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.     

The governance of nonprofit organizations: Law and public policy

Who should have the right to set the objectives of nonprofit organizations, hire their managers, set compensation standards, and in general control these organizations? Current law and public policy do not provide answers to these questions. Often, nonprofit organizations are controlled by managers and members of the boards of directors or trustees (many of whom are appointed by management). The goals of these individuals may not best serve the interests of those who support the operation of nonprofit organizations. This article proposes a legal and policy framework for empowering consumers, donors, and sponsors—those who have an economic demand for the nonprofit form of organization. The framework establishes a formal status of membership, accords standing in the court of law to members, enhances direct information dissemination by nonprofit organizations, and empowers state-sponsored agencies to support and oversee nonprofit organizations.     

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.     

When the management is the message: Relating values to management practice in nonprofit organizations

The values-expressive character of many private, nonprofit organizations is what distinguishes them from business and government organizations. The distinctive character of these organizations creates a special context for their management. This article examines the origins and development of private nonprofits in the religious realm and explores the implications of this character for management and for education of nonprofit managers.     

Shifting sands that threaten policy advocacy for vulnerable children and youth: A case study

Recent changes in the institutional and political environment, including the rise of a neoliberal logic that favors private solutions to social problems and increasing political partisanship, have created new challenges for statewide legislative advocacy. Yet, there is a lacuna in the study of the sector’s response to new and contradictory environmental pressures. Using the lens of institutional and resource dependence theories on organizations, this qualitative case study targets this gap by examining how a nonprofit statewide legislative advocacy organization for vulnerable children has responded to shifting political and institutional conditions that have transpired since its founding in the early 1990s. It examines 1) how the organization has made sense of these emerging challenges and demands, 2) how these shifts have reshaped its advocacy practices, and 3) how they have influenced the viability of the organization. Adaptive responses of the organization included a shift in emphasis from direct legislative advocacy to advocacy directed at the implementation of policy and grassroots advocacy. Implications for the future of statewide legislative advocacy for vulnerable children are discussed.     

LGBTQ + community organizations under neoliberalism in Ontario,Canada: Contradictions and disconnects

Abstract

This study examines the impact of neoliberal policy—which introduces competition for funding and pressure to professionalize and bureaucratize—on the working conditions and precarity of a purposive sample of southern Ontario (Canada) organizations dealing with LGBTQ?+?health. Findings from semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 20 community-based organization stakeholders and government bureaucrats confirmed that neoliberal policy pressures these organizations to professionalize and bureaucratize, while restricting political advocacy. Queer Liberation Theory’s three central tenets of anti-assimilationism, solidarity across movements, and the political economy of queer health are used to understand the situation and possible futures for third-sector organizations within the LGBTQ?+?movement.     

How does a board of directors influence within‐ and cross‐sector nonprofit collaboration?

Board members play a significant, yet largely unexamined, role in nonprofit collaboration. Processes, such as finding prospective partners, creating common ground with a partner, and establishing appropriate collaborative governance implicate nonprofit board members. In contrast to the scholarship of the role of interlocking directorates as potential networks for nonprofit collaboration, this paper examines the role of board members' social and human capital on nonprofit collaboration with other nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Drawing on online survey data from 636 nonprofit organizations, this paper finds that board social capital—but not board human capital—is positively related to the presence and number of within‐sector and cross‐sector nonprofit collaboration. However, board human capital enhances nonprofit‐government collaboration, when board social capital is also high. The results provide a novel perspective in nonprofit collaboration and board management research.     

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.     

Uncharted Waters: Exploring the Relationship between Strategy Processes and Management Control Systems in the Nonprofit Sector

The way in which strategy and management control combine has been the subject of much research attention, but rarely, within a nonprofit context. This is surprising, not only because of the considerable social and economic impact of this sector, but also in view of the apparent trend toward sectoral convergence in many structural and processual respects, including strategic behaviors and approaches to control. In this article, we explore the extent to which the relationship between management control and strategy, as found in for‐profit organizations, may prevail within a nonprofit context. Based on questionnaire responses from 182 Australian nonprofit organizations, we find that this relationship in nonprofit organizations is similar to that in for‐profit organizations, thereby lending support to the “convergence” argument. We reflect on the reasons for these similarities and advance an agenda for further research in this area.     

Does Nonprofit Marketization Facilitate or Inhibit the Development of Civil Society? A Comparative Study of China and the USA

With the rise of the global associational revolution and the expansion of neoliberalism across the world, nonprofit organizations (NPOs) have increasingly tended to adopt market values and approaches in many countries. A recent debate has concerned the impacts of nonprofit marketization on the civil society sector. A primary concern among Western scholars is the potential harm that marketization may cause to the traditional roles of NPOs, especially in their ability to create and maintain a strong civil society. This article joins the debate by engaging in a comparative analysis of China and the USA to answer the following question: Are the same concerns in the West applicable to non-Western countries, particularly those gradually liberalizing but still highly controlled authoritarian countries? By exploring the variations in objectives, models, and effects associated with the marketization taking place under different political–social systems, we find that unlike the nonprofit marketization in the USA, the similar yet distinct process in China is facilitating rather than inhibiting the development of civil society. On the other hand, our findings also provide nonprofit practitioners with a contextual guideline to help them devise more effective service strategies tailored to fit diverse sociocultural settings.     

Building a Social Movement for America's Children

Americans are concerned with the conditions of children and young people, and this concern has proven to be pervasive, intense, and enduring. But it has also largely proven to be politically anemic. Beyond the consensus that children's well-being is threatened, there is little public agreement over who bears responsibility for these problems or what we should do about them. As a result, public unease has failed to translate into a coherent and widespread demand for political change. What explains this gap between public concern and political action when it comes to children's well-being? This paper addresses four aspects of this question: First, in what ways is the public concerned for the well-being of children? Second, why has this concern failed to lead to political mobilization? Third, what factors helped to translate public concern with children in earlier eras into political movements, and why were those movements able to contribute to the policy-making process? Fourth, what might contemporary children's advocacy—reconfigured in light of these insights—look like? Answering these questions sheds light on how collective public will develops and how and when it translates into collective political action benefiting children.     

Conceptualizing the Third Sector in Ireland,North and South

While there is a long established and deeply embedded tradition of voluntary action and nonprofit organizing in Ireland, there has been very limited debate on a philosophy of voluntary action or on the place of the third sector in a modern democratic state. It is against this background that practitioners and academics are beginning to articulate their individual understandings of the role of the third sector in Irish society. This paper presents a framework developed from three questions to consider the place of the third sector in a modern democratic state. The questions are: What are the roles of the third sector in a society? What relationships exist between the third and other sectors? How are third sector organizations resourced within that societal context? Answering these questions contributes to a conceptualization of the third sector in Ireland, North and South.

     

Elements of Capacity in Youth Development Nonprofits: An Exploratory Study of Urban Sport for Development and Peace Organizations

Organizational capacity is often discussed among nonprofit practitioners and scholars. Yet, empirical research employing a multidimensional capacity framework remains scarce in the nonprofit literature (Andersson et al. in VOLUNTAS Int J Volunt Nonprofit Organ 27(6):2860–2888, 2016). Using a qualitative research approach, we explored capacity in a specific segment of youth development nonprofits—sport for development and peace (SDP). We were guided by three research questions: (1) what are critical capacity elements of SDP nonprofits? (2) how do these capacity elements influence the ability of SDP nonprofits to achieve their desired goals and objectives? and (3) what are the capacity needs of SDP nonprofits in the USA? Findings from in-depth interviews with leaders of 29 organizations contribute to the development of theory on nonprofit capacity by providing a more nuanced understanding of capacity strengths and challenges related to broader nonprofit goal achievement. For example, paid staff, revenue generation, and internal infrastructure emerged as critically more important for capacity in this context. Practical and theoretical implications are further discussed.     

Channeling advocacy? Assessing how funding source shapes the strategies of environmental organizations

ABSTRACT

All non–governmental organizations (NGOs) rely on funding to support their work. But how does the source of funding shape the types of advocacy groups engage in? Using novel panel data collected by the Environmental Funders Network, this research examines how funding from government, foundations, business, and members shape the advocacy work of environmental NGOs (ENGOs) in the UK. Past research suggests that elite funding sources channel groups into institutional advocacy, such as lobbying or litigation, and away from public advocacy, such as protesting. This paper confirms previous research while also showing that all types of funding channel group actions. Foundation and business funding is associated with more institutional advocacy, government funding is associated with non–political advocacy such as species conservation, and member funding is associated with public advocacy. By comparing across funding types, this study demonstrates the ways in which groups are both helped and hindered by funding from different sources.     

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.     

Social Work,Politics, and Social Policy Education: Applying a Multidimensional Framework of Power

The call to promote social justice sets the social work profession in a political context. In an effort to enhance social workers’ preparedness to engage in political advocacy, this article calls on educators to integrate a broad theoretical understanding of power into social policy curricula. We suggest the use of a multidimensional conceptualization of power that emphasizes mechanisms of decision making, agenda control, and attitude formation. We then apply these mechanisms to demonstrate how two prominent features of contemporary politics—party polarization and racially biased attitudes—affect the ability of social workers to influence policy. Finally, we suggest content that social work educators can integrate to prepare future social workers to engage in strategic and effective social justice advocacy.     

‘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.     

Proactive or Protective? Dimensions of and Advocacy Activities Associated with Reported Policy Change by Nonprofit Organizations

Nonprofit and voluntary associations have a long history of defending the rights of their members, clients, and the public. Despite a burgeoning literature on advocacy by nonprofit organizations, few studies attempt to answer a central question: what factors influence nonprofit success in achieving the changes they aim to affect? Using original data from nearly 400 US nonprofits, we examine the extent to which they were involved in changing public policy, the nature of this engagement, and advocacy activities, organizational characteristics and relationships with others associated with reported policy change. More than three quarters of respondents reported having enacted, stopped, or modified policy. Nonprofits more often reported proactively changing policy when working in partnership and reactively stopping or modifying policy when facing opposition groups. Providing expertise and attending meetings was associated with reported policy change, whereas placing opinion ads was not.     

Testing an Economic Model of Nonprofit Growth: Analyzing the Behaviors and Decisions of Nonprofit Organizations,Private Donors,and Governments

This study draws an economic model of the growth of nonprofit organizations by analyzing the behaviors of three major actors—nonprofit organizations, private donors, and governments—in making decisions on the allocation of limited resources for nonprofit services. Since decisions made by each actor affect resource allocation, it is important to understand what drives these decisions. The model was tested using an unbalanced, 463 panel dataset collected from 28 OECD countries over a 23-year period. The results indicated that macro- and micro-economic trends and government policies framed the decision premises of the three major actors, which led them to leverage the supply and demand for goods and services and, in turn, determined how they allocated limited resources for nonprofit services. This result implies that understanding the interdependencies of all sectors of the economy is critical to comprehending the size and development of the nonprofit sector. Effective management of micro-economic policies and macro-economic stability is necessary. More important, however, is understanding how a decision in one part of the economy will have intended and unintended effects on the nonprofit sector.     

Crisis on the Border: Specialized Capacity Building in Nonprofit Immigration Organizations

Traditional views of the nonprofit–government relationships suggest that while government may depend on nonprofit organizations to provide human services, nonprofits must also conform to government standards, monitoring, and regulation. In this paper, we argue that through specialized investments in capacity building, nonprofit providers can become irreplaceable to government funders. By developing a comparison case study of two organizations serving unaccompanied minor children who cross the U.S.–Mexico Border, we provide evidence of specialized capacity investments in a complex policy environment and discuss the implications of capacity building for both government and nonprofits.