State Promotion of Community Advocacy Organizations:

State bureaucracies create community advocacy organizations in an attempt to increase constituency support and promote local citizen efforts to organize and advocate for service needs. Relationships between a state bureaucracy and community advocacy organization can be expected to follow a variety of patterns. Using a sample of four case studies in which state human service bureaucracies promoted community advocacy organizations in Georgia, this exploratory, qualitative study demonstrates that loosely bounded bureaucracies are consistent with the promotion of autonomous community advocacy organizations and tightly bounded bureaucracies are consistent with the generation of dependent and closely coordinated community advocacy organizations. The converse situations of tightly bounded bureaucracies attempting to generate autonomous community advocacy organizations or loose bureaus trying to organize dependent community advocacy organizations will produce confusion and conflict.     

Fostering democracy through social media: Evaluating diametrically opposed nonprofit advocacy organizations’ use of Facebook,Twitter, and YouTube

Nonprofit organizations contribute to a democratic society by allowing those with diverse opinions to assemble and voice these ideas. Social media has provided an extensive new marketplace in which such organizations can give voice to their ideas. Thus the purpose of this study was to explore and assess the use of social media (Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube) for advocacy by nonprofit organizations with diametrically opposed points-of-view on two social issues, the pro-gun/gun control issue and the pro-choice/pro-life issue. Results of this study indicate that nonprofit advocacy organizations are using social media to ethically persuade people to their point of view, for the most part through use of one-way communication. Moreover, organizations are using the various social media for different purposes, providing thanks and recognition on Twitter, and soliciting feedback and other two-way communication with stakeholders on Facebook. Use of authority figures to communicate messages is generally reserved for YouTube.     

Nonprofit Product Placement: Human Rights Advocacy in Film and Television

As non-governmental organizations attempt to gain influence, membership, and funds in an increasingly crowded field, they are turning to popular culture as a way to spread both their brand and their message. This article examines Amnesty International USA’s use of what has traditionally been a corporate advertising technique: product placement in popular film and television. It argues that NGOs engage in product placement as a form of strategic communication with three interrelated goals: brand management, issue advocacy, and social norms marketing. This overlap creates theoretical outcomes and ethical considerations which, while not unique to second-order forms of communication, have not yet been explored with relation to human rights advocacy. This article first defines and gives examples of such product placement and concludes with a discussion of ethics considerations for advocacy organizations contemplating using this strategy.     

A hegemon fighting for equal rights: the dominant role of COC Nederland in the LGBT transnational advocacy network

Networks are alternatives to hierarchical organizational forms. However, actors in networks have different resources at their disposal, and more powerful participants will try to influence the network as a whole. We identify a dominant node in the European LGBT advocacy network, and explore whether a hegemonic actor in the transnational advocacy network will affect less powerful groups' issue framing. Our project uses software that locates the issue network on the internet, highlighting how transnational advocacy work and digital communication have become inextricably connected. We confirm that Cultuur – en Ontspannings Centrum, known as COC Netherland has higher‐than average centrality measures in the LGBT network. Noting the limitations of hyperlink analysis, we conduct a content analysis of select nodes illustrating the impact of a hegemon. We focus on marriage equality and find tentative support for our hypothesis: organizations with links to COC advocate for stronger forms of legalized same‐sex union than do organizations without ties.     

Latino Faces,Corporate Ties: Latino Advocacy Organizations and Their Board Membership

Although they have increased exponentially since the 1960s, social scientists know little about ethnic advocacy organizations. These nonprofits are important bridges between underresourced communities and mainstream funding organizations and their directors are established ethnic leaders. Sociologists study interlocking directorates—or shared board membership—to understand how organizations fit together within broader social networks. Network concepts, particularly the theory of institutional isomorphism, suggest that organizations are likely to be similar to the extent they are connected and operate within a common organizational field. We apply this logic to Latino advocacy organizations to examine the underlying source of cohesion across this ethnic field. We ask whether the organizations are tied by interlocking directorates of ethnic elites who sit on their boards of directors or if board members' common affiliation with other elite institutions creates the structural conditions that facilitate potential ideological or behavioral similarity. A social network analysis of five prominent Latino advocacy organizations reveals support for both hypotheses: Latino board members are both embedded in ethnic‐based networks and entrenched within elite organizational webs. This suggests that ethnic elites who sit on the boards of Latino advocacy organizations are also corporate elites, selected for the social capital they bring to these nonprofits.     

Social media advocacy and gun violence: Applying the engagement model to nonprofit organizations’ communication efforts

Applying the model of engagement, this study tests the effectiveness of social media advocacy strategies, framing, and mobilizing information related to nonprofit organizations’ communication about the issue of gun violence. An online experiment revealed successful social media advocacy strategies within the engagement model. Two key components of social media advocacy were identified: (1) public relations practitioners’ roles in shaping messages and mobilizing publics; (2) the important role of marginalized groups and individuals in issue amplification.     

Corporate social advocacy or social issues management? Examining state flagship universities’ responses to the killing of George Floyd

Colleges and universities are social institutions often called on to speak about socio-political issues (e.g., racism). Critics have suggested that when responding to instances of racism on their campuses, institutional leaders often ignore the racist acts and harm caused and focus their discourse on diversity and inclusion. Considering this critique, this study examined how state flagship universities in the United States (U.S.) responded to the killing of George Floyd through the lenses of social issues management and corporate social advocacy (CSA). Through my critical thematic analysis of all 50 U.S. state flagship universities’ initial public statements, I forward three key findings: (1) institutions constructed Floyd’s killing as an example of racism; (2) through their statements institutions localized the issue by focusing on their values or centering marginalized community members’ experiences; and (3) the majority of institutional responses functioned to reinforce the individualistic logics of whiteness. Based on these findings, I argue that to advance research on organizational communication about social issues, CSA should be considered beyond overt statements for or against issues and suggest that as organizations discuss socio-political issues their communication may reinforce hegemonic ideologies and create paradoxes for their marginalized publics. I conclude by proposing an approach to social issues management that could be used by organizations seeking to promote social justice.     

From advocacy to service provision: state transformation and the disability rights movement in Taiwan

This research uses the development of the disability rights movement in Taiwan as a case study to analyze the impact of state transformation, in particular marketization of social welfare policy, on the disability rights movement. First, the institutionalization of the disability rights movement enabled it to expand its organizational structure and become involved in shaping policy. Secondly, when disability rights organizations started to undertake state-funded projects, their focus shifted from advocacy to service provision. Thirdly, competition for limited state-funding gave the organizations led by urban-middle class advocates a significant advantage over small, community-based NPOs and gathered significantly greater resources. Finally, this paper suggests that, in a context in which the state did not provide basic social services for its citizens with disabilities, the institutionalization of SMOs turned advocacy groups into service providers. Although the number of disability civic organizations increased, the voices of advocacy groups were weakened.     

The Relationship between Provision of Membership Benefits and Fulfillment of Representational Roles in Nonprofit Advocacy Membership Organizations

This article explores the ways nonprofit advocacy membership organizations can manage their resource dependence on members and fulfill the organizations' representational roles, focusing on the provision of membership benefits. Membership organizations rely on financial or other resources from members and thus are constrained by them. For a nonprofit that aims to primarily speak for members, constraints by members may help to focus organizational attention on members' interests. Contrarily, for a nonprofit that aims to mainly represent broader constituents, members' constraints may hamper an organization's ability to advocate for broader constituents because members do not necessarily share the same policy goals with broader constituents. The provision of membership benefits can be a useful strategy for organizations to fulfill their representational roles and to satisfy and engage members, because people often join an organization to enjoy certain membership benefits. For an empirical analysis, this study collected a large‐scale data set through web and mail surveys of nonprofit advocacy organizations across the United States. The mixed‐mode surveys achieved a 57.5 percent response rate (729 responses). The survey and regression analysis results show that member‐serving nonprofits providing members with opportunities to participate in advocacy work are more likely to represent members' interests directly. Although broader constituency‐serving nonprofits tend to prioritize members' opinions, these organizations are more likely to adhere to the mandates of broader constituents when providing selective material membership benefits. However, when providing purposive membership benefits, these nonprofits are more likely to represent members' opinions.     

‘Being in the Spaces where Decisions are Made’: Reproductive Rights Advocacy and Policy Influence in Two Regions of Peru

In the 1990s, some segments of Latin American feminist movements shifted to advocacy strategies to influence government policies. Long-standing social movement theories predict that this tactical change to institutional means has two possible consequences for a movement: either it gains greater influence over policy arenas and becomes more effective in achieving outcomes, or it loses capacity to carry out protest tactics and becomes less effective in achieving outcomes. However, empirical studies on Latin American feminist organizations intervening in policies, and recent social movement theorizing, indicate that the relationship between social movements and policy influence is more complex. Moreover, these theories have been formulated based on empirical studies in contexts with established democratic frameworks and institutions. The study presented here employed Grounded Theory to examine inductively the research questions of how reproductive rights organizations carry out advocacy to influence government policies in Peru. Data was collected through participant observation and focus group discussions among two reproductive rights coalitions in the regions of Arequipa and Cusco. The findings indicate that the reproductive rights coalitions develop a multiplicity of interactions with government officials, as a means to influence policies through various channels and handle constraints on their ability to act as independent pressure groups. In addition, the findings show that the coalitions deal with a wide range of factors to influence policies: organizational capacity, advocacy strategies, issue frames, relationships with other policy actors as well as political and social aspects that facilitate or hinder advocacy. The study concludes that the relationship between social movements and policy influence is more complex than portrayed by long-standing theories. Instead, the findings are consistent with, and enhance the scholarship on Latin American feminist organizations involved in policies, as well as recent social movement theorizing that takes into account how various factors affect social movement influence on policies.     

Theorizing CSA’s impact on nonprofit stewardship: New challenges for ethical corporate partnerships and issue engagement

Corporate social advocacy (CSA) scholarship has helped public relations scholars and practitioners better understand business engagement in multiple contentious issue contexts (e.g., Dodd & Supa, 2014; Rim et al., 2020; Waymer & Logan, 2021). Nonprofit organizations, while often having similarly public platforms, significant resources, and the will to engage in polarizing issues outside of their core purpose or purview, have, to date, not been a part of this theoretical framework. This paper serves to theoretically link nonprofit organizations to polarizing issue discourse—while maintaining their distinct facets and relational/stakeholder needs—by developing Polarizing Issue Stewardship. This new construct shifts the perspective of nonprofit stewardship strategies, originally developed by Kelly (1998) to a contentious issue context. The new construct provides insights for both theory and praxis of nonprofit communication.     

Thirty years of advocacy in San Francisco: lessons learned and the next generation of leadership

Professional advocacy organizations are often challenged by the question of their authentic community representation and their ability to balance short-term pragmatism with strategic plans for long-term, systemic change. Coleman Advocates, one of the nation's most effective child advocacy organizations, has taken up this challenge under the leadership of a next-generation leader of color who followed a dynamic director of the baby boom generation. In this piece, Coleman's thirty years of social change strategies are analyzed from the perspective of this new executive director, who has facilitated the latest organizational shift that deepens its commitment to building bottom-up grassroots leadership and community power while keeping the best of the professional, staff-led advocacy model. Issues of race, accountability, power, and movement building are addressed through the lens of one organization's evolution, with the goal of building a long-term movement that will achieve racial and economic equity for all children and families.     

Transnational issue networks in real and virtual space: the case of women,peace and security

To what extent do online issue networks serve as a proxy for their real‐space counterparts in structure and substance? This question is significant because a number of scholars have begun to study transnational advocacy networks through their representations online. We explored whether this assumption is valid by comparing the network composition and agenda composition of the advocacy network around ‘women, peace and security’, as operationalized through a web‐based survey of actual activists, and the network's online representations of itself, as measured through advocacy websites. Two specific concerns drove the study. First, how closely does the structure of issue networks, as represented on the World Wide Web, correspond with actual advocates' understanding of the players within a specific issue domain? Second, to what extent does the online issue agenda correlate with the most prominent issues described by real‐space advocates within a transnational network? Our findings yielded a high correlation between the online issue agenda and activists’ interpretations of the agenda. However, we found that while hyperlink analysis is an effective tool for identifying the ‘hubs’ or ‘gatekeepers’ within a specific issue network, the nature of the World Wide Web makes it is a blunt tool with which to capture the broader network. This suggests that while the web poses important opportunities as a data source, scholars of transnational networks must pay closer attention to the methodological assumptions implicit in their reliance on this and other new media.     

A Survey of Grass Roots Advocacy Organizations for Nursing Home Residents

The aim of this study was to examine the role that grass roots advocacy organizations play in safeguarding nursing home residents. The article (1) describes citizen groups with respect to functions, structure, permanence, and assessment procedures; (2) examines the relationship between the grass roots groups and the official ombudsman programs; and (3) identifies distinctive models of citizen organizations. The findings suggest that these organizations provide supplemental manpower to the official ombudsman programs by increasing their capacity to carry out their oversight duties, circumventing political roadblocks and overcoming bureaucratic intertia, and improving program performance through their scrutiny, criticism, or presence as an alternative.     

Advocacy with Gloves on: The “Manners” of Strategy Used by Some Third Sector Organizations Undertaking Advocacy in NSW and Queensland

This article examines the strategies used by some third sector organizations in Australia to advocate. The purpose of this article is to identify the kinds of activities that organizations in New South Wales and Queensland use to promote advocacy, the kinds of language that is used to describe these activities, and the reasons given for the particular strategies adopted. The extent to which the organizations adopt “softer” (that is more institutional forms of advocacy) rather than more openly challenging forms of activism is examined, particularly in light of a neo-liberal political and economic environment. In this analysis emergent strategies are identified that are not easily categorized as either “institutional” or “radical” advocacy. The article presents an exploratory analysis of some of the implications of the strategies adopted, in terms of their democratic effects and potential to strengthen the capacity of third sector organizations. The article is informed by the findings of a qualitative research project involving interviews with 24 organizations in the community services and environmental fields.     

What Drives Advocacy? An Exploration of Value,Mission, and Relationships

How advocacy is interpreted and how it fits into an organization’s strategy are areas in need of additional study. Moreover, because nonprofit organizations are believed to have advocacy-based missions that drive their activities and services, the connection between an organization’s mission and its advocacy activities also needs further study. In an effort to address these issues, the purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how advocacy is interpreted in the context of an organization’s mission and how advocacy activities are viewed within human service NPOs. Five themes were identified, all providing support for findings in previous advocacy research.     

Interorganizational Partnerships as a Strategy for Lobbying: Nonprofit Administrators’ Perspectives on Collaborating for Systems-Level Change

Participation in coalitions has been identified as a policy advocacy behavior for nonprofit organizations, although few studies have examined nonprofit leaders’ perceptions of coalition building as a strategy for lobbying. This study conducted focus groups and in-person interviews with nonprofit administrators to explore how interorganizational collaboration is utilized to address their organizations’ policy advocacy goals. The findings indicate that nonprofit administrators view their participation in coalitions as a means of achieving several policy advocacy goals, including increasing their capacity to lobby and protecting them from exposure as lobbyists. Implications for practice and research are provided.     

Leaning Out: Exploring Organizational Advocacy Activities From an Open Systems Perspective

This article explores the effect of organizational culture on engagement with advocacy activities, both traditional and electronic. The Competing Values Framework offers a model for understanding how organizations’ culture influences behavior. Using a sample of nonprofit providers from across the country, the author hypothesized that organizations that use electronic advocacy tools are more involved with advocacy activities of all types. A paper and pencil survey was used to collect data on organizational culture, advocacy tools and techniques, perceived effectiveness of the advocacy tools, policy goals, organizational sustainability goals as well as barriers and facilitators of electronic advocacy. The study used path modeling to describe the connections between organizational culture and engagement in advocacy activities. The article examines the barriers and facilitators of electronic advocacy, the penetration of electronic advocacy use in this sample of agencies and the perceptions of effectiveness associated with using these strategies; lastly, the implications of these findings for managers and organizational leaders are discussed.     

Understanding Nonprofit Advocacy in Non-Western Settings: A Framework and Empirical Evidence from Singapore

Research on nonprofit advocacy in non-Western settings is still rather limited. In this article, we address this limitation by examining the advocacy practices of nonprofit charitable organizations in Singapore, a non-liberal democratic city-state in Southeast Asia with a history of colonial rule. We ask the following questions: What are the key environmental and organizational factors that influence the scope and intensity of advocacy activities of nonprofit organizations? In particular, what is the effect of the political context on the advocacy strategies and tactics among these organizations? To answer these questions, we present a three-factor explanatory model of nonprofit advocacy incorporating cause, capacity, and context. The research methodology entails a survey of nonprofit executives from a random sample of Singapore human and social service organizations. Our findings shed light on how the various aspects of the political context—perceived opportunities and threats from government intervention and dependence on government funding—shape nonprofit advocacy in a non-Western setting.     

Advocacy Tactics and Policy Outcomes of Sex Offender Rights Organizations

Social movement organizations for sex offender rights work to reduce harm to registrants and their family members by influencing sex offender registration and community notification policies. This study draws on two theories of social movement organizations—organizational emergence and political opportunities—to investigate the capacity (i.e., structure, resources, knowledge and skills) of these organizations to bring about policy changes. Data were gathered using in-depth, telephone interviews with 19 leaders of state-level advocacy organizations in the United States. Two types of strategies emerged, distinguishing organizations as proactive or reactive in their approach to policy change. Proactive organizations contribute to policy amendment, development or adoption, whereas reactive organizations focus on blocking policy. These two types of organizations have similar tactical repertoires; however, more proactive organizations report the use of networking and coalition building and media stories, and more reactive organizations report the use of legislative testimony and research and policy analysis tactics. This study informs social work policy and practice by highlighting effective and ineffective tactics used by highly stigmatized advocacy organizations.