Por favor añade que los comentarios de la AP de la OPS/OMS a este documento se enviaron a OMS, y son los siguientes:
-
This is a good document that sets out laudable goals for improving WHO's HR function, and which incorporates many of the suggestions made on the draft HR strategy that was presented at the November 2009 GSMC meeting.
-
The proposed change in function of HRD to be more strategic and supportive, rather than just administrative, is welcome and long overdue. However, the administrative functions will still need to be performed, and though the GSC is mentioned as a possible entity to assume those functions, the strategy should perhaps make it clearer who/which entity will perform them.
-
The key perfomance targets (KPTs) are very good for indicating how the HR Strategy will be implemented, and they will drive the development of an operational plan.
-
There are several conceptual constructs - 6 primary goals, 6 core values, 6 principles, 7 processes (pages 3 and 7) in addition to the HR Value Proposition Model on page 13 and the HR Business Model on page 14. I'm not sure all these are necessary, but if they'r thought to be important to set the background and framework for the Strategy, the document should do its best to keep them straight and show how they relate to each other, where possible. They should not duplicate each other, but rather be complementary. On page 8, for example, under Section 3.2, "Competency-based placement", the last sentence states that "Competency-based placement is a core value of the Human Resources Strategy" (my bold) - but the topic is "Guiding Principles for Human Resource Management"; the core values are in Section 3.1.
-
The first sentence on page 2 in the Introduction states that the HR Stratgy is designed to meet the needs of the Organization both in the short term and over the coming decade; however, the Strategy is for 2010-2015 - 6 years, not a decade...
-
It should be noted that the "appropriate contractual arrangements" mentioned in Section 2.5 on page 5 currently seem quite limited at the country level, at least in PAHO, especially for small country offices with limited regular budget funds. A critical role of HRD, which needs emphasis, is provision of advice and guidance on the best contractual mechanism to use to have the "right person in the right place at the right time", including through reassignment.
-
Some of the text sounds a bit pompous and cliched, and adds little to the document, e.g. "...the health agenda for the world" (3rd paragraph, Executive Summary). There is a development agenda for the world - the Millennium Development Goals - that all the countries agreed to. Is there such a thing for health? Similarly, the last paragraph on page 12 sounds like "United Nations-speak" - nice sounding words that are quite vague - what does it really mean?
-
The document needs many edits, including for consistent phrasing, e.g. of the KPTs and strategic aims, ensuring parallel construction throughout the relevant text.
-
The diversity and inclusion subsections on page 37 need editing to ensure that the text relating to a particular subsection is placed in that subsection, not in any other.
-
The last sentence on page 40 states that individual coaching should be understood as the principal development tool for managers (my bold) - that certainly is desirable, but given the definition of coaching in Annex IV, how practical and cost-effective would it be? Coaching is an important development tool for managers, but I'm not sure it should be promoted as the principal development tool.
-
The document should avoid "quaint" terminology - on page 29, 4th paragraph, regarding "adult brain-friendly learning approaches", the "brain-friendly" can easily be omitted, as "adult learning approaches" is a well-recognized concept with a specific meaning. Also, line 1 on page 54 refers to "an expecting female". What's wrong with saying "a pregnant staff member"?
-
We request clarification for:
-
The last provision regarding SLWOP only up to 12 months to care for a child, etc? (Annex III, page 56). Should consideration be given to "12 months or the end of the fixed term appointment, whichever is longer"? and
-
Revision of the home leave and education grant lump sum calculations to 75%? (Annex III, page 57). The former would be reduced from the current 80%.
|
