Prioritizing Your People: Pathways between NGO Capacities and Decision-Making Priorities for Staff and Beneficiaries in Czechia

• In Event: Civil society and public policy-making

Abstract

Thirty years after the fall of the communist regime, the non-governmental (NGO) sector in the Czech Republic (CR) is not yet fully institutionalized into the fabric of a democratic Czech society. This unpredictable institutional environment calls the sector’s legitimacy and long-term viability into question. However, there is limited data on Czech NGOs’ capacities to engage stakeholders in decision-making, and in turn, questions of how NGOs encourage or hinder a developing democracy remain. We leverage the Czech civil society literature, as well as literature on organizational capacity, stakeholder theory, and organizational listening, to better understand the stakeholders Czech NGOs prioritize in decision-making.

This study utilizes a mixed methods research design in which both survey and interview data were collected simultaneously between February-June 2022. The survey of Czech NGO leaders (n=~80) utilized validated scales measuring eight nonprofit capacities (Shumate et al., 2017) and how NGOs prioritize stakeholders in decision-making. The qualitative component included 20 semi-structured interviews with NGO leaders who completed the survey and several thought leaders working in government, foundations, and umbrella NGOs. We conducted a Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to understand what combinations of capacity and organizational factors result in prioritizing certain stakeholder groups.

Our findings demonstrate that NGOs prioritize internal staff and beneficiaries in their decision-making and that different combinations of capacity and organizational factors determine whether NGOs prioritize internal staff or beneficiaries. Our interview data offers explanations for why NGOs prioritize these stakeholders and provides nuances into the challenges faced by NGO leaders as they seek to legitimize their organizations. Given their country’s history, these NGOs have chosen not to focus on publicizing their many accomplishments out of fear of being seen or judged as illegitimate societal actors. The adverse consequence of this internal-facing behavior is that NGO leaders overlook the external constituencies (e.g., the broader public) that could ultimately help strengthen their organizations and their legitimacy as critical components of a healthy democracy.

We contribute to the accountability literature by showing that NGOs in CR are prioritizing beneficiaries according to best practices (Benjamin, 2021). However, the reason why NGOs in the CR behave this way is uniquely contextualized in their post-communist path toward stronger democratic institutions.

References

Fu, J. S., Cooper, K. R., Woo, D., & Kwestel, M. (2023). Beyond Stakeholder Management: Organizational Listening for Nonprofit Stakeholder Engagement. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 08997640231201068.

Navrátil, J. (2013). Making Sense of'Weakness' of Post-Communist Civil Society: Individual vs. Organized Engagement in Civil Advocacy in the Czech Republic. Organized Engagement in Civil Advocacy in the Czech Republic (May 5, 2013).

Neumayr, M., Meyer, M., Pospíšil, M., Schneider, U., & Malý, I. (2009). The role of civil society organisations in different nonprofit regimes: Evidence from Austria and the Czech Republic. In Civil society in comparative perspective (pp. 167-196). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Rikmann, E., & Keedus, L. (2013). Civic sectors in transformation and beyond: Preliminaries for a comparison of six Central and Eastern European Societies. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 24, 149-166.

Shumate, M., Cooper, K. R., Pilny, A., & Pena‐y‐lillo, M. (2017). The nonprofit capacities instrument. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 28(2), 155-174.

Weiss, S. (2020). Small and Fragmented: Civil Society in the Czech Republic in the Antagonism Between Liberal and State-Centric Ideas. Czech Democracy in Crisis, 65-88.

Authors

• Tara Kolar Bryan, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Howard Baker Jr. School of Public Policy and Public Affairs

• Robbie Robichau, Texas A&M University - Bush School of Government & Public Service