Successful Failure: Functions and Dysfunctions of Civil Society Organizations

Abstract

Although the crucial role of civil society in both the enrichment of political culture and the enhancement of societal participation is undisputed, normative perspectives on civil society organizations (CSOs) tend to neglect their ambivalence. The very fact that CSOs are operating on a nonprofit basis implies vulnerable resource dependencies, which, in turn, translate into differentiated stakeholder action orientations. Although the ideational action orientation—the commitment to a common purpose—unites the constituent groups, utilitarian action orientations may differ. Board members may be interested in gains in terms of reputation and power as well as in networking as an end in itself rather than strengthening the organization’s autonomy through managerial performance. Accordingly, the utilitarian orientation of board members may be incompatible with the action orientation of CSO managers. All this makes CSOs likely candidates for the phenomena of successful failure. Relative failure in the form of underperformance may be tolerated as long as the main stakeholders continue to mobilize resources sufficient for organizational survival. This may be a comparative advantage relative to both private businesses and governmental agencies when it comes to serious societal and political problems that, for various reasons, turn out to be unsolvable but nonetheless need to be addressed somehow without undermining the stability and legitimacy of the institutional core of a democratic polity.