A House Can’t Stand on Sinking Ground—Why INGOs Must Act on Both Fronts

PositiveMinds | Positive Stories | Edition 063

Illustration by A. Coulibaly with canva.com

Some time ago, I warned about the existential threats facing INGOs. In Can INGOs survive the looming financial crisis? I highlighted the growing financial instability and the urgent need for INGOs to embrace innovation and adaptability. Then, in The Fifth Wave, I explored the forces shaping the future of our sector and asked whether they would drive transformation or accelerate decline. 

I had hoped that my concerns would prove exaggerated. Instead, the crisis has come faster, deeper and wider than expected. The USAID crisis hit like a massive earthquake, shaking the foundations of INGOs, sending shockwaves through the global development community and exposing deep structural weaknesses. The aftershocks continue—governments are slashing development budgets, donor priorities are shifting unpredictably, and the ground beneath INGOs remains dangerously unstable. 

Strengthening organisations is necessary, but not sufficient. If INGOs focus solely on strengthening their own structures while ignoring the instability beneath them, they will fall along with the ecosystem that sustains them.

Change repairs the house. Transformation strengthens the ground.

When an earthquake strikes, there are two reactions. Some rush to repair the visible damage—patching cracks, replacing windows, repainting walls. That is change. Others realise that fixing what is broken is not enough. They strengthen their foundations, redesign their structures and make them earthquake-proof. That is transformation.

 Progress has been made over the years. Many INGOs have diversified funding sources, adapted governance models, and strengthened local leadership and partnerships. But most of these efforts have been incremental. Adjustments within existing frameworks have not been sufficient to address the profound changes that are taking place. True resilience requires transformation—so that when the next shockwave hits, organisations not only survive, but emerge stronger. 

In The Future of INGOs, Part 2: The Era of Shifting Power from the Global North to the Global South, I outlined five strategic shifts INGOs must make to remain relevant and legitimate in a rapidly changing landscape. 

First, INGOs must become adaptable like the chameleon, not rigid like the dinosaur. The chameleon does not impose itself—it observes, adapts and changes course when necessary. Decentralisation efforts have been launched, but progress remains slow. Too many structures still prioritise control over flexibility, making it difficult to respond in a volatile environment. Being agile is no longer an aspiration—it is a necessity. As Charles Darwin rightly said:  

"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent. It is the one that is most adaptable to change."

Second, INGOs need to take risks like the royal eagle, not hide like the ostrich. The sector is increasingly unpredictable and playing it safe is no longer an option. Some organisations have experimented with new funding models, adapted their operating models or expanded into advocacy, but the overall approach remains cautious. There is a need for bolder, forward-looking strategies that challenge conventional wisdom. 

Third, the generalist approach is no longer viable. There is a growing recognition that organisations cannot do everything. Some have begun to sharpen their focus, but many are still trying to cover too much ground, trying to be relevant everywhere, all the time, while mastering little. Those that define their niche and invest in deep expertise will be better positioned for the future. 

Fourth, large bureaucratic structures slow down decision-making. While efforts have been made to simplify policies, practices, and processes and empower local teams, governance structures still tend to centralise authority. To become truly networked, with decision-making closer to the point of impact, we need to move beyond discussion to implementation. 

Finally, shifting power to local actors is increasingly recognised as essential, but there is a gap between the pledge and the reality. Many INGOs continue to act as intermediaries rather than facilitators, retaining control over funding and decision-making rather than truly stepping back. Real change means moving beyond rhetoric and ensuring that partnerships are based on shared leadership and trust, and not just contractual arrangements. 

These changes are happening, but too slowly and too superficially. 

The choice is no longer between change and transformation—it is between transformation and irrelevance.

Stabilising the ground—Together

Strengthening the structures of INGOs is essential, but no organisation can thrive in a collapsing system. Fortifying individual houses while ignoring the crumbling ground beneath them is a dangerous gamble. INGOs must work on both fronts—building their internal resilience while working collectively to stabilise the wider ecosystem. 

This dual effort raises urgent questions: How do we prevent further collapse while taking care of our own houses? What practical steps must INGOs take to ensure that the foundations beneath them remain solid? 

First, INGOs need to collaborate, not compete. There is a growing shift away from zero-sum competition for funding, but collaboration is often still transactional rather than transformative. The sector needs to accelerate its efforts to collaborate—not just on projects but also in securing the financial and political landscape that supports global development efforts. 

Second, advocacy needs to go beyond organisational interests. While some INGOs have taken bold positions on climate justice, gender justice, economic justice, decolonisation and civic space, broader systemic change remains elusive. This is not a time for cautious advocacy; it is a time to push for fundamental policy changes that will secure development finance and reshape global power structures. 

Third, the funding model needs to be rethought. Traditional funding streams are shrinking and alternative financing approaches—such as impact investing, crowdfunding, social enterprises, pooled funds and direct support to national organisations—are being explored. However, these efforts are still more peripheral than central to organisational strategy. Moving beyond pilot initiatives and integrating new funding models into core operations is critical. 

Fourth, waiting is no longer an option. Internal restructuring must go hand in hand with sector-wide change. Organisations that act now—strengthening their internal structures while strengthening the wider ecosystem—will be the ones that survive and thrive. 

Fifth, resources must be pooled rather than duplicated. Shared infrastructure, from digital platforms to joint research initiatives, is beginning to emerge, but progress is uneven. The sector must move beyond ad hoc collaboration and commit to scaling collective approaches that create efficiencies, reduce costs and increase impact.

We are already late, so we need to catch up.

The sector is not where it was ten years ago. INGOs have taken important steps to rethink their roles, funding streams, structures, operating models and governance. These efforts are commendable, but they have not gone far enough or fast enough. 

The USAID crisis is not just a bump in the road—it is an ongoing earthquake that is shaking INGOs to their core. The aftershocks are spreading, and they will only intensify if organisations continue to act as if this is just another financial crisis that will pass.

 We are not at the moment of action—we are past it. There is no later, no "wait and see." There is no more time to patch up the walls while ignoring the crumbling foundation. 

What INGOs do next will determine their survival. The question is no longer whether they need to transform—it is whether they will act quickly enough to survive the transformation already happening around them. 

Just as a forest cannot thrive if the ecosystem is collapsing, INGOs need to repair their houses while strengthening the ground beneath them. 

In the end, it doesn't matter how strong an organisation is—if we let the ground collapse, we all fall together.