


































Advances in Business Research 2011 Volume 2.pdf


Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

247 

 

Sustainability in the Nonprofit Sector: Communication Strategies to Increase the Bottom 

Line 
 

Barbara Burgess-Wilkerson, Winthrop University 
 

 

This paper explores the impact of communications management strategies in the sustainability of 
community-based organizations (CBOs) and faith-based organizations (FBOs). Several communication 

challenges prevalent among nonprofits in Southwestern PA are identified and communication strategies 
for improving the bottom line are provided as a viable solution. This paper will be of interest to 
consultants, academics and nonprofit leaders who seek to undertsand and address financial sustainability 

through effective communication management strategies.  
 

 

Building nonprofit organizational capacity for sustainability is an important objective for community-

based organizations (CBOs) and faith-based organizations (FBOs). Hansberry (2002) convened a panel of 

nonprofit experts who defined nonprofit capacity-building as, “A non-profit human service organization’s 

capacity is its long-term ability to achieve its mission effectively and efficiently through management, 

governance and persistent re-dedication to achieving results” (2002:14). While the first priority is service 

provision and mission fullfillment, outstanding performance  as reflected by building a capacity to service 

the client is typically associated with sustainability. Sustainability as it is used in this paper refers to the 

ability of an organization to build financial reserves; to develop and sustain viable funding support both 

long-term and short-term; and to engage in marketing, advertising and branding strategies to assist with 

these efforts through strategic communications management. 

Many CBOs and FBOs occupy a special niche as service providers, addressing a host of social and 

economic problems that plague communities, families, and individuals in their serving areas. As providers 

of many of the services that hold neighborhoods together, they are among the local champions that 

mobilize and change the landscape of their respective communities through effective social service 

programming. CBOs/FBOs contribute to the overall economic performance and serve as a shock absorber 

during economic slowdowns by providing jobs to sustain a portion of the population and providing 

services to those in need (Kearns et al., 2003; Light, 2005; Paytas and Lagana, 2006). Accordingly, it is 

imperative that the CBOs/FBOs remain viable as service providers and employers. 
 

The Southwestern PA Nonprofit Community 
  

The researcher served as an independent organizational development (OD) consultant in Southwestern 

PA for over 15 years. During that time OD services were rendered to over 100 CBOs/FBOs in an effort to 

increase revenue and to assist with capacity-building efforts for long-term sustainability. This paper draws 

upon those experiences and relies upon secondary data from the Forbes Fund to substantiate the 

challenges and opportunites in the nonprofit sector. While Southwestern PA nonprofits are highlighted, I 

suspect similar patterns can be seen nationally. The paper seeks to increase awareness to assist with 

sustainability efforts among nonprofits.  

Southwestern PA contained roughly 2,700 nonprofits with more than 1,800 in Allegheny County 

alone. A survey conducted by the Forbes Fund ascertained that on average, nonprofits received 35 percent 

of their budgets from a combination of individual, foundation, and corporate donors; roughly 16 percent 

from individuals, 14 percent from foundations and 5 percent from corporations. The remaining portions 

came from fees for service, government contracts, endowments, the United Way and religious sources 

(Hansberry, 2002; Kearns et al., 2003; Light, 2005).  

Despite ongoing efforts for sustainability, a significant portion of Allegheny County CBOs and FBOs 

struggled to remain economically viable in an increasingly competitive funding environment. Many were 

dependent on single sources of revenue, primarily the local government. However, funding became more 

difficult to secure due to a decreased availability of support from federal, state, and local governments.  



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 
2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

248 

 

A signficant number of nonprofits operated at or near break-even, making them vulnerable to 
inconsistent funding sources. Studies about the Pittsburgh area’s nonprofit sector indicated that 
CBO/FBO’s operating margins tended to be the thinnest in organizations facing the first surges in demand 
for services from economic downturns. During those times only 61 percent of the organizations 
maintained positive operating margins. Although the communnity remained generous in giving and 
volunteering, many nonprofits appeared to operate perilously close to the edge (Kearns et al., 2003; Light, 
2005; Paytas and Lagana, 2006).   
  In addition, the average reported deficit for nonprofits in the Pittsburgh area was approximately 
$256,000 (Paytas and Lagana, 2006).  If continued over the next decade, funding issues may result in an 
erosion of civic engagement in the midst of a rising demand for social services and an increased need for 
employment opportunities (Kearns et al., 2003; Light, 2005; Paytas and Lagana, 2006). 

As an OD consultant, several executives and boards shared a belief that capacity-building for 
sustainability was a distraction from time and energy needed to operate existing programs. They appeared 
to minimize the notion that capacity-building was critical to building and sustaining long-term 
productivity and viability of essential programs and services. A significant number resorted to crisis 
management as an everyday survival strategy to meet increasing demands for limited resources 
(Hansberry, 2002; Kearns et al., 2003; Light, 2005). 

A Forbes Fund study explored the funding capability of CBOs/FBOs to determine their organizational 
and management capacity and the ability of FBOs to meet emerging needs. The study revealed that both 
CBOs and FBOs reported similar priorities with regard to needing assistance in fundraising; however, 
FBOs were most interested in improving financial management (Hansberry, 2002; Kearns et al., 2003; 
Light, 2005). 

Less than half (and in some cases less than one third) of the FBO organizations report having a high 
capacity to engage in any of the selected sustainability activities. While 58% of the CBOs and FBOs say 
they have strategic plans, only 38.6% said their organization used objective data and analysis to make 
important decisions; 33% expressed an ability to secure financial resources to ensure uninterrupted 
services, and only 26% said the same about generating unrestricted revenue (Kearns ey al., 2003; Light, 
2005). Table 1 summarizes the sustainability efforts of FBOs & CBOs. 
 

Table 1: Sustainability Efforts of FBOs & CBOs 
 

 Community-based Organizations (CBO’s) 
Capacity for Sustainabiity Efforts 

Faith-based Organizations (FBOs)  
Capacity for Sustainabilty Efforts 

 High                            Low High                         Low 

Use objective data and analysis to make  
important decisions 

50.8 15.9 38.6 13.3 

Secure finanacial resources to ensure  
uninterrupted programs and services 

29.8 21.6 33.1 29.7 

Use information technology to improve  
performance 

44.2 19.0 45.9 18.3 

Generate unrestricted revenue to spend  
where most needed 

15.8 44.9 26.4 44.9 

Manage legal and liability issues 45.1 27.9 16.3 48.6 

Respond quickly to unexpected needs for  
services in the community 

37.9 22.9 32.9 23.1 

Develop and implement new programs to  
meet community needs 

36.0 19.1 47.1 15.5 

(Source: Kearns et al., 2003) 
 

Pittsburgh is one of the most philantropic communities in the country with notable funders such as 
Mellon, Heinz, Pittsburgh, Scaife and others who generously provide millions of revenue dollars to 
worthy nonprofits annually. However, funding is becoming increasingly competitive, with more stringent 
guidelines and higher expectations for service delivery and outcomes. As a result, nonprofits must engage 
in sound business practices such as sustainability and capacity-building through strategic communications 
management in a manner that parallels for-profit enterprises.  
 



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

249 

 

Strategic Communications Management for Sustainability 
 

Sustainable CBO/FBOs have a clearly defined mission that is relevant to community needs and is 

embraced at all organizational levels. They also have capable, motivated leadership and staff members, 

with well-defined accountability. Such organization are results-oriented and offer services consistent with 

the mission and vision. Also of importance is the ability to access information and resources to create 

reliable and diverse revenue streams. Sustainable CBO/FBOs must have the ability to improve programs 

and respond to change. 

In order for CBOs and FBOs to have the ability to adapt as new opportunities appear, and to sustain 

efforts over time, they must develop effective communication strategies. According to Andrews and Baird 

(2005), “communications is not merely an activity in an organization, it is the lifeblood that allows 

organizations to exist (2005:46).” Without communications, relationships cannot be maintained, 

organizational goals and objectives cannot be achieved, and activities cannot be coordinated nor decisions 

made. In short, sustainability cannot occur without strategic organizational communication. In looking at 

organizational communications, Barrett (2006) argues that the effectiveness of an organization with 

respect to the achievement of its’ goals is closely related to its’ effectiveness in handling information 

(2006: 368). Organizational communication is the process by which messages are sent and includes: the 

monitoring of the types of messages sent, the selection of the appropriate channels, the values associated 

with those messages, the amount of information conveyed, the rules and norms under which messgaes are 

sent, and the organizational variables affecting the process like structure and outcomes measures 

(Andrews and Baird, 2005; DeWine, 1994). 

Capacity-building activities for sustainability cannot be successful without structured organizational 

communication. Organizational communications provides a framework for building the internal and 

external communications capacity within CBOs and FBOs to improve financial viability. There are 

several steps that can assist in developing a communications management strategy, which will be 

discussed in some detail as follows. The first step is to clearly define the problem before a suitable 

intervention can be developed (Barrett, 2006; Gillis, 2006; Smith and Mounter, 2005). 
 

Step One: Problem Identification 
  

Identification of  the depth and breadth of the problem with which one is dealing must come first. To 

the extent that there is a gap between where they are and where they want to go, a problem exists. The 

challenge is to create plans to close the gaps. Thus, the first step is to describe the organization in its 

current state and then determine its’ immediate and long-term goals (French and Bell, 1990). Some 

critical questions to consider are: 
 

1. Is there a well-defined, widely communicated statement of the organizational mission or purpose?    

2. Do employess have job descriptions, job-related goals and objectives, and performance feedback? 

3. Is there an organizational structure that  provides for an adequate span of control and balanced 

allocation of resources?      

4. Is there a process for commmunicating management information needed to achieve work objectives? 

5. Are program efforts consistent with the vision and mission; do program efforts meet funder 

expectations? 
 

For example, the Harbor House is a CBO/FBO located in the poverty-stricken area of Pittsburgh. The 

community is considered high-risk because of a high unemployment rate, drugs, violence, and a high 

school drop out rate. While the organization had a mission to essentially, “save the community,” it lacked 

the capacity for such efforts. Instead of identifying a niche area in which to make an impact, the mission 

was too broad in scope to be effective. The staff, recruited from the adjacent church, lacked the requisite 

credentials to address the socio-psychological challenges they faced each day. The span of control was 

non-existent with a CEO that micro-managed the Program Directors, oftentimes overstepping boundaries 

during performance reviews. Resources were shifted in a “rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul” manner, leaving 



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

250 

 

accountants unable to complete a succesful audit for annual reporting. Expenditures were justified with 

the “quality vs. quantity” argument to the dismay of funders. 

The CBO/FBO must be willing to take a candid look at their organizations to determine its current 

state of existence. While it would be all too easy to look at the successes, it is critical to explore strengths, 

weaknesses, opportunities, and threats through dialogue and discussion with  key stakeholders such as the 

CEO and board members. This step is important to sustainability as it will provide a lens for exploring 

gaps in service delivery, structure, management, communications  and operations which ultimaely impact 

the capacity of the organization to be sustainable over time. 
 

Step Two: Needs Assessments 
 

  After these questions are addressed, the next step is to conduct a formal needs assessment. Sometimes 

referred to as an organizational audit, a needs assessment is an effective strategy for identifying gaps in 

structure, service, operations, staff development and training needs, and to identify priority areas for long 

and short-term funding. There are several assessment techniques to gain insights from key stakeholders; 

however, sampling offers the most cost effective and time efficient manner to collect data in an 

organization.  

Sampling. When working with a large organization (100+), it is unreasonable to expect everyone to be 

interviewed or included in the needs assessment. Therefore a method for sampling the population is 

needed to ensure individuals are representative of the group. Two methods of selecting subjects are with 

random and stratified sampling. Random sampling means that every person in the organization has an 

equal chance of being selected. Stratified sampling is conducted by selecting individuals from subgroups 

represented in the sample, dividing the population  into subgroups and doing a random sampling in each 

group (Babbie, 1990; DeWine, 1994; Hamilton, 1987). One effective strategy is to triangulate data by 

conducting focus groups and surveys via among both stratified and random groups. 

A good starting point for CBO/FBOs  is to consider assessing internal and external organizational 

communications by asking questions in the following areas: 
 

1. Strategic objectives - To what extent is communications planning aligned with  the CBO/FBO’s 

strategic goals? 

2. Processes - To what extent is communications integrated into the yearly business planning process? 

3. Management - To what extent does management accept responsibility for organizational 

communications? 

4. Messages - To what extent are messages targeted, consistent, and strategic? 

5. Media/Forums - To what extent are multiple channels used to communicate, and are they appropriate 

for the message and culture? 

6. Communication Staff - To what extent are there communications staff, and are they strategically 

placed within the organization? 

7. Communication Assessment - To what extent is communications measured and included in 

performance outcomes and goals setting?  (Barrett, 2006; Hamilton, 1987; Smith and Mounter, 

2005). 
 

A significant number of  CBO/FBOs in Southwestern PA failed to recognize the relevance of, and 

connection between, communications and sustainability as revealed during the assessment process. For 

instance, OD consulting services were provided to develop critical documents such as strategic plans, 

mission and vision statements, as well as targeted messages and strategies for fundraising. Unfortunately, 

many capacity-building efforts proved unproductive, due partially to limited communication strategies, 

and a lack of commitment to change, thereby appearing contrived for the sole purpose of generating 

revenue.  

Data Collection Method. Surveys and interviews are the most frequently used methods for collecting 

data about an organization. Surveys are developed by identifying broad categories of concerns to be 

examined and then constructing questions within each of the categories (Babbie 1990; DeWine, 1994). 



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

251 

 

These areas can be identified from past research and  discussions with key stakeholders within the 

organization.  

There are several types of forced-choice questionnaires incuding the Likert Scale for responses from 

which respondents can indicate their opinions and beliefs. Surveys are the easiest and least expensive way 

to collect large amounts of data that can be quantified (Babbie, 1990; DeWine, 1994; Hamilton, 1987). 

Interviews provide a rich source of data and can be most helpful for uncovering areas of concern. An 

interview guide can be constructed similar to the manner in which the content matrix is used for designing 

open-ended questions. The population is an important factor to consider when selecting the data 

collection method. For instance, when collecting data from children, teen or individuals with poor reading 

skills, interviews both individually, and collectively proved much more helpful in gaining rich qualitative 

data from the client perspective. Surveys were at times viewed as intimidating or unimportant.    

Organizational outcomes data can also be a source of information. Organizational outcomes data 

includes all the publications produced by the organization as well as personnel files and client records. It 

can even include routine data. CBO/FBO’s in Southwestern PA were mandated to report program 

outcomes as a funding requirement. However, many were incapable of establishing parameters for data 

collection and typically scrambled to report outcomes at the end of the funding cycle. Structuring 

outcomes and data collection methods at the onset of funding and communicating the importance of 

timely data collection across the entire organzation is critical to accurate reporting, and subsequently for 

repeat funding.  

During the process of data collection, care must be used to maintain objectivity and openness to a 

variety of opinions and viewpoints. A wide variety of data should be used to arrive at the clearest picture 

of where the organization is, and where it wants to be in terms of how well it communicates and how 

communication efforts impact sustainability (Babbie, 1990; DeWine, 1994).  
 

Step Three: Data Analysis 
 

Once data is collected, a careful analysis should take place so that hasty conclusions and premature 

solutions are not drawn. Objectivity is critical to developing viable solutions. There should be a clear 

communications pattern that surfaces throughout the analysis or triangulation of many pieces of data and 

evidence. Without careful data analysis, interventions may fail and leave the organzation worse off than 

before.  

Assessing quantitative data can reveal patterns, trends and perspectives. This research is typically 

descriptive in nature which includes correlational and causal-comparative studies. Descriptive research is 

used to estimate the nature and degree of existing conditions. For instance, descriptive statistics can reveal 

the drop out rate of teens, the number of single parent families, the number of unemployed adults and 

other “risk factors” in a program area that predispose families to require supportive services. To address 

relationships between these variables directly, correlational and causal-comparative studies may be used. 

For example, a correlation study of relationships between single parent families and high school drop out, 

between drug addiction and drop out have been carried out. This data is critical to establishing a need for 

funding to provide “remediation” services to mitigate against the risk of drop out (Eichelberger, 1989).    
 

Step Four: Intervention 
   

Once the needs assessment has been completed, the next step is to plan an intervention. This must 

come from the data analysis itself rather than be preplanned or superimposed  (Babbie, 1990; DeWine, 

1994; Eichelberger,1989). There are several intervention strategies that can be used: 
  

Organizational Development and Organizational Communications. Organizational development (OD) 

is a form of intervention that combines the aforementioned strategies to assist in reaching the full 

organizational potential. French and Bell (1990) define organizational development as, “sets of structured 

activities in which selected organizational units engage in a task or a sequence of tasks where the task 

goals are related directly or indirectly to organizational improvement” (1990:113). 



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

252 

 

To be most effective, organizational development should include strategies for organizational 

communications, which involves the development of those abilities needed to link to the broader 

community and are required to commuicate effectively both internally and externally. All effective 

communication requires strategic thinking, and as the organization grows in complexity, so should the 

strategy for communicating (Barrett, 2006; Bavelas,1951; Smith and Mounter, 2005). Any OD 

intervention for sustainablity should include strategies for internal and external communications 

techniques. For instance some CBO/FBOs were required to bring in an outside OD Consultant to assist in 

providing a broader understanding of the inter-connectedness of activities across programs and 

departments and how each contribute to the organizational goals which in turn provide a rationale for 

sustainability. OD consultants also assist in the identification of program areas from which to operate, 

rather than indiscriminately pursuing funds without a track-record of success.  

Supportive Management. CEOs and program managers should assume responsibility for relaying 

important messages and expectations to direct reports, particularly those related to service delivery, 

program goals, rules and regulations, and  funding guidelines. Management in CBO/FBOs need to shape 

core messages that are consistent with funding guidelines and expectations. Managers should model the 

communication behavior they expect of their employees. (Bell and Nadler, 1985). Expectations regarding 

program outcomes should be clearly communicated at the onset of the funding cycle and throughout the 

year to guarantee successful, accurate outcomes which in turn increases the likelihood of  multi-year 

funding. CBO/FBOs in Southwestern PA quickly gained reputations among funders. Once these 

reputations were established, they were quite difficult to change.   

Targeted Messages. The needs of the key stakeholders are analyzed to develop messages each group 

will understand. Core messages are a necessity and should be communicated consistently to all internal 

and external stakeholders. Individualized messages are shaped for key constituents and adapted for the 

specific audience. All messages should be consistent with the organizational vision, mission, goals, and 

objectives. CBOs/FBOs should also include in their messages language clearly describing how efforts 

meet funder requirements. 

Effective Media and Forums. Organizations may need to convey messages through a variety of 

channels to reach all clients, employees and other stakeholders. This requires looking critically at the 

media and deciding which is best for receiving the intended message. For instance, a message for male 

teens is unlikely to be read in the local newspaper. CBOs/ FBOs should pay particular attention to media 

richness and identify the targeted audiences as they are likely to have a diverse population in both 

funders, clients, and employees. Recruiting new clients can be difficult. Although service may be 

warranted, building trust is important. Inclusive messages that demonstrate respect, compassion and 

dignity can assist. Also during times of low revenue employee turnover can be high; core messages need 

to be conveyed to each employee to retain talent and staff commitment. 

Well-Positioned Communications Staff. A professional communications staff can ensure that 

communications is integrated into the organization’s operations. Unlike a PR employee, the 

communications staff  is an expert communicator who can help deliver strategic messages. The 

communications expert should be involved in the strategic planning of the CBO/FBOs and should be 

included in the decsion-making process at the highest level in order to “get the word out” accurately in a 

timely, culturally-sensitive manner. While most CBOs/FBOs do not have the resources to hire such a 

person, these skill sets can be incorporated into an existing relevant postion, such as the human resources 

or public relations positions. Delivering the right message is key to sustainability as funders are very 

connected to the community grapevine and are knowledgeable of the dominant messages 

(intentional/unintentional) of all CBO/FBOs in the area. 

Training and Development. Training and development needs to be provided to assist CBO/FBOs in 

developing sound fundraising practices; to target new donor prospects, and to build capacity within their 

organizations to be more sophisticated and aggressive in their fundraising efforts, thereby helping 

nonprofits become more sustainable over time (Barrett, 2006). Training and development is also required 

to assist direct reports in learning “best practices” for  service provision in accordance with funding 

guidelines. For instance, FBOs were typically church-based programs and many were tempted to 



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

253 

 

“convert” clients. However, funding guidelines clearly stated it is a violation of individual civil rights to 

indoctrinate clients into any religious beliefs. Nonetheless, some staff felt compelled to do so and greatly 

jeopardized program funds in the process. The penalty for such a violation is severe, resulting in 

repayment of funds and possibly criminal charges.    

Learning Organization. Through developing a “learning organization philosophy,” the CBO/FBO can 

make a commitment to objectively measure and evaluate the impact of communications through 

benchmarking against which to chart the future. There is evidence that some nonprofits are successfully 

using quality assurance methods to increase efficiency and performance. These organizations have been 

shown to: 1) better define their purpose; 2) evaluate and modify their programs; and 3) measure and 

communicate their impact. They also report marked improvement in a variety of management practices. 

Some past uses of quality assurance methods include: using logical models, process mapping, designing 

implementation strategies, and re-drafting agreements with vendors and contractors. They were also more 

alert to changing circumstances that might reveal the need to adjust an established program, reframe a 

fundraising appeal, or seek confirmation of an emerging need” (Barrett, 2006; Light, 2005). 

Social Return on Investments (SROI). CBO/FBOs may also benefit from creative methods to measure 

the  Social Return on Investments (SROI). Nonprofits can benefit from developing an array of measures 

based on financial, non-financial, community and management impacts. This information would greatly 

improve sustainablility and is most likely to get the attention of the funding community (Light, 2005). 

Change Management. FBO/CBOs could also benefit from developing the capacity to quickly respond 

to emerging trends or events. This will require training and responsiveness on the part of employees, 

board members, and volunteers as well as a degree of manueverability within the  organization. In other 

words, they need to develop the capacity to respond in a funding crisis to adjust to spikes in demand, to 

adapt to unforeseen events,  to take advantage of new opportunities like requests for proposals (RFPs), 

and allow invitations to partner for new grant streams (Light, 2005). Several SFBO/CBOs in 

Southwestern PA have joined together to form collaboratives as a cost-savings strategy. Wrap-around 

services are provided to families through a referral process among “networked” agencies. Funds are 

distributed throughout the network so all agencies remain viable.  
 

Step Five: Outcomes Evaluation 
 

According to Light (2005), an organization’s capacity is measured by alertness, agility, adaptability, 

and alignment. Indicators of success includes improved and sustained performance, significant budgets, 

low executive and board turnover, diverse funding streams, access to resources for continuous 

improvement, mission driven activities, and on-going assessment of staff and programs. Each of these 

areas should be included in the evaluation process and including in annual reports to funders as an 

indicator of program viability and accountability.   

If organizations measure the wrong thing, they will not get the result or effect they want to achieve. 

Unclear wording on survey instruments may provide unclear answers as to why programming efforts are 

failing. Likewise, a fear of taking an honest assessment can result in wasted resources, failed programs 

and ultimately funding cuts (Weller and Kimball, 1988). 

Outcomes evaluations should include hard (quantitative) and soft (qualitative) assessments of the 

internal and external organizational efforts and be cumulative and summative to be most effective 

(Babbie, 1990; Herndon and Kreps, 1995). Outcomes assessments can be completed in a cost effective 

manner using focus groups, observations, surveys, and benchmarking. There needs to be a clear 

understanding of where the organization aims to be in reference to the outcomes. This information can be 

gained from funded proposals, government guidelines, strategic planning, business plan documents, and 

from the leadership. Efforts at sustainability need to be quantifiable and data collected consistently at the 

onset of the effort or activity. The monthly, quarterly, or annual reports can provide feedback that can act 

as a catalyst to motivate and encourage future sustainability efforts when shared with key stakeholders. 

Although these strategic communications efforts are important to achieving success, they should be part 

of an on-going process and not simply a “quick fix,” or means to an end (Smith and Mounter, 2005). 



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

254 

 

On-going Assessment. The CBO/FBO should evaluate communication effectiveness as part of 

individual performance appraisals and provide incentives for successful efforts. Also of importance are 

assessments of the communication process, formally and informally throughout the organization. 

Strategic communications can occur over time by consistent effort on the part of everyone in the 

organization. Like their for-profit counterparts, CBO/FBOs that communicate effectively internally and 

externally, typically are fiscally responsible and have impeccable reputations for high quality products 

and services.  

Delphi Method. Of particular interest for the nonprofit are interventions to address message flow and 

decision-making using the Delphi technique. Delphi is a method for structuring a group communication 

process so that the process is effective in allowing a group of individuals as a whole, to deal with complex 

problems. The Delphi technique is used for increasing stability and reducing uncertainty. Delphi was 

originated at the Rand Corporation in 1948 and was initially developed to provide the Air Force with 

information on the targets for a Soviet nuclear attack. Since the 1960’s, Delphi has been used in a variety 

of settings to help solve human communication problems (DeWine, 1994; Linestone, 1975). 
 

Conclusions 

 

It is essential that CBOs/FBOs respond to the fiscal crisis by pursuing diverse and creative strategies 

that include improving organizational communication in an effort to secure funding, improve and expand 

grant-seeking efforts, and establish structural balance through a mix of sources and methods of increasing 

the bottom line (Blake & Mouton, 1978). It is important for any organization embarking on a path of 

sustainability to consider the following: 
 

1. Effective sustainabilty efforts take time and requires long-term comittment from everyone involved. 

2. Effective sustainabilty efforts do not simply try to correct an organization’s weaknesses, but builds 

upon its assets and strengths. 

3. Successful sustainabilty efforts generally require realistic goals that can be measured and celebrated. 

It is essential to avoid attempting to accomplish the impossible. 

4. Successful initiatives generally begin with a thorough  and systematic organizational assessment 

(Weller and Kimball, 1988). 

5. Sustainabilty efforts are more likely to fail if they are not explicitly mission-driven. 

6. Sustainability is not the end, but a means to an end. If employees and other stakeholders don’t see 

the connection between sustainability and performance, the initiative will fail (Smith, Bucklin & 

Associates, Inc, 1994). 
 

Thus, designing and implementing a strategy for sustainability through organizational communications 

will take time. The most difficult challenge will be encouraging individuals from diverse backgrounds 

and across disciplines to work together as a team. Individuals will also need to be prepared for and 

educated about the changes that are most likely to occur. The internal communications expert will need to 

be keenly aware of how their people consume and interact with information in order to deliver new 

approaches that can be easily adapted. As internal communications moves forward, it will be more central 

to the organization’s sustainability efforts (Bavelas, 1951). Hence, any strategic planning should include 

resources and expertise for the on-going development of technical and organizational communications. A 

shift in the focus to communications as a sustainability strategy is a worthwhile investment best 

demonstrated by making a meaningful difference in the bottom line.    
 

REFERENCES 

 

Andrews, P., & Baird, J. 2005. Communication for business and the professions. Long Grove, IL: 

Waveland Press. 
 

Babbie,  E. 1990. Survey methods research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 
  



Burgess-Wilkerson                                                                                                                                                        Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 247-255 

255 

 

Barrett, D. 2006. Leadership communication. New York: McGraw Hill. 
 

Bavelas, A. 1951. An experimental approach to organizational communication. Personnel, 27: 365-371. 
 

Bell, C., & Nadler, L. 1985. Clients and consultants: Meeting and exceeding expectations. Houston, TX: 

Gulf Publishing. 
 

Blake, R., & Mouton, J. 1978. The new managerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing House. 
 

DeWine, S. 1994. The consultant's craft: Improving organizational communication. New York: St. 

Martin's Press. 
 

Eichelberger, T. 1989. Disciplined inquiry. New York: Longman. 
 

French, W., & Bell, C. 1990. Organization development: Behavioral science interventions for 

organization improvement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 
 

Gillis, T. 2006. The IABC hanbook of organizational communication. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. 
 

Hamilton, S. 1987. A communication audit handbook. White Plains, NY: Longman. 
 

Hansberry, J. 2002. Capacity-building in the nonprofit sector: A comparison of resources and practices in 

Pittsburgh and Denver. 2002 Tropman Report. Pittsburgh, PA: Forbes Fund. 
  

Herndon, S., & Kreps, G. 1995. Qualitative research in business communications: A review and analysis. 

Journal of Business Comunications, 32: 383-399. 
 

Kearns, K., Park, C., & Yankowski, L. 2003. Comparing faith-based and secular community service 

corporations in Pittsburgh. In building the faith: Strategies for building the capacity of faith-based 

organizations and congregations serving Allegheny County Pennsylvaina. Pittsburgh, PA: Forbes 

Fund. 
 

Light, P. 2005. Facing the futures: Building robust nonprofits in the Pittsburgh region. Pittsburgh, PA: 

Forbes Fund. 
 

Linestone, H., & Turloff, M. 1975. The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. London: Addison-

Wesley. 
 

Paytas, J., & Lagana, G. 2006. Built to last: Our Legacy and our future-nonprofits and the regional 

economy. 2006 Tropman reports: Applied research about the Pittsburgh regions nonporfit sector. 

Pittsburgh, PA: The Forbes Fund. 
 

Smith, Bucklin and Associates, Inc. 1994. The complete guide to nonprofit management. Robert H. 

Wilburn, Editor. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 
 

Smith, L., & Mounter, P. 2005. Effective internal communication. Sterling, VA: Kogan Page. 
 

Weller, S., & Kimball, A. 1988. Systematic data collection. Newbury park, CA: Sage.  
 

 

Barbara Burgess-Wilkerson is an assistant professor of management and director of student 

professional development at Winthrop University. She received her Ph.D. in Higher Education 

Administration from University of Pittsburgh. Her current research interests include emotional 

intelligence, business communications, sustainability and communications among non-profits, concept 

mapping and student professional development. She has published in Business Communications 

Quarterly, Advances in Business Research, and Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences.  


