Do U.S. Faith-Based Social Service Organizations Resist Collaboration? Examining the Role of Religiosity and Operational Capacity in Interorganizational Partnerships

Fu, Jiawei Sophia; Cooper, Katherine R.; Shumate, Michelle

doi:10.1177/0899764020952167

Cited by 8 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding suggests that FBOs prioritize shared service religiosity over other ascribed attributes in collaboration partners. This finding complements previous research which suggests that FBOs with more explicit religious policies and practices regarding client and staff interactions are less likely to engage in cross-sector collaboration (Ebaugh et al, 2007; Fu et al, 2021). In short, when similar service identity is established, other similarities in status matter to a lesser extent.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…However, we did not find a relationship between staff religiosity and status homophily. Prior research suggests that religious beliefs and practices of FBO personnel may motivate FBOs’ formation of cross-sector partnerships (Fu et al, 2021), and that faith-based partnerships are heavily based in personal networks (Clerkin & Grønbjerg, 2007). However, staff religiosity may hamper FBOs’ cross-sector collaboration (Ebaugh et al, 2006, 2007), suggesting that religious individuals in these organizations knowingly or unknowingly avoid working with others who do not share their religious beliefs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If, for example, networks serve as “a set of rules and resources actors draw upon in accomplishing communicative interaction” (Corman & Scott, 1994, p. 172), then prior relationships may serve as influential factors on future collaborative behavior rather than just environmental factors. The relationship between actual and idealized collaboration may be particularly relevant to FBOs, which are often expected to provide social services to the local community but may be limited both by their operational capacity as well as religious identity (Fu et al, 2021).…”

Section: Fbos and Ioc: A Focus On Idealized Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multiple Identities in Faith-based Organizations: Exploring Status and Value Homophily in Idealized Partnerships

Cooper

2021

Communication Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests that organizations tend to collaborate with others that share similar ascribed status, but focuses less on the role of value homophily. To advance a fuller understanding of how organizations select partners, this study examines the roles of—and relationship between—status and value homophily in interorganizational collaboration (IOC). Specifically, it examines the influence of value homophily (i.e., similar service, staff, and organizational identity) on three forms of status homophily ( attribute-based, geography-based, and institutional) in nonprofit collaborative aspirations. Survey data from 141 U.S. faith-based organizations (FBOs) revealed the differential impact of organizational and service religiosity on FBOs’ collaboration preferences. Specifically, findings suggest that organizational religiosity makes FBOs more restrictive, but service religiosity makes FBOs less restrictive in ideal partner selection. The results suggest theoretical contributions to communication research on IOC and social networks, as well as implications for navigating multifaceted organizational identities and cross-sector partnerships.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fbos and Ioc: A Focus On Idealized Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiple Identities in Faith-based Organizations: Exploring Status and Value Homophily in Idealized Partnerships

Cooper

2021

Communication Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For NPOs, cross-sector networks are critical to their ability to serve the community (Fu et al, 2020;Hula et al, 2007;O'Brien et al, 2019;Popp et al, 2014). Past research suggests that formal relational structures with the government are an important feature of nonprofit resilience (Huck et al, 2020;Hutton et al, 2016;Simo, 2009) yet other research points to informal networks and emergent organizations as a vital component of resilience (Rivera & Nickels, 2014).…”

Section: Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Serving the Vulnerable While Being Vulnerable: Organizing Resilience in a Social Welfare Sector

Kim

Kwestel

Youn

et al. 2021

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interplay between formal organizing structures and the informal social networks of employees and organizations furthers the resilience of nonprofit organizations that serve the community. This case study draws on qualitative multi-pronged data collected in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey from two faith networks of social welfare organizations serving the vulnerable in Houston, Texas. Results show that hybrid organizing of formal structures and informal networks contributes to organizational and community resilience. By examining both forms of organizing, this article shows how formal structures offer foundational support to the more informal and nimble social networks across the interorganizational partnerships that support the community. As such, this study extends the process orientation toward resilience by documenting how individuals, organizations, and networks expand organizational internal capacities through disaster relief efforts enacted across levels (employee–organization–community).

show abstract

“…Therefore, serving the core recipients of an NPO's services, satisfying the expectations of donors and other stakeholders, achieving financial objectives and fulfilling the NPO's mission can be intricate when seeking partners, thus requiring a multifaceted approach to address this complexity and capture its intertwined aspects. Accordingly, research that seeks to investigate the nonprofit sector as an active actor in cross‐sector collaboration has just started (Bouchard and Raufflet, 2019; Ihm and Shumate, 2019), stressing the need for more studies to uncover the mechanisms underpinning NPOs’ value creation or capture from NBC (Fu, Cooper and Shumate, 2020; Gazley and Guo, 2020).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonprofit Entrepreneurial Orientation in the Context of Cross‐Sector Collaboration

Al‐Tabbaa

Ciulli

Kolk

2021

British J of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Triggered by budgetary challenges and growing awareness of social needs, recent years have seen increasing entrepreneurial behaviour in the nonprofit sector, of which collaboration with for-profit organizations is a case in point. Yet, while extant research has extensively studied the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) of for-profit organizations, scant attention has been paid to its manifestations in the cross-sector collaboration context and from the nonprofit perspective, even though numerous nonprofit organizations' idiosyncrasies point to the need for a reconceptualization of the EO dimensions in that domain. Thus, taking the nonprofit perspective, our research aims to explore the dynamics and nature of EO in the context of nonprofit-business collaboration (NBC), examining how the EO core dimensions manifest themselves when nonprofit organizations (NPOs) proactively engage in NBC. We unpack the meaning of EO through two complementary empirical studies. Our work nuances the rather overlooked entrepreneurial posture of so-called 'active-in-collaboration' NPOs, exposes new meanings of collaborative EO dimensions (relational proactiveness, relational innovativeness and relational risk management), discusses their underpinning mechanisms and suggests promising areas for further research and implications for practice.cial management approach must be such that there is no distribution of earned profit to owners or directors (any financial surplus accrued through mission-related operations or activities should be reinvested in either the services offered by the organization or the organization itself for internal development). Given their hybrid nature, social enterprises are excluded from our analysis.

show abstract

Do U.S. Faith-Based Social Service Organizations Resist Collaboration? Examining the Role of Religiosity and Operational Capacity in Interorganizational Partnerships

Cited by 8 publications

References 39 publications

Multiple Identities in Faith-based Organizations: Exploring Status and Value Homophily in Idealized Partnerships

Multiple Identities in Faith-based Organizations: Exploring Status and Value Homophily in Idealized Partnerships

Serving the Vulnerable While Being Vulnerable: Organizing Resilience in a Social Welfare Sector

Nonprofit Entrepreneurial Orientation in the Context of Cross‐Sector Collaboration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About