Who came up on top?

I’m already hearing from sources who attended the three interviews over the last three days that Ngozi has come up as the top candidate, followed closely by Ocampo, with Dr. Kim a distant third. Three things have worked for Ngozi to push her over Ocampo, she knows the bank inside-out,  has experience on both sides of the table – a client and world banker-, and that she is an African woman supported by the whole African Union. This, if selected, will make her not only the first non-American to head the bank, but also the first woman, and first African. In the words of the Economist, “May the best woman win”

14 thoughts on “Who came up on top?

  1. Not what I hear. Neither of us attended “all three” and I saw no Board members at both CGD softball events.

  2. If the US loses the position this time around, I think it is safe to say its the fault of the republicans. They are the ones who installed Paul Wolfowitz and made the whole world question the wisdom of this “tradition” of naming an American for over 6 decades unchallanged. I think the best possible scenario for the next couple of days, will be for Kim and Ocampo to bow out and let the best woman win by consensus.

    • Why should Ocampo bow out as you and The Economist say? He has the knowledge and the experience to be the president the World Bank needs to support development around the globe; his presentation at the CGD event showed that he is highly qualified for the job. The only experience NOI has and that he does not have is working inside the bank, which is in fact a strength because he can bring new ideas to introduce it into the XXI century.

      • In addition, he has been recommended by about 380 economists around the world; three letters were sent to the Directors by well known economists from the world, Latin America and Colombia.
        He should stay in the race because he has the best qualifications.

  3. As the World Bank Executive Directors are caucusing on the election of the new President, the Independent Evaluation Group has just published a scathing report on the functioning of the Bank’s operations (summary : http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/content/dam/ieg/matrix/matrix_overview.pdf), showing commendable courage and acute political sense for its timeliness.

    This report speaks volumes about the urgent need to inject new external blood at the top of the Bank to come to grips with a desperately inefficient organization.

    It also contains reference to the disbandment in 2010 of the internal group charged with quality control at arms-length from operational management. This measure eliminated a valuable source of accountability for operational decisions, particularly in the area of the “knowledge services” which are essential for the future impact of Bank activities.

    The public would find it informative to know how the charming “insider” candidate discharged her personal accountability in this core area during her interview with the Bank Board.

  4. Indeed, we’d all like to know what the charismatic insider’s view of the need for quality was. We can think of the over-designed tool (sic) for risk assessment imposed after the Albania mess, the candor-destroying imposition of term contracts, personalization of the Bank’s Development Grant Facility (includng a big grant for an African organization where she’d seen a Bank friend and former boss installed to deliver 1980s style technical assistance), and nationality-based appointments of cronies and compatriots into key quality positions. And her leadership as the budget and organizational features of the Bank’s matrix organization hit an iceberg.

  5. Merit should play a huge role in who emerges. If indeed she has “come out tops”, then let her have it. In a deeply chauvinistic world, I know a woman needs to do more than is necessary to earn recognition. If she emerges as the World Bank President, it will change the world. It will represent a new paradigm engineered by the US that for once will allow merit to be institutionised in the selection process of the World Bank Pressident. The US will be the ultimate winner. Nigeria will miss her as its Finance Minister and Coordinating Minister for the economy. She will be released to play in the big stage.

  6. There were no World Bank board members at the two CGD/WaPo events. There were only board members at the three, in camera interviews. No staff. No advisors. So it’s fair to say that anyone who claims to have been at all three ‘interviews’ was a Board member. African advisors to Executive Directors have been adamant all along it has to be Ngozi, and still are, but they weren’t at the interviews. Unless their principals are talking–which would suggest grave indiscretion and possibly confirm their nationality preference and disrespect for a process in which they have signed off on by participating–there is ‘no news’ about the formal interview process except (unconfirmed) that each of the 25 directors could ask up to five questions.

    The poor nominees! Even candidates for US public office don’t get fired 125 questions in three hours. Lunch is a poor recompense.

  7. On the words of of the Economist I stand, “May the best woman win”.

    And there is only one iron lady in this contest: NOI

Leave a Reply to Hart Ozoya Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *