Interview with experts on the occasion of the last training course “Towards more efficient inspections”

On Thursday and Friday (December 12 and 13) was held the last, the tenth in the row, two-day training “Towards a more effective inspections”. This training brought together a large number of inspectors from the republic, city and local levels at the Hotel In in Belgrade. Over the course of the project, experts Milan Stefanovic and Dusan Radovanovic trained more than 250 inspectors from all over Serbia and were rated with the highest marks in evaluation questionnaires. However, this time we decided to ask them for impressions about the training and that they give us their assessment of the success of the training, lessons learned, what could be better in the next cycle, what moments they will remember and to what extent they are happy with the students and their learning .

Could you summarize in a few sentences your impressions of the success of these 10 trainings “Towards more efficient inspections”?

Dusan Radovanovic: The overall impressions are more than satisfactory. After nine trainings and ten concluding this activity, I can say that there was great interest for this training. All inspectors who participated in these trainings showed a high level of expertise and motivation for further improvement. A specific segment in which my colleague Milan and I assisted participants was a better implementation and understanding of the new legal framework governing the area of ​​inspection and the amended legal framework pertaining to the law on offenses. The participants repeatedly emphasized the need to continue organizing this type of training, but particularly emphasized the need to analyze more deeply the application of specific laws in inspection procedures – environmental protection, utilities, construction, tax procedure and tax administration and various other topics. I am satisfied with the results and evaluations of the training participants. There was a good atmosphere at all the trainings. I think that the new knowledge they have received in these trainings is also an incentive to further develop and discuss these topics.

Milan Stefanovic: The overall impression after ten training sessions is positive. The training was at a high level, a high level of interest, activities and a level of knowledge of our students. Here is an example – the level of knowledge they possess in this area, the students rated it with a grade of 3 at the beginning. In the end, they completed evaluation questionnaires ranging from 1-4, where after completing the training, they rated their knowledge with the highest grade – with a score of four. Also, I noticed that what the participants liked most was practice examples – explanation. That is why Dusan and I are preparing specific examples in preparation, depending on which inspection participants come from.

These trainings should be continued… some like to go through the training twice. These trainings should be repeated and new ones introduced. Not only for the inspectors, but also for the administrative oversight officers as a related form, state and local officials who carry out legal activities directly related to the inspections. Then the heads of the Inspections, the inspectors themselves indicate to us that it is necessary that the heads within the inspections, heads of municipal administrations with inspections within their scope, should receive training. It is this middle management that is stressed that they need to undergo training.

How much training has changed from the first to the last in terms of adapting the content to the target group you are working with?

Dusan Radovanovic: The materials have changed – content has been added regarding the specific inspection that comes for training, it has been adapted to the target group. The trainees stated that there were many examples that were useful. This proved to be useful in the evaluation because inspectors mean that they hear a specific example from their jurisdiction. They like to consider applying the law through specific procedures and then make it clearer.

These were the most numerous trainings on our project. Do you think this number has improved your work or would you decide to work in smaller groups in the next cycle?

Dusan Radovanovic: Group number of 25 participants is optimized for work and it is efficient enough to work smoothly. Fewer may be better, but not worthwhile in terms of financial viability.
Milan Stefanovic: I agree, 25 participants is the maximum in terms of concentration, interactivity of students.

Milan, what is your experience in monitoring the application of the acquired knowledge from training? Is there a monitoring mechanism?

Milan Stefanovic: Most inspectors are ready to cooperate and to acquire new knowledge, so there is no difference here compared to other employees… there are heavier participants, but we are here to point out and explain them properly. We have a dialogue with them, we do not impose anything on them. Everyone has their own opinion, they act as they think they should in their cases and actions. There are some who do not acquire some knowledge and continue to teach, but here we are talking about less than 10% of our trainees. The application of knowledge depends on several factors – the structure of the inspectorate, the position of the inspector. The mechanism of tracking results through reports, questions, other meetings. If they ask questions concerning finesse, then we know that they have delved deeper into matter, and that is significant to us in light of having acquired knowledge.

You have repeatedly mentioned the exchange of experience among training participants – do you think that bringing together inspectors from the local, provincial and republic levels is a good idea or something where there is room for improvement in the next training cycle?

Dusan Radovanovic: Personally, I think it is not difficult to work when we have participants from different levels of government. In the first half of the training we had more participants from the republic level, and in the second half of the training more local inspections – from cities and municipalities. The distinction should be made here that the municipality and the city carry out the tasks of original and entrusted jurisdiction. In the affairs of the original jurisdiction there is no stronger link between the local and the republic jurisdiction, while in the affairs of the delegated jurisdiction it exists. Consideration should therefore be given to developing specific training to address precisely this relationship between inspections, holders of public authority entrusted with local affairs, and ministries that control the way these affairs are conducted and direct their work. This would be particularly useful in the implementation of the Law on Tourism and Hospitality, where we have this relationship between the Republic Inspectorate and the local one.

Milan Stefanovic: It is particularly important that local inspection hear how republic inspections work that are still ahead in the process because they are often in contact with inspections from Europe, and inspections from the EU. That’s all very useful. The exchange of experience between local, provincial and republic inspectorates is certainly significant and contributes to a good atmosphere in terms of the exchange of experiences of the trainees. On the other hand, in addition to general training, those topics are grouped by sector. When we say that they group together so that the same training will find inspections that have a related and related scope.

Finally, give me one compelling event or situation that occurred in one of these ten training sessions that will remain in your memory?

Milan Stefanovic: One example remained striking to me. Specifically, our last session was about exercises, examples, and case studies, and there was a question about acting – did the general statutory time limits apply to the conduct of inspection in specific cases, and I asked the whole group if this was applicable in their experience? They said that it applied and in the end they all unanimously came to the conclusion: “Yes, it applies!” And then I told them, “No, it does not apply” and explained why. I was trying to get them to the correct answer, they were making arguments, but they didn’t see the key argument. Then when I asked them the next question they were silent, for fear that they would be wrong… So this was a specific situation because we usually hear different opinions, not everyone is united in the opinion and it turns out that the opinion is wrong.

Dusan Radovanovic: The most striking statement from a local inspection inspector who is also a football umpire who said that the Law on Inspection Supervision gives a lot of powers, institutes, mechanisms that allow the administration to work properly and to have relations with supervised entities that express a will to comply with the law. To me, his comment was sympathetic for the reason that it is in inspection as well as in football – inspectors are deciding what is acceptable in order for everything to proceed according to fair play rules. This is an adequate thinking of citizens and inspectors how the economy should function and how the authorities should behave in relation to the economy.