Organization
World Bank
Report Year
2014
1st MAR Year
2016
Accepted
Yes
Status
Active
Recommendation

Ensure that the World Bank Group takes advantage of the complementarity and strengths of World Bank and IFC business models when designing the new Trade and Competitiveness Global Practice. Exploit synergies by ensuring that World Bank and IFC staff improve their understanding of each other's work and business models. Maintain the richness of the two delivery models while addressing factors that discourage collaboration.

Recommenation Adoption
IEG Level of Adoption by Year: mar-rating-popup SNTNTNT Management Adoption by Year: mar-rating-mng-popup SNTNTNT
CComplete
HHigh
SSubstantial
MModerate
NNegligible
NANot Accepted
NRNot Rated
Findings Conclusions

The World Bank and IFC work in the same space and with the same clients through two distinct business models. The IFC business model is implemented through stand-alone advisory services. Projects are standardized, focused, and short-term and include rapid interventions. They are mostly funded through internal budget and trust funds. The World Bank business model is implemented through lending and budget support and to a lesser extent through technical assistance. Projects are comprehensive and tend to be more long term. The client or the Bank executes the project. Each model has unique features, and stakeholders appreciate their differences. Stakeholders interviewed across countries often appreciated IFC's international technical expertise, quick response and delivery, and close support. However, IFC's ability to handle the political economy was not as strong, nor was its ability to move beyond standardized products. The World Bank's main strength is its institutional access to government institutions, its comprehensive services, and its ability to provide substantive funding. Yet there was a common sense that the World Bank is slow to respond and to implement projects.
IEG's interviews with World Bank Group management and staff surveys indicated that there is collaboration among the institutions to varying degrees. Survey results show that simple activities such as information sharing are more frequent than formal engagements. Evidence shows that different operating environments of IFC and the World Bank make collaboration difficult. Systems and organizational structuressuch as different pricing policy, accountability matrix, results framework, and human resources policies and staff incentivesare perceived as the main bottlenecks to collaboration. Also, the interviews with investment climate management and staff indicate that staff have a positive perception of complementarity and strengths of the institutions with the new Trade and Competitiveness Global Practice; however, some concerns exist regarding the dominance of one institution model over the other.

Original Management Response

WB: Agree. The Trade and Competitiveness Global Practice (together with the Finance and Markets Practice, which is also being set up as a fully integrated joint Bank/IFC Global Practice) will lead the World Bank Group engagement in this area and accordingly strengthen its outreach, communication, and partnership with other networks/Global Programs on approaches, diagnostic tools, and lessons.

Action Plans
Action 1
Action 1 Number:
0357-01
Action 1 Title:
Action 3.A: Management will ensure that Bank and IFC staff in T&C improves their understanding of each otherメs work and business
Action 1 Plan:

Action 3.A: Management will ensure that Bank and IFC staff in T&C improves their understanding of each otherメs work and business model.
Indicator: Percentage of T&C staff trained in Bank and IFC operation fundamentals.
Baseline:
- Number of T&C Bank staff trained in IFC operation fundamentals (Defined as percentage of operational staff that has completed the TFLAP training (qualification to act as TTL for IFC TFs) and / or that has completed the ASOP training course (familiarization with IFC operations platform and procedures)): 6%
- Number of T&C IFC staff trained in Bank operation fundamentals (Defined as percentage of operational staff that has completed the OCC training (qualification to act as TTL for Bank Lending projects) and / or that has completed the FBO training (first step learning on Bank operations)): 4%
Target: 40 % of T&C staff trained in both Bank and IFC operation fundamentals.
Timeline: Monitored by T&C GP annually, starting with FY16. Target to be achieved by end of FY18.

Action 2
Action 2 Number:
0357-02
Action 2 Title:
Action 3.B: Exploit synergies and reinforce strengths of WB and IFC business models when designing the T&C GP.
Action 2 Plan:

Action 3.B: Exploit synergies and reinforce strengths of WB and IFC business models when designing the T&C GP. These synergies will in particular relate to the accountability framework, joint portfolio reporting, and the design of more WB-IFC integrated projects.
Indicator: Percentage of T&C mapped projects that integrate WB and IFC products. Joint approaches on accountability frameworks.
Baseline: 10% integrated projects. No integrated accountability framework.
Target: 25% integrated projects. Integrated accountability frameworks.
Timeline: Monitored by T&C GP annually, starting with FY16. Target to be achieved by end of FY18.

Action 3
Action 4
Action 5
Action 6
Action 7
Action 8
2019
IEG Update:
No Updates
Management Update:
No Updates
2018
IEG Update:
No Updates
Management Update:
No Updates
2017
IEG Update:
No Updates
Management Update:
No Updates
2016
IEG Update:

During the FY, Management has taken significant steps to ensure that Bank and IFC staff in C improves their understanding of each other's work and business. These actions included developing an action plan, training WB and IFC staff in each other's' business, taking similar approaches for both institutions' accountability and portfolio reporting. These activities are in line with the corresponding recommendation. Next year, the management should also report numerical targets achieved.

Management Update:

The C knowledge and learning team has developed a learning strategy and action plan that integrates and highlights learning programs that include building capacity of WB and IFC staff on offerings and various WB and IFC operations-related instruments. In FY16, C has focused on increasing knowledge of IFC and WB by designing and implementing the following:
Launched C overview e-learning course that highlights various IFC and WB project components as they align with C's priorities and core offerings.
Launched C onboarding site that highlights both IFC and WB operational training offerings available to staff.
Trained 113 IFC staff on WB operations courses (e.g. Fundamentals of Bank Operations and/or Operational Core Curriculum and/or Development Policy Financing Academy. Note, total since FY15).
Trained 11 WB staff on ASOP related training courses.
Trained WB staff on TFLAP training courses is not yet available.
In FY17, these efforts will continue and activities will be expanded to include workshops which highlight how to apply both WB and IFC instruments within C projects.
To exploit synergies and reinforce strengths of WB and IFC business models, there has been substantial progress regarding the following:
Joint approaches to accountability: (i) there is a total integration of the Decision-Making/Management of World Bank Projects and Advisory Services and Analytics (ASA) and the IFC Advisory Services (AS) as under C, all product lines fall under the purview, for country and Regional projects/ASA/AS, under a Practice Manager (PM) that oversees both WB and IFC C products; (ii) there is better integration of WB and IFC Staff as both, for country and Regional projects/products, fall within the same PM; and (iii) with the harmonization between the Accountability and Decision Making (ADM) framework for the WB ASA and IFC AS Governance, we have now a fully consistent accountability framework for WB ASA and IFC AS (http://intresources.worldbank.org/INTOPCS/Resources/380831-136077616709…; pages 3, 28, 30-34). Also, with the July 2016 introduction of the new WB ASA product line, we have WB ASA processing stages and milestones that are consistent with those of IFC AS (check ASA Reform page https://spark.worldbank.org/groups/analytical-advisory-activities-aaa/p…). Furthermore, with the introduction through the new WB ASA product line of optional customized log-frame and indicators for C, these are now consistent with IFC AS.
Joint portfolio reporting: As part of the integrated management systems/dashboards put together by C, we have a joint portfolio snapshot (http://tab.worldbank.org/#/site/WBG/views/Operations/TCSnapshot?:iid=1) and a live monitoring report of our portfolio and pipeline for both WB and IFC projects and ASA (http://tab.worldbank.org/#/site/WBG/views/Operations/WBGActivitiesbyPM)
In FY16 14% of WB lending projects were integrated with IFC AS projects. C will continue to push for further integration and will consider finding other measurements to more significantly measure the integration factor beyond the current methodology.