Present situation and problems of evaluation work
The assessment work is basically at a standstill, and no one has asked about it. Government procurement supervision and operation institutions spend most of their energy on how to standardize the operation of government procurement, how to comply with the increasingly high policy and capital requirements of government procurement, how to meet the needs of buyers in all aspects, and how to ensure the interests of suppliers. In a word, how to complete the government procurement task without accident is the pursuit goal, and achieving this goal is a great contribution.
The assessment results are not necessarily related to the increase or decrease of personnel. Even if the regulatory authorities put forward the assessment results, they only stayed on strengthening personnel construction. Generally speaking, there is no saying that someone is not qualified to engage in government procurement and must retire, that is, in the form of assessment, it is basically ineffective and useful to give a formal feedback to the procurement staff.
The procurement center has a heavy task and insufficient manpower. It is exhausted and has no time for internal construction. There are few people, and sometimes the channels for people to enter are beyond the control of purchasing institutions. Therefore, even if there are black sheep, you can only "keep more". The personnel right basically does not belong to the current procurement center, but the quality of work is definitely a matter for the procurement center, so it is "humanized", and the network involved is basically immobile, and this line is broken.
It seems a little wise after the appearance of criminals, but it is better to do it formally than not to do it at all.
The institutional and institutional causes of these problems.
It is an objective fact that government procurement requires higher staff, especially once there are people who do not meet the post quality requirements, it will bring great risks to government procurement. Therefore, in theory, due to the particularity of work, it is necessary to adjust the position of personnel. However, due to many problems in mechanism and system, this beautiful wish met with resistance in the process of realization and was difficult to implement. At that time, the prevailing practice only replaced the serious and cold elimination system with internal management, so the actual effect of the assessment was discounted.
On the one hand, the regulatory authorities lack the means and measures to evaluate the work. How to assess the staff of centralized procurement institutions by regulatory authorities is indeed a subject that needs to be studied. Judging from the organizational system of the unit, the system model of separation of management and procurement, which is widely implemented now, separates the procurement institution from the supervision department from the subordinate relationship. The business scope of the supervision department generally stays in the approval and acceptance of the procurement plan and the supervision of the procurement site. However, the supervision department can only participate in some activities as appropriate, such as whether small procurement projects supervise the bid opening, whether the selection judges should participate every time, and so on. It shows that the opportunities for regulatory authorities and centralized procurement institutions to contact each other from the functional and institutional levels are reduced or even unfamiliar, and the law also stipulates that regulatory authorities shall not interfere in specific government procurement business. It seems that there is a legal basis to make the contact between the two departments less and less, then the contradiction between the professional ethics of people who are separated from each other and need to be closely tracked will become more and more serious, and the assessment methods and effects can be imagined. Moreover, even if the assessment results are true and effective, because the regulatory authorities have no personnel rights and system problems, the regulatory authorities only have the right to suggest the assessment results of procurement personnel, which greatly affects the effectiveness of the assessment. Even if the regulatory authorities want to take coercive measures, institutional problems force them to give up their efforts in this regard. This situation often leads to the lack of initiative in the assessment of procurement personnel by regulatory authorities. So the passivity and perfunctory in form will inevitably appear. Due to the lack of multi-level contact between work and business, the understanding of the staff is relatively unfamiliar, or the regulatory authorities will not take this risk and draw conclusions only from hearsay. Moreover, even if the relevant information is submitted to the procurement center, from the perspective of departmental interests, the procurement center will generally have the mentality of "protecting the calf". It is also true that the so-called dirty laundry should not be published. In fact, the regulatory authorities still have deep-seated concerns. They are worried that too strict assessment behavior may undermine the relationship between the regulatory authorities and operating institutions. After all, government procurement is a lose-lose and win-win thing. I believe that the management of internal personnel in procurement will not be allowed to drift. In order to do a good job, the management work will certainly keep up, so the regulatory authorities are not willing to intervene in the evaluation affairs in this field. They have a lot of work to do.
On the other hand, the procurement center also lacks the incentive mechanism of internal assessment. Judging from the current construction of government procurement executive agencies, there are few independent procurement agencies in the true sense, and almost all procurement agencies are managed by "mother-in-law". This situation will inevitably lead to the lack of initiative in system construction and personnel arrangement, and even lead to the establishment and cancellation of government procurement centers. This kind of fundamental and basic decision-making will conform to humanism at will, then the foundation will be unstable and the work situation will be difficult to carry out. It will be more difficult to assess the internal personnel and the subsequent handling opinions. In particular, personnel rights and punishment rights are in the hands of leaders. It is not unprecedented to use the establishment and cancellation of the procurement center to arrange related households, because the establishment of the procurement center is a fully funded institution according to law. With the implementation of the Civil Service Law and the restructuring of public institutions, it is difficult for a large number of graduates to find fixed jobs, and the establishment of procurement centers naturally rises. Therefore, it is not surprising that people who work hard in procurement centers do not have the establishment, and those who do not belong to procurement personnel occupy the establishment. Then, it is difficult to explain how to evaluate this part of the staff who specially arranged to enter the procurement team and the influence of the collateral effect on the overall evaluation work. Moreover, at present, the concept of "a good old man who pursues harmony" is very popular in government agencies and units. After all, we are all colleagues who get along with each other, and no one wants to offend others. Because the current system requires "harmony is the most important", it offends people and may also make their mass base poor. When promoting them, the mass base is very important. At the critical moment, the leaders will not think that this comrade is principled and tough, so the person in charge of the center will squeeze through the crowd. Moreover, there is no uniform standard for whether the personnel meet the quality requirements. There are some people in the purchasing center who can't live alone, but they also have their jobs. People can make full use of their talents and materials. Those with high quality can arrange complex and important work, while those with low quality can arrange relatively simple affairs. Anyway, there is work, both good and bad. Lack of incentive and elimination mechanism, lack of understanding of the importance of work, internal assessment can only go through the motions, not effective. ㈠