The discussion on whether Public Health Medicine Specialists (PPKA) can replace or assume roles currently held by PTD officers must be framed correctly. It is not fundamentally a question of replacement, but rather a question of role alignment, competency utilisation, and leadership development within a complex health system. Any modern health system functions best when professional expertise and administrative competence complement each other, not when one is viewed as substituting entirely for the other.
The foundational principle of professional and administrative competence
A key principle in organisational leadership, particularly in highly specialised sectors such as healthcare, is that it is generally easier to train a technical expert in administrative and management functions than to train a general administrator to acquire deep professional and technical expertise. This is because professional training in medicine and public health requires many years of structured education, supervised practice, and competency development. Public Health Medicine Specialists undergo rigorous training through Master’s and often Doctor of Public Health programmes, covering epidemiology, health systems, health policy, programme planning, management, and evaluation. Their training inherently integrates management principles within the context of health systems, rather than management in isolation.
In contrast, PTD officers enter the civil service with diverse academic backgrounds, often without specific training in healthcare, epidemiology, or health systems. However, they bring valuable strengths in governance, administrative procedures, finance, policy implementation, and organisational coordination. These competencies are essential for the functioning of large institutions such as the Ministry of Health. Their role is therefore complementary, not inferior nor superior, but different in nature.
The unique training and competency of Public Health Medicine Specialists
Public Health Medicine Specialists are uniquely trained to understand the health system as a whole. Their competencies include disease surveillance, epidemiological analysis, programme planning, prevention and control strategies, health policy development, and health system evaluation. Importantly, their training also includes management and leadership within healthcare settings. They are trained not only to analyse disease patterns but also to design and implement interventions at population level, coordinate services across sectors, and evaluate outcomes.
This gives them a critical advantage when making decisions that directly affect health service delivery, disease prevention, and population health outcomes. Their decisions are informed by both scientific evidence and operational realities. For example, an epidemiologist overseeing disease surveillance does not merely analyse data but plans preventive strategies, allocates resources based on risk, and coordinates responses across multiple levels of the health system.
Their management training is therefore context-specific. It is grounded in healthcare realities, which makes them particularly suited for leadership roles that require integration of clinical, preventive, and system perspectives.
The appropriate positioning of Public Health Medicine Specialists within the health system
Public Health Medicine Specialists should primarily be recognised and positioned as specialists, equivalent in professional standing to clinicians in hospitals. Just as clinicians lead clinical services based on their expertise, Public Health Medicine Specialists should lead technical areas such as disease surveillance, prevention programmes, health policy planning, and population health strategy.
Many specialists, whether clinical or public health, naturally progress into administrative and leadership roles as part of their career development. Their technical background strengthens their administrative effectiveness because their decisions are grounded in real-world professional experience. This is consistent with the model seen globally, where healthcare organisations are often led by individuals with professional training in medicine or public health, supported by administrative professionals.
However, this does not mean that all specialists must become administrators. Many should remain focused on technical leadership, which is essential for maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of health programmes.
The continued relevance and complementary role of PTD officers
PTD officers play an important role in supporting the health system. Their expertise in public administration, finance, human resource management, and policy implementation (if they really have the expertise) provides essential organisational support. They facilitate the operational and administrative processes that allow technical specialists to focus on professional and programme leadership.
Rather than viewing the roles as interchangeable, it is more accurate to view them as complementary. PTD officers can support specialists by managing administrative systems, while specialists provide technical direction and professional leadership. This collaborative model ensures both administrative efficiency and technical excellence.
Leadership roles must be determined by competency, not professional category alone
Leadership is not automatically determined by whether an individual is a Public Health Medicine Specialist or a PTD officer. Leadership requires specific competencies including strategic thinking, decision-making, communication, integrity, and the ability to guide organisations effectively. These competencies must be developed over time through training and experience.
Not all specialists are suited for leadership roles, and not all administrators are suited for technical leadership roles. Both groups require leadership development if they are to assume senior management positions. The key principle is that leadership roles must be assigned based on demonstrated competency, relevant experience, and suitability, rather than professional designation alone.
Where leadership involves technical decision-making related to health systems, disease control, or service planning, individuals with professional health expertise have a natural advantage because they understand the implications of decisions at both clinical and population levels.
The relationship between directors, deputies, and administrative leadership
In many healthcare systems, directors provide strategic and professional leadership, while deputies support operational coordination, administrative implementation, and organisational management. When deputies have professional health expertise, this can strengthen decision-making by ensuring that operational and administrative decisions align closely with technical realities.
However, administrative expertise remains essential. Administrative officers provide continuity, governance, and procedural oversight, ensuring that organisational systems function efficiently.
The most effective model is therefore one where technical leadership and administrative expertise work in partnership.
Leadership at the Ministry level and the distinction between administrative and technical leadership
At the highest levels, such as the Secretary-General and Deputy Secretary-General positions, leadership involves national-level policy implementation, resource allocation, organisational coordination, and governance. These roles require strong administrative and leadership competencies, as well as an understanding of the health system.
Whether such roles are held by individuals with health professional training or administrative training depends on their competency, experience, and leadership capability. Individuals with public health expertise bring strong understanding of health systems and population health, while those with administrative training bring strengths in governance, policy coordination, and organisational management.
Both backgrounds can contribute effectively if the individual possesses the required leadership and management competencies.
Conclusion
The issue is not whether Public Health Medicine Specialists should replace PTD officers, but how both groups should be optimally positioned to strengthen the health system. Public Health Medicine Specialists should be recognised as professional specialists with leadership roles in technical and health system domains, equivalent in standing to clinical specialists. PTD officers should continue to provide essential administrative and governance support.
Leadership roles should be determined based on competency, experience, and suitability, not solely professional designation. Both specialists and administrators have important roles, and the most effective health system is one where professional expertise and administrative competence work together in a coordinated and complementary manner.
This approach ensures that decisions affecting health services and population health are both technically sound and administratively effective, ultimately strengthening the overall performance of the Ministry of Health.