Marketization of Humanitarian Work in the 21st Century: Balancing the Survival and Moral Imperatives for NGOs: A Case of Uganda Red Cross Society
Abstract
Today’s NGO is a large corporate undertaking in systems and structure in comparison to the early days of a small, humble, locally connected one with a clear vision and mission focus (Gibson, 2019). It is a big service provider dependent on funding from institutional donors rather than individuals or the public. It has elaborate structures for operations, procurement and supply chain management, public relations and communications, fund-raising and business development services (BDS), internal audit and accounting, human resources (HR), monitoring and evaluation, community engagement and feedback receipt, and implementation (Cooley and Ron, 2002; Gibson, 2019). It is staffed with thematic specialists who implement short-term niche complex programmes and projects with tight deliverables, budgets, and timelines. Its staff, while dedicated, suffer from dilemmas of balancing moral motivations and efficient implementation of discrete projects that they are assigned to implement, and the processes needed to operate large-scale undertakings (Gibson, 2019). This is, rather, rational behaviour in response to their existential pressures created by today's market conditions. This has created cracks in the heart of the NGO sector. Identity, mission, and public trust are being threatened by the resultant pressure as increased corporatization, enterprise culture, and principal-agent (P-A) relationships gain momentum in NGO operations (Salamon, 2003). NGOs need to preserve their values as they navigate the distinctiveness and survival imperatives. This article attempts to delve into how NGOs have attempted to balance these imperatives, drawing from an empirical review of the existing body of literature in the subject area and analysis of the set-up and operations of one large Relief Service NGO in Uganda - the Uganda Red Cross Society (URCS)
Downloads
References
AbouAssi, K., 2013. Hands in the Pockets of Mercurial Donors: NGO Response to Shifting Funding Priorities. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(3), pp.584–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012439629.
Ackerman, J., 2004. Co-governance for accountability: beyond “exit” and “voice”. World Development, 32(3), pp.447–463.
Agyemang, G., Brendan O’Dwyer &Jeffrey Unerman, n.d. NGO accountability: retrospective and prospective academic contributions. 2019, 32(8), pp.2353–2366.
Assad, M.J. &Goddard, A.R., 2010. Stakeholder salience and accounting practices in Tanzanian NGOs. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(3), pp.276– 299. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011032482.
Basu, R., 1994. Public Administration: Concepts And Theories. Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
Carothers, T.? &De Gramont, D., 2013. Development aid confronts politics: The almost revolution. [online] Brookings Institution Press. Available at: <https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=PwuVCwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Carothers+and+de+Gramont,+(2013)&ots=8x_QpGktbb&sig=2miTrrSN5at-iY_EctYPuyg6nrg> [Accessed 23 November 2023].
Carothers, T. &Gramont, D. de, 2013. Development Aid Confronts Politics: The Almost Revolution. Brookings Institution Press.
Chambers, R., 2014. Rural development: Putting the last first. [online] Routledge. Available at: <https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781315835815/rural-development-robert-chambers> [Accessed 15 March 2025].
Cooley, A. &Ron, J., 2002. The NGO scramble: Organizational insecurity and the political economy of transnational action. International security, 27(1), pp.5–39.
Crack, A.M., 2013a. INGO Accountability Deficits: The Imperatives for Further Reform. Globalizations, 10(2), pp.293–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2013.786253
Crack, A.M., 2013b. INGO Accountability Deficits: The Imperatives for Further Reform. Globalizations, 10(2), pp.293–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2013.786253
Crack, A.M., 2018. The Regulation of International NGOs: Assessing the Effectiveness of the INGO Accountability Charter. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 29(2), pp.419–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9866-9.
Eagleton-Pierce, M., 2020. The rise of managerialism in international NGOs. Review of International Political Economy, 27(4), pp.970– 994. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1657478.
Ebrahim, A., 2003. Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development, 31(5), pp.813– 829. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00014-7.
Edwards, M. &Hulme, D., 1996. Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations. World Development, 24(6), pp.961–973.
Gibson, T., 2019. Making Aid Agencies Work: Reconnecting INGOs with the People They Serve. [online] Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781787695092.
Herzlinger, R.E., 1996. Can public trust in nonprofits and governments be restored? Harvard Business Review, 74(2), pp.97–107.
Kaba, M., 2021. NGO Accountability: A Conceptual Review across the Engaged Disciplines. International Studies Review, 23(3), pp.958– 996. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viaa094.
Kanter, R.M. &Summers, D.V., 1987. » Doing well while doing good: Dilemmas of performance measurement.
Keating, V.C. &Thrandardottir, E., 2017. NGOs, trust, and the accountability agenda. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(1), pp.134– 151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148116682655.
Korten, D.C., 1987. Third generation NGO strategies: A key to people-centered development. World Development, 15, pp.145–159.
Minkoff, D.C., 2002. The Emergence of Hybrid Organizational Forms: Combining Identity-Based Service Provision and Political Action. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(3), pp.377– 401. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764002313004.
Murtaza, N., 2012. Putting the Lasts First: The Case for Community-Focused and Peer-Managed NGO Accountability Mechanisms. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(1), pp.109–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-011-9181-9.
Salamon, L.M., 2003. The Resilient Sector: The State of Nonprofit America. Brookings Institution Press.
Smith, S.R., 2010. Hybridization and nonprofit organizations: The governance challenge. Policy and Society, 29(3), pp.219–229.
Stoddard, A., Poole, L., Taylor, G., Willitts-King, B., Jillani, S., &Potter, A., 2017. Efficiency and inefficiency in humanitarian financing. Humanitarian Outcomes. [online] Available at: <https://humanitarianoutcomes.org/sites/default/files/publications/humanitarian_financing_efficiency_.pdf> [Accessed 17 March 2025].
Willitts-King, B., Bryant, J. & Adamczyk, S., 2019. New financing partnerships for humanitarian impact. [online] ODI: Think change. Available at: <https://odi.org/en/publications/new-financing-partnerships-for-humanitarian-impact/> [Accessed 17 March 2025].
Copyright (c) 2025 Joseph Akol, Denis Musinguzi, PhD

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.