STRATEGIC RESPONSE TO TURBULENT BUSINESS ENVIROMENTS IN UNDP SUPPORTED PROJECTS CASE STUDY OF THE MARKET ACCESS PROJECT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47672/jsm.149Keywords:
measures, commercial bank, capital adequacy requirement, Basel III frameworkAbstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the strategies that UN supported agencies can adopt in today’s turbulent business environment.
Methodology: The research design was descriptive in nature focusing on The Market Access Programme (MAP). Stratified sampling technique was used to select the sample in which twenty five (25) respondents from a population of eighty six (86) staff working at in conjunction with (MAP) was chosen. The staff includes both management and non-management staff categorized into four levels; senior level management, middle level management, supervisory staff and general staff. Information was collected using a questionnaire developed by the researcher and administered with the help of a trained research assistant. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and result presented in frequency tables to show how the responses for the various questions posed to the respondents. Descriptive statistics was used to illustrate the responses.
Results: The findings indicated that the causes of turbulence in NGOs environment include advancement in information technology, High dynamism, competitive rivalry, threat of new entrants, bargaining power of supplier and bargaining power of clientele contributes to NGOs environmental turbulence. Results also indicated that strategic planning plays a positive role to the performance of NGOs, specifically UN supported projects such as MAP. Further, results indicate that NGOs use the following strategic responses in response to turbulent environment. These strategies include acquiescence, compromise, avoidance, defiance and manipulation.
Unique contribution to theory, practice and policy: The study recommends that it is vital to understand the forces behind the increasing sophistication and efficiency of risk management systems, before adopting them more widely for regulatory purposes
Downloads
References
Anderson, P. Complexity Theory and Organizational Science,” Organization Science10 (1999)
Bak,P How Nature Works: The Science of Self-organized Criticality (New York: Copernicus, 1996).
Chackravarthy (1997). “A new strategic framework for coping with turbulence”. Sloan Management Review, p 69-82.
Collis and Montgomery (1997). "Corporate Strategy. Resources and the Scope of the Firm". McGraw Hill.
Crossan, Nanjad, Vera (2001). “Leadership on the Edge: Old Wine in NewBottles? Working paper.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Anheier, H. K. (1990). The Sociology of nonprofit organizations and sectors. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 137-159.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147160.
Eisenhardt and Brown (1998). “Competing on the Edge: strategy as structured chaos”. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
Govindarajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2004), “Strategic innovation and the science of learning”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 67-75.
Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K., ``Strategic intent'', Harvard Business Review, May-June 1989, pp. 63-76.
K. D. O'Brien, J. L. Wright, and N. A. Mandall, How to ... do a randomized controlled trial J. Orthod., December 1, 2003; 30(4): 337 - 341.
M Wheatley. J. and M. Kellner Rogers M.,(1996)” Self-Organization: The Irresistible Future of Organizing Strategy and Leadership 24 (July–August 1996): 18–25.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
Miles, R.E. and Snow, C.C. (1978), Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H. (1983), “Strategy making and the environment: the third link”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 4, pp. 221-35.
Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, Lampel (1998). “StrategySafari. A Guided Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management. London: Prentice Hall.
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. and Lampel, J., Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management, Simon &Schuster, New York, NY, 1998, p. 119.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (2003). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Porter (1980). “Competitive Strategy. Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors”. New York. The Free Press.
Porter, M. E (1985); Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, New York Free Press.
Porter, M.E (1986), ``From competitive advantage to corporate strategy'', Harvard Business Review, May-June, p. 43.
Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990), “The core competence of the corporation”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68, spring, pp. 79-91.
Scott, W. R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems, 4th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Smith, G., Arnold, D. and Bizell, B., (1988). Business Strategy and Policy, Houghton Mifflin Co, Boston, MA, 1988.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
