The Double-Edged Nature of Non-Profit Collaboration: Strategic Lessons and Future Research Directions
Author: Dr. Anna Neya Kazanskaia
Publisher: NEYA Global Publishing
Article | NEYA Global Journal of Non-Profit Studies
Year: 2025
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5669-1676
DOI: https://doi.org/10.64357/neya-gjnps-ntallstrscimp-10
Usage Terms: Institutional, organizational, or professional use requires an active license from NEYA Global
About the Article
Non-profit collaboration is both indispensable and contested. Alliances enhance scale, legitimacy, and resilience, yet they introduce risks of dependency, donor capture, and power asymmetries. This article synthesizes insights from NGO network studies to identify conditions under which collaboration strengthens effectiveness and when it generates vulnerabilities. Key factors include balancing inclusivity with efficiency, linking grassroots actors to institutional arenas, and combining trust with accountability. Strategic reflection on trade-offs guides practitioners in deciding when alliances serve mission integrity. For scholars, the article highlights the need for research on digital vulnerabilities, ethical dilemmas, and comparative variations across political and regional contexts. Ultimately, non-profit collaboration is a double-edged sword, requiring critically informed, strategically grounded, and ethically responsible engagement.
Key Topics
- Non-profit collaboration and NGO networks
- Governance and strategic trade-offs
- Donor dependency and power asymmetries
- Legitimacy and solidarity
- Digital transformation and ethical risks
- Strategic and contextual decision-making
Suggested Citation
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). The Double-Edged Nature of Non-Profit Collaboration: Strategic Lessons and Future Research Directions. NEYA Global Journal of Non-Profit Studies. NEYA Global Publishing. https://doi.org/10.64357/neya-gjnps-ntallstrscimp-10
References
Banks, N., Hulme, D., & Edwards, M. (2015). NGOs, states, and donors revisited: Still too close for comfort? World Development, 66, 707–718.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.09.028
Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on NGOs. World Development, 24(6), 961–973.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(96)00019-8
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). Networks & Alliances: Strategies for Social Impact. NEYA Global Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.64357/collaboration-2025
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). Motivations for networking among non-profit organizations: Instrumental, normative, and defensive drivers. Neya Global Journal of Non-Profit Studies.
https://doi.org/10.64357/neya-gjnps-ntallstrscimp-04
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). Benefits and risks of NGO alliances: Balancing efficiency, legitimacy, and autonomy. Neya Global Journal of Non-Profit Studies.
https://doi.org/10.64357/neya-gjnps-ntallstrscimp-06
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). The future of non-profit collaboration: Digital innovation, transnational solidarity, and hybrid alliances. Neya Global Journal of Non-Profit Studies.
https://doi.org/10.64357/neya-gjnps-ntallstrscimp-09
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). Participatory Development for Change. NEYA Global Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.64357/participatory-development-2025
Kazanskaia, A. N. (2025). Climate Change and Development: Strategies for Adaptation. NEYA Global Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.64357/climate-change-and-development-2025
Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: The dark side of internet freedom. PublicAffairs.
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015
Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press.
