Upsetting Internal Corruption: World Bank Dilemma

The epitome or highlight to achieving the World Bank mission is passed to its staff.  Criticisms have touched down on their desks that made relentless procrastinations to manipulating the whole operations of the bank (and not through the borrowing governments).  Why pick this scenario?

Most financial institution could (or would) have made (or created) their staff vulnerable to any form of corruption.  THe misbehavior is undefensable (or the misnomer form for harassment).  This is a test of one’s loyalty towards their leader or President, himself.  Such staff is dutifully bound to overcome criticisms laid upon by detractors to the allegation of corruption.

Let us talk about mismanagement.  How do this point out an illegal act?  To use one’s position or power to influence the whole or part of the Bank is to overpower whoever wanted a position of high ranks in question.  Remember, this should be within the World Bank organization (and not outside the premises).  It is then but natural to be influential even outside, so much the better.  Besides following and implementing anti-corruption agency, nothing will prove wrong to a deserving advisor like Ms. Robin Cleveland – former associate director of O.M.B. (Office of Management and Budget) in the Executive Office of the U.S. President (Source: The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Spring/Summer 2007-Volume XIII, Issue 2).

Next interesting process is that of alienation.  It came to be an experience felt under a key Wolforwitz appointee Suzanne Rich Folsom, wife of International Republican Institute President George Folsom (Source: ”Same as above”).  She has shown articulation in ethics policy and staff training when she conducted staff investigation of corrupt behavior among the staff themselves.  On a successful note, she found evidence of thirty-three (33) positive cases on fiddling taxes (and obvious, misstatement) and doctoring expenses (misrepresenting cases) out of the ninety-two (92) alleged cases within the Bank.

Should likely to comment that these two advisors did their job well?  The whole group of bankstaff have most of their PhDs criticising them (and as well as strategy papers) which expect to be consulted and heard by management at the top.  It is upon a liberalized democratic opinion of well-educated individuals that World Bank should ponder upon (do no listen to corrupt figures literally).