I.

Case Background

The Engineering Department strives to deliver quality infrastructure and public works projects
that meet the needs of the community. It offers investigation and survey, design, and project
management services, as well as the administration, coordination, supervision, and control of
construction, maintenance, improvement, and repair initiatives. Its aim is to be competitive with
highly urbanized cities by providing excellent engineering services.

This case analysis aims to delve into the strategies that could be employed by the Engineering
Department to address these challenges and achieve their vision of competitiveness among
highly urbanized cities.

II. Statement of the Problem

One of the problems that need urgent attention in the Engineering Department is transparency
and accountability. A lack of transparency can lead to inefficiency and corrupt
practices. Transparency is a tool to increase government accountability to the people, at least in
a democratic setup. The organizational practices of government personnel are central to building
public trust and confidence.

III. SWOT Analysis

Strengths:

 Transparency and accountability practices can help build public trust and confidence in
local government units.

 Transparent decision-making, procurement, and access to public information can

improve the effectiveness and efficiency of local government operations.

Weaknesses:

 Lack of transparency and accountability can lead to corruption, mismanagement, and

inefficiency in local government operations.

 Inadequate transparency and accountability practices can erode public trust and
confidence in local government units.

Opportunities:

 Implementing strong transparency and accountability practices can help local

government units attract investment, foster economic development, and improve the
quality of life for their citizens.

 Transparency and accountability can also help local government units collaborate more
effectively with other stakeholders, including civil society organizations, the private
sector, and other levels of government.

Threats:
  Resistance to change from entrenched interests within local government units can
hinder efforts to improve transparency and accountability.

 Lack of political will or capacity to implement transparency and accountability reforms

can also pose a challenge for local government units.

IV. Alternative Courses of Action

Evaluation Criteria:

1. Level of Compliance with Established Guidelines

2. Quality and Timeliness of Reporting
3. Level knowledge and skill with regards to Transparency and Accountability Practices
4. Level of Public Trust in Local Government Operations

Courses of Actions:

1. Implementing transparency and accountability reforms – This could include measures

such as establishing clear guidelines for decision-making, procurement, and access to
public information, as well as implementing systems for monitoring and reporting on
local government performance.

Advantages:

 Transparency and accountability practices can help build public trust and confidence
in local government units.
 Transparent decision-making, procurement, and access to public information can
improve the effectiveness and efficiency of local government operations.
 Implementing strong transparency and accountability practices can help local
government units attract investment, foster economic development, and improve
the quality of life for their citizens.
 Transparency and accountability can also help local government units collaborate
more effectively with other stakeholders, including civil society organizations, the
private sector, and other levels of government.

Disadvantages:

 Implementing transparency and accountability reforms can be challenging and may

require significant resources, including time, money, and personnel.
 Resistance to change from entrenched interests within local government units can
hinder efforts to improve transparency and accountability.
 Lack of political will or capacity to implement transparency and accountability
reforms can also pose a challenge for local government units.

While implementing transparency and accountability reforms can have significant

benefits for local government units, it is important to carefully consider the potential
challenges and costs associated with these reforms.
 2. Building capacity – This could include providing training and support to help local
government officials understand and apply best practices in transparency and
accountability.

Investing in building the capacity of local government personnel to implement

transparency and accountability practices can have several advantages and
disadvantages:

Advantages:

 Building capacity can help local government personnel understand and apply best
practices in transparency and accountability, which can improve the effectiveness
and efficiency of local government operations.
 Providing training and support to local government officials can help them develop
the knowledge and skills needed to implement transparency and accountability
reforms, which can help build public trust and confidence in local government units.
 Investing in capacity building can also help local government units attract and retain
talented personnel, which can improve the overall performance of the organization.

Disadvantages:

 Building capacity can be resource-intensive, requiring significant investments of

time, money, and personnel.

 There may be resistance to change from some local government personnel, which
can hinder efforts to implement transparency and accountability reforms.

 The effectiveness of capacity building efforts may depend on factors such as the
quality of training programs, the level of support provided to local government
personnel, and the willingness of local government officials to embrace change.

Investing in building the capacity of local government personnel to implement

transparency and accountability practices can have significant benefits, it is important to
carefully consider the potential challenges and costs associated with these efforts.

V. Recommended Alternative and Action Plans

The table below outlines some potential action plans for implementing transparency and
accountability reforms in the engineering department of a local government unit.

Objectives Activities Person-in- Time Budget

charge Frame

Improve Provide training on Upper 6 ₽2,000,000.0

transparency in effective decision- Management of months 0
decision- making processes and the department.
making the importance of
transparency

Increase Provide training on best Engineers 1 year ₽1,500,000.0

 accountability practices in 0
in procurement procurement and the
or importance of
implementation accountability
of Engineering
Department
Projects

Enhance access Develop online Social Media 2 ₽300,000.00

to public platforms for sharing Handler or I.T. months
information public information Expert
through social
media channels

Enhance access Develop a website I.T. Expert 2 ₽1,000,000.0

to public where ongoing and months 0
information completed projects are
through an posted and updated
official website frequently

These action plans activities, time frame, and budget may vary depending on the specific
needs and circumstances of the local government unit.

VI. Conclusion

In conclusion, the revised action plan outlined in the table provides a framework for
implementing transparency and accountability reforms in the engineering department of a
local government unit. By establishing clear guidelines for decision-making, implementing
systems for monitoring and reporting on procurement activities, and developing online
platforms for sharing public information, local government units can improve transparency
and accountability in their operations.

Submitted by:

Engr. Gian Carlo L. Nañasca

Master of Management – Major in Engineering Management

2023400394