From Routine Tasks to Measurable Results: How the New Project Management Rules Are Transforming Public Administration

From Routine Tasks to Measurable Results: How the New Project Management Rules Are Transforming Public Administration

Kazakhstan continues to strengthen its public project management system. By Order No. 375/NQ of the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, dated July 2, 2026, significant amendments have been introduced to the national Project Management Rules.

The most important change is the clear distinction between project activities and routine operational processes within government agencies. The revised framework ensures that project management tools are applied only to initiatives that create measurable public value, while routine administrative functions remain part of standard operational management.

Routine Operations Remain Outside Project Management

Under the updated Rules, process activities include regular, repetitive, or continuous functions performed by government institutions as part of their statutory responsibilities.

These include preparing recurring reports, processing citizens' requests, conducting routine monitoring, operating existing information systems, and delivering ongoing public services.

Such activities are no longer required to be managed as projects within the national digital project management platform. Instead, they continue to be evaluated through standard organizational procedures and employees' official responsibilities, reducing unnecessary administrative workload.

Projects Focus on Development and Change

Project management is now reserved exclusively for initiatives that create new products, introduce significant improvements, or deliver strategic transformation.

To qualify as a project, an initiative must simultaneously include a clearly defined outcome, fixed implementation timelines, dedicated resources, multiple interdependent stakeholders, and the application of formal project management methodologies.

Typical examples include launching new public services, constructing infrastructure, implementing digital platforms, redesigning government processes, and delivering cross-agency initiatives.

Greater Accountability and Clear Responsibilities

The revised Rules strengthen personal accountability by assigning every project participant a clearly defined role, expected deliverables, deadlines, and decision-making authority.

This approach is particularly important for cross-government initiatives involving multiple agencies.

Where project implementation depends on funding, approvals, procurement procedures, land allocation, data availability, or actions by other organizations, these dependencies are formally recorded in the digital project management system and can be escalated to the Project Steering Committee for timely resolution.

A Single Digital Source of Truth

The digital project management platform becomes the central source of information throughout the project lifecycle.

It records implementation schedules, responsible officials, achieved outcomes, project risks, changes, and management decisions, enabling transparent oversight and objective performance assessment.

The system also helps ensure that responsibility is assigned only to individuals and organizations with the authority and resources to influence project outcomes.

Strengthening Governance

The amendments further clarify the authority of the Project Steering Committee, which is responsible for launching, suspending, restarting, and overseeing projects, as well as appointing the Chief Project Manager and Project Office Administrator.

Project teams may now include representatives from government agencies, public organizations, businesses, academia, and the expert community, expanding the range of professional expertise available for implementing complex public initiatives.

A More Practical Model of Public Project Management

The updated Rules establish a more efficient and results-oriented governance model.

Routine administrative functions remain within operational management, while development initiatives receive dedicated project governance, appropriate resources, and structured interagency coordination.

This approach is expected to reduce administrative burden, improve transparency, strengthen accountability, and allow project offices to focus on initiatives that genuinely improve public services, urban development, and the overall effectiveness of public administration.