International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics
Corporate Office
ICRISAT
Patancheru 502 324
Andhra Pradesh
India
Tel +91 40 596161
Fax +91 40 241239
Telex 422203 ICRI IN
E-mail (Internet)
[email protected]
March, 1997
Introduction
The Board, Management and staff would like to thank Dr. Coffman and the members of the External Program and Management Review (EPMR) Panel for the thorough and strategic nature of their review of ICRISAT. The Panel began their task in February, 1996 at the time of the meeting of the Governing Board in Matopos, Zimbabwe and ended it by presenting their report to the Executive Committee of the Governing Board in Patancheru, India in December, 1996. They made a conscientious effort to understand the major challenges and opportunities facing the Institute. The Board is grateful to the Panel for this.
This EPMR took place during a period of major and difficult change within the Institute, made necessary by unprecedented donor funding shortfalls and shifts in donor priorities. It was inevitable in such a climate of uncertainty and looming personnel cuts that the morale of some staff members was low. Downsizing is especially painful when accompanied by rightsizing - a reshaping of the agenda which may reduce the priority of certain traditional research areas to which some are deeply, and admirably, committed. While the Panel made every effort to listen to all views, we suspect that some of their impressions of the Board and Management may have been influenced by these extraordinary and, we believe, transitional stresses. The tight time schedule of the Panel understandably made it difficult for them to fully air these issues in discussions with Management before finalizing the report.
These issues notwithstanding, we believe that the Panel's contribution will be of great help to ICRISAT in accelerating the evolution of the Institute in the directions outlined in its ten recommendations. We note that many of these changes were already well underway, so it is not surprising that we are in general agreement with them. We appreciate the Panel's endorsement of these directions, and will make every effort over the coming years to advance the change process as fully as the increasingly constrained financial resources permit.
In the following pages we first provide an overall response to the Report. After this, our responses to the ten recommendations are presented. Finally, responses are provided to the 68 suggestions.
Overview
We note that the Panel cited a "vital continuing role for ICRISAT in the SAT" (p. xv) in sustainable agricultural development focused on the poor. We are also pleased that the EPMR recognized the excellence of our research, and its increasing impact on the peoples of the SAT, as stated on page xii.
However, the Panel also recognized the profound and rapid change underway at ICRISAT, in response to constrained resources and evolving needs of its partners and other stakeholders. In light of these forces, the Panel recommended a new paradigm for the Institute (summarized on page xiv), the Strategic Partnership Model, with three key elements:
· Strategic and global germplasm research concentrated at ICRISAT Asia Center;
· Concentration of integrated natural resource management research in Africa; and
· Enhanced research partnerships and networks.
The ICRISAT Board has seriously considered the model and enthusiastically endorses many of the major components proposed, but considers the model too extreme in its most literal form.
We recognize that shifts in the funding environment compel ICRISAT to become a smaller, more dynamic and entrepreneurial organization, focused on implementing a well-defined operational mandate. However, we believe that to concentrate most of our germplasm research at one of the three geographical locations and conversely shift the majority of the resource management work to the others, would seriously impair the essential integration of these complementary dimensions of agricultural research, and could even threaten to break the Institute into two over the longer term.
We do accept the need to move ahead in strategic germplasm research, using all the new advances emerging from biotechnology, information science, participatory methodology and related areas. ICRISAT will continue to move rapidly to strengthen its work in these areas, and capitalize on the invaluable asset represented by its germplasm collection.
However, we see a strong need to maintain channels of communication and technology exchange with our NARS and farmer stakeholders, so that our research processes and outputs remain relevant and lead to impact. Particularly in Africa, we see a need for continuing involvement in applied work, along with the technology exchange activities required to help partners fully benefit from it.
We also accept the need to shift the balance of Integrated Natural Resource Management Research (INRM) more towards Africa, where these constraints are the major bottleneck to increased, sustainable production. However, environmental degradation continues at an alarming rate in Asia, burdened as it is by high population densities coupled with extreme poverty. Consequently, we see a continuing critical role for ICRISAT as a provider of strategic, upstream research elements which are complementary to the more applied efforts of NARS, many of whom are still building initial capacities in this area.
We heartily accept the model's emphasis on partnerships, and the EPMR notes this is already a strong feature of ICRISAT's ongoing work. We intend to continue to build emphasis on these mature, productive relationships, and view them as especially.
I. Responses to Recommendations
1. ... the Panel recommends that the present commodity improvement programmes of ICRISAT at Patancheru should evolve into a global germplasm strategic research effort with germplasm evaluation and enhancement components that would provide intermediate products to commodity improvement programmes operated by ICRISAT in Africa and NARS in all continents in a partnership mode.
We accept the recommendation, and view it as an acceleration of an ongoing process. However, sufficient linkages to applied work must be maintained to enable the effective transfer of these strategic outputs to partner institutions.
2. ... the Panel recommends that ICRISAT adopt a new paradigm in strategic germplasm research using all necessary disciplines and 'new science' to exploit, more scientifically, systematically and fully, the genetic endowment represented in the genebank.
This recommendation is accepted. Since ICRISAT's germplasm collection has no equal, its fuller exploitation using cutting-edge science will position the Institute in a leadership role, and should attract strong global collaboration and donor support.
3. ... the Panel recommends that ICRISAT give high priority to the maintenance of watershed facilities and studies at Patancheru, and in particular to the maintenance and analysis of the data which have accumulated over time from these experiments.
We agree that these studies are important, but need to examine them in the context of the overall research agenda. In view of declining resources and the EPMR recommendation to refocus resource management research on Africa, those aspects of the Patancheru watershed studies which have global implications and transferability will be viewed as the most important. The analysis and documentation of accumulated results will also be a high priority.
4. ...the Panel recommends that the Institute should undertake a collaborative strategic planning exercise in INRM to formulate research priorities and operational strategies, particularly in fostering effective partnerships with NARS.
We agree with the need, but feel that it is already being addressed through an number of past and current reviews. These involved extensive interactions with NARS, for example in the formative stages of the Desert Margins Program, as well as in other cases. These will continue, in parallel with the execution of agreed aspects of the joint agenda.
5. ...the Panel recommends that ICRISAT should broaden its partnerships and deepen the strength of its efforts along the strategic applied/adaptive research continuum by continuing to develop even further its proactive visiting scientist programme, and placing greater emphasis on professional development for NARS, ARIs and ICRISAT staff.
We concur. We recognize that policy guidelines must be developed which reflect our priorities and those of our partners, including the relevant resource implications.
6. ...the Panel recommends that the Board be diligent in its basic functions of providing financial and management oversight; setting vision, strategy and policy; and constituting its membership in a manner appropriate to the task.
We concur. The Board is fully aware of its responsibilities and has taken the necessary steps/measures attendant to this recommendation as being manifested during the February Board meeting and particularly in the MTP for 1998-2000.
7. ... the Panel recommends that, in the coming years, management pay due attention to the following prerequisites of good research management: effective management information systems for adequate planning, budgeting and monitoring; heightened cost-consciousness; appropriate management skills; effective teamwork; and transparent performance appraisal and accountability systems at ICRISAT.
We concur. The Center has already taken concrete action to respond to this recommendation, including refinement of its management information systems and transparent performance appraisals.
8. ...the Panel recommends that the selection of the new DDG be deferred until the new DG has joined and can participate fully in the recruitment process, and that a strong transition team of interim DDG and DG be put in place by the Board as soon as possible.
The Board has already decided to defer the DDG recruitment until the DG designate has been identified. In the interim, the Board has put into place a Change Management Team led by the current DG.
9. ... the Panel recommends that the management and Board provide adequate leadership to the Centre by nurturing an institutional culture that encourages scientific and managerial excellence, and by ensuring the effective management of financial, human and other resources of the Institute.
The Board and management have always endeavored to provide adequate leadership to the Center as has been manifested by its considerable scientific achievements and impact. This will be further encouraged.
10. ...the Panel recommends that a Mid-Term Review of ICRISAT be undertaken by the CGIAR in two years (i.e. completed by end 1998) to assess the progress made by the Institute in transforming itself into a 'new' strategic research and partnership-oriented centre of excellence.
We agree, on the understanding that this is to be a status review on the progress that has been made based upon our approved Medium Term Plan, which incorporates the accepted recommendations of the EPMR.
II. Responses to Suggestions
The Panel believes that there is now a strong and urgent need for ICRISAT ... to formulate an operational mandate so that the strategic elements and focus of work are clearly spelt out.
We agree. The MTP 1998-2000 describes an operational mandate which focuses ICRISAT's formal mandate on areas of greatest comparative advantage.
In zones with under 600 mm of annual rainfall, the CCER for West and Central Africa recommended that research efforts be concentrated on natural resource management... The panel suggests that this might later be reconsidered in the light of the proposed strategic research thrust on germplasm evaluation and enhancement...
We agree that a blanket rule based on rainfall would be an oversimplification. It should be reworded to express the principle that yield stability is a more important target than yield potential in such marginal environments. Yield stability may require genetic, as well as crop environment approaches. Participatory research is likely to be especially effective in these areas.
The panel encourages ICRISAT to pursue [participatory breeding in Rajasthan, India] further, with the end goal of developing and elaborating the methodology for participatory breeding.
We give high priority to developing methodologies for participatory breeding and will strive to find opportunities to do so wherever possible. Efforts will be made to extend this work to other regions, particularly those where adoption of improved cultivars has been poor, both to help understand past failures and better target future research.
The Panel suggests that ongoing breeding efforts to improve groundnut quality be further intensified, particularly with regard to reduction or elimination of aflatoxin contamination as well as prolonging shelf-life... the Panel likewise endorses the CCER recommendation for ICRISAT to assess critically the market prospects of different groundnut types.
We accept that groundnut quality factors will become increasingly important in the future, and that breeding can improve quality characteristics. Clearly, aflatoxin contamination is a major global problem, but improved sanitation in trade channels is essential for its solution- an area where ICRISAT has no comparative advantage. Conventional breeding to date has not been able to solve the problem. New science approaches such as genetic transformation for enhanced resistance to the causal organism are being developed in advanced laboratories, and ICRISAT will seek to participate in these where possible and appropriate. Through the Markets and Policy project, ICRISAT will improve its understanding of groundnut market trends, which will assist in establishing priorities for research in this area.
A focus is suggested on important soil-related aspects of breeding for subsistence areas, e.g. nutrient use/water use efficiency... the Panel ... suggests the Centre strengthen further its fundamental research in these areas.
We accept the importance of soil nutrient x water x crop interactions, and believe that important gains could be achieved by identifying and incorporating traits which enable crops to more efficiently acquire and utilize the limited water and nutrient supplies available in poor soils. This type of research requires close teamwork between breeders and soil scientists; ICRISAT's project structure encourages such interdisciplinarity.
The Panel is concerned that research activities in this area have been substantially scaled down in recent years, and strongly suggests that research on wild species evaluation and utilization in wide crossing [in groundnut] be given renewed emphasis.
We agree and are intensifying work in this area, despite constrained resources.
Accelerating the use of new technologies for groundnut improvement is suggested, particularly for virus resistance and other important objectives such as drought and, perhaps, oil quality modification.
We agree to the need to embrace new technologies for crop improvement generally and to do so faster than has been possible up to now. We will intensify efforts to overcome bottlenecks to the successful application of new technologies in crop improvement activities.
The Panel strongly suggests that, in concert with ICARDA, the Centre intensify its efforts on germplasm enhancement for cold tolerance [in chickpea].
We concur. This is expected to be an important responsibility of the Chickpea Breeder to be posted in ICARDA (see below).
The Panel endorses ICRISAT/ICARDA collaboration, as it highlights the synergy and complementarity of ecoregional and global approaches on chickpea research. The Panel suggests ICRISAT (and ICARDA as well) further develop this partnership, particularly with regard to germplasm enhancement activities.
We agree, and thank the Panel for its favorable comments. A proposal has been submitted to the EU to continue this collaboration. A key responsibility of the new appointee will be to advance a fuller integration of the ICRISAT and ICARDA chickpea research agendas.
The Panel suggests that in due time, ICRISAT should document and evaluate its experiences and lessons with respect to participatory approaches in breeding and assess its merits relative to conventional approaches. The Panel further suggests that the recommendations arising out of the recent review of the On-Farm Research Sector are accepted and taken into account by the Commodity Programmes in implementing future on-farm trials ...
We accept the suggestion to document the value of participatory approaches. We also generally accept the recommendations of the On-Farm review, and mil take them into account in future work.
The Panel... urges ICRISAT management and Board to expedite the [placement of germplasm into long-term storage]...
This suggestion is accepted, with implementation starting in 1997.
[For watershed-based research at Patancheru] the Panel... suggests that ICRISAT selects and concentrates on methodological studies of critical components, such as nutrient flows and socioeconomic parameters... [and] speed up and intensify the analysis of data thus far accumulated...
Same response as for recommendation 3: In view of declining resources and the EPMR recommendation to refocus resource management research on Africa, those aspects of the Patancheru watershed studies which have global implications and transferability will be viewed as the most important. The analysis and documentation of accumulated results will also be a high priority.
The Panel... suggests ICRISAT gives high priority to working with NARS towards the early interfacing of available climatic, soil, water, socioeconomic and crop data and models, with GIS technology.
We agree with this suggestion. Appropriate efforts are underway in the twelve research projects.
The Panel... suggests that ICRISAT reviews especially the conditions attached to access to APSIM and their possible impact on the implementation of CARMASAT.
The APSIM agreement is still under active discussion, and it is expected that a positive conclusion will soon be reached which is compatible with ICRISAT's nonprofit, public goods nature.
The Panel therefore strongly suggests ICRISAT give priority, especially within the evolution of ecoregional initiatives and training in Africa, to activities that assist the NARS in developing sufficient capacity for truly collaborative research programmes in INRM.
We agree. The importance attributed to NARS strengthening is reflected in the Desert Margins Program plan, and through ICRISAT's participation in the Inter-Center Training Program for Africa. Strengthened partnerships, particularly through joint research projects and visiting scientistships, also feature strongly in the new Medium-Term Plan for 1998-2000.
The Panel... suggests that ICRISAT [become involved with other CGIAR Centres to collectively generate and interpret improved scientific evidence on the extent and magnitude of the impacts of natural resources degradation or enhancement on future production, and vice versa].
A very general suggestion. We agree.
The Panel believes IFPRI has the potential comparative advantage in assembling... information [on the outlook for ICRISAT mandate crops in different regions] and... suggests that ICRISAT continues to try to arrange collaboration with IFPRI, initially perhaps on a cost sharing basis... The Panel believes [it would be desirable] if these types of initiatives were ultimately the full responsibility of IFPRI.
We believe that a joint ICRISAT/IFPRI approach would be the most desirable. ICRISAT's active research on these crops and its location in the areas where they are grown provide it with unique advantages, such as ability to recognize the potential effects of changing production technology. IFPRI's comparative advantages lie in its capacity to contribute a cross-commodity orientation and outlook, and to standardize methodologies across Centers. A cost-sharing formula would be appropriate and efficient.
If staff resources continue to be available for [product markets and policy] studies, the Panel believes they would be better used in Africa where the NARS are much weaker. Since there is undoubtedly expertise within the ICAR system for undertaking such work, the Panel suggests... in India seeking funding for contract research and visiting scientists...
We accept this suggestion. Indeed, such collaboration in India is already being pursued through a Ford Foundation-sponsored study.
If forced to make hard choices [among the three subprojects of the Markets and Policy Project, namely: commodity situation and outlook; product markets and policy; and input markets and policy], the Panel would suggest the first priority should be given the input markets and policy... with specific emphasis on the seed component.
We agree with this suggestion. This is highlighted in the current E2 project priorities.
... it is suggested [that] ICRISAT facilitate [studies of adoption and impact of final research products by NARS] by refining and finalizing the training materials for such studies, and helping to continue ensuring peer review and networking functions.
We agree with the need for training materials relating to ex post impact studies. We also agree with the need to continue peer review and networking functions.
In WCA it is suggested that priority be given to adoption and impact studies in Nigeria, which contributes very significant proportions of the total production of millet, sorghum and groundnuts in the region.
We agree. Implementation of this depends on collaborative research ties with the Nigerian NARS. This work is probably better led by Nigerian scientists than by a regionally-posted ICRISAT scientist.
This EPMR Panel is somewhat concerned that the current REIA project may be over extended. The Panel therefore suggests careful prioritization of [adoption and impact] activities... while at the same time ensuring that [this does not inhibit studies on] methodologies...
We agree. Careful prioritization is underway in response to severe funding constraints. Methodological investigations form an integral part of the project.
...it is suggested that the CGIAR Evaluation and Impact Assessment Group does a comprehensive review on what ICRISAT has done, particularly on the methodological front with a view to assessing progress, suggesting modifications, and perhaps advocating their use in other institutions within and outside the CGIAR System.
We will be pleased to assist the CGIAR Evaluation and Impact Assessment group if it decides to do this. This would help us better coordinate methods development and networking activities with other Centers.
The Panel believes that ICRISAT currently undersells its achievements and suggests that it makes greater efforts to present its achievements in a more accessible and popularized form and is more assertive in publicizing them.
We agree with the value of more broadly publicizing ICRISAT's successful impacts. Appropriate steps will be taken.
...the responsibility for overseeing gender issues has been transferred to one of the international scientists in the SEPD on a part-time basis. While the Panel has no problem with this arrangement it suggests that this is monitored closely to make sure gender-related issues continue to receive the attention they deserve. With respect to this it is strongly suggested the consultant from the CGIAR Gender Programme continues to visit at least once a year to provide advice and monitor progress.
We agree with the suggestions for close monitoring of ICRISAT's gender research effort, which we believe will be most successful if it is integrated across the research agenda, rather than being carried out by a separate unit. We would welcome increased collaboration with the CGIAR Gender Programme.
The Panel suggests that, once ICRISAT has agreed on the methodological details of the ICRISAT approach to OFR, a committee of experts on OFR (i.e., 4 or 5) from within ICRISAT screen and comment on specific proposals in the ICRISAT projects that involve OFR activities.
We agree with the spirit of this recommendation, and are exploring options for its implementation.
The Panel is glad to see the increase in socioeconomics related work during the review period, and suggests that its current identity, momentum and relevance is maintained under the 'new' ICRISAT proposed by the Panel...
We agree. If the Divisions are abolished, they may be replaced by less formal disciplinary groups which should nonetheless help maintain identity and quality of science. The momentum and relevance of this work will be sustained through the achievement of outputs by interdisciplinary project teams.
The Panel senses that [multidisciplinarity, rather than interdisciplinarity] prevails in some of the [economics] projects thus inhibiting synergism between disciplines. The Panel suggests in interacting with other disciplines priority should be given to interdisciplinary types of activities.
We strongly agree with the need for continuing priority on interdisciplinary activities.
In order to provide the necessary services in the light of possible regrettable downsizing, the economists would be expected to seek ways of increasing their multiplier effect... The Panel has... decided to suggest, rather than definitively recommend, [that socioeconomists] be proactive, with the help of management, in seeking funds to develop networks, partnerships, contracting out research, and using the services of research fellows and visiting scientists ... the IRS economists are perceived by the Panel as potentially providing catalytic and peer roles in ensuring socioeconomic expertise resident in the SAT NARS is improved...
We agree that it is important to continue to pursue strong collaborative research ties. However, sustaining ICRISAT's scientific credibility in this area would require that socioeconomic scientists also maintain their reputations as leading researchers, which can only happen if a significant part of their time is reserved for research.
Taking the above issues into consideration the Panel therefore suggests that in the 'new' ICRISAT the economics group should have expertise in... resource economics... on the strategic/applied/adaptive research continuum in Africa... modelling activities... centered in Hyderabad... production economics expertise combined with skills in... on-farm trials... in Africa... expertise [in] marketing/policy economics... stationed in Africa [as a] joint responsibility of ICRISAT and IFPRI... [and] impact assessment... stationed in Hyderabad.
While we agree with the value of carefully prioritizing the commitments and deployment of socioeconomics research staff, this cannot be defined, as it seems to be here, independently of the research thrusts chosen for the rest of ICRISAT's research program. Specific staffing patterns must reflect the priority needs of the entire agenda, and financial resources. These needs and resources may change over time and locations.
... the Panel suggests that efforts are made by ICRISAT... to document the data collected by its scientists and to make it accessible to others, after a suitable grace period.
We agree with the suggestion. A formal policy is being finalized on this matter.
...there is a perception of some degree of overlap in [the work programmes of ICRISAT and ICAR in India]. The Panel suggests this problem can best be resolved by reducing the overlap...
In spite of the perception of duplication, the danger of overlap with ICAR will diminish as ICRISAT implements its new programme directions. We expect that the relationship will increasingly evolve towards true partnership.
The Panel commends ICRISAT for its deliberate efforts to establish, develop and foster research partnerships with the NARS, with particular reference to research network systems for its mandate crops... The Panel strongly suggests that ICRISAT maintains an active role in regional networks.
We agree.
The Panel suggests that the Centre further develop [the participatory research] approach in its genetic conservation and enhancement activities and in concert with the Systemwide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP).
We agree.
The Panel strongly suggests that the Centre strengthen, and possibly expand, its research collaboration with the ARIs and explore all means to provide it with sustained support.
We agree.
The Panel encourages ICRISAT to take advantage of the complementary strengths of its partner NARS, and strongly suggests that the Centre moves toward contract research arrangements with selected NARS or ARIs on its priority research agenda; for example, germplasm evaluation... The Panel also strongly suggests that the Centre takes a proactive role in:
Catalyzing the development, adaptation and transfer of advanced technologies and information relating to improvement of its mandate crops, especially on biotechnology and information technology, for access by the NARS; andMobilizing donor support for multilateral, research network initiatives.
We agree with both suggestions. The mode adopted will depend on the particular situation.
The Panel suggests regional fora such as APARI in Asia and ASARECA in East Africa and SADC in Southern Africa, might be able to set conditions of service for scientists in their region who would work as visiting or collaborating scientists at an IARC.
We agree. This suggestion will be pursued with the regional fora.
Given the above concerns, the Panel questions how and how much ICRISAT should become involved in Systemwide activities and suggests a cautious approach by the Board and management.
We agree with the concerns, and welcome the forthcoming consultant's review commissioned by the Center Director's Committee to review experiences with ecoregional initiatives.
The Panel suggests that an additional member from Africa be added to the Board while retaining total membership at fifteen and ensuring that African membership is not exclusively from either Anglophone or Francophone countries.
We concur. The Board shall consider an additional member from Africa and shall consider expertise relevant to the new operational mandate.
The Panel suggests that the Executive Committee strive to frame the issues for the Board but avoid making preliminary decisions and recommendations that bind its members before they interact with the full Board.
We concur. The Board has already taken some actions and is being guided by the ICRISAT Governing Board Rules and Procedures.
The Panel suggests that the Finance Committee be reconstituted as an Audit Committee with full responsibility for budget, expenditure, and operational oversight of the Institute and that the oversight of the financial planning function be transferred to the Board's Executive Committee.
We disagree with the proposed change of name. The Finance Committee already includes operational audit functions, among other responsibilities.
The Panel suggests that the Programme Committee be charged with guiding the Institute's research and research-related activities, recommending the programme of work and associated budget to the full Board and monitoring the progress of research work on an annual basis.
We concur. Most of the work is now being done and the Programme Committee shall study and recommend the programme of work and associated budget of the Institute to the full Board.
The Panel suggests that a monitoring arrangement be organized by the Programme Committee to provide for organized interaction among Board members and scientists.
We concur. This was done prior to the February Board meeting and shall be enhanced further.
The Panel also suggests that the Board formally adopt the new CGIAR Guidelines on the Role, Responsibilities, and Accountability of Centre Boards.
The Board recognizes the importance of the new CGIAR Guidelines and shall endeavor to adapt accordingly.
For the future, it is suggested that the Programme Committee of the Board be more fully involved in the commissioning and monitoring of CCERs... The Panel further suggests that the Board as a whole participate more actively in the discussion of the CCER reports and recommendations and in the follow-up...
We agree.
the EPMR Panel strongly suggests that, as a matter of principle, the staff of the IARCs should not be on any CCER panel.
We agree.
The Panel ... suggests that the [project] budget figures reflect average actual costs... with scientists being placed, for budgeting purposes, in two separate categories - IRS scientists and NR scientists - in view of the large difference in cost of these two cadres of staff.
We will examine this suggestion, but differentiating NRS and IRS salary costs in project budgeting in this manner would complicate planning and reporting of investments in various activities and programs.
The Panel strongly suggests that the status of the [Financial Information System] be reviewed, to examine if it meets the needs of each level of management, and to determine how it could better serve the needs of project-based management at the Institute, both at headquarters and in the field offices.
We agree.
Since [the Institute-wide Computer Services Approach] is new to ICRISAT, the Panel strongly suggests that the situation be monitored closely by management in the coming months, and corrective action be taken as needed. Additionally,... the Panel suggests that the Board should commission a CCER in information management within the next 1 -2 years.
We agree with the two suggestions.
... the Panel suggests that... the coordinator of the Institute-wide Computer Services [Approach] visit major agricultural research institutions to gain a better understanding of the opportunities that exist for supporting research and associated functions.
We agree that there is a need to learn about the opportunities that exist for supporting research and related functions by interacting with other agricultural research institutions. However, this may be done more cost-effectively through the use of information technology than by personal visits.
The Panel suggests ... that the organization of the research agenda into projects be maintained. However, what still needs to be improved is individual accountability through a more effective performance management system, which is in the process of being developed and implemented...
We agree.
...because disciplinary networks and coordination across projects are important for staff development and quality assurance, the Panel suggests that a 'coordinator' for each cluster of related disciplines be designated by management, not for a managerial function but for network coordination and peer review.
We agree.
...the Panel strongly suggests that the Board speedily endorse management's request to abolish the RDD positions.
The Board approved the abolishment of the RDD position in its meeting of 24-28 February 1997.
...because the lack of clarity in role definitions has continuously bedeviled the existing matrix structure... The Panel suggests that the scientists report to the PTL of the project to which the highest proportion of their time is allocated.
We recognize the seriousness of this issue, and we are addressing it.
The Panel suggests that the PTLs [allocate scientists' time to projects] on an annual, or as-needed basis, subject to ADG(R) endorsement or arbitration in case of disagreement.
We agree in part. This should be a joint decision between management and the PTLs because it relates to project priorities, and has resource implications.
...the Panel strongly suggests that REDs be fully consulted before any project activity is undertaken in their region... In cases of serious disagreement between a PTM and the RED, both would address the issue to the PTL of that project, and if needed, to the ADG(R).
We agree that REDs should be fully consulted about projects undertaken in their regions. The mode of resolution of disagreements will depend on their nature.
[In view of] the co-location of ICRISAT Asia Centre and ICRISAT Headquarters, the Panel suggests that the Asia RED position be abolished.
We disagree. The position is essential at the present time.
... the Panel strongly suggests, as was suggested by the previous EPMR, that extensive management training be provided on a periodic basis to managers at all levels.
We agree. The current management training programme will be enhanced.
...the Panel strongly suggests that the new DG's managerial skills and competencies be considered as, if not more, important than his/her scientific skills.
We agree. Managerial skills are being emphasized by the search committee.
...The Panel strongly suggests it is imperative that any future staff reduction be very targetted.
We agree that staff reductions should be carried out in a selective as well as transparent and defensible basis.
The Panel suggests that ICRISAT undertake a benchmark study of areas such as Finance, Purchasing, Personnel, etc., with a view to optimizing their staffing levels.
We agree.
As currently projected cash expenditures... clearly show, without substantial cuts in expenditures or a large increase in revenue in both 1997 and 1998, ICRISAT will be in extreme financial difficulties in 1998 or sooner... The Panel therefore strongly suggests that the Board immediately takes appropriate corrective measures.
We agree and are implementing major cost-cutting measures.
...from a financial management point of view, a careful monitoring of the total cash position is key to a number of management decisions... The Panel suggests that monthly cash flow forecasts be prepared for the next 8 quarters for review by management and, periodically, by the Board's Finance/Audit Committee.
We agree.
In view of the large inventories held by ICRISAT, the Panel suggests that management seek external assistance to examine its current inventory position, and the level of service by the research programmes and the control/reordering procedures needed to meet those service levels.
We agree, and the newly-appointed internal auditor has this suggestion as part of his workplan.
Finally, the Panel wishes to express its grave concerns about the level of pollution created in the Patancheru area by certain private companies... The Panel strongly suggests that the management continue its active involvement in trying to solve this matter... In addition it is suggested that management monitor the pollution levels on campus on an on-going basis.
We strongly support this suggestion. Since the EPMR panel submitted its report the offending factory has ceased the production of the chemicals which were causing the problem under a court order. We will monitor the situation carefully should it recur.
To reduce the administrative burden on the DDG... the Panel suggests that ICRISAT management consider appointing a separate manager for research support services, and another manager for the combined information-related institution-wide programmes...
We appreciate the suggestion by the Panel, and will address the issue.
Further, since the proposed mode of research - of combining strategic and applied/adaptive research on germplasm, commodities and natural resources management, on more than one continent (particularly Africa and Asia) - could be of value to other Centres, the Panel also suggests that this approach be examined further during the System Review of the CGIAR planned for 1997-98.
We agree.
