Suchergebnisse

"Network for Social Impact is a broad review of how nonprofits, businesses, and governments work together to tackle social problems. The book takes a systems approach to explain how networks make a social impact, and when they are unlikely to do so. It argues that network design and management is not a one-size-fits-all formula. Instead, the type of social issue, the mechanism for social impact, environment, and resources available each determine appropriate choices. Drawing on research from public administration, psychology, business, network science, social work, and communication, it synthesizes what we know about how to best design and manage networks. It includes illustrations from thirty original case studies; they describe groups of organizations addressing issues such as gender-based violence, educational outcomes, senior care, veterans' services, mental health and wellness, and climate change. Additionally, the volume describes critical issues that leaders address in creating and managing networks, including social issue analysis, network governance, securing and managing funding, dealing with power and conflict, using data effectively, and managing change. Each chapter includes tools for network leaders to use to handle these issues. This book is neither a Pollyannaish, pro-collaboration account of the benefits of network approaches, nor is it a critical view of these efforts. Instead, it highlights the opportunities and challenges of networks"--

'Networks for Social Impact' is a broad review of how nonprofits, businesses, and governments work together to tackle social problems. The book argues that network design and management is not a one-size-fits-all formula. Instead, the type of social issue, the mechanism for social impact, environment, and resources available each determine appropriate choices

AbstractPrior research suggests that nonprofits are flexible and possess multiple identities, although we know less about how transformative changes, such as mergers, shape nonprofit identity. This qualitative study draws upon in‐depth interviews from 13 nonprofit merger cases to explore factors that influence postmerger identity and integration. In particular, we focus on the roles of organizational similarity and relationships, program and personnel retention, and rebranding. Ultimately, we derive a typology of postmerger integration in nonprofits and suggest that postmerger identity may be classified in terms of absorption, preservation, or creation. Implications for nonprofit leaders are discussed.

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.

Scholars have long been interested in nonprofits, religious congregations, and their collaborative activity. This research builds upon past large-scale studies of congregations to suggest a nuanced understanding of how clergy approach congregational partnerships and make decisions about collaborating with community organizations. Using qualitative data from a geographically bounded sample of 30 Protestant congregations and grounded theory methodology, we suggest that clergy view their congregations as serving a different purpose from nonprofit partners and navigate numerous tensions inherent in congregational life in their pursuit of collaborative activity. We introduce a new typology of congregational collaboration that posits collaboration as a strategy for providing material and spiritual resources, in and outside of their congregations.

AbstractIncreasingly, nonprofit organizations engage in interorganizational collaboration to address large‐scale social problems. Scholarship typically focuses on the characteristics of both within‐sector and cross‐sector partnerships of two collaborating organizations or all partnering organizations involved in a collaboration, but we know little about the patterns of interorganizational relationships that single nonprofit organizations maintain. This research draws upon surveys from 452 nonprofits and introduces nonprofit network portfolios, which we define as the number, integration, intensity, and duration of relationships that nonprofits purposefully develop with other organizations. Using 12 network measures, Ward cluster analysis revealed three distinct network portfolios: restricted within‐sector (n = 319, 70.58%), which included limited collaboration and prioritized within‐sector partnerships; robust within‐sector (n = 80, 17.70%), which included more nonprofit partnerships than restricted within‐sector portfolios; and cross‐sector (n = 53, 11.72%), which had a rich assemblage of integrative partnerships with nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Further, nonprofits that maintained each type of portfolio differed in their revenue and social mission, suggesting these factors are related to the types of collaboration that nonprofits maintain. This study makes contributions to existing research on interorganizational networks and cross‐sector collaboration and suggests practical and policy implications for nonprofit network management.

Although nonprofit collaboration is commonplace, recent research suggests that faith-based organizations (FBOs) are less likely to collaborate than other nonprofits. This study builds on prior FBO, collaboration, and nonprofit capacity research to examine the influence of religiosity and operational capacity on FBOs' within- and cross-sector partnerships. Findings from a survey with 197 FBOs across the United States reveal a complex picture of how religiosity and operational capacity influence FBO collaboration. More specifically, staff religiosity was positively related to cross-sector partnerships. Service religiosity (i.e., religious elements in staff–client interactions) was negatively associated with collaboration with government agencies. Results also indicated that FBOs with higher operational capacity had more partners in the nonprofit, business, and public sectors. These findings suggest that FBOs generally lack the operational capacity for collaboration and that service religiosity creates additional barriers to it. This article concludes with implications for research in FBOs, interorganizational collaboration, and nonprofit capacity.

Organizational listening is critical in times of change, especially for organizations that must meet diverse stakeholder interests. Organizations' views on who they are—whether they are altruistic or self-oriented entities—may shape organizational listening practices in meaningful ways. To explore the undertheorized topic of organizational listening, we conducted a mixed-method sequential explanatory study. Drawing on survey and interview data from 122 U.S. nonprofits, we found an organization's utilitarian identity for economic value creation is only related to practical motivation to engage in listening, whereas a normative identity for social mission is related to listening motivation, information analysis, and information integration. In addition, we found that organizational listening fully mediates the relationship between organizational identity and organizational change potential and implementation, indicating positive change would most likely occur through soliciting and incorporating stakeholder inputs. These results contribute to theorizing organizational listening and suggest implications for navigating multiple identities in organizational change processes.

Organizational listening to solicit, consider, and incorporate information and inputs from diverse stakeholders is critical for tackling organizational and societal challenges. Yet, despite the potential benefits of organizational listening, researchers studying stakeholder engagement and communication have focused on how organizations speak to stakeholders while overlooking how organizations listen to stakeholders. Drawing on survey data from a purposive sample of 122 nonprofit organizations (NPOs) in the United States and 40 interviews among these organizations, we explored organizational leaders' conceptualization of organizational listening, including what, why, to whom, and how NPOs listen. Results also suggested operational capacity was a key factor influencing organizational listening. This study builds on prior stakeholder research to suggest organizational listening as a more holistic approach to stakeholder engagement. The findings have important implications for the research and practice in organizational listening and improving diverse participation and representation in stakeholder engagement, particularly for NPOs and mission-driven organizations.

Nonprofits are guided by internal efforts and external mandates to build capacity. However, scholars and grant makers are hampered by varied definitions of the concept, competing but untested models, and the lack of a reliable and valid measure. This research defines nonprofit capacity as the processes, practices, and people that the organization has at its disposal that enable it to produce, perform, or deploy resources to achieve its mission. An inductive‐confirmatory two‐study approach introduces and validates the Nonprofit Capacities Instrument, a 45‐item measure of eight nonprofit capacities derived from existing instruments. The capacities are (1) financial management, (2) adaptive capacity, (3) strategic planning, (4) external communication, (5) board leadership, (6) operational capacity, (7) mission orientation, and (8) staff management. Intriguingly, this research demonstrates that nonprofit capacity is not a singular or second‐order concept, but better described in its plural form, nonprofit capacities.

Collaborative governance research examines the role of individuals, organizations, and partnerships within a community to understand why particular interorganizational networks emerge. We take a different tact, arguing that communities adopt collaborative governance models based upon exposure to the models and the individual and organizational resources in a community. We conducted a web-based national-level scan of communities in the United States ( N = 1,162) for the presence of one model of collaborative governance, education-focused collective impact. We found that spatial proximity, poverty rate, and individual resources each predicted the existence of collective impact in a U.S. county. Implications for collaborative governance research are drawn from the results.

Abstract
Increasingly, scholars and practitioners are interested in evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational networks. We use a configuration approach to study network effectiveness. This research is a mixed-method study of 26 education networks in the United States. We measure network effectiveness by comparing 4th-grade literacy, 8th-grade literacy, and high-school graduation rates. We compare these scores with all school districts in the state using interrupted time series or parametric difference-in-differences approaches. Then, drawing from qualitative data from interviews and archives, we investigate the network governance, environmental characteristics, and theories of change associated with greater student achievement. We find three configurations associated with network effectiveness using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. One configuration combines decentralized governance with a project theory of change in the context of resource munificence. A second configuration associated with network effectiveness is to combine learning and systems alignment theories of change with smaller network size and resource munificence. The final configuration combines decentralized governance, a learning theory of change, less resource munificence, and larger network size and does not use a systems alignment theory of change. The results support the configurational approach, which suggests multiple configurations of factors in combination may result in network effectiveness.