Combined strategy day session

© UPU 2013 – All rights reserved© UPU 2013 – All rights reserved
Combined Strategy Day session
Joint meeting of:
1. The Programme and Budget Prioritisation and Allocation Project Group
2. The Monitoring and Evaluation Project Group
3. The Future Strategy Project Group
DCSC.PS
Berne, 10 April 2014

© UPU 2013 – All rights reserved
Strategy Day
Part I – General items for the three groups
Led by Andrew Nongogo – South Africa

Provisional agenda
Part I – General items for the three groups
1. Opening of the meeting and adoption of the agenda
2. CA Committee 3 (Strategy) Work Plan
3. a. CA Committee 3 meeting held in November 2013
b. CA Committee 3 meeting held in Bucharest in February 2014
Part II – Items for the Programme and Budget Prioritisation and
Allocation Project Group
4. a. Prioritisation mechanism, process and criteria review
b. Making optimum use of the Doha lowest priority process
1. Opening of the meeting and adoption of the
agenda
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 1.Rev 1)

Provisional agenda (cont.)
Part II – Items for the Programme and Budget Prioritisation and
Allocation Project Group (Cont.)
5. Development of the business plan concept
Part III – Items for the Monitoring and Evaluation Project Group
6. Measurement of Doha Postal Strategy implementation: performance
indicators, evaluation and reporting
7. Towards the greatest postal convergence? Continuous benchmarking
of global postal economic conditions
agenda
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 1.Rev 1)

Provisional agenda (cont.)
Part IV – Items for the Future Strategy Project Group
8. a. Draft Istanbul Postal Strategy: development process
b. Review of Doha Postal Strategy and input into future Istanbul
Postal Strategy
9. Big postal data and strategy: building a data-driven Universal Postal
Union
10. 2014 Strategy Conference: structure and content
Part V – General items for the three groups
11. Any other business
agenda
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 1.Rev 1)

Decision expected
 Agree on the agenda
agenda
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 1.Rev 1)

Aim of the document:
• To give an overview of the 2013-2016 work plan for CA C3 and its
3 Project Groups:
 Programme and Budget Prioritisation and Allocation Project
Group (PBPG)
 Monitoring and Evaluation Project Group (MEPG)
 Future Strategy Project Group FSPG)
CA Committee 3 – Main objectives/goals:
• Take decisions on all matters referred to the Committee by the CA
C3 Project Groups
• Review and recommend improvements, if any, to the process
designed to allow Congress to provide the CA with guidance on the
prioritisation of activities
• Ensure the best allocation of resources to the projects and activities
to be included in the Programme and Budget
2. CA Committee 3 work plan
(CA C 3 SD 2013.2-Doc 2.Rev 1)

CA Committee 3 – Main objectives/goals: (Continued)
• Monitor the implementation of the Doha Postal Strategy
 Determine means of implementing the DPS goals and programmes
 Regularly examine the state of implementation of the DPS
 Support member countries in the implementation of the DPS
 Regularly disseminate the results achieved to Union member
countries
• Carry out strategic planning activities
 Provide advice on current strategic planning methodologies
 Coordinate analysis work on the postal environment
 Develop quantifiable and verifiable information about member
countries’ attainment of the DPS goals
 Formulate directives and recommendations that will form the basis
of the future Istanbul Postal Strategy
(CA C 3 SD 2013.2-Doc 2.Rev 1)

Decisions expected
 Provide input/comments, if any, on the work plan
 Take note of the work plan
(CA C 3 WS 2014.1-Doc 2.Rev 1 )

Aim of the document (3a):
• To provide a summary of the discussions that took place during the
CA C 3 plenary meeting held on 8 November 2013
Future Strategy Project Group
 Draft Istanbul Postal Strategy: methodology and development
process
 Future strategy – Nairobi Postal Strategy implementation:
lessons learned
 Proposed 2014 Strategy Conference: structure and content
3a. CA Committee 3 – meeting held in
October 2013
(CA 2013.2-Doc 9)

Programme and Budget Prioritisation and Allocation Project
Group
 Lowest-priority mechanism and process review
 Draft Programme and Budget 2014
 Development of the content and structure of the Doha Business Plan
Monitoring and Evaluation Project Group
 Economic trends and indicators impacting the postal sector
 Measurement of the Doha Postal Strategy implementation
 Regional key performance indicators
 Doha Postal Strategy implementation: reporting processes and
methods
October 2013
(CA 2013.2-Doc 9)

General strategy-related items
 Sharing experiences on corporate strategic planning
 Emerging postal trends and developments
 Big postal data – mining for gold
Annex 1
 Doha Postal Strategy: Original and updated key performance
indicators
Annex 2
 CA Recommendation: Monitoring and evaluation of Doha Postal
Strategy key performance indicators
October 2013
(CA 2013.2-Doc 9)

Decisions expected
 Provide input/comments, if any, on the report of the meeting
October 2013
(CA 2013.2-Doc 9)

Aim of agenda item 3b:
• To provide a summary of the discussions that took place during the
CA C 3 joint Project Group meeting held on 24 and 25 February
2014
• Countries represented: Brazil, Canada, France, Italy, Morocco,
Romania, South Africa, Switzerland, International Bureau
Main items discussed in Bucharest
 Monitoring the implementation of the Doha Postal Strategy
 Reporting procedures and methods
 Improving the “lowest-prioritisation” process by reviewing the
current process and by defining selection criteria
3b. CA Committee 3 – meeting held in
Bucharest in February 2014

Main items discussed in Bucharest (Continued)
 Analysing the content and structure of the Programme and
Budget
 Reviewing the concept of the Doha Business Plan
 Draft Istanbul Postal Strategy: methodology and development
process
 2014 UPU Strategy Conference in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire

Decisions expected
 Provide input/comments, if any, on the report of the meeting
 Vote of “thanks” to Romania Post for having taken the initiative to
organise the highly successful and productive meeting

Strategy working session
Part II – Items for the Programme and Budget
Prioritisation and Allocation Project Group
Led by Ciprian Bolos – Romania

• To assume responsibility for carrying out a review of the
mechanism and process that was designed to allow Congress to
provide the CA with guidance on the prioritisation of activities
Aim of this presentation:
‒ The main goals of this presentation are:
 To provide background information behind the adoption of the
“Lowest-prioritisation” mechanism and process
 To agree to the steps to be taken, if appropriate, to improve the
“Lowest-prioritisation” process
REMINDER: Role of the PBPG:
4a. Prioritisation mechanism, process
and criteria review

Background information:
• 2008 Congress – a proposal was adopted making it mandatory to
add Programme and budget impact (PBI) statements to all
resolutions needing financial resources to implement them
• The PBI tool helps Congress to align resolutions to be approved with
the limited resources available
• Despite the availability of the PBI tool, both the 2008 and 2012
Congresses approved a package of proposals that would require
financial resources exceeding the budget available
• 2008 – No mechanism was available to help Congress to prioritise
activities
• 2012 – Proposal on a lowest-priority mechanism and process was
approved and implemented by the 25th Congress in Doha
and criteria review

Aims of the “Lowest-prioritisation” mechanism and
process:
• To give Congress the possibility to provide guidance to the CA on
how to eliminate budget deficiencies by prioritising activities
• To be noted that proposals identified as having the lowest priority
nevertheless remain valid
• To provide guidance to the CA for the preparation of the annual
Programme and Budgets
• Results of the 2012 “Lowest-prioritisation” process were taken into
account when allocating resources to the 2013 and 2014
Programme and Budgets
and criteria review

Review of the mechanism and proposing improvements
Further questions to be considered:
a) The results of the 2012 “Lowest-prioritisation” process have so far
only been used in allocating resources to the 2013 and 2014
Programme and Budgets and within the IB to prioritize IT related
activities.
What are the other ways that the results of the process should be
used?
b) Now that a process has been developed to allow Congress to
identify lowest-priority activities, would it be useful for the CA to
work on developing and introducing a new mechanism for allowing
Congress to identify, perhaps, the highest-priority activities?
And if so, how??
and criteria review

Defining criteria for harmonising and facilitating the
lowest-prioritisation process
Following questions to be considered:
a) What information do CA members believe should be made available
to Congress to help them identify the lowest priority proposals
b) Should the format of proposals of a general nature be changed in
any way to make to process of identifying lowest priority proposals
easier for member countries?
and criteria review

Decisions expected
 Provide feedback on the subject of the document and reply to the
specific questions posed in the previous slides
 Agree to the next steps
and criteria review

Aims of this document
‒ The main goals of this document are:
 To open a specific channel for discussion between the CA and
the IB on the proposals given the lowest priority at the Doha
Congress
 To invite the IB to provide responses, to be discussed by the
Strategy Day participants, to 4 specific questions related to the
lowest-prioritisation process and results
4b. Making optimum use of the Doha lowest
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

Questions to the IB related to the lowest priority process and
results:
1. How useful did the IB find the results in drafting the 2013 and 2014
budgets? Does the IB feel that the process can be improved in any
way?
2. On which of the 15 lowest priority proposals did the IB make the
biggest budget adjustments? And can the IB provide an updated
version of the respective budget allocations?
3. Given that “Communication” was ranked bottom, what action has
the IB taken to optimize its budget expenditure in this area?
4. What other priorities does the IB see as being a source of possible
adjustments in the future?
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

IB responses:
1. How useful did the IB find the results in drafting the 2013 and 2014 budgets? Does
the IB feel that the process can be improved in any way?
 In principle, very useful since it offered (so far for 2013 and 2014) a tool for
identifying those proposals where resources required to implement them could be
justifiably reviewed downwards
 However, the generally perceived idea that the 10 lowest priority proposals on the list
would be sufficient to eliminate the budget deficit was incorrect since..
• False impression given to , or assumed by member countries, that no resources at
all would be allocated to the 10 lowest priority proposals
• In reality, the budget deficit was eliminated by fine-tuning downwards the total
resources allocated to the 15 lowest priority proposals
 The IB will give some thought to how, if at all, the process can be improved
However, CA members are also invited to suggest any improvements they believe could
be made to the process which is actually designed to give guidance to the CA – not to the
IB!
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

IB responses:
2. On which of the 15 lowest priority proposals did the IB make the biggest budget
adjustments? And can the IB provide an updated version of the respective
budget allocations?
 (See table on next page)
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

Budget allocation (2013–2014) for the
15 lowest priority proposals

IB responses:
3. Given that “Communication” was ranked bottom, what action has the IB taken to
optimize its budget expenditure in this area?
 Communications are continuing to carry out activities with a 22% reduction
in their budget
 So are constantly seeking cost efficiencies
 A 2013 Ernst & Young audit concluded that the Communications Team
managed its resources very effectively
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

IB responses:
4. What other priorities does the IB see as being a source of possible adjustments
in the future?
 Resolution C3/2012: “Process for allowing Congress to provide the CA with
guidance on the prioritisation of activities by supplying it with a list of the
lowest proposals adopted by Congress.
– The IB is not responsible for prioritising activities/resolutions approved by
Congress and is therefore unable to respond to this question since…
– In line with resolution C3/2012, Congress now provides the CA with guidance
on the prioritisation of activities…
– …so, Congress now communicates the list of lowest priority activities to the
CA so that its members can take it into account when considering and
approving UPU Programme and Budgets
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

Decisions expected
 Provide input and comments on the questions and answers related
to the lowest priority process and results
priority process
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 4b)

Introduction
 The new concept of a four year Doha Business plan (DBP) was
submitted to and adopted by the 25th Congress
 As the P&B focuses solely on yearly project targets and budget
allocations, there is a potential risk of losing the big picture
 The aim of the DBP is to give an overview of what is expected of the
UPU in terms of implementation of activities during the 4 year cycle
and to give an overview of the financial means available
 The DBP should also act as an operational link between the strategy
and the yearly P&Bs
5. Development of the Business Plan concept
(Congress-Doc 16.Add 1.Annexe 1.Rev 1)

Current content of the Doha Business Plan
 Section A: Introduction
 Section B: Doha Postal Strategy (DPS) One page overview
 Section C: Overview of DPS goals, programmes and activities to be
implemented and financed (1 Jan. 2013-31 Dec. 2016)
 Section D, E, F: Overview of activities supporting the
implementation of DPS
 Section G: Breakdown of activities by category and number of
activities assigned to each activity
 Section H: Summary of budget needed for implementation of all
activities during the period 2013-2016

Current content of the Doha Business Plan (Continued)
 Section I: Summary of actual budget available for
implementation of all activities during the period
2013-2016
 Attachment 1: Summary of Congress proposals of a general nature
adopted by the 25th Congress
 Attachment 2: Results of the “Prioritisation process” undertaken by
the 25th Congress
 Attachment 3: Organisational summary of the Council of
Administration
 Attachment 4: Organisational summary of the Postal Operations
Council

Reviewing the content and structure of the DBP
 The 25th Congress approved a proposal adding the concept of the
“Business Plan” to the provisions of the General Regulations
 The DBP is a new tool which means that there may be some room
for improving it
 The CA C3 Programme and Budget Project Group should assume
responsibility, in conjunction with the IB, for reviewing the content
and structure of the DBP
 The results of the review should be submitted to the 2014.1 CA
session for information and comment

Questions
1. Do you think that the DBP, in its current format, serves its purpose
or is there room for improving the document?
2. Do you think it would be useful to include “A Market Analysis” in the
Business Plan?
3. What new (if any) information should be included in the document
to make it more useable as a Business Plan?

Decisions expected
 Put forward any comments and suggestions regarding the Doha
Business Plan
 THE PBPG members are invited today to agree work on reviewing
the structure and content of the current Business Plan with the aim
of then making any recommendations, if any, on improving the plan
to the next official meeting of CA Committee 3 (Strategy) in
November 2014

Strategy Day
Part III – Items for the Monitoring and
Evaluation Project Group
Pierre Morin – Canada

6. Measurement of Doha Postal Strategy
implementation: performance indicators,
evaluation and reporting
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Committee 3 – Strategy Day – Doc 6
• Take note of the way the KPIs are presented
and provide feedback on the usefulness of
presenting an overview of the KPIs in such a
format.
• Take note of the summarized comments and
propose any action to be taken to either
modify, delete or add KPIs, as appropriate.
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Since November 2013 Meeting
• CA approved a modified list of KPIs noting the possibility
for future adjustments.
• CA approved recommendation to have each CA and POC
include an agenda item to report on and evaluate their
KPIs.
• The Doha Postal Strategy has been front and centre in
the work of the Union
• Structures of Union bodies are in line with DPS
• There are clear indications that Union bodies are
advancing their work in an integrated way
• The concept of KPIs as percentages is becoming more
and more entrenched with our Union
• Initial KPI views from members were shared
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Bucharest 2014 Meeting Summary
• First opportunity to examine an initial version of today’s
Annex 1 and Annex 2.
• IB gathered historical data to assist POC and CA
Committees during the target setting process.
• A preliminary review of the data revealed that some of the
KPIs do not meet the “Measurable” test.
• Based on this richer set of metrics, members were given
an opportunity to share their views.
• Updated contributions from the IB and members are now
available in both Annex 1 and 2.
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

POC 2014.1 Session
• The unwavering level of engagement within the POC
regarding KPIs has been growing steadfastly.
• Agenda items are not only included in ALL Committees
but they are also on the agendas of almost all Groups
with KPI responsibilities.
• This is new for the organisation.
• We are all learning from the experience and delegates
are already beginning to take advantage of the process
as they set their targets.
• They are the experts in their respective fields and you
will be impressed with some of the feedback coming our
way.
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

S
• Specific
• Stretching
• Simple
• Significant
• Sustainable
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

M
• Measurable
• Manageable
• Meaningful
• Motivational
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

A
• Achievable
• Ambitious
• Acceptable
• Attainable
• Appropriate
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

R
• Relevant
• Reasonable
• Realistic
• Result-based
• Results-oriented
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

T
• Time Bound
• Timely
• Tangible
• Time-based
• Time-oriented
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

• Examine Annex 1 and 2
• Focus on POC KPIs by Doha Postal Strategy Goal
1. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13a, 13b, 13c, 14
2. 20
3. 22a, 22b, 22c, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27a, 27b, 27c
4. 28, 29, 32, 33, 34
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Reporting
• Over the coming months our goal will be to examine
contributions from members, observers and Union Bodies
regarding all DPS KPIs.
• Based on all inputs, we will evaluate and report on our best KPIs
during our upcoming Strategy Conference.
• We will need to take into consideration that the other CA
Committees will not have had a formal opportunity to provide
feedback.
• Magical number 7 + or – 2: limits on our capacity for processing
information. (often referred to as Miller’s Law)
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Future Work Details
• In parallel to work on KPI, we will focus our attention on each
Programme’s possible actions that can be taken by UPU bodies,
designated operators, regulators and governments identified in
the Doha Postal Strategies.
• With 192 member countries and even more designated
operators, the only way to accomplish such a task will be to
reach out to all and request further information on their progress.
• We can now discuss how we go about this.
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Decisions expected:
Meeting participants are invited to:
• Take note of the way in which the KPIs are presented in Annex 1
to doc 6 and provide feedback on the usefulness of presenting the
KPIs in such a way
• Take note of the summarised comments and propose any action
to be taken to either modify, delete or add KPIs, as appropriate
(CA C 3 SD 2014.1-Doc 6)

Towards the greatest postal convergence? Continuous
benchmarking of global postal economic conditions
Presentation at end of slide show
7. Towards the greatest postal convergence?
Continuous benchmarking of global postal
economic conditions

Part IV – Items for the Future Strategy
Project Group
Led by Ahmed Kada – Morocco

Objet:
• Présentation de suggestions relatives au processus à mettre en
place pour préparer la future Stratégie Postale d’Istanbul (SPI).
• Expliquer le contenu, la structure et le contexte du stratégie de
d’Istanbul
La feuille de route Globale des services postaux
Istanbul 2017-2020
Stratégie Postale
8a. Draft Istanbul Postal Strategy:
development process

• Analyse contextuelle/stratégique
• Définition des orientations stratégiques et de la stratégie
• Méthodes et outils nécessaires pour la mise en œuvre de la stratégie
• Cadre stratégique:
• Énoncé de la vision et de la mission de l’UPU
• Focalisation sur 4 buts majeurs et 18 programmes y afférents
• Responsabilités des différentes parties prenantes
• Indicateurs de performance
Processus de planification et étapes à suivre dans la
définition de la Stratégie postale d’Istanbul
development process

Outils pour la mise en œuvre de la stratégie:
– Plan d’action quadriennal
– Programme et budget annuel / Matrices de priorités
• Priorisation intelligente orientée optimisation
– Indicateurs clés de performances / Facteurs Clé des priorisations
• Définir une politique de priorisation efficiente avec adaptation
aux aléas de changement
Temps
Contenu
Budget
development process

Structure de la stratégie d’Istanbul
• Mission et vision
• Analyse contextuelle stratégique
• Ateliers stratégiques au sujet des objectifs et
programmes y afférent
• Processus d’implémentation
development process

Mission et Vision
• La mission de l’UPU reste celle qui est énoncé dans le préambule de la
constitution de l’Union :
 Y-t-il lieu de la réajuster par rapport aux concept des coopératives et
groupe extra-budgétaire relevant de l’UPU
• La vision :
 Veiller à ce que le secteur postal reste en tant que composante
essentielle dans l’économie global
development process

Contexte et concept de la Stratégie Postale d’Istanbul
• Assurer la continuité et la cohérence avec la stratégie de Doha
• Les leçons prises via l’implémentation de la stratégie de Doha
• Conférence stratégique de Côte d’Ivoire
• Contributions participative et matricielle
• Focalisation sur 4 objectifs principaux et 18 programmes y afférents
• PESTLE (tendances globales du secteur postal, politique,
économique, social, technologique, légaux/législatifs et
environnemental)
• SWAT (forces, faiblesses, opportunités et menaces)
development process

Intégration
Packagée avec les
systèmes des différents
parties prenantes
Eléments Clés de la Stratégie Postale d’Istanbul
Physique Financiers
Inclusion
Initiatives gouvernemental
développement social
Innovation
Jeunesse des nouveaux
services et produits
Électronique
Stratégie Postale
d’Istanbul
SPD
SPI
Projectionspatiale
development process

PESTLE ? (Questionnaire à administrer aux membres)
• Evolution du paysage politique et économique international.
• Pouvoir de la technologie, d’Internet et de la clientèle.
• Facteurs humains (migrations, urbanisation, vieillissement).
• Crises mondiales.
• Régulation.
development process

SWOT Analysis: (Questionnaire à administrer aux membres)
Strengths (forces)
• Réseau mondial de 192 pays
• Caractère intergouvernemental
• Réseau intégré tridimensionnel
• Expertise and access to information
Opportunities
• Besoin d’informations et d’expertise concernant le secteur postal
• Croissance du commerce électronique et du commerce
international
• Nécessité d’inclure toutes les couches de la population
• Nouveaux réseaux postaux améliorés dans l’avenir
• Adressage
• Besoins accrus en matière d’interopérabilité et de normes
internationales
• Envois de publipostage avec adresse, services des colis et des
envois express et services des transferts de fonds abordables et
sécurisés
• Régulation internationale
Weaknesses (faiblesses)
• Structure et manque de flexibilité général dans le
processus de prise de décisions
• Difficulté à susciter l’intérêt des Pays-membres
• Incapacité à établir des priorités
• Incapacité à assurer la gestion d’un secteur de
plus en plus complexe
Threats
• Affaiblissement de la base de
• financement de l’organisation
• Relevance
• Les accords bilatéraux l’unilatéralisme risquent de
réduire la pertinence de l’UPU
• Réseaux ne faisant pas partie de l’UPU
• Pression sur l’obligation du service universel
• Substitution technologique et diversification des
moyens de communication

4 Objectifs majeurs pour 2017 – 2020 : (à approuver)
Améliorer
l’interopérabilité
des réseaux
postaux
internationaux
Apporter
des
connaissances
techniques et
une expertise
concernant
le secteur
postal
Promouvoir
les produits
et services
innovants
(en
développant
l’espace Six-
dimensionnel)
Favoriser
Le développement
Durable et initiative
sociales

Réflexions pour l’élaboration de la SPI
Réunions - Favoriser la pensée stratégique au sein des
groupes/comités
– Conférence stratégique, tables rondes régionales.
– Forums externes et coordination avec les organismes internationaux
– Questionnaires pour confirmer , adapter ou identifier les 4 objectifs
stratégique et programmes y afférent.
– Introduction dans l’ordre du jour des Commissions du CA/CEP d’un
point relatif aux questions de stratégie
– Partager les objectifs en vue de créer une cohérence globale entre les
programmes de travail: Priorisation orientée optimisation
development process

Réflexions pour l’élaboration de la SPI
Informations nécessaires à la définition de la stratégie
– Études prospectives émanant des intervenant dans la chaine
logistiques postale
– Études économiques des différentes programmes relevant siégeant
au niveau du BI
– Consultation des pays-membres au sujet des études disponible qui
peuvent être utile (questionnaire)
development process

Décisions attendues
– Les participants sont invités à se prononcer sur la marche à
suivre pour la préparation de la Stratégie postale d’Istanbul
(SPI)
development process

2014 UPU Strategy Conference
and
The road to Abidjan
DCSC.PS
Cote d’Ivoire, 14 and 15 October 2014

Host country: Côte d’Ivoire (Rep)
Dates: 14 and 15 October 2014
Dual objective: Take stock of what has been achieved with regard
to the DPS implementation + discuss topics of
importance for the future IPS
Key ideas: Limited number of high-level presentations; open
questions from the floor; inter-active discussion
between high-level panellists and audience members
2010 Strategy
Conference
Nairobi
Ministerial
Conference/DPS
Doha 2012
2014 Strategy
Conference
Abidjan
RRT
2011
RRT
2015
Ministerial
Conference/IPS
Istanbul 2016
Leaders’
Forum
10. 2014 Strategy Conference: structure
and content

and content – Draft programme

Any questions or comments regarding the 2014 UPU Strategy
Conference, please contact the IB Secretariat at;
strategy@upu.int
and content – Draft programme

Part V – General items for the 3 Project Groups
Led by Andrew Nongogo – South Africa

Any other business
and
any questions or suggestions regarding strategy-related issues?
strategy@upu.int
11. Any other business

Towards the greatest postal
convergence? Continuous
benchmarking of global
economic conditions
Bern (April 10, 2014)

UPU evolution
• 2nd oldest technical multilateral organisation – 1874
• 2 principles: single territory, freedom of transit
• Organisational model:
• Rowland Hill and Gladstone economic models
• monolithic postal-telecom-telegraph
administrations
• Becomes a specialist UN organisation in 1948
• UN Charter above UPU treaties – progress and
social/economic growth, international problem solving,
human rights
• Entrusted to carry out postal sector data/statistical
work and to cooperate more generally with UN in the field

One century after its creation until ….1985
• Continuous strengthening of single territory and freedom of
transit
• Addition of new treaties based on trust and ubiquity (money
orders, insured items, collection of bills, subscriptions to
newspapers, giro transfer, international savings, cash on
delivery)
• Also new services: small packets, international reply coupons
• EDI exchanges start and initiation of modernisation of postal
operators – from administration to enterprises (Ne)
• The new integrator model starts biting into the monopoly

Since Washington Congress (1989)
• Washington consensus approach
• One-size fits all Washington consensus solutions:
liberalisation/competition/privatisation
• Posts not seen as an essential infrastructure (World Bank)
• Application of telecom regulatory solution (capital intensive -
innovation driven) to postal regulation (labour intensive –
universal service driven)
• EU single territory and competition logic
• Weakening of single territory (ABC re-mailing, ETOE)
• Disappearance of most treaties (apart from parcel integrated
into Convention and postal payment service)
• Reduction in IB functions (research, arbitration)

Change drivers
Geopolitics
The cold war
Independence movements with arrival of numerous new
members
European construction and single market
Fall of Berlin wall
Rise of emerging economies
Technology
EDI messages
Internet connectivity
Competition
Integrators
Commercialised incumbents on each other territory
technological substitution
World IT groups

Thirty lost years
• Despite remarkable performances by some DOs with new
models both in IC (DE, IT, BE, CH, AU, nordic) and emerging
countries (BR, KZ, SG, CN, EE)
• Disconnection between economic growth and postal growth
particularly strong for international exchanges
• Strong corridor asymmetries between
industrialised/emerging and developing countries not
accountable through economic weight or distance

Why ?
• Widespread whole market assumptions detrimental to postal
economic model
• In particular, introduction of competition in nascent
postal sector and destruction of synergies (postbank,
telco separation)
• Indiscriminate application of the EU untested IC model to
DCs
• Old-fashioned image of the postal sector compared with
highly technological network industries (electronic
network, radio spectrum, telecommunications)
• Not considered as an essential infrastructure by Bretton
Woods institutions
• Little research-based evidence to show the economic and
social value of the postal network
• Neglect of weaker links for “commercial” reasons leading
to the weakening of the whole network

But extraordinary opportunities ahead
to be seized NOW
or LOST FOR EVER
• UPU data set – a gold mine for the sector and the
common good
• Post-2008 convergence of Bretton Woods institutions
and UPU objectives and methods - Beijing consensus
• WTO new moves in trade facilitation towards seamless
customs
• UN redesign of MDG post-2015
• Realignment of development policies along the Beijing
consensus – inclusive growth
• Return of public and industrial policies and international
cooperation for state soverign matters (inter
governmentalor supra national)

UPU: UNIQUELY PLACED
In the connectivity economy - facilitator of innovative disintermediation C-C
and B-C, ex Bitcoin, cloud computing
In international supply chain - synchronisation, standardisation and
interconnection, data collection and harmonisation
In inclusive development policies
At intergovernmental ( and supranational?) and all other levels of
governance as a trusted party and for sovereign state matters (security,
protection of confidentiality, government-citizen, customs)
To do this, it must :
produce convincing evidence-based advocacy,
make postal policy an integral part of development policies
and communicate effectively to the policy makers

Road map
• Contribute to developing and implementing the new MDG
• Use UPU regulatory powers to facilitate interconnectivity and
governement policies at international level (security, customs,
confidentiality, etc.)
• Enrich MSME trade facilitation and e-commerce policies through data
analytics
• Develop in-depth case studies of interesting innovations from all
angles, including regulatory framework and governance
• Communicate on postal sector in high level platforms (WEF)
• Tackle controversial issues (e.g. ETOEs)
• Reinforce single territory starting with the weakest links

Rooted in the past
Turned towards the future

And today?

The rising predictive power
of the international postal
network

Links

Observe …

The core

The periphery

The desert

The desert
The periphery
The core

The desert
The periphery
The core
Least developed country
Developing country
Emerging country

Least
developed
countries

Developing
countries

Emerging
countries

Developed
countries

Developed and
emerging
economies
Developing economies
Least developed economies

… The goal

… your weakest links

… your strongest links

Big postal data: why now?
10 April 2014 (Berne)

Big postal data: a critical need for a critical time
Postal services are redefining themselves around the world
WHERE TO FOCUS?
WHAT/WHO TO CONNECT?
HOW TO GROW?

Postal services required to master international supply chain issues
SECURITY
CUSTOMS CLEARANCE
NEW CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS

Universal Postal Union must deal with
INCREASING COMPLEXITY
INCREASING UNCERTAINTY
INCREASING CONNECTIVITY02468
Percentoftotaldestinationcountries
0
.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
10
Peak/median traffic multiplier

Big postal data: our value proposition
Big postal data can help you
SIMPLIFY COMPLEXITY
REDUCE UNCERTAINTY 99.999999999%
LEVERAGE CONNECTIVITY

Big postal data: the way forward …
Network intelligence power & actionable insights unleashed through
DATA INTEGRATION
DATA ANALYTICS
DATA PRODUCTS

… and challenges
UPU members must develop a sound framework to deal with
DATA SHARING
DATA PRIVACY
DATA STANDARDS

Big postal data: a vision and a plan
You have now
DATA 100,000,000,000 +
VISION 1
PLAN 1

… three types of data products for you
Set up your priorities and explore with us
NETWORK AND OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE
MARKET AND ECONOMIC INTELLIGENCE
GOVERNANCE AND STRATEGIC INTELLIGENCE
What?
When?
Where?

Big postal data and strategy:
building up a data-driven UPU
Bern (April 10, 2014)

100,000,000,000

A new light
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

DATA
INTEGRATION

Big data is lot about
“previously ignored data” …
can the UPU continue to ignore
this data?

Combined strategy day session

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Combined strategy day session

Similar to Combined strategy day session (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Combined strategy day session