IN his book, The Tyranny of Metrics, US historian and sociologist Jerry Muller talks about the dangers of today’s society wherein the preferred path of success is rooted in quantifying human performance, and then reaping rewards based on numbers. Originating sometime during the 1970s, data-based executive decision-making became the management tool often turned to even by government managers. However, the zeal to measure achievements and to secure better scorecards has its danger. This happens when managers are being fixated on the numbers themselves and not on the spirit of why the need for measurement was essential in the first place.
There are so many examples of this in the Philippine context. There is the nagging question on the K to 12 program adding a few more years of learning, which may sound good but not necessarily guaranteeing faculty and course quality, therefore resulting in less prepared students for college. Another case is the heralded speed of automated elections but negating questions on the integrity of the votes counted. How about the low unemployment rates but we don’t hear much on underemployment? Or the huge number of overseas Filipino workers bringing in the needed dollars but ignoring the social impact on their families and society in general?
Reaching the numbers targeted may do justice to the success of the program, but it does not assure that the spirit of the program is achieved.
This, I would like to point out, may be the danger when some of our government transport, traffic and urban planning officers throw the numbers to reinforce the validity of the program they are implementing. Take the case of the current requirement to clear the streets of roadblocks. We are told of the target reached, the numbers of cars towed and illegal vendors taken out, but we are not certain if processes were followed or even if the underlying causes of such violations were valid enough to cause further review.
Or this enforcer mentioning their target number of general travel speed if the yellow lanes are strictly enforced; then castigating complaining public commuters as undisciplined while their buses had been lining up for hours. Need we not dwell on the fact that these commuters might lose their jobs because they may come in late for that day? How about the news that several of our cities landed in the cities with the cleanest air in Southeast Asia? Was it mentioned that we lack enough air-monitoring devices to come out with an accurate measurement? Even the discourse on whether last week’s transport strike was successful or not; the discussion always dwelled on the numbers as the basis of its success or failure. Not the reasons why and not the trouble it may cause.
Scorecards do matter, don’t get me wrong. Especially if we are told about forward-looking data like the number of travel time to be reduced if the BRT and the rails are completed or the increase in passenger arrivals when the new airports are fully realized. Or the reduction of traffic incidents if we have a full complement of CCTVs and traffic signaling systems. Even the target reduction of carbon emissions when the jeepney modernization program is finally implemented.
Generally, we as human beings need to be measured, believe in such measurements and gauge our successes accordingly.
But some of our government officials may need to remind themselves that every number thrown out is a story. And for government to be truly efficient, not to mention true to its mandate of public service, they may need to have that extra effort to listen and validate that story before they even begin to state those numbers. A story that may tell them if they are in the right direction or if the numbers they are targeting or the measurements being used may be alienating the very people they are supposed to serve.
Such is the reality that government needs to be aware of. Such is the tyranny of metrics.
Thomas “Tim” Orbos can be reached via e-mail thomas_orbos@sloan.mit.edu.