International Institute of Tropical Agriculture
Oyo Road, PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria · Telephone: (234-02) 2412626, 2412169 · Fax (INMARSAT): 874-1772276 Telex: 31417 or 31159 TROPIB NG · Email: Dialcom 157:CGI072; Internet [email protected]M
5 May 1995Dr. Donald Winkelmann, Chair
Technical Advisory Committee
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Food & Agriculture Organization
00100 Rome, ItalyMr. Alexander von der Osten
Executive Secretary
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
World Bank
1818H Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20433
USA
Dear Dr. Winkelmann and Mr. von der Osten:
It is our pleasure to send you IITA's response to the Fourth External Programme and Management Review of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. We are particularly pleased that the review panel was very positive about IITA's present and future capacity to address its mandate. We strongly feel that it has been a very rewarding and constructive process which provides a sound basis for IITA's future evolution.
The review process has been fully open and as a consequence the Panel received wide-ranging views, particularly in the area of human resource management. The review has identified certain areas where strengthening of the Institute's capacity would allow it to better address its complex task. In our opinion the Panel has made every effort to arrive at well-balanced conclusions and recommendations.
The report has been reviewed extensively by the Board of Trustees and the staff of IITA. In accordance with the Panel's findings that there is much to commend IITA on with respect to its research and international cooperation achievements, the Board's attention focused on organizational issues that would enhance and improve the Institute's performance. It has requested IITA management to engage in a consultative process with staff and to prepare appropriate proposals. These will be reviewed by the Board as soon as possible in order to decide on the necessary follow up action.
Based on the outcome of the review, IITA looks forward to the future with confidence. The Institute is in an excellent position to move agriculture forward in sub-Saharan Africa. It will continue to focus its attention on improving the well-being of low-income people through the improvement of agricultural production in a sustainable manner.
Sincerely,
Lukas Brader
Director GeneralPierre Dubreuil
Chairman of the Board of Trustees
Ikeja (Lagos) Office: 531-532 WEMPCO Road, Ogba Estate, PO Box 145, Ikeja. Nigeria · Telephone: (234-1) 921-147 · Cable: TROPFOUND IKEJA
International Mailing Address: IITA, c/o L.W. Lambourn & Co., Carolyn House. 26 Dingwall Road, Croydon CR9 3EE, England Fax: (44-81) 681-8583 · Telex: 946979 LWL G · Telephone: (44-81) 686-9031
RESPONSE TO THE FOURTH EXTERNAL PROGRAM AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW REPORT OF IITA
PART I: GENERAL COMMENTS
IITA appreciates the conscientious and effective manner in which the Review Panel has addressed its complex task. The Panel has produced a very extensive analysis of the activities carried out over the last five years. The review has been undertaken in a very open manner allowing access to the widest range of information and opinions.
IITA notes the very positive outcome of the review. It is particularly pleased with the Panel's findings of the continued high quality of the research and achievements in the areas of crop improvement and plant health management. In the course of the review period, IITA had to redirect its research programs for resource and crop management. The Institute welcomes the Panel's conclusion "that the new leadership (of the Division) is instilling a spirit of teamwork and is formulating revised research programs better suited to IITA's mandate." IITA is confident that the current strong basis of its research programs allows it to face the future with confidence.
The Panel, through country visits and analysis of the replies to the questionnaires circulated earlier, has received very positive comments from NARS about effective cooperation with IITA. It also noted the increased cooperation with sister institutes. This places IITA in an excellent position to be a productive partner in the CGIAR renewal process. In this respect, IITA wants to recognize the strong support it receives from the governments of Nigeria and the other countries in which it works. The Institute intends to consolidate its international cooperation activities further through changes that will enable it to address new partnership requirements in the best ways.
The Panel calls upon IITA to continue providing leadership to the massive international effort required to move African agriculture forward and - as explained in Chapter 8 of its report - the Institute has a sound basis to address this task. IITA will continue to review and adapt its activities to meet the challenges on this front.
The Panel has developed 35 recommendations. In addition it has forwarded a variety of useful suggestions. IITA will systematically review these suggestions in the coming months in order to decide on specific actions to be taken. Several recommendations refer to strengthening of specific activities. All have implications for expansion in staff numbers. Meeting these needs will undoubtedly be restricted by budget. IITA would have welcomed the Panel's views on how they would rank priorities for the several areas of strengthening which they specified.
The recommendations which refer to research management and to human resource management need considerably more analysis, as the issues that are addressed by these recommendations are of special significance for the future development of the Institute and are based on common concerns. Follow-up action on these recommendations will affect the current structure of the Institute and will also have implications for the implementation of other recommendations. The Institute, in consultation with the various staff associations, will seek to improve its understanding of the concerns that emerged during the review. This will form the basis for the development of proposals for further action, in particular with respect to research and human resource management.
With respect to research management, IITA wishes to highlight the fact which has not been raised by the Panel, that the decentralization of its research activities has also resulted in the decentralization of research management. Consequently any changes would have to take account of this.
In the following pages, IITA comments on the Panel's recommendations. Of necessity, certain answers are preliminary in character.
PART II: RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1
The Panel recommends that rigorous review of all aspects of work on cowpea improvement at IITA be undertaken in 1998, with the participation of an external assessor (s), to determine whether the current lines of work will then have shown sufficient progress to justify their continuation.
Response
IITA agrees with the Panel. The recommendation endorses what was already planned. A rigorous review of progress will be required as severe pest problems are being tackled. However, the research has gathered momentum over the last years and there is expectation of successes in breeding and plant health.
Recommendation 2
The Panel recommends that IITA increase its effort on producing improved soybean germplasm for the moist savanna and midaltitudes of sub-Saharan Africa, either by redeployment of existing resource or by seeking additional resource.
Response
IITA agrees with the Panel. Based on IITA's past experience in West Africa and that of other soybean-producing countries, attention to postharvest technology will need to go hand in hand with improvement of field production. Implementation of this recommendation will require additional inputs by plant health scientists. When the program expansion takes place, the midaltitudes will have priority.
Recommendation 3
The Panel recommends that IITA review the scale of its activity in cassava improvement in the Humid Forest Program, particularly with respect to Central Africa, and formulate a proposal to enhance the uptake of its technology by the national programs for cassava improvement in this region.
Response
IITA agrees with the Panel, on the assumption that Humid Forest Program should read Humid Forest Zone. IITA has been trying to increase its scale of activity with cassava in Central Africa, but budget constraints combined with political instability have been restrictive. IITA agrees that emphasis should be on the spread of existing technologies, with some selective adaptation to suit local circumstances. IITA still needs to work out the modalities of implementation, but notes that Recommendation 8 has a bearing on the successful implementation of this recommendation.
Recommendation 4
The Panel recommends that IITA maintain its work on yam improvement at the current level, while seeking every opportunity to devolve more of the applied work progressively to NARS, possibly by subcontracting.
Response
IITA is pleased to have the Panel's endorsement of the current level of work on yam improvement, but considers that it applies to its work on yam systems improvement.
With respect to subcontracting, IITA works with NARS in various ways in all areas of its research agenda. For example, IITA assists NARS to obtain bilateral funding for work to complement that of IITA. Acting on the NARS' request, IITA has assisted the African Yam Network to prepare research proposals. When funding is secured, a regional research program on yam will be implemented in which NARS of West and Central Africa will participate. In sharing research responsibilities, NARS will handle the more applied aspects. Full devolution of research responsibility will have to be considered in the longer term.
Recommendation 5
The Panel recommends that IITA, in its continuing reorganization of the Maize Improvement Program, seek ways of devolving more of its work on genetic improvement of maize to NARS in the region.
Response
IITA agrees with the Panel and is already addressing what is proposed.
Recommendation 6
The Panel recommends that IITA secure the continuity of staffing of the Biosystematics Unit by maintaining its core funding.
Response
IITA agrees that it is essential to secure the staffing of the Biosystematics Unit, since its functioning meets one of the basic requirements of IITA's characterization work in plant health.
Recommendation 7
The Panel recommends that appropriate measures be taken to ensure that the data on characterization of the pest and patho-agroecosystems are kept in a form that is readily accessible to future generations of scientists.
Response
IITA agrees with the Panel's recommendation and has taken some initial steps to develop such a database.
Recommendation 8
The Panel recommends that IITA increase its strength in phytopathology at Ibadan.
Response
IITA welcomes this recommendation. There is a definite need to increase international staff strength in phytopathology. This strengthening also links with Recommendations 2, 3 and 14. The required specialization is bacteriology. With this addition, the Institute would be in a position to cover all fields of phytopathological research that are essential to its research agenda.
Recommendation 9
The Panel recommends that IITA emphasize the establishment of strategic institutional research alliances (such as consortia) to address adequately the complexity of sustainable resource management research.
Response
IITA welcomes the Panel's recommendation. It is agreed that natural resource management is a wide and complex area of research. To assist the Institute to fulfil its research goals, linkages with a range of institutions are of great importance and current efforts to establish such linkages will be increased.
Recommendation 10
The Panel recommends that the Resource and Crop Management Division core efforts be concentrated on the comprehensive attention to one benchmark area each for the Moist Savanna and Humid Forest Programs.
Response
IITA agrees with the Panel's recommendation with one proviso. While the importance of concentrating on Moist Savanna and Humid Forest is fully appreciated, some flexibility should be allowed, in order that some inputs might be made in other agroecologies; e.g., the midaltitudes.
Recommendation 11
The Panel recommends that the Resource and Crop Management Division apply rigorous priority setting to its research portfolio in order to concentrate efforts on research areas of highest possible impact.
Response
IITA agrees that rigorous priority setting is needed in deciding its resource and crop management research agenda. However, at the current stage of decision-making, it is thought that assessment of the "highest possible impact" should be based on judgment rather than quantitative methods. Impact with respect to this research is complex. It can be taken both from a productivity standpoint and/or natural resource conservation standpoint. We would therefore qualify "highest possible impact" by referring to natural resource and welfare benefits and stress that it would rely mainly on qualitative judgments and less on quantitative methods.
Recommendation 12
The Panel recommends that the Resource and Crop Management Division put greater emphasis on on-farm research in its program.
Response
The Panel considered that on-farm research would be the means for improving focus and re-balancing the current research portfolio of the Resource and Crop Management Division. IITA concurs with this general assessment and will increase emphasis on this area of research.
Recommendation 13
The Panel recommends that IITA conclude an agreement with CIMMYT to ensure that the collection and conservation of Africa maize germplasm is undertaken.
Response
IITA has taken steps to collect and conserve African maize germplasm but not along the lines proposed in the recommendation. CIMMYT has specified that it has no plans to collect African germplasm. IITA has approached CIRAD (in the framework of CORAF) to seek their support for a joint exploration. When accomplished, the African materials would be available to CIMMYT.
Recommendation 14
The Panel recommends that IITA strengthen the capacity and increase the authority of the Seed Health Unit in matters relating to the movement of germplasm by the Center.
Response
This is agreed. This recommendation together with Recommendations 2, 3, and 8, all concern the same need (one person for phytopathology, preferably in bacteriology).
Recommendation 15
The Panel recommends that IITA review its policies and strategies relating to networks to ensure that these are adequately integrated with, and receive support from, the Center's research and training programs.
Response
Networks play an important part in both technology transfer and in implementation of core research on a regional basis. The Panel's recommendation underemphasizes the way in which the International Cooperation Division interrelates with the research divisions. IITA's research and training programs already actively participate in the various networks. The Panel has identified some impediments to the effectiveness of networks. However, in all networks there are effective linkages with core research and training programs, through frequent liaison, technical backstopping, information flow, regular attendance at Steering Committee meetings and field visits.
At a policy level, IITA, together with other IARCs that manage networks in sub-Saharan Africa, is ready to devolve implementation responsibilities when NARS are in a position to manage them. For example, it was agreed at a recent ASARECA meeting that "The IARCs will be happy to pass over financial management of the donor funds to ASARECA as soon as proven mechanisms for management and accountability are in place."
Recommendation 16
The Panel recommends that the International Cooperation Division undertake a review of its priorities, strategies and activities, in order to respond effectively to the emerging opportunities/or increased partnership with NARS and other collaborators.
Response
IITA agrees that it is an appropriate time to review this Division. The scope of the review should not be restricted to the International Cooperation Division in its present form and should include the integration of Information Services, the relationship to the Technology Transfer and Training Unit in the Plant Health Management Division, and the role and affiliation of the Research Liaison Scientists.
Recommendation 17
The Panel recommends that the IITA Board develop and implement a more systematic and structured process for evaluating the Director General's performance and use the results for making future BoT decisions on Director General contract terms and conditions.
Response
The BoT agrees with the recommendation and had already begun discussion of this issue. It has developed a set of criteria against which to evaluate the Director General's performance in a structured and systematic manner.
Recommendation 18
The Panel recommends that the Program Committee utilize more proactive and participatory methods in determining research strategies and review policies, including those for internally managed external reviews, to enable the BoT to provide effective oversight of the scope and quality of the research programs of IITA.
Response
IITA agrees with the recommendation and will take steps to implement it.
Recommendation 19
The Panel recommends that the Terms of Reference of the Audit Committee (AC) include oversight responsibility for management systems, personnel policies and administrative procedures. The AC should also provide guidance in undertaking internally managed external reviews in these areas as appropriate.
Response
The Institute agrees with this recommendation. At the same time it wants to emphasize that both management and the Board must be careful not to encroach on each other's duties and prerogatives. In addition, it agrees with the view that the AC should take the necessary steps to organize internally managed external reviews, ensuring provision of appropriate input from external reviewers as necessary. However, it holds that the Executive Committee should also be involved in some of these initiatives.
Recommendation 20
The Panel recommends that the Director General re-examine with the IITA Board, the appointment of a Deputy Director General (Research) to ensure that top research leadership can be provided in a continuous and sustained manner without distorting relationships in the management structure.
Response
Appointment of a Deputy Director General (Research) has on various occasions been reviewed by the Board of Trustees. IITA acknowledges indeed that "the structure of scientific direction at IITA is unusual, if not unique in the CGIAR system." It emphasizes that this structure is closely linked with the direct involvement of the Director General in research management and the strengthening of the position of the Research Directors. As the report clearly states, it has resulted in a much improved research environment in the Institute. IITA notes that implementation of this recommendation would again centralize its research decision-making and would therefore conflict to a certain degree with the decentralization process which has been taking place. IITA agrees that there are opportunities to improve research coordination. In seeking to improve its performance, IITA will review various options, including those proposed by the Panel.
Recommendation 21
The Panel recommends that the head of international cooperation should continue to be appointed at the Deputy Director General level and have additional responsibilities including information services.
Response
The Institute had already begun to take steps to integrate the activities of Information Services within the International Cooperation Division, given the important role played by Information Services in the relationship with NARS and donors. The level of the position of the head of International Cooperation will be considered in the light of the overall changes to be implemented following a further analysis as discussed in the Part I.
Recommendations 22 and 30
The Panel recommends that IITA develop an integrated, project-based planning, resource allocation, and implementation system in the next few years and pilot test it in selected areas before extending its coverage to the entire research program and to research-related activities.
The Panel recommends that IITA develop an integrated program/project planning, budgeting and financial reporting system to support the transition to project-based research management.
Response
The Institute notes that the Panel concurs with the Institute's decision to maintain the current divisional structure and with the proposed use of time-based standard costing techniques as an appropriate control mechanism for project-based research management. IITA accepts the Panel's recommendation and will aim to evolve fully to project mode in the future. Pilot testing will be utilized because it is realized that a careful development of this system will be needed and its implementation will not be straightforward. A key aspect is considered to be the development of project log-frames, after which IITA will introduce project-based budgeting.
Recommendation 23
The Panel recommends that IITA further develop its priority-setting methodology and processes for routine screening of new projects, including ex ante impact assessment, irrespective of their funding source. It should also ensure compatibility with the formal strategic planning process of IITA.
Response
IITA is in the process of refining its priority-setting methodology. Once this process has been finalized, it will apply this methodology in the screening of new projects. Procedures are already in place to ensure that new projects are reviewed by the Program Committee to ensure that they are in line with the Institute's Medium-Term Plan objectives. IITA agrees with the thrust of this recommendation, but considers that other methods of priority setting may be more appropriate and less time-consuming than the use of ex ante impact assessment.
Recommendation 24
The Panel recommends that IITA establish a formal and transparent system for ensuring that NARS are routinely consulted in planning the Center's annual research program and research-related activities.
Response
As noted by the Panel, IITA has a variety of mechanisms in place for consulting with NARS, with respect to research planning in a wide range of areas. A highly effective, formal mechanism for determining its program priorities for the East and Southern African Regional Center (ESARC) has been established. New opportunities for priority setting are further facilitated by the plans formulated by ASARECA for the region. The Institute looks forward to developing similar arrangements in West and Central Africa and hopes that not too far in the future it can make appropriate use of the mechanisms established by CORAF and SPAAR. In the meantime, the development of the ecoregional initiatives in West and Central Africa and the establishment of the relevant task force will already considerably facilitate the overall research planning process.
Furthermore, within the above framework, IITA also intends to work closely with all other centers working in sub-Saharan Africa, in order to promote a harmonious research planning process.
Recommendation 25
The Panel recommends that IITA take steps to improve the uniformity, transparency and due process of the current Performance Evaluation System.
Response
While IITA accepts the thrust of this recommendation, it wishes to emphasize that the performance evaluation system has to be adapted to the specific categories of staff to which it applies.
The current evaluation of international staff and national management staff is based on a standard set of criteria, weighting of which is agreed upon by the staff member concerned and his/her supervisor. This is used as the basis for the appraisal at the end of the year which is then discussed again with the Director General to ensure uniformity between the divisions. The Institute notes the Panel's concern and will keep it under close review to eliminate inconsistencies and enhance objectivity. In staff evaluations, increased attention will be given to training needs and career development concerns.
Recommendation 26
The Panel recommends that IITA rescind the "11-year rule", limiting the tenure of scientists at IITA and delete it from the personnel policies applicable to internationally recruited staff.
Response
As noted in the EPMR report, the fixed-term policy was established at the recommendation of the last EPMR. In this policy, it is noted that extension beyond 11 years requires an in-depth review of staff members' performance and approval by the Board. IITA will revise its policy to ensure that the 11-year clause will not be a deterrent to international staff employment.
Recommendation 27
The Panel recommends that the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual for Internationally Recruited Staff include the Institute's Salary Structure for all classes of internationally recruited posts, indicating the pay ranges, incremental steps and criteria for the placement of staff at each level.
Response
The Institute fully accepts the panel's concerns that it should provide clarity with respect to its salary structure and the criteria for changes. Classes of international staff are clearly defined in IITA's Personnel Policy Manual. The Institute's salary ranges for the various staff categories, as well as the range of increases to be applied in a given year, are annually approved by the Board of Trustees. This information will be made available to all internationally recruited staff. The Institute does not believe it is appropriate to publish these particular salary ranges in the Personnel Policy Manual. The salary ranges and the benefits of international staff are based on comparative studies done across the centers.
Recommendation 28
The Panel recommends that IITA prepare comprehensive and updated Personnel Policies and Procedures Manuals for nationally recruited staff at all field stations.
Response
IITA accepts the recommendation and steps have already been taken to implement it.
Recommendation 29
The Panel recommends that IITA appoint a professionally qualified, internationally recruited specialist in human resources management as Head of Human Resources, reporting to the Deputy Director General (Management).
Response
The Institute's experience with the management of human resources has certainly shown the complex character of this activity. It had recently decided that this responsibility would be carried out by the Deputy Director General (Management) with the assistance of the Office of the Director General. The Institute has considered the concerns highlighted in the Panel's report and concludes that new arrangements will indeed be needed. These concerns are mainly based on interpersonal communications problems. At this stage, IITA is not yet convinced that the concerns expressed by the Panel would best be addressed through the appointment of a Head of Human Resources per se. The Institute will undertake in the coming months a consultative process with the staff associations in order to determine precisely how to overcome the shortcomings in the most efficacious way.
Recommendation 31
The Panel recommends that a Publications Policy for IITA be established, and that an Advisory Committee monitor its implementation.
Response
The Institute accepts this recommendation and will look into implementing it in a way that best reflects the needs, after Information Services has been integrated into the International Cooperation Division. (See also recommendation 21.)
Recommendation 32
The Panel recommends that a comprehensive review of Information Services be undertaken as soon as possible.
Response
A comprehensive review of Information Services was carried out in 1992. In the proposed merger with the International Cooperation Division, the Institute intends to further review the various responsibilities of Information Services.
Recommendation 33
The Panel recommends that IITA maintain an effective capacity in social science research and recruit to fill the positions approved in the Medium-Term Plan as soon as possible.
Response
IITA agrees in principle and will strive to attain the staffing level specified in the MTP. Whether this constitutes an "effective" capacity is a debatable issue, that will be addressed again in the preparation of the next Medium-Term Plan.
Recommendation 34
The Panel recommends that IITA decide on the appropriate approach to impact assessment and identify specific areas/topics on which work should initially be concentrated.
Response
IITA agrees and already has advertised for a person with qualifications and experience in this area.
Recommendation 35
The Panel recommends that IITA appoint a short-term consultant for gender issues on a periodic basis to help sensitize/train/advise IITA research scientists in gender-related methodologies in order that gender concern is institutionalized.
Response
IITA is in agreement with the need to institutionalize gender issues in research planning and implementation. It considers that short-term consultancies on a periodic basis would be one means of institutionalizing gender issues. However, there are alternatives and IITA would like to retain flexibility.
