Show simple item record

Reforming accountability in international NGOs: making sense of conflicting feedback

dc.contributor.authorDavis, Thomas W. D.*
dc.contributor.authorMacdonald, Kate*
dc.contributor.authorBrenton, Scott*
dc.date.accessioned2013-02-21T10:08:46Zen
dc.date.available2013-02-21T10:08:46Zen
dc.date.issued2012-09-01en
dc.identifier.issn0961-4524en
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/09614524.2012.696093en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10546/269954en
dc.descriptionHome and field office staff disagreement often impedes international development NGOs (INGOs) from making their accountability systems more responsive to partner and community concerns. Drawing on a staff survey, and qualitative interviews across four country programmes, of a major INGO, three interlocking explanations for this disagreement are suggested: that staff perceive accountability practices differently because they place greater interpretive weight on practices most relevant to their own organisational roles; that divergent views reflect substantively different normative beliefs about accountability; and that differing assessments of accountability practices reflect a strategic misrepresentation of field country experiences as a rational response to power differentials.en
dc.format.extent15en
dc.language.isoEnglishen
dc.publisherOxfam GBen
dc.publisherRoutledgeen
dc.relation.urlhttp://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/reforming-accountability-in-international-ngos-making-sense-of-conflicting-feed-269954
dc.titleReforming accountability in international NGOs: making sense of conflicting feedbacken
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.eissn1364-9213en
dc.identifier.journalDevelopment in Practiceen
oxfam.signoff.statusFor public use – can be shared outside Oxfamen
oxfam.subject.keywordPractitioner experiences
oxfam.subject.keywordINGOs
prism.number7en
prism.volume22en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record