Theoretical Framework of Non-Profit Organisations

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organisations. 2011;**22**(3):470-493

[19] Vrečko I. Strategija sistemskega razvoja nevladnih organizacij v Sloveniji za obdobje 2003-2008. Ljubljana: Slovensko združenje za Projektni

[20] De Cooman R, De Gieter S, Pepermans R, Jegers M. A cross-sector comparison of motivation-related concepts in for-profit and not-forprofit service organisations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

[21] Leete L. Wage equity and employee motivation in non-profit and forprofit organisations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organisation.

[22] Kolarič Z. Različni znanstvenoteoretski pristopi k preučevanju neprofitnih organizacij. V Jadranje po nemirnih vodah menedžmenta nevladnih organizacij, ur. Dejan Jelovac. Ljubljana/Koper: Radio Študent/Visoka šola za Management; 2001. pp. 29-44

[23] Salamon LM, Anheier HK. The Emerging Non-profit Sector: An Overview. Manchester in New York: Manchester University Press; 1996

[24] Bruce I, Raymer A. Managing and Staffing Britain's Largest Charities. London: City University; 1992

[25] Douglas P. Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting. Theory and Practice. London: The Dryden; 1995

[26] Uradni list republike Slovenije. Strategija razvoja nevladnih organizacij in prostovoljstva. Ljubljana: Uradni list;

Management; 2003

2011;**40**(2):296-317

2000;**43**(4):423-446

**8**

2018

**11**

**Chapter 2**

**Abstract**

**1. Introduction**

is not kindship cate" [1].

**1.1 Subjective dispositions**

Factors that Drive Volunteerism

This chapter aims at examining and reviewing the factors that drive volunteering in nonprofit organizations. The chapter follows a multidisciplinary approach in defining and examining the factors that drives individuals to volunteer in nonprofit organizations. The chapter provides a theoretical framework on how different factors are associated with volunteerism in nonprofit organizations. This chapter provides analysis of the volunteerism concept by looking at factors that drive

The study of volunteerism has yielded different theoretical and conceptual models [1]. It spans across fundamentally different disciplines, serves organizations in a wide variety of industries, and changes from one country to another. In India, volunteering is strictly defined as "social work," while in Russia, no word is used to denote the concept [1]. Scholars who were admittedly daunted by the task of defining volunteerism, like Wilson [2] and Carson [3], noticed a pattern in literature. Definitions of volunteerism tend to state what "volunteerism is not" instead of defining what volunteerism is; "it is not paid labor, it is not slavery or forced labor, it

This paper focuses on the interdisciplinary aspect of volunteerism. More specifically, we look at factors that drive volunteerism from multiple perspectives. Economic theory speculates that individuals are rational and self-interested. Hence, the notion of "unpaid labor" is absurd from an economic standpoint. Later, we look at how volunteerism is justified by economists. Sociologists, on the other hand, consider volunteerism to be a way of fostering social bonds, a sort of indulgence that serves the common good. While Economists assume rationality and sociologists look at social factors like solidary, psychologists inspect the "individual differences in psychological characteristics" [1]. In the last section, management factors are going to be discussed to answer further the question of why volunteers volunteer.

Subjective disposition is a term that embeds many factors, namely, personality traits, motives, norms, and values. They can simply be described as the device or

in Nonprofit Organizations: A

Theoretical Framework

*Mohammed Aboramadan*

volunteerism from diverse standpoints.

**Keywords:** drivers, nonprofits, volunteerism, framework

#### **Chapter 2**

## Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework

*Mohammed Aboramadan*

#### **Abstract**

This chapter aims at examining and reviewing the factors that drive volunteering in nonprofit organizations. The chapter follows a multidisciplinary approach in defining and examining the factors that drives individuals to volunteer in nonprofit organizations. The chapter provides a theoretical framework on how different factors are associated with volunteerism in nonprofit organizations. This chapter provides analysis of the volunteerism concept by looking at factors that drive volunteerism from diverse standpoints.

**Keywords:** drivers, nonprofits, volunteerism, framework

#### **1. Introduction**

The study of volunteerism has yielded different theoretical and conceptual models [1]. It spans across fundamentally different disciplines, serves organizations in a wide variety of industries, and changes from one country to another. In India, volunteering is strictly defined as "social work," while in Russia, no word is used to denote the concept [1]. Scholars who were admittedly daunted by the task of defining volunteerism, like Wilson [2] and Carson [3], noticed a pattern in literature. Definitions of volunteerism tend to state what "volunteerism is not" instead of defining what volunteerism is; "it is not paid labor, it is not slavery or forced labor, it is not kindship cate" [1].

This paper focuses on the interdisciplinary aspect of volunteerism. More specifically, we look at factors that drive volunteerism from multiple perspectives. Economic theory speculates that individuals are rational and self-interested. Hence, the notion of "unpaid labor" is absurd from an economic standpoint. Later, we look at how volunteerism is justified by economists. Sociologists, on the other hand, consider volunteerism to be a way of fostering social bonds, a sort of indulgence that serves the common good. While Economists assume rationality and sociologists look at social factors like solidary, psychologists inspect the "individual differences in psychological characteristics" [1]. In the last section, management factors are going to be discussed to answer further the question of why volunteers volunteer.

#### **1.1 Subjective dispositions**

Subjective disposition is a term that embeds many factors, namely, personality traits, motives, norms, and values. They can simply be described as the device or

devices with which people interpret their external environment, hence the word "subjective" because different interpretations come from different people. The second key word "dispositions" refers to a person's tendency to react to a certain external stimulus. Subjective dispositions are inner factors that drive our choices in life.

#### *1.1.1 Empathy*

Many studies attempted to link personality traits with volunteerism. This causal relationship unveiled some interesting findings. Empathy is one personality trait that received a lot of interest in literature. It is generally seen as an important driver in prosocial behaviors. Smith [4] found that empathy is positively correlated with altruistic behaviors. Using General Social Survey Data, 15 prosocial behaviors were found to be correlated with an emphatic personality. Altruistic behaviors may encompass both formal and informal volunteering. Because the focus of this paper is on formal volunteering, we can refer to Bekkers [5] who, having used data from the family survey of the Dutch population, has deduced that empathy is one conclusive characteristic that is found in people who volunteer. Einolf [6] and Mitani [7]' results reconciled with Bekkers [5]. Empathy alone, however, was found to be insufficient to incite volunteerism. Wilhem and Bekkers [8] introduced a new variable called "principle of care" which describes the moral principle of helping others. Interestingly, emphatic concern was shadowed by the moral principle, indicating that the latter is much stronger than the mere emotion of empathy for others.

#### *1.1.2 Extraversion*

Having studied empathy, Bekkers [5] analyzed further personality traits. Looking at extraversion this time, he found that this variable is positively related with volunteer work. Not only that, when measured in terms of intensity of engagement, extraversion was concluded to be more typical of volunteers and less related to those who hold mere memberships. One year later, another study scrutinized the relationship between extraversion and volunteerism. As predicted, extraversion was very much attached to the personality of someone who volunteers than someone who does not [9]. However, the approach that was adopted in this study was somewhat more skeptical. Instead of studying the direct relationship between the two variables, structural equation modeling was used to divulge indirect factors that are more likely to relate extraversion to volunteerism. This mediational model encompassed three variables: clubs and organization, church attendance, and contact with friends. The major premise is that extroverts, who are more sociable and friendly, would have more presence in clubs and organizations, a higher turn up rate in churches, and a larger network of friends. These mediating factors were found to be determinative of volunteerism. In other words, when these factors were statistically controlled for, extraversion did not show a direct effect on volunteerism.

Consistently, Brown [10] and Carlo et al. [11] found that extraversion was strongly related to volunteerism. The second study, having also considered the mediation effect, found that there was no direct evidence of the interaction effect between extraversion and volunteerism. Rather, both extraversion and agreeableness applied a joint effect on prosocial value motivation. Therefore, prosocial value motivation is the real impetus that drives volunteerism. This entails that an extrovert person would not volunteer unless he or she already values helping others [11]. We can then draw the connection between Carlo's findings about prosocial value motivation and empathy that was previously discussed.

**13**

*1.1.5 Conscientiousness*

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework*

Carlo et al. [11] discovered that extraversion and agreeableness impacted prosocial value motivation conjointly. This brings us to our next variable: agreeableness. The same study uncovered that agreeableness had a significant direct impact on volunteerism [11]. One important distinguishing virtue of an agreeable person is compliance to others' requests. Volunteering is a field where compliance is needed. Hence, highly agreeable individuals would be more prone to volunteer than less agreeable individuals. A study utilizing the largest UK household survey (Understanding Society) assents to the before-mentioned positive relationship. Agreeableness was found to be positively associated with monetary donations and charitable causes [10]. On the other hand, an interesting conflicting outcome was pointed out by Bekkers [5]. This particular study endeavored to categorize volunteer work by distinguishing between political activism and civic engagement. Surprisingly, the study found that agreeableness was especially an attribute of political activists. This was sought to be peculiar because agreeableness was found to be positively correlated with empathy. In turn, empathy was proven to be positively related to civic engagement [5]. One major implication can be ratiocinated.

Following commonsensical reasoning, if agreeable, extroverts are more prone to participate in volunteer work. It is only fair to assume that those who suffer from social phobias or anxieties would be less disposed to do so. Likewise, Handy and Cnaan [12] confirmed this hypothesis and many other deriving suppositions. From the outset, it is important to nuance between individuals with clinical social phobia and those with a moderate degree of social phobia. Clinical social phobia is more acute and characterized by a crushing fear of social interactions along with excessive self-consciousness in daily situations. The second case, on the other hand, is less severe. Individuals with mild levels of social phobia still manage to muddle through while being fearful of what might happen. Measuring both cases with Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, Handy and Cnaan [12] confirmed that people with higher social anxiety volunteer significantly less and are less susceptible to do so in the future. Additionally, the study investigated how people with different levels of social anxiety approached volunteering. As expected, people with higher levels of social phobia are more likely to volunteer upon request from a friend than on their own or through usual marketing tactics used by nonprofit organizations. Finally, the same study found that people with higher levels of volunteering prefer writing a check than actual volunteering. Donating money spares them the socially awkward

The last study presented us with ponderous insights about how nonprofit organizations should approach recruitment. Through personal asking, nonprofit organizations tend to face the volunteer recruitment fallacy, which holds that people who are presumed to be apt for volunteering do not actually volunteer. This leaves out a considerable population of shy and socially uncomfortable people who could potentially become productive volunteers. Besides social anxiety, depression

Another interesting line of investigation looked at conscientiousness and its relationship to volunteerism. Conscientiousness describes a large spectrum of

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

That is, agreeableness is not typical of all volunteers.

confrontations and people's judgmental squints.

was also found to be negatively related to volunteerism [13].

*1.1.3 Agreeableness*

*1.1.4 Social phobias*

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

#### *1.1.3 Agreeableness*

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

mere emotion of empathy for others.

*1.1.2 Extraversion*

effect on volunteerism.

*1.1.1 Empathy*

devices with which people interpret their external environment, hence the word "subjective" because different interpretations come from different people. The second key word "dispositions" refers to a person's tendency to react to a certain external stimulus. Subjective dispositions are inner factors that drive our choices in life.

Many studies attempted to link personality traits with volunteerism. This causal relationship unveiled some interesting findings. Empathy is one personality trait that received a lot of interest in literature. It is generally seen as an important driver in prosocial behaviors. Smith [4] found that empathy is positively correlated with altruistic behaviors. Using General Social Survey Data, 15 prosocial behaviors were found to be correlated with an emphatic personality. Altruistic behaviors may encompass both formal and informal volunteering. Because the focus of this paper is on formal volunteering, we can refer to Bekkers [5] who, having used data from the family survey of the Dutch population, has deduced that empathy is one conclusive characteristic that is found in people who volunteer. Einolf [6] and Mitani [7]' results reconciled with Bekkers [5]. Empathy alone, however, was found to be insufficient to incite volunteerism. Wilhem and Bekkers [8] introduced a new variable called "principle of care" which describes the moral principle of helping others. Interestingly, emphatic concern was shadowed by the moral principle, indicating that the latter is much stronger than the

Having studied empathy, Bekkers [5] analyzed further personality traits. Looking at extraversion this time, he found that this variable is positively related with volunteer work. Not only that, when measured in terms of intensity of engagement, extraversion was concluded to be more typical of volunteers and less related to those who hold mere memberships. One year later, another study scrutinized the relationship between extraversion and volunteerism. As predicted, extraversion was very much attached to the personality of someone who volunteers than someone who does not [9]. However, the approach that was adopted in this study was somewhat more skeptical. Instead of studying the direct relationship between the two variables, structural equation modeling was used to divulge indirect factors that are more likely to relate extraversion to volunteerism. This mediational model encompassed three variables: clubs and organization, church attendance, and contact with friends. The major premise is that extroverts, who are more sociable and friendly, would have more presence in clubs and organizations, a higher turn up rate in churches, and a larger network of friends. These mediating factors were found to be determinative of volunteerism. In other words, when these factors were statistically controlled for, extraversion did not show a direct

Consistently, Brown [10] and Carlo et al. [11] found that extraversion was strongly related to volunteerism. The second study, having also considered the mediation effect, found that there was no direct evidence of the interaction effect between extraversion and volunteerism. Rather, both extraversion and agreeableness applied a joint effect on prosocial value motivation. Therefore, prosocial value motivation is the real impetus that drives volunteerism. This entails that an extrovert person would not volunteer unless he or she already values helping others [11]. We can then draw the connection between Carlo's findings about prosocial value

motivation and empathy that was previously discussed.

**12**

Carlo et al. [11] discovered that extraversion and agreeableness impacted prosocial value motivation conjointly. This brings us to our next variable: agreeableness. The same study uncovered that agreeableness had a significant direct impact on volunteerism [11]. One important distinguishing virtue of an agreeable person is compliance to others' requests. Volunteering is a field where compliance is needed. Hence, highly agreeable individuals would be more prone to volunteer than less agreeable individuals. A study utilizing the largest UK household survey (Understanding Society) assents to the before-mentioned positive relationship. Agreeableness was found to be positively associated with monetary donations and charitable causes [10]. On the other hand, an interesting conflicting outcome was pointed out by Bekkers [5]. This particular study endeavored to categorize volunteer work by distinguishing between political activism and civic engagement. Surprisingly, the study found that agreeableness was especially an attribute of political activists. This was sought to be peculiar because agreeableness was found to be positively correlated with empathy. In turn, empathy was proven to be positively related to civic engagement [5]. One major implication can be ratiocinated. That is, agreeableness is not typical of all volunteers.

#### *1.1.4 Social phobias*

Following commonsensical reasoning, if agreeable, extroverts are more prone to participate in volunteer work. It is only fair to assume that those who suffer from social phobias or anxieties would be less disposed to do so. Likewise, Handy and Cnaan [12] confirmed this hypothesis and many other deriving suppositions. From the outset, it is important to nuance between individuals with clinical social phobia and those with a moderate degree of social phobia. Clinical social phobia is more acute and characterized by a crushing fear of social interactions along with excessive self-consciousness in daily situations. The second case, on the other hand, is less severe. Individuals with mild levels of social phobia still manage to muddle through while being fearful of what might happen. Measuring both cases with Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, Handy and Cnaan [12] confirmed that people with higher social anxiety volunteer significantly less and are less susceptible to do so in the future. Additionally, the study investigated how people with different levels of social anxiety approached volunteering. As expected, people with higher levels of social phobia are more likely to volunteer upon request from a friend than on their own or through usual marketing tactics used by nonprofit organizations. Finally, the same study found that people with higher levels of volunteering prefer writing a check than actual volunteering. Donating money spares them the socially awkward confrontations and people's judgmental squints.

The last study presented us with ponderous insights about how nonprofit organizations should approach recruitment. Through personal asking, nonprofit organizations tend to face the volunteer recruitment fallacy, which holds that people who are presumed to be apt for volunteering do not actually volunteer. This leaves out a considerable population of shy and socially uncomfortable people who could potentially become productive volunteers. Besides social anxiety, depression was also found to be negatively related to volunteerism [13].

#### *1.1.5 Conscientiousness*

Another interesting line of investigation looked at conscientiousness and its relationship to volunteerism. Conscientiousness describes a large spectrum of

constructs that revolve around self-control, hard work, rule abidance, and order in one's life [14]. Both Brown [10] and Donnelly et al. [15] concluded that conscientiousness is negatively related to volunteerism. Similarly, Bekkers [5] had found that volunteers were typically individuals with low level of conscientiousness. This is rather surprising because McCrae and John [16], in their initial description of the "Five Big Personality Traits," had described conscientiousness as being an impulsive, proactive behavior that stimulates growth through action.

#### *1.1.6 Openness to experience*

Another personality trait that was meticulously studied is openness to experience. Brown [10] found that, among all personality traits, openness to experience is the most substantial. He noted that one standard deviation increase is associated with a 6.4%-point rise in the measured variable (volunteerism). In contrast, Bekkers [8] established that openness had no impact on the intention of donating money or allocating time for a given cause. Another study joins Brown's findings, but from a different perspective. Olympiad volunteers in Iran were studied as a sample with the intention to predict the personality traits that make volunteers satisfied from their experiences. Openness to experience, which encircles aspects of personal curiosity, art appreciation, and learned wisdom, was significantly linked to volunteers' satisfaction.

#### *1.1.7 Solidarity*

The discipline of sociology scrutinized several subjective dispositions. However, a number of questions regarding the impact of solidarity on volunteering behavior remain unanswered. Solidarity, as defined by Oxford Dictionary, is "unity or agreement of feeling or action, especially among individuals with a common interest; mutual support within a group" [17]. Although the variable was not directly inspected, some studies looked at similar patterns of behavior during community disasters. Adams and Boscarino [18] tried to bring forth a study where they explain what motivated people to volunteer during the World Trade Center Disaster (WTCD). Among other factors, volunteering was particularly associated with greater exposure to WTCD events and experiences of trauma from similar disastrous events [18]. This last study is reminiscent of Beyerlein and Sikkink [19] who looked at a pool of different independent variables, namely, proximity to the terrorist attack, personal connections to the victims, participation in religious congregations, patriotic responses, and so on. Interestingly, the two authors underline four variables that proved to be most relevant, that is, having previously known the victim, experiencing sorrow, feeling a personal responsibility to help the victims, and having volunteered prior to WTCD [19]. In retrospect, the feeling of solidarity figures in most of the variables mentioned, entailing that emotions are bolstered through community belongingness.

#### *1.1.8 Personal identity*

At the level of community, the feeling of solidarity has been proven to be a propelling force in the midst of chaos. From an individual perspective, we look at personal identity and its contribution to volunteerism. A growing body of literature has examined this relationship. However, before discussing the relationship between the two, we need to define the concept. According to Oyserman, personal identity provides answers to three pivotal questions: "Who am I?" "Where do I belong?" and "How do I fit?" [20]. The answers to these questions provide a biased

**15**

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework*

theory of ourselves. Personal identity is sought to be tentative and always striving to become better [20]. Through volunteerism, the latter can fulfill a purpose. Grönlund [21] put forward an interesting interactive model where different interviewees developed their own self-image, thereby arriving at different types of identities. Volunteers were subsequently classified into five categories of identities, namely, influencer identity, helper identity, faith-based identity, community identity, and success identity. Interestingly, 4 interviewees out of 24 fell in the category of helper identity. Benevolence was sought to be their most salient value in life. Along with concerns for universalism and conservation, they endeavored to

By the same token, Matsuba et al. [22] used structural equation modeling to arrive to similar results. Studying a sample of American adults, they assessed the mediating effect of the helping identity on volunteering commitment. The construct of this variable focused on to extent to which individuals felt that they actually have control over the welfare of others, try to help the others, or see themselves doing so in the future. The study then finds that commitment to volunteering is strongly motivated by people who identify more with a helping identity. Volunteering can also be used to cloak problems of identity or lack of perceived identity [23]. For instance, people who have troubles succeeding in their professional career turn to volunteering as a way of adopting a different mission in life.

Before discussing the theory of volunteerism in economics, a noteworthy theory should be mentioned. The "low-cost hypothesis" asserts that the effect of personality characteristics on a given prosocial behavior is reduced when costs associated with the behavior are higher. Bekkers et al. [5] is a study that tracks the mediating effect of this theory in the context of personality characteristics and volunteerism. According to the theory, individuals with high wages should consider volunteering a high-cost activity, while individuals with low wages should see it as a low-cost activity. Interestingly, agreeable and conscientious people were found to be "less likely to participate as they earned more" [5]. Having introduced the concept of opportunity cost and how it meddles between the discussed factors and volunteerism, we now

Economists joined this debate as well, contesting that people are motivated by self-interest when they decide to volunteer. Hayakawa [25] discusses the hidden facets of volunteer work. In his paper, he argues that volunteering today counts as work experience in CVs. It serves as a reference for the person's ability to indulge a different social environment while away from one's comfort zone. That said, Hayakawa is suspicious of the volunteer's intention in this case and makes it clear that volunteer work is done to cover up the fact that the person is unable to find other alternatives in the job market. In this sense, economic theory challenges the altruistic mindset in volunteering, with the chief assumption that volunteers would not volunteer unless they have interest in the activity. Gee's [26] demonstration of the latter assumption is fully endorsed by experimentation. In his paper, Gee compares between households who have children in multiple schools with households who got their children in the same school. With the aim to understand the real intention of parents' time contribution in schools, Gee found that having children in the same school elevated the willingness to volunteer by 13%, hence concluding that parents are rather motivated by private interest of their own children rather than public interest for all students. Similarly, Maki and Synder [27] provide consistent results by showing

Other people try to embark in volunteer work to fight stigmas [24].

move to the economic theory of volunteerism.

that self-interest fuels the motivation to volunteer.

*1.1.9 Self-interest*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

help others and thus volunteer.

#### *Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

theory of ourselves. Personal identity is sought to be tentative and always striving to become better [20]. Through volunteerism, the latter can fulfill a purpose. Grönlund [21] put forward an interesting interactive model where different interviewees developed their own self-image, thereby arriving at different types of identities. Volunteers were subsequently classified into five categories of identities, namely, influencer identity, helper identity, faith-based identity, community identity, and success identity. Interestingly, 4 interviewees out of 24 fell in the category of helper identity. Benevolence was sought to be their most salient value in life. Along with concerns for universalism and conservation, they endeavored to help others and thus volunteer.

By the same token, Matsuba et al. [22] used structural equation modeling to arrive to similar results. Studying a sample of American adults, they assessed the mediating effect of the helping identity on volunteering commitment. The construct of this variable focused on to extent to which individuals felt that they actually have control over the welfare of others, try to help the others, or see themselves doing so in the future. The study then finds that commitment to volunteering is strongly motivated by people who identify more with a helping identity. Volunteering can also be used to cloak problems of identity or lack of perceived identity [23]. For instance, people who have troubles succeeding in their professional career turn to volunteering as a way of adopting a different mission in life. Other people try to embark in volunteer work to fight stigmas [24].

Before discussing the theory of volunteerism in economics, a noteworthy theory should be mentioned. The "low-cost hypothesis" asserts that the effect of personality characteristics on a given prosocial behavior is reduced when costs associated with the behavior are higher. Bekkers et al. [5] is a study that tracks the mediating effect of this theory in the context of personality characteristics and volunteerism. According to the theory, individuals with high wages should consider volunteering a high-cost activity, while individuals with low wages should see it as a low-cost activity. Interestingly, agreeable and conscientious people were found to be "less likely to participate as they earned more" [5]. Having introduced the concept of opportunity cost and how it meddles between the discussed factors and volunteerism, we now move to the economic theory of volunteerism.

#### *1.1.9 Self-interest*

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

*1.1.6 Openness to experience*

to volunteers' satisfaction.

through community belongingness.

*1.1.8 Personal identity*

*1.1.7 Solidarity*

constructs that revolve around self-control, hard work, rule abidance, and order in one's life [14]. Both Brown [10] and Donnelly et al. [15] concluded that conscientiousness is negatively related to volunteerism. Similarly, Bekkers [5] had found that volunteers were typically individuals with low level of conscientiousness. This is rather surprising because McCrae and John [16], in their initial description of the "Five Big Personality Traits," had described conscientiousness as being an impul-

Another personality trait that was meticulously studied is openness to experience. Brown [10] found that, among all personality traits, openness to experience is the most substantial. He noted that one standard deviation increase is associated with a 6.4%-point rise in the measured variable (volunteerism). In contrast, Bekkers [8] established that openness had no impact on the intention of donating money or allocating time for a given cause. Another study joins Brown's findings, but from a different perspective. Olympiad volunteers in Iran were studied as a sample with the intention to predict the personality traits that make volunteers satisfied from their experiences. Openness to experience, which encircles aspects of personal curiosity, art appreciation, and learned wisdom, was significantly linked

The discipline of sociology scrutinized several subjective dispositions. However, a number of questions regarding the impact of solidarity on volunteering behavior remain unanswered. Solidarity, as defined by Oxford Dictionary, is "unity or agreement of feeling or action, especially among individuals with a common interest; mutual support within a group" [17]. Although the variable was not directly inspected, some studies looked at similar patterns of behavior during community disasters. Adams and Boscarino [18] tried to bring forth a study where they explain what motivated people to volunteer during the World Trade Center Disaster (WTCD). Among other factors, volunteering was particularly associated with greater exposure to WTCD events and experiences of trauma from similar disastrous events [18]. This last study is reminiscent of Beyerlein and Sikkink [19] who looked at a pool of different independent variables, namely, proximity to the terrorist attack, personal connections to the victims, participation in religious congregations, patriotic responses, and so on. Interestingly, the two authors underline four variables that proved to be most relevant, that is, having previously known the victim, experiencing sorrow, feeling a personal responsibility to help the victims, and having volunteered prior to WTCD [19]. In retrospect, the feeling of solidarity figures in most of the variables mentioned, entailing that emotions are bolstered

At the level of community, the feeling of solidarity has been proven to be a propelling force in the midst of chaos. From an individual perspective, we look at personal identity and its contribution to volunteerism. A growing body of literature has examined this relationship. However, before discussing the relationship between the two, we need to define the concept. According to Oyserman, personal identity provides answers to three pivotal questions: "Who am I?" "Where do I belong?" and "How do I fit?" [20]. The answers to these questions provide a biased

sive, proactive behavior that stimulates growth through action.

**14**

Economists joined this debate as well, contesting that people are motivated by self-interest when they decide to volunteer. Hayakawa [25] discusses the hidden facets of volunteer work. In his paper, he argues that volunteering today counts as work experience in CVs. It serves as a reference for the person's ability to indulge a different social environment while away from one's comfort zone. That said, Hayakawa is suspicious of the volunteer's intention in this case and makes it clear that volunteer work is done to cover up the fact that the person is unable to find other alternatives in the job market. In this sense, economic theory challenges the altruistic mindset in volunteering, with the chief assumption that volunteers would not volunteer unless they have interest in the activity. Gee's [26] demonstration of the latter assumption is fully endorsed by experimentation. In his paper, Gee compares between households who have children in multiple schools with households who got their children in the same school. With the aim to understand the real intention of parents' time contribution in schools, Gee found that having children in the same school elevated the willingness to volunteer by 13%, hence concluding that parents are rather motivated by private interest of their own children rather than public interest for all students. Similarly, Maki and Synder [27] provide consistent results by showing that self-interest fuels the motivation to volunteer.

This theory of selfishness in volunteering received much attention due to the fact that it is startlingly repulsive, yet only intrinsic. Self-interest is rather common, even in the supposedly "untainted" act of giving. In public duty, firefighters were more responsive to emergency calls if they purchased vanity plates. This is indicative of self-praise in doing social good. Firefighters who feel pride in helping others are more responsible in their jobs [28]. Within the same context of work duty, Bekkers [8] found that if the invitation to volunteer is solicited by a hierarchical superior, the chances that the person would decline the invitation go down. Volunteers are also motivated by networking. Prouteau and Wolf [29] found a positive correlation between volunteer work and number friends. Apart from the relational motive, Fiorillo [30] finds that monetary rewards influence intrinsic motivations and therefore alter the person's willingness to volunteer.

#### *1.1.10 Religion*

When investigating people' inner motives, it is unavoidable to tap into the subject of religion.

Using the main sample of the midlife development in the United States, Taniguchi [31] finds that religion is, in fact, a significant predictor of the propensity to volunteer. In a brief description of his findings, Taniguchi asserts that volunteers demonstrate more behavioral religiosity than non-volunteers. This is consistent with Bekkers's [5] positive correlation between church attendance and volunteer work, although it is noteworthy to mention that the Catholic European context is more active in volunteer work than the Orthodox one [32]. A common misconception is that religion-motivated volunteers are only more disposed to volunteer in religious institutions; Johnston [33] disputes against that by demonstrating that volunteerism is not only limited to religious institutions but rather expands into nonreligious institutions over time; Grönlund [34], with an ingenious attempt, scrutinizes different styles of religiousness. The first one having religion at the heart of volunteering and the second one associated with values and worldviews that an individual has, which in turn coincides with the religious views. The first type of religiousness is proven to be most associated with volunteerism [34].

The before-mentioned studies infer to religious affiliation. Inaba [35] approaches religion from a different aspect, the individual one. In his paper, Inaba argues that the source of volunteer work in the Japanese culture is inspired by "unconscious religiosity," which infers to the tendency to magnify individual work to a more grandiose purpose. Unconscious religiosity in the Japanese culture is similar to the Western concept of spirituality. Nevertheless, spirituality was found to be a significant negative predictor in the United States [36].

#### **1.2 Demographical characteristics**

In the broad and divisive debate of genetics versus environment, demographics are, for the most part, considered and given the attention they deserve. Needless to say that volunteering, like any other prosocial behavior, needs to be studied from that perspective as well. In this section of the literature review, we consider factors such as age, race, income, and education to further explain what drives volunteering.

#### *1.2.1 Gender*

Most of the literature above use gender as a control variable in their analysis. It is such an easy variable to include regardless of the research methodology the study is using. However, it is important to note that most of the studies that we are about to

**17**

*1.2.2 Race*

*1.2.3 Age*

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework*

discuss have looked primarily at sex differences and how they impact volunteering,

It seems that gender differences with regard to donating time and money vary from country to country. For the most part, women were more susceptible to volunteer than men. In the United States, for example, men do less volunteer work than women despite the fact they are at a slight disadvantage when it comes to income [37]. Einolf, therefore, suggests that prosocial motivation is more a characteristic of women than men. Other research support this finding [38]. The latest survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the United States confirmed this trend; 21.8% was the volunteer rate for men, while the rate for women was 27.8% [39]. In the United Kingdom, Brown [10] provides further evidence by stating that men donate 25% less than women. Surveys done in Australia consent to the findings to its fellow English-speaking countries, while Japan despite being distant in culture and language still shows more evidence for women volunteering than men [40]. In Canada, gender equality is reflected in men and women's tendencies to donate time or money, no significant difference between the two. Sweden lies at the other end of the spectrum with men being more prone to volunteer [40]. These cross-cultural differences could potentially indicate that the social aspect works as a stronger

Besides country considerations, gender differences vary across surveys. Most notably, lengthy surveys show little or no difference between men and women in volunteering [41, 42]. Hence, we can presume that the more a researcher digs by asking more questions, the slenderer the gap between men and women becomes. Another noticeable difference lies in the nature of the volunteering activities that men or women tend to opt for. Men, for instance, are more likely to volunteer in sport and recreational activities, while women are interested in educational and human service organizations [40]. Nevertheless, looking at this study alone would rather provide a biased image. Organizations' standards in recruiting should also be taken into account. The domain of youth sport, which is essentially driven by volunteer workforce, is a good demonstration of double standards in recruitment. Men are mostly recruited for coaching positions, while women are recruited for supporting activities. Supporting activities involve back-office and secretarial work. As suggested by Messner and Bozada-Deas [43], gender roles in volunteer work are a mere reflection of gender roles in families. In this context, Wymer [44] validates some interesting hypothesis. He finds that females have a greater preference for nurturing roles in organizations such as helping infants and youth, while males are interested in risk-taking and dangerous volunteering experiences.

Like gender, race is almost always controlled for when investigating other independent variables. There is little focus on the variable itself to predict prosocial behaviors. Johnson and Lee [45] find that Asians have less propensity to volunteer than Hispanics or Whites. Interestingly, when looking at the Black community, only educated Black individuals passed the significance test. Wilson and Hughes [46] maintain that Whites are more likely to volunteer than any other ethnic or racial groups, while Taniguchi [31] finds no significant effect of race in his model.

There is a growing number of studies that looks at the impact of volunteerism on the well-being and mental illness of elderly individuals [47, 48]. That is obviously beyond the scope of our study. We are rather interested in the antecedents

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

rather than just using gender as a mere control variable.

impetus to volunteering than the biological one.

#### *Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

discuss have looked primarily at sex differences and how they impact volunteering, rather than just using gender as a mere control variable.

It seems that gender differences with regard to donating time and money vary from country to country. For the most part, women were more susceptible to volunteer than men. In the United States, for example, men do less volunteer work than women despite the fact they are at a slight disadvantage when it comes to income [37]. Einolf, therefore, suggests that prosocial motivation is more a characteristic of women than men. Other research support this finding [38]. The latest survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the United States confirmed this trend; 21.8% was the volunteer rate for men, while the rate for women was 27.8% [39]. In the United Kingdom, Brown [10] provides further evidence by stating that men donate 25% less than women. Surveys done in Australia consent to the findings to its fellow English-speaking countries, while Japan despite being distant in culture and language still shows more evidence for women volunteering than men [40]. In Canada, gender equality is reflected in men and women's tendencies to donate time or money, no significant difference between the two. Sweden lies at the other end of the spectrum with men being more prone to volunteer [40]. These cross-cultural differences could potentially indicate that the social aspect works as a stronger impetus to volunteering than the biological one.

Besides country considerations, gender differences vary across surveys. Most notably, lengthy surveys show little or no difference between men and women in volunteering [41, 42]. Hence, we can presume that the more a researcher digs by asking more questions, the slenderer the gap between men and women becomes.

Another noticeable difference lies in the nature of the volunteering activities that men or women tend to opt for. Men, for instance, are more likely to volunteer in sport and recreational activities, while women are interested in educational and human service organizations [40]. Nevertheless, looking at this study alone would rather provide a biased image. Organizations' standards in recruiting should also be taken into account. The domain of youth sport, which is essentially driven by volunteer workforce, is a good demonstration of double standards in recruitment. Men are mostly recruited for coaching positions, while women are recruited for supporting activities. Supporting activities involve back-office and secretarial work. As suggested by Messner and Bozada-Deas [43], gender roles in volunteer work are a mere reflection of gender roles in families. In this context, Wymer [44] validates some interesting hypothesis. He finds that females have a greater preference for nurturing roles in organizations such as helping infants and youth, while males are interested in risk-taking and dangerous volunteering experiences.

#### *1.2.2 Race*

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

*1.1.10 Religion*

subject of religion.

This theory of selfishness in volunteering received much attention due to the fact that it is startlingly repulsive, yet only intrinsic. Self-interest is rather common, even in the supposedly "untainted" act of giving. In public duty, firefighters were more responsive to emergency calls if they purchased vanity plates. This is indicative of self-praise in doing social good. Firefighters who feel pride in helping others are more responsible in their jobs [28]. Within the same context of work duty, Bekkers [8] found that if the invitation to volunteer is solicited by a hierarchical superior, the chances that the person would decline the invitation go down. Volunteers are also motivated by networking. Prouteau and Wolf [29] found a positive correlation between volunteer work and number friends. Apart from the relational motive, Fiorillo [30] finds that monetary rewards influence intrinsic

motivations and therefore alter the person's willingness to volunteer.

religiousness is proven to be most associated with volunteerism [34].

to be a significant negative predictor in the United States [36].

**1.2 Demographical characteristics**

The before-mentioned studies infer to religious affiliation. Inaba [35] approaches religion from a different aspect, the individual one. In his paper, Inaba argues that the source of volunteer work in the Japanese culture is inspired by "unconscious religiosity," which infers to the tendency to magnify individual work to a more grandiose purpose. Unconscious religiosity in the Japanese culture is similar to the Western concept of spirituality. Nevertheless, spirituality was found

In the broad and divisive debate of genetics versus environment, demographics are, for the most part, considered and given the attention they deserve. Needless to say that volunteering, like any other prosocial behavior, needs to be studied from that perspective as well. In this section of the literature review, we consider factors such as age, race, income, and education to further explain what drives volunteering.

Most of the literature above use gender as a control variable in their analysis. It is such an easy variable to include regardless of the research methodology the study is using. However, it is important to note that most of the studies that we are about to

When investigating people' inner motives, it is unavoidable to tap into the

Using the main sample of the midlife development in the United States, Taniguchi [31] finds that religion is, in fact, a significant predictor of the propensity to volunteer. In a brief description of his findings, Taniguchi asserts that volunteers demonstrate more behavioral religiosity than non-volunteers. This is consistent with Bekkers's [5] positive correlation between church attendance and volunteer work, although it is noteworthy to mention that the Catholic European context is more active in volunteer work than the Orthodox one [32]. A common misconception is that religion-motivated volunteers are only more disposed to volunteer in religious institutions; Johnston [33] disputes against that by demonstrating that volunteerism is not only limited to religious institutions but rather expands into nonreligious institutions over time; Grönlund [34], with an ingenious attempt, scrutinizes different styles of religiousness. The first one having religion at the heart of volunteering and the second one associated with values and worldviews that an individual has, which in turn coincides with the religious views. The first type of

**16**

*1.2.1 Gender*

Like gender, race is almost always controlled for when investigating other independent variables. There is little focus on the variable itself to predict prosocial behaviors. Johnson and Lee [45] find that Asians have less propensity to volunteer than Hispanics or Whites. Interestingly, when looking at the Black community, only educated Black individuals passed the significance test. Wilson and Hughes [46] maintain that Whites are more likely to volunteer than any other ethnic or racial groups, while Taniguchi [31] finds no significant effect of race in his model.

#### *1.2.3 Age*

There is a growing number of studies that looks at the impact of volunteerism on the well-being and mental illness of elderly individuals [47, 48]. That is obviously beyond the scope of our study. We are rather interested in the antecedents

of volunteerism. That said, age difference showed different motivational factors. For young individuals, it is the knowledge-seeking process that was more impelling [49]. This is only reasonable since the learning curve for young people is more curved upward than that of older people. Older people, on the other hand, were more driven by social motives [49]. In contrast, Dávilla and Díaz-Morales [50] found that younger people are more motivated by making new acquaintances than younger ones. However, the same study agreed with [49] with regard to career and knowledge concerns. While these two studies focused on age alone, most of the other studies that we discussed in previous sections controlled for that variable.

#### *1.2.4 Education*

There was a clear consensus in literature about how volunteerism is affected by educational attainment. That is, a positive causal relationship [5, 10, 12, 51]. One particular study looked further at why education is such a strong predictor of volunteerism. Gesthuizen and Scheepers [52] tested nine ingeniously crafted hypotheses that consist of mediating factors that may interfere in the presumed relationship of volunteerism and education. We mention the validated ones, starting with the cognitive competence. The latter is enhanced and polished in academic formation and sought to induce volunteer work. Additionally, higher education was linked to higher-status jobs with broader horizons and therefore higher tendency to volunteer. Lastly, the strong positive relationship between volunteerism and education is explained by the fact that educated people have a more comprehensive understanding of world problems and more awareness leads to action.

#### **1.3 Management factors**

For a long time, nonprofit organizations were cautious with being associated with profit organizations. With the birth of hardcore capitalism, management practices were rather cruel and not considering of the workforce that was, for the most part, exploited. Today, however, management is no longer a "dirty word" [53].

Nonprofit organizations are today's essential. They are no longer the "trivial and inconsequential organizations" [54], and their influence in the political arena is far-stretched. "They have made a crucial difference in the way international justice is delivered" [55]. As their growth is going through the roof, their management approaches had to adapt and thrive. Nonprofit organizations are now faced with certain overwhelming expectations; this convergence toward professionalization is only natural to produce the high-quality services they are expected to deliver [56].

Because the trend of management in nonprofits is relatively new, the methodological design remains poor . Contrary to the conclusive results that we discussed in other factors, causal inferences cannot be drawn on this one [57]. The use of longitudinal design approaches raises a lot of questions about the legitimacy of the volunteerism research with regard to management practices.

Some studies, however, have taken the initiative to use more reliable methodologies. Tang et al. [58] used structural equation modeling to inspect the direct and indirect relationship between organizational support and volunteering benefits. The study subsequently concluded that organizational support linked was positively related to two variables of socioemotional benefits: perceived contribution and personal benefit. Surprisingly, an older study applied bivariate analysis and regression analysis to look into the impact of management practices, namely, recruiting, orientation, training, and supervision [59]. The positive relationship was found to be significant in this study as well, so was the case in [60–62], Stirling et al. [63]

**19**

**2. Conclusion**

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework*

example, are negatively associated with the retention of volunteers.

organization to change its style of leadership than to change its location.

the effort put into implementing good volunteer management practices.

as they are now a valuable asset to the organization.

Within the context of volunteer management practices, Ferreira et al. [54] devised a "life cycle of volunteers" with three critical phases: exploratory, developmental, and mature phase. The first stage is rather tentative; volunteers are yet to decide if they want to stay in the organization. In the second stage, volunteers are presumably more certain of their decision to stay in the organization and hence start to contribute. In the last stage, contribution is maximized and volunteers are now in a position to give to others. Ferreira et al. [54] advice that organizations need to approach these stages with effective management practices. In the first stage, where volunteers are indecisive, organizations ought to devise an ample plan to recruit them. In the second stage, training is, without a question, necessary as volunteers are still not equipped with the necessary tools to deal with some situations. Lastly, as volunteers mature and grow, rewarding is central to their retention

This paper analyzed the interdisciplinary aspect of volunteerism. We looked at factors that drive volunteerism from an economic, sociological, psychological, and managerial standpoint. Literature considering the relationship between personality traits and volunteer work was meticulously studied. Most notably, empathy and extraversion proved to be highly correlated with volunteerism. Mediating factors were also unveiled, such as "principle of care" for the case of empathy. Agreeableness

Another exploratory study was done by Carvalho and Sampaio [66]. Using a multiple case study analysis of five Portuguese nonprofits, the study concludes that volunteering is "mostly an informal affair." Formal strategic planning is a scarce practice, and volunteer recruitment is conventionally transmitted through word of mouth. Even in the selection process, informality dominates as interviewers rarely have pre-defined criteria that need to be met. Training, although critical to the retention of volunteers, remains limited to one initial session only. Furthermore, Carvalho and Sampaio investigate other dimensions that are interrelated to the best practice in volunteer management. We can refer to the example of "centrality," defined in the paper as "the extent to which volunteer contribution is central to the organization's mission and is integrated into the overall running of the organization" [66]. Having contrasted two nonprofit organizations, one that is fully reliant on volunteers and another where paid employees ensure the central tasks, Carvalho and Sampaio assert that centrality to the mission and reliance on volunteers dictate

on the other hand, found that rigid management practices of keeping records, for

There is an abundant amount of other research that looks at similar concepts of organizations' incentivizing practices in nonprofits. Again, the methods used suffer from a plethora of pitfalls. They typically focus on specific cases, with no accurate sampling, which in turn limits the extent to which the results can be generalized [64]. Nesbit et al. [65] have developed a useful framework to assess volunteer involvement, with a special focus on how organizations affect volunteers' recruitment and retention. Organizations' characteristics were divided into "nature" and "nurture." The first type deals with characteristics that stem from the organization's nature such as mission, location, and sources of funds, while the second type includes leadership, culture, and staff receptivity to volunteers. Nesbit et al. [65] judge that organizations should rather focus on the "nurture" side of their volunteer program as it can more readily influence than characteristics found in the "nature" side; it is easier for an

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

#### *Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

on the other hand, found that rigid management practices of keeping records, for example, are negatively associated with the retention of volunteers.

There is an abundant amount of other research that looks at similar concepts of organizations' incentivizing practices in nonprofits. Again, the methods used suffer from a plethora of pitfalls. They typically focus on specific cases, with no accurate sampling, which in turn limits the extent to which the results can be generalized [64].

Nesbit et al. [65] have developed a useful framework to assess volunteer involvement, with a special focus on how organizations affect volunteers' recruitment and retention. Organizations' characteristics were divided into "nature" and "nurture." The first type deals with characteristics that stem from the organization's nature such as mission, location, and sources of funds, while the second type includes leadership, culture, and staff receptivity to volunteers. Nesbit et al. [65] judge that organizations should rather focus on the "nurture" side of their volunteer program as it can more readily influence than characteristics found in the "nature" side; it is easier for an organization to change its style of leadership than to change its location.

Another exploratory study was done by Carvalho and Sampaio [66]. Using a multiple case study analysis of five Portuguese nonprofits, the study concludes that volunteering is "mostly an informal affair." Formal strategic planning is a scarce practice, and volunteer recruitment is conventionally transmitted through word of mouth. Even in the selection process, informality dominates as interviewers rarely have pre-defined criteria that need to be met. Training, although critical to the retention of volunteers, remains limited to one initial session only. Furthermore, Carvalho and Sampaio investigate other dimensions that are interrelated to the best practice in volunteer management. We can refer to the example of "centrality," defined in the paper as "the extent to which volunteer contribution is central to the organization's mission and is integrated into the overall running of the organization" [66]. Having contrasted two nonprofit organizations, one that is fully reliant on volunteers and another where paid employees ensure the central tasks, Carvalho and Sampaio assert that centrality to the mission and reliance on volunteers dictate the effort put into implementing good volunteer management practices.

Within the context of volunteer management practices, Ferreira et al. [54] devised a "life cycle of volunteers" with three critical phases: exploratory, developmental, and mature phase. The first stage is rather tentative; volunteers are yet to decide if they want to stay in the organization. In the second stage, volunteers are presumably more certain of their decision to stay in the organization and hence start to contribute. In the last stage, contribution is maximized and volunteers are now in a position to give to others. Ferreira et al. [54] advice that organizations need to approach these stages with effective management practices. In the first stage, where volunteers are indecisive, organizations ought to devise an ample plan to recruit them. In the second stage, training is, without a question, necessary as volunteers are still not equipped with the necessary tools to deal with some situations. Lastly, as volunteers mature and grow, rewarding is central to their retention as they are now a valuable asset to the organization.

#### **2. Conclusion**

This paper analyzed the interdisciplinary aspect of volunteerism. We looked at factors that drive volunteerism from an economic, sociological, psychological, and managerial standpoint. Literature considering the relationship between personality traits and volunteer work was meticulously studied. Most notably, empathy and extraversion proved to be highly correlated with volunteerism. Mediating factors were also unveiled, such as "principle of care" for the case of empathy. Agreeableness

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

*1.2.4 Education*

to action.

**1.3 Management factors**

of volunteerism. That said, age difference showed different motivational factors. For young individuals, it is the knowledge-seeking process that was more impelling [49]. This is only reasonable since the learning curve for young people is more curved upward than that of older people. Older people, on the other hand, were more driven by social motives [49]. In contrast, Dávilla and Díaz-Morales [50] found that younger people are more motivated by making new acquaintances than younger ones. However, the same study agreed with [49] with regard to career and knowledge concerns. While these two studies focused on age alone, most of the other studies that we discussed in previous sections controlled for that variable.

There was a clear consensus in literature about how volunteerism is affected by educational attainment. That is, a positive causal relationship [5, 10, 12, 51]. One particular study looked further at why education is such a strong predictor of volunteerism. Gesthuizen and Scheepers [52] tested nine ingeniously crafted hypotheses that consist of mediating factors that may interfere in the presumed relationship of volunteerism and education. We mention the validated ones, starting with the cognitive competence. The latter is enhanced and polished in academic formation and sought to induce volunteer work. Additionally, higher education was linked to higher-status jobs with broader horizons and therefore higher tendency to volunteer. Lastly, the strong positive relationship between volunteerism and education is explained by the fact that educated people have a more comprehensive understanding of world problems and more awareness leads

For a long time, nonprofit organizations were cautious with being associated with profit organizations. With the birth of hardcore capitalism, management practices were rather cruel and not considering of the workforce that was, for the most part, exploited. Today, however, management is no longer a "dirty word" [53]. Nonprofit organizations are today's essential. They are no longer the "trivial and inconsequential organizations" [54], and their influence in the political arena is far-stretched. "They have made a crucial difference in the way international justice is delivered" [55]. As their growth is going through the roof, their management approaches had to adapt and thrive. Nonprofit organizations are now faced with certain overwhelming expectations; this convergence toward professionalization is only natural to produce the high-quality services they are expected to deliver [56]. Because the trend of management in nonprofits is relatively new, the methodological design remains poor . Contrary to the conclusive results that we discussed in other factors, causal inferences cannot be drawn on this one [57]. The use of longitudinal design approaches raises a lot of questions about the legitimacy of the

Some studies, however, have taken the initiative to use more reliable methodologies. Tang et al. [58] used structural equation modeling to inspect the direct and indirect relationship between organizational support and volunteering benefits. The study subsequently concluded that organizational support linked was positively related to two variables of socioemotional benefits: perceived contribution and personal benefit. Surprisingly, an older study applied bivariate analysis and regression analysis to look into the impact of management practices, namely, recruiting, orientation, training, and supervision [59]. The positive relationship was found to be significant in this study as well, so was the case in [60–62], Stirling et al. [63]

volunteerism research with regard to management practices.

**18**

#### **Figure 1.**

*Volunteerism drivers: A theoretical framework.*

was linked to volunteer work but was not typical of all volunteers. On the other hand, conscientiousness was negatively related to volunteer work. Unsurprisingly, people with social phobias were less prone to volunteer. Other variables such as openness to experience, solidarity, and personal identity were given equal importance. We also looked at the economic theory of volunteerism that speculates that individuals are self-interested when they decide to volunteer. Moreover, we considered religion and its impact on individuals' willingness to volunteer. Then, we turned our focus to demographical factors such as gender, race, age, and education to provide a fuller and more solid answer to our research question. Lastly, we shifted from the perspective of the individual to that of the organization to see how management affect the willingness to volunteer. Based on the previous discussion, we suggest the following framework as presented in **Figure 1** which can be a subject to future examination for validity purposes.

### **Author details**

Mohammed Aboramadan Department of Economics, Management and Statistics (DEMS), University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy

\*Address all correspondence to: mohammed.aboramadan@unimib.it

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

**21**

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework*

Traits: Evidence from UK Panel Data. Sheffield Economic Research Paper

[11] Carlo G, Okun MA, Knight GP, Guzman MK. The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation.

Personality and Individual Differences.

[13] Musick MA, Wilson J. Volunteering

[14] Roberts BW, Lejuez C, Richards JM, Krueger RF. What Is Conscientiousness and How Can it Be Assessed? American

[15] Donnelly G, Iyer R, Howell RT. The big five personality traits, material values, and financial well-being of self-described money managers. Journal of Economic Psychology.

psychological and social resources in different age groups. Social Science and

[12] Handy F, Cnaan RA. The role of social anxiety in volunteering. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 2007;**18**(1):41-58

and depression: The role of

Medicine. 2003;**56**(2):259-269

Psychological Association; 2012

2012;**33**(6):1129-1142

solidarity

[16] McCrae RR, Oliver JP. An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality. 1992;**60**(2):175-215

[18] Adams RE, Boscarino JA. Volunteerism and well-being in the context of the world trade center terrorist attacks. International

[17] Solidarity. Definition of Solidarity in English by Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford Dictionaries|English, Oxford Dictionaries. Available from: http:// en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/

Series; 2015

2005;**38**(6):1293-1305

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

[1] Hustinx L, Cnaan RA, Handy F. Navigating theories of volunteering: A hybrid map for a complex phenomenon.

Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 2010;**40**(4):410-434

[2] Wilson J. Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology. 2000;**26**:215-240

[3] Carson ED. On defining and measuring volunteering in the United States and abroad. Law and Contemporary Problems.

[4] Smith TW. Altruism and Empathy in America: Trends and Correlates. National Opinion Research Center/ University of Chicago; 2006

[5] Bekkers R. Participation in voluntary associations: Relations with resources, personality, and political values. Political Psychology.

[6] Einolf CJ. Empathic concern and prosocial behaviors: A test of experimental results using survey data. Social Science Research.

[7] Mitani H. Influences of resources and subjective dispositions on formal and informal volunteering. Voluntas.

[8] Bekkers R. Who gives what and when? A scenario study of intentions to give time and money. Social Science

[9] Okun MA, Pugliese J, Rook KS. Unpacking the relation between extraversion and volunteering in later life: The role of social capital. Personality and Individual Differences.

[10] Brown S, Taylor K. Charitable Behaviour and the Big Five Personality

Research. 2010;**39**(3):369-381

2005;**26**(3):439-454

2008;**37**(4):1267-1279

2014;**25**(4):1022-1040

2007;**42**(8):1467-1477

1999;**62**(4):67-72

**References**

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

#### **References**

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

to future examination for validity purposes.

*Volunteerism drivers: A theoretical framework.*

was linked to volunteer work but was not typical of all volunteers. On the other hand, conscientiousness was negatively related to volunteer work. Unsurprisingly, people with social phobias were less prone to volunteer. Other variables such as openness to experience, solidarity, and personal identity were given equal importance. We also looked at the economic theory of volunteerism that speculates that individuals are self-interested when they decide to volunteer. Moreover, we considered religion and its impact on individuals' willingness to volunteer. Then, we turned our focus to demographical factors such as gender, race, age, and education to provide a fuller and more solid answer to our research question. Lastly, we shifted from the perspective of the individual to that of the organization to see how management affect the willingness to volunteer. Based on the previous discussion, we suggest the following framework as presented in **Figure 1** which can be a subject

Department of Economics, Management and Statistics (DEMS), University of

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

\*Address all correspondence to: mohammed.aboramadan@unimib.it

**20**

**Author details**

Mohammed Aboramadan

Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy

provided the original work is properly cited.

**Figure 1.**

[1] Hustinx L, Cnaan RA, Handy F. Navigating theories of volunteering: A hybrid map for a complex phenomenon. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 2010;**40**(4):410-434

[2] Wilson J. Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology. 2000;**26**:215-240

[3] Carson ED. On defining and measuring volunteering in the United States and abroad. Law and Contemporary Problems. 1999;**62**(4):67-72

[4] Smith TW. Altruism and Empathy in America: Trends and Correlates. National Opinion Research Center/ University of Chicago; 2006

[5] Bekkers R. Participation in voluntary associations: Relations with resources, personality, and political values. Political Psychology. 2005;**26**(3):439-454

[6] Einolf CJ. Empathic concern and prosocial behaviors: A test of experimental results using survey data. Social Science Research. 2008;**37**(4):1267-1279

[7] Mitani H. Influences of resources and subjective dispositions on formal and informal volunteering. Voluntas. 2014;**25**(4):1022-1040

[8] Bekkers R. Who gives what and when? A scenario study of intentions to give time and money. Social Science Research. 2010;**39**(3):369-381

[9] Okun MA, Pugliese J, Rook KS. Unpacking the relation between extraversion and volunteering in later life: The role of social capital. Personality and Individual Differences. 2007;**42**(8):1467-1477

[10] Brown S, Taylor K. Charitable Behaviour and the Big Five Personality Traits: Evidence from UK Panel Data. Sheffield Economic Research Paper Series; 2015

[11] Carlo G, Okun MA, Knight GP, Guzman MK. The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation. Personality and Individual Differences. 2005;**38**(6):1293-1305

[12] Handy F, Cnaan RA. The role of social anxiety in volunteering. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 2007;**18**(1):41-58

[13] Musick MA, Wilson J. Volunteering and depression: The role of psychological and social resources in different age groups. Social Science and Medicine. 2003;**56**(2):259-269

[14] Roberts BW, Lejuez C, Richards JM, Krueger RF. What Is Conscientiousness and How Can it Be Assessed? American Psychological Association; 2012

[15] Donnelly G, Iyer R, Howell RT. The big five personality traits, material values, and financial well-being of self-described money managers. Journal of Economic Psychology. 2012;**33**(6):1129-1142

[16] McCrae RR, Oliver JP. An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality. 1992;**60**(2):175-215

[17] Solidarity. Definition of Solidarity in English by Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford Dictionaries|English, Oxford Dictionaries. Available from: http:// en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ solidarity

[18] Adams RE, Boscarino JA. Volunteerism and well-being in the context of the world trade center terrorist attacks. International

Journal of Emergency Mental Health. 2015;**17**(1):274-282

[19] Beyerlein K, Sikkink D. Sorrow and Solidarity: Why Americans Volunteered for 9/11 Relief Efforts. University of California Press; 2008

[20] Oyserman D. Self-concept and identity. In: Tesser A, Schwarz N, editors. The Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2001. pp. 499-517

[21] Grönlund H. Identity and volunteering intertwined: Reflections on the values of young adults. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 2011;**22**(4):852-874

[22] Matsuba K, Hart D, Atkins R. Psychological and social-structural influences on commitment to volunteering. Journal of Research in Personality. 2007;**41**(4):889-907

[23] Baines S, Hardill I. 'At least I can do something': The work of volunteering in a community beset by worklessness. Social Policy and Society. 2008;**7**(3):307-317

[24] Fuller S, Kershaw P, Pulkingham J. Constructing 'active citizenship': Single mothers, welfare, and the logics of voluntarism. Citizenship Studies. 2008;**12**(2):157-176

[25] Hayakawa T. Selfish giving? Volunteering motivations and the morality of giving. Traditiones. 2014;**43**(3):16-32

[26] Gee LK. The nature of giving time to your child's school. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2011;**40**(3):552-565

[27] Maki A. Investigating similarities and differences between volunteer behaviors: Development of a volunteer interest typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2015;**46**(1):5-28

[28] Carpenter J, Myers CK. Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism, image, and incentives. Journal of Public Economics. 2010;**94**(11-12):911-920

[29] Prouteau L, Wolff F. On the relational motive for volunteer work. Journal of Economic Psychology. 2008;**29**(3):314-335

[30] Fiorillo D. Do monetary rewards crowd out the intrinsic motivation of volunteers? Some empirical evidence for italian volunteers. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics. 2011;**82**(2):139-165

[31] Taniguchi H, Thomas LD. The influences of religious attitudes on volunteering. Voluntas. 2011;**22**(2):335-355

[32] Montes AA, Valencia PT, Rodríguez VF, Hager MA. Religion and volunteering over the adult life course. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 2018;**6**(1):82-111

[33] Johnston JB. Religion and volunteering over the adult life course. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 2013;**52**(4):733-752

[34] Grönlund H. Religiousness and volunteering: Searching for connections In late modernity. Nordic Journal of Religion and Society. 2012;**25**(1):47-66

[35] Inaba K. Unconscious religiosity and social capital. Religion and Social Contribution. 2011;**1**(1):3-26

[36] Okun MA, O'Rourke HP, Keller B, Johnson KA, Enders C. Value-expressive volunteer motivation and volunteering by older adults: Relationships with religiosity and spirituality. Journal of Gerontology. 2015;**70**(6):860-870

**23**

(2):207-228

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework*

findings from 12 European Countries. Innovation in Aging. 2018;**2**(1):657

[48] Von Bonsdorff MB, Rantanen T. Benefits of formal voluntary work among older people. A review. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research.

[49] Yussof R, Wan N, Mohamed W. Age and motives for volunteering: From Socioemotional selectivity theory perspective. In: Proceedings of the Academic Symposium of Social Science.

[50] Dávila MC, Díaz-Morales JF. Age and motives for volunteering: Further evidence. Europe's Journal of

Psychology. 2009;**5**(2):82-95

Quarterly. 2010;**39**(2):213-235

[52] Gesthuizen M, Scheepers P.

and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

[53] Cunningham I. Human resource management in the voluntary sector: Challenges and opportunities. Public Money & Management.

[54] Ferreira M, Proença JF, Proença T. Motivations and Management Factors of Volunteer Work In Nonprofit Organisations: A Literature Review.

[55] Dar F. Emerging role of NGOs in the world's socio-political affairs. International Journal of Peace and Development studies. 2014;**6**(1):1-19

[56] Chater D. Coming in from the Cold? The Impact of the Contract Culture

2012;**41**(1):58-81

1999;**19**(2):19-25

University of Porto; 2009

[51] Balduck A, Rossem AV, Buelens M. Identifying competencies of volunteer board members of community sports clubs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector

Educational differences in volunteering in cross-National Perspective: Individual and contextual explanations. Nonprofit

2011;**23**(3):162-169

2015

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

[37] Einolf CJ. Gender differences in the correlates of volunteering and charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2011;**40**(6):1092-1112

[38] Themudo NS. Gender and the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

[39] Bureau of Labor Statics.

Indiana University Press; 2008

Volunteering in the United States; 2015

[40] Musick MA, Wilson J. Volunteers : A Social Profile. Indiana. Bloomington:

[41] Bekkers R, Wiepking P. To give or not to give, that is the question: How methodology is destiny in Dutch giving data. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2006;**35**(3):533-540

[42] Rooney PM, Mesch DJ, Chin W, Steinberg KS. The effects of race, gender, and survey methodologies on giving in the US. Economics Letters.

[43] Messner MA, Bozada-Deas S. Separating the men from the moms. Gender & Society. 2009;**23**(1):49-71

[44] Wymer W. Developing more effective social marketing strategies.

[45] Johnso K, Lee HS. Factors associated with volunteering among racial/ethnic groups: Findings from the California health interview survey. Research on

[46] Wilson O, Hughes O. Urban green space policy and discourse in England under new labour from 1997 to 2010. Planning Practice and Research. 2011;**26**

[47] Hansen T, Aartsen M, Slagsvold B, Deindl C. Dynamics of volunteering and life satisfaction in midlife and old age:

Journal of Social Marketing.

Aging. 2015;**39**(5):575-596

2005;**86**(2):173-180

2011;**1**(1):17-31

2009;**38**(4):663-683

*Factors that Drive Volunteerism in Nonprofit Organizations: A Theoretical Framework DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86943*

[37] Einolf CJ. Gender differences in the correlates of volunteering and charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2011;**40**(6):1092-1112

[38] Themudo NS. Gender and the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2009;**38**(4):663-683

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

Journal of Emergency Mental Health.

and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

[28] Carpenter J, Myers CK. Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism, image, and incentives. Journal of Public Economics. 2010;**94**(11-12):911-920

[29] Prouteau L, Wolff F. On the relational motive for volunteer work. Journal of Economic Psychology.

[30] Fiorillo D. Do monetary rewards crowd out the intrinsic motivation of volunteers? Some empirical evidence for italian volunteers. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics.

[31] Taniguchi H, Thomas LD. The influences of religious attitudes on volunteering. Voluntas.

[32] Montes AA, Valencia PT,

Religion. 2018;**6**(1):82-111

[33] Johnston JB. Religion and

[34] Grönlund H. Religiousness and volunteering: Searching for connections In late modernity. Nordic Journal of Religion and Society.

[35] Inaba K. Unconscious religiosity and social capital. Religion and Social

[36] Okun MA, O'Rourke HP, Keller B, Johnson KA, Enders C. Value-expressive volunteer motivation and volunteering by older adults: Relationships with religiosity and spirituality. Journal of Gerontology. 2015;**70**(6):860-870

Contribution. 2011;**1**(1):3-26

2012;**25**(1):47-66

Rodríguez VF, Hager MA. Religion and volunteering over the adult life course. Journal for the Scientific Study of

volunteering over the adult life course. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 2013;**52**(4):733-752

2008;**29**(3):314-335

2011;**82**(2):139-165

2011;**22**(2):335-355

2015;**46**(1):5-28

[19] Beyerlein K, Sikkink D. Sorrow and Solidarity: Why Americans Volunteered for 9/11 Relief Efforts. University of

[20] Oyserman D. Self-concept and identity. In: Tesser A, Schwarz N, editors. The Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2001. pp. 499-517

[21] Grönlund H. Identity and

2011;**22**(4):852-874

2008;**7**(3):307-317

2008;**12**(2):157-176

2014;**43**(3):16-32

2011;**40**(3):552-565

volunteering intertwined: Reflections on the values of young adults. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations.

[22] Matsuba K, Hart D, Atkins R. Psychological and social-structural influences on commitment to volunteering. Journal of Research in Personality. 2007;**41**(4):889-907

[23] Baines S, Hardill I. 'At least I can do something': The work of volunteering in a community beset by worklessness. Social Policy and Society.

[24] Fuller S, Kershaw P, Pulkingham J. Constructing 'active citizenship': Single mothers, welfare, and the logics of voluntarism. Citizenship Studies.

[25] Hayakawa T. Selfish giving? Volunteering motivations and the morality of giving. Traditiones.

[26] Gee LK. The nature of giving time to your child's school. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

[27] Maki A. Investigating similarities and differences between volunteer behaviors: Development of a

volunteer interest typology. Nonprofit

2015;**17**(1):274-282

California Press; 2008

**22**

[39] Bureau of Labor Statics. Volunteering in the United States; 2015

[40] Musick MA, Wilson J. Volunteers : A Social Profile. Indiana. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 2008

[41] Bekkers R, Wiepking P. To give or not to give, that is the question: How methodology is destiny in Dutch giving data. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2006;**35**(3):533-540

[42] Rooney PM, Mesch DJ, Chin W, Steinberg KS. The effects of race, gender, and survey methodologies on giving in the US. Economics Letters. 2005;**86**(2):173-180

[43] Messner MA, Bozada-Deas S. Separating the men from the moms. Gender & Society. 2009;**23**(1):49-71

[44] Wymer W. Developing more effective social marketing strategies. Journal of Social Marketing. 2011;**1**(1):17-31

[45] Johnso K, Lee HS. Factors associated with volunteering among racial/ethnic groups: Findings from the California health interview survey. Research on Aging. 2015;**39**(5):575-596

[46] Wilson O, Hughes O. Urban green space policy and discourse in England under new labour from 1997 to 2010. Planning Practice and Research. 2011;**26** (2):207-228

[47] Hansen T, Aartsen M, Slagsvold B, Deindl C. Dynamics of volunteering and life satisfaction in midlife and old age:

findings from 12 European Countries. Innovation in Aging. 2018;**2**(1):657

[48] Von Bonsdorff MB, Rantanen T. Benefits of formal voluntary work among older people. A review. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2011;**23**(3):162-169

[49] Yussof R, Wan N, Mohamed W. Age and motives for volunteering: From Socioemotional selectivity theory perspective. In: Proceedings of the Academic Symposium of Social Science. 2015

[50] Dávila MC, Díaz-Morales JF. Age and motives for volunteering: Further evidence. Europe's Journal of Psychology. 2009;**5**(2):82-95

[51] Balduck A, Rossem AV, Buelens M. Identifying competencies of volunteer board members of community sports clubs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2010;**39**(2):213-235

[52] Gesthuizen M, Scheepers P. Educational differences in volunteering in cross-National Perspective: Individual and contextual explanations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2012;**41**(1):58-81

[53] Cunningham I. Human resource management in the voluntary sector: Challenges and opportunities. Public Money & Management. 1999;**19**(2):19-25

[54] Ferreira M, Proença JF, Proença T. Motivations and Management Factors of Volunteer Work In Nonprofit Organisations: A Literature Review. University of Porto; 2009

[55] Dar F. Emerging role of NGOs in the world's socio-political affairs. International Journal of Peace and Development studies. 2014;**6**(1):1-19

[56] Chater D. Coming in from the Cold? The Impact of the Contract Culture

on Voluntary Sector Homelessness Agencies in England. Voluntary Sector Working Paper, 10. 2008. pp. 1-37

[57] Mason DP. Putting charity to the test: A case for field experiments on giving time and money in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2013;**42**(1):193-202

[58] Tang F, Choi E, Morrow-Howell N. Organizational support and volunteering benefits for older adults. The Gerontologist. 2010;**50**(5):603-612

[59] Cnaan RA, Cascio TA. Performance and commitment: Issues in management of volunteers in human service organizations. Journal of Social Service Research. 1998;**24**(3):1-37

[60] Cuskelly G, Taylor T, Hoye R, Darcy S. Volunteer management practices and volunteer retention: A human resource management approach. Sport Management Review. 2006;**9**(2):141-163

[61] Resnick B, Klinedinst J, Dorsey S, Holtzman L, Abuelhiga LS. Volunteer behavior and factors that influence volunteering among residents in continuing care retirement communities. Journal of Housing for the Elderly. 2013;**27**(1-2):161-176

[62] Hager MA, Brudney JL. Problems recruiting volunteers: Nature versus nurture. Nonprofit Management and Leadership. 2011;**22**(3):137-157

[63] Stirling C, Kilpatrick S, Orpin P. A psychological contract perspective to the link between non-profit organizations' management practices and volunteer sustainability. Human Resource Development International. 2011;**14**(3):321-336

[64] Studer S, Schnurbein GV. Organizational factors affecting volunteers: A literature review on volunteer coordination. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 2013;**24**(2):403-440

[65] Nesbit R, Christensen RK. The Limits and Possibilities of Volunteering: A Framework for Explaining the Scope of Volunteer Involvement in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Public Administration Review; 2017;**78**(4):502-513

[66] Carvalho A, Sampaio M. Volunteer management beyond prescribed best practice: A case study of Portuguese non-profits. Personnel Review. 2017;**46**(2):410-428

**25**

Section 3

Governments and

Non-Profit Organisations

Section 3

## Governments and Non-Profit Organisations

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

on Voluntary Sector Homelessness Agencies in England. Voluntary Sector Working Paper, 10. 2008. pp. 1-37

International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations.

[65] Nesbit R, Christensen RK. The Limits and Possibilities of Volunteering: A Framework for Explaining the Scope of Volunteer Involvement in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Public Administration Review;

[66] Carvalho A, Sampaio M. Volunteer management beyond prescribed best practice: A case study of Portuguese non-profits. Personnel Review.

2013;**24**(2):403-440

2017;**78**(4):502-513

2017;**46**(2):410-428

[57] Mason DP. Putting charity to the test: A case for field experiments on giving time and money in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector

[58] Tang F, Choi E, Morrow-Howell N.

volunteering benefits for older adults. The Gerontologist. 2010;**50**(5):603-612

[59] Cnaan RA, Cascio TA. Performance and commitment: Issues in management

organizations. Journal of Social Service

Quarterly. 2013;**42**(1):193-202

Organizational support and

of volunteers in human service

[60] Cuskelly G, Taylor T, Hoye R, Darcy S. Volunteer management practices and volunteer retention: A human resource management approach. Sport Management Review.

[61] Resnick B, Klinedinst J, Dorsey S, Holtzman L, Abuelhiga LS. Volunteer behavior and factors that influence volunteering among residents in continuing care retirement

communities. Journal of Housing for the

[62] Hager MA, Brudney JL. Problems recruiting volunteers: Nature versus nurture. Nonprofit Management and Leadership. 2011;**22**(3):137-157

[63] Stirling C, Kilpatrick S, Orpin P. A psychological contract perspective to the link between non-profit organizations' management practices and volunteer sustainability. Human Resource Development International.

Elderly. 2013;**27**(1-2):161-176

Research. 1998;**24**(3):1-37

2006;**9**(2):141-163

2011;**14**(3):321-336

[64] Studer S, Schnurbein GV. Organizational factors affecting volunteers: A literature review on volunteer coordination. VOLUNTAS:

**24**

**27**

civic associations.

**Chapter 3**

**Abstract**

economy

**1. Introduction**

classical spheres of market and state.

Slovakia

democratic dimensions.

*Mária Murray Svidroňová*

On Relations between Government

In this chapter, we look at non-profits and civil society as a transit zone for solidarity acts, social innovations and initiatives to influence social policy by means of co-creation and collaboration with government (public sector organisations). The aim is to present collaboration practices between public sector organisations, non-governmental organisation, social economy organisations and citizens, known as co-creation, with a focus on drivers and barriers of this collaboration in Slovakia. The chapter focuses on channelling solidarity produced by non-profits into social policy through co-creation. Introducing the solidarity economy approach allows us to evaluate the relationships between the government sector and non-profit organisations from a broader societal perspective including both economic and

**Keywords:** public sector, non-profits, NGOs, civil society, social economy, solidarity

This chapter investigates how far the third sector and social economy act as a transit zone for solidarity acts, social innovations and initiatives to impact social policy. It focuses on forms of co-creation of welfare services, on gaining voice in public discourse to influence public policy practices and on the barriers and drivers

This part of the chapter provides an overview of the key concepts and literature on the third sector, social innovation and co-creation, outlining the development of the research field by mirroring on the sphere of citizen action—social movements, civil society, third sector and social economy organisations—situated between the

Let us start with a question: Which came first, the social economy or the third sector? Proponents of the social economy argue that the terms 'civil society' and 'third sector' are just names for the social economy in the countries of Eastern Europe, where the civil society developed after the fall of communism. Proponents of the third sector argue the opposite that the social economy only appropriates what the third sector built a long time ago: active citizenship reflected into founding

for channelling grassroots initiatives and ideas into political practice.

and Non-profits: The Case of

#### **Chapter 3**

## On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia

*Mária Murray Svidroňová*

#### **Abstract**

In this chapter, we look at non-profits and civil society as a transit zone for solidarity acts, social innovations and initiatives to influence social policy by means of co-creation and collaboration with government (public sector organisations). The aim is to present collaboration practices between public sector organisations, non-governmental organisation, social economy organisations and citizens, known as co-creation, with a focus on drivers and barriers of this collaboration in Slovakia. The chapter focuses on channelling solidarity produced by non-profits into social policy through co-creation. Introducing the solidarity economy approach allows us to evaluate the relationships between the government sector and non-profit organisations from a broader societal perspective including both economic and democratic dimensions.

**Keywords:** public sector, non-profits, NGOs, civil society, social economy, solidarity economy

#### **1. Introduction**

This chapter investigates how far the third sector and social economy act as a transit zone for solidarity acts, social innovations and initiatives to impact social policy. It focuses on forms of co-creation of welfare services, on gaining voice in public discourse to influence public policy practices and on the barriers and drivers for channelling grassroots initiatives and ideas into political practice.

This part of the chapter provides an overview of the key concepts and literature on the third sector, social innovation and co-creation, outlining the development of the research field by mirroring on the sphere of citizen action—social movements, civil society, third sector and social economy organisations—situated between the classical spheres of market and state.

Let us start with a question: Which came first, the social economy or the third sector? Proponents of the social economy argue that the terms 'civil society' and 'third sector' are just names for the social economy in the countries of Eastern Europe, where the civil society developed after the fall of communism. Proponents of the third sector argue the opposite that the social economy only appropriates what the third sector built a long time ago: active citizenship reflected into founding civic associations.

Cohen [1] stated that after the demise of state socialism in Eastern Europe, in which citizen movements played an important role, the concept of civil society became increasingly related to changes in institutional politics to address a perceived crisis of legitimacy of representative democracy and failing financial institutions. Apparently, neither the centralised state nor the magic of the marketplace can offer effective, liberal and democratic solutions to the problems of 'post-industrial' civil societies in the context of globalisation, introducing an economic dimension to civil society that finds expression in the emerging social economy.

Defourny [2] offers a distinction of three types of established social economy organisations: cooperative-style enterprises that go back to the mid-nineteenth century (working in agriculture, saving and credit, insurance and housing); mutual, based in the third sector or as part of the welfare state, working at community level; and advocacy associations offering services to members and society. While some of the old cooperatives, that is, in agriculture, have become more like conventional private businesses [3], the new social economy comprises 'new service cooperatives, voluntary organisations and social enterprises' [4], such as the British Community Interest Companies [5], social cooperatives in Italy [6], entrepreneurial spin-offs of traditional third sector organisations producing social services or concerned and responsible groups of citizens who want to make a difference [7].

The development of the social economy is unquestionably influenced by the development of the third sector that focuses on the provision of public services, including social services. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) earned their position in the economy of every developed country as social innovators and important actors in the social economy. Many social economy subjects take the legal form of civic associations or public benefit organisations. Third sector organisations can be seen in a certain light as social economy organisations, especially when taking into account, all the similarities between these two types of organisations summarised in **Table 1**.

To answer the question from the beginning, based on the above mentioned, we believe that third sector came first. The shift of third sector organisations towards the use of market resources, first observed in Europe during the 1990s as a means to respond to social deficits not addressed by social services and growing funding constraints, led to a re-orientation in third sector research towards notions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship [7].

In sum, conceptualisations of the third sector vary across Europe and are connected to deeper cultural traditions. They focus on different features such as charitable purpose, non-profit distribution, expressions of social solidarity, or civic values such as public participation. Nevertheless, all of these potential manifestations of the third sector share certain common attributes: they are all institutionally separate from government, they share a high degree of self-governance, and they have a social mission that is pursued on a voluntary basis. Based on this common core, Salamon and Sokolowski [9] recently proposed a definition of the third sector that includes both non-profit institutions and some social economy organisations that: (i) pursue a legally binding social mission; (ii) operate under an 'asset lock'; (iii) are prohibited from distributing more than 50% of profits; and (iv) include at least 30% of individuals with specified special needs among its employees or beneficiaries. The last two requirements have been criticised as too high and difficult to achieve even for work integration social enterprises who employ people otherwise excluded from the labour market. Appreciating that the combined public purpose dimension and limited profit distribution constraint is a way to broaden a third sector conceptualisation strictly based on non-profit institutions, Defourny and Nyssens [10] argue that it still needs further research to better understand the great diversity within the cooperative and social enterprise.

**29**

**Table 1.**

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia*

Goal Fulfilment of social mission—To

Institutions A wide variety of organisational

Autonomy Social enterprises are usually

Non-distribution constraint Limited distribution of profit

Voluntarism A combination of volunteers

Civic initiatives Typically, the result of collective

Funding Financial sustainability depends

Management Participatory governance,

*Comparison of social economy and third sector characteristics.*

*Source: Vaceková and Murray Svidroňová [8].*

Entrepreneurial/business

activity

need

**enterprises (SEs)**

companies

serve a local community or specific groups of citizens

forms, including public benefit organisations, cooperative organisations, joint stock companies and limited liability

created and managed by a group of people on the basis of an autonomous business plan

to shareholders or employees and the obligation to reinvest the profit (or a substantial part of the profit) to the social objectives of the enterprise

and paid staff; a minimum level

dynamics involving citizens or members of groups sharing a common goal or community

Business is a main activity; goods and services are produced, i.e. they enter the market and offer their production for sale

on the performance of members and staff and their efforts to ensure adequate resources; activities are also funded through financial support mechanisms from public and private sources; multisource

decision-making involves all

funding is used

stakeholders

of paid work

**Third sector/NGOs**

benefits

funds

independence

Fulfilment of organisation's mission—To provide social

NGOs are not part of the public administration: they are institutionally separated from the state and have political

NGOs are not founded to generate profit to be shared among the owners or managers, and any profits are fully returned to the organisation and used in accordance with its statutes

Voluntary participation in activities of the NGOs; a high proportion of volunteering

Established by citizens for the purpose of achieving a mutual or generally useful purpose/benefit

Funded under redistribution mechanisms; entrepreneurship is

Multisource funding is a principle; this may be a combination of public (government) sources, private and individual sources, grants, membership fees, income from self-financing and business

Self-governance; they manage themselves through established organisational structures; the main body is usually a general

seen as a side activity

activities

assembly

Formalised and institutionalised structures, legal form given by law, usually associations and public benefit organisations, but also foundations and non-profit

**Sector characteristic Social economy/social** 

The third and social economy sectors are under stress. Scholars in the field argue, reflected in policy changes, that we have reached a juncture, where societies have to choose between a greater role for civil society, the third sector and the social economy

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*


*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

summarised in **Table 1**.

enterprise and social entrepreneurship [7].

diversity within the cooperative and social enterprise.

Cohen [1] stated that after the demise of state socialism in Eastern Europe, in which citizen movements played an important role, the concept of civil society became increasingly related to changes in institutional politics to address a perceived crisis of legitimacy of representative democracy and failing financial institutions. Apparently, neither the centralised state nor the magic of the marketplace can offer effective, liberal and democratic solutions to the problems of 'post-industrial' civil societies in the context of globalisation, introducing an economic dimension to

Defourny [2] offers a distinction of three types of established social economy organisations: cooperative-style enterprises that go back to the mid-nineteenth century (working in agriculture, saving and credit, insurance and housing); mutual, based in the third sector or as part of the welfare state, working at community level; and advocacy associations offering services to members and society. While some of the old cooperatives, that is, in agriculture, have become more like conventional private businesses [3], the new social economy comprises 'new service cooperatives, voluntary organisations and social enterprises' [4], such as the British Community Interest Companies [5], social cooperatives in Italy [6], entrepreneurial spin-offs of traditional third sector organisations producing social services or concerned and

The development of the social economy is unquestionably influenced by the development of the third sector that focuses on the provision of public services, including social services. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) earned their position in the economy of every developed country as social innovators and important actors in the social economy. Many social economy subjects take the legal form of civic associations or public benefit organisations. Third sector organisations can be seen in a certain light as social economy organisations, especially when taking into account, all the similarities between these two types of organisations

To answer the question from the beginning, based on the above mentioned, we believe that third sector came first. The shift of third sector organisations towards the use of market resources, first observed in Europe during the 1990s as a means to respond to social deficits not addressed by social services and growing funding constraints, led to a re-orientation in third sector research towards notions of social

In sum, conceptualisations of the third sector vary across Europe and are connected to deeper cultural traditions. They focus on different features such as charitable purpose, non-profit distribution, expressions of social solidarity, or civic values such as public participation. Nevertheless, all of these potential manifestations of the third sector share certain common attributes: they are all institutionally separate from government, they share a high degree of self-governance, and they have a social mission that is pursued on a voluntary basis. Based on this common core, Salamon and Sokolowski [9] recently proposed a definition of the third sector that includes both non-profit institutions and some social economy organisations that: (i) pursue a legally binding social mission; (ii) operate under an 'asset lock'; (iii) are prohibited from distributing more than 50% of profits; and (iv) include at least 30% of individuals with specified special needs among its employees or beneficiaries. The last two requirements have been criticised as too high and difficult to achieve even for work integration social enterprises who employ people otherwise excluded from the labour market. Appreciating that the combined public purpose dimension and limited profit distribution constraint is a way to broaden a third sector conceptualisation strictly based on non-profit institutions, Defourny and Nyssens [10] argue that it still needs further research to better understand the great

civil society that finds expression in the emerging social economy.

responsible groups of citizens who want to make a difference [7].

**28**

#### **Table 1.**

*Comparison of social economy and third sector characteristics.*

The third and social economy sectors are under stress. Scholars in the field argue, reflected in policy changes, that we have reached a juncture, where societies have to choose between a greater role for civil society, the third sector and the social economy as providers of welfare, on the one hand, or unregulated privatisation, on the other [11]. In addition to that, Hulgård [12] detects a trend that steadily changed civil society from being a category related to political philosophy, the enhancement of citizenship and the possibility of democratic governance to a question of training business leaders to better identify and serve the markets at the bottom of the pyramid.

If political institutions are supportive of civil society, non-profit non-governmental organisations show the ability of a society to organise itself. Scholars agree that a lively non-profit non-governmental landscape contributes to institutional diversity and can have a positive impact on innovations in civil society [13]. Many European governments are seeking new ways to involve citizens and the third sector in the provision and governance of publicly financed welfare services [11].

Despite social enterprise and social entrepreneurship being a young field of academic research, which started in the 1990s with the observation of work integration enterprises, it has already produced a multitude of conceptual, analytical and comparative work [11, 14–16]. Scholars in economics and business studies have been very effective at explaining the economic rationale behind the emergence of social enterprises [17, 18] and the characteristics, dynamics and strategies deployed by these organisations in an uncertain and resource-limited environment [19, 20]. The 2008 financial and economic crisis and the turn towards austerity triggered a more financial approach, illustrated by the vast body of literature currently under development on 'social' and 'impact investment' [21].

#### **2. Moving towards a solidarity economy**

Researchers on social and solidarity economy agree that the market-state dualism (state vs. market as expressed in liberalism vs. state socialism) inherited from the twentieth century is outdated [22]. Organisations in a solidarity economy are envisaged from the outset as voluntarily engaged in forms of public action for the common good. The participatory governance dimension takes centre stage in a conceptualisation of the social economy that highlights a more organic notion of solidarity rooted in pluralist civil society and social movements, coupling it with economic understandings of citizen initiatives and third sector.

The public space as a sphere of democracy expressed in citizen and civil society action is combined with a pluralist notion of economy: market economy, nonmarket economy and non-monetary economy, the latter two describing:


Such a characterisation of solidarity economy is theoretically influenced by Karl Polanyi and his notion of reciprocity inherent to the market, and empirically inspired by the emancipatory movements in Latin America [24].

Polanyi [25] acknowledged the profit motive of capitalist economy but referred to a 'fictitious commodification' of labour, social and private spheres by drawing attention to economic practices, such as redistribution, reciprocity and household administration, safeguarded by a double movement of political elites and commercial interests on the one hand, and cross-class social movements leading to understand that it needs regulation in order to save society on the other. Thus, the

**31**

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia*

market becomes culturally and politically embedded, rather than autonomous and dominating political and private spheres, manifesting itself in the structure of government redistribution, but also in social rights and legislative and regulatory

Nowadays, Fraser [27] argues that we must add a critique of domination to Polanyi's structural critique of fictitious commodification, and since today, it also affects the sphere of social reproduction, site of giving birth to and raising children, caring for family members and maintaining households, which is increasingly outsourced to low-paid help. She proposes to think instead of a triple movement that includes civil society, by bringing in the post-war emancipatory movements that rally around status such as gender, ethnicity, sexuality, religion or nationality that exposed the suppressive factors of national welfare and social protection and demand to find a new synthesis between social protection and marketisation. This infrastructure of a solidarity economy is aware that a wage could serve as a resource against domination premised on status … they claimed the freedom of contract not as an end in itself, but rather as a means to emancipation, converting the social dimension into economic

While Fraser [27] herself points out the possible detrimental effects of emancipation on the fabric of existing solidarities as it may open a path for marketisation that can erode the ethical basis of social protection, she also states that considering the scale at which crisis is experienced today, the welfare state alone cannot protect against the decommodifiying side-effects of competition, international markets and currencies without political and social integration. Hence, solidarity economy can be regarded as complementary of third sector and social economy, existing next

Empirical evidence from Latin America shows that apart from rare exceptions, solidarity enterprises do not replace existing forms of popular economy. Their main purpose is to reorganise the productive, material and human factors of the popular economy through progressive changes [24]. This requires certain structural conditions, namely the social and political recognition of the relevance of claims, a favourable regime and favourable legislation [11, 15]. Indeed, the concept has gained the attention of policy makers in a number of countries and at EU level,

Solidarity economy identifies scope for the de-commodification of individuals due to its civil society base and focus on collective governance, self-organised production and democratic reciprocity that turns vulnerable people into co-producers and co-owners [23], rather than recipients of philanthropic expressions of solidarity that substitutes for the vocabulary of equality and rights that of public benevolence [24]. Solidarity in these ventures is evident in their members' involvement in day-to-day management and the adoption of equality principles, by placing new actors into work, recognition struggles or discourse of a meaningful life. Similar to the notion of associations as schools for democracy, solidarity encourages broader reciprocity practices, where practical experience in managing the common good

The notion of democratic solidarity dominant in solidarity economy could be considered an additional conceptual dimension in relation to 'successful acts of solidarity'. Defining solidarity as a morally motivated action arising from the feeling of an agent or a group recognising another individual or person's grief or discomfort, an actor is prone to be solidary with a certain group based on how 'deserving' the actor finds the other person or group in relation to 'control or responsibility, need, identity, attitude (e.g. gratefulness) and reciprocity' that is linked to notions of membership and inclusion that one can identify with [29]. It is generally of an altruistic or philanthropic nature. Laville [23] on the other hand criticises

albeit still lacking supportive policies at national levels [28].

lends new value to the notions of justice and public interest.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

leverage or specific productive strength.

to the for-profit market.

mechanisms, such as collective bargaining [26].

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

as providers of welfare, on the one hand, or unregulated privatisation, on the other [11]. In addition to that, Hulgård [12] detects a trend that steadily changed civil society from being a category related to political philosophy, the enhancement of citizenship and the possibility of democratic governance to a question of training business leaders to better identify and serve the markets at the bottom of the pyramid.

If political institutions are supportive of civil society, non-profit non-governmental organisations show the ability of a society to organise itself. Scholars agree that a lively non-profit non-governmental landscape contributes to institutional diversity and can have a positive impact on innovations in civil society [13]. Many European governments are seeking new ways to involve citizens and the third sector

Despite social enterprise and social entrepreneurship being a young field of academic research, which started in the 1990s with the observation of work integration enterprises, it has already produced a multitude of conceptual, analytical and comparative work [11, 14–16]. Scholars in economics and business studies have been very effective at explaining the economic rationale behind the emergence of social enterprises [17, 18] and the characteristics, dynamics and strategies deployed by these organisations in an uncertain and resource-limited environment [19, 20]. The 2008 financial and economic crisis and the turn towards austerity triggered a more financial approach, illustrated by the vast body of literature currently under

Researchers on social and solidarity economy agree that the market-state dualism (state vs. market as expressed in liberalism vs. state socialism) inherited from the twentieth century is outdated [22]. Organisations in a solidarity economy are envisaged from the outset as voluntarily engaged in forms of public action for the common good. The participatory governance dimension takes centre stage in a conceptualisation of the social economy that highlights a more organic notion of solidarity rooted in pluralist civil society and social movements, coupling it with

The public space as a sphere of democracy expressed in citizen and civil society

1. redistribution of produced goods and services by foundations or public institutions as part of the welfare state, providing citizens with individual rights,

2. redistribution of goods based on reciprocity, turning vulnerable people into

Such a characterisation of solidarity economy is theoretically influenced by Karl Polanyi and his notion of reciprocity inherent to the market, and empirically

Polanyi [25] acknowledged the profit motive of capitalist economy but referred to a 'fictitious commodification' of labour, social and private spheres by drawing attention to economic practices, such as redistribution, reciprocity and household administration, safeguarded by a double movement of political elites and commercial interests on the one hand, and cross-class social movements leading to understand that it needs regulation in order to save society on the other. Thus, the

action is combined with a pluralist notion of economy: market economy, nonmarket economy and non-monetary economy, the latter two describing:

in the provision and governance of publicly financed welfare services [11].

development on 'social' and 'impact investment' [21].

economic understandings of citizen initiatives and third sector.

inspired by the emancipatory movements in Latin America [24].

**2. Moving towards a solidarity economy**

subject to democratic control;

co-producers and co-owners [22, 23].

**30**

market becomes culturally and politically embedded, rather than autonomous and dominating political and private spheres, manifesting itself in the structure of government redistribution, but also in social rights and legislative and regulatory mechanisms, such as collective bargaining [26].

Nowadays, Fraser [27] argues that we must add a critique of domination to Polanyi's structural critique of fictitious commodification, and since today, it also affects the sphere of social reproduction, site of giving birth to and raising children, caring for family members and maintaining households, which is increasingly outsourced to low-paid help. She proposes to think instead of a triple movement that includes civil society, by bringing in the post-war emancipatory movements that rally around status such as gender, ethnicity, sexuality, religion or nationality that exposed the suppressive factors of national welfare and social protection and demand to find a new synthesis between social protection and marketisation. This infrastructure of a solidarity economy is aware that a wage could serve as a resource against domination premised on status … they claimed the freedom of contract not as an end in itself, but rather as a means to emancipation, converting the social dimension into economic leverage or specific productive strength.

While Fraser [27] herself points out the possible detrimental effects of emancipation on the fabric of existing solidarities as it may open a path for marketisation that can erode the ethical basis of social protection, she also states that considering the scale at which crisis is experienced today, the welfare state alone cannot protect against the decommodifiying side-effects of competition, international markets and currencies without political and social integration. Hence, solidarity economy can be regarded as complementary of third sector and social economy, existing next to the for-profit market.

Empirical evidence from Latin America shows that apart from rare exceptions, solidarity enterprises do not replace existing forms of popular economy. Their main purpose is to reorganise the productive, material and human factors of the popular economy through progressive changes [24]. This requires certain structural conditions, namely the social and political recognition of the relevance of claims, a favourable regime and favourable legislation [11, 15]. Indeed, the concept has gained the attention of policy makers in a number of countries and at EU level, albeit still lacking supportive policies at national levels [28].

Solidarity economy identifies scope for the de-commodification of individuals due to its civil society base and focus on collective governance, self-organised production and democratic reciprocity that turns vulnerable people into co-producers and co-owners [23], rather than recipients of philanthropic expressions of solidarity that substitutes for the vocabulary of equality and rights that of public benevolence [24]. Solidarity in these ventures is evident in their members' involvement in day-to-day management and the adoption of equality principles, by placing new actors into work, recognition struggles or discourse of a meaningful life. Similar to the notion of associations as schools for democracy, solidarity encourages broader reciprocity practices, where practical experience in managing the common good lends new value to the notions of justice and public interest.

The notion of democratic solidarity dominant in solidarity economy could be considered an additional conceptual dimension in relation to 'successful acts of solidarity'. Defining solidarity as a morally motivated action arising from the feeling of an agent or a group recognising another individual or person's grief or discomfort, an actor is prone to be solidary with a certain group based on how 'deserving' the actor finds the other person or group in relation to 'control or responsibility, need, identity, attitude (e.g. gratefulness) and reciprocity' that is linked to notions of membership and inclusion that one can identify with [29]. It is generally of an altruistic or philanthropic nature. Laville [23] on the other hand criticises

philanthropic solidarity for bringing a mechanism of social hierarchy and support for the inequality that is built into the social fabric of the community.

The concept of democratic solidarity is built on redistribution to reinforce social cohesion and to redress inequality and an egalitarian understanding of reciprocity as a way to enhance voluntary social relations between free and equal citizens. This relation between redistribution and reciprocity is the foundation of democratic solidarity in which it is not a question of replacing the state with civil society but rather one of combining redistributive solidarity with a more reciprocal version of the latter in order to rebuild society's capacity for self-organisation [23]. Solidarity is produced in such a way that the recipient can become the giver, drawing on Mauss' theory of the gift [30] and focus on social expectations that appear when one person gives and another receives a gift, creating an expectation for the receiver to return a favour. Democratic solidarity aims to allow for the recipient to reciprocate, as to avoid the permanent position of inferiority [23].

Situated within third sector and social and solidarity economy research (but not exclusive to them) are the concepts of social innovation and co-creation of welfare services, moving to the core of our objective to understand the channelling of solidarity practice into social policy in the case of the Slovak Republic.

By co-creation we understand such provision of public services in which citizens are actively involved, the following three types of co-creation can be distinguished [31]: (1) in which citizens act as initiator (co-initiate); (2) in which citizens are invited to co-design (co-design); and (3) in which citizens are 'just' invited to implement public services (instead of public organisations) (co-implement).

Co-creation is a narrowly defined aspect of civil society and third sector activity. Hence, the trend of co-production of social services is less tainted by suspicions that ultimately more scope for citizen participation will effectively make way for a discourse of civic duties linked to being a community member that allows states to withdraw from public welfare, as is the criticism in social economy discourse [32]. Co-creation is more centred on empowerment through participation in a civil society tradition, located in a new public governance approach that is a response to New Public Management of the 1980s and 1990s, where public services were viewed as manufacturing rather than service provision, leading to privatisation, contracting out, systematic performance measurement and benchmarking, turning citizens into consumers rather than users of a service [33] failing to grasp the complexity of today's plural (multiple interdependent actors contribute to the delivery of public services) and pluralist states (multiple processes inform policy) [34].

#### **3. Collaboration practices**

To map the relations between government and non-profits in Slovakia, we used a focus group. This method represents a homogeneous composed group of 6–12 participants discussing in a well-prepared way their ideas, motives and interests about a clearly defined issue chaired by a discussion leader. To guide the discussion, a list with topics was used and the discussion was recorded. Official invitations to participate in the focus group were addressed to 10 people. These included representatives of nonprofits, public institutions and municipalities that are promoting solidarity actions, as well as academic experts on solidarity issues. Eight out of 10 people agreed to participate in the focus group (we respect those, who wished to be fully anonymous):

**33**

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia*

• NGO 2 from Banska Bystrica—leader, male (The Civic Association for the

• NGO 1 from Banska Bystrica—director, female;

• NGO 3 from Bratislava—project manager, female;

• NGO 4 from Zvolen—project manager, female (EPIC n.o.);

• Participant of community education programme, male.

• there are cases with public organisations, NGOs and citizens involved;

• the selected cases represent four different policy areas (i.e. abandoned public

• at least, half of the case studies conducted are oriented to the fight against pov-

• contain an element of third sector collaboration with public institutions, that is, a participant representing a social initiative producing a social service and their

The selection of cases was based on the focus group experts' judgment, which

Since we were interested in collaboration between the non-profits or social economy organisations collaborating with public institutions (i.e. participants producing a social service possibly within the areas of education, health, abandoned properties, employment and their contact person at the municipality as the funding partner/co-producer), we asked about the nature of the collaboration and why this

The collaboration includes specific short-term projects (education and employment), whereas in the field of health and abandoned properties, there is a longterm collaboration. The values sought from the public institutions' side were mostly about increasing efficiency, providing public services in a better way or using the option that the public service is provided by the NGO (using the activity and

From the NPOs' point of view, the key values guiding their choices for collaboration were: intersectoral cooperation and synergy, open communication and fulfill-

In this part, we asked questions such as: How would you describe the nature of your relationship and the distribution of roles (non-profit partner as initiator, co-designer, co-implementer)? Has there been a change in the nature of your relationship over time (i.e. from hierarchy to equality/reciprocity, or perhaps even the other way around)?

willingness of the NGO as an alternative public service provider).

contact person at the municipality as the funding partner/co-creator.

might be biased, however, the finding allows us to identify characteristics on government—non-profits relations in Slovakia. The analysed cases of collaboration

The selection of case studies followed these criteria:

properties, employment, health and education);

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

• Public institution employee, male;

erty and social exclusion;

practices are summarised in **Table 2**.

collaboration started to achieve what goal.

ing the mission of the organisation.

**3.1 Distribution of roles**

Amphitheater);


*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

philanthropic solidarity for bringing a mechanism of social hierarchy and support

The concept of democratic solidarity is built on redistribution to reinforce social cohesion and to redress inequality and an egalitarian understanding of reciprocity as a way to enhance voluntary social relations between free and equal citizens. This relation between redistribution and reciprocity is the foundation of democratic solidarity in which it is not a question of replacing the state with civil society but rather one of combining redistributive solidarity with a more reciprocal version of the latter in order to rebuild society's capacity for self-organisation [23]. Solidarity is produced in such a way that the recipient can become the giver, drawing on Mauss' theory of the gift [30] and focus on social expectations that appear when one person gives and another receives a gift, creating an expectation for the receiver to return a favour. Democratic solidarity aims to allow for the recipient to recipro-

Situated within third sector and social and solidarity economy research (but not exclusive to them) are the concepts of social innovation and co-creation of welfare services, moving to the core of our objective to understand the channelling of

By co-creation we understand such provision of public services in which citizens are actively involved, the following three types of co-creation can be distinguished [31]: (1) in which citizens act as initiator (co-initiate); (2) in which citizens are invited to co-design (co-design); and (3) in which citizens are 'just' invited to implement public services (instead of public organisations) (co-implement).

Co-creation is a narrowly defined aspect of civil society and third sector activity.

To map the relations between government and non-profits in Slovakia, we used a focus group. This method represents a homogeneous composed group of 6–12 participants discussing in a well-prepared way their ideas, motives and interests about a clearly defined issue chaired by a discussion leader. To guide the discussion, a list with topics was used and the discussion was recorded. Official invitations to participate in the focus group were addressed to 10 people. These included representatives of nonprofits, public institutions and municipalities that are promoting solidarity actions, as well as academic experts on solidarity issues. Eight out of 10 people agreed to participate in the focus group (we respect those, who wished to be fully anonymous):

Hence, the trend of co-production of social services is less tainted by suspicions that ultimately more scope for citizen participation will effectively make way for a discourse of civic duties linked to being a community member that allows states to withdraw from public welfare, as is the criticism in social economy discourse [32]. Co-creation is more centred on empowerment through participation in a civil society tradition, located in a new public governance approach that is a response to New Public Management of the 1980s and 1990s, where public services were viewed as manufacturing rather than service provision, leading to privatisation, contracting out, systematic performance measurement and benchmarking, turning citizens into consumers rather than users of a service [33] failing to grasp the complexity of today's plural (multiple interdependent actors contribute to the delivery of public

for the inequality that is built into the social fabric of the community.

cate, as to avoid the permanent position of inferiority [23].

solidarity practice into social policy in the case of the Slovak Republic.

services) and pluralist states (multiple processes inform policy) [34].

• A university employee—academic expert, female;

• Municipality of Banska Bystrica representative, female;

**3. Collaboration practices**

**32**

• Participant of community education programme, male.

The selection of case studies followed these criteria:


The selection of cases was based on the focus group experts' judgment, which might be biased, however, the finding allows us to identify characteristics on government—non-profits relations in Slovakia. The analysed cases of collaboration practices are summarised in **Table 2**.

Since we were interested in collaboration between the non-profits or social economy organisations collaborating with public institutions (i.e. participants producing a social service possibly within the areas of education, health, abandoned properties, employment and their contact person at the municipality as the funding partner/co-producer), we asked about the nature of the collaboration and why this collaboration started to achieve what goal.

The collaboration includes specific short-term projects (education and employment), whereas in the field of health and abandoned properties, there is a longterm collaboration. The values sought from the public institutions' side were mostly about increasing efficiency, providing public services in a better way or using the option that the public service is provided by the NGO (using the activity and willingness of the NGO as an alternative public service provider).

From the NPOs' point of view, the key values guiding their choices for collaboration were: intersectoral cooperation and synergy, open communication and fulfilling the mission of the organisation.

#### **3.1 Distribution of roles**

In this part, we asked questions such as: How would you describe the nature of your relationship and the distribution of roles (non-profit partner as initiator, co-designer, co-implementer)? Has there been a change in the nature of your relationship over time (i.e. from hierarchy to equality/reciprocity, or perhaps even the other way around)?


**35**

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia*

To this question, we obtained various answers. In three cases, the initiator is a non-profit partner (employment, abandoned properties and education), and once (health) the municipality feels the hierarchical relationship but the initiator is the

In the case of employment, the initiator is the NGO EPIC and the main partner

In the area of education, the initiator is the Children of Slovakia Foundation, motivated by the low financial literacy of people in Slovakia caused by the changes of the financial markets after 1990, in the words of project manager: 'A new system of the functioning of the state came into being prior to which the people had enjoyed "the security" guaranteed by the state and limited financial products offered by one bank; the market changed and the people failed to respond to those market changes, the elderly were unable to adapt and teach the young ones; new banking products appeared along with non-banking sector companies and people were bewildered by the choices, were easily duped and fell prey to fraudsters'. The School of Family Finance is the first community project about financial literacy in Slovakia with accreditation from the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic. Apart from the accreditation, it is hard to talk about any cooperation with the public sector. The project manager visited the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family, the Ministry of Education and the Office for Minorities; however, no one expressed the desire to enter into cooperation, because they would not accept the methodology already developed by experts from the third sector. They displayed an unwillingness to cooperate on the product as they wanted to apply their own methodology. Yet another problem perceived by the project manager was the non-acceptance of the third sector by the government. Thus, the impact on changing public policies is difficult or even impossible at this moment. In the case of health, the view from the municipality is that the accountability and responsibility are on the town, and therefore, they are at the top of the hierarchy: 'I would characterise the nature of our relationship as that of a common fulfilment of predetermined goals. It is difficult to talk about full equality in terms of the hierarchy of relations, because self-government has roles and competencies defined by law. So, there is a degree of commitment and responsibility towards citizens, to fulfil the roles and tasks. NPOs perform the tasks voluntarily and the degree of responsibility in relation to citizens is of a different nature. The NPOs may be at the top in terms of expertise, it is closer to the community, but in terms of accountability, the town plays a bigger role' (the municipality representative). Also, the NGO feels the responsibility for those public services for the disabled is on the town's shoulders, but they do everything in order to serve their target group: 'We are perceived as both initiator and co-implementer; we have initiated a number of discussions (e.g. education and inclusion of autistic children). The nature of relationships with the town is perceived as a division of tasks according to expertise—we actively seek pathologies in the community and try to work with them, the town creates a platform for solving these problems, that is., by providing grants and subsidies, supporting projects, community development via community

is the municipality of Zvolen (approx. 43,000 inhabitants). Other institutions involved in the project are state/public educational institutions (schools), as well as entrepreneurs and companies—potential employers for young people, or other non-profit organisations dealing with youth work. An important partner in this project is the municipality of Turku in Finland which shares their know-how with Youth Guarantee programme and provides examples of best practices. The programme has managed to form a working group composed of a wide range of actors that are essential in elaborating on or influencing the employment of youth in the region. It aims to change the regional public policy of guarantees for youth. All

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

partners are equal in this initiative.

NGO.

#### *Source: own.*

**Table 2.** *List of collaboration practices.*

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

Employment Youth Guarantee on the local level Partners:

> university • Youth

• Citizens from various communities

the Slovak Republic

Health Non-governmental organisation

Partners: • Local NGO

Bystrica

families

amphitheatre Partners: • Local NGO

Bystrica • Citizens • Company

Abandoned properties

• the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of

helping people with autism – initiative in cooperation with the municipality of Banska Bystrica

• Municipality of Banska

• Disabled citizens and their

The civic association for the

• Municipality of Banska

Education School of family finance programme Partners: • Local NGOs • Universities

**Field Programme and partners Overview**

The aim is to pilot test the good practice of Youth Guarantee (YG) approach from Finland in the environment of one Slovak municipality. The realisation of this objective shall be the starting point for the possible revision of the YG applications in Slovakia towards the local level. By creating a working group from one region, the EPIC organisation has empowered them to create a series of events for NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training) and several initiatives have started to

The School of Family Finance (SFF) is aimed at increasing financial literacy and thus improving the lives of the participants. After completion of the course, the participants are more aware of their personal responsibility for their financial behaviour. Socially disadvantaged citizens, senior citizens, children from orphanages, clients of crisis centres and other groups of citizens have the opportunity to realise how their decisions affect their financial situation. The topics of the seminars are chosen based on the needs and interests of the participants, including topics such as looking for a job, labour issues, taxes, personal and family budget, loans, insurance, consumer protection,

The nature of cooperation is a partnership based on the principle of subsidiarity. A local NGO is one of the key actors in the Community Social Services Plan process in the town for the target group of a person with disabilities as well as for the target group of families with children with disabilities. One result is, for example, education for parents who are at home long-term caring for children. This enables parents to once again socialise during the education courses thereby helping to solve the problem of unproductive parents as well as autistic community problems.

Public Amphitheatre was once a vibrant cultural place for outdoor cinema and special events. With the arrival of a multiscreen cinema in the local shopping mall, it was abandoned. After the municipality put it on the list of non-usable property, which was only a step away from being demolished, a group of young enthusiasts formed an NGO to save the Amphitheatre. They signed a co-operation memorandum with the municipality, and in cooperation with a private company, they revitalised the Amphitheatre. The main activity of the NGO remains the support of the Amphitheatre in the form of organising a summer movie theatre or other events with the aim of helping the Amphitheatre to become a vibrant cultural and social place, with an emphasis on sustainability, content diversity and preservation of its genius loci.

help NEET at the local level.

basics of investment, etc.

• EPIC, non-profit organisation • Municipality of Zvolen • Municipality of Turku • Network of local NGOs • Local secondary schools and

**34**

*Source: own.*

*List of collaboration practices.*

**Table 2.**

To this question, we obtained various answers. In three cases, the initiator is a non-profit partner (employment, abandoned properties and education), and once (health) the municipality feels the hierarchical relationship but the initiator is the NGO.

In the case of employment, the initiator is the NGO EPIC and the main partner is the municipality of Zvolen (approx. 43,000 inhabitants). Other institutions involved in the project are state/public educational institutions (schools), as well as entrepreneurs and companies—potential employers for young people, or other non-profit organisations dealing with youth work. An important partner in this project is the municipality of Turku in Finland which shares their know-how with Youth Guarantee programme and provides examples of best practices. The programme has managed to form a working group composed of a wide range of actors that are essential in elaborating on or influencing the employment of youth in the region. It aims to change the regional public policy of guarantees for youth. All partners are equal in this initiative.

In the area of education, the initiator is the Children of Slovakia Foundation, motivated by the low financial literacy of people in Slovakia caused by the changes of the financial markets after 1990, in the words of project manager: 'A new system of the functioning of the state came into being prior to which the people had enjoyed "the security" guaranteed by the state and limited financial products offered by one bank; the market changed and the people failed to respond to those market changes, the elderly were unable to adapt and teach the young ones; new banking products appeared along with non-banking sector companies and people were bewildered by the choices, were easily duped and fell prey to fraudsters'. The School of Family Finance is the first community project about financial literacy in Slovakia with accreditation from the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic. Apart from the accreditation, it is hard to talk about any cooperation with the public sector. The project manager visited the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family, the Ministry of Education and the Office for Minorities; however, no one expressed the desire to enter into cooperation, because they would not accept the methodology already developed by experts from the third sector. They displayed an unwillingness to cooperate on the product as they wanted to apply their own methodology. Yet another problem perceived by the project manager was the non-acceptance of the third sector by the government. Thus, the impact on changing public policies is difficult or even impossible at this moment.

In the case of health, the view from the municipality is that the accountability and responsibility are on the town, and therefore, they are at the top of the hierarchy: 'I would characterise the nature of our relationship as that of a common fulfilment of predetermined goals. It is difficult to talk about full equality in terms of the hierarchy of relations, because self-government has roles and competencies defined by law. So, there is a degree of commitment and responsibility towards citizens, to fulfil the roles and tasks. NPOs perform the tasks voluntarily and the degree of responsibility in relation to citizens is of a different nature. The NPOs may be at the top in terms of expertise, it is closer to the community, but in terms of accountability, the town plays a bigger role' (the municipality representative). Also, the NGO feels the responsibility for those public services for the disabled is on the town's shoulders, but they do everything in order to serve their target group: 'We are perceived as both initiator and co-implementer; we have initiated a number of discussions (e.g. education and inclusion of autistic children). The nature of relationships with the town is perceived as a division of tasks according to expertise—we actively seek pathologies in the community and try to work with them, the town creates a platform for solving these problems, that is., by providing grants and subsidies, supporting projects, community development via community centres, etc. This all helps to integrate the target group into society'. In this case, the municipality is forming the local public policy in the field of social services together with the NGO.

The public spaces issue, specifically the abandoned public amphitheatre, which was on the list of non-usable properties, was also initiated by the NGO. It all started as an informal group of young people who organised the first screening in the amphitheatre in the summer of 2011, and the intention was to draw attention to a place that has its own value. The struggle for the preservation of the amphitheatre has gradually become a key activity for this informal group leading to a series of events: an open call for help, collecting signatures on a petition, art amphitheatre, concerts for the Amphitheatre and Week of Urbanism. This led to the founding of the NGO in 2013. At first, the municipality did not trust the young people, but they signed a co-operation memorandum with the NGO and asked for the concept of what the NGO would like to do with the amphitheatre, including the financial plan in the following three months. After the concept had been delivered, the city leadership changed their minds and began to trust the NGO. The main activity of Civic Association for the Amphitheatre remains the support of the amphitheatre, whether in the form of organising a summer movie theatre or other events. The initiative has no influence on public policy; however, it has inspired two other organisations to approach the municipality to start dealing with other abandoned properties (a former cinema turned into Urban Spot, old city bastion turned into a literary café). This initiative even has an indirect influence on politicians—the amphitheatre has become a symbol of the city, if any of the councillors wanted to 'do' something with the amphitheatre, it would affect the people in the city—the voters.

#### **3.2 Drivers and barriers in the collaboration**

To answer the main research question 'What are the drivers and barriers of collaboration', we summarised the responses into **Table 3**.

Some of the drivers and barriers are explained in depth:


**37**

**4. Conclusion**

*Source: own.*

**Table 3.**

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia*

**Employment Education Health Abandoned** 

Interest and commitment of the civic associations

Constructive discussion and mutual respect

Limited competences of officials

Hidden prejudices in society towards the disabled

qualified workforce

Finance—lack of resources

Expertise Lack of space

Impact on various communities in different life situations

Trends from abroad, e.g., European Money Quiz and Global Money Week

Social need public demand

of Ministries for deeper cooperation

Finance—lack of resources

municipality Individualism Lack of a

(setting the learning cycles from a time perspective)

**properties**

Drive to revive the potential of the place

Self-realisation of several members of the NGO (artists interested in screenings)

for cultural activities—public demand

Mistrust of the municipality in the beginning

Finance—lack of resources

A lease contract for 30 years which can be cancelled any time by the

• Officials are willing and able to communicate only within the scope of their competence; however, within the scope of the laws that they use in their work,

• Qualified workforce for children with autism (e.g., school assistants are lacking). Formally, criteria are met, e.g. by creating positions of assistants in schools, but to what quality are these services implemented? Legislation is set

The creation of municipal self-governments is an important issue also from the point of view of the existence of NPOs in Slovakia. Municipalities may take decisions independently and act in all matters pertinent to the administration of the municipality and its property, if a special law does not assign such acts to the State or to other legal bodies or individuals. Their decisions and ordinances may be superseded or invalidated only by Parliamentary Acts or, if illegal, by courts. Already in 1990, municipalities were allocated with many responsibilities

by which they are governed, they are unable to cooperate.

well, but is not enforceable due to a lack of resources.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

sectors and better understanding between various institutions, companies and organisations

Looking for solutions that do not require a change in legislation or high financial investment

Common will to solve unemployment

Finance—lack of resources

*Drivers and barriers identified by respondents.*

Barriers Legislation Unwillingness

Bureaucracy The time factor

Drivers Connecting the


*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

### **Table 3.**

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

with the NGO.

voters.

companies.

better with these issues.

relation to the citizens they represent.

**3.2 Drivers and barriers in the collaboration**

laboration', we summarised the responses into **Table 3**.

Some of the drivers and barriers are explained in depth:

centres, etc. This all helps to integrate the target group into society'. In this case, the municipality is forming the local public policy in the field of social services together

The public spaces issue, specifically the abandoned public amphitheatre, which was on the list of non-usable properties, was also initiated by the NGO. It all started as an informal group of young people who organised the first screening in the amphitheatre in the summer of 2011, and the intention was to draw attention to a place that has its own value. The struggle for the preservation of the amphitheatre has gradually become a key activity for this informal group leading to a series of events: an open call for help, collecting signatures on a petition, art amphitheatre, concerts for the Amphitheatre and Week of Urbanism. This led to the founding of the NGO in 2013. At first, the municipality did not trust the young people, but they signed a co-operation memorandum with the NGO and asked for the concept of what the NGO would like to do with the amphitheatre, including the financial plan in the following three months. After the concept had been delivered, the city leadership changed their minds and began to trust the NGO. The main activity of Civic Association for the Amphitheatre remains the support of the amphitheatre, whether in the form of organising a summer movie theatre or other events. The initiative has no influence on public policy; however, it has inspired two other organisations to approach the municipality to start dealing with other abandoned properties (a former cinema turned into Urban Spot, old city bastion turned into a literary café). This initiative even has an indirect influence on politicians—the amphitheatre has become a symbol of the city, if any of the councillors wanted to 'do' something with the amphitheatre, it would affect the people in the city—the

To answer the main research question 'What are the drivers and barriers of col-

• Solutions that do not require a change in legislation or high financial investment, such as the establishment of a commission whose members would be from different sectors and would set the issue to be addressed within a set period - set priorities, plans and timetables for activities, allocate competencies and responsibilities between the individual organisations to avoid duplication, for example, the Youth Guarantee programme formed a working group of various experts from other NGOs, public sector organisations and

• "Playing in your own sandpit"—individualism. If some areas/topics are dealt with by several institutions, they consider each other as competitors and do not want to cooperate for fear that their competitors will steal the know-how.

• Impact on various communities—there are significant changes in the participants' behaviour regarding financial situation, e.g. death of a family member, poor health, loss of employment, unexpected expenses, etc., and they can cope

• Interest and commitment of the civic association in the creation of policies in

**36**

*Drivers and barriers identified by respondents.*


#### **4. Conclusion**

The creation of municipal self-governments is an important issue also from the point of view of the existence of NPOs in Slovakia. Municipalities may take decisions independently and act in all matters pertinent to the administration of the municipality and its property, if a special law does not assign such acts to the State or to other legal bodies or individuals. Their decisions and ordinances may be superseded or invalidated only by Parliamentary Acts or, if illegal, by courts. Already in 1990, municipalities were allocated with many responsibilities (including important tasks in investigated areas of education, employment, health and public spaces), and they have full freedom to decide to what extent to involve civil and non-profit sector into the delivery of the abovementioned services as the scope and method of discharging those responsibilities are independently decided by municipalities. It also helps the municipalities to ease the economic burden—the responsibilities were passed to the municipalities from the state, but the public budgets allocated from the state are not sufficient enough to fund all the responsibilities. Cooperation with NPOs helps municipalities, and mostly thanks to the amount of volunteer work from NPOs, the costs are reduced. Also, the services provided by NPOs are complementing the public services provided by the municipalities; in many cases, the NPOs replace the municipality completely.

Under these conditions and in order to discharge their responsibilities, from the beginning, municipalities started to co-operate with the non-profits in many different ways—from simple non-monetary co-operation, via the provision of financial grants, to the contracting and outsourcing of some services to NPOs. However, none of these forms of cooperation were undertaken in a fully systematic way and the concrete conditions differ between municipalities. Many municipalities invite non-profit organisations to participate in the local policy making processes, accepting their expertise and position of core local stakeholders. Such participatory processes deepen democracy and bring positive social impact. Non-profits can only fulfil their potential when embedded in supportive policy environment.

#### **Acknowledgements**

This research was funded by the VEGA project 'Abandoned Slovakia: Effective solutions to the creative reuse of used properties in non-urban areas, grant number V-18-101-07-101312'.

#### **Author details**

Mária Murray Svidroňová Faculty of Economics, Matej Bel University, Banska Bystrica, Slovakia

\*Address all correspondence to: maria.murraysvidronova@umb.sk

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

**39**

2014

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia*

[10] Defourny J, Nyssens M. How to bring the centres of gravity of the non-profit sector and the social economy closer to each other. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations.

[11] Defourny J, Hulgård L, Pestoff V, editors. Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective. London,

[12] Hulgård L. Differing perspectives on civil society and the state. In: Laville JL, Young DR, Eynaud P, editors. Civil Society, the Third Sector and Social Enterprise: Governance and Democracy. London, New York: Routledge; 2015

New York: Routledge; 2014

[13] Klein JL, Tremblay DG,

[14] Nicholls A, editor. Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. Oxford: OUP

[16] Andersen LL, Hulgård L. Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation, Nordic Council of

Denmark: Norden; 2015

Ministers: Social entrepreneurship and Social Innovation. Initiatives to Promote Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation in the Nordic Countries.

[17] Bacchiega A, Borzaga C. Social enterprises as incentive structures. In:

[15] Mair J. Social entrepreneurship: Taking stock and looking ahead. In: Fayolle A, editor. Handbook of Research on Social Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing

2010;**51**(1):121-138

Oxford; 2008

Limited; 2010

Bussières DR. Social economy-based local initiatives and social innovation: A Montreal case study. International Journal of Technology Management.

2016;**27**:1546-1561

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

[1] Cohen JL. American civil society talk. Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly.

[3] Wijkström F, Zimmer A. Nordic Civil Society at a Cross-Roads: Transforming the Popular Movement Tradition. Baden-Baden: Nomos; 2011

[4] Pestoff V. A Democratic Architecture for the Welfare State. London, New

[5] Paton R, Spear R. Civil Society and the "Commanding Heights": The Civil Economy: Past Present and Future [Internet]. 2010. Available from: https://d1ssu070pg2v9i.cloudfront. net/pex/carnegie\_uk\_trust/2016/02/ pub1455011697.pdf [Accessed:

[6] Borzaga C, Depedri S, Galera G. Interpreting social enterprises. Revista de Administração. 2012;**47**(3):398-409

[7] Hulgård L. Social enterprise and the third sector–Innovative service delivery or a non-capitalist economy? In: Defourny J, Hulgård L, Pestoff V, editors. Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective. London, New York: Routledge; 2014. pp. 82-100

[8] Vaceková G, Svidroňová M. Nonprofit Organizations in Selected

CEE Countries: A Journey to Sustainability. Brno: Masaryk

[9] Salamon LM, Sokolowski W. The Third Sector in Europe: Towards a Consensus Conceptualization. Third Sector Impact Project Working Paper.

University; 2016

[2] Defourny J. From third sector to social enterprise. In: Borzaga C, Defourny J, editors. The Emergence of Social Enterprise. London, New York:

Routledge; 2001. pp. 1-28

York: Routledge; 2008

2019-06-06]

1998;**18**(3):14-19

**References**

*On Relations between Government and Non-profits: The Case of Slovakia DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89482*

#### **References**

*Selected Aspects of Non-Profit Organisations*

**Acknowledgements**

V-18-101-07-101312'.

**Author details**

Mária Murray Svidroňová

provided the original work is properly cited.

(including important tasks in investigated areas of education, employment, health and public spaces), and they have full freedom to decide to what extent to involve civil and non-profit sector into the delivery of the abovementioned services as the scope and method of discharging those responsibilities are independently decided by municipalities. It also helps the municipalities to ease the economic burden—the responsibilities were passed to the municipalities from the state, but the public budgets allocated from the state are not sufficient enough to fund all the responsibilities. Cooperation with NPOs helps municipalities, and mostly thanks to the amount of volunteer work from NPOs, the costs are reduced. Also, the services provided by NPOs are complementing the public services provided by the municipalities; in

Under these conditions and in order to discharge their responsibilities, from the beginning, municipalities started to co-operate with the non-profits in many different ways—from simple non-monetary co-operation, via the provision of financial grants, to the contracting and outsourcing of some services to NPOs. However, none of these forms of cooperation were undertaken in a fully systematic way and the concrete conditions differ between municipalities. Many municipalities invite non-profit organisations to participate in the local policy making processes, accepting their expertise and position of core local stakeholders. Such participatory processes deepen democracy and bring positive social impact. Non-profits can only

This research was funded by the VEGA project 'Abandoned Slovakia: Effective solutions to the creative reuse of used properties in non-urban areas, grant number

fulfil their potential when embedded in supportive policy environment.

Faculty of Economics, Matej Bel University, Banska Bystrica, Slovakia

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

\*Address all correspondence to: maria.murraysvidronova@umb.sk

many cases, the NPOs replace the municipality completely.

**38**

[1] Cohen JL. American civil society talk. Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly. 1998;**18**(3):14-19

[2] Defourny J. From third sector to social enterprise. In: Borzaga C, Defourny J, editors. The Emergence of Social Enterprise. London, New York: Routledge; 2001. pp. 1-28

[3] Wijkström F, Zimmer A. Nordic Civil Society at a Cross-Roads: Transforming the Popular Movement Tradition. Baden-Baden: Nomos; 2011

[4] Pestoff V. A Democratic Architecture for the Welfare State. London, New York: Routledge; 2008

[5] Paton R, Spear R. Civil Society and the "Commanding Heights": The Civil Economy: Past Present and Future [Internet]. 2010. Available from: https://d1ssu070pg2v9i.cloudfront. net/pex/carnegie\_uk\_trust/2016/02/ pub1455011697.pdf [Accessed: 2019-06-06]

[6] Borzaga C, Depedri S, Galera G. Interpreting social enterprises. Revista de Administração. 2012;**47**(3):398-409

[7] Hulgård L. Social enterprise and the third sector–Innovative service delivery or a non-capitalist economy? In: Defourny J, Hulgård L, Pestoff V, editors. Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective. London, New York: Routledge; 2014. pp. 82-100

[8] Vaceková G, Svidroňová M. Nonprofit Organizations in Selected CEE Countries: A Journey to Sustainability. Brno: Masaryk University; 2016

[9] Salamon LM, Sokolowski W. The Third Sector in Europe: Towards a Consensus Conceptualization. Third Sector Impact Project Working Paper. 2014

[10] Defourny J, Nyssens M. How to bring the centres of gravity of the non-profit sector and the social economy closer to each other. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 2016;**27**:1546-1561

[11] Defourny J, Hulgård L, Pestoff V, editors. Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective. London, New York: Routledge; 2014

[12] Hulgård L. Differing perspectives on civil society and the state. In: Laville JL, Young DR, Eynaud P, editors. Civil Society, the Third Sector and Social Enterprise: Governance and Democracy. London, New York: Routledge; 2015

[13] Klein JL, Tremblay DG, Bussières DR. Social economy-based local initiatives and social innovation: A Montreal case study. International Journal of Technology Management. 2010;**51**(1):121-138

[14] Nicholls A, editor. Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. Oxford: OUP Oxford; 2008

[15] Mair J. Social entrepreneurship: Taking stock and looking ahead. In: Fayolle A, editor. Handbook of Research on Social Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited; 2010

[16] Andersen LL, Hulgård L. Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation, Nordic Council of Ministers: Social entrepreneurship and Social Innovation. Initiatives to Promote Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation in the Nordic Countries. Denmark: Norden; 2015

[17] Bacchiega A, Borzaga C. Social enterprises as incentive structures. In: The Emergence of Social Enterprise. Vol. 273. London, New York: ROUTLEDGE in association with GSE Research; 2001. pp. 273-295

[18] Borzaga C, Defourny J, editors. The Emergence of Social Enterprise. London, New York: Psychology Press, Routledge; 2004

[19] Mair J, Noboa E. Social Entrepreneurship: How Intentions to Create a Social Enterprise Get Formed. IESE Working Paper D/521. 2003.

[20] Pestoff V. Hybridity, coproduction, and third sector social services in Europe. The American Behavioral Scientist. 2014 Oct;**58**(11):1412-1424

[21] Nicholls A, Daggers J. The Landscape of Social Impact Investment Research: Trends and Opportunities. Oxford: SBS Oxford; 2016

[22] Laville JL, Salmon A. Rethinking the relationship between governance and democracy. In: Laville JL, Young DR, Eynaud P, editors. Civil Society, the Third Sector and Social Enterprise: Governance and Democracy. Oxfordshire: Routledge; 2015. p. 200:145

[23] Laville JL. The social and solidarity economy: A theoretical and plural framework. In: Social Enterprise and the Third Sector. London, New York: Routledge; 2014. pp. 118-129

[24] Gaiger LI, Ferrarini A, Veronese M. Social enterprise in Brazil: An overview of solidarity economy enterprises. Retrieved February. 2015;**13**:2017

[25] Polani K. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. New York: Rinehart; 1944

[26] Laville JL, Lemaître A, Nyssens M. 17 Public policies and social enterprises in Europe: The challenge of institutionalization. In: Nyssens M, editor. Social Enterprise: At the Crossroads of

Market, Public Policies and Civil Society. Oxfordshire: Routledge; 2006. pp. 272-294

[27] Fraser N. A triple movement? Parsing the politics of crisis after Polanyi. In: Beyond Neoliberalism. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan; 2017. pp. 29-42

[28] Yunus M. Banker to the Poor: Micro-Lending and the Battle Against World Poverty. New York: PublicAffairs; 2007

[29] McKeown-O'Donovan A, Solidarity LK. Unpublished Manuscript for Solidus-Work Package. Vol. 12015

[30] Mauss M. The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. London, New York: Routledge; 2002

[31] Voorberg WH, Bekkers VJ, Tummers LG. A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review. 2015;**17**(9):1333-1357

Section 4

Financial Aspects of

Non-Profit Organisations

41

[32] Brandsen T, Pestoff V. Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services: An introduction. Public Management Review. 2006;**8**(4):493-501

[33] McLaughlin K, Osborne SP, Ferlie E, editors. New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects. London, New York: Psychology Press; 2002

[34] Osborne SP. Introduction the (new) public governance: A suitable case for treatment. In: The New Public Governance? London, New York: Routledge; 2010. pp. 17-32

Section 4
