African Community of Practice On Managing for Development Results February 2009
ONLINE
A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results
In this issue: Update………1
Forum ~ Experiences from across the Continent……2
This ONLINE is a monthly newsletter that provides a forum for members of the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results (AfCoPMfDR) and other interested parties to share experiences, discuss issues, and post upcoming events. ONLINE is available in English and French on the African CoP website, www.cop-mfdr-africa.org.
Update Asian CoPMfDR………..14
Announcements....15
E-discussions…….16
CoP Library…….16
Join Us………….16
In addition to the AfCoP Guideline document already finalized, adopted and published on the AfCoP website, in February the African community of practice also finalized during its work plan 2009-2010. This was the culmination of a long process of exchange between the various members of the Core Management Team (CMT) and the secretariat of the World Bank in charge of steering the formulation and implementation of this document. With the work plan finalized, an AfCoP Results Framework with baseline indicators was developed and is currently being finalized under the leadership of the AfCoP’s monitoring and evaluation team.
Contact Us……..17
The AfCoP has also recently initiated discussions with donors and current partners in order to begin fundraising. Outreach will also be made to new donors and partners. The AfCoP was recently represented at the meeting of the 15th meeting of the Joint Venture on MfDR in Paris by members of the Core Management Team and the Secretariat. This proved to be an excellent opportunity for the community to gain exposure and network with fellow CoPs and donors. Several announcements were made last month which relate to a call for expressions of interest to countries wishing to implement the CAP-Scan tool in 2009 as well as the development of a concept note for an African MfDR Sourcebook which will include AfCoP member country case studies. Finally, AfCoP members are currently being asked to give their input on future discussion topics that they are interested in seeing on the AfCoP forum in 2009. These suggestions will be collected and then selected by AfCoP member vote.
February 2009, Issue No 8
Upcoming Events……….15
The year 2009 began with the strong determination of AfCoP to ensure the successful implementation of activities in its work plan adopted during the second annual meeting held in Mauritius from 27 to 30 October 2008.
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
Forum ~ Experiences from across the Continent This section offers an opportunity for CoP members to share their experiences. For this issue, we are grateful to Zaam Ssali and Sylvester Odhiambo Obong’o for preparing these articles. We encourage you to contact us at info_afcop@worldbank.org if you are interested in submitting a story for an upcoming newsletter. We welcome and look forward to additional contributions from all members.
Report on the Meeting of the OECD-DAC Joint Venture on MfDR --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paris, February 5, 2009: OECD Headquarters Introduction: The Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results (JV-MfDR) held its 15th meeting in Paris at the OECD headquarters on the 5th February 2009. The main objective of the meeting was to discuss the direction and future work of the JV-MfDR while considering a certain repositioning after the HLF-3 meeting and the production of the AAA. The meeting was also meant to discuss the possible directions of MfDR in light of the proposals for the work-streams for the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness (WP-EFF). Other meetings/seminars were held around the JV-MfDR meeting to inform the debate. The meetings took place from 3 – 6 of February and were referred to as MfDR week. Communities of Practice on Managing for Development Results (CoP-MfDR): As was the case since the 12th JV-MfDR meeting, CoPs from Africa, Asia-Pacific and Latin America and the Caribbean were invited to the 15th meeting. The CoPs members attended the meeting of the OECD-DAC Joint Venture on MfDR to deliver messages from partner countries, particularly considering the proposal by the Secretariat at the OECD that MfDR should be integrated in the proposed four work-streams as a cross-cutting issue rather than a stand-alone work-stream in the future work of the WP-EFF. The African Community of Practice (AfCOP) was represented by the following Core Management Team members: Zaam Ssali, Solomon Mhlanga, Richard Ssewakiryanga, and Tamirat Yacob. The other two communities were represented by Koshy Thomas from Asia-CoP and Phillip Schonrock from the LAC-CoP. The CoPs held a joint meeting on the 4th February as a pre-event to feed into the JV meeting the next day. The goals of the meeting were: 1. To discuss and have a common position regarding the work-streams that had been proposed by the OECD secretariat for the future work of the WP-EFF. 2. To prepare for the JV MfDR meeting on 5th February 3. Brainstorming on how to ensure that the CoPs’ continue to work together sustainably The JV-MfDR Meeting: The JV-MfDR meeting took place on the 5th February at the OECD headquarters and was attended by representatives of various bilateral and multilateral donor organizations. Various technical papers were presented for discussion. The following papers were presented and discussed in the meeting:
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
1. Working Party on Aid-Effectiveness; Future Directions: The Secretariat presented to the meeting a draft proposal on the renewed mandate 2009-2010, work programme and structure of the WP-EFF and the supposed role and position of MfDR within the framework. The proposals are meant to show the direction of the WP-EFF after Accra and resolutions in the AAA. The proposal is that future work of the WP will be premised on clusters that will include a. Ownership and Accountability b. Country Systems c. Transparent and Responsible Aid d. Assessing Progress. The details of each cluster are presented below in the diagram:
Ownership
&
Country Systems
Accountability
• Strengthening local environment
• Strengthening local dialogue
• National Development Policies
• Country Accountability
Transparent
&
Responsible Aid
• Support implementation of commitments
• Strengthen capacity & performance
• Improve transparency on use
• Aid Transparency
• Predictability • In-country division of labour
• International division of labour
• Conditionality
Assessing Progress
• Monitor progress of PD & AAA
• Evaluate Implementation
• Document progress
• Monitoring the fragile states principles
The proposal further notes that MfDR will not be a standalone cluster but rather operate as a crosscutting issue in all the four clusters above. The other possible option would be to have MfDR as a platform for peer-to-peer learning with no direct links with the WP-EFF. It is also the expectation of the Secretariat that most of the work for WP-EFF will be country-level implementation in-order to capture the mood of the AAA that more should be done for MfDR outside meetings and conceptualisation. The CoPs presented a joint communique to the JV-MfDR proposing the creation of a fifth cluster specifically on MfDR. The following were the messages in the communique: •
The creation of a fifth cluster is the most appropriate way to approach future MfDR work. It will promote positive collaboration through: participation in face-to-face events and strengthen the collaboration with other networks, bi-lateral and multi-lateral donors. In the current economic scenario MfDR provides better focus on resource utilization and program planning.
•
Putting MfDR into one of the four clusters would diminish its importance and send negative signals towards the aid effectiveness agenda and ground would be lost on the achievements already realized. While MfDR is cross-cutting all the other clusters; from experience advocating for mainstreaming of a cross-cutting issue usually leaves it un-done.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
•
The sense of purpose and expected results of the formation of a fifth cluster will entail an information sharing platform of good practices that will help actors within the international community to improve their own understanding and skills on MfDR through:
§
Peer to peer learning
§
Confidence building - Dialogue between donor/partner countries
§
Demand driven - Strategic approach on common issues
§
Stakeholders beyond government (parliamentarians, SCO, private sector, academics, among others)
§
Joint research
§
One voice in common objectives among COP (Africa, Asia, LAC)
•
An MfDR cluster will promote ownership through increased regional dialogue and information-sharing for the dissemination of good practices for effective MfDR models via Intra/Inter regional dialogue and advocacy at country level (COP) in-order to take the MfDR to the highest level in governments and the world as a whole.
• Creation of a fifth cluster will also promote development of National Strategic Frameworks (establishing national priorities and cascading these priorities from the top down – national planers in consultation with all other development partners) thru demand driven mechanisms. • As a result of the permanent demand for information/models by all actors within the international community, the 5th cluster on MfDR will secure its sustainability. The asymmetries of information in relation to what occurs in partner countries, constitutes one of the greatest obstacles for the effectiveness of development. The MfDR cluster contributes to the solution of these asymmetries, the process will be more dynamic and the impact on development outcomes can be increased. • The Joint COPs (Africa, Asia, LAC) consider the continued support of the MDBs important for the MfDR agenda and future work on agenda setting will be based on the current work. 2. Future Work on Mutual Accountability – Overview: A draft proposal was presented and discussed with an aim to agree on core elements of a mutual accountability work programme for 2009 – 2010. Detailed discussions were expected by the Task Team Mutual Accountability in a different meeting the next day. 3. Future Work on MfDR: Updates were presented to the meeting on particular work-streams of the JV-MfDR; these included presentations on MfDR CAP-Scan; Distilling good MfDR practice and technical guidance which also included the expected direction of the MfDR Source-book; Incentives for aid effectiveness and Results reporting in donor agencies. 4. Improving Development Results through Better Use of the Poverty Impact Assessment (PIA) Approach: this is a participatory tool for the analysis of available evidence on the likely distributional impacts of projects, programmes or policies developed by the DAC Network on Poverty Reduction (POVNET). It is hoped that this tool will be useful in the MfDR work.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
5. Managing for Communicating Results: This was a presentation from the Informal Network DAC Development Communicators. The major highlight was a presentation of a background paper earlier commissioned by the OECD titled ‘Managing for and Communicating about Results’. A seminar was held on the next day under the same subject. Conclusion: The participation of the CoPs at the 15th meeting of the JV-MfDR was an opportunity for the continuation of a relationship building process between the various CoPs. In addition, the presence of the CoPs further strengthened the presence of a voice from practitioners in the Partner countries at the meeting. As a means to support joint works of all the CoPs a joint meeting is proposed to be held in September 2009. It is important to note that the mandate of the JV-MfDR will end in February and the decision of whether a fifth cluster capturing MfDR would be created will be made by the WP-EFF at their next meeting due to take place in March 2009. A transition team was proposed and members volunteered under the chairmanship of Mr. Joan Boer (Co-Chair of the JV-MfDR) to finalize the proposals to be presented to the WP-EFF at their meeting in March. Furthermore, the MDBs communicated that whatever the fate of the fifth cluster they will continue to support the MfDR agenda and the work of the CoPs. By Zaam Ssali N.K Program Officer, Uganda National Academy of Social Sciences
RAPID RESULTS APPROACH / INITIATIVE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutionalization of Results Based Management in Kenya Public Service The initiatives are structured in 100-day cycles from agreeing on goals to achieving results, with each goal directly connected to one or more of the overall objectives of the development effort. RRA achieves systematic change through a series of small-scale, results producing and momentum-building initiatives implemented within the100 days or less. In doing so, it helps leaders to continually adapt and refine their overall implementation strategy based on what works and what does not work on the ground. The specific goal to be achieved within the 100-days is, therefore, what is commonly referred to as 100-day Rapid Results Initiative (RRI). RRA:§
Starts by focusing on a few RESULTS
§
Challenges team to achieve 100-day Results goals
§
Create temporary governance and support structure
§
Reinforce basic management skills
§
Manage the scale-up beyond the first 100 days.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
Illustration of a Rapid Results Initiative Reduce
Carjacking
In Nairobi
20%
In 100 days
Impact Measurement Action
Variable
Scope
Time Frame
The specific Rapid Results Goal is usually derived from a broader strategic objective of the organization as demonstrated below:
Improving the Investment Climate
K Key Strategic Objective Objective
Improve overall security
To:
To:
Start with carjacking incidents
Focus on one “high incidence” district
To: Reduce carjacking incidents by 20 % in Nairobi, in next 100 days
Rapid
Results
Goal
This exercise moves the processes from the abstract to the concrete—the inputs, outputs, and desired outcomes became very clear and focused. By unleashing existing creativity and capacity, it helps teams overcome the natural inertia that makes it difficult to get things done, and to make change happen within and across ministries, departments and units. Each one of the results is an indicator by itself. And each identified a result area establishes a set of activities that helps in achieving that result. Consequently, both activities and results are monitored. By implementing the initiatives over a shorter time period, project issues also surfaces faster and could be dealt with immediately in contrast to normal project cycles (4–5 yrs), where implementation issues may not surface until much later on. How is it implemented?
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
To identify the first wave of RRIs, the organizational leadership group, identifies a set of strategic priorities from the Strategic Plan, Annual Work Plan or the Performance Contract that would benefit from RRA. A result leader, strategic leader and team leader is then appointed for each focus or Strategic Challenge Area. The portfolio of focal areas then moves into the RRI cycle-Shape, Launch, Implement and Scale-up. As the RRIs move through this cycle the results advance the achievement of the organizational overall strategy.
Key Events in the RRI Process Session # 1
Session # 2
Session # 3
Shape phase
Session # 4
Launch
Session # 5
Session # 6
Manage Progress phase
Session # 7
Scale-up
Benefits of Rapid Results Approach Rapid Results Approach has the following distinct befits among others: ยง ยง ยง ยง
It generates progress and creates momentum in a critical area of overall strategic objective; It stimulates new insights on implementation challenges and risks It achieves within 100-days or less It is challenging but achievable.
Implementation in Kenya to date To-date over 58 Public Sector institutions, thus central government ministries, local authorities, state corporations and regional authorities have implemented Rapid Results Approach. The central government ministries include all ministries and departments under the Office of the President, state corporations, local authorities launched so far include Mombasa, Nairobi and Kisumu among others, while all the six regional authorities have launched. The turning point of adaptation of the RRI methodology in the entire public service however came with its launch and implementation in the entire Office the President, Ministries and Department in September 2006. It not only gave Rapid Results Approach, visibility and publicity, it also stamped a mark of approval and authority of the highest office in the land. The subsequent success manifested during the celebration of the 100-days was therefore just a confirmation that for effective and efficient results the entire public services needed to adapt Rapid Results Approach. RRI - an RBM Tool Results Based Management was introduced in 2004 out of the need to improve service delivery and demonstrate reform gains from the implementation of the Economic Recovery Strategy. The main
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
elements of Results Based Management framework include a culture of focusing on results rather than process. Rapid Results Approach as an RBM tool was therefore both enriched and enhanced. Like other management concepts its application in the public sector necessitated slight modifications from its original concept, the basic principle of results focus has however remained. Lessons Learned Taking an average of about 10 RRI per institutions it means that over 580 Rapid Results teams have so far been constituted to deliver sharply defined results and impacts to the citizens. In the process the management skills of these team members have been enhanced, they have learned new ways of accomplishing and sustaining the results as well as team work. There are a number of lessons that can be drawn from the experience of implementing of Rapid Results Approach in the public service; these include enhancing achievement of performance targets, change from business as usual and of attitude towards results, team-work orientation to implementation of plans and strategies. In addition emerging good practices from the RRIs launched is feeding into the scale-up phases undertaken or being undertaken. Key components that have been emphasized during this period are: -
Monitoring and Evaluation & Performance management for results: this is in line with the National Performance Management Framework (NPMF) and the National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (NIMES). To this end the Ministerial Management Units (MMUs) and the Ministerial Reform Units have played a heightened roll in the initiation of RRIs and in their management during the implementation process.
-
Transformative leadership and Capacity Building: with the increased demand for roll out of RRI during this period, the coaches leveraged increased emphasis on the leadership group to drive and manage the initiatives. This has created RRI champions within the ministries and institutions.
-
Information Education and Communication (IEC): increasingly a thematic area in IEC has been created. This focuses on enhancing both internal (within the institution) and external (from stakeholders e.g. customers) interaction and feedback.
RRI becomes a way of working in Government The initiatives have no doubt created a buzz in the Ministries where they are being implemented and anxiety in other ministries where they have not been launched. Their impact has therefore so far only touched a few Kenyans. The scale of impact is definitely set to increase with the release of the Circular from the Permanent Secretary, Head of Public Service and Secretary to the Cabinet requiring all public sector institutions to be put on Rapid Results Approach. With this, the depth and breadth of involvement of all institutions across the Public Sector the impact of Rapid Results Approach will be felt. RRI 2007 and Beyond Originally conceived as a project management tool, Rapid Results Initiatives is now being applied widely in various areas of service delivery in the public sector. The tool is extremely robust and versatile and has been proven to lead to improved performance in service delivery, skills and confidence building in ability to achieve results, as well as enhancing creativity.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
RRI has laid bare the great potential that lies within public servants hence fulfilled the words said by Goethe: “Whatever you can do or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. By Sylvester Odhiambo Obong’o, Programme Coordinator- Rapid Results Approach, Public Service Reform and Development, Cabinet Office- Office of the President, Government of Kenya
MANAGING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUNCTION PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT IN ORGANIZATIONS1
FOR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Although most organizations recognize the importance of information technology as a tool for improving performance, successful implementation is far in-between and the experience with it in many organizations as a strategic business tool is often frustrating. This is true in both private and public sector organizations. There is abundant evidence from numerous surveys that many existing Management Information Systems (MIS), often using advanced computer equipment, have had relatively little success in providing management with the information it needs. The source of problems with IT in almost all of these organizations will typically revolve around five main areas: §
IT investments are unrelated to business strategy
§
Payoff from IT investments is inadequate
§
There is too much ‘technology for technology’s sake’
§
Relations between IT users and IT specialists are poor
§
System designers do not consider users’ preferences and work habits.
These problems are not new, neither are they confined to developing countries nor specific industrial sectors public or private. Big, medium and small enterprises have spent millions on consulting fees trying to resolve the problems since the advent of Information Technology, with little to show for their money. The problem is now so entrenched that top executives are adopting extreme attitudes and deploying extreme policies in dealing with this problem. Some outsource as many IT activities as possible, often in the belief that outsiders can manage the function better. Why is there such confusion? Because information technology is generally exalted as the panacea for all organizational inefficiencies, and hence the one-stop solution to poor performance. Information Technology broadly defined is about automating Information System (IS)- a system of human and technical components that accepts, stores, processes, outputs and transmits information. An information system may be based on any combination of human endeavors, paper based methods and IT. It is getting this mix right in developing information systems that has proved to be a big headache to many managers. Many organizations elevate IT to the level of strategy; however, integrating IT with organizational strategic goals is only marginally easier than reaching the summit of Everest. It can be done, but it is difficult and the cost of failure is high. To be successful, an MIS must be designed and operated with due regard to organization and behavioral principles as well as technical
1
Adapted from M. Bensaou and Michael Earl “The Right Mind-set for Managing Information Technology”.
Harvard Business Review, Sept-Oct. 1998
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
factors. Management must be informed enough to make an effective contribution to system design and information specialists (system analysts, accountants, operations researchers and others) must become more aware of managerial functions and needs so that, jointly, a more effective MIS is developed. Organizations should back away from the immediate problems of cost. They should focus and reflect on how they are framing the underlying IT-management issues. Too many top managers, especially in the public sector are intimidated by the task of managing information technology. They tiptoe around it, supposing that it needs special tools, special strategies and special mind-set. The truth of the matter is that, it does not. Technology should be managed-controlled, like any other competitive weapon in a manager’s arsenal. IT is just one competitive lever among many. Its purpose is simply to help the organization achieve its operational goals. Instead of spending much time trying, often fruitlessly, to develop an IT strategy that perfectly mirrors the organization’s business strategy, IT investment decisions should be based on simple and easily quantifiable performance improvement goals. An organization must identify its performance goals first and then choose the technology-whether old or new, that can help it achieve those goals. Most organizations, however, go for cutting-edge applications in the almost mystical belief that it would deliver improved performance, hence a competitive edge.
Changing Concepts in the application of Information Technology in organizations In the early 1980’s up to the 90s, many organizations both, private and public discovered that they were developing information systems that did not support their business strategies. Development projects were often given priority according to technical criteria rather than business imperatives, and funding went to sponsored projects enjoying political backing, rather than projects with the most strategic importance. The solution to these problems at that time was seen as lying in developing an IT strategy. IT vendors, consultants and academics invented and sold planning techniques that aimed first at discovering an organization’s competitive strategy and second at suggesting an Information Systems portfolio to support it. Strategic alignment would then be assured. Unfortunately, this goal of achieving ‘strategic alignment’ remained elusive. Business strategies and plans were rarely as expected; IT opportunities were poorly understood; the organization’s parts had different priorities; and the subsequent IT strategies that were eventually drawn up often seemed devoid of common sense. The Changing Concepts Matrix Issue
Old Concept
New Concept
How do we decide what information system our organization needs?
Strategic alignment
Strategic instinct
How do we know whether IT investments are worthwhile?
Value for money
We develop an IT strategy that We let the basic way we aligns with our business strategy compete, especially our operational goal drive IT investments. Performance Improvement
We adapt capital-budgeting We judge investments based on process to manage and evaluate operational performance
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
IT investments
improvements delivery
When we are trying to improve our processes, how does technology fit into our thinking?
Technology solutions
Appropriate technology
How should IT users and IT specialists connect in our organization?
IS user relations
How can we design systems that improve organizational performance?
and
service
We assume that technology We identify a performance goal offers the smartest, cheapest and then select a technology way to improve performance. that helps us achieve it in a way that supports the people doing the work. Organizational bonding
We teach specialists about We encourage integration by business goals and develop rotating managers through the technically adept systems. IT function, collocating specialists and users, and giving IT oversight to executives who also oversee other functions. Systems design
Human design
We design the most technically We design the system to make elegant system possible and ask use of the tacit and explicit employees to adapt it. knowledge that employees already possess.
Information technology seen in this context is, therefore, just a competitive lever that helps organizations reach their goals; it is not fundamentally different from quality, process re-engineering or performance improvement concepts. As bolder and better ideas emerge, they are developed in a process of learning by doing, that is, by making strategy in small steps. Information Technology should, therefore, be seen not as something out of the ordinary, special, different and problematic, but as part of a fully integrated picture. Focus on Performance Improvement Appraising IT investments in organizations is not an easy task. Both cost and benefits seem be confusing most of the time. Many organizations have introduced investment management processes akin to capital budgeting, hoping to legitimize IT projects and ensure management commitment to them. Such concerns about affordability and return on investment are neither irrational nor improper. After all information technology should not be exempt from the pursuit of shareholder value, and in some organizations the cost of IT is so high that it is, properly, a strategic question. However, the cumulative and pervasive value-for-money mind-set can be destructive. It can bias investments towards cost-saving automation projects and it can lead to dangerously late adoption of IT infrastructure improvements. It also carries an implicit message that IT is something to be exploited only when benefits are obvious and certain. Assessing the viability of IT projects should not, therefore, be primarily on financial metrics, audits and investment appraisals. Instead, since operational performance goals are the drivers for IT
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
investments, the key indicator for appraisal should be performance improvement, not value for money. The fact that investments decisions are not financially based does not mean they are fuzzy. Operational performance goals must be articulated with fine-grained specificity. IT investments can also support improvements in general operations and be easily justified by operational efficiency measures. In this regard, continuous improvement and incremental advances means that a lot of IT spending should come in small steps. However, major investments must still be driven by broad operational-performance goals. Contrary to the impression given by some consultants and computer manufacturers, the mere fact of using IT does not of itself automatically bring benefits. If IT is misapplied or installed without sufficient analysis of the real management or organizational problems, then no benefits will be gained and money will be wasted. Automating inefficient methods does not produce benefits. The methods and systems must be right before any attempt is made to automate them and no IT system should be installed unless it is demonstrably better than the best manual method. Proper, planned use of IT can, of course, be highly beneficial but benefits do not automatically accrue. Adapting Appropriate Technology Organization executives often complain about ‘technology for technology’s sake’. This has been brought about as a result of many IT vendors and consultants in the market, emphasizing ‘technology solutions’. Most would be customers want to know what problems or opportunities exist. The dynamics of the technology-solutions philosophy are very clear. Vendors need to create markets for new technologies. IT specialists want to try out the latest and greatest technology toys. Users cannot necessarily judge what is possible until they use a new technology, so they depend on the judgment of IT specialists. And sometimes, organizations are proud of adopting new technologies ahead of the rest of the world. That bias can lead to wonderful results as manifested in the growth of Internet and the World Wide Web. But it has its dark side too. Most executives can recall more than one system that was too advanced for the company needs and other systems that were redesigned even when they were still perfectly adequate. Many organizations have found themselves adopting technology for other secondary reasons than productivity. The ‘best practice’ in contrast is adapting appropriate technology. Organizations should identify the tasks to be accomplished and desired levels of performance; then they select a technology that will help the organization achieve that level in a way that suits the people doing the work. It must be emphasized that it is the operational goals that drive the choice of technology and not vice versa. To create value from information, changes in decision behaviour must result and consequently there must be a decision focus to the MIS. This means that the MIS must be designed with due regard to the types of decision, how decisions are taken, how the decision maker relates to the organization, nature of the organization, its environment and so on. Acceptance and understanding of this emphasis by both managers and information specialists is a primary requisite to effective MIS design. Managers and the MIS which supports them, must distinguish between effectiveness and efficiency. Thus a system may be producing the wrong output efficiently and is that an ineffective system. Good management concentrates on what must be done before considering how it should be done and the MIS should help them do this.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
Fostering Organizational Bonding Although in many cases IT function in organizations is relatively decentralized, users frequently perceive it as centralized. They think that IT specialists are remote and enjoy too much leverage in controlling the system. They also complain that IT programmers and analysts know nothing about the organization’s business. “By the time we induct the IT personnel into our business, they have left the company” observed one manager. The labels ‘user’ and ‘specialist’, while accurate, also help create two cultures. To solve this, some organizations have introduced bridging devices with mixed results. Creating hybrid managers- people who are knowledgeable about organizational business and IT, sounds appealing, but the hybrids soon discover they are stuck in a career cul-de-sac. There are four basic ways of going around this problem. First managers should spend sometime in the IT department as part of a job rotation scheme. This will provide managers with not only the technical know how, but also with knowledge about how to get things done in IT and about who can help with what. Secondly, it is advisable to co-locate IT specialists with users during the project implementation period. Co-location improves communication and understanding between users and specialist, it is another way of encouraging bonding. Thirdly, IT managers should not be isolated to that one function alone. Senior executives in-charge of IT should also be in-charge of one or two other functions, usually finance and planning. Many conflicts can be avoided when senior managers have overlapping responsibilities; integration and bonding can occur quite naturally. Finally, organizations should utilize the vendors’ expertise as much as possible and minimize use off-the-shelf packaged software. Instead they should work closely with a dedicated vendor to develop applications in-house. Care should, however, be taken to ensure that such long-term relationships do not constrain experimentation and adoption of radically new and diverse technologies. Bonding is important because the issues noted above are not structural in nature. They cannot be completely solved by setting up committees, creating new liaison roles or tinkering with the degree of centralization. The focus is on proximity, cross training, shared understanding and relationships. From System Design to Human Design Traditional system development in organizations tended to focus more on business processes being supported or redesigned than on the people who will use the product. Perhaps as a result, people often find new systems difficult to use, counterintuitive, and even annoying. If asked, how much has IT systems increased job satisfaction? The most common observation would be that IT systems have deskilled and routinized far more work than they have enriched. The point here is not that job enrichment should be the goal of IT development, but rather that specialists often leave no room in their systems for human judgment or understanding when they become overly focused on technological ‘solutions.’ Building a system should not be an end in itself; enhancing the contribution of people is the higher goal. That is why the concept of ‘Human Design’ is central in modern systems planning and development. Moreover tacit knowledge- knowledge that cannot be fully communicated with words and numbers, things that we do not know that we know and those that we cannot easily explain, are very important. Information Technology is much suited to processing explicit knowledge. It is thus important to try to marry the two as much as possible for maximum gain. It is, therefore, advisable that the process of system design incorporates non-specialists.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
Conclusion IT is here to stay and its usage can only grow and not diminish in organizations. Seamless integration of the IT function with the rest of organizational functions is a great challenge facing organizations. Integration of IT with the organization has to be from top to bottom and systemic, not structural. Thus, bridges will collapse as long as there is one IT culture and another business culture, the principle of organizational bonding will them strong and stable. System development must treat people as complements and even alternatives, not just as users. The basic principles- of strategic instinct, performance improvement, organizational bonding, appropriate technology and human design, if followed in system development would go along way in alleviating some of the major problems experienced about IT in organizations. Above everything else senior managers must regain the control of technology in their organizations and abandon the dangerous idea that IT requires special, technocratic skills to manage. It is emerging that, long time IT management traditions that have evolved over the last 40 years are in a way flawed and needs to be reviewed. Powerful IT vendors, management consultants and specialist developed these ideas and profited from them. In the end, even those constituencies have begun to doubt their goals. It is time to radically rethink how to manage the IT function in organizations especially in the Public Sector. By Sylvester Odhiambo Obong’o, Public Service Reform and Development, Cabinet Office- Office of the President, Government of Kenya
Asian CoP-MfDR Update from the Asia-Pacific CoP-MfDR 2008 was a busy year for the Asia-Pacific CoP-MfDR. Responding to a call from members for more training workshops, the CoP participated in two training programs on performance-based budgeting at the Civil Service College in Singapore as well as a workshop on results-based monitoring and evaluation in Lao People's Democratic Republic. The CoP also actively took part in international fora, giving a voice to developing countries, notably at meetings of the OECD-DAC Joint Venture on MfDR and the Third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness. Online, CoP members discussed integrated results-based management at length, with topics ranging from M&E, MIS, personnel performance, planning, and budgeting. The CoP's activities for 2008 culminated in the Annual Meeting in Sri Lanka, where participants gained collective wisdom by sharing country experiences in MfDR and seeing firsthand Sri Lanka's country-led MfDR agenda. Delegates also took part in an action planning session for 2009. See the draft action plan for this year https://wpqr1.adb.org/LotusQuickr/copmfdr/PageLibrary482571AE004FA139.nsf/h_48F86C90DC66643C482571AE004FD3DE/9263C4A7 07E5464C4825754C002B21C6/?OpenDocument
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
Up-coming Events Perspectives on Impact Evaluation Conference: March 29-April 02, 2009. Cairo, Egypt An International Conference for policymakers, Practitioners, sponsors and others stakeholders in Evaluation and in Development. For more information, please go to http://www.impactevaluation2009.org.
The International Development Evaluation Association (IDEAS) Global Assembly: March 17-20, 2009 in Johannesburg, South Africa. For more information, please go to http://www.ideasconference.org/ If you know of any up-coming MfDR events and would like to have them included in this listing, please contact us at info_afcop@worldbank.org.
Announcements COPs are becoming valuable partners in making the CAP-Scan a success! As many AfCoP members already know, the CAP-Scan is a short-term, broad, high-level and lowcost diagnostic review to identify and prioritize public sector capacity needs in the five central pillars of MfDR: Leadership, Accountability and Partnerships, Monitoring and Evaluation, Planning and Budgeting and Statistical Capacity. For the coming year, the CAP-Scan Secretariat is aiming to develop the CAP-Scan tool further. We are very pleased to see that the CoPs are becoming such valuable partners in achieving this goal! Last month we asked CoP members to let us know whether their countries would be interested in implementing the CAP-Scan. Many of you responded and we are very happy to announce that so far Senegal, Cameroon, South Africa, Ghana, the Philippines, Malaysia and others have requested to implement the CAP-Scan! We are currently preparing to start the processes to make the tool useful for your countries so they can ultimately improve their Managing for Development Results practices! To effectively respond to the increasing demand of countries to use the methodology, we are happy to announce that the second CAP-Scan facilitator training for results management practitioners is scheduled for March 2 - 3, 2009 in Washington DC. We would like to thank everybody who expressed interest and managed to join the training on such a short notice! We would also like to let you know that we are looking for opportunities to organize another round of training later this year for those who cannot attend the March training. The CAP-Scan Secretariat is excited to assist in making the CAP-Scan a successful tool for your country’s current and future MfDR planning. We look forward to keeping up the good work with you and expanding the CAP-Scan to other countries. In the end, we hope to offer this tool as a completely country-led exercise, with international agencies providing only backup and technical assistance. To realize this aim, we need to continue our collective efforts to make the CAP-Scan an even greater success! For more information please visit http://www.mfdr.org/capscan or contact ikuil@worldbank.org
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
AfCoP E-discussions Francophone discussion: Present status 1st and 2nd discussion Both (Result Based Planning and Result Based Budgeting) were completed and summaries were posted in both languages. 3rd discussion: “Theory and Practices” Based on suggestions and initiatives of members of the Francophone CoP, an open discussion was launched early December. Under the heading “Theory and Practices”, members can ask questions, debate different topics they are working on or are concerned with etc. Interesting issues were discussed already such as the problem of linear models versus complexity of change processes, link between plans and result chains, coherence between higher level policies and programmes and projects, etc. A summary of the debate will be posted on the Anglophone site in March. 4th discussion: Personnel Performance Systems NEW!!! Thursday, 19-02, a new discussion was launched (“Personnel Performance Systems”) with a few key questions, which were, among others, also raised in the Anglophone debate. This discussion will hopefully be a very dynamic one, and will last 3-4 weeks. As requested by the CMT the intention is to create real parallel debates in both languages. Therefore we will have relatively short discussions to catch up with the Anglophone site, which started much earlier. 5th discussion: Result-based Monitoring and Evaluation This debate will be launched this week, before the CMT meeting of 26th of February. This will enable the members to discuss different topics (personnel performance and M&E, as well as Theory and Practices). By mid-March we hope to be ready for a new dynamic quarter to discuss good case studies for a new African Sourcebook on MfDR!
African CoP Library The AfCoP Library is a virtual library located on our website. The library has now been established and populated with documents related to the MfDR Sourcebooks, the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, the AfCoP Annual Meetings, and other relevant topics. We are continuing to collect resources that will be posted online for your consideration. If your department, organization, or colleagues have recently written anything that you would like to share with your fellow CoP members, please contact us at info_afcop@worldbank.org.
Join Us If you are interested in becoming a member of the African Community of Practice, please visit our website, www.cop-mfdr-africa.org and register. For more information, please contact us at info_afcop@worldbank.org.
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG
Online: A newsletter about the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results February 2009, Issue No. 8
Contact Us If you have any questions, comments or suggestions in regards to either this newsletter or the Africa CoP, please feel free to contact us at info_afcop@worldbank.org or any team leader within the Core Management Team (CMT): • • • •
Membership & Publicity -- Zaam Ssali, Uganda: zaam.ssali@gmail.com or zssali@yahoo.com Networking -- Ali Doungou Boubacar, Niger: doungouali@yahoo.fr & Sylvester Obongo, Kenya: soobongo@yahoo.co.uk Capacity Building & Knowledge Management -- Solomon Mhlanga, Zimbabwe: mhlangasolomon@yahoo.com Monitoring and Evaluation -- Claude Kakule, Congo: claudeK@unops.org or claudekakule@yahoo.com
WWW.COP-MFDR-AFRICA.ORG