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

APPENDIX E
KEY FINDINGS FROM SECTOR MANAGER AND COUNTRY DIRECTOR/MANAGER INTERVIEWS
Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean. None of the sector
managers from Europe and Central Asia (0/4) described the influence of Bank-wide
sector strategies on CASs and operations as substantial. Country directors and
managers from Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean were
equally skeptical of the influence of SSPs on CASs. There are also sector-specific
divides. Transport sector managers all rated Bank-wide sector strategies’ impact on
CASs as substantial. As one put it,
“Alignment of the CASs with the sector strategy is partly guaranteed by the large demand by
country directors for transport projects (large projects, with good delivery track record). At the same
time, however, the composition of the transport sector program in individual countries may lead to
tensions […] because clients (and country directors) and sector staff may want different types of
transport projects.”
6. Three out of four Social Protection and Agriculture and Rural Development
managers believe sector strategies’ influence on operations is less than substantial.
HOW EFFECTIVELY ARE CORPORATE STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND GLOBAL PUBLIC GOODS (GPGS) ISSUES REFLECTED
IN COUNTRY STRATEGIES AND PROGRAMS?
7. Sector managers hardly ever discussed GPGs in isolation from corporate
priorities. Most argued that GPGs issues are integrated into country programs
either: (i) when a GPG becomes a corporate priority and garners higher visibility
and closer management attention, country directors are then keener to follow the
GPG’s agenda; or (ii) when the client espouses a GPG issue.
8. Once again Europe and Central Asia sector managers were the most skeptical of
the relevance of GPGs. As one maintained, “In Europe and Central Asia, global or
regional public goods have been conspicuous for their absence.” Other managers argued
that GPGs are not relevant to most countries and that there is, in general, little
incentive for country directors to dedicate resources to GPGs. According to a South
Asia sector manager,
“Most country programs and operations are determined by country demand and countries are
understandably interested in their own problems, not global problems. There are cases, however,
where the Bank corporate priorities were picked up by the country--e.g., in Brazil, the large metro
areas of Sao Paulo and Rio became interested in the climate change agenda. The real connection of
Bank corporate priorities to country programs is permissive and facilitative. When a country
becomes interested in a particular global or regional issue--or cross-sector theme--the fact that it is a
priority for the World Bank means that one can respond much better and with more resources.
Another instance is found in disaster risk management. Before it became a corporate interest,
response was always post-crisis, but more recently the Bank has been able to work with clients on
preparedness--e.g., the Caribbean Disaster Risk facility, and the Cyclone Preparedness project in
India.”
157