Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (20)
Similar a Group 4 ERI Turkey presentation March 2010 nf v4.0
Similar a Group 4 ERI Turkey presentation March 2010 nf v4.0 (20)
Más de Nicola Franklin
Más de Nicola Franklin (9)
Último
Último (20)
Group 4 ERI Turkey presentation March 2010 nf v4.0
- 1. Henley Business School Executive MBA 2008-10 Learning Group 4 Reputation & Relationships Study Education Reform Initiative Istanbul, Turkey Monday 8th – Thursday 11th March 2010
- 2. Who are ERI?Who are ERI? ‘‘A think- and do-tank’ Aims at improving education policy and decision-making through research, advocacy, monitoring and pilot projects.
- 3. ContentsContents • Terms of Engagement • Methodology • International Best Practices • Analysis of ERI • Sustainable Funding • Stakeholder Management • Relationship with Sabanci University • Summary of Preliminary Recommendations
- 4. Executive SummaryExecutive Summary Preliminary Recommendations – 1.Sustainable Funding Move away from ‘transactional’ funding to become the CSR ‘partner of choice’ in long-term relationships with donor corporations. 2. Stakeholder Management Improve communication of value and benefits, especially to potential donors, and improve management of staff. 3.Relationship with Sabanci University Strategy comes first... then review alignment with Sabanci Uni.
- 5. Terms of Engagement EM08 – Team 4
- 6. Terms of EngagementTerms of Engagement • To understand ERI’s current profile, especially with potential donors, how they can be satisfied and visibility increased to achieve a Sustainable Funding model. • To understand how ERI can improve its profile and Stakeholder Management with reference to international best practices. • To understand the pro’s and con’s of the Relationship with Sabanci University.
- 8. MethodologyMethodology Problem Implementation Leadership Business Need Analysing Presenting Managing Source: Rasiel & Friga (2001) The McKinsey Mind SolutionIntuition Data
- 9. International Best Practices 1. Literature Search and Review 2. Secondary Data 3. Primary Data Julian Exposito
- 10. Literature Review -Literature Review - Perceptions of NGOsPerceptions of NGOs • the sophisticated new communicators • instigators of change in the global marketplace • not small bands of activists but the new ‘super brands’ • significantly more trusted than business, govt or media • effective at using the powerful images • speak directly to consumers • appeal to emotions through simple and concise themes • focused on one purpose – a clear agenda with a call to action Wootliff & Deri (2001) NGOs: The new super brands, Corporate Reputation Review, 4 (2)
- 11. Literature Review -Literature Review - NGO AccountabilityNGO Accountability • Vital qualities are – • credibility • legitimacy • transparency • accountability • lack of international standards: less legitimate NGOs can undermine credible NGOs • NGOs are responsible to many different stakeholders and have to figure out how to be accountable to all of them • implementing badly conceived notions of accountability can damage NGOs’ reputation UN-NGLS (2007), The NGO Accountability Debate - A Panel Discussion, UN Headquarters, New York
- 12. Literature ReviewLiterature Review -Reputation Challenge-Reputation Challenge • factors affecting the reputational environment: – growing importance of Web-based participatory media – increasing significance of NGOs and other third parties – declining trust in advertising • these forces are promoting wider, faster scrutiny of companies and rendering traditional public-relations tools less effective McKinsey, (2009), Rebuilding Corporate Reputations, McKinsey Quarterly June 2009
- 13. Secondary DataSecondary Data Key private sector criteria when choosing an NGO - • policy and strategy • business engagement • expertise on sector • brand strength • international reach • membership • creative thinking Verdantix (2009), Green Quadrant Report. Benefits that private sector gets from NGOs – • validate green strategy • employee engagement • enhance brand • cut costs via innovation
- 14. Primary DataPrimary Data Marks & Spencer plc NGO partnership requirements – • expertise • innovation • credibility • supporter network • business benefit Georgina Stevenson (2010) CSR Manager, Marks & Spencer plc
- 15. Analysis of ERI 1. Sustainable Funding Nicola Franklin
- 16. Literature Search –Literature Search – Impact on NGOsImpact on NGOs • What factors are impacting on NGO’s relationships with commercial firms? INTRAC, NGO Policy Briefing Paper No.1, January 2000 downloaded from http://www.intrac.org Power of the Business Community Power of Nation State ResponsibilityResponsibilityLove vs Hate Funding vs Fighting Sharing expertise & agendas
- 17. Literature SearchLiterature Search -NGO/Private Sector-NGO/Private Sector Funding RelationshipsFunding Relationships 1 Corporate Philanthropy 2 Strategic Contributions 3 Mainstream Involvement 4 NGO Accountability INTRAC, NGO Policy Briefing Paper No.1, January 2000 downloaded from http://www.intrac.org
- 18. ERI Funding SituationERI Funding Situation • historical situation: • funding composed of core + project based sources • funding surplus in 2008 • surplus utilised in 2009 • current situation: • ERI desired OPEX est. $1m pa • 2010 Funding Outlook presents a 30% shortfall • issues identified: • a clearer view on Strategy and Finance required • development of a Succession Plan • what are the Contingency Plans?
- 19. Conclusions -Conclusions - Funding SituationFunding Situation What are the main factors that trigger a donation? • Relationships! Relationships! Relationships! • Non Tangible donor benefits – ie, philanthropy, greater good • Tangible Benefits to donors • changes in government policy – better Turkey • specific project related benefits • branding exposure • positive Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
- 20. Recommendations -Recommendations - Fund Raising OptionsFund Raising Options • Consolidate Operations and focus on core goals (policy work) • Improve and focus on the level of funding from current donors • Less is More – fewer donors, deeper relationships, bigger donations • Go Broader – increase number of donors • Export Critical Thinking module to private sector (eg, Sabanci companies) • introduce Volunteers to increase resource base at low cost • Maximize revenue generating assets – e.g. Corporate Sponsorship • the Right Price for the right size of projects
- 21. Recommendation -Recommendation - Donor RelationshipsDonor Relationships • Move along the four phase model – NGO Accountability NGO Accountability Corporate Philanthropy Corporate Philanthropy Strategic Contributions Strategic Contributions Mainstream Involvement Mainstream Involvement Project Donors Core Donors
- 22. Analysis of ERI 2. Stakeholder Management Ben Stanberry
- 23. Which ERI stakeholders matter?Which ERI stakeholders matter? 3 4 12 56 1. ERI Staff 2. NGO Peers 3. Teachers / Educators 4. Government 5. Current Donors 6. Potential Donors Mitchell et al (1997) Academy of Management Review, 22(4)
- 24. Stakeholder Management –Stakeholder Management – Reputation QuotientReputation QuotientSMSM Fombrun et al (2000) Journal of Brand Management, 7(4)
- 25. Stakeholder Management –Stakeholder Management – Reputation QuotientReputation QuotientSMSM Emotional Appeal Products & Services Vision & Leadership Workplace Environment Social Responsibility Financial Performance
- 26. SPIRIT: experience-emotion-SPIRIT: experience-emotion- intention modelintention model Stakeholder EXPERIENCE of ERI’s BehaviourStakeholder EXPERIENCE of ERI’s Behaviour Consequent StakeholderConsequent Stakeholder EMOTIONAL Commitment andEMOTIONAL Commitment and Trust in ERITrust in ERI Consequent StakeholderConsequent Stakeholder INTENTIONS towards ERIINTENTIONS towards ERI ERI Staff • enjoyable, challenging work • very busy, overloaded • little coaching / support • loyal to projects, not ERI? • ready to go ‘extra mile’ • want / need more support • some intend to leave • may work less hard • may ‘publicly’ complain NGO Peers • produces excellent work • communicates very well • though always really busy • see ERI as key partner/ally • respected ERI • ERI entitled to be at ‘top table’ • will continue to work with / support ERI Teachers • relevant, innovative initiatives • good at listener • good communicator • admire & respect ERI • will continue to work with / support ERI Donors • believe has $$$$$ • responsive, communicative • fixes problems quickly • see ERI as worthwhile • value ERI’s expertise • get value from relationship • will support ERI as long as project benefits / ROI is clear and aligned with donor interests Potential Donors • none: who are ERI? • none: no experience! • none, but... • many donors interested in supporting education initiatives, so • they must learn about ERI MacMillan et al (2004) Journal of General Management, 30(2)
- 27. Stakeholder Management –Stakeholder Management – ConclusionsConclusions Dimensions of ERI ActionsDimensions of ERI Actions Keeping CommitmentsKeeping Commitments ListeningListening InformingInforming Tangible BenefitsTangible Benefits Non-Tangible BenefitsNon-Tangible Benefits Lack of CoercionLack of Coercion Terminal CostTerminal Cost Success DimensionsSuccess Dimensions Retention Extension Advocacy Lack of Subversion Trust Positive Emotions Strategy
- 28. Stakeholder Management –Stakeholder Management – RecommendationsRecommendations ERI Action PlanERI Action Plan Keeping CommitmentsKeeping Commitments Listening – weekly 1-1 staff meetingsListening – weekly 1-1 staff meetings Informing – clear values statementInforming – clear values statement Tangible & Non-Tangible Benefits – demonstrate using powerful images & catchy slogans Tangible & Non-Tangible Benefits – demonstrate using powerful images & catchy slogans Lack of CoercionLack of Coercion Terminal Cost – build trust so ‘handshake as good as a contract’ Terminal Cost – build trust so ‘handshake as good as a contract’ OutcomesOutcomes Retention Extension Advocacy Lack of Subversion Trust Positive Emotions Strategy
- 29. Analysis of ERI 3. Relationship with Sabanci University Qi Zhang
- 30. What about the future?What about the future? • should ERI seek full independence from Sabanci Uni? • it depends upon the future Strategic Direction • this picture isn’t clear at present • everyone is too busy to talk about it • consider Positive Outcomes v. Negative Outcomes
- 31. Positive OutcomesPositive Outcomes • ERI can leverage the reputation of Sabanci Uni – • eg, networking, credibility, access • administrative support of Sabanci Uni • eg, payroll, HR etc • media coverage for Sabanci Uni • ERI has much flexibility within the framework • ERI can focus on core activities • bridge financing from Sabanci Uni
- 32. Negative OutcomesNegative Outcomes • Sabanci Uni already seen as a well funded – may limit ERI’s fundraising potential • media coverage for Sabanci Uni’s brand may overshadow ERI’s brand • ERI staff don’t benefit from same employment terms • being part of Sabanci Uni may limit ERI’s scope
- 33. Why does strategy matter?Why does strategy matter? Can you say what your strategy is? ERI’s ‘Strategic Sweet Spot’ is where it meets donor’s needs in a way that other NGOs can’t, given the context in which it competes for donor funding. What are the benefits of having a clear vision and strategy? (1)ERI staff will share a common purpose – raising morale. (2)Will be easier to communicate & sell benefits of ERI projects or knowhow to potential donors – increasing revenue. (3)Will be able to align expectations of staff and organisational performance to strategy – improving management. Source: Collis & Rukstad, Harvard Business Review, 2008
- 35. SummarySummary Preliminary Recommendations – 1.Sustainable Funding Move away from ‘transactional’ funding to become the CSR ‘partner of choice’ in long-term relationships with donor corporations. 2. Stakeholder Management Improve communication of value and benefits, especially to potential donors, and improve management of staff. 3.Relationship with Sabanci University Strategy comes first... then review alignment with Sabanci Uni.
- 36. Any Questions?