Managing for Development Results at ADB

Results Matter April 2008

Improving the Mainstreaming of MfDR in ADB
Excerpt from the Semi-Annual Progress Report to the Development Effectiveness Committee

South Asia Regional Department Director General Kunio Senga at the Forum on Mainstreaming MfDR in Support of Poverty Reduction in South Asia

Progress on the Managing for Development Results (MfDR) Action Plan is encouraging. However, in order to sustain momentum, ADB will need to specifically address the following seven issues for the remaining period of the MfDR Action Plan.

1. Improved MfDR Capacity at the Sector Level in Developing Member Countries (DMCs)
While there has been progress toward developing results-based national development plans or national poverty reduction strategies, implementation is constrained by significant capacity gaps at the line ministry and agency level. Regional departments should accord high priority to MfDR capacity development at the sector level. Necessary measures, including replenishment of the MfDR Cooperation Fund, will be needed to address this concern.

2. Urgency of Statistical Capacity Development
An effective results management system needs strong statistical capacity. ADB and other developing partners have been facing difficulties in accessing necessary information and data for planning, design, monitoring, and evaluation in many DMCs.

The ADB Economics and Research Departmnet has been implementing a strategic approach to statistical capacity building focusing on statistically very weak DMCs. However, due to resource constraints and competing demands, regional departments have not been able to adequately address the needs of statistical capacity development. ADB, together with other development partners, will find constructive ways to deal with this emerging issue and actively participate in joint efforts in developing statistical capacity in DMCs.

3. The Need for a Standardized MFDR
Approach While there is always a need to examine the progress and lessons from various initiatives introduced by individual regional departments, ADB is now at the point where a further standardized approach across departments must be considered. As one step in this process, a stocktaking of the results-based country portfolio reviews will be conducted by the Results Management Unit (SPRU) in consultation with regional departments and the Central Operations Services Office to draw lessons from experience and develop practical recommendations on how, ADB-wide, results should be measured, interpreted, and adopted in country portfolio reviews for effective monitoring and reporting on the progress towards country program and strategy (CPS), sector and project outcomes.

4. Improved Corporate-level Effectiveness Systems
The MfDR Action Plan includes development of a Corporate Performance Management Systems. SPRU has carried out initial preparatory work and conducted consultation with departments and offices concerned. SPRU is closely coordinating with Office of Information Systems and Technology in relation to the latter’s work in improving management information systems under the Project Processing and Portfolio Management Project.

5. Greater Applied MfDR Learning Among Staff
According to initial assessments, training has helped to enhance staff knowledge on the concepts and basic techniques of MfDR. However, more emphasis is required in relation to applied learning and the use of good quality results frameworks as a management tool. Training should be tailored to staff experience levels and specific needs. In parallel with training, regional departments established focal points at the front office to review all design and monitoring frameworks (DMFs) for all loans. This approach has proven to be effective to enhance awareness of MfDR and ensure the quality of DMF. Adequate learning programs for, or appropriate knowledge sharing among MfDR Focal Points should be arranged to support the quality assurance mechanisms at the department level.

6. Engagement on MFDR with Senior Staff
Commitment and leadership by regional/department management are key variables in mainstreaming MfDR at the department level. Their clear guidance, backed by resources, recognition, and incentives, will stimulate staff to practice MfDR techniques in actual work and accelerate changes of results culture. An MfDR colloquium with Vice Presidents in 2006 provided a good opportunity to interact with external experts in results management. Building on this experience, a follow-up colloquium with senior staff should be continued to further enhance their capacity to manage for outcomes. SPRU and Human Resources are now addressing this as part of the MfDR Learning and Development Curriculum.

7. Systematic Quality Assurance of CPS
ADB needs to improve the quality of sector roadmaps and CPS results frameworks. Unlike the DMFs, there is no annual assessment of the quality of CPS results features. Although the first biennial quality-at-entry assessment for all CPSs approved during 2004–2005 was conducted in 2005, and SPRU’s own stock-taking assessment was undertaken, these have not been able to provide real time feedback on the quality of CPS results frameworks. Building on experiences, appropriate ways to establish ADB-wide annual assessment of the quality of CPS results features could be considered.

View entire document [ PDF: 421kb | 8 pages ] | About Results Matter