Reforming policy roles in the Jordanian policy‐making process

• Author: Mohammed Iqbal Al Ajlouny,Shaker A Aladwan,Khaled Qassem Hailat,Ali Rawabdeh,Rami Tbaishat,Samir Al Balas
• Published date: 01 February 2019
• Date: 01 February 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1886

ACADEMIC PAPER

Reforming policy roles in the Jordanian policy‐making process

Rami Tbaishat

1

|Ali Rawabdeh

1

|Khaled Qassem Hailat

2

|Shaker A Aladwan

1

|

Samir Al Balas

1

|Mohammed Iqbal Al Ajlouny

3

1

Department of Public Administration, Faculty

of Economics and Administrative Sciences,

Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan

2

Department of Marketing, Faculty of

Economics and Administrative Sciences,

Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan

3

Department of Business Administration,

Faculty of Business, Al‐zaytoonah University

of Jordan, Irbid, Jordan

Correspondence

Rami Tbaishat, Department of Public

Administration, Faculty of Economics and

Administrative Sciences, Yarmouk University,

Irbid 21163, Jordan.

Email: rami.tbaishat@yu.edu.jo

The aim of this diagnostic analysis is to identify the weaknesses in the process of

reforming policy in Jordan. This study will first present a diagnostic analysis of the

characteristics of administrative reform in Jordan. Following this, weaknesses will be

identified with a focus on policy roles in the policy‐making process. Administrative

reform has long been an area of interest and development in Jordan since the early

1980s. Conferences were held, political and technical committees formed, and exper-

tise and resources invested. The outcomes of these programs have been below

expectations, with inadequate impact. This investigation paid attention on how

Jordan can best invest its resources to maximize efficiency in the public sector, spe-

cifically the process of reforming policy. This study concludes that the primary factor

impacting efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness is the degree of authority at

both national and organizational level. Recent efforts in Jordan to tackle these issues

could create more conflicts that threaten the Jordanian government's stability. Other

resources have been dedicated to reviewing the rules and values that govern the rela-

tionship between state and society.

1|INTRODUCTION

The bureaucratic ethos that emphasizes the importance

of centrally controlled rationality considers one of the

most important characteristics of the political regime

which Jordan has experienced during the last decades

(UNDP Report, 2015). In this context, economic

performance in most cases proved to be less than

adequate for either ensuring self‐sustained development

or, at a minimum, being able to meet the basic

requirements of the populace. In Jordan, the movement

away from the authoritarian past is characterized by

the efforts to maintain or improve the neoliberal

foundations of the economy while opening the political

arena to ensure the participation of a traditionally

marginalized citizenry that demands an equitable and

prompt share of the benefits of economic growth.

Despite the official political structure, it is so clear that the domination

of the executive branch over the judicial and legislative branch of

government is eminent. The extreme centralization of managerial

decision‐making surrounded by the executive branch challenges the

power of attempts at change and, more notably, to retard efforts to

tackle the problems of the government bureaucracy, like that of inef-

ficiency and corruption. Consequently, ministers and Prime ministers

continue their involvement in routine matters at the expense of stra-

tegic issues and are reluctant to send meaningful powers downward.

Researchers noticed that a significant number of senior administrators

have received their jobs through patronage rather than on merit. Their

longevity has conferred on them too much discretionary power and

rendered them ill prepared to handle the responsibilities associated

with decentralization (Amster, 2012).

The shift from government to governance, which involves the

focus of administrative practice, is moving from the bureaucratic

direct governmental form of services to third‐party government as it

has been called lately (Duflo, 2012).

Explicitly, the way we govern is shifting outside governmental

boundaries—the long‐established procedures and institutions of gov-

ernment are developing into less concerned with less centralized to,

which we administrate ourselves (Jacobsen, 2006).

The irresistible challenges in political environment recently, yet,

have created new passageway to self‐searching among practitioners

and thinkers in this field. This rethinking went alongside the subse-

quent lines: Can the old official procedure of government cope with

Received: 19 September 2018 Accepted: 13 October 2018

DOI: 10.1002/pa.1886

J Public Affairs. 2019;19:e1886.

https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1886

© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa 1of10