Unintended negative effects of LGU awards
It has been a customary practice that some award-giving bodies, at the end of the year, recognize the efforts of the local government units (LGUs). They use these awards to acknowledge the LGUs for a job well done after complying with a checklist of requirements imposed by the award-giving bodies.
While I do not interpose any objection to this practice, I raise, however, as issues some of its unintended and negative effects, to wit:
1. LGUs may only be motivated to excel or perform well simply because of the award;
2. The practice of giving awards to LGUs is competitive. Simply put, LGUs compete for the award based on some measurable outputs of their performance;
3. LGUs that joined the contest but are not included in the circle of outstanding LGUs may think they are undeserving, feel demoralized, and assume that the awards are only meant for LGUs that are exceptional and with first-rate award application documentation; and,
4. LGUs, which participated in this competition but were not bestowed any award, may create a negative self-identification or a negative reputational consequence as “underachiever.”
I think high-performing LGUs abound, yet they don’t participate in this kind of contest, knowing that the intrinsic motivation why they perform well in their task and mandate is to serve their constituents well, give what is due them, and not because of any award to receive in the future.
The main issue is: what if these awards are not offered to local government units? Will LGUs lower their performance or perform poorly?
I suggest that the Department of the Interior and Local Government look into these negative and unintended effects of awards given by award-giving bodies to the local government units. Personally, I say with haste that good performance of LGUs should be a habit, a way of life, and not to be motivated by awards.
Reginald B. Tamayo,
Marikina City
