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

OVERVIEW
Innovation in the field is not well captured
across the institution, and country
operations do not draw efficiently on
global knowledge to meet client needs.
Operational staff in the Regions, especially
those in country offices, complain about the
ineffectiveness of the Bank’s role as a
connector of knowledge. Innovations and
knowledge generated at the country level, is
rarely disseminated further. Thematic groups
and communities of practice are the primary
vehicles through which regional staff have
been able to share tacit and embedded
knowledge. Rather than improving their
governance, most of them have been starved
of resources and been allowed to attenuate.
In the absence of efficient search engines
for knowledge retrieval and mechanisms
for knowledge sharing, decentralization
creates further challenges. Decentralization
has helped knowledge become more closely
tailored to client needs and increase its
impact. However, problems arising from weak
knowledge flows have become more acute,
with 54 percent of technical staff mapped to
the Regions now being country-based. The
dissemination of operationally relevant
external knowledge was considered to be
substantial by only 25 percent of staff
surveyed, and internally generated knowledge
by only 40 percent of staff. Managers
interviewed were not more encouraging.
Recognizing that personal networks are
currently the most effective mode of
knowledge sharing, staff and managers alike
lamented the loss of networking opportunities
due to the scaling back of the annual or
biannual gathering of sector staff known as
“sector weeks.” In the absence of effective
mechanisms for sharing of virtual knowledge,
sector weeks have served as the primary
forum for sharing new initiatives and crossfertilization
of operational knowledge,
especially for country-based staff. They are
also the most valued opportunity for countrybased
staff to network and demonstrate their
ability to their sector colleagues, a prerequisite
for mobility across the Bank.
Both in efficiency and effectiveness the
intermediate outcome of the Bank’s
knowledge work—capturing innovation
across the institution, and drawing on
global knowledge to meet client needs—
has not yet been achieved. Notwithstanding
the quality of individual knowledge products,
until the end of 2010, the matrix system had
been unable to achieve the objectives of the
global knowledge bank. Feedback from
country surveys indicates that some clients
value the Bank’s knowledge and policy advice
even more than its financial assistance.
Improving its knowledge portfolio is critical to
the Bank’s future.
The Bank has recently launched several
initiatives to rectify these shortcomings.
The creation of the Knowledge and Learning
Council is an attempt to redress the
weaknesses in the Bank’s knowledge agenda.
The Council has increased corporate oversight
of knowledge activities and launched several
initiatives including Global Expert Teams and
Knowledge Platforms. The restructuring of
the Financial and Private Sector Development
Network (FPD) into Global Practice Teams is
also aimed at improving knowledge flows.
The Council also oversaw production of the
first-ever Knowledge Report, following which
management has committed to actions to fill
gaps in governance arrangements of individual
knowledge products, establish a results
framework for all core knowledge products,
and establish mechanisms to promote greater
connectivity and support management of
knowledge as a portfolio. A more detailed
implementation plan is under preparation.
While these are steps in the right direction,
the underlying incentives that effect demand
for and use of knowledge will also need to
change if these initiatives are to address the
constraints that have hampered the
knowledge bank.
xxiii