Bargaining Power of Supplier of Non-profit Organization

Bargaining power of suppliers can be termed as the capacity of control and competitive proceeds a supplier whitethorn fork out over rivals or competitors. The level of rivalry in this condition whitethorn be brought about by many factors including do of competitors in a market, market growth, fit(p) costs, storage costs or perish adapted goods, low switching costs for the consumer that encourages easy switching from one and only(a) product to a nonher, low or minimal product differentiation, strategic stakes, exit barriers, diversity of rivals and industry shakeout coifd by high supplier and low demand.In wholly this, every supplier seeks to have a competitive advantage over its rivals to ensure stability in the market and profitability. In non-profit organizations, the supplier bargaining power whitethorn be deemed as the position of advantage that donors have over new(prenominal)s. This whitethorn be in term of expertise, hood, and skills. Bargaining Power of Supplie r (POS) of Non-Profit Organization In the case of non-profit organizations, splendid criticise champions and offers education and fight back to young women who may be at risk of breast and ovarian cancer. nacreous Pinks suppliers/ choke offers may be classified as corporate (offering capital), somebodys (donors) and/or participating doctors offering knowledge, technical credibility and encourage to the women in the organization. Though the power of these doctors may be low, they most likely gain more from the relationship that B proper(ip) Pink. In most organizations, there may be ch whollyenges related to the issue of donations and stand out that may be needed. One of such challenged is supplier power. In many cases, those individuals who supply organizations, such as sleek Pink, with capital also palm some influence during decision making.This means that donors would hold talented Pink to a high standard of conduct, community involvement, and ethics. Participating doctor s who supply knowledge, technical credibility, and support to the women in the organization, may have low power but most likely gain more from the relationship than Bright Pink. This is caused by the possibility of Bright Pink reigning a multitude of doctors willing to support their cause while the number of organizations seeking doctors to participate on their medical panel may be lower-ranking in-kind donations from existing members, volunteers, and corporations are another source of support and input.Differentiation of inputs is a factor in assessing suppliers power. The higher the level of differentiation and importance in the eyes of the buyer, the more powerful the inputs become. Inputs include one-time donations, revenant donations, cause-related marketing opportunities, pro-bono administrative work, marketing, legal support and in-kind donations. Bright Pinks growth is contingent upon procuring the right combination of inputs.Given the fact that there may be threat of su bstitutes, there is a clear property of growth in the number of breast/ovarian cancer Non-profit organizations (NPOs) in recent years. Suppliers of inputs may, therefore, continue to uphold control in how these inputs are utilized. Bright Pink would, therefore, have a wide range of suppliers of capital and inputs but a seemingly low power or control over how these supplies/inputs are utilized. The degree of rivalry of similar organizations such as Bright Pink may be increasing with the number of breast/ovarian cancer support organizations coming up.This then means that Bright Pink may be loosing its grip on the number of suppliers/donors it may have. With this threat becoming more and more real, Bright Pink may have to work out strategies to keep its flow of capital and other resources supply that would ensure it continues to fulfill its goals and objectives. Taking Bright Pink as the buyer there seems to be a certain level of leverage and power that the organization may have. Th e number of participating donors such as doctors at Bright Pinks disposal seems to be fairly good.This couple with the notion that the doctors may be gaining more from the relationship than Bright Pink means that the organization may have a buyer power allowing it to have a selection of the best doctors to integrate into its programmes. Barriers to gate/threat of entrance may be one factor to be considered in Bright Pinks case. With a regulating policy to the number of entrants into the breast/ovarian cancer support field, there may be better work and better and stronger inputs from suppliers/donors. In the case of NPOs, existing organizations would offer better and expanded services and efficiently and effectively.This would ensure that those who may be considering offering similar services and/or support would have few people in need of these services hence a barrier/threat of entry by those already in the field. Currently Bright Pinks support and aid flow is efficient for the accepted programmes in the organization. As the organizations brand awareness, membership numbers, and media exposure continue to grow, it will find cause-marketing more appealing to corporate partners. Corporations are under increasing pressure to give to charities, support local organizations, and be socially responsible.Though this may not be a tangible reason to keep all organizational stakeholders on board, it may be a solid base to attract funding and donations from all suppliers. Programmes that offer a worthy cause may be an effective way of life to attract and lose capital and resources from many corporate, individual and participating suppliers. Benefits to the company include increase in brand sufferance by associating with a worthy cause, reaching a niche demographic, differentiation in a move market, and perhaps increasing brand loyalty, then the benefits to Bright Pink are obvious.Members and supporters have an easy way to make a contribution and Bright Pink woul d be able to reach a wider guest base than they wouldnt otherwise reach due to a limited advertising budget. Studies show a net positive reaction in consumers towards the contributing companys image. The congruency between the charitys perpetration and the companys product is a primary determinant in whether each fellowship gleans the benefits from the cause-marketing effort. As the organization gains popularity and acceptability of its programmes, there will be great increase in the benefits from suppliers.If suppliers are unhappy with the organizations decisions, they can easy cut funding. In this way, large donors can wield unofficial influence over the organizations behavior. Corporate donations can be correlated to economic conditions and given that the economy worsened in 2009, Bright Pink may have to be watchful for a decrease in these inputs. A way to offset this threat is to focus on individual/private donations as this tends to be less tied to the economy and these do nors identify more with the NPOs they support. Cause-related marketing, which houses benefits to both the supplier and Bright Pink, is another strategy to pursue.Since Bright Pink suppliers provide monetary donations not specific product, technology, or knowledge, there would be no switching costs to suppliers. However, since corporations and individuals will align themselves with a growing and fountainhead known charity, switching support to a lesser known NPO would not be advantageous. Since the decision to support various NPOs is a decision based on emotion, Bright Pinks most effective strategy for procuring this support is to continue to focus on success stories of those the organization has helped or is helping.Differentiating the Bright Pink story, showcasing various members reasons for join the organization, and demonstrating Bright Pinks impact on its members lives are all methods of bring out this emotional bond. One of Bright Pinks short-term objectives is to build a st able of partnering companies to provide exposure in the market, increase its membership and become an NPO of choice for corporate sponsorship opportunities. Since most doctors expertise is not readily differentiable, their bargaining power is relatively low.It would be logical to conclude that Bright Pink members may have a propensity to utilize the services of these doctors for their health care needs making the symmetricalness of power in the doctor-Bright Pink relationship reside in the organizations favor. On the other hand, inputs from volunteers, corporations, and community groups are not easily achieved, and Bright Pink has less negotiating power when dealing with these groups. former(a) than the intangible benefits of helping a respected and growing NPO such as Bright Pink, these suppliers have no economic reason to provide support.In these cases, it is most likely the appeal of Bright Pinks mission that drives the decisions for support from these suppliers. The importance of the suppliers cannot be stressed enough. Without their support, Bright Pink will not be able to grow. By focusing on cause related marketing and approaching corporations whose products/services align with Bright Pinks targeted markets, stronger alliances can be built. This will level the power balance and facilitate a mutually beneficial partnership.