9-503-101
R E V : O C T O B E R 2 7 , 2 0 0 3
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Professor John Quelch and Research Associate Nathalie Laidler prepared this case. HBS cases are developed solely as the basis for class
discussion. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective management.
Copyright © 2003 President and Fellows of Harvard College. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 1-800-545-7685,
write Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02163, or go to http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without the permission of Harvard Business School.
J O H N Q U E L C H
N A T H A L I E L A I D L E R
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
We discovered that we have the same brand value as Starbucks, $1.8 billion! This was a shock to us and may
change the way we view ourselves as an organization. The question now is how do we leverage brand value to
further our mission and goals? Should we change our strategies and operations to increase our brand value?
— Dennis Bender, senior vice president of communications
Habitat for Humanity International (HFHI) was a nonprofit, ecumenical Christian housing
ministry that sought to eliminate poverty housing and homelessness from the world. Founded in
1976 by Millard and Linda Fuller, HFHI had, by 2002, built more than 133,000 houses around the
world, providing more than 650,000 people in more than 3,000 communities with affordable shelter.
In 2002, HFHI comprised 2,285 active affiliates in 87 countries.
Through volunteer labor and donations of money and materials, HFHI built and rehabilitated
simple houses with homeowner (partner) families. The houses were sold to partner families at no
profit and financed with no-interest loans, and the homeowners’ monthly mortgage payments were
then used to build still more houses. HFHI positioned itself as an organization “helping people to
help themselves” rather than a “giveaway program.” In addition to mortgage payments, partner
families were expected to invest hundreds of hours of their own labor (sweat equity) into building
their own Habitat house and the houses of others. (See Exhibit 1 for a fact sheet on HFHI.)
History
The HFHI concept was conceived at Koinonia Farm, a small, interracial Christian farming
community founded in 1942 outside Americus, Georgia, by farmer and biblical scholar Clarence
Jordan. Millard and Linda Fuller had left a successful business and affluent lifestyle in Montgomery,
Alabama to begin a new life of Christian service and, with Jordan, developed the concept of
“partnership housing.” This model called for those in need of adequate housing to work side by side
with volunteers to build simple, decent houses. The houses were built with no profit added and no
interest charged, financed by a revolving Fund for Humanity. The fund’s money came from new
homeowners’ mortgage payments, donations, no-interest loans provided by supporters, and fund-
raising activities. An open letter to the friends of Koinonia Farm in 1968 read as follows:
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
2
What the poor need is not charity but capital, not caseworkers but co-workers. And what
the rich need is a wise, honorable and just way of divesting themselves of their overabundance.
The Fund for Humanity will meet both of these needs. Money for the fund will come from
shared gifts by those who feel they have more than they need and from non-interest bearing
loans from those who cannot afford to make a gift but who do want to provide working capital
for the disinherited. The fund will give away no money. It is not a handout.
In 1968 Koinonia laid out 42 half-acre house sites with four acres reserved as a community park
and recreational area. Capital was donated from around the country, and homes were built and sold
to families in need at no profit and no interest. The basic model of HFHI was born. In 1973, the
Fullers decided to apply the Fund for Humanity concept in developing countries, and the family
moved to Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo). Over the next three years they worked to
build adequate shelter for 2,000 people.
After returning to the United States in 1976, the Fullers called together a group of supporters to
discuss the future of the fund, and HFHI as an organization was born. In 1984 former President
Jimmy Carter and his wife Rosalynn took their first work trip, the Jimmy Carter Work Project, to
New York City. Their personal involvement brought HFHI national visibility, and the number of new
affiliates increased rapidly.
Mission and Goals
HFHI’s stated mission was “To work in partnership with God and people everywhere, from all
walks of life, to develop communities with people in need, by building and renovating houses so that
there are decent houses in decent communities in which every person can experience God’s love and
can live and grow into all that God intended.” “Habitat is clearly a Christian organization,” added
Bender. “We are guided by the love God has for all His people. We welcome anyone, and religious
conviction does not play a role in the selection of a future homeowner.”
HFHI’s self-described purpose was “To partner with specific programs in habitat development
globally, by constructing modest but adequate housing, and to associate with other organizations
functioning with purposes consistent with those of Habitat as stated in the Articles of Incorporation,
to witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world:
1. By working in cooperation with God’s people in need, to create a better habitat in which to
live and work.
2. By working in cooperation with other agencies and groups which have a kindred purpose.
3. By exemplifying the gospel of Jesus Christ through loving acts and the spoken and written
word.
4. By enabling an expanding number of persons from all walks of life to participate in this
ministry.”
“Home ownership is part of the American dream,” explained David Williams, executive vice
president and chief operating officer. “You work hard, build your house, and pay for it. That’s a story
that resonates very strongly with people in the United States. We provide partnerships that help
people achieve this dream.”
According to the HFHI 2002 annual report, HFHI’s goal was “To eliminate poverty housing and
homelessness from the face of the earth by building adequate and basic housing. Furthermore, all of
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
3
our words and actions are for the ultimate purpose of putting shelter on the hearts and minds of
people in such a powerful way that poverty housing and homelessness become socially, politically,
and religiously unacceptable in our nations and world.” HFHI’s five-year strategic plan, 2000–2005,
called for completing 200,000 homes by the end of 2005, housing 1 million people, establishing a
presence in 100 countries, and developing the organizational capabilities necessary for future growth.
(See Exhibit 2 for an overview of the strategic plan.)
“We are in the vanguard of an emerging movement,” stated Millard Fuller, founder and president
of HFHI, “to end substandard housing and homelessness. This is akin to the movement to end
slavery, the civil rights movement, or Gandhi’s nonviolent independence movement. We are
propelling humanity to find it unacceptable that human beings live in desperation and degradation.
We want to make poverty housing socially, politically, and religiously unacceptable.”
Need and Activities
Global Need
In 2002, there were an estimated 1.2 billion people worldwide experiencing “income poverty,”
meaning they lived on the equivalent of less than one dollar per day.1 The United Nations Center for
Human Settlements (UNCHS) estimated that 1.1 billion people were living in inadequate housing
conditions in urban areas alone, and that some 21 million new housing units would be required each
year in developing countries to accommodate growth in the number of households between 2000 and
2010.2 Some 14 million additional units would be required each year for the next 20 years if the
current housing deficit was to be eliminated by 2020.
In Latin America, households needed 5.4 times their annual income to buy a house. In Africa, they
needed an average of 12.5 times their annual income. The highest rents were found in the Arab states,
where a household spent an average of 45% of its monthly income on rent. Real estate costs were
highest in Asia and the Pacific, where one square meter of land for a serviced plot cost an average of
$3.10 in U.S. dollars. Less than 20% of households in Africa were connected to piped water, and only
40% had piped water within 200 meters of their homes. In the developing world, 29% of cities had
areas considered “inaccessible” or “dangerous” to the police. In Latin America and the Caribbean,
this figure was 48%. In cities of the developing world, one out of every four households lived in
poverty. Forty percent of African urban households were living below the locally defined poverty
line, and fewer than 35% of cities in the developing world had their wastewater treated. In countries
with economies in transition, 75% of solid wastes were disposed of in open dumps.3
Taking Action
In fiscal year 2002, HFHI built 19,532 homes worldwide, 5,400 of which were built in the United
States. (See Exhibit 3 for details of the number of houses built by affiliates worldwide.) In HFHI’s
2002 annual report, four focus areas were highlighted: leading in the mission to build decent homes
1 World Development Report, World Bank, Washington, 2000, Table 1.1.
2 Basic Facts on Urbanisation, UNCHS (Habitat), Nairobi, 1999, p. 9.
3 UNCHS (The United Nations Center for Human Settlements) State of the Cities Report, March 2001.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
4
with people in need; innovating methods to better accomplish goals; building the capacity to serve;
and advocating and educating about the ills of substandard housing and HFHI’s solution.
As part of HFHI’s 25th anniversary and in keeping with the objective of leadership, 87 delegates
from HFHI affiliates around the world gathered in late 2001 for a global leadership conference. This
included structured training sessions, open forums and panel discussions, and the ability to share
best practices around the world.
The 2002 annual report also highlighted innovative programs that had been initiated in
developing countries to increase people’s ability to afford decent homes. The first of these was a
“Save and Build” program in which prospective Habitat homeowners were organized into groups of
12 families. Each family saved the equivalent of 15 cents per day for six months. At the end of this
period, the group’s savings were matched by funds from HFHI sufficient to build three houses, each
house consisting of a single room with an attached kitchen and bathroom area. Within 27 months, all
12 families completed their houses. The “Save and Build” program was also adapted to a single
family that saved up for their home over time and built it in incremental stages. In Eastern Europe,
HFHI also began to renovate substandard apartments into decent housing.
HFHI was taking an increasingly active role in advocacy. The Jimmy Carter Work Projects were
annual events at which former U.S. President Carter donated his time to the building of a home.
Initiated in 1984, the June 2002 event resulted in the construction of 1,000 homes across Africa, 100 of
which were located in Durban, South Africa and drew hundreds of volunteers and the world’s
attention to HFHI’s mission. In August 2002, HFHI also held a six-day “World Leaders Build” event
in which 28 heads of state and government from 26 countries, including President Bush, along with
thousands of volunteers worked together to build 1,175 houses. This event also drew worldwide
attention to the organization.
Operations
Families in need of housing applied to their local Habitat affiliate, whose selection committee
chose homeowners on the basis of their level of need, willingness to become partners, and ability to
repay the no-interest loan. Neither race nor religion were factors in this selection process. Throughout
the world, average house costs varied widely, running from $800 for a home in some developing
countries to $51,219 in the United States. Mortgages varied in length from three to 30 years. “We are a
construction company, a bank, and a human services organization all rolled into one,” explained
Bender, “and, although we are unashamedly Christian, we do not use house-building to evangelize.”
Mortgage repayment rates in the United States were very high, with only a 2% foreclosure rate. In
the case of a foreclosure, the property was made available to the next Habitat homeowner candidate,
who in exchange provided sweat equity in the building of another Habitat house. Internationally,
however, repayment rates averaged 50% in Africa, around 70% in Latin America, and 80% in Asia. In
some countries, particularly in situations of disaster relief, Habitat competed with nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) that built houses and donated them to needy families. “It’s difficult,”
explained Bender, “to implement the Habitat model of sweat equity and mortgages in one village if,
in an adjacent village, another organization is giving away a house.” The reasons behind foreclosures
varied by country. “In Kenya, for example,” added Michael Carscaddon, senior vice president of
administration, “many of the foreclosures are complicated by land title issues.”
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
5
Habitat’s business model was easy to communicate, according to Jack Yager, director of marketing
and brand strategy:
We help people build their own homes as economically as possible and provide them with
interest-free loans. In exchange, we ask them to participate in the building process itself.
People understand the concept of sweat equity and really take ownership of the process and
the result. For donors, the brand is highly participatory and practical. Because we are not
trying to cure a disease or eliminate world hunger, it’s easy for us to demonstrate results. Our
supporters and volunteers also become very engaged; not only can they donate their money,
but they can donate their time and participate in the construction of a home.
International
Culturally, the United States was unique in the prevalence of volunteerism, which was generally a
less accepted practice in other countries. Bender explained, “In the ex-USSR countries, for example,
volunteering has a whole different meaning since it was an activity that was mandated by the state.”
Habitat marketing objectives in Western Europe were also different from those in the United States.
“Substandard housing is less common because of the government involvement in this area,” said
Bender. “In many European countries, home ownership is not that big of a deal, and HFHI does not
necessarily have the same appeal as in the United States. As a result, much of our focus in Europe is
geared to raising funds to build homes in the developing world.” He continued with a number of
examples:
In Northern Ireland, however, we are developing a project called the Bridge for
Reconciliation. This involves teams of Catholic and Protestant volunteers building eight houses
in a Protestant neighborhood and eight houses in a Catholic neighborhood. In Central Asia and
Eastern Europe, the need for housing is greater, but we have faced many obstacles to attracting
volunteers, even with the prospective homeowners. In the U.K., Habitat is a name of a home-
furnishing retailer, and we have experienced a lot of brand confusion there. We are clearly
challenged in the Middle East, and we don’t talk about our mission in these countries but
about our work. In Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt, it takes a lot of negotiation, explanation, and
use of the right words. We don’t want to be viewed as using house-building as a disguise for
evangelism. One difficulty we face, given our global presence, is to manage our image. What
we say on the ground to a specific geographical audience cannot be customized much, given
the wide access to the Internet. Ninety-five percent of our resources come from the U.S., but
most of our houses are built internationally.
“Africa is the toughest place to work,” added Carscaddon, “because of the lack of infrastructure.
Asia and Latin America, on the other hand, have excellent community organizations, and self-help
initiatives are thriving.” Ted Swisher, vice president of U.S. affiliates, expanded:
In the Middle East we have difficulty even registering as an organization, and in Egypt, for
example, we work through another existing Christian organization. In many countries, it is
illegal to evangelize, and so we have to carefully adapt all our materials and some of our
practices. For example, it is Habitat tradition to give the new Habitat homeowner a Bible.
Obviously, in Nepal, for example, we don’t maintain that tradition. Our strong Christian core
means that, in many Muslim countries, we walk on eggshells and have really struggled to
establish ourselves. In Latin America, on the other hand, it has been an asset. Asia has a lot of
potential, and we are starting to gain a foothold in China and Vietnam through alliances with
existing Christian NGOs.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
6
Specific Projects and Campaigns
The “More Than Houses” fund-raising campaign was launched in 2000 with the objective of
raising $500 million, the funds necessary to build 100,000 new homes by the end of 2005. In 2002, this
campaign was on track to achieve its goals, with over 50% of donations coming from corporations.
(See Exhibit 4 for a status report of the More Than Houses campaign and Exhibit 5 for a More Than
Houses campaign advertisement.)
HFHI also ran a Women Build program, a Prison Partnership program, a Campus Chapter and
Youth program, and a Habit for Humanity University:
! The Women Build program was established to encourage the involvement of women in the
construction of Habitat homes. In the United States, women made up 50% of HFHI’s
volunteer force but accounted for less than 15% of the work done on construction sites, and
almost 50% of Habitat homes were built for women heads of households. By 2002, 350 Habitat
homes in the United States had been built by women crews.
! The Prison Partnership program linked HFHI affiliates with volunteers who were
incarcerated offenders. These volunteers produced completed housing components,
landscaping materials, and other items for house construction and found opportunities to
develop marketable job and social skills. In 2002, there were 75 prison partnerships
throughout the United States, with offenders building or contributing to the building of 250
homes a year.
! The Campus Chapters were unincorporated student-run organizations that acted in
partnership with affiliates to help build, educate, and raise funds for Habitat. In 2002, close to
10,000 students in the United States built houses during their spring break for the Collegiate
Challenge. In addition, HFHI organized creative opportunities for youth volunteers to become
involved in Habitat through landscaping and drawing greeting cards to constructing and
painting window boxes and building picnic tables.
! Habitat for Humanity University was created to foster global knowledge sharing and to
identify and nurture the next generation of leaders in the movement to eliminate poverty
housing. The intended audience went beyond Habitat staff and volunteers, and the university
sought to serve as a catalyst for other like-minded organizations and individuals, acting as an
advocate in raising global awareness of issues and approaches to eliminating substandard
housing. It sponsored a lecture series, mentoring, online learning, and scholarly research in
partnership with academic institutions, other nonprofits, and corporations.
In 2002, HFHI was building a global village and discovery center near its headquarters in
Americus, Georgia. The village would include geographic neighborhoods of Habitat houses
throughout the world, a museum simulating the experiences of Habitat homeowners and volunteers,
and a marketplace with international crafts and merchandise. Among other activities, visitors would
be able to make pressed-earth bricks like those used in Kenya or construct roofing tiles like those
used in India. (See Exhibit 6 for graphic of the HFHI Global Village.)
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
7
Organizational Structure4
HFHI comprised three organizational layers: local and national affiliates, area and regional offices
(U.S. and international), and HFHI headquarters. At the community level, HFHI worked through its
affiliates: independent, locally run, nonprofit organizations. In 2002, there were 2,285 affiliates
worldwide, of which 1,651 were based in the United States. (See Exhibit 3 for details of affiliates.)
Williams expanded:
Our organizational structure centers on affiliates. The relationship between affiliates and
HFHI is principally governed by a covenant. Internationally, we work through national
organizations, for example Habitat Guatemala, which is staffed by local people and which we
are currently helping become self-sufficient through local fund-raising. Other than funding, a
national organization works in the same way as a U.S. affiliate. We run a very decentralized
organization, but this can get us into trouble. In the past, we have had a few badly run or
corrupt affiliates, and we’ve had to bail them out. Obviously, the negative impact of these
problems on the brand is important.
Although Habitat affiliates varied in size and character, they all had to undergo a 9- to 12-month
affiliation process consisting of 77 steps, including establishing committees and a board of directors,
fund-raising, and gaining local community support. Each affiliate coordinated all aspects of Habitat
home-building in its local area: fund-raising, building-site selection, partner family selection and
support, house construction, and mortgage servicing. U.S. affiliates were asked to “tithe”—in other
words, give a percentage of their contributions to fund house-building work in other nations where
affiliates had difficulty raising funds locally. In 2002, U.S. affiliates donated nearly $9 million to
support HFHI’s work overseas. Some European affiliates, for example in Germany and the
Netherlands, were focused entirely on fund-raising to support home-building in developing
countries.
U.S. affiliates also varied in their effectiveness. In Jacksonville, Florida, for example, a partnership
had been struck between the local authorities and the Habitat affiliate to provide 20,000 people living
in substandard housing with a Habitat home over the next 20 years. In Montgomery, Alabama,
however, the local affiliate had only built one house, and in 1993 the Boston affiliate’s board had been
asked to resign. Fuller commented, “Arson, robbery, lying . . . we have survived it all because the
concept is right. When you have good leadership at the affiliate level, it soars.”
Within the United States, seven regional offices worked to coordinate the U.S. affiliate program.
They ensured that local affiliates were well acquainted with Habitat’s vision and methods of
operation and ran annual regional conferences, training sessions, and state meetings. HFHI also had
four regional offices overseas: the Africa/Middle East office in South Africa; the Asia/Pacific office,
in Thailand; the Europe/Central Asia office, in Hungary; and the Latin America and Caribbean
office, in Costa Rica. These regional offices played a similar coordination support and cross-learning
role for international affiliates.
4 Based on Jerome P. Baggett, Habitat for Humanity—Building Private Homes, Building Public Religion (Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press, 1999).
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
8
HFHI’s headquarters, in Americus, Georgia, provided information, training, and support services
to Habitat affiliates worldwide. Headquarters comprised 325 paid employees, an additional 600 who
worked internationally or in the area and regional offices, and over 150 long-term volunteers, who
typically served for over a year. “The role of HFHI is fourfold,” explained Williams:
First we provide resources in terms of dollars and volunteers. Outside the United States we are
the main provider of funds and, within the United States, the total contributions and services
provided to affiliates by HFHI is equal to about 20% of the average cost of a Habitat house.
Second, we provide best practices, training, and coordination for our affiliates. We are
currently creating the Habitat for Humanity University. Third, we are the guardian of the
Habitat brand name and have standards of excellence for our affiliates, which we put on
probation if we feel there is a problem. Fourth, we are keeper of the torch, the Christian
mission.
HFHI permeated the town of Americus, where it was one of the largest employers and where
numerous volunteer houses had been built. Poverty housing in the town had all but been eliminated.
“Americus is a model for what we’re proposing,” said Fuller. “We have ended poverty housing
here.” Bender added:
In the last three or four years, this organization has become increasingly professional in its
management, recruiting people from the for-profit world. For example, I was in the automotive
industry for a long time; Jack Yager, director of marketing and brand strategy, was in the
advertising world; and Michael Carscaddon, senior vice president of administration, used to
work for First Union bank. We are open to outsiders who can bring the new disciplines and
practices necessary for Habitat to strengthen its organizational capacity.” [See Exhibit 7 for an
organizational chart of HFHI.]
Funding and Resource Allocation
In fiscal year 2002 (ending June 2002), the headquarters organization of HFHI recorded revenues
of $162 million, with some 74% of funding coming from individual contributions, up from 63% in
2001. U.S. affiliates accounted for 39% of expenditures, international affiliates a further 26%, fund-
raising 25%, public relations and awareness programs 7%, and general management expenses 3%.
(See Exhibit 8 for details of revenues and expenditures.)
This did not, however, reflect the scope of the entire organization. As autonomous nonprofit
organizations, HFHI affiliates and national organizations maintained their own revenues and
expenditures, which were not included in HFHI’s financial statements. Estimated total revenues for
the worldwide organization in 2002 were $689 million (including the $162 million), of which $394
million came from cash contributions, $168 million from sales to homeowners, $78 million from gifts
in kind, and $49 million in other support. Roughly 80% of funds received were spent on programs,
10% on fund-raising, and 10% on management and general expenses.
Due to the economic downturn, depreciation of stock values, and the tragedy of September 11,
2001, raising funds had become increasingly difficult. The cancellation of a direct-marketing
solicitation scheduled for soon after September 11 was another factor explaining the 5% decline in
revenues in FY2002. (See Exhibit 9 for an example of a direct-mail piece.) “Churches are our strongest
support base,” added Fuller. “A single church this year gave us $1 million, for example. We receive
enormous support from churches, we must remember this.”
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
9
When asked about the impact of competition on fund-raising, many HFHI executives did not feel
that competition played an important role. “We don’t really talk in terms of competitors but there are
organizations that we consider to be comparable to ours,” explained Williams. “I suppose
organizations such as World Vision or the Enterprise Foundation would be the closest. It’s going to
take more than one organization to solve the problems of poverty housing in the world, and the more
of us there are, the better.”
The Habitat Brand
HFHI’s unaided awareness had doubled between 1996 and 2002. Peter D. Hart Research
Associates had conducted research in both 1996 and 2002, asking respondents in the United States
which were the nonprofit organizations they knew of that focused on helping poor people. In 1996
the unaided brand awareness for HFHI stood at 4%; in 2002, it had risen to just over 8%.
In June 2002, HFHI retained Peter D. Hart Research Associates to conduct a series of focus groups
and surveys to understand how the general public, HFHI partners, potential new partners,5 and
corporate officers viewed the Habitat brand.6 Specifically, the project sought to probe these audiences
for any emerging negative views or concerns, compare the organization’s current image with that
identified in a 1995 research study, identify which messages helped bond partners most, and explore
reactions to the fledgling First Shelter concept of providing emergency housing.
The research found that HFHI enjoyed both a high profile and broad popular support, with 69%
aided recognition and all people knowing the brand having positive or very positive feelings toward
HFHI. Only 17% of people stated that they did not know of the organization. In addition, very few
people were found to hold negative views, and the public regarded HFHI as an effective and efficient
organization. (See Exhibit 10 for the market research results.)
However, the researchers also found that current and potential partners had an inaccurate image
of Habitat, believing that the organization was a secular and community-based charity rather than a
faith-based, global organization. They found that the faith-based nature of the organization was not
an issue if it was made clear that faith was not a criterion for becoming a new Habitat homeowner.
Although some people had misgivings when they first learned that HFHI did not give homes away,
these negative views turned positive once they understood the partnership concept and the idea of
“sweat equity.” (See Exhibit 11 for examples of some donor comments.) The market researcher’s
report suggested that “The Christian faith that is central to the organization’s work does not also
need to be central to the organization’s message.” Top management at HFHI disagreed about this
issue, and Fuller illustrated the tension with the following example:
It was Building on Faith Week, an annual fund-raising and awareness-building event. I saw
that the banners reading “Proclaiming Christ in Word and Deed” were not up as planned. I
inquired and was told that some Jewish and Muslim people were attending and that they
might be offended. “They are welcome,” I replied, “but we are a Christian organization, and
we should not be ashamed of it.” There is danger in these types of trade-offs. We don’t have to
exclude Jesus to include people of other faiths. We must not deny the essence of who we are.
5 In this case, the term partners includes all supporters and volunteers.
6 In February 2002, a short national survey among 806 adults was conducted. In March 2002, four focus groups, two among
existing partners and two among prospective partners, were held. In April 2002, 502 current HFHI partners and 250
prospective partners were surveyed, and, in May 2002, 125 corporate-giving officers were surveyed.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
10
While partners and prospective partners were both found to be attracted to HFHI’s core mission,
different aspects of the organization appealed to the two groups. When asked to pick one or two
statements that best described their reasons for contributing to HFHI, current partners chose the
tangible results of the work (36%) and the role of Jimmy Carter (25%), while volunteered labor and
materials (34%) and involvement of the recipients (34%) were the most appealing for prospective
partners. (See Exhibit 12 for further details.)
Attitudes toward HFHI’s international mission were not valued widely in the United States. Many
of HFHI’s own partners felt strongly that problems within the United States should be addressed
before sending money abroad. (See Exhibit 11 for examples of donor comments.) With respect to
expanding the organization’s role into emergency housing, partners offered a cautious “go-ahead,”
but many voiced concern about mission dilution and redundancy with other organizations. In focus
groups, 57% of current partners and 53% of prospective partners supported the First Shelter concept.
Market research conducted in the United Kingdom in May of 2002 showed that HFHI’s aided
brand awareness stood at just 18%. Respondents did not place homelessness or slum housing as a
social priority and were more likely to support domestic rather than international issues, with only
9% of respondents giving to charities working internationally. In addition, 28% of respondents had
taken part in some kind of volunteer activity in the past 12 months, 45% of which had been in fund-
raising activities. Respondents’ initial reactions to the aims of HFHI were cautious, with only 17%
saying that they thought HFHI was a good or excellent idea, 9% saying that they would donate to
HFHI, and 14% that they would volunteer for a cause like Habitat.
Corporate Partnerships
Over the past few years, HFHI had been approached by many corporations and asked to form
partnerships. Bender expanded:
Corporations keep coming to us because we are the American nonprofit that America loves
to hug. Unlike many other nonprofits, we are able to give our supporters the ability to get
directly involved in our work. You can literally pick up a hammer and see the results of your
efforts. There is a saying that America will contribute to anything people can take a picture of
and that’s true of what we do at Habitat. We are builders of both houses and new lives.
Everyone can identify and contribute to what we do, and many people have a positive and
emotional identification with the Habitat brand.
The volunteer aspect of HFHI work enabled employees of partner corporations to become directly
involved in HFHI, which was viewed by many corporations as a strong positive aspect of the
partnership. Bender expanded, “The volunteer opportunities HFHI offers can be used by partners as
part of their management training activities. For example, Bain and Co. pay for their new MBA
recruits to spend time volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, building a house in a foreign country.”
In January 2003, Tufts University also offered a 10-day alumni program to participate in a Habitat
house build in Costa Rica. “We are trying to develop that aspect of our program,” explained Bender,
“and become a competitor of Outward Bound. I think that many Fortune 500 companies would be
interested in getting their management teams to build a Habitat house as part of a creative leadership
program.”
Traditional partners had included companies in the home-building industries, banks, and a
number of foundations. Major corporate sponsors of the More Than Houses campaign, for example,
included Whirlpool Corporation, Lions Clubs International, The Case Foundation, Bank of America,
Dow Chemical Company, Wells Fargo Housing Foundation, and Square D/Schneider Electric. “We
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
11
have tended to stick to those partners where the reason for the brand linkage is clear,” explained
Bender. “As attention to corporate social responsibility among Fortune 500 companies increases, we
expect companies will seek the halo that a partnership with a nonprofit can bring.”
Originally, many corporate partnerships had been based on cash donations or in-kind gifts of
building materials or products. For example, in 1999, Habitat signed a five-year agreement with
Whirlpool, worth $5 million annually, to provide all the refrigerators and stoves for new Habitat
homes in North America. “What began as a product relationship,” explained Bender, “has evolved
into a broader partnership. New Whirlpool employees are required to donate one day in their first
month to helping on a Habitat worksite and special team-building exercises are held at Habitat
worksites to help build esprit de corps.” In addition, financial partners such as Wells Fargo and
Citigroup partnered with HFHI by investing in bonds secured by Habitat mortgages, thereby freeing
up resources for affiliates and facilitating their growth.
Increasingly, corporate partners were looking for deals whereby they could directly link their
activities and brand names with Habitat. HFHI was also currently assessing a potential partnership
with Marriott, a hotel management company. The proposal was for each hotel property to ask its
guests to contribute $1 to HFHI per night of stay. This had already been successfully implemented in
Costa Rica and Indonesia and was being evaluated for broader implementation. “It’s hard to estimate
the monetary value of this partnership,” said Bender. “It really depends how broadly it is
implemented, but potentially it could bring in millions of dollars a year.” “We are also currently
looking at a partnership with Lafarge,” added Williams, “that is potentially worth multiple millions
a year. Given their leadership in the cement business, they are compatible potential partners.” Other
partnerships, however, existed with companies where the link was less clear. In 2001, for example, to
celebrate its 100th anniversary, Maxwell House spent $8 million on television commercials that
promoted Habitat and provided $2 million in house sponsorships.
Bender was unsure if sharing the brand valuation information with corporate partners had
increased the average monetary benefits to HFHI, but existing partners were increasingly interested
in renewing their relationship with HFHI. Some executives at HFHI believed that funding from
corporate sponsorship and partnership represented an important, as yet largely untapped,
opportunity for the organization. “Outside the U.S., corporations don’t partner as willingly,”
explained Williams. “Companies donate money but don’t see a value in cobranding.” Carscaddon
added:
There are also risks to partnering with corporations, and we have not always recognized
that. For example, we need to establish minimum payments for the use of our brand name and
logo, say $100,000, to avoid dilution of the brand. In addition, we must be aware that potential
partner corporations also face a certain risk. We had a recent example where a corporation
sponsored a specific house, and the homeowner was a convicted felon. In this case, the
corporation’s PR has somewhat backfired.
Interbrand’s Brand Valuation Study
In May 2002, Interbrand was retained to conduct a study of HFHI’s brand value. Interbrand
defined a brand as “a relationship that secures future earnings by retaining customer loyalty” and
believed that brand value typically accounted for between 30% and 70% of a public company’s
market capitalization. Interbrand used financial analysis, market analysis, and brand analysis to
establish a specific brand’s value (see Exhibit 13 for Interbrand’s discounted cash flow (DCF) brand
value calculation model). Since nonprofits offered no direct equivalent to economic earnings,
Interbrand suggested that a surrogate for the value they created was in the number and economic
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
12
value of lives saved and/or lives improved. One approach to assessing the value of a nonprofit, it
argued, was to treat the total funds and raw materials directed to the cause as the equivalent of a for-
profit brand’s economic earnings. Although used for HFHI, this approach ignored all the
nonfinancial value added by the nonprofit brand, such as volunteer time.
Jeffrey Parkhurst, managing director of brand valuation at Interbrand, directed the Habitat study.
He expanded on the rationale for nonprofits to place a value on their brands:
First, an organization’s brand is a valuable asset that can be leveraged in corporate
partnerships to open the door for cobranding, licensing, and other partnering opportunities. In
addition, by comparing brand values, an organization is able to select appropriate partners and
extract the correct value from each partnership. Internally, knowing the value of the brand and
communicating it effectively can result in budgeting the funds and human resources necessary
to protect and grow the brand asset, as well as achieving buy-in and commitment throughout
the organization to adopt practices that protect and enhance brand equity and define the use of
the brand in the field.
Interbrand’s market analysis looked at the drivers within a brand’s industry and assessed the
importance of each and the role the brand played in contributing to each driver. For bulk chemicals,
for example, the role of the brand overall was estimated at 10 out of 100. In perfumes, however, the
contribution was estimated at 90 out of 100. The market analysis helped focus attention on which
drivers of the business were most dependent on the brand, as well as which drivers could or should
be leveraged. For HFHI, nine drivers were identified by Interbrand through research and interviews
with Habitat staff and reviewed by Habitat executives. These weighted drivers included tangible
results, being part of the solution, local impact, heritage, spiritual motivation, flexibility for
volunteers, inertia, tax benefit, and self-image. The role of the HFHI brand was estimated for each of
these at between 25% and 100%. The resulting overall branding index (RBI) for HFHI was calculated
at 58 out of 100. (See Exhibit 14 for HFHI brand index chart.)
Interbrand’s brand analysis was based on a brand-strength score and brand-risk model that
scored a brand relative to a notional “ideal” brand against seven core attributes associated with
strong brands: market, stability, leadership, geography, trend, support, and protection. HFHI’s
resulting brand strength score (BSS) was calculated at 76 out of 100. Based on multiple studies of
other brands, Interbrand attached a discount rate to future cash flows based on the BSS. In HFHI’s
case, the discount rate was 7.5%. This was applied to HFHI’s RBI-adjusted cash flows over a seven
year period with a conservative assumption of zero revenue growth.
The result was a net present value of future brand earnings—that is, operating income due to the
brand itself—of $1.8 billion. Compared with the values of other major brands, HFHI had the same
brand value as Starbucks Coffee but had substantially less than Coca-Cola, at $68 billion; Intel, at $35
billion; and IBM, at $53 billion. However, HFHI’s brand value as a percentage of revenue was 270%,
compared with 350% for Coca-Cola, 130% for Intel, and 60% for IBM.7
Based on the study, Interbrand recommended partnering with higher-value corporate brands or
getting paid accordingly. Interbrand cautioned that HFHI’s brand value varied by type of partner or
its application but noted that it was unlikely that any HFHI partner was currently overpaying,
otherwise it would not have signed the deal. In addition, Interbrand showed how some of the brand
drivers used to calculate the brand index were less unique and defensible versus competition over
time. Drivers such as local impact, spiritual motivation, flexibility for volunteers, inertia, tax benefit,
and self-image were highlighted as being less unique to HFHI. (See Exhibit 14 for brand drivers.)
7 Best Global Brand Study, Businessweek, July 2001.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
13
Parkhurst expanded: “Knowing what truly differentiates their brand versus competition, and
what brand drivers are strong or need to be protected, gives HFHI a sense of the actions they need to
take to maintain and grow the value of their brand.” Bender added, “Knowing our brand value has
helped us speak the same language as our corporate partners and helps our partners sell potential
partnership to their managements and boards. It has also caused us to reevaluate whom we want to
partner with in the future. We are setting our sights much higher.”
“We knew that the Habitat brand had widespread recognition and that it had a lot of value,” said
Swisher. “The Interbrand work confirms the fact that it is our greatest asset, and we must do
everything we can to protect it. We had a rare opportunity with public figures such as Carter and
Fuller that helped establish the brand, the trick is now to maintain brand value.” Bender added:
Given the difficulty in assessing and comparing NGOs, I think that brand value would be a
very useful tool for making comparisons. For-profit companies have a set collection of figures
and facts that are used to assess success; they have a common language that everyone speaks.
This is not the case for nonprofits. The key question for me is how do we promote brand value
as an assessment tool to be used by the NGO community.
Future Direction and Challenges
Maintaining the culture Several top executives were concerned about HFHI’s ability to
maintain its culture and Christian heritage. “Our main challenge,” said Fuller, “is keeping Jesus at the
center of our work as we grow and move ever more into a diverse world. Keeping that strong
Christian focus is of great importance. There are many organizations that have floundered because
they have forgotten who they are, and there is a danger to HFHI of erosion of our values and vision.”
Williams agreed:
Most people come to work at Habitat out of a sense of calling. We don’t want to become
like a for-profit company. Our main challenge is how to maintain our Christian ministry. How
do we continue to grow and go into countries where the population is not Christian and not
lose who we are? The more diverse and popular we become, the more difficult it is going to be
to hold on to our Christian core.”
Achieving the mission through growth The objective of eliminating poverty housing in the
world was very ambitious and, to some, overwhelming, not to say impossible. “We only build 20,000
houses a year,” said Williams. “As much success as we’ve had, it’s just a drop in the ocean. In order
to have a greater impact, we need to increase our advocacy role. We also need to do more in
partnership with third parties. We need to adapt our methods so that we can grow more quickly and
achieve our goals faster.”
“A key challenge,” added Carscaddon, “is how to grow given limited resources. We have
expanded outside the U.S., gone to Europe to access grants and individual donations, and we want to
help affiliates in developing countries to raise more of their own funds. But how do we obtain the
resources to make the big leaps necessary to achieve our overall mission of poverty housing
elimination?” Swisher expanded, “Growth has slowed. Our pledge and core income growth grew last
year by only 5%. We have saturated the U.S. market and have mailed enough acquisition letters to
have reached every American household at least once already!”
Some senior executives, however, questioned the drive for growth, arguing that the large number
of affiliates was already a challenge to manage and proposing that money should be put into
recruiting more professional staff to make the organization more effective.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
14
Expanding the mission One issue that was currently being evaluated was the possibility of
providing temporary housing for persons displaced by disasters. “We get calls when there are
natural disasters, for example in Nicaragua, asking us if we are providing relief,” said Bender, “and
people are obviously supportive of these activities. However, that’s not really the core of our business
historically, and doing too much in this area might risk mission creep.”
Protecting the brand Bender believed that one of Habitat’s key challenges was effectively
protecting the brand. “The issue is that we have shared ownership of the brand,” he explained. “We
are not like a corporation that can dictate the precise terms for use of its brand. We have a large
number of affiliates with whom we have a covenant agreement, and we don’t control our brand to
the degree we would like.” Within the United States, Habitat’s reputation varied by location
depending on local market conditions and effectiveness of the local affiliate. To address the brand
protection issue, Bender had initiated a new corporate identity program to achieve greater
standardization of the Habitat brand throughout the organization.
Conclusion
In light of the recent market research results and the brand valuation study, Bender wondered
what actions HFHI should take to both protect and leverage brand value. The impact of any such
actions on the organization’s ability to meet its major challenges of maintaining the culture, achieving
the mission through growth, and expanding the mission would also have to be considered.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
15
Exhibit 1 HFHI Fact Sheet 2002
WHO HFHI is a nonprofit ecumenical Christian housing ministry seeking to eliminate poverty
housing and homelessness from the world and to make decent housing a matter of
conscience and action. An ecumenical board of directors determines policy and guides the
mission of HFHI.
HFHI invites people from all walks of life to work together in partnership to help build
houses with families in need.
Habitat is a grass-roots movement. Concerned citizens from all walks of life come together
as volunteers to form an HFHI affiliate in their community which is responsible for fund-
raising, house construction, and family selection.
HOW Through volunteer labor and donations of money and materials, HFHI builds and
renovates simple, decent houses with the help of homeowner (partner) families. These
houses are sold to partner families at no profit, financed with affordable, no-interest loans.
Homeowners’ monthly mortgage payments go into a revolving Fund for Humanity that is
used to build more houses.
Habitat carries out its mission at the community level through organized groups called
affiliates. Affiliates around the world raise the funds used to construct the houses and
some affiliates in developing countries also receive grants from HFHI. All affiliates are
asked to “tithe”—to give 10% of their contributions—to fund house-building work in other
nations.
WHAT Habitat is not a giveaway program. In addition to down payments and monthly mortgage
payments, homeowners invest hundreds of hours of their own labor—sweat equity—into
building their house and the houses of others. In the United States the average Habitat
house costs $46,642.
Families in need of decent shelter apply to their local Habitat affiliate, whose selection
committee chooses homeowners on their level of need, willingness to become partners,
and ability to repay the no-interest loan. Neither race nor religion is a factor in choosing
homeowner families.
VOLUNTEERS/
PARTNERS
Any group of people may apply to form an affiliate, and any person may volunteer their
time and or money through their local affiliate.
HFHI also takes people to serve as International Partners (IPs) to serve with affiliates
around the world, who make a three-year commitment.
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 -16-
Exhibit 2 Overview of HFHI Strategic Plan, 2000–2005
LEADERSHIP INNOVATION CAPACITY ADVOCACY
The commitment: To establish a
framework through education and
experience that supports leadership
development throughout Habitat for
Humanity.
Habitat for Humanity International action
steps will include:
! Evaluating current leadership
development programs and needs.
! Identifying programs, including possible
creation of a “Habitat University,” to meet
existing and emerging leadership
development needs.
! Identifying new sources of funds for
leadership development programs.
What does the goal of leadership
development mean to you? Here are
some questions to help start your
discussions:
! What is the leadership structure of this
(affiliate, national office, department,
state organization, etc.)?
! How does this leadership influence the
success of our work?
! What is needed in terms of support or
training to make leaders more effective?
! What should our leadership structure
look like in five years? How will we get
there?
! How will we measure the strengthening
of leadership?
The commitment: To develop or evolve
housing models and forms of governance
that achieve community sustainability
through flexible strategic alliances,
representative governance structures and
advancement of the 21st Century Challenge.
Habitat for Humanity International action
steps will include:
! Exploring new or existing models that
transform communities.
! Studying how Habitat for Humanity can
impact housing needs in complex urban
environments.
! Actively promoting the concept of setting
a date for eliminating substandard
housing globally.
! Developing guidelines to ensure the
formation of effective strategic alliances.
What does focusing on innovation mean
to you? Here are some questions to help
start your discussions:
! Are we participating, or preparing to
participate, in the 21st Century
Challenge? What do we need to do to
get ready to set a date for eliminating
substandard housing in our service
area? Are we actively promoting the
concept that substandard housing can
be eliminated?
! Is our work having the greatest impact
possible on transforming this
community? How can we expand our
impact?
! What alliances can be formed with other
like-minded groups to further our work?
! What can we learn from other affiliates,
national organizations or HFHI
departments that would increase our
effectiveness?
The commitment: To increase the strength
of Habitat for Humanity at all organizational
levels to support the 200,000-house and
100-country goals and to put in place an
organization of achieving even greater goals
beyond 2005.
Habitat for Humanity International action
steps will include:
! Creating country-specific plans for
assisting local fund-raising efforts.
! Facilitating a land use and acquisition
policy that supports house-building
goals.
! Developing organization-wide
communications strategies.
! Developing fair and equitable
compensation systems.
! Developing an HFHI Diversity Initiative.
What does the goal of capacity building
mean to you? Here are some questions to
help start your discussions:
! What are our building targets? What
would the targets be if we really
stretched?
! How will we raise the money to reach
those targets?
! How will we acquire the land to achieve
our building targets?
! Do the numbers and knowledge of our
staffing/volunteer base support success
in meeting the building targets? Does our
staff and volunteer base reflect the
diverse demographics of the area we
serve? Are staff and volunteers treated
appropriately in terms of compensation
and/or recognition?
! Are we taking full advantage of support
offered by Habitat for Humanity
International? Are we operating within
proven “Best Practices”?
! Are we meeting the tithe expectation?
The commitment: To strengthen and
expand Habitat’s education/advocacy role in
effectively communicating the needs of all
persons for safe and decent shelter.
Habitat for Humanity International action
steps will include:
! Defining and understanding community
transformation consistent with Jesus’
teachings on peace, reconciliation and
concern for the poor.
! Reviewing existing parameters and
successes in serving as the “voice” for
adequate shelter.
! Maximizing use of public and media
opportunities to advance the case for
decent shelter.
! Giving the topic of education/advocacy a
prominent place in major HFHI
convocations throughout the year.
What does focusing on education/
advocacy mean to you? Here are some
questions to help start your discussions:
! Are we recognized as a turn-to “voice”
on the issue of adequate shelter in this
community, state, region or country?
What can we do to increase our visibility
as advocates for decent shelter?
! Have we developed effective
“advocates”—writers, speakers,
spokespersons?
! Do we have the information to effectively
discuss the “state of housing” in this
service area? If not, how do we develop
that information?
! Does our performance as an
organization match our words on the
topic of adequate shelter?
! Are we regular participants in meetings
and conferences on the needs of the
poor and the need for adequate shelter?
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 -17-
Exhibit 3 HFHI Affiliates Worldwide, 2002
Country
Year of
Affiliation
Active
Affiliates
FY 2002
House
Total
Cumulative
House
Total
Country
Year of
Affiliation
Active
Affiliates
FY 2002
House
Total
Cumulative
House
Total
AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST Thailand 1998 4 17 59
Botswana 1992 10 161 857 Vanuatu 2001 1 8 8
Burundi (partnership) 1987 0 0 988 Vietnam 2000 1 0 0
Cameroon 2001 1 0 0 TOTALS 147 4,049 18,876
Central African Rep. 1991 7 19 461 EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA
Dem. Rep. of Congo 1975 6 78 2,473 Armenia 1990 1 13 14
Egypt 1989 12 1,056 3,162 Bulgaria 2001 1 0 0
Ethiopia 1990 4 40 172 Great Britain 1995 4 0 9
Ghana 1987 34 512 2,763 Hungary 1996 3 16 62
Ivory Coast 2000 10 49 49 Kyrgyzstan 1999 1 9 9
Jordan 2001 2 21 21 Northern Ireland 1994 1 0
27
Kenya 1982 35 92 1,186 Poland 1992 4 7
23
Lebanon 2001 1 28 28 Portugal 1996 1 0 2
Lesotho 2001 1 0 0 Romania 1996 4 24 54
Liberia 2000 6 18 18 Tajikistan 2000 1 17 47
Madagascar 2000 15 74 100 TOTALS 21 86 247
Malawi 1985 5 208 5,176 LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN
Mozambique 2000 1 1 1 Antigua and Barbuda 1997 1 2 3
Nigeria 1989 2 1 1 Argentina 1992 2 0 6
South Africa 1987 17 300 903 Belize 1999 1 4 8
Tanzania 1985 12 109 1,867 Bolivia 1987 8 582 3,507
Uganda 1982 41 509 3,051 Brazil 1987 12 398 2,152
Zambia 1985 12 94 909 Chile 2000 1 0 0
Zimbabwe 1996 12 165 630 Colombia 1995 8 89 450
TOTALS 246 3,535 24,816 Costa Rica 1987 6 86 298
ASIA AND THE PACIFIC Dominican Republic 1987 7 154 807
Australia 1988 10 3 36 Ecuador 1998 5 97 131
Bangladesh 1999 2 96 153 El Salvador 1993 7 604 2,090
East Timor 2001 1 0 0 Guatemala 1979 17 2,470 11,505
Fiji 1992 5 14 469 Guyana 1995 4 30 152
Territory of Guam 1996 1 6 10 Haiti 1981 6 21 4
25
India 1982 25 1,210 7,963 Honduras 1988 5 571 3,364
Indonesia 1991 3 16 81 Jamaica 1993 8 6 82
Republic of Korea 1995 10 155 242 Mexico 1987 24 764 12,278
Malaysia 1998 2 9 15 Nicaragua 1984 16 367 2,314
Mongolia 2000 1 17 19 Paraguay 1998 1 83 133
Nepal 1997 6 182 516 Peru 1982 19 7 4,708
New Zealand 1993 21 31 150 Trinidad and Tobago 1996 3 9 32
Pakistan 1987 0 0 20 Venezuela 2000 1 9 9
Papua New Guinea 1983 10 41 1,040 TOTALS 162 6,353 44,454
Philippines 1986 33 1,087 5,745
Samoa 2000 1 4 4 UNITED STATES – 1,651 5,400 44,617
Solomon Islands 1986 1 9 36 CANADA – 58 109 631
Sri Lanka 1994 9 1,144 2,310 GRAND TOTALS – 2,285 19,532 133,641
Source: HFHI Annual Report, FY2002.
Note: U.S. and Canada affiliate house numbers are shown projected for fiscal year 2002.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
18
Exhibit 4 Status Report of the More Than Houses Campaign (as of November 2002)
FY03 Totals
Cumulative Totals
since January 2000
Overall Goal $500,000,000
FY03 Goal $65,000,000 $305,000,000
Total Raised by November 2002 $28,246,403 $272,279,451
% Goal Raised 43% 54%
Funds Raised through HFHI $19,541,672 $138,440,072
Funds Raised through Affiliates $8,704,731 $131,218,260
Timetable Elapsed 33% 60%
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
19
Exhibit 5 More Than Houses Campaign Advertisement, January 2003
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 -20-
Exhibit 6 Graphic Depiction of HFHI Global Village
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 -21-
Exhibit 7 Oganizational Chart for HFHI, 2002
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
22
Exhibit 8 HFHI Revenues and Expenditures ($ millions)
$ millions FY2002
Revenues
Contributions 120.4
Government grants 21.9
Other income 9.4
Donations in kind 10.4
Transfers to homeowners 0
TOTAL 162
Expenses
Program services
U.S. affiliates 62.2
International affiliates 42.5
Public awareness and education 10.6
Total 115.3
Supporting services
Fund-raising 39.3
Management and general 4.9
Total 44.2
TOTAL 159.6
Transfers (4.3)
Losses on receivables 1.9
Total 165.8
Changes in net assets (3.8)
Net assets at beginning of year 74.9
Net assets at end of year 71.1
Source: HFHI Annual Report 2002.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
23
Exhibit 9 Excerpts from an HFHI Direct-Mail Piece Distributed in the United States, 2002
Source: HFHI.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
24
Exhibit 10 Results of Market Research
Feelings Towards HFHI
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Positive Very Positive Negative Don’t know
Pe
rc
en
ta
ge
a
du
l
ts
n
at
io
nw
id
e
Proportion of Respondents with Positive and
Very Positive Feelings Towards HFHI
63
64
6
5
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
Nort
he
as
t
Sou
th
Dem
oc
rat
s
Rep
ub
lica
ns
Und
er
ag
e 3
5
Ove
r a
ge
65Pe
rc
en
ta
ge
o
f r
es
po
nd
en
ts
Source: Peter D. Hart Research Associates, courtesy of HFHI, 2002.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
25
Exhibit 11 Examples of Donor Comments
“I don’t have a problem if that’s where they started. I would have a problem if I’m giving money to them and
they’re promoting . . . oh, you need to be a Christian . . . in whatever form they might do that.”
— Sacramento donor
“I didn’t pay attention to the fact that it was Christian-based. Plain and simply, the organization leaves
something behind. There’s a house that a family now has. It’s kind of basic to me.”
— Baltimore donor
“It’s nice to help Third World countries and all that, but we have a lot of problems here. We need to take
care of our own first. We have this great nation, and we’ve got so many poor and homeless here.”
— Sacramento donor
“I’m all for helping other countries, but we’ve got a lot of problems, a lot of people hungry here, and a lot of
people that need homes.”
— Baltimore prospective donor
Source: Peter D. Hart Research Associates, courtesy of HFHI, 2002.
Exhibit 12 Appeal of HFHI for Partners and Prospective Partners
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Tangible
results:
builds
houses
Jimmy Carter Recipients
must work
Volunteered
labor /
materials
Has integrity Religious
Pe
rc
en
ta
ge
Current partners Prospective partners
Source: Peter D. Hart Research Associates, courtesy of HFHl, 2002.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
503-101 Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation
26
Exhibit 13 Interbrand’s Brand Valuation Model
Financial
Analysis
Financial
Analysis
Market
Analysis
Market
Analysis
Brand
Analysis
Brand
Analysis
EVA
Forecasts
EVA
Forecasts
Role
of
Branding
Role
of
Branding
Brand
Strength
Score
Brand
Strength
Score
Brand
Earnings
Brand
Earnings
Brand
Risk
Brand
Risk
Brand
Value
Brand
Value
Financial
Analysis
Financial
Analysis
Market
Analysis
Market
Analysis
Brand
Analysis
Brand
Analysis
EVA
Forecasts
EVA
Forecasts
Role
of
Branding
Role
of
Branding
Brand
Strength
Score
Brand
Strength
Score
Brand
Earnings
Brand
Earnings
Brand
Risk
Brand
Risk
Brand
Value
Brand
Value
Source: Interbrand, courtesy of HFHl, 2002.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
Habitat for Humanity International: Brand Valuation 503-101
27
Exhibit 14 HFHI Brand Index Chart
Source: Interbrand, courtesy of HFHl, 2002.
For the exclusive use of z. du, 2023.
This document is authorized for use only by zhanao du in MGT 234 – Brand Management Cases 2023 taught by Max Joo, University of California – Riverside from Jan 2023 to Jul 2023.
1. Please download Habitat for humanity case from HBSP website and carefully read it.
2. Discuss the following questions in 3~5 pages (Times new roman 11pt, 1inch margin, 1.5 spaced)
– What are the strengths of HFHI?
– What strategic challenges is HFHI facing?
– Do you believe the $1.8 billion valuation? Is it too high or too low?
– What are the benefits and risks of valuing a NGO brand like HFHI?
Format: MS Word, 1-inch margin, 1.5 spaced, font size 11, Times new roman
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
