ManageMent OrganizatiOnal SuStainability tOOl Preface The Management and Organizational...

ManageMent and

OrganizatiOnal

SuStainability

tOOl

Other PublicatiOnS by ManageMent ScienceS fOr health

Cost Revenue Analysis Plus (CORE Plus), a Tool for Cost and Revenue Analysis: User’s Guide

The Family Planning Manager’s Handbook: Basic Skills and Tools for Managing Family Planning Programs ed. James A Wolff, Linda J. Suttenfield, and Susanna C. Binzen

Health Systems in Action: An eHandbook for Leaders and Managers

Human Resource Management Rapid Assessment Tool for HIV/AIDS Environments: A Guide for Strengthening HRM Systems

Lessons from MSH: Strategic Planning: Reflections on Process and Process Sylvia Vriesendorp

Managers Who Lead: A Handbook for Improving Health Services

Managing Drug Supply: The Selection, Procurement, Distribution, and Use of Pharmaceuticals, with the World Health Organization, 2nd edition

Management Strategies for Improving Family Planning Services: The Family Planning Manager Compendium (Vols. I–IV) ed. Janice Miller and James A. Wolff

Management Strategies for Improving Health and Family Planning Services: A Compendium of The Manager Series, Vols. V–IX ed. Janice Miller, Claire Bahamon, Laura Lorenz, and Kim Atkinson

The eManager. “Good Governance in Civil Society Organizations”

The eManager. “Strengthening Human Resource Management to Improve Health Outcomes”

The Manager. “Assessing Your Organization’s Capacity to Manage Finances,” and supplement, Financial Management Assessment Tool (FIMAT)

ManageMent and

OrganizatiOnal

SuStainability

tOOl

a guide fOr uSerS and facilitatOrS

3rd edition

Management Sciences for Health Tel.: 617.250-9500784 Memorial Drive Website: www.msh.orgCambridge, MA 02139 USA© 1999, 2004 by Management Sciences for HealthAll rights reserved. Published 2010

Trainers and facilitators may photocopy the MOST instrument, forms, modules, workshop agenda, and instructions for participants without prior permission, for noncommercial use only. Any transla-tions or adaptations of this User’s Guide or of the MOST instrument or process require prior written permission from the publisher.

The trademarks or service marks used in this guide, including Microsoft, Word, and PowerPoint, are the exclusive property of Microsoft Corporation. MOST is not a product of, nor is it endorsed by, Microsoft Corporation.

10 09 08 07 06 05 04 1 2 3 4 5

ISBN 0-913723-92-4

Funding for this publication was provided by the Office of Population and Reproductive Health, Bu-reau for Global Health, US Agency for International Development, under the Management and Lead-ership Program, award number HRN-A-00-00-00014-00. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID.

v

cOntentS

acknOwledgMentS vii

Preface viii

How to Use This Guide viii

intrOductiOn tO MOSt 1

What is MOST? 1

The MOST Difference 2

How Organizations Can Benefit from MOST 3

Orientation to the Assessment Instrument 4

The MOST Process 5

MOSt and the change PrOceSS 7

Principles of Change 7

Change Leader and Change Team 8

Leading and Managing for Organizational Change 9

rOleS Of StakehOlderS 12

Role of the Organization’s Leaders 12

Role of the Participants 13

Role of the Facilitators 14

uSing the MOSt aSSeSSMent inStruMent 19

Stages of Management Development 19

Providing Evidence 19

Sample Completed MOST Assessment Instrument 21

facilitatOrS’ Plan 28

Phase 1: Engagement of the Organization’s Leaders 29

Phase 2: Preparation for the Workshop 31

Phase 3: Workshop Plan 34

Opening Session 37

Module 1: Where Are We Now? 41

vi

Module 2: Where Are We Headed? 43

Module 3: How Will We Reach Our Objectives? 45

Phase 4: Follow-Up Activities 50

wOrkShOP MaterialS 51

Making the MOST of Management 52

MOST Workshop Agenda and Anticipated Outcomes 56

MOST Assessment Instrument 57

Assessment Consensus Form 64

MOST Action Plan Form 71

Leading and Managing for Results Model 73

Leading and Managing Framework 74

Additional Resources 75

vii

acknOwledgMentS

Management Sciences for Health (MSH) first introduced the Management and Organizational Sus-tainability Tool (MOST) in April 1997 at an International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) workshop, in Nairobi, Kenya, where IPPF’s Africa Regional Office played an essential role in de-veloping the workshop format. The first edition of the MOST guide was published in 1999. Since that time, MOST has been used to strengthen over 55 public- and private-sector organizations in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Paraguay, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, the United States, Zambia, and Zanzibar, as well as with Partners in Population and Development, an intergovernmental alliance of 19 developing countries.

Organizations in these countries have found that the management changes they implemented through the MOST process have made a significant difference in the performance of their organiza-tions and their ability to provide high-quality services. This third edition of the MOST guide re-flects the experiences of users and facilitators in these countries.

This edition of the MOST guide was developed by Elizabeth McLean with assistance from Karen Johnson Lassner, Sarah Johnson, and Jacquelyn Stone.

We appreciate the support of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for the devel-opment and application of MOST, beginning under the Family Planning Management Development (FPMD II) project and continuing through the Leadership, Management and Sustainability Program. Their continuing investment in the MOST process reflects their firm commitment to good manage-ment as a critical factor in improving the organization, delivery, and quality of health services. USAID’s ongoing support acknowledges that the management changes made by organizations as part of the MOST process helps them to serve their clients better, improve overall health outcomes, and strengthen their ability to provide quality services to their clients for many years to come.

viii

Preface

The Management and Organizational Sustainability Tool (MOST) is a participatory, rapid-assessment process for identifying an organization’s management needs and making concrete plans for improve-ment. Management Sciences for Health (MSH) developed MOST as a practical application of its ex-pertise in organizational development and change management. MOST conforms to the principles of participation and self-determination that guide all MSH’s training and technical assistance.

Since the first edition of MOST was published in 1999 there has been new research in the field of or-ganizational development, and MOST has been used more extensively. The new findings, and input from experienced facilitators and organizations implementing the MOST process around the world, have led MSH to revise and expand both the instrument that shapes the assessment process and the contents of this guide. The following changes are found in the new version of the MOST guide.

• This edition of the MOST guide highlights the key role played by an organization’s leaders, and by managers who lead at all levels of the organization in implementing improvement plans and fostering change within their organizations.

• The assessment instrument incorporates one new management component (Governance: Board of Directors).

• The new guide incorporates best practices for facilitating the MOST process.

• The guide also includes revisions that will support more effective time management.

hOw tO uSe thiS guide

This guide provides complete information about the MOST concept, process, and instrument. It includes all necessary materials, both in print and on CD-ROM, for conducting a three-day MOST workshop. As such, the guide can be used by those who want to learn about MOST for the first time, as well as by those who are preparing to carry out a MOST assessment.

• Organizational directors who are considering undertaking the MOST process should read “Making the MOST of Management” on page 52. They may also wish to view the PowerPoint presentation, available on the MOST CD-ROM.

• Organizational directors who have decided to implement MOST should read the first three sec-tions of this guide.

• Facilitators who will be conducting the MOST process should read the entire guide to become familiar with the foundations and process of MOST, its participatory philosophy, and the steps involved. They should also use the workshop materials, beginning on page 56, to assemble a binder for participants in the MOST workshop. These materials may be copied directly or printed (along with other supporting resources) from the MOST CD-ROM.

MOST

Management and Organizational Sustainability Tool 1

intrOductiOn tO MOStThe Management and Organizational Sustainability Tool (MOST) is a process for improving an orga-nization’s management, with the end result of contributing to improved services. This section of the MOST guide explains what MOST is, how it differs from other management assessment processes, how organizations can benefit from using MOST, how the assessment instrument is organized, and how the MOST process works.

what iS MOSt? MOST is a structured, participatory process that allows organizations to assess their own manage-ment performance, develop a concrete action plan for improvement, and carry out their plan. Man-agement Sciences for Health developed MOST after years of experience helping public- and private-sector organizations strengthen their management systems and goverance practices to provide high-quality services under complex and changing conditions.

Good management is the glue that holds all the internal parts of an organization together, contrib-utes to a positive work climate, and supports high-quality services, thus helping bring an organiza-tion’s vision to life. MOST helps organizations focus on their management practices to improve ser-vices and make the organization institutionally, financially, and programmatically sustainable.

• A well-managed organization has a strong yet flexible structure and accountable, transpar-ent governance practices (institutional sustainability). Its structure and good governance allows it to respond to the shifting priorities of its supporters and to new responsibilities toward its clients, while creating a positive work environment for its staff. To this end, MOST helps an organization to assess its values and structure, as well as those systems traditionally identified as relating to management.

• A well-managed organization draws on various sources of revenue, allowing it to support its ongoing efforts and to undertake new initiatives (financial sustainability). MOST helps an organization determine its stage of development in terms of financial management and revenue generation.

• A well-managed organization delivers products and services that respond to its clients’ needs and anticipates new areas of need (programmatic sustainability). Its success enables it to expand its client base. Using MOST, an organization can assess its mission; its strategies for reaching existing and new clients; its planning, monitoring and evaluation, and quality assur-ance activities; and its systems for delivering products and services.

Even well-managed, successful organizations must constantly reassess and adapt their management practices as new demands arise and environments change. An organization’s leaders play a critical role in fostering a climate of continuous assessment and improvement. MOST allows an organiza-tion’s leadership—the director and senior managers—to put in motion a change process that in-volves staff from all the major divisions of the organization, as well as other key stakeholders who could contribute to an assessment. Working together they will:

• assess the current status of 19 essential components of management;

• identify feasible changes that can make the organization more effective;

• develop specific plans to implement these changes;

• generate the staff buy-in needed to support the management improvements;

• monitor the results over time.

MOST

Management and Organizational Sustainability Tool2

The cornerstone of the MOST process is a three-day workshop. During the workshop, the organi-zational leadership and selected staff come together to build consensus about the stages of develop-ment of their organization’s management practices, the improvements needed, and an action plan for making those improvements. This workshop is not an end in itself, but, rather, one step in a signifi-cant change process. For MOST to yield its greatest benefits, all staff must play a part that continues long after the workshop. They must recognize the need for change, commit to the process, and help implement the improvements in their day-to-day work.

the MOSt difference

Many traditional assessments rely on external evaluators, intensive data collection, and checklists. They result in findings and recommendations but often fall short of producing a plan for improve-ment. MOST is different. It is all about making change happen through a structured, participatory process in which staff members use an instrument to collect data from their own experience, imme-diately analyze the data, and use their analysis to make concrete, practical plans for improvements. And finally, the MOST process recognizes that meaningful changes in management rarely occur through a single event; it includes a six-month or one-year follow-up MOST exercise to review prog-ress and make any needed changes in the action plans.

The very structure of the MOST process builds in the key factors that will support organizational change.

• The MOST assessment is carried out by the organization itself, not by an external team.

• MOST is participatory, harnessing the insights and creativity of staff from all parts of the orga-nization.

• MOST uses consensus-building rather than votes or top-down rulings to make decisions about management improvements. This approach makes certain that those who will be asked to im-plement decisions have been fully involved in making those decisions.

• MOST draws on the contributions of strong, committed leaders at every level of the organiza-tion. The director and senior managers must identify the need for change, commit to the MOST process, and motivate their staff to actively participate. Staff members lead in various ways: by contributing their ideas, by serving as change agents, and by sharing with the others their personal commitment to making the changes happen.

Participants in the MOST workshop produce a realistic action plan for improving the identified ar-eas of need.

• During the MOST workshop, participants prioritize the management components to be im-proved, identify objectives for those components, and put together a concrete plan designed for immediate action. The plan identifies short-term, feasible actions to be taken toward each identified objective, the person(s) responsible, timing, and resources needed.

• The MOST action plan is integrated into the organization’s other operational plans. It should be seen as a way of helping to implement those plans through effective management, rather than as a stand-alone, unrelated set of activities.

• During the workshop, the organization sets a date for a follow-up MOST review and planning session aimed at assessing progress toward the objectives, revisiting the management compo-nents that were viewed as lower priority, and identifying any new needs.

MOST


The MOST data-collection instrument is a means of eliciting information from staff, helping them analyze the information, and building agreement about their assessments.

• It validates each participant’s experience with and perceptions of the organization’s management practices. By sharing their knowledge with their colleagues, groups can analyze different management components rapidly, without a lengthy data-collection process.

• Staff assess their organization’s stages of development vis-à-vis 19 management compo-nents, rather than simply checking off the presence or absence of a component.

hOw OrganizatiOnS can benefit frOM MOStSince its inception, MOST has been used by private non-profit organizations, government agencies, health facilities, and even departments or programs within broader institutions. MSH’s experience shows that any such organization can use MOST, provided that the organi-zation’s director and senior managers meet two criteria:

• They are committed to open self-assessment and to decision-making by consensus.

• They believe that the organization can take action to improve its management, even though there may be some constraints beyond its control.

The first criterion requires that the decision-makers read this guide carefully, feel comfort-able with the process it describes, and express their full commitment to the staff and other key stakeholders who will engage in the process. To make the MOST experience effective, the organization’s director must demonstrate that he or she is genuinely enthusiastic about staff ideas, open to the airing of issues, and willing to hear all input, including criticisms. Once the process is underway, the director must act as a participant equal to all others. This commitment to democratic participation will help ease participants’ fears about voicing their opinions or making unconventional suggestions. When staff and other stakeholders see their leader’s commitment to change, they in turn will be motivated to help make changes to im-prove management.

The second criterion requires that participants in the MOST process use their imagination and determination to find creative ways to improve their organization’s management systems and practices. Clearly, not all the solutions will be within the organization’s control. Most or-ganizations work within legal and operational contexts that limit their ability to modify some management practices. For example, government or NGO health facilities may find that many aspects of their management are determined by government authorities, national boards, or international agencies with which they are affiliated. But apart from these policy and regula-tory constraints, an organization’s managers and staff do have the ability to make significant management improvements. MOST helps these decision-makers to assess the organization’s current management performance, agree upon ways to improve that performance, and plan activities toward that end.

What Kinds of Organizations Can Use MOST?

MOST can be used by an organization or institution, a network of organizations, or an inter-nal unit—such as a department, service delivery facility, or program—that manages its own day-to-day operations. This guide uses the word “organization” in reference to any entity that chooses to implement the MOST process.

MOST


OrientatiOn tO the aSSeSSMent inStruMent

The MOST assessment instrument defines five critical areas of management: mission, values, strategy, structure, and systems. These management areas are explained below.

Mission. An organization’s mission is its purpose, the reason it exists. The mission provides guidance, consistency, and meaning to decisions and activities at all levels. It is the central point around which staff members define strategies, establish goals, move in a common di-rection, and focus on what they know and do best. It also motivates them to stretch their capacity and take on new challenges. It answers the question, Why do we do what we do? MOST can help an organization assess its mission statement, if one exists, and then plan any changes needed to make the mission more relevant, widely known, and used.

Values. An organization’s values are the beliefs and ethical principles that underlie its mis-sion. These values give meaning to the organization’s work and form the basis for staff commitment. They act as a beacon to guide strategies and to shape the ways in which the managers and staff work together toward achieving the mission. Values answer the question, What are the core beliefs and principles that we all share and that give direction to our work? Through MOST, an organization can assess its core values, then make a plan for clarifying the values, if necessary, and for holding staff accountable for adhering to them.

Strategy. An organization’s strategies are the broad approaches used to define the programs and activities that will fulfill the organization’s mission and goals. The strategies answer the question, How will we get to where we want to go? After assessing its current strategies through MOST, an organization can plan any changes needed to make its strategies consis-tent with its mission, responsive to the needs of the clients and communities it serves, and prepared to meet the demands of the potential clients it should serve.

Structure. Structure refers to the programs, projects, and offices that make up an organiza-tion. The structure encompasses the formal lines of authority, distribution of responsibilities, and ways in which significant decisions are made and people held accountable for carrying out those decisions. Structure answers the question, Are we organized in a way that facili-tates what we want to do and where we want to go? An organization can use MOST to assess its structure and to plan ways to make the structure strong enough to fulfill the mission and carry out strategies, yet flexible enough to foster decision-making and accountability at all levels.

Systems. Systems are the interdependent functions that allow an organization to do its work. MOST addresses the systems that are the key elements of management: planning, hu-man resource management, monitoring and evaluation, information management, quality assurance, financial management, revenue generation, and supply management. Organiza-tional systems answer the question, What systems help us to carry out our activities and how can they be improved? The MOST process can help an organization assess these systems and plan to carry out the high-priority changes needed for increased efficiency and more effec-tive activities.

The MOST assessment instrument divides each of these five management areas into the 19 separate, measurable components listed below.

MOST


When an organization’s staff use the MOST instrument, they assess each management compo-nent, identifying its stage of development on a scale of one to four. The “Sample Completed MOST Assessment Instrument,” beginning on page 21, shows an instrument on which hy-pothetical staff members have filled in their assessment of the stage of development for each management component, along with an example of the type of evidence that could support that view.

the MOSt PrOceSS

The central component of the MOST process is a facilitated workshop lasting three days. The workshop brings together a range of people who hold management responsibilities in all parts of the organization—the director, senior managers, and managers of organizational units or key functions—including service delivery units. It may also include other stakeholders whose work is affected by, or has an effect on, day-to-day management. This group creates a collective perspective based on their individual experiences. Their perspective guides the development of a plan to improve priority aspects of the organization’s management.

During the workshop, participants reflect on their individual perceptions of current manage-ment performance, share these perceptions, and reach consensus on changes that will im-prove performance. They establish priorities and develop an action plan that specifies objec-tives and activities for making these changes. And, to make sure that the plan is carried out, they choose the people—the change leader and change team—who will be responsible for implementing the plan.

Facilitating a MOST workshop is very complex and demanding, requiring that facilitators carefully observe and synthesize discussions that sometimes can become intense. They must also serve as resources to individuals and small groups throughout the workshop, and pro-vide rapid, accurate documentation for participants to use as they move from module to module. Past experience with MOST has clearly shown the advantages of using two facilita-tors who are accustomed to working together as a team; they complement each other’s skills, confirm each other’s observations, and share the multiple simultaneous requirements of a

Management Components Assessed by the MOST Instrument

Mission Existence and knowledge

Values Existence and application

Strategy Links to mission and valuesLinks to clients and communityLinks to potential clients

Structure Lines of authority and accountability Governance: Board of DirectorsRoles and responsibilitiesDecision-making

Systems PlanningCommunicationHuman resource management Monitoring and evaluation Information management: Data collectionInformation management: Use of informationQuality assuranceFinancial managementRevenue generationSupply management

MOST


successful workshop. Even a co-facilitator who is somewhat less experienced can provide another set of eyes and ears, help individuals and small groups complete their assignments, and help with synthesis and documentation.

Although the workshop is the main activity, the MOST process begins before it and extends beyond it, through four phases: engagement, preparation, the MOST workshop, and follow-up. The table below summarizes the activities that take place in each phase.

PhaSeS Of the MOSt PrOceSS

PHASES KEY ACTIVITIES

Engagement The organization’s director:

• reviews the MOST process to determine if MOST is appropriate for the organization at this time;

• negotiates an agreement with the facilitators for all phases of the process;

• identifies a change leader: a staff member who will champion the changes that emerge from the workshop.

The facilitators:

• become familiar with the organizational and cultural environment to determine if MOST is appropriate.

Preparation To prepare for the workshop:

• The director identifies the workshop participants.

• The facilitators conduct interviews and/or written surveys of workshop participants.

• The facilitators adapt the MOST assessment instrument as needed to account for local policy or regulations.

Workshop The three-day MOST workshop serves to:

• assess management status: Where are we now?

• set objectives: Where are we headed?

• initiate change: How will we manage the needed changes?

• develop an action plan: How will we reach our objectives?

Follow-Up To follow up after the workshop:

• The facilitators submit a written report of the workshop.

• The director and facilitators negotiate an agreement for any additional follow-up activities.

• The director and the change team inform the entire staff and engage them in the MOST plan for change.

• The director and staff integrate the MOST action plan into annual operational plans.

• The change leader and the change team guide the implementation of the action plan.

• The change leader and change team monitor the implementation of the plan and revise it as needed.

• The organization holds a follow-up MOST review and planning session at an identified time (usually six months or one year later).

MOST


MOSt and the change PrOceSS

A successful MOST process results in change. Any significant change presents major chal-lenges to an organization’s leadership and to the entire staff. Before committing to MOST, the director and other decision-makers need to be aware that:

• MOST is one step in an ongoing change process.

• To improve performance, an organization must make changes that may cause some dis-comfort among staff and other stakeholders.

• Strong leadership will be needed to initiate and sustain these changes.

• An organization will have to draw on management practices that are working well if it is to improve the management practices that are not so effective.

• It will take time for an organization to see the effects of MOST on the organization’s work, and, ultimately, on its services and sustainability.

This section of the guide explains the principles of change underlying the MOST process and details the role of the change leader and change team in implementing MOST. It also describes how MOST fits an existing model that shows how strong leadership and effective management contribute to an organization’s outcomes.

PrinciPleS Of change

Change can, of course, be imposed from the top of an organization, with little or no staff in-put. But when introduced in this way, any significant change is likely to lead to some combi-nation of reluctant acceptance and resistance among valuable employees.

The MOST change process comes from within the organization, as the result of an open ex-change of views and a successful struggle to reach consensus. MOST embodies four prin-ciples of managing organizational change, collected from literature on the subject:

The change process must meet a real organizational challenge. Change for its own sake is likely to be strongly resisted. Staff will generally support change when they perceive it as essential for resolving issues that affect their organization’s ability to live up to its mission. The MOST process applies this principle by using the organization’s own staff, rather than outsiders, to identify the areas for change. MOST also requires the organization’s director, along with a change leader and change team, to clarify the priority management issues, the rationale for changes, and the details of implementation that result from the MOST process.

The change process must be “owned” and guided by key stakeholders. Stakeholders in-clude those who are responsible for making decisions about changes and those who will car-ry out those decisions. To become supporters and effective implementers of the change pro-cess, stakeholders must accept the proposed changes fully and see themselves as integral to the success of the process. In the MOST process, this group is likely to begin with staff who have management responsibilities and take part in the workshop. These staff members “own” the change process fully, as it is they who conduct the management assessment, identify the changes to be made, and develop the plans, with the full support of the director. After the workshop, they will help mobilize their colleagues at all levels of the organization to under-stand, support, and implement the changes.

MOST


Short-term results can be milestones on the way to broader, more substantive changes. Sometimes organizations set goals or objectives for change that are so ambitious that the staff think they are unreachable. It is useful to break large goals or objectives into smaller seg-ments and measure progress step by step along the way. MOST is designed to foster smaller, feasible changes that will move an organization toward a higher stage of development.

The change process must be supported by staff with clear roles and accountability. An organization cannot make and sustain significant changes with casual, ad-hoc oversight. To keep the change process on track and monitor progress, it must be the long-term responsibil-ity of one or more people who have been assigned this new role and whose performance will be judged, in part, by how successfully they carry out the assignment. The MOST action plan is overseen and monitored by a change leader and change team, whose authority comes from the director.

Principles of change underlie the entire MOST process. A successful MOST experience will bring about changes that begin during the workshop itself and continue long afterward.

change leader and change teaM

All too often, participants leave workshops agreeing on important management changes, but the changes do not actually take place. The spirit generated by a one-time event can evapo-rate as participants return to their “real” work, and the proposed changes become a distant memory.

In accordance with the principles of change, MOST emphasizes the importance of follow-up. During the final phase of the MOST process, individuals are assigned responsibilities and made accountable for implementing the MOST action plan.

Staff members who have participated in the workshop and fully understand the issues and plans take direct responsibility for leading the implementation of the action plan. Although every workshop participant is expected to help implement the changes resulting from the MOST process, the ultimate responsibility rests with a smaller group: the director, change leader, and change team. The change leader has the authority to make decisions regarding the action plan, and he or she will be held accountable for the plan’s implementation. The change leader may or may not be the director of the organization. An effective change leader and team will contribute significantly to visible improvements in the organization.

The change leader may be selected in one of several ways. In most instances, the organiza-tion’s director identifies this person before the workshop. Occasionally, the director prefers to delay this decision—to have the facilitators clarify the qualifications for the job during the workshop and let the participants choose the leader. The members of the change team are most often chosen by participants during Module 3 of the workshop when action plans are developed. However the leader and team are selected, it is imperative that the director and senior managers wholeheartedly approve the choice and offer full moral and material support. This support may include shifting some of the change team’s duties to other staff, so that members will have time to carry out their new responsibilities.

MOST


Qualities of the Change Leader

The change leader is an individual who has:

• the confidence of the director, senior managers, and most staff members;

• proven ability to lead a team toward shared goals;

• a belief in the need for changes in management practices;

• a demonstrated commitment to the participatory nature of the MOST process;

• enthusiasm about taking on the task, with full awareness of its challenges.

leading and Managing fOr OrganizatiOnal change Making organizational change requires committed leaders and managers. Experience shows that organizations that have effective leaders and managers are able to improve management practices, create a positive work climate, and respond to changing environments. These orga-nizational changes contribute to improving the service the organization provides and increas-ing the ultimate impact of its work. The model below shows this sequence in the context of a health organization. It illustrates that leadership and management are equally important if an organization is to achieve its desired results.

leading and Managing fOr reSultS MOdel

MOST


The environment in which health organizations work today has become increasingly com-plex. For example, decentralization in many countries has placed a greater responsibility on local programs to set challenging objectives and achieve measurable results. To meet these challenges, managers at all levels must recognize how good leadership and management prac-tices can make a difference and be able to carry out these practices. As a result, the organi-zation will be better able meet the needs of its clients, and, ultimately, will improve its sus-tainability. These practices are outlined below and put in the context of the MOST process. A complete description of leading and managing practices is provided in the “Leading and Managing Framework” on page 74 and on the MOST CD-ROM.

Leadership Practices Scanning. Continually examining the environment, their organization, their organization’s stakeholders, and themselves to identify values, strengths, and weaknesses.

In the MOST process, the director begins by scanning the organization to identify the need for change. The workshop participants then scan the organization in relation to its mission, values, and the outside world to identify issues and challenges. Afterward, they will con-tinually scan for evidence of the effects of the management changes that have been imple-mented.

Focusing. Keeping themselves and their colleagues focused on the organization’s mission, strategies, priorities, and challenges.

The MOST process requires the director and workshop participants to identify the manage-ment components that are most critical to their organization’s performance and achieve-ments. During the workshop, they set priorities and develop objectives that will have to be met and reviewed before lower-priority areas can be addressed. Afterward, they will help to maintain the focus on the management priorities as they return to their day-to-day responsi-bilities.

Aligning and mobilizing. Making sure that all staff work together to carry out activities that are in line with the organization’s mission, values, strategy, and resources.

The director gains support from staff for the MOST process and mobilizes staff to participate fully and creatively in the MOST workshop. During the workshop, staff members align and mobilize themselves around an action plan, specifying the resources needed to bring about the desired changes. Afterward, they will take the lead in aligning and mobilizing the rest of the organization to carry out the MOST activities, incorporating the MOST action plan into the organization’s annual plan, and moving the plan forward.

Inspiring. Motivating, challenging, and supporting staff creativity, innovation, and learning.

The success of the MOST workshop depends on the participants’ demonstration of the integ-rity, trust, and creativity that can inspire them, as a group and individually, to commit them-selves to the agreed-upon changes. When they return to their day-to-day responsibilities, they will join the director in inspiring their colleagues throughout the organization, convey-ing their enthusiasm and building an organization-wide commitment to change.

MOST


Management Practices

Planning. Defining long- and short-term results and allocating resources accordingly.

During the MOST workshop, participants engage in an intensive exercise to plan for the de-sired improvements. Afterward, they will use their planning skills to integrate their action plan into the organization’s annual and long-term plans.

Organizing. Establishing structures, systems, and work processes to support efficient opera-tions and ensure accountability.

During the MOST workshop, participants have to organize for change, selecting the change leaders who will oversee the action plan and specifying the time, money, and other material resources needed. After the workshop, the change leaders will organize the functions needed to implement the plan.

Implementing. Integrating systems, coordinating work flow, and adjusting plans as circum-stances change.

After the MOST workshop, the participants, change leader, and change team will oversee the implementation of the management changes throughout the organization.

Monitoring and evaluating. Checking for and reflecting on progress and results, and using findings to provide feedback and make needed changes.

During the MOST workshop, participants build into the action plan the activities needed to monitor and evaluate the progress and results of implementing the plan. After the workshop, the change leaders and designated staff will monitor these activities and share the results with the organization’s decision-makers.

As the model shows, managers who lead contribute to an organization’s management prac-tices, its work climate, and its sustainability—its capacity to respond to changing environ-ments. The MOST process provides an opportunity for an organization’s staff to identify and plan management improvements while building their teamwork and leadership skills. In the case of a health organization, these improvements will help the organization contribute sig-nificantly to the improved health outcomes of the population it serves.

MOST


rOleS Of StakehOlderS

The MOST process depends on the active participation of the identified stakeholders. These stakeholders include the organization’s leadership—the director and senior managers—as well as staff with management responsibilities from all areas of the organization. Additional stakeholders may represent other entities with which the organization is affiliated. For exam-ple, a nongovernmental organization might invite members of its board of directors to take part in some aspects of the process. A government agency or department might involve rep-resentatives from the next higher level of government or, perhaps, from other governmental units with which the agency works closely.

This section of the MOST guide describes the responsibilities of three types of stakeholders in the process: the organization’s leadership, the workshop participants, and the facilitators. For each type of stakeholder, the guide summarizes the role before, during, and after the workshop.

rOle Of the OrganizatiOn’S leaderS

At the heart of the MOST process is the full commitment of the organization’s director and senior managers. No matter how productive the workshop, or how much thought the par-ticipants put into the action plan, meaningful changes will not happen without the genuine, ongoing support of the organization’s leaders.

Before the workshop, the director and senior managers should:

Understand MOST. In order to decide whether or not their organization will benefit from MOST at this time, the director and senior managers should familiarize themselves with the elements of the MOST process. In this way, they will grasp what MOST can and cannot do for their organization, what has to happen if MOST is to succeed, what resources will be required, and what roles they will play in a highly participatory series of events.

They can acquire this information by reading “Making the MOST of Management” on page 52 and by viewing the PowerPoint presentation available on the MOST CD-ROM. They may also want to talk with leaders of organizations that have undertaken MOST and consultants who have facilitated the MOST process. MSH can put them in touch with these resources and also answer their questions about MOST.

Make the decision. Once they are convinced that they understand MOST, the director and senior managers will be better equipped to make a sound decision about whether their or-ganization should undertake the MOST process. They should carefully consider whether management changes could significantly improve their organization’s performance and have a positive effect on its services and potential sustainability.

Choose the facilitators and identify a staff counterpart. After deciding to embark on the MOST process, the organization’s leadership should look for facilitators who combine MOST experience with a style and approach that best fit the organization. Most directors prefer to use external facilitators, rather than staff members, to guide the process, recognizing that observant, sensitive outsiders are better able to maintain objectivity and gain the trust of all participants. In addition to the facilitation team, the director should assign a counterpart from within the organization to serve as a resource to the facilitators for logistics before and during the workshop.

MOST


Work with the facilitators. After negotiating and signing an agreement, the director and senior managers should collaborate with the facilitators in selecting 12 to 25 staff members to partici-pate in the MOST workshop. They may choose a change leader at this time, or they may prefer to wait and let the change leader emerge from the workshop. Finally, they should set the stage for a successful MOST experience by freely sharing their perspectives and concerns in at least one interview, responding to questions from the facilitators and offering any additional information that might help the facilitators understand the organization.

Inform the staff. The director should inform the entire staff of what is about to take place and how it will benefit the organization. Those staff who have been selected to participate in the MOST workshop will need additional details about their responsibilities during and after the workshop. The facilitators can provide explanatory handouts for workshop participants and nonparticipants alike.

During the workshop, the leaders should:

Participate fully and openly. The director and senior managers should be present and involved throughout the workshop. They should view themselves as colleagues rather than bosses, learn-ers rather than teachers. They must express their full commitment to openness and demonstrate this commitment by listening carefully and responding without defensiveness, no matter what opinions the other participants express. By showing their responsiveness, the leaders will help ease participants’ fears about admitting their own failings or voicing critical opinions.

After the workshop, the leaders should:

Provide ongoing support. The director and senior managers will need to provide moral and ma-terial support to the change leader and change team. During all phases of the MOST process, it is the organization’s leaders who can best encourage the staff to use their imagination and determi-nation to identify creative improvements and to find ways to overcome obstacles. Organizational results will only be achieved when action plans are implemented; therefore, it is critical that the change team be supported during the implementation phase.

Provide follow-up. In the follow-up phase, the director will need to support the change leader in a six-month or one-year MOST activity to review progress and plan for further management improvements. In the interim, the director should stay abreast of progress and be available to as-sist the change leader whenever necessary.

rOle Of the ParticiPantS

Although the contributions of the facilitators are invaluable, it is the participants (including the director) who do the greatest part of the work during the workshop and who oversee the change process afterwards. This is one of the features that distinguish MOST from other kinds of assess-ment and planning processes—even those in which the opinions of staff and other stakeholders are solicited by skillful external evaluators.

Before the workshop, the participants should:

Understand the MOST process. For the participants to be fully invested in MOST, they should understand the purpose and anticipated results of the workshop, the desired outcomes for each module, and the activities they will undertake to achieve those outcomes. They should peruse this information ahead of time, asking questions and expressing any concerns to the organiza-tion’s leadership and the facilitators.

MOST


Provide information to the facilitators. Whenever possible, the MOST facilitators should interview each proposed workshop participant, either individually or in small groups. When interviews are not feasible, or when the facilitators wish to acquire supplementary informa-tion, participants may be asked to complete a written questionnaire. Whatever the format, participants can make powerful contributions by providing honest, thoughtful responses to the questions.

During the workshop, the participants should:

Participate fully and openly. The MOST workshop draws on the individual insights of the participants. It compels them to record their assessments carefully, listen closely to one an-other, consider the merits of differing viewpoints, and reach common ground on the basis of evidence that they can all accept. It may require them to take risks: to speak openly in front of superiors, to acknowledge weaknesses in past performance, and to accept new responsibil-ities for managing some aspects of future change. The foundation of the workshop—indeed of the entire MOST process—is the energy, creativity, openness, courage, and mutual respect of the workshop participants.

After the workshop, the participants should:

Be leaders in implementing the changes. When the workshop is over, the participants will play various roles in implementing the action plan. Some of them will be members of the change team, but even those who are not on the team will need to serve as change agents. They will be expected to take on the functions of leadership by:

• scanning for progress resulting from the planned changes, as well as scanning the reac-tions of their colleagues at all levels as changes are introduced;

• focusing the organization on the agreed-upon changes;

• aligning and mobilizing their colleagues around the changes;

• inspiring their colleagues through their own enthusiastic commitment and hard work.

It is critical that all participants understand the importance of their role in implementing the desired changes. Organizational results will only be achieved through good implementation and the participants play a key role in implementation.

rOle Of the facilitatOrS

At first glance, the MOST process seems simple. The instrument is easy to use, and the implementation modules and forms follow a logical sequence. Nonetheless, a skillful and perceptive facilitation team can make all the difference between a superficial MOST experi-ence and one that motivates the organization to achieve higher levels of performance and improved services.

The facilitators should carry out the following activities to set the process in motion and see it through to a successful conclusion. They may do these some of these tasks together and divide others between them.

Before the workshop, the facilitators should:

Get to know MOST. The first task of the facilitators is to be thoroughly familiar with every aspect of MOST. They should carefully read the guide and the materials on the MOST CD-

MOST


ROM thoroughly to be sure that they understand and are comfortable with the MOST prin-ciples and process, as well as with their own roles and the roles of the organizational leader-ship, workshop participants, change leader, and change team. Only in this way will they be able to orient the organization’s director and senior managers and answer the many questions that can arise.

Get to know the organization. The facilitators also need to find out everything possible about the organization: its purpose, history, culture, achievements, and concerns. This pre-liminary exploration can be made by reading such documents as programmatic and financial reports, evaluations, studies, and publications. The facilitators will use this information not only to provide a context for their work but also to help the workshop participants identify underlying issues, address the contributing causes, and build on organizational strengths.

Orient and learn from the organization’s leadership. A director who is uncertain about committing an organization to the MOST process may seek help in making the decision. The facilitators should make sure that the director reads “Making the MOST of Management,” handout (page 52), and sees the PowerPoint presentation (available on the MOST CD-ROM). The facilitators should then arrange one or more meetings with the director and selected se-nior managers to further clarify the MOST process and differentiate it from other assessments the organization may have undergone in the past. These meetings should help to answer questions and shed light on any areas of confusion. At the same time, the meetings should also generate critical information for the facilitators. By asking perceptive questions, listen-ing carefully, and observing attentively, the facilitators can judge whether the organization is ready to undertake MOST.

If the director and senior managers decide to embark on the MOST process, they should read the first three sections of this guide to confirm their understanding. At this point, the facilita-tors can negotiate and sign the agreement with the organization.

Adapt the instrument. Understanding the policies, legal context, and regulations that affect the organization will enable the facilitators to adapt the MOST assessment instrument. Some of the characteristics listed under the four stages of development describing each manage-ment component may need to be slightly modified to be responsive to the organization’s envi-ronmental context. For example, many NGOs or government organizations need to abide by the human resource policies of the Ministry of Health and may not have control over HR poli-cies. “Governance” and “Roles and Responsibilities” management components would need to be revised for public sector organizations as they do not have boards of directors.

Orient workshop participants. Even when the organization’s leadership understands MOST and is committed to undertaking it, the potential participants in the workshop may not be quite so certain. They may have a skeptical view of MOST as one more event in a series of assessments and plans that have added to their work and made little difference to the organi-zation. The facilitators, supported by the director, can differentiate the MOST process from these prior efforts. The facilitators should provide the proposed participants with the “Mak-ing the MOST of Management” handout (page 52). They might also wish to show the Power-Point slideshow to the entire group and respond to questions and concerns.

Learn from workshop participants. The facilitators should make every effort to interview each proposed participant. Face-to-face interviews will allow the participants to air their doubts and concerns while giving the facilitators important insights into the organization’s culture and work climate. As with the organization’s leadership, it is critical that the facilita-

MOST


tors be nonjudgmental, encourage frankness, and assure participants of confidentiality. Such discussions will yield important information and establish an atmosphere of trust. If inter-views are not feasible, the facilitators can develop a written questionnaire to glean the same types of information. In some instances, the facilitators may choose to administer the written questionnaire ahead of time and supplement it later by the interviews. Suggested questions are found in the Facilitators' Plan in this guide, beginning on page 28.

Make the arrangements. The facilitators should work with a designated staff counterpart to be sure that all preparations are made in advance of the workshop, including arranging for the meeting rooms, supplies (flip chart easels and paper, markers, overhead projector, computer, printer, photocopier, etc.), and possibly, meals and transportation. The facilita-tors and staff counterpart can prepare workshop binders for the participants by copying the workshop materials beginning on page 56 and adding any supplementary documents they think the participants will find useful—perhaps selected reprints from the MOST CD-ROM or from the facilitators’ own store of materials. This is a good time to prepare ahead, produc-ing flip charts, overhead transparencies, or slides to support the different workshop mod-ules, as suggested in the Facilitators’ Plan in this guide.

During the workshop, the facilitators should:

Explain the assessment process. The facilitators should explain clearly how to complete the MOST instrument and what constitutes convincing evidence for a specific assessment. This task is of critical importance, because the quality of the assessments completed by the indi-vidual participants will affect subsequent discussions and planning. To be able to fulfill this task, the facilitators should be completely familiar and comfortable with the example of the completed MOST Assessment Instrument, beginning on page 21.

Encourage full participation. Perhaps the most important task of the facilitators is to make sure that all voices are heard, without giving undue weight to participants who hold a higher position in the organization or who are inclined to be more assertive. The workshop structure itself fosters universal participation by requiring everyone to form an opinion in-dependently and to share that opinion with a small group. To reinforce this emphasis on par-ticipation, the facilitators should point out at the start of the workshop that everyone’s view-point is equally valid and that all perspectives must be heard to achieve genuine consensus. The facilitators can help small groups monitor themselves, encouraging the quieter members and reminding more talkative members of their responsibility to listen attentively to their colleagues. The facilitators may need to periodically remind the group of these guidelines, or even step in directly if some voices begin to dominate as the discussion intensifies.

Manage time, balancing flow and flexibility. Because different groups work at different speeds, the facilitators should be sensitive to how each small group and individual partici-pant is functioning, and lend support to move a group along when necessary. The facilitators will need to recognize and deal with the stumbling blocks that can distract the participants and divert their energy into unproductive discussions. It is very useful to check in with the participants at the end of each day, or more often if needed, to hear how they are feeling about the pace and to make minor adjustments in the schedule if needed.

Each activity in the MOST workshop builds on the output of the previous activities. Thus, the action plan is the cumulative result of all the work that has gone before it. It is the re-sponsibility of the facilitators to maintain the logical flow of the process, so that participants can use the results of each activity as the context for the next, building momentum toward

MOST


the final action plan. This is why it is so important to document the results of each module as soon as possible and give the printed documents back to the participants to use as they move forward.

However, the facilitators must balance this forward momentum against the occasional need to address issues that arise unexpectedly in the course of small-group or plenary discussions. Participants may have underlying concerns that, if ignored, could severely impede the imple-mentation of the action plan. Sometimes these concerns can be written on a flip chart page or “parking lot,” which remains posted throughout the workshop and used to list important issues that will need to be addressed in the future. But sometimes the workshop agenda must be diverted for a short time to untie the knots, cutting short some other activity or extend-ing an already long day. A skilled facilitator can define the dilemma for the group, clarify the consequences of ignoring or addressing the issue, and guide the group in making the most appropriate judgment within the time available.

Synthesize. At several points in the workshop, the facilitators will need to help the partici-pants pull together the different threads of a discussion into a set of shared perceptions. This ability to synthesize will help the group retain its focus and move forward.

Resolve conflicts. The MOST process often releases strong emotions and brings to light longstanding areas of disagreement that cannot be ignored. This airing of hidden grievances is valuable as a means of removing obstacles that stand in the way of management improve-ment. At the same time, these discussions cannot be allowed to derail the MOST process. It is critical, therefore, that facilitators maintain the stance of objective outsiders and intervene when necessary, helping the participants to either resolve or postpone the resolution of some issues.

Identify or confirm the change leader and change team. No MOST workshop should end without the clear assignment of responsibility to a change leader and change team. These people should be enthusiastic supporters of the change process. They must have the full support of the director and other decision-makers, including the time and resources needed to carry out the activities in the action plan. The director may have already appointed the change leader before the workshop; in that case, the facilitators can make time for the direc-tor to announce this decision. If the change leader has not already been appointed, the facili-tators should guide the group in choosing someone who fits the qualifications noted in the box on page 9. That person should be willing—even eager—to take on the assignment.

The facilitators should also help participants identify the members of the change team. The core of the team will be the individuals who have agreed to be responsible for key activi-ties on the action plan. The team may be supplemented by other staff members with specific skills that will be important in carrying out the action plan.

Empower the participants. One of the biggest challenges for the facilitators may be to dispel the sense of futility that some MOST groups feel when they are a small part of a large, pow-erful organization. The facilitators will need to acknowledge that some changes will require higher-level interventions, but this reality should not dilute the considerable power that the group possesses to make some important changes. The facilitators should be prepared to cite examples of groups that have made realistic and substantive management improvements de-spite the constraints imposed by the laws, policies, and regulations of their larger organiza-tional structure.

MOST


Document the decisions made. It is the responsibility of the facilitators to be sure that all points that are agreed upon are recorded. In most instances, the decisions will be docu-mented by the workshop participants themselves, on flip chart pages hung around the room. However, it is crucial that all decisions be entered on a computer and given to the partici-pants to verify the content and use as they move forward. During the final module, as the action plan is being developed, small groups will be working on previous group outputs, re-vising them, receiving feedback, and finalizing them on the same day. It will be important at the end of the day for one of the facilitators to enter the changes, print the final documents, and distribute copies to all the participants.

After the workshop, the facilitators should:

Conduct follow-up activities. Even the most highly motivated change leaders can get over-whelmed with day-to-day pressures and lose the momentum for change. The facilitators can help them maintain that momentum and move the organization toward achieving its objec-tives to improve management practices by providing support at critical junctures. Responsi-bilities after the workshop might include:

• writing and submitting a workshop report that is complete, clear, and specific enough for the director, change leader, and change team to present the results of the MOST workshop to the rest of the organization and to guide their next steps;

• maintaining regular contact (by phone or e-mail) and/or scheduling occasional meetings with the change team to track the progress and results of the changes being implemented;

• providing facilitation for in-depth assessments of management components the organi-zation has selected for more intensive work;

• providing other kinds of technical assistance as requested, or suggesting other sources of technical assistance;

• conducting a follow-up MOST workshop to review progress and take on new manage-ment challenges.

MOST


uSing the MOSt aSSeSSMent inStruMent

This section provides an example of the MOST assessment instrument, which serves as the basis for the MOST workshop. The instrument is a matrix used to assess 19 management components related to an organization’s mission, values, strategy, structure, and systems. For each component, the in-strument presents four possible stages of development, each of which is defined by a set of charac-teristics.

StageS Of ManageMent develOPMent

As organizations grow, strengthen, and mature, they evolve through a continuum of stages of de-velopment. The MOST instrument describes the characteristics of management components at each of the four stages of development. By comparing their organization’s management performance to the characteristics that mark the stages, workshop participants can decide for themselves what stage their organization has reached for each management component.

Using the Management Characteristics to Assess Stages of Development

Participants in the MOST workshop do not attempt to characterize their organization’s overall stage of development. Rather, they identify the stage of development for each management component. To be rated at a particular stage of development for a management component, the organization must match all the characteristics of that stage—it cannot be rated at an in-between stage, such as 2.5.

Each stage of development includes and builds on the characteristics of the previous stage. At the first stage, the characteristics describe an organization that has done very little to develop that com-ponent. At the other end of the spectrum, the fourth stage, the characteristics portray an organization that is operating extremely effectively with regard to that component. In such a case, the organiza-tion might consider directing its energies to components that are at lower stages of development.

It is important to note that different organizations pass through these stages at different rates, even if the organizations were founded at the same time. Even within one organization, different manage-ment components may be at different stages of development at the same time. Discrepancies between and within organizations—for example, a “3” on the links of the strategy to the mission and a “1” on the links of the strategy to potential clients—might be the result of a combination of factors: the focus of the organization’s leaders, the mandates of funding agencies, the comparative strengths of staff members, and the demands of the external environment.

PrOviding evidence

Because workshop participants come from many parts of the organization, they often differ in their perceptions of whether a component fits all the characteristics of a particular stage. To help resolve these different views, the instrument provides a space for the participants to individually record evi dence: a brief description of an event or situation that they have seen, heard, or experienced, which supports them in rating the component at the stage they have selected. Later, in heteroge-neous small groups, participants will share their evidence and take into account their different per-spectives as they seek to reach consensus on the stage of development of each component.

MOST

Management and Organizational Sustainability Tool

What Constitutes Evidence?

Many types of evidence—not simply quantitative data—may support participants’ assessments. MOST defines evidence as a fact or concrete observation that supports the identified stage of devel-opment. Convincing evidence answers the question, What can we see or hear, or what do we know, that tells us that something is true?

A sample of a completed MOST assessment instrument is found on the following pages. It provides examples of the types of evidence participants might provide to justify their choices. The instru-ment itself appears on pages 57–62, as well as on the MOST CD-ROM, and should be included in every participant’s workshop binder.

20

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

21

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Mis

sio

nEx

iste

nce

an

d

Kn

ow

led

ge

No

form

al m

issi

on

stat

emen

t ex

ists

, or

the

exis

ting

mis

sion

st

atem

ent

is in

cons

is-

tent

with

the

cur

rent

or

gani

zatio

nal p

ur-

pos

e an

d th

e ne

eds

of in

tend

ed c

lient

s.

The

mis

sion

sta

te-

men

t ex

ists

, is

cons

is-

tent

with

the

org

ani-

zatio

nal p

urp

ose,

and

is

som

etim

es c

ited

by

seni

or s

taff.

The

mis

sion

sta

te-

men

t is

freq

uent

ly

cite

d by

key

sta

ke-

hold

ers:

sta

ff, b

oard

, p

artn

er a

genc

ies,

and

cl

ient

s.

The

mis

sion

sta

te-

men

t is

wid

ely

know

n an

d re

gula

rly

revi

ewed

to

assu

re

that

it r

eflec

ts t

he

curr

ent

orga

niza

tion-

al p

urp

ose

and

the

need

s of

inte

nded

cl

ient

s.

3Ex

amp

le: W

e of

ten

refe

r to

the

mis

-si

on s

tate

men

t in

sta

ff m

eetin

gs w

hen

tryi

ng t

o de

cide

am

ong

seve

ral n

ew

initi

ativ

es. W

e ha

ve ju

st b

egun

to

post

th

e m

issi

on in

our

clin

ics,

and

I’ve

al

read

y he

ard

a fe

w c

lient

s co

mm

ent

on it

.

Val

ues

Exis

ten

ce a

nd

A

pp

licat

ion

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

have

not

bee

n de

-fin

ed.

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

have

bee

n de

fined

an

d ar

e so

met

imes

ci

ted

by s

enio

r st

aff.

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

are

freq

uent

ly c

ited

by s

taff

at a

ll le

vels

.

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

are

wid

ely

know

n,

and

staf

f are

hel

d ac

coun

tabl

e fo

r ad

herin

g to

the

m.

4Ex

amp

le: O

ur p

erfo

rman

ce r

evie

w fo

rm

incl

udes

a s

ectio

n fo

r ev

alua

ting

how

w

ell w

e liv

e up

to

our

orga

niza

tion’

s st

ated

val

ues

in o

ur d

ay-t

o-da

y ac

tions

.

Stra

teg

yLi

nks

to

Mis

sio

n

and

Val

ues

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

e-ve

lop

ed in

res

pon

se

to fu

nder

s’ r

equi

re-

men

ts o

r th

e p

refe

r-en

ces

of a

few

dec

i-si

on-m

aker

s, w

ithou

t re

fere

nce

to t

he m

is-

sion

and

val

ues.

Stra

tegi

es a

re s

ome-

times

dev

elop

ed

with

ref

eren

ce t

o th

e m

issi

on a

nd v

alue

s,

but

mor

e of

ten

in

resp

onse

to

othe

r re

qui

rem

ents

, pre

f-er

ence

s, a

nd m

an-

date

s.

Stra

tegi

es a

re a

lmos

t al

way

s de

velo

ped

w

ithin

the

gen

eral

co

ntex

t of

the

mis

-si

on a

nd v

alue

s.

Beca

use

stra

tegi

es

are

deve

lop

ed t

o co

nfor

m t

o th

e m

is-

sion

and

val

ues,

st

rate

gic

pla

nnin

g is

vi

ewed

as

an o

pp

or-

tuni

ty t

o re

affir

m o

r re

vise

the

mis

sion

.

1Ex

amp

le: T

his

year

we

adop

ted

a st

rat-

egy

requ

este

d by

one

of o

ur fu

nder

s,

even

tho

ugh

it is

not

con

sist

ent

with

our

re

cent

ly r

evis

ed m

issi

on s

tate

men

t.

SaM

Ple

cO

MPl

eted

MO

St a

SSeS

SMen

t in

Str

uM

ent

22

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

lStra

teg

y (c

on

tin

ued

)

Stru

ctur

e

M

anag

emen

t St

ages

of

Dev

elo

pm

ent

and

Th

eir

Ch

arac

teri

stic

s C

urre

nt

C

om

po

nen

t 1

2 3

4 St

age

Evid

ence

Lin

ks t

o C

lien

ts

and

Co

mm

unit

y

Lin

ks t

o

Pote

nti

al

Clie

nts

Lin

es o

f

Aut

ho

rity

an

d

Acc

oun

tab

ility

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed w

ithou

t re

fer-

ence

to

the

need

s of

cl

ient

s or

the

ir co

m-

mun

ities

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed w

ithou

t kn

owl-

edge

of t

he c

urre

nt

or p

oten

tial d

eman

d fo

r th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

serv

ices

.

Ther

e ar

e no

for-

mal

doc

umen

ts t

hat

defin

e cu

rren

t lin

es

of a

utho

rity

and

ac-

coun

tabi

lity.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed b

ased

on

as-

sum

ptio

ns a

bout

the

ne

eds

of c

lient

s an

d th

eir

com

mun

ities

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed o

n th

e ba

sis

of

anec

dota

l kno

wle

dge

of t

he d

eman

d fo

r

the

orga

niza

tion’

s

serv

ices

.

An

orga

niza

tiona

l ch

art

or s

imila

r do

cu-

men

t de

fines

line

s of

aut

horit

y an

d ac

-co

unta

bilit

y. It

is

incl

uded

in t

he o

rgan

i-za

tion’

s man

ual o

f pol

i-ci

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed b

ased

on

accu

-ra

te in

form

atio

n ab

out

the

need

s of

clie

nts

and

thei

r co

mm

uni-

ties.

St

rate

gies

are

dev

el-

oped

on

the

basi

s of

occ

asio

nal a

sses

s-m

ents

of t

he d

eman

d fo

r se

rvic

es, a

s w

ell a

s an

alys

is o

f the

ser

vice

s al

read

y pr

ovid

ed b

y ot

her

orga

niza

tions

.

The

orga

niza

tiona

l ch

art

or s

imila

r do

cu-

men

t is

som

etim

es

used

whe

n is

sues

aris

e p

erta

inin

g to

line

s of

aut

horit

y an

d ac

-co

unta

bilit

y.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed w

ith t

he p

artic

i -p

atio

n of

clie

nts

an

d co

mm

unity

gr

oup

s.

A m

echa

nism

is in

p

lace

for

regu

larly

sc

anni

ng c

urre

nt a

nd

pot

entia

l dem

and,

ev

alua

ting

othe

r or

ga-

niza

tions

’ ser

vice

s, a

nd

usin

g th

ese

fin

ding

s to

dev

elop

st

rate

gies

.

The

orga

niza

tiona

l ch

art

or s

imila

r do

cu-

men

t is

reg

ular

ly u

p-

date

d an

d co

nsis

tent

ly

used

to

reso

lve

issu

es

per

tain

ing

to li

nes

of a

utho

rity

and

ac-

coun

tabi

lity.

Exam

ple

: In

our

last

str

ateg

ic p

lann

ing

exer

cise

, we

drew

on

the

findi

ngs

of t

he

com

mun

ity s

urve

y co

nduc

ted

two

year

s ag

o.

Exam

ple

: We

intr

oduc

ed a

you

th p

ro-

gram

bec

ause

som

e pa

rent

s co

mpl

aine

d th

at t

heir

teen

aged

chi

ldre

n ha

d no

pla

ce

to g

o af

ter

scho

ol.

Exam

ple

: We

used

to

have

an

orga

niza

-tio

nal c

hart

tha

t sh

owed

eve

ryon

e’s

posi

-tio

n an

d su

perv

isor

y re

latio

nshi

ps, b

ut

sinc

e w

e re

orga

nize

d a

coup

le o

f yea

rs

ago,

it h

asn’

t be

en u

pdat

ed t

o sh

ow t

he

new

str

uctu

re.

3 2 1

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

23

Stru

ctur

e (c

on

tin

ued

)

M

anag

emen

t St

ages

of

Dev

elo

pm

ent

and

Th

eir

Ch

arac

teri

stic

s C

urre

nt

C

om

po

nen

t 1

2 3

4 St

age

Evid

ence

Go

vern

ance

: B

oar

d o

f D

irec

-to

rs

(Not

e: G

over

-na

nce

in r

ela-

tion

to b

oard

of

dire

ctor

s is

not

ap

plic

able

to

pub

-lic

sec

tor

orga

ni-

zatio

ns. H

owev

er,

gove

rnan

ce in

ac

coun

tabi

lity

and

tran

spar

ency

re

mai

ns a

n im

-p

orta

nt s

truc

ture

in

pub

lic s

ecto

r or

gani

zatio

ns.)

Ro

le a

nd

R

esp

on

sib

iliti

es(N

ote:

For

NG

Os,

th

is c

omp

onen

t p

erta

ins

to b

oth

staf

f and

boa

rd

of d

irect

ors.

For

p

ublic

-sec

tor

inst

i-tu

tions

, it

per

tain

s on

ly t

o st

aff.)

Ther

e is

no

boar

d or

th

e bo

ard

cons

ists

of

the

foun

der

and/

or

per

sons

cho

sen

byth

e fo

unde

r. Bo

ard

mee

tings

are

ra

rely

hel

d.

Role

s an

d re

spon

si-

bilit

ies

are

not

clea

rly

defin

ed. W

ork

is a

s-si

gned

on

an a

d-ho

c ba

sis,

acc

ordi

ng t

o th

e p

erce

ived

nee

ds

of t

he m

omen

t.

The

boar

d is

com

-p

rised

of p

erso

ns w

ho

have

not

bee

n se

lect

-ed

bas

ed o

n th

e ch

ar-

acte

ristic

s (i.

e. g

ende

r)

and

skill

s ne

eded

on

the

boar

d. T

he b

oard

m

eets

occ

asio

nally

an

d fo

cuse

s ex

clu-

sive

ly o

n op

erat

iona

l is

sues

as

opp

osed

to

stra

tegi

c on

es. N

o p

ol-

icie

s ha

ve b

een

deve

l-op

ed b

y th

e bo

ard.

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

li-tie

s ar

e in

the

pro

cess

of

bei

ng d

efine

d. M

ost

wor

k is

stil

l ass

igne

d on

an

ad-h

oc b

asis

.

The

boar

d is

cho

sen

from

per

sons

in t

he

com

mun

ity b

ased

on

the

cha

ract

eris

tics

and

skill

s ne

eded

on

the

boar

d. T

he b

oard

m

eets

freq

uent

ly, f

o-cu

sing

on

oper

atio

nal

and

stra

tegi

c is

sues

. So

me

pol

icie

s ha

ve

been

dev

elop

ed b

y th

e bo

ard.

The

boa

rd

app

rove

s th

e an

nual

bu

dget

but

is n

ot in

-vo

lved

in p

erio

dic

mon

itorin

g of

rev

enue

an

d ex

pen

ses.

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

li-tie

s ar

e de

fined

in t

he

pol

icy

and

pro

cedu

res

man

ual.

They

are

be-

ginn

ing

to b

e us

ed a

s th

e ba

sis

for

assi

gnin

g w

ork.

The

boar

d is

cho

sen

from

per

sons

in t

he

com

mun

ity b

ased

on

char

acte

ristic

s an

d sk

ills

need

ed o

n th

e bo

ard.

The

boa

rd

mee

ts fr

eque

ntly

, fo-

cuse

s on

str

ateg

ic is

-su

es a

nd e

valu

ates

its

per

form

ance

ann

ually

. Th

e bo

ard

per

iodi

cally

re

view

s th

e or

gani

-za

tion'

s m

issi

on a

nd

app

rove

s its

str

ateg

ic

pla

n. T

he b

oard

en-

sure

s su

ffici

ent

finan

-ci

al r

esou

rces

for

the

orga

niza

tion;

ap

pro

ves

the

annu

al b

udge

t;

trac

ks r

even

ues

and

exp

ense

s ag

ains

t bu

d-ge

t at

leas

t q

uart

erly

, an

d m

onito

rs t

he e

f-fe

ctiv

enes

s of

pro

-gr

ams

and

serv

ices

.

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

li-tie

s ar

e de

fined

in t

he

pol

icy

and

pro

cedu

res

man

ual.

They

are

be-

ginn

ing

to b

e us

ed a

s th

e ba

sis

for

assi

gnin

g w

ork.

Exam

ple

: Our

boa

rd h

as t

en m

embe

rs

from

the

com

mun

ity w

ho h

ave

diffe

rent

ty

pes

of s

kills

, but

not

nec

essa

rily

the

skill

s th

at t

he b

oard

rea

lly n

eeds

. The

y m

eet

sem

i-ann

ually

. I h

ave

neve

r se

en a

ne

w p

olic

y in

trod

uced

by

the

boar

d.

Exam

ple

: Thi

s ye

ar w

e he

ld a

ser

ies

of m

eetin

gs w

ith k

ey s

taff

mem

bers

to

refe

fine

our

role

s in

ligh

t of

sev

eral

new

in

itiat

ives

. As

a re

sult,

som

e pe

ople

hav

e sh

ifted

to

diffe

rent

wor

k ar

eas

and

take

n on

new

ass

ignm

ents

.

2 4

24

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

lStru

ctur

e (c

on

tin

ued

)

Syst

ems

M

anag

emen

t St

ages

of

Dev

elo

pm

ent

and

Th

eir

Ch

arac

teri

stic

s C

urre

nt

C

om

po

nen

t 1

2 3

4 St

age

Evid

ence

Dec

isio

n-M

akin

g

Plan

nin

g

Co

mm

unic

atio

n

The

dire

ctor

and

se-

nior

man

ager

s m

ake

all s

igni

fican

t de

ci-

sion

s w

ithou

t di

scus

s-in

g th

em w

ith s

taff.

Mos

t or

gani

zatio

nal

activ

ities

are

un-

pla

nned

and

dec

ided

on

an

ad-h

oc b

asis

.

Ther

e is

no

form

al

com

mun

icat

ion

mec

hani

sm. I

mp

or-

tant

info

rmat

ion

is

com

mun

icat

ed m

ainl

y by

wor

d of

mou

th.

The

dire

ctor

and

se-

nior

man

ager

s m

ake

all s

igni

fican

t de

cisi

ons

afte

r lis

teni

ng t

o th

e vi

ews

of s

elec

ted

staf

f m

embe

rs.

Op

erat

iona

l pla

ns a

re

deve

lop

ed fo

r so

me

pro

ject

s an

d p

ro-

gram

s, u

sual

ly t

o m

eet

fund

ers’

re

qui

re m

ents

.

Com

mun

icat

ion

mec

hani

sms

are

used

on

ly t

o co

nvey

nec

es-

sary

info

rmat

ion

from

se

nior

man

agem

ent

to

the

rest

of t

he s

taff.

Mid

-leve

l sta

ff m

em-

bers

are

enc

oura

ged

to m

ake

and

carr

y ou

t si

gnifi

cant

dec

isio

ns

rega

rd in

g th

eir

own

wor

k an

d th

e w

ork

of

thei

r te

ams.

An

oper

atio

nal p

lan

is

deve

lop

ed a

nnua

lly,

inde

pen

dent

of t

he

orga

niza

tion’

s br

oade

r st

rate

gies

.

Com

mun

icat

ion

mec

h-an

ism

s ar

e be

ginn

ing

to b

e us

ed t

o sh

are

info

rmat

ion

acro

ss o

r-ga

niza

tiona

l uni

ts a

nd

amon

g st

aff a

t di

ffer-

ent

leve

ls.

All

staf

f are

exp

ecte

d to

mak

e si

gnifi

cant

de-

cisi

ons

rega

rd in

g th

eir

own

wor

k an

d th

e w

ork

of t

heir

team

s,

and

to c

arry

out

tho

se

deci

sion

s.

The

annu

al o

per

atio

n-al

pla

n is

des

igne

d to

su

pp

ort

the

orga

niza

-tio

n’s

stra

tegi

es a

rtic

u-la

ted

in t

he s

trat

egic

p

lan.

Com

mun

icat

ion

mec

hani

sms

are

used

co

nsis

tent

ly t

o sh

are

info

rmat

ion

acro

ss o

r-ga

niza

tiona

l uni

ts a

nd

amon

g st

aff a

t di

ffer-

ent

leve

ls.

Exam

ple

: I’m

sup

pose

d to

ove

rsee

co

mm

unity

par

ticip

atio

n in

our

ann

ual

mee

ting.

But

last

mon

th, m

y su

perv

isor

ch

ange

d th

e ag

enda

and

info

rmed

co

mm

unity

mem

bers

of t

he n

ew a

gend

a w

ithou

t ev

en le

ttin

g m

e kn

ow.

Exam

ple

: Aft

er t

alki

ng a

bout

it fo

r ye

ars,

w

e fin

ally

put

tog

ethe

r a

stra

tegi

c pl

an

this

yea

r, bu

t w

e ha

d al

read

y m

ade

our

annu

al p

lan.

Som

e of

the

sho

rt-t

erm

ac

tiviti

es I’

m r

espo

nsib

le fo

r do

n’t

seem

to

be

rela

ted

to o

ur o

rgan

izat

iona

l st

rate

gies

.

Exam

ple

: Whe

n th

ere

is a

cha

nge

in p

ro-

cedu

res

or r

egul

atio

ns, i

t is

ann

ounc

ed

eith

er in

a s

taff

mee

ting

or in

a m

emo

from

the

man

agem

ent

com

mitt

ee. B

ut

the

only

way

we

shar

e in

form

atio

n w

ith

our

colle

ague

s in

diff

eren

t un

its is

in in

-fo

rmal

con

vers

atio

ns.

1 3 2

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

25

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Syst

ems

(co

nti

nue

d)

Hum

an

Res

our

ce

Man

agem

ent

Ther

e ar

e no

pol

icie

s on

job

clas

sific

atio

n,

sala

ries,

hiri

ng, p

ro-

mot

ion,

grie

vanc

es,

or w

ork

hour

s. T

here

ar

e no

pro

cedu

res

for

per

form

ance

ev

alua

tion,

sta

ff de

-ve

lop

men

t, o

r m

ain-

tena

nce

of e

mp

loye

e da

ta.

The

orga

niza

tion

has

reco

gniz

ed t

he n

eed

for

a fo

rmal

hum

an

reso

urce

sys

tem

. It

is

wor

king

to

clar

ify h

u-m

an r

esou

rce

pol

icie

s an

d p

roce

dure

s.

Hum

an r

esou

rce

pol

i-ci

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s ar

e in

pla

ce, a

nd

man

ager

s ar

e be

gin-

ning

to

use

them

to

hire

and

ret

ain

tal-

ente

d an

d co

mm

itted

st

aff.

Hum

an r

esou

rce

pol

i-ci

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s ar

e in

pla

ce, a

nd

man

ager

s us

e th

em

cons

iste

ntly

to

hire

an

d re

tain

tal

ente

d an

d co

mm

itted

sta

ff.

2Ex

amp

le: T

he b

igge

st p

rom

otio

ns a

nd

rais

es u

sed

to b

e gi

ven

to p

eopl

e w

ho

wer

e fr

iend

ly w

ith s

enio

r m

anag

emen

t.

Ther

e w

ere

no g

uide

lines

, and

it w

as

all v

ery

secr

etiv

e. N

ow o

ur n

ew h

uman

re

sour

ce d

irect

or h

as c

ircul

ated

a d

raft

of

per

sonn

el p

olic

ies

and

proc

edur

es.

A co

uple

of p

eopl

e us

ed t

his

draf

t to

ap

peal

whe

n th

ey t

houg

ht t

hey

hadn

’t be

en t

reat

ed fa

irly.

Mo

nit

ori

ng

an

d

Eval

uati

on

The

orga

niza

tion’

s w

ork

is m

onito

red

and

its r

esul

ts a

re

eval

uate

d by

ext

erna

l ev

alua

tors

onl

y w

hen

fund

ers

dem

and

it.

The

orga

niza

tion

mon

itors

its

own

wor

k to

det

erm

ine

adhe

renc

e to

pla

nned

ac

tiviti

es. R

esul

ts a

re

eval

uate

d by

ext

erna

l te

ams

whe

n fu

nder

s de

man

d it.

The

orga

niza

tion

regu

larly

mon

itors

its

own

wor

k to

det

er-

min

e p

rogr

ess

tow

ard

achi

evin

g go

als

and

obje

ctiv

es. I

t ev

alu-

ates

res

ults

at

the

end

of e

ach

pro

ject

and

p

rogr

am.

The

orga

niza

tion

regu

larly

mon

itors

its

pro

gres

s, e

valu

ates

re

sults

, and

use

s th

e fin

ding

s to

imp

rove

se

rvic

es a

nd p

lan

the

next

pha

se o

f wor

k.

2Ex

amp

le: W

e ha

ve t

o w

rite

quar

terly

re

port

s th

at s

how

how

wel

l we’

re c

ar-

ryin

g ou

t va

rious

pro

ject

s. B

ut w

hen

a pr

ojec

t ev

alua

tion

team

mad

e a

site

vi

sit

last

sum

mer

, we

had

no e

vide

nce

to c

onvi

nce

them

tha

t w

e ha

d ac

hiev

ed

sign

ifica

nt r

esul

ts.

Info

rmat

ion

M

anag

emen

t:

Dat

a

Co

llect

ion

Rout

ine

serv

ice

and

finan

cial

dat

a ar

e

ofte

n in

accu

rate

, an

d re

por

ts a

re

rare

ly s

ubm

itted

on

sc

hedu

le.

The

orga

niza

tion

has

intr

oduc

ed s

yste

ms

that

are

beg

inni

ng

to im

pro

ve t

he a

c-cu

racy

and

tim

elin

ess

of r

outin

e se

rvic

e an

d fin

anci

al r

epor

ts.

Org

aniz

atio

nal

syst

ems

yiel

d ro

utin

e se

rvic

e an

d fin

anci

al

data

tha

t ar

e

gene

rally

con

side

red

accu

rate

, and

mos

t re

por

ts a

re s

ubm

itted

on

sch

edul

e.

Org

aniz

atio

nal

syst

ems

pro

vide

cr

oss-

chec

king

to

guar

ante

e th

e ac

-cu

racy

of r

outin

e se

rvic

e an

d fin

an-

cial

dat

a. T

here

are

cl

ear,

enfo

rced

con

-se

que

nces

for

late

re

por

ts.

3Ex

amp

le: W

e ca

n co

unt

on m

ost

of o

ur

faci

litie

s to

get

the

ir m

onth

ly r

epor

ts in

on

tim

e, a

nd o

ur c

ross

-che

ckin

g sh

ows

that

the

ir ac

cura

cy is

qui

te g

ood.

But

th

ere

are

five

or s

ix fa

cilit

ies

that

are

al

way

s la

te, a

nd t

hree

of t

hem

rou

tinel

y su

bmit

data

tha

t do

n’t

mat

ch o

ur

obse

rvat

ions

.

26

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Syst

ems

(co

nti

nue

d)

Info

rmat

ion

M

anag

emen

t:

Use

of

In

form

atio

n

Thos

e w

ho s

ubm

it re

qui

red

rep

orts

re

ceiv

e no

feed

back

fr

om t

heir

man

ag-

ers.

The

info

rmat

ion

in t

he r

epor

ts is

file

d aw

ay a

nd n

ot u

sed

for

man

agem

ent

or

pro

gram

mat

ic d

eci-

sion

s.

Thos

e w

ho s

ubm

it re

qui

red

rep

orts

re

ceiv

e sp

orad

ic

feed

back

from

the

ir m

anag

ers.

Som

e m

anag

ers

use

the

info

rmat

ion

in t

he

rep

orts

to

mak

e de

ci-

sion

s.

All

man

ager

s ar

e ex

-p

ecte

d to

giv

e re

gu-

lar

feed

back

to

staf

f w

ho s

ubm

it re

qui

red

rep

orts

, and

to

use

the

info

rmat

ion

in

the

rep

orts

as

a ba

sis

for

deci

sion

s.

Staf

f mem

bers

who

su

bmit

rep

orts

con

-si

sten

tly g

et p

rom

pt

feed

back

. With

the

ir m

anag

ers,

the

y an

a-ly

ze t

he in

form

atio

n an

d us

e th

eir

findi

ngs

to a

naly

ze t

rend

s, im

-p

rove

man

agem

ent

and

per

form

ance

, an

d ac

hiev

e ou

t-co

mes

.

1Ex

amp

le: W

e se

nd o

ur r

epor

ts t

o he

ad -

quar

ters

eve

ry q

uart

er. T

heir

only

re-

spon

se is

to

ackn

owle

dge

that

the

y ha

ve

rece

ived

the

rep

orts

on

such

-and

-suc

h a

date

.

Qua

lity

A

ssur

ance

The

orga

niza

tion

em-

pha

size

s th

e nu

mbe

r of

act

iviti

es u

nder

-ta

ken,

rat

her

than

the

q

ualit

y of

ser

vice

s.

The

orga

niza

tion

ackn

owle

dges

the

im

por

tanc

e of

hig

h-q

ualit

y se

rvic

es. I

t is

co

nsid

erin

g ac

tiviti

es

that

will

hel

p s

taff

regu

larly

ass

ess

and

imp

rove

qua

lity.

Som

e p

arts

of t

he

orga

niza

tion

have

un

dert

aken

act

iviti

es

to a

sses

s an

d im

pro

ve

the

qua

lity

of s

ervi

ces.

A

few

inte

rest

ed s

taff

mem

bers

hav

e ta

ken

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r

cond

uctin

g th

ese

ac

tiviti

es.

Ther

e is

an

esta

b-lis

hed,

ong

oing

sys

-te

m fo

r as

sess

ing

and

imp

rovi

ng t

he q

ualit

y of

ser

vice

s. T

rain

ed

staf

f are

reg

ular

ly u

s-in

g th

is s

yste

m.

3Ex

amp

le: W

e ha

d a

wor

ksho

p on

qua

l-ity

last

yea

r, an

d ou

r un

it m

ade

som

e ex

citin

g ch

ange

s. T

hen

the

pers

on w

ho

ran

our

qual

ity s

essi

ons

got

too

busy

to

keep

it u

p. I

don’

t kn

ow w

hat

has

hap-

pene

d in

oth

er u

nits

.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

27

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Syst

ems

(co

nti

nue

d)

Fin

anci

al

Man

agem

ent

Budg

ets

are

deve

l-op

ed w

ithou

t in

put

fr

om p

rogr

am m

an-

ager

s. T

he fi

nanc

e sy

stem

doe

s no

t ac

-cu

rate

ly t

rack

exp

en-

ditu

res,

rev

enue

s, a

nd

cash

flow

.

Budg

ets

are

usua

lly

deve

lop

ed w

ith in

put

fr

om p

rogr

am m

an-

ager

s. T

he fi

nanc

e sy

stem

tra

cks

exp

en-

ditu

res,

rev

enue

s, a

nd

cash

flow

by

line

item

(e

.g.,

sala

ries,

util

ities

, m

ater

ials

), w

ithou

t lin

ks t

o p

rogr

am o

ut-

put

s or

ser

vice

s.

Fina

ncia

l sta

ff de

-ve

lop

bud

gets

in

conj

unct

ion

with

p

rogr

am m

anag

ers.

Th

e fin

ance

sys

tem

tr

acks

exp

endi

ture

s,

reve

nues

, and

cas

h flo

w b

y lin

e ite

m,

with

som

e lin

ks t

o p

rogr

am o

utp

uts

and

serv

ices

.

Man

ager

s w

ork

with

fina

ncia

l sta

ff to

dev

elop

bud

gets

. Th

e fin

ance

sys

tem

p

rese

nts

an a

ccur

ate,

co

mp

lete

pic

ture

of

exp

endi

ture

s, r

ev-

enue

, and

cas

h flo

w

in r

elat

ion

to p

rogr

am

outp

uts

and

serv

ices

. D

ecis

ions

are

bas

ed

on a

ctua

l cos

t of

op

erat

ions

.

4Ex

amp

le: W

hen

we

plan

, our

fina

n-ci

al o

ffice

r he

lps

us d

evel

op b

udge

ts

that

cov

er e

very

act

ivity

. She

use

s th

e re

venu

e an

d ca

sh fl

ow r

epor

ts t

o tr

ack

expe

nditu

res

agai

nst

the

budg

et, a

nd

she

aler

ts u

s if

we

star

t ov

ersp

endi

ng.

We

then

adj

ust

our

activ

ities

bas

ed o

n ch

ange

s in

cos

ts.

Rev

enue

G

ener

atio

nTh

e or

gani

zatio

n op

-er

ates

with

a s

ingl

e so

urce

of r

even

ue,

usua

lly o

ne la

rge

fund

er, w

hose

man

-da

te s

hap

es s

trat

egie

s an

d p

rogr

ams.

The

orga

niza

tion

ac-

know

ledg

es t

he n

eed

for

dive

rsifi

ed fu

nd-

ing.

It h

as d

evis

ed,

but

not

yet

imp

le-

men

ted,

a s

trat

egy

for

obta

inin

g re

venu

e fr

om d

iver

se s

ourc

es.

The

orga

niza

tion

has

begu

n to

imp

lem

ent

its d

iver

sific

atio

n st

rate

gy a

nd h

as a

l-re

ady

obta

ined

sig

-ni

fican

t re

venu

e fr

om

dive

rse

sour

ces

to

cove

r cu

rren

t ne

eds.

The

orga

niza

tion

follo

ws

a lo

ng-t

erm

re

venu

e-ge

nera

ting

stra

tegy

, bal

anci

ng

dive

rse

sour

ces

of r

ev-

enue

to

mee

t cu

rren

t an

d fu

ture

nee

ds.

1Ex

amp

le: W

e ge

t 97

% o

f our

fund

s fr

om

one

sour

ce. T

here

are

som

e ex

citin

g pr

ogra

ms

we’

d lik

e to

try

, but

our

don

or

won

’t su

ppor

t un

test

ed in

itiat

ives

. We’

ve

talk

ed a

bout

div

ersi

fyin

g ou

r fu

ndin

g,

but

we

don’

t kn

ow w

here

to

star

t.

Sup

ply

M

anag

emen

tTh

ere

is no

sys

tem

in

plac

e to

pro

cure

, tra

ck,

or re

gula

te s

uppl

ies

(clin

ical

, pha

rmac

euti-

cal,

or o

ffice

). Su

pplie

s ar

e sim

ply

rece

ived

, st

ocke

d, a

nd d

istrib

-ut

ed u

pon

dem

and.

A s

upp

ly s

yste

m h

as

been

des

igne

d to

al-

low

the

org

aniz

atio

n to

tra

ck t

he fl

ow a

nd

use

of s

upp

lies.

Sta

ff ha

ve n

ot y

et b

een

trai

ned

to u

se t

he

syst

em.

The

sup

ply

sys

tem

al-

low

s th

e or

gani

zatio

n to

fore

cast

and

pro

-cu

re s

upp

lies

in r

ela-

tion

to t

heir

dem

and

and

use.

Som

e st

aff

have

bee

n tr

aine

d to

us

e th

e sy

stem

.

Trai

ned

staf

f con

sis-

tent

ly u

se t

he s

upp

ly

syst

em t

o fo

reca

st

futu

re r

equi

rem

ents

, re

duce

gap

s, a

nd p

re-

vent

sto

ckou

ts.

2Ex

amp

le: F

or e

very

del

iver

y of

dru

gs t

o th

e cl

inic

s, w

e fil

l out

a fo

rm. W

e al

so

keep

a d

aily

rec

ord

of t

he m

edic

ines

we

disp

ense

. How

ever

, sin

ce t

he fo

rms

are

kept

in d

iffer

ent

plac

es, w

e do

n’t

usua

lly

com

pare

the

m, s

o w

e ca

n’t

pred

ict

whe

n w

e’ll

run

out.

MOST


facilitatOrS’ Plan

This section of the guide provides a suggested plan for implementing the entire MOST process. This plan is a synthesis of the experience of previous MOST facilitators. As such, it is meant to be a guide rather than a rigid prescription.

This plan is very detailed. You should read the previous sections of the MOST guide first, to obtain an overview of the process and of your responsibilities. When you have a solid understanding of the purpose and process of MOST, you can turn to this facilitators’ plan to fill in the details. You can decide with your co-facilitator how to divide responsibilities throughout the process.

The facilitators’ plan is organized according to the four phases of the MOST process:

Phase 1: Engagement of the Organization’s Leaders. During this phase, you will get to know the organization, be sure that the director fully understands MOST and is prepared to undertake the process, and negotiate an agreement on the scope of work.

Phase 2: Preparation for the Workshop. This phase involves interviewing potential work-shop participants and making all arrangements for the workshop. During this phase, you will adopt the MOST assessment instrument to the local context as needed.

Phase 3: Workshop Plan. The workshop lasts three days. The first day includes the opening session and Module 1: Where Are We Now? The second day covers Module 2: Where Are We Headed? The third day is devoted to Module 3: How Will We Reach Our Objectives? The pro-posed times are found in the Workshop Agenda on page 56.

Phase 4: Follow-Up Activities. Follow-up should be provided over a six-month to one-year period. Follow-up includes regular contact by telephone or e-mail, and possibly another MOST workshop toward the end of the period to review progress and plan for future management improvements.

For each phase, the plan identifies the objectives, describes the activities in detail, explains your role in each activity, and lists the resources you will need to prepare. (Some of the resources appear in this guide, but you will need to obtain or produce others yourself.) In addition, based on the ex-periences of past MOST facilitators, the plan also includes points to bear in mind that can enhance an activity.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

29

Pha

Se 1

: en

ga

geM

ent

Of

the

Or

ga

niz

ati

On’S

lea

der

S

Ob

jec

tiv

eS

• to

bec

ome

fam

iliar

wit

h th

e or

gani

zati

on b

y re

view

ing

docu

men

ts a

nd m

eeti

ng w

ith

the

orga

niza

tion

’s le

ader

ship

;•

to c

onfir

m w

ith

the

orga

niza

tion

’s le

ader

ship

tha

t M

OST

is a

ppro

pria

te fo

r th

e or

gani

zati

on a

t th

is t

ime;

• if

MO

ST is

app

ropr

iate

, to

final

ize

nego

tiat

ions

and

rea

ch a

gree

men

t on

the

sco

pe o

f w

ork.

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Pr

epar

atio

n fo

r th

e fir

st m

eetin

g w

ith

the

orga

niza

tion’

s le

ader

ship

Beco

me

fam

iliar

with

the

det

ails

of t

he M

OST

pro

cess

.

Beco

me

fam

iliar

with

the

org

aniz

atio

n’s

man

date

, his

tory

, cul

ture

, ac

hiev

emen

ts, c

halle

nges

, and

con

cern

s.

Firs

t th

ree

sect

ions

of t

he

MO

ST g

uide

Doc

umen

ts a

bout

the

org

a-ni

zatio

n, s

uch

as it

s m

issi

on

stat

emen

t, s

trat

egic

pla

n, a

n-nu

al r

epor

ts, r

epor

ts t

o do

-no

rs, s

ervi

ce fl

yers

, and

Web

si

te in

form

atio

n

Mee

ting

with

the

or-

gani

zatio

n’s

di

rect

or

Intr

oduc

e th

e M

OST

pro

cess

, rel

atin

g it

(whe

n p

ossi

ble)

to

wha

t yo

u ha

ve le

arne

d ab

out

the

orga

niza

tion.

Hig

hlig

ht t

he fo

llow

ing:

•

The

pur

pos

e of

the

MO

ST p

roce

ss is

to

help

an

orga

niza

tion

chan

ge a

nd d

evel

op it

s m

anag

emen

t an

d le

ader

ship

.-

Man

agem

ent

imp

rove

men

ts c

an le

ad t

o im

pro

ved

serv

ices

an

d co

ntrib

ute

to s

usta

inab

ility

.-

Stro

ng le

ader

ship

will

be

need

ed t

o in

itiat

e an

d su

stai

n th

e ch

ange

s m

ade.

• Th

e M

OST

pro

cess

is p

art

of a

n on

goin

g co

mm

itmen

t to

cha

nge.

- C

hang

e be

gins

at

the

top

, as

an o

rgan

izat

ion’

s le

ader

s de

mon

-st

rate

op

enne

ss t

o th

e is

sues

and

idea

s of

sta

ff. T

he le

ader

s ar

e on

an

equa

l foo

ting

with

all

othe

r p

artic

ipan

ts in

the

MO

ST

wor

ksho

p.

- Th

e th

ree-

day

wor

ksho

p is

the

foca

l eve

nt, b

ut n

ot t

he fi

nal

even

t. T

he w

orks

hop

build

s a

colle

ctiv

e pe

rspe

ctiv

e am

ong

staf

f, ge

nera

tes

idea

s, a

nd c

reat

es b

uy-in

for

the

actio

ns s

ugge

sted

.

“Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

-ag

emen

t” o

n p

age

52 a

nd

Pow

erPo

int

pre

sent

atio

n on

M

OST

CD

-RO

M

Prov

ide

MO

ST m

ater

ials

sev

eral

day

s ah

ead

of t

ime

and

enco

urag

e th

e di

rect

or t

o re

view

the

m b

efor

e th

e m

eetin

g.

If th

e di

rect

or q

uest

ions

the

nee

d fo

r m

ore

than

one

faci

litat

or, y

ou m

ay

wan

t to

dra

w o

n th

e ex

pla

natio

n fo

und

on p

age

5 in

“Th

e M

OST

Pro

-ce

ss.”

No

te: S

ome

dire

ctor

s m

ay c

hoos

e to

in

volv

e a

smal

l num

ber

of s

enio

r st

aff

in t

his

mee

ting.

If s

o, y

ou s

houl

d p

rovi

de t

hem

with

the

sam

e M

OST

m

ater

ials

.

30

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Mee

ting

with

the

or-

gani

zatio

n’s

di

rect

or (

cont

inue

d)

- Im

pro

ving

man

agem

ent

pra

ctic

es w

ill r

equi

re im

por

tant

fol-

low

-up

act

ions

led

by a

cha

nge

lead

er a

nd c

hang

e te

am a

nd

sup

por

ted

with

the

org

aniz

atio

n’s

reso

urce

s.-

It w

ill t

ake

time

to s

ee t

he e

ffect

s of

MO

ST o

n th

e or

gani

za-

tion’

s w

ork

and,

ulti

mat

ely,

on

serv

ices

and

sus

tain

abili

ty.

Revi

ew t

he c

riter

ia fo

r un

dert

akin

g M

OST

, ack

now

ledg

ing

that

MO

ST

is n

ot a

pp

rop

riate

for

ever

y or

gani

zatio

n. D

eter

min

e w

ith t

he d

irect

or

whe

ther

the

org

aniz

atio

n m

eets

the

se c

riter

ia a

nd is

rea

dy fo

r M

OST

at

thi

s tim

e.

Ans

wer

all

que

stio

ns fu

lly a

nd h

ones

tly.

“How

Org

aniz

atio

ns C

an

Bene

fit fr

om M

OST

,”

pag

e 3

Neg

otia

tion

of t

he

agre

emen

t w

ith t

he

dire

ctor

or

an a

s-si

gned

sta

ff co

un-

terp

art

With

the

dire

ctor

, det

erm

ine

the

scop

e of

wor

k, in

clud

ing:

• yo

ur le

vel o

f effo

rt b

efor

e, d

urin

g, a

nd a

fter

the

wor

ksho

p;

• a

desi

gnat

ed s

taff

coun

terp

art

from

the

org

aniz

atio

n to

han

dle

lo-

gist

ics

befo

re a

nd d

urin

g th

e w

orks

hop

; •

the

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

of a

ll p

artie

s to

the

agr

eem

ent;

• th

e an

ticip

ated

res

ults

of y

our

inte

rven

tions

;•

if

pos

sibl

e, id

entif

ying

the

sta

ff m

embe

r w

ho w

ill b

e th

e ch

ange

le

ader

and

ove

rsee

the

imp

lem

enta

tion

of t

he a

ctio

n p

lan.

In

con

side

ring

wha

t w

ill h

app

en a

fter

th

e w

orks

hop

, it

is u

sefu

l to

pla

n fo

r a

six-

mon

th o

r on

e-ye

ar fo

llow

-up

M

OST

exe

rcis

e, t

o ev

alua

te p

rog-

ress

and

ach

ieve

men

ts t

o da

te, a

nd

to p

lan

for

futu

re m

anag

emen

t im

-p

rove

men

ts.

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

31

Pha

Se 2

: Pr

ePa

ra

tiO

n f

Or t

he

wO

rk

ShO

P

Ob

jec

tiv

eS

• to

arr

ange

the

det

ails

of

the

wor

ksho

p;

• to

gai

n in

form

atio

n fr

om t

he id

enti

fied

wor

ksho

p pa

rtic

ipan

ts t

hrou

gh in

terv

iew

s an

d/or

que

stio

nnai

res;

• to

use

the

par

tici

pant

info

rmat

ion

in p

lann

ing

the

wor

ksho

p.

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Fu

rthe

r m

eetin

g(s)

w

ith t

he d

irect

or

Con

firm

the

exp

ecta

tions

and

res

pon

sibi

litie

s of

the

dire

ctor

, fac

ilita

-to

rs, s

taff

coun

terp

art,

and

par

ticip

ants

, bef

ore,

dur

ing,

and

aft

er

the

wor

ksho

p.

With

the

dire

ctor

, cla

rify

how

MO

ST w

ill fi

t int

o th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

ov

eral

l pla

nnin

g pr

oces

s an

d an

y ot

her c

urre

nt im

prov

emen

t ini

tiativ

es.

“Rol

es o

f Sta

keho

lder

s,”

begi

n-ni

ng o

n p

age

12

Mak

ing

arra

ngem

ents

fo

r th

e w

orks

hop

With

the

dire

ctor

, rev

iew

the

follo

win

g cr

iteria

to

iden

tify

the

wor

k-sh

op p

artic

ipan

ts.

• Id

eally

the

re w

ill b

e 12

–25

par

ticip

ants

. •

Ther

e sh

ould

be

a m

ix o

f key

sen

ior

staf

f and

oth

er s

taff

who

ha

ve m

anag

emen

t re

spon

sibi

litie

s.•

The

par

ticip

ants

may

incl

ude

othe

r st

akeh

olde

rs t

he d

irect

or

cons

ider

s ap

pro

pria

te fo

r m

anag

emen

t di

scus

sion

s (e

.g.,

pub

lic-

sect

or c

entr

al a

nd r

egio

nal s

taff,

sta

ff of

clo

sely

rel

ated

min

is-

trie

s, N

GO

boa

rd m

embe

rs, s

ervi

ce p

rovi

ders

).•

All

par

ticip

ants

mus

t m

ake

a co

mm

itmen

t to

be

pre

sent

and

in-

volv

ed t

hrou

ghou

t th

e w

orks

hop

.

“Rol

e of

the

Par

ticip

ants

,”

pag

e 13

Mee

t w

ith t

he o

rgan

izat

ion’

s st

aff c

ount

erp

art

to g

o ov

er t

he a

r-ra

ngem

ents

and

logi

stic

s he

or

she

is h

andl

ing.

Arr

ange

men

ts in

-cl

ude

sche

dulin

g th

e p

re-w

orks

hop

par

ticip

ant

inte

rvie

ws,

set

ting

the

wor

ksho

p d

ates

and

loca

tion,

gat

herin

g th

e w

orks

hop

sup

plie

s,

and

pro

duci

ng t

he p

artic

ipan

ts’ w

orks

hop

bin

ders

.

Con

firm

the

wor

ksho

p’s

loca

tion

(off-

site

, if p

ossi

ble)

. It

shou

ld h

ave

brea

kout

sp

ace

for

seve

ral s

mal

l gro

ups

to m

eet

sim

ulta

neou

sly

and

wal

l sp

ace

for

pos

ting

flip

cha

rt p

ages

.

Wor

ksho

p m

ater

ials

, beg

inni

ng o

n p

age

56

Add

ition

al r

esou

rces

, pag

e 75

32

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Pr

e-w

orks

hop

in

terv

iew

s w

ith

par

ticip

ants

Mee

t w

ith a

ll w

orks

hop

par

ticip

ants

, ind

ivid

ually

or

in s

mal

l gro

ups,

se

vera

l day

s be

fore

the

wor

ksho

p.

• Be

gin

to k

now

the

key

pla

yers

and

the

ir ar

eas

of in

tere

st a

nd

conc

ern.

• O

rient

the

m t

o th

e M

OST

pro

cess

by

goin

g ov

er “

Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

agem

ent”

with

the

m a

nd a

nsw

erin

g th

eir

que

s-tio

ns.

• In

terv

iew

the

par

ticip

ants

to

gath

er in

form

atio

n th

at w

ill h

elp

yo

u p

lan

the

wor

ksho

p. S

ugge

sted

que

stio

ns in

clud

e:

- W

hat

is y

our

posi

tion?

Wha

t ar

e yo

ur m

ain

resp

onsi

bilit

ies?

- W

hat

is it

abo

ut t

his

orga

niza

tion

that

mot

ivat

es y

ou t

o co

me

to w

ork

ever

y da

y?-

Wha

t do

you

thi

nk m

akes

thi

s or

gani

zatio

n un

ique

? -

Wha

t ar

e yo

ur m

ain

conc

erns

abo

ut t

he m

anag

emen

t of

the

or

gani

zatio

n?-

Wha

t ar

e yo

ur e

xpec

tatio

ns fo

r th

is w

orks

hop

? W

hat

do y

ou

hop

e w

ill b

e di

ffere

nt w

hen

you

retu

rn t

o yo

ur d

ay-t

o-da

y re

spon

sibi

litie

s at

the

end

of t

he w

orks

hop

?-

Wha

t do

you

hop

e to

con

trib

ute

to t

he M

OST

pro

cess

, bot

h du

ring

and

afte

r th

e w

orks

hop

?•

Iden

tify

recu

rrin

g is

sues

and

con

cern

s th

at m

ight

aris

e du

ring

the

wor

ksho

p.

• U

se t

his

info

rmat

ion

to s

hap

e th

e w

orks

hop

.

“Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

age-

men

t,”

pag

e 52

You

may

wish

to c

onsid

er o

rient

ing

the

wor

ksho

p pa

rtic

ipan

ts a

head

of

tim

e us

ing

the

Pow

erPo

int s

lide

show

foun

d on

the

MO

ST C

D-

ROM

. Aft

er t

his

grou

p o

rient

a-tio

n, y

ou c

ould

the

n p

roce

ed

with

the

indi

vidu

al in

terv

iew

s.

Alth

ough

face

-to-

face

inte

r-vi

ews

are

the

best

way

to

get

to

know

par

ticip

ants

and

beg

in t

o es

tabl

ish

trus

t, t

hese

mee

tings

m

ay n

ot a

lway

s be

pos

sibl

e. If

no

t, y

ou c

an s

ubst

itute

a w

rit-

ten

que

stio

nnai

re t

hat

will

be

info

rmat

ive

with

out

pla

cing

too

m

uch

of a

bur

den

on t

he r

e-sp

onde

nts,

usi

ng o

r ad

aptin

g th

e q

uest

ions

sug

gest

ed fo

r th

e in

terv

iew

. Dis

trib

ute

“Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

agem

ent”

and

th

e q

uest

ionn

aire

to

the

par

tici-

pan

ts, w

ith a

mes

sage

from

you

ex

pla

inin

g th

e p

urp

ose

of t

he

que

stio

nnai

re a

nd a

dea

dlin

e fo

r re

turn

ing

it. B

e su

re t

o al

low

en

ough

tim

e fo

r th

e p

artic

ipan

ts

to r

etur

n it

so y

ou c

an t

ake

thei

r re

spon

ses

into

acc

ount

as

you

pla

n th

e w

orks

hop

.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

33

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Pr

e-w

orks

hop

in

terv

iew

s w

ith

par

ticip

ants

Mee

t w

ith a

ll w

orks

hop

par

ticip

ants

, ind

ivid

ually

or

in s

mal

l gro

ups,

se

vera

l day

s be

fore

the

wor

ksho

p.

• Be

gin

to k

now

the

key

pla

yers

and

the

ir ar

eas

of in

tere

st a

nd

conc

ern.

• O

rient

the

m t

o th

e M

OST

pro

cess

by

goin

g ov

er “

Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

agem

ent”

with

the

m a

nd a

nsw

erin

g th

eir

que

s-tio

ns.

• In

terv

iew

the

par

ticip

ants

to

gath

er in

form

atio

n th

at w

ill h

elp

yo

u p

lan

the

wor

ksho

p. S

ugge

sted

que

stio

ns in

clud

e:

- W

hat

is y

our

posi

tion?

Wha

t ar

e yo

ur m

ain

resp

onsi

bilit

ies?

- W

hat

is it

abo

ut t

his

orga

niza

tion

that

mot

ivat

es y

ou t

o co

me

to w

ork

ever

y da

y?-

Wha

t do

you

thi

nk m

akes

thi

s or

gani

zatio

n un

ique

? -

Wha

t ar

e yo

ur m

ain

conc

erns

abo

ut t

he m

anag

emen

t of

the

or

gani

zatio

n?-

Wha

t ar

e yo

ur e

xpec

tatio

ns fo

r th

is w

orks

hop

? W

hat

do y

ou

hop

e w

ill b

e di

ffere

nt w

hen

you

retu

rn t

o yo

ur d

ay-t

o-da

y re

spon

sibi

litie

s at

the

end

of t

he w

orks

hop

?-

Wha

t do

you

hop

e to

con

trib

ute

to t

he M

OST

pro

cess

, bot

h du

ring

and

afte

r th

e w

orks

hop

?•

Iden

tify

recu

rrin

g is

sues

and

con

cern

s th

at m

ight

aris

e du

ring

the

wor

ksho

p.

• U

se t

his

info

rmat

ion

to s

hap

e th

e w

orks

hop

.

“Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

age-

men

t,”

pag

e 52

You

may

wish

to c

onsid

er o

rient

ing

the

wor

ksho

p pa

rtic

ipan

ts a

head

of

tim

e us

ing

the

Pow

erPo

int s

lide

show

foun

d on

the

MO

ST C

D-

ROM

. Aft

er t

his

grou

p o

rient

a-tio

n, y

ou c

ould

the

n p

roce

ed

with

the

indi

vidu

al in

terv

iew

s.

Alth

ough

face

-to-

face

inte

r-vi

ews

are

the

best

way

to

get

to

know

par

ticip

ants

and

beg

in t

o es

tabl

ish

trus

t, t

hese

mee

tings

m

ay n

ot a

lway

s be

pos

sibl

e. If

no

t, y

ou c

an s

ubst

itute

a w

rit-

ten

que

stio

nnai

re t

hat

will

be

info

rmat

ive

with

out

pla

cing

too

m

uch

of a

bur

den

on t

he r

e-sp

onde

nts,

usi

ng o

r ad

aptin

g th

e q

uest

ions

sug

gest

ed fo

r th

e in

terv

iew

. Dis

trib

ute

“Mak

ing

the

MO

ST o

f Man

agem

ent”

and

th

e q

uest

ionn

aire

to

the

par

tici-

pan

ts, w

ith a

mes

sage

from

you

ex

pla

inin

g th

e p

urp

ose

of t

he

que

stio

nnai

re a

nd a

dea

dlin

e fo

r re

turn

ing

it. B

e su

re t

o al

low

en

ough

tim

e fo

r th

e p

artic

ipan

ts

to r

etur

n it

so y

ou c

an t

ake

thei

r re

spon

ses

into

acc

ount

as

you

pla

n th

e w

orks

hop

.

Ada

pt

the

MO

ST A

s-se

ssm

ent

Inst

rum

ent

Plan

ning

the

w

orks

hop

• Re

view

the

MO

ST A

sses

smen

t In

stru

men

t w

ith t

he d

irect

or t

o no

te a

ny a

reas

nee

ding

refi

nem

ent

or a

dap

tatio

n.•

Rem

ove

any

char

acte

ristic

s th

at m

ay n

ot a

pp

ly t

o th

e sp

ecifi

c or

gani

zatio

n.•

Ada

pt

the

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ents

as

need

ed.

• Pr

int

new

cop

ies

of t

he A

sses

smen

t In

stru

men

t fo

r p

artic

ipan

ts

and

revi

ew w

ith t

he d

irect

or b

efor

e th

e w

orks

hop

.

Revi

ew t

he s

essi

on p

lans

for

the

wor

ksho

p, f

ound

in t

his

guid

e. U

se

thes

e p

lans

as

a gu

idel

ine

for

pla

nnin

g th

e w

orks

hop

.

Con

side

r w

hat

you

have

lear

ned

from

you

r m

eetin

gs a

nd in

terv

iew

s w

hen

stru

ctur

ing

wor

king

gro

ups

and

allo

catin

g tim

e fo

r w

orks

hop

ac

tiviti

es.

• M

OST

Ass

essm

ent

Inst

rum

ent

pag

e 57

–63

• Le

gal d

ocum

ents

, pol

icie

s, o

r in

form

atio

n on

reg

ulat

ions

af-

fect

ing

the

orga

niza

tion

"Pha

se 3

: Wor

ksho

p P

lan,

" be

gin-

ning

on

pag

e 34

The

pol

icie

s, le

gal c

onte

xt, a

nd

regu

latio

ns t

hat

effe

ct a

n or

ga-

niza

tion

will

hav

e an

imp

act

on

the

char

acte

ristic

s th

at a

re li

sted

fo

r ea

ch s

tage

of d

evel

opm

ent

for

each

man

agem

ent

com

po-

nent

. It

is im

por

tant

to

unde

r-st

and

the

envi

ronm

ent

in w

hich

th

e or

gani

zatio

n op

erat

es (

e.g.

, Is

it a

pub

lic-s

ecto

r or

gani

zatio

n th

at d

oes

not

req

uire

a b

oard

of

dire

ctor

s?).

Whe

n yo

u m

eet

with

th

e di

rect

or o

f the

org

aniz

atio

n,

revi

ew t

he M

OST

ass

essm

ent

inst

rum

ent

toge

ther

and

dis

cuss

w

hich

com

pon

ents

ap

ply

to

the

orga

niza

tion.

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…

MOST


PhaSe 3: wOrkShOP Plan

The focal point of the MOST process is a structured workshop in which, over the course of three days, you will help the participants pool their individual and collective experience of the organiza-tion. The result will be a better picture of the current management practices of their organization and a plan for making management improvements.

Participants. Ideally, the workshop should include 12 to 25 participants. Fewer than 12 participants limits the richness of discussions; more than 25 requires more time to integrate small-group prod-ucts into consensus and may strain the three-day format. The participants should include the direc-tor, senior managers, and a mix of staff with management responsibilities. It may also include other stakeholders whose involvement in management issues the director considers appropriate (e.g., cen-tral and regional staff, service providers, and board members).

Purpose. MOST provides a framework for an ongoing organization-wide discussion about crucial management practices. The MOST workshop is often the first opportunity for staff and stakeholders from different levels to share their perceptions of the organization’s management and the issues that affect their daily work. The goal of the workshop is to help participants use these perceptions to identify concrete actions they can take in the immediate future to improve management.

Approach. The workshop process is designed to validate the contributions of each participant. Within a highly structured environment, all participants are encouraged to express their views and listen carefully to the views of their colleagues. This process allows participants to come to consen-sus on the organization’s current management performance and make a practical plan for improving its performance.

Reaching Consensus

Consensus is strongly emphasized in the MOST workshop. This emphasis is based on two assumptions:

• No single participant in the workshop possesses the complete truth about the organization and its management; instead, every person possesses some part of the truth. An accurate picture is best obtained by pooling these individual perceptions.

• Each participant’s observations about his or her experiences vis-à-vis the management com-ponents can broaden the perspective of the other participants. The evidence the participants offer to support their opinions helps the group come to agreement on what may initially seem to be incompatible viewpoints.

The workshop participants reach consensus not by voting but by patiently sorting through all opinions until they arrive at a decision that each participant can accept and work with—even if this decision does not completely match his or her initial opinion.

MOST


Workshop Agenda. The workshop consists of an opening session and three modules with defined objectives for each session and module.

Session/Module Title

Objectives Approximate Timing

DAY 1 • Introductions.• Review the workshop agenda and anticipated outcomes.• Clarify expectations.• Introduce the MOST process.• Establish ground rules for an open, honest, respectful

exchange of ideas

1 ½ hours

Principles of leadership, management, and change

• Explore the links between leadership, improved manage-ment, work climate, sustainability, and organizational results.

• Explore the principles of change.

1 hour

Module 1: Where Are We Now?

• Explore the meaning of the five management areas and the 19 management components.

• Work in groups that cut across organizational divisions and draw on the contributions of each member.

4 hours

DAY 2 Module 1: Con-tinued: Where Are We Now? Conclu-sion

Module 2: Where Are We Headed?

• In plenary, generate consensus on the organization's cur-rent status in terms of each component.

• Agree on one or two objectives for improving each man-agement component.

• Provide evidence that will indicate progress toward these objectives.

• Select the highest-priority management components to improve during the coming period.

1 hour

5 ½ hours

DAY 3 Module 3: How Will We Reach Our Objectives?

• Prepare an action plan for these improvements.• Decide on follow-up activities that will need to be complet-

ed, and assign responsibility for the activities.• Name the change leader and change team who will over-

see the implementation of the plan.

1 day

Specific plans for the workshop appear in the following pages. A one-page duplicate of the workshop agenda and anticipated outcomes that can be distributed to workshop participants appears on page 56.

Anticipated outcomes of the workshop. By the end of the workshop, participants will have come to agreement on how well the organization is functioning and will have planned activities for mak-ing improvements. The specific outcomes include:

• a collective assessment of the current stage of development of the 19 management components;

• a prioritized list of the management components to be improved within a specified time period;

• an agreed-upon set of objectives for improving each management component;

• an action plan for reaching the objectives, identifying the broad activities, timing, resources, and people responsible for completing the activities, as well as data that provide evidence of success;

• identification of a change leader and change team who will lead the implementation of the actionplan and monitor progress;

MOST


• a list of short-term activities for following up on the MOST workshop: those the staff can do themselves with existing resources, those for which they need to seek additional resources, and those for which they will need technical assistance from outside the organization;

• agreement on post-workshop assistance from the facilitators (by phone or e-mail) and a follow-up MOST exercise, usually six months to one year after the workshop.

Helping to Develop the MOST Action Plan

A critical outcome of the MOST workshop is a concrete plan for making the changes needed to strengthen management performance. This action plan usually covers one year, broken down by quar-ters or months. For the action plan to be carried out successfully, you can help the participants to:

• link the action plan to the organization’s operational and work plans;

• secure the commitment and active involvement of the organization’s leaders, especially with regard to difficult decisions about resources;

• assign responsibility for activities only to someone who agrees to do them, preferably someone who participated in the workshop. It is unrealistic and unfair to hold people accountable for activities they have not agreed to carry out;

• plan realistically, allowing more time than seems necessary to complete each activity;

• plan for incremental improvements. Small steps are often more feasible than giant leaps and may be more effective in moving the organization toward its objectives;

• introduce the action plan to the rest of the staff and include them in the activities;

• carefully consider the organizational factors that will foster or impede change, and seek ways to address these factors, perhaps with outside assistance.

Setting. Much of the discussion during the workshop will happen in small groups, with frequent plenary meetings to synthesize the findings and make decisions. Thus, the workshop should take place in a setting in which four or five small groups can work without interfering with each other. Because much of the discussion will best be captured on flip charts, you will need to hold the work-shop in a room with plenty of wall space, for posting as many as 20 flip chart pages at one time.

Materials. The materials needed are few:

• flip chart pads, flip chart easels (two for the facilitators and one for each small group), and markers in sufficient quantity for several small groups to work simultaneously;

• a projector for transparencies, slides, or a computerized slide show, if you choose to present basic information by any of these methods;

• data entry, printing, and copying facilities, so that the decisions made by small groups can be distributed as the action planning takes place;

• a binder for each participant, containing all the workshop materials beginning on page 56, as well as any additional materials you choose.

During the workshop, one important responsibility will be to document the discussions and deci-sions of the sessions. You may therefore find it useful to have a computer and printer for one facilita-tor to use to quickly record the information and distribute the group’s decisions to the participants.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

37

OPe

nin

g S

eSSi

On (

MO

rn

ing O

f d

ay 1

)

Ob

jec

tiv

eS

By t

he e

nd o

f th

e op

enin

g se

ssio

n, p

arti

cipa

nts

will

hav

e:

• re

view

ed t

he w

orks

hop

agen

da a

nd a

ntic

ipat

ed o

utco

mes

;•

clar

ified

exp

ecta

tion

s fo

r th

e w

orks

hop;

• be

en in

trod

uced

to

the

MO

ST p

roce

ss;

• es

tabl

ishe

d th

e gr

ound

rul

es fo

r an

ope

n, h

ones

t, r

espe

ctfu

l exc

hang

e of

idea

s th

roug

hout

the

wor

ksho

p;•

expl

ored

the

link

s be

twee

n im

prov

ed m

anag

emen

t, o

rgan

izat

iona

l sus

tain

abili

ty, a

nd le

ader

ship

;•

expl

ored

the

pri

ncip

les

of c

hang

e.

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…In

trod

uctio

n of

par

ticip

ants

an

d fa

cilit

ator

; pre

sent

a-tio

n of

the

age

nda

and

an-

ticip

ated

out

com

es o

f the

w

orks

hop

Intr

oduc

e yo

urse

lf an

d ha

ve t

he w

orks

hop

par

tici-

pan

ts in

trod

uce

them

selv

es, i

f the

y do

not

all

know

on

e an

othe

r.

Pres

ent

agen

da a

nd a

ntic

ipat

ed o

utco

mes

. Rev

iew

th

e p

artic

ipan

t bi

nder

s, e

ncou

ragi

ng d

iscu

ssio

n an

d q

uest

ions

.

Revi

ew t

he fi

ndin

gs—

key

them

es, c

once

rns,

exp

ec-

tatio

ns, e

tc.—

from

the

pre

-wor

ksho

p in

terv

iew

s an

d/or

que

stio

nnai

res.

Cla

rify

how

thi

s w

orks

hop

w

ill a

nd w

ill n

ot r

espo

nd t

o th

ese

findi

ngs.

Part

icip

ant

bind

ers

cont

aini

ng t

he m

ate-

rial b

egin

ning

on

pag

e 56

Prep

ared

flip

cha

rts

or t

rans

par

enci

es

with

the

age

nda,

obj

ectiv

es, a

ntic

ipat

ed

outc

omes

, oth

er u

p-f

ront

mat

eria

l, as

de

sire

d

Flip

cha

rt o

r tr

ansp

aren

cy s

umm

ariz

ing

the

inte

rvie

w fi

ndin

gs, i

nclu

ding

exp

ec-

tatio

ns fo

r th

e w

orks

hop

Alth

ough

it is

pos

sible

to p

rese

nt th

is

info

rmat

ion

in s

lides

or t

rans

pare

ncie

s,

man

y fa

cilit

ator

s pr

efer

to u

se fl

ip c

hart

s,

whi

ch e

stab

lish

an a

tmos

pher

e of

in-

form

ality

and

invo

lvem

ent.

The

page

s ca

n be

pos

ted

on th

e w

all f

or re

fere

nce

thro

ugho

ut th

e w

orks

hop.

Fac

ilita

tors

can

ea

sily

retu

rn to

the

flip

char

ts a

t key

poi

nts

for r

evie

w a

nd d

iscus

sion

(e.g

., at

the

end

of e

ach

mod

ule,

whe

n pa

rtic

ipan

ts c

an

com

men

t on

the

exte

nt to

whi

ch th

e ob

-je

ctiv

es h

ave

been

ach

ieve

d). T

his

can

be

an in

form

al b

ut p

ower

ful e

valu

atio

n to

ol.

Set

the

tone

for

the

wor

ksho

p b

y em

pha

sizi

ng t

he

need

for

open

, hon

est

exch

ange

s an

d re

spec

tful

at

tent

ion

to o

ther

peo

ple

’s v

iew

s.

With

par

ticip

ants

, est

ablis

h gr

ound

rul

es t

hat

will

fo

ster

the

des

ired

envi

ronm

ent.

Flip

cha

rt a

nd m

arke

rs

38

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…D

irect

or’s

end

orse

men

t of

M

OST

Ask

the

dire

ctor

to

exp

lain

why

he

or s

he h

as c

ho-

sen

to u

se M

OST

at

this

tim

e an

d ho

w M

OST

will

be

nefit

the

org

aniz

atio

n.

Be s

ure

to r

emin

d th

e di

rect

or w

ell

ahea

d of

tim

e an

d m

ake

sure

tha

t he

or

she

is c

omfo

rtab

le t

akin

g on

thi

s ta

sk.

Intr

oduc

tion

to M

OST

Exp

lain

the

pur

pos

e of

MO

ST:

• to

imp

rove

the

org

aniz

atio

n’s

man

agem

ent,

si

nce

man

agem

ent

is a

n es

sent

ial f

eatu

re o

f su

stai

nabi

lity

and

cont

ribut

es t

o th

e or

gani

za-

tion’

s ou

tcom

es;

• to

bui

ld c

onse

nsus

am

ong

staf

f on

the

issu

es

and

pla

ns id

entifi

ed;

• to

pro

vide

a t

ool f

or s

imp

le, e

ffect

ive

mon

itor-

ing

of m

anag

emen

t in

the

futu

re.

Op

tiona

l: Po

wer

Poin

t sl

ides

how

abo

ut

MO

ST, f

ound

on

the

MO

ST C

D-R

OM

(r

equi

res

a co

mpu

ter

and

LCD

pro

ject

or)

Cla

rify

how

MO

ST is

diff

eren

t fr

om o

ther

pla

nnin

g p

roce

sses

and

imp

rove

men

t in

itiat

ives

the

org

ani-

zatio

n ha

s un

dert

aken

or

is c

urre

ntly

invo

lved

in:

• It

is a

n or

gani

zatio

nal s

elf-

asse

ssm

ent,

com

-p

lete

d on

site

. •

All

par

ticip

ants

’ op

inio

ns a

re v

alid

and

mus

t be

ta

ken

into

acc

ount

in r

each

ing

synt

hesi

s.•

Ther

e is

no

outs

ide

asse

ssor

—th

e on

ly o

utsi

d-er

s ar

e th

ere

to fa

cilit

ate

rath

er t

han

to ju

dge.

Dis

cuss

how

MO

ST c

an fi

t in

to a

nd e

nhan

ce o

ther

p

lann

ing

activ

ities

.

Op

tiona

l: Tr

ansp

aren

cy d

raw

n fr

om

“The

MO

ST D

iffer

ence

,” p

age

2

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

39

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…C

larifi

catio

n of

pro

cedu

res

and

met

hods

to

be u

sed

durin

g th

e w

orks

hop

Retu

rn t

o th

e ag

enda

to

revi

ew t

he d

iffer

ent

mod

-ul

es o

f the

wor

ksho

p.

Exp

lain

the

way

s in

whi

ch in

divi

dual

s w

ill fo

rm

thei

r ow

n op

inio

ns a

nd t

hen

shar

e an

d di

scus

s th

em in

sm

all,

hete

roge

neou

s gr

oup

s.

Exp

lain

the

pro

cess

for

reac

hing

con

sens

us in

sm

all g

roup

s an

d p

lena

ry s

essi

ons.

Wor

ksho

p A

gend

a, p

age

56

Op

tiona

l: Fl

ip c

hart

or

tran

spar

ency

of

the

“Re

achi

ng C

onse

nsus

” bo

x,

pag

e 34

Emp

hasi

ze t

hat

cons

ensu

s is

ach

ieve

d by

list

enin

g, d

iscu

ssin

g, s

harin

g ev

i-de

nce,

and

, fina

lly, r

each

ing

agre

e-m

ent.

Con

sens

us is

not

a v

ote:

eve

ry

mem

ber

of t

he g

roup

mus

t be

abl

e to

liv

e w

ith a

nd s

upp

ort

the

grou

p’s

as-

sess

men

t.

Intr

oduc

e th

e “p

arki

ng lo

t” c

once

pt

and

pos

t a

larg

e sh

eet

of p

aper

on

the

wal

l on

whi

ch p

artic

i-p

ants

and

faci

litat

ors

will

rec

ord

idea

s, c

once

rns,

an

d to

pic

s th

at c

anno

t be

fully

exp

lore

d du

ring

the

wor

ksho

p. T

hese

item

s w

ill n

eed

to b

e ad

-dr

esse

d at

the

end

of t

he w

orks

hop

.

Flip

cha

rt p

age(

s) o

n th

e w

all i

dent

ified

as

the

“p

arki

ng lo

t”

40

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: “

Lead

ing

and

Man

agin

g fo

r Re

sults

M

odel

”

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: P

rin-

cip

les

of c

hang

e

Use

the

“M

anag

ing

and

Lead

ing

for

Resu

lts M

od-

el”

to in

trod

uce

par

ticip

ants

’ rol

e as

man

ager

s an

d le

ader

s w

ithin

the

org

aniz

atio

n. D

iscu

ss h

ow t

heir

wor

k du

ring

and

afte

r th

is w

orks

hop

will

beg

in t

o in

fluen

ce s

ervi

ces.

Hig

hlig

ht t

he m

odel

’s r

elat

ions

hip

to

MO

ST a

nd

to t

he o

rgan

izat

ion:

MO

ST fo

ster

s ch

ange

s th

at

imp

rove

man

agem

ent,

wor

k cl

imat

e, a

nd c

apac

ity

to r

esp

ond

to a

cha

ngin

g en

viro

nmen

t (s

usta

in-

abili

ty).

The

se c

hang

es le

ad t

o im

pro

ved

serv

ices

an

d, u

ltim

atel

y, im

pro

ved

heal

th fo

r or

gani

zatio

n’s

clie

nts.

Pres

ent

and

lead

a d

iscu

ssio

n of

the

func

tions

of

lead

ers

and

man

ager

s. R

elat

e th

ese

func

tions

to

the

par

ticip

ants

’ rol

es: t

hey

are

draw

ing

on le

ader

-sh

ip a

nd m

anag

emen

t p

ract

ices

thr

ough

out

the

MO

ST w

orks

hop

and

will

con

tinue

to

use

thes

e p

ract

ices

as

chan

ge a

gent

s to

imp

lem

ent

the

ac-

tion

pla

n.

Brie

fly p

rese

nt a

nd d

iscu

ss p

rinci

ple

s of

cha

nge

and

how

imp

lem

entin

g th

e M

OST

act

ion

pla

n w

ill r

equi

re t

hem

to

initi

ate

and

lead

a c

hang

e p

roce

ss.

Tran

spar

ency

or

slid

e of

the

“L

eadi

ng a

nd M

anag

ing

for

Resu

lts

Mod

el,”

pag

e 73

“Lea

ders

hip

Pra

ctic

es”

and

“Man

age-

men

t Pr

actic

es,”

pag

es 1

0–11

Op

tiona

l: Tr

ansp

aren

cy o

r sl

ide

of

“Lea

ding

and

Man

agin

g Fr

amew

ork,

” p

age

74

Flip

cha

rt o

f the

four

prin

cip

les

of

chan

ge, b

ased

on

pag

es 7

–8

You

may

wis

h to

sp

end

time

goin

g ov

er t

he d

etai

ls o

f lea

ders

hip

and

man

-ag

emen

t as

defi

ned

in t

he “

Lead

ing

and

Man

agin

g Fr

amew

ork.

” O

r yo

u m

ay p

refe

r to

sum

mar

ize

the

cont

ents

of

the

fram

ewor

k, u

sing

pag

es 1

0–11

as

the

bas

is fo

r di

scus

sion

, and

sim

ply

p

oint

ing

out

the

fram

ewor

k, w

hich

is

incl

uded

in p

artic

ipan

ts’ b

inde

rs.

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

41

MO

du

le 1

: wh

ere

ar

e w

e n

Ow

? (a

fter

nO

On O

f d

ay 1

an

d M

Or

nin

g O

f d

ay 2

)

Ob

jec

tiv

eS

By t

he e

nd o

f th

is m

odul

e, in

divi

dual

par

tici

pant

s w

ill h

ave:

• ex

plor

ed t

he m

eani

ngs

of t

he fi

ve m

anag

emen

t ar

eas

and

19 m

anag

emen

t co

mpo

nent

s;

• fo

rmed

wor

king

gro

ups

that

cut

acr

oss

orga

niza

tion

al d

ivis

ions

and

dra

w o

n th

e co

ntri

buti

ons

of e

ach

mem

ber;

•

gene

rate

d co

nsen

sus

on t

he o

rgan

izat

ion’

s cu

rren

t st

atus

in t

erm

s of

eac

h m

anag

emen

t co

mpo

nent

.

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Re

view

of o

bjec

tives

for

M

odul

e 1

Pres

ent

on fl

ip c

hart

and

pos

t on

wal

l to

re

mai

n th

roug

hout

the

mod

ule.

Flip

char

t of

obj

ectiv

es

Age

nda

in p

artic

ipan

t bi

nder

Pres

enta

tion

of t

he s

truc

ture

of

the

MO

ST a

sses

smen

t in

stru

-m

ent:

•

five

man

agem

ent

area

s an

d 19

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ents

;•

four

sta

ges

of d

evel

opm

ent

and

char

acte

ristic

s;•

how

we

dete

rmin

e th

e cu

r-re

nt s

tage

of d

evel

opm

ent

and

mon

itor

imp

rove

men

ts;

• w

hat

cons

titut

es c

onvi

ncin

g ev

iden

ce.

Wal

k th

e gr

oup

thr

ough

the

MO

ST in

stru

-m

ent.

Dis

cuss

defi

nitio

ns a

nd d

escr

iptio

ns o

f ea

ch m

anag

emen

t co

mp

onen

t, e

nsur

ing

that

al

l par

ticip

ants

und

erst

and

the

term

s us

ed in

th

e in

stru

men

t.

Defi

ne “

evid

ence

,” u

sing

exa

mp

les

from

th

e M

OST

gui

de. C

ondu

ct a

sho

rt e

xerc

ise,

dr

awin

g ex

amp

les

from

the

gro

up, fi

rst

from

un

rela

ted

area

s (e

.g.,

evid

ence

of w

ealth

, ed

ucat

ion,

or

pow

er)

and

then

rel

ated

to

the

MO

ST c

hara

cter

istic

s.

Post

som

e of

the

ir ex

amp

les

on a

flip

cha

rt

and

disp

lay

for

the

dura

tion

of t

he w

orks

hop

, to

rei

nfor

ce t

heir

unde

rsta

ndin

g.

Tran

spar

enci

es o

f the

MO

ST A

sses

s-m

ent

Inst

rum

ent,

beg

inni

ng o

n

pag

e 57

Op

tiona

l: Tr

ansp

aren

cies

or

cop

ies

base

d on

“O

rient

atio

n to

the

Ass

ess-

men

t In

stru

men

t,”

on p

age

4

”Wha

t C

onst

itute

s Ev

iden

ce”

box

on

pag

e 20

Term

inol

ogy

can

be c

onfu

sing

, es-

pec

ially

if p

artic

ipan

ts h

ave

vary

ing

leve

ls o

f man

agem

ent

exp

erie

nce

or

spea

k En

glis

h as

a s

econ

d la

ngua

ge.

It is

use

ful t

o ac

know

ledg

e th

at s

ome

man

agem

ent

term

s ca

n ha

ve s

ever

al

mea

ning

s. T

o av

oid

long

dis

cuss

ions

of

defin

ition

s, y

ou s

houl

d ha

ve t

he p

ar-

ticip

ants

use

the

ter

ms

as p

rese

nted

in

the

MO

ST in

stru

men

t.

Revi

ew t

he e

xam

ple

s p

rovi

ded

in t

he s

amp

le

inst

rum

ent

in t

he M

OST

gui

de.

Tran

spar

enci

es o

f the

“Sa

mp

le C

om-

ple

ted

MO

ST A

sses

smen

t In

stru

men

t,”

begi

nnin

g on

pag

e 21

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: “

Lead

ing

and

Man

agin

g fo

r Re

sults

M

odel

”

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: P

rin-

cip

les

of c

hang

e

Use

the

“M

anag

ing

and

Lead

ing

for

Resu

lts M

od-

el”

to in

trod

uce

par

ticip

ants

’ rol

e as

man

ager

s an

d le

ader

s w

ithin

the

org

aniz

atio

n. D

iscu

ss h

ow t

heir

wor

k du

ring

and

afte

r th

is w

orks

hop

will

beg

in t

o in

fluen

ce s

ervi

ces.

Hig

hlig

ht t

he m

odel

’s r

elat

ions

hip

to

MO

ST a

nd

to t

he o

rgan

izat

ion:

MO

ST fo

ster

s ch

ange

s th

at

imp

rove

man

agem

ent,

wor

k cl

imat

e, a

nd c

apac

ity

to r

esp

ond

to a

cha

ngin

g en

viro

nmen

t (s

usta

in-

abili

ty).

The

se c

hang

es le

ad t

o im

pro

ved

serv

ices

an

d, u

ltim

atel

y, im

pro

ved

heal

th fo

r or

gani

zatio

n’s

clie

nts.

Pres

ent

and

lead

a d

iscu

ssio

n of

the

func

tions

of

lead

ers

and

man

ager

s. R

elat

e th

ese

func

tions

to

the

par

ticip

ants

’ rol

es: t

hey

are

draw

ing

on le

ader

-sh

ip a

nd m

anag

emen

t p

ract

ices

thr

ough

out

the

MO

ST w

orks

hop

and

will

con

tinue

to

use

thes

e p

ract

ices

as

chan

ge a

gent

s to

imp

lem

ent

the

ac-

tion

pla

n.

Brie

fly p

rese

nt a

nd d

iscu

ss p

rinci

ple

s of

cha

nge

and

how

imp

lem

entin

g th

e M

OST

act

ion

pla

n w

ill r

equi

re t

hem

to

initi

ate

and

lead

a c

hang

e p

roce

ss.

Tran

spar

ency

or

slid

e of

the

“L

eadi

ng a

nd M

anag

ing

for

Resu

lts

Mod

el,”

pag

e 73

“Lea

ders

hip

Pra

ctic

es”

and

“Man

age-

men

t Pr

actic

es,”

pag

es 1

0–11

Op

tiona

l: Tr

ansp

aren

cy o

r sl

ide

of

“Lea

ding

and

Man

agin

g Fr

amew

ork,

” p

age

74

Flip

cha

rt o

f the

four

prin

cip

les

of

chan

ge, b

ased

on

pag

es 7

–8

You

may

wis

h to

sp

end

time

goin

g ov

er t

he d

etai

ls o

f lea

ders

hip

and

man

-ag

emen

t as

defi

ned

in t

he “

Lead

ing

and

Man

agin

g Fr

amew

ork.

” O

r yo

u m

ay p

refe

r to

sum

mar

ize

the

cont

ents

of

the

fram

ewor

k, u

sing

pag

es 1

0–11

as

the

bas

is fo

r di

scus

sion

, and

sim

ply

p

oint

ing

out

the

fram

ewor

k, w

hich

is

incl

uded

in p

artic

ipan

ts’ b

inde

rs.

42

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Sm

all-g

roup

wor

k: C

onse

nsus

on

curr

ent

stag

es o

f dev

elop

men

t,

with

sup

por

ting

evid

ence

Mo

rnin

g o

f D

ay 2

To e

xpos

e pa

rtic

ipan

ts t

o va

ried

perc

eptio

ns,

form

gro

ups

of 4

–6 p

eopl

e fr

om d

iffer

ent

part

s of

the

org

aniz

atio

n, c

reat

ing

a cr

oss-

sect

ion

of

expe

rienc

e an

d pe

rcep

tions

.

Expl

ain:

In t

heir

smal

l gro

ups,

par

ticip

ants

will

re

view

the

cho

ices

and

evi

denc

e pr

opos

ed b

y ea

ch g

roup

mem

ber.

Toge

ther

the

y w

ill d

is-

cuss

any

diff

eren

ces

and

seek

con

sens

us o

n th

e st

age

of d

evel

opm

ent

and

supp

ortin

g ev

iden

ce

for

each

com

pone

nt.

Enco

urag

e p

artic

ipan

ts t

o p

rese

nt t

heir

evi-

denc

e p

ersu

asiv

ely

but

succ

inct

ly. A

few

wor

ds

shou

ld b

e ab

le to

con

vey

the

obse

rvat

ion

that

th

eir g

roup

has

foun

d co

nvin

cing

.

Circ

ulat

e am

ong

grou

ps,

offe

ring

guid

ance

an

d cl

arifi

catio

n w

here

nec

essa

ry.

One

“A

sses

smen

t C

onse

nsus

For

m”

for

each

gro

up, b

egin

ning

on

pag

e 64

In fo

rmin

g he

tero

gene

ous

grou

ps,

you

ca

n dr

aw o

n th

e p

re-w

orks

hop

inte

r-vi

ews

and

on y

our

staf

f cou

nter

par

t’s

advi

ce. R

emem

ber

that

you

r co

unte

r-p

art

shou

ld p

artic

ipat

e in

a g

roup

.

Als

o em

pha

size

tha

t th

e nu

mbe

rs t

hat

rep

rese

nt s

tage

s of

dev

elop

men

t ca

n-no

t be

ave

rage

d (e

.g.,

2.5)

. The

gro

up

mus

t ag

ree

that

the

org

aniz

atio

n fu

lfills

al

l the

cha

ract

eris

tics

in t

he s

tage

the

y ha

ve c

hose

n. If

the

y ca

nnot

agr

ee,

they

sho

uld

sele

ct t

he p

revi

ous

stag

e.

Rem

ind

the

indi

vidu

al t

eam

s to

kee

p

thei

r co

nsen

sus

form

so

that

you

can

be

pre

par

ed t

o fa

cilit

ate

the

ple

nary

di

scus

sion

at

the

begn

ning

of D

ay 2

.

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: R

evie

w a

nd

cons

ensu

s Ex

pla

in: T

he in

tent

ion

of t

his

activ

ity is

to

ar-

rive

at a

sta

ge o

f dev

elop

men

t th

at a

ll th

e gr

oup

s ca

n ag

ree

on. H

ave

smal

l gro

ups

re-

por

t th

eir

choi

ce o

f the

sta

ge o

f dev

elop

men

t fo

r ea

ch c

omp

onen

t an

d th

e ev

iden

ce t

hey

pro

pos

ed t

o su

pp

ort

thei

r ch

oice

.

Lead

the

par

ticip

ants

in d

iscu

ssin

g th

e re

ason

s fo

r an

y di

ffere

nces

and

neg

otia

ting

thes

e di

f-fe

renc

es t

o re

ach

cons

ensu

s, ju

st a

s th

ey d

id

in t

heir

smal

l gro

ups.

Rem

ind

them

tha

t th

e re

sults

of t

his

pro

cess

will

pro

vide

the

inp

ut

for

the

wor

k of

Mod

ule

2.

Aft

er t

his

mod

ule

is c

omp

lete

d, y

ou w

ill n

eed

to p

rep

are

hand

outs

tha

t p

rese

nt t

he c

onse

n-su

s ac

hiev

ed d

urin

g th

is d

iscu

ssio

n (s

tage

s an

d ev

iden

ce).

Par

ticip

ants

will

nee

d th

is in

-fo

rmat

ion

for

the

first

act

ivity

in M

odul

e 2.

One

she

et o

f flip

cha

rt p

aper

for

each

of

the

19

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ents

, w

ith s

pac

e to

ent

er t

he s

tage

of d

evel

-op

men

t ea

ch g

roup

has

iden

tified

and

th

e ev

iden

ce t

hey

have

sel

ecte

d (t

he

pap

er c

an a

lso

be u

sed

to jo

t do

wn

note

s du

ring

the

disc

ussi

on, a

s an

aid

to

res

olvi

ng d

iffer

ence

s an

d co

min

g to

ag

reem

ent)

One

“A

sses

smen

t C

onse

nsus

For

m,”

be

ginn

ing

on p

age

64, t

o be

use

d by

on

e fa

cilit

ator

to

cap

ture

the

dec

isio

ns

mad

e du

ring

the

ple

nary

dis

cuss

ion

Des

irabl

e: A

com

put

er a

nd p

rinte

r to

q

uick

ly r

ecor

d an

d di

strib

ute

the

re-

sults

of t

he p

lena

ry d

iscu

ssio

n

In t

his

sess

ion,

con

flict

oft

en a

rises

due

to

diff

erin

g p

erce

ptio

ns r

eflec

ting

the

par

ticip

ants

’ var

ied

stat

us a

nd a

reas

of

resp

onsi

bilit

y. Y

ou w

ill n

eed

to li

sten

p

atie

ntly

and

att

entiv

ely

and

help

the

p

artic

ipan

ts t

o do

the

sam

e. B

e on

the

al

ert

for

issu

es id

entifi

ed in

you

r p

re-

wor

ksho

p in

terv

iew

s th

at p

artic

ipan

ts

may

not

be

able

to

disc

uss

open

ly.

If yo

u ca

nnot

brin

g th

e gr

oup

to

con-

sens

us o

n a

com

pon

ent,

you

may

wan

t to

put

it in

the

“p

arki

ng lo

t” a

nd r

e-tu

rn t

o it

afte

r th

e ot

her

com

pon

ents

ha

ve b

een

addr

esse

d. G

ettin

g so

me

dist

ance

from

a c

ontr

over

sial

top

ic a

nd

refo

cusi

ng o

n le

ss c

onte

ntio

us is

sues

of

ten

allo

ws

par

ticip

ants

to

retu

rn t

o th

eir

disc

ussi

on w

ith n

ew in

sigh

ts.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

43

MO

du

le 2

: wh

ere

ar

e w

e h

ead

ed?

(Mid

-MO

rn

ing t

hr

Ou

gh e

nd O

f d

ay 2

)

Ob

jec

tiv

eS

By t

he e

nd o

f th

is m

odul

e, p

arti

cipa

nts

will

hav

e:

• ag

reed

on

one

or t

wo

obje

ctiv

es fo

r im

prov

ing

each

man

agem

ent

com

pone

nt;

• pr

ovid

ed e

vide

nce

that

will

indi

cate

pro

gres

s to

war

d th

ese

obje

ctiv

es.

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Re

view

of o

bjec

tives

for

M

odul

e 2

Pres

ent

on fl

ip c

hart

and

pos

t on

wal

l to

re

mai

n th

roug

hout

the

mod

ule.

Flip

char

t of

obj

ectiv

es

Age

nda

in p

artic

ipan

t bi

nder

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: R

evie

w

of c

onse

nsus

dec

isio

ns in

M

odul

e 1

Lead

par

ticip

ants

in r

evie

w p

roce

ss.

Han

dout

s w

ith r

esul

ts o

f Mod

ule

1, a

nd

sup

ple

men

tary

flip

cha

rt a

nd/o

r tr

ansp

ar-

enci

es, i

f des

ired

Smal

l-gro

up w

ork:

Exp

lora

tion

of

cont

ribut

ing

caus

esD

ivid

e th

e co

mp

onen

ts a

mon

g gr

oup

s, s

o ea

ch g

roup

is w

orki

ng o

n a

man

agea

ble

num

ber

of c

omp

onen

ts.

Hel

p g

roup

s lo

ok c

lose

ly a

t th

e ev

iden

ce fo

r ea

ch c

omp

onen

t an

d as

k th

emse

lves

why

th

e co

mp

onen

t is

at

that

sta

ge o

f dev

elop

-m

ent.

The

y m

ay n

eed

to a

sk W

hy?

seve

ral

times

to

dig

bene

ath

the

surf

ace

and

find

the

mos

t im

por

tant

con

trib

utin

g ca

uses

.

It is

a g

ood

idea

to

dist

ribut

e di

ffer-

ent

typ

es o

f com

pon

ents

am

ong

the

smal

l gro

ups,

so

that

eac

h sm

all g

roup

is

dea

ling

with

a m

ixtu

re o

f man

age-

men

t ar

eas,

sta

ges

of d

evel

opm

ent,

le

vels

of i

mp

orta

nce

to t

he o

rgan

iza-

tion,

etc

.

At

this

poi

nt, y

ou m

ay w

ish

to r

econ

-fig

ure

the

smal

l gro

ups

so t

hat

par

tici-

pan

ts c

an s

hare

the

ir p

ersp

ectiv

es w

ith

new

gro

up m

embe

rs. F

or t

his

mod

ule,

so

me

faci

litat

ors

form

gro

ups

that

sh

are

the

sam

e br

oad

area

of e

xper

-tis

e, w

hile

oth

ers

pre

fer

to m

aint

ain

a m

ixtu

re o

f per

spec

tives

.

44

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Sm

all-g

roup

wor

k, c

ontin

ued:

Se

ttin

g ob

ject

ives

and

pro

pos

ing

evid

ence

of t

heir

achi

evem

ent

Dec

ide

in a

brie

f int

rodu

ctor

y ac

tivity

, or

anno

unce

bas

ed o

n th

e di

rect

or’s

dec

isio

n,

wha

t th

e tim

e fr

ame

for

the

MO

ST a

ctio

n p

lan

will

be.

Usu

ally

it is

six

mon

ths

or o

ne

year

.

For

each

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ent,

hav

e th

e sm

all g

roup

s dr

aft

betw

een

one

and

thre

e ob

ject

ives

for

that

tim

e p

erio

d. T

he o

bjec

-tiv

es s

houl

d be

ach

ieva

ble

in t

he s

hort

ter

m

and

shou

ld r

eflec

t th

e di

scus

sion

s of

the

co

ntrib

utin

g ca

uses

of t

he c

urre

nt s

ituat

ion.

Hel

p t

he g

roup

s fo

cus

on o

bjec

tives

tha

t w

ill

help

mov

e th

e m

anag

emen

t co

mp

onen

ts

tow

ard

the

char

acte

ristic

s of

the

nex

t st

age

of d

evel

opm

ent.

Hav

e ea

ch g

roup

pro

pos

e on

e or

tw

o fa

cts,

fig

ures

, or

obse

rvat

ions

tha

t w

ill p

rovi

de

conv

inci

ng e

vide

nce

that

the

se o

bjec

tives

ha

ve b

een

reac

hed

at t

he e

nd o

f the

tim

e p

erio

d.

Flip

cha

rts

for

each

gro

up (

the

resu

lts w

ill

need

to

be p

oste

d fo

r p

rese

ntat

ion

and

disc

ussi

on in

Mod

ule

3)

Befo

re t

he p

artic

ipan

ts u

nder

take

thi

s ac

tivity

, em

pha

size

tha

t th

e go

al is

not

to

str

ive

for

per

fect

ion.

Att

emp

ting

too

big

a le

ap m

ay r

esul

t in

failu

re a

nd

disc

oura

ge s

taff

abou

t th

e p

oten

tial f

or

chan

ge. I

ncre

men

tal i

mp

rove

men

ts

pro

vide

sm

all s

ucce

sses

tha

t en

cour

age

the

staf

f to

take

on

new

cha

lleng

es.

Such

cha

nges

bui

ld u

p o

ver

time

to

have

a g

reat

er im

pac

t.

It h

elp

s to

rec

ogni

ze t

hat

the

shor

t-te

rm o

bjec

tives

at

this

poi

nt m

ay o

r m

ay n

ot m

ove

the

orga

niza

tion

into

th

e ne

xt s

tage

of d

evel

opm

ent,

whe

re

all c

hara

cter

istic

s w

ill a

pp

ly. I

f the

or-

gani

zatio

n is

clo

se t

o th

at s

tage

, one

or

two

imp

rove

men

ts m

ay s

uffic

e. H

ow-

ever

, if t

he m

anag

emen

t co

mp

onen

t ne

eds

a lo

t of

wor

k ov

er a

n ex

tend

ed

per

iod

of t

ime,

the

obj

ectiv

es d

evel

-op

ed n

ow m

ay s

imp

ly m

ove

the

orga

-ni

zatio

n in

the

rig

ht d

irect

ion

with

in

the

curr

ent

stag

e of

dev

elop

men

t.

If tim

e is

lim

ited,

you

may

wan

t to

pri-

oriti

ze m

anag

emen

t co

mp

onen

ts fi

rst

and

deve

lop

obj

ectiv

es o

nly

for

the

prio

rtiz

ed c

omp

onen

ts.

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: P

rese

ntat

ion

of a

nd a

gree

men

t on

obj

ectiv

esG

uide

par

ticip

ants

in r

evie

win

g sm

all g

roup

w

ork,

cho

osin

g th

e m

ost

app

rop

riate

ob-

ject

ives

and

agr

eein

g on

evi

denc

e th

at

will

sho

w t

hat

the

obje

ctiv

es h

ave

been

ac

hiev

ed.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

45

MO

du

le 3

: hO

w w

ill

we

rea

ch O

ur O

bje

cti

veS

? (d

ay 3

)

Ob

jec

tiv

eS

By t

he e

nd o

f th

is m

odul

e, p

arti

cipa

nts

will

hav

e:

• re

cogn

ized

the

ir r

oles

as

lead

ers

and

man

ager

s of

the

cha

nge

proc

ess;

•

sele

cted

the

hig

hest

-pri

orit

y m

anag

emen

t co

mpo

nent

s to

impr

ove

duri

ng t

he c

omin

g pe

riod

; •

prep

ared

an

acti

on p

lan

for

thes

e im

prov

emen

ts;

• de

cide

d w

hat

acti

viti

es w

ill b

e ne

eded

to

follo

w u

p on

the

MO

ST w

orks

hop.

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…Re

view

of o

bjec

tives

for

Mod

ule

3Pr

esen

t on

flip

cha

rt a

nd p

ost

on w

all t

o re

-m

ain

thro

ugho

ut t

he m

odul

e.Fl

ipch

art

of o

bjec

tives

Age

nda

in p

artic

ipan

t bi

nder

Dire

ctor

’s a

nnou

ncem

ent

of t

he

per

son

who

has

bee

n se

lect

ed a

s ch

ange

lead

er

Ahea

d of

tim

e: R

evie

w w

ith th

e di

rect

or th

e ba

ckgr

ound

info

rmat

ion

with

whi

ch to

fram

e th

e an

noun

cem

ent,

so h

e or

she

can

an-

noun

ce th

e ch

oice

with

con

fiden

ce a

nd e

n-th

usia

sm:

• re

ason

s fo

r ha

ving

a c

hang

e le

ader

and

ch

ange

tea

m;

• q

ualit

ies

of a

n ef

fect

ive

chan

ge le

ader

;•

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

of t

he c

hang

e le

ader

in

imp

lem

entin

g th

e ac

tion

pla

n.

Revi

ew “

Prin

cip

les

of C

hang

e,”

pag

es

7–8

“Cha

nge

Lead

er a

nd C

hang

e Te

am”

and

box

on “

Qua

litie

s of

the

Cha

nge

Lead

er,”

pag

es 8

–9

Be s

ure

the

dire

ctor

—w

ith y

our

help

, if

nece

ssar

y—ha

s di

scus

sed

this

rol

e w

ith

the

pros

pect

ive

chan

ge le

ader

, ful

ly

expl

aine

d th

e re

spon

sibi

litie

s in

volv

ed,

and

gott

en t

hat

pers

on’s

full

agre

emen

t an

d co

mm

itmen

t.

If th

e di

rect

or p

refe

rs n

ot t

o pr

esen

t th

e ba

ckgr

ound

mat

eria

l, yo

u ca

n do

so

and

help

pav

e th

e w

ay fo

r th

e di

rect

or’s

an

noun

cem

ent.

46

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Plen

ary

exer

cise

: Sel

ectio

n of

prio

r-ity

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ents

Em

phas

ize

the

need

to

focu

s on

impr

ove-

men

ts in

a fe

w p

riorit

y co

mpo

nent

s—th

ose

that

mee

t th

e fo

llow

ing

crite

ria:

• ca

n be

qui

ckly

acc

omp

lishe

d, a

nd/o

r;•

req

uire

min

imal

hum

an a

nd fi

nanc

ial

reso

urce

s, a

nd/o

r;•

are

need

ed a

s a

basi

s fo

r ot

her

imp

rove

-m

ents

, and

/or;

• w

ill m

ake

the

grea

test

con

trib

utio

n to

th

e m

anag

emen

t of

the

org

aniz

atio

n.

Poin

t ou

t th

at s

ome

impr

ovem

ents

tha

t m

ight

mak

e gr

eat

cont

ribut

ions

to

bett

er

man

agem

ent

may

be

too

cost

ly a

nd t

ime-

cons

umin

g to

und

erta

ke a

t th

is t

ime.

Prov

ide

a w

ay fo

r pa

rtic

ipan

ts t

o re

gist

er

the

com

pone

nts

they

con

side

r to

be

of t

he

high

est

prio

rity.

Tw

o po

ssib

ilitie

s ar

e:

• to

hav

e ea

ch p

artic

ipan

t w

rite

dow

n he

r/hi

s to

p t

hree

cho

ices

; you

tal

ly a

nd

anno

unce

the

res

ults

;•

to p

ost

all c

omp

onen

ts o

n fli

p c

hart

s;

par

ticip

ants

che

ck o

ff or

stic

k a

colo

red

dot

next

to

thei

r to

p t

hree

cho

ices

. The

en

tire

grou

p t

allie

s th

e re

sults

.

Flip

cha

rt o

f sug

gest

ed c

riter

ia fo

r p

riori-

tizin

g co

mp

onen

ts, p

rep

ared

in a

dvan

ce

or d

urin

g th

e p

lena

ry d

iscu

ssio

n

Op

tiona

l: C

olor

ed s

elf-

adhe

sive

dot

s

The

hard

est

thin

g ab

out

sett

ing

prio

ri-tie

s is

tha

t it

mea

ns t

emp

orar

ily s

ettin

g as

ide

activ

ities

tha

t ha

ve r

eal v

alue

to

the

orga

niza

tion.

Som

e p

artic

ipan

ts

may

be

stro

ngly

com

mitt

ed t

o ob

jec-

tives

in a

com

pon

ent

that

the

gro

up

deci

des

is o

f low

er p

riorit

y.

You

may

nee

d to

hel

p t

he p

artic

ipan

ts

thro

ugh

this

pro

cess

. Cla

rify

that

com

-p

onen

ts id

entifi

ed a

s lo

w p

riorit

y at

th

is t

ime

will

not

be

aban

done

d. T

hey

will

be

docu

men

ted

in t

he w

orks

hop

re

por

t an

d re

visi

ted

in M

OST

follo

w-

up m

eetin

gs.

Gui

de p

artic

ipan

ts in

usi

ng t

he t

ally

to

sele

ct t

he 4

–5 c

omp

onen

ts t

hat

they

will

w

ork

on d

urin

g th

e co

min

g p

erio

d.

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

47

Smal

l-gro

up w

ork:

Pre

par

atio

n of

ac

tion

pla

ns (

cont

inue

d)C

reat

e ne

w s

mal

l gro

ups,

one

for

each

of

the

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ents

iden

tified

as

a p

riorit

y. O

nce

agai

n, b

e su

re t

he g

roup

s re

pre

sent

a c

ross

-sec

tion

of d

ivis

ions

and

le

vels

.

Gui

de s

mal

l gro

ups

in p

rop

osin

g th

ree

or

four

bro

ad c

ateg

orie

s of

act

iviti

es t

hat

will

he

lp r

each

the

obj

ectiv

e fo

r th

eir

com

po-

nent

. Enc

oura

ge t

hem

to

thin

k cr

eativ

ely

abou

t va

ried

but

pra

ctic

al w

ays

to r

each

th

e ob

ject

ives

.

Gui

de p

artic

ipan

ts in

car

eful

ly c

onsi

der-

ing

the

reso

urce

s—hu

man

, mat

eria

l, an

d fin

anci

al—

need

ed t

o ca

rry

out

each

bro

ad

activ

ity, a

nd in

cla

ssify

ing

them

as

one

of

the

follo

win

g:•

reso

urce

s th

at a

lread

y ex

ist

with

in t

he

orga

niza

tion;

•

reso

urce

s th

at a

re n

ot c

urre

ntly

ava

il-ab

le b

ut c

an b

e ge

nera

ted

rela

tivel

y ea

sily

;•

reso

urce

s th

at w

ill r

equi

re c

onsi

dera

ble

effo

rt t

o ge

nera

te.

The

par

ticip

ants

will

the

n co

mp

lete

the

res

t of

the

ir ac

tion

pla

ns, fi

lling

in t

he p

erso

n re

spon

sibl

e an

d tim

e re

qui

red

to c

omp

lete

th

e ac

tivity

.

Flip

cha

rt p

ages

of t

he r

evis

ed o

bjec

tives

fo

r ea

ch s

elec

ted

com

pon

ent,

dis

trib

ut-

ed a

mon

g th

e sm

all g

roup

s so

the

y ca

n id

entif

y th

e ty

pes

of a

ctiv

ities

for

each

ob

ject

ive

New

flip

cha

rt p

ages

on

each

of w

hich

th

ey w

ill w

rite:

•

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ent

• ob

ject

ive

• 3

or 4

bro

ad a

ctiv

ities

• ge

nera

l typ

es o

f res

ourc

es—

hu

man

, mat

eria

l, an

d fin

anci

al—

re

qui

red

for

each

act

ivity

•

for

each

typ

e of

res

ourc

e, “

CA

”

(cur

rent

ly a

vaila

ble)

, “G

E” (

gene

rate

d ea

sily

), o

r “R

E” (

req

uire

s ef

fort

).

Blan

k ac

tion

plan

form

s (f

ound

on

pa

ges

71–7

2 an

d on

the

MO

ST C

D-R

OM

)

Op

tiona

l: H

ando

ut o

f the

“Sa

mp

le

Com

ple

ted

MO

ST A

ctio

n Pl

an”

from

th

e M

OST

CD

-RO

M

TYou

may

rel

y on

you

r st

aff c

ount

er-

par

t fo

r ad

vice

, use

you

r ow

n ju

dg-

men

t in

form

ing

the

grou

ps,

or

ask

the

par

ticip

ants

to

form

the

ir ow

n ne

w

mix

ed g

roup

s.

If th

ere

are

too

few

par

ticip

ants

in t

he

wor

ksho

p, s

ome

smal

l gro

ups

may

ne

ed t

o w

ork

on t

wo

man

agem

ent

com

pon

ents

.

It w

ill h

elp

if y

ou g

ive

exam

ple

s of

th

e ki

nds

of b

road

act

iviti

es t

he s

mal

l gr

oup

s sh

ould

pro

pos

e. F

or in

stan

ce,

to r

each

an

obje

ctiv

e re

late

d to

hu-

man

res

ourc

e m

anag

emen

t, a

n ac

tivity

m

ight

be

“pre

par

e p

erso

nnel

han

d-bo

ok.”

Thi

s ac

tivity

cou

ld in

volv

e a

num

ber

of s

mal

ler

activ

ities

.

The

wor

ksho

p m

ater

ials

incl

ude

a sa

m-

ple

act

ion

pla

n fo

rm t

hat

has

pro

ven

usef

ul in

form

er M

OST

wor

ksho

ps.

The

p

artic

ipan

ts m

ay c

hoos

e to

use

thi

s or

an

othe

r fo

rmat

tha

t co

rres

pon

ds t

o th

eir

own

pla

nnin

g p

roce

ss. I

f the

y us

e a

diffe

rent

form

at, t

hey

may

nee

d to

ad

apt

it to

incl

ude

all t

he p

lann

ing

ele-

men

ts t

hat

are

iden

tified

her

e.

Alth

ough

eac

h ac

tivity

in t

his

actio

n p

lan

shou

ld b

e br

oken

dow

n in

to s

pe-

cific

tas

ks, t

here

is r

arel

y en

ough

tim

e fo

r th

at le

vel o

f det

ail i

n th

e M

OST

w

orks

hop

. The

cha

nge

team

sho

uld

wor

k on

the

det

ails

at

a la

ter

time.

48

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…D

istr

ibut

ing

actio

n p

lans

Col

lect

the

act

ion

pla

ns, e

nter

the

m o

n a

com

put

er, p

rint

them

out

, arr

ange

for

pho

-to

cop

ies

to b

e di

strib

uted

to

the

par

tici-

pan

ts, a

nd in

clud

e th

em in

you

r re

por

t.

A c

omp

uter

, prin

ter,

and

pho

toco

pie

rTh

e ch

ange

lead

er a

nd c

hang

e te

am

are

likel

y to

ap

pre

ciat

e it

if yo

u of

fer

to e

nter

the

act

ion

pla

ns o

n a

com

-p

uter

and

sen

d th

em b

ack

qui

ckly

. The

p

rinte

d ve

rsio

n w

ill p

rovi

de t

hem

with

a

clea

r an

d co

nsis

tent

set

of p

lans

tha

t w

ill h

elp

the

m t

o im

med

iate

ly b

egin

to

mak

e th

e ne

eded

cha

nges

. The

y ca

n al

so u

se it

to

pre

sent

the

res

ults

of

the

wor

ksho

p t

o th

e re

st o

f the

org

ani-

zatio

n, a

nd y

ou w

ill b

e ab

le t

o us

e it

as

the

cent

erp

iece

of y

our

rep

ort.

Plen

ary

disc

ussi

on: D

ecis

ion

on

activ

ities

for

imm

edia

te fo

llow

-up

Hav

e th

e sm

all g

roup

s br

iefly

sum

mar

ize

thei

r p

rogr

ess

in c

omp

letin

g th

eir

actio

n p

lans

and

men

tion

any

issu

es t

hat

have

ar

isen

.

Faci

litat

e a

wra

p-u

p d

iscu

ssio

n ab

out

the

next

ste

ps

to t

ake,

incl

udin

g:

• sh

arin

g th

e fin

ding

s an

d im

plic

atio

ns

with

the

res

t of

the

sta

ff an

d ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

;•

hold

ing

the

first

cha

nge

team

mee

ting

to fu

rthe

r sp

ecify

the

tas

ks fo

r ea

ch a

c-tiv

ity, (

clar

ify in

divi

dual

ass

ignm

ents

, set

de

adlin

es, a

nd d

evel

op a

pla

n fo

r m

oni-

torin

g p

rogr

ess

on t

he a

ctio

n p

lan)

;•

mon

itorin

g pr

ogre

ss o

n th

e ac

tion

plan

an

d re

visi

ng t

he p

lan,

if n

eede

d.

This

mig

ht b

e an

exc

elle

nt a

ctiv

ity fo

r th

e ch

ange

lead

er t

o fa

cilit

ate,

initi

at-

ing

his/

her

new

rol

e. If

the

cha

nge

lead

er a

gree

s to

do

this

, you

sho

uld

offe

r an

y as

sist

ance

nee

ded.

For

a lis

t of

sug

gest

ions

of f

ollo

w-u

p

activ

ities

, see

“Ph

ase

4: F

ollo

w-U

p

Act

iviti

es,”

beg

inni

ng o

n p

age

50.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

49

Wo

rksh

op

Act

ivit

yFa

cilit

ato

rs’ R

ole

Res

our

ces

Req

uire

dK

eep

In M

ind

…C

losi

ngRe

turn

to

the

“par

king

lot,

” cr

ossi

ng o

ff is

-su

es t

hat

have

bee

n de

alt

with

and

hel

pin

g p

artic

ipan

ts d

ecid

e w

hen

and

how

to

take

up

the

issu

es t

hat

rem

ain.

Poi

nt o

ut t

hat

you

will

incl

ude

thes

e ite

ms

in y

our

rep

ort,

so

the

y w

ill h

ave

them

on

reco

rd t

o co

nsid

-er

whe

neve

r th

ey fi

nd it

ap

pro

pria

te.

Prov

ide

a fe

w m

inut

es fo

r p

artic

ipan

ts t

o re

flect

tog

ethe

r on

the

wor

ksho

p. I

n an

in-

form

al c

onve

rsat

ion,

you

can

ask

que

stio

ns

that

will

giv

e th

em a

cha

nce

to e

xpre

ss

thei

r th

ough

ts a

nd fe

elin

gs, a

nd t

hat

will

p

rovi

de y

ou w

ith fe

edba

ck. Y

ou m

ight

ask

su

ch q

uest

ions

as:

• D

id t

he w

orks

hop

ach

ieve

the

ant

icip

at-

ed o

utco

mes

?•

To w

hat

exte

nt d

id it

mee

t or

not

mee

t yo

ur e

xpec

tatio

ns?

• W

hat

was

the

mos

t us

eful

par

t of

thi

s w

orks

hop

for

you?

• W

hat

was

leas

t us

eful

?•

Wha

t do

you

thi

nk y

ou p

erso

nally

can

co

ntrib

ute

to m

akin

g th

e id

entifi

ed

chan

ges

hap

pen

?

Rem

embe

r to

tha

nk t

he p

artic

ipan

ts fo

r w

hat

they

hav

e co

ntrib

uted

to

the

wor

k-sh

op. Y

our

sinc

ere

app

reci

atio

n w

ill b

e a

wel

l-des

erve

d re

war

d fo

r w

hat

has

been

an

inte

nse

effo

rt.

You

may

wis

h to

dis

trib

ute

a w

ritte

n fo

rm fo

r fe

edba

ck o

n th

e p

roce

ss a

nd

outc

omes

of t

he w

orks

hop

, and

on

the

qua

lity

of fa

cilit

atio

n. H

owev

er,

it is

stil

l im

por

tant

for

par

ticip

ants

to

shar

e so

me

of t

heir

thou

ghts

pub

licly

, to

cap

italiz

e on

the

op

enne

ss t

hat

has

mar

ked

thei

r th

ree

days

tog

ethe

r.

Con

side

r go

ing

arou

nd t

he g

roup

, as

king

eve

ryon

e fo

r on

e co

mm

ent,

so

that

you

get

feed

back

from

eac

h p

ar-

ticip

ant,

not

just

from

tho

se w

ho r

ead-

ily v

olun

teer

.

MOST


PhaSe 4: fOllOw-uP activitieS

A successful workshop will have set the stage for the last phase of the MOST process. As quickly as possible after the workshop, you should prepare a report for the organization, presenting the assess-ment findings and the resulting action plans. You should review the report in a meeting with the director, change leader, and change team before it is distributed to the rest of the staff. You can use this debriefing to reach agreement on follow-up activities that will move the change process forward and bring about the desired management improvements.

Suggested follow-up activities for the organization include the following:

• The director, change leader, and change team meet to clarify the responsibilities they and other leaders will take on during the change process.

• The director, change leader, and change team integrate the MOST action plans into the organi-zation’s operational plan.

• The change team meets with the change leader to review and fine-tune the action plans, focus-ing on the tasks for some of the broadly defined activities, the timeline, and the individuals responsible for carrying out specific tasks. In addition to the evidence that has been proposed for achieving the objectives, the action plans specify milestones the team will use to monitor progress along the way.

• The director distributes the workshop report and informs the entire staff and board about the process: the rationale for conducting MOST, the benefits to the organization of improved man-agement, the main events of the workshop, and the coming changes.

• Members of the change team begin to achieve buy-in and engage the rest of the organization in MOST changes. They meet with individuals and work groups to discuss how the proposed management improvements will affect their work, to answer questions, and to allay fears.

Suggested follow-up activities for the facilitators include the following:

• Prepare the workshop report and review it with the director, change leader, and change team.

• Verify that resources are allocated for a six-month or one-year follow-up MOST exercise to re-view progress and plan for future management improvements.

• Discuss options for periodic follow-up conversations, e-mails, or meetings with the change leader and change team, to check on progress and serve as a resource in implementing the ac-tion plan.

• Assist the change team with their follow-up plan and with ways of engaging the rest of the organization.

• Provide technical assistance in implementing the action plan, or help the organization find other sources of technical assistance.

• Facilitate other assessment/planning exercises focusing on management components that may need more thorough consideration than was possible during the MOST workshop. See the list of additional resources on page 75 for guidelines and tools that can help organizations conduct such assessments for several management systems. These tools are available on the MOST CD-ROM.

MOST


wOrkShOP MaterialS

This section contains materials to be distributed to all workshop participants in a workshop binder or folder. The contents may be copied directly from this section or printed from the MOST CD-ROM.

The materials to be included in the participants’ binder are:

• Making the MOST of Management

• MOST Workshop Agenda and Anticipated Outcomes

• MOST Assessment Instrument (to be filled out individually by each participant)

• Assessment Consensus Form (on which participants record the assessments and comments of their colleagues, based on the individual MOST instruments)

• MOST Action Plan Form

• Leading and Managing for Results Model

• Leading and Managing Framework

Resources on the MOST CD-ROM

To supplement the resources listed above, the MOST CD-ROM includes additional materials that may be useful to the workshop facilitators and participants. These resources may be used as work-shop handouts or as preparatory materials for the workshop. These additional resources are:

• Presenting MOST at a Staff Meeting

• MOST slide presentation (available in two formats, one of which may be customized to the specific organizational context, if needed)

• Sample Completed MOST Action Plan

Health Systems in Action: An eHandbook for Leaders and Managers

Managers Who Lead: A Handbook for Improving Health Services

Issues of The Manager (a quarterly published by MSH):

“Creating a Work Climate That Motivates Staff and Improves Performance.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 11, no. 3 (2002).

“Developing Managers Who Lead.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 10, no. 1 (2001).

“Developing Plans and Proposals for New Initiatives.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 2, no. 4 (1993).

“Good Goverance in Civil Society Organizations.” The eManager (Cambridge) no. 2 (2009).

“Human Resources: Managing and Developing Your Most Important Asset.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 8, no. 1 (1999).

“Improving Contraceptive Supply Management.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 1, no. 4 (1992).

“Learning to Think Strategically.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 3, no. 1 (1994).

“Marketing Your Organization’s Services.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 8, no. 2 (1999).

“Strengthening Human Resources Management to Improve Health Outcomes.” The eManager (Cambridge) no. 1 (2009).

“Using Evaluation as a Management Tool.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 6, no. 1 (1997).

“Using National and Local Data to Guide Reproductive Health Programs.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 6, no. 2 (1997).

MOST


Making the MOSt Of ManageMent

What is MOST?

The Management and Organizational Sustainability Tool (MOST) is a structured, participatory pro-cess that allows organizations to assess their own management performance and develop a concrete action plan for organization-wide improvement.

Organizations that have undergone traditional management assessments may be surprised by MOST. Traditional assessments rely on external evaluators, intensive data collection, and checklists. They result in findings and recommendations but often fall short of producing a plan for improvement.

MOST is different. It is all about making change happen through a structured, participatory process, in which staff members use an instrument to collect data from their own experience, immediately analyze the data, and use their analysis to make concrete, practical plans for improvement. Finally, the MOST process recognizes that meaningful changes in management rarely occur through a single event; it includes a six-month or one-year follow-up MOST exercise to review progress and make any needed changes in the action plans.

Why Emphasize Management?

Management Sciences for Health (MSH) developed MOST after years of experience in helping public- and private-sector organizations provide health services under complex and changing conditions. MOST builds on a consistent finding that there are unbreakable linkages between good manage-ment, high-quality services, and organizational sustainability. Good management is the glue that holds all internal parts of an organization together, creates a positive work climate, and supports high-quality services, thus helping to bring the organization’s vision to fruition.

A well-managed organization that delivers high-quality services is able to satisfy its clients and in-crease demand. Its structure and financial base allow it to continue its work in a changing environ-ment—to be sustainable even as funders’ priorities shift, traditional sources of revenues shrink, and the organization takes on new responsibilities.

What Is the MOST Process?

The MOST process begins with an engagement phase to determine if MOST is a good fit for the orga-nization, continues with a preparation phase to identify and interview staff who will lead the pro-cess, focuses on the key activity—a facilitated assessment and planning workshop—and concludes with follow-up activities to keep the changes moving ahead.

The three-day workshop is the central component of the process. It builds a collective perspective and plan out of individual experiences. It brings together on an equal footing managers from all parts and levels of the organization, from the managers of units or projects to the director and senior managers. During the workshop, participants express their individual views on management per-formance, share these perceptions, and reach consensus on changes that will improve performance. They establish priorities and develop action plans that specify objectives and activities for making these changes, including identifying the people who will be responsible for implementing the plan.

MOST


For MOST to yield its greatest benefits, workshop participants must play a part that continues long after the workshop. They must identify the need for change, commit themselves to the process, mo-tivate their colleagues, and take the lead in implementing the improvements that emerge from the workshop.

How Can Organizations Benefit from MOST?

Through the MOST process, an organization will:

• recognize the importance of good management to its effectiveness and long-term survival;

• assess the current status of 19 essential components of management;

• identify feasible changes that will make the organization more effective;

• develop specific plans to implement these changes;

• generate the staff buy-in needed to support the management improvements;

• monitor the results over time and adapt the plans to changing conditions and new demands.

Any organization can benefit from MOST if its director and senior managers meet two criteria:

• They are committed to open self-assessment and decision-making by consensus.

• They believe that the organization can take action to improve its management, even though there may be some constraints beyond their control.

Principles Underlying MOST

• The most effective way to initiate change in an organization is to involve staff members at all levels in open self-assessment and consensual decision-making.

• Meaningful changes in management rarely occur through a single event. They require an ongo-ing effort, with frequent re-evaluations and adaptations.

• To bring about management changes, there must be strong, committed leadership at every level of the organization.

MOST


What Management Areas Does MOST Address?

Mission. An organization’s mission is its purpose, the reason it exists. It provides guidance, consis-tency, and meaning to decisions and activities at all levels. It answers the question, Why do we do what we do?

Values. An organization’s values are the beliefs and ethical principles that underlie its mission. They give meaning to the organization’s work and form the basis for staff commitment. They answer the question, What are the core beliefs and principles that we all share and that give direction to our work?

Strategy. An organization’s strategies are the broad approaches used to define the programs and ac-tivities that will fulfill the organization’s mission and goals. The strategies answer the question, How will we get to where we want to go?

Structure. Structure refers to the programs, projects, and offices that make up an organization. Structure answers the question, Are we organized in a way that facilitates what we want to do and where we want to go?

Systems. The systems are the interdependent functions that allow an organization to do its work. MOST addresses the ten systems that are the key elements of management: planning, communica-tions, human resource management, monitoring and evaluation, information management (both data collection and use of information), quality assurance, financial management, revenue generation, and supply management. Organizational systems answer the question, What helps us to carry out our activities?

MOST


What Else Do I Need to Know?

If you are involved with an organization that provides services in the private, NGO, or public sec-tor, and if you sense that some management areas could be strengthened, you may want to explore MOST more fully. You can talk with an experienced MOST facilitator, view a slide presentation, peruse the MOST guide or speak with a representative of an organization that has used MOST.

For more information, please contact:

Management Sciences for Health784 Memorial DriveCambridge, MA 02139 USATelephone: 617.250.9500Fax: 617.250.9090Website: www.msh.org

MOST


MOSt wOrkShOP agenda and anticiPated OutcOMeS

Session/Module Title

Objectives Approximate Timing

DAY 1 Opening session • Introductions.• Review the workshop agenda and anticipated outcomes.• Clarify expectations.• Introduce the MOST process.• Establish ground rules for an open, honest, respectful

exchange of ideas.

1 ½ hours

Principles of lead-ership, manage-ment, and change

Module 1: Where Are We Now?

• Explore the links between leadership, improved manage-ment, work climate, sustainability, and organizational re-sults.

• Explore the principles of change.

• Explore the meaning of the five management areas and the 19 management components.

• Work in groups that cut across organizational divisions and draw on the contributions of each member.

1 hour

4 hours

DAY 2 Module 1 Contin-ued: Where Are We Now? Conclusion

• In plenary, generate consensus on the organization's cur-rent status in terms of each component.

1 hour

Module 2: Where Are We Headed?

• Agree on one or two objectives for improving each man-agement component.

• Provide evidence that will indicate progress toward these objectives.

• Select the highest-priority management components to improve during the coming period.

5 ½ hours

DAY 3 Module 3: How Will We Reach Our Objectives?

• Prepare an action plan for these improvements.• Decide on follow-up activities that will need to be complet-

ed, and assign responsibility for the activities.• Name the change leader and change team who will over-

see the implementation of the plan.

1 day

Anticipated Outcomes of the Workshop

• a collective assessment of the current stage of development of the 19 management components;

• a prioritized list of the management components to be improved within a specified time period;

• an agreed-upon set of objectives for improving each management component;

• an action plan for reaching the objectives, identifying the broad activities, timing, resources, and people responsible for completing the activities, as well as data that provide evidence of success;

• identification of a change leader and change team who will lead the implementation of the ac-tion plan and monitor progress;

• a list of short-term activities for following up on the MOST workshop: those the staff can do themselves with existing resources, those for which they need to seek additional resources, and those for which they will need technical assistance from outside the organization;

• agreement on post-workshop assistance from the facilitators (by phone or e-mail) and a follow-up MOST exercise, usually six months to one year after the workshop.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

57

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Mis

sio

nEx

iste

nce

an

d

Kn

ow

led

ge

No

form

al m

issi

on

stat

emen

t ex

ists

, or

the

exis

ting

mis

sion

st

atem

ent

is in

cons

is-

tent

with

the

cur

rent

or

gani

zatio

nal p

ur-

pos

e an

d th

e ne

eds

of in

tend

ed c

lient

s.

The

mis

sion

sta

te-

men

t ex

ists

, is

cons

is-

tent

with

the

org

ani-

zatio

nal p

urp

ose,

and

is

som

etim

es c

ited

by

seni

or s

taff.

The

mis

sion

sta

te-

men

t is

freq

uent

ly

cite

d by

key

sta

ke-

hold

ers:

sta

ff, b

oard

, p

artn

er a

genc

ies,

and

cl

ient

s.

The

mis

sion

sta

te-

men

t is

wid

ely

know

n an

d re

gula

rly

revi

ewed

to

assu

re

that

it r

eflec

ts t

he

curr

ent

orga

niza

tion-

al p

urp

ose

and

the

need

s of

inte

nded

cl

ient

s.

Val

ues

Exis

ten

ce a

nd

A

pp

licat

ion

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

have

not

bee

n de

-fin

ed.

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

have

bee

n de

fined

an

d ar

e so

met

imes

ci

ted

by s

enio

r st

aff.

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

are

freq

uent

ly c

ited

by s

taff

at a

ll le

vels

.

Org

aniz

atio

nal v

alue

s an

d et

hica

l prin

cip

les

are

wid

ely

know

n,

and

staf

f are

hel

d

acco

unta

ble

for

ad

herin

g to

the

m.

Stra

teg

yLi

nks

to

Mis

sio

n

and

Val

ues

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

e-ve

lop

ed in

res

pon

se

to fu

nder

s’ r

equi

re-

men

ts o

r th

e p

refe

r-en

ces

of a

few

dec

i-si

on-m

aker

s, w

ithou

t re

fere

nce

to t

he m

is-

sion

and

val

ues.

Stra

tegi

es a

re s

ome-

times

dev

elop

ed

with

ref

eren

ce t

o th

e m

issi

on a

nd v

alue

s,

but

mor

e of

ten

in

resp

onse

to

othe

r re

qui

rem

ents

, pre

f-er

ence

s, a

nd m

an-

date

s.

Stra

tegi

es a

re a

lmos

t al

way

s de

velo

ped

w

ithin

the

gen

eral

co

ntex

t of

the

mis

-si

on a

nd v

alue

s.

Beca

use

stra

tegi

es

are

deve

lop

ed t

o co

nfor

m t

o th

e m

is-

sion

and

val

ues,

st

rate

gic

pla

nnin

g is

vi

ewed

as

an o

pp

or-

tuni

ty t

o re

affir

m o

r re

vise

the

mis

sion

.

MO

St a

SSeS

SMen

t in

Str

uM

ent

58

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Stra

teg

y (c

on

tin

ued

)Li

nks

to

Clie

nts

an

d C

om

mun

ity

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed w

ithou

t re

fer-

ence

to

the

need

s of

cl

ient

s or

the

ir co

m-

mun

ities

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re

deve

lop

ed b

ased

on

assu

mpt

ions

abo

ut th

e ne

eds

of c

lient

s an

d th

eir

com

mun

ities

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re

deve

lop

ed b

ased

on

accu

rate

info

rmat

ion

abou

t th

e ne

eds

of

clie

nts

and

thei

r

com

mun

ities

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed w

ith t

he p

artic

i-p

atio

n of

clie

nts

and

com

mun

ity g

roup

s.

Lin

ks t

o

Pote

nti

al

Clie

nts

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed w

ithou

t kn

owl-

edge

of t

he c

urre

nt

or p

oten

tial d

eman

d fo

r th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

serv

ices

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed o

n th

e ba

sis

of

anec

dota

l kno

wle

dge

of t

he d

eman

d fo

r

the

orga

niza

tion’

s

serv

ices

.

Stra

tegi

es a

re d

evel

-op

ed o

n th

e ba

sis

of o

ccas

iona

l ass

ess-

men

ts o

f the

dem

and

for

serv

ices

, as

wel

l as

anal

ysis

of t

he s

ervi

ces

alre

ady

pro

vide

d by

ot

her

orga

niza

tions

.

A m

echa

nism

is in

p

lace

for

regu

larly

sc

anni

ng c

urre

nt a

nd

pot

entia

l dem

and,

ev

alua

ting

othe

r or

-ga

niza

tions

’ ser

vice

s,

and

usin

g th

ese

find-

ings

to

deve

lop

st

rate

gies

.

Stru

ctur

eLi

nes

of

A

uth

ori

ty a

nd

A

cco

unta

bili

ty

Ther

e ar

e no

for-

mal

doc

umen

ts t

hat

defin

e cu

rren

t lin

es

of a

utho

rity

and

ac-

coun

tabi

lity.

An

orga

niza

tiona

l ch

art

or s

imila

r do

cu-

men

t de

fines

line

s of

aut

horit

y an

d ac

coun

tabi

lity.

It is

in

clud

ed in

the

org

a-ni

zatio

n’s

man

ual o

f po

licie

s an

d pr

oce-

dure

s.

The

orga

niza

tiona

l ch

art

or s

imila

r do

cu-

men

t is

som

etim

es

used

whe

n is

sues

ar

ise

per

tain

ing

to

lines

of a

utho

rity

and

acco

unta

bilit

y.

The

orga

niza

tiona

l ch

art

or s

imila

r do

cu-

men

t is

reg

ular

ly

upda

ted

and

cons

is-

tent

ly u

sed

to r

esol

ve

issu

es p

erta

inin

g to

lin

es o

f aut

horit

y an

d ac

coun

tabi

lity.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

59

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Stru

ctur

e (c

on

tin

ued

)G

ove

rnan

ce:

Bo

ard

of

Dir

ecto

rs(N

ote:

Gov

er-

nanc

e in

rel

atio

n to

boa

rd o

f di

rect

ors

is n

ot

app

licab

le t

o p

ub-

lic s

ecto

r or

gani

-za

tions

. How

ever

, go

vern

ance

in

acco

unta

bilit

y an

d tr

ansp

aren

cy

rem

ains

an

im-

por

tant

str

uctu

re

in p

ublic

sec

tor

orga

niza

tions

.)

Ther

e is

no

boar

d or

th

e bo

ard

cons

ists

of

the

foun

der

and/

or

per

sons

cho

sen

byth

e fo

unde

r. Bo

ard

mee

tings

are

rar

ely

held

.

The

boar

d is

com

-p

rised

of p

erso

ns

who

hav

e no

t be

en

sele

cted

bas

ed o

n th

e ch

arac

teris

tics

(i.e.

ge

nder

) an

d sk

ills

need

ed o

n th

e bo

ard.

Th

e bo

ard

mee

ts

occa

sion

ally

and

fo-

cuse

s ex

clus

ivel

y on

op

erat

iona

l iss

ues

as

opp

osed

to

stra

tegi

c on

es. N

o p

olic

ies

have

be

en d

evel

oped

by

the

boar

d.

The

boar

d is

cho

sen

from

per

sons

in t

he

com

mun

ity b

ased

on

the

cha

ract

eris

tics

and

skill

s ne

eded

on

the

boar

d. T

he b

oard

m

eets

freq

uent

ly, f

o-cu

sing

on

oper

atio

nal

and

stra

tegi

c is

sues

. So

me

pol

icie

s ha

ve

been

dev

elop

ed b

y th

e bo

ard.

The

boa

rd

app

rove

s th

e an

nual

bu

dget

but

is n

ot in

-vo

lved

in p

erio

dic

mon

itorin

g of

rev

-en

ue a

nd e

xpen

ses.

The

boar

d is

cho

sen

from

per

sons

in t

he

com

mun

ity b

ased

on

char

acte

ristic

s an

d sk

ills

need

ed o

n th

e bo

ard.

The

boa

rd

mee

ts fr

eque

ntly

, fo

cuse

s on

str

ateg

ic

issu

es a

nd e

valu

ates

its

per

form

ance

an-

nual

ly. T

he b

oard

pe-

riodi

cally

rev

iew

s th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

mis

sion

an

d ap

pro

ves

its s

tra-

tegi

c p

lan.

The

boa

rd

ensu

res

suffi

cien

t fin

anci

al r

esou

rces

fo

r th

e or

gani

zatio

n;

app

rove

s th

e an

nual

bu

dget

; tra

cks

rev-

enue

s an

d ex

pen

ses

agai

nst

budg

et a

t le

ast

qua

rter

ly, a

nd

mon

itors

the

effe

c-tiv

enes

s of

pro

gram

s an

d se

rvic

es.

Ro

le a

nd

R

esp

on

sib

iliti

es(N

ote:

For

NG

Os,

th

is c

omp

onen

t p

erta

ins

to b

oth

staf

f and

boa

rd

of d

irect

ors.

For

p

ublic

-sec

tor

inst

i-tu

tions

, it

per

tain

s on

ly t

o st

aff.)

Role

s an

d re

spon

si-

bilit

ies

are

not

clea

rly

defin

ed. W

ork

is a

s-si

gned

on

an a

d-ho

c ba

sis,

acc

ordi

ng t

o th

e p

erce

ived

nee

ds

of t

he m

omen

t.

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

li-tie

s ar

e in

the

pro

cess

of

bei

ng d

efine

d.

Mos

t w

ork

is s

till a

s-si

gned

on

an a

d-ho

c ba

sis.

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

li-tie

s ar

e de

fined

in t

he

pol

icy

and

pro

cedu

res

man

ual.

They

are

be-

ginn

ing

to b

e us

ed a

s th

e ba

sis

for

assi

gnin

g w

ork

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

li-tie

s ar

e de

fined

in t

he

man

ual a

nd u

sed

as

the

basi

s fo

r as

sign

ing

wor

k. T

hey

are

regu

-la

rly r

evie

wed

to

be

sure

tha

t st

aff a

ssig

n-m

ents

ser

ve o

rgan

iza-

tiona

l str

ateg

ies.

60

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Stru

ctur

e (c

on

tin

ued

)D

ecis

ion

- M

akin

gTh

e di

rect

or a

nd s

e-ni

or m

anag

ers

mak

e al

l sig

nific

ant

deci

-si

ons

with

out

disc

uss-

ing

them

with

sta

ff.

The

dire

ctor

and

se-

nior

man

ager

s m

ake

all s

igni

fican

t de

ci-

sion

s af

ter

liste

ning

to

the

view

s of

sel

ecte

d st

aff m

embe

rs.

Mid

-leve

l sta

ff m

em-

bers

are

enc

oura

ged

to m

ake

and

carr

y ou

t si

gnifi

cant

dec

i-si

ons

rega

rd in

g th

eir

own

wor

k an

d th

e w

ork

of t

heir

team

s.

All

staf

f are

exp

ecte

d to

mak

e si

gnifi

cant

de

cisi

ons

rega

rd-

ing

thei

r ow

n w

ork

and

the

wor

k of

the

ir te

ams,

and

to

carr

y ou

t th

ose

deci

sion

s.

Syst

ems

Plan

nin

gM

ost

orga

niza

tiona

l ac

tiviti

es a

re u

n-p

lann

ed a

nd d

ecid

ed

on a

n ad

-hoc

bas

is.

Op

erat

iona

l pla

ns

are

deve

lop

ed fo

r so

me

pro

ject

s an

d p

rogr

ams,

usu

ally

to

mee

t fu

nder

s’

req

uire

men

ts.

An

oper

atio

nal p

lan

is

deve

lop

ed a

nnua

lly,

inde

pen

dent

of t

he

orga

niza

tion’

s br

oad-

er s

trat

egie

s.

The

annu

al o

p-

erat

iona

l pla

n is

de

sign

ed t

o su

pp

ort

the

orga

niza

tion’

s st

rate

gies

.

Co

mm

unic

atio

nTh

ere

is n

o fo

rmal

co

mm

unic

atio

n m

echa

nism

. Im

por

-ta

nt in

form

atio

n is

co

mm

unic

ated

mai

n-ly

by

wor

d of

mou

th.

Com

mun

icat

ion

mec

hani

sms

are

used

on

ly t

o co

nvey

nec

es-

sary

info

rmat

ion

from

se

nior

man

agem

ent

to t

he r

est

of t

he

staf

f.

Com

mun

icat

ion

mec

hani

sms

are

be-

ginn

ing

to b

e us

ed

to s

hare

info

rmat

ion

acro

ss o

rgan

izat

iona

l un

its a

nd a

mon

g st

aff

at d

iffer

ent

leve

ls.

Com

mun

icat

ion

mec

hani

sms

are

used

co

nsis

tent

ly t

o sh

are

info

rmat

ion

acro

ss

orga

niza

tiona

l uni

ts

and

amon

g st

aff a

t di

ffere

nt le

vels

.

Hum

an

Res

our

ce

Man

agem

ent

Ther

e ar

e no

pol

icie

s on

job

clas

sific

atio

n,

sala

ries,

hiri

ng, p

ro-

mot

ion,

grie

vanc

es,

or w

ork

hour

s. T

here

ar

e no

pro

cedu

res

for

per

form

ance

ev

alua

tion,

sta

ff de

-ve

lop

men

t, o

r m

ain-

tena

nce

of e

mp

loye

e da

ta.

The

orga

niza

tion

has

reco

gniz

ed t

he n

eed

for

a fo

rmal

hum

an

reso

urce

sys

tem

. It

is

wor

king

to

clar

ify h

u-m

an r

esou

rce

pol

icie

s an

d p

roce

dure

s.

Hum

an r

esou

rce

pol

i-ci

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s ar

e in

pla

ce, a

nd

man

ager

s ar

e be

gin-

ning

to

use

them

to

hire

and

ret

ain

tal-

ente

d an

d co

mm

itted

st

aff.

Hum

an r

esou

rce

pol

i-ci

es a

nd p

roce

dure

s ar

e in

pla

ce, a

nd

man

ager

s us

e th

em

cons

iste

ntly

to

hire

an

d re

tain

tal

ente

d an

d co

mm

itted

sta

ff.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

61

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Syst

ems

(co

nti

nue

d)

Mo

nit

ori

ng

an

d

Eval

uati

on

The

orga

niza

tion’

s w

ork

is m

onito

red

and

its r

esul

ts a

re

eval

uate

d by

ext

er-

nal e

valu

ator

s w

hen

fund

ers

dem

and

it.

The

orga

niza

tion

mon

itors

its

own

wor

k to

det

erm

ine

adhe

renc

e to

pla

nned

ac

tiviti

es. R

esul

ts a

re

eval

uate

d by

ext

erna

l te

ams

whe

n fu

nder

s de

man

d it.

The

orga

niza

tion

regu

larly

mon

itors

its

own

wor

k to

det

er-

min

e p

rogr

ess

tow

ard

achi

evin

g go

als

and

obje

ctiv

es. I

t ev

alu-

ates

res

ults

at

the

end

of e

ach

pro

ject

and

p

rogr

am.

The

orga

niza

tion

regu

larly

mon

itors

its

pro

gres

s, e

valu

ates

re

sults

, and

use

s th

e fin

ding

s to

imp

rove

se

rvic

es a

nd p

lan

the

next

pha

se o

f wor

k.

Info

rmat

ion

M

anag

emen

t:

Dat

a

Co

llect

ion

Rout

ine

serv

ice

and

finan

cial

dat

a ar

e of

ten

inac

cura

te,

and

rep

orts

are

ra

rely

sub

mitt

ed o

n sc

hedu

le.

The

orga

niza

tion

has

intr

oduc

ed s

yste

ms

that

are

beg

inni

ng t

o im

pro

ve t

he a

ccur

acy

and

timel

ines

s of

ro

utin

e se

rvic

e an

d fin

anci

al r

epor

ts.

Org

aniz

atio

nal

syst

ems

yiel

d ro

utin

e se

rvic

e an

d fin

anci

al d

ata

that

are

ge

nera

lly c

onsi

dere

d ac

cura

te, a

nd m

ost

rep

orts

are

sub

mitt

ed

on s

ched

ule.

Org

aniz

atio

nal

syst

ems

pro

vide

cr

oss-

chec

king

to

gua

rant

ee t

he

accu

racy

of r

outin

e se

rvic

e an

d fin

anci

al

data

. The

re a

re

clea

r, en

forc

ed

cons

eque

nces

for

late

re

por

ts.

Info

rmat

ion

M

anag

emen

t:

Use

of

In

form

atio

n

Thos

e w

ho s

ubm

it re

qui

red

rep

orts

re-

ceiv

e no

feed

back

fr

om t

heir

man

ager

s.

The

info

rmat

ion

in

the

rep

orts

is fi

led

away

and

not

use

d fo

r m

anag

emen

t or

p

rogr

amm

atic

dec

i-si

ons.

Thos

e w

ho s

ubm

it re

-q

uire

d re

por

ts r

ecei

ve

spor

adic

feed

back

fr

om t

heir

man

ager

s.

Som

e m

anag

ers

use

the

info

rmat

ion

in

the

rep

orts

to

mak

e de

cisi

ons.

All

man

ager

s ar

e ex

-p

ecte

d to

giv

e re

gu-

lar

feed

back

to

staf

f w

ho s

ubm

it re

qui

red

rep

orts

, and

to

use

the

info

rmat

ion

in

the

rep

orts

as

a ba

sis

for

deci

sion

s.

Staf

f mem

bers

who

su

bmit

rep

orts

con

-si

sten

tly g

et p

rom

pt

feed

back

. With

the

ir m

anag

ers,

the

y an

a-ly

ze t

he in

form

atio

n an

d us

e th

eir

findi

ngs

to a

naly

ze t

rend

s, im

-p

rove

man

agem

ent

and

per

form

ance

, an

d ac

hiev

e ou

t-co

mes

.

62

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Syst

ems

(co

nti

nue

d)

Qua

lity

A

ssur

ance

The

orga

niza

tion

em-

pha

size

s th

e nu

mbe

r of

act

iviti

es u

nder

-ta

ken,

rat

her

than

the

q

ualit

y of

ser

vice

s.

The

orga

niza

tion

ackn

owle

dges

the

im

por

tanc

e of

hig

h-q

ualit

y se

rvic

es. I

t is

co

nsid

erin

g ac

tiviti

es

that

will

hel

p s

taff

regu

larly

ass

ess

and

imp

rove

qua

lity.

Som

e p

arts

of t

he

orga

niza

tion

have

un

dert

aken

act

iviti

es

to a

sses

s an

d im

pro

ve

the

qua

lity

of s

ervi

c-es

. A fe

w in

tere

sted

st

aff m

embe

rs h

ave

take

n re

spon

sibi

lity

for

cond

uctin

g th

ese

ac

tiviti

es.

Ther

e is

an

esta

b-lis

hed,

ong

oing

sys

-te

m fo

r as

sess

ing

and

imp

rovi

ng t

he q

ualit

y of

ser

vice

s. T

rain

ed

staf

f are

reg

ular

ly u

s-in

g th

is s

yste

m.

Fin

anci

al

Man

agem

ent

Budg

ets

are

deve

l-op

ed w

ithou

t in

put

fr

om p

rogr

am m

an-

ager

s. T

he fi

nanc

e sy

stem

doe

s no

t ac

cura

tely

tra

ck e

x-p

endi

ture

s, r

even

ues,

an

d ca

sh fl

ow.

Budg

ets

are

usua

lly

deve

lop

ed w

ith in

put

fr

om p

rogr

am m

an-

ager

s. T

he fi

nanc

e sy

stem

tra

cks

exp

en-

ditu

res,

rev

enue

s,

and

cash

flow

by

line

item

(e.

g., s

alar

ies,

ut

ilitie

s, m

ater

ials

),

with

out

links

to

pro

gram

out

put

s or

se

rvic

es.

Fina

ncia

l sta

ff de

-ve

lop

bud

gets

in

conj

unct

ion

with

p

rogr

am m

anag

ers.

Th

e fin

ance

sys

tem

tr

acks

exp

endi

ture

s,

reve

nues

, and

cas

h flo

w b

y lin

e ite

m,

with

som

e lin

ks t

o p

rogr

am o

utp

uts

and

serv

ices

.

Prog

ram

man

ager

s w

ork

with

fina

ncia

l st

aff t

o de

velo

p b

ud-

gets

tha

t su

pp

ort

pro

gram

mat

ic d

eci-

sion

s. T

he fi

nanc

e sy

stem

pre

sent

s an

ac

cura

te, c

omp

lete

p

ictu

re o

f exp

endi

-tu

res,

rev

enue

, and

ca

sh fl

ow in

rel

atio

n to

pro

gram

out

put

s an

d se

rvic

es.

Rev

enue

G

ener

atio

nTh

e or

gani

zatio

n op

-er

ates

with

a s

ingl

e so

urce

of r

even

ue,

usua

lly o

ne la

rge

fund

er, w

hose

man

-da

te s

hap

es s

trat

egie

s an

d p

rogr

ams.

The

orga

niza

tion

ac-

know

ledg

es t

he n

eed

for

dive

rsifi

ed fu

nd-

ing.

It h

as d

evis

ed,

but

not

yet

imp

le-

men

ted,

a s

trat

egy

for

obta

inin

g re

venu

e fr

om d

iver

se s

ourc

es.

The

orga

niza

tion

has

begu

n to

imp

lem

ent

its d

iver

sific

atio

n st

rate

gy a

nd h

as a

l-re

ady

obta

ined

sig

-ni

fican

t re

venu

e fr

om

dive

rse

sour

ces

to

cove

r cu

rren

t ne

eds.

The

orga

niza

tion

follo

ws

a lo

ng-t

erm

re

venu

e-ge

nera

ting

stra

tegy

, bal

anci

ng

dive

rse

sour

ces

of r

ev-

enue

to

mee

t cu

rren

t an

d fu

ture

nee

ds.

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

63

Man

agem

ent

Co

mp

on

ent

Stag

es o

f D

evel

op

men

t an

d T

hei

r C

har

acte

rist

ics

Cur

ren

t St

age

Evid

ence

12

34

Syst

ems

(co

nti

nue

d)

Sup

ply

M

anag

emen

tTh

ere

is n

o sy

stem

in

pla

ce t

o p

rocu

re,

trac

k, o

r re

gula

te

sup

plie

s (c

linic

al,

pha

rmac

eutic

al, o

r of

fice)

use

d by

the

or

gani

zatio

n. S

uppl

ies

are

simpl

y re

ceiv

ed

and

stoc

ked

whe

n th

ey

arriv

e an

d di

strib

uted

up

on d

eman

d.

A s

upp

ly s

yste

m h

as

been

des

igne

d to

al-

low

the

org

aniz

atio

n to

tra

ck t

he fl

ow a

nd

use

of s

upp

lies.

Sta

ff ha

ve n

ot y

et b

een

trai

ned

to u

se t

he

syst

em.

The

sup

ply

sys

tem

al-

low

s th

e or

gani

zatio

n to

fore

cast

and

pro

-cu

re s

upp

lies

in r

ela-

tion

to t

heir

dem

and

and

use.

Som

e st

aff

have

bee

n tr

aine

d to

us

e th

e sy

stem

.

Trai

ned

staf

f con

sis-

tent

ly u

se t

he s

upp

ly

syst

em t

o fo

reca

st

futu

re r

equi

rem

ents

, re

duce

gap

s, a

nd

pre

vent

sto

ckou

ts.

MOST


aSSeSSMent cOnSenSuS fOrM

Before beginning the consensus step, workshop participants should work alone to identify the stage of development for each management component of their organization. They should also list one or two examples from their experience, as evidence to support their assessment. When they have fin-ished, the facilitator will place them in groups of up to five people.

Instructions

1. Take notes on the Assessment Consensus Form as the members of your small group each state the stage of development they chose for each management component, along with the evi-dence for that decision. Use the central section of the form to record the name (or initials) of each group member, and under the name, the stage of development that person selected. In the larger white space beneath the names and individual stages, summarize the evidence presented by all group members.

2. Discuss each management component in turn, exploring any differences in your perceptions. Remember that:

• everyone’s viewpoint is equally valid because it represents that person’s individual experience;

• all the characteristics of a given stage of development must be present to place the organiza-tion at that stage. If any single characteristic is absent, your organization fits an earlier stage.

3. For each management component, come to consensus on the stage of development that best describes the organization, citing the one or two pieces of evidence that you all agree support your decision. Record these in the far right column of the table.

MOST


aSSeSSMent cOnSenSuS fOrM

ManagementComponent

Participant_________





GroupConsensus

MiSSiOn Existence and Knowledge

Individual Stage Selected Consensus Stage

Individual Evidence Consensus Evidence

valueSExistence and Application



StrategyLinks to Mission and Values



MOST


ManagementComponent






GroupConsensus

StrategyLinks to Clients and Community



StrategyLinks to Potential Clients



StructureLines of Authority and Accountability



MOST


ManagementComponent






GroupConsensus

StructureGovernance: Board of Directors



StructureRoles and Responsi-bilities



StructureDecision-Making



MOST


ManagementComponent






GroupConsensus

SySteMSPlanning



SySteMS

communi-cations

SySteMSHuman Resource Manage-ment





MOST


ManagementComponent






GroupConsensus

SySteMSMonitoring & Evaluation



SySteMSInformation Management: Data Collection



SySteMSInformation Management: Use of Information



SySteMSQuality Assurance



MOST


ManagementComponent






GroupConsensus

SySteMSFinancial Management



SySteMSRevenue Generation



SySteMSSupply Management



Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

71

MO

St a

cti

On P

lan f

Or

M

Inst

ruct

ion

s

Mak

e as

man

y co

pies

of

this

form

as

are

need

ed t

o en

com

pass

all

the

obje

ctiv

es in

the

act

ion

plan

. (T

he p

arti

cipa

nts

may

cho

ose

to u

se t

his

or a

noth

er

form

at t

hat

corr

espo

nds

to t

heir

ow

n pl

anni

ng p

roce

ss. I

f th

ey u

se a

dif

fere

nt fo

rmat

, the

y m

ay n

eed

to a

dapt

it t

o in

clud

e al

l the

pla

nnin

g el

emen

ts

that

are

iden

tifie

d he

re.)

Ma

na

geM

ent

cO

MPO

nen

t __

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

__

Ob

ject

ives

Ev

iden

ce o

f A

chie

vem

ent

Act

ivit

ies

Res

our

ces

Nee

ded

(H

uman

, Fi-

nan

cial

, Ma-

teri

al)

Peo

ple

R

esp

on

sib

le

T i m

e l

i n e

1st Q

uart

er2n

d Q

uart

er3rd

Qua

rter

4th Q

uart

erM

O N

T H

S

12

3 4

56

78

910

1112

72

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Ob

ject

ives

Ev

iden

ce o

f A

chie

vem

ent

Act

ivit

ies

Res

our

ces

Nee

ded

(H

uman

, Fi-

nan

cial

, Ma-

teri

al)

Peo

ple

R

esp

on

sib

le

T i m

e l

i n e

1st Q

uart

er2n

d Q

uart

er3rd

Qua

rter

4th Q

uart

erM

O N

T H

S

12

3 4

56

78

910

1112

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

73

lea

din

g a

nd M

an

ag

ing f

Or r

eSu

ltS

MO

del

74

Man

agem

ent

and

Org

aniz

atio

nal S

usta

inab

ility

Too

l

Man

agin

g

Plan

nin

g•

Set

shor

t-te

rm o

rgan

izat

iona

l goa

ls a

nd p

erfo

rman

ce r

esul

ts.

• D

evel

op m

ultiy

ear

and

annu

al p

lans

.•

Allo

cate

ade

qua

te r

esou

rces

(m

oney

, peo

ple

, and

mat

eria

ls).

•

Ant

icip

ate

and

redu

ce r

isks

.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Org

aniz

atio

n ha

s de

fined

res

ults

, ass

igne

d re

sour

ces,

and

an

op

erat

iona

l pla

n.

Org

aniz

ing

• En

sure

a s

truc

ture

tha

t pr

ovid

es a

ccou

ntab

ility

and

del

inea

tes

auth

ority

.•

Ensu

re t

hat

syst

ems

for

hum

an r

esou

rce

man

agem

ent,

fina

nce,

logi

stic

s, q

ualit

y

assu

ranc

e, o

pera

tions

, inf

orm

atio

n, a

nd m

arke

ting

effe

ctiv

ely

supp

ort

the

plan

.•

Stre

ngth

en w

ork

pro

cess

es t

o im

ple

men

t th

e p

lan.

• A

lign

staf

f cap

aciti

es w

ith p

lann

ed a

ctiv

ities

.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Org

aniz

atio

n ha

s fu

nctio

nal s

truc

ture

s, s

yste

ms,

and

pro

-ce

sses

for

effic

ient

op

erat

ions

; sta

ff ar

e or

gani

zed

and

awar

e of

job

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

and

exp

ecta

tions

.

Imp

lem

enti

ng

• In

tegr

ate

syst

ems

and

coor

dina

te w

ork

flow

.•

Bala

nce

com

pet

ing

dem

ands

. •

Rout

inel

y us

e da

ta fo

r de

cisi

on m

akin

g.•

Coo

rdin

ate

activ

ities

with

oth

er p

rogr

ams

and

sect

ors.

• A

djus

t p

lans

and

res

ourc

es a

s ci

rcum

stan

ces

chan

ge.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Act

iviti

es a

re c

arrie

d ou

t ef

ficie

ntly

, effe

ctiv

ely,

and

re

spon

sive

ly.

Mo

nit

ori

ng

& E

valu

atin

g•

Mon

itor

and

refle

ct o

n p

rogr

ess

agai

nst

pla

ns.

• Pr

ovid

e fe

edba

ck.

• Id

entif

y ne

eded

cha

nges

.•

Imp

rove

wor

k p

roce

sses

, pro

cedu

res,

and

too

ls.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Org

aniz

atio

n co

ntin

uous

ly u

pdat

es in

form

atio

n ab

out t

he

stat

us o

f ach

ieve

men

ts a

nd re

sults

, and

app

lies

ongo

ing

lear

ning

and

kno

wle

dge.

lea

din

g a

nd M

an

ag

ing f

ra

Mew

Or

kPr

acti

ces

that

ena

ble

wor

k gr

oups

and

org

aniz

atio

ns t

o fa

ce c

halle

nges

and

ach

ieve

res

ults

Lead

ing

Scan

nin

g•

Iden

tify

clie

nt a

nd s

take

hold

er n

eeds

and

prio

ritie

s.•

Reco

gniz

e tr

ends

and

ris

ks t

hat

affe

ct t

he o

rgan

izat

ion.

• Lo

ok fo

r be

st p

ract

ices

.•

Iden

tify

staf

f cap

aciti

es a

nd c

onst

rain

ts.

• Kn

ow y

ours

elf,

your

sta

ff, a

nd y

our

orga

niza

tion—

valu

es, s

tren

gths

, and

wea

knes

ses.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Man

ager

s ha

ve u

p-t

o-da

te, v

alid

kno

wle

dge

of t

he

orga

niza

tion

and

its c

onte

xt; t

hey

know

how

the

ir be

havi

or a

ffect

s ot

hers

.

Focu

sin

g•

Art

icul

ate

the

orga

niza

tion’

s m

issi

on a

nd s

trat

egy.

• Id

entif

y cr

itica

l cha

lleng

es.

• Li

nk g

oals

with

the

ove

rall

orga

niza

tiona

l str

ateg

y.•

Det

erm

ine

key

prio

ritie

s fo

r ac

tion.

• C

reat

e a

com

mon

pic

ture

of d

esire

d re

sults

.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Org

aniz

atio

n’s

wor

k is

dire

cted

by

a w

ell-d

efine

d m

issi

on,

stra

tegy

, and

set

of p

riorit

ies.

Alig

nin

g &

Mo

bili

zin

g•

Ensu

re c

ongr

uenc

e of

val

ues,

miss

ion,

str

ateg

y, s

truc

ture

, sys

tem

s, a

nd d

aily

act

ions

.•

Faci

litat

e te

amw

ork.

• U

nite

key

sta

keho

lder

s ar

ound

an

insp

iring

vis

ion.

• Li

nk g

oals

with

rew

ards

and

rec

ogni

tion.

• En

list

stak

ehol

ders

to

com

mit

reso

urce

s.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Inte

rnal

and

ext

erna

l sta

keho

lder

s su

pp

ort

the

orga

niza

tion’

s go

als

and

have

mob

ilize

d re

sour

ces

to r

each

the

se g

oals

.

Insp

irin

g•

Mat

ch d

eeds

to

wor

ds.

• D

emon

stra

te h

ones

ty in

inte

ract

ions

.•

Show

tru

st a

nd c

onfid

ence

in s

taff;

ack

now

ledg

e th

e co

ntrib

utio

ns o

f oth

ers.

• Pr

ovid

e st

aff w

ith c

halle

nges

, fee

dbac

k, a

nd s

upp

ort.

• Be

a m

odel

of c

reat

ivity

, inn

ovat

ion,

and

lear

ning

.

Org

aniz

atio

nal O

utco

me:

Org

aniz

atio

n di

spla

ys a

clim

ate

of c

ontin

uous

lear

ning

and

st

aff s

how

com

mitm

ent,

eve

n w

hen

setb

acks

occ

ur.

MOST


additiOnal reSOurceS

The following publications may be useful for organizations planning to improve the manage-ment and sustainability of their organizations.

The Manager is a continuing-education quarterly published by Management Sciences for Health. Each issue focuses on a specific management topic and includes “Working Solutions” from the field, tools and techniques, and a case scenario for staff development and training. All issues of The Manager and its successor, The eManager, can be downloaded at no cost from MSH’s website. Go to www.msh.org/resource-center and use the filter to locate the issue you want. MSH also publishes management tools that can be used to improve specific management areas, many of which are available in multiple languages.

Many of the MSH’s resources listed below are available on The Manager’s Electronic Resource Center (ERC) at http://erc.msh.org. The ERC provides practical answers to management ques-tions, easy-to-use tools, information on effective management practices, and reviews of recent management trends. For more information, please visit the ERC Web site or send an e-mail to [email protected].

cOMPrehenSive SOurceS Of infOrMatiOn

Management Sciences for Health. Health Systems in Action: An eHandbook for Leaders and Managers. Cambridge, MA: MSH, 2010. Available for downloading at http://www.msh.org/resource-center/health-systems-in-action.cfm and on a CD-ROM.

———. Managers Who Lead: A Handbook for Improving Health Services. Cambridge, MA: MSH, 2005. Available as a book and for downloading at http://www.msh.org/resource-center/managers-who-lead.cfm

tO PrePare fOr the MOSt PrOceSS

Management Sciences for Health. “Creating a Work Climate that Motivates Staff and Im-proves Performance,” The Manager (Boston), vol. 11, no. 3 (2002). This issue includes a Climate Assessment Tool.

tO fOcuS On iMPrOving SPecific ManageMent cOMPOnentS

PlanningManagement Sciences for Health. “Developing Plans and Proposals for New Initiatives.” The

Manager (Boston) vol. 2, no. 4 (1993).

———. “Learning to Think Strategically.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 3, no. 1 (1994).

———. “Marketing Your Organization’s Services” The Manager (Boston) vol. 8, no. 2 (1999).

———. “Strengthening Human Resource Management to Improve Health Outcomes.” The eManager (Cambridge) no. 1, 2009.

MOST


Human Resource ManagementManagement Sciences for Health. “Good Governance in Civil Society Organizations.” The eManager

(Cambridge) no. 2, 2009.

————. Human Resource Management Rapid Assessment Tool for HIV/AIDS Environments: A Guide for Strengthening HRM Systems. Boston: MSH, 2003.

———. “Human Resources: Managing and Developing Your Most Important Asset.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 8, no. 1 (1999). This issue includes a Human Resource Development Tool.

Monitoring & EvaluationManagement Sciences for Health. “Using Evaluation as a Management Tool.” The Manager (Boston)

vol. 6, no. 1 (1997).

Information ManagementManagement Sciences for Health. “Using National and Local Data to Guide Reproductive Health

Programs.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 6, no. 2 (1997). This issue includes a guide to reproductive health indicators.

———. “Using Service Data: Tools for Taking Action” The Manager (Boston) vol. 1, no. 2 (1992). This issue includes a guide to graphing data. (Available in print only.)

Financial ManagementManagement Sciences for Health. “Assessing Your Organization’s Capacity to Manage Finances.”

The Manager (Boston) vol. 12, no. 1. (2003). This issue includes the Financial Management Assessment Tool (FIMAT).

———. CORE: A Tool for Cost and Revenue Analysis. Boston: MSH, 1998.

Supply ManagementManagement Sciences for Health. “Improving Contraceptive Supply Management.” The Manager

(Boston) vol. 1, no. 4 (1992).

Management Sciences for Health and the World Health Organization. Managing Drug Supply: The Selection, Procurement, Distribution, and Use of Pharmaceuticals, second edition. W. Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, 1997.

Management Sciences for Health. Managing Drug Supply Training Series, second edition. Boston: MSH, 2000.

———. Rapid Pharmaceutical Management Assessment: An Indicator-Based Approach. Boston: MSH, 2000.

MOST


tO Manage change MOre effectively

Management Sciences for Health. “Creating a Work Climate that Motivates Staff and Improves Performance.” The Manager (Boston), vol. 11, no. 3 (2002). This issue includes a Climate Assessment Tool.

———. “Developing Managers Who Lead.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 10, no. 3 (2001).

———. “Developing Managers Who Lead to Achieve Results: Lessons and Challenges.” The Manager (Boston) vol. 12, no. 4 (2003).

MOST


abOut ManageMent ScienceS fOr health

Management Sciences for Health (MSH) is an international nonprofit organization dedicated to clos-ing the gap between what is known about the overwhelming public health challenges facing many nations and what is done to address those challenges.

Since 1971, MSH has worked in more than 100 countries with policymakers, health professionals, and health care consumers to improve the quality, availability, and affordability of health services. We work with governments, donors, nongovernmental organizations, and health agencies to respond to priority health problems such as HIV & AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, child health, and reproduc-tive health. Our publications and electronic products augment our assistance in these technical ar-eas.

MSH’s staff of more than 2,000 from almost 60 nations work in its Cambridge, Massachusetts, head-quarters; offices in the Washington, DC, area; and more than 32 country offices. Through technical assistance, research, training, and systems development, MSH is committed to making a lasting dif-ference in global health.

For more information about Management Sciences for Health, please visit our website at www.msh.org.

Management Sciences for Health784 Memorial DriveCambridge, MA 02139-4613 USATelephone: +1 617.250.9500Website: www.msh.org

ManageMent OrganizatiOnal SuStainability tOOl Preface The Management and Organizational...

Documents

Transcript of ManageMent OrganizatiOnal SuStainability tOOl Preface The Management and Organizational...