Remembering IOs: a Conceptual Framework for Organizational Memory in International Bureaucracies

One of the widely recognized functions of international organizations (IOs) is information provision. Many IOs consider and promote themselves as “knowledge brokers” and seek legitimacy through their expertise. In addition to this external knowledge-based function, we also assume IOs to be institutions “learning” from experience. To fulfill tasks of agenda-setting, coordination, monitoring, and implementation of international agreements, IOs rely on past decisions and experiences, namely their organizational memory. To build consistent international policies on peacekeeping, economic cooperation, climate change or gender equality, IOs have to “remember” what has worked or failed to work in the past and why they chose a certain path over other possibilities. This internal task of knowledge management is assumed to support IOs in achieving operational efficiency. Yet, even though IR as a field recognizes the importance of organizational memory in IO policymaking, this topic remains understudied. This conceptual article takes the first step in filling this gap by focusing on possible indicators of organizational memory in IOs, including organizational culture on information sharing, technological investments in knowledge networking platforms, presence of dedicated staff, embeddedness of memory systems in project cycle, and role of external partners. I rely on examples from practices in the United Nations (UN), UN Development Programme (UNDP), World Bank (WB), Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and the European (EU). Preliminary findings suggest that knowledge management approach to organizational memory in international bureaucracies is apolitical and fails to recognize strategic and structural obstacles to establishing memory systems in IOs. Understanding how and when international bureaucrats learn from experience or fail to do so and repeat past cycles of policy formation requires a research agenda familiar with preferences and interests of multiple actors at various levels of analysis (individual staff members, operational and field offices, IO Secretariat, member states, and civil society organizations).