My use of the term “restricted/unrestricted” in the previous post actually has to do with the way money within a non-profit is allocated. Often when someone donates money or a grant is provided, the money is restricted to a certain initiative, which means it cannot go to administrative matters. For that non-profits depend on unrestricted funding, which is what often pays for computers, salaries, and other business matters.
This is one key difference between non-profits and for-profits. For-profits establish budgets for departments and projects and expenditures are generally determined internally. Also, deficits from cost overruns are compensated for differently. For-profits can either shift money around easier, push sales, etc. The point is that a for-profit may have more options to fund projects and may not need to make due as often as a non-profit might.
I certainly don’t believe that for-profit IT departments have endless pockets. I’ve worked in for-profit and know how many administrators feel there should be a tangible cost-savings, even profitability, from the efforts of their IT departments. Some of this is unrealistic and forces IT departments to stretch money in ways that don’t necessarily make sense. Still the level of control over the money within the organization, as well as the source of that funding, is vastly different between the two sectors. That’s not to say that the non-profit is solely at the mercy of the donor or grantor, nor am I saying there aren’t options in the face of cost overruns, but these differences are factors that impact non-profit technology decision-making.