Yes, the former government was ineffective and not a true representation of the people. By dissolving and forcing a new election this opens up another chance for the people's choice to reign. The people of Jordan have expressed the opinion that corruption is high within parliament and once those individuals have gained power they have kept it through corruption. Thus overall this is a good change to help the government function better.
The Jordanian parliament was just beginning to function differently and give voice and representation to groups that previously did not have it when King Abdullah shut it down. Now the government's power will be consolidated with the King and the career politician Hani Mulqi. If government's purpose is to make and protect laws that improve the lives of all its citizens, then Jordan's government will actually be less effective without a parliament that includes candidates from a diverse set of political parties and interest groups.
Sometimes getting rid of government entities is a way of just eliminating more red tape. This may or may not be a good thing. The whole point of having multiple government agencies is to ensure that no one person has the power to make things happen. Big decisions are a group thing that need to be decided as such, no matter how long it takes.
No, Jordan's King Abdullah dissolving parliament does not help government function better. A government functions best when the representatives are chosen according to the will of the people through a civil vote. A total-control leader replacing parliament with what he sees fit is a violation of people's freedom and will only set government backwards.