No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
NPO Web-Based Accountability: How Can We Know If NPOs Are Doing Good Things?
Abstract
This study develops a comprehensive but practical framework for not-for-profit organization (NPO) web-based accountability involving (a) disclosure of operations, financial performance, and social performance, and (b) dialogue; and investigates it in the practices of five Australian NPO award finalists and 160 NPOs more broadly. The findings highlight NPOs’ web-based accountability focused on operational disclosure, promoting NPOs’ activities and mission. However, financial and social performance disclosure was lacking, despite financial performance information being publicly available on the government regulator’s website. Furthermore, the use of online platforms to promote dialogue and exchange was limited. The study suggests that regulatory requirements play an important role in strengthening NPOs’ accountability, and the lack of social performance reporting means it is still unclear what “good things” NPOs are doing.
... Gray et al., 2021;Selivanova, 2023), with some recent work directed to the media themselves (García-Orosa & Pérez-Seijo, 2020;Surva, 2023). It has commonly been assumed that greater NGO accountability will develop from enhanced media use (Chu & Luke, 2021;Saxton & Guo, 2011). Numerous researchers find few NGOs implement a successful internet presence (e.g. ...
... Numerous researchers find few NGOs implement a successful internet presence (e.g. Campbell & Lambright, 2019;Chu & Luke, 2021;Saxton & Guo, 2011); and we wonder why that is? How is digitalized accountability being made accountable, and what can we learn from particular viewpoints in the literature? ...
... Our goal is not to call for NGOs to overcome their resistance to new media (e.g. Chu & Luke, 2021), but to examine the claim that digitalization leads to beneficial stakeholder engagement (e.g. Xu & Saxton, 2019). ...
Ample survey research and content analysis has established that NGO internet presence is qualitatively weak and characterized by the dominance of asymmetrical communication. We argue that the emergent communicative and social paradigm of on-line interaction forms what could be defined as a wicked problem. NGOs, seen as a ‘sender’ of information, may well face a crisis of accountability determined by the very nature of the media; whereas the NGOs’ ‘information receivers’ often are deprived of the very possibility of stakeholder relatedness. In the internet-based/on-screen ‘universe’, information and electronic flow are assumed to be continual, which supersedes the entity logic crucial to NGO accountability and legitimacy. In designing their social media presence, NGOs may, therefore, face an impossible challenge.
Informed by Stéphane Vial’s analysis of the nature of on-line interactive media, we evaluate these conundrums. Then, inspired by Lucas Introna and Fernando Ilharco, we question the dialogic potential to ‘screen-being’. While the shift from an ‘actor-centric’ to ‘flow-oriented’ paradigm of ‘screen-being’ is inherent to digital communication, it destabilizes the entity-grounded accountability of NGO legitimacy. Hence, we end with explicating the risks to dialogic relatedness of ‘sceen being’ for NGOs. By so doing, we challenge the oft vocalized perspective that NGOs ‘just’ have to increase their digital communications in order to improve their relations with various stakeholders.
... Indeed, NPOs increasingly use web pages and social networking sites (SNS) to make the added value they provide to society visible. These digital resources facilitate NPOs' transparency and connectivity with their stakeholders (Chu & Luke, 2023) and are strategic for building solid relationships with donors (Hoefer & Twis, 2018). However, communications strategies based on websites and SNS are not always successful in engaging stakeholders (Guidry et al., 2014;, and further research is needed to guide and inform NPO managers about the most appropriate use of these platforms (Albanna et al., 2022). ...
... There is vast literature that examines how NPOs use online platforms to foster shallow levels of engagement, that is, the communicative behaviour of audiences, highlighting two main outcomes. Firstly, for fostering passive communication behaviour of the public via one-way communication strategies using websites (e.g., Chu & Luke, 2023) and SNS (e.g., Lee, 2018;Sircar & Rowley, 2020). Secondly, using the aforementioned digital resources for seeking more active, communicative behaviour of the public, based on participatory and collaborative modes of communication such as dialogue and co-creation of content (e.g., Alonso-Cañadas et al., 2019;Guidry et al., 2014). ...
This research examines the role of online platform management (websites and Social Networking Sites, SNS) and online interactions in donors’ engagement with nonprofit organisations (NPOs). To this end, we developed an index of the usage of websites and SNS for fostering donor engagement based on a sample of the top 100 NPOs in the United States, to then carry out a regression analysis. The main findings indicate that NPOs should improve the features of their websites and SNS to catch viewers’ attention and interest them in the information disclosed on online platforms to motivate them to support NPOs' social mission. Results also show that NPOs that more effectively exploit their website and SNS design receive more private donations. The main type of online interaction that NPOs receive in response to posts is clicking actions. To a much lesser extent, online users opt to comment on posts. However, none of these online interactions are decisive for fostering private donations. This study contributes to the knowledge of websites and SNS best practices, providing financial support to NPOs. Likewise, it expands the understanding of users’ online participation as predictors of charitable giving behavior.
... First, researchers use the essential criteria for a Social Enterprise in Indonesia, which refers to Haryanti et al. (2020) and Presidential Regulation No. 2 of 2022, which states that a Social Enterprise is an organization that has a social mission and measures its impact, carries out empowerment, runs an ethical and accountable business, reinvests profits with a more significant portion of the social mission, and is sustainably oriented. Furthermore, the researcher also refers to several previous studies which generally state that disclosures referring to Social Enterprise accountability include operational, social, and financial (Chu & Luke, 2023;Connolly & Kelly, 2011;Dhanani & Connolly, 2012;Kolodinsky et al., 2022;Wang, 2009). ...
... " The statement was accompanied by photos of batik artisans working on cloth woven manually from cotton-grown intercropping by farmers. Transparency about who, why, and how products are produced ultimately refers to the company's operational and social accountability practices (Chu & Luke, 2023;Connolly & Kelly, 2011;Dhanani & Connolly, 2012;Kolodinsky et al., 2022;Wang, 2009). ...
This study identifies the role of Instagram as a medium of transparency for three Social Enterprises that operate in the creative sector with empowering women as part of their social mission. This study employs content analysis with the help of NVivo software on various narratives, photos, and videos uploaded through the Instagram account from January to May 2023. The researcher also interviewed the CEO and beneficiaries via Instagram live chat. This study indicates the significant role of Instagram in building trust and media dialogue between companies and the public, which are essential in achieving company accountability, legitimacy, and sustainability.ABSTRAKStudi ini mengidentifikasi peran Instagram sebagai media transparansi bagi tiga Usaha Sosial yang bergerak di sektor kreatif dengan pemberdayaan perempuan sebagai bagian dari misi sosial mereka. Penelitian ini menggunakan analisis konten dengan bantuan software NVivo pada berbagai narasi, foto, dan video yang diunggah melalui akun Instagram pada bulan Januari hingga Mei 2023. Peneliti juga mewawancarai CEO dan penerima manfaat melalui live chat Instagram. Studi ini menunjukkan peran penting Instagram dalam membangun kepercayaan dan dialog media antara perusahaan dan publik, yang penting dalam mencapai akuntabilitas, legitimasi, dan keberlanjutan perusahaan.
... In the same sense, Zhuang, Saxton, and Wu (2011) asserted that an excellent way for organizations to stand out in the market of charitable donations is to disclose pertinent information online. Indeed, voluntary disclosure of financial and performance information allows organizations to publicize donations and to demonstrate their efficiency and effectiveness to their current and future donors (Chu and Luke 2021;Zhuang et al. 2011). Zhuang and colleagues concluded that "the amount of charitable contributions made by donors is positively dependent upon the amount of value-relevant disclosure made by the nonprofit organization" (p. ...
... It can then be inferred that location matters to nonprofit accountability. In the same sense, Chu and Luke (2021) concluded that nonprofits usually disclose online where it is mandatory. Indeed, geographic location is an important factor related considerably to the shape of political culture and behavior of organizations in the United States (Elazar 1980). ...
Scandals within the nonprofit sector over compensation and management have increased calls for nonprofits to demonstrate accountability. Many organizations have responded by disclosing information online and providing tools that allow web-based interactions with stakeholders. The literature on nonprofits’ online accountability has found that the level of nonprofit online accountability is affected by their size, age, asset, revenue, and location, but hasn’t been examined in terms of how subsector influences online accountability. Through a web-content analysis of fifty-five nonprofits, this research investigated how subsector (arts and culture, education, health, and human services) influences online accountability using a framework of four types of online accountability: financial disclosure, performance disclosure, stakeholder input, and interactive engagement. The findings show that subsectors differ depending on the type of accountability being measured. Except for asset size, previous findings regarding revenue size, personnel size, and location were confirmed. Also, this research found that the arts and culture subsector demonstrated higher online accountability than health nonprofits. Human services nonprofits are more engaged in financial disclosure than organizations in the health subsector. Finally, it was found that as personnel size increases, stakeholder input and interactive engagement increases.
... considered individual-level factors (Andreoli & Lefkowitz, 2009), including those in positions of power (Fremont-Smith & Kosaras, 2003;Gibelman & Gelman, 2004) and level of salary (Greenlee et al., 2007); organizational factors, such as type, size, and age of the NGO (Archambeault et al., 2015;Dang & Owens, 2020;McDonnell & Rutherford, 2018); governance and management systems (Gibelman & Gelman, 2001;López-Arceiz & Bellostas, 2020;McDonnell & Rutherford, 2018); organizational culture and climate (Ma et al., 2022); accountability systems (Chu & Luke, 2023;Lamothe et al., 2022); and resource dependency (Beaton et al., 2021). ...
... This research contributes to the study of organizational ethics in NGOs in several ways. First, the extant literature on this topic has been largely prescriptive, suggesting best practices to promote organizational ethics, and descriptive, detailing the extent to which NGOs adopt such practices (e.g., Bromley & Orchard, 2016;Chu & Luke, 2023). Moreover, the former category has often drawn from the business ethics literature, which, while useful, does not offer explicit consideration of the unique characteristics of NGOs and their broader role in society. ...
With the occurrence of high-profile scandals in the nongovernmental organization (NGO) sector, scholars and practitioners alike have questioned why “good” organizations behave badly, yet little empirical research has explored this topic in depth. The present study examines the NGO halo effect, a conceptual framework that proposes three mechanisms to explain how NGO moral goodness can lead to NGO unethical behavior, that is, moral justification, moral superiority, and moral naivety. Through an analysis of 34 interviews with NGO staff and volunteers, we identify 151 unique cases and 17 different types of unethical behavior. We find that 92% of these cases are related to the halo effect, with 22% through moral justification, 25% through moral superiority, and 45% through moral naivety. This study provides empirical support for the NGO halo effect as a factor for understanding NGOs’ unethical behavior, with implications for future research.
... Beberapa penelitian yang membahas akuntabilitas dalam organisasi nirlaba telah dilakukan sebelumnya yang antara lain difokuskan pada akuntabilitas penerima manfaat (Dewi et al., 2019;Wellens & Jegers, 2014), keterlibatan relawan dan akuntabilitas organisasi (Awio et al., 2011;Tooley & Hooks, 2020a), dan pengungkapan online sebagai media akuntabilitas (Amelia & Dewi, 2021;Chu & Luke, 2023;Saraite Sariene et al., 2020). Di sisi lain, penelitian terdahulu dengan tema yang mengaitkan organisasi nirlaba, relawan, dan milenial di Indonesia masih terbatas pada pembahasan minat dan alasan milenial berpartisipasi pada gerakan dalam organisasi nirlaba (Santoso et al., 2020;Sutresna & Saputro, 2023). ...
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memahami bagaiman praktik akuntabilitas program kerelawanan milenial di Indonesia. Pengumpulan data dilakukan antara lain melalui wawancara dengan berbagai pemangku kepentingan sepanjang April 2023, dokumentasi, dan observasi partisipatif melalui pendekatan retrospektif ketika peneliti terlibat dalam program. Analisis data dilakukan dengan cara reduksi, pengelompokan, dan triangulasi yang dimaksudkan agar hasil penelitian tidak bias. Temuan penelitian ini menyatakan bahwa Bakti Millennial memandang akuntabilitas sebagai proses menjaga kepercayaan dan memenuhi harapan seluruh pemangku kepentingan yang terlibat. Praktik akuntabilitas dalam bentuk formal meliputi dokumen proyek, evaluasi dan pencapaian kinerja, serta laporan penggunaan dana. Selain itu, praktik akuntabilitas dalam bentuk informal juga dilakukan dengan menerapkan strategi komunikasi yang melibatkan berbagai pihak dan dokumentasi melalui media sosial yang keduanya telah menciptakan struktur akuntabilitas yang inklusif. Bentuk akuntabilitas terlihat pada kegiatan seperti pengabdian kepada masyarakat, komunikasi dengan pemangku kepentingan, penyusunan program, dan pemberitaan melalui media. Program ini menunjukkan akuntabilitas kepada pemangku kepentingan internal dan eksternal, yang bertujuan untuk memenuhi harapan dan tuntutan mereka serta membangun kepercayaan terhadap organisasi. Dengan menerapkan akuntabilitas yang memenuhi harapan pemangku kepentingan, Bakti Millennial dapat memperkuat landasan kepercayaan dan menjaga keberlanjutan organisasi.
... Scholars highlight the importance of improved communication channels in effectively conveying stories, outputs, and impacts that align with donors' interests, fostering a meaningful connection with charities' work because donors often prioritize performance-related information over traditional financial statements (Benjamin et al., 2023;Connolly & Hyndman, 2013). Chu and Luke (2023) emphasize the significance of dialogue in enhancing the accountability of nonprofit organizations, particularly through web-based platforms that enable two-way interaction and stakeholder feedback. ...
Communication is critical for nonprofit fundraising activity because it fosters trust and accountability as well as enhances mutual understanding of the nonprofit’s mission and objectives. Nonprofit organizations develop their own strategies based on who they communicate with and utilize a variety of content through various channels and media. Although it is critical for nonprofits to use their funds efficiently for communication and
fundraising, they must also consider ethical concerns. Utilizing a text network analysis and narrative review, we find that although research on fundraising communication has been increasing in the past years, ethical fundraising communication has been rarely studied. Furthermore, beneficiaries and fundraisers have been far less studied compared to donors. The results also show that the emergence of new media such as social media was the main driver of diversifying research in recent years. Our findings suggest that nonprofits are ethically and equally accountable to both givers (donors and funders) and receivers (beneficiaries and recipients). Especially, it is critical being cautious when dealing with socially vulnerable populations such as the elderly, patients, and those in need. This study provides directions for future research and practical implications.
... Finally, the link between governance, accountability and social performance has also already been analysed and is theoretically positive (Chu and Luke, 2023;Estapé-Dubreuil and Torreguitart-Mirada, 2015). Some studies have empirically confirmed this link (Bagnoli and Megali, 2011;Bradford et al., 2020), while pointing out that it is often found in the medium term. ...
This article examines whether accountability can contribute to the analysis of effectiveness in grassroots voluntary organizations (GVOs) in France.
Based on recent studies and stakeholder theory, hypotheses are formulated about the negative link between accountability and financial effectiveness and a positive link between accountability and non-financial effectiveness.
The findings show that accountability practices are positive determinants of financial indicators (apart from ROA) and employment of people in difficulty. In contrast, the other non-financial indicators are not explained by accountability practices.
The study points out the complexity and paradoxes surrounding accountability and highlights the risk of insensitivity to it. It thus underlines a specific French situation, close to the risks of myopia linked to accountability. One possible explanation could be the coupling and decoupling mechanisms that allow NPOs to regain power. Given the sometimes-random effects of accountability, producing nuanced theories is necessary and governance should oscillate between equilibrium and adaptation in the face of stakeholders. Finally, this article introduces the risk of insensitivity of NPOs to accountability (i.e. they act as they wish, regardless of control mechanisms such as accountability).
This study thus reveals governance dilemmas, which could be solved through less formal, more mission-oriented, more creative and therefore heterodox accountability.
The French context of mistrust of certain managerial approaches and the development of codes of governance based on a disciplinary vision are confronted with a growing and critical literature on accountability in nonprofit organizations (NPOs).
The aim of this study is to explore the perspective of not-profit managers on what information is important to account for on the institution’s website in order to encourage donor giving. Focusing on a sample of community foundations operating in the EU countries and the UK and using PLS-SEM to analyse the data, we found that providing information about the organisation’s finances and communicating a willingness to engage in dialogue with donors are seen as key success factors in retaining donations. Although performance information is not perceived as having a direct impact on donor retention, transparency about this content is believed to improve dialogue with donors, which in turn influences the perceived ability of online accountability to sustain donor giving.
Purpose
This study analyses how different forms of online accountability – hierarchical/individualising, hierarchical/calculative and socialising accountability – influence online financing success of non-profit organisations (NPOs).
Design/methodology/approach
The study is based on 797 NPOs’ projects listed on three international crowdfunding platforms providing space for NPOs to present, account for and fund social projects.
Findings
Results show that accountability forms developed online play significantly different roles in NPOs’ financing. While online hierarchical/individualising and socialising accountability enhance NPO funding, hierarchical/calculative accountability reduces financing success.
Research limitations/implications
The empirical analysis is limited to the specific research context. However, the research provides theoretical and practical insights for the accounting literature.
Practical implications
The paper recommends that NPOs invest more in explaining their past and future activities rather than reporting on pure financial performances, as this may lead to stakeholders’ perception of mission drift and reduce financing success.
Originality/value
This research enhances the understanding of online accountability and its significance in securing financial resources for NPOs by highlighting the necessity of examining various accountability forms individually, as they may serve distinct functions in the financial sustenance of NPOs.
Private foundations face persistent charges of plutocracy and secrecy, undermining their legitimacy as philanthropic organizations that contribute to the public good, yet they can respond to the criticism proactively through online accountability and Internet presence. To what extent do foundations use web‐based tools to demonstrate public accountability, how are these tools used for this purpose, and what explains foundation participation in this form of self‐regulation? We argue that managerialism, organizational fields, and stakeholder relationships will matter for online accountability and Internet presence because they capture or reflect the “publicness” of private foundations. We test our conceptual framework on two online tools—websites and social media—using a dataset of private foundations located in Washington state. We find that few private foundations have a website or a social media account, and our analysis of those tools suggests that substantive accountability is not a high priority for those that do. Our empirical models nevertheless reveal that several components of our conceptual framework are associated with multiple forms of disclosure (operational, financial, and performance) and dialogic communication, a contribution to research on nonprofit accountability that also advances the literature on the organizational behavior of foundations.
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.
In the wake of unethical practices by some nonprofit organizations (NPOs), donors have called for better monitoring, to which some NPOs have responded by adjusting their donor-based transparency practices. Yet despite momentum for such efforts, a comprehensive conceptualization and operationalization of NPOs’ transparency remains missing, partly because knowledge about donors’ information requirements is limited. Accordingly, the present research proposes conceptualizing NPOs’ transparency, as perceived by donors, as a three-dimensional construct, composed of information accessibility, completeness, and accuracy. With a scale development procedure and three distinct empirical studies, this article establishes a reliable, valid measure of NPOs’ perceived transparency. Combined, the conceptualization and operationalization offer a comprehensive overview of donors’ information needs that can enhance the study of organizational transparency.
Purpose
Despite increasing public attention and media coverage of the Covid-19 pandemic, little research was conducted on how the crisis affected accountability practices in the not-for-profit sector. This study focusses on international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) that operate in emerging economies worldwide but are registered in England and Wales and examines how their online accountability practices changed after the Covid-19 pandemic. The purpose of this paper is to address these issues.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors use the theoretical lens of the situational crisis communication theory (SCCT) and a contingency approach to not-for-profit governance in order to assess how accountability practices have been shaped by the response given by INGOs to preserve their reputation which is argued to be damaged by the COVID-19 pandemic. They use Dumont's (2013) nonprofit virtual accountability index (NPVAI) for statistical analysis. They examine whether the five dimensions of the NPVAI have changed significantly as a policy of response to the Covid-19 pandemic. They also examine the documents used to disclose information on performance, governance and mission to understand if their content was affected by the pandemic.
Findings
The authors found two of the NPVAI dimensions: accessibility and engagement to be statistically different compared to before the pandemic. They also examined the documents used to disclose information on performance, governance and mission in order to understand if their content were affected by the pandemic. Their findings suggest that INGOs focussed on keeping their donors' attention and their fund flow rather than informing how they performed and how their governance has changed as a result of the pandemic. No statistically significant change was found regarding the dimensions of performance, governance and mission.
Research limitations/implications
INGOs which focus on humanitarian relief and crises management mainly in emerging economies were also affected by the pandemic. However little attention has been given to how accountability was being shaped by the Covid-19 pandemic. An analysis of how not-for-profit sector accountability practices were affected by the pandemic is, therefore, needed. Due to the nature of the pandemic online accountability practices is an area where research could focus on, until now few studies have been conducted on online accountability. The study contributes methodologically by assessing the applicability of the NPVAI for comparisons across different time periods rather than across different types of organisation at a specific point in time. The authors conclude that the NPVAI must be supplemented by some analysis of the content of key online documents and other material.
Practical implications
The authors’ findings provide important implications for crisis management and its effect on accountability practices in INGOs that operate in emerging economies and the not-for-profit sector in general. The findings suggest that the crisis led to only limited changes in mission and governance as changes in these dimensions tend to occur over the long term. Although they expected the pandemic to lead to more performance information being released, this did not happen. The enhancement of online accountability practice in the engagement and accessibility dimensions shows that INGOs focussed more on maintaining their fund flow rather than on actions to target the pandemic. This is especially apparent as regardless of size the donation and fundraising links have increased throughout the pandemic. Overall, the study provides important findings specific to the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on online accountability practices in the not-for-profit sector. The study's empirical contribution is to assess how not-for-profit organisations shape their online accountability practices to preserve their reputation and legitimacy.
Social implications
The authors have expanded the discussion of the paper's contribution to theory, methodology and knowledge about online accountability and crisis management in the conclusion section of the paper. They found that INGOs have reacted to the pandemic by becoming more anxious about their ability to generate funds, and content analysis showed that there was little additional information about how INGOs' performance had been affected by the pandemic, which suggests that INGOs need to pay more attention to how they manage accountability in times of crisis.
Originality/value
The authors construct a conceptual framework using theories that have the potential to explain how external factors such as the Covid-19 pandemic can affect online accountability practices. Their paper also responds to the call for studies of the effectiveness of various accountability mechanisms in NGOs (Unerman and O’ Dwyer, 2006). Unlike previous studies they did not compare various sectors at a single point in time, but rather they assessed the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and the reaction of INGOs by comparing online disclosures across time. This is a novel use of Dumont's NPVAI and therefore provides an important contribution to the literature.
Not-for-profit organizations (NFPs) aim to deliver public services and achieve outcomes for their beneficiaries. However, little attention has been given to how NFP professionals engage with beneficiaries to develop the performance measures that inform service improvement and accountability. Our findings illustrate how a co-production approach to performance measurement can enhance the meaningfulness of outcome measures, hence supporting service improvement and facilitating ‘collaborations for accountability’ between NFPs and their beneficiaries.
Previous research on NGO accountability has focused on the constraining features of NGOs' accountability to donors. We argue that donor accountability of NGOs also has enabling features which can be mobilised to the advantage of beneficiaries. Drawing on a fieldwork-based case study design in this paper, we show that how powerful stakeholders such as donors can influence NGOs, and in that process facilitate beneficiary accountability. We have found that donors have applied 'direct usage' (influence NGOs directly by controlling critical resources) and 'indirect usage' (influence NGOs indirectly via other stakeholders such as regulators) strategies in holding the case NGO to account.
This paper brings a review of the literature on accountability in development NGOs with a view to highlighting where we stand. While there has been a shift from top-down approaches focussing on upward accountability mechanisms, there is a growing literature that theorises and empirically investigates downward accountability mechanisms. This literature theorises a link between ownership of the development process and aid effectiveness. However, little attention is paid at potential differences in accountability mechanisms used in locally and non-locally owned NGOs. Considering that the members of locally-owned NGOs come from the same culture as the beneficiaries they serve, understanding how local NGOs’ implementation of accountability differs from other organisations would shed light on how to secure the trust of the beneficiaries. Such knowledge would assist NGOs globally to overcome the challenges of downward accountability and to enhance aid delivery.
Website of Non-governmental organization (NGO) is a focal medium of sharing information in response to transparency demands and addressing trust deficits between stakeholders. Many researchers have proposed accountability approaches to measure information sharing trends through websites. This article discusses a new index to measure online disclosure trends along with the theoretical properties of the index and a practical application of data from NGOs working in Pakistan. The websites have been coded in 2016. Results show that NGOs with branch offices have better disclosure scores than single-office NGOs, and international NGOs score better than local NGOs. NGOs that are more often the subject of newspaper reports have better disclosure trends.
Information and reporting issues are more present than ever in a context of accountability pressures on nonprofits and foundations. This conceptual article explores the information flows between the stakeholders in the philanthropic ecosystem and examines four broad types of reporting: tax and regulatory, financial, social, and grants reporting. Tax and regulatory reporting includes the general requirements imposed on charities and specific requirements imposed on Canadian foundations by the Income Tax Act. Financial reporting refers to financial statements and other financial information. Social reporting refers to information shared about foundations’ activities, non-financial performance, and impacts. Grant reporting refers to information requests and disclosure between foundations and grantees, and information about grants shared with other stakeholders. The article provides an analysis framework to examine the grantmaking foundations’ ecosystem and identify key trends and challenges regarding information exchanges.
Les enjeux liés à l’information et à la communication sont plus présents que jamais dans un contexte de responsabilisation en expansion. Diverses parties prenantes participent dans l’écosystème des fondations subventionnaires et sont engagés dans l’échange d’information. L’objectif de cet article conceptuel est d’explorer la circulation de l’information entre les parties prenantes de l’écosystème philanthropique et d’examiner quatre grands types de communication, soit celles fiscales et réglementaires, financières, sociales et subventionnaires. Les communications fiscales et réglementaires comprennent les exigences générales et spécifiques des organismes gouvernementaux, par exemple, la Déclaration de renseignements T3010 requis par la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu du Canada. Les communications financières comprennent les états financiers et les autres informations financières. Les communications sociales portent sur l’information partagée à propos des activités des fondations, de leur performance non-financière et des impacts. Les communications subventionnaires comprennent les demandes et la divulgation d’information entre les fondations et les bénéficiaires et celle partagée avec les autres parties prenantes. Parmi les contributions de l’article, notons le développement d’un cadre d’analyse, basé sur la théorie des parties prenantes et sur la circulation de l’information, afin d’examiner l’écosystème philanthropique.
Performance measurement has far-reaching implications for not-for-profit organizations because it serves to legitimize, attract resources, and preserve expectations of stakeholders. However, the existing theory and practice of not-for-profit performance measurement have fallen short, due in part, to an overuse of profit-oriented philosophies. Therefore, we examine not-for-profit performance measurement by utilizing Marques’ (J Bus Ethics 92:211-225, 2010) “five spiritual practices of Buddhism.” Marques’ spiritual practices—a pro-scientific philosophy, greater personal responsibility, healthy detachment, collaboration, and embracing a wholesome view—are the foundation of our research design. Responses from senior not-for-profit practitioners (n = 63) support the linkages between spiritual practices and not-for-profit performance measurement. We identify three essential performance measurement principles and elaborate on their capacity to generate awareness, higher meaning, and connectedness within not-for-profits.
It is held that nonprofit and voluntary organizations contribute to democratic governance by representing the interests of their constituents to the state. Yet little is known about the capacities of these organizations to represent effectively their constituents and the larger community. This study proposes a framework for understanding the varieties of representation in nonprofit and voluntary organizations. The authors argue that the nature of representation within an organization is indicated by five dimensions: substantive, symbolic, formal, descriptive, and participatory representation. Formal, descriptive, and participatory representation are different means of achieving substantive and symbolic representation; the latter being measures of the extent to which organizations act for and stand for particular constituencies. They further suggest that this conceptual framework serves as a useful first step toward examining the representational capacities of nonprofit organizations. Two illustrative cases of community-based organizations are presented to tease out the complexity of representational mixes found in nonprofits. © 2007 Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action.
Organizations with social missions, such as nonprofits and social enterprises, are under growing pressure to demonstrate their impacts on pressing societal problems such as global poverty. This article draws on several cases to build a performance assessment framework premised on an organization's operational mission, scale, and scope. Not all organizations should measure their long-term impact, defined as lasting changes in the lives of people and their societies. Rather, some organizations would be better off measuring shorter-term outputs or individual outcomes. Funders such as foundations and impact investors are better positioned to measure systemic impacts.
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to explore accountability from the perspective of charity donors.
Design/methodology/approach
– The research utilises semi-structured interviews with a range of donors. In addition, it summarises the main findings from key related research (that uses document content analysis and questionnaire surveys) as a basis for better appreciating donor engagement.
Findings
– This research offers evidence that while donors are viewed as the key stakeholder to whom a charity should be accountable, the relevance of the information commonly disclosed in formal charity communications is questionable. This is viewed as significant in terms of small dependent donors, although less critical in the case of non-dependent large donors who have power to demand individualised information. However, although all donors do not particularly engage with these formal communications, they are viewed by them as having significance and their production and publication serves as an important legitimising tool in the sector (enhancing trust and reputation).
Research limitations/implications
– This research is based on semi-structured interviews with individual small donors and large institutional donors to large UK charities and therefore any generalising of the conclusions beyond large charities, and beyond the UK, should be undertaken with care. In addition, it focuses solely on the perceptions of donors, and other stakeholder groups are also important in this process.
Originality/value
– Despite the widespread acceptance that charities have a duty to discharge accountability to their stakeholders, there is limited knowledge of their information needs and whether the performance information currently being disclosed fulfils them. This study provides a unique insight into the perspective of a key stakeholder group (donors) with respect to accountability.
Increased prominence and greater influence expose international nongovernmental development and environment organizations (INGOs) to increased demands for accountability from a wide variety of stakeholders, including donors, beneficiaries, staffs, and partners. This article focuses on developing the concept of INGO accountability, first as an abstract concept and then as a strategic idea with very different implications for different INGO strategies. The authors examine implications for INGOs that emphasize service delivery, capacity building, and policy influence. They propose that INGOs committed to service delivery may owe more accountability to donors and service regulators, capacity-building INGOs may be particularly obligated to clients whose capacities are being enhanced, and policy influence INGOs may be especially accountable to political constituencies and influence targets. INGOs that are expanding their activities to include new initiatives may need to reorganize their accountability systems to implement their strategies effectively.
Stakeholder theory has been a popular heuristic for describing the management environment for years, but it has not attained full theoretical status. Our aim in this article is to contribute to a theory of stakeholder identification and salience based on stakeholders possessing one or more of three relationship attributes: power, legitimacy, and urgency. By combining these attributes, we generate a typology of stakeholders, propositions concerning their salience to managers of the firm, and research and management implications.
Purpose
This paper aims to examine the accountability practices of large United Kingdom (UK) charities through public discourse.
Design/methodology/approach
Based on the ethical model of stakeholder theory, the paper develops a framework for classifying not‐for‐profit (NFP) accountability and analyzes the content of the annual reports and annual reviews of a sample of large UK charities using this framework.
Findings
The results suggest that contrary to the ethical model of stakeholder theory, the sample charities' accountability practices are motivated by a desire to legitimize their activities and present their organizations' activities in a positive light. These results contradict the raison d'être of NFP organizations (NFPOs) and the values that they espouse.
Research limitations/implications
Understanding the nature of accountability reporting in NFPOs has important implications for preparers and policy makers involved in furthering the NFP agenda. New research needs to examine shifts in accountability practices over time and assess the impact of the recent self‐regulation developed to enhance sector accountability.
Originality/value
This paper contributes to the NFP accountability literature by: first, developing a framework of NFP accountability through public discourse using the ethical model of stakeholder theory; and second, advancing the understanding of the accountability practices of large UK charities.
This article challenges a normative assumption about accountability in organizations: that more accountability is necessarily better. More specifically, it examines two forms of "myopia" that characterize conceptions of accountability among service-oriented non-profit organizations: (a) accountability as a set of unconnected binary relationships rather than as a system of relations and (b) accountability as short-term and rule-following behavior rather than as a means to longer-term social change. The article explores the effects of these myopias on a central mechanism of accountability in organizations—evaluation—and proposes a broader view of accountability that includes organizational learning. Future directions for research and practice are elaborated.
Nonprofit organizations are increasingly using Internet-based technologies to address accountability. This article presents a set of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical innovations to help understand this phenomenon. First, this article presents a conceptual framework that delineates two key dimensions of Web-based accountability practices: disclosure and dialogue. It then posits a four-factor explanatory model of online accountability incorporating organizational strategy, capacity, governance, and environment. Last, it tests the model through a content analysis of 117 U.S. community foundation Web sites combined with survey and financial data. The descriptive statistics show that the Web site has been more effectively used to provide financial and performance disclosures than to provide dialogic mechanisms for stakeholder input and interactive engagement. Our multivariate analyses, in turn, highlight capacity- and governance-related variables, especially asset size and board performance, as the most significant factors associated with the adoption of Web-based accountability practices.
This paper identifies and assesses the extent to which downward accountability mechanisms in non-governmental development organisations (NGDOs) have had the potential in practice to contribute to the effectiveness of rights-based approaches to development. The paper draws on evidence gathered from a detailed documentary analysis and a series of in-depth interviews undertaken with senior individuals working in the Irish NGDO sector. The analysis indicates variations in practice with regard to the substantive implementation of key downward accountability mechanisms. The accountability-in-practice revealed suggests that challenges to substantive implementation have arisen due to: insufficient Irish NGDO attention to oversight of downward accountability within locally-based partner NGDOs; a reluctance and/or inability to transfer influence to locally-based partner NGDOs by allowing them some influence on Irish NGDO governance and strategy; the perceived control of locally-based partner NGDOs by local elites who may be distant from, and unrepresentative of, local communities; and a perception that locally-based partner NGDOs may not require downward accountability. Drawing on these findings, the paper makes some suggestions aimed at helping to transform the rhetorical NGDO commitment to downward accountability into real practices that can contribute substantively to the realisation of the key elements of the rights-based approach to development.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the measurement and monitoring of social responsibility within the management control system (MCS) of an organisation that subscribes to a stakeholder and social responsibility approach and to propose a framework that provides for the integration of the MCS with social accounting and social responsibility aspects.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper is based on a case study of a small privately owned New Zealand manufacturing business that subscribes to social responsibility and stakeholder principles.
Findings
Overall, the paper finds that the MCS of the case organisation did not measure or monitor social responsibility. Building on the case findings and the literature examined, a framework is proposed that provides for the integration of the MCS with social responsibility. A significant finding is that both formal measurement and informal control are key aspects in developing a MCS that incorporates social responsibility considerations.
Research limitations/implications
The findings relate to a single manufacturing organisation based in New Zealand. Future research could examine different settings (i.e. country, organisation type, etc.) and investigate application of the proposed framework in relation to particular performance measures and controls that organisations may possibly adopt.
Practical implications
Organisations following a stakeholder and social responsibility approach should also consider the design of their MCS.
Originality/value
This paper helps to fill a gap in the literature concerning knowledge about the design and operation of MCSs in relation to stakeholder and social responsibility issues. Few studies in this area have been based on a case study approach. The paper further contributes to the literature by proposing a framework that provides for the integration of the MCS with social responsibility aspects.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to contribute to discussions about engagement in social and environmental accounting, drawing on dialogic theory and philosophy. A dialogic approach, building on existing critical inquiries, is introduced to derive principles to inform “on the ground” engagements. Applying dialogic thinking to social and environmental accounting encourages the development of dialogic forms of accountability, more authentic engagements and is more likely to contribute to sustainable social and environmental change.
Design/methodology/approach
Contains a synthesis of literature from within and beyond social and environmental accounting to shed light on the issues addressed by the special issue.
Findings
Research engagements in social and environmental accounting need not be taken in a haphazard manner uninformed by theory. In particular, the “learning turn” in social sciences has generated a large body of theorizing (informed by concrete engagement activities) that can be used to shape, guide and support engagement.
Practical implications
The principles developed can be used to inform future research design, with the aim of increasing the likelihood that such engagements will yield outcomes of “value” usually defined as emancipatory changes.
Originality/value
This paper develops a new (to accounting) theoretical perspective.
Previous research on NGO accountability have focused on the constraining features of NGOs’ accountability to donors. We argue that donor accountability of NGOs also has enabling features which can be mobilised to the advantage of beneficiaries. Drawing on a fieldwork-based case study design in this paper, we show that how powerful stakeholders like donors can influence NGOs, and in that process facilitate beneficiary accountability. We have found that donors have applied “direct usage” (influence NGOs directly by controlling critical resources) and “indirect usage” (influence NGOs indirectly via other stakeholders such as regulators) strategies in holding the case NGO to account.
HIGHLIGHTS
• This paper is concerned with finding ways for the improvement of NGOs' accountability to beneficiaries.
• We have argued against the tendency to view donor accountability versus beneficiary accountability as dichotomous.
• While previous studies have focused on the constraining features of NGOs' accountability to donors we highlight in-built enabling features of NGOs' accountability to donors which can be mobilised to the enhancement of beneficiary accountability.
• Our results show that powerful NGO stakeholders like donors have applied various influence strategies in holding the case NGO to account for their beneficiaries.
Society is demanding that its institutions be accountable for more than economic performance. However, much research in the social and environmental accounting (SEA) literature suggests that an increased level of reporting has not prompted the anticipated increased levels of accountability. Accountability is limited by what is disclosed, and what is disclosed is limited by the extant accounting system (accounting-based accountability). Most current attempts at improving social and environmental accountability by increasing disclosure reflect, at best, incremental changes to the traditional accounting system, a system that has been explicitly designed to meet the needs of financial capital providers. Alternatively, we propose that accounting systems be designed to address specific requirements of alternative accountability systems (accountability-based accounting), and the accountability system requirements should reflect the salient evaluation criteria of the interested constituencies. We propose critical dialogic accountability as a way to conceptualize accountability systems in a pluralistic society characterized by multiple, and often conflicting, interests. We present a definition of accountability that illustrates its complexity, recognizes the salience of power for operative accountability relationships and can be applied both descriptively and normatively, providing a framework for assisting in the specification of the accountability systems and responsibility networks of various interest groups. We discuss some implications for both researchers and practitioners associated with SEA endeavors, concluding with a call for imagining box-breaking accountings that extend the conventional boundaries of the SEA field.
By means of a questionnaire survey, this paper aims at analyzing the primary stakeholder viewpoint regarding nonprofit organization accountability. In detail, it investigates the member's perspective regarding social accountability in a cooperative bank (CB) in Italy.
Our findings suggest that respondents had a high level of satisfaction with social reporting: a large portion of the sample indicated that they found social reporting to be useful, credible, transparent, and complete. Moreover, members of the CB under investigation consider social accountability as a way to improve relationships, strengthen trust among members, and demonstrate transparency in its activities within the community.
Using stakeholder theory, this paper explores the motivations of charities in discharging accountability and the interplay of donor and beneficiary accountability needs. It considers the extent to which concentration on one group may disadvantage another. The authors found that stakeholders commonly perceived as more salient, such as donors, cede power and impute saliency to beneficiaries.
Web-based accountability continues to be an important consideration for nonprofit organizations. This research examines the impact of certain variables on web-based accountability in the arts, culture, and humanities sector. A content analysis of eighty nonprofit organizations was performed and multiple statistical analyses were used. Findings indicated that regulatory measures, including the prosecution and a detection index, are the most significant variables for determining web-based accountability for this group of nonprofit organizations.
Extant research in the nonprofit literature focuses on non-governmental organization (NGO) accountability, framing it relationally. We examine the interplay of several constitutive elements of NGO–donor relationships based on narratives of NGO executives and other staff: NGO perceptions of accountability and of their donors, their assumptions about donor perceptions of the NGO role and expectations of NGO accountability, and their responses to shifts in donor funding. We argue that perceptions and practices of accountability do not only determine to whom an NGO should be primarily accountable but also shape NGO behavior and alter dependence on donors. As such, accountability is not necessarily a consequence of a relationship, but more likely a constitutive element of the relationship. While a favorable response to donor interests might signify upward accountability, it might also suggest that NGOs are more assertive about managing their institutional environments, thereby mitigating their dependence on donors. Copyright
The aim of this study is to investigate the rights-based approach to development and how its embedded promise of self-determination is enacted in the accountability relationships between NGOs and their beneficiaries. In doing so, the study seeks to highlight accountability as a process that enacts a specified promise. This occurs not simply in terms of promising to provide an account of conduct or behaviour; instead the promise can stem from moral responsibilities, ones which have transformational and societal implications, and initiate strategic choices (for example, appropriate accounting practices) regarding the enactment of this promise (Brown & Moore, 2001; Dubnick, 2005). This conceptualisation of accountability is proposed as particularly relevant in the context of rights-based NGOs as this development approach has important moral, societal and strategic implications for the manner in which NGOs are accountable to their beneficiaries. The study uses insights from transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 1978) to understand how the promise of self-determination is enacted in these accountability relationships. It presents two case studies of NGOs – RuralLife and Unison - who sought to transform their target communities into active, engaged and self-determined citizens with the support of grassroots accountability practices of monitoring and evaluation.
As a tool of development, microfinance represents an extremely complex landscape. As distinct from commercial finance, microfinance is development finance - finance for the creation of longer-term social and developmental value (i.e., social profit). Thus, its focus is to blend values, to re-cycle money to multiply social impact. The international policy debate, influencing the development of the sector, has been dominated by two schools - the development school and the finance school. The field has grown through innovations flowing into the sector from both traditions. The first wave, with the most original fundamental social innovation in the form of a new social design for solidarity lending through groups, did create new economic and emancipatory space for the poor women. With the entry of commercial capital, microfinance grew with a new momentum driven by a new logic, but with a change of heart changing its focus from the clients to the institution and its sustainability, giving rise to a second wave of innovations in institutional development, market development, product development, and technology development. However, commercialization and its focus on institutional sustainability led to a mission drift. Driven by distorted market logic and a uni-dimensional narrow economism, it has run into a deep crisis today with a reputation risk, as hard questions are raised about the credibility, ability and intention of the MFIs to serve the poor. Microfinance is now disintegrating as a compelling tool for poverty alleviation. The present crisis creates an opportunity for a third wave of innovations for MFIs to grow to maturity as blended value organizations, moving from efficiency to effectiveness, and to produce credible results in terms of social impact, to achieve ever higher social returns on investment. Future innovations should be driven by the need to create institutions which cost less, perform well, and produce impact.
In a recent article in this journal, Lombard, Snyder-Duch, and Bracken (2002) surveyed 200 content analyses for their reporting of reliability tests, compared the virtues and drawbacks of five popular reliability measures, and proposed guidelines and standards for their use. Their discussion revealed that numerous misconceptions circulate in the content analysis literature regarding how these measures behave and can aid or deceive content analysts in their effort to ensure the reliability of their data. This article proposes three conditions for statistical measures to serve as indices of the reliability of data and examines the mathematical structure and the behavior of the five coefficients discussed by the authors, as well as two others. It compares common beliefs about these coefficients with what they actually do and concludes with alternative recommendations for testing reliability in content analysis and similar data-making efforts.
This article considers one mechanism that could create a clearer accountability path between nonprofits and their beneficiaries: Outcome measurement. Outcome measurement focuses attention on a nonprofit's beneficiaries and whether they are better off as a result of the nonprofit's work. The article analyzed 10 outcome measurement guides targeted to nonprofits, totaling more than 1,000 pages of text. The analysis shows that the guides were neither uniform in the conceptualization of nonprofit beneficiaries nor in how they directed nonprofits to use outcome measurement with their beneficiaries. Despite scholars' suggestion that a nonprofit's relationship to their beneficiaries is a key accountability relationship, the guides suggest that beneficiaries have an ambiguous standing, relative to other stakeholders, in the nonprofit accountability environment.
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to deepen and advance the understanding of the construction of accountability within the relationship between government funders and development non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
Design/methodology/approach
– The paper presents a case study examining the process through which an influential Dutch development NGO, Oxfam Novib, constructed its own accountability while simultaneously seeking to influence shifts in government funder accountability requirements. It enrols a combination of comprehensive archival data on the Dutch government’s financing scheme for NGOs from 1965 to 2012 and in-depth interviews with Oxfam Novib managers and Dutch government officials. The co-evolution in accountability within Oxfam Novib and the government funding scheme is conceptualised using the notions of imposed, felt and adaptive accountability
Findings
– The case unveils the dynamics through which accountability within a major government funding scheme for NGOs was co-constructed by Oxfam Novib and the Dutch government’s development aid department. In particular, it reveals how this process was influenced by an internal evolution in Oxfam Novib’s organisational approach to accountability and an institutional context characterised by consensus-based economic and social policy making. The case also unveils the process through which Oxfam Novib’s influence declined as more demanding, narrowly focused government accountability requirements emerged in a setting that was increasingly critical of NGOs.
Originality/value
– The paper presents a rare example of a context where development NGOs have proactively sought and secured influence over the accountability demands of a key donor. It is unique in combining consideration of the internal evolution of accountability within an individual NGO (conceptualised as an evolution from felt to adaptive accountability) with a progression in the form of accountability required by governmental funders. The paper unveils the conditions under which NGO-preferred conceptions of accountability may gain (and lose) influence among key funders.
Partnerships between companies and NGOs have received considerable attention in CSR in the past years. However, the role of NGO legitimacy in such partnerships has thus far been neglected. We argue that NGOs assume a status as special stakeholders of corporations which act on behalf of the common good. This role requires a particular focus on their moral legitimacy. We introduce a conceptual framework for analysing the moral legitimacy of NGOs along three dimensions, building on the theory of deliberative democracy. Against this background we outline three procedural characteristics which are essential for judging the legitimacy of NGOs as potential or actual partners of corporations.
This article introduces the Nonprofit Virtual Accountability Index (NPVAI) as a tool for nonprofits to strategically plan their online accountability, as well as for researchers to empirically analyze nonprofit Web sites. The index is developed first from the theoretical literature on nonprofit accountability, on government virtual accountability, and on best practice in website design. An exploratory factor analysis is then carried out on the index adapted from these sources. The nonprofit virtual accountability components identified were accessibility, engagement, performance, governance, and mission. The index is applied to nonprofits in Illinois to test its validity. The findings confirm the validity of the index as a tool to measure nonprofit virtual accountability.
Purpose
The intent of microfinance institutes (MFIs) in developing countries is to provide loans to very poor people in order to help them transform their lives. MFIs tend to receive subsidies; sustainability is being sought to free MFIs from non‐market dependencies. Sustainability is expected to be achieved with “best practices,” of which management with performance measures is a component. The purpose of this paper is to examine the use of performance measures by three Kenyan MFIs, which are classified as formal and client based, and likely to use rational and explicit performance measures. Clients in these MFIs are placed into self‐help groups with two responsibilities: to provide mutual support and advice to the borrowing client; and to provide the MFI with a guarantee that loans of group members will be repaid.
Design/methodology/approach
Based on a review of the economics and performance measurement systems literatures, research questions were developed along with an interview guide. Case studies were used to administer an interview guide which was distributed to the respondents prior to the face‐to‐face interviews.
Findings
The study concludes that MFIs have relatively well‐developed performance measures that support their particular businesses. There was a good balance between the use of financial and non‐financial performance measures. However, output measures were more commonly used than process measures. The nature of the MFIs suggests the importance of performance measurement. The managers of the MFIs are concerned with performance measurement, as expected within a bureaucracy, and a top‐down demand is present. In addition, group members or clients are interested in performance measurement as each member guarantees the loans of all fellow group members who have loans with the MFI. Thus, the customers exert a bottom‐up demand for performance measurement.
Originality/value
The findings support the view that performance measures are a means for managing MFIs and are a likely requirement for sustainability. Furthermore, the findings have identified performance measures (similar to those at banks) that are appropriate for the three MFIs in Kenya. The findings are important since the identified performance measures may be adopted by other evolving MFIs in this relatively new sector. In addition, the findings contribute to a better understanding of the genesis of the less popular results and determinants performance measurement framework of Fitzgerald et al.
That not-for-profit organisations acquit multiple accountabilities to a wide range of stakeholders is well documented in the research literature and in practitioner submissions to enquiries into disclosures by third sector organisations. At a conceptual level, accountability has been acknowledged to extend beyond mere agent to principal reporting to embrace ethical and strategic thinking. While the nature of the various stakeholders to whom third sector organisations acquit accountabilities, together with the purposes served by such acquittals have been well documented; the mechanisms by which multiple accountabilities can be integrated in meeting the needs of multiple stakeholders and the organisation have yet to be fully explored. This paper contributes to our understanding of the complex issue of third sector accountability by explaining the ways in which a large, multi-service Australian Community Service Organisation (CSO) managed its multiple accountabilities. In doing so, it builds on prior models of accountability by emphasising the relationship between after-the- fact reporting on outputs, ongoing behavioural processes, and organisational inputs. It is the result of a single organisation, field based case study. The paper shows that the acquittal of accountabilities was essentially a strategic response by a voluntarily organisation to stay true to its mission and optimise service delivery while navigating the highly regulated domain of Australian welfare provision.
This paper examines the conditions that foster downward accountability among nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). To do so, I compare how NGOs responded in an unusual case where, from 1999–2003, the Zapatista Movement demanded more say over projects. I compare 77 NGOs, some that dropped out and others that accommodated the movement’s demands. I argue that funders' reporting requirements inhibited NGOs from being responsive to beneficiaries. However, living alongside the movement pushed inner-circle NGOs to practice downward accountability to sustain their legitimacy. In turn, horizontal pressure among NGOs influenced organizations further afield, especially those that identified closely with the movement.
Despite the high adoption level of Facebook and other social network sites (SNSs) in Norway, local level voluntary associations have not embraced SNSs to the same degree. Regular websites are the main web representation, and information provision is the main function of the associations’ web representations. Using quantitative data on website content and organizational characteristics we have analyzed which factors hinder SNS adoption. The results point to size and complexity of associations and to age-based digital divides among members as important factors for having a profile on a SNS. It seems that a certain numerical point must be reached in terms of organizational and community size, for SNSs to be useful. Also, older members, smaller economy and a low degree of formalization in associations might hamper the implementation of SNSs in associations. Using Norway as a critical case, this article contributes new knowledge about web communication in voluntary organizations, an increasingly important field of research internationally.
This paper presents an exploratory analysis of the emergent reporting practices used by social entrepreneurs in terms of their institutional settings and strategic objectives. These reporting practices not only account for financial performance but also disclose more nuanced and contingent social and environmental impacts and outcomes. Furthermore, they act as symbolic objects expressing the market orientation of many socially entrepreneurial organizations in that they aim to provide more complete and transparent disclosure of a variety of performance impacts. Conceptually, this paper draws upon approaches developed within the sociology of accounting as institutional practice and uses three theoretical interpretations to conceptualize the function and effects of reporting, disclosure, and audit in social entrepreneurship: positivist; critical theorist; and interpretative. A discussion of five case studies leads to the development of a new theoretical construct – ‘Blended Value Accounting’ – that constitutes a spectrum of disclosure logics used by social entrepreneurs to access resources and realize organizational mission objectives with key stakeholders. Conclusions consider some further questions around socially entrepreneurial reporting practices and strategies and suggest some new lines of research going forward.
The legitimacy of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is poorly theorized in development studies literature, where it is usually seen as dependent on accountability, performance and representativeness. This `technical' approach masks deeper questions about legitimacy - for whom, for what, and how it is created. This article applies an institutional perspective from organizational theory to the analysis of NGOs. The approach emphasizes the multifaceted nature of legitimacy and the effect of organizational environments and dominant cognitive models on organizational forms and activities. The article presents legitimacy as socially constructed and raises questions about issues of power in the attribution of legitimacy. The article concludes by considering how analysis may be taken beyond institutional approaches and the contribution that can be made by anthropological perspectives, particularly an understanding of the role of discourses.
Web disclosure is a significant technological innovation aimed at improving organizational transparency. Organizations that voluntarily disclose high quality financial and performance information on their public websites are viewed as being more open, trustworthy, and accountable by the general public. Despite the positive benefit of enhanced public trust, many organizations have not implemented the recommended web disclosure principles and best practices. Informed by the theoretical underpinnings of organizational ecology theory, this study develops a theoretical model in order to examine the problem of differential implementation of web disclosure in nonprofit settings. Empirical evidence reveals that the majority of nonprofit organizational websites lack high quality financial and performance information which reflects an opaque digital informative strategy. Our results further suggest that organizational inertia – particularly resistance to change in organizational form – may play an important role in the decision to voluntarily adopt and implement innovative web disclosure practices. The findings have implications for research and information systems design.
To evaluate the current status of communication and fundraising strategies on the Internet, a stratified random sample of the Chronicle of Philanthropy's Philanthropy 400 was content-analyzed in mid-January 2005. Web sites were coded on variables identified in practitioner and scholarly literature on issues of accountability, fundraising practices, and interactive communication strategies. Chi-square analysis found that the top nonprofit organizations included copies of their annual reports, organizational goals, and mission statements, while second-tier organizations were more likely to use a sales approach by using e-commerce technology and terminology to process online donations.
This paper responds to the question, “Who are NGOs accountable to?” Most discussions on this subject are restrictive because they focus inordinately on narrow project evaluation and accountability to donors. This paper proposes a broader conceptual framework which is based on three distinct categories of NGO accountability—accountability to patrons, accountability to clients, and accountability to the NGO’s own goals and mission. Clarity in understanding which NGO actions are accountable to whom, for what, will not only enrich the intellectual discussion about the sector but will also provide a useful road map to NGOs in the field for better reflecting upon why, and for whom, they do what they do. The principal conclusion of using this framework is that most development NGOs focus principally on accountability to their patrons, often at the cost of accountability to their clients and to their own vision.
This article examines the relevance of technology, and particularly the Internet, for the improvement of accountability and transparency in nonprofit organizations. The novelty of our work regarding the previous empirical evidence resides in the fact that we have taken into account the means through which these organizations diffuse voluntary information. In this article, we have proposed a model of information disclosure for the Web sites of Spanish nongovernmental organizations for development (NGODs) that can serve as a guide for improving their informative transparency and their accountability. The empirical evidence obtained reveals that Spanish NGOD Web sites are primarily ornamental and that they should evolve toward an environment more informational and relational that allows the stakeholders to access relevant information ranging from the work being done and the use of the dispersed funds to the form in which the organization is governed. Our results have also confirmed that the disclosure levels are related to the amount of future donations received by the organization.
It has been argued that the EU suffers from serious accountability deficits. But how can we establish the existence of accountability deficits? This article tries to get to grips with the appealing but elusive concept of accountability by asking three types of questions. First a conceptual one: what exactly is meant by accountability? In this article the concept of accountability is used in a rather narrow sense: a relationship between an actor and a forum, in which the actor has an obligation to explain and to justify his or her conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgement, and the actor may face consequences. The second question is analytical: what types of accountability are involved? A series of dimensions of accountability are discerned that can be used to describe the various accountability relations and arrangements that can be found in the different domains of European governance. The third question is evaluative: how should we assess these accountability arrangements? The article provides three evaluative perspectives: a democratic, a constitutional and a learning perspective. Each of these perspectives may produce different types of accountability deficits.
In a recent article in this journal, Lombard, Snyder-Duch, and Bracken (2002) surveyed 200 content analyses for their reporting of reliability tests, compared the virtues and drawbacks of five popular reliability measures, and proposed guidelines and standards for their use. Their discussion revealed that numerous misconceptions circulate in the content analysis literature regarding how these measures behave and can aid or deceive content analysts in their effort to ensure the reliability of their data. This article proposes three conditions for statistical measures to serve as indices of the reliability of data and examines the mathematical structure and the behavior of the five coefficients discussed by the authors, as well as two others. It compares common beliefs about these coefficients with what they actually do and concludes with alternative recommendations for testing reliability in content analysis and similar data-making efforts.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the evolving nature of the accountability relationship between a group of Irish non‐governmental development organisations (NGDOs) and their primary governmental funder.
Design/methodology/approach
The examination is undertaken in the context of a unique funder‐led initiative to instil a broad social accountability focus among NGDOs while re‐orienting the NGDO‐funder accountability dynamic towards a partnership‐based approach – whereby the accountability entity would effectively be a supra‐organisation comprising the funder and the NGDOs. The empirical content of the paper is derived from a series of in‐depth interviews with senior individuals working within the Irish NGDO sector, along with a comprehensive analysis of documentary sources.
Findings
The partnership rhetoric central to promoting the enhanced focus on social accountability across the “virtual” accountability supra‐organisation has not been transformed into reality, and the NGDO‐funder accountability relationship within the supra‐organisation remains centred on control and justification. A lack of resources, organisational commitment, guidance, and expertise from the governmental funder has contributed to an attitude of scepticism among many NGDOs towards both the partnership rhetoric and the accompanying adoption of the central tenets of social accountability, particularly downward accountability to beneficiaries.
Research limitations/implications
The research is based on a detailed analysis in a specific context which may limit its wider applicability. Nevertheless, it adds insights to the developing academic literature on NGO accountability, with particular reference to their broader social accountabilities.
Practical implications
Although highly context‐specific, the findings of the study will be useful to researchers and policy makers interested in understanding how NGDO‐funder accountability relationships can move towards mutual accountability and genuine partnerships focused on promoting social accountability.
Originality/value
Very few in‐depth academic examinations of the evolving nature of NGDO‐funder accountability relationships in specific NGO contexts have emerged in the accountability literature. Many of the insights in this paper are derived from individuals inside organisations in the NGDO sector who are regularly addressing issues of accountability, both social and otherwise. This provides in‐depth, highly‐informed insider perspectives on the evolving nature of these relationships, especially in the context of attempts to promote more partnership‐based approaches to the delivery of development aid.
The concern of this paper is to extend the critique of accounting through an exploration of the more inclusive concept of accountability. The paper begins by stating the positive effects upon the individual of being held accountable, and then goes on to explore how different forms of accountability produce different senses of our self and our relationship to others. It is argued that hierarchical forms of accountability, in which accounting currently plays a central role, serve to produce and reproduce an individualized sense of self; a sense of the self as essentially solitary and singular, nervously preoccupied with how one is seen. These effects are contrasted with what are described as socializing forms of accountability which flourish in the informal spaces of organizations and which confirm self in a way that emphasizes the interdependence of self and others. The tensions and interdependencies between these two forms of accountability are then explored. It is argued that contemporary organizational accountability is constructed around an untenable and destructive split of ethical and strategic concerns to the detriment of both. The search for the possibilities of accountability should be oriented to the reconciliation of this divide.
Amid calls for NGOs to become more accountable, this work examines discrepancies between what NGOs say and do. Using a unique dataset of NGOs in Uganda it investigates the inaccuracies in reported financial transparency and community participation. We find that the threat of being caught reduces the likelihood of financial misrepresentation, while a desire to maintain a good reputation leads to misrepresentation of community consultation. Analysis provides indications that: NGOs with antagonistic relations with government may be more likely to hide information; and that unrealistic donor demands may be an obstacle to transparency. Findings caution against an overly naïve view of NGOs and a reliance on self-reported information.
Since social networking sites, such as MySpace and Facebook, began allowing organizations to create profiles and become active members, organizations have started incorporating these strategies into their public relations programming. For-profit organizations have used these sites to help launch products and strengthen their existing brands; however, little is known about how nonprofit organizations are taking advantage of the social networking popularity. Through a content analysis of 275 nonprofit organization profiles on Facebook, this study examines how these new social networking sites are being used by the organizations to advance their organization's mission and programs. Solely having a profile will not in itself increase awareness or trigger an influx of participation. Instead careful planning and research will greatly benefit nonprofits as they attempt to develop social networking relationships with their stakeholders.
The increasing prominence of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) as agents of development raises normative questions concerning their involvement in this process. These questions can be grouped together as issues of “legitimacy.” This paper suggests four criteria of development NGO legitimacy, explained as either formal-procedural or substantive-purposive. It concludes by arguing that NGOs and governments each have distinctive roles and responsibilities in the development process.
International non-governmental organisations (INGOs) are prominent actors in the international arena, aiming to improve the life of disadvantaged people. However, INGOs often do not succeed in doing this. Consequently, INGO legitimacy is regularly questioned. Increased transparency and tightened accountability mechanisms are often-mentioned solutions to this problem. Based on an analysis of four dimensions of INGO legitimacy—normative, regulatory, cognitive and output legitimacy—we argue that this is not necessarily adequate.We conclude that INGO mission statements create a normative source of legitimacy, but that this, in itself, is not enough to ground INGO legitimacy: it also needs to be institutionalised and organised. However, as a result of power relations and resulting pressures for accountability and transparency, as defined by their external stakeholders, INGOs experience a permanent struggle to reconcile their mission with the requirements for regulatory, cognitive and output legitimacy. The more these stakeholders press for increased organisation of INGO work, the more the pursuit of the core objectives of INGOs is obstructed. We illustrate this argument with the case of the post-Tsunami humanitarian intervention
This paper sets out to explore the achievements of civil society in the area of poverty reduction. The focus is mainly on three domains (1) Advocacy; (2) Policy Change and (3) Service Delivery. Three case studies illustrate how poverty can be addressed at various levels and through different approaches: (1) Shack Dwellers International (SDI) operating internationally to advocate for the urban poor’s rights; (2) civil society organizations participating in the formulation of PRSPs to call for pro-poor policy reforms at the national level; and finally (3) the example of BRAC (formerly the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee) providing services to the poorest at the grassroots level. Drawing on these case studies, the paper explains the keys to success and reasons for failure of civil society organizations in tackling poverty reduction effectively. It concludes by pointing out the challenges faced by civil society in the area of poverty reduction and presents recommendations on ‘what is still missing’ for civil society to play a more effective role in poverty reduction.