An official at Tang Nhon Phu Ward Public Administration Service Center receives and effectively processes administrative procedures for local residents (Photo: SGGP/Thu Huong)
On July 29, 2026, the Government officially issued Decree 300/2026/ND-CP to amend several pivotal articles of Decree 170/2025/ND-CP dated June 30, 2025. This regulation broadly governs the recruitment, utilization, as well as comprehensive management of civil servants, which crucially includes stringent criteria, conditions, plus required dossiers for appointing leadership and management personnel.
When selecting a candidate for a leadership or management position, it’s absolutely vital to clarify what exactly they’ve accomplished, what specific products they’ve generated, and whether their achieved results truly align with the assigned role.
According to the newly implemented regulations, the official assessment spanning the most recent three years must clearly demonstrate the individual’s working capacity and their concrete results in executing responsibilities.
This explicitly includes tangible products, work achievements, plus any inherent limitations, shortcomings, or violations if applicable. Concurrently, the rigorous standards for appointment are inextricably linked to hands-on experience, achievements, and highly specific products that genuinely suit the prospective position.
For Dr. Nguyen Thi Thien Tri from HCMC University of Law, this mandate clearly indicates that the current cadre selection process is placing a remarkably heavier emphasis on professional capacity alongside real-world results. This capacity doesn’t merely rest on run-of-the-mill, generic remarks like “good morals” or “highly responsible” anymore; rather, it needs to be tangibly showcased through concrete products intricately tied to each specific task or job position.
She also noted that any product evaluation must be closely tethered to the assigned duties. The “hard,” routine tasks inherent to a specific job position must be completely fulfilled before even factoring in any newly arising assignments, so people simply can’t look solely at the sheer volume of tasks to accurately gauge whether a cadre is performing well.
From this particular perspective, periodic evaluations via a KPI framework immensely help track work products throughout the entire ongoing process, rather than fruitlessly waiting until year-end to finally count everything up. Results dutifully recorded across each phase essentially clarify the ongoing progress, the overall completion level, alongside any lingering issues that desperately require fine-tuning.
Furthermore, Dr. Nguyen Thi Thien Tri suggested that if these assessment results are systematically combined with KPI data during the utilization, rotation, or appointment of cadres, the organization acquires a much stronger foundation to determine if a person has genuinely excelled in their current position before entrusting them with fresh responsibilities.
The pressing question is exactly how this wealth of data will be utilized within personnel management. Dr. Nguyen Huu Hoang from the Academy of Politics Region II argued that Decree 300/2026/ND-CP and HCMC’s KPI system can be viewed as profoundly complementary components for an evidence-based cadre evaluation approach.
“Decree 300 strictly demands that appointment dossiers showcase capacity, execution results, concrete products, achievements, plus any violations; meanwhile, the KPI matrix generates continuous data regarding task execution,” he perceptively analyzed.
Over in HCMC, the complex quantification of tasks is rolling out via a rigorous KPI-based system. According to Official Dispatch 568-CV/TU from the HCMC Party Committee, 100 percent of evaluated cadres plus civil servants must explicitly register their tasks centrally. These tasks must be highly specific, clearly defining expected results, timelines, and inherent difficulty; qualitative duties that are notoriously hard to verify should be heavily restricted.
The designated head bears ultimate responsibility for managing these assignments. Consequently, execution results logged on the system are meticulously examined when assessing completion levels.
Public management expert Dr. Nguyen Duc Quyen noted that quantifying tasks effectively remedies the chronic issue of vague, across-the-board evaluations. When every single task is firmly attached to a strict schedule, a tangible product, plus specific accountability, performance outcomes become crystal clear. This substantially curbs the toxic mindset of “the more you do, the more mistakes you make.”
However, he cautioned that KPIs can’t devolve into a mindless task-counting race. The metrics need to genuinely account for latent risks and socio-economic impacts while remaining anchored to the city’s collective missions.
Furthermore, Dr. Nguyen Huu Hoang thoughtfully observed an urgent need to link KPIs directly with evaluation standards. It’s not advisable to mindlessly count completed tasks but to thoroughly examine what they’ve resolved, how brutally difficult it was, alongside the product’s profound impact.
For cadres slated for strategic planning, massive emphasis must be placed on incredibly tough, interdisciplinary tasks demanding exceptional coordination. These hard-won results are infinitely more valuable in accurately forecasting true competence for higher levels.
Most crucially, these pivotal KPI results undeniably need integrating into the systematic review and utilization of cadres, but this can’t be done robotically. When multiple candidates seemingly meet baseline standards, granular data regarding task difficulty, product quality, and pragmatic capacity can effectively provide organizations a much firmer foundation for ultimate deliberation.
