 | |
Action Plan on Managing for Development Results
IV. The Revised Action Plan
B. Pillar 2: Enchance ADB's Results Orientation and Institutional
Effectiveness
1. Intended Outcome 1: Improved Quality of RB-CPSs
(i) Mainstream RB-CPSs as an ADB Priority
-
ADB will continue to better align and link its resources and assistance
with the DMC national development strategies (or national poverty reduction
strategies) through the RB-CPS process.[18]
-
A "learning note" on the experience of designing and implementing
ADB's first RB-CSP, the Nepal RB-CSP, was disseminated to operations staff
in March 2006. A "stocktaking" of RBCSP procedures was completed
by SPRU in July 2006. SPRU will further update and disseminate the Practice
Note on RB-CSPs as more experience in MfDR processing is gained. Finally,
to provide consistent and systematic guidance, and build on the lessons
of experience and the findings of the stocktaking assessment, staff guidelines
on RB-CPSs will be prepared and the Operations Manual will be revised by
September 2006. SPRU has already begun work on the introduction of a form
of completion report for RB-CPSs (see below). The chronology for RB-CPSs
is shown in Figure 3.
(ii) Implement and Evaluate RB-CPSs
-
The CPS will be implemented through results-oriented lending, private sector
operations, and non-lending assistance including results-oriented ETSW.
As several RB-CSPs are still in the early stages of implementation, the
monitoring and evaluation of RB-CPS implementation will be pilot-tested
and developed as follows:
- annual updates of CSPs have been replaced with a CPS mid-term review
report and the annual indicative rolling country operations business plans
from August 2006;
- country portfolio review missions (CPRMs) will be further linked to
nextgeneration RB-CPS processing and will be increasingly used to monitor
the progress of the CPS outcomes, primarily utilizing the results framework
as the main management tool; and
- an RBCPS completion report, which was foreshadowed as the learning
and self-evaluation tool under the enhanced PRS, will be pilot-tested
in 2006, with the aim of mainstreaming the report in 2007, subject to
the progress of pilot cases. The first retrospective assessment of CSPs
is currently being conducted in accordance with the enhanced PRS to provide
guidance on further improvements in quality-at-entry.
2. Intended Outcome 2: Improved Results-Focus at the Project Level
(i) Link Projects to RB-CPSs and Improve Quality
- Regional departments, with the assistance of COSO, will continue to enhance
resultsorientation at project and program level by mainstreaming the DMFs,
which are linked to the RBCPS results framework, particularly through results-oriented
sectoral road maps. Regional departments will also be responsible for continuing
to improve the quality of project design and portfolio management. The action
plan that was prepared in November 2005 to improve loan and TA portfolio performance
in response to Operations Evaluation Department's (OED) 2004 annual report
will be implemented, and progress will be reported to Management.
3. Intended Outcome 3: Institutionalized Results Reporting in ADB Corporate
Management Systems
(i) Use Results Approach in Strategic Planinng and Management Process
-
MfDR will be vital for MTS II, and MTS II itself is expected to be managed
for results. This is consistent with the recommendations of the Universalia
Report. In addition, Management will guide the continuous improvement of
the results-orientation of the President's Planning Directions, the Work
Program and Budget Framework, and the Budget. For example, the Planning
Directions will reflect an analysis of the previous year's achievements
and impediments (particularly the findings of the PRS annual report for
the preceding year), clearly set out operational priorities and outcome
targets, and strengthen the linkage between planning and budget. The preparation
of the Work Program and Budget Framework in 2006 and the Budget process
will build on the initial experience with MfDR in 2005, while the monitoring
and feedback process will be strengthened in line with MfDR principles.
-
A number of innovations will continue to be introduced progressively to
enhance the results-orientation in ADB's strategic planning and budgeting
process (Box 4).
|
Innovations are being introduced to enhance the results-orientation
of the Asian Development Bank's (ADB's) corporate-level strategic
planning and budgeting. Recent achievements include, among others,
the application of a strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats (SWOT)
model to assist in the formulation of MTS II, the design of a results
framework supported by monitoring indicators and targets in the 2006-2008
Work Program and Budget Framework; enhanced linkages between work
plans, resource requirements, and budget allocations; and better monitoring
of resource-use efficiency through the introduction of unit costs
for key deliverables. Results frameworks, showing the logical linkages
between new or revised corporate statements and development results
"on the ground," are now commonly developed together with
specific monitoring indicators and targets.
These changes should be considered as the first part of a more comprehensive
and longer-term effort to improve ADB's planning and budgeting processes
on the basis of MfDR, and with a view to informing the next strategic
planning cycle. Better linkage between planning and budgeting, streamlined
budget preparation and execution procedures, Management insistence
on ownership and accountability for outcomes, promotion of outcome-based
budgeting, institutionalization of results reporting as a basis for
feedback and decision making, and so on, are part of this longer-term
effort.
A comprehensive review of the way ADB plans, implements, monitors,
evaluates (and learns from) its corporate mandates is the sine qua
non of an effective results-based system. Ultimately, a unified and
streamlined corporate-level reporting system should be established
and used by senior management for decision making. |
- Regular communications with the Board on MfDR will be maintained through
the semiannual progress reports on MfDR to the DEC. In addition, OED also
plans to review and evaluate MfDR at ADB in 2007, subject to the finalization
of the OED work plan.
(ii) Design a Corporate-Level Performance Management System
-
To provide managers with concise information on implementation, performance,
and outcomes, the monitoring and results reporting process must be streamlined.
-
For example, at the corporate level, and to assist Management decision
making, the annual report on PRS implementation may be developed further
as a main report on ADB's development effectiveness, reporting on both internal
efficiency and external effectiveness. This will require further buy-in
across ADB.
- There is also a need to design a corporate-level performance monitoring
system to capture ADB's contributions to development outcomes in an efficient
manner, and to help in managing for outcomes. Recommendations for a performance
monitoring system, building on experience from balanced scorecards in the
Office of Administrative Services and SPRU, will be submitted to Management
by end-2006. The need for adequate IT support will be appropriately addressed
in connection with the development of a corporate-level performance monitoring
system.
(iii) Implement a Measurement and Monitoring System for ADF
- As part of the ADF IX replenishment, it was agreed that ADB should monitor
and report on development outcomes at country level among ADF countries. In
response to this commitment, efforts have been made to improve monitoring
and results reporting systems related to ADF operations. Starting in 2006,
ADB will report on development outcomes in ADF countries, as part of the ADB-wide
enhanced PRS implementation report. For the purposes of immediate reporting,
ADB will adopt an ADF results reporting system similar to the so-called "Tier
1" system now being used by International Development Association and
African Development Bank.[19] This system is consistent
with the Millennium Development Goals and captures both economic growth and
human development priorities. It monitors aggregate progress in ADB's developing
member countries, including the ADF countries.[20] Building
on the experience gained in preparing the first annual PRS implementation
report in 2005, the results framework and the reporting format have been further
developed in 2006 to reflect ADF concerns and to give clearer guidance to
senior management. The report also discusses results at different levels of
ADB, with a focus on the overall progress toward development effectiveness
and poverty reduction, to track ADB's institutional efficiency (the so-called
"Tier 2").
4. Intended Outcome 4: Increased Staff Knowledge of MfDR
(i) Develop ADB’s Capacity for MfDR
-
Further developing internal capacity for MfDR will be a core activity under
the revised action plan. To mainstream MfDR approaches, ADB's internal capacity
for results management must be developed in a more systematic way. To strengthen
MfDR leadership, a number of initiatives including high-level reviews of
procedures and quality assurance will be undertaken in 2006 and 2007 to
support the vice presidents and directors general in their MfDR responsibilities.
To help ADB manage for outcomes, learning and development opportunities
are being provided to directors in collaboration with donor countries including
New Zealand. This collaboration has resulted in the development of a pilot
"primer" or checklist on MfDR for directors. A training needs
assessment for staff is now being conducted by the Human Resources Division,
with assistance from SPRU, with the aim of installing a better internal
capacity development program for MfDR. (This will be in addition to the
comprehensive learning program for project-level results management and
use of DMFs, which is being successfully conducted by COSO.) This learning
and development process will include a series of in-house seminars and workshops
designed by Budget, Personnel and Management Systems Department (BPMSD),
together with SPRU, to educate mission leaders and country team members
in MfDR approaches as they apply to the country partnership strategies and
programming process, sector road map development and monitoring, and country
portfolio reviews. It is anticipated that all country team leaders, project
team leaders, and resident mission staff will have received MfDR training
by 2007. Starting in 2007, all new CPS team leaders must have attended a
learning program in results-based country programming before initiating
the preparation process. In addition to raising awareness and provoking
an MfDR mind set in the staff, results-based systems and tools must be introduced,
explained to, and taken up by staff, especially senior staff. This also
requires skills enhancement, and sharing of learning and understanding.
-
The new PDP system, with its emphasis on achieving results, relies heavily
on supervisors' capability to manage for development results. The PDP support
activities taking place in 2006 and beyond emphasize this need to manage
for outcomes, especially at the senior staff level. The PDP process also
provides an opportunity to recognize and reward staff who effectively adopt
MfDR approaches. To reinforce the importance of the role of departmental
MfDR focal points, each such focal point is expected to include the MfDR
work in his or her work plan. Decisions for senior positions need to take
into consideration the candidate's ability to manage for development results,
and selection panels will be reminded of this key consideration. BPMSD continues
to focus on the incentives for staff to pursue MfDR.
- In addition to providing current staff with opportunities to gain knowledge
and skills in MfDR, BPMSD is seeking to recruit staff with MfDR experience,
in addition to their other technical knowledge and skills. Furthermore, to
support this mainstreaming of MfDR, RDs could expand the functions of those
who are dedicated to implementing the RB-CPSs (similar to the approach taken
by SARD) to also take on the responsibility for monitoring MfDR-related work.
(ii) Focus on Senior Staff
- In 2006, the Human Resources Division introduced a session on MfDR learning
for senior staff. It is expected that all concerned directors general and
directors will have participated in MfDR learning sessions by the end of 2007.
ADB's internal MfDR network, involving MfDR focal points throughout ADB, has
been improved through enhanced engagement of senior staff, regular meetings
on specific issues and topics calling for action on the part of the network,
and a division of labor among network members to make better ADB-wide progress
in MfDR. The Universalia Report supports the enhancement of this network.
(iii) Improve Communications regarding MfDR in ADB
- The Universalia Report urges ADB to pay much more attention to the communication
of MfDR throughout ADB. The communication of the MfDR agenda has been addressed
through numerous interdepartmental meetings; a regular MfDR newsletter; in-house
seminars, lectures, and workshops; the publication of various tools and documents;
the preparation of staff guidelines; and the maintenance of a comprehensive
Web site and intranet site. But MfDR imperatives seem not to have been effectively
disseminated throughout ADB. The Department of External Relations is preparing
a communications plan for the Reform Agenda, which will now be expanded to
encompass MfDR. These efforts will be regularly upgraded.
[18] Refer to indicator 3 in Section III of
the Paris Declaration.
[19] IDA also uses a “Tier 2” system
to assess progress on IDA’s internal efficiency.
[20] There are five ADF countries
that are not part of IDA, namely, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia,
Marshall Islands, Nauru, and Tuvalu. Therefore, the Pacific Department, working
with ERD, will strengthen the statistical systems of those ADF countries, to
fill the gaps in the ADF country-level outcomes data.
Previous: Pillar 1 - Support DMC Capacity
| Back to Action Plan Topics | Next:
Pillar 3 - Maintain Effective Results Partnerships
|
|
Topics 
Top of page