Evolving Global Structures and the Challenges Facing International Relief and Development Organizations

Abstract

Most current executives of the largest international relief and development organizations (NGOs) expect their organizations to move toward more global governance structures that incorporate fully vested partners from the north and south. This article seeks to pre- sent the potential opportunities and challenges of transition to a global governance structure. As NGOs have adapted their governance structures to the pressures of globalization, two variations of the international federation structure have emerged: the donor-member-dominated federation and the global bumblebee federation. The governance histories of World Vision International and Habitat for Humanity International reveal how these two structures may evolve. NGOs considering transition to a global governance structure can expect to deal with management issues such as role conflicts, staff skills, and maintenance costs. Global structures provide the framework within which NGOs can engage multiple stakeholders, but global structures must be accompanied by complementary management systems to fully use their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fisher

(1994). Is the iron law of oligarchy rusting away in the third world? World Development, 22(2), 129–143.

Fowler

A. F.

(1996). Assessing NGO performance: Difficulties, dilemmas, and a way ahead. In Edwards

, & Hulme

(Eds.), Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post cold-war world (pp. 169–186). West Hartford, CT: Kumarian.

Hudson

B. A.

, & Bielefeld

(1997, Fall). Structures of multinational nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 8(1), 31–49.

Hulme

, & Edwards

(1997). Donors and states: Too close for comfort(chap. 1, 18). New York: St. Martin's Press.

Lindenberg

(1999). Declining state capacity, voluntarism, and the globalization of the not-for-profit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28, 147–168.

Lindenberg

, & Dobel

J. P.

(1999). The challenges of globalization for northern international relief and development NGOs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28, 4–25.

Provan

K. G.

(1983). The federation as an interorganizational linkage network. Academy of Management Review, 8(1), 79–89.

Widmer

(1993, Winter). Role conflict, role ambiguity, and role overload on boards of directors of nonprofit human service organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 22(2), 339–356.

World Vision International. (1995a, September 21). Bylaws including statement of core values, mission statement, and covenant of partnership. Monrovia, CA: Author.

10.

World Vision International. (1995b, September). Report of the partnership task force: Organizational study of World Vision International. Monrovia, CA: Author.

11.

World Vision International. (1998, March 6). Board policy on boards and advisory councils of World Vision national offices. Monrovia, CA: Author.

12.

Young

D. R.

(1989, Summer). Local autonomy in a franchise age: Structural change in national voluntary associations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 18(2), 101–117.

13.

Young

D. R.

(1991). The structural imperatives in international advocacy associations. Human Relations, 44(9), 921–941.