1. In this case yes partnership was the answer. Microsoft was not always as focused on corporate citizenship as it is today. They had a negative imagine of being an unstoppable power buying up everything in their path. So when the Kosovo crisis came to be 1999 Microsoft stood to not only offer help to thousands of suffering people, but to also improve the company’s imagine. These partnerships succeed in doing just that. When both partners stand to gain for the partnership, as they do in this case, then the partnership is the way to go. UNHCR gained all the assistance in helping the refugees, and Microsoft gained a favorable public image. The company can leverage all its assets pro bono publico. Microsoft did in this partnership. They offered cash and software to UNHCR, also the time and expertise of employees, the management skills of executives and online marketing strategy.

2. I would say that Microsoft is creating the right partnerships when it comes to expanding their market and raising opportunities. Years before Microsoft’s partnership with UNHCR, citizens pictured Microsoft as a company that walked all over other companies because they had so much money and power. This created a bad image for them and I feel they needed to make a move to recreate their image. Helping out refugees showed that Microsoft as a company had good intentions and was there for struggling people. Not only did this raise opportunities for Microsoft with all of their new successful technology, it also gave refugees the opportunity to live a normal life after repatriation, while pursuing higher education and employment. Microsoft could not have accomplished any of these missions without partnership with UNHCR, so I would say that they did create the proper partnerships.

3. Yes it was, in the late 90’s globalization was starting to become evident. Companies did not need to