Non-profits require highly motivated and professional employees to fulfill their potential to contribute to community development and well-being. But what motivates jobseekers to seek employment in non-profits over governmental organizations, and what makes non-profits more attractive than governmental organizations? Leveraging positive religious and spiritual development and self-determination theories, we theorize that spiritual and religious individuals are more likely to prefer working for non-profits over governmental organizations. This preference occurs because religious and spiritual individuals have stronger traits of self-sacrifice and compassion that motivate them to take a job that offers more non-material incentives than material incentives, leading to a preference for non-profits over governmental organizations. The serial mediation model identifies how compassion and self-sacrifice mediate the effects of spiritual intelligence and religiosity on job motivation; while job motivation mediates the effect of self-sacrifice and compassion on career preference and sector attractiveness. We validate our serial mediation-based conceptual framework based on responses from 306 job seekers in India. The results support our hypotheses, where individuals high on spirituality and religiosity prefer working in non-profits over governmental sector, owing to higher compassion, and self-sacrificing tendencies.

This article reports on the results of a multi-year, multi-phase international quantitative research investigation into perceptions of board chair leadership impact in nonprofit and voluntary organizations in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Specifically, this research tests four hypotheses and a hypothesized model derived from theoretical perspectives on chair leadership effectiveness that emerged when the results of a prior grounded theory research investigation were reviewed ex post facto through the lens of leadership literature (see Harrison and Murray, NPML, accepted). The purpose of this phase of the research is to determine: (a) whether there is empirical support for the theoretical perspectives advanced; and (b) which perspective offers the best explanation for why some board chairs are perceived as having more impact in the role than others. The results suggest chair leadership effectiveness is best understood as a multi-dimensional theoretical construct explained by more than one leadership theory. The article concludes with a discussion of the findings and directions for further research.