No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Re-thinking Nonprofit Organization Governance: Implications for Management and Leadership
International Journal of Public Administration
Abstract
This article proposes a conceptual framework for re-examining NPO governance, especially focussing upon the roles and responsibilities of boards, executives, and other staff and volunteers. It draws from Talcott Parson's idea that all human organizations exhibit three distinct levels of responsibility and control – institutional, managerial, and technical/operational.Both academic scholarship and nonprofit organization practice are increasingly re-considering the structure and functions of governance and management within nonprofit organizations (NPOs). While it can be argued that the governance portion of the institutional level of functioning should be located with the volunteer board of directors, otherwise I suggest that the following factors affect the appropriate division of roles and responsibilities among board, executive, and other staff and volunteers within an NPO: 1)the size of the NPO's budget, staff, and board; 2) the number of active volunteers and the breadth of roles they perform: 3) the stage of the NPO's life cycle: 4) the level of trust/confidence between the chief executive and the board; 5) executive transition; 6) the presence of organizational crisis; and, 7) environmental factors, including fundamental change in funding sources and pressure toward merger or intense collaboration.Both academic scholarship and nonprofit organization (NPO) practice are increasingly re-examining the structure of governance and management within NPOs. The nonprofit research and practice communities are asserting that we fundamentally need to re-conceptualize how NPOs can best organize themselves to perform their governance, management, and leadership responsibilities. This has profound affects on our ability to address issues of NPO accountability. Why? Because an organization's ability to “answer to” or “give account of itself” to those who hold it answerable, requires that it can clearly locate where the authority and responsibility within that organization lies for doing so. In the theory and practice of NPOs, it is ultimately a governance and (possibly) executive responsibility to ensure an effective answering and accounting to its multiple stakeholders, including all types of funders, other external constituencies, and the public, at large. Therefore persuasive answers about how NPOs can be accountable require effective efforts to re-conceptualize how NPOs can best organize themselves to perform their governance and executive responsibilities. The latter is the challenge to which this article responds.This effort joins the growing chorus of concern about the prevailing prescriptive models of governance in the nonprofit literature and concomitant need to rethink our understanding of governance. A sample of this recent reconsideration includes several examinations of Carver's Policy Governance model, excellent reviews of the most significant directions in board research and their practical applications, and searches for new, more useful models of governance which apply more broadly across the full universe of NPOs and expand the range of NPO governance practices.[1a], [1b], [1c]The latter represents the best known initiative currently underway to rethink the topic of NPO governance. In his article, “Is That All There Is?,” William P. Ryan describes preliminary findings from the National Center for Nonprofit Boards' (NCNB) and Harvard University's Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations' joint project aimed at assessing the prospects and strategies for developing alternative governance. As Ryan states, “the inquiry assumes that board governance as we know it may work well for many organizations -- but that new or alternative governance strategies may work better for others.”[2] He reports on NCNB's own questions which emerged from its strategic planning process: do we have a one-size-fits-all problem? Do the most prevalent models about governance adequately serve the diversity of organizations that comprise the nonprofit sector? Why aren't our views of governance changing along with the rapid changes in our environment, such as changes in funding streams, public policy, demographics, technology, etc., particularly as the nonprofit sector is so receptive in other ways to new organizational and management strategies? Ryan goes on to report that most of the respondents to the Hauser Center-NCNB study thus far “were eager for a fundamental reconsideration of our governance strategies, which they believe are flawed in design, not just in execution.”[3]In elaborating on the concern that “one size” of governance model does not “fit all” NPOs, he lists the following types of NPOs which are not well served by the prevalent models: grassroots organizations, all volunteer organizations, entrepreneurial organizations (i.e., NPOs which function like social-purpose businesses), interorganizational alliances (collaboratives and networks), and multiple corporate forms (i.e., NPOs which create holding companies that deliver services through a number of different operating entities, sometimes including for-profit subsidiaries).Moreover, both Ryan and David Renz emphasize dramatic changes in the environment surrounding NPOs which make the prevalent, conventional models of governance less relevant. Both highlight the increased role of government in outsourcing service delivery to nonprofits. In doing so, government agencies set more of the terms and conditions of service delivery, and NPO boards find themselves effectively losing control of their organization's mission.[4a], [4b] Both speak of growing demands for entrepreneurship, including what is now called the “social venture partner” approach to funding NPOs, in which grant-makers sometimes play a hands-on role in the operation and management of NPOs and their boards. Renz especially highlights growing pressures on NPOs to “engage in what many consider to be the ‘unnatural acts’ of alliances and collaborations; and the much intensified focus on outcomes and accountabi lity.”[5] He asserts that these and other environmental changes mean that we still need to know more about topics such as “the appropriate mix of board roles and functions when nonprofits engage in entrepreneurial activity, alliances, partnerships, and collaborative ventures, … and extensive work for government.”[6]Renz's, Ryan's, and other authors' characterization of the reasons for which we need to rethink governance echoes this author's experience from over twenty years of serving as an executive of local and national nonprofit organizations, as a governing and advisory board member to numerous NPOs, and as a consultant and trainer to well over a hundred NPOs in the United States and internationally. These have been organizations of highly varied size, ethnic composition, field, and stage in their life cycle.
... In addition, executive managers and/or executive committees, often in combination with boards, are studied in the context of nonprofit performance and governance (Callen et al., 2003;Smith and Shen, 1996;Stephens et al., 2004). The allocation of shared and unique responsibilities among different leadership positions within nonprofit organizations is seen as an important factor, influencing the quality of governance practices and organizational effectiveness (McClusky, 2002;Harrow and Palmer, 2003). Furthermore, the way by which the roles of nonprofit board members are perceived in relation to the executive managers are crucial in defining an organization's governance quality (Caers et al., 2006;Cornforth, 2003;Harrow and Palmer, 2003). ...
... Using the perspective of a leadership team to identify and investigate further research avenues could be advantageous for at least three reasons. First, various leadership positions in nonprofit organizations have the shared responsibility to deal with an organization's challenges regarding governance and effectiveness (Harrow and Palmer, 2003;McClusky, 2002). As a result, we focus on leadership teams, as organizational output is not determined by either directors or executives, but by the collaboration of those involved in the overall governance processes (Stone andOstrower, 2007, Willems et al., 2013). ...
... Nonprofit leadership alignment can be defined as the extent to which different people within the leadership team are adjusted toward each other in order to guarantee sufficient governance and strategic management quality. High levels of governance and strategic management quality are thus assumed to relate to high team and organizational effectiveness (Du Herman and Renz, 1999;McClusky, 2002;Moore and Whitt, 2000). From literature we derive three distinct dimensions of nonprofit leadership alignment: (1) functional alignment deals with matching differences as a result of various formal functions existing within a nonprofit leadership team (e.g. directors versus executive managers); (2) motivational alignment focuses on the extent that a common base exists among leaders regarding personal objectives to participate in an organization; and (3) practices alignment relates to the degree that nonprofit leaders share mental models on practices and have complementary skills to achieve effective outcomes. ...
In this literature review, we take advantage of analyzing nonprofit leadership teams rather than its components, such as the board, the executive management or specific committees. Within this perspective, we define the concept of ‘nonprofit leadership alignment’. We combine different bodies of literature which we structure under three headings: (1) functional alignment, (2) motivational alignment, and (3) practices alignment. For each of them we indicate important avenues for further research. Finally, we provide three methodological paths that could be used to investigate the avenues proposed.
... Nevertheless, accountability is broader and focuses on the choices made with respect to the level of transparency, taking stakeholder needs and preferences into account given the specific organizational context. Though this is a broad definition, it is a good starting point for contemplating the various contextual contingencies between various types of stakeholders and the elements of the organizations to be transparent about (Balser and McClusky, 2005;Manetti and Toccafondi, 2014;McClusky, 2002). Moreover, as 'transparency' and 'accountability' are terms used far beyond the boundaries of the CSO-relevant literature, it is important to further narrow down these definitions by taking the specific nature of CSOs into account, as this can lead to a better understanding of transparency and accountability in this particular setting. ...
... The observation that the stakeholder range can be broader and more lateral for CSOs also has other important consequences for their transparency and accountability, and, in particular, for the governance decisions regarding what to be transparent about and to what extent. In short, CSOs combine a series of goals within their overall mission that cover the various preferences of multiple stakeholder types (Jegers, 2008;McClusky, 2002;Smith and Shen, 1996;Speckbacher, 2008). Different stakeholders might contribute in different ways, but also expect other tangible or intangible benefits in return for their involvement in the organization (Speckbacher, 2008). ...
Despite the vast repertoire of practitioner and scientific literature since the early 1990s on how civil society organizations (CSOs) should be governed, we continue to regularly hear stories of severe organizational crises. Even well-respected, internationally active CSOs sometimes find themselves in the middle of a media storm (Archambeault and Webber, 2018; Cordery and Baskerville, 2011; Harris et al., 2018; Willems, 2016; Willems and Faulk 2019). It is naïve to assume that such events will cease in the future or at least stop endangering the sustainability and continuity of CSOs. Nevertheless, an explicit evaluation of how crisis situations can be avoided and how their devastatingly negative effects can be mitigated through CSO governance processes makes it necessary to focus on CSO accountability and transparency. As a result, the clarification and elaboration of the concepts of accountability and transparency can strengthen theoretical and practical insights as to how CSOs can become more crisis-resistant and resilient (Brown, 2005; Helmig et al., 2014). In addition, insight into the inherent trade-offs that CSO leadership teams need to consider in their governance decisions can help both practitioners and researchers to (1) avoid more CSO crisis situations in the future, (2) more effectively overcome such crises when they occur and (3) identify the contextual and organizational factors affecting leaders' governance decisions. Against this background, the aim of this chapter is threefold: 1. Provide an elaborated definition of CSO transparency and accountability that takes into account the nature and role of CSOs in contemporary societies. After highlighting the uniquely defining characteristics of CSOs, the chapter identifies from the inter-disciplinary literature a set of circumstances that underpin the need for a multidimensional elaboration of transparency and accountability specific to CSOs. 2. Document governance responsibilities that CSOs have with respect to transparency and accountability. The chapter explains why transparency and accountability are necessary elements of the CSO governance function. 3. Develop propositions for further scientific elaboration and validation of how CSO governance practices encompass but also support and lead to CSO transparency and accountability. The output of the first two research aims is juxtaposed with five dimensions of a governance quality index, highlighting how governance quality dimensions include and relate to various aspects of CSO transparency and accountability.
... Both these goals may well support each other in the long term but, when it comes to allocation of scarce resources, tradeoffs have to be made in the short term. Such complexity requires a nonprofit organization's governance processes, rather than its managerial strategic and tactical processes, to address the preferences and interests of a multitude of potential stakeholders (Herman and Renz 2000;McClusky 2002;Solansky et al. 2008;Willems et al. 2016). Moreover, multiple organizations might be involved in the achievement of a single goal (e.g., maintaining the environment), which makes it difficult to distinguish the impact of any single organization (Kaplan 2001;Perrow 1961;Willems et al. 2014). ...
... In practice, for the two sub-coalitions observed in Organization E, a balanced situation between centralized and diffused influence exists. Furthermore, the additional observation can be made that across all cases skewness is smaller for 'mission, vision and strategy,' potentially due to the fact that it is more an inherent function for all people involved in leadership positions (McClusky 2002;Solansky et al. 2008). ...
... Both these goals may well support each other in the long term but, when it comes to allocation of scarce resources, tradeoffs have to be made in the short term. Such complexity requires a nonprofit organization's governance processes, rather than its managerial strategic and tactical processes, to address the preferences and interests of a multitude of potential stakeholders (Herman and Renz 2000;McClusky 2002;Solansky et al. 2008;Willems et al. 2016). Moreover, multiple organizations might be involved in the achievement of a single goal (e.g., maintaining the environment), which makes it difficult to distinguish the impact of any single organization (Kaplan 2001;Perrow 1961;Willems et al. 2014). ...
... In practice, for the two sub-coalitions observed in Organization E, a balanced situation between centralized and diffused influence exists. Furthermore, the additional observation can be made that across all cases skewness is smaller for 'mission, vision and strategy,' potentially due to the fact that it is more an inherent function for all people involved in leadership positions (McClusky 2002;Solansky et al. 2008). ...
We answer the call that governance research should focus more on processes outside the boundaries of boards, especially for nonprofit organizations. In particular, we suggest and elaborate concrete steps with respect to the advantages of a leadership coalition perspective to focus more on the behavioral and informal aspects of governance. Through a comparative case analysis of five nonprofit organizations, we explore contingencies between characteristics of nonprofit leadership coalitions and governance quality. We identify two dimensions to classify leadership coalitions: centralized versus diffused influence and specific versus holistic influence. These dimensions are subsequently related with observed governance quality. We frame our finding in the existing literature on group faultlines, which are socially constructed dividing lines within groups, and we discuss the importance of establishing a balanced coalition between a weak or nonexisting and a strong dominant coalition to ensure high governance quality. We also present propositions on how governance quality and its various sub-dimensions can be studied as a complex, nonlinear intermediate concept between coalitional aspects of leadership groups and nonprofit organizational performance. Finally, we discuss concrete avenues for further testing and verification of our theoretical interpretation.
... Both these goals may well support each other in the long term but, when it comes to allocation of scarce resources, tradeoffs have to be made in the short term. Such complexity requires a nonprofit organization's governance processes, rather than its managerial strategic and tactical processes, to address the preferences and interests of a multitude of potential stakeholders (Herman and Renz 2000;McClusky 2002;Solansky et al. 2008;Willems et al. 2016). Moreover, multiple organizations might be involved in the achievement of a single goal (e.g., maintaining the environment), which makes it difficult to distinguish the impact of any single organization (Kaplan 2001;Perrow 1961;Willems et al. 2014). ...
... In practice, for the two sub-coalitions observed in Organization E, a balanced situation between centralized and diffused influence exists. Furthermore, the additional observation can be made that across all cases skewness is smaller for 'mission, vision and strategy,' potentially due to the fact that it is more an inherent function for all people involved in leadership positions (McClusky 2002;Solansky et al. 2008). ...
We explore the relatedness between different types of governance coalitions and the level of organizational governance quality. We propose two dimensions of influence to classify nonprofit governance coalitions. We apply a mixed methodology, including a comparative case analysis of five organizations and a multi-level regression analysis of coalition metrics on formal positions held by individuals. Based on our observations we formulate eight theoretical propositions, which stress for high quality governance practices the importance of a ‘balance coalition’ between diffused and centralized influences, and between specific and holistic influences. Further, we conjecture the important role of formal leadership positions, such as CEOs and chairmen, in the structure of governance coalitions. Finally, several research paths to scrutinize our propositions in further research are suggested.
... While the majority of evidence comes from quantitative studies predominately in the private and public sectors, there has been less research on nonprofit management capabilities. Researchers have certainly investigated the governance practices of nonprofit organizations and their overall structures (McClusky, 2002;Paton, Mordaunt, & Cornforth, 2007;Stid & Bradach, 2009) and the application of strategic leadership (Phipps & Burbach, 2010). However, our knowledge of management capabilities in this context is limited. ...
... The nonprofit sector has undergone significant changes in recent years in terms of impact, governance, management, and the demands placed on those in management positions (e.g., see Paton et al., 2007). For some time, the call has been for nonprofit organizations to be more "business-like" (Dart, 2004), and research has focused on evaluating and restructuring governance and management functions (McClusky, 2002) to meet organizational and stakeholder responsibilities. However, Stid and Bradach (2009) argue that while nonprofits have strong, passionate, and visible leadership, they often lack capabilities at the management level, particularly in terms of "making tradeoffs and setting priorities" to achieve the vision (p. ...
Management capabilities have been widely researched in the private and public sectors, yet there is less evidence relating to the nonprofit sector. Increasing pressures to balance the demands of organizational values with business performance in this sector leads to a focus on the managerial capabilities required to meet these expectations. This article reports an exploratory study of capability expectations of managers within an Australian nonprofit organization. Using semistructured interviews, data were collected from 21 managers across three hierarchical levels. Findings indicate that while there is some overlap with managerial requirements in the private and public sectors, there are some unique aspects of nonprofit operations which warrant further investigation. Specifically, there was an emphasis on personal knowledge and experience (i.e., self-awareness, discipline, knowledge, and strategic thinking) and having a commitment to the nonprofit sector and values of the organization. Expectations also varied depending on the level of management within the organization.
... In keeping with previous research which suggests that the use of formal management practices and professionalism varies among nonprofit organizations, this study controlled for several important organizational characteristics, including total annual revenues, age, board size, and mission area (Hackler & Saxton, 2007;Hwang & Bromley, 2015;Hwang & Powell, 2009;McClusky, 2002). ...
This paper presents the nonprofit board self-assessment tool as a valuable, formative addition to the toolkit of nonprofit stakeholders, including evaluators, who are focused on improving both board and organizational performance. Using self-assessment data from a study of 156 nonprofits, the study tested five hypotheses about the effectiveness of five nonprofit governance best practices: strategic planning, reducing ambiguity on the board, board giving, strong internal controls, and evaluating the chief executive officer. The study finds that some nonprofit management best practices are more effective than others when it comes to assessing board performance. Moreover, consistent with previous research, board members and CEOs occasionally view performance differently. The paper concludes with a discussion about how nonprofit organizations, evaluators, and others can use these findings, as well as self-assessment tools, to improve nonprofit board governance and strengthen organizational capacity.
... In keeping with previous research which suggests that the use of formal management practices and professionalism varies among nonprofit organizations, this study controlled for several important organizational characteristics, including total annual revenues, age, board size, and mission area (Hackler & Saxton, 2007;Hwang & Bromley, 2015;Hwang & Powell, 2009;McClusky, 2002). ...
This paper presents the nonprofit board self-assessment tool as a valuable, formative addition to the toolkit of nonprofit stakeholders, including evaluators, who are focused on improving both board and organizational performance. Using self-assessment data from a study of 156 nonprofits, the study tested five hypotheses about the effectiveness of five nonprofit governance best practices: strategic planning, reducing ambiguity on the board, board giving, strong internal controls, and evaluating the chief executive officer. The study finds that some nonprofit management best practices are more effective than others when it comes to assessing board performance. Moreover, consistent with previous research, board members and CEOs occasionally view performance differently. The paper concludes with a discussion about how nonprofit organizations, evaluators, and others can use these findings, as well as self-assessment tools, to improve nonprofit board governance and strengthen organizational capacity.
... However, evidence of competency models in the non-profit context is minimal (Meduri, 2021). Particularly disconcerting is the lack of assessment of the NPO leader in the context of the crisis, given that nonprofit organization leaders are a heterogeneous group inserted in various spaces and functions within their organizations (McClusky, 2002) that build and maintain necessary organizational relationships -for the success of NPOs -especially during times of crisis (Gilstrap et al., 2016). Whether in the form of community leaders and/or individuals who build ties between other NPOs and the government, the most well-known leadership roles in NPOs (members of their governing bodies, chair, board of directors, etc.) exert influence over executive leaders and influential stakeholders (Burnett, 1998;Gilstrap et al., 2016;Jeong & Kearns, 2015;King, 2002). ...
The purpose of this study is to investigate the factors that affect the Nonprofit Organization’s (NPO) competencies and leadership in a crisis situation, specifically in the Portuguese NPOs during COVID-19. Adopting an interdisciplinary perspective, this article integrates crisis management literature with leadership literature. Highlighting the leadership perspective of both intermediate employees (technical director) and top management (executive director), this research aims to advance knowledge on the main organizational leadership competencies that NPOs need to have to better cope with crises. One hundred and seventy-four (174) NPOs representatives voluntarily participated in the study which involved a survey questionnaire based on a five-point Likert scale for 23 items included in the questionnaire. Principal component analysis using varimax rotation was applied to reduce the number of variables. Reliability tests were performed to assess the items included in the questionnaire. Tests included test-retest reliability, Cronbach alpha, and split-half reliability coefficients. Results show that the most important factors that improve the capability of a NPO to cope with a crisis are: respond to all stakeholders through accountability, plan based on identification of vulnerabilities, and build a foundation of trust through communication. Additionally, it is possible to suggest that staff and top management perceive crisis and leadership competencies differently. It is possible to conclude, that these factors can be used as important lines of action to structure the sustainable development and planning of NPOs’ strategies of other similar crisis to come in the future. Findings, the implications of this work, and avenues for future NPOs crisis management and leadership research are addressed.
... The nonprofit sector is experiencing significant disruption in relation to governance, management, business models and funding structures (Anheier, 2014;Paton et al., 2007). In turn, these changes have had substantial impact on the expectations of leaders in nonprofit organizations (Paton et al., 2007) and fueled research interest in appropriate models for organizational culture (Langer & LeRoux, 2017), governance and management (McClusky, 2002;Paton et al., 2007;Stid & Bradach, 2009). Research indicates that leadership in a nonprofit organization is challenging due in part to the characteristics of the sector including "centrality of values; complexity of resource generation; reliance on volunteers; difficulties in judging organizational performance; lack of clarity about accountability" (Lyons, 2001, p. 22), together with a scarcity of resources and increasing demand for services (Anheier, 2014;Hamlin et al., 2011). ...
Leadership has been shown to have a strong influence on the culture of nonprofit organizations and therefore a focus on understanding and enhancing effectiveness of leadership in this context is critical. However, the nonprofit sector is not homogenous, and in this chapter it is argued that the underlying organizational purpose may impact on the organizational culture and therefore the leadership capabilities required. In the nonprofit sector, a growing emphasis in recent years on improved governance and accountability, and balancing competing stakeholder demands has intensified the focus on leadership capabilities. Despite this, the examination of leadership capabilities and the extent to which they may vary depending on nonprofit organization purpose or type has been limited. This chapter draws on a comparative case study of the similarities and differences in leadership capabilities that are required in different types of nonprofit organizations. This study illustrates how two different types of nonprofits, established to serve differing purposes and missions, with differing culture and values, subsequently require different leadership capabilities. The research adopted a user-centered approach to understand the participants’ mental models about leadership and culture, and the value and contribution of this research technique is also highlighted.
... Finally, disclosure on governance aims to show individual donors that governance structures and practices are capable of ensuring a fit between a nonprofit organization's mission and its activities, protecting the integrity and sustainability of the organization, and safeguarding its continuity over time (Haski-Leventhal & Foot, 2016;McClusky, 2002). As governance is related to the method by which nonprofit organizations are directed toward their mission, disclosure of governance information represents a sort of fiduciary disclosure (Haski-Leventhal & Foot, 2016), because it is aimed to build donors' trust and confidence that the organization is effectively run in terms of setting objectives and the means of attaining them. ...
The COVID-19 pandemic and the consequent need to socially distance has prompted nonprofits to rely more on their institutional websites to reach donors and seek financial support. In this study, we use qualitative comparative analysis to explore which different combinations of information on organizational profile, governance, performance, and finances are deemed most suitable by Italian community foundations to encourage charitable giving. The results highlight two different paths, suggesting that organizational profile, performance, and governance information matter most to Italian community foundations for retaining donors and donations, or attracting new ones, whereas financial information is not considered relevant for designing effective online disclosure.
... The complex interdependence between leadership and governance in NPOs (see Chait et al., 2011;Heimovics et al., 1993;McClusky, 2002), as well as the abrupt organizational changes brought on by the pandemic, have amplified the balance between leadership and managerial activities at all levels of the organization. While leadership and the skills needed to navigate crises successfully have been discussed in the literature (Gilstrap et al., 2016), less scholarly attention has been devoted specifically to how nonprofit boards contribute to organizational responses to crises. ...
How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the roles of nonprofit boards? We reflect critically on the leadership and management activities of boards to understand the implications of the current crisis on governance. Employing a contingency approach to governance, we present a model of boards of directors’ leadership and management roles under four governance configurations as organizations navigate through the stages of the pandemic. We suggest that organizations with governance configurations that are more suited to predictable environments will generally experience greater shifts between management and leadership activities as they move through the stages of the COVID-19 crisis.
... Es kann zwischen klarer und undurchsichtiger Transparenz unterschieden werden (Fox, 2007): (Balser und McClusky, 2005;Manetti und Toccafondi, 2014;McClusky, 2002). ...
In den letzten Jahrzehnten hat das Streben nach Effizienz und Effektivität des Managements viele öffentliche und zivilgesellschaftliche Organisationen verändert. Viele öffentliche Organisationen – wie z.B. die deutschen öffentlichen Universitäten im oben beschriebenen Fall – haben sich im Zuge der New Public Management Reformen als eigenständige Einheiten neu organisiert. Eine solche Umstrukturierung hat die Chance erhöht, dass kontextspezifische Management- und Führungspraktiken eingeführt werden. So können die öffentlichen Universitäten nun beispielsweise freier über die Verwendung der Mittel entscheiden. Die Umstrukturierung hat jedoch auch die Notwendigkeit erhöht, dass die Organisationen ihre Leistungen managen und darüber berichten, um somit langfristig ihre Reputation gegenüber externen Stakeholdern aufzubauen. Dies können sie erreichen, indem sie das richtige Maß an Transparenz wahren und ihren Stakeholdern gegenüber Rechenschaft ablegen. Öffentliche Universitäten bemühen sich nun mehr um ihr Image, z.B. indem sie Hochglanzbroschüren drucken und ihre Jubiläen feiern. Gleichzeitig wird von ihnen mehr Transparenz bezüglich ihrer Prozesse und Wirkungsbereiche erwartet. Wenn zivilgesellschaftliche Organisationen für den Staat die Erbringung öffentlicher Leistungen übernehmen, dann geschieht dies zunehmend auf Basis von Leistungsverträgen mit komplexen Leistungs- und Zielvereinbarungen. Infolgedessen ist bei zivilgesellschaftlichen Organisationen die Notwendigkeit gestiegen, ihre Leistung, ihre Reputation, ihre Transparenz und ihre Rechenschaftspflicht gegenüber staatlichen Akteuren zu verwalten und zu steuern. Auch die Erwartungen privater Geldgeber/innen sind gestiegen, weil Skandale im Zusammenhang mit dem Missbrauch von Spendengeldern Spender/innen sensibilisiert haben (in Österreich z.B. der berüchtigteWorld Vision Skandal von 1998, der schließlich zur Einführung des österreichischen Spendengütesiegels führte). Aktuelle Trends in Richtung Venture Philanthropy und Impact Investment haben die Anforderungen privater Geldgeber/innen in Hinblick auf die Rechenschaftslegung von NPOs weiter erhöht.
... Volunteer leaders count on other volunteers to perform tasks and accomplish goals, these volunteers are motivated by potential rewards and benefits other than monetary compensation, and volunteer leaders often have fewer resources at their disposal (Pearce, 1982;Rowold and Rohmann, 2009). Volunteer leaders provide both managerial and operational support to volunteer members (McClusky, 2002). Volunteer members have full-time careers and have professional and technical expertise. ...
Dengan mempertimbangkan bahwa penelitian tentang komitmen karyawan pada organisasi non-profit masih terbatas, maka tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi self-esteem serta komitmen organisasional karyawan/anggota pada organisasi non-profit. The International Association of Students in Economic and Commercial Sciences (AIESEC) pada Universitas Brawijaya dipilih sebagai lokasi penelitian. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif, data primer pada penelitian ini diperoleh melalui semi structured in-depth interview. Kami melakukan interview secara mendalam terhadap Vice President of Talent Management, Team Leader of Human Resource and Capacity Coordinator, dan 4 orang anggota AIESEC Universitas Brawijaya. Data dianaliasis dengan menggunakan bantuan software QSR NVivo 12. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kesempatan belajar dan mengembangkan diri, rasa memiliki, serta loyalitas adalah faktor yang membuat karyawan/anggota tertarik untuk bergabung dan berkomitmen terhadap AIESEC. Selain itu, hasil penelitian ini juga menunjukkan bahwa karyawan memiliki tingkat komitmen afektif yang lebih tinggi dibandingkan dengan komitmen normatif maupun komitmen berkelanjutan. Di sisi lain, organisasi melakukan banyak upaya untuk mempertahankan karyawan/anggotanya, diantarnya dengan memberikan apresiasi terhadap hasil kerja karyawan/anggota serta kegiatan Local Committee (LC).
... Unless it is balanced with collective, horizontal approaches to working together, workplace hierarchy can facilitate abuse of power and micromanagement (Hershcovis & Barling, 2011). Micromanagement can endanger the quality of relationships between leadership and staff, causing higher levels of distress in the workplace (Mcclusky, 2002;Rooney & Gottlieb, 2007). Although there is an inherent hierarchy between various staff positions in GBV-specific NPOs, leaders with an egalitarian approach recognize that organizations can benefit from different levels of expertise and various skills among the staff members. ...
Advocates who work for nonprofit organizations (NPOs) that address gender-based violence (GBV) experience a wide range of psychosocial health and well-being risks due to the emotionally demanding nature of the work they engage in. Most recommendations for advocates’ self-care focus on individual-level activities, failing to hold the NPOs accountable for creating workplace cultures and practices that foster psychosocial well-being, self-care, and resilience among the advocates. The aim of this qualitative research was to further our understanding of organizational-level factors that influence psychosocial well-being and self-care practices among advocates who work for GBV-specific NPOs in a metropolitan area in the southeastern United States. We conducted in-depth interviews with 25 GBV-specific advocates. Constructivist grounded theory methods were used in coding and analyzing the data. Sixteen advocates identified as White, followed by five Black, two Hispanic, and two mixed-race/ethnicity. Mean age was 36 years. Most participants had a master’s degree ( n = 16). Analysis of the data resulted in three major themes: (a) Management and Leadership Style, (b) Interpersonal Relationship Dynamics, and (c) Culture of Self-Care. The ways in which leaders established relationships with other advocates to accomplish organizational goals, how advocates developed a sense of camaraderie with their coworkers, and shared norms around self-care shaped advocates’ willingness and ability to engage in individual and collective self-care. Findings of this study highlight the role of GBV-specific NPOs in creating workplace cultures and practices that are conducive to engaging in self-care and developing resilience among the advocates. By fulfilling this responsibility, organizations would enable the advocates to not only survive, but thrive in their work and make even greater strides in the overall mission of GBV prevention.
... In effective NPOs there is a strong, supportive relationship between the chief executive officer (CEO) and the Board of Trustees (Knauft et al. 1991;Herman and Heimovics 1994). Beyond inspiring internal stakeholders, the Board should connect the organisation and its environment, representing them positively and communicating external stakeholder perceptions, views and beliefs back to the organisation (Harlan and Saidel 1994;McClusky 2002). Effective Boards often have a significant impact on organisational decision-making in NPOs, but while this is generally positive, it can have its downsides. ...
As the non-profit sector becomes increasingly dependent on projects to achieve its strategic goals, the use of formal project management processes can help to demonstrate to stakeholders that an organisation is taking steps to improve its performance. However the adoption of processes drawn from the for-profit sector does not always yield the desired results. In particular existing performance management systems and quality management systems are unsuitable for the implementation, measurement, and improvement of project management practices in the sector. A new model is therefore proposed for non-profit project management performance assessment. This is based on a conceptual analysis of the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) business excellence model, a project management performance assessment model used primarily in for-profit environments, and an assessment of criteria particular to non-profit organisations. The model is multi-dimensional, flexible, and accounts for multiple stakeholder views. After using it, non-profit organisations can reflect on their performance, create an improvement plan, and use the model again to test their progress.
... Smaller nonprofits have flatter organizational structures, with few internal candidates who can be possibly considered for promotion to chief executive positions (McClusky, 2002). ...
Purpose
This paper aims to raise the level of awareness of the critical need to have a chief executive succession plan in nonprofit organizations.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper uses a review of survey literature to determine the degree to which nonprofits plan for chief executive succession.
Findings
The findings reveal a serious lack of planning for successors in nonprofit organizations.
Originality/value
This paper underscores the need for a three-pronged approach by nonprofit boards of directors, chief executive officers, and HR departments to address planning for successors to prevent potential chaotic organizational situations and create sustainable nonprofits.
... Italy, which has an important and ancient tradition concerning the Third Sector (Evers and Laville 2004;Manetti et al. 2017;Thomas 2004;Zollo et al. 2017a). In fact, another important limitation of the NPO governance literature is that its main focus is on large NPOs located in the United States (McClusky 2002) and the UK (Mason 2010), largely ignoring the analysis of other geographical contexts-such as Italy-where the Third Sector plays an important role at the societal level. ...
The present study unpacks the relationship between non-profit organizations’ (NPOs) governance and organizational effectiveness by investigating the mediating role of volunteers’ organizational identity (OI) and their organizational commitment. While management scholars have traditionally focused on for-profit organizations (FPOs) to investigate the mechanisms underlying governance related issues, noteworthy insights may be derived from the analysis of NPOs due to the emerging societal importance of the Third Sector. Stakeholders are progressively requiring a better definition and implementation of NPOs’ governance, to ensure their effective and long-term sustainability at the service of the community. However, the extant literature has mainly focused on NPOs’ board mechanisms, thus neglecting the critical stakeholders that play a crucial role in the governance of these organizations, such as volunteers. Building on an “enlightened” stakeholder theory perspective, this study proposes and empirically tests a conceptual model that explains the linkages between NPOs’ governance effectiveness and organizational effectiveness. Specifically, volunteers’ OI and commitment to the NPO are hypothesized as the underlying mechanisms explaining such a relationship. Bootstrapped multi-mediation analysis was used on a sample of 300 respondents who volunteered in NPOs located in 10 Italian provinces. Results confirmed the role of OI and volunteers’ commitment as partially mediating variables on the relationship between NPOs’ governance effectiveness and organizational effectiveness. Both theoretical and practical implications for NPOs’ managers are provided, along with suggestions for future research by stressing the importance of the NPO governance phenomenon and the significant role played by volunteers.
Keywords: agency theory, bootstrapped mediation, governance effectiveness, organizational commitment, non-profit organizations, stakeholder theory
... This might illustrate why the leadership style is different between for-profits and non-profits. McClusky (2002) argues that leaders of a for-profit organization are mainly given special consideration due to their position, while leaders of a nonprofit organization may not be given such consideration. It is argued that the primary difference between leading in the non-profit and the for-profit sectors may be because of the number and diversity of the stakeholders. ...
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore the competencies of leadership used and the reasons behind their use in an attempt to understand the nature of leadership competencies in non-profit sports organisations, and guide the experts to focus on specific competencies for general purposes.
Design/methodology/approach
The current study adopts a qualitative method to achieve the aim of the study.
Findings
The results revealed that four groups of competencies, namely, understanding the whole,communication, general management relation, and change tend to be specific competencies for general purposes in different leadership positions. The findings demonstrate the value of the approach in discoveringinsights that would not have emerged from more commonly utilised methodologies.
Practical implications
Overall, these findings suggest that individuals, in different sport leadership positions, need four groups of competencies to overcome internal and external challenges effectively. Implications of this research may exist in business and other domains. Specifically, several competency frameworks are suggested in business for leaders to meet their internal and external challenges.
Originality/value
This research represents the first attempt to understand and explore the nature of leadership competencies in non-profit sports organisations in the Middle East.
... This might illustrate why the leadership style is different between for-profits and non-profits. McClusky (2002) argues that leaders of a for-profit organization are mainly given special consideration due to their position, while leaders of a nonprofit organization may not be given such consideration. It is argued that the primary difference between leading in the non-profit and the for-profit sectors may be because of the number and diversity of the stakeholders. ...
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to investigate the transformational and transactional leadership styles and organizational learning at for-profit and non-profit sports organizations, and the impact of these leadership styles on enhancing organizational learning in these sports organizations.
Design/methodology/approach
A quantitative questionnaire survey method was adopted. The data were collected from for-profit and non-profit sports organizations in the UK.
Findings
Management by exception–active in transactional leadership and idealized leadership in transformational leadership seem to be equally important for facilitating organizational learning. The results also revealed significant differences between the for-profit and non-profit sports organizations in leadership styles and organizational learning.
Research limitations/implications
The generalizability of the results for different sports settings or different countries must be examined, given that only some sport organizations under the umbrellas of non-profit and for-profit sectors were used as the target population. The research is limited to the use of moderating variables, such as motivation, organizational structure, culture, and innovation that might attenuate this effect. This study contributes to the field by investigating the direct relationship between leadership styles and organizational learning in a sports setting.
Originality/value
The originality of this study is its advances of sport leadership research that is linking leadership styles and organizational learning in for-profit and non-profit sports organizations.
... The case organisation is an Australian nonprofit entity conducting research into a specific disease and providing support for those impacted by this disease in the community. The nonprofit sector has experienced significant change over the past couple of decades, with calls to improve governance and management to keep pace with the public and private sectors (McClusky, 2002) and to become more "business-like" (Dart, 2004). ...
Purpose
Many organisations are reconsidering their investment in formal education and training, in favour of more informal approaches to learning such as mentoring, temporary assignments, stretch assignments, and job rotation. The purpose of this research was to explore the ways in which managers have developed capabilities for their roles thus far and their preferred approaches for future development with particular consideration given to a comparison of formal and informal learning.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper reports on a case study conducted within an Australian nonprofit organisation focusing on the extent to which managers attribute their current level of management skills to formal or informal learning and the extent to which they would prefer formal or informal learning (or a combination) for future development.
Findings
Findings indicate a large part of the managers' current management capabilities were acquired through informal means, and these are seen as desirable for ongoing development, however there is also a desire for formal learning methods to complement informal methods.
Originality/value
Management development is a critical HRD activity however there is limited knowledge about how managers have built their current capabilities and their preferences in terms of the mix of formal and informal learning for the future.
... Hence, one-size-fits-all recommendations for organizational effectiveness are, and likely will remain, open for discussion. Even within organizations, opinions might be very different on the best practices that are needed to be effective (Beck et al. 2008;Callen et al. 2003;McClusky, 2002). Therefore, the current study pays special attention to the extent to which opinions within an organization are shared among its leaders, given the need for an organization's leadership team to uniformly formulate and deploy relevant improvement actions (Cannon-Bowers and Salas 2001;Cooke et al. 2013;Zajac et al. 2014). ...
This study explores which governance practices nonprofit leaders consider necessary to avoid organizational crises. Further, it explores whether these leadership mental models of crisis resistance depend on the organizational context. This helps determine whether practical learning points are organization specific or can be applied broadly. With a multilevel sample of 304 leaders from 44 Belgian nongovernmental development organizations, an exploratory path analysis reveals that nonprofit leaders consider continuous improvement, as a governance practice, particularly relevant for effective organizational crisis resistance. A multilevel analysis also shows that variations in leadership mental models cannot be explained by the organizational variables used in this study (organizational size, leadership group size, operational activities, and languages in the leadership group). This article concludes with a discussion of consequences for further research.
... Because the board of directors has formal legal control over private organizations, it makes sense to analyze the appointment of the organization's formal leaders. Granted, particularly for nonprofit boards, the board does not always have the level of control contemplated by the law, and decisionmaking for the organization is driven by factors well beyond a boardroom vote (McClusky 2002). Yet the board's status as the ultimately responsible organ for the direction of the organization, and its power (even if unexercised) to override the decisions of staff, make it an important component of the organization to understand. ...
Quasi-Governmental Organizations (QGOs) are organizations that have both public and private characteristics, not fitting neatly into either category. One type of QGO is an organization incorporated as a private, nonprofit organization, but run by a board of directors that is composed of government officials or directors appointed by a unit of traditional government. These QGOs pose distinct conceptual and policy challenges that differ from those of traditional government entities or purely private nonprofits. Drawing on a convenience sample of five such QGOs incorporated in one metropolitan region (Greater Cleveland, Ohio), this piece explores potential reasons for, and possible pitfalls of, mixing private organizational legal status with public-affiliated leaders by developing a framework and proposing a research agenda for future study.
... operating environment. While the majority of nonprofits can anticipate chief executive turnover within the upcoming decade, most are not well equipped for the transition (Santora et al. 2011, Gothard and Austin 2013, McClusky 2002, Ip and Jacobs 2006, VonBergen 2007. ...
Predicted shortages of chief executives combined with growing economic and social significance of the nonprofit sector in an increasingly complex operating environment highlight the need for executive succession planning. Accordingly, our research explores factors that may influence executive succession planning in nonprofit and cooperative forms of organizations. Survey data (N = 242) were analyzed using multiple regression analysis. Results suggest both barriers to and substitutes for executive succession planning that help explain the apparent dearth of succession planning efforts in these organizations. A penchant for continuity was found to be a barrier to such planning, while elements of governance quality and internal development were found to substitute for executive succession planning.
... First, the age of the organizations varies from 14 to 4 years at the time of analysis. Indeed the age of the organization affects its life-cycle stage, which may impact how the organization is governed, as well as its productivity (McClusky 2002). The BRs identified are located in three different Canadian provinces. ...
Sustainability-oriented organizations have typically adopted governance approaches that undertake community participation and collaboration through multistakeholder arrangements. Documented challenges of this model are associated with collaboration and institutional capacity, and include reactive accountability structures, inability to reach consensus, funding limitations, and lack of innovation. Social entrepreneurship is a model used successfully in other social sectors; yet, it has rarely been explored by sustainability-oriented organizations. Nevertheless, research in other sectors has found that social entrepreneurship models of governance can encourage diverse participation from a wide range of social groups. In this paper we consider the value of social entrepreneurship for sustainability-oriented organizations by examining whether it can help address governance-related challenges associated with collaboration and institutional capacity. Analysis of organizational documents and participant interviews in three biosphere reserves in Atlantic Canada revealed that, over time, these organizations have struggled to maintain their mission objectives, retain productivity, and respond to economic stress. By examining social entrepreneurship theory and its practice in a biosphere reserve in northern Quebec, we learned that social entrepreneurship strategies more effectively target values and expertise, encourage meaningful engagement, foster strategic direction, and promote diversified and stable funding models than the stakeholder models explored. We determined there are opportunities to develop hybrid governance models that offer the benefits of social entrepreneurship while addressing the procedural concerns outlined by the stakeholder model.
... However, career progression opportunities are often unavailable in many small-sized nonprofits (Bridgespan Group, 2010). McClusky (2002) suggested that larger or more complex organizations (measured by number of paid staff, number of programs and services offered, or size of operating annual budget) are more likely to have higher levels of managerial function. These higher levels of managerial function have often resulted in better administration and coordination of HR functions including having formal strategies for retaining and recruitment internal talent. ...
In this study we identified and examined the characteristics of nonprofits that have organizational leadership development (OLD) initiatives integrated with executive succession planning to ensure the continuity of organizational leadership. Results from a survey of the 54 nonprofit Israeli executive directors (EDs) found that the importance of OLD and its availability and accessibility were positively associated with succession planning. Findings included the extent to which EDs advise boards about succession planning and the likelihood of internal recruitment (including an institutional policy) as a mechanism for EDs’ replacements. Implications for nonprofit boards and EDs and recommendations for future research are provided.
... In a similar way, Strebel (2004) proposed the "driving governance model" whereby board members need to carry out a particular set of activities related to their decision-making processes and resource allocations based on changes in the external environment. McClusky's (2002) governance framework suggested a shifting of roles and responsibilities between the board and management depending on a number of key organizational factors (e.g., size, life cycle stage of development, trust levels between the ED and the board, the presence or absence of organizational crisis, environmental forces). Although contingency governance models such as these alternative frameworks can be quite attractive, we need more empirical evidence about their effectiveness. ...
... De två förstnämnda tillhör vad gemene man förknippar med samhällsekonomin medan den sistnämnda allt för ofta förbises (Quarter, Mook & Richmond, 2003). Ickevinstdrivande organisationers (NPO -Nonprofit organizations) betydelse har dock ökat i dagens samhälle (Merchant & Van der Stede, 2003;Torres & Pina, 2003;Theuvsen, 2004;Paton 2003) och organisationsformen ligger numera som -2 -grund för extensiv forskning (Helmig, Jegers & Lapsley, 2004;McClusky, 2002;Brooks, 2002;Paton 2003). ...
This study aims to determine the extent of the impact of professional ethics on the quality of financial reporting, and how to apply it. This research is a literature review from various research sources. The results show that professional ethics has a significant relationship with the quality of financial reporting and is fundamental to the quality of an organization's financial statements. The application of quality financial reporting characters, high ethical commitment, and consistency play an important role in making quality financial reporting.
Building perceptions of trustworthiness that encourage donors to give is critical for nonprofit organizations that depend on charitable giving. Several studies focused on the disclosure of financial and performance information to foster public trust and help donors to make giving decisions. Drawing from stewardship theory, this study explores how additional content dimensions of a more relational nature—including appreciation for the support received and willingness to dialog with donors—might be combined with financial and performance dimensions to design effective online disclosure in the view of nonprofits. By focusing on the viewpoint of European community foundations and using the configurational approach of qualitative comparative analysis, we found that information about fundraising campaigns is deemed must‐have content to discharge online. However, this information alone is not considered to be enough; to retain current donors or attract new ones, it must be combined properly with disclosures demonstrating gratitude to and engagement with donors alongside organizational finances and performance.
This chapter considers how to best structure the delivery of government programs. For nearly every government activity you can imagine, whether setting policy, delivering services, funding programs, or assuring quality and compliance, there is seldom one public organization with complete and sole responsibility. Instead, there is often a complicated web or network of government and non-governmental organizations contributing valued public outcomes. Today we find ever more complex structures representing hybrids that leverage technology through multi-level and multi-organizational arrangements within an increasingly globalized network of organizations and program service delivery. While we have not entirely abandoned the quest for the “one best way,” we increasingly rely on organizational analysis and use design principles to accommodate collaborative action and network functioning and to develop a resilience attitude to promote flexibility and innovation for continuous improvement.
Individuals spend most of their time as a member of an organization in a social, cultural, or economic context. Individuals in these organizations; are involved in organizational activities by taking on various roles, sometimes as employees, volunteers, students, or customers. Individuals communicate with or are affected by organizations at every moment of their daily lives and for various reasons. The concept of organization is defined as communities in which individuals systematically cooperate with others to achieve the goals they cannot achieve alone (Eren, 2003: 203-204). Organization reflects an open system in which social and physical resources are brought together harmoniously (Budak and Budak, 2004: 21). Organizations that produce goods and services and engage in economic activities to meet the needs of individuals are classified as for-profit organizations and non-profit organizations according to their purposes (Aydın, 1992: 235). The most common type of organization is a for-profit organization established to generate income and achieve commercial goals (Ülgen and Mirze, 2013: 22). Non-profit organizations, on the other hand, are organizations that work for the benefit of society without the intention of making a profit and developing an understanding of participation and solidarity in solving the problems in society (Andrei et al., 2018: 215-216; Morrison, 2016: 236). The rapid progress in economy, technology, and world politics in the recent period complicates organizational environments and increases organizations' uncertainty levels. In addition, organizations face various risks, both from within their organizations and the external environment, beyond the traditional risks. As a result, managing and controlling business risk became more challenging (Alshirah et al., 2020: 219). In such an environment, the board of directors' roles in organizations is becoming increasingly important. Boards of directors in for-profit and non-profit organizations receive great attention as the final decision-makers because of their significant contribution to the success of organizations. In particular, the board of directors' advisory, monitoring, and networking/resource acquisition duties directly affect the organization's effectiveness (Jaskyte, 2017: 453). Therefore, the board of directors is considered a tool for dealing with the organization's environment. Boards of directors should fulfill their legal responsibilities, serve as boundary setters, monitor organizational managers, and increase corporate social performance (Wang and Dewhirst, 1992: 115). Previous studies provide evidence that the board plays a vital role in determining an organization's social performance and that board characteristics are associated with social performance (Huse et al., 2009; Bear et al., 2010; Jo and Harjoto, 2011). This shows that the board of directors is a significant governing body for an organization. A unique asset that genuinely adds value to an organization, the board of directors collaborates closely with the organization's management. The link between a board of directors actively partnering with management, especially in strategy development, and the success of an organization has been known for some time (Davis, 2013: 30). The board of directors is seen as more important than the organization's management. If organizational governance is not well organized, it is impossible to obtain adequate control. From this point of view, it is necessary to know the importance and duties of the board of directors, which is the top management body and directs the activities of profit-oriented and non-profit organizations. However, there is a notable knowledge gap in the management literature stream. Examination of the management literature determined that preliminary studies examine for-profit (commercial enterprises) and non-profit organizations together and simultaneously deal with the boards of directors of these organizations. This study aims to fill this knowledge gap. In addition, this study provides comprehensive information about both types of organizations and the boards of directors of these organizations are examined. More importantly, this study compares the similarities and differences between two different types of organizations and the boards of directors of these organizations.
Management literature states that board directors are involved in for-profit and non-profit organizations. To better reflect the impact and effectiveness of the board of directors, first of all, information about for-profit and non-profit organizations is given in this study. Then, the boards of directors in both types of organizations are examined in detail.
This article focuses on the concept of non-profit governance and the associated literature. It proposes a bibliometric analysis and a study of the definitions of non-profit governance to examine the ambiguity of the concept, decried by some researchers. Others rather think that it is a question of plurality. 277 articles were selected from Scopus as well as from the main publishers of scientific journals in management sciences. A bibliometric analysis (main authors, preferred journals, date of publication, countries, etc.) is complemented by a lexicometric and linguistic analysis of keywords, abstracts and definitions of non-profit governance. The results indicate a strong inspiration towards for-profit governance, a focus on the board of directors and a plurality of definitions of non-profit governance. This article therefore opens up many new research perspectives, complementary to those already stated by researchers who have constructed research agendas.
Edited by Gemma Donnelly-Cox (Trinity College Dublin, Ireland), Michael Meyer (WU Vienna, Austria) and Filip Wijkström (Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden), this multi-perspective Research Handbook provides a clear pathway through the nonprofit governance research field, pushing beyond the borders of current theory to expand and deepen the analytical framework for nonprofit governance. It offers an analysis of the basics including definitions, organizational forms and levels of governance, and takes a critical approach towards the normative and prescriptive tendencies in much of contemporary governance scholarship.
Underlining the relationship between the public and nonprofit sectors, Effective Nonprofit Management: Context, Concepts, and Competencies, 2nd Edition comprehensively explores of the practical art of forming, managing, and leading nonprofit organizations, contextualizing the changing socio-political conditions and expectations of key stakeholders in nonprofit organizations. Grounded in the practical experiences of real-life nonprofit managers, this thoroughly revised second edition explores contemporary issues that are becoming central to effective nonprofit management, including: An increasing emphasis on outcome assessment and accountability; innovative use of social media; big foundations’ impacts on nonprofits and public policy making; tensions between federal, state, and local governments with nonprofits; and the importance of instilling a culture of ethics in the sector. A completely new chapter on nonprofit ethics and accountability has been added. Each chapter introduces the reader to relevant and current scholarship on the topic, utilizes the language of nonprofit practice, explores contemporary issues and examples, provides practical tips, includes text boxes with profiles of nonprofit organizations and best practices, and ends with a short and practical case study followed by discussion questions. Effective Nonprofit Management, Second Edition will be of interest to practitioners as well as graduate and upper division undergraduate students enrolled in nonprofit and public management courses.
The non-profit governance literature is emerging, multilevel, and disparate. This chapter provides a critical review of the scholarly literature on non-profit governance, identifies the distinctive and currently most important theoretical frameworks in the field, and outlines the models of good non-profit governance that have emerged, discussing their main traits. The chapter also examines the positions and roles ascribed in the literature to constituents, stakeholders, and other claimant groups involved in non-profit organisations and develops a novel approach to distinguishing between analytically different categories of claimants. The approach is proposed as a tool for future non-profit governance research. After acknowledging the limitations of its scope and identifying upcoming issues in non-profit governance, the chapter concludes with discussion of three lacunae in the current scholarship on non-profit governance that need to be addressed.
Im Rahmen dieses Beitrags wird ein Einstieg in die Diskussion zum Thema Corporate Governance von Non-Profit-Organisationen (NPO) geliefert, indem ein Überblick über unterschiedliche wissenschaftliche und alltagspraktische Verständnisse von Governance gegeben wird. Wissenschaftliche Governanceverständnisse werden charakterisiert, indem die Hauptmerkmale des politikwissenschaftlichen, des betriebswirtschaftlichen und des soziologischen Zugangs zur Governance dargestellt werden. Alltagspraktische Governanceverständnisse werden anhand einer Typologie dargestellt, die von betriebswirtschaftlicher über familiäre, professionalistische und zivilgesellschaftliche bis hin zu basisdemokratischer Governance reicht. Abschließend werden Überlegungen zur Zukunft der Governance von NPO angestellt. Eine weitere Verbreitung des betriebswirtschaftlichen Governance-Diskurses ist wahrscheinlich. Alternative Governance-Zugänge bleiben jedoch notwendige Gegenpole, die wohl in Nischen des Non-Profit-Sektors weiterbestehen werden.
This chapter addresses the topic of accountability and reporting of social entities as concepts and instruments of governance that are used to demonstrate transparency and rigor regarding their activity to their stakeholders. The objective of this chapter is to understand how these instruments are used by social entities, and to establish whether this use brings about an increase in the trust created between theses entities and their funders with regards to the possibility of obtaining increased funding. With this in mind, two surveys were carried out, one for social entities and the other for funders, with some similar content, in order to enable a comparison of answers. This study enabled us to conclude that social entities have a formal and periodic relationship with their funders, that they believe that the current accountability and reporting (A&R) quality level is adequate, that social entities' A&R information, although not decisive, is important for funding decision making, and if social entities were to receive substantial funding, this would improve their social impact.
Human Resource Management (HRM) could very well be the key contributor to organization profitability and competitive advantage in the 21st century. That claim is a startling reality with a growing body of supporting evidence that affirms its truth. In a world where less than 15% of all employees acknowledge that they are positively engaged at work, the opportunity to capture and inspire the minds and hearts of tomorrow’s work force is immense. Thus, there are multiple reasons for this book about the strategic contribution of HRM in the third millennium economy. The bad news is that the history of HRM has been disappointing, Human Resource Professionals (HRPs) have been largely unprepared, and organization leaders have been focused on technology and innovation-rather than the people who create value for their companies. The good news is that there is a growing number of outstanding companies and enlightened leaders who have recognized that people are the key to better customer service, greater innovation, improved productivity, and higher profits. This book serves four significantly different types of readers. First, and most importantly, this book offers insights for top management teams who are served by the HRPs and provides a template to hold those professionals accountable. Each of the chapters of this book provides strategic insights into the purpose and function of HRM systems in supporting the top management team and its organization mission. Second, this book provides clear guidelines for HRPs in helping them to realize their key roles and the accountability expected from them. Third, this book is a useful foundation for students seeking to understand how HRM systems function. Fourth, the book provides scholars and academics with fundamental principles upon which to build as they explore the practical world of business. The consistent theme of this book is that HRM matters and HRPs can make a significant strategic difference in contributing to an organization’s success! The modern organization of the 21st century has already begun to change-and those changes must be effective if organizations are to successfully compete in a world that has become increasingly global and complex in its focus. However, HRM and the role of HRPs have not always been fully appreciated, and top management teams can exponentially improve the effectiveness of their organizations by rethinking HRM’s strategic roles. This book offers a wealth of information about the contribution that HRM can make to help organizations improve their economic and financial prospects. This book explains how and why organizations can benefit from treating their employees as valued assets and by honoring duties owed to those employees by helping them to fulfill their ultimate potential. As organizations honor those responsibilities to their employees, they also serve their own best interests and the interests of a society that desperately needs to effectively utilize its available resources to solve its current and future problems.
The focus of this paper is on organisations which do not have the aim of securing and distributing profits to their stakeholders. These organisations are often called ‘associations’, or ‘voluntary organisations’ or ‘not-for- profit’ or non profit (or even nonprofit) organisations or, in the UK, charities. The descriptor used in this paper is ‘non profit’, but these different names are used interchangeably in this paper, as a deliberate reflection of the lack of unanimity on exactly what these organisations should be called. The particular focus of this paper is an examination of the impact of business expertise on the governance of ‘non profit’ or ‘voluntary’ organisations. The governance of these organisations is a highly topical and contentious issue. There is increasing evidence of a convergence between for profit and not for profit organisations in the adoption and use of management practices (Tamburrini, 2009; Ramirez and Janiga, 2009). Landsberg (2004) has expressed the view that a disproportionate business influence on charities may undermine their fundamental ethos and missions. However, it has also been suggested that business expertise can make significant enhancements to the effectiveness of non profit organisations (Bradley, Jansen and Silverman, 2003). In this paper, we address this issue by exploring the impact of business members on the boards of charities. The specific charitable organisations which we examine in this chapter are those which operate in the arts, science and cultural fields in Scotland.
Because shared mental models are critical for consistent, accurate decision making, this study seeks to explain the extent to which mental models are shared on the basis of team cognition theory and social constructionism. This study thus provides new insights into how the social dynamics among nonprofit leaders can explain mental models on nonprofit effectiveness. Specifically, team member exchange (TMX) quality should relate to agreement within leadership teams. Building on recent multilevel team research, this study regards the relationship theoretically as a separate actor and partner effect, which better reveals the underlying social processes. A multilevel data sample of 402 leaders from 44 nonprofit organizations provides support for the hypotheses, offering insights into the multilevel, emergent nature of team behavior and shared mental models. Practical recommendations focus on the central role of CEOs and board chairs, and on the need for a stronger consensus assessment in nonprofit performance evaluations.
The aim of this article is to compare the extent to which nonprofits have planned for executive director succession in six different countries. The article compares the data from the survey findings of six recently published articles that used the same questionnaire in Australia, Brazil, Israel, Italy, Russia, and the United States. The article focuses on succession planning and executive selection issues (formal versus informal planning and insider-outsider selection) and provides demographic comparisons of the respondents. Implications for managing sustainable organizations include the need to be attentive to strategic priorities to anticipate and deal with the expected and unexpected departures of incumbents. Limitations such as convenience samples are noted as are recommendations for future research.
Is That All There Is? Searching for More Useful Governance Strategies Beyond the Board Room. The New England Nonprofit Quarterly
- W P Ryan
Ryan, W.P. Is That All There Is? Searching for More Useful Governance Strategies Beyond the Board Room. The New England Nonprofit Quarterly 1999, 6 (2), 7–15.
The Policy Governance Fieldbook: Practical Lessons, Tips, and Tools from the Experiences of Real-World Boards
- C Oliver
Oliver, C. The Policy Governance Fieldbook: Practical Lessons, Tips, and Tools from the Experiences of Real-World Boards; Jossey-Bass Publishers: New York, 1999; Nobbie, P. Identifying Characteristics of Carver Policy Governance Implementation in Nonprofit Boards. ARNOVA Conference, Washington, D.C., Nov 3–7, 1999; Vinson Institute of Government: University of Georgia, 1999.
Managing Turnover at the Top. The Chronicle of Philanthropy
- D Marchetti
Marchetti, D. Managing Turnover at the Top. The Chronicle of Philanthropy 1999, 11 (16).
The Board Role in Relation to Government: Alternative Models. Governing, Leading, and Managing Nonprofit Organizations
- J Saidel
Saidel, J. The Board Role in Relation to Government: Alternative Models. Governing, Leading, and Managing Nonprofit Organizations;
Nonprofit Governance Models: Problems and Prospects. Annual Meeting of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action
- R Armstrong
- L Rykert
Armstrong, R.; and Rykert, L. Nonprofit Governance Models: Problems and Prospects. Annual Meeting of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action, Seattle, Washington, Nov 5–8, 1998.
Reframing Board-Staff Relations. Liberating the Creative Potential of the Governance Function
- P Bradshaw
Bradshaw, P. Reframing Board-Staff Relations: Liberating the Creative Potential of the Governance Function. Conference on Innovation, Change, and Continuity in Nonprofit Organization Governance, University of Missouri-Kansas City, April 2000: 2.
Mergers and Alliances: Governance Challenges for Nonprofit Boards of Directors. Innovation, Change, and Continuity in Nonprofit Organization Governance Conference sponsored by the Midwest Center for Nonprofit Leadership and the National Center for Nonprofit Boards
- Feeney
- Suzanne
- Collaborations
Feeney, Suzanne. Collaborations, Mergers and Alliances: Governance Challenges for Nonprofit Boards of Directors. Innovation, Change, and Continuity in Nonprofit Organization Governance. Conference sponsored by the Midwest Center for Nonprofit Leadership and the National Center for Nonprofit Boards, Kansas City, Missouri, April 6–7, 2000; Institute for Nonprofit Management: Portland State University: 2000; Renz, Ibid; and Ryan, Ibid. NPO GOVERNANCE
The Board Members Book: Making a Difference in Voluntary Organizations; The Foundation Center
- O Connell
O'Connell, B. The Board Members Book: Making a Difference in Voluntary Organizations; The Foundation Center: New York, 1985.
Managing Nonprofit Organizations
- Governing
- Leading
Governing, Leading, Managing Nonprofit Organizations; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, 1993; 23.
Self-Assessment for Nonprofit Governing Boards
- L H Slesinger
Slesinger, L.H. Self-Assessment for Nonprofit Governing Boards;
Board Passages: Three Key Stages in a Nonprofit Board's Life Cycle; National Center for Nonprofit Boards: Washing-ton For another NPO life cycle model, see The Stevens Group, Life Cycles of Nonprofit Organizations
- K Mathiasen Iii
Mathiasen III, K. Board Passages: Three Key Stages in a Nonprofit Board's Life Cycle; National Center for Nonprofit Boards: Washing-ton, D.C., 1990; 20. For another NPO life cycle model, see The Stevens Group, Life Cycles of Nonprofit Organizations; The Stevens Group, Inc.: St. Paul, MN, 1998.
Clarifying the Board Role: A Total Activities Approach
- M Harris
Harris, M. Clarifying the Board Role: A Total Activities Approach.
Identifying Characteristics of Carver Policy Governance Implementation in Nonprofit Boards
- P Nobbie
Collaborations, Mergers and Alliances: Governance Challenges for Nonprofit Boards of Directors. Innovation, Change, and Continuity in Nonprofit Organization Governance
- Suzanne Feeney