PFM reforms have been criticized for producing “administrative systems in developing countries that look like those of modern states but that do not (indeed, cannot) perform like them” (Andrews, Pritchett, and Woolcock 2017). While in some cases there has been too much focus on the PFM’s form (which, at times, has been too complex for the capacity of the country to absorb and implement), it is difficult to reform a function without first putting in place the necessary laws, regulations, and processes to support the reform. It is clear that countries and their development partners need to ensure reform of the “function” as well as the “form” of PFM systems.

In many cases, establishing the form is an essential prerequisite to implementing the function. Focusing on form per se is not bad; rather, it is important to follow up on the implementation of form by adhering to function. This alignment often requires intensive and sustained technical assistance and support for capacity development.

A review of contemporary literature suggests some dissatisfaction with how the reform design process has worked in the past. Once the stakeholders have been identified and their motivations understood, the decision-making process should focus on reaching an agreement between different stakeholders on defining the limits of reform, agreeing with donor partners on the overall strategy for reform, and ensuring that the authorities are fully aware of the implications of, and fully committed to, the reform.