Specialization, Product Differentiation and Ownership Structure in Personal Social Services: The Case of Nursery Schools

and, Christoph Badelt; Weiß, Peter

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6435.1990.tb02049.x

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Badelt and Weiss (1990) found that church-sponsored non-profit nursery schools in Austria were less likely to provide lunch while secular non-profit and for-profit centres were more likely to provide this service. They also reported that for-profit centres tended to offer infant care and after-school care more frequently.…”

Section: Box 1 Operational Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Competing for tots: operating objectives and characteristics of for-profit and not-for-profit child care centres in the Pacific Northwest

et al. 1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child care services are provided by profit-oriented businesses, not-forprofit agencies and governmental units. This paper compares goal priorities and operating characteristics of not-for-profit and for-profit child care centres in parts of Canada and the United States. Directors of 292 Pacific Northwest centres responded to a survey about their financial and non-financial operating objectives.The relative rankings of objectives were similar for not-for-profit and for-profit centres, and for centres in both countries. Non-financial objectives were rated higher than financial objectives. Satisfying the developmental and educational needs of children was the single most important operating objective. Providing access to eligible children was the next most important objective, particularly for not-for-profit centres and for those with government-subsidised children. The remaining objectives, in order of importance, were minimising costs, maximising utilisation, maximising revenues and maximising profits. Profit maximisation was ranked low by both not-for-profit and for-profit respondents. Not-for-profit and for-profit centres exhibited differences on a number of operating characteristics, services provided and employee benefits. Such characteristics were found to be associated with auspices (not-for-profit or for-profit) and location (US or Canada).Results suggest that eentres operating under both auspices are capable of altruistic behaviour. Differences in motivation between organisational forms were very small. However, variations in operating characteristics and services suggest that the objectives are achieved in dissimilar ways.

show abstract

Section: Box 1 Operational Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Competing for tots: operating objectives and characteristics of for-profit and not-for-profit child care centres in the Pacific Northwest

et al. 1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most prominent examples have been studied by Estelle James in her various pieces on rehgious values and cultural heterogeneity as key sources for NPO behaviour (see, for example, 1987, 1993). Also, an econometric study on NPO behaviour in the Austrian market for nursery schools and kindergartens (Badelt and Weiss, 1990a) has provided evidence that church-affiliated NPOs show different supply behaviour from other non-profit providers. To give an example, they do not make use of potential cost advantages by running afternoon classes -as is done by other providers -since these classes would be inconsistent with the value judgement that children should stay with their mothers during the afternoon.…”

Section: Specific Motives Of Non-profit Entrepreneursmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has been done both for non-profit enterprises in general (for example, James, 1987; for religious values, see Hansmann, 1980;Rinderer, 1989) and for NPOs working in specific industries, for example in educational services, in hospitals, in law firms and so on (Weisbrod, 1983;Preston, 1989;Badelt and Weiss, 1990a).…”

Section: The Main Contents Of the Theory: Types Of Entrepreneursmentioning

confidence: 99%

Entrepreneurship theories of the non-profit sector

Badelt

1997

Voluntas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article summarises the main results of entrepreneurship theories of the non-profit sector and discusses the impact they may have on theory development and on the real world non-profit sector. It is pointed out that the entrepreneurship approach advances our knowledge of the non-profit sector, especially by stressing the supply-side aspect and by focusing on the preferences individuals must have in order to engage in non-profit activities. There is empirical evidence consistent with entrepreneurship theories. Yet most observations do not exclusively support entrepreneurship theories but also provide evidence consistent with other economic theories of the non-profit sector. This illustrates that the various economic theories of the nonprofit sector are more complements than substitutes. Furthermore, entrepreneurship theories indirectly help to improve the image nonprofit organisations have in the real world; therefore they play a prominent role in teaching programmes which have been established to train non-profit managers.Among economic theories of the non-profit sector, entrepreneurship theories are usually seen as one of the main lines of reasoning, although exact borderlines between theoretical concepts are not easy to define. This article summarises the main results of entrepreneurship theories and discusses the impact they have on theory development and on the real world non-profit sector.While the majority of theoretical research on non-profit organisations (NPOs) has been done in the United States, this article will also refer to relevant discussions in Europe, especially in the German-speaking countries. This may appear surprising in a article dealing with theoretical

show abstract

“…There are several possibilities for NPOs and PMOs to differentiate their product from the supply of GOs, not all of which can be discussed here (for a more detailed treatment see Badelt and Weiss, 1990). The most obvious product differentiation strategy is variation in the level of quality of services.…”

Section: Product Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NPOs basically have two ways of identifying these 'niches'. They can either concentrate on a particular clientele which is not served by GOs, 1 or they may offer specific services which are qualitatively different from those provided by GOs (see Badelt and Weiss, 1990). Usually, they will offer 'better' services in order to overcome "qualitative' deficiencies of GOs.…”

Section: Deducing Testable Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-profit, for-profit and government organisations in social service provision: comparison of behavioural patterns for Austria

Badelt¹,

Weiß²

1990

Voluntas

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates behavioural differences between non-profit organisations (NPOs), government organisations (GOs), and private market organisations (PMOs) as suppliers of nursery schools and retirement homes. On the basis of Weisbrod's undersupply model, the differentiated demand approach, and the public finance argument on the redistributive role of government, three hypotheses are theoretically specified and empirically tested: chent differentiation; product differentiation; and price differentiation. NPOs and PMOs are shown to provide qualitatively better services and charge significantly higher prices than GOs. A clustering of clients with similar socio-economic backgrounds can be observed: GOs provide services for clients with lower economic and social status than private suppliers. GOs, holding more than two-thirds of the respective markets, are responsible for a 'basic provision' of services; they pursue distributional goals by producing services themselves; only rarely a 'contracting out' to private suppliers can be noted. This paper investigates behavioural differences between non-profit organisations (NPOs), government organisations (GOs) and private market organisations (PMOs) as suppliers of social services. The problem we. are raising is of both theoretical and political interest. From a theoretical standpoint differences in behaviour can be viewed as a test of the vahdity of theories of 'institutional choice' (see Weisbrod, 1988, p. 16ff) which provide a rationale for the existence of particular institutional types of providers of social services. Seen from a political angle, behavioural differences between NPOs, PMOs, and GOs may serve as a basis for the evaluation of alternative providers, which may have an impact on numerous decisions in social policy.The first section of this paper briefly reviews the main theoretical arguments on which predictions of behavioural differences between alter-

show abstract

Specialization, Product Differentiation and Ownership Structure in Personal Social Services: The Case of Nursery Schools

Cited by 12 publications

References 4 publications

Competing for tots: operating objectives and characteristics of for-profit and not-for-profit child care centres in the Pacific Northwest

Competing for tots: operating objectives and characteristics of for-profit and not-for-profit child care centres in the Pacific Northwest

Entrepreneurship theories of the non-profit sector

Non-profit, for-profit and government organisations in social service provision: comparison of behavioural patterns for Austria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About