Office of Internal Audit and Investigations

Internal Audit of
Performance Management and Career Development

APRIL 2023

Report 2023/05
1
CONTENTS

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 3

Overall Conclusion
Summary of Observations and Agreed Actions

Context ........................................................................................................................... 8
Audit Objective, Scope and Approach ...................................................................... 11
Observations and Management Action Plan ............................................................ 13
1. Purpose and vision
2. Strategy implementation
3. Accountabilities and oversight
4. Identifying and managing underperformance
5. Motivating and developing staff
6. Career development
7. Performance management process
8. ‘Achieve’ tool

Appendix ...................................................................................................................... 29
Definitions of Audit Observation Ratings
Definitions of Overall Audit Conclusions

2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Office of Internal Audit and Investigations (OIAI) conducted an audit of UNICEF’s
performance management and career development activities, covering the period from January
2021 to October 2022. The audit was conducted from September to November 2022, in
accordance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. The
objective of the audit was to assess the design of UNICEF’s approach to the management of staff
performance and career development and its effectiveness in supporting the global workforce to
deliver results for children. The audit covered a selection of significant risk areas, including
performance management strategy and implementation management, monitoring and
measurement, performance management culture, staff reward and recognition, management of
underperformance, the performance management process and tool, and career development.
Descriptions of the specific risks identified during engagement planning are provided in the Audit
Objective, Scope and Approach section of this report.

The audit covered performance management and career development activities led by the
Division of Human Resources (DHR) and their implementation by country, regional and
headquarters offices. While the whole workforce, whether senior leaders, managers or staff
members, contributes to the quality of UNICEF’s performance management at individual, team
and entity level, the audit recommendations have been designed to guide DHR in establishing
the framework, structure and tools needed to establish a culture of robust and honest performance
management and to ensure that all staff are equipped and motivated to maximize their
contribution to delivering results for children, while respecting UNICEF’s core values1.

Over the last decade, the scale, range and complexity of UNICEF’s operations have increased,
and its workforce has risen significantly to more than 16,600 as of November 2022. One of several
‘enablers’ of UNICEF’s Strategic Plan 2022-2025 is a ‘dynamic and inclusive people and culture’.
In response to this and recommendations made in the 2019 Report of the Independent Task
Force 2 (ITF Report) to address cultural issues, in 2021 and 2022, DHR conducted a
comprehensive review of its strategies and organizational structure. Revamping performance
management and career development is a key priority in the new UNICEF People Strategy 2022-
2025.

UNICEF’s highly skilled and dedicated workforce is its most important resource. Ensuring that all
staff members and teams perform to their best is essential for delivery of optimal results for
children – in a workplace culture where performance is measured not only by the results
themselves, but how they are achieved, and how well the core values are respected. In the wider
context, being able to demonstrate this becomes ever more critical, as organizations face higher
levels of scrutiny by stakeholders in an increasingly competitive funding environment.

1
The UNICEF core values of care, respect, integrity, trust, accountability and sustainability provide a guide for
behaviours in daily staff interactions and ensure that all staff abide by the UN/ICSC Standards of Conduct and the UN
Oath of Office.
2
Report of the Independent Task Force on Workplace Gender Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Harassment and
Abuse of Authority. Prepared for UNICEF, May 2019.

3
Overall Conclusion
Based on the audit work performed, OIAI
concluded that the assessed governance, risk Satisfactory
management, or control processes were Partially Satisfactory,
Partially Satisfactory, Major Improvement Improvement Needed
Needed, meaning that the weaknesses or Partially Satisfactory, Major
deficiencies identified could have a materially Improvement Needed
negative impact on the audited entity, area,
Unsatisfactory
activity or process. (See the Appendix for
definitions of the conclusion ratings.)

Summary of Observations and Agreed Actions

OIAI noted several areas where performance management and career development activities
were adequate and functioned well:

 Organizational culture initiatives: In response to the 2019 ITF Report, significant efforts
have been made to create a workplace environment more anchored in UNICEF’s core values.
The implementation status of the ITF recommendations is reported annually to the Executive
Board. In June 2021, the six-month Pulse Check survey was launched. This provides a rich
source of data to identify workplace culture issues and trends in each office, related, inter alia,
to performance management, psychological safety and trust, and reward and recognition.
Results feed into Head of Office individual performance evaluations and targeted support is
provided, as needed. Other initiatives include the ‘Humans of UNICEF’ staff appreciation
programme; ‘Values in Action’ 3 ; the ‘Spectrum of Behaviours’ tool 4 ; and access to many
learning resources, including internal and external best practices, on the Culture and Diversity
Team’s website.

 Exit interview data analysis and reporting: In September 2021, the Culture and Diversity
Team published the first comprehensive report on employee separation exit interviews,
providing quantitative and qualitative insights into who left the organization and why, using
data from a new online exit form. Where sensitive workplace issues were reported, these were
followed up with the office concerned.

 Support with management of underperformance: The Employee Relations Team – part of

the central Policy, Employee Relations and Compensation Section (PERCS) in DHR -
provided dedicated support on cases of underperformance escalated from the field and
elsewhere within the organization. OIAI received positive feedback on the quality of this
support, including efforts to find best-fit solutions, which may include termination.

 Regional and sectoral initiatives: OIAI noted several innovative performance management
and career development practices that complemented the DHR-led activities. For example,

3
Values in Action (ViA) is an organization-wide initiative to explore what our values mean to us and our work for
children. Each core value is being highlighted for two months during 2022 and 2023, celebrating offices, teams and
individuals across the organization who are making a positive impact on how we work and deliver.
4
The ‘Spectrum of Behaviours’ tool aims to help staff to manage and respond appropriately to workplace concerns
and conflict, and to strengthen understanding of value-based behaviours. Launched globally in November 2022, it is
part of organizational efforts to improve UNICEF’s culture and strengthen staff knowledge and skills to manage poor
or negative behaviours in the workplace.

4
 the Global Nutrition Cluster developed and rolled out its own competency framework, covering
common, functional and sectoral competencies, aligned with UNICEF’s core values, for use
by staff working in Nutrition Clusters at global, regional and national level. The Middle East
and North Africa Regional Office conducted quarterly surveys to check the frequency of
staff/supervisor performance and career conversations, with targeted follow-up where more
regular engagement was required. There were various Programme Group initiatives, including
a comprehensive Water, Sanitation and Hygiene talent management strategy and a Female
Talent Initiative in the Eastern and Southern Africa Region to support the development and
career progression of potential female leaders.

The audit team also made a number of observations to the management of the key risks
evaluated. In particular, OIAI noted:

 Purpose and vision: Despite being among the key priorities in UNICEF’s People Strategy
2022-2025, the vision for performance management and career development had not been
set out nor had the root causes of the most serious challenges been adequately considered.
Therefore, the ultimate purpose and direction of UNICEF’s performance management and
career development programme were not clear. Without clarity of purpose and of the intended
outcome, resources may be wasted in pursuit of misguided or misaligned goals.

 Strategy implementation: Implementation planning for the People Strategy 2022-2025 had
not begun in earnest and some performance management and career development priorities
and timelines appeared to be too aspirational. A detailed analysis of the necessary resources,
in terms of headcount and capabilities, had not yet been performed and the proposed
organizational structure did not include definition of the roles and responsibilities, resources
and skills required to deliver the performance management and career development strategy
at country, regional and headquarters level. The interdependencies with other elements of the
proposed integrated talent management framework had not been fully thought through, and
process or system requirements had not been reviewed.

 Accountabilities: Despite numerous positive initiatives, significant improvement was needed

with respect to the workplace culture required for constructive, fair, transparent performance
management. Senior leaders and managers have a key role to play in modelling values-based
behaviours and setting the tone, direction and expectations required to embed effective
performance management. Further capacity-building is required, in particular to ensure that
those with responsibilities for managing people are able to fulfil their roles, and the
accountabilities of all staff for performance management need to be reinforced, with
appropriate consequences for failure to fulfil managerial duties.

 Underperformance: Due to workplace culture, many supervisors avoid giving negative

feedback to their staff, especially in the formal, documented year-end evaluation. This means
that there is a lack of reliable data in the performance management system to allow visibility
and oversight of underperformance. Therefore, the extent of underperformance across the
organization is unknown and UNICEF is unable to take appropriate corrective actions.
Underperformance of staff, if not appropriately addressed, may result in overburdening or
demotivation of other colleagues and reduced team performance.

 Reward and recognition: Though acknowledged as an area in need of improvement, DHR’s

2022-2025 strategic planning process did not include a review of the design of UNICEFs
performance management reward and recognition framework. A lack of upward career
opportunities in UNICEF was a common reason for staff departures in 2021. While many in-

5
 kind reward and recognition practices existed across UNICEF, there was no central oversight
of them. Some staff may be satisfied by the intrinsic rewards of their role; however,
inconsistent recognition, non-monetary rewards and/or unstructured career opportunities may
lead to discontent and departure of high-performing staff.

The table below summarizes the key actions management has agreed to take to address the
residual risks identified and the ratings of those risks and observations with respect to the
assessed governance, risk management and control processes. (See the definitions of the
observation ratings in the Appendix.)

OBSERVATION RISK RATING

Category of Risk
Area or Operation and Key Agreed Action
Process Rating

Purpose and vision (Observation 1): Define the overall purpose

of performance management in UNICEF and develop a vision of
High
UNICEF’s future performance management structure and process, as
part of an integrated talent management framework.

Strategy implementation (Observation 2): Develop a detailed

plan for implementation of the performance management and career
development strategy, with clear accountabilities and realistic
High
timelines. Ensure that the PMCD section has an approved workplan to
ensure efficient, effective delivery of key priorities and facilitate
Governance objective assessment of individual and team performance.

Accountabilities and oversight (Observation 3): Develop and

implement a capacity-building programme focused on senior leaders
and people managers, to ensure a strong tone at the top and reinforce
accountabilities for managing performance and career development.
This should include consequences for non-fulfilment of managerial High
duties. Review minimum monitoring and oversight needs, including
digitization of off-line data, spreading of good practices and
clarification of PMCD section, HR Business Partner and Regional
Office roles and responsibilities.

Identifying and managing the risk of underperformance

(Observation 4): Develop guidance for the weighting of people
management skills and technical competencies that could be used
Risk management across the organization in evaluating candidates for recruitment and High
promotion and during the evaluation of the performance of staff, to
ensure that staff at management level have the appropriate mix of
people management skills and technical competencies. Explore the
possibility of introducing a probationary period for new hires.

Motivating and rewarding staff (Observation 5): Develop a Medium

structured fit-for-purpose reward and recognition framework, with
clear criteria for application.

Controls processes Career development (Observation 6): Ensure clear and effective
linkages between performance management, learning and career
Medium
development (as well as other elements of the employee lifecycle) to
incentivize staff to take ownership of their careers and to manage the
continuous improvement of the skills and competencies required for

6
 effective performance in UNICEF as the organization’s needs continue
to grow and evolve.

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining appropriate governance, risk

management and control processes, and implementing the actions agreed following this audit.
The role of the OIAI is to provide an independent assessment of those governance, risk
management and control processes.

7
CONTEXT

UNICEF’s People Strategy 2022-2025

As one of the enablers of UNICEF’s Strategic Plan, the new ‘People Strategy 2022-2025’, under
the leadership of the Division of Human Resources (DHR), includes goals to:
 Enable managers and leaders to enhance staff motivation and engagement;
 Empower managers and leaders to manage the performance of their staff effectively;
 Provide clarity on what is expected of staff and ensure staff are equipped to deliver on
expectations;
 Implement the systems and tools to foster a culture of continuous learning and career
development;
 Ensure an innovative and integrated talent management approach.

Building on the substantive steps taken since 2019 to address concerns raised by the Report of
the Independent Task Force5, the new DHR strategy focuses on the need for a shift in mindset
and behaviours to ensure that the whole workforce models UNICEF’s core values in performing
effectively and at its best for the world’s children. It involves a new global HR service delivery
model, new organizational structure and relocation of most DHR staff from New York to a more
cost-effective location. To achieve those organizational priorities, a major strategic rethink was
required along with an upgrade in HR skills, tools and systems.

Following a protracted period of internal and external consultations, analysis of key issues and
development of potential solutions, the proposed business
delivery model was endorsed in October 2022 and a request for
additional posts was approved. Performance management and
career development were identified as priorities in delivering the
new People Strategy.

Performance management and career

development in UNICEF
As stated in UNICEF’s 2017 Administrative Instruction on
Performance Management, ‘UNICEF is committed to agile,
robust and honest performance management to deliver
outstanding results for children. Every staff member should know
what results and behaviours are expected and how their deliverables relate to UNICEF goals.
UNICEF is fostering a performance culture that recognizes and rewards outstanding
achievements at every level of the organization, a career development culture based on merit,
and open and honest feedback that is given in both directions and received timely in the spirit of
continuous learning and improvement.’

Technical guidance on performance management and career development is provided by the

DHR Performance Management and Career Development (PMCD) section. This small team is
led by a Chief, supplemented with consultants. It aims to provide best-practice guidance and
support to the UNICEF HR community, line managers and staff across all UNICEF offices.

In the proposed new DHR structure, the PMCD team becomes the Performance Management
team, tasked with promoting a high-performance culture and providing managers and leaders

5
Report of the Independent Task Force on Workplace Gender Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Harassment and
Abuse of Authority. Prepared for UNICEF, May 2019.

8
with the tools and resources required to strengthen accountability and integrity. Over the period
of the strategic plan, this team will focus on leading the key shifts required in mindset and
behaviours to advance the new performance management culture. Career development activities
will move to DHR’s Learning and Development function, to provide staff with access to integrated
learning and career development solutions. Other structural changes and HR capacity-building
activities are planned to enhance the wider HR community’s ability to support all staff in fulfilling
their various accountabilities for performance management and career development.

Performance Management can be

defined as a dynamic and strategic
approach to sustain a high-performance
culture within an organization. Its goal is to
bring out the best in every employee and
to align individual performance with the
organization's long-term vision and
mission. In UNICEF, performance
management revolves around the
‘Achieve’ system, part of a Talent
Management System (TMS) introduced in
2016, with three modules: Recruitment,
On-boarding and Performance
Management. The external vendor of the
TMS software provides client service
architecture for UNICEF’s use of the system and maintains the master data offsite. The system
is designed to facilitate regular review of staff performance through a participatory approach
where deliverables and competencies are discussed by the staff member and supervisor and
formally evaluated on an annual basis using a rating system. Enhancements to the structure and
content are made periodically. In 2022, pilots were ongoing for a five-tier rating scale and a ‘No-
rating’ approach, as alternatives to the previous three-tier rating scale.

Career development can be defined as the ongoing process of improving your skills as you
explore and refine your career path. It provides a framework for learning and advancing in your
career, which in turn leads to job satisfaction and success. Career development is important for
employees because it leads to a sense of purpose, growth and satisfaction. For employers,
supporting career development promotes staff retention and motivation and improves
productivity.

Career development was identified as a key priority in the 2017 Global Staff Survey and a working
group was established to address it. In UNICEF, career development is considered to be a
partnership-based approach between staff member, supervisor and the wider organization.
UNICEF’s Career Management Guide states that career development encompasses every
activity that helps a staff member develop their technical skills, competencies and knowledge and
increases their professional experience in a focused way. DHR provides a portfolio of career
support initiatives such as career management workshops, advisory services, coaching and a
range of online self-help career resources.

As of 21 November 2022, UNICEF’s workforce included 16,608 total staff, made up of 14,306
regular staff (86 per cent) and 2,302 temporary staff (14 per cent). The staff categories include
international professionals (30 per cent), national professional officers (35 per cent) and general
services (35 per cent). All staff are required to complete annual performance assessments in
Achieve.

9
Key issues and proposed solutions
DHR recognized that performance management needed to be improved across UNICEF. Many
issues observed by the audit team were already well known by DHR and a variety of initiatives to
tackle them had been undertaken, with varying degrees of success. Examples are included in this
report. However, the underlying causes were often related to cultural factors, not easily resolved
by systems, tools or processes.

As part of the culture change process, in 2022, DHR began to move the conversation from
‘performance management’ to ‘managing performance’, in the hope that a change in terminology
might trigger a change in mindset. The PMCD team summarized its analysis of the current and
desired future state of performance management in UNICEF in the following terms:

Performance Management - TODAY Managing Performance - FUTURE

 Overemphasis on the Achieve system  Holistic approach

 Annual planning; year-end appraisal;
ratings and calibration exercises; PIPs
and rebuttals
Limited:  Focus on people and dialogue
 Honest conversations  Leadership accountability
 Understanding of accountabilities  Psychological safety
 Role-modelling behaviour  Recognition for good performers
 Ownership for performance – staff  Support for poor performers
 Recognition of high performers  Clear roles, responsibilities and
 Support for poor performers accountabilities
 Conversations at GMT, RMT, CMT,  Ethical behaviour in feedback conversations
DMT meetings  Staff empowered to own their performance
 Focus on workplace environment and careers
 Forward-looking career conversations
 Conducive working environment
 Performance management is the  Managing performance is everybody’s
responsibility of PMCD and HR business
community

Following endorsement of its new business delivery model, DHR can now move forward with
finalization of the strategies, structures and processes to achieve UNICEF’s performance
management and career development priorities.

In developing the People Strategy 2022-2025, significant risks to its successful implementation
were identified by DHR, including a lack of long-term resources and business continuity risks
related to the DHR restructuring and relocation. All but one member of the current PMCD team
are expected to move to new positions in 2023. Given the ambitious nature of the change
programme, it will be essential to assess the risks related to the specific PMCD and wider DHR
strategy implementation and to review the adequacy of mitigating actions on a regular basis.

10
AUDIT OBJECTIVE, SCOPE AND APPROACH
The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the governance, risk
management and control processes over a selection of significant risk areas related to UNICEF’s
performance management and career development activities. The audit scope included key
areas, set out in the following table, that were selected during the audit planning process based
on an assessment of inherent risks.6

RISK AREA DESCRIPTION OF KEY INHERENT RISKS

Performance management Managers may not reinforce or model good behaviours, leading to
culture an unhealthy workplace culture and dysfunctional approach to
managing performance. This may result in demotivation, low
productivity and loss of high-potential or high-performing staff.
Performance management A strategy not based on a clear vision for performance management
and career development and career development or common understanding of its purpose
strategy may result in wasted resources on activities that do not maximize
results for children.
Implementation planning and Inadequate analysis of skill/resource needs, definition of roles and
monitoring responsibilities and interdependencies may result in an
unachievable implementation plan. A plan that is not well structured,
detailed and supported by ‘SMART’ KPIs may impede effective
delivery of the strategy.
Performance management Excessive focus by individuals on the Achieve tool and process
process and tool (including ratings) may affect the quality of feedback and discussion,
exacerbate underlying cultural issues and reduce the real value of
performance management and career development activities.
Inconsistent approaches may limit the credibility of the process for
merit-based reward/recognition. The Achieve tool may not be fit-for-
purpose. Weak data architecture, configuration and reporting
features may preclude complete and accurate information for
analysis and decision-making.
Reward and recognition An inadequate, inconsistent reward and recognition framework –
and/or unjustified rewards - may result in staff demotivation and
unwanted staff resignations.
Managing underperformance Underperforming staff may not be given timely, honest and
constructive feedback and guidance on what is expected to improve,
perpetuating poor performance and impacting team morale and
office results.
Career development Unrealistic staff expectations and a lack of structured career
development opportunities and/or resources may lead to staff
frustration and/or loss of institutional talent. Staff may not take
ownership of their career development; supervisors may not provide
adequate guidance and support.
Performance management Insufficient monitoring mechanisms and KPIs may lead to
and career development undetected and continuation of poor individual and/or systemic
oversight and monitoring practices and missed opportunities for improvement.

6
Inherent risk refers to the potential adverse event that could occur if management takes no actions, including
internal control activities. The higher the likelihood of the event occurring and the more serious the impact would be
should the adverse event occur, the stronger the need for adequate and effective risk management and control
processes.

11
The audit scope excluded the following areas: staff retention, succession planning and talent
pipeline, staff learning and skills development, staff rotation and inter-agency staff movement.
The audit did not focus specifically on risks related to diversity, equity and inclusion.

All relevant activities at UNICEF headquarters, regional and country offices were within scope.

The audit was conducted using both remote and in person procedures from September to
November 2022 in accordance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of
Internal Auditing. For the purpose of audit testing, the audit covered the period from January 2021
to October 2022. It involved a combination of methods, tools and techniques, including interviews,
data analytics, document review, tests of transactions, evaluations and validation of preliminary
observations. OIAI invited representative staff from more than 50 UNICEF offices/divisions at
country (35), regional (7) and headquarters (11) level to respond to a series of audit enquiries by
interview or in writing. The enquiries covered challenges, lessons learned and good practices.
The audit team also triangulated data from other sources, including DHR’s own analysis of key
performance management and career development risks and issues.

For benchmarking purposes, a network of representatives of Internal Audit Services of United

Nations organizations, multilateral financial institutions and other associated intergovernmental
organizations was invited to share insights related to performance management and career
development tools, processes and monitoring mechanisms.

Mindful of data privacy sensitivities and ongoing efforts to build greater psychological safety and
trust in the performance management process, OIAI did not review or discuss individual staff
performance management cases.

12
OBSERVATIONS AND MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN
The key areas where actions are needed are summarized below.

1. Purpose and vision High

Despite being among the key priorities in UNICEF’s People Strategy 2022-2025, the vision for
performance management and career development had not been set out nor had the root causes
of the most important challenges been adequately considered. This raised questions about the
ultimate objective of UNICEF’s performance management activities. Without clarity of purpose
and of the intended outcome, resources may be wasted in pursuit of unclear goals.

In 2021-22, DHR conducted a review of its strategic priorities, service delivery model and
organizational structure, to ensure its readiness to fulfil its role as an enabler of UNICEF’s
Strategic Plan 2022-25. This involved internal consultations, input from external consultants, and
analysis of current challenges and constraints across all key HR operations, to inform the ‘People
Strategy 2022-2025’. While the audit was being conducted, an additional headcount request and
the future business delivery model were endorsed.

‘Talent management’ was one of several priority areas within the new strategy. This included
performance management and career development. The ‘HR Transformation and Transition’ PBR
Submission of 24 June 2022 refers to an overarching vision for this area, with ‘a dedicated team,
focusing exclusively on leading the key shifts required in mindset and behaviours, to advance the
new performance management culture in UNICEF’. However, there was no clear vision, in this or
any other recent strategy paper, of what successful performance management and the supporting
structures and processes should look like, and its overall purpose had not been explored during
the strategic review.

The 2017 Administrative Instruction states that ‘UNICEF is fostering a performance culture that
rewards outstanding achievements….’ and ‘a career development culture based on merit’. Since
2019, UNICEF has made significant efforts to embed diversity, equity and inclusion
considerations into expected behaviours through the new values-based performance culture. The
2017 guidance may therefore need to be revisited to reflect that. To ensure that opportunities for
innovation are fully explored, assumptions may need to be clarified regarding the degree of
flexibility that UNICEF has to revise its approach to managing and rewarding performance within
the long-established UN system.

These, and other audit observations, raise some fundamental questions, including:

 How does UNICEF define ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ performance in a values-based results-

oriented organization – for both individuals and teams?
 How should staff performance ratings (if any) contribute to career prospects in UNICEF?
 What kind of available rewards and recognition will best motivate staff to achieve optimal
results for children?
 How can UNICEF improve accountability for effective performance management?
 Is a single approach to performance management appropriate for all staff, including those
responsible for managing people and those senior leaders responsible for setting the tone
and holding other people managers accountable for effective performance management
and behaviour change?

The answers to such questions will be key to addressing many of the issues outlined elsewhere
in this report, for example, with respect to reward and recognition, managing underperformance,
competency frameworks and accountabilities. Defining the purpose of performance management
13
and its role within the talent management framework is an immediate priority as DHR finalizes its
strategy for this area. Without this, there is a risk that time and resources will be invested in
structures, processes and tools that do not contribute to the development of an effective
workforce, motivated and equipped to deliver results for children.

AGREED ACTION
In collaboration with other internal stakeholders, DHR agrees to define the overall purpose of
performance management in UNICEF and develop a vision of UNICEF’s future performance
management structure and processes. This should indicate the relationship between
performance management, reward and recognition, workforce planning, learning and
development and other elements of an integrated talent management framework.

Staff Responsible: Director, DHR and Chief, PMCD

Implementation Date: June 2023

2. Strategy implementation High

A full analysis of the necessary skills and resources to deliver the performance management and
career development strategy had not yet been performed and future roles and responsibilities had
not been clearly defined. Interdependencies with other elements of an integrated talent
management framework had not been fully thought through, and process or system requirements
had not been adequately reviewed. Within the context of the wider DHR transformation, a detailed
implementation plan, reflecting all underlying requirements, will be essential to ensure successful
delivery of the strategy.

Implementation planning: Performance management and career development are priority areas
in DHR’s People Strategy 2022-2025. However, almost a year into the four-year strategic period,
implementation planning had not yet begun in earnest. Key objectives were set out in various
strategy documents, such as the ‘HR Transformation and Transition’ Programme and Budget
Review (PBR) Submission (June 2022), the ‘Reimagining UNICEF’s People Strategy’ report from
the March 2022 DHR retreat and the DHR Office Management Plan 2022-2025, but these had
not been fully elaborated. Changes in the DHR organizational structure to support implementation
of the People Strategy had been proposed and funding for some additional posts was approved
in the recent PBR. However, no detailed needs analysis or risk assessment had been performed
to demonstrate that the performance management and career development priorities, as defined,
would be achievable with the available resource and within the indicative timelines. Some
‘measures of success’ with respect to the overall People Strategy had been drafted; however, the
proposed KPIs for performance management and career development goals were not sufficient
or ‘SMART’ enough to enable objective monitoring and evaluation of their achievement and the
timeline for their implementation appeared to be unrealistic.

The proposed new organizational structure did not adequately define the future roles and
responsibilities of the DHR PMCD section, HR Business Partners (HRBPs) and regional HR
functions for performance management and career development. OIAI noted variations in staffing
levels and HR competencies between regions and offices, which affected the scope and quality
of their services. For instance, some country offices are unable economically to justify the
presence of higher-level HR professionals. In such cases, local HR staff are likely to focus on
recruitment and administrative tasks rather than on developing capacity in managing staff

14
performance and career development. All regional HR teams interviewed by OIAI provided regular
support to develop country office capabilities, but the methods and areas of focus varied widely.
Examples included coaching to change mindsets and behaviours, developing tools to improve
visibility of the quality and frequency of staff/supervisor engagement, handling complex staff
performance cases and ensuring consistent application of the performance management
procedures. It was reported that the quality of performance management and career development
activity at both country and regional office level was often influenced by the attitude and level of
commitment of the office head; however, there was evidence of cross-regional initiatives and
positive engagement between regional and headquarters DHR staff.

At the time of the audit, DHR was about to embark on a major transformation exercise, involving
a new business model, new organizational structure and relocation of many DHR staff. DHR had
identified significant risks related to this change process, including the ability to maintain HR
business process continuity and DHR staff performance during the transition of most staff to a
new office location. Implementation of the performance management and career development
strategy will be one element of a wider, more complex change process. Within this context, a
detailed implementation plan, reflecting all underlying requirements and interdependencies, will
be critical to ensure that all key objectives are achieved and any risks to delivery of the
performance management and career development strategy are identified and appropriately
mitigated.

PMCD section workplan: The PMCD section had a workplan for 2022 that included career
development and performance management objectives for the year, with key indicators. The
workplan was reviewed by the Associate Director, DHR but there was no evidence of any formal
review by DHR Management. It did not reflect all priority actions for the year and did not specify
responsibilities and timelines for each action. OIAI observed that some performance management
and career development activities were being implemented on an ad hoc basis. For example, the
initiative to refocus attention away from the performance management process to more
constructive dialogue, growth and career development was not being rolled out in a structured
manner to achieve the desired organization-wide impact. The timing of the staff-ratings pilot was
not planned to allow optimal assessment of the results of the exercise at the end of the review
cycle. The value of these activities might have been enhanced had they been part of a more
effective workplanning process.

OIAI observed well-structured workplans for performance management and career development
activities in some offices, to support implementation of DHR-driven or local initiatives. The DHR
PMCD team was aware of some, but not all, of these office-specific innovations. Coordination and
alignment of global and local plans will be important, both for the new strategy implementation
and ongoing performance management and career development activities.

A well-constructed, agreed workplan lays out the objectives, tasks, deadlines and individual staff
responsibilities for each area. The absence of such a workplan increases the risk that objectives
will not be met effectively and efficiently; it creates challenges for measuring progress, assessing
individual and team performance and making timely, appropriate decisions to reprioritize or
reallocate resources. Over time, this may lead to staff workload issues, frustration, demotivation
and failure to achieve results.

15
 AGREED ACTIONS

DHR agrees to:

i. Develop a detailed plan of action for implementation of the newly defined vision/strategy for
performance management and career development, with clear accountabilities and realistic
timelines, factoring in interdependencies with the wider DHR transformation. This should
involve:
 Robust analysis of the resources and skills required in the new organizational structure
to identify any additional funding or training needs;
 Definition of roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for performance management
and career development activities at HQ, RO and CO level, aligned with the UNICEF
Accountability Framework;
 A communication strategy to support the roll-out to all offices, including strong ‘tone at
the top’ from UNICEF senior leaders;
 Periodic review and risk analysis, using SMART KPIs against which to monitor progress
and enable timely course correction;
 Timely knowledge transfer before departure of any key staff members.

In view of the need to address underlying cultural issues, actions designed to change behaviours
and mindsets related to managing performance and career development should be prioritized
over any system-related decisions that may only resolve symptoms and not root causes.

ii. Ensure that the PMCD section has an approved, documented annual workplan to support
efficient, effective delivery of key priorities and measurement of individual and team progress.

Staff Responsible: (i) Director, DHR and Chief, PMCD; (ii) Associate Director, DHR and
Chief, PMCD
Implementation Date: (i) September 2023; (ii) March 2023

3. Accountabilities and oversight High

Further capacity-building is required to ensure that those with people management responsibilities
are capable of fulfilling their roles. The accountabilities of all staff for performance management
and career development need to be reinforced, and there should be clear consequences for
managers who fail to fulfil their staff-related duties. Monitoring and oversight of performance
management activities were not sufficient to identify areas for remediation or to support effective
decision-making on staff-related issues.

Supervisor accountability and capabilities: The UNICEF performance management

instruction gives responsibility to supervisors for managing supervisee performance. Supervisors
are accountable for honest, fair and timely performance management of staff. How well managers
are able to fulfil their accountabilities depends on their managerial capabilities and competencies
(many have primarily technical backgrounds), as well as the tone set by the office head with
respect to performance culture. Despite significant efforts by DHR to train managers at all levels,
there were inconsistencies in practices across regions and offices. While many positive
behaviours were noted, OIAI also received reports of poor execution of performance management
responsibilities, including attempts to influence the results of staff surveys and inconsistencies
16
between staff evaluations (documented in the Achieve system) and decisions to move staff
members to a new post7. Many offices included accountability among their top three challenges
related to managing staff performance and career development, and there was strong demand
for supervisor training in managerial skills.

The ITF Report recommended comprehensive training in people management for managers,
commensurate with their responsibilities, to address individual skills gaps. This has not yet taken
place in a systematic manner. Based on observations related to workplace culture and
inconsistent performance management practices, OIAI concluded that targeted coaching for
senior leaders and heads of office should be a priority, to support them in setting the right tone
and to reinforce their accountability for behavioural change.

Consequences: There are currently no significant consequences for staff or supervisors who fail
to fulfil their respective accountabilities for performance management either with respect to
adequately executing processes or in modelling expected behaviours. For example, there were
no consequences for delayed completion of the annual evaluation in Achieve or for supervisors
who failed to provide any type of regular feedback or whose assessment of staff reflected biases
or did not take all required competencies into account. There were no consequences for
managers’ failure to provide fair and commensurate ratings of staff performance or to address
underperformance by appropriately supporting the staff or initiating Performance Improvement
Plan or separation proceedings. The Achieve process is therefore perceived by some as a ‘tick-
the-box’ exercise with no consequence. The ITF Report recommended that UNICEF make visible
changes by removing people management responsibilities from managers who consistently do
not live up to the organization’s values, but the audit did not find evidence that this was being
done in a consistent manner.

Monitoring and Oversight: The central PMCD team is responsible for providing guidance and
thought leadership on performance management and career development across UNICEF. It
conducts annual quality reviews of offices’ completed Achieve records – with 10 to 30 per cent
coverage - and showcases high performing offices. OIAI observed that year-end completion
statistics were published on its intranet page, and regional and country office HR staff were tasked
with addressing individual cases requiring improvement. Webinars were conducted for guidance.
However, there was no structured root cause analysis to identify and address systemic issues.

There was minimal coordination of HR resources – across field, region and HRBPs - to proactively
monitor application of the performance management process and career development activities
and identify systemic issues and/or good practices for remediation and/or development. The
respective roles and responsibilities for monitoring and oversight had not been adequately
defined. OIAI identified examples of good practices that had been developed by regional or
country offices. One region conducted an annual review of a sample of staff evaluations,
assessing their completeness and the quality of objectives, for follow-up with the relevant country
office. There was a missed opportunity for the central PMCD team to identify and assess
innovative or well-functioning practices for potential replication across the wider organization.

DHR had a dedicated analytics team that focused on strategic support and overall DHR data
planning and reporting processes. During the audit, that team released a dashboard showing all
international professional staff promotions, with statistics on gender, geographic diversity and staff
level. However, the audit team found that there had been limited focus on developing robust data

7
There is no direct or formal link in UNICEF between the outcome of staff performance evaluations and promotion
decisions, which are typically based on competitive selection processes involving internal and external candidates,
according to United Nations Staff Rules. Recruitment in UNICEF is a tool to achieve organizational staffing objectives
and not a means of rewarding staff for good performance.
17
sets or SMART indicators for analysis and management of performance-related activity. For
example, data on stretch assignments and shadowing opportunities were not readily available.
This precluded an analysis of the impact of individual performance management results on career
movement, for instance. UNICEF’s Sharepoint HR-related dashboards focused primarily on non-
performance related workforce statistics, such as gender and diversity, as well as workplace
culture elements from the Pulse Check staff survey.

Poor demonstration of accountabilities, and ad hoc, uncoordinated monitoring with insufficient

data may impede UNICEF’s abillity to identify and address negative practices.

AGREED ACTIONS
In collaboration with relevant internal stakeholders, as appropriate, DHR agrees to:
i. Develop and implement a capacity-building programme for all people managers and
senior leaders, to ensure a consistently strong tone at the top and reinforce
accountabilities for behavioural change; this will include targeted coaching for
supervisors with identified people management skill needs;
ii. Ensure that consequences for managers who do not effectively manage staff
performance are clearly defined, communicated and appropriately applied; reliable
identification of such cases will depend on improvements in tools to evaluate
managerial performance, including 360-degree feedback (see Recommendation 7)
and in successful capacity-building at the most senior management levels (see
above);
iii. Review minimum requirements (staff, processes, tools, data) for monitoring and
oversight of performance management and spreading good practices and clarify the
related roles and responsibilities of the PMCD section, HRBPs and regional office
HR; in doing so, digitize off-line staff performance-related data sets for analysis and
monitoring purposes.

Staff Responsible: (i) Director, DHR and Principal Adviser, Organizational Culture; (ii) and (iii)
Director, DHR and Chief, PMCD.
Implementation Date: September 2023

4. Identifying and managing underperformance High

Lack of visibility and ineffective management of underperforming staff may compromise the ability
of UNICEF’s workforce to achieve optimal results for children. Failure to manage poor staff
performance contributes to overburdening, resentment and demotivation of other colleagues, and
may result in reduced team performance, departure of valued staff members and inefficient use
of resources. A lack of reliable evidence means that the scale of this problem is unknown.

Identifying underperformance: Performance data in the Achieve system indicates that, for at
least the last five years, almost all of UNICEF’s workforce contributed effectively to organizational
results. In 2021, for example, more than 99 per cent of staff whose performance appraisals were
completed in Achieve were assessed by managers as being satisfactory.

18
 2021 Achieve data 8 reflected that 72.7
per cent of UNICEF staff with completed
performance management appraisals
fell within the middle performance
management assessment rating
category of ‘solid’ performance.
Seventeen per cent of staff were
assigned the highest rating and less than
one per cent fell in the lowest category.
Almost 10 per cent of staff did not have
complete appraisals in the Achieve
system.

Audit evidence suggested a higher level

of underperformance than that reflected
in Achieve, as well as cases that had not been appropriately addressed. Managers in more than
one-third of the 33 sampled country offices stated that not all underperformance was reflected in
performance ratings given by supervisors. Reasons cited included conflict avoidance, perceptions
of abuse of authority by managers and unwillingness to invest time in a heavy performance
improvement process. It was reported that accusations of abuse of authority typically peak
following the annual evaluation period when staff file complaints against their supervisor.

Anecdotal evidence suggested that underperformers are widely known but often are not well
supported or managed, sometimes being sidelined or transferred to another team or office. This
results in continued poor performance, low productivity and/or an increased workload for others.
Thirteen of the sampled 33 country offices reported that other staff and whole team dynamics had
been negatively impacted by inappropriate handling of underperformance. Many called for
supervisor training to improve management skills and build confidence in handling
underperformance.

Following the appointment of external or internal candidates to a new position in UNICEF, no

formal evaluation of performance after a set period of time is required as a condition for continued
employment. Such a review provides an opportunity to assess skills and competencies as a basis
for confirming the appointment, identifying any coaching or training needs or, worst case, reversal
of the recruitment decision. It was agreed by DHR leadership, in a review of UNICEF’s People
Strategy in March 2022, that introduction of a probationary period for new hires should be a
priority. At the time of the audit, this had not been implemented. A probationary period would offer
an additional tool to facilitate identification and management of underperformance in the early
months following appointment to a new role.

Performance Improvement Plan process: Dealing with staff underperformance is key to

effective performance management in UNICEF, as in any organization. Supervisors are
responsible for timely and effective dialogue with staff, analysis of any underlying issues, provision
of guidance to remedy shortcomings and, if necessary, a time-bound Performance Improvement
Plan (PIP), which may result in dismissal. A staff member may rebut any performance rating or
PIP. Responses to audit questions on this topic from a broad range of headquarters, regional and
country office staff varied. Some staff were satisfied that the tool and available support facilitated
effective management of underperformance; others reported that the PIP process was viewed as
time-consuming and a source of conflict. This, coupled with concerns about accusations of abuse
of authority and retaliation, created significant disincentives to use the PIP tool, meaning that

8
DHR PMCD Unit provided the source population of 2021 Achieve talent management system data.
19
some supervisors opted not to manage poor performance at all, even adjusting performance
ratings upwards to avoid it.

Central oversight: With the exception of a few complex PIP cases escalated to a small support
team in the global Policy, Employee Relations and Compensation (PERC) section, the central
PMCD function has no visibility of the PIPs undertaken by managers across UNICEF’s country,
regional and headquarters offices. In 2021, 40 cases were received by the PERC team, of which
eight related to PIPs. No PIP data is captured in any DHR system and OIAI found no evidence of
any efforts to gather such information or seek feedback on the PIP process. The PMCD team was
therefore unable to perform any analysis of the number or nature of underperformance cases, or
the effectiveness of the PIP mechanism and other measures taken to remedy underperformance.
This limits the ability of the PMCD section to identify the need for targeted or universal guidance,
training or support or to enhance the PIP mechanism. The design of any process to collect PIP
data for regional or global consolidation and analysis should be respectful of confidentiality
requirements and its purpose should be communicated to all staff, to ensure that it does not
discourage use of the PIP by staff and/or supervisors as a valuable tool to facilitate and support
structured staff development.

Cultural challenges: As mentioned above, UNICEF guidance is clear that supervisors are
accountable for honest, fair and timely management of staff performance, while all staff are
responsible for engaging in dialogue and feedback on issues preventing achievement of goals.
Many supervisors find it difficult to manage underperformance effectively, postponing challenging
conversations until the year-end evaluation or avoiding giving candid feedback at all. This
perpetuates a culture where staff only expect to receive positive feedback. One country office
manager commented, “It will take accountability from supervisors and courage to identify, engage
with the supervisee and work together to improve and develop skills.”

In line with the conclusions of the Evaluation Office’s recent assessment of UNICEF’s readiness
to achieve the goals of the Strategic Plan 2022-20259 , OIAI acknowledges the many initiatives
and support provided by the Culture and Diversity, DHR and other teams to address the cultural
issues related to values, behaviours and enabling a safe and respectful working environment.
While these should help to advance the necessary change in culture and mindsets and reinforce
accountabilities, there is also a need to determine the consequence of failure by managers and
senior leaders to address underperformance. This is an important part of reinforcing
accountabilities for performance management, addressed under Observation 3, above.

In defining the vision for performance management and career development, UNICEF needs to
consider whether people management and technical ability should be given equal weighting in
recruitment/promotion decisions and annual evaluations. UNICEF also needs to consider whether
those with technical/functional expertise but without managerial competencies should progress
within the organization if this leads to the appointment of managers and leaders who are not able
to fulfil their accountabilities for managing staff performance.

9
Evaluability Assessment and Formative Evaluation of UNICEF Positioning to Achieve the Goals of the Strategic
Plan 2022-2025, October 2022.
20
 AGREED ACTIONS
DHR agrees to:
i. Develop guidance for the weighting of people management skills and technical
competencies that could be used across the organization in evaluating candidates for
recruitment and promotion and during the evaluation of the performance of staff, to
ensure that staff at management level have the appropriate mix of people management
skills and technical competencies;
ii. Explore the possibility of introducing a probationary period for new hires;
iii. Digitize performance improvement plan data to facilitate monitoring, analysis and
decision-making related to underperformance, and increase visibility of performance
trends as part of the performance management communication strategy.

Staff Responsible: (i) Chief, Talent Acquisition and Chief, Senior Leadership Support; (ii)
Chief, Policy (PERC) and Director, PMCD; (iii) Chief, Policy (PERC) and Chief, PMCD
Implementation Date: (i) December 2023; (ii) March 2024; (iii) September 2023

5. Motivating and rewarding staff Medium

Though acknowledged as an area in need of improvement, the design of UNICEF’s reward

framework was not reviewed as part of DHR’s 2022-2025 strategic planning exercise and there
was no central oversight of reward and recognition practices. Inconsistent or insufficient
recognition and reward, coupled with limited upward career opportunities, may lead to staff
discontent, stagnation and departure of high-performing staff.

The common United Nations salary scale is based on the premise that promotion prospects are
relatively limited and careers short in the UN system, due to a high average age at recruitment. A
lack of upward career opportunities in UNICEF was a common reason for staff departures in 2021,
particularly for female staff, as reflected in Global Staff Association deliberations and in exit
interviews. As noted in Observation One of this report, there is a need to clarify the relationship
between the performance management process and internal career prospects and how best to
ensure that staff who perform well feel valued and remain engaged and motivated.

Reward framework: Though acknowledged as an area in need of improvement, the design of

UNICEF’s reward framework was not reviewed as part of DHR’s 2022-2025 strategic planning
exercise. In terms of monetary rewards, UNICEF’s current framework is limited to the time-based
‘within-grade salary step increment’ (WIGSI) applicable to all staff members subject to
‘satisfactory’ performance. As most staff are assessed as being at least ‘satisfactory’, almost all
staff receive it, which diminishes its value as a means of individual recognition. Interestingly, since
2021, the UN Secretariat no longer regards WIGSI as a performance reward but provides it
automatically to reflect cost of living adjustments.

DHR leadership affirmed that UNICEF’s regulations do not preclude a performance-related pay
(bonus) or promotion system. Other United Nations agencies consulted by OIAI for comparison
purposes indicated that they provide monetary rewards, as well as non-monetary rewards,
including performance recognition awards, certificates of appreciation and special leave. Any
performance or merit-based awards created would require a reliable performance management
system to ensure their fair and consistent application.
21
Recognition: In keeping with its public nature and lack of monetary rewards, UNICEF has
focused on non-monetary ways of motivating staff and recognizing good performance. While
many in-kind reward and recognition practices existed across UNICEF – including team/staff
recognition in team meetings, appreciation notes, priority for learning and extra time-off - there
was limited guidance on how exceptional achievements can be rewarded and no overall system
to provide oversight and ensure fair application of appropriate criteria. For example, DHR had no
overall records or information on stretch assignments – whether offered as a reward, for career
development or simply to fill a resourcing need – other than isolated anecdotal evidence. Other
rewards, such as job shadowing, attending conferences or extra days of leave, were even less
visible. This may lead to a perception that rewards and recognition are unfair and result in
demotivation and resignation of talented staff.

The PMCD section had drafted a recognition framework to establish criteria for individual, team
and office/regional/global performance; however, that draft had not been taken forward for
implementation. DHR explained that this was due to lack of resources.

AGREED ACTIONS
DHR agrees to:
i. Develop and oversee a structured fit-for-purpose reward and recognition framework, with
clear criteria for application; this should be aligned to UNICEF values and take into
consideration reasons for staff departure; benchmarking against other United Nations
agencies or alternative sources should be considered;
ii. Develop a mechanism for the management of reward mechanisms, to ensure that they
are based on clear, consistent criteria. This should be supported by a culture change
programme, in collaboration with the Culture and Diversity Team, to ensure that
managers and staff recognize the intended developmental benefits of stretch
assignments and job-shadowing.

Staff Responsible: Director, DHR and Chief, PMCD; (ii) Director, DHR
Implementation Date: March 2024

6. Career development Medium

UNICEF supports staff members to take ownership of their career and ensure that their skill set
remains relevant to the organization’s needs and to the wider labour market. However, the limited
options for upward progression were a source of dissatisfaction for many staff, leading to
reluctance to engage in career development discussions and planning. Learning resources and
opportunities may go underutilized due to a lack of personal accountability for career
development, limited understanding of its purpose or inadequate supervisor support.

Career development was identified as a key priority in the 2017 Global Staff Survey. Since then,
the PMCD team has established a career development framework, which clarifies the respective
roles of individual staff, supervisors and the organization. In UNICEF, career development is
considered a partnership-based approach among staff member, supervisor and UNICEF, but
ultimate responsibility lies with the staff member.

22
More recent staff surveys indicate that career development continues to be a source of
dissatisfaction for many staff, who feel that opportunities are limited by the absence of structured
career paths and a promotion framework. UNICEF staff do have access to a range of ‘on-demand’
learning resources, coaching opportunities and training courses. Stretch assignments and job
shadowing offer opportunities to expand skills for career development. Nevertheless, OIAI learned
that many of these resources and opportunities are underutilized, due to a lack of staff ownership
or understanding of the purpose of career development. Some managers may lack the empathy,
ability or time to support their staff. Country office staff may be unaware of the available tools and
resources and how these might enhance their professional growth. The global PMCD section has
limited visibility of how career development is being managed at office level, and on what basis
opportunities, such as stretch assignments, are provided to staff. An exception to this is the
REACH programme, which is managed by a dedicated member of the PMCD team and supports
selected National Officer staff in country offices to advance to International Professional status.

The Career Development Manager post within DHR was abolished in 2020 and plans for a career
development strategy, policy, data analytics and communications were put on hold. As part of the
People Strategy 2022-2025, career development activities will move from the PMCD section to
DHR’s Learning and Development function, to provide staff with better coordinated learning and
career development solutions. It will, however, be important to retain a strong connection with the
Performance Management team, to promote the need for consideration of career development
within staff performance management discussions. The proposed establishment of an integrated
talent management framework should create these essential linkages – not only between
performance management, career development and learning, but also with workforce planning.

Career development is an important aspect of UNICEF’s performance management process,

which requires discussion of short- and longer-term career goals and how UNICEF can support
staff in progressing towards them. Based on this discussion, staff are required to agree on and
document a development plan in the Achieve system. This offers great potential for staff to learn
new skills and enhance the competencies needed for progression in the organization. However,
OIAI noted a perception by some staff that ‘development plan’ has negative connotations,
associated only with management of underperformance. This, coupled with a reluctance to
discuss and/or document areas for improvement and the limited options for upward progression,
means that development plans frequently are not prepared by staff. The fact that the development
plan is optional and maintained in a separate platform to Achieve is not conducive to its
widespread use.

AGREED ACTION
In developing the proposed integrated talent management framework, DHR agrees to ensure
clear and effective linkages between performance management, learning and career
development (as well as other elements of the employee lifecycle) to incentivize staff to take
ownership of their careers and manage the continuous improvement of the skills and
competencies required for effective performance in UNICEF as the organization’s needs
continue to grow and evolve.

Staff Responsible: Director, DHR and Chief, Learning and Career Development
Implementation Date: March 2024

23
 7. Performance management process Medium

Performance management at UNICEF is, for many staff, synonymous with the annual appraisal
process in the Achieve system, which is regarded by some managers and staff as a ‘tick-the-box’
exercise. Too great a focus on the tool, instead of regular, meaningful discussion about
performance and honest, objective evaluation may result in resources being wasted on activities
that do not support a values-driven performance-based culture and may entrench negative
behaviours.

Annual performance review cycle: The UNICEF performance management process starts with
establishment of objectives and optional development goals at the beginning of each calendar
year. It requires regular discussion between staff and supervisors, so that feedback can be
provided to supervisees throughout the year. The end-of-year performance appraisal entails a
review of the whole year’s performance by the supervisor and supervisee, which is discussed and
documented in the Achieve system. The supervisor assigns a performance rating, which is
confirmed and communicated to the staff member following management calibration meetings.

Due to cultural and capability issues described earlier in this report, many supervisors spend
minimal time on performance management activities during the course of the year, which
increases the time required by both supervisors and staff for the end-of-year evaluation. As this
coincides with the busiest time of year for many offices, this increases the risk that annual
evaluations happen late or not at all. Deadlines are frequently extended by DHR, which may result
in workplan objectives being set retrospectively for activities that have already been completed,
or performance feedback being received too late to influence decisions about work allocation for
the coming year. In 2021, 9.6 per cent of staff did not have a completed annual assessment in
Achieve.

Though a range of guidance materials was available on the DHR portal and on UNICEF’s learning
platform, the annual quality review conducted by the PMCD section and OIAI’s own findings
indicated that there was scope to improve the level of staff participation in the Achieve training
courses. The quality review also recommended improvements in the quality of workplan
deliverables documented by staff in the Achieve system and of the written feedback provided in
the annual assessment.

Competency framework and annual objectives: At the beginning of each year, supervisors are
required to establish clear objectives and deliverables for their supervisees, aligned with the
office/division’s overall outcomes and the supervisee’s personal development goals. Some offices
had invested time in ensuring high quality objectives, setting clear expectations and facilitating
the year-end appraisal exercise. However, OIAI also noted challenges faced by supervisors in
managing poor performance due to the lack of appropriate, agreed objectives against which to
hold staff accountable.

In response to the ITF Report, UNICEF revised its competency framework10 in 2020, to ensure a
balanced focus on how work is delivered, as well as the results of the work itself. The new
behavioural competencies, based on UNICEF’s values, are applicable to all staff at every level of
the organization. Plans to develop the functional element of the framework were thwarted by the

10
A competency framework sets out the skills, knowledge and behaviours required to perform a role well. It serves as
a means of measuring success and effectiveness and provides a shared language for performance discussions and
greater accuracy when talking about specific workplace behaviours and goals. A combination of behavioural and
technical (or functional) competencies sets out expectations for both the ‘soft skills’ and ‘know-how’ needed for
successful job performance.
24
COVID-19 pandemic and divisional heads were left to take this forward, as deemed necessary,
with little coordination or support from the central DHR. Some teams have developed their own
functional competency frameworks, but most expect staff simply to supplement the ‘core’
competencies with workplan deliverables and goals. In 2020, the Global Nutrition Cluster rolled
out its own comprehensive framework, using external expertise and support. While the
headquarters DHR team was aware of this initiative, no effort had been made to leverage off this,
or similar good practices, for the benefit of the wider organization. In the absence of a formal
PMCD section workplan (see Observation Two), it was not clear whether development of
functional competency frameworks across UNICEF remained a priority for DHR.

Feedback: UNICEF guidance requires timely, two-way, open and honest feedback, between
supervisor and staff member, in the spirit of continuous learning and improvement. The Achieve
tool is configured to capture planning, mid-year (optional) and end-year discussions between staff
member and supervisor. It also allows staff to upload or request feedback from other
colleagues/sources by direct interface email. The direct uploads are at the discretion of the staff
member, whereas the system requests for feedback cannot be adjusted. In both cases, staff
members are free to select colleagues to provide feedback, which may therefore not reflect the
full range of views, unless overseen by the supervisor.

Analysis of 2021 exit interviews showed abuse of authority by a direct supervisor as the third most
frequent reason for staff resignation. Conflict avoidance or fear of retaliation were key factors
underlying supervisor reluctance to provide honest feedback. UNICEF uses a third-party
administered 360-degree feedback mechanism to provide input to management development
programmes. Two of the sampled headquarters and regional offices reported use of a mandatory
360-degree feedback mechanism for all supervisors; one used an external service provider, the
other used a low-cost combination of the Achieve functionality, email and survey. In 2021, the UN
Secretariat introduced a 360-degree supervisory feedback mechanism to capture upward and
peer feedback. The ITF Report recommended regular anonymous multi-rater feedback in the
performance evaluation report on results and people behaviours for staff, and on results and
people management for supervisors, underpinned by a rigorous training programme. A well-
designed, properly implemented 360-degree feedback approach can provide more
comprehensive, objective feedback from a wider range of colleagues, not selected at the
discretion of the staff member. Anonymity provides staff with greater psychological safety to share
honest upward feedback without fear of retribution or retaliation. Such an approach may help to
identify shortcomings in supervisory skills and competencies and support efforts to improve
managerial capabilities at all levels and to increase transparency and accountability for
performance management.

Ratings and calibration: At its March 2022 retreat, DHR leadership and management discussed
whether to remove or suspend the rating system, in particular for professional and director grade
staff, and to replace it with reference checks for recruitment purposes. No decision was made but
it was agreed that further consideration would be given to the value of ratings.

Recognizing the constraints of UNICEF’s three-tier performance-rating scale in adequately

differentiating performance levels, a decision was taken by DHR to pilot two new approaches in
2022: no ratings and five-scale ratings. The pilot was not introduced until Q2 2022, and the criteria
for assessing the results and determining next steps were still unclear in Q4 2022. This was due
to competing PMCD team priorities. The pilots increased ambiguity for staff in comparing
performance and raised questions about how staff increments would be decided. This further
reduced the credibility of ratings as a basis for workforce decision-making. OIAI noted that certain
offices had, independently, experimented with five-tier systems in previous years, but no central
review of lessons learned had been conducted.

25
OIAI’s review of 2021 annual staff performance reviews found that the approach to calibration of
ratings varied, due partly to limited DHR guidance and inconsistent oversight. Some offices
conducted robust reviews, others none. Some ‘no-ratings’ offices still held discussions to identify
support needs for high or low performers. OIAI observed that there was no structured annual
calibration review for senior leaders and that Achieve ratings were not considered to provide
robust input for senior management career decisions. In 2022, 7 of 89 senior promotions to P5
grade and above (8 per cent) were not supported by a completed 2021 Achieve performance
evaluation. OIAI received anecdotal evidence of several cases that supported the conclusion that
performance management results and promotion decisions are not necessarily aligned.

AGREED ACTIONS
DHR agrees to:
i. Enhance communication of the guidance and learning materials available to managers
and staff to support the performance management process, in collaboration with the
Division of Global Communication and Advocacy Internal Communications team;
ii. Drawing on the experience of offices with fully developed competency frameworks,
define an approach to facilitate the development by all offices of a competency
framework that reflects all relevant functional skills and knowledge, as well as UNICEF
core competencies; this requires clarification of the responsibilities of DHR (PMCD,
Regional Office and HRBPs), as well as divisional/office heads, for the design, roll-out
(including training) and ongoing quality assurance;
iii. Develop and implement a simple 360-degree feedback approach for all staff with
supervisory responsibilities, learning lessons from internal and external experience.
Following review of its implementation, consider extending the approach to all staff;
iv. As a priority, determine the methodology and criteria for assessing the results of the
2022 rating pilots; based on that information, and in consideration of the wider talent
management framework, decide whether or not to retain a performance rating system
and establish a clear plan for implementing this decision in time to roll it out for the 2023
annual review cycle.

Staff Responsible: (i) Chief, PMCD with DHR Communications; (ii) Director, DHR and Chief,
PMCD; (iii) Chief, PMCD; (iv) Chief, PMCD
Implementation Date: (i) June 2023; (ii) September 2023; (iii) December 2023; (iv) June 2023

8. ‘Achieve’ tool Medium

UNICEF invested in a performance management system that did not meet all expected
functionalities and was not configured to ensure efficient, reliable data for analysis and monitoring
purposes. In reviewing the need for an alternative tool and developing a new business case,
lessons learned from the procurement process and from use of the system to date need to be
taken into account.

Investment in Talent Management System (TMS): ‘Achieve’ is UNICEF’s name for the
performance management module of its talent management system. In 2016, UNICEF invested
in that module and two others (for onboarding and recruitment). Annual subscription costs for the
talent management system are approximately US$430,000.

26
The question as to whether the tool was fit-for-purpose was raised in 2018, two years after its
implementation, following a post-implementation review, and again in 2019, when an analysis
found that only 44 per cent of the required functionality and reporting capability was met. DHR
explained that UNICEF’s limited scale precluded flexibility and alignment to the vendor’s own
software roadmap. Between May 2018 and September 2019, DHR submitted several proposals
to UNICEF’s ICT Board regarding potential alternatives for replacement of the TMS. The ICT
Board advised further analysis of lessons learned and future needs. Due to funding constraints
and high exit costs, DHR decided to keep the system for another two years, until November 2021.
Due to the planned DHR relocation and transfer of Achieve maintenance to UNICEF’s Global
Shared Service Centre in Budapest, the review of the tool was further postponed. OIAI is of the
view that DHR should prioritize correcting the cultural and behavioural issues highlighted in this
report, and that any decision to replace the current application should be based on a thorough
review of whether Achieve is fit-for-purpose in UNICEF’s new talent management framework,
learning lessons from the previous procurement exercise.

Ownership of Achieve: As part of DHR’s planned transition, responsibility for the management
and maintenance of the Achieve tool is expected to move from the Performance Management
team to DHR’s Operations team, based at the Global Shared Service Centre in Budapest.
Separating technical and operational responsibilities from overall management and oversight of
the Achieve process will require careful planning and strong coordination between teams. It will
be important to consider the risks related to this new structure during DHR’s strategy
implementation planning to ensure a smooth transition and effective control mechanisms. (See
Observation Two.)

Achieve data analytics: DHR’s 2018-2021 strategy included enhancing HR management

information systems and data analytics. However, in conducting the audit work, OIAI experienced
first-hand the challenges in obtaining and using Achieve records. The configuration of Achieve
requires a high-degree of detailed manual intervention, such as deleting incomplete rows of data
and purging key fields, to clean up the records for point-in-time analysis. OIAI found that this had
not been done rigorously by DHR. Achieve reports could not be reconciled to HR master data and
InSight dashboards. OIAI also observed that Achieve permanent records were limited and did not
capture progress and feedback discussions. Multiple templates and changing year-to-year
nomenclature also were sources of ambiguity. There was no oversight by the DHR Analytics team
of analysis or reporting of performance management and career development data.

Continued use of a system that does not meet business needs, with limited oversight of its use,
results in inefficient use of staff time and resources.

AGREED ACTIONS
DHR agrees to:
i. In defining its long-term vision for managing performance and career development and
in collaboration with ICTD, assess whether Achieve is the appropriate tool to meet
UNICEF’s needs, considering cost-benefit, integration within the broader talent
management framework processes and tools, and lessons learned from the
procurement process and use of the current system; develop a business case for an
integrated talent management system, as necessary, with realistic timelines for its
successful implementation based on resource availability and progress with
performance culture change;
ii. Develop procedures for data clean-up (completeness, accuracy, etc.), consider digital
data feeds into Achieve for enhanced data analysis, and review the need for oversight
by the DHR Analytics Team.
27
Staff Responsible: (i) Chief, Human Capital Intelligence team; (ii) Chief, Human Capital
Intelligence and Chief, PMCD
Implementation Date: (i) March 2024; (ii) March 2024

28
APPENDIX
Definitions of Audit Observation Ratings

To assist management in prioritizing the actions arising from the audit, OIAI ascribes a rating to
each audit observation based on the potential consequence or residual risks to the audited entity,
area, activity or process, or to UNICEF as a whole. Individual observations are rated as follows:

The observation concerns a potential opportunity for improvement in

the assessed governance, risk management or control processes.
Low Low-priority observations are reported to management during the
audit but are not included in the audit report. Action in response to
the observation is desirable.
The observation relates to a weakness or deficiency in the assessed
governance, risk management or control processes that requires
Medium
resolution within a reasonable period of time to avoid adverse
consequences for the audited entity, area, activity or process.
The observation concerns a fundamental weakness or deficiency in
the assessed governance, risk management or control processes
High that requires prompt/immediate resolution to avoid severe/major
adverse consequences for the audited entity, area, activity or
process, or for UNICEF as a whole.

Definitions of Overall Audit Conclusions

The above ratings of audit observations are then used to support an overall audit conclusion for
the area under review, as follows:

The assessed governance, risk management or control processes

Satisfactory
were adequate and functioning well.
The assessed governance, risk management or control processes
Partially
were generally adequate and functioning but needed
Satisfactory,
improvement. The weaknesses or deficiencies identified were
Improvement
unlikely to have a materially negative impact on the performance
Needed
of the audited entity, area, activity or process.
Partially
The assessed governance, risk management or control processes
Satisfactory,
needed major improvement. The weaknesses or deficiencies
Major
identified could have a materially negative impact on the
Improvement
performance of the audited entity, area, activity or process.
Needed
The assessed governance, risk management or control processes
were not adequately established or not functioning well. The
Unsatisfactory weaknesses or deficiencies identified could have a severely
negative impact on the performance of the audited entity, area,
activity or process.

29
Office of Internal Audit and Investigations

3 United Nations Plaza, East 44th St.

New York, NY 10017
www.unicef.org/auditandinvestigation

30