Executive Summary

This paper is an update on the IMF’s external communications strategy, prepared in response to the Executive Board’s request, expressed at its March 5, 2003 meeting, for more regular discussions on this topic. A further review of communications strategy may be warranted within a year or two to take into account the implications of the strategic review of the IMF’s future directions that is currently underway.

This paper addresses a broad range of communication objectives and activities related to the IMF’s core functions and responsibilities. The main thesis is that an important means of further strengthening the IMF’s external communication in the period ahead will be better coordination and integration of communication with the IMF’s policies and operations, especially in country work and for major policy initiatives and issues. Options for implementing the IMF’s existing external communications strategy that can be accommodated within existing budget limits are highlighted for discussion.

Transparency and communication have become central to the IMF’s mission. The IMF has greatly increased the transparency of its own policies and operations in recent years, with the IMF’s external website being the primary vehicle for dissemination. In addition, the IMF has increased its emphasis on effective communication as a factor in engendering national ownership of policy programs and in enhancing the persuasiveness—vis-à-vis the public as well as officials—of the economic policy advice that the IMF provides. Good communication is also a tool for learning through listening. Nearly everyone associated with the IMF shares responsibility for considering the communications implications of IMF policy decisions and IMF policy advice to members, and participating in and fostering communication to support its decisions and counsel.

Policy development—IMF staff increasingly reach out to diverse groups when preparing policy proposals and reviewing policy experience. IMF management’s engagements with legislators, CSOs, the private sector, and others contribute to mutual understanding and learning on major policy issues. The communications effort may need to focus more in the near term on the extensive policy and country work for the benefit of low-income members and how the IMF’s work contributes to progress toward achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

The IMF is committed to publishing staff research on the international monetary system and other topics—the World Economic Outlook and the Global Financial Stability Report are the main vehicles through which the IMF publicizes its global surveillance findings and draws attention to analyses related to critical policy issues. Communication about the role and functions of the IMF remains important because the mission of the IMF is still not as readily recognizable or understood as that of development banks and some other international organizations.

Country and regional surveillance—public understanding of the role of surveillance remains limited and surveillance policy messages reach only a few people, although publishing of documents related to surveillance is already extensive. Outreach has increased and is becoming an integral part of the country and regional surveillance process.

Outreach is perhaps most essential in the context of IMF-supported programs. Staff should aim to discuss communications issues with the authorities as part of the country dialogue aimed at promoting country ownership of economic policies. Staff recognize the need to do more to encourage country ownership of IMF-supported programs in Africa, to increase understanding of IMF policy recommendations, and to redress the sometimes unfavorable image of the IMF. Recently, the African Department, in consultation with the External Relations Department, formulated an external communications strategy for the region.

Standards and codes (S&C) assessments feed into the surveillance process and are also useful for identifying technical assistance (TA) needs. The principal communication effort with respect to S&C is devoted to encouraging awareness and implementation in member countries.

Statistics and data dissemination—the IMF has stepped up publication and distribution of statistical manuals and guides in multiple languages in order to promote standardized methodologies and policies. Demand from external audiences for statistical data is also significant and increasing.

Capacity building and effective communication are mutual reinforcing—training of member country officials contributes importantly both to capacity building and to facilitating Article IV consultations and program negotiations. One- or two-day seminars or short courses to familiarize legislators, CSOs, and the media with the analytical frameworks that underlie the IMF’s policy analysis and advice can often have a large payoff.

The IMF has improved its internal communication since 2002, including between management and staff. Better “horizontal” communication could be achieved across departments, and between headquarters and resident representatives and other IMF offices overseas.

I. Introduction

1. For more than thirty years following the Bretton Woods Conference in July 1944, the IMF’s approach to external communication can fairly be described as “communicate as little as possible.” The IMF published little apart from research papers, legal volumes, and its Annual Report, and had just one press officer. As the IMF faced new challenges and controversies in the 1970s in responding to oil price shocks to the global economy and persistent macroeconomic and structural problems in many member countries, the merits of communication became better appreciated. The first staff report on the World Economic Outlook (WEO) was published in 1981, and a small External Relations Department (EXR) was formed the same year for the purpose of expanding and improving the IMF’s media relations and publications.

2. The late 1990s brought a sea change as the IMF embraced transparency, particularly in the wake of emerging market crises of 1994-98, and began publishing voluminous data, documents, research, and explanatory material, especially on the Internet. Press conferences and interviews were held much more often. Discussions with civil society organizations (CSOs), labor union representatives, and others outside of government or academic circles, which had been infrequent, became common. Following the Asian financial crises of 1997-98, during which the IMF was closely followed (and frequently criticized) in the mass media and elsewhere, the Executive Board in 1998 held its first-ever meeting on the IMF’s external relations strategy. The discussion prompted the IMF to retain an outside consulting firm to make recommendations on ways to improve the IMF’s public image and broaden understanding of its responsibilities and achievements. A second Board discussion on external relations, focused on budgetary issues, was held in 2000.

3. External communications strategy was reviewed by the Board in detail in 2003 on the basis of a paper prepared by EXR. As a further mark of increasing IMF transparency, the paper and a Public Information Notice (PIN) summarizing the Board discussion were posted on the IMF’s external website (www.imf.org).¹ This paper responds to the Board’s request, as noted in the PIN, for regular discussions of the IMF’s external communications strategy and its implementation. The paper is largely an update on implementation, recognizing that a more extensive review may be useful following completion of the strategic review of the IMF’s future directions that is underway.

4. The IMF’s external communications challenges have changed, but not necessarily diminished, since the first Board discussion was held in 1998. Public interest in the IMF (as measured by media reports, for example, in 2004—see Figure 1 below and Section III of the accompanying Background Paper) remains higher than before 1998, but is well below the peaks reached in 1998-99 and 2002. In the current environment the challenges at the global level are (1) how to publicize and encourage dialogue regarding the core work of the IMF in support of financial stability, open economies, sustainable economic growth, high employment, and poverty reduction—work which, by its nature, is seldom headline- grabbing—and (2) how to explain the IMF’s role and responsibilities when world attention is diffused across a myriad of national, regional, and global issues. The challenges at the country level are (1) how to present IMF analysis and explain policy advice clearly and persuasively to those who are not specialists, and (2) how to participate effectively (but selectively, given resource constraints) and enhance the dialogue on policy issues with those who are not government officials. This paper is intended to facilitate Executive Board discussion of these topics by describing and reviewing ongoing communications work within the framework provided by the classification of IMF staff activities for internal budgeting purposes. The paper highlights options for implementing the IMF’s existing external communications strategy that can be accommodated within existing budget limits. Depending upon the conclusions of the overall IMF strategic review, consideration might be given to undertaking a more fundamental review of communications strategy within a year or two.

View Full Size

References to the IMF in Publications

Citation: Policy Papers 2005, 042; 10.5089/9781498331869.007.A001

Source: Factiva. Keywords used for the search were “FMI” or “IMF” or “IWF.”

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

II. Overview of IMF Communication Strategy and Goals

5. The way the IMF works has changed. Transparency and communication have become central to the IMF’s mission. The IMF and its members have found that greater transparency and more effective communication form part of the basis for efficient markets, good governance, national ownership of policies, and sound policymaking.² For its part, the IMF has greatly increased the transparency of its own policies and operations in recent years. In addition, the IMF has increased its emphasis on effective communication as a factor in engendering national ownership of policy programs and in enhancing the persuasiveness—vis-à-vis the public as well as officials—of the economic policy advice that the IMF provides through its surveillance, program design, technical assistance, and research work. Good communication not only transmits information and policy positions, but is also a tool for learning through listening.

6. Outreach—especially establishing constructive dialogue beyond the circle of economic and financial officials—can build trust and increase mutual learning between the IMF and its many interlocutors. An example of this at the global level is interaction between the IMF’s relatively new International Capital Markets Department (ICM) and market participants and analysts. A key objective of ICM is to bring information and judgments about capital market developments to bear on the IMF’s surveillance and crisis management work. This requires maintaining liaison with private capital market participants, national authorities, official forums, academia, and the general public, with the aims of information gathering, debating issues, explaining IMF staff assessments and the Board’s policy views, and building support for the IMF’s policy decisions and proposals. Another example is the outreach entailed in the IMF’s effort, led by the Monetary and Financial Systems Department (MFD), to strengthen its financial sector surveillance work, including the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) conducted jointly with the World Bank, Financial Soundness Indicators (FSIs), Offshore Financial Centers (OFCs), and the Anti-Money-Laundering/Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) initiatives.

7. At the country level, the IMF is increasingly recognizing the benefit of engaging a wide variety of groups in order to better inform its analysis, to communicate the goals of its operational work, and to promote support for sound policies. The African Department (AFR) recently developed a strategic approach that will incorporate external communication into the department’s day-to-day operations. The strategy involves delivering messages on the IMF’s role in low-income countries as well as supporting the implementation of sound policy at the country level. AFR’s strategic approach recognizes that a substantial change in culture and attitude toward external communications is required to make it an integral part of country work. Although AFR’s strategic approach is still in its early stages, it may offer a model that could be applied more widely in the IMF.³

8. Improving IMF external communication should be understood as part of the job of nearly everyone associated with the IMF, from Governors through the Executive Board to management and staff, and not just EXR’s responsibility. Governors, Executive Directors, and country authorities have critical roles not only in the policy dialogue and in building support for sound policies, but also in supporting the IMF publicly within their countries and constituencies, including by helping to correct impressions created by erroneous reports about IMF activities. The Managing Director is the IMF’s primary spokesperson, and his frequent public speeches, press briefings, and media interviews establish overall direction and tone for all IMF communications.⁴ The Deputy Managing Directors complement and reinforce the IMF’s messages through their own speaking engagements and media contacts. EXR's main role is to serve as a strategic communications advisor and facilitator for the Board, management, and other departments. EXR has the expertise and tools to help (see Section II of the accompanying Background Paper on “Integrating IMF Communications and Operations: Responsibilities of the External Relations Department (EXR)”), but nearly everyone associated with the IMF shares responsibility for considering the communication implications of IMF policy decisions and IMF policy advice to members, and for participating in and fostering communication to support its decisions and counsel. This sharing of responsibility also highlights the importance of effective internal communication and coordination for raising the effectiveness of external communication.

9. Effective communication requires, among other things, careful planning, clear assignment of responsibilities, and coordination of both substance and process. The IMF’s efforts to strengthen its external and internal communications is in line with a global trend in large organizations. Such organizations have increasingly recognized that good communication is a strategic management function that contributes to, and is often essential for, success. Focused external and internal communications that convey critical information and priorities clearly can contribute to tangible improvements in an organization’s productivity, cost-effectiveness, and institutional reputation. Strengthening external and internal communications at the IMF to align them with best practice will require making communication planning an integral part of the work programs of the Board, management, and departments.⁵

10. An important means of further strengthening the IMF’s external communication in the period ahead will be better coordination and integration of communication with the IMF’s policies and operations, especially in country work and for major policy initiatives and issues. This goal bears consideration in the IMF’s medium-term strategy and its resource planning and allocation. This paper suggests some ways in which communication can be incorporated more systematically into the IMF’s plans and operations, but does not request that additional resources be provided for communications purposes in the IMF’s administrative budget. The working assumption of this paper is that communication can be improved through reallocations of resources and through the greater efficiency that better communication planning should yield. If departments face shortfalls or mismatches between available resources and communication plans, they may need to reconsider and rebalance priorities (including communication priorities) and/or resolve the issues in their annual business plans and budget submissions.

III. A Framework for Reviewing IMF Communication Strategy

11. For planning and budgeting purposes the IMF groups its primary outputs and activities into five categories:

• Policy development, global (or “multilateral”) surveillance, and operation of the international monetary system, including research related to these topics;

• Country (“bilateral”) and regional surveillance;

• IMF financial support for policy programs (“use of IMF resources”);

• Standard setting and statistical information; and

• Capacity-building services—mainly training and technical assistance.

12. The IMF’s communication activities (which are “intermediate” outputs) are of four general types:⁶

• Media relations—communicating through the media via articles and letters-to-the-editor as well as briefings, interviews, and other contacts with journalists;

• Publishing—encompassing both electronic (mainly websites) and hardcopy products;⁷

• Outreach—communicating with legislators, civil society organizations (CSOs), the private sector, and the general public;⁸ and

• Internal communication—comprising internal communication that contributes both directly to good external communication and indirectly by increasing efficient management of the IMF and the productivity and motivation of its staff.⁹

13. Different types of communication have special characteristics bearing upon their effectiveness and cost. They include both direct and indirect communications—an article published by the IMF in one of its own outlets, for example, is direct (the text is fully controlled by the IMF), but a press briefing is indirect (what appears in the media depends upon the reporter and editor). Some types of communication are more readily targeted to specific recipients/respondents than others—information posted on a public Internet site is untargeted, whereas an e-mail to a selected addressee is a targeted communication (although it may be forwarded to others). The cost per reader/listener of communication activities varies greatly—it is generally lowest for website postings (excluding authoring, editing, and translation costs), followed by most forms of media relations (a single op-ed, press release, or briefing can potentially reach millions of people), followed by print publication costs and, at the most costly end of the scale, most forms of face-to-face outreach, including conferences, seminars, and meetings, which often include high travel costs for the IMF as well as staff time. But effectiveness also varies by communication type, and often directly with cost—generally, more learning takes place in face-to-face interactive meetings supplemented by print materials, as the experience of the IMF Institute (INS) and other training programs attests. By contrast, information that is posted on a website may not attract many readers, and, like many mass media items, may not have much impact if the reader is not keenly interested in the topic. There are major tradeoffs, therefore, among directness of communication, targeting, cost, and effectiveness. This paper will highlight some of the tradeoffs that should be considered when setting IMF communication priorities and allocating resources across and within the primary output categories.

14. The next five sections of this paper examine how external communications activities—media relations, publishing, and outreach—contribute to the IMF’s five primary outputs.¹⁰ Internal communication is then examined in a separate section (Section IX). The concluding section (Section X) summarizes issues identified in the previous chapters and suggests ways to improve and prioritize communication efforts in order to better serve the medium-term goal of close coordination and integration of communication activities with the IMF’s policies and operations, within resource constraints.¹¹

IV. Communication about IMF Policies, Global Surveillance, and Research on the International Monetary System

V. Country and Regional Surveillance

35. The IMFC Communiqué of October 2, 2004, called upon the IMF to “strengthen communications to markets and the public of the IMF’s policy messages while preserving its role as a candid and confidential advisor.” The 2004 Biennial Surveillance Review (BSR) emphasized increasing the “persuasiveness” of IMF surveillance. One of the main BSR findings is that active dissemination efforts have raised the visibility of surveillance in recent years, but public understanding of the role of surveillance remains limited and surveillance policy messages reach only a few people, even in countries that publish IMF documents. The BSR suggested, among other things, that (1) the role in the IMF’s dissemination strategy of the Board’s summings up of its discussions could be reconsidered, together with potential changes to existing communication vehicles (especially PINs); (2) there may be benefits in developing a more active outreach program to explain to various audiences the broad purposes and modalities of surveillance and disseminate the key findings of individual surveillance rounds (e.g., through events organized in partnership with local research institutions);¹⁹ and (3) best practices on communication activities could be disseminated more actively within the institution. It should also be noted, however, that even the most sophisticated communication strategies cannot compensate for a shortage of pointed messages in some of the surveillance documents themselves.

36. Publishing related to surveillance is already extensive. The IMF publishes about 75 percent of country papers on its external website (www.imf.org).²⁰ Books, papers, and articles containing information related to country surveillance are also published. Often monographs are published based upon documents originally prepared for the Executive Board. Region-specific pamphlets are sometimes produced (for example, the six on Middle Eastern and North African regional topics produced in English and Arabic in 2003 for the Dubai Annual Meetings). The IMF Survey publishes country-specific articles based on staff reports or selected issues papers. Articles have appeared on, for example, Belgium, China, Germany, Spain, and the United States. F&D carries major overviews of regional economies (for example, the Middle East in the March 2003 issue, Latin America and Africa in September 2003, and Europe in June 2004) as well as spotlighting individual economies (for example, China in December 2003, and the United States in March 2004). The paper Managing Oil Wealth: The Case of Azerbaijan, which was translated and published in Russian, is an example of reaching out to readers in non-English-speaking countries. The paper provides policy advice based upon the experience of various countries in managing oil revenue, and should prove useful for other oil-producing countries in central Asia.

37. A working group of Executive Directors and staff is being established to examine the issue of non-English-language publication. It will reconsider the criteria used to select material to be published in non-English languages on the website, and the resource requirements for the translating, reviewing, and posting that would be involved in any change in current practices. This working group will examine the results of a recent pilot project that involved the offer by EXR to post certain key country-related material (PINs, country reports, and mission concluding statements) in languages other than English on the external website, provided that this would not involve additional translation costs, has elicited little internal demand for postings, and little usage of the material posted (see Box 1 in Section IV of the Background Paper). A survey recently conducted on the website also indicated that additional material in languages other than English was not an especially high priority for users (see Table 4 in Section IV of the Background Paper). EXR will review how to go forward after the working group reports.

38. Outreach has also increased and is becoming an integral part of the country and regional surveillance process—in both nonprogram and program countries. While the focus of Article IV consultations is on communication between member country officials and staff mission teams, interaction with legislators, the private sector, labor unions, faith-based organizations, and other CSOs has become more important for improving the IMF’s understanding of specific issues as well as for explaining IMF views. The Western Hemisphere Department (WHD), for example, reports that missions to and resident representatives in most Latin American countries now meet frequently with legislators and CSOs during the Article IV process. MFD staff also have extensive contacts with private bankers and market participants in member countries when conducting financial sector assessments and in other financial sector surveillance activities. In some instances—for example, interactions during 2004 by European Department (EUR) staff with labor union federations in Bulgaria, France, and Serbia and Montenegro—Article IV reports have spurred contacts and thus enhanced dialogue.

39. Country-specific and regional seminars and workshops with national legislators provide an opportunity to discuss the IMF’s policy recommendations and country and regional situations. Examples include a seminar in Yaoundé in March 2003 for Cameroonian legislators; a seminar in Accra in April 2003 for Ghana’s parliamentarians; a seminar in Beirut in March 2004 for parliamentarians from Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and West Bank and Gaza Strip; seminars for legislators from Lao PDR and Vietnam in March 2004; a seminar at the Joint Vienna Institute (JVI) in April 2004 for parliamentarians from transition economies; and a seminar in Abu Dhabi in December 2004 for parliamentarians and members of consultative councils from countries belonging to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). IMF-sponsored public events on country-specific and regional surveillance issues also offer a way to engage policymakers, think tank representatives, private sector actors, the general public, and CSO representatives.

40. Broadening outreach remains a challenge in some countries. While IMF departments have developed relationships with various nonofficial interlocutors in many countries, there remain many others where such interaction is limited. EXR has taken steps in recent years to assist area departments in their outreach efforts. A Guide for Staff Relations with Civil Society Organizations²¹ was prepared with extensive input from CSOs. Looking ahead, there is a need to broaden outreach systematically in close consultation with country teams and departments’ immediate offices. A first step would be for departments to devise their own external communications blueprints, in consultation with EXR, and to identify immediate needs that can be met with current resources.

41. Mission concluding statements, press conferences, press releases, and PINs are used to publicize and explain surveillance operations and inform markets. The IMF’s Media Briefing Center is used to disseminate web-streamed press briefings accessible only to journalists, press briefings/statements at the conclusion of Article IV missions, and PINs issued following the completion of Article IV consultations by the Executive Board. EUO maintains relations with the European media, as does OAP with the Japanese and other East Asian media. Op-eds and letters to the editor are often employed by country teams to explain country-specific and regional issues—recent examples have included Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Uruguay, and Zambia.

42. Training staff (primarily area department mission chiefs and resident representatives) in media relations has contributed to more effective communication with journalists in many countries and, staff believe, to more accurate reporting on surveillance and other IMF activities. Such relationships have also facilitated placement of IMF-authored op-eds. EXR continues to work closely with HRD on staff training in media relations and other important communications skills. Given innovations in how information is delivered to the general public, including through the broadcast media, staff training is likely to evolve as effective outreach calls for new skills. Staff media relations training, which is presently restricted to mission chiefs, resident representatives, and other staff involved in high-level interaction with external communities, could usefully be extended to other staff designated by departments, if resources permit. Its scope could, moreover, be broadened to cover communications beyond media relations.

VI. Communication in the Context of IMF-Supported Programs

43. Outreach is perhaps most essential in program countries. The 2002 Conditionality Guidelines²² indicate that staff should urge and assist country authorities to broaden ownership of policies. In low-income PRGF countries, the process of preparing a PRSP provides a mechanism for public consultation by the authorities, although that mechanism should be strengthened in some PRGF countries. In countries drawing upon the IMF’s General Resources Account (GRA), there is no established mechanism for such consultation, and practice varies greatly. In all cases, if a country’s authorities fully own their program, they should be expected to explain measures and their rationales to the public themselves; if, by contrast, ownership is weak, the authorities may not welcome the transparency needed for the IMF to take the lead in explaining measures to the public. The tension between confidentiality in policy discussions and transparency is particularly acute during program negotiations and in other situations where the authorities may be especially reticent and the public may demand more frequent and candid information.

44. Staff should aim to discuss communications issues with the authorities as part of the country dialogue aimed at promoting country ownership of economic policies. Mission teams and resident representatives (see Box 2) increasingly devote time and resources to outreach as programs evolve—especially in low-income countries, in the context of the PRSP process. These staff members are in a position not only to explain IMF views and policy advice, but also to listen to the concerns of nonofficials and to help shape IMF conditionality in a way that strengthens country ownership of programs, and they can also identify and sometimes mobilize domestic support for constructive institutional changes (e.g., reforms of certain regulations or laws) that are not required as part of IMF conditionality.²³ Outreach in the program context requires an ability for rapid response as well as sensitivity to the evolving situation, and comprehensive follow-up over time. In many instances, the most effective way to reach a broad audience is through articles in major newspapers, but preparing timely articles can be difficult because the macroeconomic and policy context can change as a program evolves. Direct contact with nonofficials can be especially difficult for program negotiating missions to fit into their schedules. Consequently, a steady outreach effort—often involving a resident representative, if present in the country—is often necessary.

45. Implementation of policies needed for program success often depends upon legislative actions.²⁴ Country and regional seminars and workshops with legislators provide opportunities to discuss the program and contribute thereby to a better understanding of the issues by legislators and IMF staff and to strengthening national ownership of adjustment and reform efforts and the adoption of related legislation. In October 2004 EXR representatives joined with staff from other departments to conduct a seminar in Tanzania that allowed for extensive exchanges on country-specific questions (see Box 3).

46. The IMF has been conscious of the need to do more to encourage country ownership of IMF-supported programs in Africa, to increase understanding of IMF policy recommendations, and to redress the sometimes unfavorable image of the IMF. Outreach has been extensive in Africa (see Box 4). The Managing Director and his two predecessors, and the Deputy Managing Directors, have made many visits to Africa to explain the IMF’s policies and solicit the views of the authorities, legislators, the private sector, and CSOs. Recently, AFR, in consultation with EXR, formulated an external communications strategy for the region. The strategy will be guided by a number of principles that will be used by AFR in developing region-wide messages and by country teams as the context for country strategies. While some of the principles were specific to the particular needs of the region, many are relevant to or could be adapted for use in other regions. In summary, the principles included:

• External communications will be an integral part of the department’s operational work and performance in communications will be reflected in assessments of staff.

• External communications is an investment that, over time, boosts public understanding of, and support for, sound policies and enriches staff understanding of issues and country circumstances. Reflecting this, external communications will be conducted on a proactive basis, and staff will be prepared to respond to criticism in a timely manner.

• AFR will take the responsibility for external communications within Africa drawing on the expertise of EXR. This responsibility encompasses communications with all groups—whether local or international—operating in the country and on all issues raised by these groups.

• The department and country teams will listen to the views of interest groups—both official and unofficial—and will respond to those views by establishing substantive dialogue.

• An AFR external communications team will coordinate the department’s strategy. Significant external communications events will be conducted within a departmental framework to ensure adherence to departmental priorities, consistency of messages, and the allocation of adequate resources.

• The country mission team will be the primary organizational unit to integrate external communications into economists’ work. Country external communications strategies will be coordinated within the departmental framework.

• Country teams will discuss with the national authorities the importance of communicating their reform strategies and policy measures including through the PRSP process.

47. Outreach in the PRGF countries presents particular challenges, as well as opportunities, because interaction with legislators, labor unions, the private sector, and CSOs takes on special significance in the context of the PRSP process. The participatory process of the PRSP is predicated on close interaction between the member government and civil society. IMF staff should show willingness to be an active partner in areas of IMF expertise, such as explaining the options for macroeconomic policies and encouraging civil society groups to get involved in the PRSP process, while at the same time taking care to respect and preserve the leadership of the country itself in the process. Too active an involvement may be seen as too intrusive and interpreted as an effort by the IMF to impose its preferences on the process. Too little involvement, and the IMF may be criticized for being unwilling to accept civil society input on the crucial macroeconomic aspects of the PRSP. In general, outreach activities will be more extensive in PRGF countries than in other countries, with a large part of the burden of this work being borne by the resident representative. Staff should be prepared to engage early in the PRSP process and demonstrate a willingness to discuss macroeconomic options and alternative policies in an open and receptive manner.

48. Many documents related to country programs are posted on the IMF’s external website under the IMF’s Transparency Policy. Many print publications also cover aspects of country programs supported by the IMF. The IMF Survey often carries country policy stories. The IMF’s 2004 Annual Report presented for the first time summaries of how the IMF had helped particular member countries through policy advice, use of IMF resources, and technical assistance.

VII. Standard Setting and Statistical Information

VIII. Capacity Building and Communication

IX. Internal Communication in Support of External Communication

63. The IMF’s attention to internal communication has increased since 2002, reflecting management’s interest in, and the Board’s support for, strengthening internal communication with staff as well as the coordination of external communications.²⁸ This effort was further encouraged by the results of a Staff Survey conducted in 2003.

64. A new Office of the Managing Director (OMD) website to be located on the Intranet is in preparation. The new website will contain pages for each of the four members of management that include their biographical information, speeches, press releases, and messages to staff. The new website will also have a channel for staff to send feedback and suggestions to Management. Management has also sought opportunities to interact informally with IMF staff in various forums, as well as increasing its messages to staff on key issues.

65. Internal communication includes preparing and disseminating information tailored for staff. Several departments circulate reports and summaries of external developments of interest for staff. ICM’s Global Markets Monitor, for example, provides Executive Directors, management, and staff with a daily summary of market developments together with features on topics of interest. Morning Press provides Executive Directors, management, and staff with a daily early morning summary of media reports of news and commentaries of interest to the IMF. Current Account and Staff News are internal newsletters prepared by EXR for IMF staff (see Section VII of the Background Paper). Questions in the News was developed and is maintained as a resource for staff to provide easily accessible responses to topical questions on IMF policies and country operations (it has also been adapted for public use, and is available on the IMF’s external website).

66. Although the IMF has improved its internal communication, including between management and staff, much remains to be done. Better “horizontal” communication within the IMF could be achieved: (1) across departments, so that staff have a better understanding of emerging policy issues and relevant activities in other countries and regions (for example, briefing sessions on selected topics could be organized by functional departments for staff in area departments as needed);²⁹ and (2) between headquarters and resident representatives and other IMF offices overseas, perhaps using audio-visual communication tools more extensively than at present.

X. Issues for Discussion

67. The thesis of this paper is that a key medium-term objective of the IMF’s communication strategy should be better coordination and integration of communication activites with the IMF’s policies and operations, especially for country work and major policy issues. This review of how communication contributes to the IMF’s policy development and research, surveillance, country programs, and capacity building has identified some steps that could be taken, beyond what is already being done, to achieve this goal. As noted in the Introduction, the outcome of the strategic review of the IMF may have implications for the objectives and modalities of the communications strategy. Accordingly, Executive Directors may wish to revisit these questions in a year or two.

68. Developing and implementing regional and country communication plans: area departments and EXR would collaborate on both design and execution, consulting and drawing upon other departments and Executive Directors as appropriate. AFR has taken the initiative to develop a comprehensive regional external communication plan and is putting in place a structure and process, with EXR participation, to ensure its implementation (see paragraph 46 above). Other area departments have taken less comprehensive but significant steps in the same direction. For example, WHD, in close coordination with EXR, developed in late 2003 a country communications strategy for Uruguay, which was implemented in 2004; the strategy was intended to serve as a pilot experience for establishing a more disciplined and effective approach to communication. Do Executive Directors support the proposal to encourage area departments to develop regional and country communication plans, drawing upon the examples set by AFR and WHD?

69. Communication planning for surveillance: Do Directors agree on the importance of planning by area departments, with EXR, FAD, ICM, MFD, RES, and others, to convey surveillance findings more effectively within their regions as part of communication plans (such plans could highlight the topics/issues/geographical locations that the IMF intends to focus on within a time period, what dialogue/messages are proposed for specific groups, and the role to be played by different departments)? Do Directors consider that the IMF’s global and regional surveillance focuses sufficiently on gathering information and views, relative to explaining the IMF’s own positions? Do Executive Directors agree with the suggestion to place additional emphasis on communication related to the IMF’s global, regional, and country surveillance, relying primarily upon IMF missions and resident representatives, supported by EXR? What role do Executive Directors see for themselves in disseminating surveillance messages within their constituencies?

70. Communication in the context of IMF-supported country programs: Should additional outreach be undertaken in program countries, and, if so, how, given resource constraints? Additional media relations and outreach seems especially needed in program countries, and within program countries to legislators, labor unions, and leading NGOs, as well as journalists, but such efforts are likely to require resident representatives and/or IMF missions to expend additional resources. Emphasizing such outreach may mean, therefore, that other types or levels of communication, or other IMF work, would need to be scaled back in order to free up resources. Do Directors agree that media relations and outreach in program countries should be increased? Would Executive Directors support reallocation of resources to support more communication activity of this nature? What roles do Executive Directors see for themselves in communications in program countries? Do Executive Directors consider that it would be useful, resources permitting, to monitor and report systematically upon IMF outreach in program countries?

71. Developing and implementing communication plans for the IMF’s major ongoing policies and special policy initiatives: departments and EXR would collaborate on both design and execution, consulting and drawing upon other departments and Executive Directors as appropriate (explicit early identification by management and the Board of communication objectives and related themes for specific issues). This has been done on an ad hoc basis in some cases (see paragraph 15 above). Do Directors agree that a coordinated IMF communications initiative should be undertaken in conjunction with the review of progress toward achieving the MDGs (see Box 1)? In general, should a section on communication activities be included in all major policy papers presented to the Board?

72. Strengthening mutual learning through outreach: fostering open but structured dialogue on key issues with a wide range of interested parties and following up on such dialogue systematically. Do Directors agree that the current level of communications effort devoted to dialogue with most global CSOs is appropriate, but that more focus on dialogue at the national level would be desirable, particularly with legislators, including umbrella groups of legislators?

73. Communicating better internally in support of external communication: “vertical” communication between management and staff is improving, although more work on this still seems needed, and greater effort also appears needed to improve “horizontal” communication across departments. Do Executive Directors agree that improving “horizontal communication” is a priority for the period ahead? How do Directors see their own participation in this effort?

74. Changing the incentive structure: staff (especially resident representatives and mission chiefs) should think of external communication as “part of the job,” not a marginal, risky activity to be avoided when possible. Notwithstanding media training, mission chiefs and resident representatives are probably excessively cautious when talking to the press for fear that minor misstatements could adversely affect their careers. What types of measures would Executive Directors support to give greater incentives (or fewer disincentives) to staff to undertake effective communication in the field?

75. Communication related to IMF research, statistics, standards and codes, training, and technical assistance. Should the IMF maintain approximately the current level of communications (including publications) related to these areas, or is there a case for somewhat more (or less) in particular areas? For example, do Directors consider that the IMF’s TA missions and experts should undertake more outreach activities? Should communication training for IMF staff be broadened, as suggested in Section VIII.A? Could fewer resources be used in some areas, perhaps in publishing, and reallocated to other communications work?

76. Communication about IMF roles and functions: Most of the publishing activity related to explaining the IMF in general is not new work but updating material to reflect changes. Responding to queries from journalists, CSOs, and the general public and conducting briefings for visitors to headquarters absorb significant resources. Economies can be, and are, realized in various ways, including by posting frequently requested information on the external website. Do Directors consider that the IMF devotes about the right amount of effort to providing general information about the IMF globally, or should some reduction be considered, in order to reallocate resources to higher priority communication work?