The Royal Decree has been issued, approving the Jordanian Academy for Government Administration system number (12) for the year 2026, which comes into effect and replaces the Public Administration Institute, which was abolished with the enforcement of the new system. This national step clearly indicates a move towards rebuilding the public administration system on modern bases, rooted in investing in human capacities and transforming training from a mere traditional activity to a true institutional reform tool.
By reviewing the texts of the new system, it becomes evident that the goal was not only to establish a new institution but also to reshape the process of human resources development in the Jordanian state. The newly introduced texts reflect a clear transition from merely offering training courses, as was the case with the Public Administration Institute, to managing an integrated national system for capacity building, based on preparing unified general frameworks, linking training to public policies and national priorities, and unifying governmental efforts in this field.
In this context, the new system reflects a development in work tools and methodologies; the academy will adopt experiential, digital, and self-learning, integrating training with the challenges of government work, alongside introducing the concept of measuring the impact of training and linking it to the productivity of the public sector and employee behavior. Additionally, the academy's functional role will expand to include contributing to public policy-making and enhancing local and international partnerships within a clear vision aimed at transforming Jordan into a regional hub for government administration development and capacity building.
Comparing the texts of the new system with the principles that governed the Public Administration Institute clarifies that the government did not limit itself to modifying the institutional framework of the administrative unit responsible for government training but also brought about a fundamental shift in the legal status of the authority concerned with capacity building. Contrary to the institute, which was linked to the minister responsible for public sector development, the academy is now linked to the prime minister, reflecting the transfer of this institution from the executive level to the center of influence in government decision-making.
The composition of the board of trustees also differs between the academy and the institute; in the new system, the board is chaired by the prime minister and includes members from academic institutions, whereas the chairmanship of the institute's board of trustees was entrusted to the minister concerned, without explicitly requiring academic representation. Concurrently, rules of good governance and legal accountability have been enhanced by prohibiting board members from participating in any of the academy's activities in exchange for remuneration of any kind, obliging them to disclose any conflicts of interest, and committing to reporting any realized or potential benefits under penalty of legal liability.
In light of this, the administrative significance of converting "the institute" into "the academy" emerges, as this transformation is not limited to renaming but reflects a development in the institution's managerial function. The institute played a purely training role, even as its tasks expanded, serving as a service provider within the government apparatus, while the academy is moving towards playing a leadership role in managing human capital, through knowledge production, designing professional pathways, developing leadership, and linking training to functional competencies within an integrated institutional framework.
Additionally, the academy is characterized by not treating training as a separate stage but as part of an interconnected government system, coordinating with government agencies that the new system obliges to provide the academy with its training and specialty needs, enabling it to design appropriate programs, in addition to the mandatory involvement of its employees in specialized training paths, especially those related to preparing government leaders.
Moreover, a clear orientation towards institutional openness is evident, where one of the academy's most important functions is building local, regional, and international partnerships, and engaging in global networks of excellence, contributing to establishing Jordan's position as an international center of excellence in government administration and capacity building.
However, a careful reading of the new system reveals that this ambition remains contingent upon the availability of executive tools capable of translating the academy's goals into tangible results, clearly linking training outputs to institutional performance outcomes. It is also noted that the system, despite emphasizing capacity building, has not explicitly resolved the issue of linking these process outputs to the public employee's career progression, a crucial element in ensuring actual impact. Regardless of the quality, training remains limited in effect if its outputs do not reflect on promotions, career advancement, and performance evaluation for the employee who underwent the training and qualification process.
In conclusion, the system of the Jordanian Academy for Government Administration reflects a national orientation towards modernizing public administration within the royal efforts for administrative modernization, presenting an advanced model in terms of legal nature, governance, and vision. However, the real value of this system will be determined by its ability to move from text to application, and from idea to impact, a distance that separates advanced legislation from real institutional reform whose actual results will be felt by the citizens on the ground.
* Professor of Constitutional Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Jordan
[email protected]
