Reducing Red Tape

A facilitation and management manual

February 2010, Version 2

This is the author’s final draft of manual version 2. The final version will be published after a
consultation process with a number of development practitioners and layouting. It will be available
from www.led.co.za, www.businessenvironment.org, and www.mesopartner.com from April 2010
onwards.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 South Africa Licence.

You are free:

• to copy, distribute, display and present this document

• to make derivative works
• to make commercial use of the work

under the following conditions:

• Attribution. You must attribute the work to GTZ and mesopartner.

• Share Alike. If you alter, transform or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting
work only under a license identical to this one.
• For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.
• Any of these conditions can be waived if you obtain permission from GTZ and mesopartner.
• Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected by the above.

See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/za/ for details.

The authors can be contacted at:

- Mattia Wegmann (Mattia.wegmann@gtz.de)

- Shawn Cunningham (sc@mesopartner.com)

2
Table of Contents

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 5

List of tables ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 6
Chapter 1 The Foundation of Red Tape Reduction ............................................................................. 7
1.1 What is meant by red tape?.................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Three main kinds of red tape .................................................................................................. 7
1.2.1 Red tape caused by rules and regulations ...................................................................... 9
1.2.2 Red tape caused by inefficient procedures and administrative systems ..................... 10
1.2.3 Red tape caused by poor communication and information exchange ......................... 11
1.3 Approaching red tape from different perspectives .............................................................. 13
1.4 The rationale for reducing red tape ...................................................................................... 15
1.4.1 Addressing red tape to save costs ................................................................................ 16
1.4.2 Addressing red tape to improve the use of services and service delivery ................... 16
1.5 Important considerations when addressing red tape .......................................................... 17
Chapter 2 Diagnosing and addressing a specific Red Tape issue....................................................... 21
2.1 Problem identification, description and exploration ............................................................ 23
2.1.1 Determine the scope and description of the red tape issue: what is the matter? ....... 23
2.1.2 Identifying the symptoms and causes of red tape........................................................ 23
2.2 Diagnosis, analysis and identification of potential solutions ................................................ 25
2.2.1 Using a cause and effect diagram to diagnose a red tape issue ................................... 25
2.2.2 Mapping procedures and interfaces ............................................................................. 27
2.2.3 Detailed mapping of problem analysis and potential intervention points ................... 28
2.2.4 Using blueprinting to diagnose and design service and communication interfaces .... 29
2.2.5 Analysing red tape issues resulting from rules, regulations and policies ..................... 32
2.3 Designing interventions and solutions.................................................................................. 33
2.4 Tools not discussed in this manual ....................................................................................... 34
2.5 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 35
Chapter 3 The Red Tape Reduction Programme ............................................................................... 36
3.1 The programme cycle in a nutshell ....................................................................................... 36
3.2 The management system ...................................................................................................... 37
3.3 Managing the four phases of the Programme Cycle ............................................................ 41

3
 3.3.1 Scoping Phase ............................................................................................................... 41
3.3.2 Assessment Phase ......................................................................................................... 47
3.3.3 Implementation Phase .................................................................................................. 52
3.3.4 Evaluation Phase ........................................................................................................... 55
3.4 Understanding organisational development and change aspects of red tape reduction .... 57
Chapter 4 Additional tools, worksheets and templates .................................................................... 61
4.1 Cheat sheet to disentangle red tape fast.............................................................................. 61
4.2 Cause and effect template .................................................................................................... 62
4.3 Service blueprint template ................................................................................................... 63
4.4 Red tape reduction cycle template ....................................................................................... 64
4.5 Management system template ............................................................................................. 65
4.6 Parameter matrix template .................................................................................................. 66
4.7 Template to conceptualise management system elements ................................................. 67
4.8 Tool 1: Rainbow stakeholder mapping ................................................................................. 68
4.9 Tool 2: Public private dialogue analysis ................................................................................ 69
4.10 Tool 3: Organisational profile ............................................................................................... 70
4.11 Tool 4: Municipal and business interviews ........................................................................... 71
4.12 Tool 5: Hypothesis workshop ................................................................................................ 73
4.13 Tool 6: Check list for diagnosis workshops ........................................................................... 74
4.14 Tool 7: Health Check for change processes .......................................................................... 75
Source list and additional reading ........................................................................................................ 78

4
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Three main kinds of red tape ................................................................................................ 8
Figure 1.2: Factors influenced by local government on service delivery and the business environment
.............................................................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 2.1: Flow diagram for the diagnosis of a red tape issue ............................................................ 22
Figure 2.2: An example of a fishbone or Ishikawa diagram .................................................................. 26
Figure 2.3: Example of a simple flow diagram ...................................................................................... 28
Figure 2.4: Most commonly used flow diagram symbols ..................................................................... 29
Figure 2.5: An example of a service blueprint for an hotel .................................................................. 30
Figure 3.1: The red tape reduction programme cycle .......................................................................... 36
Figure 3.2: A checklist for the red tape reduction management system ............................................. 38
Figure 3.3: Selected parameters defining the management system .................................................... 39
Figure 3.4 Rules, regulations, procedures and systems span several levels of government................ 41
Figure 3.5: Example of contractual parties ........................................................................................... 45
Figure 3.6: The Compass of Local Competitiveness .............................................................................. 51
Figure 3.7: Evaluating the RTR Programme .......................................................................................... 56
Figure 3.8 The change process .............................................................................................................. 59

List of tables
Table 2.1: Example of the scoring process for interventions ............................................................... 33
Table 3.1: The symptoms of ineffective management systems ........................................................... 40
Table 3.2: Exemplary M&E system for an RTR programme .................................................................. 48

5
Introduction

Legal and official documents in Britain have been bound with red tape since the 17th century. This
tradition is the origin of the term, which refers to fussy or unnecessary bureaucracy. The media,
politicians, business and ordinary people use it to refer to –tedious rules and regulations involving
long queues, endless paperwork, lengthy procedures and onerous legal requirements. Red tape
hampers performance. Rules and regulations, procedures and systems, and service interfaces lead to
costs and frustrations on a personal level, inefficiencies and ineffectiveness on an organisational
level, and considerable losses in national economic output.

Governments all over world are embarking on programmes to reduce red tape and improve public
services and the environment to do business. The topic has become an important aspect of the
international discourse on governance and private sector development. In South Africa, reducing the
regulatory cost of doing business is high on the government agenda. Several departments have been
driving an initiative specifically to reduce red tape on the local government sphere to improve
service delivery and foster economic development.

This manual addresses local government officials and development facilitators tasked to reduce red
tape. Building on existing knowledge of local governance and local economic development, the
manual provides the theoretical background as well as practical steps on how to embark on a red
tape reduction exercise in a local municipality.

The foundations of red tape, the different types, and the two main perspectives on red tape are
discussed in Chapter 1. The rest of the manual will assume that the reader has read this first chapter.
Chapter 2 examines the diagnosis of and solutions to an issue of red tape, providing a practical
approach to design interventions that create smart solutions to red tape. Chapter 3 describes a
programmatic approach to red tape reduction, addressing the entire service delivery system or
business environment of a locality. Chapter 4 then provides worksheets and templates that are
frequently needed in the reduction of red tape.

The Department of Provincial and Local Government (the dplg) and the German Technical
Cooperation (GTZ) published a first manual in 2006 titled “The dplg, GTZ: Red Tape Reduction to
Improve the Business Climate, Facilitator’s Manual”(GTZ & the DPLG, 2006). Version 2.0 of this
manual builds extensively on Version 1.1, but includes new theoretical insights as well as
experiences gained from practical fieldwork.

We hope that you will enjoy this manual and that it will provide useful guidance in the reduction of
red tape. We encourage you to share your ideas, experiences and approaches with us and other
development practitioners.

6
Chapter 1 The Foundation of Red Tape Reduction
Red tape is a characteristic of all kinds of organizations. Whether it is a civic body, a business
membership organization, local government or a school, red tape emerges as an organization grows,
changes and evolves. Red tape affects the performance of these organisations, with severe impacts
on individual performance and the levels of innovation, dynamism and growth of the economy. This
chapter looks at the foundations of red tape. It discusses what red tape is, what different kinds of
red tape there are, what perspectives one can take, as well as why to address the issue of red tape
at all and what to consider in the process.

1.1 What is meant by red tape?

Red tape is defined as rules and regulations,

administrative and management procedures and
systems, which are not, or are no longer, effective in Red tape is a term that describes
achieving their intended objectives, and which
regulations and rules,
therefore produce sub-optimal and undesired social
administrative procedures and
outcomes.
systems, which are not effective in
In many cases, a perfectly sensible bureaucratic achieving their intended objectives.
procedure can become clumsy through poor interfaces Red tape therefore produces sub-
between people, or through poor communication on optimal and undesired social
how the process works. Streamlining procedures and outcomes.
increasing the service orientation of administrative
personnel can therefore play an important role in
reducing inefficiency and thus reducing costs.

Red tape shows up in and between all kinds of organisations, such as the different spheres of
government, in the private sector and in civil society. Although much red tape is created elsewhere
in the economic and social system, we specifically focus on red tape that occurs at the local
governance sphere, or that shows up in the area of sector or value chains.

1.2 Three main kinds of red tape

Within the definition given above in Section 1.1, three kinds of red tape can be identified within or
between organisations:

1. Red tape which is created by rules and regulations that are designed to achieve a
specific policy objective and that are thus policy related.
2. Red tape which is created by procedures and systems that do not function in an efficient
and effective way due to administrative and management issues.

Most red tape issues can be classified within these two broad categories which exist within or
between organisations.

7
Furthermore, whenever an organisational unit interacts with stakeholders, inefficiencies in
communication and knowledge or information transfer may occur. These information and
communication failures are a third kind of red tape which emerges between stakeholders:

3 Red tape which is created when stakeholders from different sub-systems exchange
information or interact.

The interfaces between stakeholders include human and technology interfaces, customer service
and transparency. In highly departmentalised organisations, this third kind of red tape may also be
an issue between internal units.

In Figure 1.1 the three kinds of red tape are illustrated, with the overlaps between the different
kinds of red tape shown.

Figure 1.1: Three main kinds of red tape

Rules and regulations that Inefficient procedures

are designed to but do and systems that are
not achieve a certain related to administrative
policy goal management

Inefficiencies in the communication and

information exchange within and
between organisations and external
stakeholders

Each category of red tape has distinct symptoms and, more importantly, responds to different
approaches of analysis and intervention. In many instances where there are symptoms of red tape,
more than one kind of red tape is present. Consider the following example:

8
 Example 1: Different kinds of red tape

TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT: “Traffic Department, good day, all our lines are currently busy. Please
leave a message indicating your request, name and phone number, and we will call you
back.” Beeep.

CALLER: “This is Jack Mabuza from Fountains B&B. I’ve just got a fine for erecting an illegal
sign down at the M86 crossing. I went to check and it’s gone! I really don’t understand this. I
put it up last week after waiting five month for the approval by you guys. Ask the clerk at the
counter in the main building, he stamped the thing! Aren’t you talking to each other? Besides,
my lawyer finally got hold of the signage regulation. The thing is so ambiguous. No wonder
all kind of signs clutter the town. But mine was legal and it wasn’t exactly cheap! Man, how
are my customers supposed to find me now? This is the third time I am calling; can someone
please get in touch with me? You can reach me at 068 3158955!”

Example 1 contains all three kinds of red tape: a rule or regulation not achieving its policy goal, an
efficient as well as an inefficient procedure, and several elements of communication and information
failure. The three kinds of red tape are discussed in more detail under the next three headings.

1.2.1 Red tape caused by rules and regulations

Senior decision makers in local municipalities or local
firms must make decisions that affect the behaviour and
performance of the resources and people under their
Red tape caused by policies, and
control. In some cases, these managers have to respond implemented by rules, regulations
to or interpret policies shaped higher up in the and laws, may be due to their
organisation or legislative environment, with little space absence or partial to complete
for customisation or flexibility. In other cases, managers ineffectiveness. Inconsistent inter-
at a local sphere can choose how to prioritise the use of pretations and difficulty in
resources and people, and how to develop the strategy of enforcement are symptoms of
the organisation. All of these decisions or legislative policy-related red tape.
requirements can be broadly described as policies that
define how an organisation as a whole should behave or
perform.

Policies implemented by rules, regulations, and laws govern not only the functions of an
organisation, but also the behaviour of society or the economy as a whole. Government regulations
and laws exist in order to shape behaviour and to guide individuals and organisations to behave in a
certain way that is deemed socially desirable. They are created by every society and within almost
every organisation. Furthermore, governments at different spheres also have a responsibility to
address market failure, and to provide public goods that create positive externalities to all
enterprises (and citizens).

While policies are in most cases developed with good intentions, they often result in unintended
consequences, or become ineffective as circumstances change. Perhaps a regulation made sense
under a specific set of circumstances, which is no longer relevant. Alternatively, a rule was never

9
properly defined, and people found all kinds of work-arounds, resulting in several changes or
additions to the rule. This could lead to the rule becoming difficult to enforce or interpret in a
consistent way.

Finally, when management decides not to make a decision about a given issue, either through
ignorance or other more important priorities, this can also be interpreted as a policy decision.

1.2.2 Red tape caused by inefficient procedures and administrative systems

Administrative and management procedures and
systems are at the operational core of any organisation
and therefore affect its performance. The procedures Administrative and management
of organisations and their subsystems determine how procedures and systems create the
decisions are made and how people can perform routines that enable organisations
routine or standard operations. For instance, the to perform functions. Typical
accounting system may require certain procedures with symptoms of red tape at this level
regard to making or receiving payments, combined are long delay and unclear roles
with a particular IT equipment and software and responsibilities.
configuration.

Together, procedures, equipment and people are described as a system. It can be the entire system
or the procedures involved that are poorly designed. Thus only a holistic perspective of how a
system is supposed to function and how it supports the objectives of the organisation will make it
possible to refine or enhance performance. All too often, the focus on efficiency improvement is on
technological equipment, while the supporting procedures and the human elements are neglected.
By definition, there are not too many or too few procedures, suitable or inappropriate equipment, or
helpful or unhelpful people. It is the right mix of these elements that enables the system to reach a
specific objective.

Typically, there is a close interaction between the procedures and systems and the regulations and
rules of organisations. Organisations use procedures to enforce regulations and rules, and use
regulations and rules to make procedures work better. Yet many procedures and systems are
designed purely from a functional or transactional perspective.

Example 2, as a continuation of example 1, shows part of a customer care system, with a procedure
of how to record and forward messages, operated by a receptionist using specific technical
equipment. In this example, the administrative and management customer care system, involving
procedures, people and equipment, seems to be designed, managed and implemented efficiently to
reach the objective of quick reaction to customer complaints.

10
 Example 2: Procedure for taking messages

FROM: RECEPTIONIST
DATE: 22 February 2007, 15:18
TO: HEAD OF CORPORATE SERVICES
SUBJECT: REMOVAL OF SIGN

Sir
A telephone message was left at 08:01 this morning from Mr Mabuza (Fountains B&B) regarding
a sign that was removed. A transcript of the message follows below this message.
I have recorded this message in the official correspondence register. Can you please let me know
when you have contacted Mr Mabuza so that I can close the entry?
Regards, Janet

Typically red tape in administrative and management procedures and systems is caused by a
multitude of factors ranging from poor management skills, lack of formal procedures, poor design of
procedures, little oversight of the performance of procedures, to staff simply not following
procedures. Complicated forms, unnecessary steps, or poor IT systems also create problems at this
level. With the broadening of municipal functions, and the increased size of municipalities, the
procedural level of management is often under huge pressure because of pressures from the local
community for the municipalities to address a wide range of policy issues. At the same time, many
private sector actors are also under pressure at this level due to changes in the legal environment
and increased international competition.

1.2.3 Red tape caused by poor communication and information exchange

This kind of red tape is caused by the interaction between stakeholders, either within or between
organisations, or between an organisation and external stakeholders. These interactions take place
through:

• human interfaces such as interpersonal communication between individuals, teams and

organisations
• technological interfaces that enable communication or automation such as websites,
telephone systems and other media
• the usage or consumption of public and private services and goods by people or consumers,
such as refuse removal or telephone lines.

There is a close relationship between the procedural level and the interface level. Even carefully
designed procedures and systems can become cumbersome if there is too little information
available on how the procedure works, or if the staff behind the counters are unfriendly or
unhelpful.

Many quick wins can be achieved at this level, because improving service levels can in fact be
achieved without senior management involvement. That said, getting administrative staff to ‘care’

11
and be helpful can be extremely difficult in an
organisation where management is unfriendly or The interfaces between units and
where morale is low due to poor performance or
organisations allow information
unsatisfactory working conditions.
and communication to flow. These
Red tape on this level can be addressed by identifying interfaces can be physical, human
the various ways the organisational units interface or or technological. Typical symptoms
interact with other units and organisations. With the of red tape at the service interface
increased use of information technology, the role of are lack of information and
the traditional receptionist as the main interface transparency, and poor or
between organisations is rapidly changing. In the
inconsistent customer care.
private sector, several instruments have been
developed to make sure that service standards and
efficient interfaces are maintained. One such instrument is called service blueprinting that will be
discussed in Chapter Error! Reference source not found..

Service blueprinting is based on the premise that all service transactions must be carefully designed.
It is not only the one-to-one communication between two people that matters The physical
environment, parallel interfaces, the available information and the communication style all affect
the delivery of services. In service blueprinting the following interfaces are typically diagnosed:

• Physical evidence or environment of the transaction or exchange

• Customer actions (the role of the customer in the transaction or exchange)
• The visible contacts or employees (who represent the organisation)
• The backstage or invisible contacts or employees (who support the visible frontline staff)
• Support processes (both equipment and also decision-making powers of service staff).

In service blueprinting, attention is thus not only given to the traditional frontline staff. The
environment in which the interaction takes place, the direct interaction the customer engages in,
the other employees of the organisation that are visible to the customer, the employees invisible to
the customer but still involved in the service, as well as the internal organisational structures and
resources available to the interacting staff, are all critically important to avoid interface-related red
tape.

Myth: Red tape is created by incompetent or obstructive staff.

The truth is that red tape increases over time as organisations grow and as the variety of routines
and specialised departments expands. What is seen as red tape today might be the result of well-
intended solutions to address specific problems at a specific time. Unfortunately red tape also gets
worse over time as the interdependency between different factors is not understood, and the
interventions and its consequences are often separated in time.

12
1.3 Approaching red tape from different perspectives

Different stakeholders will approach the identification and reduction of red tape from different
perspectives, and will thus have different motivations to participate in the process. Red tape not
only affects the ability of a specific organisation to perform its functions, but also influences
performance of other stakeholders and organisations.

Clearly, under-performance due to red tape will affect the services delivered by a municipality (see
Figure 1.2 below). This in turn has an impact on the performance of businesses in the local economy
due to changes in the local business environment. Similarly, red tape in the private and social sector
affects citizens and consumers, and this has an impact on the broader developmental context.

Figure 1.2: Factors influenced by local government on service delivery and the business environment

Service Delivery Business Environment

Infrastructure and Social Services Laws, regulations Procedures and Interface

Environment and policies systems
Roads Residential Taxes and levies Management Public-private
quality structures dialogue
Electricity, Energy Education and Town planning Decision making Partnerships,
research collaboration

Water and Sewage Health Environmental Reporting Information and

regulation structures consultation
Built and natural Recreation Business sector Skills and Service interface
environment regulations capacities

Property and Land Culture Licensing Human resources Private sector

organisation

ICTs ... ... ... ...

A first perspective on red tape is to consider its effects on Local Economic Development (LED). The
South African LED Framework describes LED as an ongoing development process between the
public, private and civil society stakeholders of a given territory to improve the local economy, in a
competiveness-oriented, inclusive and sustainable manner. It further suggests using the available
resources to create conditions which stimulate and enable the general environment in which
business is done (DPLG, 2006).

13
Indeed, initiatives which pursue LED are likely to show
very limited and isolated effects on the local economy, if
From a LED perspective, reducing
they are designed within a disadvantageous or even
red tape creates opportunities for
hostile local business environment (LBE). Firstly, this
approach refers to the regulatory framework and the the public and private sector to
administrative systems which provide, besides market work together to identify red tape
forces, the rules of the game that shape the decisions issues that affect the local business
and actions of all businesses. Hence it is an approach environment. From a service
with leverage, which has to be used responsibly, as it can delivery perspective, red tape
change the situation of thousands of businesses almost reduction provides opportunities to
at the stroke of a pen. Secondly, the approach refers to address inefficiencies in service
the relationship between the public and private sector, delivery.
including their organisational arrangements. 1 These
allow the negotiation and implementation of the rules of
the game. In a decentralised government system, there is an often complex relationship between
the spheres of government and the associated private sector organisations. Policies might be shaped
at national sphere, translated into laws at the provincial sphere, and implemented at the local
sphere where businesses are operating. Hence regular feedback mechanisms between spheres and
across sectors are a necessity.

The reduction of red tape is clearly embedded in the concepts of LED and LBE, and it is one of several
tools promoted by the South African Government in this context (DPLG, DTI & SALGA, 2008).
Implemented as a programme on the local sphere, it is based on dialogue between the public and
private sector, focusing specifically on the rules of the game: efficiency and effectiveness. Smart
tape, to use the positive term, can reduce the cost of starting, operating and closing a business. In
more practical terms, simply imagine the costs of a street trader not allowed to do business in the
town centre, a transport company unable to operate a truck during a seven-month vehicle
registration process, or a large-scale investor losing patience with a 24-month land rezoning process.
When these resources are used more productively, new profits and market shares can be achieved.
This in turn enables investment, employment and output, as a recent study on cutting the cost of
red tape in South Africa has shown (Small Business Project, 2004).

Myth: If we could only do away with all bureaucracy then we would have no more red tape.

The truth is that many stakeholders actually demand red tape to protect their investments by
creating entry barriers, standards, checks and balances. Tourism provides an example where guest
houses often complain that ‘new entrants’ do not comply with certain standards. Red tape in the
business environment is critical for firms (and other stakeholders) as it governs how they compete or
operate. Therefore, while businesses may complain about regulations, they would also be the first to
complain if all the regulations were abolished.

1
See: http://www.publicprivatedialogue.org/

14
A second perspective on red tape is service delivery. Figure 1.2 shows several examples of services
typically rendered by municipalities. Organisations such as local municipalities and other
government and non-governmental organisations involved in the provision of public services have
limited resources to perform a wide range of duties. Some services directly affect citizens and
businesses. Other services have indirect effects on the ability of businesses to operate profitably, or
citizens to enjoy a certain quality of life. Inefficient planning, poor resource management, vacant
positions and service backlogs are often symptoms of red tape that affects service delivery.
Inefficient or unclear bureaucratic processes waste valuable time, energy and resources.
Furthermore, employees can easily become demoralised and may leave the organisation. In the
worst case, red tape creates opportunities for corruption and bribery of officials, who wield power
by being able to influence processes or decisions.

Municipalities offer many services to overcome market failures, for instance by providing public
goods such as libraries or municipal abattoirs. Other services are charged for (e.g. electricity and
waste removal). One way of increasing public service delivery is by making sure that essential and
public good services are of a high standard and are delivered effectively. From the service delivery
perspective, instruments such as organisational development, process development, regulatory
reform and customer service improvement are important. This topic is further explored in Chapter
1.4.2.

Myth: Red tape is created only by government.

The truth is that red tape is also created by the private sector and by other actors like universities,
business membership organisations and trade unions. Take for instance the requirements to join an
accommodation association in a town with a strong tourism sector, or the number of forms that
must be completed to change a subject at a university.

1.4 The rationale for reducing red tape

Not every rule, regulation, procedure or system is necessarily red tape. The purpose of reducing red
tape is not to take away all the policies and administrative and management processes. Rather, the
aim of cutting red tape is to focus rules, regulations, procedures and systems on achieving their
objectives efficiently and effectively. Where this is not possible, it becomes necessary to make sure
that people can interact with the policies and procedures in a more efficient and transparent way.

In the previous section the different perspectives of reducing red tape were described. Two themes
emerged that provide a rationale for red tape reduction:

1. The LED perspective: reduce compliance costs for business and thereby improve the
business environment, leading to economic growth.
2. The service delivery perspective: reduce costs for service provision and increase the use of
services.

15
1.4.1 Addressing red tape to save costs
The cost of red tape first of all affects the budget and resources within the organisation where the
red tape originates. In the municipal context, for instance, rules and regulations which are
unnecessary or do not help to achieve their policy goals make it more difficult for officials to do their
jobs, even when there is no enforcement. Unnecessary or complicated procedures and systems also
create costs. There might be increased training costs, compliance enforcement costs and
performance monitoring costs for management and staff to use the procedures and systems.
Furthermore, there is also ever-increasing pressure on local municipalities to better utilise their
financial, human and physical resources.

Second, the cost of red tape within an organisation does not only relate to its own budget and
resources, but also creates costs for other stakeholders interacting with the organisation. In a
municipal context, red tape increases the costs of doing business by the private sector directly
through:

• Compliance costs: the costs of complying with regulations and procedures in terms of time
and money
• Non-compliance costs: fines, bribery, harassment, appropriation of stock (specifically
relevant for the informal sector), etc.
• Procurement costs: barriers created by procurement procedures, poor supply chain
management or clumsy tender procedures

and indirectly through:

• Ineffective service delivery

• Inefficient or ineffective allocation of public funds

New technologies and ICT create many opportunities to redesign or optimise the performance of
procedures and systems in order to reduce costs. However, while reducing costs in the long term
may be sensible, the immediate costs of redesigning a system or upgrading to a better technology
may require short-term investments that may exceed the financial resources of a department or unit
in an organisation.

1.4.2 Addressing red tape to improve the use of services and service delivery
Many symptoms of red tape in an organisation relate to the consumption of the services offered by
the organisation. Red tape in the municipal context reduces the consumption of services in many
cases, which in the end defeats the objective of government. In the worst case, inefficient service
provision has a marginalisation effect.

For instance, when a municipal licensing department responsible for vehicle registration and driver’s
licences is poorly configured, then long queues will develop and the throughput of the system will
slow down. Mothers with children or small enterprise owners cannot afford be away from their
homes and businesses to go through such a procedure. This result in fewer people using the service
– they then either go to another municipality where the service is faster, or they find illegal means to
obtain licences and register their vehicles. The problem may be that although enough resources
have been allocated to the department, the procedures and interface have not been designed
holistically for efficiency. This is likely to lead to frustrated staff and service users. A redesign of the

16
entire licensing system, including simplifying the rules, signage, forms and application procedure,
may result in the ability to process more license applications and decreased frustration levels.

Myth: Red tape cannot be addressed at a local sphere level.

While it is true that a lot of red tape originates at national or regional spheres of government, many
red tape issues are created at local sphere by the local municipality or local business. Furthermore,
local offices of national or regional institutions, such as a local affiliate of a national hospital, often
also create red tape.

Again, technologies, such as websites or self-help counters, can greatly improve the delivery of
certain services. The interface can be improved by providing forms on a website or by ensuring that
people have all the required supporting documents before they start the application procedure. This
will save valuable time, and can reduce the length of queues.

1.5 Important considerations when addressing red tape

Experience in various fields of development cooperation has proven that the design and
implementation of reforms require a holistic and systemic perspective and an iterative and
participatory approach.

Reducing red tape must therefore be seen as a complex, diverse and pluralistic process, which
cannot be simply implemented and controlled through one-dimensional hierarchical planning and
management. Bringing a multitude of actors to work together and complement each other requires
systemic and facilitative interventions towards change. A red tape issue may lead to several
symptoms that are created or reinforced by many different causes. Some of these causes may even
be external to the organisation in which the red tape issue resides.

Facilitating change in a local system has to be based on a systemic understanding of the local context
and the red tape issue at hand. Red tape reduction takes place within a variety of different local
systems – the economic system, the political and administrative systems, the social and cultural
systems - all of which collectively make up the specific local context. At the borders of the locality,
these different local systems again interact with other systems at local, provincial and national
spheres, such as the national tax regime.

There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach in red tape reduction. Bringing about change requires an
approach that sufficiently takes into account the specific dynamics, the complexity and
interrelatedness of a locality and its actors.

17
A systemic approach is based on seven main assumptions:

1. Understanding the local context requires knowing the different elements of which it is
comprised, and understanding and awareness of the multiple, complex and reciprocal
relationships and linkages by which these elements are connected.

2. Each system follows its own logic, which functions as a perfectly rational guiding principle for
the system’s stakeholders. Being aware of the logic of these different systems is crucial for
understanding the local context as a whole.

3. Systemic change can only be made by or with the local stakeholders and the people most
affected by the specific issues.

4. To bring about systemic change, the internal actors must be aware of the local
characteristics and the issues that might inhibit the performance of the local systems.

5. Systemic change cannot be linearly planned, but can only be achieved in a step-wise and
flexible manner. The main triggers to change a local system are likely to be revealed only as
the change process unfolds. The interconnectedness of the different factors and
stakeholders make it impossible to understand and predict all the reactions of all the
elements at any one point.

6. Problems that reduce the performance of a system are likely to be benefiting someone
working within the system, otherwise the problems would already have been eliminated by
the system itself. This phenomenon can often be observed in the form of invisible vested
interests or hidden agendas of certain people, e.g. public service officials benefiting from
ineffective rules and regulations.

7. Every local context is unique. A systemic approach aims at exploring the specific triggers or
leverage factors of this uniqueness.

These assumptions clearly show that to approach red tape from a systemic perspective, a specific
type of intervention is required, because the logic involved in problem identification and problem
solving from the outside would not give the desired results. We call this specific type of intervention
’facilitation’.

Why is facilitation so crucial for systemic interventions in the local business environment? The
common definition of facilitation already contains the main answers to this question: Facilitation is
understood as “a process of decision-making guided by a facilitator who ensures that all affected
individuals and groups are involved in a meaningful way and that the decisions are based on their
input and made to achieve their mutual interests.” 2

2
http://www.nymir.org/zoning/Glossary.html

18
The concept of facilitation therefore directly relates to the key requirements of systemic intervention:
It is conceptualised as a process unfolding, as opposed to the one-time implementation of an
ambitious plan. It aims at including all affected stakeholders – and their interrelations - and thus
looks at systems rather than single actors or elements. The idea that solutions have to be born by
the internal actors themselves based on their inputs and knowledge and not on some mere transfer
from outside is clearly reflected. And finally, facilitation aims at creating decisions that correspond to
the mutual interests of all different stakeholders involved.

The private sector and the local government have different reasons for undertaking a red tape
reduction exercise. Business is interested in cutting red tape in order to reduce the costs of doing
business, and the public sector is interested because of the direct effect of cutting administration
costs, and at the same time because of the indirect benefit of supporting existing and attracting new
enterprises. Initiatives and proposals for cutting local red tape therefore have to be measured
carefully against this aim - which includes a clear calculation of costs and benefits of the planned
interventions in the regulatory framework.

The aim of increasing local competitiveness is to make the area and its businesses more competitive
than other areas – regionally, nationally and even internationally. Therefore an important element
of strengthening local competitiveness is supporting the development of endogenous solutions
which are suited to the area’s specifics. These specifics make the area unique in its business-
friendliness and efficiency, and can be marketed in competition with other areas.. The mere
introduction of ’outside solutions’ – often termed best practice and resulting in just another ’one-
stop –shop’ – is not sufficient, as external solutions must be developed further and fitted into the
local context by local actors. Therefore the finding of homegrown solutions should be encouraged,
and creative thinking on the part of local actors is sometimes more essential than importing great
ideas that worked elsewhere.

Exploring the local red tape context – and designing solutions for improvements - is an incremental
process with surprises waiting around each corner. Policy issues and actors are linked by a complex
network of interrelations, and often the development of proposals requires detailed technical
research and debate. Red tape reduction must therefore be facilitated by taking a clear incremental
approach in the form of a step-by-step process. Defining the next steps can often only be done on
the basis of the previous step. This requires flexibility in the planning and implementation of
interventions, and clear management of expectations: systemic intervention in the local regulatory
context will in many cases not be able to come up with ’quick and big’ (and often unfeasible)
interventions, but will rather devise a number of smaller improvements which will allow relatively
easy implementation. This often prepares the ground for more challenging interventions in the
course of the longer process.

Incrementalism is also required in the light of the fact that large-scale, intensive changes can be
perceived as a threat to local actors and provoke adverse reactions. In contrast, a variety of small
and incremental changes, instead of one ambitious big change, gives the actors involved sufficient
time to adjust.

19
We stated above that the reduction of red tape at a local sphere will only be successful as a multi-
stakeholder process with broad and systematic participation of a variety of actors. In reality we often
find that the local context is characterised by isolated stakeholder groups with only a minimum level
of communication and trust. Public sector and private sector hardly collaborate, and different public
departments are held captive in a ’silo mentality’, in which highly specialised actors take decisions
which are perfectly in line with the logic of their department, but which can provoke adverse and
even counterproductive effects with regard to the broader context of development.

Here we wish to underline once more the general importance of participation as a key principle to
successful red tape reduction: Although it might be difficult to encourage active participation and
dialogue at the beginning of the process, this does not justify an isolated planning approach without
a clear emphasis on participation. Only through participation can it be ensured that the right local
solutions are found, that the necessary momentum for implementation is built, and that an
institutionalisation of the process can be envisaged. In other words, participation is the key to the
sustainability of the process through acceptance and commitment of the local stakeholders. Only
through participation in its various forms and phases can an LRTR (Local Red Tape Reduction)
process be successful and sustainable over time.

Furthermore, participation and an active public-private dialogue produces important benefits far
beyond the concrete red tape initiatives. By working together and being focused on clear tasks and
objectives, the public and private sectors are given the opportunity to build networks and trust:
these are the prerequisites for an active and stable public-private dialogue also on other topics of
Local Economic Development and Local Governance.

20
Chapter 2 Diagnosing and addressing a specific Red Tape issue
Diagnosing and addressing red tape be done as part of a larger red tape reduction programme, or by
simply addressing one specific red tape issue as a stand-alone project. In this chapter, the different
approaches to diagnosing and addressing one specific red tape issue are described. These
approaches can then be applied to addressing red tape in a programme, which is described in detail
in Chapter 3 of this manual.

Myth: reducing red tape is a complicated and expensive process that requires legal expertise.

The truth is that there are many red tape issues that can be addressed by local stakeholders without
much cost. While some resolutions require legal input, many others only require careful thinking and
joint problem solving.

A specific red tape issue can be diagnosed in four generic steps:

Step 1: Identify the red tape issue and describe it in detail by developing a problem statement.
Explore the boundaries or scope of the problem by identifying the various symptoms.

Step 2: Diagnose the red tape issue using a variety of facilitation and analytical tools. This often
involves looking at alternative solutions.

Step 3: Intervention selection and project design.

Step 4: Implementation of interventions or solutions.

In Error! Reference source not found., the four coloured layers represent the steps described above.
Within each step we have suggested a simple order of how the tools contained in this chapter can be
applied. Experienced facilitators can mix, combine, or substitute any of these tools, although we are
confident that the logic is relevant. In some cases, a red tape issue can be diagnosed, solved and the
solution implemented quickly, while in other cases, what appears to be a simple issue might require
a detailed step-by-step analysis.

21
Figure 2.1: Flow diagram for the diagnosis of a red tape issue
Problem identification and exploration

Develop a Brainstorm the If not sure how to

Check if the
problem statement symptoms of the brainstorm causes
original problem Yes, it is
of the status and issue, and try to and symptoms
statement is accurate
scope of a given identify possible use fishbone
accurate
red tape issue causes diagram

No, it needs
adaption
Diagnosis, Analysis and potential future solutions

Assess the original intention of the policy or

Mainly policy
rule. Consider cost benefit analysis, or
related
regulatory impact assessment

Use flow diagram mapping to diagnose the

Mainly process
bottlenecks and possible areas of
related Decide what kind
improvement
of red tape is
MAINLY the cause
of the symptoms
Use service blueprinting to diagnose the
Mainly interface
service interfaces and possible areas of
related
improvement

A combination of
Then combine the recommended methods to
more than 1 kind
conduct in-depth diagnosis
of red tape

Are there catalytic

interventions that
require project
Intervention design and planning

management and
change
management?
Yes
Identify possible
interventions that
can be influenced
locally

Are there aspects of the

Are there quick
Define action teams, interventions that
win activities that
responsibilities and requires change
can immediately
timeframes management or project
be implemented?
management?
Implementation of interventions or solutions

No

Formally refer
Develop project
national or Project manage or
management plan and
external red tape facilitate
change management
issues to relevant implementation
plans where appropriate
organization

Ongoing performance
management, communication
and documentation

22
2.1 Problem identification, description and exploration

The first step in diagnosing a red tape issue is to determine whether the stakeholders are describing
one or several different problems. In order to define the exact problem that must be solved it is
important to develop a comprehensive problem statement describing the red tape issue.
Furthermore, by identifying all the symptoms and causes associated with the issue, it becomes
possible to conduct an in-depth analysis of the problem. These two steps are discussed under the
next two headings.

2.1.1 Determine the scope and description of the red tape issue: what is the matter?
What must be done?
A comprehensive problem statement must be developed that accurately describes the problem or
red tape issue to be addressed. This statement must be precise enough so that the stakeholders in
the process know exactly which problem is being described, diagnosed and optimised.

Why?
This makes it possible to get the stakeholders to focus on solving a specific problem. The problem is
isolated and the scope or effect of the problem is clarified. This helps to determine who should be
involved in better understanding or solving the problem.

How?
When an issue is identified, the facilitator or project champion should try to determine what exactly
the problem is. This can be done during a facilitated workshop or during key interviews with
stakeholders.

The questions asked to develop the problem statement are:

“What exactly is the problem?”

“Who is involved or affected by this problem?”

“How do we know there is a problem?”

“What is the impact of the specific issue?”

What next?
This problem statement should be visually present in all future workshops or meetings to make sure
that the discussions are focused on the specific issue. The next step is to identify the symptoms and
possible causes of the specific issue. After that, it may be necessary to revisit the formulation of the
problem statement to make sure it still accurately describes the problem or issue.

2.1.2 Identifying the symptoms and causes of red tape

When inefficiencies exist in an organisation certain evidence may arise to suggest a potential
problem. The same issue might be described by different people in different ways. For instance, if
signage and information postings in municipal premises are inadequate, the receptionist might
describe the symptom as: “I spend a lot of time directing people to the right office”. For customers,
the symptom might be: “I have to spend a lot of time searching for the right person to assist me”.
These are two symptoms that are related to the same cause, namely inadequate signage.

23
What must be done?
Using the problem statement as a reference point, the facilitator or project champion must get as
many different descriptions of symptoms from people affected by the problem. The wider the range
of people providing inputs, the better the chances of designing a system that performs better than
the existing one. The facilitator should try to steer participants away from identifying the causes
(people are tempted just to solve the problem) for as long as possible.

Why?
Symptoms are indicators of causes. One of the main reasons for identifying all symptoms and causes
is that many problems in organisations recur after being fixed, because often only some of the
symptoms have been addressed and the underlying causes remain in place.

Symptoms and causes are often separated by time. There are also chains of symptoms that together
lead to more symptoms and only then to causes. For instance, if people faint waiting in a long queue,
it is unlikely that this symptom is directly linked to a complicated form as the cause. The cause is
connected with this symptom by other symptoms, such as long processing times, leading to longer
queues, combined with too few human resources.

In complicated systems, it is difficult to identify all the symptoms of a given problem. The symptoms
and causes of red tape are spread throughout the system, making changes to policies, procedures
and service interface necessary. These kinds of intervention need to be carefully managed, not only
from the legal, administrative or technical angles, but also from a project management and change
management approach. The systemic and multidimensional character of red tape means that care
should be taken not to decide too early whether a given piece of red tape is of a policy, process or
interface nature. Rather, all the symptoms and relations between the different causes must first be
captured.

How?
Symptoms can be identified either in a workshop with different stakeholders, or through a series of
interviews with different affected parties. Participants very often find this step frustrating, as they
tend to want to solve the problem directly without spending too much time on the symptoms. As
symptoms are indicators of the problem, it is important that a proper diagnosis of the symptoms and
some of their potential causes is done in a comprehensive way.

To identify all the symptoms associated with the red tape issue, ask questions along the lines of:

• “What are the symptoms of this specific red tape issue?”

• “How do you know there is a problem in this area?”
• “What are the complaints or comments received from users or consumers?”
• “How are other people affected by this issue?”
• “How would someone from the outside know that this problem exists?”

Thereafter the symptoms are organised to see whether there are causal relationships between the
causes and different groups of symptoms. These causes are then identified as either one or a
combination of the three types of red tape.

What next?

24
If the causes of the red tape issue can clearly be allocated to one of the three kinds of red tape, then
proceed to Chapter 2.2. However, if the red tape issue spans two or more kinds of red tape, then
consider completing the cause and effect diagram in Error! Reference source not found., as it helps
to allocate the causes of the red tape to different origins.

2.2 Diagnosis, analysis and identification of potential solutions

The next major step is to conduct a detailed diagnosis of the specific red tape issue. In most cases
this will take more than one meeting or event to complete. Several tools are explained in this
chapter that can be used to diagnose a specific red tape issue. All these tools are also used to design
solutions. However, we strongly recommend that the diagnosis first be completed before solutions
are designed. Experienced facilitators will be able to mix and combine different tools and methods
to deepen the diagnosis as they see fit.

The following tools are appropriate in the following instances:

Main type of red tape issue Preferred approach Alternative approach

A combination of two or more Cause and effect diagram Combining mapping with general
types of red tape combined with visual mapping of brainstorming and interviews
key affected process or interfaces
Mainly regulatory or policy related Use interviews and workshops to Other instruments available are
determine the original intention of regulatory impact assessments or
the regulation and policy and its more quantitative measures such
intended objective. as detailed cost-benefit analyses
Mainly procedure or system The main instrument is a flow Benchmarking a specific process
related diagram, which can be combined with another similar approach
with either service blueprinting or within the organisation or from
with a cause and effect diagram another organisation
Mainly service interface or Main instrument is service Service design process
communication related blueprinting or brainstorming

2.2.1 Using a cause and effect diagram to diagnose a red tape issue
In most cases, it is necessary to probe deeper than the symptoms analysis described in Chapter
Error! Reference source not found.. Cause and effect diagrams, also known as fishbone or Ishikawa
diagrams, help one to think through a problem or issue in a very systematic way. This tool is
especially useful in instances where it is difficult to decide what the origin (cause) of the problem is,
or where a red tape issue is caused by a combination of different kinds of red tape or from different
units in an organisation. A generic template is provided in Chapter 4.2.

What must be done?

This exercise can either be done in an interview process or in a workshop. Symptoms are identified
under six generic headings as they relate to the problem statement: process, people, equipment,
materials, environment and management.

Why?
A cause and effect diagram is a simple instrument used to thoroughly diagnose the relationship
between different symptoms and causes of a red tape issue as it relates to a specific problem

25
statement. This helps to go beyond the most obvious causes or symptoms of the problem, and
assists in identifying multiple causes and points of intervention.

Steps to construct a cause and effect diagram:

A generic example of a cause and effect diagram is provided in Error! Reference source not found.,
which is developed through four steps:

Figure 2.2: An example of a fishbone or Ishikawa diagram

Equipment Process People

Sec cause

Primary Cause

Sec cause

Problem

Sec cause

Primary Cause

Sec cause
Materials Environment Management

1. Make sure that the problem statement developed in Chapter Error! Reference source not
found. describes the problem in detail. This statement is inserted under “problem” in Error!
Reference source not found..
2. Determine the major factors involved using the generic headings of:
a. process
b. people
c. equipment
d. materials
e. environment
f. management
The symptoms already described in the earlier step can be allocated to these six heading,
but at the same time these headings may prompt the identification of some additional
symptoms and causes not yet identified. Connect each factor with the spine that leads to the
problem statement. Try to draw out as many factors as possible. Experienced facilitators can
also use their own customised headings, or can add additional headings if deemed
necessary.
3. Identify possible causes.
For each factor, brainstorm possible causes of the problem that may be related to the factor.
Show these as smaller lines coming off the bones of the fish. Where a cause is large and
complex, it may be best to break it down into sub-causes. Show these again as lines coming
off each cause line.

26
 4. Analyse the diagram.
All the possible causes should be on the diagram now. Phrase questions and point out issues
that need to be investigated.

What next?
The cause and effect diagram makes it easy to identify different intervention points to improve the
situation. The same method can be used to develop an ‘ideal’ or future state of how the system
should work. The diagnosis can now be deepened with the other tools, such as detailed process
mapping or service blueprinting, or the interventions can be designed next.

2.2.2 Mapping procedures and interfaces

There are many different approaches to mapping the procedures within and between organisations,
ranging from simple flow charts constructed during a workshop to complicated procedure maps of
an engineered service solution.

What must be done?

Very often, the first attempt to understand a
sequence or procedure within a red tape
context will be developed by a group of
stakeholders in a workshop. During this
workshop accuracy is not as important as
getting the stakeholders to think through the
process in a systematic way.

Why?
This simple map is usually useful as it typically
shows that even a simple procedure consists of many different steps, involves different decision
makers, and could be delayed by many other sub-routines, meaning that any attempt to improve it
needs to be properly managed. By developing this procedure map in a visual way with a group of
stakeholders, trust is built, information shared and joint learning takes place.

How?
Use rectangular cards or A4 pages and simply map out a procedure according to the main steps
involved. After the main steps are identified, the smaller in-between steps can then be identified.

In Error! Reference source not found. an example is shown where a simple 6-step procedure was
mapped. Originally, this example was created on the floor in a conference room with about 16
participants. The participants who created this example were very familiar with the procedure, so
the actors involved in the process are shown on the Y-axis and time line on the X-axis.

27
Figure 2.3: Example of a simple flow diagram

Step 4
E.g. Submit to
Decisionmaker
manager for
decision

Step 3 Step 5
Administrator Step 2 E.g. enter request E.g. type official letter
E.g. receive form onto system – check and send notification to
for completeness customer

Step 1 Step 6
Customer E.g. customer
E.g. submit form
receives official
letter

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 5 Day 10

The next step is to allocate symptoms or descriptions to the procedure. In the example provided in
Error! Reference source not found., the customers complained that they could not receive updates
of where in the process their applications were. The administrator complained that people
submitted incomplete documents, that this is only discovered after the customer leaves, and that it
leads to another attempt to start the procedure. Another symptom identified was that the
administrator did not know how long the manager would take to make a decision, nor whether
there was any management or escalation of issues that were waiting for the manager to decide
upon.

An experienced facilitator may opt to add other dimensions to such a map, for instance indicating
missing steps, allocating costs, forms, or decision-making routines on the map.

What next?
Establishing a flow diagram sometimes takes several iterations. Uncertain issues or unclear steps
must be identified, marked and investigated either during the meeting or afterwards. The flow
diagram makes it easy to identify different intervention points to improve the situation. The same
method can be used to develop an ‘ideal’ or future state of how the system should work. Care
should be taken, however, that the participants first map the system as it currently is.

After the workshop or meetings, the flow diagrams should be captured for monitoring purposes. The
flow diagram shows the situation before the intervention. After the intervention, the solution can be
compared to the original status and the impact can be determined.

2.2.3 Detailed mapping of problem analysis and potential intervention points

In some cases, the solutions or interventions are easy to identify, and a facilitator feels that the
group should move from problem analysis to problem solving. It may, however, be necessary to
further refine the procedure map after the mapping workshop or interviews.

What must be done?

In many cases a simple map is not sufficient and a more detailed map indicating timelines, decisions,
processes and routines, decisions made, and documents, is required. Now accuracy and

28
completeness become very important, and in most cases a flow diagram will be refined in several
iterative steps of stakeholder consultation.

Why?
In instances where a solution may require a change in functions, powers, or formal procedures, or
where there are cost and resource implications, it may become necessary to develop a more
detailed flow diagram. The more detailed a flow diagram, the more useful it is for monitoring and
evaluation purposes.

How?
Although several notation systems exist for flow diagrams, the common thread among the different
techniques is that similar basic symbols are used.

Figure 2.4: Most commonly used flow diagram symbols

Process or Document
Decision Data
function

Distinct steps in the process are visualised using rectangular shapes that are connected by lines with
arrows. These arrows indicate when control moves from one distinct activity to the next. Documents
are shown by the second symbol in Error! Reference source not found.. Diamond shapes are used to
show decisions or conditions, especially for YES/NO or TRUE/FALSE questions. Where data are
needed for a decision, the parallelogram is used. Arrows shows the flow of control and when the
control passes from one symbol to another. 3

What next?
Detailed mapping can be used both to diagnose and analyse an issue in detail, and to create an ideal
or desired future state for the system. If the flow diagram provides sufficient insight, then the
interventions must be designed next.

2.2.4 Using blueprinting to diagnose and design service and communication

interfaces

What must be done?

Service blueprinting is a diagnosis and planning technique that is suitable to design services in detail.
In the business sector this tool is often used to design the service interfaces of hotels, retail stores,
banks and other kinds of enterprise. An example of a service blueprint of a hotel is provided in Error!
Reference source not found. below, with the different layers that must be considered. A detailed
description of service blueprinting is provided by Bittner et al. (Bitner, Ostrom & Morgan, 2008). A
template is provided in Chapter 4.3.
3
For more sophisticated process mapping and design the following methods can be studied:
• IDEF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDEF
• Unified Modelling Language (UML) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Modeling_Language;
• Business process modelling notation (BPMN) -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Process_Modeling_Notation

29
Figure 2.5: An example of a service blueprint for an hotel

Why?
Ad hoc maps often neglect important aspects of good service provision. The result of a service
blueprint is a map that shows how a service is transacted between a service consumer and the
various agents and interfaces involved in the service delivery. It allows one to consider all the
important layers of service quality:

• Physical evidence or environment of the transaction or exchange

• Customer actions (the role of the customer in the transaction or exchange)

• The visible contacts or employees (represent the organisation)

• The backstage or invisible contacts or employees (support the visible frontline staff)

• Support processes (both equipment and also decision-making powers of service staff).

30
How?

As with the flow diagram, care should be taken that the system is first mapped as it currently is! Only
then is an ideal blueprint established. Use the template provided in Chapter 4 and convert the flow
diagram developed earlier into a more detailed blueprint, based on four steps:

1. Clearly articulate the service process or sub-process to be blueprinted. This includes deciding
which customer segment to focus on. During this step, it might become evident that there
are several services or sub-services that must be mapped separately.
2. Map the customer actions. When does the service start and stop from the customers’ point
of view? Very often this involves observation of the flow of people and their interactions in
the service area being analysed. Interviews with customers, service staff and back-office
staff can also be used to expand the blueprint.
3. Map the contact, onstage and backstage employees. Links can be added that connect
customers with contact employees, and between contact employees and supporting
functions.
4. Map the supporting processes and add the physical evidence to the blueprint.

From these four steps it becomes obvious that both direct and indirect employees need to be
interviewed, and where possible, the accounts from customers should also be used to construct a
blueprint.

The resulting service blueprint(s) can now be used to identify areas of improvement, standard
documents, frequently asked questions, frequently repeated routines, and potential recurring
problems. Where possible, standard routines and responses must be developed, and staff must be
trained in these. It may also be necessary to delegate decision-making authority to visible or indirect
service staff. An important aspect of standard documentation is that can be used to address
frequently asked questions. The intention is to free up the service staff as much as possible by
providing the customer with the relevant information so that the service staff need not repeat the
same answers to different customers. This will allow service staff to dedicate more of their attention
to the non-standard issues. A benefit of developing standard routines is that it is easier for staff to
rotate. This often leads to increases in job satisfaction, especially for staff who deal with customers
every day.

What next?
Service blueprinting makes it easy to identify different intervention points to improve the situation.
The same method is used to develop an ‘ideal’ or future state of how the system should work. After
developing a service blueprint it will be necessary to get senior management support and staff buy-
in. This should be treated as a change process. It is important to create visualisations of the
processes (different maps and routines) and to display the new processes clearly. 4

4
For more information on service blueprinting, see the article by BITNER, M.J., OSTROM, A.L. & MORGAN,
F.N. 2008. Service blueprinting: a practical technique for service innovation. California Management Review,
50(3):66-94..

31
2.2.5 Analysing red tape issues resulting from rules, regulations and policies
When the symptoms of red tape are caused by rules, regulations and policies, some additional work
over and above the tools already discussed in this chapter may be required. However, from our
practical experience most of the policy related issues can be diagnosed using the tools described
earlier. Some additional questions, interviews and legal expert advice may provide sufficient insight
on how a rule or regulation may be altered to improve its effectiveness.

For instance, it is important to determine whether the identified rules and regulations are required
by legislation elsewhere in the government system, or whether there is a legal requirement for
municipalities to have specific regulations in place.

Before going further it is important to confirm that the problem or issue is indeed a policy or
regulatory issue and not an enforcement or procedural issue (although a close relationship may exist
between the policy and the procedure). This can be confirmed by asking:

“Is there a problem with consistent interpretation and enforcement of a regulation?”

If it is confirmed that the issue is caused by a rule or regulation then the following questions can be
used to diagnose it further:

“Which stakeholders are directly or indirectly affected by this rule or regulation?”

“What was the original intention (policy goal) of creating this rule?”

“Do affected consumers and officials understand the rule or regulation?”

“Does the current desired policy goal differ from the original one?”

When there are strong lobby or advocacy groups working to change rules or regulations it is
important to identify the less-organised yet affected parties. For instance, in many towns there are
strong advocacy groups demanding that informal traders should be banned from selling their goods
in town. It is important to ensure that the perspective of commuters who support informal traders,
and indeed the traders themselves are also consulted or involved in changing respective rules or
regulations.

In most cases, the legal department or chief financial officer of a municipality is the most informed
on the constitutional and legal requirements of municipalities, such as the Local Government
Municipal Systems Act (2000) and the Municipal Finance Management Act (2004). When
investigating how a rule or regulation can be improved with regards to red tape, it may indeed also
be worthwhile comparing or benchmarking specific rules or regulations with those used by other
municipalities.

It should be born in mind that there are specific legal processes involved when changing or adopting
municipal rules and regulations. Not only is a consultative process required by law, but other steps,
such as seeking legal opinion, and announcing council approved changes in the media must be done
correctly. It is important that the opinion of a legal expert familiar with municipal law is consulted
before changing rules and regulations. The Presidency of South Africa as well as the Department of
Cooperative Government and Traditional Affairs are constantly working on the performance of the

32
local regulatory environment. In recent years, new legislation concerning local tender procedures,
local human resource procedures, and local rates and taxes have been approved by parliament,
which must be implemented by all municipalities. Resources and specific documents are made
available from time to time on the www.cogta.gov.za website.

2.3 Designing interventions and solutions

Generally, there are two kinds of interventions that can be identified based on a diagnosis of a red
tape issue: quick wins and change processes. The first interventions, namely quick wins, are activities
that are suitable for an open and visible implementation process. A quick win is measured against
three criteria (see Error! Reference source not found. below):

1. Can this activity be implemented with local resources?

o Local resources include people, funds, authority and knowledge. The criterion makes
sure that the local capacity exists to implement the proposed activity.
2. Can implementation start immediately?
o Starting immediately means that the first credible steps can be taken in the next
three weeks. The criterion makes sure that no long planning or approval processes
are required.
3. Can you expect a visible result within three months?
o A visible result can be clearly communicated internally and to external stakeholders.
This builds credibility and generates goodwill and trust.

There are three possible answers when testing a proposal against the criteria: 1 = No; 2 = Maybe; 3 =
Yes. After having answered the questions, the score is obtained by multiplying the values allocated
to each question. The proposal with the highest score is the most feasible and should be chosen for
implementation.

Table 2.1: Example of the scoring process for interventions

Proposed Availability of local Can implementation Is there a visible result Score

intervention activity resources (people, start immediately within three months
funds, knowledge, (within the next
authority) three weeks)?
Upgrade billing
system to new 1 1 3 3
software
Properly document
and publish the
procedure for the 3 3 3 27
sale of municipal
land

From these criteria, it is obvious that a quick win favours an incremental learning process and it
draws from the experiences of process consultants working with change in learning organisations. By
limiting the activities to those that are possible with local resources, local ownership and
understanding is assured. This helps to build local confidence and trust. The criterion of how soon
the process can starts filters activities that can start soon and that thus require less decision-making

33
time or planning. The last criterion ensures that the progress will be visible and easily
communicated.

Thus activities that score high on all three criteria are more likely to be driven from within an
organisation, can be started soon, do not require much planning or approval, and will be easily
communicated to others. If an activity scores low (9 or below) then a practical tip is to check if the
activity is perhaps configured as a project (these typically require more planning), and then breaking
the activity into smaller steps (e.g. ’write project proposal’ instead of ’implement project’) will
typically change the score.

People typically argue about the scores. If the scores awarded differ widely, then double-check that
the participants agree on the formulation of the activity. Generally speaking, the more specifically
the activity is described, the more likely it is to be scored correctly and that it will succeed. Generic
or vague activity descriptions (e.g. revise all forms used in the municipality) are prone to failure.

The second kind of intervention is a change process or a project that needs to be managed to certain
performance criteria, overseen by senior management. In this case a proper implementation plan
must be prepared using good project management and change management principles and
approaches (see Section 2.9 for more information on the change aspects of red tape reduction
interventions).

The Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMI, 1996) provides a detailed insight into
the standards of project management. It identifies 44 processes that fall into five basic process
groups (Initiating, Planning, Executing, Controlling and Monitoring, and Closing) and nine knowledge
areas that are typical of almost all projects. The nine knowledge areas are: Project Integration
Management, Project Scope Management, Project Time Management, Project Cost Management,
Project Quality Management, Project Human Resource Management, Project Communications
Management, Project Risk Management and Project Procurement Management.

In a relatively simple red tape intervention, an individual without prior project management
experience may be able to manage the process. However, with more sophisticated red tape
interventions spanning different types of red tape and organisational departments, project
champions should either be qualified in project management or have previous experience of
managing projects of this nature.

2.4 Tools not discussed in this manual

There are many tools, workshop formats and instruments that an experienced practitioner or
manager can draw upon. For instance, tools such as Regulatory Impact Assessment or Analysis (RIA)
are often promoted for policy or regulatory reviews. We do not promote these methods in this
manual because these approaches are typically implemented at a national level (under regulatory
reform programmes) and are not particularly participatory in nature. Several organisations, such as
USAID and the OECD (2009, 2006) have published handbooks on these topics.

34
Other business management tools, such as cost-benefit analysis, communications and public
relations, or human resource management have also not been discussed in this manual. This also
applies to public management and local government laws and regulations. The facilitator or manager
leading a red tape reduction process has to draw on the resources available in the municipality or
other supporting structures for this specialised expertise.

2.5 Summary

In this chapter, the process of diagnosing a specific red tape issue is described. The process starts
with a precise problem description that may be changed upon reflection as the process unfolds.
Thereafter the various symptoms and causes of the red tape issue, as well as the main origin of the
symptoms or causes are identified. To diagnose a red tape issue in detail, a variety of workshop tools
or interviews can be used to dig deeper and to identify potential solutions. We recommend that
priority be given to quick win activities, as these build confidence in the process and are more likely
to succeed. As stakeholders’ confidence increases, more difficult issues that require professional
project or change management can be taken on. However, there are instances where a major
change or project is required, and in these cases we urge practitioners to manage the project with
care and sensitivity.

Within the frameworks provided by this manual, experienced facilitators and public officials can use
a variety of other instruments that they are already familiar with.

Chapter 3

35
 The Red Tape Reduction Programme
This chapter describes how red tape reduction (RTR) can be conceptualised as a programme in a
local municipality, and how this programme is operationalised in a programme cycle. Chapter 2
showed how to diagnose, analyse and find solutions to red tape. The respective steps are introduced
on a project basis, with a defined short-term timeline and objective to deal with a single red tape
issue. In the context of local governance, such a project-based intervention will not be sufficient to
establish either of the two perspectives on red tape reduction - an environment conducive to
business or service delivery excellence. These perspectives can only be achieved through a
programmatic approach, with a long-term timeline and with complex, multiple objectives.

3.1 The programme cycle in a nutshell

The programme cycle to implement RTR in a local municipality, shown in Figure 3.1, consists of four
phases: scoping, assessment, implementation and evaluation. The scoping phase prepares the
programme, the assessment phase establishes RTR projects, the implementation phase focuses on
achieving the objectives, and the evaluation phase celebrates success and prepares the continuation
of the cycle.

Figure 3.1: The red tape reduction programme cycle

The smaller cycles within the main programme cycle represent the iterative implementation
progress: systemic change is usually a non-linear process, which cannot be rigidly planned. Each

36
phase consists of a number of steps, and the smaller cycles indicate their possible repetition if
circumstances demand.

The phases and steps are specific enough to provide guidance, but at the same time they are generic
enough to allow for unique local circumstances. The necessary customisation becomes apparent as
the red tape reduction programme unfolds. Therefore the programme cycle needs to be constantly
adapted to new insights. A template of the cycle is provided in Chapter 4.4.

The programme cycle is based on an integrated management system, which provides further
guidance without pre-empting local circumstances. It consists of four success factors, which are
apparent in various steps of the cycle:

• A clear mandate & objectives

• Prepared people
• Established projects
• Custom-made processes.

In the next section, the RTR management system is explained and the next section integrates this
system into the RTR programme cycle step by step.

3.2 The management system

A comprehensive RTR programme will change the management system of a municipality. Aimed at
improving the business environment or achieving service delivery excellence, a programme will
change municipal policies (regulations and rules) and will result in more innovative processes
(administrative procedures and systems). Experience shows that this is a profound intervention with
far-reaching implications. A programme will lead to the adaptation of several elements of the
management system, including the Integrated Development Plan (IDP), operational plans,
organisational structure and functions, job descriptions, work assignments, employee development,
performance management, as well as monitoring, evaluation and reporting systems.

Example - the effect of red tape reduction on the municipal management system
In order to change the street trading by-law and the related licensing procedure and
enforcement, the council decides to proceed with a budgeted IDP project. The LED manager
is appointed as the project leader and her performance management scorecard is updated. A
consultant then facilitates a consultative process to determine the focus of the by-law. The
resulting by-law is adopted by council. Because it restricts traders to certain locations,
changes in the licensing procedure are undertaken and more police enforcement becomes
necessary. The job descriptions and work assignments of the officials involved are adapted
as a result. Due to the increased complexity, the municipal manager further decides to have
all the officials involved trained in a three-day course.

While an RTR programme will change the municipal management system, at the same time it needs
to be firmly integrated into the system. As a municipal programme, the change approach becomes a
temporary feature in the municipality. It might run over two to three years until the desired impacts

37
on the business environment and service delivery are achieved. This means that the programme
must be treated as an integral part of the municipal management system which requires top
management oversight and management.

Figure 3.2 provides an overview of the elements required in a municipal RTR management system.
Based on standard practice, the system features four dimensions: mandate & objectives, people,
projects and processes. These dimensions are clearly interdependent and mutually reinforcing: a
mandate & objectives empower people to implement red tape reduction projects, based on a
number of standard procedures.

Figure 3.2: A checklist for the red tape reduction management system

The checklist serves as a guideline to set up a management system, and a template can be found in
Chapter 4.5. In each specific application, one has to determine how the dimensions and elements
need to be conceptualised to achieve the specific objectives efficiently in the prevailing context. All
dimensions and elements are equally important, because they are mutually reinforcing. However,
depending on the prevailing parameters, certain elements of the management system require
specific calibration to achieve success.

The size of a municipality determines to what extent the mayor or the municipal manager has the
time to lead the programme operationally. The perspective on red tape – LBE or service delivery –
determines the required extent of participation of the private sector and civil society, and suggests
whether political (LBE) or administrative (service delivery) leadership is required. The capacity and

38
general status of the municipality, in turn, determines the required perspective on red tape.
Fragmentation and silo attitudes in the municipality require a programme under senior political and
administrative leadership. The dynamism of the economy has an influence on the available
resources and therefore the size of a programme, but also the perspective of the programme.

Figure 3.3 suggests a way to illustrate how such parameters define the programme management
system. First, all relevant parameters are brainstormed between the initiating stakeholders. Then
two are selected and their extreme opposites are placed at the ends of the vertical and horizontal
axes of a matrix. The four emerging quadrants now each compare one of the opposites of both
parameters. Based on the question of how the management system should be designed, short
scenarios are written in the quadrants. Finally, the quadrants and even several matrixes are
compared and analysed and a decision is taken on the basic features of the management system.

Figure 3.3: Selected parameters defining the management system

To emphasise the importance of the right management system for the individual contexts and
objectives, Table 3.1 lists some typical symptoms encountered in pilot programmes where certain
management dimensions or their elements were neglected or not properly prioritised in red tape
reduction programmes.

39
Table 3.1: The symptoms of ineffective management systems

Symptoms of not having a mandate and objectives

 Senior management prioritises more pressing projects over red tape reduction
 When political decisions are required, such as on land issues or suspected corruption in a municipal
procedure, council is not available and the programme is blocked
 There is no budget for the implementation of a changed procedure, such as a new telephone system to
improve customer care
 No annual objectives were set and hence nothing is done!
 Because the mandate of the champion is not captured in the organisational and functional chart, there
are power struggles over changing procedures which are affecting several departments
Symptoms of not preparing people
 The programme is stuck, as a champion from lower management was selected and senior management
ignores the proposed solutions
 In the absence of oversight from a political champion, senior management half-heartedly implements
the programme, as the proposed changes affect their power bases
 Senior management does not have an incentive to implement the programme, as no performance
agreement is in place and hence nobody checks and enforces progress
 Nobody prioritises time for the programme, as its activities are not part of their work assignments
 The municipal staff do not know about the programme, do not understand what red tape is and hence
do not see why it should be eliminated
Symptoms of not establishing projects
 As there are no project plans for the reduction of individual red tape issues, long delays jeopardise the
credibility of the projects and the municipality as a whole
 A new procedure makes things worse for businesses and citizens, as the private sector was not involved
in the conceptualisation and was not consulted on the outcome
 Meetings are ineffective and conflict and tensions arise, as a facilitator is not in place to moderate
workshops efficiently and mediate between departments or the municipality and the private sector on
delicate topics
 Only what is monitored and has an influence on performance appraisals!
Symptoms of not following processes
 The foundations of red tape are ignored and more red tape results from the programme
 It is unclear as to who can take decisions on the solutions developed and at what time, and the
projects get delayed – by red tape
 The mayor and council reject budget proposals, as the impacts of the programme have neither been
captured nor reported to them
 Employees continue to implement old procedures, as they have not been informed about the newly
developed ones
 Red tape is successfully reduced but nobody except the staff and businesses involved know about it - the
results have not been celebrated and made public to create trust in the municipality’s ability to provide
services efficiently and effectively.

40
3.3 Managing the four phases of the Programme Cycle

In the following four headings we discuss the scoping, assessment, implementation, and evaluation
phases of the RTR programme cycle. The various steps through which the management system is
implemented are described.

3.3.1 Scoping Phase

How does an RTR programme come about? The programme can be initiated from within local
government, by another stakeholder in the local sphere or
from outside the locality. A politician or an official from the
municipality, a local LED agency, a business membership
organisation, the province, a national government
department, or a donor might take the initiative and
suggest implementing a programme.

Whoever the initiator is, the first steps are likely to be

informal, with tentative talks being held on the programme
objectives, scope and timeframes between and within
organisations. Only at a later stage will the formal
programme leadership emerge. The first few steps of the
RTR cycle therefore do not specify who undertakes the
tasks until a formal programme champion is identified in
step IV.

I. Understanding the local context

An RTR programme involves multiple stakeholders in a locality. Understanding who these
stakeholders are, what interests and capacities they have, and how they relate to each other is a key
preparatory step for each participatory process and will define the RTR management system. In the
process of understanding the local context, which ideally continues throughout the entire
programme, the perception of the political, social and economic context and stakeholders often
changes considerably, as new stakeholders and Figure 3.4 Rules, regulations, procedures and systems span several
relationships are discovered. levels of government

The RTR programme, with the perspective on the

LBE, by definition evolves between two primary
stakeholders: the local municipality –
responsible for shaping large parts of the LBE -
and a formal or informal business membership
organisation (BMO) - advocating the interests of
one or several economic sectors. 5 However, red
tape is often due to the inter-linkages of local,
provincial and national government, as shown

5
To learn more about PPD, see DFID, WB, IFC & OECD. 2006. The PPD Handbook, A toolkit for business
environment reformers (www.publicprivatedialogue.org). or www.publicprivatedialogue.org.

41
in Figure 3.4. Therefore public and private organisations in other spheres of government can be
important, even if only as secondary stakeholders. Finally, a variety of tertiary stakeholders, such as
a local college or an LED agency, might be valuable partners with an interest of informing or even
supporting the programme.

The following tools help to understand the local stakeholder landscape and the key relationships
between primary, secondary and tertiary stakeholders. Templates for these tools can be found in
Chapter 4.

Tool 1 Rainbow Stakeholder Mapping

This mapping technique differentiates between public and private stakeholders

and tiers of governance. The map can be enhanced with linkages between
stakeholders, such as tensions, partnerships or disconnection

Tool 2 Public-Private Dialogue Analysis

The analysis of the relationship between a municipality and a BMO is the core of
this tool. The public-private dialogue partners are asked the same questions on
how they cooperate and the (potentially diverging) answers are analysed.

Tool 3 Organisational Profile

This tool allows for the analysis of the degree and form of self-organisation.
Applied for instance to the municipality or the BMO, the strengths and
weaknesses of a number of organisational criteria are assessed and provide a
profile.

II. Designing the management system

Understanding the local context will help to
define the parameters that shape the municipal
RTR programme management system. As set
out in Section 3.2 of this chapter, the
parameters are analysed in terms of their
implications for the programme, and the basic
features of the management system are
conceptualised. This first draft of the
management system serves as a work plan for
the establishment of the RTR programme. The
elements of all management dimensions are
described in as much detail as possible. The

42
guidance for this can be found in the various chapters of this manual. The example below shows how
the elements of the management dimensions are conceptualised and a respective work plan is
established. Chapter 4 also provides a template for this task.

Example: Conceptualising the element relating to the involvement of the political sphere, mandate
and objective dimension
How should the element be The mayor, speaker and the mayoral committee understand and
conceptualised? strongly support the programme. The mayor is available for key
programme activities. A council resolution, mandating the
administration, is established. The LED portfolio councillor
champions the programme from the political side.
Why is it important and what The programme will only succeed if there is an explicit mandate
are the supporting arguments from the political sphere, and active leadership from a council
for this concept? member, as it is likely to address mismanagement if not corruption
in a specific municipal department, affecting the LBE.
What needs to happen next to The programme needs are presented to all parties mentioned
operationalise this element? above and their commitment is secured.
Who should do this? The LED portfolio councillor, who has initiated the programme and
already held informal talks within the municipality and with the
private sector

When should this happen? Within the next three weeks, until 12 December

Note that not all programme management elements can be outlined to the same level of detail at
this stage. At the start of the programme, it might not yet be exactly clear which red tape issues
need to be addressed, as they will only be identified in the course of programme implementation.
Still, the project dimension of the management system can only be outlined so that stakeholders
understand how the projects will be managed.

With the established draft of the management system, the identified tasks are implemented
according to the specified timelines. Once the system is complete, the programme is operational. It
is suggested that the logic of the management system be followed: 1) obtaining the mandate &
objectives, 2) preparing people, 3) creating and implementing projects, 4) following processes. The
following steps of the cycle will provide further guidance on the activities involved.

43
III. Establishing the mandate & objectives
Following the logic of the management system, the establishment of the mandate & objectives
dimension is completed first. It is self-evident that without a mandate, the people, project and
process dimensions cannot be established. Therefore the political mandate and support, the
objectives in the strategic and operational plan, the organisational and functional charts, the budget,
as well as other local specific elements, need to be brought into place. This is done via the tasks
defined in the draft design of the management system (see step II).

In the South African Intergovernmental Planning Cycle, the ideal time to initiate an RTR programme
is October to January, when the integrated development planning (IDP) consultations and drafting
takes place. This is because the IDP is the most important strategic plan for local government to
operationalise the political mandate and objectives of the programme. The necessary inputs to
outline the programme objectives can be seen in chapter 1.4. The ideal programme start is therefore
in April, with the adoption of the IDP, the budget and the PMS as critical management system
elements. The programme then runs for a year,
which is a realistic timeframe to achieve short to
medium-term successes, and can be renewed in In certain municipal contexts, it might
subsequent years if the overall programme well make sense to devise a special
objectives have not been reached completely. organisational section for the RTR
Importantly, times of high programme activity
programme, for instance a line function
should not be planned close to larger events, such
to the municipal manager. As red tape
as local government elections, sports events or
spans municipal directorates, adapting
major conventions, as large events often
completely absorb the capacities of local
the organisational and functional chart
government. provides the programme and its
champions with the necessary power
How much does an RTR programme cost? Exact and mandate versus existing
figures depend on the scale and scope of the
organisational structures and functions.
programme. Therefore the budget has to be
calculated carefully to suit the objectives of each
programme.

There are four types of costs to be budgeted for in most programmes: First, we suggest contracting
an external facilitator to support steps VI to VIII of the programme. Second, the programme involves
various workshops. This will require venue hire and catering. Third, the public relations of the
programme will require communication costs, such as advertising in local newspapers, which go
beyond the regular communication budget of a municipality. Last but most importantly, some
measures identified to turn red tape into smart tape are likely to require funds. As these solutions
will only emerge in the course of the programme, it is suggested that funds be earmarked for
implementation of RTR programme projects. Solutions requiring no or only limited funding can then
be implemented immediately, whereas solutions requiring larger budgets can be budgeted for in the
following IDP.

44
To finalise the mandate and objectives, it might also Figure 3.5: Example of contractual parties
be necessary to establish formal or informal
agreements between primary, secondary and
tertiary stakeholders, as shown in Figure 3.5.
Particularly in programmes with a large involvement
of the private sector or when external funding is
involved, clear roles and responsibilities and a
common vision of the outcome are vital
prerequisites for success.

IV. Preparing People

However well the RTR programme is set up, it is
always the people who make or break it.
Choosing the right champions and staff to
implement the programme is the most essential
ingredient of success.

How are the champions qualified? Based on the

mandate and objectives, they take full
ownership of and are accountable for the
programme. Hence the job descriptions,
performance management system and work
assignments have to include the programme
objectives. This will give them the power and
incentive to implement the programme and change the performance of the organisation. They need
to have a clear understanding of how the programme unfolds, understand all roles and
responsibilities, and have a vision of the outcome to be achieved. The champions know their
organisation very well. They are change agents who are well supported by their superiors and
colleagues and clearly gain from the reduction of red tape. The champion markets the programme
and its results on a continuous basis in a very visible, honest and transparent way, encouraging
dialogue and feedback from the clients of the municipality.

From this description it becomes clear that the champion to operationalise the programme will be a
senior manager. The champion to oversee the programme is at least a municipal councillor, if not a
member of the mayoral committee or the mayor himself or herself. Furthermore, consider
nominating one or several co-champions from the private sector or civil society, who will serve as
essential links of the programme to the many businesses and citizens in the municipality.

Preparing people, however, not only relates to the champions. The programme will be implemented
by designated staff members, possibly allocated to the programme for the time of its operations.

45
Their human resource tools also have to include the RTR programme and it might well be advisable
to train them on RTR. 6

A final step in preparing people is to communicate the programme to all staff members of the local
municipality, as well as to businesses and citizens. One of the first steps of the champions is to
announce the programme. This might entail a memorandum to municipal staff as well as members
of business membership organisations, a press statement in the local newspapers, and perhaps a
discussion on the programme on a local radio station. Through this initial communication effort, the
programme champions become accountable to deliver results, and the stakeholders become aware
what to expect as well as what to contribute to the programme.

The announcement is formulated as a strategic intent, delivered in motivating, non-technical

language. It used throughout the programme to brief new stakeholders joining the process. It lists
the major vision, briefly explains how the programme is to unfold, describes the expected outcomes,
and states who is involved with what roles and responsibilities.

V. Setting-up Processes
Processes enable projects, hence it is a good
idea for the champions to conceptualise the
programme processes before engaging in
projects to reduce red tape. The programme
management concept developed for this
dimension in step II is now verified and
operationalised. Whoever has to take
decisions, whoever needs to receive progress
reports, and whoever needs to be informed
about programme outputs, now needs to
become aware of their roles and
responsibilities and accept them – otherwise
the programme implementation will suffer at a later stage. In turn, this will raise the expectations of
these stakeholders and they will demand these management elements in future. While processes
will vary according to the perspective on red tape or the size of the municipality, it is advisable, as a
general rule, to align the programme with the operational routines of the municipality. Programme
reporting should for instance feature in management, council or mayoral committee meetings,
which already take place on a regular basis. The same bodies are also likely to take decisions on
changing rules, regulations, procedures and system. In this way, the programme is integrated into
existing processes, rather than giving rise to many additional forums, such as steering committee
meetings.

In terms of internal and external communication, existing structures are often not sufficient, though.
As a general rule, we suggest that the internal and external stakeholders be informed about the
output of every step of the RTR cycle, starting with a public notice about the start of the programme.
In all likelihood, the number of stakeholders will increase in the course of implementation. Hence
the importance and time requirements for communication are not to be underestimated. Imagine a

6
There is an LG SETA-accredited training course available for RTR: InWEnt, MXA (2008), Locati Trainer’s
Manual for Improving the Environment for Business. See www.led.co.za

46
municipal staff member being informed about the programme in the IDP process, or a business
person being consulted on a red tape issue. If these stakeholders do not hear about progress after
four months, they will suspect that the programme has been blocked or has even failed. They might
then classify the programme “as another failed attempt to improve service delivery”.
Communication requirements will be further highlighted in the remaining steps of the RTR cycle.

A last crucial element of operationalising the process dimension of the management system is the
RTR programme M&E system. It is the basis for much of the reporting on the progress of the
programme versus the IDP, the budget the political sphere and, not least, the performance
assessment of the champion. Above all, however, the M&E system provides an overview and a
constant reminder of the higher-level objectives that need to be achieved – something that often
goes missing in the course of implementation. Error! Reference source not found. provides an
example of a logical framework with objectives, indicators and a means of verification for an RTR
programme from the perspective of improving the business environment. 7

Note that the operationalised management system equals the outputs or services of the
programme. The M&E systems for each RTR project logically feed into the programme M&E system
as an intermediary outcome. How these are conceptualised is part of step XII of the cycle. Note also
that some of the tools proposed in this manual can be used not only to inform the programme, but
also to measure progress.

3.3.2 Assessment Phase

The previous steps have prepared

three of the four dimensions of the
RTR management system: the
mandate and objectives, the people
and the processes. The assessment
phase now serves to finalise the last remaining dimension: RTR projects are prepared, designed and
established so that the programme can become operational.

The following steps VI to VIII are most efficiently and effectively implemented in one go, within a
period of about three weeks. Red tape is often characterised by long delays and frustrations. The
announcement of reducing red tape often meets with hope but also disbelief. If the assessment
phase is implemented at a fast pace, this will send a message that smart tape is within reach. The
raised expectations of officials and businesses are met, trust in the programme is built and the
willingness of stakeholders to participate is high.

7
Consult the handbook on M&E in LBE programmes, IFC, GTZ & DFID. 2008. The Monitoring and Evaluation
Handbook for Business Environment Reform.

47
Table 3.2: Exemplary M&E system for an RTR programme

Objectives Indicators Verification

Higher-level impacts contributed to by the programme (for observation only)

1) New economic
Gross value added and employment grow Official statistical sources,
opportunities are created for
faster that the national average by [year] annual measurement
the local community
2) The productivity and The local productivity and market share of
Official statistical sources,
competitiveness of the local economic sectors grows faster than the
annual measurement
economy is enhanced national average by [year]
Programme Outcome
The LBE (defined by dialogue and state-
3) The continuous reduction business relations, infrastructure,
and avoidance of red tape regulatory environment, land and Local Business Environment
8
improves service delivery and property rights, government support, and Survey , annual measurement
the LBE quality of life) improves by 20% between
[year] and [year].
Intermediary Outcome
The public-private dialogue analysis
Tool 2 Public-Private Dialogue
4a) A PPD is initiated reveals a cooperation improvement in at
Analysis, annual measurement
least three catagories by [date]
4b) The awareness of the
At least 30% of municipal staff can provide
importance of reducing red Quick staff survey, annual
the correct rationale for and strategic
tape for improved service measurement
intent of red tape reduction by [date]
delivery and LBE is created
4c) Exemplary solutions to a
selection of core local red At least 60% of the RTR programme RTR project M&E systems,
tape problems are projects achieve their objectives by [date] annual measurement
implemented
Output or Services of the Programme
The political sphere actively supports the
5a) The mandate and
programme, which is listed in the IDP and
objectives of the RTR
budgeted for throughout programme
programme are established Report on the
implementation
conceptuatlisation and
The champions and their staff allocate
implementation of the RTR, IDP,
5b) The champions and sufficient time to the programme, based
programme management
support staff are mandated, on their performance management
sytem, continuous monitoring
prepared and implement the agreements, job descriptions and work
programme assignments throughout programme
implementation
5c) RTR projects are being
At least 60% of the RTR projects are
implemented and monitored RTR project M&E systems,
implemented based on the original project
together with the private continuous monitoring
planning by [date]
sector
5d) Information on rules, Quick survey of the level of
regulations, procedures and The outputs of each programme cycle step information of selected senior
systems hampering a is disseminated internally and managers, councillors and
favourable LBE is created, externallybetween [date] and [date] businesses, continuous
discussed and disseminated monitoring

8
An efficient way of measuring the LBE is suggested in ROGERSON, C.M. 2009. Economic governance and the
local business environment: evidence from two economically lagging provinces of South Africa. Pretoria: GTZ.

48
Hence the assessment phase is a very intensive work period. It is unlikely that the programme
champion and staff have sufficient resources to dedicate three weeks of full-time work to the
programme in addition to their normal work. Contracting facilitation support is therefore a solution
for smooth implementation. There is, however, a further reason for involving a facilitator.
Experience shows that only an external team can facilitate an objective and demand-oriented issue
selection, diagnosis and solution process.

Consider a number of examples: a municipal official is unlikely to speak freely, if interviewed by his
superior on a red tape issue actually caused by this very superior. Similarly, a businessperson might
fear repercussions if the information provided about potentially corrupt tendering practices is not
treated confidentially. A manager accused of misconduct cannot mediate conflicts with the private
sector or another manager in a municipality.

Therefore external facilitation support is suggested for an efficient and effective assessment phase.
The high number of tasks to be carried out in a short time period require careful preparation. The
interviews are conducted in the first week and the prioritised red tape issues are decided upon
immediately afterwards. Then the diagnosis and solution workshops are conducted and the projects
are established immediately afterwards.
The number of red tape issues to be
VI. Identifying Projects
tackled in a particular year of the RTR
A preliminary step for the completion of the last
programme depends on the available
remaining programme dimension is the identification
resources, the time allocated by the
and selection of RTR projects. During the preparation
involved staff and the financial
of the programme, the stakeholders involved are likely
resources made available. Less is
already to mention certain red tape issues which are
more! Rather focus on three red tape
their concern. However, only a participatory and
issues and solve them, than tackle ten
therefore demand-driven, structured approach will
projects, of which seven fail due to
reveal the red tape issues which are hindering service
lack of dedicated resources.
delivery from the municipal client’s point of view.

A series of structured interviews with senior management, selected middle and lower-level staff, as
well as selected councillors of the local municipality follow the announcement of the programme. At
the same time, a small sample of businesses (and possibly civil society organisations) of varying sizes
in all major economic sectors of the local economy are interviewed. These interviews serve three
equally essential purposes:

1. To manage expectations by checking and then if necessary correcting the understanding of the
programme based on the initial announcement
2. To gain insight into who is keen to reduce red tape and who is less so, by uncovering motivating
factors and opportunities, but also fears, risks, hidden agendas and vested interests
3. To identify red tape issues both within the municipal structures as well as between the
municipality and the business.

The results of the municipal and business interviews are then assessed in a hypothesis workshop
between the interviewers, the process facilitator and the process champions. In the workshop, the
red tape issues identified by the public and private sector are, if possible, matched. Furthermore, the
motivations of the stakeholders involved in a red tape issue are assessed and the chances of

49
successfully creating smart tape with these stakeholders and within a reasonable timeframe are
evaluated.

The workshop informs a written recommendation on which red tape issues to prioritise for
implementation. The bodies that need to approve the selection – already identified in the
preparation of the process dimension of the management system – meet and take a decision. The
resulting selection of red tape issues is communicated to all stakeholders involved in the programme
so far, using the established communication processes. A public announcement in the local media is
advisable, particularly if further private sector stakeholders need to be mobilised for the next steps.

The municipal and business interviews as well as the the hypothesis workshop are further explained
in the following tools. Templates for these tools can be found in Chapter 4.11 and 4.12.

Tool 4 Municipal and Business Interviews

This tool provides interview templates as well as indications on how to organise

the interview process.

Tool 5 Hypothesis Workshop Format

The workshop format provides a guidline on how to arrive at a choice of red tape
reduction issues, which have a good chance of being implemented in a reasonable
timeframe.

VII. Diagnosis and Solutions

Chapter 2 outlined all the necessary steps to diagnose, analyse and find solutions to red tape issues.
Now the task is to apply these steps to the selected red tape issues. In most cases, a series of
workshops and meetings between the public and private sector for each of the prioritised red tape
issues are the core of the step. Note that the time requirements for this task are not to be
underestimated. It might take a workshop and several meetings to diagnose and analyse a red tape
issue and several more to identify solutions based on the suggested steps in Chapter 2.

The workshops are essential to build trust between public officials and business people, which is a
basis for ongoing public-private dialogue. Individuals get to know each other and constructively
analyse a specific issue and discuss how red tape can be turned into smart tape. Business people
often contribute ideas on how to structure procedures more efficiently but at the same time learn
from the public officials about legal requirements.

The appropriate diagnosis, analysis and solution-finding tools are described in Chapter 2, and the
tool below provides a checklist for the organisation of the workshops. The template for the tool can
be found in Chapter 4.13.

50
 Tool 6 Checklist for the Diagnosis Workshops

The workshops need to be prepared well. This checklist provides a guide on how
to organise successful red tape diagnosis workshops.

VIII. Establishing Projects

The diagnosis and solution workshops create a
number of outputs which complete the project
dimension of the RTR management system. For
red tape issues requiring project or change
management, which applies to most projects,
an implementation plan with clear timeframes
and objectives is defined. Public and private
representatives commit to task teams for the
implementation of these projects and
facilitation support is secured, if necessary.
Furthermore, a results-based M&E system is
established for each project. It feeds into the
overall M&E system of the programme, as shown in Table 3.2 earlier in this chapter. The defined
projects are likely to need the approval of senior management and the political sphere. The full
extent of what it means to reduce red tape only becomes apparent at this stage and the proposed
solutions need approval. Hence the already prepared decision-making processes are utilised. Based
on the approval, the work assignments and performance agreements of the municipal staff involved
are updated. It is important that not only the RTR programme champion and staff have clear
incentives and a mandate, but also those people who are involved in project implementation.
Otherwise it is likely that other change processes or routine tasks will be prioritised over the RTR
projects.

Finally, as for all outputs of the various steps of the RTR cycle, information on the proposed solutions
to red tape, timeframes and responsibilities are distributed to all public and private stakeholders
who have been involved in the programme so far. The
Figure 3.6: The Compass of Local Competitiveness
by now established communication processes are used
for this purpose. Besides updating the involved
stakeholder on progress, communicating the projects
helps to establish clear accountability and ownership.

Chapter 2 has already outlined the critical factors of

project and change management. One option to
develop an implementation plan and a results-based
monitoring and evaluation system at the same time is
to use the ’Compass of Local Competitiveness’ (GTZ &
mesopartner, 2010). The compass is a participatory
performance management tool, used in the context of
local economic development (LED) initiatives (see

51
Figure 3.6). It is based on the Balanced Scorecard, a performance management tool often applied in
the private sector. The Compass uses the principles of the Balanced Scorecard to assist with:

• Articulating a vision and objectives

• Aligning key stakeholders
• Identifying critical success factors for successful implementation
• Defining key performance indicators and specific targets
• Defining specific activities to achieve these targets

We suggest using the tools provided in Chapter 2 to support the RTR project M&E system. The red
tape problem statement, the symptoms, the cause and effect diagram, and the flow diagrams
describe the situation before the intervention. These tools therefore not only serve to diagnose and
analyse red tape, but as baseline information for M&E. Once smart tape is implemented, one simply
has to evaluate whether the problem statement really has been addressed, the symptoms have
disappeared and whether the redefined flow diagram or the service blueprint is working in practice.

3.3.3 Implementation Phase

The description of all four dimensions of the RTR management

system is now complete. It is only now that the programme
implementation starts. With mandates and objectives in place,
people prepared, and the processes already in use, the projects can
now move forward. Experience shows that the RTR cycle is
implemented fairly smoothly in the scoping and assessment phase.
It is often in the implementation phase that blockages occur, as
there is always opposition to the implementation of innovation and
change processes. The health check for change processes
(ChangeWright, 2008) serves as a final test of whether the
programme, i.e. the management system, is integrated and robust.

The change management and organisational development aspects of red tape reduction is discussed
in Chapter 3.4, and a template for the instrument can be found in Chapter 4.14.

Tool 7 Health Check for Change Processes

The ’health check’ is a spreadsheet that contains a list of critical items to be

considered for both designing and assessing the change process throughout its
lifespan.

52
IX. Implementing Projects
The implementation plans for the RTR projects contain all of the necessary activities, timeframes,
and objectives that guide implementation. Whatever the exact nature of the projects, the teams set
out to produce first drafts of new rules and regulations, procedures and systems, and stakeholder
interfaces.

Note that this should start right after the first diagnosis workshops. So-called ‘quick wins’ – solutions
than can be implemented within a few days – often do not need long design, approval or
consultation processes. Signs directing businesses and citizens to offices in the municipal premises
can be printed and put up within an hour. However, complex solutions to red tape require a lot of
preparation by the project teams, possibly including feasibility studies, funding applications or staff
training initiatives. While a new by-law for street traders can be drafted and approved within a few
weeks, it might take months to design a first draft of a revised billing system or a customer care
programme.

The programme champion actively manages this step of establishing first drafts of new rules and
regulations, procedures and systems, and stakeholder interfaces. Based on the project and process
dimension of the management system, four management elements are required:

1. Facilitation Support

The programme champions initiate and then support the work of the project teams, if required with
the help of an external facilitator. Some teams might implement the solutions very fast, while others
might need extensive guidance and support. The latter is the more likely case, because otherwise an
RTR programme would not have been necessary in the first place. In the absence of capacity,
managing by objectives does not work. Considerable time needs to be allocated to network the
project team members, facilitate solutions and guide individuals.

To find ways of reducing the time requirement of rezoning, for instance, the champions support the
town planning officials to establish the legal background by contracting an external expert with RTR
programme funds. Then the champion facilitates consultations with other municipalities in the
district on possible solutions. Finally, the champion initiates a session with HR and the responsible
senior manager to review the functions of the town planning unit. Based on these inputs, the town
planning official finally drafts a new rezoning procedure.

2. Results-Based Monitoring

Experience shows that project team meetings on a regular basis are indispensable to monitor and
support the implementation process. Of course, detailed activities, timeframes and objectives of the
RTR project implementation plans are indispensable for effective monitoring of progress. A
suggested format for these monitoring sessions are workshops where all project teams present the
status of their projects to each other. The team members can then exchange successes and failures,
and thereby learn from other teams. This creates an environment where all involved stakeholders
are motivated, progress is rewarded, commitment renewed, responsibilities clarified and
accountability to the objectives of the RTR programme upheld.

53
3. Reporting

The champions in turn regularly report to their superiors on the results of the RTR project result-
based monitoring, as well as the overall RTR programme progress. They use the established
reporting processes for this purpose. The more integrated these reporting processes are in the
existing municipal management practices, the better. Senior management or mayoral committee
meetings are obvious possibilities.

4. Decision Making

Finally, the established decision-making processes serve to approve the reporting, take action if the
results-based monitoring results suggest major delays or deviations from objectives, and last but not
least to approve the developed draft rules and regulations, procedures and systems, and
stakeholder interfaces.

X. Consultations
Each project will typically reach a point where rules
and regulations, procedures and systems, and the One of the most common red tape issues
stakeholder interface of a particular red tape issue in the South African municipal context is
are revised and ready for implementation. This is a long delays and unclear procedures in the
critical point in red tape reduction and the public- approval of building plans. Once a task
private dialogue on the creation of a conducive team has designed optimal procedures,
business environment and effective service delivery. these are then presented to the business
community – such as architects,
In its regulatory capacity, the municipality sets the
developers and construction companies –
framework conditions for all businesses to operate in
in order to make sure that all relevant
the local economy. Correspondingly, the smart tape
businesses approve of the solution as
solution has to be recognised as such by all affected
smart tape.
businesses. In a consultation workshop, the private
sector gets the chance to comment and approve of
the draft solution. This caters for the risk that unintended consequences of a regulation or
procedure lead to market distortions, such as providing an unfair advantage to specific businesses or
even excluding certain businesses from the market. At the same time, the workshop serves to
communicate the proposed solution to all relevant stakeholders.

With slight adaptations, Tool 6 provides suitable guidance on how to organise and facilitate a
consultation workshop.

After incorporating possible amendments based on the consultations, the smart tape solution needs
approval through the RTR programme decision-making processes. At this stage, this might for
instance mean the official adoption of a new law by council, which in turn very often legally requires
certain communication processes to the public. At the same time, the approval and communication
is also the mandate for the stakeholders involved to institutionalise smart tape.

54
XI. Institutionalisation
The smart tape rules and regulations, procedures and systems, and stakeholder interfaces are now
legally in place. Having drafted these solutions to red tape issues, the stakeholders involved have
already undergone a learning process and have a good idea of how to institutionalise the innovative
ways of doing business. As it is unlikely that all institutionalisation features are foreseen in the
establishment of RTR projects, it might be advisable to adapt the project implementation plans,
timeframes and objectives.

Once again, the programme champions actively manage institutionalisation of the new rules and
regulations, procedures and systems, and stakeholder interfaces, based on the above-mentioned
four management elements: facilitation support, results-based monitoring, reporting and decision
making. By now the RTR management system should be well established and smoothly operating – if
not, it is unlikely to have achieved the described outputs and intermediary outcomes. Strictly
following the system elements will ensure that smart tape becomes institutionalised.

While this step is described only briefly in this manual as it builds on methods and tools already
described above, it is important to realise that this is the most important step in the entire RTR
programme. A new law, even if adopted by council, does not turn red tape into smart tape. Only its
implementation by means of operating the adapted procedures - possibly with new staff with a
different attitude, in a new office, with a new IT system, and new ways of law enforcement - make
the difference. The RTR projects end when the defined objectives have been achieved. For instance,
only when the result-based project-monitoring shows that the timeframe for vehicle registration - in
reality and in day-to-day practice - was reduce by the targeted 30 days, comes the respective project
to an end. Once the objectives have been achieved, it is time to evaluate progress.

3.3.4 Evaluation Phase

The main purpose of the evaluation phase is to celebrate

success, learn from failures, and conceptualise the next
cycle of red tape reduction. Of course, the primary
evaluation tasks are to compare the progress of the
programme and projects to the defined objectives, based
on the respective M&E systems. These evaluation results
also inform the performance appraisals of the people
involved – from the programme champion to the staff involved. However, the main purpose remains
to look ahead and provide the environment for continued red tape reduction.

XII. Preparing the next Programme Cycle

The established M&E systems allow a comparison of
the progress of the programme and its projects to Consider fast tracking the reporting and
the defined objectives. While the programme decision-making by inviting the decision
already might have been planned to run over several makers right away to the results-based
years, this step structures the assessment of monitoring sessions.
progress, learning from failures and planning of the
next cycle of the RTR programme. We suggest three
evaluation steps:

55
1. Was the RTR programme effective in
Figure 3.7: Evaluating the RTR Programme
achieving the main outcome objective? In
the exemplary M&E system illustrated in
Outcomes Service Delivery
Figure 3.7, the main objective relates to the Conducive LBE
improved business environment and/or Awareness and
excellence in service delivery. Evaluating the Intermediary Information
outcome indicator measured by the specified Outcomes Public-Private
verification method provides the answer as Dialogue
to whether the RTR programme continues in Smart Tape
the next municipal planning cycle or whether Mandate and
Objective
it can be ended. Outputs
People
2. Was the programme effective in achieving its
Projects
intermediary outcomes? In the exemplary Processes
M&E system shown in Figure 3.7, these
objectives relate to the creation of information on red tape, the public-private dialogue, and the
effective reduction of red tape. Evaluating the intermediary outcome indicators provides the
answer to whether the programme champions have achieved their goal or not. This evaluation
step therefore informs the performance appraisal of the champions, as they are responsible for
implementing the programme.
3. Was the programme effectively implemented? In the exemplary M&E system in Table 3.2, the
output objectives relate to the various elements of the four management system dimensions.
This evaluation step not only informs the performance appraisal of the champions and other
staff involved, it first and foremost allows one to learn how to adapt the management system in
order to improve effectiveness.

An efficient way to evaluate the RTR programme with these three questions is for the programme
champions to prepare the evaluation and to assess the results in a workshop. All major stakeholders,
such as the mayor, mayoral committee members, selected councillors, senior management, as well
as the co-champions from the private sector and BMO representatives, should attend the workshop.

Provided the evaluation results suggest a continuation of the RTR programme, the
recommendations from the lessons learnt are implemented by again engaging in step I of the
programme cycle.

XIII. Celebrating Success

The RTR programme, with its focus on problems, challenges and issues, by definition triggers a
rather negative overall association, even though it is more than often very much welcomed by both
public officials and businesses. Smart champions realise the value of celebrating success to motivate
the creation of smart tape. Celebrating success is part of creating an incentive for change and
innovation, by awarding agents of change. The celebration objectives are to increase the motivation
for sustained red tape reduction on an individual and an organisational level.

On the one hand, success is celebrated on an everyday basis to motivate staff during project
implementation. The champions and the facilitator might simply thank staff individually for putting
in an extra effort. A second simple technique to celebrate success is to ask project teams what went
well since the last meeting. Alternatively, one might simply invite the task team out to lunch to

56
celebrate the achievement of a specific milestone, such as a successful consultation workshop with
the tourist and hospitality sectors on a new by-law of street signage. Finally, the evaluation results,
positive or negative, of course need to inform the performance appraisals of the people involved –
from the programme champion to the involved staff – as set out in the respective management
system elements.

On the other hand, the successes should be celebrated both internally and externally, based on the
reporting, information and communication elements of the process management dimension. This
will help to raise the project teams profile and credentials for future projects. However, such success
stories are not only a source of motivation for the team, but also a matter of public relations of the
municipality and the participating BMO. The municipality can show that it is efficiently and
effectively providing services to the public and the BMO can show that it is effectively advocating the
interests of their member businesses.

3.4 Understanding organisational development and change aspects of

red tape reduction

When attempting to improve or address issues related to red tape in an organisation, it is important
to recognise the change management aspects of these interventions. Managers and consultants
often intuitively understand that larger or more sensitive interventions must be properly managed
both from a project management and a change management perspective, but the importance of
proper management of smaller interventions is often underestimated.

A distinction can be made between organisational development and change management. At the
core of organisational development is the concept of ‘organisation’, which is defined as two or more
people working together towards one or more shared goals. Development in this context is the
notion that an organisation may become more effective over time at achieving its goals through
purposeful attempts to address certain inefficiencies or to create new ways of doing things. Typical
organisation development practices include business re-engineering, hierarchy or organisational
restructuring, technology upgrades or training. Most organisation development approaches are
planned, implemented organisation-wide and managed from the top. They are meant to increase
organisational effectiveness and health.

For instance, the management of an organisation might decide to improve its customer service using
an organisational development approach. Their programme could include:

• running an organisation-wide communication campaign on customer service and why it is

important
• holding department or unit-based workshops with staff to identify areas where customer
service can be improved
• reducing the steps in processing a query from a customer
• improving the IT systems to make customer information management faster and more
integrated
• increasing the decision-making ability of frontline service personnel by changing a policy
about delegation of authority
• changing the financial reward system for customer service and management staff

57
 • redesigning the areas where customer-staff interaction takes place to a more customer-
friendly environment.

The example provided above is generic enough to illustrate a typical customer service improvement
programme in a large retail store or in a municipality. But the example is specific enough to show
that an organisational development programme is systematic with planned approaches to change.
Furthermore, this example shows how an organisational development approach could address three
different kinds of red tape.

Thus the purpose of organisational development is to increase the effectiveness of the

organisational systems, and to fully develop the potential of all the individuals and units of an
organisation. In most cases, organisational development practitioners are professionals with more
than 10 years’ management experience, appropriate qualifications and membership of professional
bodies. A textbook that is often prescribed in organisational development courses is An experiential
approach to organisation development, by Don Harvey and Donald Brown (2005). For consultants or
facilitators, the book by Edward Schein (1999) is recommended: Process Consultation Revisited:
Building the helping relationship. Process consulting describes the role of an external professional
that guides organisational development and change processes.

Change management is often seen as a more specific aspect of organisational development, but is
very often seen as a less systemic and more issue-specific approach. People often intuitively
understand and recognise the need for change, as humans are subjected to change on a daily basis.
It is often claimed that people reject or resent change because it takes them out of their comfort
zone. While this may be true in some cases, what is often overlooked is that it requires a mental and
physical effort for individuals to change their behaviour or attitude. Thus a positive vision of the
benefits or rationale for change and a managed process already enhances the likelihood of a
successful change process (Figure 3.8). While individuals in their personal capacities often struggle to
cope with change, it is even more difficult to achieve change in an organisational context where the
failure or anxiety of individuals affects their colleagues, thus influencing the outcomes of a change
process.

The difficulty of achieving change in organisations even when the benefits of the change are very
clear has led to the emergence of a specialised field called change management. In change
management, change is seen as a carefully designed process that must be managed. A change
management approach requires that the individuals subjected to change receive dedicated attention
at the same time that a technical or organisational change is taking place. Thus change management
is about the human dimension that typically accompanies technical or organisational changes.

Central to change management is the realisation that people tend to resist changes they do not
understand, value or approve of. A properly managed change intervention takes cognisance of the
fact that organisational systems and not just individuals can resist change. To ensure a successful
change process it is necessary to use influence and strategic thinking in order to create vision and
identify those crucial, early steps towards it. In addition, the organisation must recognise and accept
the dissatisfaction that exists by communicating industry trends, leadership ideas, best practice and
competitive analysis to explain the necessity for change.

58
Figure 3.8 The change process

Future state
“what” and “where”
we want to be

Change through
ge
interventions an
Performance

ch
to
ce
an
sist
Re

Present state
“what” and
“where” we
are now.

Time

From a red tape reduction perspective, resistance to change does not come about only when
attempting to ‘fix’ a specific red tape issue. The resistance might actually already start long before
the actual intervention during the activities to identify or diagnose specific organisational
inefficiencies, with some people not wanting to participate or be honest about the symptoms or
effects of red tape. Sometimes inefficiencies or administrative (or legal) processes allow some
people to gain bargaining power. In some instances this bargaining power might lead to corruption,
but in most cases people use this power to further their own ambitions or to remain relevant. In
other cases, people might resist addressing a red tape issue because the clumsy design of the system
hides their own insecurities, incompetencies or performance levels. It might even be the case that
people resist addressing red tape because they do not like the champion, or because they are afraid
that they might become obsolete if the efficiency of the system is improved.

A very useful book that can be given to leaders or managers of a change process to equip them for
their journey is Our iceberg is melting: Changing and succeeding under any conditions by John Kotter
and Holger Rathgeber (2006).In it they describe the following 8-stage process of successful for
change.

Set the stage:

1. Create a sense of urgency

Help others to see the need for change and the importance of acting immediately.
2. Pull together a guiding coalition
Make sure there is a powerful group guiding the change — one with leadership skills, bias
towards action, credibility, communications ability, authority, analytical skills.

Decide what to do:

3. Develop a change vision and strategy

59
 Clarify how the future will be different from the past, and how you can make that future a
reality.

Make it happen:

4. Communicate for understanding and buy-in

Make sure as many others as possible understand and accept the vision and the strategy.
5. Empowering others to act
Remove as many barriers as possible so that those who want to make the vision a reality can
do so.
6. Produce short-term wins
Create some visible, unambiguous successes as soon as possible.
7. Consolidate gain and produce more change
Press harder and faster after the first successes. Be relentless with instituting change after
change until the vision becomes a reality.

Make it stick:

8. Create a new culture

Hold on to the new ways of behaving, and make sure they succeed, until they become a part
of the very culture of the group.

This process is described in more detail in the book by John Kotter, Leading change (1996). An
additional resource that describes many different tools frequently used in change management is
The Change Handbook by Holman, Devane and Cade (2007).

Change interventions, and more specifically organisational development interventions, are in most
cases managed by professional facilitators or change practitioners. Depending on the intensity or
complexity of the intervention, it might be advisable to approach a professional service provider in
this regard.

In summary, many red tape interventions should be considered as change interventions, even if
these interventions seem to be purely technical (for instance, the upgrading of accounting software).
Change management deals with the human side of change, and seeks to find ways to overcome
uncertainty, resistance and confusion through a properly managed process. Organisational
development is also a change intervention, but on a much larger scale that typically affects the
whole or large parts of the organisation. In both cases, strong leadership is required.

60
Chapter 4 Additional tools, worksheets and templates

4.1 Cheat sheet to disentangle red tape fast

For experienced facilitators who are able to mix and match methods, the following steps can be used
in the context of a workshop or a process to diagnose and immediately address a red tape issue.

1. Identify and describe the issue

2. Unpack the issue using symptoms, causes and sequences
3. Map the sequence and analyse it
4. Identify multiple improvement points
5. Develop action plans and appoint action groups
6. Analyse the decision-making structures and the improvement process
7. Project manage the implementation and change process
8. Reflect and evaluate implementation
9. Celebrate!

61
4.2 Cause and effect template

1. Symptoms caused by the process 2. Symptoms related to people involved 3. Symptoms related to equipment used in the
activity

4. Symptoms related to the materials required 5. Symptoms related to the environment that the 6. Symptoms related to management
problem occurs in or where service takes place
4.3 Service blueprint template

Service blueprint

Physical
Evidence

Customer
actions

Line of interaction

Onstage/Visible
contact
employee
actions

Line of visibility

Backstage/
invisible Contact
Employee
Actions

Line of internal interaction

Support
Processes

63
4.4 Red tape reduction cycle template
4.5 Management system template

√ Mandate and objective √ People

√ Processes √ Projects

65
4.6 Parameter matrix template

66
4.7 Template to conceptualise management system elements

Management system dimension:

Management system element:

How should the element be conceptualised?

Why is it important and what are the

supporting arguments for this concept?

What needs to happen next to operationalise

this element?

Who should do this?

When should this happen?

67
4.8 Tool 1: Rainbow stakeholder mapping

Step 1: Brainstorm all stakeholders – individuals or organisations, public and private, local to national - and place them into graph
Step 2: Highlight relationships, like conflict, tensions, alliances, or cooperation
Step 3: Decide on potential primary, secondary and tertiary stakeholders to the RTR programme.

Public Sector Private Sector

Bureaucratic Market
Orientation Orientation

My
perspective
National Regional Local Local Regional National

68
4.9 Tool 2: Public private dialogue analysis

Step 1: Decide on a public and a private stakeholder

Step 2: In separate meetings, ask the stakeholders how they assess their dialogue; fill in dots on the agreement scale of ++ to --.
Step 3: Compare the results. Decide on what dialogue features the RTR programme can build, and what needs to be improved through the programme
Step 4: Share the results with the stakeholders, if possible. Use this tool to monitor progress in the public private dialogue.

by the private stakeholder by the public stakeholder

Elements Question on how the dialogue is assessed
++ + - -- ++ + - --

Goal “We periodically define goals”

Agreement “We have a clear understanding of duties and liabilities”

Agreement Compliance “We stick to our agreement”

“We provide contact persons and adequate means of

Communication
communication”

Trust “We inform actively on our agenda”

Benefits & Opportunities “We benefit from the cooperation and derive
opportunities”

Costs & Risks “The cooperation involves considerable costs and risk”

69
4.10 Tool 3: Organisational profile

Step 1: In a workshop or a meeting with key organisational representatives, answer the statements by filling in dots on the agreement scale of ++ to --.
Step 2: Analyse the results and decide what the RTR programme can build on, and what needs to be improved. Use the tool to monitor progress.

Criteria Statement ++ + - --
Strategy The organisation has formulated goals and a medium term planning, which describes purpose, clients,
products, services and partners.
Goal Coherence The staff / members show through their behaviour their agreement with the declared goals
Centre of Expertise The organisation is focussing on tasks, which can be solved competently
Market position and client The products of the organisation are in demand; the organisation pursues its competitive advantages
orientation and is client oriented
Task structure Tasks involve the whole cycle from planning, to implementation to evaluation
Staff management The organisation appoints qualified staff at the right time and at the right place, staff has clear mandates
and is adequately supported and trained
Incentives Staff/members knows the performance criteria and they are periodically evaluated and rewarded
Relations Conflicts are immediately, openly and directly discussed with all stakeholders

Delegation The decision making power is situated where the experience and information are in place

Decisions Decisions are take timely and clearly & unmistakably

Management The management is interested in staff expectations, client orientation, limiting factors and future trends

Cost transparency The organisation knows the cost of its services and utilizes resources efficiently

Administration Administrative processes are efficient

Cooperation The organisation cares for relations to other organisations and is capable to manage and foster
Information and self- The organisation provides timely, decision-relevant and client-specific information, has a system of self-
assessment assessment and incorporates lessons learnt

70
Adaptability and The Organisation adapts to new situations quickly and invests in the research & development of
Perspective products / services

4.11 Tool 4: Municipal and business interviews

What must be done?

During a number of consecutive days, the interview team talks to a number of businesses of varying sizes and sectors, as well as a number of municipal
officials and politicians from lower to senior level. The interviews serve three equally essential purposes: 1) to manage expectations, 2) to determine who is
motivated to reduce red tape, and 3) to identify red tape issues.

Most people prefer surveys to interviews, because they are a cheaper way of gathering information. If you chose this option, be aware that surveys will not
provide the same extent and quality of information as interviews. Also be note that extremely frustrated individuals are unlikely to participate in surveys.

How?
A team of up to five external facilitators conducts interviews over 4 days. One facilitator can do about four interviews of 45 minutes per day. This results in
more than 60 interviews with public officials and businesses.

We suggest doing slightly more business interviews than municipal interviews. Consulting an organisational chart and senior management helps to identify
municipal interview partners across all management levels. Consulting the major business membership organisations helps to identify a number of
interview partners from the private sector. We suggest, however, not to determine all interview partners at the beginning, but to follow the leads
uncovered in the course of the interview process. For instance, if a businessperson mentions a red tape issue, determine with other businesses from the
sector whether they experience the same problem.

The template below provides all the necessary questions for the interviews. Each interview is captured with this template. Let the team determine what the
best interview style is. A short sharing and learning session before and after the first interviews determines which methods lead to the best insights.

What next?
After each interview day, the team and the programme champions gather to share and compare the insights. “Who has been interviewed?”, “What are the
identified red tape issues?”, “Who is involved in these issues?”, and “who needs to be interviewed next?” are guiding questions for these mini workshops.
They allow to flexibly manage the interview process and keep all interviewers updated on the latest findings.

71
 □ Yes Name,
Disclosure of personal details
organisation,
and statements □ No position

Contact details Description of

organisation, or
Cell, Email, Address function

“What have you heard about

the RTR programme?”
Provide more information if
necessary

“What red tape issues have

you experienced in recent
months?”

“Are others experiencing the

same red tape issues?”

“Are you willing to support “Who else should

the programme?” we speak to?”

72
4.12 Tool 5: Hypothesis workshop

What must be done?

The interviewers, the process facilitator and the process champions assess the results of the municipal and business interviews in a hypothesis workshop
immediately after the interviews. The results are treated as preliminary findings, as only the unpacking of the issues reveals the full information. The
workshop leads to a written recommendation on which red tape issues to prioritise for implementation, which is considered by the decision makers of the
programme.

How?
We suggest organising the workshop according the following steps:

Step 1: Prepare a large table or several pin boards, and then create a section and label for all red tape issues identified during the interview process.
Step 2: Write a short problem statement for each red tape issue, and allocate cards with the names of all interviewees who have raised this issues,
separated according to public and private sector. Highlight those people who are willing to support the RTR programme on an issue.
Step 3: Add the names of the managers and officials who are responsible for or working on the red tape issues in the municipality. Highlight those who are
willing to support the RTR programme.
Step 4: Determine those red tape issues with the best overlap between the public and private sector and the best support from the stakeholders.
Step 5: Apply the prioritisation tool in Table 2.1, chapter 2.3 to this selection and determine which issues have the best chance for success.

What next?
Write a recommendation on which red tape issues to prioritise for implementation. The bodies that need to approve the selection – already identified in
the preparation of the process dimension of the management system – then meet and take a decision immediatedly. The resulting selection of red tape
issues is communicated to all stakeholders involved in the programme so far, using the established communication processes. A public announcement in
the local media is advisable, particularly if further private sector stakeholders need to be mobilised for the next steps.

73
4.13 Tool 6: Check list for diagnosis workshops

Before the workshop

Plan the facilitated workshop based on the tools in chapter 2
Have the plan approved by the programme decision makers
Determine which public and private sector stakeholders need to be part of the workshop
Ask some businesses and officials what an appropriate workshop date and time is
Book a large enough venue that suits the invitees, with lots of natural light and without tables
Organise facilitation material, like pin boards, cards and markers, as well as catering
Write an invitation with all the relevant information (what, why, how, when, where) and send it to the selected stakeholders
Call the invitees a few days later and ask them whether they will participate. Provide additional information, if required
Two days before the workshop, send a reminder SMS to the invitees. Repeat this a few hours before the workshop
Prepare the room, if possible the day before the workshop, and make sure catering and materials are ready.
At the workshop
Be there well before the workshop starts and do last preparations
Personally welcome the participants when they enter the room
Start on time, even if not all participants have arrived yet
Facilitate the workshop based on the plan, or on a flexible basis according to new insights
Take pictures of participants during the workshop
Make sure next steps, tasks, responsibilities and timeframes are determined towards the end of the workshop
Ask the participants who else should have been at the workshop
Thank participants for their support and close the workshop on time
Take pictures of all workshop outputs, pack materials and clean up the venue
After the workshop
Write a short but concise workshop report within 24 hours, include the pictures as references
Send it to all participants for their perusal or comments and thank them again for their support
Oversee the implementation of tasks and involve additional stakeholders (if applicable).

74
4.14 Tool 7: Health Check for change processes

The health check, provided by Ivan Overton from ChangeWright, is an Excel spreadsheet that contains a list of possible items to consider when assessing the
health of your change initiative. It is intended to be completed by those facilitating and/or leading the change, during a session specifically scheduled for
this purpose. Two to three hours should allow adequate time for some discussion and debate. One can also add own items by inserting rows or
modify/delete the existing items as appropriate. Download the full tool at http://www.change-management-toolbook.com (registered users only).

++ + - --
There is an explicit internal sponsor for the change process. There is no explicit internal sponsor for the change process.
There is an effective and explicit performance management There is no effective and explicit performance management
process which is fully aligned with the change initiative process, or if there is, it is not aligned with the change process.
There is adequate organisational capacity to deal with the There is inadequate organisational capacity to deal with the
current change initiative. current change initiative.
There is a documented case for change, which is brief, clear, There is no case for change, or if there is, it is too long, vague,
logical and compelling, and is well-accepted within the confusing, and/or irrelevant.
There is a definite and formal process in place to identify all the There is no definite or formal process in place to identify all the
risks related to the change process. risks related to the change process.
There is a common acceptance among employees that the There is a common perception among employees that the
status quo is not desirable and that change is necessary. status quo is desirable and that change is not necessary.
There are well-monitored processes in place to manage the There are no processes in place to manage the risks related to
risks related to the change processes. the change process, or such processes are not well monitored.
There are people from within the organisation who are Nobody from within the organisation is held accountable for
accountable for the change management process. the change process.
The strategy and strategic vision is clearly and effectively The strategy and strategic vision is not communicated very
communicated to all employees. clearly or effectively to all employees.
The sponsor markets the change process on a continuous basis The sponsor does not market the change process on a
in a very visible way. continuous basis or in a visible way.
The sponsor has the support of senior management regarding The sponsor does not enjoy the support of senior management
the change process, and is also well-respected within the regarding the change process, or is not well-respected within
The sponsor has taken ownership of the change process. The sponsor has not taken ownership of the change process.

75
The organisation has a history of largely successful change The organisation has a history of failed change initiatives.
initiatives.
The likely impact of the change is well understood by all The likely impact of the change is poorly understood by many
involved. of those involved.
The communication programme uses several channels of The communication programme is dependent on one or two
communication, and the effectiveness of communication is communication channels only, or the effectiveness of
The communication programme is creative, easy to The communication programme is dull, confusing, or poorly
understand, and well-executed. executed.
The communication programme is based on honesty and The communication is not honest or transparent.
transparency.
The communication programme elicits interaction and The communication programme does not allow for interaction
encourages open feedback. or open feedback is not encouraged.
The change process is visibly supported by senior management. Senior management do not visibly support the change process.
The change process is managed through a formal, well- There is no formal, well-documented or focused overall plan,
documented and focused overall plan. or the change process is not managed according to it.
Systems and processes have been put in place to support There are no systems and processes in place to support people
people during and after the change process. during and after the change process.
Stakeholder issues and needs are explicitly accommodated in Stakeholder issues and needs are not accommodated in the
the change process. change process.
Major issues and needs have been identified and documented There has been no identification and documentation of major
for each significant stakeholder. issues and needs for significant stakeholders.
Individuals who are responsible for the change initiative have a Individuals who are responsible for the change initiative lack
very good understanding of typical human emotional reactions understanding of typical human emotional reactions to change,
Employees understand how they personally will benefit from Employees cannot see how they personally will benefit from
the change process. the change process.
Employees understand how the business will benefit from the Employees do not understand how the business will benefit
change process. from the change process.
Employees have an excellent understanding of how the change Employees do not understand how the change process relates
process relates to the organisation's strategy. to the organisation's strategy.
Change initiatives usually result in lasting change which is well- Change initiatives are not followed through and often "fizzle
supported by appropriate internal systems. out" after the initial spurt of activity.

76
Change agents are well trained and understand their role. Change agents are not well trained and/or do not understand
At present, there are no other major change initiatives h present,
At i l there are many other change initiatives happening
happening in the organisation, or if there are, they are limited at the same time in the organisation.
All the stakeholders in the change process have been identified There has not been a formal identification of stakeholders in
in a formal manner. the change process.
A well-organised communication programme is in place to There is no communication programme in place to support the
support the change process. change process.
A network of change agents is in place to support the change There is no network of change agents in support of the change
process. process.
A formal system is in place to track those individuals who find it There is no formal system to track those individuals who find it
difficult to cope with the change process. difficult to cope with the change process.
A detailed and formalised implications analysis has been No detailed and formalised implications analysis has been
undertaken for the areas affected by the change process, or if undertaken for the areas affected by the change process, nor is

77
Source list and additional reading
BITNER, M.J., OSTROM, A.L. & MORGAN, F.N. 2008. Service blueprinting: a practical technique for
service innovation. California Management Review, 50(3):66-94.
CHANGEWRIGHT. 2008. Health Check for Change Processes. Johannesburg. [Web]
http://www.changewright.com [Date of access].
DFID, WB, IFC & OECD. 2006. The PPD Handbook, A toolkit for business environment reformers
(www.publicprivatedialogue.org).
DPLG. 2006. Stimulating and Developing Sustainable Local Economies: National Framework for Local
Economic Development (LED) in South Africa. Pretoria: The Department of Provincial and
Local Government (DPLG).
DPLG, DTI & SALGA. 2008. Improving the Local Business Environment, Better Business Environments
for shared Local Economic Growth and Development. Pretoria:
GTZ & MESOPARTNER. 2010. The Compass of Local Competitiveness: A Practical Guide. Pretoria:
GTZ & mesopartner.
GTZ & THE DPLG. 2006. Facilitators Manual. Local Red Tape Reduction to improve the Business
Climate. Version 1.1, Pretoria: Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
and the Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG).
HARVEY, D. & BROWN, D.R. 2005. An experiental approach to organization development. 7th Ed.:
Pearson Education.
HOLMAN, P., DEVANE, T. & CADY, S. 2007. The change handbook : the definitive resource on
today's best methods for engaging whole systems. 2nd. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
IFC, GTZ & DFID. 2008. The Monitoring and Evaluation Handbook for Business Environment Reform.
KOTTER, J. & RATHGEBER, H. 2006. Our iceberg is melting: Changing and succeeding under any
conditions. London: MacMillan.
KOTTER, J.P. 1996. Leading change. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
OECD. 2006. Cutting red tape. National strategies for administrative simplification. OECD Publishing.
OECD. 2009. Regulatory Impact Analysis: A Tool for Policy Coherence. Paris: OECD.
PMI. 1996. A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK). Newton Square, PA:
Project Management Institute Standards Committee.
ROGERSON, C.M. 2009. Economic governance and the local business environment: evidence from
two economically lagging provinces of South Africa. Pretoria: GTZ.
SCHEIN, E.H. 1999. Process Consultation Revisited: Building the helping relationship. Addison-
Wesley Publishing Company.
SMALL BUSINESS PROJECT. 2004. Counting the cost of Red Tape for business in South Africa.
Headline report. Johannesburg: Small Business Project.
THE GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2000. Local Government Municipal Systems Act,. Cape
Town: Government Gazette.
THE GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2004. Local Government: Municipal Finance Management
Act. No. 56 of 2003, Cape Twon:

79