RESEARCH REPORT. NGOs (non-governmental organizations) Resource coordination processes during emergency responses after disasters. From Muriel Dufour

Transcription

1 RESEARCH REPORT NGOs (non-governmental organizations) Resource coordination processes during emergency responses after disasters From Muriel Dufour Executive Summary of Ph.D. thesis Presented at the National School of Public Administration in Montreal, QC, Canada on July 22, 2015 This research was made possible with a grant from CGA-Canada, a scholarship from the National School of Public Administration, and a generous donation from Martin Lacasse to the Performance Research Group at the University of Quebec in Outaouais, QC, Dufour 2016

2 FOREWORD/ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This report is a summary of my Ph.D. thesis, presented on July 22, 2015, at the National School of Public Administration in Montreal, QC, Canada. It was written in response to the outspoken interest of the participants in having a summary of the study for which they provided essential information. The free distribution of the results presented in this document is given as a token of our gratitude to all the NGOs and people who participated in our data collect. Thanks for their time and their generous contributions to this work. We hope that this study will contribute to a better understanding of how Humanitarian NGOs work, and ultimately boost the efficiency of emergency responses by the same token. Special thanks to the United Nations, and especially to M. Mañon, Oficial de Coordinación Interagencial, at the Officina del Coordinador Residente, United Nations office at Santiago de Chile, for coordinating the communication of these results to anyone interested. Muriel Dufour ii

3 SUMMARY Research focus: Organizational resource coordination processes within and between NGOs, in the context of emergency responses (fast onset) following a large disaster. Objectives: Our main objective is to increase the efficiency of resource management and coordination processes by enhancing our knowledge of the processes used by emergency NGOs. We ve focused this study on two perspectives, 1) intra-organizational processes (i.e. processes within an NGO), and 2) inter-organizational processes (i.e. processes between non-affiliate NGOs). The research has two main objectives: I. Identifying and comparing the intra-organizational processes used by emergency NGOs to manage their resources, and measuring the operational capacity provided by these processes; II. Identifying and comparing inter-organizational processes used by emergency NGOs to coordinate their resources with non-affiliate NGOs, and evaluating the coordination intensity resulting from them. Findings 1. Intra-organizational processes From an intra-organizational standpoint, five types of processes were identified: Procurement Donations management Storage and transportation, Distribution Resources transfers between affiliate NGOs After comparing the different processes used by NGOs, four types of NGOs were identified based on the flexibility of their processes and their operational capacity with respect to resource management. A generic tool that can be used by emergency managers was created to provide a means to measure at one point in time the operational capacity of an NGO or a group of NGOs, in general or for a specific response. 2. Inter-organizational processes From an inter-organizational standpoint, three categories of processes were identified: Processes made in common or assigned to a non-affiliate NGO Resource transfer processes to a non-affiliate NGO Mechanisms resulting from an agreement between non-affiliate NGOs to use or share out resources iii

4 Four types of NGOs showed up, based on the intensity of the coordination of their resources with other NGOs. As for intra-organizational processes, a generic tool for emergency managers was created to measure the resource coordination intensity of an NGO, a group of NGOs, in general or for a specific response. Benefits of this research Increasing the understanding of emergency responders to the processes used by different types of emergency NGOs; Enhancing the awareness of experts and managers in the field to the significant differences of intra and inter-organizational resource coordination processes and operating procedures chosen by various types of NGOs; Identifying some of the key factors that increase process flexibility a determining factor of an NGO s operational capacity as well as ensure a greater coordination intensity with other NGOs working during one given emergency response; Providing two useful tools that allow measuring flexibility operational capacity to be more specific and coordination intensity. The results that we obtained significantly enhance our understanding of NGOs functioning and could lead to an improvement of the emergency responses efficiency if taken in account. This can be possible by targeting specific operating procedures that should be changed in order to increase the operational capacity and the coordination intensity with respect to resources. Overall, these results should allow Emergency Managers to establish more robust and realistic coordination plans and strategies, on all levels, for a better and more efficient response. Limits of our methodology The two main limits of this research are the following: 1) The diversity of humanitarian NGOs represented in this study is limited by the sample population selected. Therefore, it is possible that the diversity of all existing processes may not be fully described in this study; 2) This study took a strictly managerial and reductionist perspective, considering only the NGO as a black box on an organizational standpoint; 3) Only the organizational processes favored by NGOs were taken in account. Environmental contingencies and other outside forces and constraints that could lead to a transformation of the organization were considered falling outside the scope of this research. iv

5 TABLE OF CONTENT SUMMARY... III TABLE OF CONTENT... V LIST OF TABLES... VII LIST OF FIGURES... VII 1. INTRODUCTION RESEARCH FOCUS BACKGROUND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES CONCEPTS DEFINITIONS... 3 Resources... 3 Process... 3 Efficiency, effectiveness and operational capacity... 3 Intra and inter-organizational coordination METHODOLOGY AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLED NGOS RESULTS IN REGARD TO INTRA-ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCE-ORIENTED PROCESSES IDENTIFICATION OF RESOURCE-ORIENTED INTRA-ORGANIZATIONAL PROCESSES MEASURING OPERATIONAL CAPACITY BASED ON INTRA-ORGANIZATIONAL PROCESSES... 7 Indicators and scores used for measuring operational capacity... 7 Global score of operational capacity in regard to intra-organizational resource-oriented processes RESULTS: COMPARISON BETWEEN NGOS AND TYPOLOGY PROPOSED CONCLUSION RESULTS IN REGARD TO INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL PROCESSES FOR RESOURCE COORDINATION IDENTIFYING INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCE COORDINATION PROCESSES MEASURING INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCE COORDINATION INTENSITY Indicators and scores allowing measuring the resource coordination intensity Global scores for resource coordination intensity NGO TYPOLOGY BASED ON THE INTENSITY OF THEIR RESOURCE COORDINATION WITH OTHER NGOS CONCLUSION BENEFITS OF THIS RESEARCH TOOL FOR MEASURING OPERATIONAL CAPACITY TOOL FOR MEASURING RESOURCE COORDINATION INTENSITY PURPOSE, METRICS AND OUTPUTS OF THE TWO MEASUREMENT TOOLS RESULTS, LIMITS AND FUTURE WORKS FINDINGS SUMMARY RESEARCH SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS FUTURE RESEARCH AND EXPECTED BENEFITS v

6 6. CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES ANNEXE A: FULL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR OPERATIONAL CAPACITY MEASUREMENT ANNEXE B: FULL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL COORDINATION INTENSITY MEASUREMENT vi

7 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Organizational attributes and attributes values 5 Table 2. Main characteristics of sampled NGOs.5 Table3. Description of the indicators and their scoring scheme measuring the flexibility of resource-oriented processes of emergency NGOs..7 Table 4. Global operational capacity scores for all NGOs in regard to resource management.. 10 Table 5. Types of intra-organizational process used by NGOs to coordinate their resources Table 6. Summary of indicators used to measure resource inter-organizational coordination intensity and scores assigned 14 Table 7. Global measure of resource coordination intensity with other non-affiliate NGOs. 15 Table 8. NGO ranked according to their global score for the coordination of their resources with other NGOs.15 Table 9. Characteristics of NGOs in regard to inter-organizational resource coordination intensity 17 Table 10. Summary of conclusions in regard to inter-organizational resource coordination processes..18 Table 11. Measurement Tool for evaluating the operational capacity based on intraorganizational resource-oriented processes 21 Table 12. Measurement Tool for evaluating the resource coordination intensity between non-affiliate NGOs 23 Table 13. Metrics and outputs of measurement tools designed 24 Table 14. Benefits of the operational capacity and coordination intensity measurement tools. 24 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Objectives in relation to resource-oriented intra-organizational processes.2 Figure 2. Objectives in relation to resource-oriented inter-organizational processes.2 Figure 3. Identification of processes used for intra-organizational resource coordination 6 Figure 4. Criteria for assessing operational capacity 7 Figure 5. NGOs typology based on their operational capacity measured with intraorganizational resource-oriented processes.11 Figure 6. Contribution of our tool in relation to intra-organizational..12 Figure 7.The four types of NGOs based on the intensity of the coordination of their resources with other NGOs..16 Figure 8. Operational benefits of the tool built to measure the intensity of interorganizational resource coordination 19 vii

8 1. INTRODUCTION New disasters occur every year. In order to limit the extent of the damage in their wake, it appears essential to manage emergency operations more efficiently (Boin, Clay and Whybark, 2010; Kumar and Havey, 2013). However, the coordination of emergency operations leaves a lot to be desired in many cases (Thomas and Kopczak, 2005; Schultz and Blecken, 2010). This is particularly true for the coordination of resources within and between non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as between key actors of emergency responses (US House of Representatives, 2006; Gatignon, Van Wassenhove and Charles, 2010). 1.1 Research Focus This research narrows down its scope to the study of Humanitarian NGOs acting in the context of emergency responses to sudden large-scale disasters i.e. fast onset context. The focus is on NGO s resource coordination processes o at the intra-organizational level, i.e. management of resource flows within the organization; o at the inter-organizational level, i.e. resource coordination processes between non-affiliate NGOs. Complex emergency response contexts (war zones) and emergency that evolves on a long period of time (slow onset) are outside the scope of this study. 1.2 Background Field observations have frequently shown a great level of ignorance, misunderstanding and sometimes mistrust between NGOs, especially between small and large ones. Despite their differences, NGOs must often work together and coordinate their efforts because of the proximity and overlap of their actions on the field of operations. Furthermore, the global efficiency of the emergency response depends in large part on their coordination, especially when it comes to resources (Haimes et al., 2008; Maon, Lindgreen and Vanhamme, 2009). It is worth noting that the will for coordination between or within NGOs is not enough to make it so in any meaningful way. Past experiences such as the emergency response during Hurricane Katrina in 2005 have shown that coordinating resources within and between NGOs is a very difficult thing to put in place, even for large organizations such as the Red Cross (US House of Representatives, 2006). 1.3 Research Objectives 1

9 The main objective of this research is to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of resource management and coordination processes by having a deeper understanding of the processes used by the different types of emergency NGOs. In order to do so, we focus our attention on two aspects: 1) Intra-organizational processes: Identifying and comparing intra-organizational processes used by emergency NGOs to have adequate resources Measuring their operational capacity based on intraorganizational resource-oriented processes Proposing a NGO typology based on their operational capacity in regard to resource management processes Figure 1. Objectives in relation to resource-oriented intra-organizational processes 2) Inter-organizational processes: Identifying and comparing inter-organizational processes chosen by NGOs in order to coordinate their resources with non-affiliate NGOs. Measuring the intensity of their coordination based on processes used with other NGOs Establishing a NGO typology based on the level of coordination intensity reached through their inter-organizational resource-oriented processes Figure 2. Objectives in relation to resource-oriented inter-organizational processes 2

10 1.4 Concepts definitions This research uses several concepts that are briefly described in this section. Resources Resources encompass equipment, goods, money, information (between NGOs) and human resources (Moore et al., 2003, Therrien, 2010). Process A series of actions aimed at accomplishing some result, a continuous action, operation, or a series of changes taking place in a definite manner (WordReference, 2015) Efficiency, effectiveness and operational capacity The organizational effectiveness is an objective measure, an external performance standard related to «[ ] how well an organization is meeting the demands of the various groups and organizations that are concerned with its activities.» (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). The organizational efficiency is an objective measure of the optimal way of using resources (Ibid.). The organizational efficiency relies in large part on operational capacity. Thus, measuring operational capacity is also a means to evaluate the efficiency of organizational processes. It is worth noticing that the overall efficiency of emergency operations depends on each NGO s organizational efficiency (Jahre and Jensen, 2010). Intra and inter-organizational coordination Intra-organizational coordination relies on pre-defined procedures that adapt the behavior of an individual to the plan of the group (Simon, 1983), which implies putting in place processes. Therefore, studying internal processes is equivalent to studying intra-organizational coordination. Inter-organizational coordination means aligning one s actions with those of other relevant actors and organizations to achieve a shared goal. (Comfort, 2007). This coordination is most often the result of an organization s need for resources (Cook, 1977; Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). Resources being always scarce compared to one s needs (Bui et al., 2000), one s control over resources translates into a decrease over the uncertainty over one s operations and an increase of power to control a given situation (Cook, 1977; Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). Coordination is often described in terms of intensity. For the purpose of this study, the interorganizational coordination intensity can be defined as the strength of the relationships between different organizations which exchange and therefore coordinate their resources. 3

11 Intra and inter-organizational coordination are different but complementary things. An organization can have a good intra-organizational coordination level allowing an optimal resource flow, without coordinating with any other organizations and without insuring that adequate resources are provided for the global emergency response. Therefore, organizations can have two different coordination levels for their intra and inter-organizational level respectively. In both cases, the efficiency of the global response is negatively affected. 1.5 Methodology and characteristics of sampled NGOs The methodology used for this research is based on multiple case-studies with each NGO being a case. We collected three types of data, i.e. verbal, written and observation data: Verbal data are coming from 65 in depth-interviews: 47 with emergency managers from various NGOs responding to fast onset emergency and 18 with UN coordinators and representatives of different governmental agencies many of them being Chileans. Written data is coming from public documents websites, books, newspapers and official reports as well as internal documents made available by NGOs and emergency managers. Observation data are collected in the field, most particularly in Chile following the earthquake of February In order to keep all interviewee s identity and affiliations to NGOs anonymous, an identification number was given to every NGO (e.g. O1) throughout this report. An initial sample population of 24 NGOs was selected. Those NGOs were chosen based on organizational characteristics (attributes) that are illustrated in table 1. The goal was to obtain the greatest level of diversity between NGOs, in order to have in turn the greatest diversity of processes possible 1. After a first analysis, nine NGOs were discarded, either because they did not reflect the criteria of diversification required or because the data collected was insufficient for cross-referencing and validating the information available. This screening process resulted in a final sample of 13 NGOs acting in emergency responses. 1 According to the structural and environmental contingency theory (Mintzberg, 2003) 4

12 Table 1. Organizational attributes and attributes values Attribute 1. Size (based on annual budget) Small (<10 M$) Possible values of the attribute Medium Large (10 à 100 M$) (> 100 M$) 2. Origin French South American Anglo-Saxon International 3. Age Young (<10 years) Mature (<30 years) 4. Strategic Emergency Combined orientation only (develop. and emergency) 5. Structure Centralized Decentralized 6. Funding Private Private funding funding 51 to 75% > 75 % Old (> 30 years) Institutional funding 50 to 75% The main characteristics of the NGOs in the sample are summarized in table 2. Institutional funding > 75 % Table 2. Main characteristics of sampled NGOs ONG Origin Age Size Strategic Orientation Structure * O1 French old large Combined Centralized (towards decentralization) O2 South mature small Combined Centralized American O3 South old medium Combined Centralized American O4 Anglo-Saxon old large Combined Decentralized O5 International old large Combined Centralized O6 International old large Emergency Centralized O7 South young small Combined Centralized American Emergency (since 2010) O8 Anglo-Saxon mature small Emergency Centralized O9 French old large Emergency Decentralized O10 Anglo-Saxon mature large Combined Centralized O11 Anglo-Saxon old large Combined Centralized (towards decentralization) O12 Anglo-Saxon old large Combined Decentralized (towards centralization) O13 Anglo-Saxon old large Combined Centralized *NGO Identification number 5

13 2. RESULTS IN REGARD TO INTRA-ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCE- ORIENTED PROCESSES Section 2.1 identifies the different processes chosen and used internally by NGOs to ensure an adequate level of resources for them; section 2.2 measures the operational capacity of NGO in regard to their resource processes; section 2.3 presents the analysis and results of this research; section 2.4 presents a conclusion in regard to intra-organizational processes. 2.1 Identification of resource-oriented intra-organizational processes The processes identified are illustrated in figure 3. Supply Chain Management Procurement Logistics processes Storage and Transportation Funding processes Distribution Resources transfers between affiliate NGOs Figure 3. Identification of processes used for intra-organizational resource coordination This figure shows all processes used internally by NGOs to manage their resources i.e.: Goods transfers: logistics processes for procurement, transportation, storage and delivery; Funds transfers ongoing funding activities, including donations management (top-down arrow), taking place at the same time as the logistics processes, from procurement to resource usage in the field; Resource transfers between affiliate NGOs, which occur to supplement or complement logistics processes and funding activities for NGOs seeking more resources. 6

14 2.2 Measuring operational capacity based on intra-organizational processes Indicators and scores used for measuring operational capacity Researchers agree on the fact that process flexibility is the basis of operational capacity and can be measured according to the following criteria (see figure 4): Process timeliness (Balcik et al., 2010) Adaptability: capacity to adjust to any change in the environment (Schreyogg et al. 2007) Dynamicity : capacity to adjust quickly in a turbulent or dynamic environment (Schreyogg et al. 2007) Speculativity (opposed to reactivity): levels of preparedness and readiness to respond quickly to any unexpected event (Cattani et al., 2008) Figure 4. Criteria for assessing operational capacity Within the scope of NGOs taking part in emergency responses, these criteria have been further developed into 5 indicators listed in table 3. NGO s resource-oriented processes are scored according to their level of flexibility for each of those criteria. Lower scores indicate greater operational capacity. Table 3. Description of the indicators and their scoring scheme measuring the flexibility of resource-oriented processes of emergency NGOs. Indicator Indicator 1 : Number of levels of decision making controlling the process (Timeliness) Description A small number of levels in decision making speeds up the process A small number of levels in decision making is the indicator of a greater operational capacity Scoring scheme : 1 level: 2 points 2 levels: 4 points 3 levels: 8 points 7

15 Indicator Indicator 2 : Types of resources (Adaptability and dynamicity) Description NGOs differ on just one thing, their hiring practices of paid professionals and volunteers. Despite the fact that Emergency Managers are scarce, some NGOs in need of additional human resources during emergencies recruit paid emergency professionals almost exclusively, while some others have a policy of recruiting volunteers. NGOs recruiting volunteers have: A greater adaptability - i.e. capacity to adapt to changing needs A greater dynamicity i.e. capacity to adjust quickly to any changes Hiring volunteers is the indicator of a greater operational capacity Scoring scheme : Volunteers: 2 points Emergency professionals: 4 points Indicator 3 : Type of favored providers (Timeliness, adaptability and dynamicity) An NGO favoring local/national providers has a greater adaptability and dynamicity than an NGO favoring international providers. This is mainly the case because of the small distances which speeds up delivery and improves the capacity to adapt quickly to any changes in needs. Favoring local/national providers is the indicator of a greater operational capacity Scoring scheme : Local/national only: Local/national and international: International only: 2 points 4 points 8 points Indicator 4 : Type of Funding (Timeliness, adaptability, dynamicity and speculativity) Given the number of standards imposed by institutional funders, an NGO which relies mainly an institutional funding has often the following constraints : Long timeliness due to the addition of levels in decision making process; Low adaptability and dynamicity due to the need to comply to the agreement with the funder; Low speculativity due to the fact that institutional funding rarely allows acquiring resources beforehand in preparation of an eventual disaster. 8

16 Indicator Description On the other hand, funding coming mainly from private donors imposes very few constraints on the NGO management's processes. Being mainly funded by private donors is the indicator of a greater operational capacity Scoring scheme: Private funding > 75%: 2 points Private funding 51 to 75%: 4 points Institutional funding 51 to 75 %: 8 points Institutional funding > 75%: 16 points Indicator 5 : The phase (predisaster or post-disaster) of the process (Speculativity) An NGO having procurement, storage and funding activities during the pre-disaster phase has more adaptability and dynamicity than an NGO having all those processes put in place only during the post-disaster phase and being just able to react rather than be pro-active. Resource-oriented processes made mainly in the predisaster phase are the indicator of a greater operational capacity Scoring scheme : Pre-disaster phase only: Pre-disaster and post-disaster: Post-disaster only: 1 point 2 points 4 points Global score of operational capacity in regard to intra-organizational resource-oriented processes Adding up the scores of an NGO s processes together gives us a global score for its operational capacity. The global scores of all the NGOs of this study are summarized in table 4. The operational capacities highlighted in red are the lowest scores obtained for this study, while the scores highlighted in green are the highest ones. 9

17 Table 4. Global operational capacity scores for all NGOs in regard to resource management Indicators NGO Global operational capacity score ONG O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 O7 O8 O9 O10 O11 O12 O13 Level Indicator Types of resources Indicator Types of providers Indicator Type of funding Indicator Phase Indicator Total Score Results: Comparison between NGOs and typology proposed As previously mentioned in section 2.2, NGOs with lower scores have a higher operational capacity because the flexibility of their processes are higher. An NGO with a high operational capacity with respect to its resources-oriented processes has the following characteristics: A small number of levels for decision making controlling the process process timeliness; Processes made mainly during the pre-disaster phase speculative rather than reactive capacity; Preference toward hiring volunteers rather than emergency professionals greater dynamicity i.e. capacity to make quick adjustments; Preference toward choosing local/national providers rather than international ones greater timeliness, process adaptability and dynamicity; Funding coming mainly from private donors rather than institutional donors process adaptability and dynamicity because the NGO avoids constraints imposed by institutional donors on processes. Findings Summary NGOs have a very wide variety of operating procedures in regard to their resource-oriented processes. This is confirmed by looking at the great variability in the results shown in table 4, with scores from 31 to 56 e.g. NGOs O8 s high operational capacity vs. O2 s low operational capacity; A given NGO does not use the same operating procedures for all its processes, and thus does not have the same operational capacity with all its processes. 10

18 Scores can be clustered into four groups of values, which results in defining four types of NGOs (figure 5). Increasing Process Flexibility (Increasing timeliness, adaptability, speculative capacity of processes Type 4 NGOs Type 3 NGOs Type 2 NGOs Type 1 NGOs Increasing operational capacity Scores 50 and over or under NGO with operational capacity significantly lower than average NGO with operational capacity below average NGO with operational capacity over average NGO with operational capacity significantly higher than average Figure 5. NGOs typology based on their operational capacity measured with intra-organizational resource-oriented processes. 2.4 Conclusion Several conclusions can be brought up: Operating procedures for resource-oriented processes is a determining factor of an NGO s operational capacity in relation to the management of its resources Processes and their operating procedures taken all together have a cumulative effect that can improve or diminish the global operational capacity of an NGO in regard to its resources 11

19 It is essential that NGOs Emergency Managers understand the relationship between the processes they choose and the level of operational capacity they aim for their NGO. The tool that we built and the typology proposed enables emergency managers to: Measure Compare Evaluate the NGO operational capacity an NGO to others to its target level the evolution of operational capacity over time Figure 6. Contribution of our tool in relation to intra-organizational resource management 3. RESULTS IN REGARD TO INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL PROCESSES FOR RESOURCE COORDINATION Section 3.1 identifies, the inter-organizational processes allowing coordinating resources between non-affiliate NGOs. Section 3.2 measures the coordination intensity of these processes. Section 3.3 presents the discussion and results. Finally, section 3.4 presents the conclusion regarding these resource coordination processes. 3.1 Identifying inter-organizational resource coordination processes All processes allowing resource coordination between non-affiliate NGOs are summarized in table 5. There are three types of processes: Type 1: Processes made in common or assigned to a non-affiliate NGO; Type 2: Processes resulting in a resource transfers from or to a non-affiliate NGO; Type 3: Mechanisms resulting from an agreement between non-affiliate NGOs to use or share out resources. Needs assessments have been taken in account since they are considered by all sources as an essential process to enable coordinating resources and activities between responders. 12

20 Table 5. Types of inter-organizational process used by NGOs to coordinate their resources Types of inter-organizational process used by non-affiliate NGOs to coordinate their resources TYPE 1 PROCESSES TYPE 2 PROCESSES Processes made in common with or assigned to non-affiliate NGOs Procurement Processes involving a resource transfer from or to a non-affiliate NGO Transportation and storage Distribution Needs assessments TYPE 3 PROCESSES Lending, exchanging or resources donations between NGOs Mechanisms resulting from an agreement between non-affiliate NGOs either to use resources or to share them out Sectorial or geographic activity breakdown Tools and common standards used or commonly developed by NGOs Sharing information Partnerships 3.2 Measuring inter-organizational resource coordination intensity Indicators and scores allowing measuring the resource coordination intensity Coordination intensity can be measured with three indicators based on Galbraith s coordination model (1977) and on the organizational relations theory from Cook (1977). These indicators are: The organizational level controlling the process operational, tactical or strategic level; The degree of process formalization: on an ad hoc or a contractual basis, or according to a strategic alliance; The process standardization: standards imposed or not on a process. 13

21 Higher scores have been assigned to processes with operating procedures that tend to increase the intensity of coordination. Indicators and score are summarized in table 6. Table 6. Summary of indicators and scores used to measure resource inter-organizational coordination intensity Indicator Indicator 1 : Organizational levels controlling the process Description and score assigned The higher the organizational level controlling a process is, the greater the coordination intensity becomes Scoring scheme: operational: 2 points tactical: 4 points strategic: 8 points If a process is controlled by several organizational levels, scores equal to every level are added Indicator 2 : Process Formalization The more formalized a process, the greater the coordination intensity becomes Scoring scheme : On an ad hoc basis: 2 points On a contractual basis: 4 points According to a strategic alliance: 8 points If a process can be made on several basis, scores equal to every level will be added Indicator 3 : Standards imposed on the process Standards imposed on a process lead to a higher coordination intensity Scoring scheme : No standard imposed: Standards imposed: 2 points 8 points Options mutually exclusive Global scores for resource coordination intensity Adding all scores for every process of our sample population of NGOs gives us the global scores shown in table 7. 14

22 Scores highlighted in green show NGOs coordinating their resources with other NGOs with a greater intensity while scores highlighted in red show NGOs not coordinating much with other non-affiliate NGOs. Table 7. Global measure of resource coordination intensity with other non-affiliate NGOs. NGO Identification number Level Indicator Standards Indicator Formalization Indicator Total Score for each ONG Global Intensity score with scores added for every indicator and for every type of processes Mean Table 8 represents NGOs ranked by decreasing intensity scores. Table 8. NGO ranked according to their global score for the coordination of their resources with other NGOs NGO Identification number Total intensity score Mean NGO typology based on the intensity of their resource coordination with other NGOs It is possible to define four types of NGOs, grouped together in relation to their score and their position around the mean score, as illustrated in figure 7. 15

23 Increasing Resource Coordination Intensity Higher organization level Greater process formalization Greater number of standards imposed on processes Type A NGO Type B NGO Type C NGO Type D NGO Increasing inter-organizational resource coordination 127 or under* * * 231 and over* Intensity of coordination significantly lower than average Intensity of coordination under average Intensity of coordination above average Intensity of coordination significantly higher than average *NGO s global intensity score Figure 7. The four types of NGOs based on the intensity of the coordination of their resources with other NGOs The summary of the characteristics of every type of NGO in regard to their inter-organizational resource coordination intensity is illustrated in table 9. 16

24 Table 9. Characteristics of NGOs in regard to inter-organizational resource coordination intensity Type A NGOs: NGO with a coordination intensity significantly lower than average Scores <127 (25% below average or under) Characteristics Very few or no inter-organizational resources-oriented processes If processes exist, they are limited to the operational level i.e. in the field. No or very few standards imposed (exchanges happen only with NGO partners having the same standards) Processes made on an ad hoc basis (informal) Type B NGOs: NGO with a resource coordination intensity below average Scores between 128 and 177 (128 : 25 % below average; 178: mean) Characteristics Processes made the most often at the operational or tactical level (but rarely strategic) Impose or have standards imposed upon their processes (depending on their size) Average process formalization (most often on a contractual basis). Very few strategic alliances. Type C NGOs: NGO with resource coordination intensity above average Scores between 178 and 230 (178: average; 230 : 25 % over average) Characteristics High intensity for many processes: Processes made at several organizational levels (operational, tactical and strategic) Most processes are constrained by standards imposed by another NGO, or constraining another NGO to abide by its standards. Variable levels of formalization (ad hoc, contractual or set according to alliances) Type D NGOs: NGO with resource coordination intensity significantly higher than average Scores> 230 (25% over average and more) Characteristics High intensity for most of the processes: Inter-organizational processes made at all organizational levels (operational, tactical and strategic) Very formalized processes occurring in accordance with many strategic alliances Inter-organizational processes always made according to imposed standards 17

25 3.4 Conclusion The conclusions in regard to inter-organizational resource coordination processes used by emergency NGOs are summarized in table 10: Table 10. Summary of conclusions in regard to inter-organizational resource coordination processes Fact 1) Results show a very high variability From one process to another for a given NGO; From one NGO to another for all processes. Conclusion NGOs coordinate their resources with a very different intensity from one to another o o Different intensities between processes of a given NGO; Different intensities from one NGO to another for all processes. 2) The majority of NGOs coordinate with an intensity below average The majority of NGOs tend to have a weak to very weak intensity of resource coordination with other non-affiliate NGOs Consequences: Many emergency responses are less efficient than they could or should be because of the differences between NGOs mentioned above. Solution: Emergency managers must realize that inter-organizational coordination is a determining factor of the efficiency of emergency response and must understand the importance selecting the right processes has on the inter-organizational coordination intensity of their NGO if they want to increase the efficiency of their emergency responses. Benefits of the tool proposed to measure inter-organizational resource coordination intensity 18

26 The tool we created for the purpose of measuring inter-organizational resource coordination intensity and the typology we propose have several benefits for emergency managers, as illustrated in figure 8. Specifically, they allow them to: Measure Compare Evaluate the coordination intensity with other NGOs an NGO to others the optimal and desired intensity vs its actual level the evolution of the coordination intensity over time Figure 8. Operational benefits of the tool built to measure the intensity of inter-organizational resource coordination. 4. Benefits of this research The first benefit of this research is to get a better knowledge and understanding of intra and interorganizational resource coordination processes in order to disseminate this information among different NGOs and diminish the misunderstanding and mistrust among them. The goal is to increase the level of collaboration and reciprocal relationships for better resources coordination during emergency responses. Additional benefits rely on the design of two measurement tools, one for evaluating the operational capacity of emergency NGOs and the other for evaluating the resource coordination intensity between non-affiliate NGOs. Both tools will be presented in a generic form, allowing emergency managers to use them as a management tool for improving the efficiency of their action plans. 4.1 Tool for measuring operational capacity This tool designed to measure operational capacity based on resource-oriented processes is based on five indicators to evaluate for a given NGO. The following guidelines describe how each indicator is used and how each score is calculated: 19

27 Organizational Level Indicator: A small number of levels in decision making speeds up the process and therefore enhances flexibility (see section 2.1 for the list of processes and section 2.2 for a detailed description of the indicators.). The number of decision-making levels controlling a process must be identified for each of the five types of processes. Each type of process is scored based on the number of levels (from 2 only one level controlling the process to 8 if three levels are controlling the process. The five scores are then added up to obtain a score for the Organizational Level-Indicator. Phase Indicator: Processes taking place during the preparedness phase give more flexibility to the NGO (concept of speculativity see sections 2.1 and 2.2 table 3). The objective is to identify when each of the five resource-oriented processes are initiated. Each type of process is scored according to the phase, from 1 for processes initiated during the preparedness phase, to 2 for processes made during preparedness and response phases and 8 for processes initiated only during response phase. The five scores are added up to obtain a score for the Phase-Indicator. Types of Resources Indicator: NGOs recruiting volunteers when they need additional human resources have a greater flexibility than NGOs hiring only emergency managers (see section 2.1 and 2.2 table 3). The goal is to identify whether the NGO hires emergency professionals or volunteers. Only the hiring process is taken into account for this analysis and two scores are possible: 2 for favoring volunteers resulting in a higher flexibility and 4 for favoring emergency managers resulting in a lower flexibility. Type of providers Indicator: An NGO favoring local/national providers has a greater flexibility than an NGO favoring international providers [see sections 2.1 and 2.2 table 3]. The objective is to identify whether the NGO favors international, local or both types of providers. Procurement, storage and transportation processes are analyzed together. Three scores are possible for the NGO: 2 if the NGO favors local/national providers; 4 when the NGO chooses equally local/national providers and international providers; and 8 when the NGO favors international providers, the latter being the lowest level of flexibility. Type of funding Indicator: An NGO which relies mainly on public funding has a lower flexibility than an NGO relying on private funding. The objective is to identify the main type of funding. No specific process is analyzed. A given NGO can obtain a score of 2 75% or more of private funding, a score of 4 51 to 75% of private funding, a score of 8 51 to 75% of public funding or 16 75% or more of public funding, the latter being the lowest level of flexibility. The addition of all scores gives us the total score of an NGO's operational capacity in regard to its resource management. Table 11 is the summary of the indicators and the scoring scheme. 20

28 Table 11. Measurement Tool for evaluating the operational capacity based on intra-organizational resourceoriented processes Organizational Level Indicator Phase Indicator Types of resources Indicator Type of providers favoured - Indicator Type of funding - Indicator OPERATIONAL CAPACITY MEASUREMENT What is the number of organizational levels in decision making controlling the process? Options: Operational Level; and/or tactical level; and/or strategic level Scoring scheme: 1 level : 2 2 levels : 4 3 levels : 8 Five types of processes: 1) Procurement 2) Donations 3) Storage and transportation 4) Distribution 5) Resource transfers between affiliate NGOs When is the process done? Options: Preparedness Phase; or Response Phase; or both phases Scoring scheme: Pre-disaster:1 Preparation & response: 2 Response: 4 Five types of processes : 1) Procurement 2) Donations 3) Storage and transportation 4) Distribution 5) Resource transfers between affiliate NGOs Is the NGO seeking to hire volunteers or emergency professionals? Options: Emergency managers; or volunteers Scoring scheme: Volunteers: 2 Emergency managers: 4 Take only on account the hiring process What are the providers favored by the NGO? Options: Local/national; or international; or both Scoring scheme: Mainly local: 2 Local and international: 4 Mainly international: 8 Process type : Procurement and Storage- Transportation (all together) What is the main type of the NGO s funding? Options: Private > 75%; or private 51-75%; or public 51-75%; or public > 75% Scoring scheme: Private > 75%: 2 Private 51-75%:4 Public 51-75%: 8 Public > 75%: 16 No process taken on account Operational capacity score: ADD ALL SCORES Add scores for the 5 types of processes. For each type, up to 3 organizational levels can be involved Add scores for the 5 types of processes. For each type, only 2 phases are possible (+ additional Score: 2 or 4 Score: 2, 4 or 8 Score: 2, 4, 8 or 16 21

29 option of both phases) The full questionnaire for operational purposes is presented in Annex A. 4.2 Tool for measuring resource coordination intensity The generic tool designed to measure the intensity of resource coordination based on interorganizational processes is presented in table 12. A short guideline of how each indicator is used and each score calculated is presented here: Organizational Level Indicator: The higher the organizational level controlling a process, the greater the coordination intensity becomes. The objective is to identify the organizational levels controlling each process for the ten types of inter-organizational processes - See section 3.1 for the list of processes and section 3.2 for a detailed description of the indicators. If a process is done at several levels, add up the scores of each of those levels together. The ten scores for the ten types of processes are added together to obtain a score for the Organizational Level - Indicator; Standard Indicator: Standards imposed on a process lead to higher coordination intensity. The objective is to identify if standards are imposed on the ten types of inter-organizational processes - See section 3.1 and 3.2. The ten scores for the ten types of processes are added together to obtain a score for the Standard - Indicator; Formalization Indicator: The more formalized a process, the greater the coordination intensity becomes. The goal is to identify the degree of process formalization for the ten types of processes - See section 3.1 and and if a process can be carried out with several degrees of formalization, add up the scores for each degree of formalization. The ten scores must be added together to obtain a score for the Formalization Indicator. The global intensity score for inter-organizational resource coordination is obtained by adding the total score of each of these three indicators. 22

30 Table 12. Measurement Tool for evaluating the resource coordination intensity between non-affiliate NGOs Organizational Level Indicator Standard Indicator Formalization Indicator RESOURCE COORDINATION INTENSITY MEASUREMENT What are the organizational levels controlling the process? Options: Operational Level; and/or tactical level; and/or strategic level Scoring scheme: Operational : 2 Tactic : 4 Strategic : 8 if a process is controlled by several levels, add the score for every level 10 types of resourceoriented processes between non-affiliate NGOs* Are standards imposed on process? Options: No standard; or Standards imposed Scoring scheme: No Standard: 2 Standard: 8 10 types of resourceoriented processes between non-affiliate NGOs* What is the degree of formalization of the process? Options: Ad hoc basis; or Contractual basis; or Alliance/coalition basis Scoring scheme: Ad hoc: 2 Contractual basis: 4 Alliance/coalition: 8 if a process can be done with several degrees of formalization, add the score of every degree of formalization 10 types of resourceoriented processes between non-affiliate NGOs* Coordination intensity score : ADD ALL SCORES Add scores for the 10 types of processes Add scores for the 10 types of processes Add scores for the 10 types of processes * 10 types of inter-organizational resource-oriented processes: 1) Procurement; 2) Transportation and storage; 3) Distribution; 4) Needs assessments; 5) Lendings and exchanges; 6) Donations; 7) Sectorial and geographical resource breakdown; 8) Design or usage of common tools; 9) Info sharing; 10) Partnerships The full questionnaire for operational purposes is presented in Annex B. 23

31 4.3 Purpose, metrics and outputs of the two measurement tools The purposes, metrics and outputs of both tools are presented in table 13. Table 13. Purposes, metrics and outputs of measurement tools designed Measurement Tool Purpose Measuring an NGO operational capacity in resource management Metrics Measurement of the flexibility of intraorganizational resource-oriented processes Timeliness Adaptability/adjustment capacity Dynamicity/ quick adjustment Speculativity/preparedness Output of both tools Rank an NGO according to 1) its operational capacity and/or 2) the intensity of its resource coordination: Measuring the intensity of resource coordination of an NGO with nonaffiliate NGOs Measurement of the intensity of resource coordination reflected by interorganizational resource-oriented processes Organizational level Formalization degree of processes Standard imposed on the processes Significantly lower than under average Under average Above average Significantly higher than average Both tools presented here can be used in different manners, as described in table 14. Table 14. Benefits of the operational capacity and coordination intensity measurement tools Benefits MEASUREMENT TOOLS: Evaluate the operational capacity or coordination intensity of an NGO, a group of NGOs, for a specific response or in general. COMPARAISON TOOLS: Compare the operational capacity or the coordination intensity between NGOs. DIAGNOSIS TOOLS: Identify which processes and which operating procedures should be changed to reach a greater operational capacity or coordination intensity level. CONTROL AND FOLLOW UP TOOLS: Decide in terms of capacity and coordination intensity which levels should be reached and control from time to time if the goals have been met and if some other changes should be made. 24

32 5. Results, limits and future works 5.1 Findings summary Our research addresses the resources coordination problem within and between NGOs during emergency responses after large scale disasters. The focus of this research is on the following question: why NGOs experience so many problems coordinating their resources, internally as well as between them? Processes are mentioned by numerous sources as being at the root of these difficulties. The two main points often made are the problems inherent to the difference between intra-organizational processes used by emergency NGOs, and the reciprocal misunderstanding about processes among NGOs taking part to a given emergency response. Our findings lead us to some important conclusions about the way NGOs function: 1. There are significant differences between resource-oriented processes chosen by emergency NGOs, especially with regards to operating procedures. 2. The resource-oriented processes chosen by emergency NGOs for their internal processes, determines the level of operational capacity, while their chosen inter-organizational processes determines their resource coordination intensity with non-affiliate NGOs. 3. These differences exist between non-affiliate NGOs, and internally between an NGO's own processes; 4. This diversity leads to significant gaps: some of them favour the NGO, some others adversely affect the NGO s efficiency in terms of operational capacity (based on intra-organizational resource-oriented processes) as well as in terms of resource coordination with other NGOs (impeding or improving coordination intensity). This situation shows that despite a general agreement among researchers and emergency managers on the fact that a high level of process flexibility and a high intensity of coordination are essential to insure the efficiency of emergency responses, many NGOs do not realize how their processes detrimentally affect their flexibility and the coordination intensity. Seeking to improve those aspects, this research has identified the following key factors that allow greater process flexibility: A small number of organizational level for decision-making Processes established beforehand during the pre-disaster phase Systematic use of volunteers 25

33 Choosing local/national providers systematically Funding strategies based mainly on private donors rather than institutional donors. The key factors allowing high resource coordination intensity with other NGOs have been identified as the following: Resource coordination at every organizational level; High degree of formalization and multiple strategic alliances and contractual agreements between NGOs; As many common standards as possible within the community of NGOs co-acting in the field of an emergency response. This research also provides tools allowing the measurement of an NGO's resource coordination intensity as well as its process flexibility, the latter being an implicit measure of its operational capacity. These measurement tools offers various benefits, providing a metrics to gauge an NGO's actual performance against its target performance or the performance of others in terms of resource coordination in the context of emergency responses. Moreover, emergency managers are offered new tools to target the procedures that should be changed to improve an NGO's operational capacity in regard to resource management and to increase the intensity of resource coordination with other non-affiliate NGOs. 5.2 Research scope and limitations A strictly managerial perspective This research adopts a managerial approach that limits our perspective of an organization to a black box with unknown internal dynamics. We also deliberately excluded the external environmental constraints exerted on the organizations to eliminate any bias induced by those external forces. This results in a reductionist approach which does not address the political, economic and regulatory constraints which affect the decision of an NGO to adopt certain processes instead of others. Sampling limits for the representation of NGOs diversity Given the number of existing NGOs in the world and the number of emerging NGOs after each major catastrophe, it is likely that our sample population does not reflect the full extent of NGOs diversity. As a result, it is possible that our typologies do not represent all types of processes. However, the typologies proposed are a good first step in the analysis of such a complex environment. Scope limitations to the processes favored by NGOs The processes taken in account in this research are the ones described in the NGOs' internal policies and used by the NGOs in absence of external constraints other than the catastrophe itself. 26

34 Some specific aspects that could lead to the accidental adoption of processes in some particular contexts have not been taken in account. On the same account, transformations of organizations due to external political, economic or regulatory constraints leading to constraints on the very functioning of the NGO itself were considered outside the scope of this research. Doing otherwise would lead to have as many ways of working as responses and contexts. In order to keep this study manageable and useful without prior knowledge of those external constraints, we chose to limit our study to emergency responses in developed countries and to exclude war zones and slow onset disasters. The reductive nature of typologies Due to the inherent nature of typologies, their explanatory and sometimes predictive value must be mainly taken as leads for future researches rather than absolute truths. Our findings are opening new perspectives and unlocking a new understanding of organizational dynamics which must be further investigated to validate previous conclusions and reach new ones that will help us reach a better global emergency response efficiency more concretely. 5.3 Future research and expected benefits Our findings lead us to answers which are crucial to improve the efficiency of resource coordination through a better understanding and explanation of resource-oriented processes. Three problems are of particularly importance. Problem 1: Why some emergency NGOs do not choose processes allowing them to be more efficient? We previously saw that NGOs show some significant gaps in terms of operational capacity and intensity of resource coordination. However, all those NGOs are acting in emergency responses which require more flexibility and more coordination than any other environment. That leads us to ask two questions: 1) Why some emergency NGOs do not choose processes allowing them to have enough flexibility and therefore enough operational capacity, to respond more adequately to emergency responses? 27

35 2) Why those NGOs do not choose processes that allow them to have a high intensity of resource coordination despite the fact that all NGOs agree on the need to coordinate in the field? Addressing these questions will allow NGOs to choose more knowingly the more adequate processes in order to reach their goal in terms of operational capacity and coordination intensity. The second important problem that should be solved is the following: Problem 2: Why NGOs with same organizational characteristics have different resource-oriented processes? Findings show that NGOs with similar organizational attributes (such as size, strategic orientation, age and main type of funding) do not choose the same processes and therefore do not have the same level of operational capacity and resource coordination intensity. This conclusion goes against preconceived ideas that similar NGOs would work in similar ways. Hence the following question: Why NGOs with similar organizational characteristics and working in similar contexts do not choose the same processes? Answers to this question would allow understanding the influence of some key factors regarding the choice of processes and operating procedures, be it on an intra-organizational level (more often chosen by the NGO itself) or an external one (environmental constraints on the NGO). Identifying and measuring those influencing factors will allow NGO managers to make a first step towards establishing strategies and controlling mechanisms that could limit such influences, and enable NGOs to choose more favorable processes in terms of efficiency and coordination with other organizations. 28

36 A third problem comes from some preliminary results of this study. Problem 3: Is there a link between an NGO operational capacity and the intensity of its resource coordination with other NGOs? A concept generally accepted is that NGOs with a high operational capacity will tend to coordinate mainly or only with their NGO partners. The preliminary findings of this study seem to corroborate this concept. However, all responders agree on the fact that resources are often scarce and insufficient for most of NGOs in the wake of major disasters, and they agree on the need to coordinate their actions beyond their usual partners. They also highlight the fact that environmental constraints make resource coordination very difficult, internally as well as between organizations in the field. Giving these elements, it would be logical to think that NGOs with a high level of operational capacity should join forces with others to fulfill the needs they cannot satisfy or that require extra efforts that they cannot provide given their mission. That leads us to the following question: Does the level of operational capacity determine the resource coordination intensity? In other words, is there a correlation between those two parameters? Preliminary results show that a majority of NGOs with a high operational capacity in terms of resource management tend to weakly coordinate or not coordinate at all their resources with other NGOs. Why is that a minority of NGOs coordinate more significantly resources with other NGOs despite their high operational capacity? What are the factors driving the intensity of the coordination of those NGOs? If we can isolate these factors, could they be applied to NGOs that do not coordinate with others? Answers to those questions are crucial to understand what encourages or impedes coordination between NGOs. It could be an important answer to the coordination problems that occur so frequently. 29

37 6. Conclusion In conclusion, given the growing professionalism of NGOs and the importance for accountability required by donors, refining our understanding and acquiring knowledge which helps NGO achieve a higher efficiency is paramount. This research brings an important brick to this construction allowing a better understanding of resource-oriented processes and the impacts of choosing particular types of processes on the operational capacity and coordination intensity. These aspects are fundamental to reaching higher levels for the global emergency response efficiency. Furthermore, a better understanding of the link between an organization s efficiency and its processes can enable NGOs to make institutional donors more aware of the impacts of their requirements. Imposing so many constraints on the NGOs processes they fund may affect negatively what donors try to protect i.e. the efficiency of the organization they fund, the efficiency of the emergency operations in general, and the efficiency of the community of NGOs as a whole. Every NGO is linked to the others as part of one global system. Acting alone or while ignoring other organizations can no longer be chosen as the right course of action if an NGO is striving to achieve better global results. 7. Bibliographical references Boin, A., Kelle, P. and Whybark, C. (2010). Resilient supply chains for extreme situations: Outlining a new field of study. International Journal of Production Economics, 126, 1-6. Bui, T., Cho, S., Sankaran, S. and Sovereign, M. (2000). A Framework for Designing a Global Information Network for Multinational Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief. Information Systems Frontiers, 1(4), Comfort, L. K. (2007). Crisis Management in Hindsight: Cognition, Communication, Coordination, and Control. Public Administration Review, 67(s1), US House of Representatives (2006, 15 February). A Failure of Initiative, Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to investigate the Preparation for and Response to Katrina. Consulted on 11 November 2014 on Cook, K. (1977). Exchange and Power in Networks or inter-organizational Relations. The Sociological Quarterly, 18(1), Gatignon, A., Van Wassenhove, L.N. and Charles, A. (2010).The Yogyakarta earthquake: Humanitarian relief through IFRC s decentralized supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 126(1), Haimes, Y. Y., Crowther, K. and Horowitz, B. M. (2008). Homeland security preparedness: Balancing protection with resilience in emergent systems. Systems Engineering, 11(4), Jahre, M. and Jensen, L. M. (2010). Coordination in humanitarian logistics through clusters. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 40(8/9),

38 Kumar, S. and Havey, T. (2013). Before and after disaster strikes: A relief supply chain decision support framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 145(2), Maon, F., Lindgreen, A. and Vanhamme, J. (2009).Developing supply chains in disaster relief operations through cross-sector socially oriented collaborations: a theoretical model. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14(2), Mintzberg, H. (2003). Le Management. Voyage au centre des organisations (6e éd.) (J. M. Behar, trad.). Paris, France : Éd. d Organisation. (Ouvrage original publié en 1989 sous le titre Mintzberg on Management. Inside Our Strange World of Organizations. New York, NY : The Free Press. Moore, S., Eng, E. and Daniel, M. (2003).International NGOs and the Role of Network Centrality in Humanitarian Aid Operations: A Case Study of Coordination During the 2000 Mozambique Floods. Disasters, 27(4), Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. R. (1978).The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependance Perspective. London, United Kingdom: Harper & Row. Simon, H. A. (1983). Administration et Processus de décision (1ère éd.). Paris, France : Economica. Therrien, M. C. (2010). Stratégies de résilience et infrastructures essentielles, Télescope, 16(2),

39 Annexe A: Measuring operational capacity Questionnaire for evaluating an NGO's operational capacity based on intra-organizational resource-oriented processes I. QUESTIONS A. How many organizational levels in decision making are controlling the intra-organizational resource-oriented processes? Instructions: For each process listed below, select which organizational level(s) control(s) it and calculate the number of levels involved. Note: A description of each process is added at the end of this questionnaire Scoring scheme: Options for Organizational levels controlling the process No processes / Not applicable Operational level Tactic level Strategic level* Any combination of levels * Strategic level includes the international level and the National Head Office level. Number of organizational levels controlling the process Scoring scheme

40 Evaluation grid 1 Process (internal to the NGO) Number of organizational levels controlling the process (check all applicable option) No coordination process Operational level Tactic level Strategic level Total number of organizational levels involved (only one answer) Score score = 0 if no process Score = 2 if only 1 level Score = 4 if 2 levels Score = 8 if 3 levels A 1 A 2 A 3 A 4 A 5 Procurement Transportation and storage Distribution Donation Management Resource transfers with affiliate NGOs Total Score (sum of the scores for all processes): B. When are the intra-organizational resource-oriented processes made? Instructions: For each process listed below, select the time at which the process is mainly performed - i.e. its phase. For each type of process, there is only one answer and therefore only one score possible. Note: A description of each process is added at the end of this questionnaire Scoring scheme: Phase of the process Scoring scheme mainly made during the preparedness phase 1 33

41 equally made during both phases 2 mainly made during the response phase 4 Evaluation grid 2 Process (internal to the NGO) Phase of the process Preparedness Both phases phase (score: 1) (score: 2) Response phase (score: 4) Score (only one score possible) B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 Procurement Transportation and storage Distribution Donation Management Resource transfers with non-affiliate NGOs Total Score (sum of the scores for all processes): 34

42 C. What types of resources are acquired by the NGO? Note: NGOs differ on just one thing in terms of types of resources acquired: their hiring practices. Therefore, only the hiring processes are analyzed. Instructions: Check the best answer (only one answer possible) Scoring scheme: Hiring practice Scoring scheme Hiring volunteers 2 Hiring emergency professionals 4 Evaluation grid 3 When Human Resource needs suddenly increase, what hiring practice does the NGO favor? Hiring practice favored Hiring volunteers Hiring emergency professionals (score: 2) (score: 4) Score (only one score possible) C1 Hiring practice favored Total Score (sum of the scores for all processes): 35

43 D. What types of providers are favored by the NGO? Note: only procurement and storage/transportation processes are analyzed in this part of the questionnaire because only these processes need to choose providers. Instructions: Check the best answer Scoring scheme: Type of Providers favored Scoring scheme Local/national providers 2 Local/national and international 4 International providers 8 Evaluation grid 4 What types of providers are favored by the NGO for the following processes? D1 D2 Procurement Transportation and storage Local/ national providers (score: 2) Types of providers favored Local/ national and international (score: 4) International providers (score: 8) Total Score (sum of the scores for all processes): Score (only one score possible) 36

44 E. What is the main type of the NGO s funding? Note: This section of the questionnaire is not dependent on any process. Instructions: Check the appropriate answer (only one answer possible) Scoring scheme: Type of Funding Scoring scheme Private funding > 75% 2 Private funding from 51 to 75% 4 Public funding from 51 to 75% 8 Public funding > 75% 16 Evaluation grid 5 Type of funding Private funding > 75% (score: 2) Private funding from 51 to 75% (score: 4) Private funding from 51 to 75% (score: 8) Public funding > 75% (score: 16) Score (only one score possible) E1 Main Type of Funding Total Score (sum of the scores for all processes): 37

45 II. GLOBAL SCORE OF THE NGO s OPERATIONAL CAPACITY BASED ON ITS INTRA-ORGANIZATIONAL RESOURCE COORDINATION PROCESSES Summary of scores calculated previously: Indicator A. Organizational Level - Indicator (Addition of scores # A1 to A5) Score obtained B. Phase - Indicator (Addition of scores # B1 to B5) C. Types of resources - Indicator (Score #C1) D. Types of providers - Indicator (Addition of scores #D1 to D2) divide the total score by 2 and use this average as the total score) E. Type of Funding - Indicator (score #E1) OPERATIONAL CAPACITY GLOBAL SCORE Based on intra-organizational resource oriented-processes III. COMPARISON WITH OTHER NGOs Where is your NGO? Score 50 or > Score from 41 to 50 Score from 35 to 40 Score 35 or < aa Operational capacity significantly lower than average Operational capacity under average Operational capacity above average Operational capacity significantly higher than average 38

46 Comparison with other NGOs: an example Comment: The operational capacity measured is based on intra-organizational resource-oriented coordination and processes: the higher the score, the lower the operational capacity is. FACTOR SCORE SCORE BRACKET* Diagnosis Example: From 10 to 20* score of 15 A. Operational capacity based on the number of organizational levels used to control the processes B. Operational capacity based on the phase during which the process is done C. Operational capacity based on the hiring practices of the NGO: favoring the recruitment of volunteers over hiring Emergency professionals when the need for human resources increases D. Operational capacity based on the types of providers favored E. Operational capacity based on the main type of the NGOs funding Example: score of 10 Example: score of 4 Example: score of 8 Example: score of 16 10: number of organizational levels significantly < than average 20: number of organizational levels significantly > than average From 9 to 18* 9: processes initiated mainly during preparedness phase 18: processes initiated mainly during response phase From 2 to 4* 2: favors recruiting volunteers 4: favors hiring emergency professional From 2 to 8* 2: favoring local/national providers 8: favoring international providers From 2 to 16* 2: private funding >75% 16: public funding >75% Example: the score is average because the NGO uses either 2 levels or 3 levels, but rarely only 1 level. Example: the score is significantly higher than average because many of its resource-oriented processes are initiated during the preparedness phase. Example: the NGO has a weaker operational capacity than NGOs favoring recruiting volunteers. Example: The NGO has a weaker operational capacity than other because it favors international providers over local/national ones. Example: The type of funding of the NGO drives toward public funding sources making the NGO's operational capacity significantly weaker. *The score bracket is coming from the scores obtained by the 13 NGOs sampled selected on a diversification criterion See Research Report section 1.5 (methodology and characteristics of sample NGOs) and section 2.2 table 4 (Global operational capacity scores for all NGOs in regard to resource management) 39

47 Conclusion for the example shown: To increase its operational capacity based on its intra-organizational resource coordination processes, the NGO could: 1. Reduce the number of organizational levels controlling the resource-oriented processes (To increase processes speed) 2. Systematically use volunteers rather than professionals to increase the capacity to adapt quickly to changing needs 3. Develop policies favoring local/national providers rather than international providers to increase process speed and augment the capacity to adapt quickly to changing needs 4. Try to diversify funding sources and have more private donors to increase process speed, to get the added capacity to adapt quickly to changing needs, and to be prepared for any disaster 40