Author Topic: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development  (Read 923 times)

Albani

  • *
  • Posts: 27
    • Vlerësimi i Ndikimit / Impact Assessment
Dear PFM Boarders,

After a while, in the fire-side conversation we have the honour to have with us John Short.  His journey as an economist started way back in 1970s, with experience all over the world.  I, as I believe all of us PFM Boarders, are pleased to find out that he published a book on Public Finance Management and Development.

A video presenting the book can be found in following link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5V958QrNGs

A sample pdf:

https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.austinmacauley.com/sites/default/files/john_short_applied_economics_public_financial_management_and_development_sample.pdf

Full book:

https://www.austinmacauley.com/book/applied-economics-public-financial-management-and-development

If you are registered with PFM Board, you will have the possibility to post a question to John online.  The focus of this discussion will be central and local government budgeting, tracing the progress of revenue aspects and expenditure allocation overtime from inputs alone to matching those inputs to achieving and measuring service delivery in programmes, as well as assessment instruments that measure public finance management strengths and weaknesses.

Time available to post questions to John is Thurday, 1st to 15th September.  Afater this period the interview will be closed and remain in archive for future references.

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2022, 06:59:47 GMT »
Dear John,

QUESTION 1

I have two questions  on the revenue side.
1. How have you seen Domestic Revenue Mobilization policies developing over the course of your career?
2. Currently there is a lot of attention of tax expenditures and their gradual removal. Can this be a stand-alone tax policy or does it need to be coupled with other interventions on policy rates?
In relation to a specific tax expenditure, VAT exemption for donor-funded projects, what is your view? Isn’t  that  double standard from the same donors recommending the phasing out of tax expenditures?

Cheers, Mauro

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2022, 12:34:17 GMT »
Mauro

Thanks for the questions.

ANSWER TO QUESTION 1

1.   How have you seen Domestic Revenue Mobilisation policies developing over the course of your career?
It is important to specify Domestic Revenue Mobilisation (DRM) here and what contributes to it!
There are at least three broad elements which will impact on DRM: 1. policy that impacts on Tax Administration, 2. tax policy itself – type of tax and tax rates and 3 policy related to the drivers of tax revenues which can be simplistically be GDP and its composition.

•   Improvements in Admin have been significant
o   Creation of Revenue Administration with focus on professionalism of staff and management structures geared to delivery of collection revenues.
o   Tax payer education risk assessment and audit. TINs etc reducing tax avoidance. Appeals process.
o   IT development and adoption has contributed greatly.  Take ASYCUDA as an example where initially it was pretty redundant but now used extensively and efficiently
o   PEFA scores on tax administration have shown real improvements (Page 224) and I am confident that this will be over all PEFAs (using all in the PEFA sense!) There is an Issue on arrears – keeping uncollectable taxes remaining on the books can give wrong signal – cleaning up the balance sheet to remove bankrupt companies would help. Also the discussion on pages 156 t0 171.
•   Tax policies have changed – a move from trade taxes to VAT has been a feature since the 1990s. Competitive corporate taxes and reform of PIT have lead to more growth orientated policies that increase revenues. 

Specific tax policies will be more aligned to a country’s politics and resource endowment whereas tax administration will tend to have a common theme as summarised above

•   Ultimately growth in GDP important but it has to be monetised GDP. Pages 44 to 49 discuss this.  How economic policies are developed will again reflect a country’s politics particularly relating to the state and the private sector.  Chapter 7 addresses this in relation to countries in the 1990s but would appear to be less of an issue now or maybe in the countries that I have worked recently this has not been a notable concern

2.   Currently there is a lot of attention of tax expenditures and their gradual removal. Can this be a stand-alone tax policy or does it need to be coupled with other interventions on policy rates?
What are tax expenditures?  The NAO report referenced in Chapter 8 defines “two broad categories of tax reliefs: structural tax reliefs that are largely integral parts of the tax system and define the scope and structure of tax (such as the personal tax allowance); and non-structural tax reliefs where government opts not to collect tax to pursue social or economic objectives (such as relief on contributions to pension schemes). Non-structural tax reliefs are often referred to as ‘tax expenditures’ and we use this description in this report”.
•   The first issue in relation to your question is why tax expenditure in the first place?  What is it trying to achieve and is it measured? I am not sure if those questions are fully addressed.
I think that tax expenditures have to be seen in the context of actual expenditure policy, and not just as a standalone.  Would it be better to provide directly focused subsidies in the context of sectors strategies? Should there be a focus on simplified tax structure and use expenditure to deliver services?  Nevertheless there are areas that tax expenditures may be a better option particulate in nudging consumer behaviour such as in getting investment in green energy and electric cars.
 My PEFA experience suggests that tax expenditures may a bit of an afterthought – it only gets a mention as an additional element Quantification of Tax Expenditures in PI-6 Budget Documentation.  Yet it could have a bigger role in Pi-16.3 Alignment of sector plans and medium term budgets.  Certainly in the Climate Change PEFAs tax expenditures should be important in promoting climate change.  I did a review of the literature for Chapter 8 and I think tax expenditure may be considered as an easy policy option without too much consideration of targeted expenditure alternatives and the cost of tax expenditures!

In relation to specific tax expenditure, VAT exemption for donor-funded projects, what is your view? Isn’t that double standard from the same donors recommending the phasing out of tax expenditures?

My answer would be based on two considerations. 

Firstly are these discretionary or automatic?  If discretionary they may place an unnecessary administrative burden on a recipient country.  If they are automatic I am not sure if it should be an issue.  It may be possible that the donor may reduce its spend to take account of VAT paid (as it may have a fixed budget) or may ask for the VAT to be the recipient country’s contribution to the project.  In the end the net effect may be zero! 

I am not sure if these donor exemptions can be considered tax expenditures given the definition above.  I would be much more concerned about duty free imports where domestic producers would be disadvantaged in competing for the donor’s potential purchases.

To end I would like to pay tribute to Richard Bird who sadly passed away last year.  I had the privilege of meeting him in Belarus while both of us were on mission way back in 1993 and I learnt so much from him over a beer or more.

Richard Bird - Remembering a Canadian Taxation Giant | Tax at Osgoode Hall Law School (yorku.ca)
Richard M. Bird (1938-2021) (utoronto.ca)

https://www.bing.com/search?q=richard+bird+economist&qs=NWU&pq=richard+bird+economist&sc=9-22&cvid=0DA92F2699F34FB39498EF0B871A01D1&FORM=QBRE&sp=1
https://www.ictd.ac/news/remembrance-professor-richard-bird/
« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 07:59:11 GMT by Napodano »

LashaGotsiridze

  • Posts: 1
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2022, 17:07:57 GMT »
Dear John,

QUESTION 2

Couple of questions from my side (reg PEFA):
1) There are countries where Supreme Audit does not have enough power/leverages to ensure audit recommendations are implemented timely. Despite SA weakness, SA may do its best and follow up on implementation status. but still, recommendations implementation rate will not be high. Therefore it may affect SA's score - PI30.3. What do you recommend to PEFA assessor in such cases?
2) Another case: Formula based equalization grant system to subnational governments was changed by granting VAT share to municipalities. Although fiscally there for zero effect, legally transfers are reduced and municipal own revenues are increased. Because of formula based transfers are reduced (legally), transfers volume and structure (formula based/discretionally) is changed. Accordingly, it may affect PI 7. What do you recommend to assessor?

Thanks in advance,
« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 07:58:04 GMT by Napodano »

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2022, 17:47:41 GMT »

ANSWER TO QUESTION 2

PEFA Secretariat would be the arbitrators on these!
On 1 it is difficult to blame the SAO if the entity does not implement the recommendations.  First of all, has the SAO made recommendations and communicated and discussed these with the entity?  All the SAO can do is that it ensures that it follows up and is in constant contact.  This can be done through a formal letter requesting an action/implementation plan and periodic reports on how recommendations are being addressed.  It may take some time for recommendations to be implemented and time should be a factor in this.
You can take a horse to the water but you can’t make it drink!

On 2 follow the arithmetic re the share of rules based transfers as a share of total grants received as this will determine the score! 
If the VAT is just the VAT collected in the municipality then it is not an equalization grant. The tax is being collected by the Revenue Authority on behalf of the municipality.  But if all national VAT or even a percentage of the VAT is being distributed to municipalities based on a formulae then it can be treated as grant (whether equalization or not).  If it reduces the total revenue available to the municipalities then the new system may be too reliant on VAT collection rather the previous system. But perhaps it was designed to encourage municipalities to collect more own revenue to make up the shortfall or maybe VAT is not as resilient as first thought.   COVID may have an impact on VAT revenues so it may be too early to assess the full impact of the new system.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 08:00:49 GMT by Napodano »

harnett

  • *****
  • Posts: 203
    • REPIM
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2022, 07:44:50 GMT »
Hi John

QUESTION 3

My question:  The globalisation of the world's economies has not been accompanied by a globalisation of the world's taxation system (the recent agreement on 15% minimum corporation tax by most countries being a rare exception).  Can you see a way forward to strengthen international taxation/charges?  I ask particularly as we have international "bads" such as fossil fuel extraction, deep sea trawling, sea bed mining (proposed), deforestation etc. which are not being disincentivised.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 08:02:21 GMT by Napodano »

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #6 on: September 03, 2022, 16:11:43 GMT »

ANSWER TO QUESTION 3

Paul

Given the time taken to get that agreement on Corporation Tax I would not be too optimistic.  Add to the that, the inability to get the planned/expected consensus on climate change issues on the Glasgow COP I would be ever more pessimistic.  And that does not take into account tensions between the US and China and all the others linked to the Russian war in Ukraine. At best individual countries might take action where these can be linked to their geographical sovereignty if the political consensus recognises the issues, and of course there is that entity called the EC (remember that!) which may be able to generate some collective action.  In other words, the conditions for international agreement are not there.

 I suppose the more the Climate Change PEFA gets rolled out the more there may be awareness of the linkages between the “bads” as you call time and the overall PFM system.  PEFA in general has been rolled out extensively, but not in probably the more "bads" countries. But The Climate Change PEFAs may be only scratching at the surface but may raise awareness.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 16:22:49 GMT by Napodano »

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #7 on: September 03, 2022, 16:41:32 GMT »
QUESTION 4

John,

Recently Srinivas Gurazada, Head of the PEFA Secretariat, made an interesting point about the difference between allocative efficiency and technical efficiency. We all know about the importance of allocative efficiency when deciding priorities on expenditure allocations during MTBP and budget processes.

My question is on your views of how applying technical efficiency, a private sector concept, to PFM assessments. This in relation to both individual investment expenditures and more in general to expenditure prioritization. Are we talking about two separate worlds or techniacl efficiency should be better consider in PFM when doing planning, monitoring and assessment in Government?

Thank you, Mauro

PS: Srini, if you read this, can you please post the link of your video in relation to technical efficiency? I cannot find it.



« Last Edit: September 03, 2022, 16:44:08 GMT by Napodano »

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #8 on: September 04, 2022, 07:58:00 GMT »

ANSWER TO QUESTION 4

Mauro
I have not heard the podcast.  Technical efficiency should apply to both the private and public sectors.  That would be the basis of looking at alternative ways of delivering a service or outputs.  But the costs of the technical inputs must be a factor – otherwise there is not really the possibility to compare different alternatives in a cost benefit analysis.  In the PFM system there may be different technical ways of doing something – say keeping accounts – using handwritten ledgers then progressing to excel/databases and on to the IT driven TSA/IFMIS etc.  Here the technical efficiency will be so great that the alternatives would not even be considered.  This would apply to revenue service management as well.  If I look at the PFM IT system in Georgia (where I write this from) the application of IT in government record keeping has released government officials from very mundane bookkeeping to more productive work in both the public and private sectors as the numbers needed to keep the records are less.  And there are significantly different skills which the bookkeepers will have acquired. This delivers data in real time which is a significant boon to decision making. This would be an example of technical efficiency in PFM where input cost compared to alternatives would unlikely be a factor even if the capital cost is much greater. But I cannot see how technical efficiency would not be a factor in decision-making in the public sector.  There is a difference in the systems in place now and what the alternatives may be if they are changed.  But costs and benefits which would include technical efficiencies as they cannot be ignored and have to be part of the CBA.

Re podcasts I am a bit of a dinosaur here.  I don’t think I have listened to one. Perhaps I should learn to use them when on my exercise bike instead of listening to the news or music on the radio. But only if they are useful podcasts. There would be little of no additional cost, and I may get more outputs for my input. Or when walking.  However, if I cannot hear an approaching lorry on a country road there is a danger of getting run down.  So the alternative cost benefit should be considered in all these examples!
« Last Edit: September 04, 2022, 09:31:15 GMT by Napodano »

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #9 on: September 04, 2022, 09:20:17 GMT »
The discussion in https://pfmboard.com/index.php?topic=9160.msg31672#new would be an example of initial technical efficiency would lead to considerable savings and allocative efficacy in carrying out research on impact analysis.

Albani

  • *
  • Posts: 27
    • Vlerësimi i Ndikimit / Impact Assessment
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2022, 06:56:43 GMT »
Hi John,

QUESTION 5


1.  Last 3 years we have been faced with extraordinary situation (COVID-19, energy crisis) and associated uncertainties.  Due to this situation, governments were forced to intervene with direct support by using ad-hoc decisions.  Considering this, where do you see the future of Medium Term Budget Planning, and do you think current practices should become a normality?
2. From your experience, what's the impact on the development process for countries that move from line-item budgeting to programme budgeting?
« Last Edit: September 05, 2022, 16:14:43 GMT by Napodano »

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2022, 11:22:44 GMT »
RESPONSES TO QUESTION 5

Alban,

Q1. Paradoxically I think it strengthens the case for Medium-Term Budget Planning (MTBP).  Typically, MTBP is made up of a fiscal table which looks at revenue projections and rolling over of existing policies and what that would mean for borrowing which may be constrained by fiscal rules.  Estimated fiscal space would indicate if new policies and /or improvement in standards are possible. Rolling over of existing policies would determine what is being delivered in terms of services such as education in but also pensions.  Such services as education have to be planned in the medium term.  Provision for pandemics, climate change etc. are “usually” paid for from contingency but if these are thought to be more of a frequent but unplanned event either the contingency has to be increased or there is sufficient fiscal space from increasing revenues and/or borrowing.  This may require more prudent annual/medium-term commitments and also use of a supplementary budget to deal with these in-year adjustments.  Indeed, in the case of likely but unpredictable in the short-term climate change that may happen in the medium term, contingency provisions for such events may be best to be accumulated (when unspent) so that when disasters do occur there is some funding in place to deal with the emergencies. 

Recent events were generally paid by increased borrowing but that may not be sustainable in the medium to long term. But it is difficult to see how core services such as education could be cut if a country is to progress.  So, in that context MTBP is essential so that these core services are planned and delivered over the medium term and are the basis of expenditure projections.  It may be that non-core services may have to be cut to make way for increased contingency or greater fiscal space.  Configuring core services becomes a challenge.  Ultimately it will be a political decision and often politicians have short term vision!

Q2 The focus of line-item budgeting is on input costs and their control.  Programme budgeting adds a further dimension to it but the line-item element is still there.  The main difference (simplistically!) is that programme budgeting should focus on delivery of services measured by outputs/objectives/outcomes – the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) and assigning the inputs (the Line Items) to achieve them.  There is nothing to stop KPIs being assigned to administrations (the other classification item) but generally programmes are considered to be more amenable for that purpose. 

Most of the countries that I have been involved in over the past few years have successfully implemented programme budgeting.  A key element of this has been the development of appropriate IT and software.  However, at the times too many KPIs may have been specified for programmes that complicate things and in some cases country wide KPIs are not specified for common local authority services that make intra country comparisons of the same service not possible.  The development and roll out of programme budgeting is not an overnight event. Generally speaking, those countries that have done this successfully have been able to focus expenditure on better delivery of key services and ultimately economic development even though fine-tuning is required.

« Last Edit: September 05, 2022, 16:15:18 GMT by Napodano »

harnett

  • *****
  • Posts: 203
    • REPIM
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2022, 17:06:59 GMT »

MORE ON QUESTION 3

Regarding question 3, there is a small scale (so far) agreement between some countries to limit oil and gas - BOGA - https://beyondoilandgasalliance.com/
A friend of mine in the Irish NGO - Feasta - is currently writing a paper on how the alliance can be expanded - the EU being a key target!
« Last Edit: September 08, 2022, 08:24:56 GMT by Napodano »

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #13 on: September 08, 2022, 10:56:56 GMT »

QUESTION 6

John,

My career in consulting is just a bit shorter than yours.

When I started in development there were projects, budget inputs and activities.
Now it is normal to talk about costed strategies, programmes and budget performance.

Yet I see a plateau in the PFM reform process, recently. The next big thing appears to be the extension of accrual accounting to developing and transition countries.
What is your take on the above and what you see in the future for the PFM reform?

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #14 on: September 08, 2022, 13:40:09 GMT »
ADDENDUM to QUESTION 6

I forgot to mention the analysis of fiscal risks in particular those of SoE's but this is more a current development in PFM than something for the future.


John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #15 on: September 08, 2022, 14:12:44 GMT »
Re QUESTION 6
Mauro
The important issue is getting the basics right and the sequencing right.  You list the progression but often there is a jump in the progression before steps have been taken. Take accrual accounting, there is lot to be done on cash management etc. and getting the basic financial statement sorted even on a cash basis.  Then modified, then full.  But is the architecture in place?  What about the state of physical asset registers? PEFA scores are low relative to other aspects of PFM.  A lot of work may well be needed there.  And you are right about SOEs but also fiscal risk – pandemic and climate changes are focusing attention there!   But countries are different and at different stages of progression so there should be lots to do!

If you are asking me to have a crystal ball, then capacity building in PFM may well be an area that could be addressed.  I don’t think PFM gets enough coverage in economic courses, and, of course, in all countries there is a need to expand experience in PFM.   

A short Short answer!

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #16 on: September 08, 2022, 15:31:41 GMT »
on with QUESTION 6

Thanks a lot, John.

'Getting the sequence right' is often challenged nowadays by 'seizing the moment'. You may remember the PFM platforms (see attachment).
I have seen some countries and some donors 'seizing the moment' and make PFM leaps through stages. Results were, mostly, mixed.


John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #17 on: September 08, 2022, 16:46:30 GMT »

On with QUESTION 6

Mauro

Also, Jack Diamond's paper on sequencing which has been discussed on the PFM Board in https://pfmboard.com/index.php?topic=6478.msg19620#msg19620 and is referenced Page 86 of that book.  The Conversation with Marc Robinson is worth reading for those not familiar with it and rereading for those that may have read it. Indeed, the Fireplaces are all worthy of reflection!

« Last Edit: September 08, 2022, 18:01:12 GMT by Napodano »

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2022, 13:15:21 GMT »

QUESTION 7

More than a question, I want to share the IMF proposal on Reforming the EU Fiscal Framework: Strengthening the Fiscal Rules and Institutions' (https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Departmental-Papers-Policy-Papers/Issues/2022/08/31/Reforming-the-EU-Fiscal-Framework-Strengthening-the-Fiscal-Rules-and-Institutions-The-EUs-518388 )

QUOTE
------
The IMF’s proposal has three interconnected pillars:

Risk-based EU-level fiscal rules: While the current 3 percent deficit and 60 percent debt reference values remain, the speed and ambition of fiscal adjustments would be linked to the degree of fiscal risks. These are identified by debt sustainability analysis using a common methodology, developed by a new and independent European Fiscal Council, or EFC, in consultation with other key stakeholders. Countries with greater fiscal risks would need to converge to a zero or positive overall fiscal balance over the next three to five years. Countries with lower fiscal risks and debt below 60 percent would have more flexibility but still need to consider risks in their plans. The framework would incentivize buildup of fiscal buffers allowing for significant flexibility to respond to adverse shocks and conduct countercyclical policy.

Strengthened national fiscal insti­tutions: All EU countries would have to enact medium-term fiscal frameworks and set multi-year annual spending caps consistent with their overall balance anchor over the period. Independent national fiscal councils would play a stronger role to strengthen checks and balances at the country level, including making or endorsing macroeconomic projections, assessing fiscal risks, and ensuring the consistency of the expenditure ceilings and fiscal plans. The European Commission would continue to play its key surveil­lance role and the EFC would serve as the central node for a network of national fiscal councils, helping to promote good practices and providing an independent voice both on debt risks and the execution of the framework.

A well-designed EU fiscal capacity: This would be established to achieve two key roles: improving macroeconomic stabilization, especially when monetary policy is operating at the effective lower bound, and allowing the provision of common public goods at the EU level, such as climate change and energy security infrastructure. Delivering these has become more urgent due to the green transition and common security concerns. A dedicated climate investment fund is an important part of the proposal.
--------
UNQUOTE

John, the establishment of Fiscal Councils is not new. Their coordination at EU level is and sounds a wise step towards a slow process of fiscal policy convergence. What is you take on it?

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #19 on: September 11, 2022, 05:33:53 GMT »
Response to Post on Fiscal Rule/question7.

Mauro
The PFM system is underpinned by a fiscal table which should have sustainability rules. Reading the article, I was struck by Figure 2 Euro Areas Fiscal Aggregates and Reference Values (Percentage of violation incidents), Figure 6 EU fiscal Governance: Key reform areas and Table 3 Comparisons of Fiscal Councils. While sound in concept I wonder of the practicality of “persuading” certain members to toe the fiscal rule line even if it is in their fiscal interest particularly within the added constraints of the euro.  The clash between politics and sound policy might be too great!

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #20 on: September 13, 2022, 13:28:55 GMT »
QUESTION 8

John,

We have entered the last week of our conversation. Let's have a bit of fun!

Which are the professional and personal characteristics, in your opinion, that make a PFM expert apart from the pack of development consultants?


John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #21 on: September 13, 2022, 18:14:23 GMT »
Response to QUESTION 8

Fun! What’s that? PFM life is far too serious!  Or maybe not!
 
So here goes in the spirit of your question and given the width of PFM as the book tries to show.

There are a few positive things: be a team player – which includes everyone involved in the project/consultancy.  As consultants we work generally with a Ministry of Finance who is the client – not the other way round.  Be able to work to tight deadlines under pressure.  Show respect and listen but there is a need to be knowledgeable!  But don’t fob people off if you don’t really know the answer.  You can point them in the right direction by searching for it.  So have humility. Don't be an expert, it is a term I dislike!

Be sociable and respect the local culture – in Georgia that may involve toasts (not the burnt bread) type. Be able to talk about non-PFM things – in my case sport and particularly rugby.  In your case obscure Jazz!  Page 231 gives a good, even a great, example.  Some of our colleagues had good taste (and skills) for Karaoke!  Stamina is good!

All of the above means be resilient, in more ways than one!

And a few nots: Don’t be preachy. Don’t be aloof. 

And above all: be a team player.

Whether all of that distinguishes the PFM from the rest I am not sure to be fair.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2022, 18:25:08 GMT by John Short »

Napodano

  • *****
  • Posts: 676
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2022, 07:01:16 GMT »

MORE ON QUESTION 8

Let me add

- Strong analytical thinking,
- Capacity to absorb and filter a lot of financial data and info,
- Understanding that the PFM reform cannot be a linear process. Talking about Georgia, I felt the Government got in a bad deal when they agreed to link several specific conditions in the EU Budget Support contract to the PEFA scores!

« Last Edit: September 14, 2022, 07:06:32 GMT by Napodano »

Albani

  • *
  • Posts: 27
    • Vlerësimi i Ndikimit / Impact Assessment
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #23 on: September 15, 2022, 14:09:06 GMT »
As announced in the beginning, the time has come to close our conversation with John Short based on his just-published book Public Finance Management and Development. 

The topic will be locked and archived for reading only, as of tomorrow.

Dear John,

On behalf of all PFM Boards let me thank you for sharing your time to share your insights and discuss with us on PFM and Development. I would like to invite you to provide a closing post before the conversation is locked. 

All the best,

Albani

John Short

  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Conversation with John Short on lessons learned in PFM and Development
« Reply #24 on: September 15, 2022, 14:55:34 GMT »
just a big or even a Short thank you to all who have contributed to the conversation and those who have read it, even if being silent or though gritted teeth.  The PFM Board, in my opinion, provides an opportunity for all PFM practitioners to share with others their experiences and insights without the confines of the more institutional Blogs.  The PFM Community should use it in that spirit!

Thank you to Alban for managing the conversation and asking a pertinent question, and also to Lasha, Paul and Mauro.  I hope I met your expectations...a rhetorical question to finish!


John

 

RSS | Mobile

© 2002-2022 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF