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.     

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.     

Collaboration Between Nonprofit and Business Sectors: A Framework to Guide Strategy Development for Nonprofit Organizations

Collaboration between nonprofit and business sectors is widely regarded as a value creation process that benefits society, business, and nonprofit organizations (NPOs). This process, however, has rarely been considered from a nonprofit perspective. In this paper, we discuss a new framework to assist NPOs in developing strategic collaborations with businesses. We argue that, by being strategically proactive rather than reactive to what businesses might offer, NPOs can increase the scale of their cross-sector collaborations and thus enhance their sustainability. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

The social processes of interorganizational collaboration and conflict in nonprofit organizations

This article takes a qualitative approach to research in advancing knowledge of the social process by which interorganizational relationships are established and nurtured in nonprofit organizations. The findings reveal that a balance of dependence and autonomy is needed for initiating interorganizational relationships. These relationships are stabilized at the interpersonal level through positive attributes (attitudes, perceptions, and trust) and interpersonal ties of individuals representing their organizations. Sources of conflict, such as value differences, divergent goals, and personality clashes, also influence the working relationships of these organizations.     

Interorganizational network portfolios of nonprofit organizations: Implications for collaboration management

Increasingly, nonprofit organizations engage in interorganizational collaboration to address large‐scale social problems. Scholarship typically focuses on the characteristics of both within‐sector and cross‐sector partnerships of two collaborating organizations or all partnering organizations involved in a collaboration, but we know little about the patterns of interorganizational relationships that single nonprofit organizations maintain. This research draws upon surveys from 452 nonprofits and introduces nonprofit network portfolios, which we define as the number, integration, intensity, and duration of relationships that nonprofits purposefully develop with other organizations. Using 12 network measures, Ward cluster analysis revealed three distinct network portfolios: restricted within‐sector (n = 319, 70.58%), which included limited collaboration and prioritized within‐sector partnerships; robust within‐sector (n = 80, 17.70%), which included more nonprofit partnerships than restricted within‐sector portfolios; and cross‐sector (n = 53, 11.72%), which had a rich assemblage of integrative partnerships with nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Further, nonprofits that maintained each type of portfolio differed in their revenue and social mission, suggesting these factors are related to the types of collaboration that nonprofits maintain. This study makes contributions to existing research on interorganizational networks and cross‐sector collaboration and suggests practical and policy implications for nonprofit network management.     

Interorganizational relations of nonprofit organizations: An exploratory study

In their several roles as appropriators, redistributors, and providers, nonprofit organizations are involved in complex transactions with organizations in the nonprofit, for-profit, and public sectors. The purpose of this exploratory investigation, based on a sample of New York State nonprofits, is to explain variation in the extent of intrasector and intersector transactions. Various kinds of prevailing environmental complexities, coupled with the ways in which organizations are structured to deal with these complexities, help explain variation in the extent of organizational transactions. Another important predictor is directors' perceptions of main problems affecting the activities of their agencies. These findings are consistent with the conclusion that environmental uncertainties and perceptions about them affect the nature and extent of interorganizational contact.     

The effectiveness of nonprofit lead‐organization networks for social service delivery

Public agencies increasingly contract with nonprofit organizations to lead community‐based networks for social service delivery. We explore the role that partnership characteristics play in the effectiveness of these networks. Using data on children and family services in Los Angeles County, we consider the impact of both the motivations for forming partnerships and the nature of the resulting partnerships on perceived outcomes for clients, interorganizational relationships, and organizational learning. We find that client outcomes and interorganizational relationships are enhanced when partnerships are formed to meet certain programmatic and organizational goals. Organizational learning, however, is affected only when partnerships are formed to enhance organizational legitimacy. Partners selected because they share common vision increase effectiveness, while those selected because there are few alternative partners decrease effectiveness. Finally, when partnerships use an interorganizational coordination mechanism, client outcomes are improved. The managerial implications of these impacts for the nonprofit sector are developed. The results lend considerable support to the role of partnership motivation and partner selection in the effectiveness of nonprofit lead‐organization networks, and specificity about the nature of that role.     

The institutional antecedent to firms’ interorganizational network portfolios: Evidence from China

Although the amount of research on interorganizational networks has increased significantly in recent years, few studies have examined the antecedents to interorganizational network portfolios—organizations’ configuration of their relationship networks with other organizations. To address this gap, this study examines how firms’ interorganizational network portfolios vary across three types of ownership structures (i.e., state-owned, private, and multinational enterprises) in China. Cluster analysis of the data on 212 leading firms operating in China revealed two types of network portfolios firms maintain. Specifically, firms maintaining robust cross-sector portfolios had more extensive networks with organizations in the nonprofit and public sectors than firms maintaining limited cross-sector portfolios. Moreover, regression results suggested that firms across different ownership structures had distinct numbers and types of organizational partners, particularly nongovernmental organization (NGO) partners. Theoretical and practical implications are derived from the findings.     

Training Policy Governance in Nonprofit Boards of Directors: The Views of Trainer‐Consultants

Although scholars widely discuss John Carver's (1990) Policy Governance model for nonprofit organizations, they have conducted little formal research on the implementation of the model. For this study, the researchers surveyed ninety‐two trainer‐consultants who graduated from Carver's Policy Governance Academy. The goal was to learn three things from their experiences: (1) whether trainer‐consultants maintain the model as a coherent whole or teach only parts of it; (2) what they perceive as the major challenges for nonprofit boards in implementing the Policy Governance model; and (3) what contextual factors, if any, they feel affect implementation of the model across nonprofit boards with different characteristics. Survey responses indicated that (1) consultants predominantly teach the model as a whole, (2) particular policy areas appear to be problematic for nonprofit boards of directors that implement the model, and (3) two contextual factors may negatively affect the ability of a board of directors to successfully implement Policy Governance boards larger than fifteen members, and organizations with no hierarchy, where the board also functions as staff. Overall, consultants' responses indicated that they feel Policy Governance is far superior to other models, but they recognize the problems and challenges that boards face in trying to implement it.     

The Role of Nonprofit Management Support Organizations in Sustaining Community Collaborations

This articles uses case studies to explore the theory that nonprofit management support organizations (MSOs) should consider taking on the role of convener and facilitator of community collaborations. They can do this work by facilitating planning and change and providing data to inform decisions about how to improve communities. In acting as a community support organization, their primary mission would be to build the capacity of all sectors to work together to solve social problems rather than simply to build the management capacity of individual nonprofit organizations.     

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.     

The financial information that nonprofit trustees need and how they can get it

With one exception, the accounting principles governing the information reported on the financial statements of nonprofit organizations should be the same as those for business organizations, and trustees should use this information to decide on budgets and analyze actual performance in essentially the same way as do business boards of directors. The exception is that nonprofit organizations receive capital contributions, which are rare in business corporations. In some nonprofit organizations, especially colleges, the information that trustees actually receive is confusing because of the unnecessary use of fund accounting and other peculiarities. Nevertheless, trustees can insist on businesslike financial statements.     

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.     

Succession planning in nonprofit organizations

Executive leadership is a critical component in the success of nonprofit organizations. An upcoming period of leadership transition is anticipated as substantial numbers of baby boomers, now at the peak of their careers, reach retirement age. With nonprofit organizations growing in both size and number, an impending leadership deficit is a concern. To help prepare for these important transition events, this study focuses on planning for executive succession. A survey exploring details of succession planning was undertaken of executive directors of 501(c)(3) charitable nonprofits and CEOs of 501(c)(4) cooperative organizations—the more business‐oriented user‐owned and controlled nonprofit organizations prominent in agricultural, utility, and finance sectors. We found that planning and preparation do not match the level of interest and concern for executive succession. Although the replacement of long‐serving leaders is acknowledged as difficult, few proactive steps are undertaken.     

Termination of Nonprofit Alliances: Evidence from China

Nonprofit alliances have grown with a striking speed in recent decades. While researchers focus on why nonprofits build interorganizational partnerships, few discuss how such partnerships are terminated. Through a multiple case study of 13 nonprofit alliances that had been established in response to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake in West China, this study explores how nonprofit alliances were terminated and what caused their termination. Four patterns of alliance termination emerged out of our data analysis: failure at birth, planned termination, failed transition, and evolution into independent organizations. Four determinants were identified as accountable for alliance termination: political pressure, resource shortage, short-term orientation, and leadership failure.     

Board members' influence on the government-nonprofit relationship

This study examines whether, how, and under what conditions nonprofit boards of directors influence the government and voluntary sector relationship. The survey responses of executive directors and board presidents in a randomly selected sample of 400 nonprofit organizations indicate that boards are not bystanders in the contracting relationship with government. Rather, many boards play multiple roles, simultaneously enhancing interdependence and maintaining the boundary between state government and nonprofits.     

The Embeddedness of Nonprofit Leadership in Civic Governance

VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations - This study examined how board chairs and executive directors of nonprofit civic engagement organizations interpreted their...     

Changing Relationships Between Nonprofit and For-profit Human Service Organizations Under the Long-Term Care System in Japan

In Japan, a nonprofit organization system enacted in the late 1990s and the later introduction of privatization policies in human services were expected to overturn government dominance of nonprofit organization activities. By focusing on the long-term care insurance (LTCI) system, which privatized public human services for the first time in the country, this study empirically examines whether, and to what extent, nonprofit–government relationships in Japan have actually changed as a result of this new system. In addition, because LTCI newly allows for-profit organizations to provide services, the influence of such organizations were incorporated into the analysis. The outcomes of this study demonstrate that the government continues to extend its sphere of influence over nonprofit and for-profit organizations through LTCI. In addition, for-profit organizations appear to be more successful than nonprofit organizations, in that the former organizations have overcome their lack of experience as public service providers by taking over the roles that nonprofit organizations have traditionally occupied.     

Structures,Challenges, and Successes of Volunteer Programs Co‐managed by Nonprofit and Public Organizations

This article presents a mixed‐methods, multicase study and comparison of volunteer programs in US national parks that have evolved, in response to growth and fiscal pressures, to be co‐managed by national park staff and their nonprofit support partners. Findings detail why and how the expanded partnerships were formed; how they operate; challenges they face; ways in which they adhere to, stretch, and depart from theories of nonprofit management, collaboration, and program institutionalization; and the significant—even exponential—volunteer program growth that resulted in each case. These nonprofit?public volunteer program partnerships—at Acadia, Arches and ­Canyonlands, Cuyahoga Valley, Golden Gate, the National Mall, and Yosemite national park sites—employ many standard forms of interorganizational relations, even though in these cases the nonprofits give money to the government organization instead of the reverse. Their volunteer program and management structures also share similar elements because of coercive, normative, and mimetic pressures. At the same time, each volunteer program partnership is a distinct blend of collaboration and management practices because of the unique natural features, climate, needs, adjacent populations, and personalities of leaders at each site. The cases employ innovative strategies to substantially increase the number of staff who lead volunteer programs. Recommendations are offered for nonprofit management research and practice, and findings are instructive for organizations that utilize volunteers either as a single entity or as part of a collaboration.