Chapter 6: Governance for equity. Spotlight 8: Service delivery: Education and health. Chapter 7: Elite bargaining and adaptation. Spotlight 9: Decentralization. Spotlight Public service reform. Chapter 8: Citizens as agents of change. Spotlight From transparency to accountability through citizen engagement. Spotlight The media. Chapter 9: Governance in an interconnected world. Spotlight I llicit financial flows. World Development Report Governance and the Law.
World Development Report Toggle navigation. About Why are carefully designed, sensible policies too often not adopted or implemented? When they are, why do they often fail to generate development outcomes such as security, growth, and equity? And why do some bad policies endure? UK, remember your settings and improve government services.
We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services. You can change your cookie settings at any time. This also applies to some motorhomes. You have to pay a higher rate for diesel cars that do not meet the Real Driving Emissions 2 RDE2 standard for nitrogen oxide emissions.
You do not have to pay this if you have a zero emission vehicle. Indian government agencies have also made data localization a requirement for cloud providers computing for public contracts. Indonesia has a range of data-localization laws that cover a broad range of sectors and technologies. Indonesia has been expanding its range of localization policies as part of a persistent attachment to state-directed development and digital protectionism strategies.
In , Indonesia enacted a rule—regulation no. Localization policies are also spreading to other areas. Iran does not have an explicit personal data-protection act, but it has been slowly moving toward developing its own national intranet—the Halal Internet—to separate itself as best it can from the rest of the Internet, including moves toward greater data localization. In , Iran launched its own search engines, which only show approved websites. In August , Iran set up its first government-paid cloud data center.
In May , Iran ordered foreign messaging apps, such as WhatsApp and Telegram, to store data from Iranian users locally. Since , Kazakhstan has required that all domestically registered domain names i. Furthermore, in , Kazakhstan enacted an amendment to its personal data-protection law that requires owners and operators collecting and using personal data to keep such data in-country.
The requirement for localization of personal data applies to companies established in Kazakhstan and individual proprietors in Kazakhstan, including branches and representative offices of foreign companies.
It is not clear whether the localization requirement should apply to foreign companies without any legal presence in Kazakhstan but whose websites are accessible in Kazakhstan. Personal data cannot be transferred outside Malaysia, unless the action has been approved by the Malaysian government.
As with other countries, a consent requirement for transfer abroad is a burdensome requirement to satisfy. The Netherlands Public Records Act requires public records to be stored in archives in specific locations in the country. Under no circumstances are these transactions to be processed outside Nigeria. Poland required e-commerce entities to store customer details in Poland, but after an intervention by the European Commission, Poland was forced to lift the requirement, and it is now sufficient that the servers are in the EU.
The Polish Gambling Act also requires online gambling firms to store all data relating to customer betting in the European Union.
In , Romania enacted new online gambling regulations that requires all data on players and their gambling activities to be stored in Romania. Russia operates one of the most extensive sets of data-localization policies in the world. This personal data may be transferred out, but only after it is first stored in Russia. Russia has threatened to shut down and fine websites, such as LinkedIn, that refuse to store data locally.
Furthermore, in , Russia enacted extensive new data-localization requirements for telecommunications data. Second, it requires telecommunications companies and ISPs to cut services to users if they fail to respond to a request from law enforcement to confirm their identity which raises a range of privacy issues.
This is clearly a substantial burden on companies trying to send data across borders. Korea has used data localization requirements to protect local e-commerce and online payment operators. In , Korea slightly revised this rule by allowing certain foreign e-commerce firms those with stores in more than five countries to store such data abroad. Korea is the only significant market in the world that maintains data localization requirements for mapping data.
Korea has defended the policy as it wants to limit the availability of high-resolution commercial satellite imagery of Korea for national security reasons, even though such imagery is already. Subsequent guidelines—the Data Protection Standards for Cloud Computing Services Guidelines—contain rules that effectively require data localization as cloud computing networks serving public agencies have to be physically separate from networks serving the general public.
This discriminatory policy may have a significant affect as it applies to thousands of institutions, such as educational institutions, public banks, and public hospitals. This amounts to de facto localization, as companies are forced to store data in Sweden.
Furthermore, Sweden has accounting requirements that force companies to store data about current company records and accounts in Sweden for seven years.
In addition, there is the potential for Swedish government regulations to be interpreted such that data processed by a government agency needs to be held within Sweden, which would obviously affect cloud computing and ultimately result in data localization. PayPal withdrew from the country after refusing to abide by this data localization requirement.
In , Turkey enacted the Law on the Protection of Personal Data, which limits transfer of personal data out of Turkey and may require firms to store data on Turkish citizens in country. The need for specific and individual engagement holds the potential to act as de facto data localization. The United States has proposed or enacted a few data localization requirements, most of which focus on public procurement. Most recently, the United States pushed for financial services data to be exempt from rules in the Trans Pacific Partnership that prohibited countries from enacting barriers to data flows.
However, after the agreement was finalized, the United States sought to limit the scope of this provision through bilateral discussions and via provisions in ongoing negotiations for a Trade in Services Agreement.
We should stop teaching business school students that operational issues are beneath the CEO—and should encourage firms to invest in strengthening management throughout the organization. There are vast differences in how well companies execute basic tasks like setting targets and grooming talent, and those differences matter: Firms with strong managerial processes perform significantly better on high-level metrics such as productivity, profitability, growth, and longevity. In addition, the differences in the quality of those processes—and in performance—persist over time, suggesting that competent management is not easy to replicate.
But we contend that it should be treated as a crucial complement to strategy—and that this is true now more than ever. On the other hand, if firms have sound fundamental management practices, they can build on them, developing more-sophisticated capabilities—such as data analytics, evidence-based decision making, and cross-functional communication—that are essential to success in uncertain, volatile industries.
Achieving managerial competence takes effort, though: It requires sizable investments in people and processes throughout good times and bad. These investments, we argue, represent a major barrier to imitation. For example, researchers such as Kim Clark, Bob Hayes, and David Garvin documented differences within factories, industries, and companies.
But a lack of big data encompassing many firms, industries, and countries inhibited the statistical study of management practices. In the past decade, however, we have developed ways to robustly measure core management practices, and we can now show that their adoption accounts for a large fraction of performance differences across firms and countries.
Building on a survey instrument that was initially developed by John Dowdy and Stephen Dorgan at McKinsey, we set out to rate companies on their use of 18 practices in four areas: operations management, performance monitoring, target setting, and talent management. The ratings ranged from poor to nonexistent at the low end say, for performance monitoring using metrics that did not indicate directly whether overall business objectives were being met to very sophisticated at the high end for performance monitoring that continuously tracked and communicated metrics, both formally and informally, to all staff with an array of visual tools.
In our research, we assess the sophistication with which organizations manage the four broad dimensions—and the 18 specific aspects—of management shown below. The list varies slightly depending on sector this one is for manufacturers. Process documentation Use of key performance indicators KPI reviews Discussion of results Consequences for missing targets.
Connection to strategy, extent to which targets cascade down to individual workers. Talent mindset at the highest levels Stretch goals Management of low performance Talent development Employee value proposition Talent retention.
Our aim was to gather reliable data that was fully comparable across firms and covered a large, representative sample of enterprises around the world. We realized that to do that, we needed to manage the data collection ourselves, which we did with the help of a large team of people from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics. To date the team has interviewed managers from more than 12, companies about their practices.
On the basis of the information gathered, we rate every organization on each management practice, using a 1 to 5 scale in which higher scores indicate greater adoption. Those ratings are then averaged to produce an overall management score for each company.
That data has led us to two main findings: First, achieving operational excellence is still a massive challenge for many organizations. Even well-informed and well-structured companies often struggle with it. This is true across countries and industries—and in spite of the fact that many of the managerial processes we studied are well known.
The dispersion of management scores across firms was wide. The discrepancies were substantial even within rich countries like the United States. At the other end of the spectrum we identified clear management superstars across all the countries surveyed: Six percent of the firms in our sample had an average score of 4 or greater.
In other words they had rigorous performance monitoring, systems geared to optimize the flow of information across and within functions, continuous improvement programs that supported short- and long-term targets, and performance systems that rewarded and advanced great employees and helped underperformers turn around or move on.
Achieving operational excellence is still a massive challenge for many firms. By interviewing several companies multiple times throughout the past decade, we were able to observe that these large differences in the adoption of core management practices were long-lasting. One of our findings may surprise readers: These differences show up within companies, too. A project conducted with the U. Census revealed that variations in management practices inside firms across their plants accounted for about one-third of total variations across all plant locations.
0コメント