Results Based Management

Results Based Management (RBM) Results-based management is a way of managing whereby an organization ensures that all of its processes, products and services contribute to the achievement of desired results. It depends on clearly defined accountability for results, and requires systematic monitoring, self-assessment and reporting on progress. When managing for results, RBM considers the inputs, outputs and outcomes of a particular project. Inputs refer to all factors (experts, equipment, funds etc) that we put in a project. Outputs are the specific products and services that emerge through processing the inputs, relating to the completion of activities and are the results over which managers have a high degree of influence. Outcomes are the intended changes in developmental conditions. Outputs combined with the achievement of impact result in outcomes. Outputs do not guarantee the achievement of related outcomes, as the contribution of a wider group of partners is necessary. UNDP focuses on only those outputs that clearly have a significant role to play in contributing towards major outcomes. Outcomes are highly dependant on country conditions, the importance of UNDP assistance, UNDP s track record and contributions of partners. Therefore, the outcomes of a particular project are dependant on a variety of factors whereas outputs are dependant only on the inputs and the transformation process. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E): M&E are the key tools for the implementation of RBS. They emphasize on the monitoring and evaluation of the projects with the help of Results Oriented Annual Reports (ROAR) to ensure: y y y y Continuous improvement of strategies Monitoring of results instead of inputs and implementation process Monitoring of results as they emerge instead of as an ex-post activity Conduction of M&E as joint exercises with development partners

Use of Indicators: There are a variety of indicators with the help of whom we can measure the performance of our projects. For outcomes which UNDP contributes to in partnership with others, not all monitoring assignments fall upon UNDP. It is important that all the partners agree on key indicators to monitor, and who has the responsibility for monitoring them. These indicators include indices like Human Development Index. UNDP makes use of three types of indicators: 1. Corporate outcome indicators set centrally and providing a standardized basis for monitoring changes UNDP wants to be associate with globally 2. Outcome indicators, identified by the country office measuring progress against specified outcomes 3. Situational indicators, which provide a broad picture of whether the developmental changes that matter to UNDP are actually occurring Effective identification of indicators is very important because it assists in tracking the progress and learning lessons from the project and the process of identifying indicators can help managers in

clarifying the outcomes they seek. But too much emphasis on the numerical values of the indicators might lead the team to focus their efforts on the attainment of good figures and divert them from the actual goals of the project. Accountability: The outcomes and outputs relevant to the operating units should reflect the key results against which managers wish to be assessed. However, outcomes are not the result of any specific operating unit; therefore, making an operating unit accountable for the outcomes would not be fair. The attainment of outcomes is subject to shared accountability among operating units. Managers can be held accountable for ascertaining that outcomes are monitored, but their full accountability can only be applied to outputs. Performance indicators for Special Development Situations: 1. Number of internally displaced persons (% of population) 2. Food availability per capita (daily per capita supply of calories, proteins or fat 3. % of population dependant on humanitarian relief