Efficiency and Effectiveness – the fifth principle of good administration

Efficiency and Effectiveness – the fifth principle of good administration

Published March 17, 2026

Introduction

The two distinct principles are democratic essentials that cannot be reduced to technical measures alone. Nor should they be understood to represent “drawing board” targets alone.

Efficiency stands for the best use of resources in terms of time, cost and effort, in short: “doing things right”.  Good administration requires improvement of procedures to enable public services to become more accessible to more people.

Effectiveness is the achievement of targeted results, in short: “doing the right things”. 

In practice

The Ombudsman does not manage the public administration.  However, by means of its investigations the Office can help identify systems that fail and can stimulate the public authorities to improve their operations.

By means of his investigations, the Ombudsman can highlight weaknesses, identify systemic problems and recommend improvements. 

Day-to-day 

A public body is effective when it provides services that meet real needs, avoids unnecessary red-tape, acts within a reasonable time, and corrects mistakes when they occur.

Effectiveness is measured on everyday experience: applying for a permit, accessing healthcare, receiving educational support, or obtaining a pension. When processes are clear and staff are responsive, trust grows. When files are misplaced or lost, decisions are delayed, or rules are applied inconsistently, confidence in the administration of public affairs is shaken.

People do notice when public services work well and when they do not. There is effectiveness when public authorities deliver results, use resources wisely, and serve people without unnecessary delay.  

One of the most common issues raised with the Ombudsman concerns delay. Delays are not just inconvenient but can cause burden: a delayed permit can bring business to a halt; a delayed educational decision can affect a child’s development; the delayed payment of a benefit can cause financial hardship.

The Ombudsman consistently stresses that public authorities have a duty to act within a reasonable time. Even when a final decision cannot be made immediately, people are entitled to updates, explanations, and clear timelines. Silence or inaction is not good administration.

Through investigations, the Ombudsman often finds that bad faith is not the cause of delays, but that the source of delays are unclear responsibilities, poor coordination between departments, or outdated procedures. By recommending better internal communication or revision of procedures, the Ombudsman helps authorities become more efficient without compromising legality or fairness.

Learning

An important aspect of effectiveness is the ability of public bodies to learn from mistakes. The Ombudsman encourages public bodies to see complaints as opportunities to improve. When an investigation reveals that a department repeatedly misapplies a rule, the Ombudsman may recommend staff training or more clear internal guidance. When a procedure generates confusion, one could suggest simplifying forms or improving public information. These changes can significantly reduce future complaints and improve service delivery.

Effectiveness is not achieved by rigidly defending existing practices, but by being open to evaluation and reform. A system that listens and adapts becomes more efficient.

Social dimension

Effectiveness has a social dimension. Public services must work not only for those who are confident, well-informed, or persistent, but for everyone—including older persons, people with disabilities, migrants, and those unfamiliar with administrative procedures.

The Ombudsman is there to ensure that vulnerable persons are not placed at a disadvantage. When procedures are inaccessible or too technical, efficiency suffers because people are excluded or forced to seek repeated assistance. Simplifying processes and communicating clearly improves outcomes.

Improvement

Efficient service delivery is fundamental to public trust. When people see that government institutions respond promptly, correct errors, and improve their performance, confidence of the public increases.  Persistent inefficiency makes people cynical by believing that “nothing works” or that complaints are pointless. By offering an independent, accessible avenue for redress, the Ombudsman tries to help break through negative cycles. 

Effectiveness is not achieved overnight. It is built through consistent attention to how decisions are made, how services are delivered, and how institutions respond when things go wrong.

Conclusion

Through its investigations, recommendations, and ongoing dialogue with public authorities, the Ombudsman helps ensure that power is exercised not only lawfully and fairly, but well. In doing so, the Office strengthens the public administration and reinforces a simple but powerful idea: government exists to serve the people, and it must do so effectively.