Using a multilevel analysis including 207 volunteers and paid workers nested within 51 nonprofit organizations (NPOs), this study examines the effect of individual and group attitudinal and behavioral commitment on their assessment of organizational effectiveness. Drawing on classical attitude theories, our results indicate that individuals with higher affective organizational commitment tend to assess their NPO’s effectiveness higher, while individuals staying because of the lack of alternatives assess it lower. However, in line with behavioral commitment theories, both relationships are mediated by the effect of teamwork behavioral commitment. We also found a negative effect of normative attitudinal commitment partially nested at the group level. Overall, our results suggest that encouraging volunteers and paid workers to participate in concrete teamwork behaviors on a daily basis constitutes a twofold benefit: it adds to the effect of affective attitudinal commitment at the individual level, while counter balancing the negative effects related to normative individual and collective resistances.

In recent years, civil society organizations (CSOs) have become a significant aspect of Mexican reality given the number of people involved in them and their contribution to the services sector. These entities are organizations where voluntary and paid workers may experience wellbeing conditions that are inherent in empowerment processes, feelings of usefulness, and the satisfaction associated with participating in decision-making. At the same time, contradictory dynamics related to governance, power relations, leadership, and decision-making may be activated in CSOs and create uncertainty and psychosocial malaise. In this research, based on a grounded theory approach, 11 interviews and 89 questionnaires were realized in 14 service-providing CSOs in the Mexican State of Morelos, highlighting the wellbeing/malaise dimensions and psychosocial factors that are relevant for their members.

This study explored the motivations of Catalan older people to engage in political organizations. The sample consisted of 192 people aged 65 and over who were active members of three types of political organizations: neighborhood associations, political parties/trade unions, and single-issue organizations. Their answers to an open-ended question were content analyzed, and a series of Chi-square tests were run to assess the association of the resulting categories with the type of organization in which participants were active. The results show that the motives for engaging in political organizations were mainly focused on introducing changes in the community, although the scope of the changes desired tended to vary. While some participants expressed idealistic motivations, others stated that they become involved in order to stand up for a cause in which they believed. One in six participants was motivated by self-interest, either related to personal growth or to self-protective needs. Motives for participating were related to the type of organization in which participants were active, suggesting that organizations should consider the influence of their own particular context and characteristics in developing recruitment and retention strategies.

This research paper investigates open innovation—that is, the use of purposive inflows and outflows of knowledge in order to innovate—in the context of nonprofit sports clubs, and is based on the content analysis of semi-structured interviews held with representatives of eleven sports clubs. The study develops a framework that describes open innovation activities in nonprofit sports clubs as facets of four superordinate dimensions, namely permeability of the club’s boundary, application and implementation of open innovation practices, managerial competencies, and the environmental and organizational surroundings in which the club operates. Within these dimensions, subordinate facets such as commitment of the club’s president and the strategic use of coopetitive environments explain how and why sports clubs are successful at implementing innovations and how their nonprofit status (e.g., volunteer work) contributes to (or is in conflict with) innovation. The findings provide implications for nonprofit organizations inside and outside the sports sector.

This paper examines the relief work of a faith-based organization (FBO)—Tzu-Chi (Buddhist Tzu-Chi Compassion Relief Organization) in China as a response to the Malaysia Airlines MH370 incident. The study first shows that crises facilitate a synergetic relationship of co-production for social services among states, corporate enterprises, and FBOs. FBOs deliver services that states and corporate enterprises cannot easily provide. This case-study shows how a FBO derives strength from its transnational networks, moral teachings, and compliant political attitude toward the government. The findings underscore the lack of discussion on FBOs in the Chinese civil society literature. Furthermore, they contribute to the understanding of how FBOs may benefit state welfare provisions following a 2012 policy shift in which religion was encouraged to participate in social provision.

Currently, social enterprise represents a clear commitment of the European Union (EU) to generate socially responsible economy. Sheltered Workshops are a manifestation of this phenomenon. Their study raises interest because they are able to create value by combining a social purpose with a commercial activity. Thus, we intend to analyze the relationship between the social impact and the economic returns of these entities. In Spain, results show a strong interaction between social value (proxy for social impact) and economic value (proxy for economic returns), which allows us to state that it is possible to develop socially responsible and financially viable activities. In addition, the estimation using instrumental variables reveals that economic value is the result of the social strategy that takes precedence in managing Sheltered Workshops.

This study draws an economic model of the growth of nonprofit organizations by analyzing the behaviors of three major actors—nonprofit organizations, private donors, and governments—in making decisions on the allocation of limited resources for nonprofit services. Since decisions made by each actor affect resource allocation, it is important to understand what drives these decisions. The model was tested using an unbalanced, 463 panel dataset collected from 28 OECD countries over a 23-year period. The results indicated that macro- and micro-economic trends and government policies framed the decision premises of the three major actors, which led them to leverage the supply and demand for goods and services and, in turn, determined how they allocated limited resources for nonprofit services. This result implies that understanding the interdependencies of all sectors of the economy is critical to comprehending the size and development of the nonprofit sector. Effective management of micro-economic policies and macro-economic stability is necessary. More important, however, is understanding how a decision in one part of the economy will have intended and unintended effects on the nonprofit sector.

Our intent in this paper was to provide experimental evidence for the Gift Exchange Mechanism in the context of charitable donations in Pakistan. We chose a simple and elegant experiment of Falk as the basis for our experiment. Due to institutional differences, we replaced his postal campaign for charitable donations by a door-to-door campaign. The additional opportunity for social interaction, and cultural differences, led to substantial and unexpected variation in the results. Most importantly, in direct contrast to results of Falk, both frequency and average size of donations declined with increasing gift size. Thus the GEM failed to operate in this experiment. We provide some potential explanations for this surprising result. Our experiment also provides some information on gender and income effects on charitable donations, which vary from main findings in the literature. In particular, we find that females contribute more in frequency and size, and that the share of giving declines with income.

We investigate social innovation adoption and extend instrumental factors of adoption intention by including non-instrumental factors. We argue that, from a market-based perspective, conventional innovation adoption models based on instrumental factors do not fully consider specific characteristics of social innovations. Our objective is to improve the explanatory power of conventional adoption models by including symbolic, emotional, and motivational factors as non-instrumental factors. We conducted two empirical studies in which we investigated younger adults’ adoption intentions regarding time-bank-based senior cooperatives. The results extend the findings of conventional adoption research and show that explanatory power can be substantially improved by including non-instrumental factors. The results contribute to the understanding of social innovation adoption and indicate limited generalizability of conventional innovation adoption research to social innovations. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Using data from an experiment carried out by a large nonprofit organization, this paper finds that lapsed donors who received a solicitation letter referencing a relatively high donation made by another donor (high social information) were more generous in giving, but overall less likely to make a donation, relative to the baseline (low social information) group. After using the propensity score matching to correct for pretreatment differences in the two experimental groups, the estimated effect of high social information on the average donation amount is an increase of $14.95 (45 %). However, high social information is also found to reduce the probability a lapsed donor will give by 4.1 %. Thus, high social information can have potentially offsetting effects when applied to lapsed donors. Nonprofits should consider this trade-off when employing social information fundraising techniques to solicit donations from lapsed donors.

In the context of government regulation and social demand, Chinese foundations have increasingly faced pressure to make their organizations more transparent. Our paper explores the factors associated with voluntary disclosure by foundations in China. Building on the literature on transparency and foundation development in China, we explore how the public (donations) and the government (funding and control) might influence the voluntary transparent behaviors of Chinese foundations. Using the database of the China Foundation Center, we perform regression analysis of N = 2074 Chinese foundations. Controlling for organization size, age, and other characteristics, we find that foundations that depend more on donations, collect more restricted funds, receive fewer government funds, and operate with less government control have a higher probability of offering voluntary disclosure. We then discuss organizational strategies and policy implications for building a healthy and transparent foundation sector in China.

Accountability in grant-making requires a valid, fair and transparent selection process. This study proposes a four-step framework for validating such a process: determine standards for qualified applicants, assess inter-reviewer reliability, assess factorial validity, and assess reliability. This framework is applied to the Corporation for National and Community Service’s 2013 RSVP grant-making process. The standards were close to the highest points of reliability. Inter-reviewer reliability was above 0.90, a common threshold for high-stakes measurement. After conducting confirmatory factor analysis, the final model merged two of the original five domains of selection criteria, resulting in four domains. The final model was found to have strict measurement invariance, high convergent validity, and measurement reliability between 0.88 and 0.93 for all domains. The results validate the 2013 review process and indicated that the scores exhibited high degrees of reliability, giving public assurance that the process was sufficiently objective and accurately reflected program priorities.

Recent debate in Voluntas and elsewhere has paid a great deal of attention to the subject of mapping the nonprofit sector. However, very little attention has been paid to the ways in which the practice of mapping is a political mode of knowing and the ways in which knowing is governing. In this essay, we turn to critical theory and political anthropology in order to demonstrate how mapping as it is currently practiced is a mode of knowledge inquiry that facilitates statecraft. In light of these interdisciplinary perspectives, we wrestle with the implications of knowing—and thereby governing—voluntary collective organization in this manner. We conclude that this approach potentially disciplines the qualitative dimensions of democratic associational life and misrepresents the possibilities of social change.

Since its introduction by Tuckman and Chang (Nonprofit Volunt Sector Q 20(4):445–460, 1991), the Hirschman–Herfindahl Index (HHI) has been widely adopted into the nonprofit literature as a precise measure of revenue concentration. This widespread adoption has been characterized by diverse composition, with the HHI’s calculation being largely determined by the nature of the available data and the degree to which it contained disaggregated measures of revenue. Using the NCCS 990 Digitized Data, we perform an acid test on whether different HHI measures yield significantly different results. Four measures of revenue concentration—an aggregated measure based on three revenue streams, an aggregated measure separating government grants from other contributions, a more nuanced measure based on seven revenue streams, and a fully disaggregated measure based on thirteen revenue streams—are used to predict two dominant nonprofit financial health dimensions: financial volatility and financial capacity. Overall, our results show that aggregation in HHI measurement matters; aggregation often downplays relationships by influencing the significance levels and magnitudes of estimates in a non-trivial way.

This study compares educational foundations in the Chinese Mainland and Taiwan systematically and empirically using a complete evaluation index-system tool based on corporate governance theory that involves both static governance structures and dynamic governance mechanisms. Understanding the differences between foundations in the Mainland and Taiwan can affect government policy and foundation management methods. A group decision making-analytic hierarchy process (GDM-AHP) alongside an evaluation index value of foundation governance (EIVFG) model established a weight coefficient of the evaluation index system, yielding EIVFG scores. Despite having similar EIVFG scores, foundations in the Mainland and Taiwan have distinct governance structures. The governance mechanisms of foundations are more important than their governance structures, and Taiwanese educational foundations are more mature than Mainland foundations with regard to their underlying governance mechanisms. These findings underscore the importance of policies that employ the principles of fairness and impartiality (rather than requiring legal inspections) and that establish thereby an environment of mutual trust that fosters foundations’ maturity and growth.

This article contributes to the growing amount of literature on co-production, focusing on co-production of public outcomes and taking the perspective of local government and public managers. A model for explaining the dynamics of outcomes’ creation at the community level is provided. The core argument of the article is that community outcomes result from a sum of peer production, co-production and inter-organizational collaboration processes promoted and activated at individual, organizational and network level across the public, third and private sectors. Institutional, managerial and organizational implications are discussed. The article argues that local government and public managers are asked to play new roles and to employ a new ethos grounded in a citizens capabilities’ approach.

Among Arab-American Muslims, secular ethnic and humanitarian giving, focused on ‘results’ and ‘measurable impact,’ is displacing religiously inspired giving, that is driven by ‘charity’ and ‘love of mankind.’ This trend is supported by evidence of the way donors position themselves and philanthropic organizations appeal to their donor base. The case is supported by qualitative data drawn from interviews with key informants and from trend data on giving. I propose a new model of giving based on identity and giving, using Grounded Theory methods. This model challenges our understanding about the connection between community and philanthropy and proposes that philanthropy can create ‘community.’

This paper calls attention to the problematic use of the concept of social innovation which remains undefined despite its proliferation throughout academic and policy discourses. Extant research has thus far failed to capture the socio-political contentions which surround social innovation. This paper therefore draws upon the work of Thomas Kuhn and conducts a paradigmatic analysis of the field of social innovation which identifies two emerging schools: one technocratic, the other democratic. The paper identifies some of the key thinkers in each paradigm and explains how the struggle between these two paradigms reveals itself to be part of a broader conflict between neoliberalism and it opponents and concludes by arguing that future research focused upon local contextualised struggles will reveal which paradigm is in the ascendancy.