published_or_final_version / Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering / Master / Master of Philosophy

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / In 2008, grassroots NGOs formed 13 alliances in response to the need for emergency relief and post-disaster recovery after the Sichuan Earthquake that occurred in West China and killed approximately 87,000 people. These alliances served to raise and deliver relief materials, train and supervise volunteers, promote information sharing, and assist victims with mental health and livelihood recovery. However, all alliances were terminated within less than four years. Although plenty of scholarship discusses how corporate alliances evolve or fail, few studies focus on interorganizational collaboration among nonprofits. To explore how NGOs developed collective actions in China’s adverse sociopolitical environment, the author performed three years of observation in four coalitions and interviewed 60 alliance leaders, employees, and volunteers. This paper identifies four types of termination these NGO alliances experienced: three of them failed at their very births, five self-disbanded shortly after the end of emergency aid, three dissolved due to failed institutionalization, and the remaining two evolved into independent organizations. Tracking their life cycles, this study finds four main factors accountable for their terminations: political pressure, funding shortage, short-term orientation, and leadership failure. In particular, the repressive NGO regulation regime and limited funding sources fundamentally restricted all alliances’ capacity and sustainability. Further, the transient nature of disaster relief efforts and the conflict between disaster management and planned work areas contributed to the short-term orientation among alliance members and, thus, led to the closure of some alliances shortly after they provided emergency relief. In addition, though generally exempt from internal rivalry that often undermines inter-firm partnerships, NGO alliances of all types were confronted with leadership challenges—partner misfits concerning resources, strategy, and mission; flawed governing structures, and undesired individual leadership. The four factors interplayed and led to alliance dissolution through different combinations. The paper points out that, in addition to environmental uncertainty, leadership failure has become a major challenge for nonprofit collaborations.