Dismantling ’memocracy’ in PH education

In a country that prides itself on democratic space, public schools operate under what the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EdCom II) calls “memocracy”—a rigid culture where compliance with memoranda outweighs professional judgment. Teachers describe their schools as “policy compliant,” following Department of Education instructions to the letter, regardless of context. For the business community, this is not merely an education-sector issue but an upstream failure in talent formation that directly affects workforce quality, productivity, and adaptability.

By centralizing authority and discouraging initiative, memocracy conditions students to prioritize rule-following over critical thinking, risk assessment, and problem-solving—the very competencies firms need to compete in dynamic markets. When innovation in schools becomes an act of defiance rather than a professional norm, businesses ultimately bear the cost through skills mismatches, longer training cycles, and diminished competitiveness.

Although the Philippine state embraced subsidiarity through the Local Government Code of 1991, education remains a notable exception. Despite its impact on communities and labor markets, it is governed through one of the region’s most centralized bureaucracies. Even after the Mandanas-Garcia ruling expanded local governments’ fiscal capacity, authority did not follow resources. LGUs may have funds, but schools cannot act without clearance, delaying responses to learning gaps, classroom congestion, and teacher deployment.

Economically, this misalignment is a classic example of institutional friction: systems designed for administrative control end up undermining the human capital and productivity they are meant to foster.

School-Based Management was meant to counter bureaucratic rigidity, and early pilots showed that giving schools real authority improved student performance. Yet EdCom II and earlier World Bank assessments found that SBM was never fully institutionalized. Most schools adopted minimal participation structures because discretion carried risks: leaders faced penalties for deviating from rigid requirements, and teachers who went beyond memorandums were labeled pabibo. Memocracy thus neutralized SBM by rewarding compliance over results.

This system is self-reinforcing. Schools lack decision-making authority, higher offices are too distant to respond, and accountability is blurred. The predictable outcome is risk aversion, delays, stalled solutions, and learning losses that accumulate into long-term skills deficits employers later confront.

For the business community, memocracy is not merely an issue in the education sector; it is a systemic human capital risk. Firms depend on workers who can solve problems, exercise judgment, and adapt to change—capabilities developed through autonomy and initiative. A compliance-driven school system rewards obedience over thinking. While centralization may produce administrative uniformity, it does so at the expense of relevance, responsiveness, and real-world preparedness.

Local economies evolve far faster than national curricula. When schools lack the authority to contextualize learning or engage flexibly with local industries, education drifts away from labor market realities. This misalignment weakens workforce readiness and productivity over time. Business neutrality does not preserve stability; it quietly sustains a system that underperforms against economic needs.

Reversing this trajectory requires shifting authority to where problems are best understood. Teachers, principals, barangay leaders, and mayors must be empowered to address education challenges in their communities, while the national government focuses on standards, quality assurance, and equity.

The business community plays a decisive role in making this shift a reality. It can use its influence to press for genuine educational devolution, clarifying the decision-making authority of local governments and schools while safeguarding national standards. Beyond policy advocacy, businesses can co-create and scale decentralized solutions through public-private partnerships in classrooms, teacher development, digital infrastructure, and learning materials, thereby demonstrating that local control, when paired with accountability, yields better outcomes.

Equally important, business leaders can help reshape institutional culture by legitimizing experimentation and reducing fear of failure. By reinforcing that sustainable improvement depends on trust, flexibility, and responsibility for results—not flawless compliance—they can help move the education system from memocracy toward meaningful reform.

With an education budget nearing one trillion pesos, the central challenge is no longer how much to spend, but how well to govern. A lasting legacy will not come from larger appropriations alone, but from dismantling memocracy and replacing it with accountable decentralization. For Philippine education to truly serve both learners and the economy, memorandums must stop being the ceiling of action—and start being the floor.