Liaison or ‘layason’?

Egay Uy .

A liaison officer, in its strict sense, is one who makes it possible for two organizations or groups to work together and provide information to each other.  He or she serves as the go between so two organizations could communicate and coordinate their activities.  The main job, it seems, is to establish a working relationship, typically in order to cooperate on a matter of mutual concern.

A sample job description of a real liaison officer requires the job holder to be organized, efficient, communicative (not the chika kind) to coordinate between the employer’s or home office’s business and other entities.

The purpose of the position is to streamline operations and resolve issues (not create them as in cases when the supposed liaison spreads rumors picked up along the way or which the liaison himself or herself started).  In a way, the purpose is to improve communications, not to spread chika, and generally ensure that the working relationship is mutually beneficial and harmonious.

Loosely, as used in some government offices, liaison refers to an employee who is supposed to be a go-between for his or her home office and other offices in order to serve and receive documents, follow up action on certain documents, or in other words, “tig” as in tig-follow up, tig-hatud papeles, tig-papirma, tig-hatud supplies, etc..

But are liaison officers, as the position title is loosely used, really necessary in government offices? The answer that I can offer is both yes and no.

Offhand, I thought that “liaison officers” may no longer be necessary if those who perform functions or tasks as part of a process will only be conscious that their outputs are the inputs of other offices or personnel, hence they should not wait to be followed up.  However, I then saw that transactions in government offices, those that really do their mandates, are simply voluminous that what I thought may not be perfectly workable.

The tasks of liaison officers must therefore be redefined to for it to do justice to the position title assigned to the function. This is because there are supposed-liaison officers who merely deliver or retrieve documents from the mother office to another, vice versa, but do not add value to that phase of the document flow.

For example, when the “liaison” delivers the payroll of the employees of his or her home office, she should know more details beyond the mere act of delivery of documents, e.g., when will the pay be available, what other requirements must the employees submit to complete the process, or whether the documents delivered contain the required signatures.

There are transactions that are not completed despite the delivery of documents because the supposed “liaison” does not add value to the act of delivery, such that when asked, all she could mutter would be, “gidala na man nako sa didto ang papel.” And what makes this worse is when the attention of the supposed “liaison” is not even called by the head of office.

It is always best to do one’s job well.  Otherwise the position title better be changed to “layason.”

(Egay Uy is a lawyer and is co-chairman of the local price coordinating council. He is also serves in city hall’s Regulatory and Complaints Board.)