Search results

The paper examines aspects of not-for-profit leadership and in particular the importance of values in such leadership.

Drawing on the literature for leadership in charities, not-for-profits and social enterprise, the paper also uses two detailed case studies to illustrate dilemmas and challenges specific to the not-for-profit sector. These examples are the Salvation Army and Emmaus, both of which are found across many countries.

The paper identifies the importance of value sets in not-for-profits – in particular the voluntarist element that especially distinguishes these organisations from those in the private and public sectors. However, it also identifies common ground between some aspects of not-for-profit leadership and those other sectors.

The paper furnishes a composite of literature on leadership reinforced by detailed case studies as well as observations on characteristics that both link and separate leadership in the different sectors.

Policymakers worldwide have proposed a new contract – the ‘social impact bond’ (SIB) – which they claim can allay the underperformance afflicting not-for-profits, by tying the private returns of (social) investors to the success of social programs. We investigate experimentally how SIBs perform in a first-best world, where investors are rational and able to obtain hard information on not-for-profits’ performance. Using a principal-agent multitasking framework, we compare SIBs to inputs-based contracts (IBs) and performance-based contracts (PBs). IBs are based on a piece-rate mechanism, PBs on a non-binding bonus mechanism, and SIBs on a mechanism that, due to the presence of an investor, offers full enforceability. Although SIBs can perfectly enforce good behaviour, they also require the principal (i.e., government) to relinquish control over the agent’s (i.e., not-for-profit’s) payoff to a self-regarding investor, which prevents the principal and agent from being reciprocal. In spite of these drawbacks, in our experiment SIBs outperformed IBs and PBs. We therefore conclude that, at least in our laboratory test-bed, SIBs can allay the underperformance of not-for-profits.

Change in ownership among U.S. community hospitals has been frequent and, not surprisingly, remains an important issue for both researchers and public policy makers. In the past, investor-owned hospitals were long suspected of pursuing financial over other goals, culminating in several reviews that found few differences between for-profit and nonprofit forms (Gray, 1986; Sloan, 2000; Sloan, Picone, Taylor, & Chou, 2001). Nevertheless, continuing to the present day, several states prohibit investor-ownership of community hospitals. Conversions to investor-ownership are only one of six types of ownership change, however, with relatively less attention paid to the other types (e.g., for-profit to nonprofit, public to nonprofit). This study has two parts. We first review the literature on the various types of ownership conversion among community hospitals. This review includes the rate at which conversions occur over time, the relative frequency in conversions between specific ownership categories and the observed effects of conversion on hospital operations (e.g., strategic direction and decision-making processes) and performance (e.g., access, quality, and cost). Overall, we find that the impact of ownership conversion on the different measures is mixed, with slightly greater evidence for positive effects on hospital efficiency. As one explanation for these findings, we suggest that the impact of ownership conversion on hospital performance may be mediated by changes in the hospital's strategic content and process. Such a hypothesis has not been proposed or examined in the literature. To address this gap, we next study the role of strategic reorientation following hospital conversion in a field study. We conceptualize ownership conversion within a strategic adaptation framework, and then analyze the changes in strategy content and process across sixteen hospitals that have undergone ownership conversions from nonprofit to for-profit, public to for-profit, public to nonprofit, and for-profit to nonprofit. The field study findings delineate the strategic paths and processes implemented by new owners post-conversion. We find remarkable similarity in the content of strategies undertaken but differences in the process of strategic decision making associated with different types of ownership changes. We also find three main performance effects: hospitals change ownership for financial reasons, experience increases in revenues and capital investment post-conversion, and pursue labor force reductions post-conversion. Membership in a multi-hospital system, however, may be a major determinant of both strategy content and decision-making process that is confounded with ownership change. That is, ownership conversion may mask the impact of system membership on a hospital's strategic actions. These findings may explain the pattern of performance effects observed in the literature on ownership conversions.

Higher education in the United States aims to nurture civically engaged and democratically minded individuals. During its long history, nonprofit higher education has successfully responded to that call. While for-profit higher education is not new, in recent decades its expanded reach and career-focused influence have begun to drastically challenge our thinking about all of higher education and specifically the character and practices of nonprofit institutions. At the same time, for-profit institutions of higher education have been highly criticized for their administrative practices, their cost, and their questionable outcomes. Given this criticism, there has been only limited study of the student experience with for-profits. This chapter introduces a brief history of for-profit education in the United States and offers an overview of studies exploring the student experience at for-profit institutions. It examines the relationship between administrative practices at for-profit institutions and how those practices have affected students and their educational choices, both before enrolling and after graduation. By doing so, the reader is challenged to consider the past, present, and future of higher education along with its role and mission of shaping individuals and society.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how two types of drivers, namely, executive compensation and market competition, can affect hospital quality in the USA. Recently, patients, insurers and regulators have increasingly focused on hospital quality. Understanding the interplay of incentives in this industry is important because in 2019, hospital treatment contributed $1.161bn to health-care costs in the USA. This study answers the call for more studies in the so-called “mixed” industry, where ownership differences can affect organizational objectives and operating constraints.

This study explores the roles of hospital executive compensation and industry competition as determinants of health-care quality. Specifically, the study probes the heterogeneity in the factors that influence quality across hospital types in the USA.

Using California hospital data from 2006 through 2020, the findings show that the effects of compensation and competition on hospital quality differ by ownership type. Executive compensation is positively associated with quality in for-profit hospitals but is not associated with that of nonprofit hospitals, suggesting for-profit hospitals are more likely to use higher levels of compensation to attract managers with higher ability, whereas the utility function for nonprofit managers may be multidimensional. Within the nonprofit hospital group, competition is more positively associated with quality for religious nonprofits relative to secular nonprofits, suggesting that competition provides more monitoring for religious hospitals.

Taken together, the findings provide evidence that the drivers of quality vary across hospitals in ways consistent with differences in constraints and objectives across ownership types. The findings are important for regulators seeking to incentivize higher quality. For example, Medicare in the USA has incorporated quality measures into its new hospital reimbursement scheme (value-based purchasing) to incentivize quality. This study proposes that regulators should consider differences across ownership types when evaluating the best ways to incentivize hospital quality.

This study examined donor development processes in a faithbased, 501(c)(3) publicly-supported, tax-exempt organizational setting. The conceptual framework is relationship marketing theory as informed from a systems theory alignment perspective. Organization-public relationship (OPR) dynamically predicts donor willingness to contribute unrestricted funds. It is proffered that the discrepancy variable, “values-fit incongruence,” significantly affects this dynamic. This contention is explored by asking the following two questions: (a) does donor-organization values-fit incongruence significantly negatively predict donor willingness to contribute unrestricted funds, and b) is the OPR construct strengthened with the patent inclusion of values-fit incongruence as an interactive moderator variable. Results suggest values-fit incongruence significantly negatively predicts donor willingness to contribute unrestricted funds. The results also suggest the OPR model is not strengthened by patently including the values-fit incongruence variable, as it may already be latently accounted for.

Not‐for‐profit organisations often experience accounting problems when dealing with the restrictions that donors impose on how the organisations may spend funds. Part of the accountability and stewardship that the managements of not‐for‐profit organisations assume is adhering to the wishes of donors and reporting compliance with restrictions. Fund accounting is a general phenomenon among not‐for‐profit organisations. The use of different funds usually stems from the restrictions imposed by donors, and funds are used to account for restricted resources. Separate funds are often used to separate restricted funds from other funds in these organisations, and to present information to the users of financial statements, indicating that the organisation has indeed complied with donor‐imposed restrictions. This article discusses the principles of some accounting standards already issued specifically for not‐for‐profit organisations in the United States of America, Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia, and presents the results of empirical research on how donor‐imposed restrictions could be recorded in the financial statements of not‐for‐profit organisations.

Organizations are communicating with the public about their thoughts and behaviors relevant to the environment via social networking sites. The purpose of this paper is to explore for-profit and nonprofit organizations' Twitter messages to understand their environment-related messages and their influences on the publics' responses.

This study conducted a content analysis adopting four message classification systems: environmental message orientation, message specificity, message framing, and environmental issue. Guided by attribution theory, this study also explored how the organization's environmental messages influence social media (Twitter) user responses, likes, retweets, and replies.

The analysis showed that for-profits' messages tend to discuss their green products and manufacturing processes with specific numeric evidence, while nonprofits are disposed to describe a severely degraded environment. In addition, the study revealed that tweets yield a high number of likes and replies when the organizations are for-profits and the messages emphasize green products.

The findings of this study showed that the green message categorization systems are applicable to the social media context. But, this study focused on Twitter only. Future studies need to examine various social media platforms.

The study findings recommend communication practitioners use substantive green messages highlighting actual pro-environmental performances. Also, practitioners might need to make a linkage between the discussed environmental issue and the organization (e.g. a water issue by a wildlife-related nonprofit, an energy issue by a home appliance manufacturer, an air pollution issue by a bicycle company). In addition, regarding the message specificity, infographics can be present specific information that audiences can readily understand because it is described visually.

Scholars investigated environmental messages in advertising and cautioned that environmental messages that are not substantive or specific can cause audiences to perceive the messages as greenwashing. However, these previous studies focused on conventional media, and they have not been replicated in the age of social media. Thus, it is important to explore the current status of organizational environmental messages on social media.

This paper aims to focus on governance theories and practice variables in Not-For-Profit Service Organizations. The research answers two questions: what the prevalent governance practices of Not-for-Profit Service Organizations (NPSO) are, and whether there is a crossover among NPSO governance practices and For-Profit-Organization theories in the literature.

A questionnaire to the 285 organizations within the defined parameters obtained a 18 percent response. Data were collected regarding the boards' predominant roles in the organizations' governance activities, the top executives' predominant roles in the organizations' operations and their interrelationship with the boards, and the boards' most common meeting agenda topics.

The findings prove that governance models in NPSO are mostly driven by Agency Theory (52 percent of the sample). Stewardship and Resource Dependence Theories also contribute to existing governance models (28 percent), while some of the organizations have developed Hybrid Models (20 percent) drawing from the various theories.

The limited number of organizations participating in the research does not allow a generalization. However the diversity of organization types and sizes within the scope do provide a panoramic view of the not-for-profit service sector.

Having proved that there is a crossover of governance practices among For-Profit and Not-for Profit Organizations, this research opens the door to the evaluation of many other existing or potential crossovers in governance and other management elements.

This research is novel in its approach to look for similarities rather than differences between For-Profit and Not-for-Profit Organizations. The approach allows both sectors to learn from each other and seek for fresh improvement alternatives.

Not‐for‐profit organisations often have accounting problems in the recognition of donations where donors impose restrictions on how funds are spent. The specific receipts which cause most problems relate to grants made ‘in advance’, grants received for a specific purpose, and capital grants. This article investigates whether some of these restricted receipts must be recorded as income in the income statement; whether others must be recorded directly against a fund, or whether unused funds must be recorded as a liability. This article discusses these problems and the principles of accounting standards already issued specifically for not‐for‐profit organisations in some countries. This article also presents the results of an empirical study done in South Africa which has a bearing on the recognition of certain restricted receipts. Recommendations are made on the most appropriate way for not‐for‐profit organisations to record receipts in advance, receipts for specific purposes and capital grants in their accounting systems.