Resiliency and Crisis Management Frameworks
Looking at how nonprofits can develop resiliency strategies to avoid crisis.
Theory of Planned Behavior
Emily Kinsky et al. (2014) point to the Theory of Planned Behavior (originally formulated by Ajzen and Fishbein in 1975) which states that individuals act rationally and according to social norms and perceived behavioral control.
Kinsky’s research takes this one step further, arguing that in the case of a nonprofit organization, people’s intentions affect how an organization will behave in any situation.
According to Kinsky et al.:
At a nonprofit, people’s intentions typically are to either become a member and/or recipient of service; make a donation; or volunteer.
Moreover, to be able to actively respond—both inside and outside of crisis—organizations need to examine social norms, concepts of perceived behavioral control, and public attitudes to make informed decisions and responses (279).
Therefore, to weather crises, nonprofit organizations need to know:
Their target audiences
What will retain supporters
How to look at crises as opportunities for renewal
How to be honest and apologize sincerely
KEY CONCEPT:
Nonprofits are particularly susceptible to crisis.
Kinsky notes that nonprofit crises are also often public and agents are held to a higher standard than for-profit organizations would be in the same situation.
-
Ajzen, Icek. “The Theory of Planned Behavior: Frequently Asked Questions.” Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, vol. 2, no. 4, 2020, pp. 314–24, https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.195.
Akingbola, K., Rogers, S., & Baluch, A. (2019). Change Management in Nonprofit Organizations : Theory and Practice. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fishbein, Martin, and Icek Ajzen. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior : an Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1975.
Kinsky, E., Drumheller, K., & Gerlich, R. (2014). Weathering the storm: Best practices for nonprofits in crisis. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 19(4), 277-285.
Situational Crisis Communication Theory
W. Timothy Coombs, one of the world’s leading researchers on crisis management and communication, formulated a Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) in 2007, which provides a theoretical framework for crisis communication in the for-profit sector.
SCCT posits that crisis response is situational, meaning there’s no one size fits all solution to crisis management.
In this frameworks, there are three factors that create a potential threat for an organization: its responsibility for the crisis, its crisis history, and its prior relational reputation.
Ultimately the type of “crisis situation” (victim, accident, or intentional) shapes how stakeholders interpret the situation.
KEY CONCEPT:
Public perception & organizational reputation are key to understanding crisis management.
Because, ultimately, the type of crisis situation (victim, accident, or intentional) shapes how stakeholders interpret the situation.
applying SCCT to nonprofits
-
Hillary Fussel Sisco takes SCCT and points out how it applies to the public sector.
She argues that reputation management is paramount to success specifically in the nonprofit sector because nonprofits do not ‘coerce’ stakeholders or participation with financial incentives (3).
Therefore, the nonprofit organization’s power rests predominantly on public perception that they’re meeting a common good (i.e., mission).
-
They develop a theoretical framework for nonprofit organizations that highlights how internal factors (such as evaluation and infrastructure), leadership, and external factors (such as community, political actors, and financial actors) improve both the resilience and growth of nonprofit organizations.
Key concept: nonprofits improve resilience by staying close to core organizational goals and accessing/diversifying key resources
-
Their findings show that although nonprofit organizations may be more resource constrained compared to private corporations, they adopt more crisis mitigation and preparedness activities than private corporations.
One reason for this might be because of society’s “increased expectation that the organizations dedicate the majority of their funding toward funding innovative and effective solutions to address various societal ills that the fragile welfare state no longer directly provides” (396).
In other words, because the services nonprofits provide directly affect the wellbeing of communities, the stakes and expectations are higher to successfully weather crises.
-
Chikoto, Grace L., et al. “Disaster Mitigation and Preparedness: Comparison of Nonprofit, Public, and Private Organizations.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 2, 2013, pp. 391–410, https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012452042.
Kimberlin, S., Schwartz, S., & Austin, M. (2011). Growth and resilience of pioneering nonprofit human service organizations: A cross-case analysis of organizational histories. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 8(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10. 1080/15433710903272820.
Sisco, Hilary Fussell. “Nonprofit in Crisis: An Examination of the Applicability of Situational Crisis Communication Theory.” Journal of Public Relations Research, vol. 24, no. 1, 2012, pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2011.582207.
Nonprofit Resiliency Framework (NRF)
In 2021, scholars Elizabeth Searing, Kimberly Wiley, and Sarah Young built upon SCCT to build the Nonprofit Resiliency Framework.
They argue that most literature is focused on predicting organizational closure, not weathering storms—but because of community stakeholders, we need to look at how nonprofits survive and continue to deliver services during crisis.
5 areas of focus for resiliency:
Solidifying financial best practices
Guarding employees (there’s often no room to ‘trim fat’ at in organizations with less infrastructure)
Curating positive outreach
Protecting core services
Developing strategic management/leadership.
KEY CONCEPT:
Stakeholders look different at nonprofits.
Searing et al. argue that nonprofits handle crises uniquely because the focus is not only on recovering monetary investments for financial stakeholders, but also on supporting community stakeholders by continuing care.
precursers to NRF
-
Studied survival patterns amongst community-based organizations.
They argue that legitimacy is key to success (distinguishing survival from success) and urge organizations to turn outward rather than inward in times of crisis.
Walker and McCarthy were the first researchers I found to look specifically at smaller community-based organizations in their research as well. They identify small organizations that are successful in crisis as ones that
Engage in grassroots fundraising
Are affiliated with a larger network of similar organizations
Establish and enhance local legitimacy.
-
Their research helped lay the foundation for NRF because it discusses how nonprofits can build resiliency by sticking to their mission and unique status as a nonprofit.
They highlight 3 key factors that influence organizational growth and resilience:
Leadership
Internal operations
External relations
They also point out that an organization’s understanding of its own history and operations is key to resilience because leaders need to be able to recognize patterns and understand how they can respond to challenges.
-
Key concept: organizations that continuously practice resilience building tactics are more likely to survive crisis.
They define resiliency via a three-stage process that begins with the ability to respond to an issue, continues with ability to adapt/adjust, and ends with organizational learning
For Burnard and Bhamra, resiliency is seen through the Organizational Response Framework which defines with three key steps for organizational response: 1) activation/detection, 2) event perception, and 3) organizational response).
They complicate this framework by breaking down each component into more complex systems. Click here to see this breakdown more in depth.
Ultimately, they build a Resilient Response Framework (click here to see this in a more concise flow chart).
This framework begins with an event.
The event then evolves into a threat.
That threat kicks off a critical period of detection/activation and enhanced monitoring.
The detection/activation period concludes with a response from the organization.
That response either elicits to a positive adjustment (i.e. resiliency response) or a negative adjustment.
Both adjustments move the process to a phase of organizational learning
After organizational learning, the process jumps back to the detection/activation phase and repeats until a final resolution is found.
-
Burnard, K., & Bhamra, R. (2011). Organisational resilience: Development of a conceptual framework for organisational responses. International Journal of Production Research, 49(18), 5581-5599.
Herrero, M., & Kraemer, S. (2022). Beyond survival mode: Organizational resilience capabilities in nonprofit arts and culture fundraising during the Covid‐19 pandemic. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 33(2), 279-295
Kimberlin, S., Schwartz, S., & Austin, M. (2011). Growth and resilience of pioneering nonprofit human service organizations: A cross-case analysis of organizational histories. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 8(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10. 1080/15433710903272820
Searing, E., Wiley, K., & Young, S. (2021). Resiliency tactics during financial crisis: The nonprofit resiliency framework. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 32(2), 179-196.
Walker, E., & McCarthy, J. (2010). Legitimacy, Strategy, and Resources in the Survival of Community-Based Organizations. Social Problems (Berkeley, Calif.), 57(3), 315-340.
building on NRF
Guillaume Plaisance in his 2022 analysis of resilience in arts and cultural nonprofits during the Covid-19 crisis in France, sought to determine the support that arts and cultural nonprofit organizations need to bounce back, using resilience as an analysis filter.
He argues that Covid is a crisis specifically for community-based organizations because these organizations rely on human capital to sustain during crisis, but the pandemic removed their access to that key resource. This loss heightens a general trend of economic and financial fragility in the nonprofit sector due to a loss of reliable resources (previously coming from for profit sectors).
KEY CONCEPT:
For arts and cultural organizations, resilience is not about growth and survival at any costs (like it might be in the for-profit sector).
Instead, resilience about changing the nature of the objective and working with resources
Instead, resilience is based on an organization’s emphasis and access to resources and relationships, link to external issues with internal evaluation of decisions being made, and the reforms made during and how they need to continue after a crisis.
-
Look at resilience capabilities to examine how nonprofit orgs survived financially during covid (UK focused)
Ultimately, they argue that nonprofits deploy cross-capability building in crisis.
Resilience capabilities, when put in context with arts and culture sector fundraising efforts, are unique. ‘Cross-capabilities’ capture strategic ways in which fundraisers deploy resilience practices
For Herrero & Kramer, resilience points to the org’s ability to understand the current situation and develop a catered response
Fundraising and resilience then become a relationship that’s constantly reassessed rather than a strict process.
-
Herrero, Marta, and Simone Kraemer. “Beyond Survival Mode: Organizational Resilience Capabilities in Nonprofit Arts and Culture Fundraising During the Covid‐19 Pandemic.” Nonprofit Management & Leadership, vol. 33, no. 2, 2022, pp. 279–95, https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21524.
Plaisance, Guillaume. “Resilience in Arts and Cultural Nonprofit Organizations: An Analysis of the Covid-19 Crisis in France.” Voluntas (Manchester, England), vol. 33, no. 5, 2022, pp. 1015–34, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00435-6.