The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER 5 INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 5.10 Most regional sector managers are highly critical of anchor units. Despite their own inability to contribute to Sector Board governance meaningfully, sector managers are highly critical of anchor units. As one sector manager put it, “The anchor meets its own needs and corporate demands, but not the Regions’ needs.… knowledge generated by the Regions is uploaded and disseminated, but mainly through—and depending on—the thematic groups.” 5.11 In 2011, the FPD vice presidency and the FPD departments in the Regions were restructured in an attempt to address the perception that “the network anchor and the six Regions were not working in full alignment.” Among other measures, FPD introduced six global practice groups, each focused on one of the six areas identified as strategic priorities in the sector. All staff members in the FPD network—whether in the anchor or the Regions—have been mapped to one or more global practice. And each of six dual directors now has both a regional and functional responsibility: they are accountable to the FPD network vice president for quality across all Regions in one of the six global practices, and they are accountable to a regional vice president for project implementation and risk mitigation across all global practices in one of the six Regions. Their pay is divided equally between the Region and the network VPUs, and they have the support of one manager in the Region, as well as one to three service line managers for the practice group. 5.12 This design was intended to address matrix-related issues on strategy, knowledge, and quality and accountability. Dual accountability of sector directors was expected to make them “think corporate” rather than just regionally or topically, and thus allow them to both better integrate corporate strategic priorities into operational work and build on-the-ground realities into strategic work. New relationships were expected to increase the sharing of knowledge and expertise across Regions and between the Regions and network anchors by creating natural communities of practice among staff centered on the strategic priorities of the institution. And the new system was expected to increase attention to quality by making sector directors accountable for quality on a global practice Bank-wide. Box 5.1 outlines a prospective assessment of the FPD model based on the matrix issues identified in this evaluation. 5.13 Recent efforts by management to rejuvenate the Sector Boards do not address the underlying constraints that impede them. The Matrix Leadership Team has agreed on a 10-point program 60 to enhance sector practices which states that henceforth sector managers will also report to both sides of the matrix. The program consists of 10 steps that Sector Boards will take to brand their sectors as “Enhanced Sector Practices.” But the underlying incentives and structural constraints, 85
CHAPTER 5 INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE including span of control of sector managers that have prevented efficient functioning of the Sector Boards have not yet been addressed. Box 5.1. The New FPD Model: Creating “Global Technical Practices” FPD set ambitious goals for its restructuring, including more cross support, improved outcomes, and improved client satisfaction. Still in its infancy, the restructuring cannot be evaluated for its outcomes, but there are some hints given the degree to which the new system introduces new incentives and removes disincentives for achieving its objectives. Strategy: The introduction of dual directors responsible for operations in one Region and one Global Technical Practice (GTP) will likely help to integrate the Bank’s strategic sector priorities, where appropriate, into country operations. At a minimum, the directors now have an incentive to integrate the GTP for which they are responsible into the operations of the Region for which they are responsible and, to a lesser degree, to reciprocate on other practices. Knowledge: The mere setting of a goal for cross support and mapping of staff to more specific global practices is unlikely to dramatically increase the use of cross support unless cross support penalties are removed. FPD is addressing this by switching to pay-as-you-go cross support which addresses the disincentive caused by delays in budget adjustment. Sharing of knowledge across VPUs could benefit from the orientation of teams around global practices through informal networking. Experience in other sectors suggests that for a thematic group to be useful, it must (i) be financed well-enough to provide a minimum threshold of knowledge management functions; and (ii) focus on a topic specific enough to attract a group of motivated staff to yield a strong network. Accountability for quality: The directors’ new accountability for quality for one GTP Bankwide may heighten their attention to quality. This will incentivize directors to insist on more robust quality assurance systems for all operations in their GTP. Sustainability: In several ways, the FPD pilot is quite similar to the original vision of the matrix system, with staff assigned to Bank-wide Sector Boards and expected to work across Regions as needed. These teams would ensure that current knowledge is integrated into country operations. The FPD pilot holds a similar vision with a few adjustments: GTPs are more specific than Sector Boards; directors serve in a dual role; and some incentives have been modified. While these changes have the potential to enhance the effectiveness of the FPD Network, it remains to be seen if the initial excitement over the new structure will be internalized by FPD staff and can be sustained. Replicability: The new structure for FPD is designed as a pilot exercise. Its applicability to other networks may be constrained by differences in the relative share of anchor staff and in overall staff size. Almost half of FPD staff are in the Network Anchor—giving it more flexibility for sharing knowledge—compared to less than a quarter in PREM and HDN and a third in SDN. PREM and HDN are roughly 60 and 80 percent bigger than FPD. SDN staff is more than the combined strength of the other three and the breadth of its technical sectors is too vast for the FPD model to be feasible under its current structure. Source: “Frequently Asked Questions, FPD Global Practices Pilot,” interviews with FPD staff 86
Page 1 and 2:
The Matrix System at Work An Evalua
Page 3 and 4:
©2012 Independent Evaluation Group
Page 5 and 6:
Costs of Country and Sector Strateg
Page 7 and 8:
Table 3.6. Total Cross-Support Sold
Page 10:
Abbreviations AAA AFR ARDE ARPP BET
Page 14 and 15:
Glossary Term Anchor sector directo
Page 16 and 17:
GLOSSARY Practice managers (PM) Reg
Page 18 and 19:
Overview The Matrix System at Work
Page 20 and 21:
OVERVIEW rather than on the 1997 ma
Page 22 and 23:
OVERVIEW satisfactory or better in
Page 24 and 25:
OVERVIEW toward capacity building a
Page 26 and 27:
OVERVIEW Innovation in the field is
Page 28 and 29:
OVERVIEW Figure D. Outcomes of Bank
Page 30 and 31:
OVERVIEW modernization in the corpo
Page 32 and 33:
OVERVIEW management structure but t
Page 34 and 35:
OVERVIEW Structure Bank-wide matrix
Page 36 and 37:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE interest and ow
Page 38 and 39:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Management cons
Page 40:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE that reach far
Page 43 and 44:
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
2. The Strategic Alignment of Secto
Page 61 and 62:
CHAPTER 2 THE STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT O
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76: CHAPTER 2 THE STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT O
Page 77 and 78: CHAPTER 2 THE STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT O
Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 3 THE PROMISE OF A KNOWLEDG
Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 4 DELIVERING QUALITY SERVIC
Page 123 and 124: CHAPTER 5 INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND
Page 125: CHAPTER 5 INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND
Page 145 and 146: 6. Conclusions and Recommendations
Page 147 and 148: CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEND
Page 149 and 150: CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEND
Page 152 and 153: Appendix A Matrix Management and Or
Page 154 and 155: APPENDIX A MATRIX MANAGEMENT AND OR
Page 162 and 163: SECONDARY ANALYSIS OF CASCR REVIEWS
Page 164 and 165: APPENDIX B EVALUATION METHODOLOGY a
Page 166 and 167: APPENDIX C RESPONSIVENESS AND EFFEC
Page 176 and 177:
APPENDIX D EXPERIENCE IN THE TRENCH
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Appendix E Key Findings from Sector
Page 198 and 199:
APPENDIX E KEY FINDINGS FROM SECTOR
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Table E.1. Country Directors and Ma
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
# Other Questions Q # 7 APPENDIX E
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
APPENDIX F FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:
Page 216 and 217:
APPENDIX F FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:
Page 218 and 219:
Appendix G Comparison of the Six Re
Page 220 and 221:
APPENDIX G PROFILES OF THE BANK’S
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Appendix H Working across Organizat
Page 228 and 229:
APPENDIX H WORKING ACROSS ORGANIZAT
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Appendix I Budgetary Incentives 65.
Page 240 and 241:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES Bud
Page 242 and 243:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES 72.
Page 244 and 245:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES com
Page 246 and 247:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES Fig
Page 248 and 249:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES mea
Page 250 and 251:
APPENDIX J WORKING ACROSS SECTORS A
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Appendix K World Bank Sector Strate
Page 258 and 259:
APPENDIX K WORLD BANK SECTOR STRATE
Page 260 and 261:
APPENDIX K WORLD BANK SECTOR STRATE
Page 262 and 263:
Appendix L International Finance Co
Page 264 and 265:
APPENDIX L IFC 2013 CHANGE INITIATI
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
APPENDIX M STAFFING DATA Note: Head
Page 272 and 273:
APPENDIX M STAFFING DATA Table M.7.
Page 274 and 275:
Appendix N Managers Interviewed Nam
Page 276 and 277:
References Barnett, Michael N. and
Page 278 and 279:
REFERENCES Sy, Thomas and Laura Sue
Page 280 and 281:
Endnotes 1 See Wapenhans 1992, 1994
Page 282 and 283:
ENDNOTES appropriately assessed by
Page 284 and 285:
ENDNOTES 46 The respondents to this
Page 286:
ENDNOTES 71 See Safeguards and Sust
show all

The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?