The Octagon

A tool for the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in NGOs

Target group

Working
environment
Structure
Activities

Expertise
Systems and
finance

Relevance
Identity
SWEDISH INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
COOPERATION AGENCY

S-105 25 Stockholm, Sweden

Tel: +46 (0)8 698 50 00. Fax: +46 (0)8 20 88 64
www.sida.se
Table of Contents
Description of the Octagon .......................................................................................... 3
How the Octagon came into being .................................................................................................. 3
The idea behind the Octagon .......................................................................................................... 3
How to use the Octagon .................................................................................................................. 4
Users’ Guide for the Octagon ...................................................................................... 8
The organisational base ................................................................................................................... 8
Activities – output ........................................................................................................................... 11
Capacity ......................................................................................................................................... 14
Relations ......................................................................................................................................... 18
Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................... 21
Basic values and identity ................................................................................................................ 21
Activities – output ........................................................................................................................... 22
Capacity ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Relations ......................................................................................................................................... 24
Appendix 2 ............................................................................................................... 25

THE OCTAGON 2002 1

2 OKTAGONEN 2002
Description of the Octagon

How the Octagon came into being

In 1999, Sida invited a number of Swedish non-governmental organisations (NGOs),
the so-called frame organisations, to a discussion on possible ways of measuring results
of the support provided for capacity and organisation development at local partner
organisations. A special reference group for reporting results was formed, consisting of
representatives of most of the frame organisations. In May 2000, a model for the
evaluation and follow-up of organisations was presented to this group. The model –
the Octagon – was presented by a consultant, Peter Winai, on behalf of Sida.

Peter Winai was commissioned to further develop the model together with another
consultant, Anders Ingelstam, and a small working group consisting of representatives
of Sida and some of the frame organisations. Among other things, a manual was
produced as well as a tool for compiling data in tabular form.

One year later it was possible to present a complete model to the frame organisations.
Prior to the formal launching of the model, Sida implemented a pilot project in
cooperation with Diakonia, in which the model was tested by some of Diakonia’s local
partner organisations in South America and Asia. The analyses of these pilot projects
led to certain revisions being made to the model, which is presented here in its final
form.

The idea behind the Octagon

The main purpose of Sida’s support to Swedish NGOs is to promote the development
of robust and democratic civil societies and to strengthen local partner organisations in
developing countries. The method provides support for organisation and capacity
development.

The Octagon is a tool for the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in NGOs and
can be used by both the Swedish organisations and their partners in cooperation. The
Octagon can function as an instrument to structure the dialogue with a partner organi-
sation when the aim is to obtain an overall picture of the organisation and to get to
know it well. It can also serve as an aid for the selection of partners; for grouping
partner organisations in relation to their needs of internal organisation development;
or for identifying the point in time when the Swedish organisation, as the financier,
should phase out its support for organisation development.

The Octagon is based on the idea that it is possible to obtain a comprehensive picture
of an organisation’s capacity and development profile by making systematic reviews
and assessments of four basic aspects:

– The organisation’s objectives and management/administrative structures, the so-called

organisational base.

– The organisation’s activities with or for selected target groups, i.e. output. (N.B. It is
easy to confuse this with the effects of the organisation’s work, which cannot be
assessed with the Octagon.)

OKTAGONEN 2002 3
– The organisation’s capacity to succeed in its work. This refers both to its professional
skills and the funds at its disposal, as well as its administrative systems.

– The organisation’s capacity to create and maintain relations with its target groups
and other actors in civil society.

Apart from the fact that the Octagon is a tool for rapid and simple analyses of an
organisation’s strengths and weaknesses, the model also identifies necessary measures
to improve the organisation’s capacity to perform effectively. If the same type of
analysis is made systematically on several occasions over several years, it is also possible
to follow changes in the organisation in question. In this way, the Octagon can be used
both for “base-line studies” and for measuring changes and results of internal organi-
sation development over a certain period of time.

In other words, the development of an organisation can be measured with the aid of
the Octagon. On the other hand, it does not evaluate the results of certain projects, i.e.
the effects of the organisation’s work with or for target groups. This is intentional.

The Octagon can also provide a form of support prior to a major programme for
organisation development. Since it provides a comprehensive picture of central parts
of the organisation, it can be used, for example, to initiate a dialogue among the staff
or management at the organisation. However, the Octagon has limitations if it is used
for the purpose of developing an organisation. In such cases it needs the support of
other, in-depth tools.

How to use the Octagon

The Octagon is constructed in such a way that four basic aspects of an organisation
are analysed with the aid of eight variables.

The organisation’s base:

1. Identity: The organisation expresses its basic values and has articulated the reasons
for its existence.

2. Structure: The organisation’s management and its division of duties and responsibili-
ties are explicit and visible.

The organisation’s activities – output:

3. Implementation of activities: The organisation has the capacity to plan and to
implement planned activities.

4. Relevance of activities: The content of activities and the methods used are relevant in
relation to the organisation’s vision and operational objectives.

The organisation’s capacity development:

5. Professional skills: voluntary and paid staff and management have the requisite
professional skills and qualifications to pursue and develop the organisation’s
operational objectives and vision.

6. Systems: The organisation has the financial resources and administrative routines to
run its activities.

4 OKTAGONEN 2002
The organisation’s relations:
7. Acceptance and support of target groups: The target groups’ assessment of the organisa-
tion and the demand for its activities give the organisation legitimacy.

8. Relations with its external environment: The organisation is accepted and supported in
the community and is able to mobilise support for its vision and operational objec-
tives.

The eight variables form an octagon. Each dimension is ranked by assessments of two
statements/questions on a seven-point scale. When all the variables have been analysed
and ranked, the average points are transferred to an Excel document where the organi-
sation’s development profile is illustrated in the form of an octagon (see Figure 1).

A
Target group B
7

6
A A
Working environment B 5
Activities B

1
A A
Expertise B 0 Relevance B
kk

A A
Systems and finance B Identity B

A
Structure B

Figure 1. Example of the result of a measurement.

As a user of the Octagon, it is important in the first place to determine the purpose of
collecting information on an organisation, regardless of whether it is a partner organi-
sation or one’s own organisation. Likewise, it is also important to document this work.
Appendices 1 and 2 contain forms that can be used for this purpose. In order to
produce a picture of the organisation in the form of an octagon, access Excel is re-
quired. This handbook is available on Sida’s web-site in pdf format, including the
Octagon in Excel. The Octagon is also available in Swedish and Spanish.

I. A tool for the follow-up and measurement of results of organisation development

It is possible for financiers or partners to use the Octagon as a tool for measuring
results or following up organisation development at a partner organisation. However, it
is important to be aware of the fact that the Octagon is based completely on subjective
assessments of the organisation. Its subjectivity makes the Octagon a sensitive instru-
ment. Therefore, it is important to give reasons in writing for each ranking of the
Octagon’s eight variables on the very first occasion measurements are made. In order
to measure results, it is necessary to make analyses of the same variable on several
occasions over a long period of time, for example at one-year or five-year intervals.
Since the person who makes the first Octagon analysis of a partner organisation may

OKTAGONEN 2002 5
change his/her opinion over the course of time or may be replaced, it is necessary to
document what, for example, was the reason for awarding four points in one part of
the Octagon analysis on the first occasion. The weakness of the Octagon as an instru-
ment for measuring change is the risk that it is the basis used for personal assessments
that has changed and is reflected in the Octagon’s results, rather than real changes at
the partner organisation. As long as there is awareness of this risk and everything
possible is done to eliminate subjectivity in assessments, the Octagon will function as a
tool for rapid results analyses. The form in appendix 2 can be used to advantage for
this purpose.

II. A tool to start organisation development at a deeper level

If you, as a financier, partner or consultant, intend to use the Octagon for organisation
development purposes, it is important to remember that the Octagon is a tool for
making a rough initial analysis of an organisation. Thereafter, other tools must be
used. The responsibility for the process must rest with the partner organisation. Never-
theless, you must explain that the purpose of your initiative to make an Octagon
analysis is the first stage in providing support for the internal organisational develop-
ment of the partner organisation, and describe the forms of your support for this
process in the future. Is your role to finance measures that have been identified? To act
as a sounding board or as a mentor? Or something else? The partner organisation
must feel that it has the overall responsibility for the strengths and weaknesses that
emerge in the analysis, while your role as an analyst can be active or not so active.

It is possible to use the Octagon as the first step for organisation development purposes
if the tool is used as an instrument for a so-called self-assessment process and involves
many diverse representatives of the organisation. Where self-assessment processes are
concerned, it is also necessary to have a moderator who is well-informed about the
different components of the Octagon. The moderator’s role is to lead the discussion. A
self-assessment process for organisation development purposes is a one-day workshop
and should involve 3–7 persons from the organisation who have different areas of
responsibility and different perspectives on the organisation’s work. It should possibly
also include members or representatives of the target group. A self-assessment process
of this type requires a considerable degree of openness in the organisation. Partici-
pants should be able to express themselves freely and they should have the capacity to
listen constructively to different experience. If there is the slightest uncertainty about
the organisation’s ability to handle differences of opinion among the staff, it is recom-
mended that the self-assessments are made first in homogenous groups: the operative
personnel, management or the target group only. Thereafter, the different groups
should be brought together for a joint discussion at which each group’s self-assessment
is presented and analysed. In this way, experience is presented at a general, overall level
rather than a personal level.

A self-assessment workshop should preferably be started with a presentation of the

Octagon’s eight variables. Thereafter, let the participants individually apply the Octa-
gon to their own organisation and rate the eight variables. Also, in connection with
this, ask the participants to identify what is lacking for a maximum seven-point rating.
The rating process should be regarded as an aid for a group discussion on the organisa-
tion’s current strengths and weaknesses, and changes that will be necessary in the
future. In this way, at the same time as an analysis has been made of the organisation’s

6 OKTAGONEN 2002
strengths and weaknesses, a plan of action for the organisation has also been identified.
For individual ratings, the form in appendix 1 can be used. To document the group’s
overall ratings, the consensus-based rating, and the plan of action that has been identi-
fied, appendix 2 can be used.

In order to produce the visual picture of the Octagon, access to Excel is required.
Transfer the ratings to the Excel matrix and the organisation’s profile will be visible in
the form of an octagon.

III. A tool for deeper understanding and dialogue with the partner organisation
If you, as a financier or partner, intend to use the Octagon with the aim of improving
your dialogue with, and understanding of, another organisation, you should make it
clear to the partner organisation what the information will be used for. Is it to be used
for initiating or phasing-out cooperation? Is it to be used in a decision on an increase/
reduction in grants? Information for the purpose of understanding another organisa-
tion can be obtained with a large or small degree of participation on the part of the
organisation concerned. If it is a question of an organisation that has been a partner
organisation for a very long time and a great deal of information on the organisation is
thus already available, individual supplementary interviews with key persons in man-
agement or in the field can be sufficient to make a complete Octagon analysis of the
partner organisation. If the partner organisation is involved in the analysis, it is recom-
mended that several persons be included in the process: representatives of manage-
ment, the operative personnel and possible the target group. You can then form a
picture of the organisation’s strengths and weaknesses in the light of the responses
given by these representatives of the organisation to the Octagon’s eight areas of
analysis. It can be a delicate matter to bring these representatives together and hold a
group discussion. In order to obtain as frank responses as possible, you should consider
interviewing them on different occasions, or holding group discussions in which each
group is homogenous. Use appendix 2 to document your assessment of the partner
organisation. There is space on the assessment form for regular assessments. This
makes it possible to follow developments and results over time.

OKTAGONEN 2002 7
Users’ Guide for the Octagon

◆ The organisational base

A strong institution has a democratic Target group
7
A
B

structure and is open to insight. The Working environment

A
6
Activities
A
B B
application of democratic rules also
5

includes promoting the participation 3

of women. Furthermore, it is impor- Expertise A

1
A
0 Relevance
tant that the organisation has a vision
B B

and a mission – in other words, the

organisation knows what it wants to A A
Systems and finance Identity
achieve and how it should do it. B B

A
Structure B

An institution’s strength is shown,

among other things, in the existence
of a structure that holds the organisation together, and that is not dependent on
individual leaders or members. A structure of this type is shown by a clear division of
duties and responsibilities. Registration at the authorities (in those countries where this
is possible) can provide a good indication of the degree of structure in the organisation.

1. An organisation’s basic values and identity

A. Formulation of the organisation’s vision and mission

An organisation’s identity can be expressed in different ways, for example with the aid
of written declarations that describe the reasons for the establishment of the organisa-
tion, the objectives the organisation wishes to achieve in the future (vision), and the
contributions the organisation wishes to make (mission). The organisation’s members
can then support the basic vision to varying degrees.

Ascertain whether the vision has been documented; if it has been discussed internally;
how it was developed; and who participated in its development.

Highest points are awarded if the organisation’s vision and mission are documented in
writing, are known and accepted by all members of staff, and have been spread outside
the organisation.

Lowest points are awarded if the organisation has not defined the purpose of its
activities, the objectives it wishes to achieve, or its mission in society.

One characteristic of an intermediate situation is that a person who wishes to find out
about the organisation’s basic concept can be given information in the form of written
and oral descriptions.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

8 OKTAGONEN 2002
B. Formulation of relevant strategies in relation to the vision
Where the organisation’s stage of development is concerned, the crucial factor is
whether there are strategies – courses of action – for the realisation of the vision.
Ascertain whether written strategies exist or whether strategies of this type have been
discussed and whether these reflect what the organisation claims it is working with. Are
there sub-goals that shall be achieved on the way to realising the vision and the overall
objectives?

Highest points are awarded if the organisation has devised strategies that have been
documented and which are clearly linked to the organisation’s vision. The organisation
has also formulated sub-goals that shall be achieved in order to realise the vision and
overall objectives.

Lowest points are awarded if the organisation has not formulated any strategies at all,
not even ideas that can be expressed orally, on how the organisation should proceed
towards its overall objectives.

Characteristics of an intermediate situation are that work has been started on

drawing up strategies and that there are documents that contain strategic consid-
erations.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2. Structure and organisation of activities

A. Application of a clear division of duties and responsibilities

Structure in an organisation means that duties and responsibilities are allocated and
coordinated. The structure can then be made more specific in various ways, for exam-
ple by documenting it in the form of an organisation chart. However, the crucial factor
is the extent to which there is a specific, practical division of duties. It is important to
understand that structure is not the same as hierarchy, i.e. a pyramidal structure. In
principle, the structure can be flat – this is still a structure.

Ascertain whether an organisation chart exists and whether the staff are fully aware of
their positions and duties in the organisation.

Highest points are awarded if management and all members of staff know the duties,
responsibilities and powers they have in the organisation. All functions are also docu-
mented in an organisation chart.

Lowest points are awarded in a situation in which everyone can take on all types of
duties, but there is no specific division of responsibilities.

OKTAGONEN 2002 9
An intermediate situation is characterised by the existence of a certain division of
duties but a lack of clarity in respect of who should really do what and what powers
members of staff actually have.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Application of democratic rules

The concept of structure where non-governmental organisations are concerned also
includes the application of democratic rules and that the manifestation of these rules
in the organisation’s constitution. One of the most important principles is that deci-
sion-makers can be held responsible for their decisions and actions. Furthermore, the
way in which management is appointed and the possibilities available to change the
constitution of the organisation can also provide indications of democracy in the
organisation. Ascertain, for example, the position of management in relation to the
annual general meeting.

A democratic organisation does not exclude participation by people on account of

their sex, or their ethnic or religious affiliation. Ascertain, for example, the breakdown
of men and women among the decision-makers in the organisation, or the extent to
which different ethnic groups are represented.

Highest points are awarded for a completely transparent situation in which there are
routines and systems for the approval of annual accounts and reports, and for the
scrutiny of decisions made by decision-makers. This situation also includes the partici-
pation of both men and women in the decision-making process and their equal repre-
sentation in, for example, management. There are just as many programmes for the
development of the managerial skills of women as there are for men.

Lowest points are awarded for an organisation in which decision-makers are not held
accountable for their actions, and decisions are made without any participation at all
by members of staff. Women or ethnic/religious minorities are largely excluded from
participation in the decision-making process.

Characteristics of an intermediate situation are that the organisation has the ambition
to establish democratic decision-making procedures and there are clear indications that
democratic principles are actually being applied.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

10 OKTAGONEN 2002
◆ Activities – output
Every organisation has the ambition Target group
7
A
B

to supply something, to contribute to Working environment

A
6
Activities
A
B 5 B

change for the better. One important 4

criterion in the assessment of an 3

organisation’s strength is, therefore, A

1
A
Expertise 0 Relevance
whether it has succeeded in delivering
B B

what it has promised. This is naturally

a question of how extensive the
A A
organisation’s activities have suc- Systems and finance B Identity B

ceeded in becoming, and of the Structure A

B

content and quality of activities.

One important aspect in this assessment is whether the organisation has the capacity to
make realistic plans that are based on its policy. One indicator is, therefore, whether it
has performed as planned. Here it is important to assess the relationship between the
organisation’s activities, i.e. its output, and the organisation’s access to financial and
personnel resources.

The other aspect that should be assessed is whether the activities are relevant in rela-
tion to the organisation’s declared vision and objectives. Is the organisation a learning
organisation? The temptation of counting seminars should be avoided – instead an
examination should be made of the quality of the seminars. Therefore, it is important
to see whether there is a continuous discussion on the activities of the organisation and
whether this discussion actually leads the organisation forwards, towards its objectives.

3. The implementation of activities

A. Planning for the implementation of activities

An organisation contributes something to the world around it in the form of goods or
services (output), i.e. it provides an activity for certain, identified target groups. In other
words, it is not a question of output for internal consumption, for example internal
information. This concept is not without problems in non-governmental organisations.
Ascertain what the organisation defines as outputs intended for its target groups. Can
the organisation describe its activities in the form of operational plans? Consider then
the quality of the plans. Are the plans useful for the implementation of the organisa-
tion’s activities and can the results achieved be traced back to the plans?

Highest points are awarded if the organisation can produce operational plans that are
actually used by management and in its activities in order to achieve the organisation’s
objectives. Furthermore, results achieved have been documented and can be traced
back to the plans, i.e. it is possible to see the extent to which the plans have been
fulfilled. The organisation also achieves the planned results.

Lowest points are awarded if there is a total absence of operational plans and the
organisation is unable to describe what it should achieve.

An intermediate situation is characterised by the existence of operational plans, but it

is not completely clear whether they cover all operations or whether all results can
actually be traced back to the plans.

OKTAGONEN 2002 11
 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Follow-up and learning from work done

In this context, follow-up means that results achieved are really compared against
plans. The quality and quantity of the results are placed in relation to resources in-
vested and are evaluated on this basis. Are there systems and routines for regular
follow-ups and are discussions held on the extent to which the results correspond to the
plans? Ascertain whether there are routines to incorporate deviations and experience
gained in new plans, i.e. whether the organisation is a learning organisation.

Highest points are awarded if there is clear evidence that there is a continuous discus-
sion on results in relation to resources, i.e. that there are systems and routines for
regular follow-up and for making good use of experience gained. This means that
conclusions drawn from the follow-ups have a clear impact on future planning, in
which any deviations receive attention.

Lowest points awarded if there is no follow-up and activities tend to continue as before.
Systems and routines for making good use of experience gained have not yet been
developed and the organisation has no idea of the cost of its activities.

An intermediate situation is characterised by questions being asked on how activities

should be run in the future. Thought is also being given to the use of resources and
there is a picture of the quality that should be achieved.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

4. Relevance

A. The content of activities correspond with the vision

The activities pursued by the organisation correspond with its vision. This means that
the work of the organisation is not permitted to be in conflict with the vision or domi-
nate the vision negatively, for example through commercial activities or the exercise of
authority.

The fact that planning and methods development is given priority in an organisation
indicates that the organisation is working strategically in its regular activities in order to
realise its vision and its long-term objectives.

Highest points are awarded if the activities of the organisation actually correspond to
its vision and this is the subject of continuous reflection and internal discussion. Fur-
thermore, planning and methods development are given priority in the organisation.

12 OKTAGONEN 2002
Lowest points are awarded if there is no link between the origination’s activities and its
vision, and planning and methods development are not given priority.

An intermediate situation is characterised by a discussion on the relationship between

activities and vision, but the extent to which they actually correspond is unclear.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Working methods correspond with the vision

An organisation’s working methods must correspond with its vision and objectives, i.e.
the organisation must practise what it preaches. For example, an organisation that
works for respect for human rights cannot exclude a certain group of people on ac-
count of their religious/ethnic affiliation. Awareness of this requirement is shown if
the organisation makes regular evaluations of its working methods. Ascertain whether,
for example, the working methods can be found in policy or strategy documents, and
whether the methods are openly and critically examined by the members of the
organisation.

Highest points are awarded if the organisation practises what it preaches. There is full
awareness in the organisation that its methods should correspond with its vision. The
organisation has also introduced routines for regular evaluation of its working meth-
ods.

Lowest points are awarded if there are double standards and self-contradiction in the
organisation. The organisation is run with methods that are in conflict with the vision.

One characteristic of an intermediate situation is that a discussion is taking place in the

organisation on its working methods, but that no systematic evaluation is made.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

OKTAGONEN 2002 13
◆ Capacity
A
Target group
This refers to all the internal resources that 7
B

an organisation needs in order to do its work Working environment A

B
6

5
Activities
A
B

and to develop the organisation. In other 4

words, this is not merely a question of 2

finance, it also refers to the inputs of the ExpertiseA

B
1

0 Relevance A
B
staff and volunteers, as well as various
systems and structures that create efficiency
and stability in the core activities. To facili- A A
Systems and finance Identity
tate the measurement of these resource
B B

components – while still providing a com- Structure A

B

prehensive picture of the organisation –

decisive and competent leadership has been identified as an indicator. Good manage-
ment provides leadership and has the ability to make good use of the potential of the
staff.

5. Right skills in relation to activities

A. The professional qualifications and experience of the staff

The persons working in the organisation – members, volunteers and employees –
should, as far as possible, have the qualifications and experience necessary to achieve
objectives and to implement plans. This is not merely a question of formal qualifica-
tions, it also includes what can be called tacit knowledge. The engagement of the
target groups in activities is essential, not least to obtain information about their needs.
It is important that there is awareness in the organisation of the importance of rel-
evant qualifications and experience. This would be indicated by the existence of job
descriptions (or similar) for the posts in the organisation, and that the staff working for
the organisation actually have the qualifications and experience stated in the job
descriptions. There are organisations, particularly small organisations, where the duties
rotate among the members. They can nonetheless possess the requisite skills to perform
the different duties. Job descriptions in organisations of this type may be slightly
different, but nonetheless express the organisation’s criteria in respect of qualifications
and experience.

Ascertain whether the organisation has a recruitment strategy and selects personnel in
accordance with existing, documented criteria.

Highest points are awarded to organisations that have documented job descriptions for
all posts and which, in addition, have staff in place that fully meet the criteria of the
job descriptions. Therefore, in the ideal situation, there are no vacancies and all mem-
bers of staff have exactly the qualifications required.

Lowest points are awarded to organisations in which there are no documented require-
ments of qualifications and experience and that the skills possessed by the staff are
unclear or irrelevant in relation to their working duties.

An intermediate situation is characterised by an ongoing discussion of requisite qualifi-

cations and experience and that initial attempts are being made to formulate criteria.
The staff have qualifications and experience that are satisfactory for running activities.

14 OKTAGONEN 2002
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. The ability of management

The ability of management is shown, for example, in its capacity to make good use of
the skills and potential of the staff. This implies that management encourages the
entire work force, women and men, to participate and develop. Other indicators of the
ability of management are regular presence at staff meetings, knowledge of activities,
and the existence of relevant plans for staff development that have been produced in
consideration of individual and group requirements and from a gender equality
perspective.

Highest points are awarded if the staff regard management as legitimate and give
management their active support. Furthermore, there is a living plan for human
resource development that is used and discussed. There are concrete examples of
programmes for staff development that take both individual and group needs into
consideration, and which also have a gender equality perspective.

Lowest points are awarded to organisations where management is not legitimate in the
eyes of the staff or does not participate in activities. Furthermore, there are no plans
for human resource development.

The intermediate situation is characterised by management that is visible, for example

members of staff can refer to directives from management. There is no plan for
human resource development, but the issue of staff development is on the agenda.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

6. Systems for financing and administration

A. Administration of financial resources

Crucial factors for the ability of an organisation to survive are the capacity to handle
its financial dependence, and a realistic perception of what it can do within the frame-
work of the resources it has. A highly developed capacity to handle financial depend-
ence is accompanied by a determination to spread risks and to avoid one-sided depend-
ence on one single financier. The organisation also plans the scope of activities in
relation to its finances. Ascertain which, and how many, sources of finance the organi-
sation has, and whether it is a question of donations, government grants, sales, project
support etc. Examine also whether the organisation has a plan to reduce its depend-
ence on external grants and whether existing financial resources are sufficient to
implement planned activities.

OKTAGONEN 2002 15
Another aspect that reveals a great deal about the administration of financial
resources in an organisation is its bookkeeping. A cash ledger in which expendi-
ture and revenue are recorded regularly, and which permits regular checks on
transactions, is a good start. Are there observable systems and routines for the
bookkeeping of expenses and income (cash ledger) and of assets and liabilities?
In an efficient bookkeeping system, for example, last month’s transactions have
been recorded in the books and are in good order. The existence of perform-
ance reports and annual accounts for the last few years is a further indication
that the bookkeeping is in good order.

In certain countries, particularly those in which democracy is fragile or there is a

dictatorship, the concept of double bookkeeping tends to have the meaning of
registered and unregistered transactions. This can be necessary to avoid harass-
ment and confiscation, but at the same time it increases the risk of corruption

Highest points are awarded when the organisation has guaranteed financing
and, in all probability, several sources of finance. This makes the organisation
minimally vulnerable. The organisation can also show that resources actually
exist for ongoing and planned projects, as well as for regular activities. A book-
keeping system has been installed, is in good working order, and is used.

Lowest points are awarded when the organisation is barely managing to survive
financially and receives funds from one financier who has started to direct
activities. The organisation does not have a cash ledger. Nevertheless the organi-
sation has extensive plans and ongoing projects that, if implemented, will
require additional capital.

Characteristics of the intermediate situation can be that resources are available

for projects, but only in the short term, and that no financing is available for
basic administrative activities. The organisation is dependent on one financier,
but anticipates that it may be possible to obtain financing from another source.
A bookkeeping system is in place, but it is difficult to obtain an overall picture of
the financial situation and financial trends.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-
existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Administrative routines
Highly developed internal administrative systems and routines of various types
are important components of a good organisation. Ascertain the organisation’s
routines for the systematic documentation of its activities: operating manuals,
plans of operation, reports on operations, follow-ups and evaluations, job
descriptions and contracts, registrations and contacts with the authorities etc.
Are there, for example, transparent systems and routines that document knowl-
edge and experience? These tend to enhance the expertise of the organisation
and to make the organisation less vulnerable.

16 OKTAGONEN 2002
Highest points are awarded if the organisation has efficient administrative systems in
which documents are filed systematically. Manuals have been produced on how docu-
ments shall be handled and there are routines to ensure, for example, that time mar-
gins are kept.

Lowest points are awarded if activities are not documented and any documents that do
exist are not filed. The organisation’s knowledge is “documented” in the heads of
individuals.

An intermediate situation is characterised by the existence of an administrative docu-

ment-handling system. However, the system does not function satisfactorily. Docu-
ments (for example reports) are presented, but with difficulties.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

OKTAGONEN 2002 17
◆ Relations
The organisation’s interaction with target
A
Target group B
7

groups and its working environment are Working environment Activities

A
B
6

5
A
B

important for its legitimacy. In the assess- 4

ment of the organisation, the degree of

3

support and acceptance that the organisa- Expertise Relevance

A
1

0 A
B
tion receives from its target groups is impor-
B

tant, as well as whether it cooperates and

conducts an active dialogue with the target A A
Systems and finance Identity
group. The same applies to the organisa- B B

tion’s interaction with its working environ- Structure A

B

ment and its legitimacy in the eyes of other

actors, for example its active participation in
different networks. The organisation’s legitimacy in its own context affects, in turn, the
organisation’s strength and its output.

7. Target groups

A. Support and acceptance by target groups

The support of target groups can be seen in different ways. It must be possible, for
example, to clearly define the target group(s). Does the organisation know which target
group(s) it is working for/with? Another aspect is that the organisation is active in its
relations with its target groups and that the target groups accept the organisation and
its work, i.e. the organisation enjoys the trust of its target group(s).

Highest points are awarded if the organisation has documented how the target groups
are defined. There are also clear indications that the organisation has legitimacy in the
eyes of the target groups, for example persons from the target group contact the
organisation’s representatives, the organisation can show that it is appreciated by the
target groups and so on.

Lowest points are awarded if the organisation is unknown. The organisation has
difficulties in pointing out whom it works for, or the target group has little confidence
in the organisation.

One characteristic of an intermediate situation is that, in practice, there are target

groups that the organisation works with but they are not fully defined. The organisa-
tion is known among the target groups but there is some uncertainty as to what the
organisation stands for.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

18 OKTAGONEN 2002
B. Dialogue with the target groups
To enable the organisation’s work with the target groups to develop, it is necessary that
the organisation is aware of the needs of the target groups and of how its activities
contribute to meeting these needs. Since it is often a question of qualitative work,
where it can be difficult to specify the activities, it is even more important to analyse
the depth and regularity of contacts. If the target groups are actively engaged in
activities, it is easier to adapt activities to needs.

Ascertain whether the organisation encourages the continuous and broad participation
of the target groups in its activities, and whether the target groups participate, in one
way or another, in the planning, implementation and evaluation of activities etc. Give
some concrete examples of activities designed to increase the participation of the
target groups and when the target groups have influenced activities.

Highest points are awarded when the target groups are clearly involved in activities,
particularly in both the planning and evaluation phases. This will also be reflected in
the documentation. There are also clear indications that the target groups participate
continuously in activities, and in discussions on activities.

Lowest points are awarded when the target groups do not participate in the planning
and evaluation of activities. The organisation does not collect the points of view of the
target groups, either since this is difficult or because the target groups are not consid-
ered to be sufficiently competent.

One characteristic of an intermediate situation is that the organisation is open to the

points of view of the target groups, but there are no systematic activities to engage the
target groups in activities.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

8. The working environment

A. Legitimacy for its work

The starting point for being recognised is being known. To enjoy legitimacy the organi-
sation must communicate its message. Therefore, it is important that it has a communi-
cation and information strategy. However, its endeavours to inform and communicate
must be placed in relation to its size. A small organisation does not have the same
amount of funds at its disposal as a large popular movement. The organisation’s
legitimacy among other actors is equivalent to its really being recognised as an actor in
its field of work.

Ascertain the knowledge and picture that other actors have of the organisation, how
often it is referred to in the media or in other public contexts.

Highest points are awarded if a relevant information strategy is being used and that
the organisation is mentioned and noticed in different contexts in the community. The
organisation is a recognised actor in the community in its field of work.

OKTAGONEN 2002 19
Lowest points are awarded if the organisation is not known among actors in its work-
ing environment. The organisation has not yet produced a strategy, written or oral, for
providing information about its existence.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Active participation in networks

The likelihood that the organisation will survive and have an impact is strongly related
to how it tries to cooperate with others, in both the short and long term. Cooperation
can be spontaneous or deliberate – strategic.

Ascertain whether there are concrete examples that the organisation is part of, and
actively participates in, existing networks, and whether the organisation takes initiatives
for coordination between organisations with similar objectives. Are there examples of
joint activities, methods work, regular meetings with networks?

Highest points are awarded when the organisation participates actively in existing and
functioning networks and also, whenever necessary, builds new relevant networks and
strategic alliances.

Lowest points are awarded when the organisation competes with all other NGOs in its
working field.

One characteristic of an intermediate position is that the organisation participates, but

not regularly, in different networks. The organisation is a passive participant. It has not
analysed the way in which it participates.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

20 OKTAGONEN 2002
Appendix 1

◆ Basic values and identity

1. Identity

A. Formulation of the organisation’s vision and mission

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Formulation of relevant strategies

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2. Structure

A. Application of a clear division of duties

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Application of democratic rules

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

OKTAGONEN 2002 21
◆ Activities – output

3. Implementation

A. Planning for the implementation of activities

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Follow-up and learning from work done, output

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

4. Relevance

A. The content of activities correspond with the vision

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Working methods correspond with the vision

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

22 OKTAGONEN 2002
◆ Capacity

5. Qualifications and experience

A. The professional qualifications and experience of the staff

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. The ability of management

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

6. Systems

A. Administration of financial resources

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Administrative routines

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

OKTAGONEN 2002 23
◆ Relations

7. Target groups

A. Support and acceptance by target groups

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Dialogue with the target groups

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

8. The working environment

A. Legitimacy for its work

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

B. Participation in networks

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very good Good Reasonable Weak Very weak Non-existent
Comments

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

24 OKTAGONEN 2002
 Appendix 2

Dimensions Actor Actor Actor Plan of

Review 1 Review 2 Review 3 action

1. Basic values/Identity Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Vision and mission

B. Strategies

2. Basic values/Structure Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Division of work

B. Democracy

3. Activities/Implementation Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Planning

B. Follow-up

4. Activities/Implementation Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Content of activities

B. Working methods

5. Capacity/Expertise Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Staff

B. Management

6. Capacity/Systems Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Finances

B. Administration

OKTAGONEN 2002 25
7. Relations/target group Points Points Points Actions taken

A. Support and acceptance

B. Dialogue

2. Relations/ Points Points Points Actions taken

Working environment

A. Legitimacy

B. Participation

26 OKTAGONEN 2002
 The Octagon
A tool for the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in NGOs

Target group

Working
environment
Structure
Activities

Expertise
Systems and
finance

Relevance
Identity
SWEDISH INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
COOPERATION AGENCY

S-105 25 Stockholm, Sweden

Tel: +46 (0)8 698 50 00. Fax: +46 (0)8 20 88 64
www.sida.se