CONSOLIDATION OF THE OBTAINED RESULTS

- Focus on ownership to Link the information generated by monitoring to future program improvement and learning.

- Engage national actors to have ownership over the entirety of development plans, programs, and projects.

- Consider the dimensions of intervention work in the space of nonlinear change

- Develop the “capacity to change”

The Participation Mechanism must:

- Ensure ownership, learning and sustainability of results

- Institutionalize stakeholder participation

- Take specific steps in the management process to ensure effective and continuous stakeholder involvement

● Tensions at the level of the multiple interfaces between the services of the administration hosting the reform, between this administration and other stakeholder administrations

● Paradox of control by the hierarchy (Hudon & Mazouz, 2014; Kamdem, 2002; Reynaud, 1997) and duality of legal and functional requirements (Mazouz et al., 2016)

● Paradox of performance

● Paradox of co-creation and value capture (Niesten & Stefan, 2019)

● Project time/reform time paradox

● Learning paradox

● Management tools and instruments paradoxes (Aggeri & Labatut, 2010; Grimand et al., 2018b; OCDE, 1996, 2009)

● Role paradox (Bollecker & Nobre, 2016)

● “Exploration/exploitation” paradox (Benner & Tushman, 2003; March, 1991; Sinha, 2015)

● Bureaucracy paradox and cultural paradox (Kamdem, 2002; Reynaud, 1997)

● Paradox of values (Trosa, 2017)

● Systemic principles (see text);

● Organizational ambidextrous forms (Benner & Tushman, 2003; Grimand et al., 2014; Uman et al., 2020)

● Managing unexpected negative reactions of stakeholders to issues of sustainable development, management of environmental impacts of any human action (see for CSR (Mazouz & Gagnon, 2019) )

● Conflict management: functional, dysfunctional, cognitive

● Integrating PSM (Public Service Motivation) into human resource management processes (Giauque, 2004; Perry & Wise, 1990; Vandenabeele & Hondeghem, 2004)