A Contingency View of the Responses of Voluntary Social Service Organizations in Ontario to Government Cutbacks

Abstract

Voluntary organizations in Ontario have been thrust into a new environment; government funding on which they have traditionally counted has been reduced to the extent that actions have to be taken in order for some organizations to survive. Using a sample of 85 from a mailed survey to voluntary social service organizations in Toronto, we collected information on how organizational characteristics are influencing the actions taken in the face of these changes. We found that the alternatives considered factored into five dimensions: enhancing the image of the organization; cutting costs; developing strategic plans and accountability; implementing new tactics, such as user fees; and restructuring the governance and management structure. Analysis showed that younger organizations, smaller‐sized agencies, and those with a diverse set of funding sources employ a wider range of options to deal with environmental challenges. Many of these options are directed at protecting the main mission of the organization and building awareness and marketing strength so that the organization reduces its susceptibility to environmental shifts. Résumé Les organismes de bénévolat de l'Ontario sont plongés dans un nouveau contexte, car les subventions gouvernementales sur lesquelles ils comptaient jusqu'à présent sont réduites à un point tel que des mesures doivent être prises afin qu'ils puissent survivre. Un sondage effectué par la poste auprès de 85 organismes de services sociaux bénévoles de Toronto nous a permis de rassembler des données montrant que certaines caractéristiques organisationnelles peuvent influencer les mesures à prendre face à de tels changements, et nous avons envisagé cinq solutions possibles pour remédier à la situation: rehausser l'image de ces organismes; réduire leurs coûts; mettre sur pied certaines stratégies et rendre compte de leurs activités; utiliser de nouvelles tactiques, tels des frais d'utilisation; ainsi qu'en restructurer l'administration et la gestion. Il ressort de cette analyse que les organismes plus récents et de plus petite taille ainsi que ceux bénéficiant de sources de financement plus variées peuvent utiliser un plus vaste ventail d'options pour contrer les difficultés que présente la conjoncture actuelle. La plupart de ces possibilités visent à préserver la mission principale de ces organismes et à renforcer leur vision et leur politique de marketing afin de réduire leur vulnérabilité face à tout changement conjoncturel.

Funding conditions for aid effectiveness: A mixed blessing for the sustainable development of host‐country‐national employees

“…Although efforts to reduce salary discrepancies are underway (Carr et al, 2012), the relocation costs associated with expatriate assignments make it probable that HCNs will continue to remain the less expensive option for the foreseeable future. This finding echoes what has been observed in the private sector literature, where less costly HCN labour has been found to drive global outsourcing (Taylor & Bain, 2005), but contrasts with the domestic nonprofit literature, where reductions in funding generally have had uniformly negative staffing consequences (e.g., staff reduction and workload overload) (Alexander, 1999;Foster & Meinhard, 2002). In this sense, it reveals a significant but previously underexplored contextual difference between domestic and international nonprofits: Namely, the latter have the option to shift their labour force composition to less costly options (i.e., HCNs).…”

“…The findings of this study support the practical suggestions of previous nonprofit research (e.g., Crutchfield & Grant, ; Foster & Meinhard, ) that INGOs would benefit by reducing their dependency on government funding resources. Specifically, in the absence of any constructive changes to existing aid effectiveness policies, INGOs are advised to diversify their funding sources (e.g., increase private sources of funding) and/or engage in interorganizational alliances to achieve economies of scale.…”

Partner Strategic Capabilities for Capturing Value from Sustainability-Focused Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships

“…For example, in the private sector, marketing is essential to gaining the reputational, and thus financial benefits from CSR activities [40]. Likewise, nonprofit organizations are increasingly investing in marketing strategies to improve the reputation and visibility of their programs or services, so that they can compete with other nonprofits for access to funding opportunities [43]. Somewhat surprisingly, of the three strategic capabilities compared in this study, marketing and promotion was the best predictor of improved human capital.…”

“…One such strategy common to business-nonprofit alliances is called cause-related marketing, whereby the partners implement a marketing campaign that simultaneously increases public awareness about the nonprofit partner's social cause and promotes the business partner's CSR activities related to addressing the same issue [41,42]. It is less common to consider the competitive advantage of nonprofit organizations, however, the intensified competition among organizations in this sector to secure funding, membership, and government support is increasingly incentivizing nonprofits to develop strategic capabilities in marketing and promotion [17,43]. As well, local governments compete with each other to attract important resources for economic development, and the reputation of the city or town can be a major contributing factor to its competitive success.…”

The Purpose (and Perils) of Government-Nonprofit Partnership

“…This approach to the benefits of interorganizational cooperation, emphasizing collaboration as a strategic response to environmental or funding uncertainty, has been extensively explored in the nonprofit literature and is also reflected in the theoretical frameworks discussed below (Connor, Taras-Kadel, & Vinokur-Kaplan, 1999;Foster & Meinhard, 2002a, 2002bGrønbjerg, 1993;Mulroy & Shay, 1997;Provan & Milward, 1995;Rapp & Whitfield, 1999).…”