Allegedly objective criteria are utilized to evaluate some of the work of the government employee. However, in the final analysis, it is the personal preference of the agency head that carries the most weight. No matter how cleverly the agencies may try to suppress it, it will not be effectively eliminated because there are no objective criteria by which efficiency may be measured. If money is set aside to be awarded to the most efficient employees, it easily lends itself to favoritism and patronage. When agencies are established to protect the rights of the people, it is not uncommon to find that the law grants the respective agencies a monopoly in the investigation and prosecution of cases that arise under the law.
Individuals thus lose the freedom to institute legal proceedings in their own defense.
According to these laws, the agency chooses whether or not to assert the claim. Administrative agencies frequently cite the rate of success of their legal actions as evidence of efficiency. However, those statistics are incomplete. Of the actions that were administratively dismissed, no one knows how many would have been litigated successfully had the government allowed the parties to litigate at their own choice. Administrative agencies frequently under-utilize their resources precisely because cost is not a significant consideration.