Not-for-profit sector is sensitive to the direct or indirect consequences made by various externally environmental changes.

Factors Economy

Main Impact Boom -Wealth creation but larger gap of wealth -More funds and non-profit organisations are needed to help -High inflation & costs-tightening organisational budget Recession -Suffer declines in funding from government and social giving -May perform better than other sectors due to higher demand -High unemployment rate and social instability bring opportunities

Policy

Government policy -National Competition Policy: competition for sparse funding is a reality for NFPs as competing for funding, donations, volunteers and reputation -Government regulation & future opportunities of cooperation Taxation policy -Income tax exempt charitable entity & tax deductible gift recipient make organisations more attractive Social welfare policy -Regulations, differentiated in each organisation

Social-culture

Demographic -Population growth and incremental social issues such as poverty, education, employment Geographic -Differences and gaps in each state -Indigenous issues towards Aboriginal and Terroes StraitIsland Social values & attitudes -Positive perception attitude and knowledge towards non-profit organisations and more altruistic motives -Charitable trust -Changing in the clients demand cause the industrial

diversification Technology New technology -New methods of reaching donors, volunteers and supporters may such as using Twitter and Facebook -Hardware updating and staff training which generate companies costs and budget Environment Climate change -Global warming and disaster leads to large amount victims and more funds, charities are need to deal with the issue Environment protection -Environment-friendly organisations Figure 1: the PEST analysis of nor-for profit organisations

In recent years, as a whole, the Australian not-for-profits (NFP) sector has grown rapidly and been in the Golden era. The key driving forces behind are the strong economic growth and supported government policies. The Australian buoyant economy brings the larger gap between rich and poor. Hence, more non-profit organisations and more funds are demanded for the disadvantaged groups. On the other hand, during the economic downturn like the GFS, although the whole sector may suffer declines in funding, its overall trend to fare better than other sectors due to the greater demand (Hall, 1990). Since the Australian Government implemented National Competition Policy in 1993, non-profit sector has changed their role into more businesslike sector and each organisation has to be more profitable to survive in incrementally competitive environment. Meanwhile, the tax-deductible policy generate positive stakeholders attitude and encourages the growth. Although government has reinforced intervention by stronger regulations, it provides more opportunities of cooperation, as well. Besides the economic and political factors, the development of NFP sector is contributed by and affected by the social-cultural, technological and environmental changes, shown in Figure 1. Although, the not-for-profit sector expands strongly and continuous growth is still possible, it also faces various challenges, such as the increased competition. To best analyze Whitelions position, the Porters Five Forces of industry examination is warranted.

New Entrants Barriers to entry: MODERA-HIGH - Government policy and legislation (+) - Specialized resources requirement (+) - Capital requirement (-) - Services differentiation (+)

Substitutes Power of Substitutes: MODERATE - Similar or better access to funding sources (+) - Better/worse access to services (+/-) - Only servicing particular population segments (-)

Suppliers Power of Suppliers: HIGH - Depending on volunteers to operate (+) - Other support services in demand (+) - Funders have many projects from which to choose (+)

Buyers Power of Buyers: LOWMODERATE - Participants have some options (+) - Targeted customer with lowincome have little options (-) - Indigenous young people have little options (-)

Intensity of Rivalry Rivalry: MODERATE -Many competitors with bigger size and power (-) -Whitelion operates in service gap (+) Figure 2: Porters Five Forces Model Whitelions main challenges are the strong supplier power and competition in the industry. Barriers to entry are relatively high considering government policies and the necessary resources. As Whitelion fill the service gap, substitutes are the mainly competitors, such as the YMCA, Job services Australian and each substitute has a mixture of strength and weakness comparing to Whitelion. Due to the segments and target markets differ, the substitute power is moderate. This is the consequence made by the specific segments limited power of selecting alternatives. Combining the PEST and market attractiveness analysis, Whitelion builds up its differentiated position in the industry, shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

Key Success Factor In The Industry Funding resources Services offered and the way they are delivered

Brosnan Job Brother Youth Service hood Services Aus All heavily dependent on government funds, hence need to compete to attract more funds from government budget (+/-) White Lion YMCA + (Fill the gap, WEP) + (Employ own client) + (Holistic support service) + (Free of poverty) (No strong focus )

Opportunity /threat Threat due to power of government Opportunity to be further differentiated through unique

Brand awareness and image Volunteer Recruitment

(Not famous) + + (Disadva ntaged teens Indigeno us) + (Rely on compani es)

+ (1851)

+ (1994)

+ (1930)

+ (Gover nment) -

+/-

+/-

Represent user population

+ (Young services)

Cooperation with others

(Fitness centres)

+/-

Customer satisfaction

employment program Threat as low brand awareness and inefficient market programs Opportunity to build strong volunteer relationship Opportunity to continuously differentiating in segments and beneficial from most profitable consumers Opportunity to work with government and strength collaborative partnerships Opportunity to strengthen current compatible strategies

Figure 3: Critical Success Factors In The Industry By looking its threats and opportunities, Whitelion needs to develop effective strategies (Figure 4) to deal with the low-funding and weak-brand-awareness issues and hence further differentiate itself from competitors.

Further Differentiated methods Continuously perfecting current unique WEP and Indigenous EP, especially the tailor-made program Diverse Staff resources more to fundraising/sponsorship management, also perform communications tasks to increase media exposure Registration as criteria required to run a program, including clients,

Consequences Customers wants and needs satisfaction Social and financial contribution and build brand responsibility, reputation and hence generate more funding Establishing strong brand awareness and image through successful campaigns Word-of-mouth marketing strategy Generate more resources of funds

Enhance relationship marketing and emerge brand resonance with buyer,

volunteers, partners

purchaser and user Enrich efficient resources

Request involvement from young teens who have successful experiences with Whitelion to inspire more consumers

Word-of-mouth promotion, more reliable and more persuasive, enhance correct brand knowledge and brand image

Figure 4: Possible Further Differentiated Methods

Reference: Hall, P. D. (1990). Conflicting Managerial Cultures in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership: 1(1, Winter), 153-165