The World Bank Group is interested in gauging the views of clients and partners who are either involved in development in Serbia or who observe activities related to social and economic development. The following survey will give the World Bank Group's team that works in Serbia, greater insight into how the Bank's work is perceived. This is one tool the World Bank Group uses to assess the views of its stakeholders, and to develop more effective strategies that support development in Serbia. A local independent firm has been hired to oversee the logistics of this survey.
This survey was designed to achieve the following objectives:
- Assist the World Bank Group in gaining a better understanding of how stakeholders in Serbia perceive the World Bank Group;
- Obtain systematic feedback from stakeholders in Serbia regarding:
- Their views regarding the general environment in Serbia;
- Their overall attitudes toward the World Bank Group in Serbia;
- Overall impressions of the World Bank Group's effectiveness and results, project/program related issues, knowledge work and activities, and communication and information sharing in Serbia; and
- Perceptions of the World Bank Group's future role in Serbia.
- Use data to help inform Serbia country team's strategy.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
The World Bank Country Assessment Survey covered the following topics:
Section A: General issues facing Serbia
Section B: Overall attitudes toward the World Bank Group
Section C: World Bank Group's effectiveness and results
Section D: The World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities (i.e., analysis, studies, research, data, reports, conferences)
Section E: Working with the World Bank Group
Section F: The future role of the World Bank Group in Serbia
Section G: Communication and information sharing
Section H: Background information
Stakeholders of the World Bank in Serbia.
Producers and sponsors
Public Opinion Research Group
The World Bank Group
From November 2013 to January 2014, stakeholders of the World Bank Group in Serbia were invited to provide their opinions on the WBG's assistance to the country by participating in a country survey.
Participants in the survey were drawn from among the office of the President or Prime Minister; the office of a Minister; the office of a Parliamentarian; employees of a ministry, ministerial department, or implementation agency; consultants/contractors working on World Bank Group-supported projects/programs; project management units (PMUs) overseeing implementation of a project; local government officials or staff; bilateral agencies; multilateral agencies; private sector organizations; private foundations; the financial sector/private banks; NGOs; community-based organizations (CBOs); the media; independent government institutions; trade unions; faith-based groups; academia/research institutes/think tanks; and the judiciary branch.
Paper questionnaires were sent to 34 potential respondents via courier or post. Of those, 6 were completed and returned via courier or post (18% response rate). Online questionnaires were sent to 608 potential respondents via email. Of those, 247 were completed (41% response rate).
Dates of Data Collection
Data Collection Mode
Ipsos Strategic Marketing
Data Collection Notes
Respondents were asked about: general issues facing Serbia; their overall attitudes toward the WBG; the WBG's effectiveness and results; the WBG's knowledge work and activities; working with the WBG; the WBG's future role in Serbia; and the WBG's communication and information sharing in Serbia.
The Questionnaire consists of 8 sections:
A. General Issues Facing Serbia: Respondents were asked to indicate whether Serbia is headed in the right direction, what they thought were the top three most important development priorities, which areas would contribute most to reducing poverty, which areas would contribute most to generating economic growth, and what would best achieve "shared prosperity" in Serbia.
B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group: Respondents were asked to rate their familiarity with the WBG, its effectiveness in Serbia, WBG staff preparedness, the effectiveness of its activities, to what extent it should provide capacity building support to certain groups, the importance and effectiveness of the WBG's current capacity building work, their agreement with various statements regarding the WBG's work, and the extent to which it is an effective development partner. Respondents were also asked to indicate the sectoral areas on which it would be most productive for the WBG to focus its resources, the WBG's greatest values and greatest weaknesses, its most effective instruments, with which stakeholder groups the WBG should collaborate more, if the WBG should have more or less of a local presence in Serbia, and to what they attributed slowed or failed reform efforts.
C. World Bank Group's Effectiveness and Results: Respondents were asked to rate the extent to which the WBG's work helps achieve development results in Serbia, the extent to which the WBG meets Serbia's needs for knowledge services and financial instruments, the extent to which the WBG's internal evaluation mechanisms hold it accountable for achieving results, and the importance of the WBG's involvement and the WBG's level of effectiveness across twenty-seven development areas. Respondents were also asked to indicate if WBG decisions regarding its Serbia program were made primarily in country or at Headquarters.
D. The World Bank Group's Knowledge Work and Activities: Respondents were asked to indicate how frequently they consult WBG knowledge work and to rate the quality of the WBG's knowledge work and activities, including how significant of a contribution it makes to development results and its technical quality.
E. Working with the World Bank: Respondents were asked to rate the extent to which various aspects of the WBG's delivery work contributes to solving Serbia's development challenges and their level of agreement with a series of statements regarding working with the WBG. Respondents were also asked to indicate if the WBG operates with too much risk.
F. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia: Respondents were asked to indicate what the WBG should do to make itself of greater value in Serbia and which of its services the WBG should offer more of in Serbia.
G. Communication and Information Sharing: Respondents were asked to indicate how they get information about economic and social development issues, how they prefer to receive information from the WBG, their Internet access, and their usage and evaluation of the WBG's websites. Respondents were asked about their awareness of the WBG's Access to Information policy, past information requests from the WBG, and their level of agreement that they use more data from the World Bank Group as a result of the WBG's Open Data policy. Respondents were also asked to evaluate the WBG's information accessibility and responsiveness to information requests.
H. Background Information: Respondents were asked to indicate their current position, specialization, whether they currently collaborate or have ever collaborated with the WBG in Serbia, what their position was when they did work with the WBG, with which WBG agencies they work, their exposure to the WBG in Serbia, and their geographic location.
Questionnaires were in English and Serbian.
Public Opinion Research Group
The World Bank Group
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the Identification of the Primary Investigator
- the title of the survey (including country, acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download
Disclaimer and copyrights
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.