Sustainability for Oxfam is the synergy created by the seven themes that were identified earlier, namely, by human resources, credibility, partnerships, funding, competition, attempts to remain apolitical and finding a unique identity as Northern affiliates operating in an African context.
169 Sustainability was defined as being achieved if the organisation/affiliate:
Possessed enough resources to ensure adequate project delivery, implementation and monitoring over an extended period of time
Was able to survive ever-changing and turbulent environmental changes due to a surplus of resources and funding at its disposal
Had a network of reliable partners and funders who were able to ensure sustained funding and other assistance
Possessed a well-developed communication infrastructure between itself, its affiliates, and its local and global funders and partners
Was able to utilize certain business practices and models to generate revenue and maintain organisational processes, without sacrificing or negating commitment to the original social mission and vision of the organisation
Was consistently ethical, accountable, committed and transparent in the pursuit of their social mission, projects and programmes.
It was also recognised that the definition of “sustainability” is highly dependent on, and influenced by, those attempting to interpret it, and therefore is in constant flux as to how it is defined generally (M. Sanders & McClellan, 2012, p. 15). However, examining the sustainability of this Oxfam affiliate from a systems thinking perspective has shown that there are many variables that interact in particular ways (reinforcing or balancing behaviours), and thus
“sustainability”, or the lack thereof, is the product of all these variables and the manner in which they influence one another. In addition, environmental changes or changes from outside the organisation cannot be ignored as they have the potential to influence everything within the NPO, especially when it comes to the funding the organisation receives (Schuh & Leviton, 2006, p. 176), which in itself bears a major influence on its sustainability.
Sustainability then becomes about whether the NPO has the capacity to survive in such a changing, turbulent environment with the resources at its disposal. According to Merino and Carmenado (2012, p. 967):
“Capacity is defined by the existence of resources, networks, leadership and group process skills, and capacity building is a cyclical concept related to the development of human, organizational, institutional and social capital.”
170 Thus, capacity is quite a robust term encompassing many dimensions much in the same way sustainability is a single term with multidimensional meanings. This multidimensionality adds to confusion regarding a single, universal definition for “sustainability” and makes the
“measurement” or accurate assessment thereof, a challenging feat (Merino & Carmenado, 2012, p. 967). This also extends to consideration of the social impact of the NPO as the social good it does is an important part of its sustainability and the initial reason for its existence. Difficulty in measuring social impact (Omura & Forster, 2014, p. 46) hinders recognition of the extent to which such social impact contributes to the overall sustainability of the organisation.
Added to this is the fact that the term is not black and white in the sense that NPOs can exist on a continuum by demonstrating different degrees of sustainability. They are not either sustainable or not sustainable, but rather should be seen as moving on a scale either closer to, or further away, from sustainability depending on how they manage the variety of internal and external influences they are privy to.
The systems thinking view of the Oxfam GB affiliate’s sustainability has demonstrated that a multitude of variables and the manner in which they influence one another are responsible for the organisation’s state of sustainability or lack thereof. This challenges the common assumption of assuming that sustainability in NPOs automatically refers to financial sustainability and dedication to a social mission (Dees, 1998, p. 56; Moore, 2000). It is true that if the NPO has sufficient financial resources at its disposal and is committed to a particular social mission, that they are more likely to be “sustainable”, but as we shall see in the dissection and explanation of the Qualitative SD Model, the focus should not be on funding and social mission alone, as there are many variables that influence funding specifically, and sustainability of the overall organisation generally. Dees (1998, p. 58)asserts that creating a thriving, sustainable NPO is not an easy feat. The number of variables identified as influencing non-profit organisational sustainability in this study, together with consideration of the fact that there may be many more factors in existence that were not identified in this study, gives some insight into why the sustainability of NPOs is such a conundrum requiring more than simply funding and commitment to a cause.
In addition, while these variables are generally present in other NPOs, they may influence each other in a different manner than the manner in which they influenced the sustainability of the Oxfam GB affiliate in this study. Therefore, whether an NPO is sustainable or not moves beyond
171 the simple identification of certain criteria which it fulfils, and embraces acknowledgement of how such criteria reinforce or balance each other out. In this way, strategies to make an NPO more sustainable need to take cognisance of the many variables at play in sustainability and will need to ensure that such variables influence each other in ways that will be beneficial to the overall organisation. This presents a complex endeavour indeed, but not an impossible one.
We also need to bear in mind that every NPO is situated in a different context. This is especially relevant to the structure of the Oxfam Confederation (or any international NPO for that matter) as it has many affiliates throughout the world. Therefore, such organisations may have a common strategy, vision and mission, they need to be cognisant of how these differing contexts will influence how they interpret such strategies, mission and visions, as well as being influential in terms of project implementation and delivery.