Organizational responses to a changing aid environment: the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)

As a major European donor, German government development assistance faces a series of challenges. Recent political changes have raised expectations for demonstrable health outcomes as a result of German development assistance; there has been a deepened commitment to collaboration with other bilateral and multilateral donors; and partner countries are increasingly open to new approaches to development. German development assistance also reflects a new ethos of partnership and the shift to programmatic and sector based development approaches. At the same time, its particular organizational structure and administrative framework highlight the extent of structural and systems reforms required of donors by changing development relationships, and the tensions created in responding to these. This paper examines organizational changes within the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit) (GTZ), aimed at increasing its Regional, Sectoral, Managerial and Process competence as they affect health and related sectors. These include the decentralization of GTZ, the trend to integration of projects, the increasing focus on policy and health systems reform, increased inter-sectoral collaboration, changes in recruitment and training, new perspectives in planning and evaluation and the introduction of a quality management programme. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

The case for emotional intelligence in organizational research

Since its popularization by Goleman (1995), the concept of emotional intelligence has been the subject of ongoing controversy, so it is understandable that the model we proposed, which includes emotional intelligence as a moderator variable, would attract its share of criticism.

The Utility of the Human Security Agenda for Policy-makers

The idea of “human security” is gaining attention among policy-makers and security analysts. Little scholarly attention has been given to the questions of why states accept (or reject) a human security agenda or how such an agenda is incorporated into policy practices. The article suggests that a human security approach is most likely to be applied when both humanitarian and national interests combine. Yet when states or organisations adopt a human security approach, they often misjudge the complex and long-term commitment required of such an approach. There is also the potential for such an agenda to be manipulated to justify questionable courses of action. These issues frame an analysis of six recent case studies.