NGO- BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP

Lecture 13 & 14
WHAT IS AN NGO?
NGO
 An organization formally
independent of the state and private
sector having its own constitutional
identity that doesn’t seek profit for
individuals/members.
What are the
various types of
NGOs?
TYPES OF NGOS: WORLD BANK
CLASSIFICATION
Operational NGO Advocacy NGO

 Design and  Defend or promote a

implementation of specific cause.
development-related  These NGOs typically try
projects. to raise awareness,
 These NGOs can be acceptance & knowledge
community based, by lobbying, press work &
national or international activist events.
LEGAL IDENTITIES OF NGOS
WHY ----NGO- CORPORATE PARTNERSHIP
Risk management: rising social
consciousness

Mgrs focus now on

long-term socio-
environmental
impacts & MOTIVES Activism
value addition

Emergence of new expectations

WHAT IS PARTNERSHIP?
 A sort of collaboration to
pursue common goals, while
leveraging joint resources and
capitalizing on the respective
competences and strength of
both partners.
HOW PARTNERSHIP: NGOS &
CORPORATE SECTOR
 Resource Mobilization
 Employee volunteering

 Support in kind/infrastructure

 Issue /cause based

AREAS OF NGO –BUSINESS
PARTNERSHIP
 Marketplace
 Workplace

 Environment

 Community
WHY SHOULD CORPORATES ENTER
INTO CROSS SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS ?
CROSS SECTOR PARTNERSHIP

Sustainable
Development
Contemporary-Strategies and tactics for
promoting CSR
• Research and Reporting – media exposure;
• Social Responsibility – dialogue with Companies
• Social Accountability – standards and audits;
• Shareholder Activism – shareholder resolutions;
• Economic Pressure – boycotts;
• Government Regulations – supporting legislation;
• Litigation – bringing law suits; and
• Norm Creation – development of international law
SALIENT FEATURES OF A PARTNERING
ARRANGEMENT
 Self assessment in the initiation stage
 A careful consideration of partner choice

 Mission connect

 Alignment of values

 A clear assignment of management responsibility in the

respective areas of competence
 Commitment of resources

 Open , frank and constructive communication

 Inter-personal relationship between the CEOs of partner

firms
 Appreciation and positive inclination to learning

 Regular tracking of progress and performance

KEY REQUIREMENTS OF EFFECTIVE
PARTNERSHIP Resource dependency
Institutionalization

Commitment
symmetry
integration

Key
Ingredients

Interdependence Common goal

symmetry

Converging
Work culture Intensive
communication

Learning Alignment of cooperation

capability
HOW TO SELECT PARTNERS?
 Four Cs
 Compatibility

 Capability

 Commitment and

 Control
DRIVERS OF COLLABORATIVE CSR
PROJECTS

Centrality: the closeness of

fit b/w the firm’s CSR
activity & its mission &
objective

Specificity: the extent to

which the firm is able to
capture a share of the profit
stream generated by its
investments in CSR
COLLABORATION CONTINUUM
Relationship Stage Philanthropic Transactional Integrative
Level of low High
engagement
Importance of peripheral Strategic
mission
Magnitude of Small Big
resources
Scope of activities Narrow Board
Interaction level Infrequent Intensive
Managerial Simple Complex
complexity
Strategic value Modest Major
WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF
CROSS SECTOR PARTNERSHIP?
BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE
NGO PERSPECTIVE
FEW EXAMPLES: WORKPLACE INTERVENTION

 L&T collaborated with DTK , an NGO for AIDS awareness

programme at the Powai plant.
 Voluntary Counseling and Training Centre at the L&T
Health Centre in collaboration with MADCS for employees.
 Recently identified & referred to MDACS for follow-up & ART
 Management trainees & students of the L&T Institute of
Technology contact workmen, transport drivers, children of
employees and impart HIV/AIDS education.
FEW EXAMPLES: WORKPLACE
INTERVENTION
 BPCL collaborated with Kripa Foundation , De-
addiction centre for the employees addicted to alcohol
FEW EXAMPLES: MARKETPLACE
INTERVENTION
 Nestle’s , Nesquik milk powder contained GE
ingredients which was not indicated in the label when
sold in China.
 Greenpeace has been campaigning globally to eradicate
GE ingredients from food products.
FEW EXAMPLES: MARKETPLACE
INTERVENTION
 Bhopal Gas Tragedy
 Safety measured designed to prevent a gas leak had either
malfunctioned or were otherwise inadequate
 Safety siren intended to alert the community in case of an
accident turned off.
 Union Carbide refused to provide full information regarding the
nature of poisoning which meant the doctors were unable to
properly treat those exposed.
 Union Carbide merged with Dow Chemicals, the company
refused to take moral responsibilities of the actions of Union
Carbide.
 Greenpeace campaigning for an international liability instrument
to ensure that both corporations are held liable for their action ,
for compensation to victims of pollution & for environmental
clean-up
FEW EXAMPLES: ENVIRONMENT
INTERVENTION
 Greenpeace as a part of its global Tox Tech
Campaign had issued a public challenge to WIPRO
to phase out its hazardous chemicals from its
electronics products.
 A day before Wipro’s AGM, the IT giant committed
to 100% RoHS compliance by 2007.
 Sustained campaign of Greenpeace has already
resulted in international market leaders like HP,
Dell, LG Electronics, Samsung , Sony, Sony
Ericssion & Nokia committing to eliminate some of
the most hazardous chemicals from their products.
FEW EXAMPLES: ENVIRONMENT
INTERVENTION
 Tata International Limited
 Concern for the environment is reflected in the Environment Policy and
the Environmental concern measures taken up by the company in the
leather manufacturing facilities in MP and Tamil Nadu.
 Developed special training programs that educate employees on the
hazards of wastage and pollution.
 The first Leather manufacturing unit in India which was granted the
“ECO-MARK” for their products from the Bureau of Indian Standards.
FEW EXAMPLES: COMMUNITY INTERVENTION

 The Infyosys Foundation:

 Grants to socially & physically challenged children for education.
 partnered with various NGOs & local government in
strengthening rural development activities and infrastructure

 Cadbury India : funds a street children project focusing on

education

 Ranbaxyhas contributed for community health care

programmes
 FEW EXAMPLES: COMMUNITY INTERVENTION
 Pratham : catalytic role in improving primary education in
Mumbai
 Developing low-cost mass replicable innovative models to address
existing problems,
 motivating teachers & parents
 studying the current system to make it more effective.

 Pratham & MCGM are the active partners in this time bound
effort to achieve universalization of primary education
 Corporate partners ICICI Bank, ACC, HSBC, Ballarpur
Industries etc.
CAUSE RELATED MARKETING
 P&G , Hygiene & Health Care India : project DRISHTI – 1st ever
Sight Restoration Corporate project in association with NAB

 OPEN MIND with UNICEF : support & educate working

children

 These initiatives are support by their brand. Part of the sale of the
products is contributed towards these initiatives
WHAT IS EMPLOYEE
VOLUNTEERING?
EMPLOYEE VOLUNTEERING
 Allowing staff to volunteer in NGOs which can be part
of a broader corporate social responsibility programme
or to improve their image as a good corporate citizen.
 By responding to employee interests, employers can
build loyalty and pride in their company as well as
reducing many of their core costs in the process.
 FEW EXAMPLES OF EMPLOYEE
VOLUNTEERING
 HLL deputes management trainees to NGOs to sensitize them to
the rural ethos, markets & culture

 OTIS elevators motivates its employees to work with mentally

challenged .

 Tata Group of Companies encourages its employees to participate

in community development activities
CAN CROSS SECTOR
PARTNERSHIPS REALLY
MAKE A DIFFERENCE
Yes
NO
PERSPECTIVE- NO, CAN’T MAKE
DIFFERENCE
 Lack of understanding of what Partnerships are
 Insufficient Partnership skills
 Lack of Govt. support to/role in facilitating
Partnerships
• Most Partnerships non-strategic project related
• Most Partnerships driven by outcome, not process
• Most Partnerships not monitored or evaluated
• Insufficient dedication to sharing and learning from
Partnership experience.
 
YES- CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE
WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS TO
PARTNERSHIPS?
BARRIERS TO PARTNERSHIPS – THE BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

• NGO credibility: need for standards

• Lack of familiarity with Business contexts and processes
• Bound to traditional views of Business: limited role in development
• Bound to ideological views of Business: necessary evil
• Inability to discern between responsible/irresponsible business
Viewing Business as either something to be fought or as a source of funds
• NGO support for exclusively compliance driven SR
BARRIERS TO PARTNERSHIPS- THE NGO PERSPECTIVE

• Vast majority of Business either irresponsible, indulge

in green-washing, or at best only practice
philanthropy.
• Self-regulated SRB not acceptable.
• Concerns about globalization widening gap between
poor and rich ; concern about privatisation of essential
services
• Lack of understanding of Poverty issues by Business
• Lack of equity in Partnerships
• Lack of disclosure on CSR issues by Business
 
 THE WAY FORWARD

More Companies must get past “why should we?” to “How can we?”
Don’t wait to be “shamed” for bad practices.
More NGOs need to lose their ‘ I don’t need to engage with

Business” mindset.
More NGOs need to review ideological anti-for-profit/business bias
and begin to distinguish between the difference between
responsible and irresponsible business.
 More NGOs need to experiment with tri-sector partnership
initiatives.
Companies need to begin to think about CSR compliance as a

normal part of the cost of doing business, and as providing a

competitive advantage.