Bureaucratic structures and organizational performance: A comparative study of Kampala capital city authority and national planning authority

Uganda has experienced reasonably good economic and institutional performance for over a decade which has been partly explained by the implementation of public sector reforms including the restructuring of public institutions, creating new agencies, and decentralization with the view to rationalize delivery of services (Republic of Uganda, 2010). This paper examines the relationship existing between bureaucratic structures and organizational performance in Kampala Capital City Authority and National Planning Authority, which were established under the same vein. Specific objectives include: to critically review the hierarchical nature of organizational structures; to assess the role of rigid rules and procedures on optimal use of resources, and on the ability to carry out activities and deliver outputs; to assess the effect of group and individual relationships on the ability to deliver functional outputs; and finally to assess the role of leadership on the ability to deliver functio nal outputs. The study is a qualitative review based on secondary literature. The findings indicate that bureaucratic structures are effective if well-resourced and hierarchy is unambiguous; regulations and operational guidelines are critical in effectively operationalizing structures, and any lapse in their popularization and enforcement will lead to high levels of impunity and low performance; organizations with bureaucratic structures should pay attention to group factors; and choosing an organizational structure is a risk minimization decision process. Lastly, it is noted that leadership style that is rational in appreciating and not compromising national political interests while exercising technical professionalism is critical in obtaining greater leverage for the delivery of strategic outputs of the organization. The study does not however quantify the relative effects of structures on performance and this provides an area for further research.

the motivation to produce greater and higher quality goods and services at the highest levels possible.In order for these public institutions to be able to provide the needed services in a sustainable manner, there is need to have in place mechanisms to ensure that their performance is optimally sustained.
Therefore, this study is interested in organizational performance as the dependent variable, and its determining factors are bureaucratic structures and incentives.This study examines the relationship between bureaucratic structures and organizational performance by comparing two public agencies, namely; Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) and National Planning Authority (NPA).
This study examines the relationship existing between bureaucratic structures and organizational performance in Kampala Capital City Authority and National Planning Authority.The specific objectives of this study are; 1.To critically review the hierarchical nature of organizational structures 2. To assess the role of rigid rules and procedures on optimal use of resources 3. To assess the role of rigid rules and procedures on ability to carry out activities and deliver outputs 4. To assess the effect of group and individual relationships on the ability to deliver functional outputs; and 5. To assess the effect of leadership style on the ability to deliver functional outputs.
Since the 1990"s, Uganda has experienced reasonably good performance in terms of economic growth and development (Republic of Uganda, 2010).Performance has partly been explained by the implementation of public sector reforms which have involved restructuring public institutions, creating new agencies, and decentralization with the view to rationalize delivery of services.There is indication that urban areas have developed faster, as demonstrated by the increased infrastructure development especially private housing.Equally the rural areas have experienced similar infrastructure developments, but much of it is public with much emphasis of public infrastructure on roads, schools and hospital infrastructures.
In the same period, we have seen increase in urbanization in the country and much of the impact of urbanization is seen in Kampala, the capital city, where the pace of replacement and redesign has been outpaced by the growth in population size and the demand for services, especially for mass transport and garbage management.
In the second National Development Plan (NDPII) it is noted that the rapid increase in urban population is not matched with adequate planning, implementation and growth or development of basic infrastructure, housing, and social amenities resulting into overcrowding, traffic congestion, growth of slums and informal settlements, dilapidated housing, and poor sanitation (Republic of Uganda, 2015).
The Uganda Vision 2040 underscores the importance of planning, both for rural and urban development such that, the extent to which the national planning bureaucracies both in the city and other government jurisdictions change existing plans to cope with the increase in demand for services have such quality that should not be outpaced by any other institution in the country (Republic of Uganda, 2013).This is because as the less developed communities gain affluence, there will be increase in demand for services to match those in already developed communities, and the planning bureaucracies" speed might get outpaced if there is not adequate incentive to keep the performance high, and match the country"s overall national development aspirations.
The Uganda Vision 20140 indicates that the country will pursue a planned urbanization policy that will bring about better urban systems to enhance productivity, livability and sustainability and at the same time release land for commercial agriculture.Further it indicates that, government will undertake regular review, monitoring and evaluation in line with the mechanisms provided for in the Comprehensive National Development Planning Framework (CNDPF).
To some extent, the above situation will arise if factors that inhibit performanc e of organizational structures, such as political interference through networks and alliances come into play (Lambright, Gina M. S., 2012).In urban areas pressures increase for land, other resources and services.In Kampala City for instance it has been observed that while public organizational structures create bureaucratic managerial and accountability processes imposing planning and participation obsessed government systems (Stelman, 2012), at the local community levels the power to influence and define projects according to their local needs is very little despite existence of genuine interest by bureaucratic officials to provide public goods and services.
The two institutions, KCCA and NPA, face challenges which can be linked to the theoretical underpinnings of bureaucratic structures and hence the institutional performance, particularly regarding undertaking development planning which is common to both of them.The fundamental issues here relate to how these organizations with such planning and development mandate sustain performance so that the delivery of planning and development outputs translates into adequate access to services by the population in their jurisdictions.
To be specific, the effectiveness of KCCA and NPA represent the outcome of their respective activities.For instance, the reforms in KCCA responded to the near total breakdown of systems and service delivery stemming from mismanagement, fraud, and lack of financial accountability by both staff and political leaders.
These resulted in massive financial loss, loss of public property, poor service delivery and compliance, infrastructure breakdown and the haphazard, uncontrolled development of Kampala city over the years.
Actually, it is observed that by the time Kampala City Council (KCC) was changed to KCCA, there was deterioration in compliance to the national and international standards and this was attributed to administrative failures in the former KCC (Karyeija and Kyohairwe, 2012).The structure of KCC including functions and powers were also critiqued.
The performance of both KCCA and NPA is important for Uganda because more cities will be developed according to the Vision 2040, and NPA will continue to steer and guide national development planning, for which current understanding of ways to improve organizational performance of these institutions becomes very vital for Uganda"s development and its administration.
In the study by Stelman (2012), it was found that the tensions between rigid bureaucratic managerial requirements and local realities frustrated local development efforts, thereby complicating the achievement of community desired local projects.Stelman (2012) found a gap between the official system and the actual organizational performance realities.He further found lack of performance and the stakeholders in KCC were disillusioned with the discrepancy between the rhetoric of an effective local government system and the existing non-performance.
The city council has a decentralized system but which is controlled by central government and this mode of organizational system may lead to a failure to perform to the expectations of the community stakeholders.Likewise, the system of hierarchical power in NPA provides inadequate delineation between the administrative and policy making body given that both the Board and the administration perform day today administrative functions.
Historically, KCCA and NPA are two key bureaucratic institutions in the public administration of the republic of Uganda.NPA was created by Act of Parliament in 2002 (Republic of Uganda, 2002) and established in 2004 while Kampala became the capital city of Uganda in 1962 at independence.The name KCCA was changed recently from KCC under a new law that sought to transform Kampala City to competitive international standards (Republic of Uganda, 2010).
Kampala was originally the capital of Buganda Kingdom since the 1600s and served as a political and administrative capital until the year 1893, when the British declared Uganda a protectorate and the capital was transferred to Entebbe.It is observed that the first modern urban planning scheme for Kampala was prepared in the year 1912, covering Nakasero and Old Kampala hills, with a population of about 2,850 people.This was followed by other planning schemes in the years 1919,1930,1951,1968,1972 and the latest one in 1994.With these modern plans, the vision of KCC changed over time.By the time it became KCCA, this vision was "to serve the city residents through coordinated service delivery, focusing on local and national priorities and contribute to improvement in the quality of life in the City".
In regard to planning of public services, all local government agencies including municipalities and cities are expected to deliver to their visions within the framework set nationally as guided by the NCDPF, within which long-term, medium term and short-term development goals for the country are set.The national development plan for five years serves as a blue print which guides medium term public investment, to which the city council authority contributes.In the Vision 2040 (Republic of Uganda, 2013) document, there is indication that the country"s the overall development planning has been guided by medium term plans.
By the year 1971, the country had developed two national development plans, after which the era of development planning was replaced by economic turmoil only guided by annual budgets.This continued until the government financial year 1999/2000 when the leadership conceived the medium term Poverty Eradication Action Pan (PEAP) and the 25-year national vision (Vision 2025) to serve as frameworks that would guide investment aimed at reducing and eradication of poverty.When the second PEAP was developed around 2002/3, the country was seen to have challenges regarding legal, institutional and policy frameworks for guiding national development planning and execution.
Government therefore decided to enact the National Planning Authority Act 2002 which led to the establishment of the NPA in 2004.The vision of the NPA is to be "the institution for National Development Planning propelling sustainable socio-economic transformation of Uganda".The mission of NPA is to "produce comprehensive and integrated development plans and provide evidence based public policy guidance for Uganda" (National Planning Authority, 2011).
The NPA however, according to its current strategic plan faces challenges related to inappropriate organization structure, lack of critical mass of skilled personnel, weak internal management systems, rigid mind-sets and attitudes.Yet at the same time NPA"s work and existence are threatened by poor implementation of national plans, overlaps of institutional mandates, fluid political priorities, resource constraints, un-harmonized legal and regulatory frameworks, and the potential negative corporate image.This situation is critical given that Uganda is expected to have desirable characteristics such as high planned urban population, efficient urban infrastructure that facilitates efficient mobility with the rural hinterland according to Uganda Vision 2040 (Republic of Uganda, 2013).
From the aforementioned, there is need understand further how shared hierarchical power across different levels of the bureaucratic structure enhances or compromises organizational performance in both KCCA and NPA, as institutions delivering on national planning and development.In KCCA, there seems not to be a clear head of the authority in regards the Lord Mayor and the Executive Director.Because of this, there are power struggles between the two offices which in a way compromises services delivery.At the same time, the NPA has a structure in which the Authority Membership or the Board is in place full time and the powers of the Executive Director seem to be fused into the Board.
Whereas this may be a normal structure, it is not clear whether the administrative roles of the Executive Director and the board are not fused, a situation that may lead to lack of harmony and inefficient performance.Because of this situation, the Executive Director has limited executive power over the technical staff as they often bypass the Executive Director"s office and get administrative guidance from the office of the Executive Chairperson.

Organizational performance
Organizational performance is the measure of the extent of effectiveness and efficiency against indicators of an organization"s mandate.This follows from the understanding that an organization is an institution with a structure for carrying out particular activities on a regular basis, employs people and assigns them functions associated with specific goals and objectives.If an organization does things right, and is able to optimize the use of resources in achieving its objectives, it is efficient.Efficiency focuses on the input-output relationship.Whereas effectiveness is doing the right things, efficiency is doing things right (Khan et al., 2012).This was also a concern to Jean-François (2004) who shows that the terms "performance" and "effectiveness" are used interchangeably because problems related to their definition, measurement and explanation are virtually identical.In this spirit, it is seen that the need to constantly be concerned with the quality of public institutions such as in Kampala city and the entire country at large is not an isolated phenomena for Uganda, because this concern has been observed all over the world.
For instance, Rauch and Evans indicate that ratings of bureaucratic quality have been included in indices of institutional quality (Rauch and Evans, 2000).They further indicate that an index of bureaucratic efficiency has been used to rate bureaucratic delays, red tape and corruption in public institutions.Therefore, research is concerned with the extent to which an organization has met its stated goals and objectives and how well it performed in the process.

Bureaucracy
Bureaucracy is a management system invented to handle state affairs and organize state relationships with its citizens (AlQahtani, 2013).This relates to the standardization of procedures, keeping records of transactions, and organizing decision-making processes in a management system.The degree of bureaucratization along particular dimensions or organizational attributes determines the type of organizational activities.A bureaucracy is a complex and specialized organization composed of non-elected, highly trained professional administrators and clerks hired on a full-time basis to perform administrative services and tasks.
Bureaucratic structures are thus a form of organizational structure by which the organization arranges its staff to reflect how it functions to deliver its goals and objectives.Bureaucratic structures take the shape of the pyramid in which there exists a direct vertical line connecting the top management, extending through middle management, and then cascading down to the baseline employees.
The classical theory works of scholars such as Weber, Fayol, Taylor, Gulick and Urwick illuminate the foundational ideas of the universal principles that are followed for an organization to be successful (Malone, 1986).More insight is provided in the review on organizational structures by Malone who presents an integrative summary of organizational designs.
In strategy decision-making, the issue of whether groups take more or less risks than its members is critical.In hierarchies, decision making involves several individuals at different levels.Ideally it is noted that no organization is better than any other, and that the choice of the organizational structure should depend on four factors (Csaszar, 2008): 1.The task the organization is expected to perform, thus the costs of the errors of commission or omission likely to be met in any case 2. The cost of the organization, thus the number of decision-makers 3. The characteristics of the individuals, thus distribution of factors affecting their capabilities, and 4. Characteristics of the environment, thus the range of space defining the possible quality of work possible.
When the cost of choosing a wrong strategy is very high, it pays off to choose a structure that is highly centralized.There is indication (Csaszar, 2008) that if the price of not choosing the right strategy is high, for instance in the case where lower level information is critical in making competitive decisions, it is critical to have a structure that is highly decentralized.Further, if both the cost of choosing a wrong strategy and the price of not choosing the right strategy are high such that, both not investing in a good strategy is as costly as investing in a bad one, then it would be wise to choose a structure that minimizes both costs jointly.This paper is based on the Weberian model of bureaucracy in reference to organizational performance, which is highly centralized.

Weberian structures
There are five major elements or factors that are important in the Weber"s model of bureaucratic structures and which form a basis for the examination of organizational performance.These factors are: hierarchical order, rigid rules and procedures, impersonal relationships, bureaucratic transactional leadership, and bureaucratic transformational leadership.Hierarchy and high structures are a characteristic of bureaucratic structures as the most standard type of organization structures.The chain of command goes straight up the chart with a decreasing lateral spread, like a triangle.
That characteristic differs them from other forms of structures which are functional, divisional, matrix or horizontally-linked.Functional structures put decisionmaking power along the bottom of the organizational chart with functional specialists.Divisional structures use a product structure where decision-making groups are divided by product lines and have all of the functionality to operate independently.In the matrix structure, employees are grouped by function and product.Lastly, horizontally-linked structures use features of the other formats and links them through a horizontal chain of command.This study is most interested in understanding how hierarchy in the structures affects or would affect the case studies.
Weber indicates that bureaucratic organizations have technical superiority over any other form of Organization (Weber, 1948).He elaborates that developed bureaucratic mechanisms compare with other organizations exactly just as the machine with the nonmechanical modes of production.He adds that s trictly bureaucratic administration leads to optimal levels of precision, speed, un ambiguity, strict subordination, reduction of costs whether friction, material and personal.Bureaucratic structures have a certain degree of standardization.They are better suited for more complex or larger scale organizations, usually adopting a tall structure.
According to Weber (1948), bureaucracy is characterized by well-defined roles and responsibilities, a hierarchical structure, and respect for merit.This view is supported by the finding by the study on optimal hierarchical structures of organizations that can commit to their organizational structure, but not to long-term wages (Shin and Strausz, 2013).They identified two effects by which vertical hierarchies with more restricted communication channels improved dynamic incentives and facilitated early information revelation.Because the horizontal hierarchy allows more control, the optimal hierarchy depends on trade-offs between information revelations versus control.They also indicate that seniority rather than merit matters for promotions, and production complementarities favors vertical hierarchies.
There are rigid rules and procedures in the Weber"s model whereby the division of labor is based on functional specialization, well-defined hierarchy of authority, system of rules and procedures covering the rights; duties of positional incumbents, system of procedures for dealing with work situations, the impersonality of interpersonal relations, promotion and selection for employment based upon technical competence.A well-tuned bureaucracy is actually one where individual decisions are relegated to functional steps to the extent that a bureaucracy that requires leadership is in some sense imperfectly designed (Patty, 2014).
Impersonal relationships exist in bureaucratic structures such that the bureaucrats officially communicate from an impersonal position, not for them personally.Bureaucrats adopt a self-protective position towards official behavior which affects the performance of the organizations especially in low job satisfaction and motivation and less of a sense of social responsibility among the leaders.
Bureaucratic transactional leadership exists in the Weberian structures, and relates to having an impact on the level of the organization"s performance when individuals avoid making a decision when a decision is required.This affects the quality of decision-making among the leaders especially in critical situations.Moreover, the wrong decision also makes employees dissatisfied and demotivated.Therefore, based on this argument transactional bureaucratic leadership is expected to have an impact on the performance.Bureaucratic transformational leadership is one of the three classifications where power in an organization is exchanged and utilized to secure outcomes (Germano, 2010).
The other two are situational and transactional.Transformational leaders work towards changing those they lead using knowledge, expertise and vision.The followers get embedded in buy-in that remains even when the leaders leaves the scene.Transformational leadership develops people and gets followers get on board upon their own evolving thought process and changing responses to leadership challenges.It is useful for fast paced, change laden environments demanding creative problem solving and customer commitment.

Bureaucratic structures and organizational performance
On the basis of the conceptual definitions in the preceding sections, this study considers four main dimensions of bureaucratic structures namely 1. Hierarchical order 2. Rigid rules and procedures 3. Impersonal relationships, and 4. Bureaucratic leadership.
These four factors affect the level of organizational performance at varying degrees and complement each other.On the side of dependent variables, organizational performance is considered to have two main dimensions; namely 1. Optimal use of resources and 2. Ability to carry out activities and deliver outputs on a regular basis along objective or goal oriented functions.
In order to examines the relationship existing between bureaucratic structures and organizational performance, along the identified dimensions; assess the role of rigid rules and procedures on optimal use of resources and the ability to carrying out activities and deliver outputs on a regular basis.In this case, the adherence to existing rigid rules and procedures is an indicator that the systems are working.In order to make systems more productive, the factors that could imperfect their effectiveness could be managed, and these include, performance motivation, organizational environment, managerial expertise, creative synergies among others.
Further, how relationships in the organizations have affected the ability to carrying out activities and deliver functional outputs on a regular basis is linked to the assessment of group factors (Mullins, L. (2010).Workers are organized formally in functional departments, but also informally they establish groups, which may or may not be recognized by the organizational leadership, that meet their motivational interests.
Besides the formal hierarchies formed along the organizational structures, informal group behavior will influence performance of individual members and consequently that of the organization.
The formal structure provides a way through which individuals and groups carry out their organizational activities.Individuals through processes of social domination may impose their will on others.
Leadership style is critical in ensuring that the departments and the workers in them produce the desired outputs through the allocation of mobilized resources to carry out approved strategic actions.Using the structures, leaders utilize the relationships established between individuals and groups, to provide incentives as inducements that provide a motive for the workers to choose a particular course of action.These incentives may be of three general types: moral, coercive and remunerative.Their styles of leadership could have an effect of the incentives, the order, and the systems that direct the efforts of the organization into goal-seeking activities.
In organizations, individual members are central whether acting in isolation or as part of a group, in response to expectations of the organization, or as a result of the influences of the external environment.Management integrates the individual and the organization and provides a working environment that permits the satisfaction of individual needs as well as the attainment of organizational goals.The groups within organizations arise from the social needs of people and their pressures influence the behavior and performance of individual members.The group structure and behavior enhances the knowledge of individual behavior.The formal structure enables people to carry out their organizational activities and achieve aims and objectives.
In a simple centralized organizational structure, power, decision making authority and responsibility for goal setting are vested in one person at the top.This structure is usually found in small and single-person-owned organizations.The basic requirement of a simple centralized structure is that it has only one or two functions, and a few people who are specialists in critical functions.The manager is generally an expert in all related areas of functions and is responsible for coordination.Thus, the organization has only two hierarchical levels.However, this structure has to become more complex for growth, diversification or other reasons.Bureaucratic organizations display a number of essential elements such as the use of standard methods and procedures for performing work; and a high degree of control to ensure standard performance.Figure 1 illustrates a bureaucratic organizational structure with eight levels of hierarchy (National Planning Authority, 2013).
Two types of bureaucracies, namely the standard and professional bureaucracy exist (Mintzberg, 1979).While there is emphasis on efficient performance of standardized routine work in standard bureaucracies, professional bureaucracy depends upon efficient performance of standardized but complex work.Professional bureaucracy requires a higher level of specialized skills.The structure of standard bureaucracy is based on functions, large technical staff and many midlevel managers.In contrast, professional bureaucracy has few mid-level managers.

METHODOL OGY
The study w as conducted in tw o public agencies, that is, KCCA and the NPA.The tw o institutions w ere selected because of the special positions they hold as focal institutions for the development of plans for the development of the country both rural and urban.Both institutions have appeared in the limelight of public service reforms w ith a view to facilitate faster transformation of the country.While KCCA is responsible for the management of the affairs the capital city, the NPA is responsible for the entire country, both urban and rural development planning.
These tw o institutions handle public matters that attract the attention of stakeholders and their comparison can provide inferences for advancing the broader understanding of the management of organizational performance.By evaluating the meaning of perceived relationships betw een dependent and independent factors as presented in the conceptual framew ork, the paper makes a comparison of the importance of the factors across the tw o institutions.The sources of information for this paper are basically secondary literature, on the basis of the reference list provided.As a qualitative review no focus has been placed on quantifying the relationships but rather identified qualitative links of the dependent and independent factors, as review ed in the literature and discussed in this paper.The measurement of variables w as guided by the conceptual and operational definitions provided in the background w ith information collection being specific on the indicators of key variables.Data w as collected by review ing official records of the tw o selected institutions guided by hypotheses that bureaucratic structures, in particular; hierarchical order, rigid rules and procedures, impersonal relationships, and bureaucratic leadership have an effect on the level of organizational performance, particularly; the optimal use of resources, and the ability to carry out activities and deliver outputs on a regular basis along objective or goal oriented functions.

Examination of bureaucratic structures and organizational performance
This analysis is based on a review of secondary information on bureaucratic structures and performance.KCCA and the NPA are public agencies that have been reformed over time, and this analysis thus explores the extent to which such reforms are making KCCA and NPA deliver public goods and services in a manner that is consistent with the reform objectives.It is particularly important in this study is to understand how the new organizational structures are facilitating changes in the processes as well as the outcomes of these institutions.

Nature of hierarchical order
Organizational structures are associated with production, coordination, and vulnerability costs.Using the model by Malone (1986), reforms in KCCA and NPA were expected to primarily contribute to reducing institutional costs and perform better.The assessment of performance is in respect of the functions for which each institution was established.The functions of KCCA are specified in Sections 7(1), 7(2), 35, 44 and 83(1) of the KCCA Act, 2010 (Republic of Uganda, 2010).
On the other hand, NPA functions are specified under Section 7(1) of the NPA Act, 2002, which is "to produce comprehensive and integrated development plans for the country elaborated in terms of the perspective vision and the long term and medium term plans" (Republic of Uganda, 2002).Specifically, KCCA performs the following functions: initiates and formulates policy; sets service delivery standards; determines taxation levels; monitors the general administration and provision of services in the divisions; enacts legislation for the proper management of the capital city; promotes economic development in the capital city; constructs and maintains roads; constructs and maintains major drains; installs and maintains street lights; organizes and manages traffic; carries out physical planning and development control; monitors the delivery of services within its area of jurisdiction; assists in the maintenance of law, order and security; mobilizes the residents of the capital city to undertake income generating activities and self-help community projects; assists the city divisions in mobilizing the residents to pay local taxes; registers the residents in their area of jurisdiction; and registers births and deaths in their area of jurisdiction.In order to perform the above functions, the structures of NPA and KCCA were adopted.
The organizational structure presented compares the two institutions in respect of the size of the Board and management levels, the turnover of management committee and Board Members, horizontal differentiation, vertical differentiation, and degree of board and management committee Membership formalization, as presented in Table 1.

Structural challenges linked to organizational performance
From the rules-based approach, rule compliance rates are used to estimate the extent to which the institutions actually exist, and the institutions are distinguished from within a range of administrative and political settings, and performing a wide range of public tasks.In his regard, there may be differences in behavior of individuals and differences in decision-making outcomes.Since institutions are associated with reducing variance in behavior, understanding them is useful in improving predictions.At the same time, where institutions are readily identifiable they form a starting point for analysis.As seen from Guy (2000), the identification of the existing institutional arrangement, in form of policy or structure that signify the persistence of the institutions and the identification of the constraints or incentives available to the stakeholders help to understand the institutions" payoffs.This has been examined in regards to staffing, status of leadership tenure, institutional rivalry and political interference, and reporting relationships.

Staff Establishment
In view of the organizations" objectives, both NPA and KCCA have structures that are not fully filled, which hampers the delivery of strategic outputs.According to NPA"s recruitment plan for the year 2014/15, the authority had 119 approved positions, 69 are filled and 50 are vacant, as shown in Table 2.
There are challenges at operational levels from assistant officers to senior officers where 54 of the positions are vacant, yet these are the personnel that tackle the detailed technical work of planning, as frontline workers to facilitate implementation.This is an improvement however given that by the time of approving the structure in strategic plan of 2011 the status was 43%.In 2013/14 KCCA targeted to fill 986 posts against the approved 1.332 posts, which would account for 74 percent.However, by May 2014 in her ten Directorates, KCCA had managed to fill only 395 positions, that is, 42percent.NPA has been planning to fill positions but faced challenges in receiving resources budgeted for.For instance that year, the recurrent wage approved was 2.111 billion, but what was released and spent was 1.874 billion, that is, 89%.By 2014/15, NPA had a wage shortfall and related expenses underfunded by about 0.89billion Uganda shillings (National Planning Authority, 2014).In the two cases, Both NPA and KCCA adopted structures that they cannot afford to resource, and consequently have every reason to relate this shortage of staff to shortfalls in effectiveness against outputs.

Status of leadership tenure
The nature of a full time Authority Membership of NPA provides a structural challenge related to the status and mode of operations of the Authority"s Board.The law provides that the Authority members operate on a full time basis.
However, the affiliated members do not practically serve on a full time basis.The members" involvement in the day to day activities carried out by the secretariat has a bearing on the reporting relationship and there is a feeling that this situation violates the rules of Corporate Governance (Adam Smith International, 2011).
Furthermore, issues of inadequate capacity in terms of staffing levels in the NPA Secretariat were identified.At the end of the financial year 2013/14, the Authority had a total staff establishment of 65 employees.Although most of the positions at lower levels are filled, it was noted that a number of senior positions such as the Deputy Executive Director, the Director for Policy Analysis and Research and most of the senior officers were vacant.This held NPA performance below optimal levels.
At the KCCA, there has been a situation of uncertainty as to who provides utmost leadership for the strategic direction of the city, and the office of the Mayor has been disoriented due to existing legal contentions over the issues.Whereas the creation of a duo structure in the KCCA and bringing on board a Chief Executive Officer in the city was expected to bring transformational leadership into the city, this has instead brought forth confrontation at the strategic level.It is noted also that the perception that the Chief Executive Officer was powerful, led to victimization and fights for attention among lower level staff, characterized by intrigue, blackmail and enmity (Kiyaga, 2013).There was the temptation arising from the director"s power for the subordinates to coalesce around the Executive Director leading further to the emergence of cliques; allegedly each competing for the director"s attention.As seen above, the power above is derived from the KCCA Act, that makes the Executive Director answerable to the Minister for KCCA under central government, and no longer to the Mayor.

Institutional rivalry and political interference
KCCA faces the challenge of political configurations subverting structures of city governance and specific cases have been cited involving office of the President

Turnover of Management committee and Board Members
The term of office for elected council members is five years.The term of office of the Executive Director is unlimited.Directors" term of office is three years The term of office of the members of the Executive Board and the Executive Director is four years.The Heads of Departments tenure is three years

Horizontal differentiation
There is a Metropolitan Physical Planning Authority consisting of a chairperson and four other persons all of whom appointed by the Minister with the approval of Cabinet, for five years and shall be eligible for re-appointment for one more term The NPA is responsible for overall Social and economic development planning; The Ministry of Finance, planning and Economic Development is responsible for fiscal policy; while the Central Bank is responsible for Monetary policy.This functional differentiation at national level of planning institutions gives them independence in managing their mandated functions

Vertical differentiation
The KCCA Organization Structure and Implementation Guidelines issued by the Ministry of Public Service in 2012 provides for 328 job families that make the approved structure, approved 1332 posts out of which 74 percent was filled The strategic plan for NPA provides for the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director, 2 Directors, 11 Managers, 27 Senior Officers, 22 Officers, 13 Drivers, 3 Others, a total of 119.By end of 2014, only 65% percent was filled engaging increasingly with informal workers groups in the city (Tom and Kristof, 2012).This situation is propagated by political competition which has created an environment where informal groups seeking to protect their livelihoods can tactically leverage a presidential intervention in their favor, helping them evade the policies and regulations of the City authority.
In the case of Kampala City, it has been argued that informal economic agents such as "Boda Boda" riders and vendors desire to remain outside city authority regulation, and this is facilitated by "clientelistic" linkages with politicians, which is seen to severely undermine efforts to govern the city of Kampala in a transparent and formal institutional process.The domination of the city council political sphere in a multiparty dispensation is said to explain the increased motivation for the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) leadership to interfere in city politics and overturn decisions made by the city authority political leadership, thus boosting NRM support among city-dwellers in an increasingly open political marketplace (Tom and Kristof, 2012).
Consequences of this kind of affairs include uncertainty of funding or underfunding, reallocation of functions, such that in the case of the city administration this includes the privatization of some of the functions and the intervention of central government in the decision making processes of decentralized offices.Other research has indicated that the recent institutional transformation of the city"s governance structures was intended to enable the central government to intervene into the affairs of Kampala"s municipal government (Lambright, 2012).That was the reason why there is no executive in KCCA as the executive powers are vested in the Executive Director, and in this manner, political interference was found to undermine service delivery in Kampala city through financing, tax policy, and direct interference in the city policies and decisions.
In the case of NPA, similar rivalry has been reported where the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development has seemingly interfered with the smooth operations of the Authority given the desire of the Ministry to retain planning functions that were devolved to the Authority under the NPA Act, 2002.Because of this, the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development has not willingly observed the constitutional requirement to submit the budget proposals of NPA to Parliament without uncalled review of the Authority"s budget proposals and posing financial limitations.This situation is caused by the fact that the Authority is represented in parliament by the Minister, yet the Ministry was not restricted after the Authority"s establishment, hence rivalry exists in regard to functional mandate related to planning processes.The midterm review of the National Development Plan for the period 2010/11-2014/15 identified this as a challenge, and observed a negative consequence where NPA struggled to get sufficient agreement with the Ministry for the necessary funding for NDP priorities, and this undermined the alignment between the National Development Plan (NDP), the national budget and the NRM Manifesto, despite NPA being subordinated to MoFPED (National Planning Authority , 2013).This is the reason why it was proposed that NPA be moved to the Office of the President so that the competition is minimized, given the authority and power vested in the Office of the President.

Reporting relationships
It has been observed that another challenge related to bureaucracy emanates from contradictions in Sections 7 and 18 of the NPA Act, 2002(Adam Smith International, 2011).Whereas section 18 requires that NPA submits annual reports to the Minister who tables them before Parliament for decision making, section 7 (c) requires the Authority to advise the President on Policies and strategies for the development of the Country.Lack of clarity in this regard is seen to be a source of encumbrances in reporting which potentially causes unpleasant relationship with the Minister in cases where the Authority advices the President without involving the Minister.
In the case of KCCA, both the Executive Director and the Lord Mayor report to the Minister responsible for the Capital City.The KCCA Act 2010 is not clear on either the Lord Mayor or the Executive Director being a supervisor of the other, thus creating lacuna in the structural hierarchy at the top level of the institution.It has actually been observed that KCCA Act, 2010, created a structure that "brought about tension amongst workers and confusion between the leaders relating to powers and roles" (Karyeija and Kyohairwe, 2012).
As Karyeija and Kyohairwe (2012) note, the practice at KCCA is that the boundaries of the political and administrative leaders and the government are somewhat fused, yet as a government agency, it would have been expected to be structurally disaggregated as the Act stipulates in regard to the autonomy that the Authority"s leadership would exercise under its functions.Because of this challenge, the office of the Lord Mayor and that of the Executive Director have often clashed in the running of city affairs of the authority because of lack of clarity on each other"s powers.Despite these challenges, Karyeija and Kyohairwe (2012) find evidence of active control from top managers wielding discretionary power to effect decisions as well as the visibility of good performance on the functions of the authority.
Despite the achievements registered by KCCA, it is important to note that some sections of the city dwellers think that many of these achievements lack political ownership within the city.In particular, prominent politicians in the country have critically observed the gross alienation of elected politicians in the city who are expected to on behalf of the people own responsibility for the decisions made by the authority (Bakireke, 2011).
According to Bakireke (2011), the challenge is a result of lack of clarity in the provision under Sections 11(1) (a) and 17 (1) of the KCCA Act 2010.Section 11(1) (a) provides that "the Lord Mayor shall be the political head of the Capital City, while section 17 (1) provides that the Executive Director shall be the Chief Executive of the Authority".In this regard, it is not clear whether the institutions led by the Executive Director and the Lord Mayor are different, and in particular indicating the relationships between Kampala Capital City and Kampala Capital City Authority in terms of practical leadership institution.In reference to section 5(3) of the KCCA Act which provides that the Authority shall be the governing body of the City, yet the Executive Director is not on the list of members that make up the Authority as provided for in Section 6 of KCCA is said to create confusion in the Authority and offering ground for power conflicts.In view of this, both the Lord Mayor and Executive Director claim to be the topmost persons heading the Authority.The organization structure presented in the Ministerial policy statement for KCCA seems to provide a solution to the reporting challenge, but questions still linger in respect of the practical powers of the Lord Mayor over the Executive Director.Therefore, the problem is not the structure, but rather other relational issues.The above situation puts to question the relevance of the established structures, if they cannot be respected.

Rigid rules and procedures and optimal use of resources and delivery of outputs
In line with objective 2 of this study, this section assesses the role of rigid rules and procedures on the optimal use of resources and the ability to carrying out activities and deliver outputs on a regular basis.
In the paper on connotations of organizational effectiveness and factors affecting it (Khan et al., 2012), it was found that organizational effectiveness, in general, is based on the integration of the goals of the organization and the employees.The rigid rules and procedures are part of the environmental factors, and they include all policies, practices, procedures and legislation in existence both within and outside the organization.The factors that affect the organizational effectiveness include: performance motivation, organizational environment, managerial expertise, creative synergy, multi-ethnic and racial background.
In respect of KCCA, evidence is found in regard to explaining effectiveness in implementing certain urban policies and regulations based on a comparative study of the cities of Kampala and Kigali (Goodfellow, 2012).The Goodfellow study found that bureaucratic competence, political context, the incentives for enforcement and compliance which affect state actors and urban social groups are state-society dynamics that were far more important than bureaucratic capacity in accounting for divergent state effectiveness.Both KCCA and NPA have their goals and objectives reflected in their respective medium-term strategic plans.Based on legislations creating the two institutions, the overall objectives and mandate of each are elaborated indicating their visions, the missions, the goals and objectives; which are further expounded in the annual ministerial policy statements.These institutions have policies that integrate employees with these objectives.Policies, practices, procedures and legislation in existence have been developed to facilitate competence of staff and aid their effectiveness.NPA has developed the following human resource policies and guidelines: The human resources manual, the staff training policy, policy on staff length of service and appointments, and the policy guidelines on staff retirement, contracts and exit management, among others.There is evidence that a number of staff in both institutions have been trained to enhance their competences required to deliver on organizational objectives.However, the recognition of the role of the function of human resources in the respective organizational structures is lower in NPA compared to KCCA.Whereas KCCA has a Director responsible for human resources issues, NPA provides for the highest level of a Senior Officer, who is not part of the management committee of the organization.Therefore in NPA, the extent of integration of the employee issues with the organizations goals may be compromised by the organizational structure.
In both organizations, there exist performance appraisal guidelines that require the staff to be appraised on the delivery against performance plans.Failure to deliver to the expectations leads to non-renewal of contracts.At NPA one head of department was discontinued by having his contract not renewed in 2012 due to his failure to respond to performance appraisal requirement.In KCCA, rules exist but many times are flouted and this affects performance.Factors that explain this problem include influence peddling by non-technical political leadership in the hierarchy of the structures (Goodfellow, 2012), and this explains why delivery on outputs was inefficient by 2010.

Group and individual relationships and the delivery of functional outputs
Hierarchy is observed by individuals and the groups they belong to within the organization.In this study, the groups refer to the departmentalization of functions including task teams, and the staff welfare groups established by staff themselves outside the formal hierarchies.
Management is expected to take keen interest in integrating individuals and the organization providing a working environment to facilitate individual needs satisfaction in order to attain organizational goals.Besides the formal hierarchies formed along the organizational structures, informal group behavior will influence performance of individual members and consequently that of the organization.The formal structure provides a way through which individuals and groups carry out their organizational activities.Individuals through processes of social domination may impose their will on others.Therefore in the bureaucratic orientation to work, there is a sense of obligation to the work of the organization and a positive involvement in terms of a career structure.There is a close link between workrelated and non-work-related activities.In regard to formal groups, at the level of divisions in the case of KCCA, and departments in both Authorities, evidence is found in the study on performance in KCCA, (Madinah et al., 2014), in which a method to measure efficiency at the level of subdivision-level was developed.
In that study, the general efficiency of KCCA divisions in garbage collection had improved from 45% to 55% and that improvement was attributed to change of management in the city and enhancing new work methods particularly shared services.In this particular example, it is noted that the previous under-utilization of available refuse trucks had led to accumulation of garbage in the city, but the decision to share solid waste management services among divisions given the centralized purchasing system enabled a strong bargaining power, despite operational costs remaining high.In the case of solid waste management in KCCA the boost in the budget resources of KCCA by 100 percent to ensure the beautification and sanitation of the city (Madinah et al., 2014), and implementation of forced amalgamation of the budget of the five divisions in the city which resulted in the willingness to support service delivery was an incentive to foster the formal needs of the members of the divisions.The main fear observed in KCCA is that shared services could result in a failure to optimize skills of some employees and other resources like time which is disadvantageous to employees in the long run.Whereas shared services have the potential to share resources, consolidate technology and yield economies of scale, there is fear that the merger of the budget of the five divisions will lead to too much bureaucracy thus a likelihood of establishing processes in the long run that may delay service delivery in favor of control and power.
In NPA, the delivery of outputs is by outputs as provided for in the Act establishing the authority.The departmentalization of staff is aimed at ensuring that there is a minimum required professional expertise.The delivery of the national development plan for instance is done by teams established to handle specific processes of the planning exercise.Performance of the NPA has improved in the recent years, especially with the introduction of a revised structure based on the needs of the strategic plan for the period 2011/12 to 2015/16 (National Planning Authority, 2011), and this led to the delivery of two national development plans for the realization of the Uganda Vision 2040.
Both NPA and KCCA have in place well-articulated job designs and processes for recruitment and selection, staff development and training, rewards and performance management.
These are characteristics of the high performance groups and individuals, in line with high performance practices (Deborah, 2012).Deborah (2012) indicates that high performance work practices include aspects of job design, recruitment and selection, staff development and training, performance management, rewards, and high involvement work practices.Accordingly, the characteristics for high performance groups and individuals include having a clear purpose, enhanced processes, shared accountability, shared leadership, complex and diverse skills and competencies, shared leadership, motivational goals, and affective commitment.
The existence of informal groups in both NPA and KCCA and attempts to align the objectives of these groups to those of the organization has been useful in ensuring that the groups are not harmful to the organizations.For instance, in NPA a group of all female staff because of their call for more observance of their rights, led to the decision by management to develop a sexual harassment policy for NPA.On a similar note, KCCA has recognized the establishment of a savings and credit cooperative for its employees in order to enable staff access to resources for personal welfare and development.
This recognition of the needs of the informal groups facilitates the attainment of organizational performance as it is essential for germinating innovation, efficiency, communication, identity, involvement, job security, and motivation.In the end the goals of the organization are achieved as the individuals increase their focus on the customer, processes, as well as learning and growth (Farivar and Esmaeelinazhad, 2012).

Leadership and the Ability to Deliver Functional Outputs
Leaders are bound to provide transactional as well as transformational leadership.Have there been situations where leaders in KCCA and NPA avoided making a decision when a decision was required, thus putting the quality of decision-making in critical situations.Are there decisions that were made but considered to be wrong, thus making employees and service users dissatisfied and demotivated?Has there been efforts by leaders towards changing those they lead using knowledge, expertise and vision in order to develop people and get followers on board thought evolving processes and changing responses to leadership challenges?
There is indication from the literature that the leadership has witnessed gaps and challenges in the administration of KCC, which include weaknesses in the systems of addressing accountability manifested in inflated claims, forgery of documents and outright fraud including payments for undelivered services and fuel mismanagement; internal inefficiencies and illegal involvement in revenue collection by politicians; legal breaches and inefficiencies procurement system; inefficiencies in dispensing technical advice and Matte 13 allocation of resources; personal interest and conflict of interest by politicians; staff and politicians involvement in malpractices; and staff being poorly remunerated, poorly supervised, short of capacity and having poor work cultures, among others (Musisi, 2013).Musisi (2013) further indicates that it was on that basis that Parliament passed the KCCA Act in 2010.It is important to know whether the establishment of the new KCCA was sufficient in addressing the challenges of the city administration that are related to bureaucratic structures.In order to establish whether structural changes that have taken place at NPA and KCCA have actually resulted in increasing organizational performance, a review of the performance of the two institutions indicate positive effect, despite lack of sufficient comparative information.
During the financial year 2011/12, KCCA placed emphasis on garbage collection and management, road works and drainage and decongesting the City through provision and development of alternative employment avenues for youth and women (Republic of Uganda, 2012).
In 2011/12 the authority"s main objectives centered on improving revenue mobilization and public finance management; enhancing institutional efficiency and rebuilding the corporate image; improving public health, safety and environment; improving the quality of road network; enhancing public safety; improving provision of education and social services; and enhancing gender and community services.In regard to allocation of mobilized resources, the Ministerial Policy Statement indicates that the Authority"s image had since improved as a result of enhanced public service delivery.It is important to note that whereas the initial allocation from Central Government to KCCA for the annual budget totaled to UGX 101.3 billion, actual releases amounted to Uganda Shillings 83.05billion.Local Revenue collection was UGX 41.0billion, 8percent less than planned.Accordingly, there was a reduction in effort in the following output areas: job stimulus package, roads including the road fund, non-wage recurrent, local government management & service delivery programme (LGMSD), school facilitation grants (SFG), NAADS, and primary health care (PHC).
Mentioning a few of KCCA outputs, there is evidence that several markets have been upgraded with modern infrastructure, and improved several roads in the city of Kampala.
By 2010/11 KCCA did not have sufficient capacity to address full road maintenance needs, or rehabilitation requirements, which necessitated that the Ministry of Works and Transport take the policy lead in Kampala across all transport sub-sectors including the regulation of the transport sector to enhance and sustain the coordinated delivery capacity of public sector transport actors.In 2012/2013, decongestion of the city, enhancement of connectivity between towns, improvement of traffic flow and ensuring public safety and maintenance of the road network were priority actions for KCCA (Republic of Uganda, 2014).For that purpose, 74.1%of 30.5 billion shillings approved for urban road network development and rehabilitation was received.Despite this, connectivity across urban centers remained a challenge.The government Annual Performance report indicated that there remained congestion and high traffic jams especially during the morning and evening rush hours, which is attributed to the absence of a high volume transport system.Commuter taxi and motorcycles or "boda-boda" passenger transport is the dominant mode in the city.Progress on reducing slum growth remains minimal in the 62-slum settlements in the capital because of the overlapping land tenure systems, dysfunction planning, and the lack of: up-to-date data, authentic and informed citizen participation, and consensus building (Dobson et al., 2014).
The legal challenges in the Kampala City Council has led to, as at the end of the financial year 2013/14, the Lord mayor of the Kampala city not working with the Executive director, and legal processes were in court over whether the there is a Lord Mayor in the city.This contributed to the budget for the financial year 2014/15 to be presented to parliament without its discussion by the KCCA political leadership.The reforms that provided KCCA with greater autonomy in the office of the Executive Director and consequently under greater influence of the central government has increased access to resources and clout in enforcing regulations.
In the case of the National Planning Authority, delivery on the institution"s performance indicators in the government performance report since 2010/11 has been positive, with the delivery of the vision framework in 2010 and the national development plan as key outputs.The Authority on another note was not able to complete 10 of 40 activities for the national capacity building programme, mainly because of inability to attract central government counterpart funding.This programme which was being funded by the Africa Capacity Building Programme of the Africa Development Bank was later withdrawn.Whereas the authority performs well in regards to budget releases, it has persistently found it difficult to eradicate shortfalls in the wage budget.Often the authority has used non-wage funding to recruit critical staff and this affects all outputs.
By end of 2012/13, the authority had increased capacity though not sufficient to achieve its outputs.NPA produced the Annual National Development Report (NDR) on the performance of the economy for the FY2011/12, commenced the mid-term review of the National Development Plan (NDP) 2010/11 to 2014/15, and carried out status studies on service and service delivery standards for selected Sectors, particularly sectors of Environment, Housing, Physical Planning, Health, Education and Works and Transport.The achievement on these outputs does not reflect the fact that NPA has structure challenges outlined in the previous section, but this means that the Authority would be achieving much more in their absence.Like in KCCA, the accession of NPA Chairperson to Cabinet as an exofficial on a person to holder basis has given the planning authority greater clout in holding ministries, departments and agencies to account on matters of planning in line with NPA Act 2002.Therefore in these bureaucracies, understanding and balancing political interests with technical professionalism has been critical to the delivery of their strategic outputs.

CONCLUSIONS
The study has examined the ways in which bureaucratic structures affect organizational performance in KCCA and NPA.
Some structural factors contribute to undermining delivery of services, and therefore performance has been identified.

Bureaucratic structures are effective if wellresourced and hierarchy is unambiguous
Once structures are in place, they can only be useful if the staffing and other resources are provided at all identified levels.
Structures have affected KCCA organizational performance through the channels related to staffing, institutional rivalry and political interference, and reporting relationships.In both KCCA and NPA, the structures are confusing as they have been interpreted differently by stakeholders on the distribution of executive powers.This has affected decision making.Whereas in KCCA it is the mayor that is disenfranchised, it is the Executive Director at one level, and the Executive Board at another level in NPA.The effect on performance is more significant in KCCA than NPA because of the direct political hand in KCCA in safeguarding central government decisions in the city.In NPA there is double structural jeopardy given the weak delineation of the administrative roles between the Authority and the Executive Director and the second level relates to the relationship with the Minister, there is a direct link with Cabinet.Leaders of bureaucratic institutions should have both technical and political clout for them to mobilize resource and hold those below them accountable effectively.

Regulations and operational guidelines are critical in effectively operationalizing structures
Weaknesses in the legislation and absence of supportive regulations to reinforce the legislation establishing both the KCCA and NPA are institutional issues that further affect the performance of the two institutions.The magnitude of these effects could not be measured to precisely determine which of them is more affected.Any lapse in the popularization of guidelines, policies and regulations as well as their enforcement will lead to high levels of impunity and low performance.

Organizations with bureaucratic structures should pay attention to group factors
In both KCCA and NPA, both group factors and environmental factors have been prominent.Formal group factors especially related to groups formed along professional specialization in departments have strong links with statutory outputs.The group factors seem to be affected by environmental factors especially where there are issues related to the ability of the institutions to recruit competent and professional staff, finance activities according to statutory functions and of the technical nature, and provide for an appropriate atmosphere for the delivery on mandated outputs.Recognition of the role of the informal groups because of their effect on individual motivation and performance is critical.There are still gaps in the literature on explaining the hierarchical challenges in KCCA and NPA where administrative power seems to be usurped in NPA while it is the reverse for KCCA, and whether this seemingly confusing phenomenon has empirical or theoretical explanations.

Choosing an organizational structure is a risk minimization decision process
The bureaucratic structures in KCCA and NPA were carefully chosen as noted from their respective strategic plans reflecting association with efficient delivery of specialized services.As seen in Csaszar (2008), firms in fermenting environments, the review of organization structures in public agencies should avoid omissions in order to explore new high-fitness positions, because exploration and exploitation are mirrored in omission and commission errors.
In strategy decision-making, the issue of whether groups take more or less risks than its individual members is critical.In hierarchies, decision making involves several individuals at different levels.Ideally it is noted that no organization is better than any other, and that the "right" organization should depend on 1.The task the organization is expected to perform, thus the costs of the errors of commission or omission likely to be met in any case.2. The cost of the organization, thus the number of decision-makers.3. The characteristics of the individuals, thus distribution of factors affecting their capabilities, and 4. Characteristics of the environment, thus the range of space defining the possible quality of work possible.
When the cost of choosing a wrong strategy is very high, it pays off to choose a structure that is highly centralized.

Matte 15
If the price of not choosing the right strategy is high, for instance in the case where lower level information is critical in making competitive decisions, it is critical to have a structure that is highly decentralized.Further, if both the cost of choosing a wrong strategy and the price of not choosing the right strategy are high such that, both not investing in a good strategy is as costly as investing in a bad one, then it would be wise to choose a structure that minimizes both costs jointly.
Effective stewardship of bureaucratic structures in the public sector requires leadership style that exploits the political power of government The performance of both KCCA and NPA improved greatly when the executive leadership of the two institutions had greater leverage in influencing cabinet.By sidelining the leadership of the KCCA aligned to the opposition, and the accession of NPA to Cabinet accorded the two institutions greater opportunity to access resources and implement their plans with minimal internal and external administrative challenge.Therefore, leadership style that is pragmatic in appreciating and not compromising national political interests while exercising technical professionalism is critical in obtaining greater leverage for the delivery of strategic outputs of the organization.

Table 1 .
The organizational structures.