Professionalism and management: Accountability versus responsiveness—recent Inland Revenue developments
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.4230150319 |
| Published date | 01 November 2006 |
| Author | Steve Matheson |
| Date | 01 November 2006 |
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT, VOL. 15,295302 (1995)
Professionalism and management: accountability versus
responsiveness-recent Inland Revenue developments
STEVE
MATHESON
UK
Board
of
Inland Revenue
INTRODUCTION
This article seeks to do three things. First, it outlines the responsibilities of the Inland
Revenue (IR). Second, it gives an overview of the scale of change that the Revenue is
now undergoing, how we are handling it and what the changes involve. Third, it
argues for the increasing similarities rather than differences these days between the
public and private sectors. Table
1
illustrates this point.
PUBLIClPRIVATE SECTOR COMPARISONS
In the private sector there are the disciplines of the bottom line and shareholder
expectation. In the public sector, on the other hand, we have very tight expenditure
control, strict accountability and the added spice of ministerial expectation. But in
all sectors-including the voluntary sector-it seems that the pressures for change
are very similar. We are all looking for greater cost efficiency, increased added
value, more for less, and quicker, better and improved customer satisfaction. That
will be familiar to you as it certainly is in the Inland Revenue.
Table 1. Public/private sector comparisons
Private:
Public:
Pressures for change:
Bottom line
Shareholders
Tight expenditure control
Accountability
Ministers
Cost efficiency
Increased value added
More for less, quicker and better
Customer satisfaction
Steve Matheson CB, MA, FBCS
is
Deputy Chairman
of
the
UK
Board
of
Inland Revenue, Somerset
House, Strand, London WC2R lLB,
UK.
CCC 0271-2075/95/030295-08
0
1995 by John Wiley
&
Sons, Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial