“ACNIS ReView from Yerevan” . Armenia is grappling with a human resources crisis. Why, one might ask? “In a country where over 70% of settlements lack kindergartens and more than 70% of schools are in a state of physical and mental decline, a personnel shortage is inevitable,” the prime minister declared, defending his government’s personnel policies against persistent criticism. Surprisingly, this is how the individual occupying the prime minister’s chair of the Republic of Armenia justifies the situation. He made these remarks during a government session on April 3, barely concealing his frustration as accusations of mismanagement and flawed personnel policies continue to mount against his administration. Nonetheless, Pashinyan argues that while he is ultimately responsible as the country’s leader, he should not be seen as the primary culprit.
This is one of the executive leader’s old, perhaps forgotten “songs,” now with new lyrics and a fresh performance. While acknowledging that public service in a meritocratic system should be regarded as a noble and essential contribution to society, he states: “Yes, the government pursues a flawed personnel policy because the country is facing a personnel crisis, a human resources crisis.” He complains that the few qualified individuals prefer working in the private sector, where they earn monthly salaries ranging from 1 to 10 million drams, rather than in government positions, where they receive 400,000-500,000 drams and “bring home insults along with their salaries.” However, Pashinyan is being disingenuous here—ministers in Armenia earn a monthly salary of one and a half million drams, plus bonuses, a fact that has sparked public discontent.
Criticism from the public is not unfounded: they observe that the executive’s programs lack effectiveness, ministries and other state institutions remain bogged down by administrative red tape, there is an absence of a clear strategy, and citizen services based on the “one-window” principle are poorly implemented. It is no secret that much of this stems from personnel incompetence. Pashinyan is candid in expressing his desire to financially incentivize qualified professionals to join the executive branch, yet he faces resistance. However, state service should maintain its prestige even with modest salaries, as it ought to value and reward individual excellence, fostering respect and recognition for skill and dedication beyond monetary compensation.
According to experts, even if the government succeeds in attracting skilled specialists with high salaries, their efforts are likely to fail because the challenges faced by the private and public sectors are fundamentally different. In the private sector, profit is the primary goal, while in the public sector, the focus is on effective resource management. Most importantly, in Armenia—and elsewhere—the issue is not a lack of qualified personnel but rather a widespread reluctance to work with Pashinyan or under his administration. After all, not everyone is willing to join a system where staff are selected and appointed not based on professional qualifications or meritocracy, as is standard in the civilized world, but rather on the basis of personal loyalty.
Read also
Of course, there are also many who support this system—usually opportunistic, mediocre individuals who prioritize personal gain over principles and have no qualms about becoming subservient. These are exactly the kind of people Pashinyan relies on to advance his personal agenda at the expense of the state’s interests.They are willing to tolerate the risk of being fired by SMS notification, without due notice in advance. A competent professional, someone with intellectual abilities and a strong track record, typically refuses to become subservient; they know their worth and understand the proverb: “Hard work does not go unnoticed, and someday the rewards will follow.” Studies have consistently shown that Armenia does not face a personnel crisis but rather a leadership one.
When a leader fails to set clear goals and effectively motivate his team, lacks an understanding of the resources needed to achieve objectives, and prioritizes personal loyalty above competence, he is unfit for his role. Such leadership is incapable of inspiring, engaging, or guiding people toward meaningful outcomes. This is the prevailing situation in Armenia today. For instance, in Pashinyan’s government, a history teacher has been appointed as minister of defense, a civil law specialist as minister of health, a historian as minister of labor and social affairs, and an orientalist as minister of high-tech industry, among others. These appointments reflect a broader pattern of mismatched leadership and misplaced priorities.
The Armenian Center for National and International Studies