Download report here - Norwegian Refugee Council

Learning within the MSU in order to further develop the routines and standards fordeployment.Sustaining the Knowledge and Experiences of the SBTOne topic of concern which was raised in a number of interviews is the one-year contract forSBT members. The UN has an internal regulation (stipulated by the General Assembly)which restricts the employment of gratis personnel provided by member states to a one-yearperiod. As a result, the SBT in the first year exited after 15 months (there was an exceptionalthree-month extension to allow for a new recruitment process) and gave way to a newStandby Team.In our interviews, MSU staff members and SBT members agree that they need someinduction time (most mentioned approximately three months) to adjust and fully understandthe UN environment and to get a solid understanding of how best to use their expertise insupport of the field missions. Some SBT members suggested expanding the terms ofemployment for two years. The NRC suggested that the MSU identify pragmatic solutions tothis problem.On the other hand, we heard from SBT members that they would not have been attracted ormotivated to join the SBT if the terms would have been longer than one year. It allows someestablished professionals to take a one-year sabbatical and return to their positions after theassignment. Some SBT members also mentioned that they felt exhausted after deploymentswhich almost always involve long-distance flights, long working days and the need to adjustquickly to new, complex and difficult political environments in the field of conflict resolution.Assessing the pros and cons of the assignment period of the SBT, we believe that the oneyear period should be maintained as a principle which allows attracting the best expertiseavailable, keeping the SBT member highly motivated to do his job and bringing in freshperspectives. In some cases and upon mutual consent, a second employment term (after ashort break) might be considered as was the case with one of the experts on securityarrangements. In any case, experts could continue to be deployed through the MSU rosteron demand if there is a demand from existing processes.The important aspect is to provide for the best possible induction for SBT members to bedeployed within a short-term period and being regularly replaced by other experts. A relatedaspect to enhance sustainability and allow for a systematic upgrading of quality of the SBTincludes a systematic review of lessons learned.Currently, SBT members have the opportunity to take part in a comprehensive inductionmeeting which exposes them to the UN system, MSU and DPA staff members, workprogrammes and other work-related aspects. This one-week programme is well designedand also provides for an opportunity for NRC staff to attend and update themselves withactivities within the UN system. It is a useful team-building exercise allowing UN staff topersonally meet members of the SBT. In the past, several SBT members could not join thisinduction week either because they had been sent on mission (which happened to severalmembers in both teams) or because they started their work after the induction week whichwas unfortunate.Particularly, during the first standby team period there was little opportunity to organise jointlessons learned meetings beyond the induction meeting. After a number of efforts to allow fora joint MSU/NRC final debriefing meeting, the NRC organised an end-of-mission meeting atthe end of 2008. We could not determine whether or not the discussions or lessons learned(which have not been put on paper) were shared orally with other audiences, including theincoming SBT. We believe that for lessons learned, such a final debriefing exercise is ofessential value, both for the NRC, the SBT and the MSU. Such a forum should preferably24