Accountability in organizational life: Problem or opportunity for nonprofits?

This article reviews the notion of accountability as an intrinsic experience in daily organizational life and contrasts it with the more traditional construct of accountability as an external control or monitoring device. The concept of “felt responsibility” can provide an opportunity to enhance the effectiveness of nonprofit organizations. Both research and the author's field experiences in nonprofit settings suggest how nonprofit leaders and managers can use felt responsibility to help individuals act with accountability to themselves and to others. The concept of “conversation for accountability” poses a pragmatic opportunity for nonprofits in particular to turn the current environment of finger pointing and aggressive monitoring into an enabling organizational practice that benefits both nonprofit members and their clients or constituencies.     

Public reporting: A neglected aspect of nonprofit accountability

Nonprofit organizations have a compulsory external accountability (largely involving financial reporting) to government agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service and state regulators. They also have a pragmatic “must‐do” accountability to their funders, clients, and other obvious stakeholders. But are nonprofits also accountable to the public at large? If so, how can such accountability be implemented, given the diffuseness and breadth of the public as an audience? This article suggests that nonprofits should consider the citizenry as a stakeholder, if only due to the substantial taxpayer subsidy of the sector. The theory of public reporting that emerged in public administration literature beginning in the 1920s and 1930s can be helpful. Using principles, templates, and examples from public administration, nonprofit organizations can pursue more vigorous public reporting as one method to increase citizen confidence in their activities and in the sector as a whole.     

Non-formal educator use of evaluation results

Increasing demands for accountability in educational programming have resulted in increasing calls for program evaluation in educational organizations. Many organizations include conducting program evaluations as part of the job responsibilities of program staff. Cooperative Extension is a complex organization offering non-formal educational programs through land grant universities. Many Extension services require non-formal educational program evaluations be conducted by field-based Extension educators. Evaluation research has focused primarily on the efforts of professional, external evaluators. The work of program staff with many responsibilities including program evaluation has received little attention. This study examined how field based Extension educators (i.e. program staff) in four Extension services use the results of evaluations of programs that they have conducted themselves. Four types of evaluation use are measured and explored; instrumental use, conceptual use, persuasive use and process use.Results indicate that there are few programmatic changes as a result of evaluation findings among the non-formal educators surveyed in this study. Extension educators tend to use evaluation results to persuade others about the value of their programs and learn from the evaluation process. Evaluation use is driven by accountability measures with very little program improvement use as measured in this study.Practical implications include delineating accountability and program improvement tasks within complex organizations in order to align evaluation efforts and to improve the results of both. There is some evidence that evaluation capacity building efforts may be increasing instrumental use by educators evaluating their own programs.     

Collaborative evaluation within a framework of stakeholder-oriented evaluation approaches

Collaborative Evaluation systematically invites and engages stakeholders in program evaluation planning and implementation. Unlike "distanced" evaluation approaches, which reject stakeholder participation as evaluation team members, Collaborative Evaluation assumes that active, on-going engagement between evaluators and program staff, result in stronger evaluation designs, enhanced data collection and analysis, and results that stakeholder understand and use. Among similar "participant-oriented" evaluation approaches (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2011), Collaborative Evaluation distinguishes itself in that it uses a sliding scale for levels of collaboration. This means that different program evaluations will experience different levels of collaborative activity. The sliding scale is applied as the evaluator considers each program's evaluation needs, readiness, and resources. While Collaborative Evaluation is a term widely used in evaluation, its meaning varies considerably. Often used interchangeably with participatory and/or empowerment evaluation, the terms can be used to mean different things, which can be confusing. The articles use a comparative Collaborative Evaluation Framework to highlight how from a theoretical perspective, Collaborative Evaluation distinguishes itself from the other participatory evaluation approaches.     

The Prospective Role of Economic Stakeholders in the Governance of Nonprofit Organizations

This article focuses on the nexus between the governance of U.S. nonprofit organizations and their ability to secure the resources necessary to effectively execute their missions. Different sources of nonprofit income are associated with alternative stakeholders. Viewing these constituencies as beneficiary groups, we consider how the particular mix of income sources influences the capacity of nonprofits to generate resources, especially if there is competition among stakeholder groups for control of the organization’s policies and practices. We then ask how nonprofit governance might be modified to improve the ability of the organization to generate resources through a regime of economic stakeholder governance.     

Toward the Importance of Nonprofit Brand Equity

Various brand evaluation approaches assess the value and equity of for‐profit brands; accordant approaches for nonprofit brands, however, have been limited, and there is disagreement on what makes up a strong brand in the nonprofit sector. In response, this article provides insights into the conceptualization and operationalization of stakeholder‐based nonprofit brand equity and derives an initial measurement index. We conceptualize nonprofit brand equity as having three dimensions—nonprofit brand awareness, nonprofit brand trust, and nonprofit brand commitment—thereby empirically investigating trust in nonprofit brand equity building for the first time. The methodological procedure for building the index is based on partial least squares path modeling, and we draw on a sample of forty brands (N = 3,617 brand evaluations) identified as some of the best‐known nonprofit brands in Germany. Applying the index yields some of the strongest German nonprofit brands; for example, German Red Cross has by far the highest value of brand equity, followed by Aktion Mensch and UNICEF. The nonprofit brand equity index provides the basis for nonprofit managers to compare their brands’ performance over time and develop accordant branding strategies; it can be also used by organizations from other countries.     

An application of the nonprofit virtual accountability index: Accountability in sport for development and peace

In this research note, we examine web-based accountability practices of human service nonprofits. Data were collected directly from the organizational websites of an international sample of 532 organizations involved in operating sport for social change programs, more commonly known as the field of sport for development and peace. Websites were coded using the nonprofit virtual accountability index—a theoretically grounded and robust tool—to measure information and interactivity available for stakeholders across five dimensions of accountability. Analyses of variance and independent t-tests were used to test potential group differences based on geographical region, the thematic types of social change efforts, and the type of sport used to deliver programming. The results of this analysis highlight the critical importance of geographical location and other organizational variables for web-based accountability practices. Furthermore, the results allow nonprofit leaders to identify common areas in need of improvement for smaller and emerging nonprofits.     

Managing stakeholder relationships and nonprofit organization effectiveness

This research examined how nonprofit organizations manage their relationships with stakeholders and how these practices relate to perceived organization effectiveness. We conducted semistructured, open‐ended interviews with executive directors of nonprofit organizations (NPOs) to discover whom they see as their stakeholders, the types of expectations they encounter from stakeholders, and the practices they use in managing stakeholder relationships. The two nonprofits that were evaluated as most effective used a consistent, thematic rationale in dealing with stakeholder issues: one organization discussed its actions in terms of its mission and core values, the other based its actions in terms of building relationships and networks. Our study suggests that organizations that ground their external relations in issues that are recognized as good nonprofit management, and do so consistently across stakeholder groups, will tend to be rated as more effective by multiple, external evaluators.     

Human resource management,employee engagement,and nonprofit hospital performance

Human resource management (HRM) has been shown to impact organizational performance, but more research is needed on particular human resource (HR) practices in nonprofits and their effect on performance. In this article, we explore one HRM practice argued to influence performance, employee engagement in decision‐making, examining whether involving staff at different levels of a nonprofit affects nonprofit organizational performance. Drawing on data from a 2011 study of nonprofit hospitals, we find employee engagement has a positive influence on managerial and stakeholder perceptions of organizational performance. Employee engagement in decision‐making is also related to objective nonprofit performance measures, although the effects are less consistent. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for nonprofit research and practice.     

Saving the Moral Capital of NGOs: Identifying One-Sided and Many-Sided Social Dilemmas in NGO Accountability

The literature on nonprofit management has embraced the concept of “accountability” to target urgent challenges related to NGO probity and integrity, and there have been attempts in the literature to use rational-choice-based governance approaches to solve them. Although the existing principal–agent frameworks provide important insights, they are limited to the analysis of financial relationships between NGOs and donors. We contribute to the literature in developing a comprehensive rational-choice-based governance approach to analyze all stakeholder relationships of NGOs. Applying the research program of ordonomics, we unpack two fundamental interaction problems: (a) the “stakeholder dilemma” between the NGO and a single accountability holder as a one-sided social dilemma and (b) the “competition dilemma” among rival NGOs as a many-sided social dilemma. We show that improving NGO accountability in relation to intended beneficiaries, peer organizations, and the general public also requires identifying the underlying governance problem as a competition dilemma focusing on collective self-regulation as a solution.     

Sensegiving,Leadership, and Nonprofit Crises: How Nonprofit Leaders Make and Give Sense to Organizational Crisis

This study examined how 43 nonprofit leaders across 15 U.S. states make sense of organizational crises in nonprofit contexts, as well as what they think effective leadership is during crises. Findings revealed perceived nonprofit organizational crises emerging from disasters, disruption of mission delivery, internal stakeholder challenges, and unanticipated occurrences, while six major characteristics of effective crisis leadership emerged including being a team player, being strategic, being transparent with stakeholders, being quick to respond, being self-composed, and being prepared. Comparisons to previous empirical investigations of nonprofit leadership and crisis response yielded additional insights into effective crisis leader sensemaking in nonprofit contexts—most notably that nonprofit crisis leaders leverage sensegiving frameworks of instrumental knowledge, normalcy, and dynamic learning. Further analysis demonstrated these diagnostic and prognostic sensegiving activities to be more clearly observed than motivational sensegiving activities across crisis leaders in nonprofit contexts.     

Common Agency in Nonprofit Advocacy Organizations

Most theories of nonprofit organizations and nonprofit leadership recognize the multitude of stakeholders—including board members, donors and volunteers, funders, the media, and policy makers—that organizational leaders must contend with in doing their work. For nonprofits engaged in advocacy, demands from stakeholders may be even more challenging to meet. Although stakeholder theory recognizes the effect of various groups on an organization, it does not explain how leaders manage the preferences of their often‐competing stakeholders while they make choices for the organization. This study develops a common agency framework, evaluating the roles of three groups crucial to nonprofit advocacy organizations: the organization's board of directors, elected officials, and donors/members. The common agency framework is then illustrated with interviews with leaders of nonprofit advocacy organizations in California. Findings suggest that the leaders of these groups have a significant amount of discretion in guiding their organizations’ activities and operations.     

Accountability in Action?: Program Evaluation in Nonprofit Human Service Agencies

Program evaluation can be used as an excellent tool to promote nonprofit human service organizations' accountability. This article lays out several conditions that need to be met before evaluation achieves its potential. Application of this framework to nonprofits in Dallas, Texas, indicates the usefulness of the approach. Results show that considerable numbers of evaluation are being conducted but that the quality of the research methods and measures is low. This indicates that evaluation cannot currently be said to be providing the level of accountability possible. Additional efforts by all stakeholders to promote the use of evaluation to hold agencies accountable for efforts and results are necessary.     

Participation in stakeholder-based evaluation: A case study

This paper reports on the evaluation of some of the elements of a multi-component program aimed at improving the accessibility of health and social services for the homeless. The program involved provincial, regional and municipal authorities and more than 20 non-profit and public agencies. In accordance with the overall approach of the program, the principle of stakeholder participation in the evaluation was emphasized by the funding agencies. However, even if the evaluation started under promising conditions, including administrative support, a strong commitment from the involved agencies and experience in formative evaluation within the research team, participation of stakeholders from charitable non-profit agencies met with many difficulties. Using a case study approach, this paper attempts to analyze and discuss how the organizational context of the evaluation, certain stakeholder characteristics and methodological features may have impacted on the evaluation process.     

The Drivers of Voluntary Transparency in Nonprofits: Professionalization and Partnerships with Firms as Determinants

This research analyzes the drivers of voluntary transparency in nonprofit organizations (NPOs). Particularly, we assess the influence of key internal and external resource providers—paid staff and business partners—on the extent to which NPOs make accessible relevant information about themselves for public scrutiny on a voluntary basis. First, we conceptualize transparency as one of the critical dimensions of accountability and explain how it has become a key issue for NPOs. Second, we discuss professionalization and business–nonprofit partnerships as business-oriented strategies directly connected to the main challenges (and controversies) NPOs face. Third, following institutional theory as core theoretical framework, we propose a set of hypotheses linking those strategies to transparency. Their influence will be measured through an empirical research based on a survey to a representative sample of 325 NPOs. Regression analysis and probit models will be used to test the hypotheses. The results confirm the positive effects of both professionalization and partnerships, although each strategy influences different dimensions of transparency.     

Clarifying the role of belief-motive explanations in multi-stakeholder realist evaluation

In realist evaluation, where researchers aim to make program theories explicit, they can encounter competing explanations as to how programs work. Managing explanatory tensions from different sources of evidence in multi-stakeholder projects can challenge external evaluators, especially when access to pertinent data, like client records, is mediated by program stakeholders. In this article, we consider two central questions: how can program stakeholder motives shape a realist evaluation project; and how might realist evaluators respond to stakeholders’ belief-motive explanations, including those about program effectiveness, based on factors such as supererogatory commitment or trying together in good faith? Drawing on our realist evaluation of a service reform initiative involving multiple agencies, we describe stakeholder motives at key phases, highlighting a need for tactics and skills that help to manage explanatory tensions. In conclusion, the relevance of stakeholders’ belief-motive explanations (‘we believe the program works’) in realist evaluation is clarified and discussed.     

Determinants of Nonprofit Sector Density: A Stakeholder Approach

Why do nonprofit organizations exist? From an economic perspective, a number of major theories have been proposed to explain their existence. However, when exploring determinants of nonprofit sector density, one needs to take into account that demand and supply factors operate simultaneously and that it is difficult to separate them. By using a stakeholder approach, we develop a more integrative framework for understanding variations in nonprofit sector density. We test this framework by investigating determinants of nonprofit sector density in Texas at the county level.     

Racial accountabilities: the legal legibility of racial state violence in the Special State’s Attorney Report on Police Torture in Chicago

Public inquiries command significant political capital for liberal democratic states that premise their authority on being accountable to a generalized public sphere. By attending to the particular relations of visibility that are generated by these investigative state institutions, this article reveals the differentiated forms of legal and political accountability that structure the proceedings and case history of the 2006 Special State’s Attorney Report, which investigated the torture of African American suspects by Chicago police officers under the supervision of former Commander Jon Burge. More specifically, this article documents the racial relations of power that shape how state actors and institutions are made to answer for their conduct, explicating the ‘racial accountabilities’ that mediated this public inquiry as well as the practices of state violence it was tasked with investigating. On the one hand, these forms of accountability focused blame on the individualized actions of particular state actors, abstracting their conduct from the broader systemic conditions that have rendered African American populations vulnerable to racial state violence. On the other hand, this article explains how the forensic gaze deployed throughout the legal investigations into torture reconstituted its victims as objects of law with differential access to its forms of protection and technologies of redress. By detailing the force and dimensions of these racial accountabilities, this article illustrates how public inquiries and other institutions of law can reproduce and extend racial fields of violence while also regenerating public confidence in the efficacy and equality of the state.     

Learning from Our Mistakes: An Autopsy of an Unsuccessful University–Community Collaboration

A challenge facing social work education is how to enhance its connection to local communities. To this end, university and community collaborations have grown in popularity to address community needs and to augment student learning. The research literature indicates that there are many factors—from designs to guidelines—that drive successful collaborations. Building on the lessons from that research, this article provides a case study about a service-learning collaboration between a community organization and a masters-level social work course in the United States that was ultimately unsuccessful. Through stakeholder interviews and reflections, the authors provide several suggestions to improve future collaborations. These suggestions include the following. First, increase accountability for students and agency staff. Second, conduct an orientation session at the agency that includes necessary agency staff. Third, be mindful of cultural differences between organizations. Finally, restrict the number of service-learning options for students.