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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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
APPENDIX E KEY FINDINGS FROM SECTOR MANAGER INTERVIEWS AND COUNTRY DIRECTOR/MANAGER INTERVIEWS 9. Only 36 percent (4/11) of country directors and managers rated the influence of GPGs and corporate priorities on country strategies and operations as substantial (or very large). Knowledge THE ROLE OF ANCHORS AND SECTOR BOARDS 10. Sector managers are typically critical of the knowledge function of their anchors and Sector Boards and the operational support received from them. None of the country directors and managers reported receiving substantial knowledge or operational support from anchors. High on the list of criticisms is the anchors’ failure to provide adequate operational support to the Regions. Both quantity and quality of operational support are reported to be inadequate. Yet, anchors are somewhat effective on corporate priorities and to some extent on selected highly specialized topics (e.g. agribusiness, climate change, resource-based financing, national health accounts, pharmaceuticals). 11. Sector managers were asked to rate the effectiveness of their anchor on a variety of activities on a scale of 1 to 10. The average score for knowledge and learning services to the Regions is 5.0; the score for operational support to the Regions is 4.3. Middle East and North Africa and Europe and Central Asia managers’ average scores for operational support are the lowest, both at 3.3. Anchor performance was rated the highest (7.5/10) on addressing corporate demands on the sector, not a knowledge activity. 12. Sector managers voiced their dissatisfaction with anchor performance rather forcefully. One said, "The anchor does what it wants to do, with a cottage industry mentality and without reference to country needs or even discussion with sector people in the Regions." Another argued that, “[t]he role of the anchor is mixed to low, as most relevant knowledge is generated by the Regions --linkages are very weak and the anchor is essentially a self-standing entity. The anchor meets its own needs and corporate demands, but not the Regions' needs. The Sector Boards are inactive in the knowledge area, although they have some involvement in strategic staffing. Some of the knowledge generated by the Regions is uploaded and disseminated, but mainly through--and depending on--the thematic groups.” 13. Social Protection sector managers on the other hand, are rather satisfied with both anchor and Sector Board knowledge performance. Social Protection managers’ scores were higher than average across the board. Their average scores for anchor effectiveness in knowledge and learning services to the Regions and operational support to the Regions are 9.0 and 7.8. As one Social Protection manager put it, “Social Protection is one of the best sectors in global knowledge management. The Sector Board works well and has a business model that puts the Regions first. The anchor too is very client-focused and very supportive of the Regions.” 158
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:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
CHAPTER 3 THE PROMISE OF A KNOWLEDG
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
CHAPTER 4 DELIVERING QUALITY SERVIC
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
CHAPTER 5 INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
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 196 and 197: Appendix E Key Findings from Sector
Page 200 and 201: APPENDIX E KEY FINDINGS FROM SECTOR
Page 206 and 207: Table E.1. Country Directors and Ma
Page 210 and 211: # Other Questions Q # 7 APPENDIX E
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 226 and 227: Appendix H Working across Organizat
Page 228 and 229: APPENDIX H WORKING ACROSS ORGANIZAT
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?