The average Google Maps rating of 1.8 for the Defence Resources Agency speaks for itself. The reviews are painfully honest and straightforward: “The whole process is very archaic and primitive. About 60 citizens are forced into one narrow corridor to sweat,” writes one disappointed visitor. Another adds: “Not recommended, a waste of time, probably another 8-11 months of wasting time after going there.” What does all this say about the standards in our e-government?
Defence Resources Agency’s Customer Consultant – Customer Service Agent or Dictator?
According to the job description, the KRA client consultant should be a first-level communicator who guides young people through entering military service, explains the rules, and decides who is suitable for service and who is not. The job also includes granting extensions and releasing from service. However, from the outside, the role seems to be used more to impose dominance and obligation rather than as a helper.
In no other customer service organization would it be acceptable for consultants to lower the average rating of an institution to a level characterized by words like “primitive,” “slow,” and “deeply inhumane?” Worse, it is not even acceptable to respond to these criticisms. Is this a manifestation of the hypocrisy of a state that treats citizens as insignificant subordinates?
“Client” or Insignificant Human Resource?
The Defense Resources Agency’s strong refusal to engage in dialogue with its critics and “clients” raises valid questions. While in other areas customer satisfaction and feedback are central, here it seems that citizens are treated as resources rather than as serious subjects. Comments such as “The contingent was dirty and the air smelled of sweat. Beware at all costs,” paint a picture of an institution where human dignity has taken a back seat.
The role of the state should be to protect the interests of citizens and respect their time and mental well-being. However, the current situation shows that the KRA’s activities resemble a bureaucratic machine rather than a modern, customer-centric and ethical organization.
Problems That Won’t Go Away
Let’s also take a closer look at the criticisms highlighted in the reviews:
– Primitiveness of processes. In the digital age, one would expect that the stages related to military service could be completed conveniently and quickly. Reality? “About 6 hours of time” and nearly a hundred people in one narrow space.
– Lack of communication and empathy. Comments point to doctors and officials ignoring visitors’ concerns. If a Defense Resources Agency doctor says, “A trench and fresh air is the best medicine,” how is a citizen supposed to feel respected?
The Need for Solutions
The organization and attitude of the Defense Resources Agency need radical reform. A process fit for the digital age should be the standard, not the exception. Citizen satisfaction and a holistic approach should be a central priority, not a side concern.
In the case of the Defence Resources Agency, there is a clear lack of dignity not only in the way the processes are organised, but also in their inability to admit their mistakes. Should we accept state institutions that treat their citizens as if they were mere resources, not free and respectful people ?
Sources:
- CVKeskus.ee. Job offer: Customer consultant
- Google. Defense Resources Agency Reviews
- Slave Mind. Human. Commodity or a Free Being?
Leave a Reply