Structuring corporate governance in the context of crisis: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic in a nonprofit organization

de Oliveira, Raffaella Regueira; Quelhas, Osvaldo Luiz Gonçalves; Bergiante, Níssia Carvalho Rosa Article Structuring corporate governance in the context of crisis: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic in a nonprofit organization Administrative Sciences Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: de Oliveira, Raffaella Regueira; Quelhas, Osvaldo Luiz Gonçalves; Bergiante, Níssia Carvalho Rosa (2025) : Structuring corporate governance in the context of crisis: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic in a nonprofit organization, Administrative Sciences, ISSN 2076-3387, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 15, Iss. 3, pp. 1-19, https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15030091 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/321235 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Received: 30 January 2025 Revised: 3 March 2025 Accepted: 5 March 2025 Published: 8 March 2025 Citation: Oliveira, R. R. d., Quelhas, O. L. G., & Bergiante, N. C. R. (2025). Structuring Corporate Governance in the Context of Crisis: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Nonprofit Organization. Administrative Sciences,15(3), 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci15030091 Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/). Article Structuring Corporate Governance in the Context of Crisis: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Nonprofit Organization Raffaella Regueira de Oliveira * , Osvaldo Luiz Gonçalves Quelhas and Níssia Carvalho Rosa Bergiante Postgraduate Program in Production Engineering, Fluminense Federal University (UFF), Niterói 24210-240, Brazil *Correspondence: raffaella_r[email protected] Abstract: This study aimed to analyze the adaptations in the corporate governance practices of a Brazilian support foundation, in the context of the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Support foundations act as pillars of support for research and innovation, ensuring the continuity of strategic activities in teaching, research, and outreach. This research adopted the Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) methodology to identify the organization’s core values and objectives, assessing their influence on decision making. Through the application of the VFT method, decision-making alternatives were structured based on the sessions conducted with the foundation’s employees. Among the adaptations made were the implementation of health protocols, the adoption of technologies for risk monitoring, and the restructuring of workflows, with a focus on financial support and process optimization. The results indicated that governance practices were strengthened, with an emphasis on transparency and cost reduction. This study contributes to good governance practices by integrating organizational strategy into the digital transformation process. As a suggestion for future research, it is proposed to investigate the impact of these adaptations in the post-pandemic period, as well as to conduct comparative studies with other institutions to deepen the understanding of the effectiveness of corporate governance practices in different contexts. Keywords: corporate governance; digital transformation; crisis management; decisionmaking framework; corporate governance adaptation; Value-Focused Thinking 1. Introduction In recent years, several major global events have led society, the economy, and organizations to rethink and reformulate their models and methods of work organization (Breque et al.,2021;Ramos,2021). Geopolitical conflicts, economic crises, climate change, and the COVID-19 pandemic have substantially altered organizational processes and, consequently, driven organizations in their quest for improvements in management through the development of new competencies and governance and management control mechanisms (Belluzzo,2019;Golovianko et al.,2023;Oliveira et al.,2024c;Passetti et al.,2021;Saharti et al.,2024). These adverse conditions highlight the need to strengthen organizational resilience, with the goal of facing environmental changes that may compromise the continuity and survival of organizations (Tang et al.,2025). Organizational resilience can be understood as the organization’s ability to absorb the impacts of unexpected events, develop strategic responses for its adaptation, and promote transformative actions for its future success (Tang et al.,2025;J. Zhang et al.,2021). The capacity for adaptation to changes and Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15030091 Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 2 of 19 the management of organizational knowledge becomes a competitive advantage for the survival of organizations (Arik et al.,2016). In periods of uncertainty, corporate governance plays an essential role in the crisis management process and in organizational adaptation by aligning the external context with the internal characteristics of the organization in the decision-making process (McMullin & Raggo,2020). The adoption of new technological resources and digital platforms enhances the integration of organizational processes, strengthening transparency and data-driven decision-making (Al-lami et al.,2024), and enabling timely adjustments that directly contribute to corporate resilience (Tang et al.,2025). In this sense, boards of directors and other organizational managers should base decision making on agile strategies, guided by analytical intelligence, to effectively respond to environmental transformations (McMullin & Raggo,2020). Several authors have analyzed in their work the impact of crises on nonprofit organizations, considering the particularities of these institutions. The study by Arik et al. (2016) highlights that, during the economic crisis triggered in the United States in 2008, nonprofit organizations were more profoundly affected compared to for-profit organizations due to the combination of reduced resources and increased demand for services. Another work (McMullin & Raggo,2020) also mentions the impact of the refugee crisis, which began in 2015, on nonprofit organizations in Europe. According to the authors, organizational structures and service delivery models had to be reconsidered by these organizations. In their recent research, Waniak-Michalak et al. (2024) pointed out that the COVID-19 pandemic presented a new need for nonprofit organizations: scientific studies, particularly in the medical field. In the studies mentioned, there is an emphasis on the restructuring of decision-making processes in governance, taking into account the complexity of multiple stakeholders in nonprofit organizations. However, as Arik et al. (2016) highlight, the challenges faced by nonprofit organizations differ from those observed in for-profit entities, especially regarding governance management. While in nonprofit organizations, the institutional strategy is guided by values, for-profit entities focus on operational efficiency and maximizing profits for distribution to owners or shareholders. The global crisis caused by COVID-19 has intensified the adoption of digital technologies in organizational operations (Al-lami et al.,2024). This digital transformation process aimed to maximize the efficiency and flexibility of production processes by increasing productivity (Çipi et al.,2023) or reducing costs (Ghobakhloo et al.,2022), seeking to create organizational value (Chatzipetrou & Varvaropoulos,2024). The digital transformation presented technological creations such as artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IoT), cloud computing, virtual/augmented reality, autonomous robots, and BigData, among others (Furstenau et al.,2020;Golovianko et al.,2023;Santhi & Muthuswamy,2023;Zhironkin et al.,2022). This movement marked the beginning of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, also known as Industry 4.0 (Oliveira et al.,2024a). It is worth noting that the term Industry 4.0 was used for the first time in 2011, in Germany (Gródek-Szostak et al.,2023). Following the international scenario, the economic instability resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic affected the economic performance of organizations in Brazil, particularly research and development support foundations (FUJB,2023). Established by Law 8958/94 (BRASIL,1994), the support foundations are private, nonprofit institutions created with the purpose of “support projects in teaching, research, extension, institutional, scientific and technological development, and to promote innovation, including the necessary administrative and financial management for the execution of these projects” of Federal Institutions of Higher Education (FIHE) and other Scientific and Technological Institutions (STIs) (Oliveira et al.,2024c). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 3 of 19 The substantial reduction in government and private investments in research and development projects, especially in the early years of the pandemic, directly impacted the revenues of support foundations across the country, considering the financial dependence of these organizations on donations and national and international partnerships (Kim & Mason,2020). In response to this scenario, support foundations sought more effective financial management practices, identified new funding and partnership opportunities, and adopted innovations in their organizational management (FUJB,2023), exploring real-time solutions and adjusting their goals and decisions (Waniak-Michalak et al.,2024). The implementation of the digital transformation process in Brazilian support foundations reflects a strategy focused on enhancing efficiency, fostering collaboration, and developing agile tools to address organizational challenges (Oliveira et al.,2024c). Investments in technology, process digitization, intensified cloud computing, the replacement of manual activities with digital approaches, and remote work (FUJB,2021) characterize the changes implemented in the operational management of the foundations. To support these adaptations in organizational management in response to COVID-19, corporate governance mechanisms serve as instruments capable of facilitating the sharing of new knowledge (Riccotta & Costa,2022) and ensuring the balance of economic, social, and environmental outcomes (Oliveira et al.,2024b). The strategic management of corporate governance practices helps enhance organizational efficiency and competitiveness, expanding access to new sources of capital, protecting stakeholder interests, and ensuring business sustainability (Correia & Amaral,2006;Oliveira et al.,2024b). Corporate governance in support foundations, especially in crises and uncertain contexts, lacks research considering the relevant support these institutions provide for the development of research and scientific projects. While support foundations face financial limitations, these organizations also face pressures to continue providing essential services. Thus, this study aims to fill this gap by investigating the following research question: how were the corporate governance practices of a support foundation in Brazil adapted to the crisis context during the COVID-19 pandemic? The main objective of this article was to analyze the structuring of the adaptations of corporate governance practices of a research and development support foundation in Brazil in the crisis context of the COVID-19 pandemic. To assist in the structuring and analysis of decisions regarding these adaptations in the studied organization, the Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) methodology was used. Developed by Ralph Keeney in 1992, VFT provides a structured approach to support the decision-making process, emphasizing the definition of values by focusing on identifying the fundamental objectives that will guide the generation of alternatives to achieve the best decision (Vieira et al.,2023a). VFT aims to ensure that the decisions made are aligned with the values (Keeney,1992). This paper is organized into five sections: Section 2presents the literature review with the main concepts addressed in the research. Section 3describes the methodology, detailing the research questions and objectives. Section 4details the results achieved and Section 5discusses the results achieved. Finally, Section 6presents the conclusions of the study, highlighting the limitations and suggesting topics for future research. 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1. Corporate Governance The adoption of standards and guidelines for corporate governance practices has gained increasing relevance in the contemporary organizational context, driven by the need to mitigate internal and external factors that can undermine organizational management efficiency (Villiers & Dimes,2021). Strengthening internal controls, increasing transparency Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 4 of 19 in operations, and reducing information asymmetry are part of the set of benefits aimed at promoting effective and responsible management through the adoption of corporate governance practices (Velte,2023). The concept of corporate governance is defined from several perspectives in the literature (Silva Junior et al.,2021). Identified as a set of norms and practices that guide the organization and assign controls to management with the aim of safeguarding the interests and expectations of stakeholders (Bigioi & Bigioi,2023;V. A. Martins et al.,2018), corporate governance directs the decision-making process by the management, protecting shareholders (Carreiro et al.,2021;Ferreira & Quelhas,2007). In this way, corporate governance encompasses both internal agents (management, shareholders, and employees) and external agents (suppliers, customers, competitors, government) of institutions (Oliveira et al.,2024b). Historically, the private sector in the United Kingdom was a pioneer in associating the concept of corporate governance with managerial control and the financial results of companies. This perspective was formalized with the first publication of corporate governance principles in 1999 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (Bigioi & Bigioi,2023). Since its inception, corporate governance has been based on the need to monitor and control organizational operations, identifying and mitigating potential problems related to Agency Theory. In this way, favorable conditions are established for better access to capital (Noga et al.,2021), promoting greater transparency and trust between managers and shareholders (Carreiro et al.,2021). In Brazil, the adoption of corporate governance principles gained momentum starting in the early 2000s, following the launch of the first Code of Best Corporate Governance Practices in 1999 by the Brazilian Institute of Corporate Governance (BICG) (Oliveira et al.,2024b). Following international precursor concepts, corporate governance in Brazil developed, driven by the opening of the Brazilian economy to the external market. The requirement for compliance with the standards established by the regulatory bodies of international stock exchanges, combined with the increasing access of foreign investors to the Brazilian capital market, led to the implementation of initiatives to promote the adoption of corporate governance practices by organizations (CVM,2019). In this regard, recognizing the importance of corporate governance practices for creating a conducive environment for trading, BM&F Bovespa launched, in 2000, the Differentiated Corporate Governance Levels (DCGLs): (i) Level 1 (N1); (ii) Level 2 (N2); and (iii) the New Market (NM). The Differentiated Corporate Governance Levels are structured in a tiered manner according to compliance with specific requirements, with a gradual increase in demands from N1 to NM, promoting a high standard of corporate governance in the Brazilian market (CVM,2019;Noga et al.,2021;Oliveira et al.,2024b). Given the emerging need for professionalism in organizational management and the recognition of the benefits gained from adopting good corporate governance practices, several organizations “exempt” from this adoption are implementing governance standards in their management (Serafim et al.,2010). The motivations for adopting good corporate governance practices stem from factors such as the perception of the superiority of benefits over costs, the harmonization of conflicts between managers and shareholders, organizational reorganization, and preventive management against fraud and other agency costs (Ponte et al.,2012). The principles of corporate governance guide the actions of organizations by establishing standards and apply to all types of institutions, regardless of legal nature, capital composition, or stage of development (OCDE,2024). The five principles of corporate governance address (i) integrity (ethical culture), (ii) transparency (disclosure of information), Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 5 of 19 (iii) equity (fair treatment of stakeholders), (iv) accountability (accountability and corporate responsibility), and (v) sustainability (the long-term sustainability of the organization) (IBGC,2023). Corporate governance mechanisms are essential to ensure the balance of economic, social, and environmental outcomes, supporting decision making and addressing institutional dilemmas (Oliveira et al.,2024b). The COVID-19 pandemic context intensified challenges and accelerated the digital transformation process in various organizations (Chatzipetrou & Varvaropoulos,2024;Galanti et al.,2023). The crisis scenario triggered by COVID-19 highlighted the need to develop new business models to adapt to rapid and abrupt changes in the environment (Puthusserry et al.,2022). Corporate governance practices play an essential role in organizational resilience during times of crisis by promoting the adaptation of organizations, enabling agile responses to new demands and economic, social, and technological uncertainties (Breque et al.,2021). The digital transformation process marked the beginning of Industry 4.0 (Almeida et al.,2024;Oliveira et al.,2024a) and impacted both organizations and society by introducing various technological improvements and innovations (Gollhardt et al.,2020). The innovations and technological advancements resulting from this process provide competitive advantages to organizations (Rojko et al.,2020) by leading to increased productivity through improvements in systems, processes, and products (Gökalp & Martinez,2021), or the optimization of business processes (Gollhardt et al.,2020). The incorporation of new digital technologies in organizations contributes to more efficient and effective decision making (Babel’ová et al.,2022). In this way, corporate governance mechanisms prove to be strategic tools for the dissemination of new knowledge within organizations (Riccotta & Costa,2022). In association with digital transformation, the flow of knowledge becomes more accessible with the reduction of communication barriers and the strengthening of the organizational capacity for innovation and adaptation to the competitive environment (C. Zhang et al.,2022). 2.2. Support Foundation in Brazil Support foundations were formally established in Brazil in 1994 as private, nonprofit institutions through Law 8958 (BRASIL,1994). With the purpose of providing support in the administrative and financial management of teaching, research, and extension projects at Federal Higher Education Institutions (IFESs) and other Brazilian Scientific and Technological Institutions (ICTs) (Oliveira et al.,2024c), support foundations perform fundamental activities for institutional, scientific, technological development, and innovation stimulation. The foundations were established to enhance academic management and the execution of research projects, delegating scientific and academic activities to researchers at universities and research centers, whose focus is the advancement of knowledge. Meanwhile, the role of the foundations is focused on the capture and management of financial resources, as well as other operational matters necessary for the implementation of projects in the Brazilian context. Support foundations play a strategic role, promoting collaboration between academia, the private sector, and the public sector (government), facilitating integration among different institutions. Support foundations are essential for the continuity of research in various areas of knowledge, enabling the execution of research and development projects in universities and other research institutions, and contributing to the scientific and technological progress of the country. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 6 of 19 Corporate Governance in Support Foundations The growth of nonprofit organizations in Brazil has driven an increase in studies analyzing corporate governance mechanisms and practices within these institutions (Martins & Martins,2013). With their own characteristics and internal processes distinct from for-profit organizations, support foundations have more decentralized governance structures and participatory decision-making processes, with management led by the board of directors, guided by the institution’s vision, mission, and values (Rodrigues & Malo,2006). Another important characteristic of support foundations is their creation by a founder, who can be either an individual or a legal entity, establishing the foundation’s assets, purpose, and administrative structure (Martins & Martins,2013). These particularities make governance mechanisms essential to mitigate challenges related to conflicts of interest (Canito Filho et al.,2014), transparency in presenting financial statements, and accountability (Martins & Martins,2013). In this sense, it is understood that good governance practices are applicable and recommended for all entities, regardless of their nature (governmental or nongovernmental) or their purpose (for-profit or nonprofit) (Milani Filho & Milani,2011). In support foundations, the adoption of these practices is highly relevant, considering the challenges they face with management complexity, fundraising, transparency requirements, and board composition (Canito Filho et al.,2014). The COVID-19 pandemic intensified the challenges faced by nonprofit organizations, requiring rapid changes in governance to adapt to the new context. Studies, such as those by Waniak-Michalak et al. (2024) and Kim and Mason (2020), indicate that the programs and funding of nonprofit organizations were strongly impacted, highlighting the need for rapid structural and strategic transformations to ensure overcoming the crisis. The results of these studies emphasized the necessary modifications in the management of these organizations, such as cooperation with funders, the implementation of additional projects, collaboration with the government, the use of grants, and the conduct of virtual campaigns. These and other management strategies are directly dependent on the decisions of decision-makers, as they are the individuals who determine strategic directions and implement organizational changes (Peschl & Schüth,2022). The corporate governance mechanisms of support foundations were crucial in facilitating the necessary adaptations in the challenging context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic accelerated the digital transformation process, promoting administrative reorganization with the implementation of new systems, process digitalization, investments in technology for new fundraising methods (online), intensification of cloud computing, online monitoring, and other technological advancements (FAURGS,2021;FUJB,2023). In this scenario, governance practices, especially transparency and accountability, underwent changes in support foundations, supported by the digital transformation process that enabled organizational reconstruction (J. Zhang et al.,2021). 2.3. Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) Problem Structuring Methods (PSMs) are effective in assisting decision-making processes that involve multiple perspectives, various alternatives, multiple decision-makers, conflicts of interest, resource constraints, and an absence of clear objectives. These methods help stakeholders identify the relevant factors of the problem, facilitating the understanding and analysis of alternatives (Vieira et al.,2023b). Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) is a problem-structuring methodology developed to support complex decision-making processes in organizational environments. Widely used, VFT serves as a tool to support the creation of alternatives for problems (Morais et al., 2013). The VFT approach focuses on identifying the stakeholders’ values that influence the Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 7 of 19 construction of decision alternatives, structuring them according to the defined objectives (Françozo et al.,2022). The VFT methodology provides a framework that enables more informed decisions, aligned with the needs and preferences of those involved, establishing a solid foundation for problem-solving in complex environments (Keeney,1992). Developed by Ralph Keeney in 1992 (Françozo & Belderrain,2022;Vieira et al.,2023b), the VFT method uses a systematic approach to create alternatives based on the stakeholders’ values in decision-making contexts with multiple parties involved (Morais et al.,2013). In scenarios of risk and uncertainty, VFT stands out as an effective mechanism for evaluating and prioritizing different alternatives, maximizing value in uncertain and highly complex environments. The VFT methodology proposes mapping values to convert them into objectives, focusing on the creation of innovative and improved alternatives (Françozo & Belderrain, 2022;Keeney,1992). For identifying decision objectives, stakeholders are encouraged to answer certain questions (Vieira et al.,2023b). Figure 1presents the suggested questions. Adm. Sci. 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 20 VFT approach focuses on identifying the stakeholders’ values that influence the construction of decision alternatives, structuring them according to the defined objectives (Françozo et al., 2022). The VFT methodology provides a framework that enables more informed decisions, aligned with the needs and preferences of those involved, establishing a solid foundation for problem-solving in complex environments (Keeney, 1992). Developed by Ralph Keeney in 1992 (Françozo & Belderrain, 2022; Vieira et al., 2023b), the VFT method uses a systematic approach to create alternatives based on the stakeholders’ values in decision-making contexts with multiple parties involved (Morais et al., 2013). In scenarios of risk and uncertainty, VFT stands out as an effective mechanism for evaluating and prioritizing different alternatives, maximizing value in uncertain and highly complex environments. The VFT methodology proposes mapping values to convert them into objectives, focusing on the creation of innovative and improved alternatives (Françozo & Belderrain, 2022; Keeney, 1992). For identifying decision objectives, stakeholders are encouraged to answer certain questions (Vieira et al., 2023b). Figure 1 presents the suggested questions. Figure 1. Identifying objectives for VFT. Source: Vieira et al. (2023b). The VFT structure consists of four stages, based on the “VFT Front-End” approach developed by Keeney, which defines and structures the decision (Vieira et al., 2023a). In this sense, Françozo and Belderrain (2022) proposed the four stages of VFT: (i) the identification of values; (ii) the conversion of values into objectives; (iii) the construction of the objectives hierarchy; and, lastly, (iv) the construction of a means–ends objective network. Figure 2 presents the configuration of the VFT stages. Figure 1. Identifying objectives for VFT. Source: Vieira et al. (2023b). The VFT structure consists of four stages, based on the “VFT Front-End” approach developed by Keeney, which defines and structures the decision (Vieira et al.,2023a). In this sense, Françozo and Belderrain (2022) proposed the four stages of VFT: (i) the identification of values; (ii) the conversion of values into objectives; (iii) the construction of the objectives hierarchy; and, lastly, (iv) the construction of a means–ends objective network. Figure 2 presents the configuration of the VFT stages. In several studies, the methodological structure for identifying objectives in the construction of VFT varies between 2 and 10 stages, depending on the decision-making context and the stakeholders involved (Françozo & Belderrain,2022). This set of identified objectives forms the fundamental basis for the quantification of values, generation of alternatives, and framing of the decision situation (Keeney,2008). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 8 of 19 Adm. Sci. 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 20 Figure 2. Suggested VFT Framework; adapted from Françozo and Belderrain (2022). In several studies, the methodological structure for identifying objectives in the construction of VFT varies between 2 and 10 stages, depending on the decision-making context and the stakeholders involved (Françozo & Belderrain, 2022). This set of identified objectives forms the fundamental basis for the quantification of values, generation of alternatives, and framing of the decision situation (Keeney, 2008). In this sense, the application of the VFT methodology in this study is justified by the method’s ability to identify and prioritize relevant strategic objectives, structuring alternatives for decision making in an uncertain environment, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and with multiple stakeholders, as is the case in support foundations. 3. Materials and Methods 3.1. Methodology Despite the growing number of articles published on corporate governance and digital transformation, the literature lacks studies that explore the application of these mechanisms as a methodology for achieving organizational innovation in Brazilian research and development support foundations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Within the presented scenario, this study aimed to help fill this gap. With the main objective of analyzing the structuring of adaptations in the corporate governance practices of a research and development support foundation in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, this study presents a qualitative approach and a descriptive nature (Gil, 2008). The research method selected was the case study, as it seeks to understand a contemporary phenomenon in depth (Yin, 2015). To structure the adaptations of corporate governance practices in the organization under study, the following specific objectives were developed: 1. To examine the values and objectives that guide the organization’s decisions in the process of adapting corporate governance practices; 2. To analyze the feasibility of maintaining the new corporate governance management beyond the crisis context. Thus, this research seeks to answer the following research questions: 1. What is the relationship between digital transformation and the management of corporate governance practices in the crisis context? Figure 2. Suggested VFT Framework; adapted from Françozo and Belderrain (2022). In this sense, the application of the VFT methodology in this study is justified by the method’s ability to identify and prioritize relevant strategic objectives, structuring alternatives for decision making in an uncertain environment, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and with multiple stakeholders, as is the case in support foundations. 3. Materials and Methods 3.1. Methodology Despite the growing number of articles published on corporate governance and digital transformation, the literature lacks studies that explore the application of these mechanisms as a methodology for achieving organizational innovation in Brazilian research and development support foundations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Within the presented scenario, this study aimed to help fill this gap. With the main objective of analyzing the structuring of adaptations in the corporate governance practices of a research and development support foundation in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, this study presents a qualitative approach and a descriptive nature (Gil,2008). The research method selected was the case study, as it seeks to understand a contemporary phenomenon in depth (Yin,2015). To structure the adaptations of corporate governance practices in the organization under study, the following specific objectives were developed: 1. To examine the values and objectives that guide the organization’s decisions in the process of adapting corporate governance practices; 2. To analyze the feasibility of maintaining the new corporate governance management beyond the crisis context. Thus, this research seeks to answer the following research questions: 1. What is the relationship between digital transformation and the management of corporate governance practices in the crisis context? 2. What adaptations in governance practices were made by the organization under study to face the crisis caused by the 2020 pandemic? 3. What were the main challenges faced by the organization in the process of adapting to the new corporate governance management? Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 15 of 19 management in the long term, as well as contribute to the development of resilient corporate governance strategies in Brazilian support foundations. 6. Conclusions This study describes the decisions made in the context of the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which shaped the corporate governance practices of the studied foundation of support, an institution crucial for supporting and developing research and innovation in Brazil. Support foundations act strategically to ensure the continuity of essential activities in teaching, research, and outreach, especially during times of adversity. Based on the Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) methodology, this study aimed to answer the research question: How were corporate governance practices adapted during the crisis? The application of the VFT approach allowed for the identification and prioritization of the organization’s fundamental objectives, which were financial support and the optimization of operational processes, and it guided the formulation of strategic alternatives to address emerging challenges. The application of the VFT methodology revealed that the adaptations in corporate governance practices were guided by the values and objectives of the foundation. Among the main results, the implementation of health and safety protocols, the strengthening of organizational transparency, cost reduction, and the adoption of technologies for monitoring activities and organizational risks stand out. These measures demonstrate the institution’s commitment to adjusting to the adverse context, using its value and objective framework to sustain organizational resilience. In this way, this study contributes to the literature by demonstrating the applicability of Value-Focused Thinking as a structured tool for decision making in organizations operating in contexts of uncertainty. Additionally, this article presents an empirical analysis of the adaptations in corporate governance practices of a nonprofit institution during the COVID-19 pandemic. The application of the VFT methodology enabled the identification and prioritization of the institution’s strategic objectives, providing the necessary structure for formulating alternatives aligned with the defined objectives and the organization’s long-term continuity. Therefore, this work deepens the understanding of the influence of value-oriented decision-making structures in strengthening corporate governance, offering important theoretical reflections and practical implications for organizations facing challenges in crisis and uncertainty scenarios. The results of this paper indicate that the adaptations implemented in the support foundation reflect trends observed in other organizations during the pandemic, particularly regarding digital transformation and the strengthening of governance practices as a response to crises. The implementation of new technologies, coupled with the restructuring of workflows and employee training, proved essential for overcoming challenges posed by resistance to change and the need for rapid adaptation. For decision-makers and governance managers of nonprofit organizations, particularly support foundations, the results of this study provide relevant guidelines in the pursuit of enhancing organizational resilience in crisis contexts. Among the best practices identified, the adoption of digital technologies to optimize operations in service delivery, institutional management, and risk monitoring stand out, along with the promotion of an organizational culture based on innovation and transparency of processes and projects, with continuous investment in employee training to overcome challenges in uncertain scenarios. Additionally, the findings of this study reveal that some adaptations implemented during the pandemic have the potential to be incorporated into organizational operations, such as the digitalization of processes and the strengthening of transparency policies. However, the maintenance of these changes may be impacted by budgetary constraints, Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 16 of 19 regulatory/governmental changes, and cultural resistance within organizations. Therefore, it is observed that the consolidation of these practices will depend on the organizational management’s commitment to renewing governance and adapting to the demands of the external environment. A contribution to future research is to analyze the post-pandemic period to identify which of the adaptations made were permanently incorporated into the organizational culture of the analyzed support foundation. Additionally, the study faced limitations, such as being restricted to a single institution with a limited number of respondents and focusing exclusively on the crisis context. A limitation of the selected method is the subjectivity in identifying the values and objectives pointed out by stakeholders, as well as the challenge and complexity of decision making in the pandemic scenario. These factors highlight the need for comparative studies to deepen the understanding of the effectiveness of corporate governance practices in different contexts and types of organizations. In addition, it is worth highlighting that this research was conducted in the context of one of the BRICS member countries, providing an opportunity to expand the analysis of governance practices to other countries in the group and broadening comparisons within the emerging economic context. Thus, it can be identified that comparative studies between sectors, countries, and crisis scenarios, especially among BRICS member countries, may provide important insights into the adaptation of corporate governance. These investigations can expand the analyses and comparisons of corporate governance practices in emerging economic contexts, providing valuable contributions to the development of best practices in crisis contexts. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, R.R.d.O. and O.L.G.Q.; methodology, R.R.d.O. and N.C.R.B.; formal analysis, R.R.d.O. and N.C.R.B.; investigation, R.R.d.O.; resources, R.R.d.O.; writing— original draft preparation, R.R.d.O., O.L.G.Q. and N.C.R.B.; writing—review and editing, R.R.d.O., O.L.G.Q. and N.C.R.B.; supervision, O.L.G.Q. and N.C.R.B.; project administration, R.R.d.O., O.L.G.Q. and N.C.R.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. References Al-lami, A., Shirkhodaie, M., & Safari, M. (2024). The digital transformation model for innovative marketing maturity in the oil companies. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental,18(9), e06535. [CrossRef] Almeida, F., Rodrigues, H., & Freitas, P. (2024). “No Need to Dress to Impress” evidence on teleworking during and after the pandemic: A systematic review. Administrative Sciences,14(4), 76. [CrossRef] Arik, M., Clark, L. A., & Raffo, D. M. (2016). Strategic responses of non-profit organizations to the economic crisis: Examining through the lenses of resource dependency and resourced-based view theories. Academy of Strategic Management Journal,15(1), 48–70. Babel’ová, Z. G., Vraˇnaková, N., & Stareˇcek, A. (2022). Moderating effect of Industry 4.0 on the performance of enterprises in the constrains related to COVID-19 in the perception of employees in Slovakia. Administrative Sciences,12(4), 183. [CrossRef] Belluzzo, R. C. B. (2019). Transformação digital e competência em informação: Reflexões sob o enfoque da Agenda 2030 e dos Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Revista Conhecimento Em Ação,4, 3–30. [CrossRef] Bigioi, A. D., & Bigioi, C. E. (2023). Governance and performance in Romanian energy companies. Energies,16(13), 5041. [CrossRef] BRASIL. (1994). Lei 8.958, de 20 de dezembro de 1994. In Diário oficial da união; Poder Executivo. Available online: https:// www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8958.htm (accessed on 27 October 2024). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 17 of 19 Breque, M., De Nul, L., & Petridis, A. (2021). Industry 5.0 towards a sustainable, human-centric and resilient European industry. Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/468a892a-5097-11eb-b59f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (accessed on 18 September 2024). Canito Filho, F. d. O., Tassigny, M. M., & de Almeida Bizarria, F. P. (2014). Possibilidades de efetivação de práticas de governança em fundações privadas. Revista Brasileira de Administração Científica,5(3), 305–326. [CrossRef] Carreiro, N. K. D., Nascimento, J. C. H. B. D., Barbosa, F. L. S., Neto, A. R., & da Silva, M. C. (2021). Relações entre governança corporativa, desempenho financeiro e valor de mercado. Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas,29(2), 11–28. [CrossRef] Chatzipetrou, E., & Varvaropoulos, K. (2024). Managerial digitalisation cost in the hotel sector: The case of northern Greece. Administrative Sciences,14(3), 52. [CrossRef] Correia, L. F., & Amaral, H. F. (2006). Reflexão sobre as funções da governança corporativa. REGE Revista de Gestão,13(1), 43–55. CVM, Comissão de Valores Mobiliário. (2019). Mercado de valores mobiliários Brasileiro (4th ed.). Comissão de Valores Mobiliários. Çipi, A., Fernandes, A. C. R. D., Ferreira, F. A. F., Ferreira, N. C. M. Q. F., & Meidut ˙ e-Kavaliauskien ˙ e, I. (2023). Detecting and developing new business opportunities in society 5.0 contexts: A sociotechnical approach. Technology in Society,73, 102243. [CrossRef] FAURGS. (2021). Relatório de Gestão. Available online: https://www.faurgs.ufrgs.br/ (accessed on 2 November 2024). Ferreira, M. D., & Quelhas, O. L. G. (2007). Avaliação qualitativa das decisões do conselho de administração: O caso de uma instituição financeira. Revista Gestão Industrial,3(3), 128–147. [CrossRef] Françozo, R. V., & Belderrain, M. C. N. (2022). A problem structuring method framework for value-focused thinking. EURO Journal on Decision Processes,10, 100014. [CrossRef] Françozo, R. V., Paucar-Caceres, A., & Belderrain, M. C. N. (2022). Combining value-focused thinking and soft systems methodology: A systemic framework to structure the planning process at a special educational needs school in Brazil. Journal of the Operational Research Society,73(5), 994–1013. [CrossRef] FUJB—Fundação Universitária José Bonifácio. (2021). Relatório Anual de Gestão. Available online: http://www.fujb.ufrj.br/ PortalTransparencia/B)%20Relat%C3%B3rios%20Anuais%20de%20Gest%C3%A3o%20-%20Avalia%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20 de%20Desempenho%20e%20Balan%C3%A7o%20Patrimonial/Anos/2021/Relatorio _ Anual _ de _ Gestao _ 2021.pdf (accessed on 26 October 2024). FUJB—Fundação Universitária José Bonifácio. (2023). Relatório de Atividades. Available online: http://www.fujb.ufrj.br/ PortalTransparencia/B)%20Relat%C3%B3rios%20Anuais%20de%20Gest%C3%A3o%20-%20Avalia%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20 de%20Desempenho%20e%20Balan%C3%A7o%20Patrimonial/Anos/2023/Relatorio _ de _ Atividades _ 2023.pdf (accessed on 26 October 2024). Furstenau, L. B., Sott, M. K., Kipper, L. M., MacHado, E. L., Lopez-Robles, J. R., Dohan, M. S., Cobo, M. J., Zahid, A., Abbasi, Q. H., & Imran, M. A. (2020). Link between sustainability and Industry 4.0: Trends, challenges and new perspectives. IEEE Access,8, 140079–140096. [CrossRef] Galanti, T., De Vincenzi, C., Buonomo, I., & Benevene, P. (2023). Digital transformation: Inevitable change or sizable opportunity? The strategic role of HR management in Industry 4.0. Administrative Sciences,13(2), 30. [CrossRef] Ghobakhloo, M., Iranmanesh, M., Mubarak, M. F., Mubarik, M., Rejeb, A., & Nilashi, M. (2022). Identifying industry 5.0 contributions to sustainable development: A strategy roadmap for delivering sustainability values. Sustainable Production and Consumption,33, 716–737. [CrossRef] Gil, A. C. (2008). Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. Atlas. Gollhardt, T., Halsbenning, S., Hermann, A., Karsakova, A., & Becker, J. (2020, June 22–24). Development of a digital transformation maturity model for IT companies. 2020 IEEE 22nd Conference on Business Informatics, CBI (Vol. 1, pp. 94–103), Antwerp, Belgium. [CrossRef] Golovianko, M., Terziyan, V., Branytskyi, V., & Malyk, D. (2023). Industry 4.0 vs. Industry 5.0: Co-existence, transition, or a hybrid. Procedia Computer Science,217, 102–113. [CrossRef] Gökalp, E., & Martinez, V. (2021). Digital transformation capability maturity model enabling the assessment of industrial manufacturers. Computers in Industry,132, 103522. [CrossRef] Gródek-Szostak, Z., Szel ˛ag-Sikora, A., Siguencia, L. O., & Niemczyk, A. (2023). From Industry 4.0 paradigm towards Industry 5.0. Vide. Tehnologija. Resursi—Environment, Technology, Resources,2, 46–49. [CrossRef] IBGC. (2023). Código das melhores práticas de governança corporativa (6th ed.). Instituto Brasileiro de Governança Corporativa. Keeney, R. L. (1992). Value-focused thinking: A path to creative decisionmaking. Harvard University Press. Keeney, R. L. (2008). Applying value-focused thinking. Military Operations Research,13(2), 6–17. [CrossRef] Kim, M., & Mason, D. P. (2020). Are you ready: Financial management, operating reserves, and the immediate impact of COVID-19 on nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,49(6), 1191–1209. [CrossRef] Martins, M., & Martins, V. F. (2013). Governança corporativa em uma fundação de serviços hospitalares: Um estudo de caso no Brasil. Revista de Administração de Roraima-RARR,3(2), 70–89. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 18 of 19 Martins, V. A., Jeremias Junior, J., & Enciso, L. F. (2018). Conflitos de agência, governança corporativa e o serviço público brasileiro: Um ensaio teórico. RGC—Revista de Governança Corporativa,5(1). [CrossRef] McMullin, C., & Raggo, P. (2020). Leadership and governance in times of crisis: A balancing act for nonprofit boards. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,49(6), 1182–1190. [CrossRef] Milani Filho, M. A. F., & Milani, A. M. M. (2011). Governança no terceiro setor: Estudo sobre uma organização francesa do século XIX. Revista Eletrônica de Ciência Administrativa,10(1), 32–46. [CrossRef] Morais, D. C., Alencar, L. H., Paula, A., Costa, C. S., & Keeney, R. L. (2013). Using value-focused thinking in Brazil. Available online: www.scielo.br/pope (accessed on 26 October 2024). Noga, L., Ribeiro, F., & Gerigk, W. (2021). A relação entre o gerenciamento de resultados e os níveis de governança corporativa: Um estudo em empresas do segmento de energia elétrica da BM&FBOVESPA. Revista UNEMAT de Contabilidade,10(19), 145–169. OCDE. (2024). Princípios de governação corporativa do G20/OCDE 2023. OECD Publishing. [CrossRef] Oliveira, R. R., Quelhas, O. L. G., & Bergiante, N. C. R. (2024a, October 31–November 1). Convergência entre as tecnologias digitais e o desenvolvimento sustentável: Análise em empresa de petróleo e gás com gestão ESG. XII Lean Six Sigma Congress—2024 & I Congresso de Excelência de Serviços Regulados, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Oliveira, R. R., Quelhas, O. L. G., & Bergiante, N. C. R. (2024b, September 26–27). Governança corporativa: Uma análise comparativa sob as perspectivas público e privada. XVIII CNEG_Congresso Nacional de Excelência Em Gestão & INOVARSE_Simpósio de Inovação e Responsabilidade Social, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Oliveira, R. R., Quelhas, O. L. G., de Pereira, D. A. M., & dos Santos, M. (2024c, November 5–6). Aplicação do método S.W.O.T-D.M.S no planejamento estratégico de transformação digital de uma organização de apoio àpesquisa e oo desenvolvimento. Simposio de Excelência em Gestão e Tecnologia—SEGet, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Passetti, E. E., Battaglia, M., Bianchi, L., & Annesi, N. (2021). Coping with the COVID-19 pandemic: The technical, moral and facilitating role of management control. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal,34(6), 1430–1444. [CrossRef] Peschl, A., & Schüth, N. J. (2022). Facing digital transformation with resilience—Operational measures to strengthen the openness towards change. Procedia Computer Science,200, 1237–1243. [CrossRef] Ponte, V. M. R., Oliveira, M. C., De Luca, M. M. M., de Oliveira, O. V., Aragão, L. A., & de Sena, A. M. C. (2012). Motivações para a adoção de melhores práticas de governança corporativa segundo diretores de relações com investidores. BASE—Revista de Administração e Contabilidade Da Unisinos,9(3), 255–269. [CrossRef] Puthusserry, P., King, T., Miller, K., & Khan, Z. (2022). A typology of emerging market SMEs’ COVID-19 response strategies: The role of TMTs and organizational design. British Journal of Management,33(2), 603–633. [CrossRef] Ramos, C. M. Q. (2021). Digital transformation: Effects on education, trade and environmental sustainability. In RISTI—Revista iberica de sistemas e tecnologias de informacao (Vol. 2021, pp. 1–4). Associacao Iberica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informacao. Issue 44. [CrossRef] Riccotta, R., & Costa, I. (2022). O impacto da transformação digital na sustentabilidade e a gestão do conhecimento em uma empresa de manufatura: Um estudo de caso. Perspectivas Em Gestão & Conhecimento,12, 66–85. [CrossRef] Rodrigues, A. L., & Malo, M. C. (2006). Estruturas de governança e empreendedorismo coletivo: O caso dos doutores da alegria. Revista de Administração Contemporânea,10, 29–50. [CrossRef] Rojko, K., Erman, N., & Jelovac, D. (2020). Impacts of the transformation to Industry 4.0 in the manufacturing sector: The case of the U.S. Organizacija,53(4), 287–305. [CrossRef] Saharti, M., Chaudhry, S. M., Pekar, V., & Bajoori, E. (2024). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance of firms in the era of geopolitical conflicts. Journal of Environmental Management,351, 119744. [CrossRef] Santhi, A. R., & Muthuswamy, P. (2023). Industry 5.0 or industry 4.0S? Introduction to industry 4.0 and a peek into the prospective industry 5.0 technologies. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing,17(2), 947–979. [CrossRef] Serafim, E., Luiz, O., & Quelhas, G. (2010). Governança corporativa-contribuições de boas práticas para o desempenho das organizações. Available online: www.ethos.org.br (accessed on 29 October 2024). Silva Junior, A., da Silva, V. C., Dumer, M. C. R., & de Oliveira Martins-Silva, P. (2021). Modelos de governança corporativa e indicadores econômico-financeiros de Instituições de Educação Superior privadas: Uma análise do mercado de capitais brasileiro. Avaliação: Revista Da Avaliação Da Educação Superior (Campinas),26(2), 629–653. [CrossRef] Tang, C., Dong, S., & Zhou, R. (2025). The impact of digitalization on corporate resilience. International Review of Economics & Finance, 97, 103834. [CrossRef] Velte, P. (2023). The link between corporate governance and corporate financial misconduct. A review of archival studies and implications for future research. Management Review Quarterly,73(1), 353–411. [CrossRef] Vieira, G. B., Logullo De Souza, Y., Simões, A., Araújo De Almeida, J., Carmen, M., & Belderrain, N. (2023a). Using value-focused thinking in an integrated process to support decisions. Pesquisa Operacional,44, e276110. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 91 19 of 19 Vieira, G. B., Souza, Y. L., Simões, A., de Almeida, J. A., & Belderrain, M. C. N. (2023b). Identifying initiatives for solid waste collection using VFT as a PSM. Available online: https://proceedings.science/sbpo/sbpo-2023/trabalhos/selecting-initiatives-for-solidwaste -collection-using-vft-as-a-psm?lang=pt-br (accessed on 4 November 2024). Villiers, C., & Dimes, R. (2021). Determinants, mechanisms and consequences of corporate governance reporting: A research framework. Journal of Management and Governance,25(1), 7–26. [CrossRef] Waniak-Michalak, H., Leitoniene, S., & Perica, I. (2024). To survive in the COVID-19 Pandemic: The financial aspects of NGOs. Contemporary Economics,18(3), 321–335. [CrossRef] Yin, R. K. (2015). Estudo de caso: Planejamento e métodos (5th ed.). Bookman. Zeng, X., & Rojniruttikul, N. (2025). The impact of the forward-looking strategy on the sustainable development of enterprises under the background of digital economy—Based on dynamic regulation. Sustainability,17(1), 272. [CrossRef] Zhang, C., Chen, P., & Hao, Y. (2022). The impact of digital transformation on corporate sustainability-new evidence from Chinese listed companies. Frontiers in Environmental Science,10, 1047418. [CrossRef] Zhang, J., Long, J., & von Schaewen, A. M. E. (2021). How does digital transformation improve organizational resilience?—Findings from pls-sem and fsqca. Sustainability,13(20), 11487. [CrossRef] Zhironkin, S., Gasanov, M., & Suslova, Y. (2022). Orderliness in mining 4.0. Energies,15(21), 8153. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.