In most crisis situations, a large number of organisations will be working to provide support in the same area. This study attempts to identify the factors that contribute to effective coordination. It concentrates on the IASC ‘Clusters’, a formal humanitarian coordination forum for ‘sectors’ of the response at the country level.
Using a mixed methods approach combining a literature review, questionnaire and interviews, this study addresses two key questions:
- What is the optimum level of coordination in the humanitarian Clusters?
- What are the conditions required to achieve successful Cluster coordination during a humanitarian response?
This paper suggests that, between complete independence and full merger, there are three levels of coordination:
- Communication: Organisations share information with one another, but are otherwise independent, and use the information as they wish.
- Alignment: Organisations adjust their activities to create a more effective response on the basis of the activities of other organisations. Adjustments include accepting common guidance and changing the nature or location of activities to reduce gaps/duplication.
- Collaboration: An explicit, formalised relationship, with actors sharing agreed objectives and priorities.
The study found that, overwhelmingly, Cluster activities function at the ‘alignment’ level. This research suggests that, for most Cluster members, the benefits of a looser, ‘alignment’ level of coordination outweigh the costs. However, with some exceptions (such as advocacy) the costs of achieving a collaborative level of coordination are too high. The research finds that coordination at the alignment level was improved by:
- clarity over the purpose and priorities for the cluster
- a focus on activities that have direct operational relevance to members (rather than on collecting information for other actors)
- clear, mutually agreed and respected procedures for information management and decision-making
- sharing common goals for the response
- trusting relationships and the ability to recognise and resolve conflicts
- an independent, knowledgeable, respected cluster coordinator
- clear divisions between cluster activities/needs and those of cluster lead agencies
- clear and agreed roles and responsibilities for cluster members and cluster coordinators
- development of sub-national as well as national level clusters, with good linkages between these different levels
The study also found that there is no evidence to suggest that any particular phase in the response is more conducive for effective coordination. There is also no overwhelming evidence from this research to support a shorter-term limited activation period for the Clusters, as currently recommended in IASC guidance. Additionally, there is no evidence suggesting that the size of a Cluster has an impact on the quality of coordination. Clusters have failed to adequately include national non-governmental organisations (NNGOs) in coordination activities. The research did not address whether nationally or internationally led coordination mechanisms were more effective. Finally, the research shows that the quality of decisions is higher when decision-making is done by a group rather than an individual. Despite common assumptions, group decision-making was not found to be slower than individual decision-making.
See ALNAP’s Discussion starter summarising this report.
