• Save
2006 2nd Place University of Auckland
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

2006 2nd Place University of Auckland

on

  • 576 views

2006 2nd Place University of Auckland

2006 2nd Place University of Auckland

Statistics

Views

Total Views
576
Views on SlideShare
573
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 3

http://static.slideshare.net 3

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

2006 2nd Place University of Auckland 2006 2nd Place University of Auckland Presentation Transcript

  • Rainforest Action Network TRUE ROOTS: A Concentrated Growth Strategy
  • RAN: Key Organization Values
    • Target selection crucial
    • Focus on corporate (not government) campaigns
    • Radical but responsible organization
    • Relationship focused
    • - Developing economically feasible solutions
    • Specialized forest expertise
    • Preservation of threatened forestry
  • RAN`s focus lies in its true roots What is RAN`s strategic focus ? Limited Resources Perceived lack of target projects Leveraging core competencies
    • Focus on RAN`s true roots
    • Redrafting of mission statement
    • Increased campaign funding
    • Concentrated growth
  • Limited Resources Budgets & Finance
    • 1% of Greenpeace revenues
    • 0.3% of Nature Conservancy
    • $2.4m Revenue
    • $1m for each project
    • 24 staff
    • 4 board members meet infrequently
    • Low remuneration
    Staff
    • Student groups / Concerned Public
    • Affiliated members / other NGOs
    • Relationships with CEO’s
    Volunteers Strive for achievable utilization and best use of scarce resources
  • Perceived lack of target projects; or is there?
    • Direct relationship to forestry
    • Old wood
    • Global finance
    • Pulp and Paper industry
    • International focus
    • Indirect relationship to forestry
    • Jumpstart Ford
    • Air
    • Water
    • Climate
    • Strategic change if moving to indirect forestry impacts
    • Still further scope for expansion in areas directly relating to forestry depletion
    Key is to choose strategy that is the best fit
  • Leveraging Core Competencies
    • RAN Market Leader
    • Strong belief in `market economy`
    • Creation of strategic partnerships
    • Non violent workable solutions
    • Trickle down to reform rest of industry
    • Building further industry experience
    • and credibility of RAN
    • Other NGOs
    • Lobbying government
    • Changing public policy
    • Human rights focus
    • Wider environmental focus
    • Information distribution
    Utilize established model for future campaigns
  • Matrix of Potential Strategies  ?   Protects threatened forests – core value base     Retains level of Autonomy   ?  Leverages core competencies     Growth opportunities     Efficient use of resources- achievable Expanded Geographical focus Jumpstart Ford Campaign Alliance with large NGOs (eg. Greenpeace) Expanded strategic focus: Air, water, climate
  • Refining RAN`s Focus
    • Redraft mission statement - protecting threatened forests
    • Do not continue with Ford initiative
    • Communicate refocus to staff
    Refine focus to leverage core competencies and align with stakeholder values
  • Overseas Expansion
    • Requirements for RAN to enter into a new market
    • Large number of MNCs and big brands
    • MNCs contributing to deforestation
    • Environmentally aware population
    • High consumption comparative to USA
    • Existing NGO available for partnership
  • Top 10 Wood Product Importers
  • Japan fits all entry criteria
      • Second largest economy after the USA
        • Imports 17% of wood products world-wide
      • Widely criticized for contribution to deforestation
      • Increasingly environmentally conscious
      • Many MNCs available as potential targets
      • Existing NGO (JATAN) available for local alliance
  • Campaign Specific Funding ``Sponsor a Campaign`` Business (Friends of RAN) Public
    • ``Sponsor a Campaign`` for $1 a day or fixed fee donation
    • All donors become members of RAN, receive quarterly updates
    • Advantages – traceable revenues, steady source income, plan ahead
    • Additional funding to be used for more campaigns, increased remuneration of staff and training volunteers
  • Concentrated Growth Timeline Mission U.S . Japan Funding Organization Redefine RAN 3 6 9 12 months Exit Ford Negotiate with NGO: JATAN ‘ Sponsor a Campaign’ Target on DAISHOWA Paper Increase Remuneration 12 staff in Japan
  • True Roots provides real benefits $2.5 m $9.3 m 13,000 $8.9 m $2.4 m 30,000 28 40 Revenue Expense No. Members No. Staff
    • Most effective impact with limited resources
    • Target largest rainforest abusers
    • Best utilization of core competencies
    • Fits organization's mission statement
    • Expand global influence
    Global presence with influence and power to protect threatened forests 2004 2009
  • True Roots aligns with Key Values
    • What is RAN`s strategic focus ?
    • Limited resources
    • Perceived lack of target projects
    • Leveraging core competencies
    • RAN`s true roots
    • Focus on protecting threatened forests (exit Ford)
    • `Sponsor a Campaign`
    • Japan NGO Partnership
    Rainforest Action Network: Protecting Earth's Threatened Forests Since 1985
  • Question Time
    • Index of Additional Material
      • An educational focus
      • Staffing Issues
      • Potential Risks
      • Funding opportunities from target companies
      • Why revert to a narrow focus strategy
      • Organization Structure 2009
      • Why not Ford or large NGO partnerships
      • Strategy Financial Forecasts
  • An Educational focus ? Policy: - Education no longer a key driver in mission statement Justification: - Public informed by range of other media - Easier to tell people about the `bad guy` BUT: - All members receive quarterly progress reports on the campaign they sponsor - Information on new campaigns given with opportunity to sponsor - Industry updates posted on website - Online discussion board facilitated by RAN Index
  • Staffing Issues Problem: Limited staff resources Solutions: Better staff remuneration - funded through sponsorship Relocation and international opportunities available – eg Japan Website to include a recruitment page with online application and employment opportunities Staff receive benefits – eg health care Note: High turnover a common industry characteristic Index
  • Potential Risks Risk Mitigation Index
    • 12 month leeway to form an alliance with another Japanese activist group
    • JATAN unwilling to form partnership
    • Enforce strong anti-violence policies
    • RAN having greater control over all acts of civil disobedience in which members are involved
    • Making members aware of possible security concerns
    • Risks of protestors developing FBI file
    • Retain earnings to mitigate financial impact
    • Sell assets if necessary
    • Acts of civil disobedience not eligible for tax benefits under S501(c)(3)+(4)
  • Funding Opportunities: Target Companies
    • Current Policy:
    • Contributions not accepted from targets or
    • corporations, except from `friends of RAN`
    • Justifications:
    • Targets cannot buy their company a positive image
    • Encourages firms to adopt environmentally friendly practices on their own accord
    • Encourages small-med sized firms to become `friends of RAN`
    • Better aligns with funding needs and donors’ wishes
    Index
  • RAN: Why revert to narrow focus ?
    • RAN has small budget with limited resources
    • Larger organizations better resourced to address broader environmental issues
    • Proven track record & established model to gain results in protecting threatened forests
    • Narrow focus will achieve measurable and attainable results
    • Exact impact of global warming on forestry unknown
      • Biggest threat = burning of fossil fuels
    • Still scope to expand nationally and internationally with narrow strategy focus
    Index
  • Organizational Structure - 2009 Index Board USA (28) Japan (12) Operations Campaign Communications Development Fundraising Campaign Funding
  • Why not Ford or large NGO Partnerships
    • Would be a radical departure away from traditional organizational mission to `protect the rainforests`
    • Danger in pursuing coalitional objectives, especially when R.A.N. is a small player. Risk of marginalization and losing autonomy and focus
    • Still significant scope in protecting rain and old wood forests worldwide in achieving growth
    • Stick to what you do best
    • Executive Director Michael Brune, and R.A.N as an organization are vastly experienced in forest ecology and preservation
    Index
  • Strategy Financial Forecasts Index $0.37 $0.29 $0.22 $0.17 $0.13 $0.10 Profit 40 36 33 32 30 28 No. of staff 9,000 7,950 6,510 5,400 3,120 1,300 Japan 21,000 18,550 15,190 12,600 12,480 11,700 U.S. 30,000 26,500 21,700 18,000 15,600 13,000 Total membership $8.91 $6.85 $5.27 $4.06 $3.12 $2.40 Expenses $9.28 $7.14 $5.49 $4.23 $3.25 $2.50 Revenue 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 In USD millions