Study About Non Governmental Organizations Business Essay Example

due to their significant growth and unique characteristics that distinguish them from market or state organizations. Efforts have been made to categorize and analyze NGOs compared to provincial and market actors [2]. The literature on NGOs is diverse like the NGO community itself, focusing primarily on four subjects: explaining the existence of NGOs, evaluating their effectiveness, examining their relationships with other actors, and understanding the factors influencing their development over time [3].Various functional explanations suggest that NGOs outperform or complement state and market organizations. The literature also explores the recent expansion of the NGO community, mainly attributed to their promise of successful performance. However, concerns about their effectiveness have led to research on their characteristics and behavior. It is important to question whether NGOs can be treated as a cohesive group, leading further research on understanding the diversity within the NGO community and its impact on their behavior and performance [3]. NGOs are often seen as a solution to various problems, either complementing or replacing government or market organizations. Theories suggest that they can address unmet needs not covered by government organizations (public goods theory) and provide services with information asymmetry (contract failure theory) [4]. They can also work alongside family and informal networks [5]. Moreover, NGOs offer solutions to free-rider problems faced by governments, assisting in dealing with diversity, minimizing bureaucracy, and encouraging experimentation [3] [4] [5]. Additionally, NGOs offer governments a means to address political and sensitive social issues that cannot be resolved. These advantages can be divided into two perspectives: a political perspective and an instrumental perspective. The NGO community is perceived in different ways.NGOs can be seen from different perspectives. On

one hand, they are viewed as service providers that fill the gaps left by the government and market, which is considered an effective and efficient role. On the other hand, NGOs are seen as playing a political role with various viewpoints within this context. Some see them as balancing forces against the government and market, contributing to checks and balances in society. Others view NGOs as representatives of existing political conflicts within civil society and between civil society and the government. Furthermore, NGOs are described as individuals fighting for recognition and respect as human beings [7] [8] [9]. The academic treatment also places different political positions on the maps of NGOs. Liberals perceive NGOs as preferable channels for exchanging state or market action aimed at socio-economic development. Neo-liberals consider NGOs as channels for providing services that complement the state [10]. From a left-of-center perspective, NGOs are seen as means of democratization and contributors to societal transformation [11]. In simpler terms, NGOs either bridge the gap between the market and the state or become areas of "political controversy" in response to formal institutions' dominance [12]. The debate on their role remains unresolved, questioning whether it is an "either...or" matter.Some argue that non-profit organizations, as represented by NGOs, have both instrumental and political qualities. They are seen as protectors of pluralism and privilege, sources of democracy and control, innovation, stagnation, as well as instruments and competitors to states [13]. However, the prevailing outlook is generally optimistic: Non-governmental organizations are viewed favorably as promising actors on a global scale. Criticism has been directed towards NGOs for their performance and accountability, which has sparked a discussion about their effectiveness.

It was expected that they would outperform government or market organizations in service provision while contributing to a better world. At first, academics had an optimistic view of NGO performance leading to positive portrayals of their actions. However, since the 1980s there has been a more critical examination of NGOs' political roles and instrumental functions with studies highlighting not only their strengths but also weaknesses and problems they encounter. Some criticisms include failure to reach the poor efficiently in certain areas and lack of internal democracy and accountability. The text also emphasizes organizational issues like establishing legitimacy, ensuring accountability, and balancing professionalization with voluntarism. This criticism has ignited a heated debate on NGO performance and accountability resulting in inquiries into how to address these performance-related issues within NGO research.
The problems faced by NGOs can be attributed to their prioritization of protecting their own interests alongside representing deprived groups, which hampers their satisfactory performance. Additionally, NGOs have multiple stakeholders with varying expectations, including donors, governments, beneficiaries, board members, and employees. These conflicting responsibilities often lead to the resorting of NGOs to engage in various activities and employ "creative packaging" in order to meet all demands effectively. It is suggested that these contrasting expectations from stakeholders influence the constructions and actions of NGOs, impacting their organizational structure and operations. Due to the diverse interests and opinions of stakeholders, NGOs inherently face contradictions that pose challenges to effective action. There has been a recent discussion regarding stakeholders emphasizing the utilitarian nature of NGOs as cost-effective service delivery tools while NGOs themselves emphasize their political role. This discrepancy is influenced by influential stakeholders adopting a formal, linear approach to

development planning which inhibits belief in accurately measuring development outcomes (Biggs and Neame 1996). The challenges faced by NGOs are commonly believed to stem from shared characteristics and behaviors discussed in numerous publications that explain why they may be perceived as inefficient or slow in responding to changing demand.Economic experts argue that the lack of ownership, limited access to capital, and lack of control over clients and workers contribute to the current situation. Additionally, organizational and management perspectives examine leadership, learning capabilities, organizational change, and innovative capacities within NGOs. However, it is important to question the assumption that all NGOs behave cohesively. Furthermore, a human-centered assistance NGO follows a specific decision-making logic which includes consecutive logical thinking, prospective logical thinking, maximizing behavior, information-driven decision-making, and expert decision-making. Decision-makers within these NGOs perceive their work as providing assistance where they can have the greatest impact within a given budget. While effectiveness can be defined in various ways for an NGO, its primary goal is always to efficiently achieve its organizational objectives. This may involve undertaking projects that aim to assist the largest number of people or operating in areas where others do not operate. A project is considered complete if its goals are achieved or if it proves ineffective or inefficient. The decision to initiate humanitarian projects relies on evaluating information provided by experts and considering factors such as the scale of the crisis, the number of people in need, and their specific needs (such as hunger, illness or displacement).The NGO takes into consideration the presence of other aid agencies in the area when evaluating factors such as its goals and future plans. This evaluation helps

determine the organization's budget and formal policy plans, specifying regions and types of activities it intends to engage in globally. Detailed project proposals that include budgets, schedules, and deadlines are highly valued by the NGO.

The choice of locations and humanitarian activities depends on information about crisis situations that align with the organization's goals and policies. However, circumstances may require changes in location and activities based on policies and demands. Thorough evaluations are conducted to determine if projects should be terminated due to goal achievement or valid reasons like inefficiency or ineffectiveness.

NGOs that prioritize efficient decision-making often conclude projects accordingly. Indicators of project success include the number of people assisted, adherence to project plans within budget limits, and timely execution. Organizational policies and procedures are expected to closely align with decision-making outcomes. Policy documents, procedures, and guidelines are regularly used by organizational members during the decision-making process.

The NGO has specialized divisions organized by region or theme, which bring together experts who play a significant role in decision-making.All members of the organization have a clear understanding of the hierarchy of decision-making. Additionally, there is an administrative system in place that facilitates the collection and exchange of information. Filing and documenting decisions, as well as rating and appraisal mechanisms, serve as important means to control the decision-making process. Furthermore, projects are expected to be closely monitored through regular financial and activities reports.

To identify a suitable humanitarian assistance NGO, it is crucial to analyze their approach towards decision-making. If decision-making follows a logic of appropriateness, it should be based on rule-based thinking that is instant, consistent, retrospective and mandatory in nature. Decision makers within humanitarian assistance NGOs that adhere

to this model will base their decisions on organizational experiences. Therefore, individuals who have been working within the organization for a significant period of time and possess knowledge about these experiences have a defining impact on decision outcomes.

Past actions play a vital role in shaping future decisions. There is an inherent understanding of the organization's actions and conduct with a belief that there is only one correct way to act in alignment with its purpose. This ingrained way of operating has evolved over time, reflecting the organization's history.Title: The Unique Decision-Making Process of a Humanitarian Assistance NGO

The Nonconventional Approach to Decision-Making within a Humanitarian Assistance NGO

The text emphasizes that humanitarian NGOs must employ an appropriate decision-making approach when determining whether or not to travel to specific states. Various factors, such as public opinion, urgency, the conditions of the receiving states, and the organization's values and beliefs, influence this decision. Past experiences also significantly impact this process.

If the organization has previously been involved in a particular area, initiating humanitarian projects there becomes almost automatic. Furthermore, successful past projects that have maintained trust within the organization are likely to receive approval for similar ventures without hesitation.

Within the organization, decision-making is governed by internalized rules that guide individual actions. Since trust and obligatory action align closely with organizational values, conflicts within the NGO are expected to be minimal.

Title: The Unique Characteristics of an NGO Providing Humanitarian Assistance

The Unconventional Decision-Making Process of an NGO Providing Humanitarian Assistance

The passage underscores that project proposals and other matters related to initiating or completing project activities within the NGO cannot be debated; instead, decisions are made by members who rely on

their internalized value system. What sets this NGO apart is its rejection of manuals or policy plans in guiding their decision-making process.The organization operates with an entrepreneurial spirit, fostering simultaneous and independent forward thinking. The stable assistance flows provided to countries and organizations create future expectations and a commitment to continue activities. Members understand which assistance projects align with organizational objectives, ensuring stability. Consequently, long-lasting relationships thrive between the NGO and recipient countries. Ending projects requires extensive deliberation and consultation to ensure smooth transitions or enable locals to take care of themselves effectively. The distinctive humanitarian assistance NGO remains dynamic yet disruptive in its operations by avoiding haphazard decision-making approaches. Multiple discussions and intense debates occur within the organization due to a lack of agreement on goals and preferences, attracting public attention to its turbulent dynamics. Unstable participation in decision-making forums results in high staff turnover.The decision-making process in the organization will primarily be informal, potentially leading to decisions that do not align with formal goals and policies. This lack of coherence can be seen in selecting locations, target groups, and activities for humanitarian assistance projects. The simultaneous nature of the decision-making process directly causes this lack of coherence. Consequently, the organization's activities may appear scattered as they reflect individual ideas about humanitarian assistance rather than a focused approach.

Each project proposal will generate discussions about the organization's values and mission. Consensus may be lacking on questions such as what constitutes effective humanitarian assistance or which activities should be prioritized or avoided. There will also be uncertainties regarding when to leave a certain location or where to go/not go, as well as when it is appropriate

to initiate a project.

The commencement and culmination of humanitarian aid projects, along with their location and activities, are mainly arbitrary and can be better understood through group dynamics rather than relying solely on the organization's structure, policies, or shared values. This study highlights that external factors like the crisis context and stakeholders significantly influence decision-making.The combination of external constraints and a persistent commitment to a preferred decision-making approach often leads to garbage can decision-making as a last resort. This phenomenon has been observed in cases where limited options for action are available due to external dimensions in the provision of aid in the country. Both organizations frequently experience hindered and ineffective decision-making, which is often associated with contextual constraints faced by humanitarian aid NGOs. It is theorized that providers of humanitarian aid commonly encounter the phenomenon of decreasing options and resorting to garbage can decision-making. Future research could explore whether other human-centered NGOs facing limited options and internal pressure also struggle with refuse cans' decisions. The main focus would be on how much these NGOs adhere to their preferred decision-making style and how much they are influenced by external limitations in both their home country and the project's location. In essence, how frequently do human-centered NGOs involved in humanitarian aid find themselves with fewer choices for action?