Voluntary accountability carried out by nonprofit organizations seeks to ensure organizational adherence to financial and ethical standards beyond legal regulations, thereby sending signals of quality and trustworthiness. Yet, insights into whether and how different forms of voluntary nonprofit accountability influence the public’s attitude are limited, and recent calls emphasize the need for further empirical investigation. Building on the combination of three different research streams, this article presents a conceptual framework that distinguishes between four forms of (voluntary) nonprofit accountability within the theoretical context of the principal-agent theory. In an online experiment with 407 participants, the author demonstrates that externally certified voluntary accountability demonstrates higher reputation and perceived quality among nonprofit organizations, but not relating to donation behavior (relative to the other accountability conditions). Internal voluntary accountability has no effect, whereas no accountability is associated with less public trust, reputation, perceived quality, and donation behavior (compared with legal minimum accountability).

Transformative service initiatives (TSIs) refer to activities by organizations (public, private, nonprofit) or volunteers to serve people experiencing vulnerabilities, including long-term challenges (e.g., refugees, homeless people, undocumented immigrants, ex-convicts) and try to improve their well-being. To advance the concept of TSI, this study proposes a 3A (Awareness, Alignment, Access) Integration Process Framework that can facilitate empirical tests of whether participation in TSIs affects people’s access to critical services. The empirical evidence affirms a positive influence of TSI participation on two TSR outcomes (application and access to higher education), according to data from a longitudinal study of 2,068 refugees (Study 1) that relies on propensity score matching and regression analysis. Study 2 uses qualitative data from six focus groups and identifies 16 barriers to successful refugee integration; it also identifies four individual strategies to overcoming those integration barriers. From academic and public policy perspectives, the findings demonstrate that efforts to plan and implement TSIs should follow a stepwise process to achieve the intended transformative outcomes. These findings can help academic, public policy, and civil society actors design and implement TSIs in various contexts to benefit people experiencing vulnerability.

PurposeBuilding on the theories of social exchange and organizational support, this study proposes a research model to investigate the impact of green human resources management (GHRM) on nonprofit employees' green work-related outcomes, namely green voice behavior, green knowledge-sharing behavior and green helping behavior. In the model, perceived green organizational support (PGOS) is theorized and employed as an intervening mechanism between the examined linkages.Design/methodology/approachData were collected in two different waves from 408 employees working in the Palestinian nonprofit sector. Covariance based-structural equation modeling was used to validate the study's research model and to examine the hypotheses.FindingsThe results indicated that GHRM is positively associated with green voice behavior, green knowledge-sharing behavior and green helping behavior. Moreover, the results show that PGOS exhibits a significant mediation effect between the aforesaid links. This study thus provides initial empirical evidence in the field of GHRM, with particular focus on the nonprofit sector.Research limitations/implicationsThis research provides a roadmap to nonprofit managers and practitioners on how GHRM can encourage employees to speak up, share information and help others in the environmental and green domain. By supporting nonprofit managers strengthening green employee behavior, it provides an additional source to fostering intrinsically motivated behaviors in the workplace.Originality/valueIn response to urgent environmental threats, this study contributes to green and sustainable management research with a focus on GHRM, thereby providing initial empirical research from a nonprofit perspective.

This study develops and tests a model that evaluates eight antecedents of charity trust and its influence on volunteering and donating. Secondary data from a national Australian survey (N = 1,377) was collected and data was analyzed using partial least square path analysis. Key findings include identifying individual and organizational antecedents of charity trust and its influence on charity supportive behavior. Results show that organizational transparency is a very strong antecedent, followed by the individual awareness level of an individual towards the organization. We also examined the effect of gender as a moderating influence but did not find a significant effect. We conclude with managerial implications and areas for future research.

No abstract

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

PurposeThis paper aims to untangle the underlying mechanisms through which reputational signals promote stakeholders' intentions to donate in nonprofit organizations via stakeholder trust.Design/methodology/approachThe authors apply a moderated mediation model using an experimental design with N = 248 business and public management students of France.FindingsThe results indicate that both a formal reputational signal (third-party certificate) and an informal reputational signal (self-proclaiming to be social entrepreneurial) affect stakeholder trust and intentions to donate. Stakeholder trust partially mediated the relationship between the formal signal and intentions to donate, and the mediation effect was stronger when an informal signal was present (vs. not present).Practical implicationsTrust is central to the exchange of nonprofit organizations and their external stakeholders. To enhance trust and supportive behavior toward nonprofit organizations, these organizations may consider using formal and informal reputational signaling within their marketing strategies.Originality/valueThis research highlights the pivotal role of formal and informal reputational signals for the enhancing stakeholders' trust and donation behavior in a nonprofit context.

This study contributes to recent discussions on voluntary disclosure as a signaling approach among nonprofit organizations and its effects on stakeholders’ decision-making. Focusing on nonprofit program effectiveness, we test how nonprofit campaigns providing information on three effectiveness indicators—outputs, outcomes, and impacts (as part of the logic framework)—influence donation and lending behavior. An online survey experiment ( N = 271) reveals that donors value outcome and impact indicators more than output information, without any differences between the two. Moreover, the three indicators have no statistical influences on lending behavior. We also consider the moderating role of reflective decision-making and find no influence on either donation or lending behavior.