Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Resource-Based Accountability: A Case Study on Multiple Accountability Relations in an Economic Development Nonprofit

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In economic development nonprofits, the disparity between the nonprofit’s, its donor’s and the poor’s expectations concerning poverty alleviation has been identified as the main reason for ineffective aid delivery. The study at hand contributes to this discussion by following this question: How do the nonprofit, its donors, the supported SMEs, and the poor refer to the nonprofit’s mission of poverty alleviation when negotiating accountability? To answer this question, the study follows the literature on accountability and resource dependency and presents results of an empirical case study on multiple accountability relations between a donor, a development aid nonprofit, its supported SMEs, and the poor living in the environment of the supported SMEs. The results show a pattern we call “resource-based accountability.” This pattern is constituted by the observation that most of the stakeholders tried to meet the expectations of the resource owners with respect to the resource owner’s understanding of successful poverty alleviation. Finally, the paper introduces a hypothesis for further studies.

Résumé

Une des raisons principales du manque d’efficacité dans la livraison d’aide des organisations à but non lucratif dans le domaine du développement économique, semble provenir des divergences de conception entre organisations, donateurs et pauvres en matière de réduction de la pauvreté. La présente étude contribue à cette discussion en posant la question suivante: comment les organisations à but non lucratif, leurs donateurs, les PME et les pauvres se réfèrent-ils à la mission de réduction de la pauvreté lorsqu’il s’agit de négocier les questions de responsabilité ? Pour répondre à cette question, notre étude suit la voie ouverte par la littérature sur la responsabilité et la dépendance des ressources et présente les résultats d’une étude de cas empirique des relations multiples ayant trait à la responsabilité entre un donateur, une organisation à but non lucratif dans le domaine de l’aide au développement, les PME qu’elle soutient, et les pauvres qui vivent dans la zone d’action des PME soutenues. Les résultats révèlent un motif que nous appelons la « responsabilité fondée sur les ressources » . Ce motif émerge de cette observation que la plupart des participants essayent de satisfaire les attentes de ceux qui détiennent les ressources, suivant en cela la conception que les détenteurs de ressources se font du succès en matière de réduction de la pauvreté. Pour finir, l’article introduit des hypothèses qui pourront servir de base à de futures études.

Zusammenfassung

Bei Nonprofit-Organisationen für wirtschaftliche Entwicklung sind die unterschiedlichen Erwartungen der Nonprofit-Organisationen, ihrer Spender und der Armen zum Abbau der Armut als ein Hauptgrund für eine uneffektive Hilfeleistung identifiziert worden. Die vorliegende Studie trägt zu dieser Diskussion bei und geht auf die folgende Frage ein: Wie sehen die Nonprofit-Organisation, ihre Spender, die von ihr unterstützten kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen und Arme die Mission der Nonprofit-Organisation zum Abbau der Armut, wenn über Rechenschaftspflichten verhandelt wird? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage lehnt sich die Studie an die Literatur zu den Themen Rechenschaftspflicht und Ressourcenabhängigkeit und präsentiert die Ergebnisse einer empirischen Fallstudie zu mehreren Rechenschaftsbeziehungen zwischen einem Spender, einer Nonprofit-Organisation für Entwicklungshilfe, den von ihr unterstützten kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen und den Armen, die im Wirkungskreis dieser unterstützten Unternehmen leben. Die Ergebnisse zeigen ein Schema, das wir als „auf Ressourcen basierende Rechenschaftspflicht“bezeichnen. Dieses Schema begründet sich dadurch, dass bei einer Mehrheit der Stakeholder beobachtet wurde, wie sie versuchten, den Erwartungen der Ressourceninhaber gemäß deren Verständnis eines erfolgreichen Abbaus der Armut zu entsprechen. Abschließend wird in dem Beitrag eine Hypothese für weitere Studien vorgestellt.

Resumen

En las organizaciones de desarrollo económico sin ánimo de lucro (EDNs, del inglés Economic development nonprofits), la disparidad entre las expectativas de las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro, de sus donantes y de los pobres en relación con el alivio de la pobreza ha sido identificada como una de las principales razones para la entrega inefectiva de ayuda. El estudio en cuestión contribuye a este debate en base a la pregunta: ¿Cómo las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro, sus donantes las PYMES apoyadas y los pobres hacen referencia a la misión de alivio de la pobreza por parte de las organizaciones sin ánimo de lucro cuando se negocia la responsabilidad? Para responder a esta pregunta, el estudio se basa en el material publicado sobre responsabilidad y dependencia de recursos y presenta los resultados de un estudio de caso empírico sobre múltiples relaciones de responsabilidad entre un donante, una organización de ayuda al desarrollo sin ánimo de lucro, sus PYMES apoyadas y los pobres que viven en el entorno de las PYMES apoyadas. Los resultados muestran un patrón que denominamos “responsabilidad basada en los recursos”. Este patrón está constituido por la observación de que la mayoría de las partes interesadas trataron de satisfacer las expectativas del propietario de los recursos con respecto a la comprensión que éste tenía del alivio satisfactorio de la pobreza. Finalmente, el presente documento introduce hipótesis para estudios adicionales.

摘要

在非营利组织 (EDN) 的经济发展中,非营利组织、其捐赠者和穷人对扶贫的预期之间的不一致被确定为低效援助交付的主要原因。针对这一讨论,本研究探讨了以下问题:当协商责任时,非营利组织、其捐赠者、支持的SME和穷人如何看待非营利组织的扶贫使命?为回答这一问题,本研究参考了责任和资源依赖性方面的资料,并展示了经验案例研究的结果,该案例研究探讨了捐赠者、非营利组织发展援助、其支持的SME和生活在受支持SME环境的穷人之间的多重关系。结果显示了所谓的“基于资源的责任”模式。这种模式由这种观察构成,即大部分利益相关者都尝试满足资源所有人的预期,该预期源自资源所有人对成功扶贫的理解。最后,本论文介绍了进一步研究的假设。

ملخص

تم التعرف في التنمية الاقتصادية الغير ربحية(EDNs)، على التفاوت بين توقعات الغير ربحية، جهاتها المانحة و الفقراء بشأن التخفيف من حدة الفقر كسبب رئيسي لتقديم المعونة الغير فعالة. هذه الدراسة التي في متناول اليد تسهم في هذه المناقشة عن طريق إتباع السؤال: كيف أن الغير ربحية، جهاتها المانحة، دعمت الشركات الصغيرة والمتوسطة والفقيرة(SMEs) للرجوع إلى مهمة الغير ربحية للتخفيف من حدة الفقر عند التفاوض على المساءلة؟ للإجابة على هذا السؤال الدراسة تابعت الأدب بشأن المساءلة و موارد الإعتماد وتعرض نتائج دراسة الحالة التجريبية على علاقات المساءلة المتعددة بين المانحين، مساعدات التنمية الغير ربحية، دعمت الشركات الصغيرة والمتوسطة والفقيرة(SMEs) والفقراء الذين يعيشون في بيئة الشركات الصغيرة والمتوسطة و الفقيرة(SMEs) المدعومة. أظهرت النتائج وجود نمط نسميه ‘ موارد تستند على المساءلة’. هذا النمط هو الذي يشكل ملاحظة أن معظم أصحاب المصلحة حاولوا تلبية توقعات أصحاب الموارد فيما يتعلق في فهم مالك المورد التخفيف الناجح من حدة الفقر. وأخيرا، يقدم البحث فرضية لمزيد من الدراسات.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agyeman, G., Awumbila, M., Unerman, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2009). NGO accountability and aid delivery. London: The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atack, I. (1999). Four Criteria of Development NGO Legitimacy. World Development, 27(5).

  • Autio, E. (2008). High- and low-aspiration entrepreneurship and economic growth in low-income economies. Paper presented at the UNU-WIDER Workshop on Entrepreneurship in Economic Development.

  • Balser, D., & McClusky, J. (2005). Managing stakeholder relationships and nonprofit organization effectiveness. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15(3), 295–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. Philadelphia: PublicAffairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. L., & Moore, M. H. (2001). Accountability, strategy, and international nongovernmental organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30(3), 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, R. A., & Ebrahim, A. (2006). How does accountability affect mission? The case of a nonprofit serving immigrants and refugees. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 17(2), 195–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, A. (2001). Counting the world’s poor—Problems and possible solutions. The Worldbank Research Observer, 16(2), 125–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollar, D., & Kraay, A. (2002). Growth is good for the poor. Journal of Economic Growth, 7(3), 195–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterly, W. (2010). Only trade-fuelled growth can help the world’s poor. London: Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2001). NGO behavior and development discourse: Cases from western India. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 12(2), 79–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2002). Information struggles: The role of information in the reproduction of NGO-funder relationships. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(1), 84–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2003a). Accountability in practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development, 31(5), 813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2003b). Making sense of accountability: Conceptual perspectives for northern and southern nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14(2), 191–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2005). Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M. (2002). International Development NGOs: Agents of Foreign Aid or Vehicles for International Cooperations? In M. Edwards & A. Fowler (Eds.), The earthscan reader on NGO management (pp. 27–37). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations. World Development, 24, 961–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from cases. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, A. (1996). Demonstrating NGO performance: Problems and possibilities. Development in Practice, 6(1).

  • Fowler, A. (2000). NGO futures: Beyond aid: NGDO values and the fourth position. Third World Quarterly, 21(4), 589–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauge, A. O. (2002). Accountability—to what end? Development Policy Journal, 2(December), 73–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayashikawa, M. (2009). Trading Out of Poverty. OECD Journal on Development (Vol. 10, pp. 7-41): Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development.

  • Howard-Grabman, L. (2000). Bridging the gap between communities and service providers: Developing accountability through community mobilisation approaches. IDS Bulletin, 3(1), 88–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilby, P. (2006). Accountability for empowerment: Dilemmas facing non-governmental organizations. World Development, 34(6), 951–963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreutzer, K. (2009). Nonprofit governance during organizational transition in voluntary associations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20(1), 117–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landingin, R. (2007). Rapid growth fails to reduce Asian hunger. London: Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D., & Madon, S. (2004). Information systems and nongovernmental development organizations: Advocacy, organizational learning, and accountability. Information Society, 20(2), 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg, M., & Bryant, C. (2001). Going global: Transforming relief and development NGOs. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lister, S. (2000). Power in partnership? An analysis of an NGO’s relationships with its partners. Journal of International Development, 12, 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, K. (2000). NGOs without aid: Beyond the global soup kitchen. Third World Quarterly, 21(4), 655–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehanna, R.-A. (2004). Poverty and economic development: Not as direct as it may seem. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33(2), 217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller-Millesen, J. L. (2003). Understanding the behavior of nonprofit boards of directors: A theory-based approach. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32(4), 521–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J. B., & Salipante, P. (2007). Governance for broadened accountability: Blending deliberate and emergent strategizing. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Najam, A. (1996). NGO accountability: A conceptual framework. Development Policy Review, 14(4), 339–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naudé, W. (2010). Entrepreneurship, developing countries, and development economics: New approaches and insights. Small Business Economics, 34(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2010). Enhancing the role of accountability in promoting the rights of beneficiaries of development NGOs. Accounting and Business Research, forthcoming.

  • O’Dywer, B., & Unerman, J. (2007). From functional to social accountability transforming the accountability relationship between funders and non-governmental development organisations. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20(3), 446–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ospina, S., Diaz, W., & O’Sullivan, J. F. (2002). Negotiating accountability: Managerial lessons from identity-based nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(1), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, G. (2003). NGOs and poverty reduction in a globalizing world: Perspectives from Ghana. Progress in Development Studies, 3(2), 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravallion, M. (2001). Growth, inequality, and poverty: Looking beyond averages. World Development, 29(11), 1803–1815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (2010). Pool resources and reinvent global aid. London: Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senauer, B. (2002). A Pro-poor growth strategy to end hunger. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84(3), 826–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorens, J. (2009). Development and the political economy of foreign aid. Journal of Private Enterprise, 24(2), 87–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, M. M., & Hager, M. A. (2001). Organizational characteristics and funding environments: A study of a population of united way-affiliated nonprofits. Public Adiministration Quarterly, 61(3), 276–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, J. G., Porter, G., & Mawdsley, E. (2002). The role of the transnational community of non-government organizations: Governance or poverty reduction? Journal of International Development, 14(6), 829–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unerman, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2010). NGO accountability and sustainability issues in the changing global environment. Public Management Review, 12(4), 475–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vakil, A. C. (1997). Confronting the classification problem: Toward a taxonomy of NGOs. World Development, 25(12), 2057–2070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Véron, R., Williams, G., Corbridge, S., & Srivastava, M. (2006). Decentralized corruption or corrupt decentralization? Community monitoring of poverty-alleviation schemes in eastern India. World Development, 34(11), 1922–1941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (1998). The abridged version of case study research. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.), Handbook of applied social research (pp. 229–259). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Young, D. R. (2002). The influence of business on nonprofit organizations and the complexity of nonprofit accountability: Looking inside as well as outside. American Review of Public Administration, 32(1), 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nina Hug.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hug, N., Jäger, U.P. Resource-Based Accountability: A Case Study on Multiple Accountability Relations in an Economic Development Nonprofit. Voluntas 25, 772–796 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9362-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9362-9

Keywords

Navigation