Management of Change: Implementing change in UNDP Pakistan Area Development Programme AJK
Case Study
(I was working with UNDP Pakistan programme ADP AJK during 2000 – 2004, the change management process was initiated and implemented during 1999 -2001)
Introduction
Implementing change initiatives in an international organization like United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is not less than a paramount. UNDP is involved in thousands of development projects in over 130 countries around the world. It operates in unique environment, with assisting governments with different political systems, multiple ownership on project from different donors and from UN system and the cultural diversity of its human resource base.
UNDP launched a change management initiative in 1998, symbolically entitled as “UNDP 2001” to transformed UNDP into a recognized leader and provider of services to programme countries in line with their national priorities. The overall thrust of the exercise was to build a flatter organization, with greater speed of response, flexibility and manoeuvrability, able to capitalize on the unique UNDP country-office network and staff resources.
Current case study focus on change process and its implementation in UNDP Pakistan project, Area Development Programme (ADP) AJK in 2000. ADP AJK was operated in remote area of Pakistan, Muzaffarabad, which was not only far from its country office in Islamabad but faraway from UNDP headquarter in New York. The study glimpse into the change process what and how change was delivered to the project, what were the issues raised in this exercise.
Area Development Programme AJK Background
The Area Development Programme (ADP) AJK was UNDP assisted community development Programme operated in 1997-2003 in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), Pakistan. The programme supported number of activities in four districts of AJK and It employs more than 100 professional and support staff. The activities were carried out in disburse geographical locations which was mainly hilly and mountainous. The programme served 2.973 million disadvantage and poor people in the area.
ADP AJK laid emphasis on three key areas i.e. governance, gender and sustainable livelihoods. The major focus of the Programme was to organize rural community into groups at grassroots level, motivate people to participate in development initiatives and mobilize available resources for undertaking income generating activities to alleviate poverty.
ADP AJK was a multi-sectoral intervention and was operating through 6 components. The programme components were co-funded by UNDP with a parallel financing of World Food Programme (WFP) and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
The ADP AJK components lead towards exploitation of human resources, gender empowerment achieving sustainable livelihood. Each component was supporting and contributing to the overall objectives of ADP AJK while focusing on their specific areas as required by beneficiaries.
Throughout the programme period, ADP AJK carried out its mandate in fine fashion and achieved its targets. The programme faced many difficulties and challenge for the execution of day to day business because of its structure and operations running in a unique environment.
Structure & Operations
In UNDP Pakistan organizational structure, diverse power was centre in country offices (see Exhibit 4). Programme Support Unit (PSU) was responsible for day to day execution of the programme activities. Planning, coordination, budgeting and monitoring were done at PSU and were submitted to UNDP country office, Government and other donor agencies. UNDP country office and Government were the approval authority and sometime it took months for filling of a position. Programme activities were hampered most of the time of bureaucratic procedures.
All component projects of ADP-AJK had to produce mandatory reports for country office, for other donors such as IFAD, WFP and government on periodic basis. It was the biggest time taking activity professional staff and obstructed filed work. The culture of autonomy from country office was dominated and to impress more control it had introduced many new reporting requirements.
Each project was executed in different sector, area and professional from different backgrounds. There was culture of opposing or reacting any changes impose from country office. Which were true as most of the time as circumstances at field level were not been considered at planning stages neither staff were taken involved.
UNDP 2001 Change Process for ADP AJK
The UNDP 2001 change process was initiated in 1997. The need for change came from the shift from multilateral to bilateral assistance, the onset of globalization, the mushrooming of crises around the world and the overall decline in Official Development Assistance (ODA), which signalled the end of providing assistance on the basis of entitlement.
The objective of UNDP 2001 change process was to involve changes in the structure and operation of UNDP, particularly in recasting the relationship between headquarters, country offices and programme offices and giving country and programme offices greater autonomy and decision-making power. The implementation plan identified six major areas of UNDP activity for change:
support to country and programme offices
organizational learning
re-engineering and restructuring
resource mobilization
accountability and
support to United Nations reform
The change process anticipated to use country level exercise for better articulation and analysis of requirements for programme. Ten countries were selected to pilot test and results used to validate and further refine the methodology.
UNDP Pakistan country office with consultative approach with programme office identified UNDP 2001 change process for ADP AJK. The main theme of the process emphasised (a) more effective priority-setting, and results-oriented activities; (b) more effective and decentralized decision making and operations to empower country offices; (c) clearer and simpler lines of accountability and responsibility; (d) more closely aligned budget and corporate planning systems; (e) easier access to information needed for analysis and decision-making; (f) more effective relationships with stakeholders; and (g) greater capacity for assigned responsibilities in the United Nations system.
The Change Process
An intensive exercise was conducted at the country office to define and generate a preliminary process. The Change Management Committee was established to provide direction and guidance to the process. The participatory approach adopted involving key stakeholders donors, programme management, the government and beneficiaries. Programme management was involved as a key and integral part.
The consultative workshops were arranged to analyse how change can be successfully delivered in programme. The informal brain-storming session involved key stakeholders, donor, government officials, programme personal and country office management and communicated change process and discussed issues in implementation.
A map of steps, guiding the process step-by-step was defined and a four stag e change management process was identified, with two broad processes: a) managing the environment of change; and, b) executing the change itself.
A) Managing the environment of change
Creating the momentum for change
· Advocacy: It included sharing the rationale for change openly and transparently with key stakeholders, mainly employees.
· Visioning: Activity used to enable stakeholders to review fundamental questions in order to generate a vision for the future.
Analysis of the change context
· Stakeholder Analysis and setting the baseline: The purpose of stakeholder analysis was to identify stakeholders in process; to analyzed their knowledge, attitudes and practices.
· Problem-oriented analyses were used to support decision-making or to gather additional factual information about the status and needs of beneficiary groups.
b) executing the change itself
Facilitation of change
· Process Consultation: This was the engaging of individuals to facilitate change processes. A process consultant engaged to enable “learning by doing” and facilitate organizational learning.
· Consensus-building exercises: As options for change emerge, there was a need to build consensus so that decisions can be taken and the change process can move forward.
· Leadership development was one of the key components to bring passion and conviction for change, building partnerships and facilitating changes in organisational culture.
Communications about change
· Factual information and stakeholder positions communicated widely to all concerned parties.
· Interactive communications and public outreach: provided officials with the opportunity for presentation possible solutions, for sharing of information and for dialogue with stakeholders.
· Measuring and celebrating progress: this activity was to strengthening organisational performance and focusing on process indicators of change to ensure celebrating early wins, create learning and ensure continuous support for change.
Impacts of Change Process
Change management committee with the help consultants implemented changes over the period of a year in the following area.
Increased Decentralization
New business processes developed with objective to improve the speed and allow programme office to exploit opportunity better. Programme office was also benefited from increased delegation with regard to human resources management. Provision was given to manage leave, travel, education grant and management of contract at programme office. On the other side new reporting requirement were introduced.
Re-engineering and restructuring
A number of initiatives were been introduced to increase organizational efficiency, and streamline procedures in order to allow country office to focus on strategic issues and oversight. Improvements were been introduced in information technology and management, including budget module, Financial Information Management System (FIMS) and accounting system (WINFOAS). The Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) for human resources management was introduced.
AccountabilityCompliance with financial rules and procedures continue to be paramount, with responsibility for outcomes and impact, the results-oriented annual reports (ROARs) were introduced. A major feature of the new accountability framework is the Control Self-Risk Assessment (CSRA) programme, which enables UNDP staff to identify the risks in their day-to-day work, as well as ways to manage those risks.
Learning Organization
The programme adopted a policy allowing five per cent of staff time to be used for learning. Learning resources, including videos, self-study guides, audiotapes, CD-ROMs, books and licenses for on-line training for staff members have been made available.
Issue Raised
The participatory approach adopted in launching change process was impressive and has provided some valuable momentum. Experience dictates that successful organizational change comes about through a total and continuous commitment with adequate resources to sustain the effort.
One of the main issue was mistrust of staff about change, the programme went through many adjustment scenarios and budget cuts in the preceding years and in the opinion of many, staff had become impervious to the arguments for change.
Negotiations on change were often defensive and parochial, protecting unit positions while trying to stave off budget cuts. The culture of country office autonomy dominated, this resistance from programme staff was curial as change ultimately depends on the commitment of the line units.
The sense of urgency that would normally fuel a change strategy was not widely appreciated. The diverse power centres in headquarters became points of resistance, hence the commitment of corporate leadership necessary to bring about sustainable organizational change was a missing element.
Communication throughout the change process, sharing around outcome and implications with all stakeholder groups is vital for success. It was observed that programme staff were not been given basic information about what is expected of them, nor are they being involved in the change process. The expectations that staff will apply initiative and creativity to achieving organisational goals are unrealistic in this context.
Conclusion
UNDP faces many constraints to change, arising from the intergovernmental nature of the business it performs, the multiple ownership of core processes within a common system and the cultural diversity of its human resource base.
The challenges inherent in implementing change is arguably more acute in UNDP programme where temporary teams and geographically dispersed employee render the coherent implementation of systems and restructure.
The participatory approach adopted in launching change process by country office was early success, which lost focus later on staff requirement working in different socio cultural background. It became imposed change and was perceived as ‘not a serious job’ at programme and field level. Although it was understood that change had successfully transformed programme but matter of facts it did only developed the ability to get things done in a new way.
Change process promised making UNDP more flatter and learning organization. Restructuring and reorganization had to provide speed and efficiency. Similarly it was also aimed to empower communities, managers and policy-makers to monitor the impacts of programmes. But at programme level few changes were delivered and emphasis was drawn more on introducing accountability and monitoring & evaluation procedure resulted in increase of the distance between country office and the field.
(I was working with UNDP Pakistan programme ADP AJK during 2000 – 2004, the change management process was initiated and implemented during 1999 -2001)
Introduction
Implementing change initiatives in an international organization like United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is not less than a paramount. UNDP is involved in thousands of development projects in over 130 countries around the world. It operates in unique environment, with assisting governments with different political systems, multiple ownership on project from different donors and from UN system and the cultural diversity of its human resource base.
UNDP launched a change management initiative in 1998, symbolically entitled as “UNDP 2001” to transformed UNDP into a recognized leader and provider of services to programme countries in line with their national priorities. The overall thrust of the exercise was to build a flatter organization, with greater speed of response, flexibility and manoeuvrability, able to capitalize on the unique UNDP country-office network and staff resources.
Current case study focus on change process and its implementation in UNDP Pakistan project, Area Development Programme (ADP) AJK in 2000. ADP AJK was operated in remote area of Pakistan, Muzaffarabad, which was not only far from its country office in Islamabad but faraway from UNDP headquarter in New York. The study glimpse into the change process what and how change was delivered to the project, what were the issues raised in this exercise.
Area Development Programme AJK Background
The Area Development Programme (ADP) AJK was UNDP assisted community development Programme operated in 1997-2003 in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), Pakistan. The programme supported number of activities in four districts of AJK and It employs more than 100 professional and support staff. The activities were carried out in disburse geographical locations which was mainly hilly and mountainous. The programme served 2.973 million disadvantage and poor people in the area.
ADP AJK laid emphasis on three key areas i.e. governance, gender and sustainable livelihoods. The major focus of the Programme was to organize rural community into groups at grassroots level, motivate people to participate in development initiatives and mobilize available resources for undertaking income generating activities to alleviate poverty.
ADP AJK was a multi-sectoral intervention and was operating through 6 components. The programme components were co-funded by UNDP with a parallel financing of World Food Programme (WFP) and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
The ADP AJK components lead towards exploitation of human resources, gender empowerment achieving sustainable livelihood. Each component was supporting and contributing to the overall objectives of ADP AJK while focusing on their specific areas as required by beneficiaries.
Throughout the programme period, ADP AJK carried out its mandate in fine fashion and achieved its targets. The programme faced many difficulties and challenge for the execution of day to day business because of its structure and operations running in a unique environment.
Structure & Operations
In UNDP Pakistan organizational structure, diverse power was centre in country offices (see Exhibit 4). Programme Support Unit (PSU) was responsible for day to day execution of the programme activities. Planning, coordination, budgeting and monitoring were done at PSU and were submitted to UNDP country office, Government and other donor agencies. UNDP country office and Government were the approval authority and sometime it took months for filling of a position. Programme activities were hampered most of the time of bureaucratic procedures.
All component projects of ADP-AJK had to produce mandatory reports for country office, for other donors such as IFAD, WFP and government on periodic basis. It was the biggest time taking activity professional staff and obstructed filed work. The culture of autonomy from country office was dominated and to impress more control it had introduced many new reporting requirements.
Each project was executed in different sector, area and professional from different backgrounds. There was culture of opposing or reacting any changes impose from country office. Which were true as most of the time as circumstances at field level were not been considered at planning stages neither staff were taken involved.
UNDP 2001 Change Process for ADP AJK
The UNDP 2001 change process was initiated in 1997. The need for change came from the shift from multilateral to bilateral assistance, the onset of globalization, the mushrooming of crises around the world and the overall decline in Official Development Assistance (ODA), which signalled the end of providing assistance on the basis of entitlement.
The objective of UNDP 2001 change process was to involve changes in the structure and operation of UNDP, particularly in recasting the relationship between headquarters, country offices and programme offices and giving country and programme offices greater autonomy and decision-making power. The implementation plan identified six major areas of UNDP activity for change:
support to country and programme offices
organizational learning
re-engineering and restructuring
resource mobilization
accountability and
support to United Nations reform
The change process anticipated to use country level exercise for better articulation and analysis of requirements for programme. Ten countries were selected to pilot test and results used to validate and further refine the methodology.
UNDP Pakistan country office with consultative approach with programme office identified UNDP 2001 change process for ADP AJK. The main theme of the process emphasised (a) more effective priority-setting, and results-oriented activities; (b) more effective and decentralized decision making and operations to empower country offices; (c) clearer and simpler lines of accountability and responsibility; (d) more closely aligned budget and corporate planning systems; (e) easier access to information needed for analysis and decision-making; (f) more effective relationships with stakeholders; and (g) greater capacity for assigned responsibilities in the United Nations system.
The Change Process
An intensive exercise was conducted at the country office to define and generate a preliminary process. The Change Management Committee was established to provide direction and guidance to the process. The participatory approach adopted involving key stakeholders donors, programme management, the government and beneficiaries. Programme management was involved as a key and integral part.
The consultative workshops were arranged to analyse how change can be successfully delivered in programme. The informal brain-storming session involved key stakeholders, donor, government officials, programme personal and country office management and communicated change process and discussed issues in implementation.
A map of steps, guiding the process step-by-step was defined and a four stag e change management process was identified, with two broad processes: a) managing the environment of change; and, b) executing the change itself.
A) Managing the environment of change
Creating the momentum for change
· Advocacy: It included sharing the rationale for change openly and transparently with key stakeholders, mainly employees.
· Visioning: Activity used to enable stakeholders to review fundamental questions in order to generate a vision for the future.
Analysis of the change context
· Stakeholder Analysis and setting the baseline: The purpose of stakeholder analysis was to identify stakeholders in process; to analyzed their knowledge, attitudes and practices.
· Problem-oriented analyses were used to support decision-making or to gather additional factual information about the status and needs of beneficiary groups.
b) executing the change itself
Facilitation of change
· Process Consultation: This was the engaging of individuals to facilitate change processes. A process consultant engaged to enable “learning by doing” and facilitate organizational learning.
· Consensus-building exercises: As options for change emerge, there was a need to build consensus so that decisions can be taken and the change process can move forward.
· Leadership development was one of the key components to bring passion and conviction for change, building partnerships and facilitating changes in organisational culture.
Communications about change
· Factual information and stakeholder positions communicated widely to all concerned parties.
· Interactive communications and public outreach: provided officials with the opportunity for presentation possible solutions, for sharing of information and for dialogue with stakeholders.
· Measuring and celebrating progress: this activity was to strengthening organisational performance and focusing on process indicators of change to ensure celebrating early wins, create learning and ensure continuous support for change.
Impacts of Change Process
Change management committee with the help consultants implemented changes over the period of a year in the following area.
Increased Decentralization
New business processes developed with objective to improve the speed and allow programme office to exploit opportunity better. Programme office was also benefited from increased delegation with regard to human resources management. Provision was given to manage leave, travel, education grant and management of contract at programme office. On the other side new reporting requirement were introduced.
Re-engineering and restructuring
A number of initiatives were been introduced to increase organizational efficiency, and streamline procedures in order to allow country office to focus on strategic issues and oversight. Improvements were been introduced in information technology and management, including budget module, Financial Information Management System (FIMS) and accounting system (WINFOAS). The Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) for human resources management was introduced.
AccountabilityCompliance with financial rules and procedures continue to be paramount, with responsibility for outcomes and impact, the results-oriented annual reports (ROARs) were introduced. A major feature of the new accountability framework is the Control Self-Risk Assessment (CSRA) programme, which enables UNDP staff to identify the risks in their day-to-day work, as well as ways to manage those risks.
Learning Organization
The programme adopted a policy allowing five per cent of staff time to be used for learning. Learning resources, including videos, self-study guides, audiotapes, CD-ROMs, books and licenses for on-line training for staff members have been made available.
Issue Raised
The participatory approach adopted in launching change process was impressive and has provided some valuable momentum. Experience dictates that successful organizational change comes about through a total and continuous commitment with adequate resources to sustain the effort.
One of the main issue was mistrust of staff about change, the programme went through many adjustment scenarios and budget cuts in the preceding years and in the opinion of many, staff had become impervious to the arguments for change.
Negotiations on change were often defensive and parochial, protecting unit positions while trying to stave off budget cuts. The culture of country office autonomy dominated, this resistance from programme staff was curial as change ultimately depends on the commitment of the line units.
The sense of urgency that would normally fuel a change strategy was not widely appreciated. The diverse power centres in headquarters became points of resistance, hence the commitment of corporate leadership necessary to bring about sustainable organizational change was a missing element.
Communication throughout the change process, sharing around outcome and implications with all stakeholder groups is vital for success. It was observed that programme staff were not been given basic information about what is expected of them, nor are they being involved in the change process. The expectations that staff will apply initiative and creativity to achieving organisational goals are unrealistic in this context.
Conclusion
UNDP faces many constraints to change, arising from the intergovernmental nature of the business it performs, the multiple ownership of core processes within a common system and the cultural diversity of its human resource base.
The challenges inherent in implementing change is arguably more acute in UNDP programme where temporary teams and geographically dispersed employee render the coherent implementation of systems and restructure.
The participatory approach adopted in launching change process by country office was early success, which lost focus later on staff requirement working in different socio cultural background. It became imposed change and was perceived as ‘not a serious job’ at programme and field level. Although it was understood that change had successfully transformed programme but matter of facts it did only developed the ability to get things done in a new way.
Change process promised making UNDP more flatter and learning organization. Restructuring and reorganization had to provide speed and efficiency. Similarly it was also aimed to empower communities, managers and policy-makers to monitor the impacts of programmes. But at programme level few changes were delivered and emphasis was drawn more on introducing accountability and monitoring & evaluation procedure resulted in increase of the distance between country office and the field.
0 Response to "Management of Change: Implementing change in UNDP Pakistan Area Development Programme AJK"
Post a Comment