Why is it that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF)—operating within the same state structure, under the same national constraints—has managed to deliver world-class performance in one of the most complex and demanding 21st-century warfare domains, while our civilian bureaucracy struggles with even basic administrative competence?
This is not just a rhetorical question. It is the central governance paradox of our time—and it holds profound lessons for public sector reform in Pakistan.
We often hear that “the system is broken,” or that “the state lacks capacity.” Yet the PAF proves otherwise. It is a world-class institution, executing precision missions, operating complex machinery, and collaborating with leading international air forces. It competes and cooperates with some of the best militaries globally — and holds its own.
Meanwhile, many of our federal and provincial ministries cannot ensure timely transfers and postings, let alone design quality policy or deliver services with consistency. The public perception of the bureaucracy is mired in images of red tape, inertia, and weak delivery.
Why the disparity?
The PAF’s performance is not an accident. It results from deliberate design and decades of institutional investment. Four interlocking elements underpin its success:
The PAF systematically recruits the best available talent. Its selection process is rigorous, competitive, and merit-driven. Once inducted, recruits go through highly structured training regimes aligned with international standards. Continuous skill development and leadership grooming are embedded into the career path — unlike in civilian services, where training is often sporadic, outdated, or symbolic. Organisational theorists have long argued that high-performing institutions invest deeply in how they recruit, train and provide a culture where they form their new organisational identity (Van Maanen & Schein, 1979).
A process which for sure can help the workforce commit to excellence and delivery. The military’s ability to build capacity through consistent human capital development stands in sharp contrast to the stagnation of most civilian bureaucracies.
Within the PAF, performance is not an aspiration — it is an institutional expectation. There is a culture of precision, discipline, and pride in execution. Mistakes are analysed, and excellence is celebrated. Systems are in place to identify, correct, and reward behaviour in line with institutional goals. This aligns closely with the concept of “high-reliability organisations” in the literature (Weick & Sutcliffe, 2007) — systems where failure is not an option, and organisational learning is constant. Civilian bureaucracies, by contrast, often default to mediocrity because there are few consequences for failure — and fewer rewards for excellence.
The PAF trains and works alongside leading air forces. Joint exercises with NATO partners and Gulf states expose PAF personnel to global best practices and performance benchmarks. These aren’t abstract “policy exchanges” — they are hands-on experiences that normalise global standards. Most ministries in Pakistan lack this exposure, especially below the secretary level. There is little or no engagement with peer bureaucracies in other countries, not just in one of the training trips but in leading joint workstreams.
As a result, practices become insular, and innovation stagnates. Global benchmarking, a key mechanism of institutional learning is missing from the civilian side and often in ministries there is no systematic manner of building the functional capabilities of staff allowing them to keep learning and upskilling themselves constantly.
In fact, it’s been years ministries had arranged a reflection or learning workshop on their own and unless they are not invited in their promotional trainings or roundtables arranged by donors/international partners, there is not culture of constant improvement.
Every PAF officer and crew member is constantly reminded of their mission: to defend the country’s skies. It is a clear, compelling, and national goal. The sense of purpose is reinforced through language, rituals, and public narratives. The institution knows what it stands for—and so does every individual within it.
This is perhaps the biggest gap in civilian institutions. Ask most public officials what their ministry’s mission is, and you’ll get vague answers—if any. The bureaucracy lacks a unifying narrative of service. Public servants are rarely inspired to see their work as nation-building. And without shared purpose, systems lose coherence and morale.
Why this matters? The PAF’s success offers us a model of what is possible. It shows that high performance is not incompatible with the Pakistani state—it already exists. The challenge is not lack of capacity—it is lack of institutional design, culture, and purpose in the rest of the state apparatus. This creates a governance paradox: the same state, the same people, and yet vastly different results.
The civilian bureaucracy is not doomed to fail—it is simply not set up to succeed. So, what can be done? How do we apply the lessons of the PAF—without militarising governance and how can key civilian offices of the chief secretaries in provinces and federal secretaries in Islamabad start implementing a new vision based on possibly following key lessons which may sound naïve in ever desponded public sector culture here but the question if this generation of leaders would not do that who will? They will have to streamline disjoined human resource management to follow a more standard (and by 2025 very well know) simple management principles. (Please do not mention the word political economy and incentives to me which has become a standard exclude to not to reform the day-to-day doable governance reforms).
A few priority reforms come to mind:
- Recruit and Train for Mission
Reform recruitment to ensure merit, and overhaul training to align with delivery outcomes. Introduce lateral entry where needed, especially in technical sectors. - Build Purpose-Driven Cultures
Cultivate mission clarity at the ministry and department level. Celebrate excellence in public service. Introduce performance contracts and transparent KPIs for secretaries and DGs. - Benchmark Globally and Learn Actively
Create peer exchange programmes for civil servants with successful bureaucracies in the Global South. Join global reform networks. Benchmark ministry performance against regional or global counterparts. - Autonomize Key Delivery Units
Create or reform agencies that are insulated from bureaucratic politics but accountable for results—like NADRA or the State Bank. Scale this autonomy to health, education, and climate action. - Reignite the Narrative of Public Service
Public service should be seen—and practiced—as a noble calling. Just like the PAF projects pride and discipline, the bureaucracy must reclaim its constitutional role as the backbone of the state.
The real question is: what prevents the rest of the state from learning?
If we are serious about reform, the answer lies not in new commissions or donor-funded projects, but in learning from institutions that already perform. We don’t need to import excellence. We just need to replicate and scale what already exists within.
Pakistan doesn’t lack talent. It lacks systems that turn talent into service. The PAF has shown us the way. It’s time the rest of the state followed.
