Home/Search Documents Themes Visuals Context FAQ/Contact Documents   2010+ 2000-2009 1990-1999 1980-1989 1970-1979 1962-1969 All years PDF docs Themes   Organizations and networks Conferencing and dialogue Human development Knowledge organization Comprehension & communicability Conceptual patterns Knowledge presentation Learning, experiments, patterns Strategy and governance Challenges, problems, issues Management & information systems Musings Resources Organizations and networks   International organizations and associations Civil society Interrelationship Networking, tensegrity, virtual organization Beyond the matrix Community,lifestyle, occupation Case study: Union of International Associations Conferencing and dialogue   Dialogue and transformative conferencing Human development   Human development and self-reflection Faith, religion and spirituality Human values and wisdom Existential engagement and embodiment Community, lifestyle, occupation Time: futures, present moment, history Knowledge organization   Beyond the matrix Diversity, variety, typology Knowledge organization and classification Systems, complexity, loops, maths Synthesis, transdisciplinarity and integration Comprehension & communicability   Comprehension and communicability Terrorism: the conceptual challenge Criticism, bias and dissent Conceptual patterns   Configurations and patterns Paradigm change, social transformation Alternation, dynamics, movement Polarization, dilemmas, duality Knowledge presentation   Visualization, presentation, mapping Metaphor for governance Identity through metaphor Culture and aesthetics Language Learning, experiments, patterns   Learning, education Experiments, case studies, forms of presentation Experimental declarations Patterns of I Ching / Tao te Ching Strategy and governance   Global strategy and policy making Governance, democracy, participation, access Legal status, agreements, rights Declarations, principles, guidelines Challenges, problems, issues   World problems / issues Collaboration on specific issues Sustainable development Community, lifestyle, occupation Management & information systems   Management of international organizations International information and documentation Software innovation and groupware International facilitation and empowerment Musings   Musings, irresponsible and otherwise "Poems" on this Site Quests, questions and answers Resources   Resources, links Data, statistics Visuals   Selected presentations of interrelationships between UIA databases Selected Screen-shots of Problem and Organization Networks in Virtual Reality (PDF images) Network visualizations (PDF images) Gallery of screen shots of virtual reality displays (interrelated problems or organizations) Experimental representations of entity interrelationships (using SVG) NetMap visualizations of questions, world problems, global strategies, and values Network visualizations (PDF images)   2001: Spring maps (organizations, problems, strategies, values) 2002: Network analyses (organizations, problems, strategies, values) 2003: Network analyses (organizations, problems, strategies, values) 2004: Network analyses (organizations, problems, strategies, values) NetMap visualizations of questions, world problems, global strategies, and values   Problems and strategies: Energy / Water / Strategies against violence Questions: Peace-related / Faith/Prosperity-related Pattern-language Context   Association context (map) Complementary initiatives Research resources Historical associations Complementary initiatives   Cognitive Fusion Reactor (ITER-8) Union of Imaginative Associations University of Earth Union of the Whys Research resources   Laetus in Praesens Historical associations   Union of Intelligible Associations Union of International Associations Mankind 2000 / Humanité 2000 FAQ/Contact   Contact FAQ: Website FAQ: Author? FAQ: Themes FAQ: Style / Content / Method FAQ: Credibility FAQ: Publication policy / Audience FAQ: Links / References / Citations FAQ: Alternative electronic publishing methods FAQ: Site maintenance and errors FAQ: Website   Meaning of Laetus in Praesens? Responsibility for Laetus in Praesens? Ideological agenda? Purpose, motivation or bias? Intent in quotes? FAQ: Author?   Anthony Judge (unless otherwise stated) Bio of Anthony Judge FAQ: Themes   Range of topics treated? Focus/intention of the articles? Obtaining an overview of topics treated? Searching for articles? Obsolescence? Particular biases? FAQ: Style / Content / Method   Advice for the impatient reader? Length / complexity / readability? Mix of "serious" and "irresponsible"? Definitive? Methodology? Critical style? FAQ: Credibility   Authoritative? Knowledge base? Disciplines? Peer review? Basis for writing? Quantity produced? Status? FAQ: Publication policy / Audience   Copyright status? Publication elsewhere? Intended audience? Dissemination? Book form? FAQ: Links / References / Citations   Links to other documents? Self-citation? Bibliographical standard? FAQ: Alternative electronic publishing methods   Content Management System (CMS)? Segment the articles? Blog facility? FAQ: Site maintenance and errors   Under construction? Articles in draft form? Broken links? Spelling? Errors of fact? Updating indexes?

1972 Comparative Evaluation of Different Types of International Organization - / - Note prepared for a UNESCO expert meeting on international organization studies (Paris, 1972) Introduction There is a current of dissatisfaction and confusion concerning the means of comparing different types of international organization. This is particularly evident in connection with the 2700 international nongovernmental nonprofit organizations, less so in connection with the thousands of multinational enterprises, but rarely in connection with the 200 intergovernmental organizations. The object of any such comparison could be: to have some agreed-upon scale by which the more "significant" or 'important'' organizations to be contacted would be isolated. to attempt cross-comparisons between NGOs, MNCs, and IGOs and even with nations of comparisons of MNCs with with nations) to reduce dependence upon legal criteria which artificially separate organizations of equal functional im- (eg "international" organizations are separated from "national" organizations with international programs in a large number of countries, when many of the latter group may be functionally more significant). These notes are an attempt to examine a few of the questions in any such comparisons. Of particular value is the relative significance of different forms of organization as features of the social system, representing different types of interests (political, economic, or other) of the individuals in the system -- irrespective of any one single conventional or legal boundary. Quantitative measures available A number of possible available measures are tentatively listed in Table 1. This is structured as though comparison were possible or useful between the four categories -- which remains to be seen. Table 1: Some quantitative measures available   Nations IGOs MNCs NGOs A.1. Individuals population combined population consumers product purchases individuals represented 2. employees population (working population) staff staff Staff (including voluntary) B.1. fund exchange with constituency taxes contributions sales Nonprofit income 2. operating budget Admin. budget admin. budget admin. budget admin. budget 3. program budget programs programs programs programs C.1. no of countries represented by individuals ------- countries represented countries of consumer sales Nationalities represented 2. no of continents represented by individuals ----- continents represented continents of consumer sales Continents represented D.1. no of countries of program action no of bilateral agreements No. of countries in which there are national programs no of countries within which business is done No. of countries in which there are national programs 2. no of countries with operating offices no of countries in which there are consulates, embassies, trade missions, etc no of countries with national IGO representative or field offices no of countries with sales or manufacturing offices no. of countries with operating tries in tries with tries with tries with E.1. country source of funds no of countries from which imports are received no of countries contributing no of countries with which business is done no. of countries contributing Comparison might, for example, be useful for empirical program decision-making without being of great theoretical significance. 1. Nations: Nations are frequently ranked according to population, GNP, etc-, 2. Multinational enterprises: MNCs are frequently ranked according to sales (cf. the Fortune list of 500 companies, etc.). The author has attempted a crude ranking of 600 MNCs according to a measure of "internationality" based on nature and number of subsidiaries in foreign countries relative to those in the head quarter country (1). 3. Intergovernmental organizations: No attempt appears to have been made to rank IGOs. 4. International NGOs: No attempt has been made to rank international NGOs (2) In Table 2 is reproduced a list of NGOs in order of mass membership or individuals represented indirectly, via national bodies. In Table 3 some NGOs are listed in order of the number of countries represented. In Table 4 some NGOs are listed in order of their budget (or funds handled). Examination of these lists brought out several obstacles to further programs: some organizations do not provide information under all headings (and therefore cannot be included in all three tables) it is difficult to compare a mass membership organization with a select membership organization some organizations describe their membership in terms of countries and territories (which makes comparison difficult) A crude effort was made to get around the above difficulties by totalling the rankings of an NGO in each list, using means where rankings were absent. The first few NGOs in the resultant list are given in Table 5. Clearly, absence of information unfavourable to an NGO pushes it further up the list. This is not satisfactory. Cross-comparison One of the original stimuli to experiment with cross-comparison was a comparison of national budget of countries with turnover of MNCs (3). The first few in the series were: United States 95.2 Britain 15.2 General Motors 9.6 Italy 8.8 Japan 7.1 Canada 7.0 Standard Oil 5.9 Ford 5.9 Shell 5.9 Sweden 3.6 It was then hoped that by placing countries in order of population, a more interesting comparison with MNCs could be made by inserting MNCs into the sequence on the basis of sales against GNP. The decrease in the latter does not follow the decrease in population of course, and several "rules" were tried to govern insertion -- with little success. The hope had been that NGOs could also be inserted into the se- on the basis of mass membership against population. The non-mass momb3rship NGOs could then have been inserted into the same sequence on the basis of country representation. This approach seems to be of little use and of extremely doubtful significance -except for a journalistic presentation. Development of a ranking technique The following points have to be taken into account: some information will always be absent absent information should not severely penalize the organization's rank the technique should encourage organizations which are more "international" to give extra information which can increase their rank even within the NGOs, significant bodies may have very high or very low membership program funds membership distribution etc The objective must be to capture those bodies which score relatively high when as many factors as possible are taken into account. some factors are more important than others in evaluating the significance of an organization -- but the weighting depends much on the user and therefore must be modifiable. Three approaches were considered: multiplying scores on different scales, for each body, and ranking on the total adding scores on different scales, for each body, end ranking on the total a combination of adding and multiplying The first approach was rejected because of the problem of handling the many cases where either information would be absent, because not available, or absent, because it was not a significant operating characteristic of the organization. The second was rejected in favour of the third to permit overall addition but multiplication within factors when these could be "exploded" to give a more elaborate assessment. Illustration: Score = a1(factor)2 + a2(factor)2 + a3(factor)3 + ... where an = weighting to be attached to each factor but an(factor) may be exploded as: an(bn1(factor))n1 + bn2(factor)n2...) where bnn equals weighting to be attached to a component factor (which may itself score as zero) Similarly each of the factors may be exploded when appropriate – an "onion peel" principle. The argument would be as more information was given on a factor and it could be examined at a lower level, this extra information should itself tend to push the overall score up, ie more detailed information can only improve the score, it cannot push it down. Example: Suppose an organization it has members in 87 countries, this would be described as: Score = ...ap(87)+ .... If this was amplified as 87 countries with a given distribution by continent the score becomes: score = ...ap(bp(35)+bp2(20)+bp3(30)+bp4(7)...)+.... where the b factors are the number of continents activated It would be an advantage to allow the user to experiment with different wieghtings to refine the importance which he attaches to different factors. It would seen that th is approach would be satisfactorily tested. Non-quantitative actors could also be scored and weighted for addition to the others, eg: nature of membership Mass Special mass Professional Specialized professional The difficulty would be to score each so that millions of mass members would be appropriately counterbalanced by the right factor weighting. Whilst this technique could be used for ranking NGOs only, given the contents of Table 1, it might also be possible to Attempt useful comparaison with MNCs, IGOs, etc. Comparaisons using financial ratios There is a long-established practice of using fainancial ratios, based on analysis of the financial statements, to: analyze the performance of a corporation compare a corporation’s financial performance to that of other corporations Many financial ratios have been studied for this purpose, to help analyze the "health" and equilibrium of an organization. The argument has always been that these techniques could not be applied to organizations without any profit objective. Such techniques have, however, been applied to a limited extent to compare the performance of national nonprofit associations in the U.S.A.(4). There seems to be much scope for using them to compare international NGOs, IGOs, and to cross-compare on equivalent budget items. Certain mixed (financial/nonfinancial) ratios are used such as GNP/ capita. These might well be used in cross-comparisons, eg GNP/capita as a possible equivalent to sales/employee (MNC) or to total funds/employee (IGO or NGO). Tables 2-5 In Table 2 is reproduced a list of NGOs in order of mass membership or individuals represented indirectly, via national bodies.. Table 2: NGOs in order of mass membership Organization membership in millions countries     International Social Security 500.0 91 International Cooperative Alliance 255.5 61 League of Red Cross Societies 225.0 115 World Federation of Trade Unions 155.0 53 World Federation of Democratic Youth 101.0 115 Socialist International 73.4 48 Lutheran World Federation 53.2 52 International Confederation of Free Trade Unions 48.4 91 World of Credit Unions 38.0 39 International Touring Alliance 30.0 85 Baptist World Alliance 26.0 72 International Automobile Federation 23.0 79 International Amateur Basketball Federation 20.0 132 World Veterans Federation 20.0 49 World Methodist Council 118.8 78 Boy Scouts World Bureau 12.0 102 General Federation of Women's Clubs 11.0 49 Would Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts 6.1 87 International Association of Crafts and Small and Medium- Sized Enterprises 6.0 22 Associated Country Women of the World 6.0 66 World Confederation of Organizations of the Teaching Profession 5.0 85 International Federation of Resistance Movements 3.0 20 International Federation of Photographic Art 2.5 66 General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists 2.0 187 African Trade Union Confederation 2.0 30 International Council of Social Democratic Women 2.0 33 In Table 3 some NGOs are listed in order of the number of countries represented. Table 3. NGOs in order of countries represented (organization / countries / members) Baha'iinternational Community 319 —— Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society 207 1,600,000 General Confederation of Seventh Day Adventists 187 2,000,000 Rotary International 149 707,500 Lions International 147 960,000 International Amateur Athletic Fed 142 —— International Fed of Association Football 140 Society for International Development 135 —— International Amateur Basketball Fed 132 20,000,000 International Olympic Committee 131 —— World Peace Through Law Center 128 5,000 International Hotelassociation 123 —— International Amateur Boxing Assn 115 —— League of Red Cross Societies 115 225,000,000 World Federation of Democratic Youth 115 101,000,000 International Criminal Police Org 111 —— Society of St. Vincent de Paul 107 608,000 International Air Transport Assn. 106 —— Boy Scouts World Bureau 102 12,000,000 International Volleyball Federation 102 —— InternationalAssn of Universities 101 —— In Table 4 some NGOs are listed in order of their budget (or funds handled). Table 4. NGOs in order of budget (organization / budget / members ) General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists $211,000,000 2,000,000 Lions International 10,000,000 966,000 International Air Transport Assn 3,000.000 League of Red Cross Societies 1,100,000 225,000,000 Junior Chamber International 890,000 —— International Recreation Assn 872,000 —— The Criminal Police Organization 850,000 —— International Road Federation 750,000 —— Int. Union for Conservationof Nature and Natural Resources 730.000 —— Int Chamber of Commerce 580,000 -— International union against Cancer 590.000 —— World Peace Through Law Center 550,000 5,000 International Cooperative Alliance 360,000 53,200,000 Lutheran World Federation 332,000 53,200,000 World Confederation of Organizations of the Teaching Profession 300,000 5,000,000 International assn of universities 285,000 —— International Hotel Association 220,000 —— Baptist World Alliance 200,000 26,000,000 Society for InternationalDevelopment '20,000 —— Studies and Expansion Society 90,000 —— World Fed Of United Nations Assns 80.000 —— Universal Esperanto Association 777,000 33,500 International Amateur Basketball Fed 50,000 20,000,000 International Amateur Wrestling Fed 25,000 —— Int Catholic Assnfor Radio and TV 23,000 —— Table 5: Overall ranking of leading NGOs (mass membership, no. of countries represented, and budget) Table 5. Overall Ranking of Loading NGOs (organization / mass membership / countries represented / budget) Baha'i International Community — 319 International Amateur Athletic Federation — 142 League of Red Cross Societies 225,000,000 115 $1,100,000 International Federation of Association Football — 140 _ World Federation of Democratic Youth 101,000,000 115 General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists 2,000,000 — $211,000,000 International Air Transport Association — 106 $ 3,000,000 International Olympic Committee _ 131 International Criminal Police Organization — 111 $ 850,000 Lions International 968,000 147 $ 10,000,000 Society for International Development 135 $120,000 International Social Security Association 500,000,000 91 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society 1,600,000 207 International Hotel Association 123 S 220,000 International Amateur Basketball Federation 20,000,000 132 3 50,000 Boy Scouts World Bureau 12,000,000 102 International Confederation of Free Trade Unions 48,400,000 91 International Association of Universities 101 $ 285,000 References Anthony Judge. Multinational business enterprises. In: Yearbook of International Organizations (1968-1969) [text] The author has produced a crude list of over 100 NGOs ranked on a measure of the number of times they have been recognized by IGOs (see Yearbook of International Organizations 1972-73). This is one measure of their importance to the intergovernmental system. G P Speeckaert Quo pense-t-on des sociétés internationales Introduction à une petite anthologie. 'Associations Interna- 24, 2, pp. 71-88. Anthony Judge. Management and Assessment of Financial Resources. International Associations 23, 1971 52 p. 287-293, reporting on: Ernst and Ernst (Comp.). Association Operating Ratio Report. Washington, American Society of Association Executives, 1967, 36 p. (see also: Policies and Procedures of Associations. Washington, ASAE, 1968, which is a comparative analysis of financial, and nonfinancial characteristics of 1326 USA national associations. [text]

This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Licence.