No abstract

Amid a global pandemic, unprecedented numbers of citizens relied on essential public employees as lifelines for their health, safety, and connectedness to the broader community. These public servants worked tirelessly through collective trauma to ensure their neighbors had what was needed to maintain some semblance of a routine in an otherwise unpredictable environment. This article uses narrative inquiry to examine the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic disruption on the public sector workplace, the quality of work life, and to investigate how employees coped during the crisis. Our research reports on interviews with 43 front-line and behind-the-scenes public employees who describe how they coped, maintained their public service motivation, and worked through increased demands for emotional labor in this new work-life environment. The findings suggest the need for human resources policies that allow for a flexible, reflective, holistic, and person-centered approach.

This research provides detailed descriptive information about decision-making behaviors and processes of community foundation boards. Our study responds to Graddy and Morgan’s (2006) call for research that examines how community foundation leadership (board and staff) affects strategic direction. We provide an understanding of how community foundation boards interpret organizational and environmental realities while balancing what has been described in the literature as “competing” mission-related objectives among donors, recipients, and the community. We find decision making to be influenced by three powerful forces; fear, tradition, and serendipity.

This study investigates the degree to which nonprofit board volunteers understand their role and performance expectations in the organizations they govern. Using data collected from chief executives and board members, the authors first compare board member self-reports of role ambiguity with chief executive assessments of how well board members understand their roles. They then examine the antecedents and consequences of board role ambiguity, finding that training and feedback can decrease role ambiguity and that role ambiguity adversely affects board engagement.

Boards of directors of nonprofit charitable organizations have long been responsible for serving essential purposes and performing critical agency functions. Given these responsibilities, it seems reasonable to expect that a periodic review of a board’s capacity to effectively govern a nonprofit charitable organization be conducted. Using data collected from 800 individuals serving as board members of 42 different performing arts nonprofits, this study reports on board member evaluations of their individual and collective participation in the governance process through a self-assessment undertaken to inform decision-making and build capacity at both the board and organizational levels. Findings suggest the need for more (or better) training/orientation opportunities; focused, intentional, and tailored recruitment processes; clear communication, greater role clarity, and specificity regarding board performance expectations; greater understanding about best practices and the need to add value; and time to cultivate openness and collegiality among the board members and between the board and staff.