Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Facilitator’s Report
Ministry of Planning and Investment European Commission
2
Capacity Development in the Public Sector in Vietnam
Five days for Capacity Development in the Public Sector in Vietnam – Highlights
The Vietnamese government through the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) has
committed to strengthen the attention to capacity development in the public sector. This is
part of the commitment to the Paris‐ and Accra‐agendas for enhanced aid effectiveness, but
also a nationally driven quest for development effectiveness, so that Vietnam’s rapid
economic growth is accompanied by improved public services and regulatory effectiveness.
However, CD is an evasive concept, and therefore the MPI – with support from the European
Commission (EC) – arranged for a 5‐day learning event aiming at defining a framework for CD
in the public sector, and a road map for integrating CD in sector plans and policies, including in
the new Social and Economic Development Plan (SEDP) 2011‐2015.
During the event (two half‐day meetings in Hanoi and an intensive small group technical
workshop in Tam Dao for three days), a number of lessons were drawn and pointers identified
for future CD activities:
• Capacity development can usefully be understood as processes that enhance capacity
to efficiently deliver better services/products, and to have better relations to others.
The processes can focus on individual, organizational or systemic level – and to deliver
on better services, efforts would usually be required at all levels.
• Capacity development is an integral part of good development planning and
management – not a separate issue. The challenge is to integrate is not only in
planning, but also in the daily behaviour of managers in particular, and of staff in
general.
• CD is a change process and as all change processes it requires that the drivers of
change are stronger than the barriers to change, that there is an inspiring vision and
that there is credible management.
The three day technical workshop found that it is important to recognize that a lot of efforts to
develop the public sector, particularly at the systemic level, are carried out by other actors and
in other programmes. It was therefore recommended to consider, departing from MPI’s
particular vantage point, to focus on:
• A modest, incremental approach, supplementing ongoing initiatives
• Get CD into sector/province/unit plans
• Guide managers at all levels to implement small bottom‐up improvements using a
positive, inclusive and participatory approach.
• If national level leadership is strong enough, then stimulate the local processes in a
wider effort at sector, province or district level that could eventually, if successful, be
brought to the national level.
3
1. Introduction
In early 2010, the European Union delegation in Vietnam agreed with the government to request support to
organize a joint learning event on capacity development in the public sector. The event is supported by the EC
under the auspices of the Learning Network on Capacity Development (LenCD, see www.lencd.org) and the
donor network for competency development, Train4Dev (see www.train4dev.net). It is also part of the EC’s
effort to reform how technical assistance is used (see www.capacity4dev.eu).
The event took place in Hanoi and Tam Dao from 10‐14th May 2010. This report was prepared by the facilitator
of the event, Mr. Nils Boesen. The report briefly explains the background for the workshop (section 2), the
workshop process (section 3), the results (section 4) and the key lessons learned as perceived by the facilitator
(section 5).. A fuller set of materials, including the programme and the initial presentation offered by the
facilitator is available at www.lencd.org and www.train4dev.net, as well as on the EC’s www.capacity4dev.eu
website.
2. Background and Workshop Rationale
According to the Aid Effectiveness Forum (AEF) Work plan for 2010, MPI needs to develop a Capacity
Development Strategy for Vietnam in order to strengthen government ownership and leadership. The aim of
the action plan is to develop a strategy for capacity building in the public sector, building on ODA management
experience to strengthen country systems. Ultimately this CD strategy will be fed into the new Socio‐Economic
Development Plan 2011‐2015 and the corresponding sectoral strategies.
Moreover, recent reports such as the Independent Monitoring Report in 2007 and the OECD‐DAC 2008 Survey,
also recommended to Vietnam to develop a national capacity development strategy and to give more
attention to strengthening capacity at sub‐national level.
A number of initiatives, which will ultimately contribute to the development of a CD Strategy for Vietnam, has
already been undertaken since 2009. These include: (i) discussions between Government and donors in the
framework of the Partner Group on Aid Effectiveness thematic group on CD; (ii) the Workshop on Joint Mutual
Accountability Study between Vietnam, Lao DPR and Cambodia held in Vientiane from 10‐11 November 2009;
and (iii) the CD seminar in Hanoi, held on 18 December 2009.
Nevertheless, it was felt that there is still a lack of a common understanding on what CD is and how the
Government should move forward in developing its CD strategy. The many different interpretations on what
the CD strategy should contain, have resulted in (i) a stagnation of the development of the CD strategy; (ii)
different donors and line ministries embarking on their own innovative activities in capacity development (as
many as 15 projects at provincial level throughout the country), including needs assessment, the development
of competency standard, CD services, etc. while mostly focusing on one sector and on a selected number of
provinces.
In the broader Vietnamese context, it is important to note that there have been concerted efforts by the
government and the party to strengthen the public sector. Since 2001, a Public Administration Reform (PAR)
has been pursued; there are ongoing efforts to simplify and streamline regulations and laws (Agenda 30), as
well as efforts to address the corruption that affects public sector efficiency and effectiveness. These various
processes have lead to comprehensive decentralisation in the public sector, steps towards rationalization of
organisations and procedures, introduction of “one‐stop‐shops” easing access to services for citizens and
business, measures to increase transparency as well as introduction of more appropriate incentives for
performance in the public sector.
4
Recognising the important steps forward already taken, it seems broadly accepted that there is more work to
do in these areas of systemic and structural reforms that can, in the longer run, address some of the binding
constraints on performance in the public sector.
Against this backdrop it was from the onset clear that any proposals for a strengthened approach to CD
emanating from the MPI and the aid effectiveness agenda would have to carefully define its relation to these
other ongoing efforts driven by other government agencies and actors.
3. The Capacity Development Workshop – expected outcomes and process
a. Expected Workshop Outcomes
The Seminar was divided in 2 parts: a technical working session with line ministries and a final official meeting
during the last day.
The expected outcomes of the technical working sessions were:
1. a common, in‐depth understanding about CD;
2. a draft, general framework for the development of a national CD strategy which will be the
overarching strategy for the sectoral CD strategies;
3. a roadmap for development of a national /sectoral CD strategy;
4. a common understanding on the role of donors and sector working groups (SPGs; ISGs) in supporting
MPI and line ministries to develop and implement their CD strategy;
The final official meeting would have the following expected outcomes:
1. a common understanding about CD;
2. roadmap for development of national /sectoral CD strategies;
3. the role of donors and sector working groups (SPGs; ISGs) in supporting GoV agencies to develop and
implement their CD strategy;
4. next steps in CD efforts.
b. The preparation process
The dialogue that shaped the event started some 2 months ahead and included e‐mail exchanges and a
telephone‐conference. The Comprehensive Capacity Building Project (CBBP), which supports the MPI in the
area of enhancing aid effectiveness, was assuming the organizational tasks and facilitated the dialogue
between the MPI, the EU delegation and the external consultant. TOR for the workshop were prepared and
endorsed by senior level leadership of the MPI.
There was basically agreement on both the main design and the desired participants in the different sessions
of the learning event. This included:
‐ A three‐step event: a 2‐hour kick‐off meeting, providing direction to a three‐day technical workshop
that would report back to a wider official meeting for both government officials and development
partners.
‐ Participation in the technical workshop by a small group (10‐15) of mid‐level officials from MPI,
relevant cross‐cutting ministries and agencies (eg. Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA) and the National
Academy for Public Administration (NAPA), line‐ministries and provinces.
‐ Development partners would participate in the initial and final official meeting, but only with very
limited presence in the technical workshop.
The MPI furnished the consultant with a few document about previous CD processes and events. However,
this did not include documents regarding the Public Administration Reform and other wider efforts to develop
5
the public administration. With hindsight, this seemed to reflect the expectation that CD would be, to a large
degree, something different from the outcomes of successful public sector reform, more (or maybe
exclusively) linked to development assistance than to the mainstream national efforts conducted by other
ministries and agencies than MPI.
Excellent logistics and venue: The logistics worked very well in terms of venues, transport, interpretation, and
assistance to the consultant and the participants. The CCBP should be commended for their professional and
efficient approach to these essential tasks. Necessary last minute photocopying of presentations and
translation of agendas also worked impeccably. The three day workshop took place in Tam Dao, some two
hour drive from Hanoi.
c. The Meeting and the Workshop
First meeting: setting the stage. The first meeting was attended by 7 officials from government organisations,
and 8 development partner representatives. The unexpected low turnout from government agencies already
forewarned that despite very timely invitations made to other agencies, several of these found it difficult to
accord the meeting (and the workshop) priority. The first meeting aimed at getting to a shared basic concept
about CD and tapping the insights and experiences of the participants as an input to the subsequent days’
work, but became in practice more a presentation of a CD framework by the consultant than a strong input to
the subsequent workshop. However, it was clear that the exercise also was a “scouting exercise” for the MPI
who wanted more clarity about the sometimes quite fuzzy concept of CD and about how to make it
operational.
The technical workshop: training as much as action planning. Despite all good efforts, the turn‐out for the
three day workshop was significantly reduced compared to expectations: 3 central level officials (from health,
education and NAPA, respectively), and 2 representatives from provincial Departments of Planning and
Investment. The latter, however, did not participate full time and had little apparent background for discussion
of the subjects at hand. Fortunately, AusAid had decided to let two officers, both Vietnamese, participate in
the workshop, and they contributed strongly and positively to the process, knowing their country and the
context of public sector development as well as their colleagues from the public sector.
The limited number of participants and the fact that MPI and MOHA had not been able to send participants
implied that the group felt some vary understandable limitations in entering into too many forward looking
discussions that would imply, potentially, actions and commitments from other than their own agencies. It
meant that the intention that participants – rather than the facilitator – would present the findings and
recommendations of the group in the official meeting on Friday 18th was abandoned, and the presentation
was made by the facilitator.
The limited size and narrow composition of the group was seen as an illustration of the practical difficulties of
embarking on debate about CD across ministries and agencies, illustrating that ministries are strongly
attending their own agendas with narrow scope for attending to the agendas of others, unless the push for
such participation comes from a very high level. The group took this into their discussions about how
comprehensive an approach to CD should be, in terms of cross‐institutional coverage and ambition.
As the workshop involved, the group had very lively and engaged debates, which on the first day were
prompted by somewhat comprehensive presentations by the facilitator, followed by group discussions among
the participants. The group sessions flew freely in Vietnamese, after which summary presentations were given
with translation to English for the sake of the facilitator.
6
Finally, given the composition of the group and its perception of not having a mandate beyond participating, it
should be stressed that the conclusions and the presentation made on the last day were eventually the
facilitator’s, and not the groups – though they of course sought to reflect the debates held.
Final meeting, Friday 14th May: See below. The meeting counted on the participation of 9 government officials
and 15 from development partners
Results of the learning event
Conceptual framework, road map: The presentation Foundation and strategic choice for integrating
of the final day (see Annex 1) outlined suggestions and strengthening CD in sectors, provinces and
for: units
‐ A foundation for CD (core concept)
‐ A summary of drivers of and constraints to Foundation:
CD Capacity development is processes that enhance
‐ A strategic choice capacity to efficiently deliver better
‐ A vision for CD services/products, and to have better relations to
‐ Guiding principles and approach others.
‐ A sketchy road map, illustrating that it Capacity development is an integral part of good
would be feasible to translate the development planning and management – not a
suggested approach into an operational separate issue
action plan.
Strategic choice:
The approach emphasized an incremental, modest ‐ Modest, appreciative approach
approach trying to unleash capacity in a bottom‐up ‐ Complementing existing efforts
approach that can work within the given “systems ‐ Focus on sectors, provinces, districts
parameters”. The basic argument for this ‐ Making CD happen in existing system
recommendation is the following: ‐ Working both from within and from
without
• Despite significant progress, there are still
‐ Bottom‐up approach, energized and
quite significant macro‐level or systemic
supported from the top
constraints on performance in the public
‐ Expandable model if ownership expands
sector. These are being addressed by the
government and the party at other levels.
• Therefore, while a strengthened approach to
CD can be launched from the MPI’s particular platform – linked to ODA, socio‐economic planning and
public investments – such an approach should take stock of, but not duplicate or seek a coordination‐
intensive relation to these other initiatives, given the limited capacity of cross‐institutional
coordination.
• This said, the perception was that there is indeed room to exploit small scale, incremental
opportunities for improving capacity within the limitations of the current system and the constraints
on change. Such efforts could conveniently build on an appreciative approach, which stimulate,
support and reward, in an appropriate manner, public sector units that demonstrate that change is
possible.
• The approach should be “scale‐able” to the energy that sectors, provinces and units are able to put
behind it. As a minimum, guidance can be given on how to integrate CD in sector, provincial and unit
planning, and guidance can be produced helping managers – whose leadership and active
engagement is crucial – to enhance the quality of the products and services they are responsible for. If
leadership and commitment of resources is sufficient, then a sector, a province or a district can
engage in a more active and ambitious approach, including mutual learning between vanguard units
7
and champions, competitions, fairs, exchanges etc. Such initiatives can draw on experiences from
other relevant countries (e.g. Singapore, Korea, Malaysia).
• The official meeting that concluded the learning event had participation of 9 from government
agencies, and 15 from development partners, including senior level participation from MPI. The
reactions to the presentation made by the facilitator largely applauded the findings and
recommendations, and added useful observations about the excellent options to link CD to the
upcoming SEDP which, it was said, include a focus on both institutions and human resource
development. There was some discussion whether a strengthened CD effort, to avoid overlapping
with initiatives for elsewhere in the government and party, should mostly focus on individual
competencies. The facilitator underlined that international experience with individual focused
competency development very often has not delivered on strengthened organisational capacity or on
improved services, and suggested that the balance between a focus on individual and organisational
capacity should be found through a consistent focus on improving performance and delivery of
services.
On the macro‐level, Vietnam obviously also needs to look at its overall manpower and skills needs for the
public as well as private sector, and on the quality of the education system at all levels as well as on the system
of on‐the‐job training, career development, incentives in the civil service etc. However, initiatives in these
fields are or will be addressed in other processes – meanwhile, in the opinion of the facilitator, there is room
to strengthen attention to practical capacity development in those places where managers and leaders are
interested and motivated to take steps forward.
1. Lessons Learnt
LenCD learning events need sharp focus: The learning process in Vietnam helped stakeholders come to some
level of clarity about what CD is and is not. Particularly those who participated in the three day event had a
very good opportunity to go in‐depth. However, the broad agenda for the event – discussing CD for the entire
public sector as well as in relation to the aid effectiveness agenda – made it difficult to make as much progress
towards operational conclusions as desired.
Participation and agenda is closely linked: The limited participation of other ministries and agencies may well
reflect that the agenda was seen as unwieldy or as a particular agenda of the MPI in relation to international
cooperation. Future events should learn from this experience and most likely focus on a specific sector or
territory – not on the national level. Discussions at national level would have required another format, most
likely an internal process between relevant Vietnamese authorities preparing the ground for discussions with
external inputs and participation.
Face‐to‐face preparation process: Despite quite an investment from the MPI, the EU delegation and the
consultant in preparatory discussion, it is difficult to get through all the issues at the necessary depth at a
distance. Though somewhat costly, a preparatory visit of the facilitator should be considered. Events like this
one will always risk becoming “fly‐in‐fly‐out” events that leave little trace, despite the careful attention paid by
all parties to ensure the opposite. A somewhat more comprehensive investment might ensure a better
levelling of expectations, and preparation of the event, the participants and the consultant.
Basic framework for CD is well appreciated: The basic “building blocks” used in the presentations and in the
three day workshop work well, and are well accepted by participants who can generally mirror their own
experiences regarding change and CD in the framework. In particular, it is useful that the approach departs
from “a theory of change” that focus on CD as a result of energy, drive and motivation as much as a result of
often formal “needs assessments” and formal planning frameworks.
8
Annex 1: Presentation of results, Friday, May 14th
9
Ministry of Planning and Investment – European Commission
Learning Network on Capacity Development – Train4Dev
THE PROPOSAL
1 2
7 8
DRIVERS TO BUILD ON CHALLENGES
´ Desire to take CD into 5-year SEDP
´ System not catching up with development
´ Project 30, 165 (PAR), Anti-Corruption
measures ´ Week coordination across organizations
STRATEGIC CHOICE
11
VISION PRINCIPLES
´ Capacity development is an integrated part ´ Driven by demand and results
of sector plans, provincial/district plans and ´ Harmonizing interests of all stakeholders
plans of individual public sector units ´ Transparent and publicly open initiative
´ Building on ownership of organizations and
individuals
´ Public sector units at all levels have tools, ´ Working with the flow and energy, not against it
guidelines and incentives to improve their ´ Aiming at visible, feasible small victories
13 14
15 16
ROADMAP REFINE AND SELL APPROACH – FIRST STEPS
1. Refine and sell the approach –upwards, and to ´ Develop basic idea in draft – why, how, who
key institutions (MOHA, MoF, NAPA). Ensure ´ Conduct informal talks with other cross-
buy in through participation in formulation. cutting and sector agencies to get buy-in
2. Specify organizational set-up
set up and leadership
´ Test
T t interest
i t t and
d commitment
it t carefully
f ll
3. Shape simple and attractive guidance, tools, e-
´ Develop a full description together with other
platform – and a “help desk” function
champions, including budget
4. Pilot in district or province, refine tools
´ Seek support from DPs if required
5. Launch at appropriate time
17 18
19