The GMS Meeting is an important element of

our annual Business Heartbeat. The Execu-

tive Leadership Team and Directors from all

Divisions are convened twice yearly in or-

der to engage in establishing and under-

standing organizational strategy and vision,

deliberate how vision and strategy translate

into concrete operational plans and budgets,

and to engage in systematic reflection on

our progress towards achieving impact in

our programming . Each GMS meeting will

also ensure time to discuss and deliberate

the changing context in which we operate.

GMS April 2012 Global Management Strategy

Meeting

Bridget Snell & Jacob Kasell

1

The April 2012 GMS meeting took place at Oxfam America

headquarters on 25 – 26 April, 2012 and provided an oppor-

tunity for the senior leadership team, including regional lead-

ership, to come together over the course of a day and a half to

deliberate both operational and strategic issues of the agen-

cy. The first GMS session kicked off Oxfam America’s 2013

fiscal year, with Adrian DeDomenico presenting the Board-

approved budget, as well as cross-divisional planning and

budgeting commitments. The remaining time was devoted to

the Oxfam America Strategic Planning process, with partici-

pants engaging directly with OA’s President, Ray Offenheiser,

at this critical point in determining what the strategic goals

we should be committing ourselves to up to 2019.

The planning and budgeting processes are complete for all

divisions, offices and units. At this GMS, the senior leadership

team reviewed the commitments and deliverables to be

achieved in the coming year and prepared to fulfill operation-

al commitments.

Didier Jacobs and Jim Daniell set up the session by reviewing

the last OASP (2008 – 2012) and the subsequent operational

plans documented in the Beachhead process. They produced

a powerful summary of accomplishments made related to our

last strategic plans.

Adrian DeDomenico, Director of Business Planning and Anal-

ysis, reviewed the organizational budget that has been ap-

proved by the OA Board of Directors, and went into particu-

lar detail on Inter-Divisional Crosswalks, what budgetary

commitments were made, and what will be happening with

any unfunded budget areas.

Adrian DeDomenico’s presentation to the GMS can be found

on Padare.

Overall theme: Help poor rural communities gain

more secure access to food, land, water, and en-

ergy resources in the face of climate change and

other pressures on their natural environment.

4 program areas: Agriculture and trade; Climate

change; Humanitarian response and Extractive

industries

2 special initiatives: Aid effectiveness: US aid re-

form and Gender equality: internal goal

Internal Change goals: Commitment to make stra-

tegic plan for constituency-building and branding

and rounding the skills of program officers and

more flexible campaigners.

Revenues

Expenses: $72m – right on target

$52m in 2012 (actual: $39m – largely flat)

$13m restricted (actual: $30m vs. $21m)

Test Trailwalker, Direct TV, cause marketing,

canvassing

Operations

Online training (Oxfam University); Volunteer pro-

gram, Intranet (Padare) and Systems upgrades in

Finance, HR, IT (BI Project/Oracle)

Things Happen:

Financial crisis (impact on revenues + program

opportunity); Food price crisis; Haiti earthquake;

Obama election; Arab Spring

2

The participants had a number

of requests for next steps in the

budgeting process that are

meant to clarify various pro-

cesses and to guide future deci-

sions.

Request to Adrian DeDomeni-

co and Mark Krupp in Finance

to update the financial trend

analyses done in previous years

to clarify shifts in budget and

expenditures.

Note: The GMS participants are interested in continuing

to monitor shifts in the investment balance between long-

term programs and campaigns, regional vs. HQ, Boston vs.

DC, executive as a percentage of operations, etc.

Request by Stephanie Kurzina (RD) to Muthoni Muriu

(RPD) and Maliha Khan (LEAD) to document for the

ELT/GMS the 6 programs that have met 3-year bench-

marks (per the Beachhead Goal)

Request by Ray Offenheiser to Jim Daniell (COO) to ad-

dress the process by which we can manage appropriate

limits of governance in making agency commitments to OI

on underfunded mandates.

Request to Mike Delaney (HRD) to document and share with

the GMS participants what is necessary to achieve a 3.5 rank-

ing for OI Humanitarian Response.

April 2012 is approximately mid-way through the OA Strate-

gic Planning period, and a critical point for senior leadership,

especially senior regional leadership, to engage directly in the

process. During the last GMS retreat in October 2011, Ray

Offenheiser presented his Vision Paper to the GMS partici-

pants for feedback and commentary. Since then, the Execu-

tive Office (Didier Jacobs, advising) with the support of the

Consensus Building Institute (David Fairman, Lead Consult-

ant) have conducted a global staff consultation on the Vision

Paper, which will guide Oxfam America’s strategic direction

over the next five years.

In addition, an OASP Steering Committee has worked over the

past few months to draft eight priority goal areas for consid-

eration by the President.

The session began with a review of the OASP planning pro-

cess, and an acknowledgement that this process has been the

most inclusive and consultative of all the previous strategic

planning efforts. Ray also referenced the importance of such

strategic planning processes as being pivotal in moving the

organization forward and focusing us on concrete achieve-

ments such as building a campaign operation, and the launch-

ing of PSD and LEAD. He expected no less from this plan.

Clarification: unbudgeted FY’13 items are either cut or parked.

Cut items will not receive funding in FY ’13. They are dropped from plans.

Parked items will only receive funding contin-gent upon unspent funds from other units/areas or receipt of restricted funding in the coming fiscal year

Action to be taken: GMS Managers must com-municate to staff what has been cut; cut items will not be worked on; parked items may be worked on if funding becomes available.

3

Cross-divisional/functional groups were asked to discuss the following questions:

What is the essence of Ray’s comments in the first 4 pages?

What is the proposition behind each priority goal?

What is in the prioritized Internal Goal: Becom-ing a 21st Century NGO?

What is the recommended approach to address-

ing other strategic?

At the April 2012 GMS, participants were given a hot-off-the-

press memorandum from Ray outlining a refined vision for

OA’s strategic direction up to 2019. Within the memo, Ray

reiterates Oxfam America’s commitment to a rights-based

approach along with recommending a focus on three strate-

gic goals for the FY 2013-2019 period:

Stepping up our Humanitarian Capacity

Advancing Rural Resilience and Food Security

Active Citizenship in Pursuit of Effective Develop-

ment Investments

In addition to the three strategic areas of focus mentioned

above, Ray also added an internal goal:

Becoming a 21st Century Networked Organization

Participants were tasked with first making sense of Ray’s

proposition paper in cross-divisional groups.

Participants were asked to form groups depending on

their interest in a particular goal area and the initial level

of senior leadership excitement and interest in a goal area

was deduced by which groups had the most adherents.

Later on during the session, each of the goals was ranked

in terms of both energy around the goal and readiness of

the goal.

[Please note that ‘readiness’ was determined solely on the

basis of the goal itself, without looking at organizational,

budgetary or other constraints.]

A very dynamic case study session ensued for half a day dur-

ing which the senior leadership groups debated the meaning

of sections of the memo and Ray’s ultimate intent. The

groups also had direct access to Ray and the other ELT mem-

bers and therefore were able to gain clarification on different

elements of Ray’s proposition paper. Finally, the cross-

divisional groups were asked to specifically address Ray’s

upfront questions to the group:

Are the [three strategic goals] coherent as a set?

Are they the most judicious [relevant and impactful]

goals to take on to pursue our mission in the next six

years?

4

All groups agreed generally to Ray’s choice of the three stra-

tegic goal areas, and considered them coherent, potentially

impactful and relevant to our mission, and allowing us an

opportunity to set vision and align with OI.

At the same time, some groups identified that not all the goals

respond to some of the key trends identified in the earlier OA

Working Group process, including addressing the youth

boom and shifting demographics/face of poverty to the urban

and peri-urban areas.

In addition to the three strategic goal areas, many partici-

pants felt that the strategic plan was not giving the issue of

gender and women’s empowerment sufficient weight and

consideration in the memo. It was strongly felt that unless a

much greater emphasis was given through an explicit internal

change goal around gender, the strategic plan would not

reflect the values or the mission of the organi-

zation. A sub group of the GMS met

and made the following

proposition.

Clearly state gender justice and women’s rights as our meta-goal, at the top of our plan, stating clearly that unless we address gender issues in all our programs, we will never achieve our mission

Within each of the three external goals explicitly state gender justice, and the implications of that in terms of the measures of success in each of the goals related to gendered impact stated explicitly

Include as an internal goal, an explicit statement that our internal processes and staff competencies will reflect our external ambitions on promoting gender justice. We must walk the talk and hold ourselves ac-countable against this goal at all levels.

Create an investment fund, as suggested, that will be used towards supporting the gender internal change goal and gendered impacts.

5

Ray led a spirited discussion on how best to incorporate

this request into the OA-SP. He discussed similar initiates

he led while at Ford Foundation and lessoned learned from

his decades of experience working with women’s groups

around the world.

One issue he repeatedly stressed is that this effort must not

become a broad-based and administrative “check the box”

effort but that we make a clear commitment to real and

achievable goals with metrics in each program. While we all

support this effort, the proof will come if we continue to

build on the GMALI initiative and reinforce our program

designs with greater gender-lensed training and support.

Next, GMS participants were asked to refine the goal state-

ments Ray had presented in his memo to make winning and

winnable goals that can rally the organization to achieve

concrete results by 2019. Specifically, they were asked to

address the following questions in their process:

Why is this goal the most important in the upcoming strategic

period? Why is it the winning goal?

Following the plenary session, during which participants dis-

cussed the goals, a set of modifications were created and pre-

sented to the entire group. The next three pages summarize

the refined goal statements and articulated success indica-

tors.

You can also watch the four video presentations that capture

the agency’s senior leaders expressing their excitement

around the strategic goal areas and their interest in owning

the final strategic goals as a whole agency and not just within

specific units.

Enjoy.

6

We will transform the way NGOs, the private sector, the UN, and governments respond to humanitarian cri-

ses, moving toward prevention instead of response by building up local communities and governments so

that they are the first and best actors in prevention, preparedness and response.

INVEST NOW, SAVE LIVES, SAVE MONEY

Meet Oxfam International standards in fully local response to all Cat 3 emergencies

National governments, where we are managing affiliate, achieve high scores on Hyogo framework

(preparedness)

Growing network of learning and practice among Oxfam humanitarian partners

10% of US ODA global expenditures directed at Disaster Risk Reduction

5 Fortune 500 companies institute global policies and investments for prevention, preparedness and

response in countries where they are active

Positive changes in national level policy and investment to prevention, preparedness and direct re-

sponse for Cat 3 emergencies.

Specific changes in UN system, redirecting Humanitarian Response and funding flows toward local

investment and response.

Gendered analysis built into program and policy development

Need to bring out gender more

Need to bring out conflict agenda more, including women, peace, and security

Need to figure out how to “sell” this approach

Would require big scale-up of advocacy and capacity at country level

7

Women food producers and workers contribute significantly to national and global food security in just, resili-

ent, innovative, and transparent food systems by realizing their right to control resources, by gaining greater

value from their participation in a market economy, and by having voice and influence in national policy.

Material Well Being Changes:

Farmers and workers receive higher prices, wages, and other conditions improve.

Producing more in a risk reduced environment

Opportunity Structure Changes:

Improve the practices of major agri-business actors in targeted countries to the benefit of small food producers and workers

National government practices (both oversight and investment for small holders) is improved

Increased international and national investment in small holder agriculture

A stronger enabling environment and increased investment and support for women-led enterprises in targeted markets

Access to weather insurance

Access to financial services, affordable inputs and appropriate and innovative technical assistance

Easy access to timely and accurate market information

Improved laws on association.

Enhanced water and land rights

Social Relations Changes:

Measurable reduction in barriers to market participation

Large input producers experiment with sustainable input products/markets

Investment in Ag is targeted to rural woman producers

Aligned to support in-country food security executives (not just big ag for export)

Cultural practices shift in measurable ways to enhance women’s access and ownership of land and water resources.

Increase in number of women in leadership positions, elected and non-elected

National political platforms reflect small holder interests

What is OA connection to the overall OI strategy related to agriculture

What is OA’s strength vs. other affiliate’s strength?

Women at the center or as an indicator?

The extent to which we focus on production and yield or political economy and shifting the balance of rights

How to drill down from what is an overarching goal statement into a country specific level conversation

8

We support Oxfam’s aim to create a global movement for change to create and solidify the space for active

citizens to engage effective states and the private sector to secure and ensure their rights. In this space, citi-

zens routinely redress injustices on their terms and within their national context.

In the countries where we work, we will have supported the creation of 3 established, institutionalized spaces

that have directly shaped the national resource utilization and specific legislation on both non-renewable (EI)

and renewable resources (food, water, etc.) to address the rights of the most marginalized citizens, particu-

larly women.

That at least 10% of EI royalty payments are directed to agricultural initiatives for the most marginal-

ized, particularly women (target: $10B in the aggregate)

EI royalty payments be considered to fund climate change adaption for women farmers (target $1B)

10% of external aid flows are redirected towards renewable resource development for the most mar-

ginalized, particularly women (target $5B)

Right to Know, Right to Decide legislation establishes legally binding fora in 3 LAC countries, 3 ECO-

WAS, and 1 East African country

Even within closed or closing civil society space we are the go-to actor that focused on social and eco-

nomic rights. [What does this say about the political rights space?]

Partnered or developed much stronger budget monitoring systems and capability at the national

level

We have to invest in stronger national level advocacy

We have to invest in activist diplomatic skills particularly in private sector (economic) and gender

(gender policy analysis)

We have to be better at partnering with the right organizations

9

Marginalized citizens are able to direct their governments’ use of 5 major revenue flows in development: extractives

revenues, foreign aid, agricultural investments, corporate fines, and adaptation financing. Investment in pro-poor

development in 4 countries increases by 30% and are making progress towards new MDG goals.

In selected countries:

Marginalized citizens, especially women, have influenced local and national investment decisions in development.

All major oil and mining companies will fully disclose revenues and contracts for their projects, as re-quired by the SEC.

all bilateral aid agencies will make their operations conform to agreed aid effectiveness principles.

investments in agriculture by state and corporations support the viability of female farmers, entrepre-neurs and workers. (see rural poor goal)

Adaptation funding has increased, and government have made targeted investments in the resilience of vulnerable communities.

In southeast US, BP oil spill fines are directed to restoration of poor coastal communities.

Pre-requisites:

Investment in acquiring new competencies in fiscal transparency and monitoring (even if done through

partners)

Crafting appealing stories, putting human face, on this work

Building partnerships at global and national levels in transparency and accountability and for broader

social investments (health, education, etc)

Building expertise in corporate engagement at the regional and national levelResearch on major reve-

nue flows and current budget allocations by country, if feasible

Caveats and Reservations:

How to get our constituencies fired up about this?

What is our niche in a relatively crowded transparency/accountability field?

Funding? How much will it take and from where do we get it?

Important to continue to work on global norms because they are a critical tool

Beware of tough local politics

How does this work relate to Essential Services Campaign? Would new MDGs be the new measures?

10

The GMS participants registered their energy around each

goal twice in the OASP session. First they registered energy

by gravitating to the goal statements that they wished to

work on and improve. By the end of the session, all partici-

pants were asked to rate the 3 strategic goal areas in terms of

their energy around the issue and their sense of the goal read-

iness (was it a winnable goal in terms of focus and clarity of

what success would be in 2019). The cross-divisional and

functional ranking results of the ranking were as follows:

1. Active Citizenship 1. Humanitarian

2. Humanitarian 2. Active Citizenship

3. Rural Resiliency 3. Rural Resiliency

There was a high-level of energy in the group around Active Citizenship with 3

groups forming around the goal area/proposition in the first afternoon. By the

next day, some participants migrated to work on other goals, but the energy

level remained quite high throughout.

In terms of both energy and overall readiness of the goal statement and suc-

cess indicators, humanitarian capacity rated quite high.

It was acknowledged that while rural resiliency was not rated as high as the

others there may be strong potential to define a winning goal during the next

strategic period.

11

There will be a final meeting(s) of the OASP steering com-

mittee to make recommendations to Ray around goal state-

ments in May 2012.

Ray will hand the process over to Jim who will initiate the

operational planning process around the goals to define

concrete multi-year plans, budgets, organizational capacity,

and so forth.

This will further engage staff in

the OASP process. Ray and Jim

want to remind us that the goals

will be refined over the summer

using staff input, and taking into

consideration also the following

four inputs:

GMS participants’ input as

summarized above

OI’s goals, which are being

developed in parallel to ours

The fundraising campaign’s

feasibility study, which should

provide data as to the funda-

bility of both individual goals

and the whole set

Competitive analyses: for this

strategic planning cycle, we

decided not to make an over-

all competitive analysis of OA

as an organization as we did

during the beachhead exercise, but rather to analyze

the competition and define our niche more specifically

for each of our goals.

Ray acknowledged upfront that the Humanitarian goal

seems pretty clear. Rationale and comparative advantages

are there, even with the caveats mentioned. There is the

widest consensus that it is time for Oxfam to step up here.

It is the neatest, tightest and briefest of goal statements –

which indicates people understand it and are ready to move

on it.

In terms of the Rural Resiliency goal, Ray identified that we

still have work to do in this area. We do have competencies,

experience and some innovative programs in this area. But

we have to ask if our real competency is building yields and

productivity, or if the real opportunity is in the area of Ag,

Climate Change and Food Security and how to leverage these

spaces more effectively for small scale farmers and rural

women. What is the Food Security

and resilience challenge in differ-

ent contexts from Peru – with a

high bounty but unequal access

versus Ethiopia where we have low

yields and broad hunger? What

are the real issues at play and how

can we leverage development re-

sources to move on this issue. We

have a lot of goals on this issue,

which indicates a lack of clarity on

what we should work on. We

could work on any of this – what is

our place. Do we continue to work

mainly with small scale producers

or do we work in a more complex,

political space around how benefit

is distributed in an agricultural

economy and move key leverage

points. This may require some

new competencies.

Ray finished by pointing out that

there is some real creative energy

around the concept of Active Citi-

zenship. It seems to fit us and the comparative advantages

here are clear. We will need to continue to refine and bring

clarity to what we are delivering in the next period, and en-

sure that we are leveraging the lessons from some great work

in Extractive Industries and expand it to other areas and oth-

er development investment flows. He also sees that there

remains a clear space for us to work within the U.S. on overall

Aid Reform and the ability to leverage more effectively aid

flows out of the U.S. as part of this effort.

In summary, Ray reiterated the value of strategic planning.

This is the moment in our organizational life where we can

reinvent ourselves for this contemporary moment.

12

Program Theory of Change

$1 $16

“Investing in nurturing a happy goat costs you US$ 1 dollar. If you wait, and don’t address [a potential crisis] with

early warning systems you have a dead goat, which costs you US$16 dollars.”

-Mike Delaney as translated by Ken Mallette

Note: No Animals were harmed in the making of this communiqué.