Which evaluation methodology could be applied to WSGA?

In order to improve, it is necessary to measure. That is why we created this measurement system. However, to improve the governance of an organisation, it is not enough to measure it once and improve the governance system according to the comments reported. It will be necessary to establish a system of “control” (or a regulatory system) of governance that will serve as a method for measuring the governance of an organisation.

This system can be modeled using the conventional graph of a control system as described below. Somehow, the indicators highlighted in the proposed tool will drive the “good” governance of an organisation by constant regulating (or fine tuning) of the governance of an organisation.

The system of governance assessment will measure the five levels of organizational governance: 1. Management (professional, independent financing and management), 2. Governance (identity, values, flexibility and internal configuration of power) 3. Regulation (control, communication and accountability), 4. Harmonisation (partnership relations, reputation and jurisdiction) 5. Meta-governance (meta-jurisdiction, social and economic development, conservation and management of resources for development, strengthening of major groups and means of implementation).

It is using such a “control system” that we would be able to note that governance changes over time. That is the reason why the measurement should be made at various times during the year. If, for example, we take the recommendations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as the operating reference, this measurement should be done four times a year internally and once externally, in order to be fully comprehensive in measurement results. As to FIs, we propose to have two internal audits and one external audit per year.

The conceptual framework of audits is described in narrative form by the principal dimensions and studied their relationships according to the levels of management of the framework proposed and tested by Pérez.

To conduct the control operation of an organisation under review, the audit will be done by two different groups:

1. The internal control commission of an FI for FIs and the IOC’s for the IOC,

2. An external auditor recognised by the WSGA.

Indeed, on the basis of these two audits, we would have an internal measurement (eg, two measurements per year) of the governance of an IF and an external measurement (unbiased) of the governance of an IF and the IOC. Then we would compare the two tests and measure the differences between them. This will not only provide an interesting complement to the transparency of an IF, but it will be the average of the two results which will give the final rating of the organisation which is analysed.