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

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE
needs and improves client ownership and thus impact. Management stresses that knowledge
flows are not only North to South and the Bank has done a great deal to strengthen the focus
and capacity to facilitate those important and growing South-South flows.
Incentives and Accountability for Quality
Management continues to give the highest priority to technical quality. There is room for
improvement of the peer review and quality enhancement review processes, for example, by
making these reviews timelier, involving external peer reviewers, clarifying sector accountability
for technical quality, and supporting the organization of these reviews in accessing appropriate
technical skills.
Management also agrees with the recommendation to improve quality assurance
mechanisms for ESW and non-lending TA and is actively pursuing actions in this
direction. The corporate quality assurance approach that management is now developing will
soon (within the next year) include all knowledge work. Management has clarified responsibility
for overseeing, coordinating, and facilitating the implementation of the knowledge management
agenda, including strengthening the governance and coding for these products. This builds on
the decisions coming out of the ESW/TA review, already under implementation, which has
defined control points for the processing of non-lending outputs, with clearance now required
from sector and country management, both sides of the matrix.
With regard to a quality assurance mechanism for feedback on quality independent of line
management, it is not foreseen at this point to introduce a new “independent” office or function
for the purpose of quality assurance. Experience has shown that such a unit was not effective in
providing the needed just-in-time support that truly enhances quality. Instead, attention will
focus on continuing to strengthen and support the front line in delivering quality across the
board in Bank support. Nevertheless, as part of the ongoing review of Corporate Quality
Assurance, management is considering an appropriate framework for an accurate and timely
gauge of operational quality for use at the corporate level.
Management agrees that staff rewards should be based on results achieved, but has
reservations about tightly linking staff performance with the achievement of operational
development outcomes. Because the Bank supports clients’ policies and programs, the
recommendation raises an attribution problem and potentially discourages staff from taking risks
or working in fragile and conflict-affected situations. Management notes that it is already
planning an extensive reform of the performance management system—including replacement
of the current overall performance evaluation (OPE) form—that will reflect a realignment of
incentives with due attention paid to knowledge. Also, the recent changes to the governance of
analytical and advisory activities (AAA) will focus on well-defined objectives and outcomes of
AAA. This includes how these will be assessed, for example, through consultation with client
countries. Systematic capture of these aspects in the system will form the basis for developing
processes to recognize staff contributions and provide incentives.
Organizational and Institutional Issues
Management agrees that more clarity is needed on the roles of sector directors and sector
managers. Management is examining their roles and responsibilities to ensure a more balanced
division of labor, particularly with regard to sector governance. Building on the work of the
Finance and Private Sector Development (FPD) pilot, management has agreed that sector
directors and managers will report to both regional and network anchor sides of the matrix.
xxxiv