The newspaper "Fact" writes: "Statistical indicators have always been, to put it mildly, secondary in the social, political, and economic life of Armenia. However, in the last eight years they have acquired a dominant importance, as a result of which qualitative standards and long-term processes are relegated to the background. Against this background, primary importance is given to primitive PR, leaving deep reforms and citizens' sense of systemic changes in vital areas in the shade.
All this can be considered in the context of Goodhart's law, which briefly states: "When a standard becomes a goal, it ceases to be a good standard." And it is no coincidence that this principle is most often mentioned in the framework of public administration, macroeconomics, monetary policy, although it can also be attributed to other areas, including politics. This law states that when a numerical indicator is chosen as evidence of success, the performance of that very criterion begins to be abused, as a result of which the given indicator begins to no longer reflect the real and balanced results of related policies. For example, when only GDP growth becomes the primary target in the economy, very often this growth can be ensured not through social improvement, but through over-concentration of capital, accounting manipulations, packaging of indicators, regardless of how much the living standards of the majority of the population, the quality of education, justice or health services have improved. When benchmark percentages become a protective shield and PR factor for the authorities, and a shadow reality or, so to speak, a "scam" for the public, the public becomes merely a consumer, with limited awareness and ability to present appropriate public expectations.
In Armenia, a similar pattern is expressed at almost all levels of state governance: government representatives often emphasize, for example, how many meters of road have been renovated, how many public institutions have been digitized, how many people have joined the insurance sector, and so on. However, there is no qualitative analysis behind them: the quality of the asphalt itself, the sustainability of servicing that road, the real accessibility and fairness of the insurance sector, the effectiveness of the educational environment are ignored or presented only as consequential appendices. Moreover, if the goal is to present fancy numbers, it is clear that talking about quality “from the top” becomes meaningless. The public is also presented with a digital illusion of “vital improvements,” while in the daily life of citizens these changes are often unnoticed or sometimes even have the opposite effect.
The Armenian government summarizes its current activities with precisely such approaches, firmly adhering only to indicators. There is hardly a single government session where some specific indicators are not emphasized. It is understandable that they are influential, impressive. For the government, what is key are not real changes, not results, quality, but only indicators that can “dazzle” the public. Well, you can always find certain positive indicators. Finally, you can present, for example, the number of visits to museums as a major result of the government’s activities.
It is no coincidence that government messages are dominated by percentages and numbers, almost not reflecting significant, long-term, qualitative improvements in the daily lives of citizens. The impression is created that it is not real life that is changing due to indicators, but rather the numbers that are changing at the expense of life's regression. Such a situation gradually forms public self-deception and a lack of management responsibility, as a result of which a closed chain is also formed, when state officials themselves become members of a closed system of self-justification, each time "catching" or providing numbers and ignoring the quality, the real result.
The real value and purpose of politics are hidden when the initial goal, say, to ensure high quality of roads, accessibility of the healthcare system, modern refinement of education, is replaced only by reporting figures. When a dry indicator, a number, becomes decisive, it becomes a false criterion. And against this background, the work is often done "in the head". The important thing is that the program is underway, there is work done on paper, but the deeper value of the work, the results, and the long-term impact are being pushed into the shadows.
If the entire process of governance is subjected solely to the “production” of numbers, it becomes an indicator not only of the ineffectiveness of governance, but also of the crisis of the public value system. People gradually do not believe in the real results of state programs, and general distrust becomes widespread (not to mention the fact that people tangibly feel and see a globally failed government). And even in the case of truly measurable achievements, the public is increasingly skeptical about whether something has really been done or whether a new number has simply been added to official statements.”
More details in today’s issue of the newspaper
