Summary
UNICEF is launching a Global Review (March–June 2025) to ensure it remains effective and agile in the face of growing global challenges and declining financial resources. The review comes in response to a projected 20% cut in total income, demanding a reevaluation of organizational structures, financial strategies, and operations.
Key principles guiding the review include program effectiveness, affordability, agility, coherence, staff wellbeing, and future preparedness.
The review is led by a Leadership Group and three specialized teams focusing on:
* HQ/RO Structure Complementarity
* Country Office Business Models
* Operational/Transactional Efficiencies via Service Centers
The goal is to streamline operations, reduce duplication, and enhance efficiency across all levels of the organization while ensuring continued delivery of results for children globally. Staff engagement and communication are central to the process, with timelines and milestones set through June 2025.
Oh dear! The deckchairs again! Everyone for himself!
ReplyDeleteTo reform a multi-billion dollar organization from the inside is difficult and it is a slow and gradual process of attrition. In the private sector, it takes care of itself, if they are no good, they go bust. In international organizations, it is impossible as most staff cannot find another job with similar pay and benefits. It must be enforced from the outside. Who would enforce it? The US is powerful and Trump and Musk are ruthless. The Chinese are also powerful, but since they were excluded from these organizations why would they care? The Europeans, who have been the main payers over the years, might be more considerate but may need to see convincing and major changes in how aid to Africa is dealt with.
ReplyDeleteIt may be time for a voluntary group of senior UNICEF elders as an advisory body on strategic direction and policy to address the current climate - hopefully get us away from thinking "process" and another top-heavy exercise.
ReplyDeleteWould that be referred to as addressing climate change?
DeleteNo, it would be 'change management'
DeleteFantastc!
Delete