Ideas and suggestions
Not lost for words
We seem to be inundated with surveys of all kinds, particularly at work, but that did not stop UN colleagues around the world from responding en masse to the questionnaire to mark the 60th anniversary of our Organization. The survey even inspired more than 1800 to come up with suggestions to improve the UN. They were happy to have their say—one colleague in Montevideo gave us his or her e-mail address “por más ideas”—and felt better placed than highly paid external consultants to point out what’s wrong with the system.
Most of their proposals fall into two categories: suggestions to improve the work of the Secretariat and suggestions to improve the UN’s political set-up. The latter are mainly related to the Security Council, which some would like to expand but others would prefer to disband, and the power of veto of its permanent members, which many want to scrap. “The UN should not be the face of colonialism.” And while some colleagues have thrown in the towel (“It’s never going to work”), others would like to see the UN institute a proper mechanism for staff to submit suggestions and new ideas.
We are the world
Many of us believe in our work and feel that, at 60, the UN is still doing a good job. We are also convinced that our work is appreciated by the people we set out to help. “Its proverbial ‘heart’ is in the right place.” However, some feel that the UN should do more to get its message across, particularly to “the peoples of the United Nations” and not just to the Governments of Member States. They suggest launching a large-scale media campaign to highlight its successes throughout the world and show ordinary people that the UN is there to serve them. One colleague even suggested we should all be trained in marketing and public relations to promote the good work the Organization does. “Our peacekeeping missions have a higher success rate than American operations and cost a fraction of the money… The public should know things like that.”
Better communications and more PR in the United States might also help to appease the Organization’s critics there. Although others feel the UN is wasting its time trying to convince Americans that it is making this world a better place and should simply pull out of New York. There is no shortage of alternative locations: the suggestions ranged from next-door Canada to the Sinai desert.
Back to basic
Concerning the UN’s future, respondents said over and over again that we simply need to go back to the Charter. They feel it is as valid today as it was 60 years ago. The UN doesn’t need a new mandate. The Charter already spells out exactly what the Organization’s role in the world is and that’s what it should stick to. Not everyone agrees though. Some believe it’s out of date and not useful “to deal with the new threats in the 21st century.”
As far as the running of the Organization is concerned, many respondents want to see the UN take a leaf out of the private sector’s book.
One subject that inevitably comes up is red tape. Many find the bureaucracy at the UN frustrating. They want “more transparency, less bureaucracy.” Some rules and regulations are necessary to ensure the smooth running of an organization the size of the UN. But applying the rules is a means to an end; it should never become an end in itself.
Jobs for the boys?
Most criticism is levelled at recruitment, which many of us feel is a shambles. “The procedure is too slow to get the best candidates for the job,” according to one colleague. “The current recruitment process is inherently flawed. It is the single most troubling area of the UN and also offers the greatest opportunity for improvement,” says another.
To begin with, job applicants’ qualifications should be properly checked. All their claims should be verified. Introducing personality tests wouldn’t be a bad idea either, because personality traits are notoriously difficult to “correct.” A newcomer who lacks certain professional or technical skills can be trained on the job, but what do you do about someone with seemingly impeccable academic qualifications who turns out to be lazy or crazy?
Before looking outside the Organization for new recruits, the UN should also have a closer look at the staff and the skills it already has at its disposal. Some staff are overqualified for the jobs they have, yet administrative rules bar them from applying for jobs they are fully qualified for. The UN prefers to waste their talents and hire new employees. Also it wouldn’t hurt if “the Organization, which subsidizes the education of its staff’s children, subsidized the education of the staff themselves.”
In all, the UN’s recruitment is unsatisfactory say some and the entire process should be outsourced. Introducing succession planning wouldn’t be a bad idea either.
But with hiring comes firing and there too some believe that the UN’s performance is not up to scratch. More must be done to fire “unsuitable” staff. Not only are they unproductive, but they also stop others from doing a good job, by undermining morale or simply by being in the way. “What other employer would put up with this?”
Promotions are similarly criticized. We want “meritocracy instead of mediocrity.” But promotion, like recruitment, is in the hands of senior managers, who are never penalized for their poor judgement.
“Practise what we preach”
Yes, managers come in for a lot of flak. They are incompetent, shirk their responsibility, turn a blind eye to abuse or turn their units into fiefdoms, when they should be upholding the very values that the UN is trying to promote worldwide (respect for human rights…).
The Peter Principle
Part of the problem is that people with good technical skills get promoted to jobs with managerial responsibilities, for which they are ill-prepared. Promotion is a reward for success, but unfortunately such people are promoted to their level of incompetence. As a result, the Organization loses a good technician and hapless staff have to put up with a boss who has no leadership qualities. This does not mean that colleagues with outstanding technical skills should not be promoted, but the UN should promote them within their field of expertise.
One suggestion, which was already put forward ten years ago, is that managers ought to be elected, not appointed. Many lower-level staff believe that they know best who would make a good manager. And since they will also have to live with the consequences, this option may make a lot of sense.
But blaming managers for all the ills of the Organization is too easy. As individual staff members, we should look at our own behaviour, because integrity, like charity, begins at home. “There is no miracle solution. The UN is not as bad as some disgruntled staff and some media and Governments depict it, but it is no better than the cumulative failures of all of us.”
How am I doing?
Two figures get bandied about a lot. The first is 360, as in “360-degree appraisals”. This is a very popular proposal. Some colleagues ingratiate themselves with their supervisors and so manage to get glowing appraisals, when in fact they take credit for other people’s work or generally make life miserable for their co-workers. 360-degree appraisals would allow those same co-workers to let the truth be known.
The other number that crops up regularly is zero, as in “zero tolerance” of corruption and other abuses. Whether this is as a result of media reports or because of what staff observe in the workplace is not clear. What is clear, however, is that many of us feel that working for the United Nations is an honour and anyone who is a disgrace to the Organization should be booted out. At the same time, there should be more protection against arbitrary actions.
The jet set
One area where many feel that the Organization’s money is being wasted is official travel. The per diem is too generous, according to some. They allege that colleagues go on trips that are of no particular use to the UN simply to cash in on the DSA and collect frequent flyer miles. (Why not pool them and use them for UN missions instead of family holidays?) Clearly, there are still some parts of the Organization that the Integrity Initiative hasn’t reached.
The taxman cometh
Many colleagues are unhappy with the UN’s dependence on its Member States’ largesse. They would like to see the Organization enjoy financial independence. Several options have been put forward to raise money, such as a worldwide tax on financial transactions or on international travel. One colleague is in favour of letting individual taxpayers indicate on their tax returns whether they want some of their taxes to be paid to the UN.
“Stop the band-aid approach”
Finally, two suggestions to help us make a difference in our world. To solve the world’s ills, the UN should focus on poverty eradication. Lift people worldwide out of poverty and the other problems will take care of themselves. And whatever aid you send, make sure it reaches the people it is supposed to help and not just their Governments.
And to wrap it all up, here’s a random selection of some of our favourite comments:
“We work ‘FOR’ the UN not ‘AT’ the UN”
“Dépoussiérer, dératiser, stériliser, désinfecter…”
“Make Member States realize that the UN is as good as they are making it”
“Listen to the suggestions of those who are actually doing the work!”
“Good luck”
“Create a ‘can do’ culture in the Secretariat”
“This is the wrong medium to solicit this kind of response… If you call for formal papers to be
submitted, you’ll get a response from me.”
