Triple dilemma
These organisations are increasingly confronted with a strategic trilemma:
Should they adapt to externally imposed norms to secure funding, as some environmental NGOs in China have done by reframing their mission around development or public health rather than activism, allowing them to continue operating?
Should they resist by remaining faithful to their founding principles at the risk of losing critical resources, as Médecins Sans Frontières did in 2016 when it refused EU funding in protest of the Union’s migration policy, prioritising ethical autonomy over financial support?
Or should they relocate to a more supportive political and legal environment, as Open Society Foundations chose to do in 2018 when it moved its European operations from Hungary to Berlin in response to growing government hostility?
Internal Dynamics & External Perceptions of Strategic Choices
Each of these strategic options reshapes how an organisation defines its mission, preserves its independence, and is perceived both by its stakeholders and the communities it serves. While adaptation may ensure continued access to funding, it can also limit thematic or geographic reach. Resistance often safeguards core values but may constrain operational capacity. Relocation can offer legal protection and renewed flexibility, though at the cost of disrupted coordination and institutional continuity.
Such choices also influence external positioning. Adapting to dominant expectations may strengthen formal recognition but risk distancing the organisation from activist circles. A posture of resistance can enhance credibility among grassroots actors while reducing access to policy platforms. Relocating operations might protect autonomy yet raise concerns about local disengagement and diminished representativeness.
Internally, perceived misalignment between strategic direction and founding principles can weaken trust, diminish morale, and erode cohesion—ultimately compromising the organisation’s long-term resilience.
This article is a contribution by Kadrant, a specialist Brussels-based independent law firm whose lawyers have an in-depth knowledge and expertise in the not-for profit sector. For more information, please visit www.kadrantlaw.com or write to mauri@kadrantlaw.com.
A Decision-Making Framework
Strategic decisions—whether to adapt, resist, or relocate—cannot be made reactively or in isolation. They require deliberate reflection guided by a set of key considerations. While no single framework can capture the full complexity of organisational realities, several interrelated criteria can help structure a meaningful assessment. These dimensions are neither exhaustive nor prescriptive, but they offer a valuable compass for navigating high-stakes decisions.
- Nature and Scope of the Constraint
What is the origin of the pressure—legal, political, financial, or cultural? Is it local or systemic, short-term or enduring? Does it affect the entire organisation or only specific activities?
- Compatibility with Core Values
Can the organisation adjust without compromising its founding principles? Are the proposed changes consistent with its ethical identity and mission?
- Impact on Operational Capacity
How will each option affect the ability to deliver programmes, mobilise staff, and maintain organisational continuity?
- Membership and Internal Cohesion
How might members, volunteers, staff, and supporters respond? Is there a risk of internal fragmentation, loss of trust, or disengagement?
- Financial Sustainability
What are the implications for funding streams, diversification strategies, and the long-term ability to remain financially autonomous?
- Geographic and Legal Flexibility
Is relocation feasible without weakening effectiveness or legitimacy? Does the legal framework in a potential host country offer greater protection or stability?
- Strategic Alliances and Stakeholder Relations
How might existing relationships with funders, partner organisations, or public institutions be affected? Could new alliances emerge from a repositioning?
A Strategic but Not neutral Choice
There’s no universal answer to the funding dilemmas associations face today. Some will choose to adapt quietly, others will take a stand, and a few may decide to move elsewhere. What matters is being aware that every financial decision is also a political one—and that staying true to an organisation’s mission may sometimes mean refusing what’s on offer.