Abstract
The corporate sector has an important role to play in contributing towards community building and addressing social ills that are prevalent in society. Similar to the government and civil society, there is much scope for the corporate sector to play a role in taking up some of the socio-economic and environmental concerns of society, especially in the local South African context where many communities are faced with social ills such as inequality, poverty, youth unemployment and crime among others, which are a legacy of the country’s apartheid past. Indeed, many corporates have over the years risen to the occasion and taken responsibility to contribute towards improving the socio-economic status of society through different Corporate Social Investment (CSI) initiatives.
However, these CSI efforts of corporates are usually criticised for being misdirected as they do not address the real concerns of communities at grassroots levels. Corporates are said to fail to make the necessary efforts to understand the circumstances of the needy and marginalised in society to be able to effectively make a difference. Instead, they design their CSI objectives based on their obscure ideas of what communities at grassroots levels are facing. Furthermore, corporates are criticised for only engaging in CSI initiatives for purposes that are self-serving instead of being motivated by real concern for the poor and marginalised in society. They are said to be engaging in CSI only for brand-promotion purposes and creating positive brand images in society which are linked to profit maximisation and serving shareholder interests. Furthermore, and exclusive to the South African context, corporates are said to be engaging in CSI for purposes of complying with the likes of the BBBEE Act.
Given this background, the researcher embarked on this research study to design and review a corporate-NPO partnership practice model for asset-based community-led development projects. NPOs are identified in literature as best suited to go into partnership with corporate companies because they are usually located in close proximity to communities and are better positioned to understand the circumstances of communities on the ground. Furthermore, NPOs are usually knowledgeable and skilful in community development methodologies. The practice model was designed around principles of the Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) approach which is based
iv
on mapping and mobilising communities’ assets, strengths and capabilities to direct the process of community development instead of identifying communities’ needs and problems and then trying to provide solutions to address those. ABCD is also community-driven and thrives on the social capital of communities. It locates community members in the centre of local community develop and gives them the ability to leverage all external resources from external entities such as government, corporates and the civil society.
In designing the practice model, the researcher employed the Intervention Design and Development (IDD) model of intervention research as a research design. The researcher conducted the problem analysis and project planning, the information gathering and synthesis, the design and the early development and review phases of IDD. A qualitative research approach was followed in the study which enabled the researcher to conduct in-depth and comprehensive data collection processes with her research participants, especially as the research population of the study was small. Two corporate companies and two NPOs that are working in partnership with the two corporate companies were included in the study. The corporate-NPO partnerships were selected due to their unique trait of conducting their CSI work in an ABCD manner. Two community projects that are supported by these two corporate-NPO partnerships were also included in the study.
Findings of the study indicated that both the corporate companies and NPOs had been thoroughly trained on the ABCD approach and had endorsed it as their approach to community development. They had deliberately sought partners that were like-minded in adopting and utilising ABCD as an approach to community development work. The corporate-NPO partnerships preferred to engage with and support community projects that were already existing and had already determined and defined their own community development agenda instead of starting up community projects themselves in communities. Community members in community projects were viewed as partners instead of clients in the process of community development as the community members had also invested of their own assets into the community development work. Another finding of the study was that decisions around what the corporate-NPO partnerships were to invest into the community projects were made in consultation with community members as community members had already mobilised their own resources and could point to
v
specific areas of their projects where they needed assistance. Furthermore, emphasis was also placed on other non-monetary investments that could be made by the corporate-NPO partnerships such as knowledge sharing.
The study and the results thereof make original contributions to the existing knowledge on the CSI field as they provide a practice model that can be followed in conducting CSI work which is different from the traditional needs-based and problem-focused approaches to community development. The study also contributes to the existing knowledge on the ABCD approach as it brings in the field of CSI into the existing knowledge on the ABCD. The study and the results thereof also contribute to the knowledge of community development. It contributes new knowledge on how the corporate sector in partnership with NPOs can meaningfully contribute to community development in a way that would be impactful in communities and also achieve sustainability of community projects.