nextI once thought that if I hear it one more time I’ll break out
in tears. But then our UN partners started a debate I presumed we had done with
a long time ago. Exactly those agencies that most vocally advocate for NEX and
similar philosophies now deplore that we are spending too much time on
programme planning, especially on CCA and UNDAF.
Enough of planning. Let’s implement! has become the battle cry of the
development warrior.
Except for in emergencies, I have not seen many UNICEF water officers digging a
well. Or health officers vaccinating a child. Education officers teaching in
class. In fact, I have rarely seen a UNICEF project officer implementing
anything[1].
But I have seen hundreds of Project Officers sitting on piles of virtual cash,
doodling on the ProMS screen, eyeing liquidation claims, perusing proposals and
reports and thinking up new ones. And if all goes well, disbursing money bit by
bit in support of an action plan that we helped government to make its own.
To equate disbursing with implementing is preposterous. Yes, we monitor what’s
happening. We follow up if needed. We build alliances to increase the oomph of
our advice. We nudge counterparts into action.
But between requesting cheques to be written and calling up our counterparts,
the bulk of our job is researching, planning, advising, reviewing and
re-planning. Again, except for humanitarian situations, we are primarily a
development planning organization. Our corporate commitment should be to provide
the best possible planning advice to our partners.
In fact, the most backslapping success would be if we could be so convincing
that the government would turn around and say: Wow, what a great plan. We’ll
implement it – with our own money, or that of the World Bank, or other donor
funds.
[1] Of course I see different degrees of hands-on and hands-off management support among UNICEF professionals.
(8 October 2004)
previous
next