HOW TO ASSESS NGO CAPACITY? A Resource Book on

HOW TO ASSESS NGO
CAPACITY?
A Resource Book on
Organisational Assessment
Stein-Erik Kruse
Oslo 1999
Norwegian Missionary Council
Office for Development Cooperation
Table of Content
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD............................................................................................................................ 2
HOW TO READ THE BOOK ...............................................................................................3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE ................................................................ 4
1.1. NEW CHALLENGES FOR NGOS ......................................................................................4
1.2. WHAT IS ORGANISATIONAL ASSESSMENT? ...................................................................4
1.3. WHAT ISSUES ARE DISCUSSED? .......................................................................................5
CHAPTER 2: AID POLICES AND KEY CONCEPTS ....................................................... 8
2.1. THE REDISCOVERY OF ORGANISATIONS ..........................................................................8
2.2. CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS .........................................................................................10
CHAPTER 3: STAKEHOLDERS AND PURPOSES ........................................................ 14
3.1. WHO ARE THE STAKEHOLDERS? .....................................................................................14
3.2. HOW TO DECIDE THE PURPOSE?.....................................................................................15
3.2.2. MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT ..................................17
3.2.3. ESTABLISHING NEW PARTNERSHIPS............................................................................17
CHAPTER 4: A FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING NGO CAPACITY......................... 19
4.1. FOCUSING THE ASSESSMENT: ZOOMING IN AND ZOOMING OUT .....................................19
4.2. FRAMEWORKS FOR ASSESSING PERFORMANCE ..............................................................20
CHAPTER 5: HOW TO CARRY OUT AN ASSESSMENT?........................................... 27
5.1. REASONS FOR CONDUCTING AN ASSESSMENT ................................................................27
5.2. MAPPING THE STAKEHOLDERS. ......................................................................................28
5.3. ASSESSING ORGANISATIONAL READINESS ......................................................................30
5.4. DECIDING THE TEAM TO CONDUCT THE ASSESSMENT .....................................................32
5.5. IDENTIFYING KEY ISSUES AND SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT.............................................34
5.6. TAILORING THE TOOLS ...................................................................................................35
5.7. ARRANGING THE WORKSHOP .........................................................................................35
5.8. PREPARING THE FOLLOW-UP .........................................................................................37
CHAPTER 6: FOCUSING THE ASSESSMENT ............................................................... 38
6.1. RAPID ASSESSMENT TOOLS ............................................................................................38
6.2. ORGANISATIONS IN DIFFERENT STAGES OF LIFE ..........................................................43
APPENDIX 1: ORGANISATIONAL ASSESSMENT FORMAT .................................... 47
APPENDIX 2: REFERENCES............................................................................................. 52
Foreword
2
FOREWORD
An anecdote tells of six blind men who happen upon an elephant. One man felt
the animal's leg and exclaimed: "Elephants are very much like trees!" Another
man felt the tail and concluded: "No, an elephant is more similar to a rope".
Another felt the tusks, and yet another the trunk, and so on. In the end, each of
the six blind men left with his own idea of what an elephant really is.
The assessment of organisations is very much like the six blind. It is the same
organisation, but conclusions vary dramatically depending on who describes
and evaluates, and the purpose of the assessment. To some extent this is
necessary. Organisations are complex "animals" that need to be examined from
many different perspectives.
As such, there is not only one organisation, but several images of the same
organisation depending on people's different perceptions. On the other hand, we
believe that a more systematic approach helps to provide a better understanding
of organisations and their dynamics.
It is increasingly being realised that NGO performance is linked to and depends
on organisational capacity. Capacity building or organisational development
have become key aims and strategies in respect of the cooperation between
Northern and Southern NGOs.
NGOs in the North and South are thus faced with new challenges. How do they
form the basis for constructive collaboration? How do Norwegian NGOs
appraise the capacity of their partners, and identify genuine needs and
opportunities for change? What methods of self-assessment are available for
Southern NGOs starting capacity building efforts? And not least, how should
the results and impact of partnership and organisational objectives be measured
and evaluated?
The Norwegian Missionary Council – Office for Development Cooperation
(BN) has for several years worked with thematic areas like new partnerships,
the assessment of organisational sustainability and how to measure results and
impact. A Handbook with various models for how to assess organisational
sustainability was developed in 1995, along with tools to analyse the handing
over process of development projects. 1 This book has been used extensively
and BN wished to prepare a new and supplementary resource book. While the
former analysed organisations in relation to a broad discussion of sustainability,
this book goes more inside the organisation and presents models and tools for
assessing NGO capacity.
1
"Caring, Sharing, Daring. Development Work in Transition”, Oslo 1995.
Acknowledgements
3
HOW TO READ THE BOOK
This is partly a Handbook presenting guidelines and tools for how to assess
organisations, but it seeks also to broaden perspectives and knowledge about
organisational change and institutional development.
Chapters 1 and 2 set the scene by defining new challenges for NGOs as
partnership organisations and key concepts used in the book. Chapter 3 makes
the point that the purpose of organisational assessment depends on the interests
of the users, and introduces three main purposes for conducting an assessment.
In Chapter 4 the framework and main analytical model for organisational
assessment is presented. Chapter 5 goes through the practical steps in an
assessment process and Chapter 6 suggests some more rapid assessment
methods.
There is a logical progression in the book and basic ground rules are important.
Organisational assessment is not a neutral instrument, but needs to be
understood in a broader development context and handled with care. Users
could, however, benefit from specific tools and guidelines in the final chapters.
We will also encourage readers to test and experiment with alternative
approaches and keep in mind that one or the same tool does not necessarily
work in all organisations. Quality assessment is not a matter of mechanical
application, but careful adaptation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank BN for funding this project and their staff - in particular
Arne-Kjell Raustøl for his moral support and professional advise throughout the
process. An advisory group consisting of representatives from Norwegian
missionary organisations and external advisers have met three times and
provided valuable comments and input to the process and product.
The main model in this book has been tried out in Bangladesh and Kenya. We
would like to thank Bangladesh Evangelical Lutheran Church (BNELC) and the
Norwegian Santal Mission, the Free Pentecostal Fellowship (FPFK) in Kenya
and the Pentecostal Foreign Mission of Norway (PYM) for their active
cooperation and useful comments in constructive workshops in Dinajpur and
Nairobi.
Chapter 1
4
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1.
New Challenges for NGOs
New partnerships between Norwegian and Southern NGOs are emerging.
NGOs in Norway are not supposed to plan and implement programmes on their
own, but collaborate with and provide support through like-minded Southern
partners. Capacity development has become a key concern for most Norwegian
NGOs, and organisational development represent both a strategy and an aim in
a new era of development cooperation.
NGOs are faced with new challenges. How do organisations find each other and
form the basis for constructive collaboration? How do Norwegian NGOs
appraise the capacity of their partners, and identify genuine needs and
opportunities? What methods for self-assessment are available for Southern
NGOs starting new capacity building efforts? And not least, how should the
effects and impact of partnership and organisational change be measured and
evaluated?
NGOs need new knowledge about organisations and how they change in
different cultural contexts. They need to know what characterises a well
performing NGO, a framework for assessing NGO capacities, skills and
methods for the systematic collection of data.
The new concepts of capacity building and institutional development are still
over-used and under-defined by most NGOs. Strategies and rhetoric have
changed without sufficient understanding of operational strategies and the skills
required to follow the new principles and practices for development
cooperation. Capacity development has been presented as part of the new
answers, without a clear sense of the problems. Effective strategies for capacity
development require good diagnosis. Lack of diagnosis is malpractice whether
in medicine or management, and may lead to resources being wasted and
serious failures. Project support was often found to be difficult, but
organisational development is a far more complex and risky effort.
1.2.
What is Organisational Assessment?
Organisational assessment is defined as:
«all systematic processes which are used to assess the performance,
competence and capacity of an organisation and find ways to increase its
efficiency and effectiveness". 2
2
Another definition is: "OA is the application of different frameworks, techniques and tools to
help development agencies decide which partner organisation to work with, and to help them
identify which interventions may be needed to strengthen this partnership". Hailey J. (1995)
Chapter 1
5
It consists of tools and techniques which are used to identify areas in
organisations that are progressing well, and to reveal deficits in capacity and
competence that are limiting performance. The analysis also indicates what
level of capacity would be needed in the future. The comparison between the
actual and the desired shows what gaps need to be filled.
Organisational assessment is nothing new or mysterious. It is a continuous
process carried out by managers, staff, members and beneficiaries. People often
have clear views about the qualities of leaders, the reputation of the
organisation, its profile, ability to provide services, etc. There is, however, an
important difference between intuitive judgements and more formal
organisational assessment. It is the structured approach and more systematic
procedures which characterise organisational assessment.
The purpose of this resource book is twofold:
• To present an approach, models and procedures for assessing NGO
capacity.
• To place organisational assessment as a strategic challenge for NGO
growth and development.
It is partly a Handbook which presents guidelines on how to conduct an
organisational assessment. The specific dos and don’ts are relatively few since
every assessment needs to be tailored to a context and particular organisation.
We would rather call it a resource book on organisational assessment with the
intention of broadening perspectives and knowledge about organisational
diagnosis and development.
The book is prepared mainly for NGO managers, staff and consultants working
with NGOs. We also believe that development practitioners from other sectors
could benefit from the approach and models presented here.
1.3. What Issues are Discussed?
Changing Policies and Key Concepts
What drives the interest for capacity development?
What are the basic concepts and definitions?
Concepts are many and often unclear. Similar terms have multiple meanings.
There are few operational definitions which allow NGOs to target capacity
development well. Recent NGO evaluations illustrate a wide gap between
theory and practice in the sense that NGOs are often more clever at adopting
Chapter 1
6
new buzzwords than at translating and putting those words into operation in
their programmes. 3
The Purpose of Organisational Assessment
Why are we doing an organisational assessment?
Who are the users and the stakeholders?
Organisational assessment is always a means to an end, and should be placed
within a broader strategic framework. It is the user that defines purpose and
relevance. A powerful tool has little value if the craftsman does not know how
and why he is using it. Assessment of organisational capacity is carried out at
various points in the programme cycle with different objectives. We need to
clarify the most common uses, define who the stakeholders are and their
interests.
Framework and Analytical Model
What is a relevant framework and model for assessing organisational
capacity?
What are the most important dimensions?
An organisational assessment requires a view of what constitutes an
organisation, and what capacities or abilities are required to perform well. For
each ability a set of dimensions should be defined for measuring the most
relevant characteristics.
This Resource Book concentrates on one analytical model - not because there
is only one way to analyse organisations. On the contrary, no blueprints are
available. Different approaches are complementary and each model might
provide particular insights. There is a growing abundance of literature
available 4 on the subject and NGOs have gained much experience in assessing
organisations. Our attention is focused on one approach since it is
comprehensive and has been found to be relevant in practice. 5 For practical and
pedagogical purposes one approach remains in focus - not excluding others.
How to Carry out an Organisational Assessment?
How to clarify the reasons for conducting an assessment and its major
stakeholders?
How to decide whether an organisation is prepared and ready for an
assessment?
What is the best team to conduct an assessment?
3
UD Evaluation Report 3/98, NGO Study
See References.
5
The model has been tried out with NGOs in Bangladesh, Kenya and Jamaica.
4
Chapter 1
7
How to identify key issues and the scope of the assessment?
How to organise an assessment and prepare for the follow up?
The tool in itself is neutral – neither good nor bad, but the use and how the
process is carried out must be guided by clear, shared and agreed values and
guidelines. The message is that there are several roads to the same goal. But it
is equally important to acknowledge that organisations start from different
“locations” and normally use different means of transport depending on how far
they want to travel, their resources, cultural preferences and the time available.
Chapter 2
8
CHAPTER 2: AID POLICES AND KEY CONCEPTS
2.1. The Rediscovery Of Organisations
The broad ideas of organisational and institutional development gained new
importance in the 1990s in Norwegian development cooperation. This was a
result of the growing realisation of the role organisations and institutions play
in the development process. In Norwegian aid policy increasing emphasis has
been placed on the ability and capacity of developing countries to design and
implement their own programmes through the growth of effective organisations
and institutional frameworks in the public, private and civil sectors. Capacity
building for sustainable development has become a cornerstone of Norway’s
involvement in international development cooperation.
Linking organisations in the South with like-minded partners in Norway was
encouraged. While institutional development was perceived as the goal,
cooperation between public agencies, universities, cultural institutions, and
non-governmental organisations became the means. In the same period there
has also been a rapid increase in the number and size of non-governmental
organisations involved in development work. There are currently more than 80
Norwegian NGOs supporting about 1000 large and small projects in Africa,
Asia and Latin America with support from the Norwegian Government.
This Resource book is about NGOs and there has been a gradual shift in how
most Norwegian NGOs have responded to three questions:
• Strategy:
• Activities:
• Evaluation:
What should we focus on?
What should we do?
How do we know if we are succeeding?
Chapter 2
9
Strategy: From Project Support to Organisational Development
There has been a change in focus for Norwegian NGOs from supporting their
“own” projects to building and strengthen-ing like-minded organisations in the
South.
Various NGOs have followed different paths and speed in the process of
change, but most Norwegian NGOs currently define themselves as «partner
organisations» in the sense that their main role is to support Southern NGOs in
achieving their aims and objectives.
The chart illustrates the change of focus which has taken place from helping
poor individuals, to community development, leadership training and finally
partnership and organisational development. There are obvious differences
between NGOs. Some provide only support to organisational development
while most seek to balance traditional projects with forms of organisational
support. Emergency relief maintains a strong focus on helping individuals in
need, while long-term development has a stronger organisational focus.
What do we focus on?
Helping individuals in
poverty
Organising local groups
Developing leaders
Building capacity in partnership
Activities: From Transferring Resources to Building Capacity in
Partnership
When development is understood as helping individuals, it is natural that the
primary activity involves transferring those resources they are lacking. Most
NGOs have realised, however, that simply transferring resources was a shortterm solution. A more lasting response was to offer new technology and/or
enable people to help themselves. But technical solutions were often
inappropriate and imposed from the outside. Communities were not sufficiently
involved in solving their own problems.
Therefore Northern NGOs started to concentrate on activities with the aim of
embedding capacity in partner organisations. The transfer of resources and
skills were still required, but the emphasis was on equipping those
organisations to use the technology and resources more wisely.
More recently some NGOs have tried to more radically redefine the terms
capacity and partnership. Partnership should not be a lopsided arrangement
where one organisation provides the resources, direction and ideas, but a
reciprocal relationship in which both parties share ideas and learn from each
Chapter 2
10
other. In this context capacity is not something that one organisation has and
can give or teach to another organisation. Capacity is built when two
organisations are able to work together to find the best ways of interacting with
the poor in a particular situation.
What are our activities?
Transferring resources
Transferring technology
Embedding capacity
Building capacity in partnership
Evaluation: How do We Know if We are Succeeding?
What are the expected results? How should those results be measured and
evaluated? These are burning and complex issues for any NGO. There are
complex methodological problems and criteria and standards of effectiveness
have changed over time. NGOs have supported several programmes based on
good intentions and general assumptions about what was needed. Many of these
programmes were later found not to benefit the poor and NGOs were
challenged to go beyond good intentions.
Some NGOs developed management-by-objectives systems which reported
regularly on achievements in terms of increased crop yields, improved literacy,
reduced child malnutrition, etc. However, with less emphasis on individual
projects, changes in organisational performance became more important. The
challenge of evaluation in a period where mutual partnership is high on the
agenda is to find appropriate criteria for quality and "good" performance, and
relevant methods for measuring results. This is both urgent and necessary in
order to avoid reverting to good intentions.
How do we measure results?
Good intentions
Management by
objectives
Organisational skills in monitoring
Evaluations partnership
2.2. Concepts And Definitions
Chapter 2
11
Several broad and complex concepts will be used in this book and some
definitions are required to provide direction and guidance for assessing
organisational capacity. 6
What is Institutional Development?
Institutional or capacity development is defined as:
"the process by which individuals, organisations and social systems increase
their capacities and performance in relation to goals, resources and the
environment".
It is important to keep in mind that
institutional development consists of,
but goes beyond human resources and
organisational development. It
involves fundamental social change,
the transformation of patterns of
behaviour. Institutional development
embraces three levels and includes a
broad range of activities at individual,
organisational and system levels.
Organisations and institutions
The concepts of institution and organisation
are related, but not identical. Institutions
refer mostly to the system level and the
norms, values and regulations which guide
and constrain the behaviour of individuals
and organisations in a society (“the rules of
the game), while organisations are the actors
or “players” within a system. A health care
delivery system, for example, can be said to
be an institution made up of many
interrelated organisations.
What is Capacity?
This is a difficult term to get a handle
on. It consists of dimensions at
various levels and is most often part of an ongoing process. Capacity is the
power or energy of something which determines the outcome and performance
of an organisation. It is synonymous with capability and refers to the ability of
individuals, organisations and broader systems to perform their functions
effectively, efficiently and sustainably.
Dimensions of Institutional Development
The failure of many development programmes can often be attributed to a
narrow view of capacity which has concentrated on individual skills or
organisational characteristics. Important dimensions of capacity at the system
or contextual level are left out. A holistic and multi-dimensional perspective is
important as a starting point.
For an NGO we are talking about the immediate action environment at the
community or local level and the broader context, like economic and political
stability, cultural traditions, legal frameworks for NGOs, etc. If not all levels
and dimensions of capacity are addressed, the chances of sustainable
development occurring are diminished.
6
See UD Evaluation Report 5.98, Capacity Assessment and Development, UNDP 1998 and
How to Assess Institutional Sustainability, NORAD Handbook 1999.
Chapter 2
12
In brief, what we are saying is that NGOs depend on capacities both inside and
outside the organisation. They are shaped by both internal capabilities and
forces in the external environment. A strong and effective NGO often
possesses the skills to make a good fit between internal strengths and external
opportunities, and is able to continuously manage this fragile and changing
balance.
INSTITUTIONAL LEVELS
M
b
SYSTEM
LEVEL
ORGANISATIONA
L LEVEL
INDIVIDUAL
LEVEL
Strategy
Development
Organisational
Development
Human
Resources
Development
A major dimension of capacity is at the individual level - staff, including small
networks and groups of individuals – participants and managers of
organisations. The smallest and most basic building block in any organisation
consists of individual energy – competence and capability in the form of
technical and managerial knowledge and skills, morale and conduct,
communications skills, motivation, integrity and attitudes, personal and
professional networking, interrelationships and teamwork. Sufficient capacity
at this level represents the conditions necessary for any project or organisation
to function efficiently and effectively.
There is also another dimension of capacity at the organisational level
irrespective of whether or not the organisation is a Northern or Southern NGO,
a national or a local community-based organisation. Capacity at this level
refers to the vision, objectives, leadership of the organisation, its structures and
resources, external linkages, performance and sustainability.
The system level provides the context for any NGO or development
programme. For most NGOs the system level will include those components
that are relevant in the immediate action environment, like the community,
other NGOs, etc., and broader contextual variables like: economic and political
frameworks, cultural norms and traditions, relations to external agencies,
participation and legitimacy, etc.
Chapter 2
13
What is Institutional Sustainability?
There are various kinds of sustainability, like financial, technological,
environmental and socio-cultural. We are focusing on the institutional aspects
of sustainability.
An institution is sustainable if it appears to have the strength to survive and
develop long enough to fulfil its functions. More specifically, an NGO is
sustainable if it is likely:
to be able to secure the necessary external input and support,
to provide, efficiently and effectively, a continuing stream of activities and
output
that are valued by its stakeholders (members, beneficiaries, etc.)
for as long as the institution is needed.
This understanding of sustainability brings out several important messages:
The emphasis is on prognosis – on what is expected to happen in the future.
The goal is to assess the likelihood that the organisation appraised will
survive until its mission is accomplished, with or without external support.
It is not assumed that sustainability means permanent survival. Even NGOs
may disappear when their mission is accomplished, they may go through
radical changes since needs and opportunities are transformed, or they
merge with other organisations to survive.
There is a difference between effective NGOs and legitimate NGOs. Both
effectiveness and legitimacy are required in order to secure long-term
sustainability. A strong and well-managed organisation may have a high
level of effectiveness, but not the trust and credibility of its stakeholders.
On the other hand, respected and highly credible organisations may be weak
from a management point of view.
Chapter 3
14
CHAPTER 3: STAKEHOLDERS AND PURPOSES
3.1. Who are the stakeholders?
The users of the assessment influence its scope and direction. The sooner the
stakeholders are identified, the easier it will be to determine their needs and
concerns.
Stakeholders are individuals or organisational actors that will be affected by the
outcome of the assessment. Most organisations have a wide range of
stakeholders:
Inside the organisation – the Board of Directors and senior officials who
use the results of the assessment to support their efforts in respect of
strategic management or organisational change. Professionals and staff
using the results to improve decisions relating to roles and responsibilities.
Outside the organisation – funders using organisational assessments to
support internal change and to better understand the outcome of their
investments. Members, clients or beneficiaries can use the results to better
understand their relationship with the organisation.
As shown in the figure below, most organisations have a wide range of
stakeholders, some more influential than others. Not all stakeholders have the
same stake in the organisation, and it is important to recognise the level of
impact each stakeholder has on the organisation. A tool for mapping the
stakeholders and their interests is presented in Chapter 5.
Level of influence: Strong:
Medium:
Little:
Collaborators
Community
Suppliers
Funders
Employees
Organisation
Board
Governments
Competitors
Media
Clients
Beneficiaries
Chapter 3
15
3.2. How to Decide the Purpose?
Organisational assessment is only a tool for achieving something else. It is
therefore important to define the reasons for undertaking an assessment and
agree on the purpose. Once the purpose is clear, it is easier to determine:
• The scope of the assessment
• Its focus in terms of issues
• Who should be involved and carry out the process
Three main purposes for conducting an assessment are discussed:
• Programme planning and development – a basis for preparing a new
programme or improving an existing one. (3.2.1.)
• Monitoring and evaluation – as a tool to keep track of the progress of
capacity development programmes and evaluate their successes and
failures. (3.2.2.)
• Establishing new partnerships – as a guide for screening and selecting
new partners. (3.2.3.)
Projects go through a life cycle of planning/preparation, implementation,
evaluation and completion. The assessment precedes planning and action. In the
programme cycle there is a logical progression from assessing “Where we are
now,” to discussing “Where we want to be,” “How to get there,” and “How to
stay there”. In practice, differences may be more blurred. An assessment of
organisational capacity is required in all phases of the cycle, but the purpose
and direction will differ.
Chapter 3
16
WHERE WE
ARE NOW
Current situation
WHERE WE
WANT TO BE
Vision
HOW TO GET
THERE
Strategy/
action
HOW TO
STAY THERE
Sustainability
3.2.1. Programme Planning and Preparation
When a Southern NGO is in the process of preparing a new programme for
strengthening its own management capacity, it is particularly important to start
the process with a proper description and analysis of the existing situation.
Leaders and members need to address what gaps there are in capacity and the
opportunities, competence and capabilities that exist and should be maintained.
We argue that NGOs need to invest more time in analysis and reflection, as a
basis for action. In the field of organisational development, action without
proper understanding of the complexities of organisational change may cause
serious damage, or lead to a waste of people’s time and resources.
An assessment would provide some clues to and estimates of required future
capacity. Comparison between current and required capacity provides an
indication of what capacity gaps to fill. In this setting assessment is used as a
precursor to a organisational development for the purpose of:
identifying areas in which organisations need to improve or skills they
need to maintain,
suggesting relevant interventions which might help to overcome the
problems.
The exercise could be carried out as an internal and participatory process – a
self-assessment where the leaders and members clarify and present their own
Chapter 3
17
perceptions of organisational capacity. It is also possible to use external
personnel to assist and facilitate in the self-assessment, and/or to provide their
own independent analysis. At any rate, the instrumental use of assessment is
prominent. It should prepare the ground for a new programme.
3.2.2. Monitoring and Evaluation of Capacity Development
It is often said that organisational development is difficult to measure compared
to projects in the agricultural or water sectors. There are in fact few evaluations
carried out of capacity development efforts, and major NGOs admit their
shortcomings. Some of the reasons are:
• Objectives are too general. It is difficult to define output and impact
clearly, and indicators to measure the success of an activity.
• Organisational development is seen as a problem-solving and learningoriented process more than an aim in itself.
• Performance and impact is determined by several factors inside and
outside the organisation, where it is difficult to decide the relative
importance of each factor.
• Assessment of change tends to be based on subjective perceptions.
• Organisational development constitutes part of a long chain of means and
ends.
Organisations are complex, but not mysterious entities. They are possible to
penetrate and assess with proper methods. Problems with finding indicators,
lack of relevant methods or methodological constraints should not be used by
NGOs as an excuse for not trying, or as a reason for reverting to good
intentions and progressive rhetoric for hiding poor practice.
We believe that this Resource book presents a feasible approach and method for
monitoring and evaluating organisational development.
3.2.3. Establishing new Partnerships
There is another use of organisational assessment – which starts before the
programme cycle. It is not sufficient to base long term collaboration on
“romantic love” between people meeting each other at international meetings.
Individuals are often found to be important in the initial stage to establish links,
but the collaboration will sooner or later have to be broadened and
institutionalised in the sense that certain rules and regulations for cooperation
are established.
To appraise and select a partner is one of the most difficult and important tasks
for any Norwegian NGO. It is no secret that there are a broad range of
illegitimate and opportunistic NGOs in Southern countries (as well as in
Norway). The costs are high for any partner making a wrong choice.
Chapter 3
18
A Norwegian NGO could use organisational assessment for:
Screening and selecting new partners.
Making decisions on future cooperation and funding.
The different purposes could be summarised as follows:
TYPE OF
ASSESSMENT
Planning
PURPOSE
(a) Identify capacity
Preparatory phase
gaps
(b) Suggest interventions
Monitoring
(a)
Evaluation
(b)
(a)
(b)
(c)
Partnership
Appraisal
WHEN
(a)
(b)
BY WHOM
Internal/
participatory
and/or
external
contributions
Measure progress
During implementation Internal/manage
and detect constraints
ment
Report and improve
Measure
Mid-term and at the
Internal
and/or
achievements
end/after
Contribute to
external
revisions and
improvements
Provide
accountability
Screening and
Before and at the end
Norwegian NGO
selecting partners
Basis for continued
collaboration
Chapter 4
19
CHAPTER 4: A FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING NGO
CAPACITY
4.1. Focusing the Assessment: Zooming in and Zooming Out
All assessments are carried out with the use of certain lenses and categories.
Lenses help to focus our attention on issues and dimensions which are
considered important. Categories help to organise and systematise the
collection of information and analysis. Different lenses could be used to throw
light on and discover various aspects of an organisation. If this is true, the best
method would be to use several lenses or multiple methods – look at the
organisation from more than one side and change lenses from time to time.
The previous section argues that an assessment of capacity needs to address
dimensions of capacity at individual, organisational and system levels. The
reason is that an organisation like an NGO is shaped by both internal
capabilities and external forces. This does not mean that all assessment must
include every aspect of capacity.
This Resource Book focuses on the organisational level. In other words, the
analysis zooms first in on organisational capacity, and with this entry point
seeks to incorporate an assessment of the human and system levels. Other
approaches zoom first in on the individual or system level, and then move to
the organisation. There is in principle nothing right or wrong about any of the
approaches. It is important to make a deliberate choice based on the purpose
and scope of the assessment, and not least the competence of those carrying
out the assessment. Analysis at the individual, organisational and system
levels requires quite different professional expertise.
Chapter 4
20
E N T R Y P O IN T S – Z O O M IN G IN A N D O U T
Z O O M IN
SYSTEM
O R G A N IS A T IO N
IN D IV ID U A L
ZOOM OUT
4.2. Frameworks for Assessing Performance
How do we know if and when an NGO is performing well? This is the
underlying question in respect of the different frameworks for assessing
performance. Is performance related to effective management systems
providing donors with solid and timely plans and reports on activities and the
use of funds? Is a strong NGO an organisation with values and principles and a
vocal leader to fight for a worthy cause? Could performance be measured
through the satisfaction of its members or participants? Or is the effective NGO
simply able to deliver and meet its targets and objectives?
These questions introduce the problem inherent in defining and measuring
organisational effectiveness. The belief that success or performance defies
definition in humanitarian work has unfortunately been widely accepted. Many
people fail to realise that irrespective of whether or not they can define or label
a phenomenon, that phenomenon is still real and continues to function.
Gravitation existed for a long time before Newton "discovered" it.
But if the ambition is to find a single and universal criterion for success,
disappointment is understandable. Since NGOs do many things and their
success depend on adequate performance in a number of areas, the criteria for
success must reflect this complexity. Subjective judgement and intuition are
also involved in the assessment process.
Before presenting the "Abilities model" we will briefly outline three options for
measuring performance.
Chapter 4
21
(a) The Goal Attainment Approach - Success measured through Results
According to this approach an organisation's effectiveness is judged by its
results. What is important is not how you play, but that you win the game in the
end - restoring patients to good health, providing services, delivering products.
The assumptions are that NGOs are rational goal-seeking organisations with
goals that are defined well, and are few enough to be manageable and
measurable. Tangible, verifiable, and measurable goals are developed and
performance is measured and compared against targets.
This approach is popular with governments and donors, but fraught with
problems that make its exclusive use questionable. Are goals clear and
measurable? Whose goals are we talking about? What about the difference
between official and actual goals? Are we looking at the short term or long term
goals, and is it not true that most organisations have multiple and sometimes
even conflicting goals? Small NGOs may act first, then later create a "goal" to
justify what has happened and satisfy the donor.
We are not questioning that organisations are goal oriented - the problem lies
more in identification and the measurement of goals, and that performance
needs to be evaluated by more than the goals achieved.
(b)The Systems Approach
In this approach, goals are not ignored, but they are only one of several
evaluation criteria. Systems models emphasise multiple criteria that increase the
long-term survival of the organisation - such as the ability to acquire resources,
manage and maintain itself internally, and interact and adapt successfully to its
external environment. The focus is not so much on specific goals as on the
means and processes needed for the achievement of those ends.
This approach implies that organisations are made up of interrelated parts, and
if any one of those parts performs poorly, it will affect the performance of the
whole system. It is short-sighted to judge success only on results. Sustained
performance requires awareness and successful interactions with external
stakeholders. An NGO cannot fail to maintain good relations. Survival also
requires a steady in-flow of resources and an ability to manage those resources.
In practice performance could be appraised in a number of areas to ensure that
the organisation get the maximum efforts out of its resources.
The problem with this approach is that measuring goals may be easy compared
to measuring process variables such as "flexibility of response" or "clarity of
internal communications". It can also be argued that if results are achieved, is
the discussion of means really important? Is it sufficient to look good?
Chapter 4
22
(c) The Stakeholder Approach
This represents a more recent and radically different approach. It proposes that
an effective organisation is one that satisfies the demands of those stakeholders
and constituencies in its environment from whom it requires support for its
continued existence. A Board member will have different criteria than a
community member, a government official or a donor representative. Neither
goals nor internal systems are in focus.
Organisations are assumed to be political arenas where vested interests compete
for control over resources. Success can then be said to be determined by the
ability of the organisation to identify critical constituencies, assess their
preferences, and satisfy their demands. This is an intriguing approach even if it
can be difficult to follow in practice.
(d) The Abilities Approach
This is a comprehensive approach which seeks to incorporate lessons from the
former. It takes as a point of departure that an NGO would need four key
abilities to function effectively. 7 In other words, an organisation needs four
groups of capacities which to a large extent determine how the organisation is
perceived, its performance and sustainability.
The four abilities and the twelve elements can be summarised and visualised as
follows:
IN T E R N A L D IM E N S IO N S
" A B IL IT Y T O B E "
E X T E R N A L D IM E N S IO N S
" A B IL IT Y T O R E L A T E "
GOVERNANCE
L E A D E R S H IP
ID E N T IT Y
S T A N D IN G
L IN K A G E S
R E S P O N S IV E N E S S
O R G A N IS A T IO N A L
PERFORM ANCE
" A B IL IT Y T O O R G A N IS E "
HUM AN
RESOURCES
SYSTEM S
F IN A N C E S
7
" A B IL IT Y T O D O "
RELEV ANCE
E F F E C T IV E N E S S
V IA B IL IT Y
The model is developed from a framework prepared by INTRAC, UK. “Participatory Self
Assessment of NGO Capacity”.
Chapter 4
•
23
AN ABILITY TO BE
To maintain an identity reflecting important purposes, values and
strategies, and a leadership to direct and manage the organisation.
The organisation should know what it wants to achieve – both in terms of a
long-term vision and more short-term objectives and targets. If an organisation
does not know where it wants to go, it will most likely never arrive there. Most
NGOs are driven by values and principles which explain and justify the
formation of the organisation in the first place. These values are important for
the members and should be understood and shared. The organisation also needs
a strategy on how to reach its objectives. Finally, leadership is required to
direct and manage the organisation.
• AN ABILITY TO ORGANISE
To establish effective managerial systems and procedures, and ensure that
human and financial resources are available.
A strong and clear identity is a necessary condition for being an able NGO, but
not sufficient for those who want to make an impact on society. The
organisation also needs a capacity to organise and establish effective systems
and procedures to translate objectives into specific activities, and serve as tools
to help leaders and managers find the right direction. An organisation must also
have the human and financial resources to implement its policies. An
organisation needs capable staff and/or members willing to work, and a level of
financial and material support is required to start or continue activities.
• AN ABILITY TO DO
To provide services that are relevant for and valued by its users and/or
members.
However, the former two abilities are not sufficient. Several NGOs have strong
ideas and principles and a vocal leadership speaking loud about NGO identity
and core values, but they possess little ability to implement and carry through
their good intentions. Principles remain lofty rhetoric. There needs to be a
correspondence between speaking and action – and an NGO would need the
ability to deliver and provide services that are relevant and valued by its
members or users. “The proof of the pudding lies in the eating.” This ability is
measured through an assessment of relevance, effectiveness (ability to achieve
agreed goals and objectives) and sustainability.
• AN ABILITY TO RELATE
To respond and adapt to new demands among its users and changing
needs in society, and retain standing (legitimacy) among its stakeholders.
It is not sufficient to be a “doer” either – an NGO with a strong ability to
effectively deliver products and services to its members or clients. There are
Chapter 4
24
many action-only oriented NGOs working hard for a certain period of time –
reaching a point where energy tends to gradually dissipate because a clear cause
or ideology is missing, or because needs are changing.
Several NGOs (in the North and South) are not directly exposed to pressures
and changing external demands in a market. NGOs are mostly funded by
external grants (usually for a long period of time) and are to a certain extent
protected from a critical review of their programmes. They may be able to
continue activities of poor quality which are overdue for change. Due to donor
grants few incentives are in place to take quality issues seriously and make
NGOs more responsive to new demands.
A Southern NGO may even be able to operate without the trust and support of
its members – due to the availability of external funding. These are the reasons
why ability to relate is so important. In the long run most NGOs face the
realities and need to respond and adapt to new needs and demands, and also
retain sufficient standing or legitimacy among their members and stakeholders.
The argument is that NGOs need all four abilities to be effective and ensure
future sustainability, or to be more correct: if an NGO has a combination of
these abilities their chance of success is enhanced considerably. It is important
to emphasise that the categories or abilities are “empty”. We do not say that a
particular identity is required, only that organisations need to know what
business they are in and what they want to achieve.
No particular systems or procedures for implementation are favoured. Neither
does the model tell how much of each ability is required for an organisation to
perform well. A high score on all abilities is not necessarily the best, nor is a
certain combination of abilities. A small, weak NGO with strong vision and
commitment, but poor managerial systems, may be as good as a strong
business-like NGO with one hundred employees.
A framework helps us to define what relevant indicators to look for. It provides
direction to our assessment, but it does not put a value or a quality on the
finding. The model does not say which image is better than another. Neither
does it help to answer what is good, acceptable or poor performance. For
valuating - putting a value on - standards are required and most of the time they
exist in programme documents and in people’s minds.
In our experience leaders and members of NGOs have clear ideas about
standards – what is good and what is poor performance. All stakeholders need
to be involved in the discussion about criteria and standards. As partners
Norwegian NGOs should be involved, and in the end discuss findings in the
light of their own values, but they should take care not to impose one set of
criteria and standards.
Chapter 4
25
We need to break down the four abilities into smaller and more manageable
units. In the model each ability is represented by three elements for each ability,
giving a total of twelve. These elements form the basis of the rating system. In
the attached assessment format (Appendix 1) a number of statements reflect and
represent each element. The assessment exercise is carried out by rating to what
extent the assessment team agrees or disagrees with a statement on a scale of
one to five. Based on the responses the next step is to draw a profile for each
element and then a composite profile for each ability, e.g. aggregating or
summarising the profiles for each element.
The procedures will be described in more detail later, but the product of the
assessment is an organisational profile, or in other words a map which presents
the organisation’s strong and weaker abilities.
This is a comprehensive approach involving a relatively time-consuming
assessment process. Other more rapid assessment tools are presented later. It
should be emphasised that the time required for the suggested approach is
variable. In a workshop setting at least one full day will be necessary. For a
small team it can be carried out within a few hours, but only if the scoring is
based on perceptions, impressions and available data. If the team or the
organisation decides to collect new data and information, the process would
take considerably longer.
Chapter 4
26
ABILITIES
ABILITY TO BE
(Identity)
ABILITY TO
ORGANISE
(Capacity)
ABILITY TO
RELATE
(Linkages)
ELEMENTS
1.
Governance
2.
Leadership
3.
Identity (Purpose,
values, strategy)
4.
Human resources
5.
Systems and procedures
6.
Material and financial
resources
7.
Legitimacy and trust
8.
Alliances and
connections
9.
External pressures
10. Relevance & outcome
ABILITY TO DO
(Performance)
11. Effectiveness
12. Sustainability
DEFINITIONS
The role and functions of the
Executive Board.
The legal basis, charter or bylaws.
The system of constituency – or
level of member ownership.
The abilities and qualities of the
leadership (more than the Head).
Purpose or long term vision –
what the organisation wants to
achieve.
Values – what drives the
members and organisation.
Strategy – the distinctive profile
or individual identity of the
organisation.
The capability to recruit, train,
compensate and keep people with
good technical and managerial
skills.
The capability to plan, implement/
manage and evaluate
programmes.
The ability to secure sufficient
financial support and material
infrastructure.
The extent to which external
stakeholders respect and have
confidence in the organisation.
The quality and effectiveness of
links with national/international
partners.
The level and type of response to
external demands and pressures.
To what extent activities are
perceived as relevant.
To what extent the organisation
meets its short and long-term
targets and objectives.
To what extent the organisation is
able to sustain its activities
without external technical and
financial support.
Chapter 5
27
CHAPTER 5: HOW TO CARRY OUT AN ASSESSMENT?
The former chapters provide direction, models and tools, but no tools are
better than the hands that guide them - and no guide can replace practice and
common sense. This chapter describes how an organisational assessment
could be carried out using the rating approach from the abilities model. Some
of the most important, practical issues in an assessment process are discussed
and additional tools are suggested. 8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Identifying the reasons for conducting an assessment.
Mapping the stakeholders.
Assessing the organisational readiness.
Deciding the team to conduct the assessment.
Identifying key issues and scope.
Organisations in different stages of life.
Tailoring the tools.
Organising an assessment workshop.
Preparing the follow-up.
5.1. Reasons for Conducting an Assessment
It is important to clarify the reasons for undertaking an assessment. When this
is clear it is easier to determine the scope of the assessment, its focus in terms
of issues, who should carry out the assessment, etc.
In Chapter 3 three main purposes are discussed:
Programme planning and development – a basis for preparing a new
programme or improving an existing one.
Monitoring and evaluation – as a tool to keep track of the progress of
capacity development programmes and evaluate their successes and
failures.
Establishing new partnerships – as a guide for screening and selecting new
partners.
It is common for an organisation to conduct an assessment when it is at a
turning point in its history, or when it needs to make important decisions. Some
of those decisions are:
Strategic decisions – Should the organisation grow? Merge? Shrink?
Change its mission?
8
This Chapter has several contributions from Lusthaus (1999)
Chapter 5
28
Programme decisions – Should programmes be expanded? Should two or
several programmed be integrated? Should new services be offered?
Financial sustainability decisions – Should funding sources be diversified
and how? Should new approaches to fundraising be identified?
Staffing decisions – Should staff with different skills be hired to support a
changed mission? Should the organisation let some staff go, and if so, who?
IDENTIFYING THE REASONS
Before starting an assessment ask senior managers and staff – or people that would most
likely be involved in the assessment - to start reflecting on the reasons and purpose for the
assessment. Request them to prepare a list with the three main reasons and ask them to
share the list to form a basis for a group discussion in the preparatory phase of the
assessment process.
In your organisation, identify the three main reasons for undertaking an assessment:
1……………………………………………………………………………………
2.……………………………………………………………………………………
3……………………………………………………………………………………
5.2. Mapping the stakeholders.
Before starting an assessment it is also important to identify who are the
stakeholders and what do they want to know and what are their roles and
interests? The mapping may be carried out using the following two exercises.
Identify the stakeholders and their level of influence:
Strong:
Medium:
Little:
Chapter 5
29
WHO ARE THE STAKEHOLDERS
1.
Fill in the names of the stakeholders from the previous diagram.
IDENTIFY EACH STAKEHOLDER’S CATEGORY – FUNDERS, EMPLOYEES,
LEADERSHIP, PARTNERS, ETC. YOU MAY ALSO INDICATE WHETHER A
STAKEHOLDER:
Is an integral part of the organisation;
Is interested in, and committed to the organisation;
Knows the organisation, but is not committed to it; or
Has a vested interest in destroying the organisation, i.e., rivals, competitors, etc.
2.
Indicate each stakeholder’s interest in the assessment results, e.g.:
Use the results for planning;
Use them to support the organisation;
Use the assessment to design new programmes, introduce changes, or develop future
strategies, etc.
3.
Identify each stakeholder’s possible participation or role in the self-assessment, e.g.:
Be a provider of information;
Make a decision on the assessment findings; or
Become a beneficiary of change arising from the assessment, etc.
Stakeholder
Category
Interests
Participation or
role
Chapter 5
30
5.3. Assessing organisational readiness
Organisations need to have a certain degree of readiness in order to engage in
assessment. If the purpose is to prepare the ground for organisational
development, an assessment should not be imposed from outside. To be able to
make a successful link between assessment and development, the organisation
and in particular top management needs to be involved throughout the process,
see the needs and acknowledge the potential benefits of a systematic
assessment. People must also be willing to spend time before, during and after
the assessment.
An assessment is a critical learning process for any organisation which involves
both risks and opportunities. For learning and development to take place, NGOs
involved must be open to critical reflection, alternative arguments, and even
criticism from peers and partners. An assessment might hurt and create
tensions. If the climate of the NGO is not open and conducive to change, the
frustrations and mistrust that are likely to emerge will themselves become
bottlenecks to growth and development. Hence, establishing trust and an open
working relationship must be one of the first steps in an assessment process.
You should also be aware that there might be cases where internal conflicts are
so strong that a participatory assessment process is impossible, or at least
difficult to carry out.
The following types of readiness should be considered:
Cultural readiness - which means that the organisation has an internal
culture and climate in which it is acceptable to provide suggestions for
improvement.
Leadership readiness - which means that leaders support the assessment
and the allocation of resources to the process.
Resource readiness - which means that the organisation is prepared to
commit the resources needed to conduct the assessment.
People readiness - which means that the organisation has employees who
will champion the assessment process and be willing to work together
through a process that may sometimes be ambiguous and will constantly be
changing. 9
9
Lusthaus (1999), p.3.
Chapter 5
31
FACTORS THAT CAN AFFECT READINESS
You must have
• Acceptance of the process by leaders in
the organisation
• A champion
• Adequate internal resources (time and
people) for the assessment
• A compelling reason for doing the
assessment
These are mixed blessings
• Other changes going on at the same time,
some of which you cannot control
• An organisation with a history of change
• Past experience with evaluation (positive
or negative)
It's nice to have
• Leaders with credibility
• A clear vision in the organisation of
where it wants to go
• Additional resources (financial) to
conduct the self-assessment
These can be major barriers
• Past failures and frustrations with
assessments
• Superficial motives
• Low level of skills and capabilities
• Negative incentives for self-assessment
The following exercise will help you to assess the readiness of an organisation.
Ask a group of managers to reflect on the questions. Bear in mind that there are
no clear-cut answers to these questions.
READINESS ASSESSMENT
1.
To what extent do the leaders support the assessment and change process? Do staff
have confidence in the leader's ability to engage in change management?
2. To what extent is any individual willing to champion the process and is capable of
doing so?
3. Is the organisation facing the need to make strategic decisions and would a selfassessment help in the decision making?
4. Does the organisation have a clear vision of where it wants to go?
5. Are major changes already going on within the organisation that might slow down the
process or interfere with it?
6. Does the organisation have access to resources to carry out the process?
7. When was the last major organisational change? To what extent was it successful? Did
it energise the staff or lower their morale?
8. Do people inside the organisation have adequate skills to undertake this process?
9. Is this is a good time for change? Would another time be better? Are there future
incentives for change to occur now?
10. What are the positive, negative, neutral, or cultural implications of changing? Are
people in the organisation supported if they try new things?
Chapter 5
32
5.4. Deciding the team to conduct the assessment
Part of the planning process is to decide roles and responsibilities and select the
team to be in charge of the assessment. Such teams have often two roles:
strategic and operational.
The strategic role will require people to provide direction and guidelines for the
process, make necessary decisions and monitor overall quality. The operational
role will require people to be involved in the process itself with the collection
of data, analysis and reporting. It has to be decided whether there is a need for
one or two teams to perform the different roles.
The organisation could organise and carry out an assessment using only internal
people, but we would recommend including external facilitators - not
necessarily an expatriate, but a consultant with no personal interests in or
background from the organisation concerned. It is an important lesson that
positive, constructive internal processes often depend on the support and
facilitation of outsiders.
Most importantly, he or she should possess the skills of a process consultant, be
familiar with organisational dynamics and be trusted and accepted by the
organisation. The facilitator also needs to speak and understand the language of
the people participating. An external consultant could be more impartial, be
able to take a "fresh look", focus on opportunities were others only see
problems and have a distance to internal alliances and old conflicts.
The purpose of the assessment will to some extent determine the configuration
of the team, but in most cases a combination of external and internal people
would be advisable. A Steering Committee fulfilling the overall strategic role
would also be needed in most cases.
CRITERIA FOR SELECTING A TEAM
The following criteria can help in the selection process:
Credibility – The members should have an appropriate mix of authority, responsibility,
knowledge of the organisation, and insight. They need to be respected and accepted.
Technical expertise – Someone who understands the assessment approach and uses the
various tools and techniques.
Impartiality – Someone who can balance the perspectives of different people.
Communication skills – Someone who can communicate the results in a manner easily
understood by all parties.
Interpersonal skills – Someone who can interact with all parties in an effective manner
and is able to work in a team.
Availability – Someone who is available and willing to commit time to the work.
Chapter 5
33
BUILDING THE TEAM
To help in building the team the following exercise may be used:
1.
2.
3.
In the organisation who will be on the team?
Who are the preferred external facilitators?
What value will each of them add to the team?
4. What roles are foreseen for them in the process
Name
Special skills
Role
Chapter 5
34
5.5. Identifying key issues and scope of the assessment
An assessment requires focus – that key issues are identified and the scope of
the process is defined. The scope is often too broadly defined, focus is unclear
and impact may suffer. Some of the following questions need answers:
What is the unit of analysis for the assessment? The entire organisation?
The national office? All branches? Or some sections?
What are the main performance issues to be addressed? Management
issues? Issues relating to objectives and strategy? Financial issues? Lack of
results? Partner issues?
How much time and resources would be available for the process?
What kind of information and data would be required?
What method of data collection is needed? Are relevant data collection
instruments available?
Chapter 6 presents some additional tools to identify the main performance
issues. The ability model is comprehensive and may initially be used to scan the
entire organisation and for instance identify management and performance
issues as the most important. In the next round the assessment may zoom in on
more detailed questions and issues relating to those issues. The following
exercise may also be used:
IDENTIFYING PERFORMANCE ISSUES
Gather a small team of key stakeholders during the planning phase for the assessment, and
ask them to complete the chart below. In the first column, fill in what are believed to be the
main performance issues. In the second fill in some of the reasons why these issues are
problematic.
Main Performance Issues
What Makes this a Problem?
Chapter 5
35
5.6. Tailoring the tools
The next step is for the consultant and organisation to find the most appropriate
tools and mechanisms for carrying out the assessment. It is here assumed that
the organisation involves key personnel from its Board, management, staff and
members. Our preferred method is a joint workshop. It is also decided to follow
a broad approach addressing all four abilities which provides general
information on a large number of variables. If this is the first time the
organisation carried out this type of assessment, such a wide-spectre approach
would be advisable.
If the organisation on the other hand is more "advanced", and has defined one
problem area more precisely, it is advisable to zoom in directly on one ability
or area of concern. More questions will be raised concerning a smaller number
of dimensions, when the former approach favours a large number of dimensions
and a smaller number of questions.
If the Assessment format for the ability model in Annex 1 is used in the
workshop, the next step is to tailor that tool to the particular needs and situation
of the NGO involved. The list of questions is long and presented as a menu
where “guests” are encouraged to pick and choose, mix, change and also
prepare their own “dishes”. A small working group chaired by the main
facilitator should review the list and delete irrelevant questions, add new issues
which are missing, adjust and change formulations and try to use well-known
terms and names.
The list must also be translated to a local language if participants do not
understand English. This process helps to improve the assessment and reduce
potential anxiety and tensions. The participants will learn that real
organisational issues are in focus, not individuals and personal conflicts. The
consultant should then edit the format and make sufficient copies for the
workshop participants.
5.7. Arranging the Workshop
The assessment session is then carried out during a full day workshop using a
participatory and structured approach. It is important to emphasise both
participation and structure. The model is empty and the participant should come
with the substance, but the process needs a structure for the latter to happen. An
open process may go astray at any moment in a workshop. The facilitator needs
a clear mandate to direct the group gently, but firmly through all the steps. A
loose discussion might be useful, but will not lead to the same results as a more
structured approach. One is not better than the other, but if a decision is made
to be more systematic, it is counter-productive to be otherwise.
Chapter 5
36
AGENDA FOR THE WORKSHOP
Welcome and presentations
Present and confirm workshop objectives
and allow people to voice expectations.
Present the model
with the four abilities and explain/present the Assessment format.
Individual assessment
For each participant to fill in the questionnaire and make a personal choice about what to
score on a scale of one to five in respect of all the statements.
Collective presentation
Each participant should then transfer his/her marks from the questionnaire to four large
flip-charts on the front wall in the room. 10 One chart will consist of all the issues for one
ability and all the scoring options from one to five.
Preliminary analysis
When all the marks have been transferred, the consultant will briefly explain how to read
the charts and indicate some findings. If the majority of scores cluster under number
five, this indicates that a large number of the participants agree with the statement, and
since all statements are positive, it indicates a "good" score for the organisation. If most
of the responses come under one, this most likely reveals weakness. Average responses
might reveal moderate achievements or uncertainty about what the situation is. If the
rates are spread all over the scale, there is a high level of disagreement or considerable
differences about how to assess the situation.
Group Work
Divide the participants into four groups so that each group may review all the statements
under one ability and discuss three questions: Based on the response from the selfassessment, what are the:
- Strengths of the organisation
- Areas in need of improvement
- Surprises or confusing findings
(f) Plenary Presentation
Each group will present their findings and the other groups will be asked to make
comments to either confirm, contradict or add information.
(g) Synthesis
The first day of the workshop should end with a session where the consultant and the
steering group/Head of organisation summarises the main findings of the day. If there is
no second day in the workshop a follow-up plan must be discussed and agreed.
The purpose of the assessment is identify as clearly as possible strong and
weaker abilities in the organisation and present these findings in the form of
scoring profiles. The use of several different modes of work is used
deliberately. In the individual phase each and everyone should be given time to
think through the questions and make up their own mind, maximise
participation and minimise group pressure.
In the group work findings are summarised and participants look for patterns
and trends, and the groups also discuss to what extent findings are valid and
10
Equipment needed is a large number of flip charts, multicoloured markers and masking tape
in order to move the charts around in the room.
Chapter 5
37
reliable. The plenary session moves the same discussion further along and
allows the entire group to build a common frame and consensus of what the real
issues are. Such a workshop structure is interactive and lively and seldom
boring.
5.8. Preparing the follow up
As mentioned several times: The assessment is never an end in itself. Analysis
and action go together. The use and follow-up of assessment processes should
be discussed from the very beginning. It is often advisable to continue directly
from assessment to planning in the same workshop. The issues discussed and
defined during the assessment are brought into a planning process where certain
issues are selected and prioritised and where activities are suggested to address
each issue. The various steps and procedures in a planning process will,
however, not been dealt with here.
Chapter 6
38
CHAPTER 6: FOCUSING THE ASSESSMENT
Several methods can be used to identify and focus the assessment process. This
chapter introduces some tools which can be used when the resources available
(time and funds) are scarce. A broad range of diagnostic tools is currently on
the “market”. It is not our intention to present a broad range of tools in
workshops or meetings to create interest and awareness about the assessment
process. Tools for more rapid assessments are often useful.
The second part of the chapter presents the concept of organisational life
cycles. It is discussed in this context to help focus the assessment. It is
important to be aware that organisations are moving through different stages or
life cycles and relevant issues and questions differ depending on where the
organisation is in its life-cycle. A young and expanding organisation faces
different challenges compared to an established organisation with little
enthusiasm.
6.1. Rapid Assessment Tools
An assessment process often follows three basic steps:
(a) Dreaming about the future;
(b) Identification of strengths and weaknesses;
(c) and it ends with: Bridging the gap.
There are several ways to take those steps – individually, in workshops, expert
teams, etc. It depends to a large extent on the purpose and interest of the
organisation. The following are some tools available with the purpose of
guiding and facilitating the process.
All the tools seek to uncover and identify the perceived strengths and
weaknesses of the organisation, and prepare the basis for change and
improvements.
Appreciative Inquiry
At the beginning of an assessment process participants in a workshop or
meeting could be asked to reflect on two questions. The first question
deliberately focuses on the positive aspects – or what the organisation is good
at, and not on deficiencies. The point is that assessments tend to start with and
focus on the negative aspects, what is missing or wrong, but should rather be
based on opportunities and strengths. It is often important to be opportunityoriented and not problem-oriented. A Canadian organisation 11 uses the term
11
CRWRC (1997)
Chapter 6
39
“appreciative inquiry” - meaning that an assessment starts with what gives life
to an organisation, and not with problems and constraints.
1.
What do you value most about your
organisation?
2. What are the three most important hopes you
have to strengthen the vitality of your
organisation?
It is important to look for the best in what there is. Regardless of how weak an
organisation is, it will also have its strengths and abilities which should be
acknowledged and form the basis and provide the resources for any changes.
Such broad questions may initiate and stimulate self-reflection on other issues,
and gradually become more specific.
SWOT Analysis
This is a well known technique for diagnosing key institutional issues by
looking at S(trengths), W(eaknesses), O(pportunities) and T(hreats). Although
it can be used by external consultants for their analysis, it also lends itself to a
workshop approach, facilitating self-diagnosis by the institution concerned. It
encourages not only diagnosis of internal issues, but also discussions on the
external environment. If you want to assist the participants or guide the process,
you may prepare ands present a long list of potential strengths and weaknesses.
Findings could be presented in the following format:
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
OPPORTUNITIES
CONSTRAINTS
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
Chapter 6
40
Appraising Organisational Fundamentals
The process of internal self-reflection may also start by asking the staff of an
organisation to critically appraise some organisational fundamentals. This can
be done by addressing a set of five key questions formulated by Peter
Drucker 12 :
1. What is our organisation for?
That is, what is our purpose or mission in society?
2. Who are we here to serve?
That is, who should benefit from our work?
3. What do the people we serve value?
That is, how will they judge what we do?
4. What are our results?
That is, are we satisfying those we are here for?
5. What is our plan?
That is, how are we proposing to go about our work?
These basic questions apply to NGOs of all sizes and lie behind the more
complicated approaches which appear later. Any staff member should be able
to provide an answer to each of these questions - answers that are not too
different. Missing or conflicting answers may reflect or be symptoms of
organisational problems.
The five questions could also be used as a basis for a more comprehensive
assessment. The staff or members could be asked to specify relevant subquestions or a list of pre-formulated questions could be used. The following list
is formulated on the basis of Drucker’s fundamentals:
12
Fowler (1995), p.10.
Chapter 6
41
QUESTIONS FOR SELF-REFLECTION
1.
What is our organisation’s purpose in society?
What are we trying to achieve?
What specific results are we seeking?
Do we need to redefine our purpose?
2.
Who are we here for?
Who are we primarily here to serve or influence?
Who else are we here to serve or influence?
How are these people changing?
3.
What do the people we are here for value or find important?
How does what these people value affect what we do?
Are we providing those we are here for with what they value?
Are we reaching those we wish to influence?
What information do we need about them for our work?
4.
What are our results?
How do we define results?
To what extent have we achieved those results?
What are our strengths and weaknesses?
How do our results affect what we do?
5.
What is our plan?
What have we learnt and how should we change what we do?
Where should we prioritise?
What is my personal plan to improve in my area of responsibility?
What is our plan to improve the organisation’s performance?
There are several ways to use the questions. They could be used in a workshop
or as a questionnaire to be sent to all staff, volunteers, board members, etc. with
a request that they answer the questions on their own. With each answer they
are also asked to indicate on what basis or how they know the answer. Concrete
examples are the best way to do this.
Another process could consist of three steps: an internal team starts by drawing
an organisational profile based on the questions. Then an external team could
do the same and the process would then be summed up in a meeting where
similarities and differences between the internal and external profiles or
"images" of the organisation are discussed, and the need for further action
decided.
At any rate, what we look for are questions with a potential to “trigger” a
constructive discussion, stimulate self-reflection and help to guide the
discussion in the right direction.
Chapter 6
42
Setting Priorities
Another technique which has proved to be useful in setting and clarifying
priorities also takes some fundamental questions as its point of departure, and
could be presented in the form of concentric circles:
SHOULD NOT HAPPEN
COULD DO LESS OF
CAN DO
HAS TO DO
In terms of priorities there are four fundamental questions: First of all the
organisation has to decide what the organisation has to do in order to be in line
with its core purpose. What are the “musts” that the NGO cannot avoid and still
remain in the same business. A church cannot forget its gospel, a human rights
organisation has to address human rights issues, an environmental organisation
needs a strong focus on the environment, etc.
The other question seeks to clarify what the organisation also can do – in
addition to its core activities – if it has the resources. Very often the distinction
between “must” and “can” is blurred. Any organisation tends to grow by
incremental expansion and continuously adding new activities.
Then the organisation should know what it could and should do less of if
resources are reduced, and the organisation had to focus its priorities. And
finally, any organisation should set some ethical standards concerning what
should not happen or be avoided. The misuse of people or corruption should not
happen. Discrimination of women should be avoided, etc.
Chapter 6
43
6.2. Organisations In Different Stages Of Life
Organisations are born, they grow and may eventually die. New organisations
are brought to life every day and in the last decade thousands of new NGOs
have seen the light in both the North and the South. At the same time, several
NGOs close their doors, never to open again. Organisations - like biological
organisms - go through life cycles – or patterns of predictable change. Some
develop faster than others, some do a far better job of growing up or ageing
than others, but the metaphor from organic nature is interesting in order to
understand and assess the life of organisations.
Models often do not take account of organisational life cycles, and present
static capacity profiles and ignore the fact that organisational needs and
opportunities change, for instance, between the young and the established
NGOs.
For our purpose it is important to know what stage of life an organisation is in,
since we shall find opportunities and strategies for becoming more effective.
The actions that are appropriate for a given problem, when the organisation is
growing, may be very different if the same problem occurs during the decline
stage. What is considered as a good leader will also change from the formation
to the consolidation and finally the decline stage.
Similarly, it is not fair to expect that a very young NGO will have all the
systems and procedures of a much older and experienced colleague. We would
also expect an established organisation to have more consolidated structures
than NGOs in the start-up phase. The relevant issues and questions change from
phase to phase.
The following presents the life-cycle perspective and seeks to define what are
the key issues and concerns for an organisation at the various stages. The
problem is that several potential life cycles are available.
The first assumes a progression from birth, growth, maturity, and finally
decline and maybe death. It is possible to define five stages:
1. Entrepreneurial stage.
This stage represents the formation. The organisation is in its infancy. Goals
tend to be ambiguous. Creativity is high. There is often a strong,
charismatic leader. Few systems and procedures in place. Mainly informal
communication. Progress to the next stage demands acquiring a steady flow
of resources.
Chapter 6
44
2. Collectivity stage.
Innovation continues, but the organisation’s mission is clarified.
Communication and structure remain essentially informal. Members put in
long hours and show a high degree of commitment.
3. Formalisation stage.
The structure stabilises. Formal rules and procedures are imposed.
Innovation is de-emphasised while efficiency and stability are emphasised.
Decision-making becomes more centralised and conservative. The
organisation does not depend so much on one or a few individuals. Roles
are clarified and professionalised in the sense that formal training becomes
more important.
4. Diversification stage.
The organisation expands and diversifies its services – looking for new
needs and opportunities. The structure of the organisation becomes more
complex and specialised with departments and sections.
5. Decline stage.
As result of competition, fewer resources, internal conflicts, etc. the
turnover of key staff increases, conflicts become more common and people
start looking for a strong leader to arrest the decline. Decision-making is
again centralised.
Such models should be used with care. All organisations do not go through all
the stages. The stages in the life-cycle do not necessarily follow the
organisation’s chronological age. All organisations do not move from birth to
death, but maybe towards transformation in one way or another. Maybe there
are only four stages and the following illustration presents the four and five
stage model in combination. It is the principle of stages in the life of an
organisation which is important – not the number and names of the stages.
Chapter 6
45
Maturity
Growth
Decline
Formation
Death
1. Entrepreneurial
Stage
Ambiguous
aims
High
creativity many ideas
circulate
Risk-taking
encouraged
Loosely
defined
structures
Strong
leader/
founder
2. Collectivity Stage 3.
Mission
clarified
Communication
and structures
remain
informal.
High
commitment –
strong group
identity.
Coordination
remains centred
on leader
Innovation
emphasised
Formalisation
Stage
Formalisation of
rules
Structures/
procedures
emerge and
become
consolidated
More conservative culture
with more
emphasis on
efficiency and
stability
4. Diversification Stage
5. Decline Stage
More complex
structure
Decentralisation
Expanded/
Diversified
mandates
High employee
turn over
Increased
conflict
Centralisation.
Detoriating
image
Denial of threats
Overconfidence
The Evolution – Crisis – Evolution Model
An alternative model suggests that an organisation’s evolution is characterised
by phases of prolonged and calm growth, followed by periods of internal
turmoil. The point is that each stage of evolution or growth creates its own
crisis. The resolution of the crisis, however, initiates a new evolutionary phase.
The first stage is characterised by the creativity of its founders. Decisionmaking is controlled by the top manager/founder. Founders and members
devote a lot of energy towards the organisation. Communication between
people is frequent and informal.
As the organisation grows, it becomes difficult to manage by relying only on
informal communication. Managers become overextended. A leadership crisis
occurs. Stronger and more professional management is needed.
Chapter 6
46
New leadership will formalise communication and put managerial systems and
procedures into place. The organisation becomes increasingly bureaucratic.
Specialisation is introduced with an increasing number of staff.
The new direction, however, will create a crisis of its own making. Lower level
staff become frustrated and seek greater independence and autonomy. The new
management, though, is reluctant to give up autonomy. The result is a crisis of
autonomy.
Decisions are then decentralised. Lower-level staff will have relative autonomy
to run their units. Managers will devote most of their energy to long-term
strategic planning. Delegation, however, eventually creates a crisis of control.
The Board or the top level management fear that the organisation is going in
too many directions at the same time. There is an attempt to re-centralise
decision-making to provide unity of direction, but this is rarely realistic.
The end result may be stronger personal collaboration between the members of
the organisation, and/or more and stronger external partnerships. A strong
culture acts as a substitute for formal controls. The structure of the organisation
becomes flatter and more organic.
This model illustrates that success or evolution creates its own problems. As an
organisation grows, it faces new problems. Its crisis, in turn, requires
management to make new adjustments.
References
47
Draft 24.05.05
APPENDIX 1: ORGANISATIONAL ASSESSMENT FORMAT
DIMENSIONS
CHARACTERISTICS
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
ABILITY TO BE
(1)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Governance
The organisation has a board which clarifies overall aims and supports direction.
The Charter (by-laws) provides an adequate legal framework.
A representative General Assembly is organised annually.
Members own and control the organisation.
Members take active part in all major decisions.
(2) Leadership
The leadership has a proven capability to:
6. Set priorities and provide clear direction for the organisation.
7. Direct, motivate and manage staff.
8. Be a good spokesman on behalf of the organisation.
9. Make decisions in a timely manner.
10. Make decisions after proper consultation with staff/members.
11. Handle internal conflicts well.
12. Delegate work and involve staff and members.
IDENTITY
(3) Identity
Purpose (What the organisation wants to achieve)
13. The purpose is clear.
14. The purpose is understood and internalised by all staff/members.
15. The purpose is not contested
16. There is no need to change overall direction.
Values (What the organisation believes in.)
17. Staff/members are committed to key values and beliefs.
18. Values and believes are shared with the Norwegian partner.
Strategy (The distinctive profile of the organisation.)
19. The organisation has a clear strategy which helps to clarify priorities
20. The organisation shows an individual identity in what it does.
21. There are certain things that only this organisation can do.
RATING
Low
1
2
3
High
4
5
COMMENTS
References
ABILITY TO ORGANISE
DIMENSIONS
48
Draft 24.05.05
CHARACTERISTICS
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
(4) Human resources
The organisation has a proven capability to:
22. Recruit and select people effectively.
23. Ensure that staff composition reflects fair gender and equity policy.
24. Regularly train and upgrade the skills of staff.
25. Provide satisfactory incentives and compensations.
26. Avoid turnover among staff.
27. Attract people with good technical skills.
28. Attract people with good managerial and administrative skills.
CAPACITY
(5) Systems and procedures
The organisation has a proven capability to:
29. Set realistic priorities and plans.
30. Carry out plans and projects in a timely manner.
31. Monitor and report on activities.
32. Learn from mistakes and change accordingly.
33. Effective financial management and accounting systems are in place.
35. An organisational structure is in place with clear division of responsibilities at all levels.
(6) Material and financial resources
36. Funds are available when needed for planned activities.
37. The budget is large enough to allow the organisation to fulfil its obligations.
38. Funding is stable and predictable.
39. Buildings and internal services (water, electricity, etc.) are adequate.
40. Building and equipment maintenance are well taken care of.
41. Communication systems function effectively (telephone, fax etc.).
RATING
Low
1
2
3
High
4
5
COMMENTS
References
49
DIMENSIONS
Draft 24.05.05
CHARACTERISTICS
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
ABILITY TO RELATE
(7) Standing (legitimacy)
The following external stakeholders respect and have confidence in the organisation:
42. Members and/or participants
43. Other national NGOs
44. Public authorities
45. Donors
LINKAGES
(8)
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
Alliances and connections
The organisation is linked to and works effectively with national partners.
The organisation is linked to and works effectively with international partners.
The organisation maintains stable relations with its donors.
The organisation shares information about its activities with others.
The organisation has no major rivals or competitors.
(9) Responsiveness
51. The organisation becomes involved in new areas of work and responds to new needs .
52. The external environment supports the organisation.
53. The organisation is resilient – is not swayed by new winds.
The following factors support the work of the organisation:
54. The legal/regulatory context, e.g. the government’s NGO laws and regulations, etc.
55. Political environments (particular decisions, politicians, etc.).
56. Social and cultural environment.
57. Donor policies or preferences.
RATING
Low
1
2
3
High
4
5
COMMENTS
References
DIMENSIONS
50
Draft 24.05.05
CHARACTERISTICS
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
ABILITY TO DO
(10) Relevance
58. Members/users perceive activities to be relevant and beneficial.
PERFORMANCE
(11) Effectiveness
59. The organisation meets its short-term targets in annual work plans.
60. The organisation achieves most of its objectives.
61. Achievements compare well with other similar organisations.
(12) Sustainability
62. The organisation can sustain its activities without outside financial support.
63. The organisation can manage all its activities without outside staff support.
64. The organisation generates an increasing level of domestic financial resources.
65. There are good prospects to sustain all activities without external support.
RATING
Low
1
2
3
High
4
5
COMMENTS
References
51
Draft 24.05.05
Summary Sheet
ELEMENTS
1.
Governance
2.
Leadership
3.
Identity
4.
Human resources
5.
Systems and procedures
6.
Material and financial resources
7.
Standing
(legitimacy)
8.
Alliances and connections
9.
External pressures
(adaptation)
AVERAGES
ABILITIES
ABILITY TO BE
ABILITY TO ORGANISE
ABILITY TO RELATE
10. Relevance
11. Effectiveness
12. Viability
ABILITY TO DO
AVERAGES
References
52
Draft 24.05.05
APPENDIX 2: REFERENCES
Bergh, Mirjam (1995), “Caring, Sharing, Daring. Development work in transition”, DiS/BN,
Oslo.
Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (1997), “Partnering to Build and Measure
Organisational Capacity”, USA.
Dale, Reidar (1998), “Evaluation Frameworks for Development Programmes and Projects”, Sage
Publications, London.
Fowler, Allan (1995), “Participatory Self Assessment of NGO Capacity”, INTRAC Papers
Series, Number 10, Oxford.
Hailey J. (1995), "International Organisation Assessment”, Brighton.
Harrison, Michael. I. & Shirom.A. (1999), “Organisational Diagnosis and Assessment”, Sage
Publications, London.
Kruse, Stein-Erik (1998), “Institutional Development in Norwegian Bilateral Assistance,
Synthesis Report”, UD Evaluation Report 5.98, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo.
Lusthaus, Charles et.al. (1999), “Enhancing Organisational Performance”, A Toolbox for SelfAssessment, IDRC, Ottawa.
Morgan, Gareth (1997), “Images of Organisations”, Sage Publications, London.
Paterson et.al (1998), “Institutional Development promoted through Norwegian NGOs”, UD 3/98
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo.
UNDP (1998), “Capacity Assessment and Development”, Technical Advisory Paper No.3, New
York.