Download report here - Norwegian Refugee Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Added Value and Challenges of the Co-operation Between the NRC and the MSUThe evaluation team considers the joint management of the Standby Team by theUNDPA/MSU and the NRC as an added value to mediation support servicing its mainstakeholders and clients. The reason for this has been partly outlined in the sections 4.2 to4.5 and shall be summarised in the following:First, the semi-autonomous management model (the SBT as an instrument used and ownedby the UN, but with experts funded, contracted, and administered by the NRC) allows for amaximum of flexibility:The SBT is fully funded, no additional and time-consuming fund-raising isrequested.The quick deployment within 72 hours which allows for responding to an urgentrequest in a timely.The field missions need experts who could give independent advice. There is anadvantage if mediation support advisors are outspoken and can think outside theframe of the UN. They will not have to take decisions.SBT members could take risks whereby envoys or SRSG tend to be overlycautious.Second, NRC is a world leader in roster management and deployment of experts. In terms ofefficiency of services, they bring in unique know-how and operational strengths in thepartnership. This enables the MSU to focus upon the content and the complex politicaldynamics of deploying the mediation support experts.Third, NRC has a strong ownership of the SBT, too. The project was initiated with the NRCand the motivation for achieving success is high. As a strategic partner to the NorwegianMinistry of Foreign Affairs, the NRC is a reliable partner which is helpful in the securing ofexternal funding, thus enhancing sustainability.Although both partners complement each other well, the co-operation has not been free ofchallenges and frustrations. Whilst part of the co-operation challenges have certainly beencaused by the different expectations regarding the usage of the Team (as described inchapter 4.1), the evaluation team is of the opinion that the different management cultures ofboth organisations also played a role. The NRC, as a very professional and efficientorganisation in the field of expert roster management and rapid deployment of emergencystaff, follows a more linear management style whereas the MSU, which is embedded in acomplex decision-making environment of global politics, applies a less-linear and morepolitical approach in its management. These two different management cultures have, attimes, created challenges for working with one another.What both partners have in common is a high level of expectation regarding the performanceand success of the Standby Team. This joint interest is not matched by a sharedunderstanding of each organisation s role. The particular importance of this project to theNRC has created the expectation of a close partnership with regular communication,interaction and exchange of opinions in order to allow for input beyond a purely technical andadministrative role. The NRC has stated that it would need for more systematiccommunication in order to enhance the impact of the work of the SBT. As the idea of theStandby Team and its development have been developed in partnership with the NorwegianMinistry of Foreign Affairs and the NRC, it was an assumption of the NRC that the initialpartnership that was built upon an equal level with the UN/MSU would continue throughoutthe operation of the Standby Team. Indeed, it is an expectation to be considered as strategicpartners for the MSU which, therefore, assumes a corresponding level of communication onall matters of management which pertain to the use of the Standby Team. This has not beenthe case.30
Whilst the MSU has appreciated the co-operation with the NRC, it does not offer the level ofintensity of communication which is desired by the NRC. This is, on the one hand, due tohuman resources constraints (see above), a change in leadership and the need to furtherdefine and expand the role of the MSU which all combined make it difficult to allow for moreadditional engagement, On the other hand, it reflects the MSU s perceived need to create aclear ownership and leadership of the SBT. The annual report of the MSU (2009) shows thatthe MSU implements a multitude of tasks. It provided support to 19 peacemaking efforts, hascontributed to the building of capacity of regional organisations, it began to develop lessonslearned and knowledge management deliverables and it offered and contributed to trainingas well as to in-house capacity building of various sorts. The Standby Team contributed tosome but not all of these efforts. The high workload of the MSU possibly explains thelimitations to engage in detailed consultations with the NRC on strategic issues. It seems thatthe MSU implicitly would prefer a pragmatic, service-oriented relationship as outlined in thejoint agreement.The NRC, in turn, would like to be informed upon a regular basis about developments withinthe MSU, both as a measure to increase its capacity for effective deployment and also toensure further the success and sustainability of the project. Without doubt, it is important forthe NRC to be well informed about the key challenges concerning deployments and relatedissues. In order to improve regular communication, the NRC and the MSU started to holdweekly conference calls in May 2009. Other suggestions for improved communication (e.g.quarterly meetings) have hitherto not received approval.It is not surprising that other suggestions offered by the NRC regarding the managementstructure of the SBT; namely, to create a Standby Team Secretariat or to establish a UNInteragency Steering Committee, were not considered by the MSU.31
Page 2: Evaluation of theMediation Support
Page 5 and 6: eason, the MSU had to proceed caref
Page 7 and 8: deployment rate of the first team w
Page 9 and 10: 1 Introduction: Mediation Support i
Page 11 and 12: 2 Background of the MSU SBTThe Medi
Page 13 and 14: 3 Purpose and Methodology of the Ev
Page 15 and 16: interviewing process was to be qual
Page 17 and 18: MSU as Part of the New PMDSenior an
Page 19 and 20: peace process which could be logist
Page 21 and 22: Thus, the expertise within the SBT
Page 23 and 24: Box 5: Geographic Involvement of SB
Page 25 and 26: these activities and the related kn
Page 27 and 28: strategy framework and was able to
Page 29 and 30: 4.4 Efficiency of the MSU SBTThe ef
Page 31 and 32: The SBT has been considered as a pi
Page 33 and 34: take place in a conducive atmospher
Page 35 and 36: function of the Standby Team. The S
Page 37: good way of improving co-operation
Page 41 and 42: approach. The SBT is not just anoth
Page 43 and 44: Because the MSU has developed its o
Page 45 and 46: Annex I: Terms of Reference(attache
Page 47 and 48: Annex III: List of Documents Review

Download report here - Norwegian Refugee Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?