Habitat For Humanity Implementing A Global Strategy Locally Case Solution

Since the 1976, HFH went through many organizational changes. One main change was the shift from the strategy of expansion into other countries held on to by the former CEO Millard Fuller, to the strategy of limiting that expansion due to the fact that the HFHI board members “feared that rapid expansion into other countries might pull Habitat for Humanity away from its core philosophies in a mad dash toward expansion”, (William Davidson Institute, 2011). This new strategy was hauled by the new CEO Jonathan Reckford, and it entailed the monitoring of various positions and policies such as a mission statement, board bylaws and policies, family selection policy, logo and branding compliance, construction standards, record-keeping and accounting, lobbying and advocacy efforts and volunteer engagement policies.

Subsequently, intermediaries between the headquarters and the affiliates across the world were abolished. This allowed a more direct link to be developed between the two parties. As a result of this, “many foreign operations were consolidated or shut down, with a paradigm shift away from building in as many countries as possible to a focus on having very strong programs in a given country or area – or simply no program at all”, (William Davidson Institute, 2011).

Another element of the post-Fuller strategic shift was for Habitat for Humanity to focus on “eliminating both smaller disorganized affiliates and the “drop-in” engagement strategy led by support offices, instead shifting the focus toward creating stronger local affiliates who were more independent and viable using stable, local resources”, (William Davidson Institute, 2011). This strategy led to the strengthening of the affiliates but also a decrease in the presence as many token affiliates evaporated, and this went so far as the disappearing of Habitat for Humanity from several countries. Consequently, the change also led to a “more consistent quality and capability of affiliates around the globe”, (William Davidson Institute, 2011). Thus, “Instead of attempting to respond to every natural disaster around the globe, Habitat for Humanity began responding when and where they had a local presence and expertise, and the response focused on Habitat’s core strengths-long-term recovery through homebuilding, and volunteer management”, (William Davidson Institute, 2011).

2. Analysis

According to the Strategic Change Cycle approach (Bryson, 2011), there are several constituents of strategic planning that should be followed by a public and nonprofit organization such as Habitat for Humanity. These elements are also agreed to by Poister and Streib (1999). The approach outlines various points on strategic planning as follows (Bryson, 2011):

1. Identification of the most critical issues faced by the organization and devising appropriate response strategies to deal with them

2. Attending to the challenges of defining purpose, mission and strategies of the organization in the influence of “competing values”

3. Highlighting the need for monitoring external factors that are relevant to the organization and its purpose and mission and that may impact the operations

4. Ensuring that concerns and interests of all stakeholders – internal and especially external – are taken into account in all business decisions

5. Incorporating active support and involvement of senior management, elected officials, and also relevant staff where necessary

6. Tackling critical problems head-on via active participation of the key members so as to “build commitment to plans”

7. Focusing on developing plans for implementation of strategies and being “action-oriented” in the planning approaches and

8. Focusing on being responsive in the present so that the future is positively secured for the organization.