Doing Better With Less: Unlocking Efficiency in the UN

In March 2025, the UN Secretary-General launched the UN80 initiative to make the UN more efficient, effective and agile in a resource-constrained environment. Workstream 1 focuses on efficiency and cost reduction by streamlining administrative functions, consolidating structures and relocating services to lower-cost locations, including through shared services. In parallel, the UN Secretariat has announced a 15–20% reduction in higher-grade posts, with similar cuts introduced by other UN entities.

The efficiency and cost-reduction proposals from UN80 Workstream 1 are also integrated into the Revised UN Secretariat Programme Budget for 2026, presented by the Secretary-General on 15 September 2025 to the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACAABQ) for review before deliberations in the Fifth Committee. The revised estimates propose reductions of 15.1% of resources and 18.8% of posts in the regular budget compared with 2025. The 2027 Programme Budget, expected in March/April 2026, will likely also incorporate further UN80 reforms.

This thematic brief aligns with and complements the central focus of the UN80 proposals. It draws on evidence from 15 recent MOPAN assessments of humanitarian and development-oriented UN entities to examine efficiency at three levels:

· Administrative support systems and processes, in line with Workstream 1.

· Organisational structures and workforce planning, in light of the announced staffing reductions.

· Operational management, to complement the administrative focus of Workstream 1.

​It is part of a series of three thematic briefs on multilateral effectiveness in a shifting landscape, which includes forthcoming briefs on results and mandate implementation and Comparative Advantage and Collaboration. A forthcoming mapping of responses by organisations to funding cuts will round up the series. The series aims to inform MOPAN members, multilateral organisations and other stakeholders as they navigate UN80 reforms.

Administrative support is critical to programme delivery, but inefficiencies in recruitment, procurement and financial disbursement remain widespread.

· Intra-agency reforms such as digitalisation and cloud-based Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems have reduced delays, though unevenly. More emphasis on process improvements, especially on timeliness, is needed.

· Intra-agency consolidation via shared service centres has delivered savings, but trade-offs include sunk costs, knowledge loss and reduced responsiveness.

· Inter-agency shared services such as Common Back Offices and Global Shared Services show potential, but require clear mandates, investment, sustainable cost-recovery approaches and attention to quality and control.

· Mutual recognition of policies and systems has reduced duplication and transaction costs, but implementation is slow and fragmented across functions.

Organisational structure reforms, decentralisation and strategic workforce planning have aimed to boost efficiency and reduce duplication, but their impact remains unclear. Incomplete reforms and unclear roles and responsibilities continue to hinder efficiency.

· Structural reforms aimed at reducing duplication and aligning functions with strategic priorities (such as at WFP, UNAIDS and UNFPA) show potential but raise concerns about process inclusivity and impact on oversight capacity.

· Decentralisation and delegation of authority have improved responsiveness in some organisations (e.g. IFAD, UNFPA, WFP, UNHCR), but remain partial in others due to under-resourcing, unclear accountability frameworks or limited devolution.

· Workforce planning is still a weak point. Agencies like WFP, WHO, IFAD and UNHCR have taken steps toward more structured workforce planning, but many others lack strategies or capacity. Heavy reliance on short-term contracts and high turnover erodes institutional memory and efficiency.

Efficiency is not yet systematically embedded in organisational strategies and operational management. Some entities, such as WHO, IFAD and UN Women, have developed frameworks or indicators for efficiency, but most lack conceptual clarity and consistent monitoring systems.

· At the organisational level, efficiency – and related concepts – are often referenced, but poorly defined. WHO is an exception with a clear value-for-money framework.

· At the project level, approaches such as cash-based transfers (WFP, UNHCR), larger project sizes (IFAD), or unit cost analysis (UNRWA) have integrated efficiency goals, but systems to monitor cost-efficiency and timeliness remain weak.

· Timeliness is tracked, but rarely benchmarked. Delays persist due to both internal procedures and external shocks.

To address the above-mentioned gaps, this brief identifies a set of enabling factors that are essential for advancing efficiency across the UN system:

· Clear leadership and conceptual clarity: Strong and accountable leadership at all levels drives efficiency. Shared definitions of efficiency can help align organisational and system-wide efforts.

· Effective risk management: Concerns around fiduciary risks, reduced oversight and control, and HR impacts are limiting agencies’ incentives to adopt shared services, relocate functions or streamline structures. Managing these risks is critical to enabling reform.

· Robust performance measurement: Efficiency remains poorly monitored across the system. The cost-efficiency and quality of shared services are under-evaluated.

· Quality and sustainable funding: Insufficient, fragmented and short-term funding continues to undermine efficiency efforts. Shared services require start-up investments and stable cost-recovery models.

MOPAN evidence reinforces the rationale for the UN80 reforms. It also highlights the conditions that need to be met and risks that should be mitigated if efficiency gains are to translate into sustained effectiveness. Efficiency gains are possible, but structural reforms alone are insufficient. Administrative consolidation, workforce restructuring and relocation must be underpinned by clear objectives, robust governance and adequate funding. Efficiency must be systematically embedded in organisational policies, processes, systems and performance frameworks, while trade-offs are acknowledged and managed.

To enable the UN to do better with less, the following considerations should be taken into account regarding the proposed and future reforms:

1. Administrative consolidation and harmonisation

The UN Secretariat’s plan for new administrative hubs and payroll consolidation mirrors reforms already underway across agencies. This brief confirms that intra-agency consolidation and inter-agency shared services can generate efficiency gains, including cost savings. However, experience shows trade-offs in service quality, responsiveness and institutional knowledge retention that could undermine the success and sustainability of such reforms.

·  UN entities should establish strong governance arrangements, transparent cost-recovery models and robust monitoring of service quality.

·  MOPAN members and other member states should advocate for harmonised frameworks on administrative costs, service quality indicators, and cost categories.

2. Relocation of functions and staffing reductions

The proposal to shift functions from New York and Geneva to lower-cost duty stations reflects long-standing efficiency debates. MOPAN’s preliminary findings related to administrative services show that relocations can reduce staff costs, but short-term savings often obscure transition risks, including knowledge loss and staff turnover. In addition, MOPAN evidence reveals that most UN entities lack strong strategic workforce planning frameworks. Without such planning, large-scale headcount reductions risk hollowing out core capacities and eroding institutional memory, particularly important for oversight, risk management and governance functions, if appropriate mitigation measures are not put in place.           

· UN entities should ensure rightsizing exercises are guided by strategic workforce planning and long-term cost-benefit analysis rather than short-term cost-cutting imperatives.

· MOPAN members and other member states should request evidence that restructuring efforts preserve essential functions and expertise (core and oversight/governance) amid staff reductions and relocation, and request clear business cases and transition planning to preserve effectiveness.

3. Conceptual and performance frameworks for efficiency

The UN Secretariat’s proposals to consolidate administrative functions and optimise systems – including digital – are consistent with MOPAN’s evidence that similar initiatives have shown potential to deliver efficiency gains. However, clear conceptual frameworks and robust performance measurements for efficiency are generally missing. Persistent gaps in the use of reliable indicators and systems to monitor efficiency hinder progress. Establishing clear definitions and a coherent measurement framework is essential to drive efficiency gains.

· UN entities should adopt clear organisational definitions of efficiency and embed them within performance management systems.

· MOPAN members and other member states should press for greater transparency on how efficiency gains will be tracked and reinvested to sustain organisational effectiveness.

4. Resources

Efficiency reforms – particularly shared services, but also structural re-organisation – require upfront investment and sustained resources to deliver results. By contrast, MOPAN evidence shows that across the UN system, fragmented, short-term and earmarked funding continues to dominate, hindering efficiency. Excessive projectisation drives up administrative costs and reduces value for money.
While some efforts – such as through the Funding Compact and the Grand Bargain – have led to improvements in quality funding and transparency in the use of unearmarked funding, they have not yet led to a systemic shift in financing patterns.

·  UN entities should strengthen the business case for quality funding to support efficiency reforms by accounting for start-up costs, transition risks and long-term efficiency gains. They should continue to address gaps in prioritisation, transparency, accountability, results-based management, oversight and governance to strengthen donor confidence in their ability to manage core and softly earmarked resources effectively, and report on progress against commitments made in the Funding Compact.

·  MOPAN members and other member states should strategically use more flexible funding to support structural reforms and offset inefficiencies linked to earmarking. They should also measure and report on their progress against commitments made in the Funding Compact and other relevant commitments and pledges.

There are opportunities for further analysis beyond the three dimensions covered by this thematic brief. Assessing efficiency in multilateral organisations requires attention to multiple organisational dimensions and trade-offs. Several areas would merit deeper inquiry, including financial management and budget execution; administrative and support costs; relocation of functions; digitalisation and automation; and organisational culture. Further clarifying and adopting systemic definitions of concepts such as efficiency, cost-efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and value for money will also be critical to grounding reforms.

As the first in a new MOPAN Insights series on Multilateral Effectiveness in a Shifting Landscape, the brief will be followed by thematic briefs on mandate implementation and on comparative advantage and collaboration, as well as a mapping of multilateral responses to funding reductions. Together, these products are intended to contribute to the evidence base for UN80 reform debates and donor funding decisions.