This is just an old story…
Based on the encyclopedia, effective means "producing or capable of producing an intended result or having a striking effect", while efficient means "acting or producing effectively with a minimum of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort". Of course you can find another definition of those adjectives with the same meaning but in different words, but let me use the meaning above for simplicity.
In a national scope project that I was involved at that time, there are two "fat" committees (Steering and Technical Committees), where the members of those are Indonesian government institutions. Those committees, in the very beginning concept, are made to cut off the bureaucracy and to integrate the works. The Steering Committee has a main task discussing the policy while the Technical Committee discussing the implementation. So far people agree with the concept, but when the discussion reaches the "critical" step, in this case the member of the committee and the BUDGET (read: money), problem appears one by one and accumulates without "good" solution. The side effect of these problems are "fat" committee (more than 20 members) and of course the "bloated budget", almost 3x higher than the real budget.
Well, the conceptors need some efforts to make the "bloated budget" back to normal or realistic, but unfortunatelly, no best solution available and the budget still high enough, 2x higher than the real budget (if the budget only Rp.100,- then 2x means Rp.200,- not so big, but if the budget is in billion, you can imagine how big the mark up is?).
The main reason why the budget becomes high is very simple: "conflict of interest". I'll give you 2 lavish examples: (1). Every institution involved in the project ask for the same facilities that they actually don't need. (2). All of the Steering Committe members want to go abroad (to the partner country who also gives the soft loan or to another countries who have similar project).
Then, after hard "internal" meeting among institutions involve in the project, the conceptor should go to the next step, negotiation with the government institution who has authority to give permit for a soft loan project (BAPPENAS). New "deal" of course should be made to make the project accepted. And again, the conceptors face the same "critical step", BUDGET (read: money). There are two options available: (1). shares an amount of money (about 25%) from the "old budget" with the "gentlemen" from that institution, or (2). makes a new alocation for them by marked up the "old marked up budget".
Of course, this "rule" makes the condition become more complicated for the conceptors. Each member of the conceptors still have a right to withdraw from the team if don't like the rule, but the negotiation process should be continued anyway. If the leader institution doesn't agree with the rule and want to cancel the project, it doesn't mean that the project will be cancelled at all, the authority can give the project to another institutions as far as they agree with the rule.
From the story above, of course we can see that "effective" and "efficient" are not so important and can be avoided. We can put them in the "proposal" but not in the "real world". The most important thing is "how big the share is?". Big share means "you have project in hand", and NO share means "NO Project available for you!". So the conclusion is: "we are not allowed to do our project in effective and efficient ways!". We should do it "uneffectivelly" and "unefficiently"!
Well, the story above is just an old story during the New Order (ORBA), and probably you will never find again same story like this in the new reformation era… 😛