Brian Gallagher’s 2005 UWA strategy hits the key points any stakeholder would want to hear; it is clearly defined, reactive in establishing how UWA will correct past faults such as of erosion of trust and a lack of accountability and proactive in establishing standards of excellence.
While the overall strategic vision seems sound, there’s a question as to whether the underlying UWA model is still viable in an age when donors increasingly want to be ‘connected’ to the causes they fund. Despite stating that UWA’s focus has shifted to “community impact”, such impact is nonexistent without fundraising. It’s unclear if the new focus on accountability has yielded a positive impact on fundraising. The nearly 50% drop in contributions from ’05 to ’06 suggests a troubling trend.
By only encouraging, but not mandating, adherence to the new standards of excellence, UWA stumbled in executing its new strategy effectively. There is little incentive for established local chapters to adopt potentially burdensome regulations or shift their charitable work away from established areas. Moreover, given that autonomous local chapters have long questioned the need for the parent organization, the threat of de-certification probably carries little weight. Incentives such as larger funding allocations in exchange for adherence to the stated best practices could spur widespread adoption of the new standards.
The biggest challenge the new strategy faces, yet does not address, is the failed governance of the various Boards of Directors. Without strong governance supporting and guiding the new strategy there is little force behind Gallagher’s vision. UWA needs method to ensure accountability amongst board members. Bringing the various boards together for “stakeholder meetings” cou ...