Perspectives on corporate partnerships

Perspectives on corporate

partnerships for

development

Andrew Britton

March 2015

Perspectives on corporate partnerships for development

1

Contents

Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................. 2

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

Defining development partnerships ...................................................................................................................... 5

Motivations for partnership ................................................................................................................................. 6

Financial scale and internal visibility .................................................................................................................... 8

Relationship dynamics ....................................................................................................................................... 10

Common frustrations and challenges ................................................................................................................. 14

Future outlook and good practice insights.......................................................................................................... 16

References ........................................................................................................................................................ 18

Acknowledgements

The author would like to sincerely thank the individuals from the following organisations who participated in this

research study for their generous and insightful inputs:

BG Group

British American Tobacco

Cargill

Coca Cola

Concern

Earthwatch

Emerge Poverty Free

HSBC

IKEA

Monsoon

Self Help Africa

Tesco

UK Department for International Development

WaterAid

World Vision

WWF


2

Executive summary

There is much interest in the potential for partnerships between business, non-governmental organisations (NGOs)

and government aid donors to address development challenges in impoverished countries. As a relatively recent

approach to international development, there remains a lack of understanding about the motivations for

corporates to enter into partnership projects, or about the dynamics of relationships within these partnerships.

This research study aims to help address this and, by doing so, contribute towards more effective working

relationships between the different stakeholders involved in the design and management of development

partnership projects.

Development partnerships take many different forms and vary significantly in scale

There is no such thing as a ‘typical’ partnership project. Partnership projects include global multi -stakeholder

initiatives seeking to address challenging cross-border issues, predominately financial support to development

NGOs, and project-based partnerships where corporates work collaboratively with their partners to design and

deliver the project. Some corporate partnerships have a similar level of annual funding per project to that

provided by major development agencies such as the UK’s Department for International Development or the EU’s

EuropeAID. However there is also a huge range in the scale of corporate funding provided to partnership projects,

from a few thousand to several million dollars per year, depending upon the nature of the partnership p roject.

Corporates primarily seek partnerships to help address technically challenging issues or to build relationships with

stakeholders who are affected by the company’s operations

Regardless of the type of partnership project, for corporates the motivat ions for participation are usually the

same; to leverage the skills, resources and relationships of external organisations to tackle social, economic or

environmental issues that impact the corporate’s business activities. Brand considerations – from a marketing

perspective – are not important to many corporates.

Partnership projects often have a high visibility with senior corporate leaders

With the leadership of many multinational corporates increasingly interested in the broader societal impacts of

their business beyond financial returns, partnership projects often capture the attention of senior corporate

leaders – particularly when the projects are seeking to address issues that have implications for longer term

commercial strategy. This can provide significant benefits for internal stakeholder management within corporates,

and for the external profile and publicity of the project . However, it can also increase the pressure on corporate

managers of partnership projects to be able to demonstrate the benefits that the project has delivered.

For corporates, ensuring that a partnership project is appropriately scoped and designed is central to securing

internal support

Internal support is easier to secure when the parts of the business that are impacted by the project can see that it

provides a pragmatic response to a business-relevant challenge. The source of funding for a partnership project is

often a key issue. Corporate participation in a development partnership project is often led by its sustainability

department. However most corporate sustainability departments have limited ‘stand-alone’ budgets and deliver

sustainability initiatives by drawing in funding from other parts of the business that are impacted by the initiative.

This can also apply to development partnership projects; further reinforcing the need for partnership projects to

have a strong commercial business case. Some corporates use their internal corporate foundations to help

overcome potential financing issues arising from internal budgetary constraints.

Corporates and NGOs can have differing views on their respective strengths in delivering development partnership

projects

Many corporates believe that their in-house personnel often have technical subject-matter expertise that is

comparable to that offered by their NGO partners, and that this internal knowledge can usefully inform the design

and management of partnership projects. NGOs do not always share this view. Similarly, corporates often feel that


3

their project management capabilities are more advanced than that of their NGO partners, who sometimes

struggle to deliver the project management discipline the corporate expects. NGOs, on the other hand, may often

not recognise that their corporate partner has concerns in this area. Such issues are often at the heart of ‘culture

clash’ challenges which can emerge in development partnerships.

Successful partnership requires strong relationships – but relationship building does not always receive the

investment that is needed

Key to any successful partnership is strong relationships. This is widely recognised by corporates, NGOs and donors.

Nonetheless, there are two common pitfalls that frequently restrain relationship building, particularly in new

partnerships. One is not allocating sufficient time to allow relationships to develop prior to commencing project

delivery activities. The other is delegating primary relationship management responsibilities to relatively junior

personnel without sufficient backup from senior managers.

Corporates recognise the many benefits that are to be gained by working with NGOs and donors, but also have

some common frustrations

The most common frustration that corporates expressed in relation to NGOs is the reluctance of international

NGOs in particular to collaborate with their peers. The areas of greatest frustration with respect to working with

government donors were the bureaucratic and administrative hurdles created by government procurement and

project management processes, and the slow pace of decision making.

Prospective partners to corporates need to refine their value proposition

Corporates are deluged by requests from NGOs to enter into partnership projects or to provide funding for a

project. NGOs who wish to partner with corporates will only succeed in doing so if the value that the corporate

gains from the partnership is clearly defined. An NGO’s value proposition is usually strongest when it is focused on

the technical expertise that the NGO can bring to a challenge the corporate is facing, or on the relationships that

the NGO has and can build upon with external stakeholders that will help support the corporate’s social license to

operate.

Internal staff reticence about partnering with corporates remains a significant challenge in the development

community

NGOs and donors face their own internal challenges when seeking to build partnerships with corporates. In

particular, many professionals in the development community remain wary of partnership with corporates. NGOs

and donors wishing to expand their engagement with corporates need to ensure that sufficient efforts are made

to engage with and gain the support of their staff, particularly at a country-level.

Development partnerships will become increasingly commonplace – but the pace of growth in partnering is

uncertain

Some commentators argue that the rate of growth in the number of development partnerships over the next few

years will be dramatic. However there are a number of reasons to believe that, whilst development partnerships

will become increasingly commonplace, the rate of growth may be more conservative. Corporates tend to enter

into long term relationships with partner organisations, thus limiting the potential for new partnerships with the

same corporate. There is also the fact that for the number of development partnerships to grow, partnerships will

need to be formed with corporates who are less advanced in their management of sustainability issues than the

‘sustainability leaders’ who currently dominate corporate participation in partnerships. Engaging with such

corporates is likely to be more challenging for NGOs and donors than it has been to-date with the sustainability

leaders.

Although some challenges remain, this study provides further evidence that partnerships are an important means

of developing solutions to many of the social, economic and environmental challenges that developing countries

face. It also provides some good practice insights for improving the relationship dynamics of organisations

working together in development partnerships.


4

Introduction

The potential for business to drive sustainable socio-economic development is now recognised by development

non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and government aid donors, who are increasingly collaborating with

multinational corporations (corporates) to deliver projects that aim to address social, economic or environmental

challenges in developing countries. The importance of such partnerships to the international development

community is likely to be further reinforced through specific objectives in the UN’s Sustainable Development

Goals, set to be agreed in September 2015.

Some of the rhetoric on the potential for development partnerships is quite strong, with some commentators

talking about “a new era defined by partnership”.1 Despite this, partnerships between corporates and development

organisations are marred with misconceptions that can limit the sustainability and impact of such collaborations.2

There are growing numbers of initiatives seeking to improve the collective understanding of partnerships amongst

the organisations and individuals involved in international development, some examples include:

Devex Impact: A collaboration between the media platform Devex and the United States Agency for

International Development (USAID).

The Partnering Initiative: A non-profit organisation focused on promoting cross-sectoral collaboration for

development.

Corporate-NGO Partnerships Barometer: An annual survey by the consultancy C&E Advisory.

However, the dynamics of partnerships between corporates, NGOs and donors are complex. In particular, few

studies have sought to explore the experience of entering into development partnerships from the perspective of

corporates. This report aims to help address this and, by doing so, contribute towards more effective working

relationships between the different stakeholders involved in the design and management of development

partnership projects.

Research methodology and scope

The research for this study involved structured, confidential, interviews with 15 leading companies and NGOs, and

one government donor agency. Interviews were undertaken between November 2014 and March 2015 with

personnel in each organisation who have management responsibility for partnership projects or initiatives.

Interviewees included sustainability directors and managers in global corporations, chief executives of NGOs,

senior civil servants, and corporate engagement managers in NGOs.

The main focus of the research questions was on development partnership projects where – as part of core

business activities - corporate personnel are actively working with NGO or donor partners to deliver projects in

developing countries that aim to provide social, economic or environmental benefi ts. The activities of corporate

foundations were not a focus of the research, except in those instances where corporate foundations supported

projects that had linkages to the core business.

The sample size of interviewees may be relatively small, but the insights gained are rich. Research data presented

in this report are intended to be representative rather than statistically significant.


5

Defining development partnerships

Development partnerships take many different forms

Partnerships between corporates, NGOs and donors can take a range of different forms. For this research, three

distinct types of partnership project were identified:

Global multi-stakeholder initiative

These were defined as initiatives that involved multiple corporates and NGOs, and potentially also donors,

working together on specific issues that are large-scale in their nature and require multi-stakeholder

collaboration to address. As examples, some of the global multi-stakeholder initiatives which interviewees

participated in included the Better Cotton Initiative, the CEO Water Mandate, the Extractive Industries

Transparency Initiative and the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil. Corporate participation in such

initiatives typically involved some level of funding together with some level of time commitment.

Financial support

This was defined as the provision of philanthropic financial support to an NGO working on issues relevant to

business risks or impacts. Financial support projects may be financed by corporate foundations or by

businesses directly, but in either case corporate personnel would have little involvement in the delivery of

the project activities beyond the initial scoping and the provision of funding.

Project-based partnership

Project-based partnerships – the main focus of this study – were defined as projects when corporates and

NGOs and/or donors would work collaboratively to design and deliver projects that are intended to achieve

socio-economic development or environmental protection outcomes. Corporate participation in these

projects would involve both financial support and the active involvement of corporate personnel throughout

the project lifecycle.

Most of the corporates interviewed for this study participate in all three types of partnership project. Interviewees

noted huge variation between different projects in terms of the financial investment and staff time required

across different partnership projects. This was particularly true with respect to global multi -stakeholder initiatives,

which ranged from initiatives requiring minimal corporate funding and attendance at a few meetings per year,

through to initiatives that were catalysts for strategic change programmes within corporates requiring significant

personnel resources, senior management time, and funding commitments measured in multiple millions of dollars.


6

Motivations for partnership

Corporates primarily seek partnerships to help address technically challenging issues or to build

relationships with stakeholders who are affected by the company’s operations

The two most important motivators for corporates to enter into development partnership projects are to (a) gain

access to technical skills, resources or inputs that can help address issues that the business faces, and (b) to build

relationships with key stakeholders such as local communities or national governments that help support and

facilitate business operations - often referred to as the ‘social license to operate’. This is illustrated by Figu re 1.

Figure 1: Motivations for corporates to enter into partnership projects with NGOs and donors

All but one of the corporate interviewees stated that gaining access to the technical expertise of development

professionals working for NGOs and donors was a key motivating factor for entering into partnership projects. As

Figure 1 illustrates, technical inputs are particularly important as a driver for participation in multi -stakeholder

initiatives, which are usually set up to tackle deep-rooted or large-scale issues that organisations – be they

corporates, NGOs or donors – cannot address on their own. Similarly, of the motivations for entering into project-

based partnership projects, 75% of respondents stated that the technical competencies that NGOs and donors can

bring were an important motivating factor.

The social license to operate can be a critical business issue for many companies operating in developing

countries, particular in the extractives and agricultural sectors. For example, academic studies have identified

several instances where project delays as a result of conflicts with local communities cost mining projects around

US$20 million per week as a result of delays to production.3 For corporates, working in partnership with

organisations that have credibility with and the support of local communities can deliver clear business benefits

by developing and maintaining the social license to operate. Figure 1 shows that there is relatively little distinction

between the three different types of partnership projects suggesting that, in the right circumstances, all three

types of partnership project can deliver value to corporates by helping to build relationships and enhance the

social license to operate.

Philanthropic partnership projects might not actively involve corporates in the delivery of the project but they are

still expected to deliver business value. For 75% of corporate interviewees the social license to operate and the

desire to motivate their employers provided the primary business drivers for philanthropic partnership. One of the

NGO interviewees who ran an employee-focused, philanthropic partnership programme for a major corporate

stated that the corporate’s internal staff satisfaction surveys had found that employees who participated in the

partnership programme were 20% more satisfied with their roles than those employees in similar roles who did

not participate in the programme. Interestingly, for 50% of the corporate interviewees, business-relevant technical

inputs from NGOs were also an important motivating factor for philanthropic projects even though the corporates

themselves do not directly participate in such projects.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Technical (inputs

relevant to business

challenges)

Build relationships

(social license to

operate)

Motivate employees Enhance brand

(marketing)

% o

f co

rpora

te r

esponden

ts

(Inte

rvie

wee

s id

enti

fied

all m

oti

vati

ons

that

applied

)

Global multi-

stakeholder

initiatives

Financial

(philanthropic)

support

Project-based

partnership


7

A recent report on corporate-NGO partnerships stated that, for corporates, enhancing reputation was the main

driver for partnerships.4 The term ‘reputation’ can encompass many different aspects of the relationship between a

company and its stakeholders. Social license to operate is fundamentally about reputation. However, interviewees

for this survey were very clear that marketing and brand considerations – which could also be considered part of

‘reputation’ – are not an important motivating factor when considering entering into development partnerships.

Indeed, several corporate interviewees remarked that multinational corporations usually have a stronger, more

publicly recognised brand than the NGO or donor they are partnering with and, therefore, it is the corporate that

has the most to lose if the partnership is unsuccessful.

Figure 2: Motivations for NGOs to enter into partnership projects with corporates

Figure 2 illustrates that for NGOs the primary motivator for entering into partnership projects with corporates is

to undertake projects that are relevant to the charity’s core mission . However, there was almost the same

emphasis given to the funding opportunities that corporate partnership can provide. NGO interviewees were keen

to stress that they would not undertake projects that were inconsistent with their charitable mission.

Nevertheless, for many NGOs, working with corporates is not seen as a strategic imperative to enable them to

fulfil their mission; rather it may be a more tactical decision that provides access to funding. For some NGOs th is

is starting to change, however, with several interviewees stating that they were starting to actively look for

potential synergies between corporate interests and their own priorities within the countries in which they

operate.

Addressing challenges

relevant to the charity's

core mission

48%

Requested to participate

by other parties

12%

Gain funding

40%


8

Financial scale and internal visibility

The scale of corporate financing for development partnership projects is approaching that of

government donor agencies

Figure 3: Typical financial investment by corporates to partnership projects, per project per year (US$)

The financial commitments that corporates make to partnership projects are not insignificant. Figure 3 illustrates

the typical financial commitments that corporates make to the three different categories of partnership projects

on an annual, per project basis. The majority of corporate interviewees funded philanthropic projects that each

received over US$1 million per year, and 60% had project-based partnerships that received a similar level of

funding. This is comparable, on an annual per-project basis, to the scale of grant funding provided to development

NGOs by government aid agencies. Several interviewees had philanthropic or project-based partnership projects

that each received between US$250,000 and US$1 million in corporate funding per year, and few corporates had

philanthropic or project-based partnership projects that had an annual funding commitment below US$250,000.

There was a wider range in the funding requirements of multi-stakeholder initiatives; those initiatives that were

focused on policy dialogue typically required fewer resources than those that were seeking to address issues ‘on

the ground’. Several NGO interviewees commented that their participation in multi-stakeholder partnership

initiatives was usually self-funded. Whilst they felt that the impact of their participation in such initiatives was

often high, and the initiatives themselves often very effective for driving change on challenging issues, it is very

difficult for NGOs to find organisations willing to finance their participation in such activities.

Partnership projects often have a high visibility with senior corporate leaders

The significant variations in the type and scale of partnership projects that corporates engage in mean that there

are also significant variations in how partnership projects are perceived and engaged with by the business.

Internal corporate culture is the biggest determining factor in whether involvement in partnership projects is the

preserve of a small team within a corporate, such as the corporate sustainability team, or something that gains

wider involvement and interest amongst senior management and different business functions. It is important to

note that many partnership projects are established to address very specific challenges and, as such , it is not

always appropriate to expect that a wide range of internal corporate stakeholders will be aware of or involved in

the project. Nonetheless, interviewees from corporates where sustainability issues have a high profile as strategic

priorities for the business tended to report higher levels of engagement than interviewees from corporates where

sustainability issues had a lower profile within the business.

Figure 4 illustrates the average levels of interest and engagement in partnership projects reported by corporate

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

>$1m $250k-1m $50-250k $10-50k <$10k

% o

f co

rpora

te r

esponden

ts Global multi-

stakeholder

initiatives

Financial

(philanthropic)

support

Project-based

partnership


9

interviewees. Senior leaders were defined as executive management one layer below the board, and ‘staff’ referred

to the wider population of employees outside of senior management and the corporate sustainability team. The

comparatively high scores for senior leaders are indicative of the strategic importance of social and environmental

issues to many large corporates.

Figure 4: Interest and involvement of corporate personnel with partnership projects

(1) No interest/awareness, (2) Limited interest/awareness, (3) Moderate interest/limited participation, (4) Strong interest/some

participation, (5) Active interest/significant participation

Many of the corporate interviewees reported that senior leaders in their organisation, sometimes right up to

Chairman and Chief Executive level, took an active interest in their development partnership projects , for example

chairing relevant internal committees or representing the company in multi-stakeholder forums. As Figure 4

shows, interviewees reported that senior leaders were often particularly interested in philanthropic partnership

projects. The reason cited for this is that such projects often resonate with a sense of ‘wider purpose’ – the

broader contributions that business can make to society beyond commercial success. Project-based partnerships

were also often of significant interest, being more directly connected to day-to-day business activities than

philanthropic projects. Many corporate interviewees reported that engaging internal staff more broadly in

partnership projects was an on-going challenge though, as noted above, many development partnership projects

are focused on specific issues or geographies and therefore may be of limited relevance to corporate functions

that are not directly impacted by the project.

0

1

2

3

4

5

Senior leaders Staff

Leve

l of

inte

rest

/invo

lvem

ent Global multi-

stakeholder

initiatives

Financial

(philanthropic)

support

Project-based

partnership


10

Relationship dynamics

For corporates, ensuring that a partnership project is appropriately scoped and designed is

central to securing internal support

Partnership projects can be a powerful mechanism for helping corporates to address social, economic and

environmental issues that impact the business. Internal support is easier to secure when the parts of the business

that are impacted by the project can see that the scope and design of a partnership project provides a pragmatic

response to a particular challenge that is appropriate to the needs of the business and its stakeholders.

Nonetheless, persuading stakeholders within the business that project-based partnerships are not charitable

donations was an on-going challenge noted by several corporate interviewees. However, it was notable that those

corporates with the most experience of partnering tended not to face this challenge; for companies like Cargill

partnership projects have become an accepted and widely deployed response to strategic business risks that the

company faces on issues such as potential supply shortages for key commodities within its supply chain. For

example, Cargill’s partnership projects to support smallholder farmers and their communities in countries such as

Ghana and Cameroon5 are a rational response to the strategic business risks created by poverty and declining

yields in cocoa producing regions.

Equally, there are many instances when a partnership project is not appropriate and corporates need to take

unilateral action on social, economic or environmental challenges that may be impacting short -medium term

commercial strategy or creating operational business risks. As Figure 5 illustrates, the majority of corporate

interviewees felt that partnership projects are not appropriate under these circumstances. Where there are issues

that directly impact short-medium term commercial strategy or create operational business risks, corporates will

usually have formal management controls and mechanisms for regular monitoring and reporting to provide senior

management with oversight of the issues. Such business processes often do not easily lend themselves to

integration with the activities of development NGOs or donors.

Figure 5: Corporate interviewees’ responses to the statement that partnership projects are not suitable as formal control

mechanisms for issues that directly impact short-medium term commercial strategy or risk management

Most of the corporates interviewed for this study had limited experience of working in partnership with donors.

Those that had experience in this area commented that working with government donors often introduces

political risk considerations to the company’s internal approval process for projects. This can mean that for certain

projects with donors the internal approval process for participation is more involved, requiring consultation with a

wider range of internal stakeholders than may be the case if partnering with an NGO. However, these factors are

by no means insurmountable challenges; most corporates who had partnered with government donors had done

so more than once and planned to continue doing so.

Disagree/Strongly disagree

12%

Neither

25% Strongly agree/Agree

63%


11

Securing internal budget for the funding of partnership projects can sometimes be a

challenging process for corporate partnership managers

It is not always straightforward to determine how best to finance a development partnership project. F or example,

funding might come from a corporate headquarters budget, the budget of operational business divisions, from a

corporate foundation, or some combination of different sources. A recent survey of corporate sustainability

executives by the research firm, Verdantix, found that many are significantly dependent upon other parts of their

business in order to finance sustainability programmes.6 This was certainly the case for several of the corporate

interviewees, and has important implications for potential partners to corporates as the importance of a strong

business case for partnership is further emphasised.

Significant numbers of major corporates have a charitable foundation that provides financial support to causes of

interest and relevance to the business and/or its employees. Some corporates are using their foundations to help

manage internal dynamics on how development partnership projects are financed. Whilst foundations are

charities in their own right and therefore cannot finance projects that directly provide commercial gain for the

corporate, they can fund projects which are seeking to address broader challenges that impact other stakeho lders

as well as the corporate itself. For example, the Coca Cola Africa Foundation supports the Replenish Africa

Initiative (RAIN) which, amongst other things, invests in watershed protection across a number of African

countries7. Watershed protection is a strategic business issue for Coca Cola, but it is also a critical issue for many

other stakeholders not connected to Coca Cola’s business activities. Using foundations to fund longer -term

partnership projects can protect project funding from internal commercial pressures and provide a more stable,

longer term funding platform by removing the project’s financial requirements from the annual budgets of

business departments.

Corporates and NGOs can have differing views on their respective strengths in delivering

development partnership projects

Whilst there is agreement that partnerships should be genuine collaborations, there were some differences of

opinion between corporate and NGO interviewees on the roles that they should aim to take within partnership

projects. Figure 6 illustrates one area where some differences emerged, which was the extent to which corporates

may have technical expertise in-house that is comparable to that of NGOs.

Figure 6: Interviewees’ responses to the statement that the technical expertise that corporates bring to partnership projects is

comparable to that of NGOs

Many corporates have in-house sustainability teams staffed by highly qualified and experienced individuals who

may have deep technical expertise in the issues a partnership project is seeking to address. Some corporate

interviewees felt quite strongly that they had comparable technical expertise to NGOs who they may be

partnering with, but that NGOs did not recognise this or seek to involve them on technical issue s. Clearly there are

exceptions; some NGOs recognise that other constraints, such as the availability of technical corporate personnel,

can be the main reason a delivery partner is needed. Nevertheless, as a means of building trust at the outset of a

new partnership it is important that neither party makes assumptions about the technical expertise of the other

party.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Corporates

NGOs Disagree/Strongly disagree

Neither

Strongly agree/Agree


12

Differences also emerged amongst interviewees on the extent to which project management capabilities varied

between corporates and NGOs. This is illustrated by Figure 7, which shows that the majority of corporate

interviewees felt that they had better in-house project management capabilities than NGOs and, therefore, the

involvement of corporate project management capabilities to partnerships improves, or could improve, project

delivery. NGO interviewees were less inclined to agree that corporates tended to have stronger project

management capabilities.

Figure 7: Interviewees’ responses to the statement that corporates typically have better project management capabilities than

our partners and therefore improve project delivery

The differences between corporate and NGO opinions illustrated in Figure 7 point towards an issue that many

interviewees mentioned as one of the key challenges in development partnerships: differences of organisational

culture. Corporate interviewees in particular often felt that NGOs, particularly those who are relatively

inexperienced at partnering with corporates, struggled to meet their corporate partner’s expectations for quality

management through the project programme. This is illustrated by Figure 8, which suggests a perception gap may

exist between what corporates expect in terms of quality management and what NGOs feel that they are

delivering. Only one of the corporate interviewees had no concerns about the abilities of their NGO partners to

meet their quality management expectations, whereas a majority of NGO interviewees felt that their quality

management was not an issue for their corporate partners.

Figure 8: Interviewees’ responses to the statement that NGOs often struggle to meet the expectations of corporate partners

with regards to quality management

Figures 7 and 8 show that how partnership projects are managed and delivered can be a potential source of

tension in a corporate/NGO partnering relationship. However, corporate expectations of the project delivery

process for development partnerships will often differ from the expectations that corporate project owners may

have for internal or commercial consultancy projects. This is illustrated by Figure 9. Corporate interviewees stated

that this difference in expectations was partly a recognition that NGO partners may not be familiar with the

corporate’s expectations but, moreover, was an acknowledgement that very often partnership projects are focused

on challenges that may be complex and multifaceted, requiring flexibility on how the project is implemented.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Corporates

NGOs Disagree/Strongly disagree

Neither


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Corporates

NGOsDisagree/Strongly disagree

Neither



13

Figure 9: Corporate interviewees’ responses to the statement that partnership projects are set less demanding project and

performance management standards compared to internal projects or projects delivered by commercial consultants

Successful partnership requires strong relationships – but relationship building does not always

receive the investment that is needed

Relationships are probably the most critical factor in determining whether partnerships between corporates, NGOs

and donors are successful. All interviewees were unanimously agreed on this point. To help facilitate relationship

building many organisations involved in development partnership projects have started nominating relationship

managers to act as ‘single points of contact’ for their organisation’s involvement in a partnership proje ct. For

example, DFID has assigned a number of personnel with the responsibility to build relationships with certain

corporates with whom DFID is collaborating or exploring potential opportunities for collaboration.

Two common challenges with relationship building that are equally applicable to corporates, NGOs and donors,

emerged from the interviews. One is that relationship building takes time, particularly when the parties involved

have not worked together before. Many interviewees commented that often, in the process of setting up

partnership projects, insufficient time is invested in this. The general consensus amongst interviewees was that in

setting up a new partnership project, between 6 to 12 months should be allocated to relationship building and

planning prior to commencing any delivery activities.

The second challenge is that the individuals who are assigned responsibility for relationship building can often be

relatively junior. This has a two important implications; it means that the people responsible for relationship

building may have limited experience of how the different types of organisation in a partnership operate,

potentially impacting their ability to foresee potential challenges or ‘speak the language’ of the other parties. It

can also mean that internally within their own organisations, partnership relationship managers may struggle to

influence the decision-makers who ultimately determine how their organisation engages in a partnership project.

Many organisations involved, or intending to become involved, in development partnership projects should

consider how best to secure and utilise senior-level sponsorship within their own organisations in order to support

relationship-building with other stakeholders in the partnership.

Disagree/Strongly

disagree

37%


63%


14

Common frustrations and challenges

Corporates recognise the many benefits that are to be gained by working with NGOs and

donors, but also have some common frustrations

There are some common frustrations that corporates have in relation to development partnerships. With respect to

working with NGOs, the area of greatest frustration to corporate interviewees was the perceived inability of many

international NGOs to work collaboratively with other international NGOs. A survey undertaken by The Partnering

Initiative five years ago noted the same challenge8. Whilst international NGOs will frequently work with local NGO

partners to deliver projects, peer-to-peer collaboration at a project level is rare. NGO interviewees acknowledged

that this was often a problem, and may partially stem from the restrictions that NGOs feel are placed upon them

by the rules on how NGOs utilise their financial resources. Nonetheless, if multi -stakeholder partnerships are to

become widely adopted for addressing development challenges then this is an area which NGOs will need to

address.

It is worth noting that corporates, too, whilst usually being willing to work with competitors on multi-stakeholder

partnership initiatives focused on large scale or sector-wide issues, often struggle to work together effectively at a

project level. All organisations involved in development partnerships, be they corporates, donors or NGOs, need to

improve on peer-to-peer collaboration.

The areas of greatest frustration from those corporate interviewees that had experience of working with

government donors were the bureaucratic and administrative hurdles created by government procurement and

project management processes, and the slow pace of decision making. One corporate interviewee who had

participated on a partnership project with a government donor stated that even though the project wa s a success

in terms of the results achieved, working with the donor was so difficult that it is highly unlikely the corporate

will partner with a government donor again. Other corporate interviewees were resigned to the challenges of

working with donors and factored this into their decision making about whether or not to enter particular

partnership projects depending on whether or not the potential benefits of the project outweighed the costs

created by the additional administration. A recent survey of corporates by Devex and Abt Associates found the

same complaints.9

Most corporate interviewees recognised that significant benefits could be gained through working with

government donors. However, partnership on a project is often not the preferred means of collaboration for

corporates; many corporates would rather utilise government donors’ influence and convening power, particularly

in developing countries where donors may often have significant influence with national governments.

Prospective partners to corporates need to refine their value proposition

Corporates are deluged by requests from NGOs to enter into partnership projects or provide funding for projects.

For some of the corporate interviewees, letters from NGOs with new requests were received on a weekly basis. The

overwhelming majority of requests that corporates receive in this way are rejected.

The key message from corporate interviewees for NGOs who are hoping to establish or expand partnerships with

corporates is that they need to very clearly articulate their value proposition: how the partnership that is being

proposed will support the business objectives of the corporate. NGOs can be particularly impactful when they

demonstrate that they understand particular challenges that the corporate may be facing and have ideas and

expertise that may help address some of those challenges. As this report has shown, an NGO’s value proposition is

usually strongest when it is focused on the technical expertise that the NGO can bring to a challenge the

corporate is facing, and on the relationships that the NGO has and can build upon with external stakeholders that

will help support the corporate’s social license to operate.

Clearly for some NGOs there may be a strong value proposition focused on areas othe r than technical expertise

and external stakeholder relationships. For Earthwatch, for example, the main value proposition for corporates

centres on the satisfaction that employees can gain through participation on an Earthwatch project . This may


15

then translate into business benefits for the corporate such as increased employee motivation and reduced staff

turnover.

The fundamental point remains the same, however; there must be a business benefit before a corporate will

consider a partnership project. When it comes to seeking corporate partnerships, NGOs need to recognise that

they are operating in a competitive marketplace where there are many different organisations vying for the same,

finite, corporate resources.

An example of an area that is often overlooked by NGOs themselves in terms of their value proposition for

corporates is their knowledge and networks ‘on the ground’ in developing countries. Many development NGOs

have extensive networks of contacts and an in-depth understanding of current issues and socio-political dynamics

in the countries in which they operate. Such knowledge could often be extremely useful for corporates that are

operating or considering expansion into the same geographies. However, at present few NGOs are seeking to

capitalise on their knowledge when presenting their value propositions, which tend instead to be focused on

‘products’ rather than ‘insights’.

Internal staff reticence about partnering with corporates remains a significant challenge in the

development community

For international NGOs, and for donors such as DFID, initiatives to engage with corporates are usually led by head

office teams. However, much of the organisational decision-making with regards to ‘on the ground’ project

priorities is driven by in-country personnel who are often somewhat detached from the corporate engagement

activities of head office personnel. Moreover, many interviewees commented that many people working within the

development community have only ever worked for NGOs or aid agencies so don’t understand the corporate

‘world’. Many development professionals are sceptical about the motives of big multinational businesses in

particular.

Historically, the development organisations with the most to say about corporates and international develo pment

have tended to be campaigning organisations drawing attention to the negative social and environmental impacts

of businesses. This is changing; progressive NGOs have now been working with corporates for many years and

there are various prominent development community forums, such as Devex, that are actively promoting a

positive narrative about the benefits of partnership with corporates.

Nonetheless, at a grassroots level many in the development community remain wary of partnership with

corporates. This issue was also noted by the 2010 survey undertaken by The Partnering Initiative 10. Therefore NGOs

and donors wishing to expand their engagement with corporates need to ensure that sufficient efforts are made

to engage with and gain the support of their staff, particularly at a country-level.


16

Future outlook and good practice insights

Development partnerships will become more commonplace – but the pace of growth in

partnering is uncertain

As a means of tackling social, economic and environmental issues, all interviewees unanimously agreed that

partnerships between corporates, NGOs and donors are here to stay and are only likely to become more

commonplace in the future. However, partnering is not the solution to every challenge and the pace growth in the

establishment of new development partnerships is uncertain. Some commentators argue that partnerships will

grow dramatically,11 but there are a number of reasons to believe that the rate of growth may be more

conservative:

Corporates tend to prefer entering into longer-term commitments with partner organisations, due to the

time it takes to build effective relationships and the additional administrative effort that working in

partnership often requires compared to working independently. Consequently many companies that are

currently working with development partners have entered into multi-year agreements and therefore may

not be interested or have the available resources to enter into new partnerships with different partners.

Corporate sustainability functions, which are the most common functions within corporates to initiate and

manage partnership projects, don’t usually have particularly large ‘standalone’ budgets or personnel

resources when compared to other corporate functions. As the management of social, economic and

environmental issues becomes increasingly embedded in core business activities, the delivery of corporate

sustainability initiatives is increasingly reliant upon the resources of other business functions and operational

teams. For development partnership projects to become more commonplace , NGOs and donors will need to

substantially improve their ability to engage with business in terms that resonate with business personnel

outside of corporate sustainability functions; interviews for this report have found that most NGOs and

donors have some way to go in this regard.

Most of the corporates that currently work in partnership projects are widely recognised as sustainability

leaders within their sectors. As many of the sustainability leaders have already made long-term commitments

to partner organisations and are unlikely to experience substantial increases in their budgets for

sustainability initiatives, growth in development partnerships will increasingly require NGOs and donors to

engage with corporates that may not be as advanced on sustainability issues as the recognised sustainability

leaders. Engaging with such corporates is likely to be more challenging for NGOs and donors than it has been

to-date with the sustainability leaders.

As discussed in this report, internal staff reticence about partnering with corporates remains a significant

challenge for many NGO and donor organisations. Whilst clearly there are organisations where this is less of

a challenge, continued efforts will be needed to build a more positive narrative within the development

community about partnering with corporates and enable more partnership opportunities to be identified and

developed.

Most partnership projects are between corporates and NGOs and/or donors. Another form of development

partnering which has potential for future growth are partnerships between NGOs and sustainability consulting

firms to deliver projects for corporate clients. NGOs have been working with development consultancies to deliver

donor-funded projects for many years, but the majority of development consultancies have limited experience of

working with corporates. Sustainability consultancies, on the other hand, tend to primarily serve corpo rate clients

but often have limited experience of working in partnership with NGOs.

Increasingly, however, there are examples of NGOs partnering with sustainability consultancies to deliver social

impact or community-focused projects. This can be particularly useful as a means of bringing the development

and business benefits of partnership to smaller projects for which a business case for the staff time and financial

resource investments of a conventional corporate/NGO partnership is harder to justify. Partnerships with

consulting firms can also help smaller NGOs without the corporate engagement resources of larger NGOs to


17

participate in partnership projects with major corporates. For example, one of the smaller NGOs interviewed for

this study had worked as part of a consortium of organisations led by an international sustainability consultancy

delivering a major social impact assessment project for a global mining company.

Good practice insights for successful partnering

There is a growing body of literature providing advice for organisations entering into development partnerships.

The research for this study identified some further recommendations for activities that help develop and advance

successful approaches to partnering:

When setting up a new partnership project, a feasibility and planning stage of around 6-12 months should

be included before the project is publicly launched. The purpose of this feasibility and planning stage is to

allow relationships to develop, the detailed scope of the project to be established and the different roles and

responsibilities of the parties within the partnership to be agreed. Undertaking this feasibility and planning

activity prior to publicly launching the partnership is important because it allows all parties to p lan and

collaborate without the expectations of their various stakeholders to be demonstrating progress and results

from the partnership. Corporates will need to be prepared to adequately fund this activity as their NGO

partners will be unable to undertake any work on the project without the funding to do so.

All parties involved in a partnership project should assign a single-point-of-contact in order to facilitate

relationship management. Mechanisms to enable the nominated contact to draw upon senior man agement

within their own organisation should be established.

Corporates should not overlook the value of the support they can provide to NGOs outside of financing and

delivering development partnership projects. Several of the corporates interviewed in this study had used

their human resources, IT and finance teams to provide coaching and support to their NGO partners. In

addition to helping improve the NGO’s operations this also was a useful means of engaging corporate

functions in the partnership that would not normally be involved. Some corporates have also allowed their

NGO partners to use their office facilities to host off-site events for the NGO’s staff.

Where appropriate, corporates should support their NGO partners in finding alternative sources of funding

for a project once the corporate’s involvement has come to an end. Jointly approaching potential new

corporate funders substantially enhances the impact and credibility of the NGO and greatly improves the

likelihood of securing new sources of funding for the project.

When undertaking the contextual analysis that informs priorities and programme objectives ‘on the ground’,

development NGOs should also consider systematically assessing what private sector interests in that

particular country might be relevant to the issues or challenges that the NGO is seeking to address. Building

this analysis from the ‘ground-up’ helps identify areas of shared value – where charitable mission may be

aligned to corporate strategy. It may also help prevent country teams feeling that corporate partnership

initiatives are pushed down from headquarters.


18

References 1 Devex and Abt Associates (2015) Collaboration post-2015: Where can partnerships take development? Available

at: https://pages.devex.com/where-can-partnerships-take-development.html (accessed March 2015) 2 Ocampo (2015) Partnerships in development: Breaking down myths.

Available at: https://www.devex.com/news/partnerships-in-development-breaking-down-myths-85168 (accessed March 2015) 3 Franks et al (2014) Conflict translates environmental and social risk into business costs, Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol.111, no.21 4 C&E Advisory (2014) Corporate-NGO Partnerships Barometer 2014

5 Cargill Cocoa Promise: http://www.cargillcocoachocolate.com/sustainable-cocoa/index.htm (accessed March

2015) 6 Verdantix (2014) Global Survey 2014: Sustainability Budgets And Priorities

7 Global Environment and Technology Foundation: http://www.getf.org/our-projects-partnerships/rain/

(accessed March 2015) 8 The Partnering Initiative and SOS Kinderdorpen (2010) Changing trends in business-NGO partnerships: A

Netherlands perspective 9 Devex and Abt Associates (2014) Partnerships for Development: In-depth Interviews with Sustainability

Executives 10

ibid 11

ibid

https://pages.devex.com/where-can-partnerships-take-development.html

http://www.cargillcocoachocolate.com/sustainable-cocoa/index.htm

http://www.getf.org/our-projects-partnerships/rain/

Perspectives on corporate partnerships

Documents

Transcript of Perspectives on corporate partnerships