1. LAC MIC++ Launch June 25, 2009 Nick Manning Sector Manager Public Sector and Governance Public sector management Sharing knowledge amongst peers A LAC/MIC perspective

2. Country level – indicators of progress Very weak regional data collection Tend to be anecdotal and fashion-driven Thematically Strong existing professional networks (INTOSAI, CAROSAI, LAC SBO etc.) – but coverage is limited Agency level Very few institutionalized peer-to-peer linkages How do we share knowledge on public management developments?

3. We can do better – but we need to take care Need to be very wary about any ratings/rankings approach to public management Not everything needs to be public

4. Ranking is a tricky business Ratings/rankings approach to public management is risky Can be a catalyst to dissatisfied public But just as likely to be a source of political resentment that closes down debate Above all, our evidence base that one arrangement is better than another is generally thin

5. Not everything needs to be public Sharing technical information between partners is facilitated by confidence and trust Tax agencies, budget departments, ministries of public service – are all more likely to share information within a small group

6. LAC-MIC++ takes care Not normative Develops a safe space for honest peer partnerships

7. LAC-MIC++ is carefully positioned

8. In conclusion Long way to go We’ll know that we’re getting somewhere when: LAGG generates tough questions and challenges orthodoxy Peer-to-peer partnerships are routine in any capacity-building exercise