Change Process for Organisational Change of Networking Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations under Non-Governmental Organisations in Tanzania ()
1. Introduction
Networks of Farmer Organisations (FOs) for their change predominantly in Africa is one of the wide areas covered by various literatures. Organisational Change (OC) can be termed as a procedure by which organisation intentionally redirects or reorients its core patterns of actions and any of its key areas to meet a newly defined set of strategies and goals ( Booth, 1994 ; Cross et al., 2007 ; Ogochi, 2018 ). Most of literatures opine that FOs networks are crucial for bringing OC of various organisations; from simple to complex including FOs, particularly Smallholder Farmer Organisations (SFOs) which are characterized by farmers with limited place of farming and limited products ( Ton, 2013 ). This can be via lessening competition by forming necessary unity between competitors as allies; ensuring harmonization of resources use, increased economies of scale as a result of joint activities (i.e. production and marketing research) and decreased financial risks due to spreading of financial risks by various means including shouldering any risky projects ( Contractor & Lorange, 1988 ; Zajac & Olsen, 1993 ; Contractor & Lorange, 2002 ; Choi & Contractor, 2016 ) Consequently, inter-organisational networks of FOs can enhance their competitiveness in terms of improved products, better market access or faster market entry and thus to increase their revenues ( Zajac & Olsen, 1993 ; Contractor & Lorange, 2002 ; Choi & Contractor, 2016 ).
In other words, literature views inter organisational networks as instruments of reciprocity, efficiency, stability and legitimacy. This is because, with reciprocity networking organisations can portray direct and complex inter dependencies with common beneficial goals or interests. More so, efficiency results into networking organisations which can achieve higher input/output ratios. It should be noted that stability occurs in networking organisations when they can better foresee, forecast and thus be in better position of dealing with uncertainty affecting their activities. Another profound benefit of organisational network is legitimacy. This is when networking organisations can establish or enhance their reputation, image, prestige, correspondence to the prevailing norms/standards ( Oliver, 1990 ; Bianchi & Lomi, 2022 ). All these seem to be important vehicles for enhancing change of various kinds of organisations including SFOs.
It is against this background that in organic agriculture, worldwide level network of International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement (IFOAM) was formed in 1972. In Africa at continental level, African Organic Network (AFRONET) was formed in 2012, evolving from IFOAM Africa that was established in 2005 ( Wagala, 2005 ; Arbenz, 2018 ; Gama, 2018 ). At national levels various movements including National Organic Agriculture Movement of Uganda (NOGAMU) in 2001 and Kenya Organic Agriculture Network (KOAN) in 2005 were commenced ( Wagala, 2005 ; Arbenz, 2018 ). These networks aimed at leading, strengthening and assisting networking of various stakeholders in the organic sector at regional, national and local levels including SOHFOs with the aim of upholding the organic sector ( Wagala, 2005 ; Schwindenhammer, 2017 ; African Union, 2015 ; Gama, 2018 ; Rehber et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, the networks worked on improving productivity and profitability of organic trade development amongst organic farmers via various projects including Organic Trade development in East Africa (OTEA) in 2017 ( Gama, 2018 ). In the same spirit, on 14th May 2005 national umbrella organisation known as Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM) was founded with the aim of organising and harmonizing efforts of FOs, local umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and other stakeholders in organic sector including researchers, traders, certifiers and processors ( TOAM, 2005 ; Tanzania National Organic Agriculture Forum, 2008 ; HODECT, 2010 ).
Apparently, from such initiatives literature posits numerous accomplishments. For instance, according to Forschungsinstitut fur Biologischen Landbau (FiBL)-Research Institute of Organic Agriculture and IFOAM recent surveys, in Africa organic agriculture land including in conversion areas in 2017 was 2,056,571 ha. Referring to ten years (2007) the statistics indicate 130.2% (1,163,089 ha) increase of organic agriculture land ( Lernoud & Willer, 2019 ). Samewise, in Ocenia (area in the world experiencing highest growth of organic agricultural land including in conversion areas), agricultural land was 35,894,365 ha in 2017. The increase indicates 196.4% (23,783,698 ha) in ten years (2007) ( Lernoud & Willer, 2019 ). These data show us unreasonable growth pace of organic agriculture land for African countries. This is well observed where in ten years before 2017 Africa has been able to increase only 1,163,089 ha of organic agriculture land including in conversion areas while Ocenia has increased 23,783,698 ha. There has been little information on organic agriculture in Africa due to scant studies available to give particulars on organic horticultural products ( De Bon et al., 2018 ). In Tanzania, the sector is faced with numerous challenges including weak production base with minimal rate of growth, low productivity and quality that does not meet market demands ( HODECT, 2010 ; Mayala & Bamanyisa, 2018 ) accompanied with poor coordination of various organisations including SOHFOs ( URT, 2006 ; HODECT, 2010 ; URT, 2013 ; Africa Union 2015 ; URT and Kingdom of Netherlands, 2017 ).
Evidence substantiates the change process adopted by various organisations as significant component in achieving successful OC ( Goni, 1999 ; Lingham et al., 2005 ; Hossan, 2015 ; Ogochi, 2018 ). Based on the unreasonable growth pace of organic agriculture land for African countries circumstance including Tanzania, there have been numerous studies done to analyze the OC as a result of networking in organic agriculture sector ( Kroma, 2006 ; Crawford et al., 2015 ; Kavia, 2016 ). However, there is still a need of understanding change process of networking SOHFOs in different contexts of operations including the role played by local umbrella NGOs in the process. Since the study targets the SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs, the focus is on understanding the OC process adopted by SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs. To realize this, the study first explores how the change process has been implemented in SOHFOs in inter-organisational networks in Tanzania under NGO and second, the role played by NGOs as intermediary organisations in the process of change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs for their OC. The understanding of process of change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs for their OC is inevitable since NGOs are among important earlier stakeholders with observable role in supporting reformation SFOs in Tanzania during structural adjustment and liberalization (SAL) epoch ( Wennink & Heemskerk, 2006 ; Mella et al., 2007 ; Wanyama et al., 2009 ); and NGOs are among intermediaries that have been scantly studied (Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement) ( TOAM, 2005 ; Mella et al., 2007 ; URT, 2013 ). Again, the understanding is so crucial since change in organisations is influenced by people involved, aspired change and settings of the activities in the particular organisation ( Ogochi, 2018 ).
1.1. Theoretical Framework
This study is influenced with two theories, that is Organisational Development Theory (ODT) and Resource Dependence Theory (RDT). The main theory adopted for this study is Organisational Development Theory (ODT). Resource Dependence Theory (RDT) was used in this study to complementthe first theory (by providing required information); and supplement (by adding information that previous theory failed to do so) ( Bryman, 2006 , 2016 ).
1.1.1. Organisational Development Theory (ODT)
The ODT observes OC as planned change, with active participation of all the relevant stakeholders in an organisation through the application of behavioral science ( Rhydderch et al., 2004 ). The theory insists about human processes in the process of OC ( Rhydderch et al., 2004 ), whereby properly followed process of change, teams, participation and communication among team members are emphasized ( Goni, 1999 ; Rhydderch et al., 2004 ; Nielsen & Randall, 2012 ). Furthermore, the theory acknowledges the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model that encompasses unfreezing (breaking down old behaviours and attitudes); transition period towards new ways of doing things (moving) and establishment of new routines (refreezing) ( Lewin, 1947 ; Lewin, 1951 ; Burnes, 2004 ; Ogochi, 2018 ). Despite the fact that the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model has been used to demonstrate OC some critics are against it with arguments that it advocates top-down management approach to change whereby change is imposed from external environment ( Kanter et al., 1992 ; Wilson, 1992 ; Dawson, 1994 ; Hossan, 2015 ). Furthermore, it is simplistic and incremental (smallholder) change ( Pettigrew, 1990 ; Dawson, 1994 ; Hossan, 2015 ). However, the model fits the study since SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs exhibit the mentioned characteristics. Furthermore, the understanding of the use of this model is done since most literature admits on the strength of having a special constructive framework that helps those who are leading changes and their followers so that they are not stumbled in process (in this case, various stages of the model) ( Ogochi, 2018 ; Hussain et al., 2018 ) In this study, the theory was used to analyze existing process of change in SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs. The theory helps us to realize the process of change (change process stages, participation and communication in SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs). On mentioning how crucial the participation is, Hussain et al. (2018) argued on the involvement of those who are supposed in the required change as important tool in reducing resistance to change.
1.1.2. Resource Dependence Theory (RDT)
The main tenet of the (RDT) is inter dependencies over organisations resulted by their insufficiency ( Scott, 1992 ). This infers that capacity of organisation to get resources from within or external is reflected in its structure and behaviour (internal and external actions) ( Emerson, 1962 ; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978 ). The theory insists on external control of organisations ( Davis & Cobb, 2010 ). The theory can be used to realize how intermediary organisations use their power to manage demands of interest groups by creating supportive institutional environment upon which the groups are dependent for resources ( Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978 ). The theory was used to explore the role of local NGOs as intermediary organisations in controlling and directing process of change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs in their networking for their OC.
1.2. Conceptual Framework
Based on the aforementioned theories, the conceptual framework built from the theories and numerous literatures portrays change in interacting SOHFOs as dependent variable on one hand and development and implementation of change process of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs for change on the other hand as independent variable. In addition, the conceptual framework shows that role of local intermediary NGOs in process of change for change of SOHFOs as intermediate variable that indirectly affects the OC as shown in Figure 1. According to Kanter et al. (1992) , OC involves the crystallization of new possibilities by design and construction of new patterns, or the reconceptualization of old ones, to make new more productive actions. OC can include but not limited to change in the behaviours, policies, procedures, rules, regulations, structures, technology, and diversification of products or economic elements ( Haveman, 1992 ; Kanji & Moura 2003 ; Lycke, 2003 ). It should be noted that in farming systems, technological change involves change in technological processes and products (artifacts and tools) ( Tereso et al., 2012 ; Glover et al., 2019 ). This study considers the similarity of the terms “innovation” and “change” ( Tereso et al., 2012 ). In organic agriculture, technological change emphasizes on use of organic seeds or locally adapted varieties, use of measures to improve soil fertility (via crop rotation, organic manure and soil erosion control) and pest/weed control (via mechanical, biological and thermic measures) ( Meemken & Qaim, 2018 ). Despite of the various forms of change mentioned, the study mainly focused on changes found in the field from the SOHFOs that are technological changes (organic agriculture practices in SOHFOs particularly use of organic manure and use of soil erosion control measures). However, these changes were not discussed extensively in this paper since this was done on another paper. In this paper they were only referred as expected changes.
When observing process of change for change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs as independent variable, as (ODT) emphasizes it involves human processes whereby properly followed process of change, teams, participation and
NB: Since this article is the part of studies’ requirements, positions of variables in the conceptual framework as shown in Figure 1 have considered the clarity of the conceptual framework for the whole work. Source: Researcher through Literature review, 2019.
Figure 1. Conceptual framework for exploring the change process for organisational change of networking Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations under Non-Governmental Organisations in two selected regions in Tanzania.
communication among team members are emphasized ( Goni, 1999 ; Rhydderch et al., 2004 ; Nielsen & Randall, 2012 ). As earlier mentioned, change process model adopted in this study is the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model. The model is comprised of three steps i.e. unfreezing, moving and refreezing ( Lewin, 1947 ; Lewin, 1951 ; Burnes, 2004 ). In unfreezing step, the organisation enters into neutral state by unlearning old behaviours and adopts new behaviours. For the matter of second step, it is transition (moving) step where change is implemented by employing driving forces and minimizing resisting forces (force field). Driving forces encompass forces that work to support organisational change. On the other hand, the resisting forces are the forces of the same kind but in opposite direction since they reduce the probability of the acceptance of the change efforts during change ( Hossan, 2015 ). In third step it is when an organisation has adopted change and thus refreezes into a new state ( Hossan, 2015 ). Apart from exploring the adoption of properly followed process of change, participation and communication of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs on one hand and NGOs as important part on other hand to allow teamwork amongst them was also observed. The definition of participation has been borrowed from ( Hurrell, 2005 ), whereby participation in the context of teamwork involves active involvement of members in planning and implementing a teamwork intervention.
As earlier observed, role of local intermediary NGOs in process of change for change of SOHFOs is the intermediate variable. Intermediary organisation also known as third party, broker or bridging organisation ( Howells, 2006 ) can be referred to as organisation that acts as an agent or broker in any selected aspect between two or more parts ( Lefebvre et al., 2012 ). Literature posits that intermediary organisations functions include supporting provision of information about potential collaborators, playing brokering role in transactions, acting as mediators between organisations already collaborating, helping organisations to find advice, funding and support for intended outcomes of such collaborations between two or more parties ( Lefebvre et al., 2012 ). Intermediary organisations usually perform three basic functions i.e. demand articulation, network formation and innovation process management (known also as network orchestration) ( Batterinck & Wubben, 2010 ; Lefebvre et al., 2012 ).
Demand articulation can also be known as innovation initiation ( Batterinck & Wubben, 2010 ). One argument of Howells (2006) and Klerkx & Leeuwis (2009) is when intermediary organisation goes through demand articulation stage, it is supposed to diagnose and analyse the existing problem in the area it wants to bring change and problems and coherently understand the existing needs. The second function which is also known as Network formation can also be named as network brokerage, network design or network construction ( Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006 ; Klerckx & Leeuwis, 2008 ; Lee et al., 2010 ). Literature posits that network formation involves facilitating the establishment of connections between the demand and supply side for innovation (that is scanning, scoping, filtering and matchmaking of possible cooperation partners Lefebvre et al. (2012) . The third function is innovation process management. It can also be known as network management or network orchestration ( Lee et al., 2010 ; Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006 ). The term can be regarded to the act of enhancing collaboration through developing alignment, communication and learning among partners ( Klerckx & Leeuwis, 2008 ; Lee et al., 2010 ).
2. Methodology
2.1. Study Area
This study was conducted in Morogoro and Kilimanjaro regions. The selection of the regions was made purposely since it is where two NGOs known as NGO X in Morogoro and NGO Y in Kilimanjaro working as local umbrella organisations for SOHFOs are. This is perpetuated by the fact that the regions are amongst regions with high production of horticultural products ( URT & the Kingdom of Netherlands, 2017 ; Mayala & Bamanyisa, 2018 ). There have been numerous NGOs working in revamping organic agriculture by strengthening organic farming practices and boosting the economic situation of organic farmers. Nonetheless, the two NGOs were selected since they have been founded in different years (in 2004 and 2011 years respectively) which can influence the process of change of their SOHFOs. As argued by Knight (2002) and Miller-Seitz (2011) , that various inter organisational networks can lead to change of processes and structures of the networks that consequently can bring various benefits including network learning and increased performance.
Furthermore, the NGOs are working actively in facilitating networking amongst SOHFOs, TOAM and other stakeholders in the sector (Singo, S. Personal Communication, 2018), and they have different nature (one is denominational oriented and the other civil societies oriented). This study is not comparative study, but it only covered the Kilimanjaro and Morogoro region to observe effects of years they have been founded i.e. 2004 and 2011 years respectively and their orientation i.e. one is denominational oriented and the other civil societies oriented in their matters of study.
2.2. Materials and Methods
The study employed concurrently mixed design informed by social network analysis ( Creswell & Clark, 2017 ; Borgatti et al., 2018 ). The design gave the researcher opportunity to collect quantitative as well as qualitative data at single point in the same time i.e. triangulation of data (for the purpose of supplementing (adding data due to failure of the previous administered data collection method to capture the intended matter of inquiry; for instance it can include administering Focus group discussion with the aim of obtaining more public views compared to use of Structured interview) and complementing (adding the richness and complexity of the matter of the inquiry) ( Bryman, 2004 , 2006 , 2016 ). Out of 79 and 207 SOHFOs from NGO X and NGO Y, The description of the population of SOHFOs was as follows. As earlier aforesaid, NGO X which operates at Morogoro Urban only (while dealing with SOHFOs from three districts) had a population of 79. On the other hand, there were 207 SOHFOs at NGO Y which operate at Points A, B, C and D areas. The 207 SOHFOs were divided in the population of 82, 82, 22 and 21 SOHFOs respectively. The total of population of SOHFOs in X and Y NGOs was 286. The probability sampling method particularly simple random sampling was employed to select 167 SOHFOs under aforementioned NGOs. The sample was determined by Yamane (1967) ’s formula:
Yamane’s formula is
.
where: n is the sample size;
N is the estimated number of SOHFOs in the two selected NGOs;
e = level of estimation (0.05)2.
Thus
SOHFOs.
Proportionate random sampling was used to ensure proportionality of SOHFOs selected ( Hansen et al., 1953 ). Thus, the formula used was:
where: a is sample size for each point in the NGO;
n is a total number of SOHFOs in a single point found among two NGOs;
N is the total number of SOHFOs found in five points under two NGOs;
And b is target (sampled) SOHFOs in all points under two NGOs.
The selected sample for SOHFOs at each point in two NGOS is 46 SOHFOs at NGO X and 121 SOHFOs from NGO Y divided in 48, 48, 12 and 13 SOHFOs from points A,B,C and D. The proportionality of sample of SOHFOs selected from two NGOS in terms of percentage is 27.6 percentage of SOHFOs from NGO X and 72.4 percentage of SOHFOs from NGO Y divided in 28.7, 28.7, 7.2 and 7.8 percentages of selected sample of SOHFOs that were from points A, B, C and D. A total of 323 members of SOHFOs were selected purposefully due to their experience and leadership in SOHFOs. A total of 6 FGDs with participants ranging from six to eight who are knowledgeable in SOHFOs matters making a total of 44 representatives of 44 SOHFOs. 18 KIs from 10 managing organisations were purposely selected. Their unified standard for selection of these 10 managing organisation was their responsibility in one way or another in directing and coordinating organic sector particularly horticultural production farmer organizations. These include TOAM, NGO X, NGO Y and 7 various District Councils in Morogoro and Kilimanjaro regions. On the other hand, within these organisations, responsible officers who had the knowledge and experience on the matters of concern were selected as KIs. The 18 KIs interviewed were the responsible officers for management of SOHFOs from TOAM, NGO X and NGO Y. For the case of District Councils of Morogoro and Kilimanjaro Regions where studies were undertaken; District Agriculture, Irrigation and Cooperative Officers (DAICOs) and District Community Development Officers (DCDOs) were also interviewed.
Quantitative primary data were collected using a structured questionnaire with both open and closed ended questions. Since the theoretical and conceptual frameworks are working as road map for preparation of tools for data collection, we contemplated the questions in the questionnaire that are particularly dealing with the aspects of change process of SOHFOs based on Goni (1999) ; Rhydderch et al. (2004) and Nielsen & Randall (2012) literatures.The data were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21. Descriptive statistics, particularly index score was used to clarify how process of change has been implemented in SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs networking in inter organisational networks in Tanzania ( Landry et al., 2001 ). The developed index includes total of 18 statements, seven statements were categorized in stages of change process of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs, six statements were categorized in communication of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs and five statements were categorized in participation of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs. In developing the 5 points index score, respondents (leaders of SOHFOs who involves chairpersons to SOHFOs, treasurers and project supervisors; or conversant individual members) were asked to indicate on a scale (whereby 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree) to what extent they agree or disagree with the statements as seen in Tables 1-3. The qualitative data on exploring the role of intermediary organisation and; to compliment (that is adding the richness and complexity of the matter of the inquiry); and supplement (that is adding data due to failure of the previous administered data collection method to capture the intended matter of inquiry) the information on first objective which focused on process of change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs for their OC were collected ( Bryman, 2006 , 2016 ). The collection involved Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). Qualitative data collected using checklist of questions were analysed by using content analysis whereby information pieces were organised into different themes and compared based on study objectives.
2.3. Ethical Considerations
One of the key ethical values for researchers is safeguarding the privacy of the respondents (anonymity). We observed this value by allocating alphabetical symbols (names). This was done especially for two NGOs involved in this study whereby they were assigned alphabetical names X and Y. While one NGO operates from the single point, the other one operates from four different points. Thus, alphabetical symbols (names) were also assigned in these four points at which one NGO has its main centres for dealing with SOHFOs. The points were named A, B, C and D.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Experience of Change Process Adopted by Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisationss under X and Y Non-Governmental Organisations for Their Organisational Change
Determining the extent to which an organisation involves itself in change process is imperative in finding out its capacity to change ( Goni, 1999 ; Lingham et al., 2005 ; Hossan, 2015 ). Thus, the results for this study aims at understanding the experience of OC process by SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs in two regions of Tanzania. The study accomplished this by exploring first, the extent to which the process of change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs networking in inter organisational networks in Tanzania and second, the role played by NGOs as intermediary organisations in the networking for SOHFOs’ change in Tanzania. The subsequent parts explore the aforementioned areas.
3.1.1. Practices for Change Process in Change of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations under Two Local Umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations in Tanzania
In observing the extent to which the change process has been adopted for change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs, results, as shown in Table 1 show that in NGO X, SOHFOs has the mean score of 3.89 in applying the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model. This indicates that, they were able to breakdown old tasks, behaviours and attitudes towards organic horticultural production. This enabled them to practice well various organic agriculture practices including the use of organic manure and use of soil erosion control measures. For the matter
![]()
Table 1. Stages in change process of smallholder organic horticultural farmer organisations under local umbrella non-governmental organisations.
NB: The numbers in the parenthesis represent percentages. Source: Research findings, 2019.
of second step, in building new way of doing things in transition period towards organic horticultural production, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.85 in going through the step. In last step of Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.70 on establishing and concretizing new routines that facilitate organic horticultural production. When it comes to articulation of goals at SOHFOs, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.48 meaning that more than half of SOHFOs’ leaders had the knowledge and lead well the members towards a clear overall goal. Furthermore, the results show that SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.54 indicating that more than half of SOHFOS’ leaders have clear knowledge on specific measurable operational objectives. Again, over three quarter of SOHFOs’ leaders (with the mean score of 3.93) perceived there was clear definition of tasks between SOHFOs and intermediary organisation for SOHFOs’ change. When it comes to availability of clear procedures to follow in order to obtain SOHFO’s change, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.96 indicating that there was availability of clear procedures to follow in order to obtain SOHFO’s change.
For the case of NGO Y, findings in Table 1 indicate that SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.88 implying that SOHFOs’ leaders were able to breakdown old tasks, behaviours and attitudes towards organic horticultural production. In application of the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model mainly on step two, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.84 indicating that more than half of SOHFOs were able to build new way of doing things in transitional period towards organic horticultural production. Similarly, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.88 indicating that more than half of SOHFOs leaders applied the step two of the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model well by establishing and concretizing on new routines that facilitates organic horticultural production. Besides, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.67 meaning that more than half of leaders in SOHFOs were able to know and lead the members towards a clear overall goal in relation to OC that can hold for a year. Again, SOHFOs had mean score of 3.60 indicating that more than half of SOHFOs’ leaders have clear knowledge on specific measurable operational objectives in relation to organisational change. When referring to clear definition of tasks between SOHFOs and intermediary organisation for SOHFOs’ change, SOHFO had the mean score of 3.78. Regarding availability of clear procedures to follow in order to obtain SOHFO’s change, NGO Y SOHFOs had the mean score of 4.00 indicating that majority of SOHFOs’ leaders put in place clear procedures.
From these data, it is worth noting that in applying the change process for change of SOHFOs under two local umbrella NGOs in Tanzania, there are some achievements and challenges seen. For instance, at NGO X a large proportion of SOHFOs’ leaders experienced clear assignment of tasks to their SOHFOs that goes perpendicularly with the clear distribution and sharing of assignments with the intermediary organisation that is working with them. This has allowed smooth operations of the tasks needed to be accomplished with minimal wastage of time on questioning about responsible party. This is evidenced by FGD results (FGD, December, 2019).
“There are numerous mechanisms that were put in place with NGO X to ensure we are conversant with organic agriculture. The mechanisms are such as NGO X officers’ field visits, field and inhouse trainings, SOHFOs reports and exhibitions were important in accelerate the change.”
The findings also reveal that at NGO X, SOHFOs’ leaders have lower knowledge on overall objective in relation to aspired organisational change. This has affected observed changes (much of the concentration was in production with no clear goal that expands their current activities). The situation concurs to Mnguu et al. (2018) who argued on complexity of objectives of smallholder farmers which are ranging from food security to income earning. Though their paperwork intended to focus on smallholder farmers, this is plausible to apply at their SFO. From such circumstance there is a need to enhance the SOHFOs’ leaders knowledge on change direction as it has been argued by Beer & Nohria (2000) that failure of change can initiate from inadequate knowledge of change practitioners on direction of change process.
The results also indicate that in NGO Y, majority of SOHFOs adopted the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model. In implementing the model, SOHFOs ensure they understand and implement changes in organic agriculture practices particularly use of organic manure and use of soil erosion measures. In the same vein, in NGO Y, leaders on few SOHFOs have clear knowledge on specific measurable operational objective in relation to organisational change. As earlier mentioned in NGO X, SOHFOs’ leaders limited knowledge on objectives in relation to aspired organisational change (For NGO Y is for specific objectives). This is evidenced by FGD results (FGD, October 2019):
“Constitutions, regulations, collective plans on organic horticultural production that are flexible based on the weather during their meetings and directives of their intermediary organisation’ officers are guidelines for our daily endeavours and sources of specific objectives.”
The findings are against Wang et al. (2009) who in their work of explaining the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model application to leaders, managers, and organisational development professionals, insisted on importance of leaders in the process of change to be aware of the step the organisation is in the change process and how change can be implemented effectively based on the current stage. Another study done by Wambura et al. (2003) regarding self-managed FOs also insisted on increasing knowledge of leaders of FOs by using training of various matters concerning their FOs. It is the fact beyond doubt that currently, the SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs are receiving trainings. This is evidenced by FGD results (FGD, October, 2019):
“We are normally been trained. In initial training o prior the formation of the SOHFO, we were imparted knowledge for three months…on group dynamics and development.”
Despite the fact that the SOHFOs are receiving trainings, the training should be advanced to cover on various matters including managing the projects in their FOs, leadership of FOs, savings and credit, record keeping and financial management.
3.1.2. Communication of Local Umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations as Intermediary Organisations to Their Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations
In exploring the communication of SOHFOs and their local umbrella organisations (intermediary organisations) again, there are areas where the situation is impressive and in other areas is not. Starting with NGO X, results in Table 2 show that nearly one third of SOHFOs (with mean score of 3.59), change plans for improved organic agriculture are not properly communicated to the SOHFOs by intermediary organisations. Again, in majority of SOHFOs (mean score of 4.02) intermediary organisation has infrastructure to provide timely and honest communication with SOHFOs. Regarding intermediary organisation communication strategy if it has timeline for critical messages, SOHFOs had mean score of 2.50 showing that intermediary organisation communication strategy has no timeline for critical messages to half of SOHFOs. In addition, in checking whether intermediary organisation uses appropriate communication channels mix to reach their SOHFOs; SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.20 implying that
![]()
Table 2. Communication of smallholder organic horticultural farmer organisations under local umbrella non-governmental organisations.
NB: The numbers in the parenthesis represent percentages. Source: Research findings, 2019.
more than half admitted on the matter. Besides, in provision of feedback, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.65 implying that more than half of SOHFOs have experienced provision of feedback in both parts (i.e. SOHFOs’ leaders as well as intermediary organisation). In observing if there is availability of communication systems meant for conflict resolution, more than half of SOHFOs (mean score 3.91) have communication systems meant for conflict resolution.
Regarding NGO Y, the findings in Table 2 show that change plans for improved organic agriculture are properly communicated by intermediary organisation to more than half of SOHFOs (mean score of 3.64). Also, findings show that more than half of SOHFOs (with the mean score of 3.76) admits intermediary organisation Y has infrastructures to provide timely and honest communication to them. Again, still in more than half of SOHFOs (mean score of 3.16), intermediary organisation communication strategy has the timeline for critical message. The results also indicate that SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.27 in experiencing appropriate communication channels mix to reach them by intermediary organisation. When it comes to provision of feedback, SOHFOs had the mean score of 4.04 indicating that most of SOHFOs experienced the provision of feedback between SOHFOs’ leaders as well as intermediary organisation. Lastly, more than half of SOHFOs (mean score of 3.86) have communication systems meant for conflict resolution.
Evidence from the findings shows that, infrastructure to provide timely and honest communication with SOHFOs is in place in local umbrella NGO X. Again, the main drawback in communication between SOHFOs and intermediary organisation (local umbrella NGOs) is poor communication strategy with unstrict timeline for critical messages. Probably this is accelerated by areas of projects selected by intermediary organisations. While it is true that both NGOs are doing remarkable job of reaching very remote areas farmers (some areas are only reached by Bodaboda Motorcycles), comparatively the situation for NGO X is critical where some SOHFOs are found in areas that are 30 kilometres from passable roads with poor communication infrastructures. This consequently affects the communication between SOHFOs and NGO X in other hand. It is the fact that NGO X has employed strategically virtual boundary objects such as web platforms in reaching some of their SOHFOs, which has enhanced the intensity of communication between SOHFOs and intermediary organisation. Besides, it has the cases of poor communication for remote areas SOHFOs. This case of poor communication is influencing their outcomes in organic agriculture practices particularly use of organic manure and use of soil erosion measures. In other words, it should be admitted that effective communications could lead into effective changer into SOHFOs under NGOs. The results on poor communication infrastructures are evidenced by KII. On this, NGO X officer said:
“We have a number of farmer organisations that are found in areas with no mobile networks. In such circumstance you have to recall and recall and wait on the time where the responsible farmer organisation leader is in the area with mobile phone network or sometimes you have to call the nearer farmer organisation leader and request him/her to deliver the message to the responsible farmer organisation leader. Generally, it takes time to reach the remote FOs compared to their counterparts (KII, Morogoro Region, December, 2019).”
The results from the study also indicate that in NGO Y the provision of feedback by farmer organisation’s leaders as well as intermediary organisation is well observed. Probably this is the reason for smooth operations again in their activities. Furthermore, the drawback in communication between SOHFOs and intermediary organisation (local umbrella NGOs) of poor communication strategy with unstrict timeline for critical messages is also found in NGO Y. Despite the fact that remoteness of their SOHFOs is comparatively low to NGO Y due to context variability, NGO Y has not yet employed strategically virtual boundary objects such as web platforms. NGO X has been implementing Macho Sauti project and formed Whats App groups for numerous purposes including enhancing communication between between SOHFOs and intermediary organisation.
3.1.3. Participation of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations under Local Umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations in Their Change
The definition of participation has been borrowed from ( Hurrell, 2005 ), whereby participation in the context of teamwork involves active involvement of members in planning and implementing a teamwork intervention. In this part the study explored the participation of SOHFOs as explained by ( Hurrell, 2005 ; Nielsen & Randall, 2012 ). In Table 3, when observing if SOHFOs make decision about the team in which they wished to work, In NGO X, SOHFOs had mean score of 3.15 indicating that more than half of SOHFOs make such decision. Again, SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.04 in planning how they wished to work together as team. Furthermore, more than half of SOHFOs (mean score of 3.00) were able to define initiatives to support team implementation e.g. training. Results show that in SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.09 in training of leaders, whereby SOHFOs’ leaders were provided with proper training for implementing change via inter organisational networks. Finally, results indicate that SOHFOs had the mean score of 3.50 in showing whether they were involved in evaluating their results by reflecting on the implementation in teams.
Conversely as shown in Table 3, in NGO Y, less than a half of SOHFOs (with mean score of 2.41) was making decision about the team in which they wished to work wherever they needed. Likewise, the findings indicate again respondents from less than a half of SOHFOs (with the mean score of 2.40) were able to plan how they wished to work together as team. It should also further noted that SOHFOs had the mean score of 2.68 in being able to define initiatives to support team implementation e.g. training. Besides, in less than half of SOHFOs (with mean score of 2.98), SOHFOs’ leaders were provided with proper training for
![]()
Table 3. Participation of smallholder organic horticultural farmer organisations under local umbrella non-governental organisations in their change.
NB: The numbers in the parenthesis represent percentages. Source: Research findings, 2019.
implementing change via inter organisational networks and (more the half of SOHFOs (with mean score of 3.28) were involved in evaluating their results by reflecting on the implementation in teams.
In participation of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs, evidence indicates that in both local umbrella NGOs (NGOs X and Y) SOHFOs were involving their SOHFOs to some extent in their change plans. For instance in both Local Umbrella NGOs (X and Y NGOs), most of SOHFOs agreed that, in participation intermediary organisation involved them in evaluating their results by reflecting on the implementation in teams. Again, in NGO X, few SOHFOs were able to define initiatives to support team implementation e.g. training. In NGO Y, few SOHFOs were involved in planning how they wished to work together as team. All these hinder/reduce the teamwork spirit that increases the ownership of the change to SOHFOs members, thus affects the achievement of the desired changes at SOHFOs ( Rosskam, 2009 ; Ogochi, 2018 ; Hussain et al., 2018 ). The findings are also contrary to the work of Udod & Wagner (2018) in Canada who emphasized teamwork and participation of those involved in change for effective results.
3.2. The Role Played by Non-Governmental Organisations as Intermediary Organisations in Facilitating Change Process of Their Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations
This part explores the role played by NGOs as intermediary organisations in the networking and allowing the change process to take place for change of SOHFOs under local umbrella NGOs in Tanzania. This was accomplished by observing three crucial functions that an intermediary organisation usually performs i.e. demand articulation, network formation and innovation process management ( Batterinck & Wubben, 2010 ; Lefebvre et al., 2012 ).
3.2.1. Demand Articulation Function of Non-Governmental Organisations as Intermediary Organisations in Facilitating Change Process of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations
Demand articulation as the function of NGO as intermediary organisation was explored. This was done by asking leaders of SOHFOs in formation of their SOHFOs whether the NGOs diagnosed and analysed the existing problem in the area it wants to bring change and if SOHFOs existing needs and problems were coherently understood. Responses from participants show that, though problem were analysed and needs were articulated, there are some weaknesses portrayed on the process. Basing on FGD results (FGD, October, 2019):
“NGO Y ensures the problems are articulated; however deep analysis is missing resulting into SOHFOs to be given the same farm implements while sometimes the needs are different. In some of SOHFOs are in areas with animals which destroys their products, thus they are more in need of security equipments rather than farm implements (hoes, spades or rakes).”
In another FGD results at Mvomero, the participants were more concerned on group composition during group formation, the reason which they argued as the factor that affects their performance and consequently their change (FGD, December, 2019):
“We are generally satisfied with the SOHFOs formation. However, we have some concerns in specified number of SOHFOs members that is needed for the SOHFO to qualify in acquiring some rights (e.g. prize in yearly performance of SOHFOs).This is because at a certain juncture, we have to invite distant or partially willing members that in a long run they affect the SOHFOs change.”
These evidences contend that despite the fact that NGOs as intermediary organisations are doing substantial work in formation of groups, there are still issues of concerns such as problems and needs articulation; together with membership composition and enrolment. This is also emphasized in the study done by Wambura et al. (2003) who opine that training that is two-way traffic to allow provision of important information for leaders of FOs, members of FOs and their facilitators is pertinent for the provision of knowledge and hence their empowerment.
3.2.2. Network Formation Function of Non-Governmental Organisations as Intermediary Organisations in Facilitating Change Process of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations
When we wanted to observe how both NGOs are constructing or design their networks the findings show that in both NGOs, they are acting less in scanning, scoping, filtering and matchmaking of possible cooperation partners. Furthermore, they have directed most of their efforts in disseminating information, help farmers to practice the technology and market their products. However, the SOHFOs are encountering some challenges that affect their change process that could be supplied or facilitated by other stakeholders. The result on less involvement of intermediary organisations in facilitating change process of SOHFOs by involvement of various possible cooperation partners was also emphasized by FGD results (FGD, October, 2019) whereby participants reported that:
“We recurrently see NGO Y’s field officers and facilitators as key stakeholders in upholding organic agriculture in their SOHFOs.”
3.2.3. Innovation Process Management Function of Non-Governmental Organisations as Intermediary Organisations in Facilitating Change Process of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations
Innovation process management can also be known as network orchestration. Regarding Innovation process management, participants from both local umbrella NGOs postulated that their local umbrella NGOs as intermediary organisations were the main stakeholders networking with them. Furthermore, in the case of enhancement of networking both intermediary organisations are concentrating on forming collaborations between SOHFOs that are under them rather than including other potential collaborators. Basing on FGD results (FGD, December, 2019) participants reported that:
“In NGO X, there are virtual objects, presence of agriculture college and marketing agents, field officers and field facilitators as tools to make SOHFOs together. Marketing agents is a new strategy implemented only to few SOHFOs.”
At NGO Y, the participants in FGD results (FGD, October, 2019). had the same view:
“At NGO Y, field officers, field facilitators and marketing centres are tools for enhancing cooperation between SOHFOs in the change process. Marketing centres is a strategy used by few SOHFOs.”
The results indicate that, both intermediary organisations enhance mainly collaboration of SOHFOs within both intermediary organisations (this has also not been implemented effectively since there is still possible collaborations that can be productive). Again, they are leaving out orchestration of other partners that can facilitate the change process of SOHFOs. Thus, change observed in terms of technological change that refers to use of organic practices i.e. use of soil erosion control measures and use of manure has not explored the fullest potential of SOHFOs.
4. Conclusion
This study aimed to understand the change process of smallholder organic horticultural farmer organisations (SOHFOs) under Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). The change process encompasses effective implementation of the Lewin’s 3 stage planned change model, with high level of participation and communication of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) and Local umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Evidence from the index score findings shows that, in applying the change process for their Organisational Change (OC), Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) under both local umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)in Tanzania (X and Y NGOs) have been somehow successful on some of the issues due to local umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) intermediation.
Notwithstanding such success, the Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) under both Local umbrella Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) have also faced some challenges in implementation of other elements. The challenges include; limited knowledge of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) leaders on overall and specific objectives in relation to aspired organisational change. Furthermore, the poor attendance for few members and introduction of new members that affect the pace of implementation of Lewin’s 3-stage planned change model varies across the 1, 2 and 3 stages, poor communication strategy with unstrict timeline for critical messages and poor involvement of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) in planning how they wished to work together as team. This consequently affects the outcomes in organic agriculture practices particularly use of organic manure and use of soil erosion measures for effective practice of organic agriculture.
Again, the findings show that both Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) as intermediary organisations play a substantial role in facilitating change process in their Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs), particularly in demand articulation function. Nevertheless, the Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) have less efforts in network formation and innovation process management, whereby they are acting less in scanning, scoping, filtering and matchmaking of possible cooperation partners and scantly use relevant tools that can enhance collaboration, communication and learning among partners.
Generally, despite the difference in years of establishment and orientation (management styles), the intermediary organisations appear to behave the same with minor differences as a result of contextual variability. To improve the change process, the study recommends for collaborative efforts between government via responsible ministries, private sector stakeholders, responsible Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), and Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) in revising the policies and systems so as to create conducive environment for Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) as intermediary organisations to achieve effectively their roles.
This involves enabling intermediary organisations; that is Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) to enhance collaboration, communication and learning amongst Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) and between them and other partners so as to allow well implementation of the change process for Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs)’ effective organisational change (OC). One of the ways can include mobile phones companies revising their products to curb the farmers’ communication needs. This can go hand in hand with upgrading of digitalization systems and employment of strategically virtual boundary objects such as web platforms by intermediary organisations. Additionally, this should involve tailor made facilitation since some Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) are from very remote areas with marginalization in digitalization issues. Again, the awareness of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs)’ leaders on main goal, specific objectives, short- and long-term plans with some reviews whenever necessary (strategic plans) should be active activity of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in collaboration with other relevant stakeholders. In this era where networking is contemporary term in various fields, studies on how change process can be implemented in various consortiums and alliances are profound. Furthermore, the replication of this study in Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs) with inclusion of various stakeholders and thus various initiatives to upscale the change process aspects are inevitable so as to recognize its relevant contribution to innovation of Smallholder Organic Horticultural Farmer Organisations (SOHFOs).