The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...
The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...
The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
CHAPTER 5<br />
INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE<br />
merging social development with SDN r<strong>at</strong>her than with other networks, such as HDN<br />
or PREM, which have overlapping mand<strong>at</strong>es. 67<br />
5.27 <strong>The</strong> merger of the two networks was also induced in part by the possibility<br />
of cost savings, but there is little evidence th<strong>at</strong> this has occurred and organiz<strong>at</strong>ional<br />
complexity has increased. SDN <strong>at</strong>tempted to reorganize itself after the merger was<br />
announced. In the network VPU, the three infrastructure departments were merged<br />
into two departments, 68 but staff from former ESSD and urban sectors resisted a<br />
further merger. More substantial cost savings might have been realized if Sector<br />
Boards under the two previous networks were merged. However, even among the<br />
INF sectors, despite the reduction in number of departments, the number of Sector<br />
Boards remained unchanged. SDN has eight Sector Boards, 69 compared to three in<br />
HDN and four in PREM. Within the Regions, some sector units were merged but this<br />
was done unevenly across Regions and span of control increased to 47 staff per<br />
manager in SDN (Table 5.1). SDN has adapted to budget constraints by becoming<br />
even more dependent on trust funds than other network anchors.<br />
Table 5.1. Selected Indic<strong>at</strong>ors for Networks<br />
VPU FPD HDN PREM SDN<br />
Total regional and<br />
anchor staff (as of June 2011)<br />
565 904 827 2308<br />
Share of anchor staff/total staff 48% 23% 21% 30%<br />
Span of control<br />
(total staff/sector manager)<br />
28 40 34 47<br />
Scope of control<br />
(Sector Boards/Global Practices)<br />
6* 3 4 8<br />
Network Anchor Expenditures<br />
(FY10 BB + BETF actuals) (in US$ million)<br />
68 64 47 208<br />
Share of BETFs in Anchor Expenditures 39% 43% 32% 52%<br />
Source: <strong>World</strong> Bank d<strong>at</strong>abases.<br />
Note: D<strong>at</strong>a exclude financial management and procurement sector boards which fall under the OPCS Network.<br />
*FPD reorganized itself into 6 global practices <strong>at</strong> the end of FY11. FPD staff d<strong>at</strong>a include only IBRD head counts.<br />
5.28 SDN is the largest network, its staff numbers exceeding th<strong>at</strong> of the FPD,<br />
HDN, and PREM networks combined. <strong>The</strong> m<strong>at</strong>rix system directly affects 78 percent<br />
of the Bank’s staff. In FY 11, of the 11,402 total Bank staff, 6,235 were loc<strong>at</strong>ed in the six<br />
regions (Appendix M, Table M.1) and 1,630 in the anchors of four networks (FPD,<br />
HDN, PREM, SDN) plus OPCS 70 (Table 5.2). <strong>The</strong> size differential between SDN and<br />
other networks remains true among network anchor staff as well as when the<br />
combined strength of anchor and regional staff of the networks are compared.<br />
91