3.2 Research Approach
3.2.1 A Holistic approach
It was recognised that in order to investigate the issue of the sustainability of a NPO a broader framework or methodology had to be employed. This is because, as stated before, the sustainability of an NPO is a complex issue resulting from the interplay of various variables both internal and external to the actual organisation. Examining any of the aspects alone, would undoubtedly lead to learning of some sort, but in terms of the overall sustainability of the NPO, it would only provide a fragmented perspective. For instance, exploring how the financial dynamics within the NPO influences its sustainability would produce knowledge and learning on just the financial sustainability of the organisation. However, even well-funded organisations can sometimes demonstrate operational inefficiencies that negatively affect their overall sustainability.
Thus, it is important to recognise that “sustainability” is a complex issue that arises from the interplay of a number of functions, operations and spheres that constitute the organisation and therefore it was imperative to utilise a framework that could make sense of, and properly deal with, all the complexity and intricacy of the issue of non-profit organisational sustainability. As Jackson (2000, p. 1) states:
“Complex problems involve richly inter-connected sets of “parts” and the relationships between those parts can be more important than the nature of the parts themselves. New properties, “emergent” properties, arise from the way the
82 parts are organised. Even, if the parts constituting a complex situation can be identified and separated out, therefore, this may be of little help because the most significant features, the emergent properties, then get lost.”
Systems thinking is proposed as a more holistic way of examining such complex social problem issues because it is centred on the philosophy of Holism. Holism states that it is important to examine all the aspects of a problem issue as it is the interaction and relationships between these various aspects that gives rise to the problem issue (Jackson, 2000, p. 2). However, Systems Thinking is an umbrella concept encompassing a wide range of philosophies, tools and methodologies all based on the principle of holism, but different in varying regards. The full depth and breadth of the philosophies, tools and methodologies constituting “Systems Thinking”
is not the focus of the study and would be far too lengthy a discussion to include here. This study was guided by one of these Systems Thinking methodologies known as System Dynamics (SD).
Thus, SD served as the theoretical framework guiding this research.
SD is based on the premise that systems are constituted of more than just particular variables, but rather that the behaviour of the system as a whole is governed by the feedback processes between such variables, thus it becomes critical to have a deep understanding of the structure of the system, in order to understand its behaviour and implement effective problem solving policies (Jackson, 2000, p. 139). Since the emphasis is on the structure of the system as the root of all problem issues and examining the system holistically is a priority, SD moves beyond the common tendency in the field of management to place blame for organisational ills on the employees, managers and/or customers (Milstein & Homer, 2006, p. 3).
When it comes to the issue of the sustainability of a NPO, often the spotlight falls onto the head of the organisation to ensure that the organisation remains competitive and survives all external turbulence and complexity. However, organisational “sustainability” is a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional concept arising from the feedbacks between a myriad of human actors, various strategies, organisational processes and departmental functions. It is not simply something that emerges from the actions and strategies of leaders alone. Therefore, the SD methodology which recognises and respects the interconnectedness of all variables comprising a system, as well as the feedback processes at play in a system’s behaviour, seemed to be a suitable framework for investigating the sustainability of the NPO in this study, namely the Oxfam GB affiliate in SA.
83 According to Milstein and Homer (2006, p. 2), SD as a methodology addresses the following five lines of inquiry:
What aspects of a system’s behaviour are of concern?
When examining the sustainability of this affiliate of Oxfam, we had to focus on extricating the variables most involved in the overall issue of the organisation’s sustainability as this was the particular behaviour of the system which this research sought to investigate.
Why are those features changing in those ways at those times?
Beyond simply identifying the variables involved in organisational sustainability, we had to recognise how these variables interacted with one another and the feedback processes at play between them, thus giving us an indication of why the system behaves as it does.
Where is the system headed if no new action is taken?
By being aware of why the system behaves as it does and the variables at play in this behaviour, it was possible to identify the consequences of particular organisational dynamics (through identification of generic system archetypes) that would influence the organisation’s overall sustainability.
How else can the system behave, if different decisions are made?
Insight into how the system will behave allows policy makers and stakeholders to assess for themselves whether such behaviour is satisfactory or non-conducive to the organisation’s well- being (and overall sustainability). Thus, they are able to investigate how the system will behave under the influence of various decisions or policies. Policies that produce unintended, negative consequences can in this way be avoided before they are implemented, thus saving the organisation time, resources and unwarranted embarrassment. This is of particular importance in the case of non-profit sustainability, as time and resources are often in short supply in these types of organisations. Thus, any attempts to implement policies that bring about overall sustainability, without depleting the NPO of its resources will be an extremely beneficial approach to investigating the sustainability of such organisations.
Who has the power to move the system in a more desirable direction?
In the case of non-profit sustainability, which is a complex and multi-layered issue, it can be extremely difficult to pinpoint a particular person as being responsible for the entire system or organisation. This is heightened by the belief that it is not a single person, or group of people
84 that influence system or organisational behaviour, but rather the feedback relationships between them, and between the multitudes of variables influencing the organisation’s sustainability. The issue then becomes not really “who” has the power to move the system in a more desirable direction, but rather which “areas” or particular variables can be manipulated to produce more beneficial system behaviour that will ultimately encourage organisational sustainability. The issue of “who” will then pertain more to who has jurisdiction over those particular areas or variables so as to be able to influence them more readily than other actors within the same system.