Nonprofit Isomorphism: An Australia–United States Comparison

Abstract

This paper examines the organizational structures of nonprofit organizations in Australia and the United States. Using random samples of nonprofits drawn from the two organizational populations, the analysis compares the extent of structural resemblance or isomorphism in each. It detects similar levels of isomorphism for several structural characteristics. The paper interprets this finding as reflecting expectations for nonprofit organizations that stretch worldwide.Résumé Cet article analyse les structures organisationnelles des organisations à but non lucratif en Australie et aux Etats-Unis. En proposant des exemples pris au hasard des objectifs non lucratifs des deux populations organisationnelles, l'analyse compare l'étendue les ressemblances ou de l'isomorphisme de chacune d'elles. Cela permet de détecter l'isomorphisme de plusieurs caractéristiques structurelles. L'article interprète le fruit de ces recherches en reflétant les attentes des organisations à but non lucratif qui s'étendent dans le monde entier.Zusammenfassung Dieser Beitrag untersucht die oranisatorischen Strukturen von Nonprofit-Organisationen in Australien und den Vereinigten Staaten. Unter Bezugnahme auf zufällig ausgewählte Stichproben beider organisatorischen Populationen vergleicht die Analyse das jeweilige Ausmaß struktureller Ä hnlichkeit oder Isomorphie. Es werden ähnlich ausgeprägte Isomorphien bei mehreren strukturellen Charakteristiken entdeckt. Der Beitrag interpretiert diese Ergebnisse als ein Spiegelbild der Erwartungen für Nonprofit-Organisationen weltweit.

Looking Beyond Traditional Volunteer Management: A Case Study of an Alternative Approach to Volunteer Engagement in Parks and Recreation

“…For instance, a large literature exists around formalizing the entire practice of volunteerism including forming voluntary boards and committees, developing job descriptions and evaluation measures, and requiring training and orientation sessions (Barman 2007;Brudney and Nezhina 2005;Helmig et al 2004;Howe 1991;Leiter 2008;Kim et al 2007). Many organizations adhere to this approach because it is believed that thorough selection, screening, training, and orientation are linked with a job well done by volunteers (Crompton 1999).…”

“…Much of this literature borrows heavily from practices developed in the private sector where the emphasis is on measuring activities and demonstrating competencies in hopes of overcoming a common challenge-an approach that has been expressed as ''the amateur administration'' of nonprofit organizations (Helmig et al 2004). The similarity among organizations or isomorphism in the voluntary sector is becoming evident, revealing that nonprofit organizations share many structural characteristics (i.e., departmentalization, hierarchical levels, formalizations, autonomy, work intensity, organizational age) (Leiter 2008). A study by Brudney and Nezhina (2005) strengthens this argument because they essentially studied whether a formalized volunteer program was related to program effectiveness outside of the West, and concluded that written policies to govern the volunteer program, job descriptions for volunteers, basic/on-going training, and resources to manage volunteers, held up in Kazakhstan.…”

“…Allen argued that few organizations are ''volunteer friendly,'' which may be in part due to the formalized approach taken by so many. Leiter (2008) also questioned the extent to which isomorphism reduced the local responsiveness of voluntary organizations.…”

“…To address this reported decline, much has been developed to help organize the work of volunteers. Scholars in various disciplines have studied strategies related to organizing volunteers and managing the volunteer relationship including recruitment, training, and retention (Barman 2007;Brudney and Nezhina 2005;Helmig et al 2004;Howe 1991;Leiter 2008;Kim et al 2007). Further, there has been a substantial amount of work that has examined motivations and satisfaction related to volunteer involvement (Finkelstein 2007;Goblin Conn and Barr 2006;Mayer et al 2007;Rehberg 2005;Silverberg et al 2001;Stebbins 1996;Zweigenhaft et al 1996).…”

Taking Your Eyes Off the Objective: The Relationship Between Income Sources and Satisfaction with Achieving Objectives in the UK Third Sector

“…This means that TSOs are exposed to isomorphic pressures and increased interaction from the markets (Reid and Griffith, 2006;Leiter, 2008;Mason, 2012). In a Swedish context, Åberg (forthcoming) also highlights the need for particular organisational structures to be adopted in order to gain state funding.…”