the uphill journey of professionalism in government: beyond stereotypes and office politics

When it comes to public perception, government employees often find themselves burdened with unfair stereotypes. The image of slow, overly bureaucratic workers more preoccupied with office politics than performance enhancement has long been stuck in the public imagination. In contrast, the private sector is often praised for being more dynamic, efficient, and performance-driven. But is this comparison trully fair? Let’s take a closer, more balanced look.

Private vs. Public Sector: Which Private Are We Talking About?

A common misconception is to compare government employees directly with those in the private sector without recognizing the different layers within both. The private sector is not monolithic — it includes multinational corporations, digital startups, family businesses, and small enterprises. Each comes with its own unique work culture, ethical standards, and career systems.

Similarly, the public sector consists of government ministries, local agencies, frontline service providers, and national strategic institutions. It’s neither accurate nor fair to generalize the entire public workforce based on a few underperforming individuals.

Office Politics: A Reality That Needs to Be Managed

One of the biggest challenges to maintaining professionalism in government is the prevalence of office politics. Career decisions like promotions, transfers, or strategic assignments are sometimes influenced by personal alliances rather than pure merit. This risks discouraging dedicated, high-performing, and ethical civil servants.

However, politics within bureaucracy doesn’t have to be eradicated — positions of leadership inevitably involve trust and alignment. The key is ensuring that these elements are managed transparently and don’t undermine a healthy, merit-based career system.

Strategies to Protect and Empower High-Performing Public Servants

To create a healthier, more professional public service environment, here are several actionable strategies:

1. Strengthen the Merit System and Transparency
   Career progression should be based on objective, data-driven performance indicators — not favoritism or proximity to power.

2. Meaningful and Fair Reward Systems
   In addition to performance-based financial incentives, non-monetary recognition such as public acknowledgment, opportunities for international exposure, and access to strategic projects can be highly motivating.

3. Career Protection for Integrity-Driven Employees
   Establish independent units or committees within agencies tasked with monitoring, protecting, and advocating for high-performing employees who may be targeted by political maneuvering.

4. Mood Management and Mental Well-Being Programs
   Psychological well-being matters. Countries like Canada and New Zealand implement mental health and employee assistance programs within public institutions to keep their workforce motivated and supported.

5. Healthy Job Rotation Practices
   Rotating positions based on organizational needs and personal development, rather than politics, prevents the concentration of power and broadens employees’ competencies. Japan, for example, uses structured job rotations to develop versatile and balanced government leaders.

Learning from International Practices

Several advanced nations embrace what can be called Protected Professionalism — safeguarding government employees from political interference as long as they uphold professional and ethical standards.

South Korea has excelled in managing public careers through open recruitment for strategic positions and a well-defined competency-based career path. Singapore bases promotions on measurable achievements, offering top performers overseas training and leadership programs, regardless of their political affiliations.

Relevant Theories to Support Implementation

Some modern management theories can be effectively applied to government institutions:

• Merit System Theory (Goodnow, 1887) — positions should be earned based on ability, not personal connections.

• Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964) — People are motivated when they believe their effort will lead to desired outcomes.

• Public Service Motivation (Perry & Wise, 1990) — public servants are driven not only by material incentives but by a genuine desire to serve society.

• Organizational Justice (Greenberg, 1987) — ensuring procedural, distributive, and interactional fairness strengthens employee trust in institutions.

Closing Thoughts

The road to professionalism in government is steep and winding. Negative public perceptions, internal politics, and performance challenges remain persistent hurdles. But these aren’t insurmountable.

With a consistent merit-based career system, fair reward structures, protections for ethical employees, and lessons drawn from successful international models, we can reshape public institutions into professional, respectable, and high-performing organizations.

It’s time to break the stigma. Behind those office doors, countless public servants are working diligently, quietly, and honestly for the greater good.