Briefing on management issues

Statement by Mr. Joakim Reiter, Deputy Secretary General

Briefing on management issues

Geneva
04 March 2016

​[AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY]
 

 Distinguished delegates,
I am pleased to address you once again to make good on our promise to hold regular briefings on management issues. As I have mentioned, we are aiming to hold these briefings every 6 weeks.
 
Today, I would like to concentrate on an issue that is very important to you, and also to us: results-based management - RBM, as we usually call it.

 
Let me start by giving you more details of the specific elements that we have been able to put together now that we have dedicated capacity within the secretariat for this issue.
 
As I had flagged in my previous briefing, we decided to revise our original plan. Instead of a subprogramme-by-subprogramme review of the results frameworks, we are aiming for areview by pillars instead. This approach takes better account of the constraints we face to capture and measure results.
 
Additionally, as we laid down the milestones we want to achieve, we had to consider that UNCTAD would be immersed in a titanic effort to put together a ministerial conference in a few months. This is why we have started with the technical cooperation pillar first, as it is arguably the easiest pillar from an RBM point of view. We then plan to move on to research and analysis in the fall. And we planto have an open discussion with you as to how to tackle the intergovernmental pillar.

One thing we have realized is that the formal programmatic documents such as the biennial programme plan is only part of the puzzle. These documents do not allow establishing clear links to higher level objectives, for instance Agenda 2030. Nor do they provide a level of detail that would allow managing results at the programme manager-level. Therefore, our focus is now more on developing other layers of planning, guidance, and oversight that would support better RBM-orientation. In terms of results orientation of technical cooperation projects, this means that we will: 
  • Introduce more thorough and systematic analysis of stakeholder demands and needs as projects are planned.
  • Work with you on aligning UNCTAD's priorities with such stakeholder demands and needs.
  • Study ways to enhance the current requirements of logical frameworks in projects to also include  theory of change analysis.
  • Establish cost-effective, SMART indicators and the means of measurement, including the specific plans and resources assigned to them.
  • Determine where to make exceptions. These will be necessary because we do not want to create a white elephant. For instance, for projects of a limited duration, scope or budget, it would not be an efficient use of staff time to prepare lengthy analyses for them.

 These elements are being outlined in a set of guidelines for RBM in technical cooperation projects that will be discussed with programme managers in the new few weeks.

Nevertheless, we cannot have an open discussion about technical cooperation without coming back to the resource gap between technical cooperation requests and voluntary contributions. We have a responsibility to find a transparent mechanism to address this gap and to make sure that all our improvements eventually pay off. The database of outstanding requests will be ready and available by the first half of April. 

Also on technical cooperation, we are looking into how to standardize the reporting requirements to make sure that we can be more efficient while remaining accountable for the funds you entrust us.

Currently, UNCTAD produces an array of reports for donors with varying levels of detail and frequency. We believe that a standard set of documents could provide a satisfactory amount of information. In exchange for such a compromise, we would offer central control, higher quality information and regular reporting in line with agreed commitments. This is another element that we will be bringing to you.

Having said this, we do not want to stop at activity and financial reporting. We are also aiming to have better evaluation capacities embedded in all projects. This would be achieved through the requirement to devote a percentage of projects funds to evaluation. This is something many of you are already doing when you entrust us your taxpayers' money, but we want to extend it to give you better assurances of value-for-money.

Before I finish, I would also like to give you a brief overview of what we are planning for the fall in relation to RBM mainstreaming in the research and analysis pillar. We need to tie the RBM efforts into the implementation of the OIOS recommendations for this pillar. This means that we are probably looking at a wider revamping of research and analysis - this would put  emphasis not only on how we plan and prepare our publications, but on how we disseminate them and follow-up on their results. I believe we will need to make some decisions to be able to reconcile all these elements with our limited resources, and so I count on your support to take this forward.

I would like to stop here to give enough time to interact. We will continue this dialogue today and then I hope to see you again sometime in late April.

Thank you.

UNCTAD - Palais des Nations, 8-14, Av. de la Paix, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
© Copyright | Privacy notice | Terms of use | Map disclaimer
Sign up for our Newsletter