Catalog

	Table of Contents
p. 6 of 25 BACK | NEXT Introduction Background Evolution of resident missions Current responsibilities and functions Current organization, staffing, and costs Achievements and constraints The need for change Practices of other multilateral development banks Policy framework Organizational and resource issues Recommendation

Resident Mission Policy : Background

---

Achievements and constraints

Achievements

The effectiveness of RMs has not been comprehensively assessed. Part of the problem has been the absence of a clear set of RM objectives. There are considerable difficulties in isolating the impact of RMs on key country performance indicators such as contract awards, disbursements, and disbursement ratios.¹² Many variables affect country performance including complexity of project design and implementation, varying size and frequency of contracts, availability of counterpart funds, and portfolio composition. Despite these difficulties, an attempt has been made to analyze the historical performance of key indicators for each of the five countries where RMs were established prior to 1993. Appendix 3 compares the indicators before and after the establishment of RMs. Contract awards and disbursements have substantially increased in the five countries after RM establishment, and the disbursement ratio has tended to improve. Even allowing for the impact of other factors, this is still a significant RM contribution. A more rigorous methodology for reviewing RM effectiveness will be developed through the study of RMs to be undertaken in 2000 by the Operations Evaluation Office.

The Office of the General Auditor has audited the Indonesia RM and attempted to assess its performance using a variety of indicators. The results generally indicate that the Indonesia RM was effective in improving implementation performance (Box 1) and making a positive contribution to ADB’s operational effectiveness.

RMs also make a positive contribution in qualitative terms. In this context, ADB’s Task Force on Improving Project Quality¹³ noted that “the ADB experience with resident missions has been uniformly positive to date, although their potential for facilitating project implementation has not been fully realized.” This contribution can be seen in three broad areas.

1. In project administration, RMs generally have quicker response times thereby reducing implementation delays. RMs have helped executing agencies improve their performance in key areas: (a) compliance with loan covenants (for projects) by regular monitoring, (b) speed of the decision-making process during project implementation, (c) contract award, (d) submission of audited accounts, and (e) follow-up with governments on problem projects.

2. Although country programming is not a primary function of RMs, they have facilitated the preparation of ADB's country operational strategies and assistance plans, and played an important role in improving ADB's monitoring and communication with governments on the implementation of priority country development programs.

3. A third major area of ADB operations consists of country interface. In many DMCs, regular interaction has improved communication with the government and other agencies, and helped build a relationship of trust. RMs have also supported better aid coordination and strengthened interaction with civil society and the media.

Constraints

Despite these achievements, most of ADB's RMs are unable to play the wide-ranging developmental role that the DMCs and ADB expect. The long-standing emphasis on project administration is no longer an adequate response to the increasingly complex development agenda.

There is a perception that in the changing approach to development work in DMCs, ADB’s RMs are increasingly less relevant. More and more development issues and priorities are addressed within the DMCs, but as presently constituted, ADB’s RMs sometimes cannot assume a major role in these discussions. They do not always have the resources to participate fully in aid coordination. Some other aid agencies’ local offices can respond authoritatively to a variety of issues. ADB's RMs lack the delegated authority to do so, and must refer to headquarters for decisions in most areas. The potential effectiveness of an RM is therefore eroded as response time is considerably increased. ADB’s RMs are also at times perceived as lacking in-depth knowledge on a range of broad country and development issues. Within ADB, RMs are not always viewed as integral parts of ADB's core activities as a whole, but as extensions of the programs departments. Communications difficulties between RMs and headquarters, and a lack of feedback between various ADB departments and RMs can aggravate this situation.

In project administration, the division of delegated and nondelegated projects between RMs and headquarters can result in different levels or standards of client service being offered, including response time, quality and frequency of supervision and assistance, and even of approaches to implementation problems.

Some of these constraints result from inadequate staff resources. While ADB cannot deploy as many staff as can some other multilateral development banks, the current levels limit the RMs’ functional effectiveness. One-person missions are an example. Given the increasing tendency for aid coordination to occur locally, the rapidity of political and economic changes, unfamiliar and often unpredictable government procedures, and the difficulties of language and logistics, one headquarters staff cannot be an effective participant in development activities locally and handle the considerable requirements of headquarters departments and offices. While national officers are a valuable RM asset, in many countries they lack access to higher levels of government and thus cannot effectively substitute for headquarters staff.

An important issue is the assignment of staff. As the head of ADB’s office in a DMC, the resident representative must have the seniority, status, and experience to interact effectively with the highest levels of government. Resident representatives who do not have such qualifications have been constrained in their effectiveness.

A second staff issue is an incomplete or inappropriate skills mix at RMs. For example, ADB increasingly expects RMs to (i) provide information about and analyses of economic, financial, and social developments and (ii) support policy work in these areas. However, not all RM staff have the capacity to meet this requirement. Consequently, RMs are unable to act as they do not have the knowledge base to carry out work for which they are otherwise well positioned. It is also difficult to adjust the skills mix because of the lack of flexibility in deploying locally recruited staff.

Furthermore, sometimes RMs cannot attract the best headquarters staff. Because of perceived career and compensation issues, RM postings are not always seen as assignments that enhance career prospects. There are also concerns about reentry problems to headquarters.

The lack of adequate communications and information technology infrastructure has been a major handicap to the effectiveness and response time of RMs. In this respect, ADB lags behind some other multilateral and bilateral agencies.

___________________

Back Current organization, staffing, and costs	Next The need for change