My definition of the word “bureaucracy” is not in the dictionary, but it is accurate nonetheless. A synonym for “bureaucracy” could be “the worship of regulations regardless of their effectiveness.” Seriously, a bureaucrat is somebody who exploits the concept that all rules and regulations are a form of “sanctity,” and that anyone who questions procedure is in violation of this covenant.
But the truth is that these rules should be amended and adapted to new circumstances, realities and efficiencies. The problem is that any suggestion of change or adaptation is met by fretting bureaucrats who resist all change as if the rules were set in stone, never to be altered.
Take, for example, the discussion over the Saudi educational system that took place at the National Dialogue recently. Education officials simply refused to accept any suggestion that the curriculum should be changed to adapt to modern circumstances. Things got even worse (or, that is to say, bureaucrats got more entrenched) when addressing the higher education system in terms of utilizing modern technology.
We have firmly established universities with spacious facilities and premises that many countries around the world would envy, but we need to objectively compare these universities with other universities in countries like the United States, Canada and Malaysia.
We need to assess how far did we use our advanced facilities that we constructed in these educational facilities and whether the number of students to the number of teachers is compatible according to standards in advanced countries.
Bureaucrats rejected the dialogue concerning the idea of developing our educational system. But they need to realize that the debate is not about personal interests. It’s about solving problems for the betterment of society. The problem is these entrenched bureaucrats stopped learning years ago and are resting on their laurels unwilling or unable to adapt to changing circumstances and needs.
I believe that closed-minded bureaucrats coveting old rules and methods deserve to be given full retirement so they can go home and relax and let others do the job required for advancing social and national — rather than personal — interests.
