Recrafting Iucn - Asia Regional Organization

http://ajc.sagepub.
com/
Asian Journal of Management Cases
http://ajc.sagepub.com/content/5/1/21
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/097282010800500104
2008 5: 21 Asian Journal of Management Cases
Zafar Iqbal Qureshi
Asia Regional Organization Recrafting Iucn
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at: Asian Journal of Management Cases Additional services and information for
http://ajc.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://ajc.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:
What is This?
- Jul 29, 2008 Version of Record >>

at INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MGMT on July 28, 2014 ajc.sagepub.com Downloaded from at INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MGMT on July 28, 2014 ajc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Cases
RECRAFTING IUCNASIA REGIONAL ORGANIZATION
Zafar Iqbal Qureshi
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)Asia Regional Organiza-
tions rapid growth in various countries as well as within the region put pressure on
the existing organization structure and its capacity to manage growth in an effective
fashion. The Asia Regional Director (ARD) realized that the reorganization of the Re-
gion had become imperative in order to manage this rapid growth. She felt the need
to seek outside assistance to generate options for the reorganization. Therefore two
consultants were hired to analyze the current situation and propose some options.
The consultants handed in their proposals in May 2002 for discussion at a meeting in
Bangkok. This meeting led to the creation of three Task Forces to tackle the contentious
issues surrounding Country Programmes, Regional Thematic Programmes and Corpor-
ate Services. ARD told the three Task Forces that she would like to implement the re-
organization by December 2002.
Keywords: Reorganization, programme growth, conservation, expansion, coexistence,
diversity management
In October 2002, AMK, the Regional Director (RD) of the International Union for Conser-
vation of Nature (IUCN) Asia Region Office was thinking about the challenges that pro-
gramme expansion within the Asia Region had created. She knew that she had to re-
organize the Region to make it more efficient in order to manage these challenges. While
she was debating the issue of reorganization with her senior colleagues, AMK was not
sure which options to consider. So she decided to seek outside assistance to get a diagnosis
of the situation as well as some options for reorganization. In December 2001, she hired
two consultants.
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 5(1), 2008: 2140
SAGE PUBLICATIONS LOS ANGELES/LONDON/NEW DELHI/SINGAPORE
DOI: 10.1177/097282010800500104
This case was written by Visiting Professor Zafar Iqbal Qureshi to serve as a basis for class discussion rather
than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. This material may
not be reproduced in any form without the prior written consent of the Lahore University of Management
Sciences. This research was conducted by LUMS-McGill Social Enterprise Development Centre and was
funded by CIDA.
at INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MGMT on July 28, 2014 ajc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
22 ZAFAR IQBAL QURESHI
In May 2002, the consultants handed in their report to the Asia Regional Director (ARD).
This report was discussed in a meeting at the Asia Region Office in Bangkok. It contained
three options to reorganize the Asia Region, and AMK wanted to assess the pros and cons
of each option by November 2002, with a view to implementing the new organization by
December that year. In order to reach a consensus over the final decision for reorganiza-
tion, she decided to set up three Task Forces to look into the different dimensions of re-
organization that were a bone of contention between the internal stakeholders. The
urgency to implement the reorganization plan was heightened by the fact that AMK had
been invited as a visiting scholar at Yale to teach in the area of development studies. She
was expected to start her teaching assignment from January 2003.
IUCNTHE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION
IUCNthe World Conservation Union, a worldwide organization with its headquarters
in Gland, Switzerland was created in 1948. It brought together some 76 states, 111 govern-
ment agencies, 720 non-governmental organizations (NGOs), 35 affiliates and about 10,000
scientists and experts from 181 countries in a unique worldwide partnership. IUCN had
three major components in its networkthe Membership, the Commission and the Secre-
tariat. Together, these components were referred to as the Union. As a global alliance of
governmental and non-governmental organizations, the Union encouraged the conserva-
tion of nature and the equitable and sustainable use of natural resources.
IUCN had two overarching conservation goals: (a) to face the extinction crisis, and
(b) to restore and maintain ecosystem integrity. To realize these two goals, IUCNs vision
was a just world that values and conserves nature. Its mission clearly identified its
programs, projects and activities: To influence, encourage, and assist societies throughout
the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and ensure that any use of
natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.
THE ASIA REGION: ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
IUCN was divided into various geographic regions of the world. These regions comprised
Asia, Central Africa, Mesoamerica, Europe, Southern Africa, Eastern Africa, South
America, West/Central Asia and North America. The Mediterranean countries were
headed by a Director, the United States of America by an Executive Director and Canada
by a Head.
IUCN-Asia Region consisted of Bangladesh, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Nepal, Pakistan, India,
Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. China, an emerging country within the region was
considered to have immense potential for IUCNs programmes. The Asia Region included
RECRAFTING IUCNASIA REGIONAL ORGANIZATION 23
the worlds two most populated countriesChina and India (see Exhibit 1 for a map of
the region).
In the early 1990s the Asia Region was managed from the headquarters (see Exhibit 2
for a partial organization chart of the Union). The headquarters raised funds, signed con-
tracts and controlled the flow of funds. Within the Region, however, some countries were
headed by independent Country Representatives supported by professional staff to manage
the programmes portfolio. Later, during 199597 when the number of countries in the
Region started growing, an Asia Working Group was established. The primary purpose of
this group was to coordinate the working of various countries within the Region and to
ensure that programmes within the countries maintained a sharp focus.
The decision to set up the Asia Regional Directorate was taken on the recommendations
of the Asia Working Group during 19972000. In addition, it was decided that from then
on the funds for the programmes in the area would be raised regionally. Following this
decision, the Asia Regional Office (ARO) was established during 20002001 and the re-
quired staff was recruited. In addition, new Regional Thematic Programmes (RTPs) were
developed and efforts were made to set up new Country Programmes (CPs).
Structurally, the Asia Region had four components: the Asia Regional Directorate,
Asia Regional Office, Regional Thematic Programmes and Country Programmes (see
Exhibit 3 for organizational principles and IUCN Asia). The Asia Regional Directorate
(ARD) was the management body of the IUCN Secretariat charged with the responsibility
of leading the Secretariat programme in Asia. A matrix management approach, which
implied extensive information sharing, the maintenance of regular and good communica-
tion and the sharing of responsibility within the ARD for achieving programme objectives
was adopted by the management.
Asia Regional Office
The Asia Regional Office, headed by the Regional Director, was the executive arm of the
Asia Regional Directorate. It was responsible for supporting the directorate in managing
organizational work processes and executing executive decisions and following through
on them. It also assisted the Asia Regional Director in the accountability function of the
Region delegated by the Director General (DG) of the Union. The Asia Regional Office
consisted of the following units:
1. Regional Directors Office
2. Programme Coordination, Development and Assessment Unit
3. Constituency Development and Coordination Unit
4. Finance Unit
5. Human Resource Unit.
Regional Thematic Programmes
Nine Regional Programmes were working in the following thematic areas: Biodiversity
Conversion co-located in Sri Lanka; Environmental Assessment co-located in Nepal; Envir-
onmental Economics co-located in Pakistan; Environmental Law co-located in Pakistan;
Forest Conservation co-located in Thailand; Marine and Coastal Resources co-located in
Sri Lanka; Protected Areas co-located in Vietnam; Sustainable Use co-located in
Bangladesh; and Wetlands and Water Resources co-located in Thailand. The Regional
Thematic Programmes performed the following functions:
Assuring policy and technical linkages to global partners and debates
Developing strategic alliances at the regional level
Mobilizing and managing resources
Developing and implementing regional and subregional programmes
Supporting the development of country programmes
Influencing and testing policy
Learning and communicating lessons and experiences through regional networks.
As a policy, ARD wanted to locate Regional Programmes and their staff within the Country
Offices (COs) with a view to spreading expertise more evenly throughout the Asia Region
and for creating programmatic synergies within host Country Programmes.
Country Programmes
At the national level, the Asia Programme was implemented primarily through the Coun-
try Programme supported by the Asia Regional Office and the Regional Thematic Pro-
grammes. The functional mandate of the Country Programme which was headed by a
Country Representative included the following responsibilities:
Programme development, management and implementation, monitoring and
evaluation
Mobilizing and managing resources
Developing strategic alliances at the national level
Influencing and testing policy
Learning and communicating lessons and experiences through networks
Supporting the development of regional thematic programmes
Contributing to IUCNs global and Asia Regional goals, objectives and outputs
Assuring policy and technical linkages to global and regional partners and debates.
Asia Region: Challenges and Opportunities
The Asia Region was inspired in its work by the Unions vision and mission. In this con-
text it had three programme goals: (a) to conserve and rehabilitate ecosystems, habitats
and species, (b) to use and manage natural resources on an equitable and sustainable
basis within and amongst nations, communities and gender groups, and (c) to develop a
dy-namic, sustainable organization that is effectively managed to pursue IUCNs mission
in the Region.
In 2002, Asia was home to 60 per cent of the worlds population, and it roughly repre-
sented one-third of the worlds economic output. It, however, faced major conservation
and environmental management issues such as freshwater depletion and water pollution;
forest loss and degradation; biodiversity loss, with particular emphasis on loss of flagship
species; loss of key ecosystems notably cloud forests, wetlands and mangroves; soil erosion;
and climate change. Also, there were a number of contextual factors that rendered it dif-
ficult to tackle the conservation challenges. These factors included poverty, underde-
velopment, food and economic insecurity, poor governance and accountability, political
decision-making and patronage, and low health and education levels.
Organizational Profiling: Strengths and Weaknesses
AMK continually undertook an organizational assessment of the region to identify its
strengths, weaknesses and future challenges. In a recent meeting at Dhaka, a detailed
assessment of the Region was made. As a result of this assessment the following profile
of the organization emerged:
StrengthA highly committed staff, good reputation and matrix management
WeaknessesFast project growth (almost 30 per cent per annum), staff and systems
overextended and roles of Country and Regional Programmes fuzzy, creeping ineffi-
ciency in the Regional Directorate and too much self-criticism
ChallengesDeveloping a better definition of the roles of Regional components
(Country/Regional/Functional); establishing mechanisms for subregional strategic
planning; transforming planning and reporting base activities into outputs, results
and impact; and finding a way to move from the present to the future by removing
weaknesses and preserving strengths.
Compulsions for Reorganization
The consultants had a number of meetings with different staff members of the Asia
Region. Their meetings, especially with the senior management team in the Regional
Directorate and also with some Country Representatives identified a number of issues
which warranted recrafting of the Regions existing organization structure. Briefly, the
issues that emerged from these meetings were:
The staff in various components complained about the slow and inefficient decision-
making at the Regional Directorate. The situation was considered to be injurious to
the image of IUCN Asia Region because its past and current expansion had resulted
out of an effective decision making structure.
Quite a few people felt that because of a spurt in growth, the organization was losing
its focus and was being driven by donors agenda rather than its own strategic intent.
Hence, there was a dire need to refocus.
Almost everyone confided in the consultants that the Regional Director had a very
large span of supervision which was leading to inefficient decision-making. This
was exhausting the energies of the Regional Director in minor operational matters.
Managers felt that interface with the headquarters in Gland was rather weak and that
it was important to manage the relationship with the team at the headquarters.
Many people complained that the functional units at the Regional Directorate were
not cost centres and that their cost was being passed on to the Country Programmes
even when the countries were not getting any value addition from these units.
The co-location of Regional/Thematic Programmes within the Country Programme
Offices had created quite a few tensions. One of the areas of tension was cost-sharing
for the services offered by the Country Programmes to the Regional/Thematic Pro-
grammes. Another was the use of staff services which overloaded the Country Pro-
grammes people without sharing the costs for the time utilized. Most of all, the
Country Representatives felt that the Heads of Regional/Thematic Programmes
were in direct competition with them for the resources meant for the Country Pro-
grammes. Who should the Regional/Thematic Programme be accountable to? This
was a question that needed an answer.
Many people felt that the matrix management, which the Regional Director claimed
was the foundation for the Asia Regions Operations, was not congruent with the
operative financial model, at least in areas where collaborative activities were
involved.
The staff expressed serious concerns regarding the present degree of integration
across Regional/Thematic Programmes.
Since the Asia Region employed professional staff from different countries, concerns
were expressed with respect to institutional capacity to manage this diversity.
Some Country Representatives complained about the financial model in vogue in
the organization. The matrix management in use at the IUCN Asia Regional Office
warranted that there should be collaboration even in funds and costs at places where
there was a financial crunch. However the concept of cost centres, applied in a
myopic way within the organization was working at cross purposes and not in tandem
with the matrix management philosophy.
OPTIONS FOR RECRAFTING THE ASIA REGION
AMK, the Regional Director in her meeting with the consultants had reiterated the follow-
ing end-goals as the underpinnings for any future reorganization of the Asia Region:
To create more satisfying work conditions
To increase the flexibility of the organization
To be cost conscious and cost effective
To encourage the sharing of pooled resources, especially technical expertise
To promote innovation, creativity and continual learning
To turn IUCN-Asia into a high energy, high-performance organization.
AMK further stated that a clear understanding of our present programme coverage and
Regional Thematic Programmes would also help sharpen our focus on how to recraft the
Asia Regional Programme organization and structure. According to the present classification
Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal were already considered as matured programmes whereas
Bangladesh, Vietnam and Lao PDR were at a stage of being developed into this category.
The Regional Director viewed Cambodia, China, India and Thailand as countries with
potential and prospects for moving into this category in the not too distant future.
The Regional Thematic Programmes currently co-located in different country offices
and considered as an eyesore by the Country Representatives could be briefly classified
as follows:
(a) Biodiversity, Forests, Marines, Water and Wetlands were considered matured
programmes; and
(b) Environmental Assessment, Environmental Economics, Environmental Law, Pro-
tected Areas and Sustainable Use of Resources at a stage of being developed into
matured programmes.
AMK was very candid in suggesting that any future reorganization of the Region must
not disturb, in any major way, the following parameters of the current working of the Re-
gion since these were considered as the key success factors of the Regional Programme:
Diversity management, which encouraged the deployment of employees from dif-
ferent countries to bring the best professional talent into the Region
Matrix management that encouraged dual reporting relationships as well as close
collaboration across Country Programs and Regional Thematic Programmes by shar-
ing the existing resource base
Decentralized decision-making and empowerment of Country and Regional Thematic
Programmes
Co-location of Regional Thematic Programmes (described above) within Country Pro-
gramme Offices to provide in-depth expertise to the country portfolio of programmes
Centralized corporate services such as human resource management, financial man-
agement, constituency development and programme coordination.
The Advisor on Special Assignment had also identified a list indicating the organization
development principles that could be used as guiding principles in planning for the re-
organization of the Region (Exhibit 4).
PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS AT REORGANIZATION
The Asia Region had gone through three iterations to come to a broad agreement over
the reorganization of the Region. The first round of discussions on reorganization took
place in Dhaka in February 2002. The Dhaka Group proposed four options to reorganize
the Region (see Exhibits 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d).
The Second Round of discussions on reorganization took place in Bangkok in May 2002
in which the options generated by the consultants constituted the basis of deliberations
(see Exhibits 6, 7 and 8).
The options generated in the May 2002 meeting in Bangkok had proposed the establish-
ment of a Strategic Planning Unit (SPU) which would also amalgamate the positions of
Special Advisor on Organization Development (OD) and Advisor on Special Assignments
and the function of Programme Coordination. It was envisaged that this unit would be
entrusted with the following core responsibilities:
To be the hub for all tasks related to the reorganization of the Region
To periodically assess the capabilities of the Region and to ensure that any deficien-
cies in the skills needed in the future were removed
To formulate medium and long term strategic plans for the Region
To monitor the performance of Country Programmes and Regional Thematic Pro-
grammes and provide corporate guidance for performance improvement
To assist the Regional Director in the implementation of the Regional Management
Teams decisions.
FUTURE ROLE OF THE REGIONAL THEMATIC PROGRAMME HEADS
While debating the future role of the Regional Thematic Programme Heads (RTPH), the
following points were underscored:
To maintain global linkages in respective theme areas and to transfer field knowledge
across the world
To provide technical, quality assurance and capacity building assistance to Country
Programmes
To maintain a relationship with the relevant commission, members within the Region
as well as in the Union
To help monitor project implementation in different countries within the Asia Region
To maintain close liaison with the country as well as subregional offices
To direct and lead Regional Programme Initiatives
To represent the Region in those countries where the Asia Region had no presence
To negotiate with donors who have interests in Regional Programmes
To mobilize funds for Regional Programmes
To maintain technical excellence in the Thematic Programme.
During discussions on the functional responsibilities of the RTPH the following points
were raised about their role:
To facilitate cross-country linkages within Asia in a Thematic Programme area
To negotiate with the donors through relevant Country Heads
To learn and disseminate knowledge in the Thematic Programme area
To manage matrix management relationships.
ASSESSING THE OPTIONS
AMK had set up three Task Forces to deal with issues relating to Country Programmes,
Regional Thematic Programmes and the Corporate Services. She felt that the inputs of
these Task Forces would facilitate in making a final choice about the reorganization of
the Asia Region. She was well aware of the contention between the Regional Programme
Heads (RPHs) and the Country Representatives over the issue of co-location of the Regional
Programmes in Country Offices and the Country Representative concerns over cost
sharing due to co-location of the Regional Programmes. She was also aware that the
Country Representatives were weary of the Regional Programme Heads vying for donor
funding within their territorial jurisdiction.
AMK also knew that any plan for the reorganization of the Asia Region had to be con-
gruent with the Unions philosophy of decentralization and regionalization of global opera-
tions. Under this philosophy, the World Union headquarters wanted to transfer financial
and administrative powers to Regional and Country Offices.
On her part, AMK was very conscious of the fact that the new structure must: (a) help
in balancing growth objectives with IUCNs mission and goals; (b) assist in selecting the
right opportunities for growth; (c) lead to mobilizing human resources to optimize outputs
and impact; and (d) groom leadership talent while making the Asia Region a sustainable
entity.
While she stressed upon the three Task Force coordinators to bear the above parameters
in mind in their recommendations, she also reminded them that she would like to imple-
ment the new organization in the Region by December 2002 at the latest. Having given
the timelines to the three Task Forces, AMK wondered whether or not she would be able
to develop a consensus amongst her senior professional team over the new structural
configuration for the Asia Region. In case she ran into a deadlock over the reorganization,
what course should she adopt to recraft the new organization? Would the creation of a
transition team help to synthesize the recommendations of the Task Forces?
On the other hand, she was also worried that in case of a broad agreement amongst
her senior professional team over the new organization for the Region, what implementa-
tion strategy should she follow. Should she decree the implementation of the new structure
from the top or should she adopt a different process for its implementation? Also, should
she implement the new organization all at once or follow a staggered approach? In case
she implemented it in phases, then over how many phases and over what period of time
would this happen? These were other related questions that she wanted answers to.
She wanted to complete a rigorous assessment of the options and at least have a final deci-
sion, even if the implementation plans were to be kept on hold.
Exhibit 1
Map of the IUCN Asia Organization
Asia
RUSSIA
MONGOLIA
KYRGYZSTAN
TAJIKISTAN
CHINA
6
7
8
9
VIETNAM
BHUTAN
NEPAL
PAKISTAN
AFGHANISTAN
IRAN
1
2
3
4
5
OMAN
1. KUWAIT
2. BAHRAIN
3. QATAR
4. UNITED ARAB
EMIRATES
5. TURKMENISTAN
6. HONG KONG
7. MACAU
8. PARACEL
ISLANDS
8. SPRATLY
ISLANDS
YEMEN
SAUDI
ARABIA
JORDAN
IRAQ
CYPRUS
LEBANON
ISRAEL
SYRIA
TURKEY
KAZAKHSTAN
UZBEKISTAN
INDIA
BANGLADESH
MYANMAR
THAILAND
SRI LANKA
SINGAPORE
BRUNEI
MALAYSIA
INDONESIA
CAMBODIA
PHILIPPINES
LAOS
SOUTH
KOREA
TAIWAN
Pacific
Ocean
JAPAN
Indian
Ocean
NORTH
KOREA
N
Source: IUCN Asia Region documents
E
x
h
i
b
i
t

2
P
a
r
t
i
a
l

O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

C
h
a
r
t

o
f

t
h
e

U
n
i
o
n
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
.
E
x
h
i
b
i
t

3
P
a
r
t
i
a
l

O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

C
h
a
r
t

o
f

t
h
e

A
s
i
a

R
e
g
i
o
n
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
C
o
m
p
a
n
y

D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
.
N
o
t
e
:
A
R
O
:

A
s
i
a

R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l

O
f
f
i
c
e
;

S
A
:

S
o
u
t
h

A
s
i
a
.
Exhibit 4
Organizational Principles and IUCN Asia
IUCN Asia aspires to be a premium institution providing intellectual space and opportunities for professional
development and growth. By the very nature of its work, it promotes a multidisciplinary approach, individual
and collective learning and a work ethic that puts a lot of value on continuous striving towards excellence.
Organizational Development and IUCN Asia
IUCN Asia sees itself as an entity in perpetual evolution. It is an institution shaped through and from the
people working for a set of shared goals and objectives and the systems and process that are used to run it
in a coherent fashion. It works within a region which is perhaps the most diverse in social, cultural, economic
and ecological terms and is affected by people from across the world thereby, aiming to demonstrate that
diversity is a value to be nurtured and brought together for a common purpose.
We see ourselves in constant change, learning how to do it better, as we move forwards, and constantly
adapting ourselves to the needs of our constituency. No less is our effort to influence change, in ourselves
and the in the world around us. And, this can be done if we adopt a culture of querying, in quest of some-
thing better all the time. Organizations function best if they evolve, rather than just grow. The process of
evolution provides the wherewithal to revitalize and move to another platform of performance, shedding
tried, but older ways of working and moving on to untested waters.
IUCN Asia defines organizational development as a process of change which seeks to address key questions:
What have we set out to achieve?
What roles and responsibilities do we have towards our constituency?
How are we performing?
Are we organized, staffed and resourced to play the expected roles?
What values, norms, ethics do we promote, and do these conform to the mission we aspire to?
What are we doing today that can be improved for better effectiveness, efficiency and quality?
Are our organizational systems, processes and procedures facilitating our efforts to achieve organiza-
tional objectives?
How can we avoid the pitfalls of organizational decadence, stagnation and apathy?
The Organizational Development Policy is underpinned on ten guiding principles:
IUCN Asia shall be driven by aspirations that are higher than individual or collective gains in monetary
wealth, power or control over others
Staff in IUCN Asia are citizens of the world, and hence are beyond any racial, ethnic, religious, rank
or gender biases
IUCN Asia believes that all living species on earth have values that have spiritual, aesthetic, economic
and cultural aspects and that these values have to be considered together in order to truly conserve
and protect them against extinction
Resources and their benefits have to be fairly, equitably and sustainably shared amongst human beings
throughout the world, and no one group has more rights than the others, except as decided through
consensus and principles of justice
The main component of organizations are people, and processes and procedures exist to facilitate
the work carried out by people and not for, and in themselves
IUCN Asia does not exist for itself, but for the objectives it stands for, and for meeting the needs and
expectations of its constituency
IUCN Asia values tolerance, humility and sharing of knowledge and learning. It therefore promotes
an open, generous and giving culture in which collaboration and helping each other, with or without
individual benefit is a strength
Personal reward systems are not necessarily based on financial gains, and the value of an individuals
work is the work in itself
Personal integrity, honesty and courage are absolute personal characteristics required
Compassion and a sense of humour are encouraged and fostered.
Source: Company documents.
Exhibit 5 (a)
Dhaka Group Reorganization 1
Note: RD: Regional Director; Sec: Secretary; HRM: Human Resource Management; CDC: Constituency
Development Coordinator; WA: West Asia; CP: Country Programme; NEA: Near East Asia; SEA:
Southeast Asia; SA: South Asia; RTP: Regional Thematic Programme.
Exhibit 5 (b)
Operating Mechanism
Note:

Temporary Activity Driven; APDG: Asia Programme Development Group; ARD: Asia Regional
Director.
Exhibit 5 (c)
Dhaka Group Reorganization 2
E
x
h
i
b
i
t

5

(
d
)
D
h
a
k
a

G
r
o
u
p

R
e
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

3
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
C
o
m
p
a
n
y

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
.
N
o
t
e
:
R
D
:

R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l

D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r
.
T
h
e
m
a
t
i
c

c
l
u
s
t
e
r
s

a
r
e

l
o
c
a
t
e
d

i
n

s
u
b
-
r
e
g
i
o
n

(
e
n
g
e
n
d
e
r
s

h
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

l
i
n
k
a
g
e
s

a
n
d

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
)
.
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s

n
e
w

l
e
v
e
l

o
f

c
l
u
s
t
e
r

m
a
n
a
g
e
r
;

t
h
e
s
e

a
r
e

a
k
i
n

t
o

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
e

c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
s
.
Exhibit 6
Reorganization Option (2)
Note: DG: Director General; RD: Regional Director; RD Sctt: Regional Directors Secretariat; FC: Finance
Committee; RDC: Regional Directors Committee; HRM: Human Resource Management; CDC:
Constituency Development Coordinator; SPU: Strategic Planning Unit; FIN: Finance; ARD: Asia
Regional Director; CRC: Country Review Committee; CP: Country Program; RTG: Regional Thematic
Group; C: Country.
Exhibit 7
Note: DG: Director General; RD: Regional Director; RD Sctt: Regional Directors Secretariat; FC: Finance
Committee; RDC: Regional Directors Committee; HRM: Human Resource Management; CDC:
Constituency Development Coordinator; SPU: Strategic Planning Unit; FIN: Finance; CP: Country
Program; RTG: Regional Thematic Group; CSC: Corporate Services Committee; HR: Human
Resources; C: Country.
Note: ARD: Asia Regional Director; HR: Human Resources; CDC: Constituency Development Coordinator;
COs: Country Offices; OD: Organization Development; TPs: Thematic Programmes.
Exhibit 8
Note: DG: Director General; RD: Regional Director; CSC: Corporate Services Committee; FC: Finance
Committee; RDC: Regional Directors Committee; RD Sctt: Regional Directors Secretariat; HRM:
Human Resource Management; CDC: Constituency Development Coordinator; SPU: Strategic
Planning Unit; FIN: Finance; ARD: Asia Regional Director; MCR: Matured Countries Region; DRD:
Deputy Regional Director; CP: Country Program; ECP: Emerging Country Program; RTG: Regional
Thematic Group; CRC: Country Review Committee; DC: Deputy Coordinator.

Recrafting Iucn - Asia Regional Organization

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Recrafting Iucn - Asia Regional Organization

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

http://ajc.sagepub.

http://ajc.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

- Jul 29, 2008 Version of Record >>

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen