Last month, I went to the National Taxation Bureau office in Kaohsiung’s Lingya District (苓雅) to apply for a tax payment certificate. I figured it would be a straightforward task — something I could wrap up in about half an hour — but I was instead taught a shocking, three-day lesson.
Upon arriving at the bureau, I took a number and waited patiently. When my turn came, the staff member took one look over my documents and dryly said: “You’re missing documents. Come back after completing them.”
Of course, I asked what documents were missing exactly, but all I got was a formulaic and impatient response — no explanation and no guidance. It was as if my questions were an unwelcome disturbance.
After returning home with vague instructions and doing some online research, I was confident that I had collected all of the necessary documents. I returned to the bureau the next day, only for a staff member to point out some new issue with my paperwork. Surprised, I asked why the person helping me the day prior had not mentioned it. He shrugged and said: “Those are just the rules.”
It was not until the third day of navigating these contradictory standards that I finally managed to complete the process and get my certificate. As I left the bureau, all I felt was deep exhaustion and a sense of powerlessness.
The experience led me to reflect. Why should retrieving a simple administrative certificate require someone to make three separate trips? Why can the information not be provided all at once? Why should the standards of execution vary on an individual basis?
First, this is not just an issue of individual attitudes, but one of systemic failure. My experience felt akin to a mirror reflecting the long-standing systemic issues in public services.
The second issue is that processes are primarily focused on fraud prevention rather than providing convenient public services. Multiple layers of checkpoints and complex regulations have been put in place to prevent rare cases of system abuse, thereby disproportionately burdening the vast majority of the law-abiding public with wasted time and mental anguish. The role of public servants is to point out your mistakes, not help you solve problems.
Next is the lack of transparency and standardized procedures. Why can all requirements not be clearly and completely communicated in one sitting? Behind this problem lies a severe information imbalance that leaves the public at a disadvantage. The fact that standards vary on an individual basis highlights a failure in the standardization of internal processes, leaving the public helpless.
Finally, there is the failure to implement a user-centered approach. Private enterprises optimize their customer shopping experiences by studying the “user journey,” but how many government agencies design their processes from the public’s perspective? The shadow of agency-centered thinking is all around — from the organization of information on Web sites and the word choice on application forms to the flow and guidance at service counters — demonstrating a lack of user-centered consideration.
Improving the efficiency of public agencies would require effort to be made in three key areas: mindset, technology and systems.
First, a shift in mindset — from that of “managers” to “servants” — is necessary among personnel. The core values of public servants should evolve from a passive compliance of execution “according to the law” to cultivating an attitude of serving the public. Performance evaluations should not merely focus on the number of cases handled, but also include service quality indicators such as public satisfaction and single-instance resolution rates.
A second necessary step is to empower the government through digital technology. Many services have already transitioned to be completely online. The government should invest resources to optimize Web sites and app interfaces, allowing the public to easily access information, fill out forms and upload documents. The integration and connection of back-end databases could also prevent people from having to repeatedly upload identical documents to different agencies.
Last, there is a need to establish clear and unified standardized procedures to optimize public service systems. Services frequently used by the public require the development of nationwide, easily understandable standard operating procedures to ensure that frontline staff receive comprehensive training. A list system should be implemented — if any documents are missing, staff should be obligated to provide people with a checklist detailing all necessary documents to prevent any unnecessary back-and-forth.
My three-day ordeal was by no means an isolated incident — it reflects the daily realities of countless Taiwanese. Reform to improve efficiency in public services is a necessary step that can no longer be delayed.
Lin Wen-pao is a professor in the Department of Business Management at National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
An elderly mother and her daughter were found dead in Kaohsiung after having not been seen for several days, discovered only when a foul odor began to spread and drew neighbors’ attention. There have been many similar cases, but it is particularly troubling that some of the victims were excluded from the social welfare safety net because they did not meet eligibility criteria. According to media reports, the middle-aged daughter had sought help from the local borough warden. Although the warden did step in, many services were unavailable without out-of-pocket payments due to issues with eligibility, leaving the warden’s hands
When former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) first took office in 2016, she set ambitious goals for remaking the energy mix in Taiwan. At the core of this effort was a significant expansion of the percentage of renewable energy generated to keep pace with growing domestic and global demands to reduce emissions. This effort met with broad bipartisan support as all three major parties placed expanding renewable energy at the center of their energy platforms. However, over the past several years partisanship has become a major headwind in realizing a set of energy goals that all three parties profess to want. Tsai
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on Monday announced that she would dissolve parliament on Friday. Although the snap election on Feb. 8 might appear to be a domestic affair, it would have real implications for Taiwan and regional security. Whether the Takaichi-led coalition can advance a stronger security policy lies in not just gaining enough seats in parliament to pass legislation, but also in a public mandate to push forward reforms to upgrade the Japanese military. As one of Taiwan’s closest neighbors, a boost in Japan’s defense capabilities would serve as a strong deterrent to China in acting unilaterally in the
Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesman Randhir Jaiswal told a news conference on Jan. 9, in response to China’s latest round of live-fire exercises in the Taiwan Strait: “India has an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our trade, economic, people-to-people and maritime interests. We urge all parties to exercise restraint, avoid unilateral actions and resolve issues peacefully without threat or use of force.” The statement set a firm tone at the beginning of the year for India-Taiwan relations, and reflects New Delhi’s recognition of shared interests and the strategic importance of regional stability. While India
RSS