What’s the context?

A leading healthcare organization operates with a mission to expand access to quality primary care through a combination of in-clinic, home-based, and digital services. At the core of its approach is a strong organizational philosophy: fostering a diverse and engaged workforce while creating a culture that empowers individuals to perform at their best.

Achieving this vision requires more than clinical excellence. It depends on ensuring that staff across all roles and locations are skilled, motivated, and fairly recognized for their contributions.

What’s the challenge?

As part of a broader effort to strengthen talent management practices, the organization partnered with Birches Group to implement a comprehensive HR transformation program. A central element of this initiative was the introduction of a Skills Assessment framework based on Birches Group’s Community™ Skills methodology.

Historically, compensation progression had been driven by tenure or performance indicators such as annual reviews. While useful, these approaches did not fully capture how employees were developing the capabilities required for their roles.

The organization sought to transition to a more forward-looking model—one that directly links pay progression to measurable growth in skills. This required adapting the framework to operational realities and equipping HR teams and managers with the tools and confidence to apply it effectively in practice.

What’s the solution?

Birches Group designed and delivered a structured, hands-on training program to support the rollout of the Skills Assessment framework. The approach emphasized practical application and alignment with real organizational decisions on pay and talent development.

The training introduced the core philosophy that compensation progression should reflect capability growth rather than time in role or short-term performance metrics. Participants were guided through five stages of skills progression—Basic, Proficient, Skilled, Advanced, and Expert—each aligned with job-level expectations. This ensured consistency with existing job evaluation structures and created an integrated talent management system.

To support adoption, the program incorporated real-life scenarios and role-specific examples, enabling managers to understand how skill development manifests across different functions. Interactive exercises allowed participants to assess employees, compare results, and calibrate evaluations to ensure consistency.

A key component of the training focused on strengthening the role of managers as coaches. Participants learned how to use assessment outcomes to identify skill gaps, define targeted development goals, and create structured learning plans aligned with both role requirements and organizational priorities.

What’s the outcome?

Following implementation, the organization has completed multiple cycles of skills assessments using the Community™ framework. Early results indicate a shift toward more transparent and consistent decision-making in pay adjustments, grounded in observable capability growth.

This has strengthened trust between employees and leadership by reinforcing perceptions of fairness and objectivity. At the same time, aggregated assessment data has provided valuable insights into workforce capabilities, helping identify strengths, gaps, and areas for targeted investment in learning and development.

The approach also enhances the organization’s ability to compete for talent by clearly demonstrating a link between skill development and career progression. This positions it as an employer that values and rewards real growth, an important differentiator in competitive labor markets.

What’s the takeaway?

A skills-based approach to talent management is more than a technical solution—it is a catalyst for cultural change. By equipping managers to assess and develop capabilities objectively, organizations create a reinforcing cycle where growth is recognized, motivation increases, and performance improves.

This experience highlights the value of integrating compensation, capability development, and workforce planning into a unified framework. With ongoing support from Birches Group, the system continues to evolve, ensuring its relevance and effectiveness over time.

In an environment where skills are increasingly central to organizational success, investing in the ability of managers to assess and develop talent is key to building transparent, equitable, and high-performing workplaces.


What’s the context?

A global agricultural research network is composed of multiple independent centers employing thousands of staff across dozens of countries. Many of these centers have operated for decades and maintain significant autonomy over their administrative policies and structures. As a result, employment conditions, principles, and practices can vary considerably across entities and locations.

At the system level, a central coordinating office provides a forum for policy alignment and collaboration. While its mandate has traditionally focused on research coordination, its role has increasingly expanded to include administrative harmonization. To support its evolving function, the office has begun deploying staff beyond its headquarters location into a range of international settings.

What’s the challenge?

In the absence of a unified framework for defining employment conditions across locations, and with individual entities following varied approaches, the central office lacked a clear model to guide its own workforce deployment.

Key questions emerged: how to ensure fair and competitive purchasing power across locations, how to account for difficult working conditions, and to what extent employment conditions should differ from those at headquarters. Establishing a consistent and credible approach was essential to support expansion while maintaining internal coherence.

What’s the solution?

International employment systems typically follow established models. One common approach is the “home/host” model, where employment conditions are anchored in the home country with limited adjustments for temporary assignments abroad. However, this approach is less suitable for organizations with long-term, multi-location international deployment.

In such cases, a more globally integrated model is required—one that establishes market-relevant employment conditions independent of an individual’s country of origin while fostering internal equity and cohesion.

Once a market position is defined, the primary consideration becomes how to adjust for differences between locations. While many factors can vary, the most significant is cost of living. Measuring and applying cost-of-living differences is complex, and organizations take different approaches—some make no adjustments, while others aim to maintain purchasing power parity across locations.

In this case, the central office adopted an established international benchmark by aligning its approach with a widely recognized multilateral system. Using post-adjustment indices, it introduced a structured method to ensure purchasing power consistency across duty stations. Given that headquarters is located in a relatively high-cost environment, this resulted in downward adjustments in base salary levels for many locations.

This approach provided a transparent and pragmatic solution, balancing fairness with responsible resource management. It also allowed for targeted adjustments in locations where cost differentials exceeded defined thresholds.

What’s the outcome?

The introduction of a clear and structured framework has enabled the central office to deploy staff internationally with confidence and consistency. By anchoring its approach in a recognized global standard, it has strengthened both the credibility and sustainability of its employment model.

Transparency has been a critical factor in this process, particularly in managing expectations around variable pay adjustments. The framework not only supports current deployment needs but also serves as a reference point for broader system alignment across the network’s independent entities.

What’s the takeaway?

In global workforce management, transparency and credibility are essential—especially when compensation varies by location. Anchoring policies in established and widely understood frameworks simplifies implementation, supports acceptance, and builds trust among stakeholders.

For organizations navigating similar challenges, leveraging recognized international models can provide both clarity and legitimacy, particularly when engaging with partners and funding communities.


What’s the context?

A regional intergovernmental organization works to support countries and territories in protecting their environment and promoting sustainable development. As part of its long-term vision, it aims to become an employer of choice within its region—one that attracts global talent, fosters an inclusive and empowering culture, and enables staff to contribute meaningfully to community impact.

Achieving this vision requires more than technical expertise. It depends on creating a work environment where employees, contractors, and volunteers feel safe, supported, and valued. A healthy and secure workplace is not only a moral imperative but also a critical driver of organizational performance. When individuals feel protected, they are better able to focus, collaborate, and deliver on the organization’s mission.

What’s the challenge?

The organization operates across a geographically dispersed and diverse region, with personnel based in headquarters, field offices, and remote locations. Each setting presents distinct health, safety, and security risks—from natural hazards to operational risks associated with fieldwork.

While policies existed, they had been developed over time and lacked a unified, integrated framework. This created challenges in ensuring consistency, clarity of roles, and effective implementation across all locations. Without a cohesive system, there was a risk of gaps in accountability, uneven application of standards, and missed opportunities to proactively manage risks.

What’s the solution?

The organization engaged Birches Group to design a comprehensive Occupational Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Wellbeing (OHSSE) Management System tailored to its international and multicultural workforce.

The process began with a detailed review of existing policies, procedures, and regulatory requirements across all operating locations. This assessment identified compliance obligations, highlighted inconsistencies, and pinpointed areas for improvement.

To ensure the system was practical and context-specific, Birches Group facilitated consultations with leadership and staff representatives. These discussions explored how policies could be effectively implemented across different environments, including headquarters, field operations, and mission travel.

The resulting framework provides clear and actionable guidance aligned with international standards. It defines core principles, establishes roles and responsibilities, and introduces structured processes for hazard identification and risk mitigation. It also incorporates communication, training, and capacity-building measures, along with mechanisms for ongoing monitoring, evaluation, and continuous improvement.

What’s the outcome?

With the new system in place, the organization now benefits from a unified and coherent framework for managing health, safety, and well-being across all its operations. Staff are better equipped to integrate safe practices into their daily work, while leadership can demonstrate a clear commitment to workforce well-being.

The system enhances the organization’s ability to anticipate and respond to risks, contributing to a safer and more resilient work environment. It also strengthens its reputation as a responsible and values-driven employer, supporting efforts to attract and retain skilled talent. Over time, these improvements contribute to higher morale, reduced incidents, and stronger organizational performance.

What’s the takeaway?

This experience underscores a broader lesson for international organizations: health, safety, and well-being are fundamental to mission success. An integrated OHSSE framework does more than reduce risk—it builds trust, reinforces organizational culture, and protects the people who drive impact.


What’s the context?

A major international development organization operates at a significant scale, with a highly diverse workforce drawn from across the globe and deployed in a wide range of operational contexts. Managing such a workforce effectively requires more than formal policies and procedures. It depends on a shared understanding of institutional purpose and how that translates into everyday behavior.

In recent years, the institution introduced a Code of Ethics built around five core values—impact, integrity, respect, teamwork, and innovation—replacing an earlier framework and signaling a deliberate shift toward a more values-driven culture.

What’s the challenge?

In a large, multicultural, and multidisciplinary environment operating across varied socio-cultural and political settings, defining shared values is relatively straightforward. Ensuring they are consistently applied in practice is far more complex.

The central challenge lies in preventing values from remaining abstract concepts. They must be translated into clear behavioral expectations, mutual obligations, and institutional systems that staff can rely on. Without this, the gap between stated values and lived experience can widen, undermining trust, accountability, and overall effectiveness.

What’s the solution?

The Code of Ethics establishes a clear institutional compact between the organization and its staff, grounded in mutual responsibility. The institution commits to fostering a respectful and supportive work environment, ensuring fair treatment, protecting individuals from retaliation, and promoting leadership that models expected behaviors.

In turn, staff are expected to uphold the institution’s values in their daily work, interactions with colleagues and stakeholders, and in how they exercise entrusted authority. Rather than attempting to prescribe responses to every possible ethical situation, the framework emphasizes values as the foundation for decision-making, particularly in complex or ambiguous circumstances.

What’s the outcome?

The Code creates a coherent link between individual conduct and organizational mission. It clarifies how key principles such as integrity, respect, and accountability are applied in practice—including decision-making, managing conflicts of interest, raising concerns, and professional interactions.

This clarity strengthens trust across the organization. Staff understand both what is expected of them and what they can expect in return, reinforcing consistency, motivation, and a shared sense of responsibility for institutional performance.

What’s the takeaway?

This approach illustrates that a strong institutional culture cannot be built through policies alone. It requires clearly defined values that guide real decisions, consistent behavioral expectations, and leadership that demonstrates those values in action.

For organizations seeking to translate stated principles into everyday practice, the key is to make the institutional compact explicit, mutual, and visible in how people are treated and how work is carried out.


What’s the context?

A prominent international organization operates as a multidisciplinary platform, drawing staff from both public and private sectors to foster engagement on major global challenges. For more than fifty years, it has worked toward improving global outcomes by convening leaders from around the world and facilitating dialogue across a wide range of issues.

Its approach to building and sustaining a workforce that supports high-profile programs and drives ongoing engagement is distinctive within the international community. A key factor behind its success is the visibility and influence of its flagship initiatives.

What’s the challenge?

The organization is widely known for its annual flagship gathering, but its work extends far beyond that event. It continuously forms groups and communities to generate insight on complex global topics. What distinguishes it, however, is its ability to bring together influential individuals from diverse sectors.

The organization of its major annual event exemplifies this strength, bringing together global leaders from government, business, and other fields. The central challenge lies in building and sustaining a workforce capable of delivering high-impact convenings while maintaining motivation and engagement in a demanding, high-pressure environment.

What’s the solution?

The organization structures itself around current global priorities, with relevance serving as a guiding principle. This focus shapes both its program design and its expanding network of offices, helping attract individuals motivated by meaningful and timely work.

It is not designed as a traditional long-term career institution. Staff turnover is relatively high, reflecting the intensity of delivering continuous high-level engagement and major events. However, this same high-performance environment fosters strong motivation and a sense of empowerment among personnel.

While compensation is competitive, individuals are primarily drawn by the opportunity to contribute to impactful work and to build valuable professional networks. The organization functions fundamentally as a convening and networking platform, making it an attractive place for those seeking exposure, experience, and connections.

High expectations are placed on staff, who are rewarded with intensive learning and professional growth. Preparation for the annual flagship event requires organization-wide effort, with personnel at all levels contributing intensively to ensure its success. Given this pace, it is common for individuals to seek new opportunities after a few years.

What’s the outcome?

The organizational structure emphasizes contribution over hierarchy. Attempts to establish more traditional hierarchical models have had limited success. Recognition is based largely on individual impact and output, often spanning diverse responsibilities.

This results in a highly dynamic and empowered workforce, where engagement is sustained through challenging work and visible outcomes rather than formal rank. The high-energy environment proves effective in motivating staff for as long as they are able to thrive within its demands.

What’s the takeaway?

Many institutions aim to motivate staff through alignment with mission and purpose. This model extends that concept by combining empowerment with intensity and visibility. Rather than relying on predictable career progression, it generates engagement through relevance, high-impact work, and continuous delivery in a fast-paced environment.

This creates a compelling setting for individuals who are motivated by challenge, visibility, and the opportunity to operate at the center of global dialogue.


What’s the context?

In 2022, sudden economic volatility was felt worldwide. According to the International Labour Organization, the combined effects of the COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020 and 2021, rising energy and food prices, and the outbreak of the war in Ukraine in early 2022 severely disrupted global trade and triggered widespread inflation—the highest recorded over any 12-month period since early 2019.

Many countries faced simultaneous high inflation and rapid currency devaluation at an unprecedented pace. In June 2022, Birches Group identified thirteen countries experiencing varying levels of volatility. By October 2022, that number had risen to thirty-nine, spanning Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America.

Lebanon provides a striking example. Following the financial crisis that began in 2019, the Lebanese pound (LBP) lost much of its value. By November 2022, Birches Group classified Lebanon at Level Four volatility—characterized by currency devaluation of at least 50% or more within six months and hyperinflation reaching triple digits, which eroded purchasing power for much of the population.

Employers across sectors and regions were caught off guard, uncertain how to respond to these rapid changes. Employees, in turn, looked to their organizations for reassurance and guidance on how to continue supporting their families.

What’s the challenge?

All markets experience volatility—whether economic, environmental, or geopolitical—the question is not if, but when. When unpredictable events disrupt day-to-day operations, employers must be prepared to respond quickly and appropriately to the level of volatility. However, the economic shifts in 2022 revealed that many organizations were unprepared. Employers began looking to one another for guidance, needing sound advice on how to respond both swiftly and thoughtfully.

What’s the solution?

Birches Group’s Partners have deep expertise in managing compensation in developing markets. One critical tool they identified, often overlooked by organizations, is the Special Measures Policy.

A Special Measures Policy provides HR with clear guidance on appropriate triggers and corresponding responses based on the type and severity of volatility in the countries where they operate. To develop this policy, organizations need insights into key indicators, such as:

  • Exchange rate movements (especially over six months)
  • Labor market trends
  • The real-world impact of currency devaluation on staff’s daily transactions

By monitoring these indicators, organizations can identify volatility triggers and implement predetermined responses, typically within 24 to 48 hours, to cushion the impact on staff.

To support this, Birches Group developed the Market Monitor, a bimonthly publication that tracks exchange rate movements globally and highlights countries experiencing varying levels of volatility—from mild (Level One) to severe (Level Six). It also includes recommended triggers and response examples organizations can consider in managing compensation during turbulent periods.

Case Study: Ethiopia’s Forced Devaluation in 2024

In July 2024, Ethiopia experienced a forced currency devaluation where the Central Bank lifted restrictions on foreign exchange trading to gain IMF support and advance a long-delayed debt restructuring. As a result, the Ethiopian birr (ETB) immediately dropped 30% against the U.S. dollar. Simultaneously, a thriving black market for currency emerged, with unofficial exchange rates exceeding the official rate by over 80%.

The rapid devaluation triggered widespread concern among employers, many of whom faced intense pressure from their employees to dollarize salaries—a move staff believed would mitigate the effects of inflation and currency loss.

Birches Group responded promptly with insights through the Market Monitor and expert guidance based on years of experience in volatile markets like Ethiopia. At the beginning of August 2024, Birches Group’s Market Monitor classified Ethiopia at Level Two volatility. However, by mid-August, it escalated to Level Four, reflecting a significant and sudden shift in market conditions.

Level Four is defined by:

  • A currency devaluation of 50% or more within six months or less
  • Sudden or unexpected socio-economic events
  • Disjointed or unclear comparator responses in salary surveys

Despite the pressure to dollarize salaries, Birches Group advised against it. Instead, the Market Monitor recommended a moderate salary adjustment of 10–20%, tied to inflation. While this does not fully offset the impact of devaluation, it provides meaningful support to employees and signals employer responsiveness. This approach also allows organizations to adjust cautiously, avoiding overcompensation in a rapidly changing environment, and preparing for potential shifts in the next 12–24 months.

What’s the outcome?

Since June 2022, Birches Group has published the Market Monitor twice a month, keeping organizations across sectors informed about labor markets experiencing volatility. It has quickly become one of Birches Group’s most popular resources, drawing interest not only from large and small organizations but also from consultants and international publications. Through the Market Monitor, Birches Group has helped many organizations:

  • Understand how to respond to specific levels of volatility
  • Avoid common misconceptions and reactionary decisions (e.g., dollarization after sudden devaluation)
  • Recognize why inflation alone is not a reliable volatility indicator
  • Clarify salary adjustment strategies under pressure from staff

Additionally, Birches Group has hosted multiple well-attended webinars on Special Measures, providing guidance and sharing insights captured through the Market Monitor.

What’s the takeaway?

For organizations operating in developing markets, volatility is a fact of life. Having a Special Measures Policy—a companion to your Compensation Policy—is essential. It outlines triggers and pre-approved responses that HR can activate during periods of volatility, offering structure and agility in uncertain times.

Subscribing to resources like the Market Monitor equips organizations with timely data and practical guidance to navigate volatility with care and confidence.

To learn more about our Market Monitor and to access a copy, click here to subscribe


What’s the context?

This large international institution has one of the broadest operational footprints of any organization, with personnel deployed in more than 160 countries and present in hundreds of duty stations worldwide. Staff operate in a wide range of environments, including fragile and high-risk locations. Many assignments involve hazardous and, at times, life-threatening conditions

Safeguarding personnel while promoting an effective workplace is a complex task. With decades of operational experience, this institution has developed well-established principles and policies addressing workplace safety. In addition, a structured set of tools has been designed to monitor issues, advise staff and management, and take action when needed to ensure personnel protection.

What’s the challenge?

Ensuring safety in a global work environment goes far beyond securing workplace premises. While physical security is essential, the greater challenge often lies outside the workplace, where personnel face broader environmental risks that are sometimes unavoidable and difficult to control.

As international operations expanded over time to an increasing number of locations, assessing and addressing difficult work environments became more pressing. Gathering timely information, evaluating the severity of conditions, and designing appropriate risk mitigation measures required building dedicated capacity to respond effectively.

What’s the solution?

Under a broad framework focused on Conditions of Life and Work, a system of measures and criteria was developed to assess and respond to difficult work and living conditions. Given the international and multicultural nature of operations, defining “hardship” required careful consideration to avoid implying criticism of any country or culture.

Assessment criteria are grouped into six key areas: Local Conditions (such as size of the international community, proximity to transport hubs, and availability of facilities), Housing, Education, Health, Security, and Climate. These factors affect individuals consistently regardless of background and can be measured objectively using defined indicators (for example, frequency of medical incidents among staff).

Based on collected data, locations are classified into five categories, ranging from A to E. An A classification indicates minimal difficulty, while an E classification reflects severe and potentially life-threatening conditions, requiring contingency planning and possible evacuation capacity. As classifications become more severe, compensatory measures are introduced, including financial incentives and more frequent leave cycles.

What’s the outcome?

Today, these classifications are applied across hundreds of locations worldwide, enabling effective deployment of personnel even in challenging and high-risk environments. Additional measures have been developed to address extreme situations, such as areas experiencing significant instability.

These approaches have proven effective and are widely recognized as a model for addressing safety challenges through a multicultural and structured lens. The framework is regularly reviewed and updated and has been adopted beyond its original system by various international actors, bilateral programs, and non-governmental organizations as a practical method for managing safety and security.

What’s the takeaway?

The assessment of Conditions of Life and Work is conducted through a clear and structured framework, using defined criteria evaluated by qualified experts. Health conditions are assessed by medical professionals, security conditions by specialized safety experts, and local contextual factors by in-country leadership. Final classifications are determined through a formal review process and approved at the appropriate senior level.

The effectiveness of this system lies in its simplicity and transparency. By grounding decisions in objective criteria and institutional oversight, it successfully addresses sensitive aspects of international deployment while maintaining trust among personnel and stakeholders.


Birches Group provides insights into volatile labor markets that are making news headlines, focusing on key developments.  

The conflict involving Iran in 2026 has quickly emerged as one of the most consequential geopolitical developments in recent years. While hostilities remain concentrated in the Middle East, the economic ripple effects are being felt far beyond the region. Energy markets have reacted sharply, shipping routes are under strain, and uncertainty has begun to weigh on financial markets worldwide.

For business leaders, the central concern is clear: how will this conflict affect operations, costs, and long-term planning?

There is no simple answer. The impact will vary across industries and geographies. What is certain, however, is that geopolitical disruptions of this scale tend to affect global business in ways that are both direct and indirect—and that careful planning can meaningfully limit exposure and preserve operational stability.

Background of the Conflict

The current crisis escalated in late February 2026 following coordinated military strikes against Iranian targets by the United States and Israel. The strikes triggered a series of retaliatory actions by Iran, including missile and drone attacks on military and strategic targets across the Gulf region.

Tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most strategically important shipping corridors, have also intensified. In an article by the Los Angeles Times, roughly one‑fifth of global oil supply typically passes through this narrow waterway (Bulos, 2026), meaning even partial disruption can quickly ripple through energy markets and supply chains. According to the United Nations, the strait is responsible for approximately a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil trade, along with substantial quantities of liquefied natural gas and fertilizers (UN Trade and Development, 2026). Reports indicate that vessel strikes, maritime security warnings, and rising war‑risk insurance premiums have significantly reduced tanker traffic through the strait. Shipping companies have responded by delaying shipments, rerouting vessels, or temporarily suspending Gulf transit altogether (Tan and Chow, 2026).

Why This Matters for Businesses

Geopolitical developments rarely stay confined to the political sphere. The Iran conflict illustrates how quickly instability in one region can reverberate across global industries.

Energy markets reacted first. Oil prices rose as traders anticipated possible supply disruptions—a cost increase felt directly by aviation, logistics, manufacturing, and shipping. According to The Guardian, nearly all tanker operators have halted passage through the strait (Lowell, 2026). Supply chains have also come under parallel pressure: when shipping companies avoid higher‑risk maritime routes, cargo must travel longer distances, driving up transportation costs, extending delivery timelines, and creating new bottlenecks in already complex networks.

Financial markets have shown similar sensitivity. Periods of geopolitical uncertainty tend to increase volatility in equities, commodities, and currencies, and if disruptions persist, they can contribute to inflationary pressure and slower economic growth.

Several sectors face heightened exposure due to their proximity to Iran and their role as major economic and logistics hubs – particularly in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, and Bahrain. Aviation and logistics centers in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Doha have experienced airspace restrictions, flight rerouting, and temporary operational disruptions (Schneider, 2026). Maritime shipping and port operations, especially in Oman and the UAE, face growing uncertainty as instability around the Strait of Hormuz raises costs and prompts shipping companies to reassess Gulf transit.

Financial and business centers such as Dubai, Doha, and Manama may encounter

operational challenges as multinational organizations evaluate employee safety and contingency planning. Tourism and hospitality across the Gulf are experiencing short-term volatility as travel demand responds to heightened regional security concerns. The BBC reported that flights were briefly grounded on March 16 following a fire near the airport caused by a drone-related incident, noting that Iran had directed more than 1,900 missiles and drones at the UAE since the onset of hostilities between the US, Israel, and Iran (Pomeroy, 2026). Even organizations not directly targeted by attacks may face indirect disruption as transportation networks adjust, governments implement tighter security measures, and corporate risk policies evolve.

How Birches Group Can Help

For employers operating in markets affected by this conflict, a Special Measures Policy provides a critical foundation for business continuity. This proactive, documented framework outlines specific, pre-approved, temporary actions an organization will take to support employees and sustain operations during a crisis—allowing compensation practices and HR protocols to adapt to rapidly changing circumstances.

Birches Group specializes in developing Special Measures policies tailored to high-risk environments. Our consultants bring deep understanding of crises and unforeseen events, particularly in developing markets, enabling us to craft solutions that account for present challenges, risks, and evolving uncertainties.

As a supplement to a Special Measures Policy, our Market Monitor—published monthly—keeps organizations informed of exchange rate movements and country-level volatility. Each edition includes recommendations on potential triggers and the measures organizations can take depending on the level of volatility observed.

The Path Forward

The long‑term trajectory of the 2026 Iran conflict remains uncertain. Military developments, diplomatic negotiations, and regional dynamics will continue to shape how the situation evolves in the months ahead.

For organizations operating in or connected to the Gulf, the central challenge is managing uncertainty while maintaining operational continuity. Businesses with exposure across the region will need to monitor developments closely as governments tighten security measures and companies reassess operational risk.

More broadly, the conflict highlights how geopolitical instability can disrupt global commerce—from transportation networks and travel patterns to investor confidence and corporate risk management. In an increasingly interconnected global economy, preparedness and adaptability are not merely prudent, they are essential to sustainable business leadership.

Contact us to learn more about developing a Special Measures Policy for your organization.

Lowell, H. (2026). US intelligence sees direct attacks by Iran on oil tankers as greater risk than mines. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/11/attacks-iran-oil-tankers-strait-hormuz?

Bulos, N. (2026).  Iran’s threat to burn ships is choking off Persian Gulf oil flow to world. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2026-03-07/irans-threat-to-burn-ships-is-choking-off-persian-gulf-oil-flow-to-world

Tan, F. and Chow, E. (2026). Global oil and gas shipping costs surge as Iran vows to close Strait of Hormuz. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/middle-east-oil-shipping-costs-surge-all-time-high-us-iran-conflict-intensifies-2026-03-02/

Schneider, F. (2026). The Costs of the Iran Conflict for the Gulf. https://mecouncil.org/blog_posts/the-costs-of-the-iran-conflict-for-the-gulf/

UN Trade and Development (2026). Hormuz shipping disruptions raise risks for energy, fertilizers and vulnerable economies. https://unctad.org/news/hormuz-shipping-disruptions-raise-risks-energy-fertilizers-and-vulnerable-economies     Pomeroy, G. (2026). Iran hits key UAE oil port and Dubai airport. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crl4gxgkkylo


Important Note: The views expressed in this article are those of John Hanley personally and do not express the opinion or position of the Millennium Challenge Corporation or the US Government.

We all live under the same sky, but we don’t all have the same horizon.” —Konrad Adenauer

Many organizations operate in close partnerships while maintaining some degree of independence. Inter-organizational dependence can take many forms. A corporate takeover that leaves a new subsidiary intact, for instance. Or a financing organization and a local implementing partner.

Regardless of the circumstances or industry, such relationships carry the potential for organizational values to come into conflict. Managing this challenge falls to today’s modern human resources leaders, who craft the concrete workforce policies that drive daily work. Their success in doing so is dependent on the ability to diagnose and embrace different values and their impact on operations.

With such complexity at play, it is important to have a simple and consistent framework for analyzing each policy issue. That framework entails three steps in which a policy objective is aligned to shared values, given specific policy spaces for differentiated values to flourish, and then consciously reviewed with an eye towards improvements.

An example of how this framework has been used effectively can be drawn from a small US economic development agency—the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). For over 20 years, MCC has partnered with well-governed countries to fund transformative investments and reduce poverty through economic growth.

At MCC, the work was guided by several sound principles of the agency’s founders. Three of the most important were

  1. Value country ownership in project design and implementation.
  2. Instill urgency by strictly limiting project duration.
  3. Demand accountability for results and value for money.

These three critical principles include the seeds of contradiction. In relationships between a funding organization (MCC) and the separate entities (“MCAs”) that implement projects on behalf of their governments, there is a risk that remaining faithful to any two principles can undermine the equally important third.

Overemphasis on results in a short timeframe, for instance, can undermine an individual MCA’s efforts to develop unique organizational values. Similarly, allowing those organizational values sufficient time and space to flourish could risk project completion.

The successful balancing act implied here required a conscious three-step policy framework that focused on organizational values.

Step 1: Identify organizational values shared between MCC and MCA partners. Design common human resources policies to operationalize those values across all MCAs.

Step 2: Identify organizational values that are likely distinct between MCC and individual MCAs. Empower MCAs to develop policies that reflect their individual values.

Step 3: Continually assess whether you’ve balanced correctly. If not, make policy changes decisively.

All of this may make sense, but how is it actually done? Let’s review two examples, starting with performance management.

A policy goal diagram outlines three steps—Shared Values, Differentiated Values, and Review & Refine—for developing a performance management system with key practices listed for each step.

Performance management is difficult for many organizations and is made more so by the dependencies in the MCC model. But by providing a standardized system supportive of the shared values of MCC and MCAs, while introducing flexibility where consensus softens, adoption of the system was successful.

Initial adoption, however, was not enough. MCAs are established for the implementation of each grant, and inevitably, organizational values can evolve. This is what makes Step 3 so critical. Willingness to assess each experience and make substantive changes to rebalance between the guiding principles enhances credibility and allows for innovation. To this end, MCC’s revised guidance introduced the possibility for systems entirely designed by individual MCAs to be introduced.

This same framework was utilized to develop compensation standards. Many years ago, compensation design was largely decentralized to each MCA as part of each grant. A bespoke methodology and market position were developed for each MCA formation. While this tracked with each MCA’s separate legal status, the practice undermined accountability and rapid start-up. It also reduced oversight to ensure compensation was broadly market-based.

With intensive support from the Birches Group, MCC used the same three-step framework to significantly standardize the methodology while creating policy space for country ownership.

Infographic outlines three steps in compensation design: Shared Values, Differentiated Values, and Review & Refine, emphasizing accountability, country ownership, and flexibility.

Here again, carefully balancing values was critical. As the organization providing financing for the salaries in question, MCC needed a defensible way of developing pay ranges. These ranges needed to be broad enough for flexibility, but once set, needed to be defended strongly against efforts to pay above (or below) on the basis of individual circumstances.

In an assessment over time, MCC and MCA partners determined that greater dynamism was needed. To be competitive for talent, it was necessary to ensure a regular process around the comparators used to establish salary ranges. With this in mind and consistent with Step 3, initial guidance suggesting that pay movement would be infrequent was updated to create a system that responded to market movement.

These are just two examples of workforce policy development employing a simple methodology for balancing the shared and distinct values of organizations dependent on each other. In the context described, the framework was successful and necessary to ensure that the potentially competing principles were all achieved.

Approaching it this way is not without its costs. To work, both the team at MCC and the human resources experts within each MCA needed to be sufficiently resourced and empowered. Without this investment, it was very difficult to achieve the critical “Step 3” that allowed for refining and rebalancing.

With this caution in mind, however, the framework is a practical and effective way to anchor values in the shared work of separate organizations. That extra effort is worth it. Making space for the distinctive values of partner organizations in workforce policies is an investment that will drive innovation in the long run.


John Hanley is the founder of Mosaic Consulting, LLC, based in the San Francisco Bay Area. Mosaic is committed to serving the needs of organizations focused on operational excellence in financial management, internal control, organizational design, and talent acquisition.

John’s prior service with the federal government spanned over two decades, working to build small organizations around the world capable of achieving transformative results.

With expertise in both public financial management and human resources management, he led teams overseeing the investment of billions of dollars in economic development and infrastructure projects through grants between the Millennium Challenge Corporation (www.mcc.gov) and MCC’s country partners around the world.

For more information, see Mosaic Consulting’s website: https://www.mosaic-consulting-llc.com/

This interview is part of the inaugural edition of Community Magazine, Birches Group’s publication on workforce management. Subscribe to receive the full issue and future updates. Subscribe here


Moving organizations towards virtual work environments is progressing in fits and starts.  After the COVID-19 pandemic, many scaled back work-from-home policies. While virtual work presents challenges, it also offers opportunities for greater efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and reach—advantages traditional workplaces often cannot match.

In this issue of Community Magazine, we explore a fundamental question: Does a workplace still need to be a place?

From its inception, AMPLIFY Girls was intentionally designed as a virtual organization. By embracing a virtual structure from the start, it has operated efficiently while expanding its reach cost-effectively, allowing the team to focus on making a virtual organization work.

A person wearing a black polo shirt with the Amplify logo stands indoors, facing the camera and smiling.
A woman smiling at the camera is seated in a modern, warmly lit room with wooden walls, a fireplace, large window, and plants.

Zack Fowler and Lucy Minayo are co-CEOs of AMPLIFY Girls, bringing a collaborative leadership style to guide the organization’s strategic growth. Together, they share a passion for amplifying the voices of community-driven organizations serving adolescent girls.

Zack has two years as Head of Strategic Partnerships at AMPLIFY Girls and is a seasoned nonprofit professional with experience in gender, health, and education initiatives across four continents.

Lucy is a human rights lawyer with over twenty years of experience in the development sector. Before joining AMPLIFY Girls, she served as Executive Director of NurtureFirst, a global funder and capacity-builder for home-based childcare providers.

Source: www.amplifygirls.org/

Q: The decision to be, from the outset, a virtual organization is unusual. Why did the governance of AMPLIFY Girls take this avant-garde step?

(Zack): Working remotely was never really a choice for us; it was a necessity. We set out to build an international team that brought together deep expertise and lived, on-the-ground experience. That meant having team members based in Africa to help shape strategy for African organizations, while also drawing on the networks, experience, and access to resources of early contributors in Canada and the United States. Given these goals, a remote structure was the only way to ensure all those voices were in the room.

Q: Adopting a virtual approach can be controversial. What were the main concerns and opportunities, and how were they addressed?

(Zack): I don’t think we ever considered anything other than this.

Q: As a virtual organization, HR must approach workforce formation differently. How do you communicate this to candidates and onboard people virtually?

(Lucy): This approach isn’t unique, particularly in the African development context, where remote work has become the norm. As a result, we haven’t faced challenges in presenting this model to potential colleagues or team members at AMPLIFY Girls, and it aligns well with broader trends among funders.

These conversations have been relatively straightforward, and the flexibility of the model is a strong draw. When engaging potential collaborators, we emphasize the opportunities that flexibility creates, which has helped us build a diverse and dynamic team we’re excited to work with.

Q: In terms of reaching talent, how has being virtual extended or impeded this reach?

(Lucy): Virtual work hasn’t impeded our ability to reach talent at all. If anything, it’s expanded by removing geographic limitations and allowing us to focus purely on finding the best people for the role, regardless of where they’re based.

(Zack): Our East Africa team is spread across Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania. For example, our Head of Communications is based in Uganda—not because we relocated the role there, but because the strongest candidate was already there, and our model allowed us to hire without geographic constraints.

Q: Similarly, how has being virtual affected the organization’s staff demographics in terms of gender and geographic diversity?

(Zack): From a gendered, feminist perspective, remote work is a powerful driver of accessibility—especially for women at different stages of their careers or family lives. I’ve seen this firsthand throughout my career, having worked remotely long before AMPLIFY Girls.

Many women step away from the workforce to have children and later face barriers to re-entry. Remote work offers the flexibility that makes returning possible, allowing us to recruit mid-career women who are ready to re-engage but may not be able or willing to commit to rigid hours and long commutes. Several of these women have become exceptional members of our team—talent we likely would have missed if in-office work were required.

(Lucy): There’s also another side to this conversation: remote work creates an opportunity to challenge gendered narratives about roles within the home. It opens space for a more equitable sharing of family responsibilities and makes those shifts more visible and achievable.

In this sense, remote work is deeply deconstructive. It has the potential to reshape how we think about work, family, and community, and to help redesign societies that are more equitable and inclusive. By doing so, it expands access to opportunities for people who were previously excluded from the workforce due to the kinds of constraints Zack mentioned.

A woman sits at a desk, looking intently at a laptop screen with her hand resting on her chin. Office supplies are visible on the desk.

Q: Does AMPLIFY Girls use any fixed physical locations?

(Zack): We don’t have permanent physical space, though we do occasionally use shared spaces. For example, when it makes sense, we’ll bring the Nairobi-based team—our largest cohort—together at a co-working space or even coordinate a shared lunch at a nearby café.

While our team spans multiple countries, these informal meetups allow for in-person connection from time to time. Overall, our model remains fully flexible and truly remote.

Q: Is there an established periodicity for in-person meetings and activities?

(Lucy): Over the past two years, we’ve been able to make in-person connections more regular. We hold an annual meeting that brings the full team together in one physical space, and we also organize additional in-person gatherings around specific activities or events. The annual meeting, however, remains the fixed point on our calendar.

As Zack mentioned, teams in Nairobi and Tanzania have had more opportunities to connect locally. With five staff members in Nairobi and two in Tanzania, it’s been easier for those groups to meet and collaborate face-to-face when needed.

Q: Are these organized on a unit or cross-unit collaboration?

(Zack): Most of the time, we stay on schedule with our in-person gatherings. We’ve just returned from our annual year-end strategy retreat, where the entire international team comes together to reflect on the past year and plan ahead. These retreats are intentionally flat in structure, with no hierarchy or segmentation; everyone is in the same room, collaborating and contributing equally.

Q: Are there standards where AMPLIFY Girls defines a virtual workspace?

(Zack): We don’t provide strict guidelines or standards; what we offer is more of a resource. Staff receive an annual and monthly stipend to invest in their home office, helping create a comfortable space for remote work.

We do have expectations around communication—responsiveness, clarity, and participation—but physical setup is flexible. We don’t monitor backgrounds, seating, or location.

For example, even before I started working in AMPLIFY Girls, a remote team member with chronic pain would sometimes take meetings lying on the floor, saying, “Today is a floor day.” Her setup allowed her to participate fully, and we welcomed it. Flexibility like this is exactly what remote work is meant to support.

Q: Is virtual work typically carried out at home or in other locations, and is the choice a decision of the staff member or the organization?

(Zack): Absolutely. I’ve worked while traveling, from coffee shops, and all over the place. I often joke that my only in-person colleagues are the baristas at the café down the road—I see them more than anyone else during the week!

(Lucy): That’s what makes remote work so interesting. While many organizations see it as disruptive—prescribing where you sit, how you present yourself, or even what you wear—remote work shifts the focus. It asks organizations to prioritize results and outcomes over rigid, visible routines.

Q: Are there guidelines that define the physical attributes of an effective virtual workplace?

(Lucy): One requirement we do have for some roles is location. Certain staff need to be ordinarily resident in a specific town or area—not to limit flexibility, but to ensure practical accessibility: reliable internet, the ability to attend in-person meetings, and other role-specific needs.

Q: How does AMPLIFY Girls assist a staff member in setting up a virtual workplace?

(Zack): We provide an annual stipend for home office setup and a monthly stipend for communications, internet, and related expenses, added directly to everyone’s pay. An HR specialist manages this, having established the standards a few years ago. The amounts are based on averages from similar organizations, reflecting typical practices in the field.

A woman with curly hair and a necklace looks intently at a computer screen, resting her chin on her hand.

Q: Is there a clear understanding of virtual work etiquette, including expectations for hours and availability across time zones, disconnecting, camera use in meetings, and professional appearance?

(Lucy): Sometimes I wonder if we’re at the other end of the spectrum. We’re fortunate to have a highly responsible team that approaches remote work thoughtfully. While contracts outline general hours, there’s built-in flexibility: team members are expected to be available during the day for meetings and timely responses, but we don’t prescribe exact hours or require strict time-tracking. At AMPLIFY Girls, the focus is on the work being done and the outcomes being delivered.

(Zack): That’s true, especially for me, since I’m 11 hours behind the East Africa team. Today, for example, I’ll have a heavy morning of meetings from 6:00 to 11:00 AM my time, but I’ll handle a few tasks later, around 4:00 or 5:00 PM, when the rest of the team is asleep. Remote work lets me balance real-time collaboration with tasks I can do at my own pace, seamlessly.

(Lucy): Another advantage of remote work is nearly 24-hour coverage of the CEO role. It’s an often-overlooked benefit, the ability to respond across time zones and ensure the right people are available when needed.

Q: That’s certainly an advantage. At our organization, we require people to turn on their cameras for virtual work to maintain eye contact. Does AMPLIFY Girls have a similar requirement?

(Zack): We do require cameras in specific instances, but otherwise, team members have flexibility, and usage usually ends up about 50/50. During weekly or biweekly meetings with team-building or reflection activities, we ask everyone to turn cameras on and engage fully. For routine check-ins or quick updates, we’re much more flexible.

Q: How does AMPLIFY Girls prepare new hires for virtual work? 

(Zack): Our onboarding emphasizes the systems we use to stay connected. While every workplace introduces new hires to tools, for us, it’s front and center—team members rely on them to connect, coordinate, and collaborate, sometimes more than in-person organizations.

For example, getting someone up to speed on Slack channels and WhatsApp groups is the virtual equivalent of walking around the office and learning how work gets done, so it’s a key focus from day one.

Q: How are issues around stress and isolation in a virtual work environment managed?

(Lucy): Sitting in the same physical space doesn’t automatically prevent isolation, and the same is true for remote work. To stay connected, we hold biweekly team meetings and use tools like Slack and WhatsApp to coordinate across units. Supervisors keep in touch, and everyone has ways to check in with one another.

Isolation isn’t just about distance—it’s cultural, shaped by practices that foster inclusion, safety, and connection. This includes creating space for staff to reach out, providing mental health support, and encouraging collaboration and care.

We do our best to address this, though it’s not perfect. We continuously learn and adapt to improve the remote experience for our team.

Q: How are issues related to pay equity and equivalent worth addressed in a virtual environment?  Are issues related to variances in cost of living a factor?

(Lucy): At AMPLIFY Girls, our compensation philosophy is simple: equal pay for equal work. Salaries aren’t adjusted based on location; instead, we aim for fair remuneration for all staff and address equity within existing pay bands. Equity considers factors like experience and length of service, but the core principle remains: doing the same work means being paid the same.

Q: The three markets are quite different, with Nairobi more robust than Kampala or Dar es Salaam. Do you base compensation on Kenyan levels, or do you also consider international pay benchmarks?

(Lucy): We recently completed a job evaluation and compensation review, which was very illuminating. For example, Nairobi is a dynamic market with significant pay differentials. When setting midpoints, we averaged across various markets to determine rates that make sense for the organization. In less defined markets, individuals may benefit, but we aim to balance interests and ensure no one is undervalued simply because of where they’re located.

Q: Salaries are obviously subject to taxation, which varies by country. How do you ensure staff clearly understand your pay philosophy, how it’s applied, and that it’s fully transparent?

(Zack): We do exactly that. At our recent strategic retreat in Nairobi, we held a session laying everything out plainly—our philosophy, why we chose it, and what it means in practice.

We encouraged the team to speak up if they had questions or concerns, aiming to prevent anyone from leaving thinking, “I’m not happy with this,” without saying anything. Any changes to our structure or philosophy are fully transparent, and we have no issue explaining how and why these rates are set.

Q: At least internally, do you publish your pay scale?

(Zack): Yes, the pay scale, yes.

Q: How are issues around benefits related to insurance and pension addressed?

(Zack): We manage this by using different employment structures in different locations, ensuring full legal compliance and accountability with our staff. A central HR specialist supports the organization as a whole, while local HR support helps navigate location-specific issues. For example, our Nairobi-based specialist advises on tax changes and their impact on Kenyan staff—not to set compensation, but to ensure compliance and fairness across locations.

Person sitting at a desk using a laptop for a video conference call with four other people, with glasses and a phone on the table nearby.

Q: What has been the greatest challenge virtual work poses for building and sustaining cohesion within a team and across the organization?

(Zack): One of the biggest challenges of remote work is maintaining energy, focus, and continuity on a single issue. Team members may join a conversation late, step away, or return the next day, while others have continued the discussion.

The challenge is ensuring everyone stays informed, invested, and comfortable contributing. Sometimes this means pausing to bring people up to speed so no one is left behind. Remote work requires intentional reintegration to make sure every voice is heard and no input is lost.

(Lucy): A big part comes from my years of doing remote work. Without daily in-person interaction, it’s sometimes hard to know what people are thinking or feeling. Cameras may be on or off, and it’s not always clear if someone is disengaged from the process, the work, or the team.

What’s helped me is assuming good intentions—that everyone is committed to the mission and doing their best. That mindset has been invaluable in guiding me to support the team effectively.

Q: Does the absence of a physical center to the organization pose any difficulties in engaging with clients and collaborators?

(Zack): I don’t think so—if anything, it’s a huge benefit. Just today, we met with people across multiple countries. Working with team members in different international locations is a priority for us, and I honestly can’t imagine doing that in person. Remote work is clearly advantageous.

(Lucy): Of course, there’s another side—the human connection that sometimes only happens in person. Virtual engagements often lay the groundwork, but in some cases, face-to-face meetings truly unlock a relationship.

Remote work hasn’t been a barrier for us; no one has said, “We don’t want to work with AMPLIFY Girls because we’re remote.” Instead, we see in-person and remote interactions as complementary, using each strategically when it adds value.

Q: Is the concept of career different in a virtual organization?

(Lucy): The building blocks are the same, whether I’m working in-person or remotely.

(Zack): For me, the biggest benefit of always working remotely is that my career feels inherently open. I wouldn’t hesitate to consider opportunities in other locations or work arrangements. One challenge has been location filters on job sites, though more platforms now offer remote options, which helps.

Remote work has given me flexibility in both personal and professional life and the ability to build connections across locations. Over the past ten years, I’ve worked remotely for two nonprofits while living in three different states across various time zones—and it never affected my ability to work effectively.

Q: Overall, is being virtual a necessary challenge or an asset in maintaining and building AMPLIFY Girls’ corporate culture?

(Zack): Every model has pros and cons, but for us, remote work is overwhelmingly an asset. If we were forced to go fully in-person, I honestly don’t know how we’d manage it—and I wouldn’t want to. Shifting away from remote work would be extremely detrimental. Even considering a change would likely confuse our team, partners, and funders, who might wonder why we’d abandon the structure we’ve carefully built.

(Lucy): It also reflects our philosophy on administrative costs and serving partners. We don’t believe in spending resources to build that kind of infrastructure when those funds could be better used directly for, or in service of, our partners.


This interview is part of the inaugural edition of Community Magazine, Birches Group’s publication on workforce management. Subscribe to receive the full issue and future updates. Subscribe here