History of the National Productivity Organization

• In 1959, the 1st Asian Round Table Productivity Conference was held in Tokyo, Japan.  An interim committee was assigned to draft a convention for the formation of an Asian productivity body.

• In 1960, the 2nd Asian Round Table Productivity Conference was held in Manila, Philippines.  The draft convention was adopted as the Charter of the Asian Productivity Organization. 

The Philippine government under President Carlos P. Garcia issued Executive Order 385 s. 1960 to promote and increase productivity in all sectors of society, through the creation of the Productivity Commission that shall coordinate the activities of agencies performing functions involving or relating to productivity, directly or indirectly, with the objective of promoting and increasing productivity in all sectors of the economy. This is in fulfillment of the Philippine commitment to the first Asian Roundtable Productivity Conference in Tokyo, Japan which aimed to establish the Asian Productivity Organization (APO). 

Included in the duties and functions of the Productivity Commission as stated in EO 385 was to act as liaison between Philippine entities-government and non-governmental, including government owned and controlled corporations and the Asian Productivity Organization.

The Director of the Industrial Development Center (IDC) served as the Executive Director of the Productivity Commission. IDC was under the National Economic Council (NEC).

• In 1961,  the Philippines together with the Republic of China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Nepal, Pakistan, and Thailand established by convention the APO.

• In 1962–1967, the NEC underwent several restructuring and during this period, the IDC became the Productivity and Development Center (PDC).

• In July 1, 1967, the Productivity and Development Center (PDC) was established under the National Economic Council, citing the country's commitment under the APO Convention as its legal basis. The PDC was provided with budgetary appropriations to help fulfill the country's international commitments under the APO.  

• In 1972, The National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) was created which was charged with the task of national economic planning. Its functions encompassed and integrated the functions of NEC. 

• In 1973, the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) was established with the original charter created by Presidential Decree 205, amended by Presidential Decree 1061, and further amended by Executive Order 288. The functions, properties, and appropriations of the PDC was transferred from NEDA to DAP as mandated by Presidential Decree PD 205 (Section 14).

The DAP was created for the following purposes:

1. To foster and support developmental forces at work in the nation’s economy through selective human resources development programs, research, data-collection, and information services, to the end that optimization of wealth may be achieved in a manner congruent with the maximization of public security and welfare;

2. To promote, carry on and conduct scientific, interdisciplinary, and policy-oriented research, education, training, consultancy, and publication in the broad fields of economics, public administration, and political sciences, generally involving the study, determination, interpretation, and publication of economic, political and social facts and principles bearing upon development problems of local, national and international significance; and

3. To discharge a regional role in initiating and catalyzing the exchange of ideas and expertise on development activities in the region of Asia and the Far East.

• In 1980, Executive Order 615 was issued creating the National Productivity Commission (NPC) to enhance the viability and competitiveness of Philippine enterprises launched a national productivity movement to formulate policies and programs to increase productivity, undertake research on productivity improvement and advocate productivity awareness. The President of the Academy served as one of the members of the Commission.

• Following the end of the Marcos administration in 1986, the Corazon C. Aquino administration in 1987 issued Administrative Order (AO) No. 38, s. 1987, institutionalizing the Government Productivity Improvement Program (GPIP), to enhance overall productivity and to coordinate and integrate the programs/projects and activities of government together with the private sector. AO 38 also created the GPIP Council which shall be the primary policy-making and overall coordinating body on productivity. The DAP President served as a member of the council and the Academy provided technical and administrative support to the GPIP Secretariat. Subsequently, October was declared as the National Productivity Improvement Month by virtue of Proclamation No. 305 s. 1988.

• During the Ramos administration Administrative Order 267, s. 1996, was issued creating the Multi-Sectoral Committee on Productivity to formulate a National Action Agenda for Productivity to complement the Philippine Development Plan and serve as a comprehensive strategy for productivity improvement. The DAP provided the lead technical secretariat and administrative support. Upon the submission of the NAAP, Executive Order No. 395 was issued in January 1997, approving and adopting the National Action Agenda on Productivity (NAAP), and creating the Philippine Council for Productivity (PCP) to oversee the implementation of the same. Likewise, AO No. 325 s. 1997 was issued constituting the Regional Productivity Committees under the Regional Development Council to formulate, implement, and monitor the Regional Action Agenda for Productivity (RAAP).

• In 2001, under the Arroyo administration Republic Act (RA) 9013 was enacted establishing the Philippine Quality Award (also known as the PQA Act of 2001). The PQA program jointly administered by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), the DAP, and the Philippine Society for Quality, seeks to motivate organizations in both the private and public sectors to embrace and attain excellence in quality in the production and/or delivery of their goods and services. The DAP per RA 9013 is the designated award administrator for the public sector.

• In 2004, the government issued Proclamation No. 726, declaring October as National Quality and Productivity Improvement Month.

• In 2006, President Arroyo issued AO 161 s. 2006 to institutionalize the Government Quality Management System in government and to direct the DTI, DBM, and DAP to formulate the appropriate institutional framework mechanisms and standards to effectively implement the Government Quality Management Program (GQMP).

• As such, EO 605 s. 2007 was issued the following year. This requires all departments and agencies of the Executive branch, including all government-owned and/or controlled corporations (GOCCs) and government financial institutions (GFIs), to adopt the ISO 9001:2000 Quality Management Systems as part of the implementation of a government-wide quality management program. The quality management systems shall be certified for demonstrated conformity with ISO 9001:2000 (and now the applicable upgraded versions) and the applicable Government Quality Management Systems Standards (GQMSS), with priority to be given to frontline services.

• The State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) are likewise actively encouraged to establish ISO Quality Management Systems (ISO-QMS) and be certified accordingly. The Local Government Units (LGUs), Judiciary, the Legislature, and the Constitutional offices are likewise also encouraged to develop their respective ISO-aligned QMSs and pursue certification. Under this issuance, DAP was designated as member of the Government Quality Management Committee (GQMC).

• RA 9485, also known as the Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007, was passed “to promote integrity, accountability, and proper management of public affairs and public property as well to establish effective practices aimed at the prevention of graft and corruption in government.” It sought to streamline transactions in order to remove the possibility of bottlenecks in the transaction process that usually give rise to opportunities for graft and corrupt practices to surface.

• In 2011, under the administration of President Benigno S. Aquino III, AO 25 s. 2011 was issued to harmonize national government performance monitoring, information, and reporting systems through the Results-based Performance Management Systems (RBPMS). The following year, the Performance-based Incentive System (PBIS) was instituted under EO 80. The Performance-based Bonus (PBB), which is the new bonus introduced via the PBIS, will be given to employees based on their contribution to the accomplishment of their Department’s overall targets and commitments. The PBIS can be viewed as the overall performance monitoring structure on which remuneration for improved performance by government employees would be based. Therefore, under the PBIS, the PBB is one component of incentivizing, the other being the Performance Enhancement Incentive (PEI). But while the PBB is a top-up bonus given to employees based on their actual contributions to their offices’ or agencies goals or targets for a given year, the PEI is an outright across-the-board cash gift that is given regardless of the employee’s – and his or her agency’s – actual performance on the job.

• In April 2015, the 57th session of the APO Governing Body Meeting in Bangkok approved the establishment of the APO Center of Excellence (COE) on Public-sector Productivity (PSP) in the Philippines. Under the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), the center supports the APO in promoting and implementing PSP-related activities in the Asia-Pacific region. The COE on PSP has initiated projects to help member country governments improve their performance and productivity such as research, assessment of needs for future capacity-building initiatives, training of PSP practitioners so that they can lead capacity-building initiatives, introducing new knowledge, and continuing review of the APO PSP Framework. The COE was formally launched in November 2015 with the involvement of various stakeholders including those from the public sector. The launch highlighted the commitment of the Philippine government to supporting the APO COE on PSP under the auspices of the DAP.