Supervise the job performance of a government employee (A Comparative Study of Iraqi and Iranian Law)

The subject of this study is the monitoring of the job performance of a government employee, which has been conducted as a comparative study between Iraqi and Iranian law.

 In the first chapter of the research, we have discussed the concepts of government job, government employee, supervision, job performance, the importance of job performance and supervisors and its different types. The second chapter is devoted to administrative oversight and types of oversight of this performance, which is done through management oversight, oversight by research committees, and oversight by oversight bodies. Then, in the third chapter, judicial supervision and its role in controlling the performance of government employees through the inspection organization and the disciplinary committee are discussed. We have examined the law or at least its non-contradiction with the text of the laws.

 Supervision, whether administrative or judicial, has both positive and negative administrative and financial implications, to which we have devoted the fourth chapter of the dissertation.

Administrative and judicial oversight is important in the performance of a government employee as one of the pillars that determines the employee’s path and the degree of his / her compatibility with the work and his / her need for progress and the reasons for his / her failure to perform the assigned duties. These two oversights are also important in determining the role of situational law in measuring performance and enhancing work efficiency.

 This research is done using descriptive comparative analytical research method and examines how performance monitoring, which distinguishes the present dissertation from other studies.

 The research has concluded that: Despite the multiplicity of administrative and judicial oversight practices, this is skewed in many occupations due to personal motives, partisanship, or the inattention of individuals to file complaints or lawsuits against government employees’ misconduct.

 The legislature has not enacted a law to measure the effectiveness and efficiency that organizations are required to implement in order to obtain rights. There is no correlation between the return of a government employee and the salary and privileges he earns. The monitoring process is inefficient in increasing efficiency because it does not use technology tools that are effective in providing government services without direct contact between employee and client.