assessing the fairness of professional competitions for employment in an institution of public administration. The aggregated variable is de fi ned based on the following application:
] ) 5[(51],4,1[ :45 44 43 42 41 B B B B B CPP N CPP  o
A high value of the mean of this variable highlights major de fi ciencies
in hiring a person in public administration by holding a contest.For this variable there was calculated the mean and standard deviation, yielding the following results: • Mean is 1,91; • Standard deviation is 0,688. Distribution of values for this variable is shown in the chart below.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 65Distribution of values for CPP variable
Figure 5
Mobility of persons from public administration
An important aspect to be considered in the analysis of how to characterize the persons employed in public administration refers to the mobility of employees. Thus, through the questions included in the questionnaire it was aimed to calculate some statistical indicators to characterize the following aspects: the average seniority of people from public administration, the average seniority of people within the same institution, the average seniority in the central public administration in the position currently held, the average seniority of a person subordinated to the same manager. To highlight these criteria in the questionnaire a question was then introduced to determine if each employee worked a period (in years): in public administration, within the same institution, in their current position and subordinated to the direct manager. Descriptive indicators as calculated for the characterization of the four dimensions of mobility of employees from public administration are presented in Table 7. In the four graphs in Figure 6 is shown the distribution of age groups compared with the four indicators used to analyze mobility of local government employees. Based on the results in Table 7 there were calculated three indices that are used to characterize the mobility of employees from local government on three levels: in public administration, the institution where the employee is currently working and in the management hierarchy. Average indicators calculated for the four variables are presented in Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 66Figure 7. These average indicators are used to characterize three aspects of
civil mobility in public service. The values of these derivate indicators allow the highlighting of important aspects of local government employees mobility on vertical (on hierarchical management structures) and on horizontal (at the level of the institution or between institutions).
Descriptive indicators to characterize the employees’ mobility
Table 7
Indicator
(years)I work
in public
administrationI work in
the current
institutionI work in
my current
positionI am directly
subordinated
to the same
manager
Mean 8,320 7,690 5,490 3,850
Minimum 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000
Maximum 35,000 35,000 25,000 18,000
Standard deviation 6,831 6,166 4,616 3,574
Average years in public administration, in the same institution, on the
same position and under direct subordination to the same manager
Figure 6
Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 67Age distribution of persons in relation to years in the public
administration (a), in the same institution (b), in the same position (c)
and under direct subordination to the same manager (d)
a
b
c
d
To assess the degree of mobility in the central public administration,
the next three indictors are calculated as follows: • Functionaries’ mobility between institutions
12
1VMVMk

where: VM
1 – average seniority in public administration and
VM2 – average seniority in the same public institution.
For data recorded at the sample level the results were obtained as below:
.92,040,915,8
1 kStatistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 68 • Functionaries’ mobility on positions within the institution
23
2VMVMk
where VM3 – average seniority of the position.
Based on information recorded at the sample level the following value was obtained:
.71,015,817,6
2 k
• Functionaries’ mobility in leading positions
34
3VMVMk
where VM4 – average seniority of an of fi cer directly subordinated
under the same manager. Based on recorded data at sample level the following value was obtained:
.70,017,646,4
3 k
The high values of the indicators show a low mobility of central
public administration’s employees in relation to the three criteria: – On average, 92% of the time while a person was employed in public
administration was spent in the same institution; – On average, 71% of the time while a person was employed in public
administration was spent the in the same position; – On average, 70% of the time a person was employed in public
administration was spent at the same hierarchical level. Values of the three indicators calculated above are represented in Figure 8.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Revista Român ă de Statistic ă nr. 8 / 2010 69Indicators used for the analysis of mobility
Figure 8
Conclusions
An important aspect to support the process of public service reform is the implementation of a modern wage system for the functionaries. According to government employee’s quali fi cations, current revenues are not incentives
for developing the public service. Implementation of the new public sector’s wage system raises major problems for the following reasons: implementing the new system was carried out while the central and local public administration has been restructured; the economic crisis at international and national level creates major dif fi culties in the development of the reform process etc.
The macroeconomic approach of reforming the wage system for the public administration, as a matter of fact from the entire public sector, should be an important coordinate of implementation of current wage system. The reform of public administration process should encourage the development of new types of professional competitions for employment and promotion in the public service. Generally, state sector and, in particular, public administration, should attract the most competent people. It should not be forgotten that the state sector is in fi erce competition with the private sector.
Another issue not at all to be neglected is to ensure a higher mobility on the vertical (in the professional hierarchy of training) and horizontal (between government institutions) of employees from the public administrations. Changes in the civil service in the last decade have stimulated increasing mobility of civil functionaries. This feature must also be motivated by state institutions in the near future.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545

Romanian Statistical Review nr. 8 / 2010 70***
This work was supported by CNCSIS – UEFISCSU, project number PNII – IDEI code 1814/2008, fi nancing contract no. 763/2009.
Bibliography
– Andrei, T., Pro fi roiu, M., Oancea B. și Nedelcu M. (2009), Considerations on the
Remuneration System of the Public Administration – an Analysis on Electoral Cycles and Scenarios Development, Theoretical and Applied Economics , 3 (532), p. 57-70.
– Andrei, T., Matei, A. și Roșca, I. Gh. (2009), The Corruption – an economic and
social analysis , București, Editura Economic ă.
– Bai, C.-E. și Wei, S-J. (2001), The Quality of the Bureaucracy and Capital Account
Policies , Policy Research Working Paper Series 2575 , The World Bank.
– Pro fi roiu, M. și Andrei T. (2005), Public Administration Reform in Romania,
Research Report , European Institute from Romania, Bucharest.
– Rose-Ackerman, S. (1975), The economics of corruption, Journal of Public
Economics , 4.
– *** – Consiliul European (2004), Regular Report on Romania’ s progress towards
accession , Brussels.
– ***Guvernul României (2004), Strategia actualizat ă a Guvernului României
privind accelerarea reformei în administra ția publică 2004-2006 , București.Statistical Analysis
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1708545