Administration in Social Work
ISSN: 0364-3107 (Print) 1544-4376 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wasw20
From Needs-Based Segmentation to Program
Realignment: Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
Donna S. Finley , Gayla Rogers , Michael Napier & Jill Wyatt
To cite this article: Donna S. Finley , Gayla Rogers , Michael Napier & Jill Wyatt (2011) From
Needs-Based Segmentation to Program Realignment: Transformation of YWCA of Calgary,
Administration in Social Work, 35:3, 299-323, DOI: 10.1080/03643107.2011.575346
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03643107.2011.575346
Published online: 31 May 2011.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1175
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wasw21
Administration in Social Work, 35:299–323, 2011
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0364-3107 print/1544-4376 online
DOI: 10.1080/03643107.2011.575346
From Needs-Based Segmentation
to Program Realignment: Transformation
of YWCA of Calgary
DONNA S. FINLEY
Framework Partners, Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada
GAYLA ROGERS
Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada
MICHAEL NAPIER
Framework Partners, Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
JILL WYATT
United Way of Calgary & Area, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
This article delineates how a social service organization was
transformed, enabling the transition from severe financial strain
to healthy financial sustainability, now eight years running. By
applying a client needs-based segmentation that informed a program and service realignment, the YWCA of Calgary significantly
improved its program and service delivery.
KEYWORDS needs-based segmentation, program and service
alignment, process improvement, strategy implementation, performance improvement, organizational effectiveness, transformation
In memory of Judi Osborne, YWCA of Calgary Board Chair, 2001–2003. Judi had the
vision, courage and foresight to lead YWCA of Calgary to a whole new level of performance
and impact in the community.
The authors would like to recognize the contributions of Mario Siciliano, formerly COO
of YWCA of Calgary.
Address correspondence to Gayla Rogers, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary,
2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4. E-mail: grogers@ucalgary.ca
299
300
D. S. Finley et al.
INTRODUCTION
Segmentation is a concept often used in public and corporate planning that
can also be applied in a nonprofit context. Specifically, nonprofit organizations can benefit by segmenting their stakeholders (including clients) into
needs-based clusters to more effectively serve them. This paper describes
how in 2001, a struggling nonprofit organization, the YWCA of Calgary,1
implemented a segmentation model based on the needs of its clients to
strategically realign its programs and services, and emerged as a leading
social services organization in the community.
Segmentation, in this context, involves arranging the current and potential clients of an organization into clusters according to their current and
evolving needs. These clusters of needs underpin their motivations for using
various programs and services. In the case of the YWCA of Calgary at the
time of this strategic planning initiative, multi-barriered women2 made up
the largest demographic client segment (72%). Historically, the YWCA of
Calgary approached serving these women with a standard menu of services
based on what the organization traditionally offered rather than what the
women may have actually required. Programs and services were typically
designed around funding availability, not necessarily around the organization’s strategic direction and clients’ needs. The array of programs and
services being offered in 2001 did not evolve from actual client needs and,
therefore, over time the programs increasingly underserved the YWCA of
Calgary’s client base. These misaligned programs and services were not comprehensive, lacked coordination and integration, and had unclear financial
viability. Increased demand for services by clients, fierce competition for dollars, the search for a niche in the sector, and the hiring of a new CEO created
the conditions required for transformational change within the organization.
Success was quickly realized. By 2003, post-program realignment, the YWCA
of Calgary was stabilized and the threat of financial disaster from 2001 was
averted.
This paper describes the types of segmentation used by the YWCA of
Calgary as the basis from which realignment of core programs and services
could occur. It offers a model for linking such a strategic framework to
operational priorities as the means for making decisions about expanding,
contracting, creating, or outsourcing programs and services. In the subsequent sections, this paper reviews the relevant literature, presents the needsbased segmentation applied by the YWCA of Calgary, discusses the program
realignment that occurred, and assesses the success of this organizational
transformation.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
301
SEGMENTATION LITERATURE REVIEW
Market Segmentation
Segmentation involves assessing and then clustering a group of individuals
(e.g., clients, members, funders, partners) based on a predetermined set of
criteria. There are multiple forms of segmentation, each of which provides
value toward strategy setting and/or operational planning.3
Traditionally, social service organizations segment their clients by demographics such as age, income, ethnicity, gender, and health status. This
observation is consistent with McCarthy and Jinnett (2001), who found
that other types of nonprofit organizations typically define their client
groups geographically, demographically, or by some behavioral characteristics. These methods of classifying clients, while useful at an operational
level, cannot account for the increasing complexity or the evolving nature
of clients’ situations. Furthermore, these models do not enable a strategic
overview of the multiplicity of products and services offered within a given
community.
In the past 40 years, segmentation has taken many forms, each specific
to its intended use, and each with a different level of operational or strategic intensity. Frank, Massy, and Wind (1972) are among the first researchers
to develop a taxonomy of segmentation in the nonprofit sector. This taxonomy was set up as a matrix, which is based on variables either directly
measurable (observable) or inferred (unobservable), and variables independent of or related to goods and services (general and product-specific,
respectively). While this method can be effective for segmenting clients
demographically based on service use, it is operationally focused because
it has limited application when reconceptualizing a full range of service
offerings.
In a later paper, Robbins and Robbins (1981) use a frequency-ofparticipation segmentation method. This model allows organizations to
segment participants into three common categories: those not disposed to
participate, those disposed to participate but are not currently doing so,
and those already participating. While this method allows an organization
to develop strategies to increase participation, it does not determine why
people are participating. Therefore, developing strategies to target one of
these three groups will be challenging without knowing what motivates
one’s decision to participate.
Todd and Lawson (2001) use attitude, interest, and opinion variables
to segment patrons in the arts; these variables focus on demographics and
statistics. While this method provides valuable insight as to who is attending events or partaking in services, it does not directly inform strategy; it
302
D. S. Finley et al.
does not help us understand who is not attending and why. This method
does, however, help in defining sub-segments and setting tactics that support
strategic outcomes.
After employing a straight statistical demographic segmentation and
only finding semi-interesting results, Pawson and Troy (2004) investigated
an aesthetic approach to segmentation. The authors use product-specific
unobservable (inferred) variables and are largely concerned with the aesthetic appeal of organizational offerings. Sewall (1978) claims that aesthetic
interest is a key decision-making factor when deciding whether to attend an
event/program. Therefore, segmentation based on preferences is intuitive as
consumer reactions to product and/or service attributes are not indicative of
functionality.
Clopton, Stoddard, and Dave (2006) build on preference-based modeling by conducting a survey of patrons of arts events. The survey contained
basic demographic questions in addition to questions on preferences.
Data were used to segment customers based on their relative preferences for the arts in general. This allowed the authors to compare and
contrast how each of the segments behaved based on the other survey
questions. Furthermore, the authors tested the significance and nature of
the relationships between the market segments that emerged and typical demographic variables. While the comparison with demographics is
interesting to the organization, it is what can be learned from the preferencebased segments that effectively repositions the strategic direction of the
organization.
Similar to preference-based segmentation is a needs-based segmentation model described by Rogers, Finley, and Galloway (2001), who
explained how social service organizations can benefit from conducting
and implementing a needs-based segmentation approach. Using this segmentation method and learning from other nonprofit sectors, such as the
performing arts, social service organizations can better serve the community. Furthermore, the organization’s staff, board, and volunteers will be
better equipped to meet the current and evolving needs of clients. As
Greengrove (2002) described, needs-based segmentation is fundamentally
a strategic process that drives product and service development, and brand
strategy.
Performance-based segmentation is defined by fundamental needs that
may or may not be explicitly expressed by the client. Nonprofit organizations
typically struggle to define who their clients are and are generally preoccupied with chasing funding. Identifying and understanding core needs
enables the organization to take the next step: identify the clusters of
client needs the organization is best equipped to serve and the clusters
of client needs that are better served by (or jointly with) other service
providers.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
303
Needs-Based Segmentation
The reason for employing a needs-based segmentation approach is that the
needs that individuals would like to have satisfied are “the basic reasons for
the existence of true market segmentation” (Haley, 1968).
In order to best serve their clients and achieve their mandate while
doing so, nonprofit organizations must think and act with strategic intent.
A needs-based segmentation allows service providers to understand the
groups of clients it currently serves, should serve, and can best serve based
upon clients’ and potential clients’ current and evolving needs, backgrounds,
motivations, and expectations, as well as the organization’s desired future
state.
Such a needs-based segmentation approach was employed by Finley,
Gralen, and Fichtner (2006) to pull a performing arts organization out of
bankruptcy protection and reposition it into a sustainable organization4 that
maintains a sizable surplus. Needs-based segmentation guides the design,
growth, and closure of programs, services, and processes to meet the
targeted needs of clients. Figure 1 is a depiction of the movement from
demographic-based to needs-based segmentation.
Typically when organizations develop strategies, they focus on demographics and firmographics (demographics of organizations or “firms,” rather
Powerful
in defining
sub-segments
and setting
tactics.
Firmographics
• Size of
organization
• Sector
Demographics • Size of clientbase
• Age
• Gender
• Language
• Geography
Behaviours
• Convenience
sensitivity
• Quality
sensitivity
• Price
sensitivity
Needs-based
• Security
• Power
• Esteem
• Confidence
• Tangible
resources
Powerful in
setting
strategy and
designing
programs and
processes.
Traditional Focus
FIGURE 1 Process from demographics to needs-based segmentation (color figure available
online).
Source: Framework Partners Inc. planning tool.
304
D. S. Finley et al.
than of people). When using demographics and firmographics to develop
strategy, organizations become focused on “doing things right,” and outcomes tend to be operational details. Organizations can also segment their
markets by behaviors (e.g., what do my clients consider when deciding
to access my program or service?). However, even behavioral segmentation tends to be tactical; it informs the implementation of the organization’s
promotional strategy and does not contribute to that strategy’s development.
Using needs-based segmentation, organizations can think of the clients
they serve and could serve (prospective clients) at a higher level—“are
we doing the right things?” The needs-based segmentation approach helps
define an organization’s target market, or more specifically, target client.
A primary target client is a segment of the market that the organization
can best serve with its programs and services, which are provided with
the highest level of expertise and/or lowest cost of implementation. An
organization’s secondary target client is generally served with programs and
services complementary to the organization’s primary breadth of services
that are less actively promoted. Lastly, the organization will opportunistically serve clients; those needs-based segments that the organization can
efficiently serve, however, are not part of the organization’s target market.
By identifying and deeply understanding an organization’s primary target clients, programs and services can be tailored to meet all the needs of the
target client. An organization can become more effective and focused, and
achieve better client retention because the organization now understands
and appreciates the depth and breadth of the programs and services it must
deliver.
Once the strategically focused needs-based segmentation is complete,
demographics, firmographics and behavioral characteristics can be used to
sub-segment the needs-based segments for operational decisions/purposes.
One case example is provided by the YWCA of Calgary. One needsbased segment might include anyone (i.e., women, children, and men)
who requires abuse counseling. This segment of the market can be targeted and served with focused programs and services. However, it could be
that women require a female counselor and men require a male counselor.
While the entire needs-based segment is targeted and served in the same
way, the sub-segment of gender plays an important role and informs strategy to ensure that when hiring counselors the appropriate ratio of female to
male counselors is considered.
Ideally, an organization would differentiate clients by their needs and
create as many specific needs-based segments as possible in order to exhaustively meet every need of every client. In reality, this is not feasible and it
is recommended to limit the number of needs-based segments from six to
nine. One must consider weighing the increased revenue/expenses from
better meeting the needs of one’s clients with the increased cost of altering
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
305
promotion, funding, and/or HR plans (Peltier & Schrobrowsky, 1997), or
realigning programming.
Greengrove (2002) discussed a needs-based segmentation from the
medical sector where it was discovered that needs-based segments can be
independent of pathology. In other words, it is better for doctors to treat
the patient and not the pathology (e.g., in some cases, the needs of a breast
cancer patient are more aligned to those of a gastric cancer patient opposed
to the needs of other breast cancer patients).
A more relevant example to social services of using needs-based
segmentation is the United Way (UW) of Las Vegas who examined the
“exchange” relationship between donors and fundraisers in the 1990s.
Donors and non-donors were clustered based on “needs” that included general attitudes toward charities, reasons for giving, perceptions of the UW, and
individual ranking of particular causes. The UW of Las Vegas’ needs-based
segmentation approach increased donations nearly 25% in the first year of
implementation, and UW Las Vegas was instantly the fastest growing UW in
the United States (Peltier & Schrobrowsky, 1997).
This example of the UW of Las Vegas also applies to program and
service alignment. Caramanica, Cousino, and Petersen (2003) argue that program and service alignment to an organization’s strategic direction is the
first step to success. If different departments are implementing programs
and services that do not align with the mandate of the organization, then
this misalignment creates uncertainty amongst its staff, clients, funders, and
the programs and services. Furthermore, the risk of mission-drift arises as
the organization or departments within the organization lose focus as to
the purpose of the organization. Aligning organizational objectives to the
organization’s strategic direction is akin to and just as important as aligning
programs and services to target clients.
Ideally, an organization defines its mission and then identifies its primary and secondary target clients before developing the programs and
services it intends to offer. However, most social service organizations have
been operating for several years (even decades) and suffer from legacy client
targets that have evolved with the operation of the organization, not through
strategic thought and mission alignment. Employing the ‘strategy’ of providing programs and services “because those are the programs we have
always offered” will likely lead to offering programs and services that do not
sufficiently meet clients’ needs.
In 2001, the YWCA of Calgary experienced this same series of legacy
issues. However, through its program and service realignment analysis (discussed later in this paper), the organization clustered all programs under one
of three categories: growth, restructuring, and divestiture. After this analysis,
the YWCA of Calgary was better equipped to realign its current program and
service offerings with the needs of its target clients.
306
D. S. Finley et al.
THE PROCESS OF NEEDS-BASED SEGMENTATION
The needs-based segmentation process describes how an organization can
move from traditional segmentation methods to identifying needs-based segments, determining which clusters of client needs can be served best by the
organization and which client segments are best left to be served by other
organizations. Box 1 in Figure 2 illustrates how most organizations assume
they are serving one type of client with one primary need or a limited set
of common needs. Box 2 shows how clients can be segmented into clusters
based on their differentiating needs. Some of these clusters may develop
overlap, while some clusters may be very distinct and separate from all others. Box 3 highlights that by deliberately selecting specific groups (segments)
of clients that the organization can best serve, the organization defines a
unique value proposition and becomes more effective at serving the clients
within the chosen segment(s) (the dark circles in Box 3). The value proposition is a tight explanation that staff and volunteers can use when advocating
for the organization or explaining to clients, funders, and the community
how the YWCA of Calgary can help.5 This focus on unique value propositions increases the opportunity for forging partnerships with other service
providers in order to better serve clients’ needs (the light circles in Box 3).
Partners and potential partners also become more aware of the services of
the original partnering organization (in this case, YWCA of Calgary) and can
redirect/refer clients as well.
The internal process of moving an organization’s client focus from Box
1 to Box 3 usually takes time and encompasses lengthy discussions for
those engaged in the organization’s strategic planning. Nonprofit organizations typically do not have the resources for internal strategic reflection—a
systemic weakness in the nonprofit sector. However, as nonprofit organizations face increasing client wait lists and decreasing funding, a more
Segmentation divides clients into clusters with similar needs.
Value
Proposition 1
Value
Proposition 2
Value
Proposition 3
Value
Proposition 4
Many organizations
perform assuming one
cohesive set of client
needs
In reality, there can be
multiple sets of
differing client needs
Understanding differing
expectations and
consciously targeting
selected needs to serve is
key to effective performance
FIGURE 2 Segmentation model (color figure available online).
Source: Framework Partners Inc. planning tool.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
307
systematic re-examination of their strategic direction leading to program and
service realignment is warranted.
Once an organization has segmented its clients and identified those
clusters it can best serve, there is an opportunity to streamline and redesign
programs and services to meet the needs of the target segments. This step
in the process may include divesting programs and/or services that are no
longer required because they no longer meet the needs of the organization’s
target segments or because these programs/services are not effective from a
cost-benefit perspective. This process of restructuring and repositioning may
be revolutionary for some organizations and, therefore, it is vital that consensus is reached within the group so that the actions to take will be supported
by the organization. It is also important to engage key stakeholders in the
realignment process to build commitment and understanding of the need
for restructuring. These stakeholders will more likely support such a potentially disrupting change (in the short run) if they are included throughout
the realignment process, kept abreast of progress, and encouraged to submit input. Also, by including updates throughout the process, revaluation of
a large restructuring plan is not unveiled on unsuspecting staff, volunteers,
clients, and funders.
Over-streamlining an organization’s focus so that it leads to stagnation, or the prevention of expansion and/or renovations is not common
nor much of a threat to an organization undergoing such a transformation.
However, planners are advised to be aware of this possibility. To avoid this
risk, significant client analysis (including a re-evaluation of the needs-based
segmentation) should be completed about every five years to ensure the
organization remains in line with evolving client needs. Also, preventing
large expenditures such as renovations could be a positive outcome if the
organization would have otherwise dissolved before the renovations are
complete, or shortly thereafter.6
The act of dividing clients into distinct segments allows an organization
to selectively develop programs, tailor services, and communicate specific
messages to targeted groups of clients (and funders) in order to maximize organizational effectiveness. Thus, in the face of declining financial
resources and increasing demand for quality service, a client needs-based
segmentation can be an effective and efficient strategy when nonprofit organizations are making decisions about program priorities, best uses of limited
resources, and/or better methods of targeting funders due to the clarity
gained from the client-focused programs and services.7
THE CASE OF YWCA OF CALGARY
While the academic literature on using needs-based segmentation to align
programs and services within primary and secondary target client markets is
limited, it is this very path that the YWCA of Calgary took in 2001 to achieve
308
D. S. Finley et al.
a new level of sustainability. The motivation for the YWCA of Calgary to initiate such a strategic planning initiative was that the organization was facing
severe cash shortfalls. The organization’s board agreed that quick action was
required. As part of a comprehensive strategic planning effort, the board
approached the bank to refinance the organization’s debt; a decision was
made to sell its camp at Sylvan Lake; a serious cost-cutting program was
implemented so that payroll could be met; and a systematic rethink of the
YWCA’s programs and services was initiated to significantly improve service to clients. The staff was highly engaged in the restructuring process,
which created buy-in and commitment during the implementation phase.
While defining the strategic positioning is vital to the process, implementation follow-through on the part of the staff is equally important. The role
of the CEO during this sensitive time to take the board’s strategy work and
implement it with the staff was paramount to the transformation’s success.
Furthermore, the CEO (newly hired at the start of the transformation process)
had to skillfully manage the relationships between the board, senior management, and a third-party strategic planning consultant. The YWCA of Calgary
implemented its renewed strategic direction over five years (2001 to 2005).
Background
The YWCA advocates on behalf of women and children, particularly in the
areas of economic autonomy and domestic violence. The YWCA of Calgary
is one of the 36 YWCAs in Canada. Throughout its more than 150-year history, the YWCA in Canada has been a pioneer in meeting women’s emerging
needs (see Figure 3)
At the end of the 20th century, the YWCA of Calgary was struggling
to overcome a number of growing issues within the organization, including
long-term operation in a state of chronic financial vulnerability. With financial and human resources continuously constrained, the YWCA of Calgary
experienced difficulty in delivering its services. Changes to internal fundraising models also became a challenge for the organization; the need for
greater attention to donor stewardship, including reporting to donors and
the demonstration of program and service sustainability, stretched available
resources to the limit. Furthermore, competition in the market for additional
fundraised dollars was fierce at the time when the organization was attempting to decrease its dependence on government funding. In addition, while
the YWCA of Calgary’s profile in the local community remained relatively
high, public awareness and appreciation of the organization’s role within
the community and its implementation of programs and services were very
limited. The roles of the YWCA and YMCA remained significantly unclear
to the public, and their relationship with each other appeared competitive
opposed to collaborative.
Prior to initiating a strategic planning process, the YWCA of Calgary’s
programs and services were spread across a broad client base of women,
309
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
YWCA’s History
1919
Canadian
Women Get
Vote
Prayer and Shelter for Women
1985 Community
Model approved
(to accommodate
co-ed programs)
1995 First
Community
YWCA
Established
1
20 990
00 –
s
70
19
50
19
–8
0s
–6
0s
–4
30
19
0s
National
Centennial
0s
–2
1
19 890
00 –
s
18
18
70
50
–8
–6
0s
0s
1893
National
YWCA
10
1870 First
Canadian
YWCA
(St. John)
1954 First
YMCA/YWCA
Established
19
1894
World
YWCA
Shelter For Women and Children
Education & Shared Resources
Employment & Education Programs
Programs for Unemployed Women
Lending
libraries
(Montreal,
Quebec
City)
• School of
Cookery
(Toronto)
• School of
Domestic
Science
(Hamilton)
Evening classes
for employed
women (English,
bookkeeping)
Social Advocacy
• Hostess
Houses (for
wives of
service men)
• Farm Service
Force (camps
for women
and girls doing
farm labour)
Daytime
Programs
for Young
Mothers Researching and educating
on the role of women in
Canadian Society
FIGURE 3 Evolution of the YWCA of Calgary from 1850–2000 (color figure available online).
The YWCA of Calgary’s planning initiative, 2001.
children, and men. Multi-barriered women were the traditional focus for programs and services, which represented the largest client segment (72%) of
the YWCA of Calgary. Also, 70% of the YWCA of Calgary’s clients lived below
the poverty line. At the onset of the segmentation initiative, the YWCA of
Calgary’s programs and services fell into four categories: family violence prevention, housing, education and employment, and health and recreation. It is
evident that these categories were demographic—as described in Figure 1;
YWCA of Calgary was operating in Box 1 of Figure 2—and attempted to
serve the broadest array of individuals possible. This ultimately led to the
YWCA of Calgary being opportunistic in following funding sources and,
therefore, offering some programs and services that the target clients did
not require and from which they derived marginal benefit.
YWCA of Calgary’s Strategic Planning Initiative
STRATEGIC
ISSUES
With the urgency for change on YWCA of Calgary’s horizon in 2001,
the organization began the process of renewing its strategic direction.
The first significant step in achieving a new strategic direction was the
310
D. S. Finley et al.
identification of strategic issues (i.e., the fundamental drivers for change).
To do this, the organization completed a situation assessment that examined its current strategy and how it fit within the current environment.
The organization’s strengths and weaknesses were articulated; a comparative assessment of other service providers was undertaken; a key
stakeholder analysis was completed; and key trends in six areas of focus
emerged.
From the aforementioned analysis and the YWCA of Calgary staff consultations, consensus was reached that two significant strategic issues were
eminent and needed to be urgently addressed:
1. Strategic positioning and clear market focus needed to be determined
by:
a. Identifying the types of clients the YWCA of Calgary can best serve
(perform a needs-based segmentation analysis);
b. Reframing core programs and services that reflect the evolving needs
of targeted clients (increase client satisfaction); and
c. Increasing public awareness and understanding of the YWCA of
Calgary and its services in the community.
2. Debt-restructuring and revenue enhancement needed to be addressed
and implemented by:8
a. Significantly enhancing the YWCA of Calgary’s ability to fundraise to
ensure the organization’s sustainability;
b. Articulating the means to realize organizational growth through transformational repositioning; and
c. Developing new revenue streams to support long-term sustainability.
The key driver for the YWCA of Calgary’s transformation was reframing
core programs and services to better reflect the evolving needs of targeted
clients. Addressing this fundamental issue allowed the YWCA of Calgary
to gain a better understanding of who its current and potential clients were
and what these clients needed the organization to deliver. By addressing this
issue first, a foundation was established for addressing other issues affecting
the organization. To better understand its clients, the YWCA of Calgary, with
the solicited support of a third-party strategic planner, initiated a needs-based
segmentation process.
NEEDS-BASED
SEGMENTATION
In the recent years leading up to YWCA of Calgary’s strategic planning initiative in 2001, the number of multi-barriered women coming to the YWCA of
Calgary had increased and continues to increase today. Clients seeking services at the YWCA of Calgary have increasingly higher levels of needs, more
barriers, and gaps in their ability to meet their most basic living requirements.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
311
Over the years, programs and services had mushroomed in an attempt to
meet all needs of all persons seeking service at YWCA of Calgary.
The first step included identifying the needs common to all clients
as well as the needs that distinguished groups of clients. Common needs
to YWCA of Calgary clients include: access to a continuum of programs
and services; transportation; access to other services (e.g., health care);
and a non-discriminatory and non-judgmental environment. The YWCA of
Calgary also identified seven categories of clients distinguished by unique
needs. Table 1 lists each client segment and describes the associated needs.
The board and staff worked together to determine which of these seven
segments the YWCA of Calgary could best serve given the organization’s
strategic direction, resources, capabilities, and differentiated position within
the sector.
The YWCA of Calgary’s segmentation model can be seen as a continuum of services that supports a client from intervention through to transition,
stabilization, and finally self-sustaining (from being “dependent” through
to the ultimate goal of “sustained independence”) as depicted in Figure 4.
Although there are multiple entry points along the continuum, multiple exit
points also exist. However, if the organization were able to provide a seamless continuum of service, every client would (theoretically) be successfully
transitioned to be self-sustaining and independent. The YWCA of Calgary
would provide all of the program and service support required, either on its
own or jointly with other service providers.
TABLE 1 YWCA of Calgary Client Segments and Associated Needs
Segment
Crisis Sufferer
Employment Seeker
Solution Seeker
Transition Seeker
“Social” Support
Seeker
Community Leader
Trouble Free
Distinguishing key need(s)
Immediate safety, shelter (food), timely support, crisis
counseling, hope, emotional support, continuity of care for
“family,” convenience, legal assistance, emotional support,
self-esteem and self-sufficiency.
Job/career counseling, specific skills development/upgrading,
network to gainful employment, gainful employment.
Information, access to networks, recommendations,
coordinated/integrated approach, convenience, legal
assistance.
Hope, personal counseling, time for stabilization, emotional
support, shelter (food), life skills development, independence,
continuity of care for “family,” sense of direction, legal
assistance, emotional support, validation, self esteem, peer
network.
Safe interaction, interesting (engaging) activities, peer network,
emotional support, camaraderie/friendship, sense of
belonging, fun, validation, self esteem, peer network.
Make a difference, opportunity for action, peer network.
Peer network, recreation.
YWCA of Calgary’s Strategic Planning, 2001 (working model).
312
D. S. Finley et al.
Intervention
Dependence
Transition
Stabilization
Time or Progress
Self-Sustaining
Sustained
Independence
FIGURE 4 The YWCA of Calgary’s continuum of services (color figure available online).
YWCA of Calgary Strategic Planning, 2001.
YWCA of Calgary’s Focus
Continuum of Services is Essential
Intervention
Transition
Stabilization
Employment Seeker
Crisis Sufferer
Transition
Seeker
Community
Leader
“Social”
Support Seeker
Solution Seeker
Dependence
Self-Sustaining
Time or Progress
Trouble Free
Sustained
Independence
FIGURE 5 The YWCA of Calgary’s focus of continuum of services (color figure available
online).
YWCA of Calgary Strategic Planning, 2001.
Once the common and differentiating needs of clients are hypothesized
and placed accordingly along the continuum, target clients are selected from
these possible segments. Figure 5 identifies the needs-based segments that
the YWCA of Calgary can best serve (highlighted by “YWCA of Calgary’s
Focus” in the figure). In general, and as seen below with employment seekers and solution seekers, it is possible for segments to fall into more than
one target area. Identification of where along the continuum a type of client
lies, even if it is across the continuum, helps align programs and services to
better fit client needs.
Figure 5 demonstrates where the YWCA of Calgary’s efforts were
focused at this stage in its strategic planning work in 2001. It is understood
that once a client is in the “self-sustaining” box, they no longer require
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
313
the YWCA of Calgary’s primary services and will no longer be considered
a target client of the YWCA of Calgary. This is not to say that this client
may not return to the organization for additional services at some time in
the future. Also, people already in this segment will not be targeted. This
analysis helped the YWCA of Calgary narrow its focus on those who the
organization could best serve.
The YWCA of Calgary recognized the need to assist clients with a
smooth and integrative transition between intervention, transition, and stabilization in order for the clients to achieve sustained independence. As such,
the YWCA of Calgary aligns its programs and services to range from crisis
intervention to proactive and preventative crisis management. To support its
delivery of services along the continuum, the YWCA of Calgary works in
collaboration with partners to support any client needs outside the area of
the YWCA of Calgary’s target focus.
One example of such collaboration is within the emergency shelters
serving victims of domestic violence. Shelters within Calgary stay in close
contact to ensure that when women arrive at a shelter, they are either
taken in or directed to the shelter that would best serve their needs. A
second example from Calgary is that two or more agencies will collaborate
in response to a funding application request and indicate how they will use
the funding to work together. A successful example of this type of collaboration is the Parent Link Centre, a thriving partnership between Calgary
Family Service, Calgary Urban Planning Society (CUPS), and the YWCA of
Calgary.
Based on the above analysis, the YWCA of Calgary chose its primary target market as “women who are seeking economic well-being and/or safety
from violence,” i.e., it chose the segments crises sufferer, transition seeker,
social support seeker, solution seeker and employment seeker). The YWCA
of Calgary also selected a secondary target market—“children and other
family members of the client.” This secondary target market will be pursued
only once a client from the primary target market has been identified and
has asked for the YWCA of Calgary’s services.
REVISITING YWCA’S
VISION AND MISSION
With the identification of key strategic issues and target client segments, the
YWCA of Calgary refined its desired future state (vision) and distinct identity
within the sector (mission).
Through the planning process, the original mission statement was
simplified and elevated to a higher level. Its mission is to:
Offer programs and services for women and their families, providing
them with the skills, abilities, and opportunities to contribute to and
benefit from healthy communities.
314
D. S. Finley et al.
Prior to the revised mission statement, the YWCA of Calgary was
focused on being a recognized advocate for women, providing services
from centralized locations, providing ad hoc service facilitation, delivering
programs and services as opportunities arose, and targeting funding sources
reactively. The updated mission signaled a shift for the YWCA of Calgary
from these tactical operations to being focused on strategically engaging
clients and donors, providing an integrated and coordinated continuum of
programs and services, managing facilitation of service provision (in partnership with other service providers), leveraging impact on their clients and the
community, and being a recognized advocate for women seeking economic
well-being and safety from violence. This change in direction was vital to
the YWCA of Calgary’s revitalization because the organization began shifting
its focus from chasing funding to better serving clients.9
ALIGNMENT OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
After completing the needs-based segmentation, selecting target client segments, and re-evaluating its strategic framework, the YWCA of Calgary was
set to align its programs and services with its renewed strategic direction.
This process ensures that all programs and services are offered because they
tailor to the needs of YWCA of Calgary’s primary target clients. As a starting
point, the YWCA of Calgary asked itself a series of questions about its current programs and services (see Table 2) to guide the decisions regarding
which programs and services should be enhanced, maintained, or removed.
From these questions, a series of summary implications were derived (see
Table 2), which informed subsequent realignment of programs and services.
ACTION
PRIORITIES
Based on the YWCA of Calgary’s goals and strategic issues, the board and
staff agreed on six action priorities—three for year 2002 (i.e., program alignment, process improvement, and brand & image) and three for year 2003
(i.e., facilities, fundraising, and partnerships). The board and staff reached
consensus that it was necessary to: discern the programs and services to
be provided directly by the YWCA of Calgary or be facilitated by the organization; align the service provision to ensure a “continuum of service” to
clients, and recognize multiple points of entry and the need to create client
care teams; and identify and consider merger and/or de-involvements with
other service providers, where appropriate.
During these discussions, emotions were very high. In the past, programs were typically designed around funding availability and community
development priorities, not necessarily around the organization’s strategic
direction and targeted clients’ needs.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
315
TABLE 2 Questions of Focus and Resulting Implications
Questions
Implications
1. Based on our strategic direction and
available resources, is the
program/service on our list of
priorities?
2. Is there someone else better
able/financed to deliver this
program/service? If so, what is the best
way to access this service (partnership
or referral)?
3. How does this program/service
support the “continuum of service”?
4. Are we accessible to those in the
greatest need?
5. Do our actions align with the national
and international organizations?
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Need to narrow current client focus and
refocus the services delivered.
Develop a system to manage
program/service priorities to support the
YWCA of Calgary’s strategic direction
while considering the resources available.
Need to form partnerships with other
service providers to promote facilitation of
referrals for people with needs outside the
YWCA of Calgary’s focus.
Funding partnerships will be driven by
client needs.
Change in organizational culture toward
more integrated, facilitative, and
collaborative approaches inside the
organization and with outside partners.
Invest in staff/volunteer development and
training to allow for effective needs
assessment, implementation of care teams
and support the continuum of service.
Invest in the infrastructure (systems,
processes, organization) of the business.
YWCA of Calgary, Strategic Planning, 2001.
PROGRAM
ALIGNMENT
Program alignment, outcome measurement, and performance management
can be coordinated into one continuous process that fosters an organizational culture of learning, growth, and accountability to stakeholders. For
the YWCA of Calgary to undertake a process of program alignment and
the ensuing need for outcome measurement and performance management,
a guiding model was required. A number of models were reviewed from
a wide variety of choices available to the nonprofit sector. These models
included a balanced scorecard (a corporate-based model), a logic model (an
outcome measurement-based approach), and formal research (a model from
the academic community).
The basis for the YWCA of Calgary’s program alignment model (see
Figure 6) was an adaptation of a number of logic model approaches. The
logic model approach was selected due to its ease of use and accessibility to
all staff levels, as well as its ability to capture the many intangible benefits of
programs that balanced scorecards might not accommodate. It is relatively
accessible in terms of the resources required to implement and can develop
the foundation from which more intensive formal types of evaluation can
occur. The logic model was a tool that a number of YWCA of Calgary staff
had already received training for and had worked with for several years, and
316
D. S. Finley et al.
Mission
Board’s
Responsibility
Strategic Target
Clients
Program Areas
Management’s
Responsibility
Evaluation Criteria/
Strategic Framework/
Operational
Considerations
Place of
Program
Realignment
Indicators and
Measurement Tools
FIGURE 6 The YWCA of Calgary’s Program Alignment Model (YWCA of Calgary, Strategic
Planning, 2001; color figure available online).
it was the dominant model used by the YWCA of Calgary’s funders at this
time. Management discussed its program alignment model with a number
of its larger funders and received enthusiastic responses. The discussions
between the board, staff, and third-party consultant concluded that a program alignment tool (see FIGURE 7) would be necessary to support the
thinking of the logic model.
For discussions to evolve further and the successful development of
the program alignment tool, it was necessary to identify and reach consensus on the board and staff’s roles and responsibilities throughout the
process. Ideally, the board would be responsible for its own effectiveness,
ensuring it had knowledgeable, effective board members; the right structure
and processes in place; good relationships with management; and a means
of monitoring its own performance. Secondly, the board and management
should work together to ensure strategic and organizational effectiveness;
that a solid strategic direction is articulated; that risk management is in place;
that ethical standards are upheld; and that quality senior management are
employed. Lastly, operational excellence is primarily the responsibility of
management and other employees. It is this last point that underscores a systemic weakness in the nonprofit sector: Boards frequently have misguided
viewpoints as to who is responsible for operational excellence. The daunting
317
9
9
3
3
3. Family Violence Prevention:
a) Family Violence Counselling
b) Sheriff King Home
4. Housing
a) Mary Dover
b) Safe Haven
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
9
9
9
6
9
6
6
9
9
9
6
9
9
9
6
3
3
3
3
3
Impact for
Client
3
6
6
6
6
6
4
2
6
6
6
2
6
4
2
6
Partners
2
4
2
4
2
2
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
6
2
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
4
2
Facilities
Positive
Image
6
4
4
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
2
3
2
1
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
1
Volunteer
Capacity
1
Staff
Capacity
Operational Alignment
1
1
1
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
1
2
3
3
3
2
Cost
Recovery
1
3
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
1
1
3
3
3
Core Funding
35 / 57
32 / 57
50 / 57
42 / 57
45 / 57
43 / 57
46 / 57
52 / 57
52 / 57
46 / 57
32 / 57
40 / 57
41 / 57
33 / 57
33 / 57
Total
FIGURE 7 YWCA of Calgary program alignment tool (YWCA of Calgary, Strategic Planning, 2001; color figure available online).
9
6
9
9
9
9
6
9
6
3
3
Unique
Programs
Market
Alignment
6
6
6
3
Strategic Alignment
3
2. Education & Employment:
a) Canadian Employment Skills
b) English for New Canadians
c) Language Instruction for Newcomers
d) Construction Training for Women
e) Exploring Trades
f) Focus
g) Lifeprints
h) Stepping Out
1. Community Health & Recreation:
a) Childcare
b) Day Camps
c) Fitness on 5th
Program / Service Areas
Weighting
YWCA of Calgary Program Alignment
(Considerations Weighting - Low = 1, Medium = 2, High = 3)
11
14
3
8
6
7
4
1
1
4
14
10
9
12
12
Rank
318
D. S. Finley et al.
task of the incoming CEO at the YWCA of Calgary in 2001 was to build internal alignment and to use the newly articulated strategic plan for infusing a
planning discipline into the organization. Once the YWCA of Calgary’s board
and senior staff accepted this model, implementation of the new strategic
direction and program realignment became less problematic.
Both the board and staff had input into the development of the program
alignment tool. In Figure 7, the board defined the priority strategic criteria
(i.e., strategic alignment), while the staff defined the operational criteria (i.e.,
operational alignment). See Table 3 for a list and description of all the criteria
in Figure 7. Concurrently, all of the YWCA of Calgary’s existing programs and
services were clustered under one of the four existing service areas. Each
program and criterion could be labeled as: 3 = high priority, 2 = medium
priority, or 1 = low priority. It was decided that the strategic criteria provided
the foundation necessary to complete the operational criteria, so (most of)
the strategic criteria were labeled 3. The operational criteria were mostly
assigned 1. One of the strategic criteria was deemed less important than
the others, and two of the operational criteria were deemed more important
than the others, so all three were assigned 2.
The staff market evaluated each program and service based on its applicability to the YWCA of Calgary’s redefined target. The process of involving
the staff was critical because it created buy-in, accountability, and momentum, as these same staff would be required to implement the results of
the strategic planning. To engage the staff effectively, they were invited
to participate in surveys, attend meetings, and participate in workshops.
TABLE 3 Description of Balanced Scorecard Criteria
Criteria
Strategic Criteria
Market Alignment
Unique Programs
Impact for Clients
Partners
Operational Criteria
Image
Facilities
Staff Capacity
Volunteer Capacity
Cost Recovery
Core Funding
Description
Is this program aligned with our new target market (addresses
strategic issue 1)?
How unique is this program in the Calgary area?
How much does this program impact our current clients?
Can the program be complemented by our key partnerships?
Does this program present a positive image for the YWCA?
Can the program be implemented in our current facility?
Do we have a sufficient number of staff members to implement
and/or do they have the necessary skills?
Do we have a sufficient number of volunteers to implement
and/or do they have the necessary skills?
Can we recover some/all costs of the program (addresses
strategic issue 2)?
Is this program part of our core funding (addresses strategic
issue 2)?
YWCA of Calgary, Strategic Planning 2001.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
319
Furthermore, the chief operations officer discussed with each staff member how each of the programs with which they were actively involved
aligned with all evaluation criteria of the program alignment tool (i.e., strategic alignment and operational alignment). From these discussions, the staff
assigned each program the weight thought to be most appropriate under
each alignment option.
The formula for determining ultimate value of a program or service
(as depicted in Figure 7) was calculated by taking its priority value and
multiplying it by each of the values of the criteria. An example from Figure 7
is childcare, which was given a priority of 2 for market alignment, and the
strategic alignment criteria was previous agreed upon as a priority of 3,
giving that combination a score of 6 (i.e., 2 times 3). Once each program or
service is combined with each criteria and a score is calculated, all the scores
for that program or service are summed and a total out of a maximum of
5710 is recorded. Looking again at the example of childcare, the total for this
program is 41/57, and it ranks 9th most important overall. This tool proved
valuable as it became very clear very quickly how the YWCA of Calgary’s
programming could be reprioritized going forward.
Once programs and services were evaluated, key staff members were
invited to attend the board meeting in which the program alignment tool
was presented. The staff and board made adjustments to the tool together
and reached consensus.
After the evaluation of all its programs and services was complete, the
YWCA of Calgary ensured that its core programs (defined as having the
highest priority) fully met clients’ needs. This led to the further expansion of
some programs and services. Secondly, the YWCA of Calgary re-evaluated
the relevancy of its lowest priority programs and services given the strategic
intent of the organization and its current capability to deliver. This led to the
devolution of some programs and services, as well as the transfer of some
programs and services to other more appropriate service providers. Lastly,
the organization reviewed its key performance indicators to start measuring
the impact of its strategic realignment.
CONCLUSION
After struggling with resource issues for many years, the YWCA of Calgary
solicited the guidance of a strategy facilitator who led it through a
needs-based segmentation process of its clients, which informed program
realignment and the rest of the strategic planning initiative undertaken by
YWCA of Calgary.
YWCA of Calgary came from a challenging financial situation to having
achieved relative financial stability just one year after completing its strategic restructuring. The needs-based segmentation process proved invaluable
320
D. S. Finley et al.
as a tool for achieving several objectives including organizational learning, cultural shift, and process improvement. In addition, needs-based
segmentation supports ongoing and future work in the areas of resource
development, branding and image, facilities management, and partnerships.
The tools and processes developed for program realignment provide a template for implementing the strategic direction at a systematic level in the
organization.
Prologue
Today, eight years after the onset of transformation, the YWCA of Calgary
is a leading social service organization in Calgary. In 2008, the organization
served more than 15,000 Calgarians. Recently, the YWCA of Calgary teamed
up with the Royal Bank of Canada for the first annual “RBC Keep A Roof
Over Their Heads” fundraiser. The YWCA of Calgary has also developed a
relationship with Vermilion Energy Trust that has resulted in significant funding, and ARC Resources is contributing to infrastructure needs. CTV Calgary,
Energy 101.5, and Golden Acre Garden Centre chose YWCA of Calgary for
its first-ever Christmas fundraising campaign. For the fifth consecutive year,
the Calgary Herald selected the YWCA of Calgary’s women’s emergency
shelter as the recipient of the Calgary Herald Christmas Fund. While many
other partners exist, the overwhelming support for the YWCA of Calgary is a
direct reflection of the strength and impact of the organization in the Calgary
community.
The year 2008 ended a three-year strategic planning cycle, the first cycle
post-transformation. The increase in clients served and funding are indicative
of the success of the initial transformation and the ability to keep the
momentum strong with ongoing strategic planning focused on implementation and operational excellence. The 2009–2011 strategic planning cycle
will keep clients at the forefront while focusing on site development, the
organization’s centennial milestone, human resources development, succession planning, service growth and impact, and increasing brand awareness
and profile.
NOTES
1. Founded in 1910.
2. Multi-barriered women of YWCA of Calgary suffer from the consequences of poverty,
homelessness, and abuse.
3. The difference between strategy and operations is that strategy can be described by the question,
“Are we doing the right things?” while operations can be described by the question, “are we doing things
right?”
4. “Sustainable” for the YWCA of Calgary is defined as six years of posted surpluses, cash reserves
of more than $574,000CAD, and endowment re-established to more than $23,000,000CAD.
5. For a more detailed definition of the value proposition and the YWCA of Calgary’s value
proposition, see Appendix A.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
321
6. At times, large expenditures occur for the wrong reasons. Right reasons include to meet sustainable demand or that a detailed business case proves the move to be economically viable and sustainable.
Wrong reasons include “because we can get the funding” and “because prices are only going up.” If such
an expenditure is made for the wrong reasons, it is likely that the organization is not aligned with its
clients’ needs.
7. Many other factors contributed to the transformation of the organization, such as new leadership,
an external third party to lead the strategic planning initiative, the new Canadian focus on homeless women after the murders of homeless women in east Vancouver, new Calgary and Alberta police
forces, and others. However, while these factors enabled the change to be successful, the needs-based
segmentation was the mechanism for the transformational change.
8. The topic of debt restructuring is out of scope for this paper. However, successful debt restructuring occurred because the bank was aware of and fully supportive of the YWCA of Calgary’s efforts to
realign core programs. This was a contributing factor in the success of the transformation.
9. A carefully crafted needs-based segmentation reinforces the mission and vision. If major misalignment is found upon completing a needs-based segmentation, do not fret. Strategic planning is
an iterative process; therefore, a revaluation of the vision and mission is likely in need to allow for
realignment with the outcome of the needs-based segmentation.
10. A maximum score of 60 is obtained for a program/service if all criteria earn a priority of 3
multiplied by all 10 criteria’s respective priority weightings.
REFERENCES
Caramanica, L., Cousino, J. S., & Petersen, S. (2003). Four elements of a successful
quality program. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 24(4), 336–343.
Clopton, S. W., Stoddard, J. E., & Dave, D. (2006). Event preferences among
arts patrons: Implications for market segmentation and arts management.
International Journal of Arts Management, 9, 48–59.
Finley, D. S., Gralen, A., & Fichtner, L. (2006). From bankruptcy to sustainability: Stakeholder engagement and strategic renewal in a performing arts
organization. International Journal of Arts Management, 9, 4–16.
Frank, R., Massy, W., & Wind, Y. (1972). Market segmentation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Greengrove, K. (2002). Needs-based segmentation: Principles and practice.
International Journal of Market Research, 44, 405–421.
Haley, R. I. (1968, July). Benefit segmentation: A decision oriented research tool.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32, 30–35.
McCarthy, K. F., & Jinnett, K. (2001). A new framework for building participation in
the arts. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Pawson, A. K., & Troy, L. C. (2004). Nonprofit organization and membership motivation: An exploration in the museum industry. Journal of Marketing Theory
and Practice, 12(2), 1–15.
Peltier, J. W., & Schribrowsky, J. A. (1997). The use of need-based segmentation
for developing segment-specific direct marketing strategies. Journal of Direct
Marketing, 11(4), 53–62.
Robbins, J. E., & Robbins, S. S. (1981). Museum marketing: Identification of high,
moderate and low attendance segments.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 9(1), 66–76.
Rogers, G., Finley, D. S., & Galloway, J. R. (2001) Strategic planning in social services
organizations: A practical guide. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Scholars’
Press.
322
D. S. Finley et al.
Sewall, M. A. (1978, November). Market segmentation based on consumer
ratings of proposed product designs. Journal of Marketing Research, 15,
557–564.
Todd, S., & Lawson, R. (2001). Lifestyle segmentation and museum/gallery visiting
behavior. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing,
6, 269–277.
Zweig, J. M., Schlichter, K. A., & Burt, M. R. (2002). Assisting women victims of
violence who experience multiple barriers to service. Violence Against Women,
8, 162–180.
Transformation of YWCA of Calgary
323
APPENDIX
Appendix A: The YWCA of Calgary’s Value Proposition
A value proposition is a statement that describes the benefits a client will
receive and how the client will receive such benefits when enrolling in
the services of an organization (Rogers, Finley, & Galloway, 2001). It is
possible that an organization will have a series of value propositions directed
at specific target markets, or a statement that consists of a list of value
descriptions.
The YWCA of Calgary developed the following value proposition after
completing its needs-based segmentation and selecting its target clients.
YWCA of Calgary provides benefits to clients through:
●
●
●
●
A holistic approach (integrated, coordinated, encompassing);
Timely needs assessments performed by experienced staff;
A safe, inclusive, non-judgmental environment; and
A larger national and international network of YWCAs.
Agency Structure and Change
Collaborations and Connections
Millicent was in a quandary. Within a week of being asked to consider the executive directorship
of All-Families, she received a feeler about another opening, the exec’s job at Catholic Children,
Family, and Community Services (known as CCFCS or Catholic Social Services). She was
intrigued.
Over the years, she’d become aware of the deepening involvement of Catholic Charities USA,
the umbrella agency for local Catholic social service agencies, in issues related to social justice
and to poverty and its consequences. And she strongly favored those moves. Those were, after all,
the issues (along with a desire for adventure) that had drawn her to work in South America.
In trying to sort her options, she found herself comparing the two agencies. In the 20 years or
so since she had returned to the States, she felt, the church had become much more open. And so
had she! She did a quick assessment of the similarities and differences between the challenges she
might face in each agency.
• Their internal structures were relatively similar. Both were professional bureaucracies with
centralized structures, although CCFCS was larger, more top-down, whereas All-Families leaned
toward a flatter structure at the departmental level from which many of its program directives
originated. If I had to sum it up, I would say that Catholic Social Services would be a bit more on
the “bureaucratic” side and All-Families a bit more into “professional” autonomy.
• Although both are nonsectarian in staff- and client makeup, the Catholic agency had a clear
ideology. Moreover, that ideology could open doors to collaborations with other faith-based
agencies on issues on which they agreed.
• Both All-Families and Catholic Social Services were extensively networked with other local
service agencies and to the local United Way. However, Catholic Social Services was also linked
to Catholic Charities USA, which expanded the local agency’s access to networking opportunities
and informational services nationwide. Many of its local programs reflected policies that had
originated nationally. Its Catholic identity could increase its access to volunteers from local
parishes.
When it comes to external relationships, she concluded, there might be some clear benefits to
working in a faith-based setting.
On the other hand—along with Harvey, Bill, and Carl, among others—-Millicent had been
integral to building the relationships between All-Families and the United Way and dozens of other
agencies. She was aware that this was one of the reasons for the Catholic agency’s interest in her.
Building good relationships in the community and elsewhere—that and fundraising—are
increasingly central to executive leadership. Well, at least, she thought, I’m halfway there.
The recruiter from Catholic Charities appeared to think so, too. To make the point about what
the Catholic agency was interested in, he listed the issues Millicent had taken leadership for.
“We’ve been impressed with your creation of a certificate program for community volunteers,”
he’d told her, and then enumerated a series of other interagency activities. “We really are looking
for someone who knows the community and has demonstrated the ability to build structural
relationships between CCFCS and other organizations,” the recruiter had told her.
They appear to be more interested in my inter- than my intra-agency work, thought
Millicent. always saw myself as the ‘inside’ person, motivating and training others to do their jobs
better. Bill and Harvey were the ‘outside’ persons, linking the agency to other organizations and
funders. Am I up to managing interorganizational relationships? Am I interested?
HOW YOUR AGENCY IS STRUCTURED
Social agency management requires the performance of both internal and external coordination
tasks. Agencies use various structural configurations to manage internal relationships and
processes and maintain external relations to important people and organizations—the
organization’s actual and potential stakeholders.
Holding It All Together While Linking to Others
All organized human activities require both the division of labor into specific tasks and
coordination of those tasks to achieve desired ends. In social agencies, those tasks include goal
setting and plan making, providing core services, supervising paid and volunteer staff members,
securing necessary resources, evaluating outcomes, and coordination with other service providers
and relevant constituencies.
Agencies differ in what they do, how and where they do it, and with whom and on whose behalf
they do it. Structure is what holds an organization together, keeps it afloat, and separates the inside
from the outside.1 As is true of all organizations, your social agency is structured, in part, to reduce
the impact of external contingencies and to take advantage of new opportunities.2 How it does so
will affect its survival and growth as well as the effectiveness of its performance.3
Your agency’s internal structure reflects its division of labor and the coordinating mechanisms
designed to make it effective and efficient. Its external structure reflects the agency’s relationship
with the external publics on whom it depends or with whom it is interdependent.
Some Definitions
Organizational structure is what holds an agency together. It is the framework that both links
its units to each other and separates it from its environment.
An agency’s division of labor is the way it divides functions and responsibilities between
individuals and work units.
Coordination is the way agencies orchestrate the activities of individuals and work units, within
and outside the organization, so that they operate in harmony.
An agency’s configuration is the way it balances between specialization and coordination, and
includes considerations of size, complexity, and control.
Chapter Contents
The chapter begins with an examination of the internal structures common to most social agencies,
drawing heavily on Harold Mintzberg’s theory of organizational configurations.4 That section
concludes with a brief discussion of the structural reconfigurations agencies engage in when
moving from a start-up to a more mature phase of operation, or when facing pressures to downsize
or merge with other agencies. We’ll then shift our attention to the structures common to
interorganizational relationships. These include such mechanisms as interagency service
agreements, ad hoc advocacy coalitions, and more long-term federated arrangements.
The design, and redesign, of organizational structures in the interest of organizational stability
and productivity has been of primary concern to organizational researchers, many of whom are
housed in business and other professional schools or in specialized research institutes.5 It intersects
with many of issues addressed earlier in this volume.
Some the topics covered in this chapter include
•
•
Task specialization and coordination
Internal and external control through procedures, supervision, and mutual
adjustment
•
Contingency factors (like size and location) that influence structure
•
Restructuring, downsizing, merging agencies and their functions
•
Interagency collaborations, coalitions, and federations
INTERNAL STRUCTURES
The Division of Labor and the Need for Coordination
Specialization and Coordination in Your Social Agency
Coordination is necessary whenever two or more people divide up responsibilities for getting
something done. The twin hallmarks of all organizations is that they (1) allocate specialized tasks
and responsibilities to individuals and to multiperson units, and then (2) use coordination
mechanisms to make sure that those tasks are performed in pursuit of organizational interests.
Similar mechanisms occur between organizations that divide functions between them, and then
use interorganizational mechanisms to coordinate their joint efforts.
Like all organizations, your social agency groups people into work units or into larger divisions
on the basis of the tasks assigned. Tasks might be grouped by
•
•
•
•
required knowledge and skill,
processes,
location in time and space, and
client characteristics (including problems addressed).
These are explained in Table 10.1.6
Mechanisms Used for Internal Coordination in Social Agencies
Your social agency uses three mechanisms to coordinate the specialized tasks performed within
it. Mintzberg refers to these as
•
•
•
Direct supervision
Standardization of processes, outputs, and skills
Mutual adjustment
These coordination mechanisms are rarely fully independent of each other. For example,
in Table 10.2 the use of performance appraisal, listed under process standardization (Item 2a), is
often conducted through the supervisory process (Item 1).
Direct Supervision A number of administrative tools and processes are commonly used as
components of or complements to supervision. Among them are
Table 10.1 How Job Tasks and Specializations Are Typically Grouped
•
Training—the formal instructional process required to perform the assigned
tasks (People with similar skills and knowledge can be expected to use the same methods.)
•
Indoctrination—activities and relationships designed to optimize socialization and
acculturation into an organization’s ideology or value system (People who think like us can
be trusted to do what is expected of them.)
•
Liaison—facilitating working together and interacting with others (as in task forces
and other inter- or intra-agency mechanisms) in ways that are likely to lead to mutual
adjustment and collaboration (Let’s make sure we hear the other side.)
Table10.2 Coordination Mechanisms Built Into Organizational Structure
Standardization Standardization can be achieved through
• Formalization—such as standardized job descriptions and work procedures (Playing by the
rules means doing the right thing, even if the patient dies.)
• Procedural Clarity—achieved through use of such tools as automated checklists that reduce
the chance of error (Reducing the “oops” factor protects the client, the worker, and the agency.)
• Centralization—where communication and/or decision-making authority are from the topdown and center-out (When in doubt, check with the boss.)
The Impact of Contingency Factors on Management and Coordination8
Efforts to manage and coordinate service programs are rarely under anyone’s full control. A
number of contingency factors influence the ways in which those components affect organizational
design. Among them are
• Age and Size—The older the agency, the greater its adherence to patterns that are historically
integrated into its organizational culture. The larger the agency, the more elaborate its structure
(i.e., greater specialization leads to a wider range of horizontal and vertical collaborations).
• Technology—The more complex and indeterminate the agency’s core technology, the more
professional and autonomous its staff members will be. When organizations can’t be sure (on the
basis of scientific or other evidence) that doing this or that will achieve a desired outcome, they
often defer to those (often professionals) who have mastered the relevant technology, trusting that
they will make the correct (operational or moral) choices. In contrast, the more routine and
predictable the core technology (e.g., in eligibility determination), the less prior training may be
needed, and the more likely that the work can be organized into more bureaucratic structures and
routine practices.
• Environmental Factors—The more dynamic and diversified an agency’s external environment,
the greater the pressure on the agency to respond flexibly to environmental preference.9
• External Power Factors—The more powerful an agency’s external claimants and stakeholders,
the more influence they are likely to exert over an agency’s programs.10 That may be why
managers often try to find the right fit between agencies and their suppliers.11
Organizational Components and Their Structural Configurations
The Component Parts of All Organizations
In a simple structure, the agency is likely to have only two components: the center or apex of the
agency, and its larger operating core.
Mintzberg12 uses the term “apex” to refer to the top manager or senior management group. The
apex includes one or more persons who perform management functions, overseeing both the
agency’s internal and external structures. The operating core includes all those individuals who
perform the basic work of the agency, such as providing services to clients and conducting other
activities related to its boundary and adaptive functions.13
In many smaller agencies, management may include only one or two persons who may be in
charge, providing direction to core staff (see Figure 10.1a). But in others, any kind of hierarchy
may be discouraged. For example, in some feminist agencies (like ViVa, in its early years), the
structure may be flat nonhierarchical), and the management team may be composed of colleagues
who rotate in and out of a management “center” rather than up to the “top” of the agency
(see Figure 10.1b).
Figure 10.1 Simple Organization Structures Showing Management Apex or Center14
More complex and larger agencies are likely to have taller hierarchies and more component
parts (see Figure 10.2).
Figure 10.2 Mintzberg’s General 6-Part Depiction of the Structure of a Complex Organization
In Figure 10.2,
• The Middle Line represents department heads and work group supervisors who deal with dayto-day managerial concerns, leading to a hierarchy of authority between senior management15 at
the apex (top) of the organization and those staff members working in the agency’s core.
• The operations Support Staff team includes those who perform mostly internal services, such
as those associated with human resources and fiscal management. They make it possible for those
at the Operating Core and the Middle Line to concentrate on the work they do best.
• Technostructure support staff members are found in more complex organizations, where their
efforts shape the agency’s structure as well as its programs. Among them might be the planners
who develop agency programs and coordinate with other organizations, human resources staff who
engage in job design, information and communication technology experts who design new
applications, and resource development specialists without whom it might not be possible to get
the funding and other resources needed to maintain and grow the agency.
In his more recent formulations, Mintzberg adds a sixth component—the ideology or belief
system. He did so to reflect the importance of culture as a variable in shaping an agency’s
configurations. The ideology is shown in Figure 10.2 as internal to the organization. But you’ll
note that the organization’s boundary is made up of broken lines, suggesting it is porous. And, as
we know from Chapter 7, an agency’s ideology (or values) is impacted by those in the broader
environment.
The Configurational Options
Differences in the ways in which organizations divide up tasks and coordinate their performance
lead to a number of alternative organizational configurations. These range from a relatively
inflexible machine bureaucracy to the mostly unstructured network organization and
flexible adhocracy. Although Mintzberg initially identified five configurations,16 he later
expanded his list to seven, reflecting the recent emergence of newer forms of organization. The
first five are
•
•
•
•
•
Start-up and other entrepreneurial agencies
Machine bureaucracies
Professional bureaucracies
Divisionalized organizations
Adhocratic structures and other innovative agencies
To which he added,
•
•
Missionary
Political organizations
I’ll describe each, briefly. Think of each configuration as a set of frames within which
organizational behavior can be observed, or the arenas within which action takes place. Which of
these configurations appears to best describe your agency? How has the agency’s configuration
changed over the years? Does it appear to be morphing into something new and different?
Understanding Bureaucratic Configurations
Let’s look at these one at a time. We’ll begin by looking at machine bureaucracies, which are
closest to those forms described by Max Weber.17 We’ll then move on to examine professional
bureaucracies, which are more common to social agencies, and conclude with divisional
organizations, which may be among the largest and most complex of all social agencies.
Machine Bureaucracies The machine configuration is found in such public bureaucracies as
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid; county public welfare agencies (where the focus is on
eligibility determination); and in units of both non- and for-profit organizations that deal with
routine aspects of client processing (e.g., admissions departments of universities and community
colleges, and in health insurance companies like Blue Cross/Blue Shield). Many of these agencies
are governed by procedures that were devised by trained professionals in the relevant health or
welfare occupations. In contrast, when some of these functions were outsourced to business
corporations, error rates accelerated precipitously.18
The configurations of machine bureaucracies are characterized by hierarchical authority
structures and clear divisions of labor. Practice standards are defined in written policies, procedural
rules and guidelines, and other mechanisms. Managers are responsible for incorporating work
standards into the workplace, mediating disputes and troubleshooting disturbances, and evaluating
staff performance. They may benefit from the internal consultation, training, and organizational
and program redesign activities performed by operations and techno-systems support staff.
Because top management is somewhat distanced from operations, potential innovations are
often overlooked. In some machine bureaucracies, however, management encourages lower-level
staff members to experiment with innovations of their own design or borrowed from other
agencies. These efforts are often coordinated with technosystems and operations support
specialists. Innovations, if proven effective, may then be transferred to other units of the
organization or marketed outside the agency.
Professional Bureaucracies The professional configuration is more common to social agencies
that hire professionals to perform core services. This is the configuration you might find in a
multiservice family agency or in a community mental health center. The operating coredominates
it in both its size and its centrality to the agency’s mission.
Within the operating core you might find clinical and community social workers, rehabilitation
specialists, health practitioners, recreation workers, and a wide variety of other professionals
whose skill and expertise make those services possible. Relationships between professionals and
between agency units tend to be more horizontal than vertical. Professional bureaucracies depend
more on staff members’ professional knowledge, skill, and norms, rather than on agency rules and
procedures.
The support staff of professional bureaucracies focuses on activities that free core staff to do
their work with little interference from other nonservice tasks. For example, techno-staff may be
engaged in raising the funds to permit core staff to concentrate on client services, or on program
evaluation and program design.
In the opening vignette, Millicent, you may recall, has assessed Catholic Social Services to be
a bit more on the bureaucratic side (she might have used the term machine bureaucracy, had she
been familiar with Mintzberg), whereas she saw All-Families as a bit more on the professional
side (e.g., as a professional bureaucracy).
Divisional Agencies In general, divisionally structured social agencies tend to have central
headquarters that house both top management and many technosystem and other support staff
whose efforts are aimed at supporting the service and management functions performed in the
agency’s semi-independent service units. These may be separated geographically or by function.
For example, Alterra Healthcare, with its headquarters in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, operates some
350 local residences for adults suffering from Alzheimer’s and related diseases in 24 states.
Policies and procedures for admissions, services, hiring, and supervision are developed centrally.
Local directors are hired by headquarters staff. Although local staff participate in recruiting and
interviewing local hires, all workers are employed by the national office. Other divisional
arrangements may operate more like franchises (in which ownership is shared with the ownerdirector of local units that serve different parts of a city or state).
Functional divisions are typical of hospitals and universities in which various departments and
schools operate as semi-autonomous units. Clark Kerr,19 a former chancellor of the University of
California, called his institution a multiversity instead of a university to highlight the relative
independence of its many campuses, professional schools, and academic departments. In nonprofit
social agencies, divisional arrangements may include a greater or lesser amount of power sharing.
The JCCA (the national Jewish Community Centers Association) sets practice standards for
local affiliates, provides scholarships for professional studies to potential employees, provides
employment services (serving both agencies and interested applicants), and conducts in-service
training for local communities or continuing education at the national and regional levels. It also
manages the affairs of its professional association (open to all JCC or JCCA employees), including
its life and health insurance programs. However, JCC employees are employed by local affiliates.
Both process and output
standardization in
divisional
agencies
are
common. Administrative supervision comes down the line from the top. It may stop at the office
of the director, or proceed down the line through middle management, and to other staff engaged
in quasi-managerial roles (like kitchen managers in food distribution agencies). The procedures
are generally obligatory. In contrast, what some agencies might call professional consultation,
while also concerned with performance, is likely to be nonobligatory and more supportive in style,
similar to the supportive consultation available from specialists in matrix organizations.20 In matrix
organizations, administrative supervision is provided by line supervisors, whereas consultation,
educational, and supportive services are provided by program specialists who may have little or
no authority over those they assist.
Understanding Innovative and Other Nonbureaucratic Configurations
Nonbureaucratic social agencies may appear to be less rule governed than machine or professional
bureaucracies. That is often true of start-ups. However, some adhocracies, innovative agencies,
and those that pursue ideological missions or political achievements may operate on the basis of
hidden assumptions and strongly held values that have the force of procedural rules. Beliefs that
are strongly held in common by members of an organization can impact not only their own, but
the organization’s behaviors.21
Start-ups and Other Agencies With Simple Structures Many social agencies start up with
simple configurations, such as those shown in Figure 10.1.With a founder or founding group at the
top or center of the figuration and no layers between them and those providing core services,
decisions can be made quickly and without much internal interference. Founders are likely to have
a grand view of the possibilities, but also get heavily involved in the nitty-gritty of daily operations.
Start-ups tend to be nimble structures, often able to shift gears when new opportunities present
themselves. They are low on standardization and high on supervisory leadership.
Although entrepreneurship tends to be a stage in the development of most social agencies, some
more established agencies also manage to remain nimble and entrepreneurial—at least in part—
throughout much of their existence. That was true of All-Families, the agency Bill Clapman headed
since it was founded, until his retirement almost 30 years later. It was also true of ViVa, a small
women’s cooperative, at least until the community changed and its leadership group found itself
out of touch with current realities.
All-Families was able to respond to new challenges and to keep growing in part because it had
(at least informally) delegated the responsibility for innovation to its various departments—so long
as they coordinated with each other. The Community Services division was most attuned to
changing needs. It was no accident that Harvey’s propensity for entrepreneurship flourished there,
or that Community Services was the initial location for the New Americans Project. Even the most
traditional of agencies can remain innovative if it sets aside a department or a project that is tasked
with the responsibility of seeking newer and better ways of doing things. These units are often
given the autonomy to the test the waters, so to speak, before setting sail on uncharted waters or
committing the rest of the agency to sailing alongside.
Missionary Agencies The missionary configuration is typical of many faith-based agencies, as
well as others that are fueled by strong ideological perspectives and belief systems. Examples
include those engaged in the promotion of human rights or the environment and global warming.
Agencies that cooperate on some issues can be on opposite sides of others. For example, some
family service agencies can collaborate on some issues while battling over such discordant issues
as the right to choose or the right to life. Whatever the issue, in missionary agencies, values are
used to energize and unify staff members and volunteers.
What all missionary social agencies have in common is that they—to a greater or lesser extent—
use indoctrination as well as reward and punishment to maintain commitment to the ideology.
Punishment can be subtle, as in the social or occupational exclusion of doubters from desired
associations or positions. New staff members are often selected on the basis of whether they can
(or will) fit the organization’s mold. Political correctness and other control mechanisms make it
uncomfortable for staff or board members to deviate from agency norms. Clients, too, may
experience pressure to accept the agency’s treatment methods as the “right” way toward selfimprovement. Millicent found this to be the case in both her work with Sisters of Mercy in the
United States and in a radically different work experience in Latin America. Both experiences
were an expression of her social commitments and were integrated in her professional persona. To
what extent, do you think, did she view the Catholic agency as having a missionary agenda? How
might that impact her choice were she offered both of the top management positions she was
apparently being considered for?
Political Configurations Agencies that employ political configurations include, but are not
limited to, advocacy organizations. These agencies are characterized by their use of power to
achieve their objectives. They are more prone than other agencies to use confrontational in addition
to coalitional strategies. Confrontational approaches are used to change the rules or policies of
other organizations regarding such issues as client participation (e.g., clients’ rights) or to increase
access to service (for example, to make room for new populations in public housing). However,
the use of power may not require confrontational means. Readers will recall that there are multiple
sources of power, ranging from knowledge and know-how to the potential to reward and punish.22
Coalitional alliances include joint action with other organizations to advocate for specific
populations or causes. Collaboration can increase their access to legitimate, reward, referent, and
expert, as well as coercive power. Moreover, the choice to be confrontational or not depends on
the issue environment.
For example, in an environment of indifference the appropriate strategy might be to begin an
intervention with consciousness-raising activities. Where there’s general agreement about the
goals, the strategy might be involve a campaign orientation to bring those in agreement together.
Only where there is disagreement may there be a need for a competitive or conflict-oriented
strategy.23 For some agencies, a political orientation may be temporary, tied to a stage in its life
cycle. For example, a rights group may start off as confrontational but may settle into a more
collaborative configuration after winning over skeptics or neutralizing former opponents.
Adhocracies, Network Configurations, and Radix Organizations Unlike machine and
professional bureaucracies, innovative organizations are not likely to depend on the use of
standardization of methods, means, or outcomes to coordinate internal or external efforts. Instead,
they tend to engage in a process of mutual adjustment that depends heavily on their range of
contacts with potential collaborators. This is true of both adhocracies and other innovative
agencies.
The term adhocracy is used by Mintzberg to describe temporary action systems that emerge out
of the formal and informal networks of social agencies and other interested parties. Others tend to
use the term “network organization” or, most recently, radix organizations,24 a term that evolved
to reflect the fluid forms and shifting boundaries necessitated by an increasing use of teams,
outsourcing, contingent workers, and strategic (generally temporary) alliances.
Not all networks are network organizations. For example, interorganizational networks focus
on how independent organizations can increase their effectiveness in service delivery by increasing
their interdependence.25 Networks become network organizations when they have relatively clear,
even if permeable, boundaries, and generate clusters of their own (usually identified as part of the
network organization and sometimes overlapping in terms of members and tasks). Those clusters
also have high degrees of connectedness with each other.26
What may begin as knowledge sharing between staff or lay members of social agencies, may
lead to joint actions between organizations or to the emergence of new organizations that act
independently. As social action becomes less organization driven, adhocracies may become
increasingly important in the complex of social agencies and programs.27 On the other hand, as ad
hoc organizations become increasingly focused on consolidating their gains and preserving their
achievements, they may be willing to give up a bit of freedom of maneuver in return for more
certainty and predictability.
The characteristics of all seven structure types are briefly compared in Table 10.3. The
descriptions are similar but not identical to the terms Mintzberg uses. They are tailored to the
configurations most commonly found in American social agencies, rather than the business
corporations that Mintzberg may have had in mind.
Table 10.3 Structural Configurations of Social Agencies and Their Defining Characteristics28
Additional Structures Clegg29 and his colleagues inventoried a number of additional structural
configurations. Among them are
• virtual organizations—linked through virtual networks—are characteristic of some
organizations involved in information sharing or in distance education or distance coaching;
• post-bureaucratic organizations—in which both hierarchy and formal rules tend to be absent
or seriously minimized—permit a wider range of interactions;
• heterarchies—which resemble fishnets or spiderwebs—are characteristic of some new
organizations that later reformat themselves into more permanent configurations; and various
• hybrid forms—some of which include both (1) direct service provision (which may require
ongoing interagency collaboration), and (2) advocacy and social action (which assumes a political
configuration).30
Some readers might disagree with Clegg, concluding that some or all four of his additional
structures could fit into one or more of Mintzberg’s seven categories. Do you have a position on
this possibility? Would it make a difference in the way you understand your social agency?
Taking Stock
1.
Which of the described configurations fits your agency? Just one, or more than one?
Explain.
2.
Which one might have fit 5 years ago, 10 years ago?
3.
Is your agency moving toward a change in configuration? To what? What is likely
to influence its continued movement in this direction?
Why There Aren’t More Types of Configurations
You may have wondered why the range of organizational configurations tends to be limited to 5
or 7 types. Why not 8, 10, or even 20 or 30? Given the variations of environments within which
agencies operate and within which they are interdependent, could there not be a greater number of
variations between them? The answer is probably no, and the reason can be found in the
reinforcing nature of all the factors that go into defining a configuration. For example,
bureaucracies operate in what (for them) are relatively stable environments, perform tasks that are
relatively routine and rule governed, and use hierarchical structures as well as standardization of
procedures and tasks. These factors reinforce each other. In contrast, adhocracies respond to
uncertain environments, decentralize decision making, and expect individuals to make
independent judgments about what tasks to perform and how to perform them.
It’s hard to mix and match components without breaking the frame, so to speak. The same
factors that limit the range of possible configurations may explain why organizational change can
be difficult and unsettling.31
Routine and Nonroutine Agency Restructuring
Few organizations maintain a fully constant structure over long periods of time. Most changes are
gradual, in response to ongoing environmental pressures and opportunities and to the imagination
and drive of agency personnel. However, some transformations can be dramatic, sudden, and frame
breaking.
Frame-breaking Changes
Frame-breaking changes are generally the result of external pressures stemming from
•
sharp disruptions in service delivery or funding patterns (like the substitution of
funding for managed care in lieu of what may have been routinely applied for and received
program grants or allocations);
•
shifts in patterns of demand (as when changing population characteristics lead to
the obsolescence of early service programs); and
•
cutbacks in staffing (as when key personnel retire, or cost cutting may require hiring
less well-trained professionals).
These pressures may build up to a point where agency survival requires revolutionary rather
than evolutionary change.
In the aftermath of the recent economic meltdown, some agencies, unable to reframe
themselves, slipped into permanent failure;32 others found themselves swallowed up in mergers,
or with resources sufficient to stay afloat but not to get anywhere. The economic downturn of
2008, however, also led to the creation of a number of small niche-oriented networks and some
tentative start-ups that may remain nimble and able to respond to changing circumstances.
Downsizing and Mergers
When agencies face serious loss in financial or other support, there may be pressure on leadership
to downsize or merge, if they are to remain in business at all. Both have implications for
employment leadership. Downsizing generally requires reducing the number of staff, cutting hours
of employment, or altering the nature of the job. For example, transitions may include
•
moving some people from the status of employee with benefits, to contractor
without benefits;
•
winnowing down the agency structure so that various functions are now handled by
fewer individuals, each with a greater variety of assignments; and
•
pooling services or merging with other agencies.
Harvey Shifts His Perspective
He had not expected things to turn out this way; but with the start of the recession, Harvey’s new
foundation job turned out to be less about distributing grants than in counseling the foundation’s
grant recipients to deal with their new realities. He put together a workshop for which he prepared
a workbook. The outline appears below.
A Manager’s Guide to Downsizing and Mergers
Contents
The Pressure to Downsize or Merge—Where’s It Coming From?
Who Is Affected by Downsizing and Mergers, and How They Are Affected
How the Agency Can Get the Maximum Benefit From Downsizing
How the Agency Can Increase Benefits and Minimize Losses From Mergers
How to Reduce the Negative Impact of Downsizing and Mergers on the Agency, Its Clients, Its
Staff Members, and Other Stakeholders
A Social Agency’s Responsibilities to Staff and Volunteers (Coaching, Job Finding, Retraining,
and Other Support Functions)
Setting Up Transition Teams to Move From Today to the Future
As an agency-based fundraiser, Harvey had always been focused on growth and income
generation. Now, on the staff of a foundation, he was faced with the challenge of helping former
recipient agencies do more with less. Not something foundations had to focus on in the past, he
realized.
Downsizing and mergers can have a destabilizing effect on the organizations undergoing these
transitions. Yet both downsizing and mergers also have the potential of inducing agencies to make
changes that improve service and/or contribute to long-term stability. However, that is not likely
to be the way the process is perceived by many employees, volunteers, clients, and collaborating
agencies. When agencies are forced to downsize or merge, the sense of lo...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment