institutionalizing corporate evaluations
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
INSTITUTIONALIZING CORPORATE EVALUATIONS

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 17

INSTITUTIONALIZING CORPORATE EVALUATIONS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 85 Views
  • Uploaded on

INSTITUTIONALIZING CORPORATE EVALUATIONS. Todor Dimitrov, Black Sea Trade and Development Bank ECG meeting, October 25 th 2013, IDB, Washington DC. Overview. Background, goals, resources Feasibility 7 planning factors (event, feasibility, amendments, focus, plan, leadership, follow-up

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'INSTITUTIONALIZING CORPORATE EVALUATIONS' - etta


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
institutionalizing corporate evaluations

INSTITUTIONALIZING CORPORATE EVALUATIONS

Todor Dimitrov,

Black Sea Trade and Development Bank

ECG meeting, October 25th 2013, IDB, Washington DC

overview
Overview
  • Background, goals, resources
  • Feasibility
  • 7 planning factors (event, feasibility, amendments, focus, plan, leadership, follow-up
  • BSTDB Timeline (2006-2013)
  • Performance Management Policy
  • Conclusions
  • Q&A
background
Background
  • Recent focus on overall results: MDG; MfDR vs. MbDR; performance measurement, RBM, etc.
  • 7 MDBs WG 2003/06 – COMPAS
  • Intention-reality gap: use of systemic CE is modest, not institutionalized
  • Consensus about CE need/benefits; methods exist, but a few coordinated implementations.
goals
Goals
  • Share experience and lessons learned in conducting a pioneering CE, followed by a challenging institutionalization process
  • Why, when and how to institutionalize CE as part of an integrated evaluation policy
  • Reveal critical issues and establish long-term cooperation (harmonization?)
resources and gaps
Resourcesand Gaps
  • CEs - ad-hoc, rarely policy based, institutionalized, and/or harmonized, despite available theory/practice
  • A critical mass of prerequisites for sound CE – conductive environment
  • Resource/cultural/maturity challenges: no silver bullets, incremental process, common terms/definition (BSC – beyond DAC 5), min. standards, harmonization and cooperation
ce conductivity
CE-conductivity
  • Phasing: LT work, incremental efforts – years, credibility, sustainability
  • 5 phases: approach, identify key issues, WP, (data collection/analysis, reporting/action)
  • Simultaneously address 7 pre/planning factors
the 7 planning factors
The 7 planning factors

1. Future event - launching the CE

2. CE feasibility / infrastructure

3. Evaluation framework - amendment

4. Focus & scope of CE: snowball

5. Work Plan: timing, resources, resistance

6. Leadership commitment / continuity

7. Follow-up, replication, evolution

future event ce launch
Future event – CE launch
  • New Strategy / Business Plan
  • Restructuring
  • Leadership change
  • Crisis management
  • Credit rating
  • Best: combination – time alignment
  • Promote, cascade, engage, leadership
  • Top-down & bottom-up, incentives, resistance
  • Participatory - process and culture shifts
2 ce feasibility infrastructure
2. CE feasibility / infrastructure
  • Assess conductivity: culture, climate, resources, motivation, policy framework
  • Framework and perception toward sharing and disclosing of information
  • Reveal / promote common denominators / drivers towards a shared willingness to learn and change
  • Peer partnerships
3 evaluation framework update
3. Evaluation framework update
  • Direct vs. indirect
  • Peer IFIs, GPS, sample study, promotion
  • Stand alone goal, even if CE postponed, suppressed or minimized
  • Cooperation links
4 ce focus scope snowball
4. CE Focus/scope: snowball
  • Observe existing minimum standards
  • Tradeoffs and compromises - CE institutionalization
  • Control scope/depth: avoid cost overruns, too many sensitivities, inability to follow-up/implement
  • Preparatory research – pre-evaluation
  • Demo-demand: cost-effectiveness, speed, BoD/BoG
5 work plan timing resources
5. Work Plan: timing & resources
  • Dedicated resources – unavailable
  • Expectations for “shoe-string” approach
  • Streamline, relocate, reinvent, prioritize, phase, distribute, engage, train
  • Finances and HR – timing, budgeting
  • Traps: underestimate follow-ups, timing
  • Institutionalize as priority per se
  • External partners – efficiency/credibility
  • WP – integrate and commit to re-evaluation
6 leadership process management
6. Leadership,process management
  • Articulate process, responsibilities, purpose, users – update, adapt
  • Top oriented, but with several rounds of dissemination/consultation
  • Inherent resistance within/outside
  • Leadership ownership/engagement - help stakeholders cooperate
  • The above favors an internal approach (external input)
  • Articulate expected empowerment and distinguish CE from rest of business
  • Detect and address skepticism at the outset
7 follow up replication issues
7. Follow-up,replication issues
  • Myths: internal is less rigorous, less independent and less followed-up
  • Open-up (new) suppressed perspectives and issues when relevant – incremental approach
  • Internal – realism, replicate, upgrade
  • Goals: (i) strategies to reflect CE, (ii) highlight overall mandate fulfillment
  • Gear/implant CE to major events / phases (vs. stand alone follow-up)
timeline
Timeline
  • 2006 - Synthesis evaluations: repetitive issues (approval culture, cancellations, inefficiency…)
  • 2007 – New BP/Strategy – first CE (BSC)
  • 2008 – OM amendments towards replication
  • 2009 – MT review; BSC initiated as recommended
  • 2010 – BP/Strategy - further CE
  • 2011 – CE became part of strategy development
  • 2012 – Consultant/WG on BSC – draft, issues
  • 2013 – New inter WGs – PM/CE Policy approved
pm policy 2013 2014
PM Policy 2013-2014
  • KPI framework - ongoing
  • CE every 4 years; 2 year updates, strategy related:
    • LT Strategy;
    • MT Strategy;
    • Teams appraisal;
    • Budgeting
    • Training
conclusions
Conclusions
  • Substantial preparation
  • Careful use of a launcher event(s)
  • Critical mass of pre-conditions and leadership support - revisited
  • Irreversibility and distribution
  • Tailored methodology
  • Gradual institutionalization and replication – aimed opportunism
  • Ongoing learning, upgrading
ad