While scholars of management have extensively discussed paradoxes, scholars of volunteer management have given them little systematic attention. This special issue brings together the field of paradox studies with the research field of volunteer management. While many studies highlight paradoxes between different “missions” and mandates within volunteer-involving organizations, this introduction suggests using a “dramaturgical” approach that highlights the interplay between different actors, audiences, instruments for communication and action, and the broader moral, institutional frameworks in which the organizations operate. We review the field of paradox studies in management, then connect it to volunteer management, and then suggest ways that the dramaturgical approaches might help systematize some of the paradoxes that scholars have found in organizations that use volunteers. Next, the introduction summarizes this issue’s articles. Finally, we suggest that paradoxes take a more prominent role in studies of volunteer management.

The article argues that in Denmark during the past 150 years, moral elites have been central in settling paradoxes within social policy by developing ‘classifications’ of citizens and sectors: who are deserving of help and what sector (public or third) should provide care. Contrary to widely held beliefs, historically, there is no logical or practical connection between ‘more deserving’ and ‘state support’. Theoretically, the article integrates elite scholarship and cultural sociology in developing a concept of moral elites’ power from—their sources of moral authority—and power to, the way that they have used their power to classify citizens and sectors. Empirically, the Danish moral elite and its involvement in social policy are analyzed based on secondary as well as primary historical sources. Findings: The development of the Danish moral elite has roots in the administrators of the nineteenth-century absolutist state: the clergy, medical doctors, and lawyers. Educational resources and state affiliation continue to be central to moral elite status. Economists have ascended to the top of the moral elite, while clergymen have dropped out. Three major classifications were developed during the period. ‘Help to self-help’ (late nineteenth century): deserving poor should receive help from private charity, while the public system should deter and discipline. ‘Rights’ (mid-twentieth century): the state should care for all, philanthropy mostly considered stigmatizing. ‘Workfare’ (late twentieth century to present): citizens are considered deserving as long as they are ‘active’, and sectors are considered equal in providing for citizens as long as they reach the economistic goal of activation.

This article proposes a new typology between professional and voluntary care, thus seeking to understand why attempts to establish clear boundaries between them often end in ambiguity and frustration. We argue that because both forms of care represent their own unique and paradoxical ways of combining formal and relational care principles, any attempt to fix the boundaries between them and create the sense of a predictable world usually proves challenging. As such, we show that the two different care practices, in fact, have severe difficulties drawing their boundaries on their own terms. Finally, we consider how these insights might enhance efforts to manage collaborations between professional and voluntary care delivery.

While volunteering is an essential factor in service delivery in many societal areas, the inclusion of volunteers in formal settings can also lead to tensions. In this article, we combine the literature on volunteering and inter-professional collaboration (IPC) to elaborate a framework regarding remedies for tensions between professional staff and volunteers within IPC in health care provision to ensure successful collaboration. Using a dyadic survey design to interview volunteers and volunteer managers, we show that the perspectives of volunteers and volunteer managers on the antecedents of effective IPC differ in paradoxical ways. While volunteer managers apply organizational logic concerning tasks and processes to avoid tensions, volunteers seek solutions on a relational basis. However, rather than trying to resolve these paradoxes, our study indicates that carefully managing tensions arising between volunteers and professional staff may be more successful than trying to resolve all tensions.

This paper contributes to our understanding of volunteer management by charting some important challenges associated with the governance of one of the UK’s largest timebanking networks. While timebanking is often treated as a form of volunteering, many timebank advocates are keen to distinguish it sharply from traditional volunteering. We suggest that this tension generates a fundamental ‘performance paradox’ in the management of timebanks in the voluntary sector. We draw on political discourse theory to characterise and evaluate associated challenges, suggesting that, when viewed against a host of context-specific organisational and policy pressures, the progressive potential of timebanking cannot be realised as a distinct community economy without adequate support. Instead of taking up a position alongside more traditional forms of volunteering, timebanking is more likely to be subsumed by them.

This paper investigates how volunteer managers from Roskilde Festival experience, enact, and respond to organisational paradoxes and how these paradoxes are both formed by, and sustain, the organisational context of the festival. The festival is a professional world-class event with high standards of performance, while being primarily volunteer-driven. This constitutes a context of “professional volunteerism”, which serves as a locus of interwoven paradoxical tensions. Paradox is often portrayed as a pair of poles that are connected, but in opposition, this paper illustrates how different paradoxes and the responses to them can be interwoven, thereby describing a more complex understanding of paradox.

This paper explores the paradoxical nature of volunteering by examining how volunteers navigate the market/mission paradox in their everyday practices. It mobilizes a communicative framework to study organizational oppositions. The paper contributes to the literature on the paradoxical nature of volunteering by proposing six discursive navigation strategies and a processual model for navigating oppositions in interaction. The findings highlight the importance of an organizing and pragmatic oriented discourse that acts as a dispatcher between opposed discourses, as well as “both-and” and “more than” approaches that create middle ground for negotiation. In addition, it shows the importance of balancing market and mission by looking for compromise.

This paper explores Twitter adoption and social media engagement of private German environmental foundations. The study follows Lovejoy and Saxton’s (2012) approach to the hierarchy of social media engagement. It demonstrates the domination of an information provision role on Twitter and the almost equal relevance of action mobilizations and community building posts. At the same time, the study supplements the existing typology with the additional dimension of communication partners addressed in each type of tweet. Finally, using data from interviews, the study interprets and explains the role of social media tweets and patterns of engagement with different groups. In-depth analysis of tweets and interviews with the foundation representatives confirmed a limited use of social media as a means for dialogue and community development. Simultaneously, analysis shows that tweets posted by foundations predominantly address a professional community of other civil society actors, experts and politicians, creating an online expert bubble. Interviews confirmed that such online connections mirror offline cooperation networks that are perceived to be more important for successful communication and project development by the investigated organizations.

While numerous studies have shown that individual donors respond more generously to identifiable victims than to statistically equivalent victims, the impact of the identifiable victim effect (IVE) on collective donations remains unknown. This article addresses this research gap by proposing an explanatory framework that incorporates both rational and irrational perspectives. Two between-subject experiments were conducted to determine the effect and mechanism of IVE on collective donation behavior. A total of 610 participants with prior donation behavior were recruited. ANOVA and multiple regression analysis are used to examine the main effect, as well as the mediation and moderated effects. The results suggest that in Chinese charitable contexts, an identifiable victim effect leads to significantly stronger intentions for collective donation actions, as it increases both donors’ emotional reactions and perceived responsibility. In addition, the fundraising method moderates the impact of IVE on collective donations. Several significant implications for NPO practitioners are discussed.

This study investigated the collaboration between public and third-sector organisations (TSOs) in the framework of collaborative governance. We examined how TSOs portray their collaboration with public organisations and what kind of collaboration agency can be identified based on these descriptions. Using a discourse analytical approach, we identified three multifaceted, and somewhat paradoxical, types of collaboration agency discourse in third-sector organisations: situationalised, service system–oriented, and dependency-driven. We argue that collaborative governance both sets expectations and shapes the agency of TSOs. At the same time, TSOs strategically use these opportunities to their advantage, constantly reshaping their collaboration with public organisations.

Nonprofit accountability research has garnered much attention in recent years, greatly expanding our understanding of the field. Yet, this focus has resulted in a complex and oftentimes fragmented body of research, which has made it difficult to navigate and effectively study nonprofit accountability. To address this concern, this article uses characteristics of accountability and articulates the dynamic interaction between the various accountability dichotomies found in the literature through a theory-based typology. In summary, this article argues that a narrow conception of accountability, focused on resource dependence, public interest and agency theories, can be seen as a functional process (“how”) to meet the imposed requirements (“for what”) of upward principals (“to whom”). In contrast, a broad conception of accountability, focused on stewardship, democratic, and stakeholder theories, can be seen as a strategic process (“how”) to provide information that is based on felt responsibility (“for what”) to downward stakeholders (“to whom”).

According to social and fiscal contract theories, governments provide core social services largely to maintain their legitimacy. But does the state itself have to provide the services? In most developing countries, both nonprofit and for-profit schools and health clinics exist alongside those of the state. However, limited research has measured the relationship among citizens’ use of these services and attitudes about state legitimacy. This paper examines whether nonstate service provision is associated with decreased government legitimacy. We find a negative relationship between the use of for-profit services and state legitimacy, but no clear relationship between nonprofit service provision and legitimacy, even when controlling for satisfaction with services provided. We propose several explanations for why for-profit service provision could affect legitimacy that are not present in nonprofit services.

In this article we challenge the conventional wisdom that COVID-19 and related legal restrictions invariably reinforce a global trend of shrinking civic space. We argue that the legal guarantee (or restriction) of civil society rights is not the sole factor configuring civic space. Instead, we reconceptualize civic space by broadening its determinants to also include needs-induced space and civil society activism. Investigating five countries with flawed democracic or competitive autocracic regimes in Southeast Asia, we propose a three-pronged mechanism of how these determinants interact in the context of COVID-19. First, legal restrictions on civil society rights intertwine with the space created by health and economic needs to create new opportunities for civil society activism. Second, these new opportunity structures lead to the cross-fertilization between service delivery and advocacy activism by civil society. Third, this new trajectory of civil society activism works to sustain civic space.

Many charities rely on donations to support their work addressing some of the world’s most pressing problems. We conducted a meta-review to determine what interventions work to increase charitable donations. We found 21 systematic reviews incorporating 1339 primary studies and over 2,139,938 participants. Our meta-meta-analysis estimated the average effect of an intervention on charitable donation size and incidence: r = 0.08 (95% CI [0.03, 0.12]). Due to limitations in the included systematic reviews, we are not certain this estimate reflects the true overall effect size. The most robust evidence found suggests charities could increase donations by (1) emphasising individual beneficiaries, (2) increasing the visibility of donations, (3) describing the impact of the donation, and (4) enacting or promoting tax-deductibility of the charity. We make recommendations for improving primary research and reviews about charitable donations, and how to apply the meta-review findings to increase charitable donations.

Over the last three decades, Japanese NGOs have become increasingly engaged in the delivery of Japanese foreign aid, and humanitarian responses to national emergencies. Despite these attainments, a lack of recognition for the Japanese NGO sector among the domestic audience remains noticeable. The article proposes that, despite the increasing professionalization and professionalism of the Japanese NGO sector, the activities of practitioners are frequently construed as volunteering. Additionally, the article contends that concerns about the anti-government or “political” undertone to NGO activities and diminishing interest in international cooperation issues constitute a considerable challenge to fostering recognition and building domestic constituencies for development and humanitarian NGOs. Finally, the dominant approach to the non-profit and voluntary sector in Japan promoted by the government in the post-1995/1998 climate is discussed as a consequential hindrance to the process of establishing Japanese NGOs’ aid work as a professional knowledge-based enterprise in the public sphere.

In this paper, I adopt Pierre Bourdieu's theoretical and methodological framework to investigate patterns of inequality in volunteering fields and practices in Norway. Multiple correspondence analyses of national survey data indicate a hierarchically structured social space in Norway according to total volume of capital, while the positioning of different volunteer fields and practices seems to be more egalitarian with regard to capital possession, with some exceptions. This resonates well with established notions of the Norwegian civil society model as social democratic and egalitarian. Based on the discussions and findings, and considering growing social, cultural, and economic differences in many societies, I argue for a new volunteering research agenda better tailored for investigating social inequalities and differentiation in volunteering in different societal contexts, providing a new vantage point for understanding and explaining such inequalities.