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