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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1. Introduction and Context Highlights Many independent evaluations have found that internal World Bank constraints are barriers to achieving development outcomes. Organizations adopt matrix systems to help balance competing objectives and to better manage interdependent activities; successful matrix organizations continuously review their organizational effectiveness and readjust internal power imbalances as necessary to enhance their ability to achieve their strategic goals. For the Bank, these competing objectives are responsiveness to client needs on the one hand, and technical excellence in operations, analytical work, and advice on the other. The institutional aspects of reform—incentives, processes, and organizational culture—are far more challenging than changes in organizational structure, even in the private sector. The objective of the evaluation is to assess the extent to which the twin objectives of the matrix system—enhancing client responsiveness and establishing strong technical networks to deliver quality services—have been attained and have enhanced the Bank’s development effectiveness. The evaluative framework for the matrix system focuses on outputs and intermediate outcomes along three dimensions: strategic alignment, the global knowledge base, and delivering quality services. Rationale and Purpose 1.1 The World Bank’s ability to deliver effective country operations and services is contingent upon responsiveness to the client and technical excellence. The Bank has made several attempts, most notably in 1987 and 1997, to strengthen its ability to achieve these twin objectives. The 1997 renewal was motivated largely by recognition that the Bank’s development programs were excessively driven by a culture of lending, with insufficient attention to client needs and the quality of results, which are crucial to development effectiveness. 1 The reforms included an organizational restructuring and change management process and brought the word “matrix” into the Bank’s organizational vocabulary. The resulting structure consists of a dual matrix—Bankwide between the six regional vice presidential units (VPUs) and network VPUs, and in each Region between Country Management Units (CMUs) and Sector Management Units (SMUs). 1.2 Several recent Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) evaluations found that organizational constraints stood in the way of better development outcomes. For 1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT instance, evaluations of the Bank’s work on social safety nets (IEG 2011b), agriculture and agribusiness (IEG 2010a), climate change (IEG 2009a), and health, nutrition, and population (IEG 2010b) indicated that there are few incentives for teams to work across sectors, and the “narrow subsectoral view” adopted by staff leads to weaker development outcomes. The problem is not new—the same issue was cited in the 2006 Annual Review of Development Effectiveness that looked back on previous IEG reports. Other evaluations—including the 2008 Annual Review of Development Effectiveness and evaluations on the environment (IEG 2009b) and the global economic crisis (IEG 2010d)—highlighted the tension that arises when the country-based model is called upon to contribute to the supply of global public goods (GPGs) and address other cross-country issues. 1.3 Evaluations also raised concern about the internal pressure to lend and resulting preference for operations with large commitments, noted in evaluations of governance and anticorruption (IEG 2011c) and climate change (IEG 2009a). This lending pressure has also resulted in an insufficient focus on the sharing of knowledge, as noted in evaluations of GPGs (IEG 2008), agriculture and agribusiness (IEG 2010a), transport (IEG 2007), and knowledge (IEG 2008a). 1.4 IEG is evaluating the Bank’s matrix system, at the request of the Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE), 2 as a contribution toward strengthening the Bank’s effectiveness in assisting its client countries. The primary motivation is to build on the findings from IEG’s previous evaluations to assess the relevance and effectiveness of the Bank’s matrix system and its ability to provide high-quality services to its clients in order to inform the Bank’s ongoing reforms. The objectives of the 1997 reforms were to create a new Bank culture through increased client responsiveness and delivery of quality services. Client responsiveness was to be improved through a new country compact and strong country managers who are closer to the client, hold budget authority, and are accountable for delivering the country program and ensuring results. Quality services were to be achieved through strong sector groups working together across the World Bank. These sector groups would deliver quality through product teams tasked with providing client solutions and results, building the Bank’s global knowledge base, and ensuring quality and accountability. 3 1.5 The evaluation examines the extent to which the twin objectives of enhancing client responsiveness and establishing strong technical networks to deliver quality services have been attained and have enhanced the Bank’s development effectiveness. The evaluation focuses on the implementation of the current matrix system rather than on the 1997 matrix design, and it follows an objectives-based approach to assess the relevance and effectiveness of the matrix reform. To the extent feasible, the evaluation also examines the efficiency of matrix arrangements. In this 2
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 45 and 46: CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Page 59 and 60: 2. The Strategic Alignment of Secto
Page 61 and 62: CHAPTER 2 THE STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT O
Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 3 THE PROMISE OF A KNOWLEDG
Page 91 and 92:
CHAPTER 3 THE PROMISE OF A KNOWLEDG
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 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
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 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
APPENDIX D EXPERIENCE IN THE TRENCH
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Appendix E Key Findings from Sector
Page 198 and 199:
APPENDIX E KEY FINDINGS FROM SECTOR
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Table E.1. Country Directors and Ma
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
# Other Questions Q # 7 APPENDIX E
Page 212 and 213:
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 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Appendix H Working across Organizat
Page 228 and 229:
APPENDIX H WORKING ACROSS ORGANIZAT
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?