Human resource management:

– Not an easy task!

Are you a newcomer to the United Nations?

I have been with the UN since 1979, mostly (first) with UNICEF and then a couple of years with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Most of my career has been in the field, which enables me to bring that experience to my new job.

How difficult is your new job?

In the United Nations human resource management is not an easy task! Not only do you have to deal with the staff, but also with the Member States. Every decision has an extra level of complexity; we may come to an agreement between the staff at large and management, but then this agreement has to be endorsed by member states. It means that things go very slowly because decisions have to meet the agreement of all parties.

What do you think of the recently released results of the Survey on Integrity? 

I think that there were some problems with the design of the survey. I know that it was designed in consultation with a wide group of people, but still some questions were ambiguous. For example, questions asking people whether they have heard of cases of intimidation. If a lot of staff members answer yes, the impression is that intimidation is widespread, but in fact it may be that people are speaking about the same case or five cases and not that there are 2,000 cases all around the UN. What was also interesting to note is that people said that they trusted their superiors and their colleagues. They felt very confident in their immediate neighbour- hood. But looking at the wider world people didn’t feel this same degree of confidence. I suppose it is the same as in the
U.S. when people say that Congress is corrupt while they fully trust their own congressman.

There is still a feeling that the morale is very low. What do you intend to do to improve the situation? 

I think this study is full of paradoxes. When people were asked if they like working in the U.N., about 75% said yes. And yet obviously not everything is OK. Perhaps people like working for the UN because the environment is secure and the salaries are good. So the conditions are good but there seems to be something wrong with the atmosphere. To what extent can we do something about it? I think the responsibility remains with the senior managers.

It is widely recognized that the PAS is not working. What do you intend to do to improve the situation?

My personal opinion, based on my own overall experience, is that if an evaluation system has no consequences, it will never work. If you have an evaluation system that says that Mr. X. is very good and that he should get a promotion or an increase in salary, people will have something to strive for. And if that same system says that Mr. Y is not good and that his contract should not be renewed, then people will take an immediate interest in the evaluation system. For the time being there is no such thing, which means that nobody cares about the PAS. The problem is, can we change the system? That is very difficult. It goes back to the question mentioned above, namely that people don’t trust each other. And if they don’t, how are they going to agree on the performance evaluation? How will people be able to accept a judgment from their superior if they don’t trust him or her? It is very hard to have a good evaluation system. That being said, what the PAS should encourage and allow for is better communication between people, and I think that this isn’t happening. What comes up at the end of the year shouldn’t be a surprise if there is good communication between staff members and supervisors. They should know well in advance whether they performed well on not. In many cases staff members don’t know about their evaluation until the last minute, which is a tremendous source of dissatisfaction. But we have to have some type of evaluation. We keep on refining it but it is far from perfect and I am afraid it can never be totally satisfactory.

Where do we stand with the new mobility system ? There seems to be quite some confusion ! 

The situation is fairly clear. If you read all the documents that have been issued concerning the new mobility system, it boils down to the fact that people are not supposed to remain in the same post forever. They are supposed to move. This is in their own interests and the interests of the Organisation. By moving I don’t mean only from one duty station to another, but within a duty station, between departments or even inside a given department. We have not yet started this mobility program except for new staff members at the P-2 level. Between now and 2007 we will be implementing pilot mobility programmes for other levels, starting with management and administration. Some people say it is never going to happen but I can assure you that it will happen.

For some very specialized staff members, it seems that it would be difficult to move from one post to another. What are you going to do about them ? 

That is a matter that is raised often by the regional commissions, where people are thought to be so specialized that it seems impossible to move them from one post to another. That will have to be taken up at a later stage as it concerns a small number of staff members.

What about the deadline of 2007?

2007 is the deadline but people should start to move well in advance.

What about Galaxy? It seems that people have lots of difficulties in finding a job on Galaxy. 

First thing, all the posts are advertised on Galaxy. Second, I do not think that it is so difficult. We have already advertised several hundred posts and had people apply. The problem is rather the reverse, namely that we get thousands of applications for each post. So what I am concerned about is not that people do not apply, what I am concerned about is our method of screening. A large number of external applicants apply for posts for which they are not qualified. Some of them apply for any type of job, be it at a G-6 level or at a D-2 level. That just congests the system. There is one very interesting statistic: namely, we have around 400’000 applications coming from only 100’000 applicants. That means that people are applying for several posts at the same time.

How can you improve the situation ?

By improving our screening methods, for example, by using indicators such as the number of years of experience requested. If it is 10 years, we can immediately eliminate those candidates with less experience. The problem is that in certain cases a very good candidate could come up with nine years of experience and it would be a pity to eliminate him or her for this sole reason. With language it is easier. If Spanish is required and it is not mentioned on the application, the candidate can be easily eliminated. We have refined the system by introducing the option of including screening questions on the application form. However, it is far from being perfect and we need to improve it.