[SOLVED] Volunteer Rewards and Recognition Programs Discussion Paper – Writing

Select one published article from a peer-reviewed journal that addresses a current issue in volunteer rewards and recognition programs.
Write a summary of the article, including an overview of the content, the publication year, the length (number of pages), the purpose or hypothesis, the method, design or procedures, and a discussion of the findings or conclusions.
Then, discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, considering the value of its findings to a volunteer manager and to volunteers, and include any other relevant thoughts or observations that you might have.
Critically analyze the article in light of the readings you have done in your text and additional sources.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your conclusions using a minimum of three credible sources, also cited in accordance with APA guidelines.
volunteer rewards and recognition programs the purpose or hypothesis, the method, design or procedures, and a discussion of the findings or conclusions
References
Alfes, K., Shantz, A., & Bailey, C. (2016). Enhancing volunteer engagement to achieve desirable outcomes: What can non-profit employers do? Voluntas, 27(2), 595-617. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy-library.ashford.edu/10.100…
Connors, T. D. (2011). Wiley nonprofit law, finance and management series: volunteer management handbook: leadership strategies for success (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN-13: 9780470604533.
Chapter 11: Volunteer and Staff Relations
Einolf, C. (2018). Evidence-based volunteer management: A review of the literature. Voluntary Sector Review, 9(2), 153-176. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy-library.ashford.edu/10.133…Voluntary Sector Review • vol 9 • no 2 • 153–76 • © Policy Press 2018
Print ISSN 2040 8056 • Online ISSN 2040 8064 • https://doi.org/10.1332/204080518X15299334470348
Accepted for publication 23 May 2018 • First published online 12 July 2018
research
Evidence-based volunteer management:
a review of the literature
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf, ceinolf@niu.edu
Northern Illinois University, Dekalb, IL, USA
This article reviews 81 articles that directly tested the effectiveness of volunteer management
practices. Many articles measured volunteers’ perceptions of the quality of management practices,
not the practices themselves, making their utility to volunteer managers limited. Most articles
used self-reported, cross-sectional surveys and subjective outcome measures such as satisfaction
and intent to continue volunteering. Despite these limitations, current research supports the
effectiveness of 11 best practices: liability insurance, clearly defined roles, job design, recruitment
strategies, screening and matching, orientation and training, supervision and communication,
recognition, satisfying motivations, reflection and peer support. No support has yet been found
for three supposed best practices suggested by the practitioner literature: written policies, recordkeeping and individual evaluations. Future studies should use more rigorous methods, including
validated measures, external ratings of volunteer effectiveness, field experiments and longitudinal
surveys.
key words volunteering • non-profit management • volunteer management
To cite this article: Einolf, C. (2018) Evidence-based volunteer management: a review of the
literature, Voluntary Sector Review, vol 9, no 2, 153–76,
DOI: 10.1332/204080518X15299334470348
Introduction
Volunteers form an important part of the non-profit labour force and some
organisations are mostly or entirely staffed by volunteers. The scholarly community
could help non-profits greatly by giving volunteer managers evidence-tested best
practices for volunteer management. Unfortunately, there is not an extensive scholarly
literature on the subject (Locke et al, 2004; Studer and von Schnurbein, 2013;
Brudney and Meijs, 2014). Most scholarly work focuses on the questions of who
volunteers and why, with the emphasis on the volunteers’ characteristics, not on the
management actions of the non-profits where they work (Musick and Wilson, 2008).
There are a number of volunteer management websites and handbooks, but these
draw primarily on practitioner experiences and advice, not scholarly research. The
practitioner perspective is important and useful, but scholars could add value to this
literature by performing rigorous tests of what are currently considered best practices
and innovating new practices that go against the conventional wisdom. This article
153
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf
presents an overview of the existing evidence-based research on effective volunteer
management, draws preliminary conclusions for researchers and practitioners, points
out the numerous gaps in current knowledge and suggests future directions for
research.
The only prior article to perform a similar review of the literature is Studer and
von Schnurbein’s (2013) paper, ‘Organizational factors affecting volunteers’. Their
review of the literature is comprehensive (387 articles) and their article is well argued
but largely theoretical, as the majority of the articles reviewed did not test whether
particular best practices actually affected volunteer outcomes. Despite the title of
the paper, most of the articles discuss characteristics of volunteers that are outside
of managers’ control, such as their ‘attitudes, implicit assumptions, and expectations’
(Studer and von Schnurbein, 2013: 411) and the section on management practices
is short. Studer and von Schnurbein’s review is valuable and important. This article,
however, focuses on a different area: articles that explicitly tested how volunteer
management practices affected outcomes such as volunteer satisfaction, retention,
commitment, hours volunteered and quality of work.
To perform this review of the literature, I searched Google Scholar, PsycINFO and
Sociological Abstracts using keywords such as ‘volunteer management’, ‘volunteer
recruitment’,‘volunteer retention’,‘volunteer satisfaction’ and ‘volunteer engagement’.
I also used the Studer and von Schnurbein (2013) review.With each article that I found,
I looked through the references section to search for older articles they cited and I
used Google Scholar to search for new articles citing articles already in the review. I
excluded those that did not test the effects of volunteer management practices using
empirical methods and ended up with 81 articles in all. Excluding articles that did not
test the effects of volunteer management practices involved reading the abstracts of a
large number of articles, and at times reading the articles themselves, before deciding
whether to include them in the review. The final selection of articles was therefore
somewhat subjective and this is one of the limitations of the review.
This article first discusses the methods and samples used by the studies in the review
and then discusses the studies themselves. It divides the studies into two groups:
those that used volunteer opinions and attitudes towards management practices as
the independent variable and those that used specific management actions as the
independent variable. It identifies 11 best practices that have received research support
and identifies several more practices that have not received support.The penultimate
section of the article discusses research on special types of volunteering: volunteering
in small volunteer-run organisations, volunteering in membership associations, public
sector volunteering, episodic volunteering and corporate volunteering.The conclusion
draws implications for managers and makes recommendations for future research.
Methods and samples
The best way to study volunteering is to use a longitudinal method, and a few
studies did this (Davis et al, 2003; Tang et al, 2010; Beirne and Lambin, 2013), but
most studies used cross-sectional methods. Some of these attempted to make causal
claims by using structural equation modelling (Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Grube and
Piliavin, 2000;Vecina and Chacón, 2005; Costa et al, 2006; Boezeman and Ellemers,
2007; Kim et al, 2007; Waters and Bortree, 2007; Tang et al, 2010; Dwiggins-Beeler
et al, 2011; Vecina et al, 2012; Huynh et al, 2012; Allen and Mueller, 2013; Dwyer
154
Evidence-based volunteer management
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
et al, 2013; Alfes et al, 2016). Most used self-reported surveys given to convenience
samples of volunteers.
Six articles surveyed volunteer programme managers, not the volunteers themselves,
and looked for correlations between management practices and managers’ perceptions
of positive volunteer outcomes (Hager and Brudney, 2004, 2015; Cuskelly et al,
2006; Stirling et al, 2011; Studer, 2015; Rogers et al, 2016).These outcomes included
retention alone (Hager and Brudney, 2004; Cuskelly et al, 2006), both recruitment
and retention (Stirling et al, 2011; Hager and Brudney, 2015; Studer, 2015) and
client satisfaction (Rogers et al, 2016). Two of these articles used a large, nationally
representative random sample (N = 1,354) of non-profit organisations in the United
States (Hager and Brudney, 2004, 2015) and the other four respectively used a sample
of Australian volunteer rugby clubs (Cuskelly et al, 2006), a sample of American
hospitals (Rogers et al, 2016), a selective sample of Australian non-profits (Stirling
et al, 2011) and a representative sample of Swiss non-profits (Studer, 2015). Table 1
provides a summary of the studies, classified by method of analysis, dependent variables
and independent variables.
Table 1: Studies classified by method, dependent variables and independent variables
Study type
Studies
Method:
longitudinal survey
Davis et al, 2003; Tang et al, 2010; Beirne and Lambin, 2013
Method: structural
equation modelling
Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Grube and Piliavin, 2000; Vecina and Chacón, 2005; Costa
et al, 2006; Boezeman and Ellemers, 2007; Kim et al, 2007; Waters and Bortree,
2007; Peloza et al, 2009; Tang et al, 2010; Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Vecina et al,
2012; Huynh et al, 2012; Allen and Mueller, 2013; Dwyer et al, 2013; Haivas et al,
2013; Van Schie et al, 2015; Alfes et al, 2016; Malinen and Harju, 2017
Method: crosssectional
correlations and
regression
Nelson et al, 1995; Cnaan and Cascio, 1998; Farmer and Fedor, 2001; Hager
and Brudney, 2004; Peterson, 2004; Finkelstein et al, 2005; Wisner et al, 2005;
Cuskelly et al, 2006; Hellman and House, 2006; Hobson and Heler, 2007; Kulik,
2007; Caldwell et al, 2008; Finkelstein, 2008; Karl et al, 2008; Millette and Gagné,
2008; Booth et al, 2009; Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009; Hustinx and Handy, 2009;
Stukas et al, 2009; Tang et al, 2009; Garner and Garner, 2011; Stirling et al, 2011;
Gazley, 2012; Nesbit and Gazley, 2012; Dwyer et al, 2013; Østerlund, 2013; Presti,
2013; Vecina et al, 2013; Hager, 2014; Newton et al, 2014; Gatignon-Turnau and
Mignonac, 2015; Hager and Brudney, 2015; Studer, 2015; Erasmus and Morey, 2016;
Hyde et al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016; Rogers et al, 2016
Method: experiment
Clary et al, 1994; Fisher and Ackerman, 1998; Boezeman and Ellemers, 2007, 2014a,
2014b
Dependent variable:
intent to continue
volunteering
Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Grube and Piliavin, 2000; Vecina and Chacón, 2005; Wisner
et al, 2005; Hellman and House, 2006; Kim et al, 2007; Karl et al, 2008; Millette and
Gagné, 2008; Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009; Stukas et al, 2009; Dwiggins-Beeler et al,
2011; Gazley, 2012; Huynh et al, 2012; Allen and Mueller, 2013; Vecina et al, 2013;
Newton et al, 2014; Hyde et al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016
Dependent
variable: volunteer
satisfaction
Cnaan and Cascio, 1998; Boezeman and Ellemers, 2014a; Costa et al, 2006; Hellman
and House, 2006; Hobson and Heler, 2007; Kulik, 2007; Craig-Lees et al, 2008;
Finkelstein, 2008; Karl et al, 2008; Stukas et al, 2009; Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011;
Garner and Garner, 2011; Vecina et al, 2012; Dwyer et al, 2013; Nencini et al, 2016
Dependent variable:
time volunteered
Cnaan and Cascio, 1998; Farmer and Fedor, 1999, 2001; Grube and Piliavin, 2000;
Jamison, 2003; Finkelstein et al, 2005; Waters and Bortree, 2007; Craig-Lees et al,
2008; Finkelstein, 2008; Randle and Dolnicar, 2009
Dependent variable:
burnout
Nelson et al, 1995; Maslanka, 1996; Kulik, 2007
155
Christopher Einolf
Study type
Studies
Dependent
variable: quality of
volunteers’ work
Caldwell et al, 2008; Millette and Gagné, 2008; Rogelberg et al, 2010; Rogers et al,
2016
Dependent
variable: continued
volunteering
Davis et al, 2003; Tang et al, 2010; Beirne and Lambin, 2013
Independent
variable: volunteer
engagement
Huynh et al, 2012; Vecina et al, 2012; Haivas et al, 2013; Van Schie et al, 2015; Alfes
et al, 2016
Independent
variable:
organisational
commitment
Nelson et al, 1995; Costa et al, 2006; Vecina et al, 2012, 2013
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Studies of volunteer opinions and attitudes about organisations
One type of study uses measures of volunteers’ opinions, traits and attitudes towards the
organisation where they volunteer and relates these measures to dependent variables.
Commonly used independent variables include commitment, engagement and
satisfaction with management actions. Commonly used dependent variables include
intent to continue volunteering and hours volunteered.Volunteer satisfaction is often
included as a dependent variable and is also used as an intermediate variable between
some other construct and hours volunteered or intention to continue.
Dependent variables: The most commonly used dependent variable among the studies
reviewed was intent to continue volunteering, used in 18 studies (Farmer and Fedor, 1999;
Grube and Piliavin, 2000;Vecina and Chacón, 2005;Wisner et al, 2005; Hellman and
House, 2006; Kim et al, 2007; Karl et al, 2008; Millette and Gagné, 2008; Hidalgo and
Moreno, 2009; Stukas et al, 2009; Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Gazley, 2012; Huynh
et al, 2012; Allen and Mueller, 2013;Vecina et al, 2013; Newton et al, 2014; Hyde et
al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016). Subjective intent to continue volunteering suffers from
social desirability bias and the other problems associated with self-reported survey
questions.A more effective variable would be a measure of actual volunteer retention
in a longitudinal survey, but only three studies used this research strategy (Davis et al,
2003; Tang et al, 2010; Beirne and Lambin, 2013).
The next most commonly used dependent variable was volunteer satisfaction, which
was used in 15 studies as either a dependent or an intermediate variable (Cnaan and
Cascio, 1998; Boezeman and Ellemers, 2014a; Costa et al, 2006; Hellman and House,
2006; Hobson and Heler, 2007; Kulik, 2007; Craig-Lees et al, 2008; Finkelstein,
2008; Karl et al, 2008; Stukas et al, 2009; Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Garner and
Garner, 2011;Vecina et al, 2012; Dwyer et al, 2013; Nencini et al, 2016). There was
no generally accepted measurement of volunteer satisfaction. Some authors used
single-item measures (Hellman and House, 2006; Hobson and Heler, 2007; Stukas
et al, 2009) and some generated their own multiple-item scales (Cnaan and Cascio,
1998; Craig-Lees et al, 2008). Some modified existing scales of satisfaction with paid
employment for use with volunteers (Costa et al, 2006; Kulik, 2007; Karl et al, 2008;
Nencini et al, 2016) and two others took different volunteer satisfaction scales from
earlier research on volunteers (Finkelstein, 2008; Dwyer et al, 2013).
156
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Evidence-based volunteer management
Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley (2002) developed a ‘Volunteer Satisfaction Index’,
which two later studies used (Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Garner and Garner, 2011).
This index is divided into four subscales: organisational support, empowerment,
participation efficacy and group integration.The last two of these subscales significantly
predict intent to remain. Despite the existence of Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley’s
measure,Vecina et al (2009) developed a measure that they also named the ‘Volunteer
Satisfaction Index’, which has three subscales: motivation, task and management
support. Vecina et al (2012) used their scale in a subsequent article but no other
scholars have adopted it.
Scholars use satisfaction as a dependent variable on the assumption that satisfied
volunteers will do better work, work more hours and be less likely to quit. In general,
studies found moderate-to-strong correlations (r values between .35 and .84) between
satisfaction and intent to remain (Hellman and House, 2006; Hobson and Heler,
2007; Karl et al, 2008; Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Garner and Garner, 2011;Vecina
et al, 2012; Hyde et al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016). However, studies found only
non-significant (Nencini et al, 2016) or weak (r between .16 and .36) correlations
between satisfaction and hours volunteered (Finkelstein et al, 2005; Craig-Lees et al,
2008; Finkelstein, 2008).
The third most commonly used dependent variable was time volunteered, used in 10
studies (Cnaan and Cascio, 1998; Farmer and Fedor, 1999, 2001; Grube and Piliavin,
2000; Jamison, 2003; Finkelstein et al, 2005; Waters and Bortree, 2007; Craig-Lees et
al, 2008; Finkelstein, 2008; Randle and Dolnicar, 2009). Other dependent variables
included burnout (Nelson et al, 1995; Maslanka, 1996; Kulik, 2007), organisational
citizenship behaviours (Van Schie et al, 2015) and recruiting others (Dwiggins-Beeler et
al, 2011).
Retaining volunteers and getting more of their time are worthwhile goals, but
if volunteer managers want to know how to get higher-quality work from their
volunteers, the literature has little to tell them. Only four studies used external ratings
of volunteer performance as dependent variables: three used supervisors’ or colleagues’
ratings of volunteers’ effectiveness (Caldwell et al, 2008; Millette and Gagné, 2008;
Rogelberg et al, 2010) and one measured client satisfaction with hospital volunteers
(Rogers et al, 2016).
Independent variables: Many studies used measurements of volunteers’ motivations
and attitudes as predictors of good volunteering outcomes, either as independent
variables or as intermediate variables in structural equation modelling. One of the
more popular independent variables was organisational commitment, the subject of five
studies. Four of these (Nelson et al, 1995; Costa et al, 2006;Vecina et al, 2012, 2013)
used a measure taken from the literature on commitment in paid employment. This
scale uses a set of seven-point agree/disagree statements such as ‘I take an interest in
the organisation’s future’, ‘I find that the organisation’s values are similar to my own’
and ‘I am proud to say that I am a part of this organisation’; the scale has a Cronbach’s
alpha of .89 (Vecina et al, 2013).
Similar to organisational commitment is the measure of volunteer engagement, an
independent variable in five studies (Huynh et al, 2012;Vecina et al, 2012; Haivas et
al, 2013;Van Schie et al, 2015; Alfes et al, 2016). All five studies used measures adapted
from the literature on paid employment. Three used an adaptation of the Utrecht
Work Engagement Scale (Huynh et al, 2012;Vecina et al, 2012;Van Schie et al, 2015)
and the other two adapted different scales designed to measure engagement in paid
157
Christopher Einolf
work. Sample items from the adapted Utrecht Work Engagement Scale are: ‘At my
volunteer work, I feel bursting with energy’, ‘I am enthusiastic about my work’ and
‘Time flies when I am working’ (Huynh et al, 2012: 881–2).
Other measures of volunteer attitudes included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
pride in the organisation (Boezeman and Ellemers, 2014b);
sense of community (Costa et al, 2006);
empowerment (Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Kim et al, 2007);
self-efficacy (Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Hellman and House, 2006);
trust (Waters and Bortree, 2007);
positive emotions (Vecina and Chacón, 2005);
having fun (Karl et al, 2008).
Subjective measures of the quality of the organisation’s actions included:
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
perceived organisational support (Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Garner and Garner,
2011);
satisfaction with communication (Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011);
feeling respected by volunteer managers (Boezeman and Ellemers, 2014b);
satisfaction with managers (Kim et al, 2007);
person–organisation fit (Kim et al, 2007);
involvement in decision making (Studer, 2015; Nencini et al, 2016);
relationship with the board (Nencini et al, 2016).
All of the studies mentioned above took a similar approach to measuring and testing
volunteer management practices. They defined measures of volunteer attitudes
and opinions, such as engagement and organisational commitment, and correlated
them with measures of outcomes, such as satisfaction or intent to remain. The more
sophisticated articles used structural equation modelling to make statements about
possible causality and mediating variables.
The articles generally found positive correlations among the constructs used.Three
examples help to illustrate this. Alfes et al (2016) found that organisational support,
volunteer engagement, volunteer happiness and intent to remain were all positively
correlated, and that engagement acted as a mediator in their structural equation model.
Dwiggins-Beeler et al (2011) found that satisfaction with communication correlated
positively with satisfaction in general, which correlated with intent to remain and
recruiting others to volunteer. Farmer and Fedor (1999) found that having one’s
expectations met and perceived organisational support correlated with a volunteer’s
level of participation and intent to continue volunteering.
These three studies and others like them achieved positive and statistically significant
results, but they suffered from the problems of being obvious and lacking utility to
volunteer managers. In regard to obviousness, it is hardly surprising that one type of
positive opinion about an organisation correlates with another. One would expect
that volunteers who perceived their organisation as being supportive would also be
happy (Alfes et al, 2016) and would be more likely to intend to continue volunteering
(Farmer and Fedor, 1999). The hypothesis that all good things go together is not
difficult to support.
158
Evidence-based volunteer management
More problematic than the obviousness of these studies is their lack of utility to
volunteer managers. Telling volunteer managers that volunteers who perceive their
organisation to be more supportive are more likely to continue volunteering is not
useful unless you can tell volunteer managers what specifically they should do to
support their volunteers. The same critique applies to the other subjective measures
used in these studies, such as organisational commitment, volunteer engagement,
pride in the organisation and feeling respected. Unless scholars can tell managers how
best to instil these attitudes and opinions in volunteers, advising them to do so is not
useful. The next section discusses a more useful approach: testing whether specific
management practices correlate with positive volunteer outcomes.
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Studies of management practices
This section reviews 11 practices that the research has found to correlate with positive
volunteer outcomes and then describes several practices that research has not yet found
to correlate with positive outcomes. Most of the practices tested are components of
the human resources management (HRM) model of volunteer management, which
is the model most commonly used in both the practitioner and academic literature.
The HRM model treats volunteers as similar to unpaid employees and recommends
that non-profits use professional HRM tools to supervise them. Much of the literature
on the HRM model takes a ‘universalistic’ approach, recommending that non-profits
follow a single set of best practices regardless of size, number of volunteers, tasks or
mission (Brudney and Meijs, 2014). Only recently have scholars begun to consider
whether non-profits should adopt different aspects of the HRM model strategically
and adapt it to an organisation’s individual characteristics and environment (Hager
and Brudney, 2015).
Many versions of the HRM model have been proposed over the years (Safrit and
Schmiesing, 2012), with some variation in the best practices recommended, but a
recent review of the different models ‘shows that they are quite similar, grounded
in a set of core functions that volunteer programs typically perform, including
selection, orientation, job design, training, placement, and evaluation’ (Brudney and
Meijs, 2009: 567). A practical guide based on the HRM model makes the following
recommendations for managing volunteers (Brudney, 2012):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Plan a volunteer programme carefully by considering the costs and benefits of
participation, setting reasonable expectations, establishing a rationale and goals
and involving paid staff in the programme’s design.
Write policies for volunteer management.
Purchase liability insurance for volunteers.
Designate who will manage volunteers.
Create written job descriptions.
Recruit volunteers.
Interview potential volunteers to screen out undesirable volunteers and to match
volunteers with suitable assignments.
Hold an initial orientation and training programme for volunteers.
Give follow-up training and professional development opportunities.
Keep records of volunteer hours and activities.
Supervise and communicate frequently with volunteers.
159
Christopher Einolf
•
•
Evaluate volunteers’ individual performance and evaluate the volunteer
programme as a whole.
Recognise volunteers’ contributions.
This section reports 11 best practices that have received empirical support in scientific
studies. The first eight best practices on the list come from the HRM model and
the last three come from other models. The last subsection in this section discusses
supposed best practices that have not received empirical support.Table 2 summarises
the 11 best practices and the articles that support them.
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Table 2: Empirically supported best practices in volunteer management
Best practice
Articles supporting the practice
Get liability insurance
for volunteers
Hager and Brudney, 2015; Studer, 2015
Clearly define
volunteers’ roles
Nelson et al, 1995; Kulik, 2007; Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009; Allen and
Mueller, 2013
Design good volunteer
jobs
Grube and Piliavin, 2000; Jamison, 2003; Wisner et al, 2005; Hobson and
Heler, 2007; Kulik, 2007; Millette and Gagné, 2008; Hidalgo and Moreno,
2009; Dwyer et al, 2013; Van Schie et al, 2015
Recruit volunteers
Clary et al, 1994, 1998; Fisher and Ackerman, 1998; Boezeman and Ellemers,
2007, 2014a, 2014b; Østerlund, 2013
Screen and match
volunteers
Hager and Brudney, 2004; Cuskelly et al, 2006; Kim et al, 2007; Caldwell et
al, 2008; Studer, 2015
Give new volunteers
orientation and training
Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Jamison, 2003; Hager and Brudney, 2004; Wisner et
al, 2005; Caldwell et al, 2008; Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009; Tang et al, 2010;
Newton et al, 2014
Supervise,
communicate with and
support volunteers
Cnaan and Cascio, 1998; Farmer and Fedor, 1999; Hager and Brudney, 2004,
2015; Hobson and Heler, 2007; Kim et al, 2007; Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009;
Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Hill and Stevens, 2011; Huynh et al, 2012;
Studer, 2015; Alfes et al, 2016
Recognise volunteer
contributions
Canaan and Cascio, 1998; Hager and Brudney, 2004, 2015; Wisner et al,
2005; Cuskelly et al, 2006; Kulik, 2007; Studer, 2015
Satisfy volunteers’
motivations
Clary et al, 1994, 1998; Farmer and Fedor, 2001; Davis et al, 2003;
Finkelstein et al, 2005; Finkelstein, 2008; Randle and Dolnicar, 2009; Stukas
et al, 2009; Haivas et al, 2013; Erasmus and Morey, 2016; Hyde et al, 2016;
Nencini et al, 2016
Encourage reflection
Wisner et al, 2005
Encourage a supportive
environment
Farmer and Fedor, 2001; Wisner et al, 2005; Boezeman and Ellemers, 2007;
Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009; Hustinx and Handy, 2009; Garner and Garner,
2011; Huynh et al, 2012; Dwyer et al, 2013; Presti, 2013; Alfes et al, 2016;
Hyde et al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016
Get liability insurance for volunteers
Volunteers may worry about their legal liability, so getting liability insurance may
assuage this concern and encourage people to both start and continue volunteering.
While Hager and Brudney (2004) found that liability insurance did not correlate
with a single-item measure of whether an organisation had problems recruiting and
retaining volunteers, Studer (2015) found that non-profits that gave their volunteers
160
Evidence-based volunteer management
liability insurance scored slightly but significantly higher on aggregate measures of
success in volunteer recruitment and retention. Hager and Brudney (2015) found
that liability insurance correlated with retention but not with recruitment.
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Clearly define volunteers’ roles
The mere existence of job descriptions does not correlate with positive volunteer
outcomes (Hager and Brudney, 2004; Rogelberg et al, 2010; Stirling et al, 2011;
Studer, 2015). However, well-written job descriptions can be helpful, as volunteers
like having clearly defined roles and dislike role ambiguity.Volunteers who felt that
their roles were clearly defined expressed more satisfaction with their experience
(Kulik, 2007) and volunteered for a longer time (Tang et al, 2009). Conversely, role
ambiguity and role conflict correlated with feelings of burnout (Nelson et al, 1995;
Kulik, 2007; Allen and Mueller, 2013), lower levels of commitment (Nelson et al,
1995) and greater intention to quit (Allen and Mueller, 2013).Volunteers who said
they understood their roles and the organisation’s goals were more likely to intend
to continue volunteering (Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009).
Design good volunteer jobs
Volunteers who said they had high-quality jobs were more likely to feel satisfied
with their volunteer work (Hobson and Heler, 2007; Kulik, 2007). Feeling that
their volunteer work was meaningful (Dwyer et al, 2013) and that it contributed to
the good of clients and the organisation (Grube and Piliavin, 2000) correlated with
volunteer satisfaction. Feeling that their volunteer tasks were challenging correlated
with a higher intent to remain (Jamison, 2003). Autonomy and a flexible schedule
were two other job design features that predicted intent to continue volunteering
(Wisner et al, 2005).
Two authors tried to construct a comprehensive measure of volunteer job quality.
One model proposed five task characteristics: variety, carrying out a complete process,
autonomy, significance and receiving feedback (Hobson and Heler, 2007;Van Schie
et al, 2015). One study found that volunteers who said that their jobs had these
characteristics were more engaged in their work and undertook more organisational
citizenship behaviours (Van Schie et al, 2015).Another found less robust results: while
all five characteristics predicted job satisfaction, only task significance predicted intent
to remain, and only skill variety and autonomy predicted quality of work (Millette
and Gagné, 2008).
A second comprehensive measure rated a volunteer job as good if it had eight
characteristics:
(1) the job involves several non-repetitive tasks; (2) the job involves a complete
process; (3) tasks are chosen by oneself; (4) jobs have clearly defined objectives;
(5) the ultimate purpose of the job is known; (6) the job is useful for others;
(7) the job can be done with great autonomy; [and] (8) the job requires
cooperation with others. (Hidalgo and Moreno, 2009: 598)
Hidalgo and Moreno’s (2009) model incorporated four of the five components of
Hobson and Heler’s model: variety, complete process, autonomy and significance; only
161
Christopher Einolf
feedback was missing. The eight questions in Hidalgo and Moreno’s (2009) model
correlated at Cronbach’s alpha = .80 and predicted intent to continue volunteering.
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Recruit volunteers
Several laboratory experiments, in which subjects stated how hypothetically likely
they would be to volunteer, have suggested some best practices for recruitment.Two
studies found that matching recruitment messages to potential volunteers’ motives
made them more likely to volunteer (Clary et al, 1994, 1998). Another found that
subjects were more open to being recruited to hypothetical non-profits when they
anticipated feeling pride in the organisation, anticipated being treated with respect
and sensed that the organisation was open to newcomers (Boezeman and Ellemers,
2007, 2014a).
Recruiting a diverse workforce of volunteers is more effective when organisations
acknowledge and point out the value of diversity. In a laboratory experiment
(Boezeman and Ellemers, 2014b), male college students were asked if they would
be interested in volunteering for a childcare organisation in which the majority of
volunteers were older women.When the recruitment materials emphasised the need
for young male volunteers to act as role models for the children, the young men were
significantly more interested.
Volunteers are often recruited by word of mouth and current volunteers are an
essential resource for recruiting new volunteers. One study found that volunteers
were more likely to recruit others when they felt a sense of psychological ownership
of their organisation (Boezeman and Ellemers, 2014b), but it did not specify how to
create this sense of ownership. A second study begins to answer this question: using
data from surveys of 5,203 Danish voluntary sport organisations, it found that involving
members in major decisions, delegating decision making and tasks, recognising
volunteers through material incentives and perks, having a recruitment strategy
and using electronic communications all correlated with successful recruitment
(Østerlund, 2013).
A field experiment with parent volunteers in children’s football leagues found
interesting results. Parents were told that there was either a great or a small need for
volunteers, and either were promised a t-shirt to recognise their contribution or were
promised no recognition. Neither a great need for volunteers nor the recognition
gift by themselves was enough to increase volunteering, but potential volunteers
who were told there was a great need and were promised recognition volunteered at
significantly higher rates and for significantly more hours (Fisher and Ackerman, 1998).
Screen and match volunteers
In three studies, organisations that reported that they put more effort into screening
and matching volunteers were more likely to have good results in terms of retention
and recruitment (Hager and Brudney, 2004; Rogelberg et al, 2010; Studer, 2015),
but a fourth study found no relationship (Cuskelly et al, 2006).The value of effective
placement is supported by the work of Kim et al (2007), who found that measures of
person-task fit predicted intention to continue volunteering. A study of volunteers
serving on the local executive committees of a health advocacy non-profit found that
162
Evidence-based volunteer management
local chapters that used good selection methods recruited volunteers who performed
better in third-party measures of work quality (Caldwell et al, 2008).
Give new volunteers orientation and training
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Among the studies reviewed, orientation and training correlated with higher
volunteer retention (Hager and Brudney, 2004; Wisner et al, 2005; Hidalgo and
Moreno, 2009; Newton et al, 2014), more hours volunteered (Farmer and Fedor,
1999) and a longer duration of volunteer participation (Tang et al, 2009).Two studies
found that orientation and training correlated with higher-quality volunteer work
(Rogelberg et al, 2010; Tang et al, 2010) but another found no relationship to work
quality (Caldwell et al, 2008). Only one article distinguished between pre-service
and in-service training; it found that both predicted retention (Jamison, 2003). All of
these studies used simple ratings of the amount or quality of orientation and training
given; no studies told managers what best practices they should follow in delivering
orientation and training.
Supervise, communicate with and support volunteers
Many studies showed that volunteers who had positive perceptions of the supervision,
communication and support they received from the organisation volunteered more
hours and were more likely to continue volunteering (Cnaan and Cascio, 1998; Farmer
and Fedor, 1999; Hobson and Heler, 2007; Kim et al, 2007; Hidalgo and Moreno,
2009; Dwiggins-Beeler et al, 2011; Huynh et al, 2012; Studer, 2015; Alfes et al, 2016).
Because they used simple subjective measures of volunteers’ perceptions, without
details about what management actions led volunteers to have these perceptions,
these studies do little to help volunteer managers do their jobs more effectively. In
effect, they state that good management leads to good outcomes, without informing
volunteer managers about what good management consists of.
One interesting clue comes from two studies, which found that the more often
volunteer managers communicated with and supervised volunteers, the more trouble
they had recruiting and retaining them (Hager and Brudney, 2004, 2015). This
somewhat surprising finding can perhaps be explained by the difference between
volunteers’ and volunteer managers’ perceptions of the nature of supervision.
Volunteers may prefer a light touch in management and communication that offers
them autonomy, while volunteer managers may overdo it out of a felt need to maintain
communication and exercise control.
The question of the best management structure for volunteers remains largely
unresearched, but a recent article studied the differences between paid and volunteer
managers of volunteers. Compared with their paid counterparts, volunteer managers
of volunteers were more likely to work in smaller organisations and were less likely
to adopt formal HRM management practices such as written policies, written job
descriptions, orientation and training (Hill and Stevens, 2011).
Recognise volunteer contributions
In general, recognition efforts lead to positive outcomes. Volunteers who reported
being satisfied with how they were thanked and recognised reported more satisfaction
163
Christopher Einolf
with volunteering (Wisner et al, 2005; Kulik, 2007) and had a stronger intent to
continue volunteering (Wisner et al, 2005). Three studies found that non-profits
that made more use of volunteer recognition activities reported fewer problems
recruiting and retaining more volunteers (Hager and Brudney, 2004, 2015; Studer,
2015), although one study found no significant relationship (Cuskelly et al, 2006).
Only one study (Canaan and Cascio, 1998) examined specific types of volunteer
recognition. Nearly all recognition activities – including thank-you letters, certificates
of appreciation, prizes, organised trips, parties, in-house lectures, newsletter publicity,
luncheons, annual dinners, service pins, free parking, free meals and free medical
services – correlated with higher volunteer satisfaction. Only the following three
did not significantly predict satisfaction: awards, the opportunity to participate in
conferences and media publicity. Prizes, conference participation, free meals and free
medical services also correlated with hours volunteered.
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Satisfy volunteers’ motivations
Some articles examined how the strength and nature of volunteer motivations and
the ability of organisations to satisfy those motivations correlated with volunteer
satisfaction, commitment and retention. Most used theVolunteer Functions Inventory
(VFI) (Clary et al, 1998), which measures six motivations for volunteering: building
career skills, enhancing self-esteem, protecting oneself from negative emotions,
social interaction, understanding others and prosocial values. Two studies found that
recruitment efforts were more effective if they included messages that accurately
targeted volunteer motives (Clary et al, 1994, 1998). Support for the importance
of motivations in retention and hours volunteered was mixed, with some studies
finding little correlation between motive strength and fulfilment and positive
outcomes (Finkelstein et al, 2005; Finkelstein, 2008), but others finding some support
for motive fulfilment (Clary et al, 1998; Farmer and Fedor, 2001; Davis et al, 2003;
Erasmus and Morey, 2016). A system that used all six VFI motivations and weighted
them to account for the interaction between their level of importance and fulfilment
also found a positive correlation between motive fulfilment and positive outcomes
(Stukas et al, 2009).
Four studies that used different measures of motivation than the VFI also found
connections between particular motives or motive fulfilment and positive outcomes.
One found that volunteers who were motivated by an intrinsic sense of enjoyment
were more likely to intend to continue volunteering (Nencini et al, 2016). A second
study found that the fulfilment of the need for autonomy, competence and relatedness
correlated strongly with work engagement and intent to remain (Haivas et al, 2013).
In a third study, episodic volunteers for sports fundraising events were more likely to
return to the next event if they were motivated by a desire for socialisation and fun
and by others’ expectations that they would continue volunteering (Hyde et al, 2016).
A fourth study found that high-contributing volunteers had stronger motivations
than low contributors, particularly self-interested motivations such as the desire for
social contact and the desire to feel like they were doing a good job (Randle and
Dolnicar, 2009).
164
Evidence-based volunteer management
Encourage reflection
Wisner et al (2005) found that the single strongest predictor of intent to continue
volunteering was encouraging volunteers to take time out for reflection.The authors
defined reflection as ‘a way to help volunteers make sense of their experiences – both
positive and negative – as they help to accomplish the organisation’s mission’ (Wisner
et al, 2005: 148) and a way to integrate their experiences with their own knowledge,
attitudes, beliefs and previous experience. Reflection provides volunteers with an
opportunity to think consciously about their experiences with others, to examine their
own values and beliefs and to develop problem-solving skills. Wisner et al’s paper is
the only one to date that tests the value of reflection as a best practice but the strong
positive correlation between reflection and intent to continue volunteering justifies
its consideration as a subject for future research.
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Encourage a supportive environment
Several studies examined the social relationships among volunteers or the social
attachment and identification between volunteers and their organisation.Volunteers
who reported strong support from and a good relationship with other volunteers
donated more time (Farmer and Fedor, 2001), did better work (Rogelberg et al,
2010) and were more likely to continue volunteering (Wisner et al, 2005; Hidalgo
and Moreno, 2009; Garner and Garner, 2011; Huynh et al, 2012; Dwyer et al, 2013;
Alfes et al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016). In addition to the social support and friendly
interactions that may make volunteers happier, close relationships with peers can lead
to the development of external norms and shared values that make volunteers feel an
obligation to continue (Hyde et al, 2016; Nencini et al, 2016). Finally, volunteers may
identify with and feel a sense of attachment to an organisation that causes them to feel
satisfied and to keep volunteering (Hustinx and Handy, 2009).Volunteers who felt a
sense of pride in their organisation and felt like the organisation respected them were
more likely to intend to remain volunteers and had a higher level of commitment
Boezeman and Ellemers (2007).
Hidalgo and Moreno (2009) compared the effect of HRM practices and peer
relationships in the same study and found that peer relationships were a slightly better
predictor of intent to remain. HRM practices such as a well-designed job (r = .36),
training (.19) and understanding how one’s volunteer role fits into the organisation’s
mission (.26) correlated positively but weakly with intent to remain. Organisational
support (.33) and peer support (.29) correlated at about the same level and the quality
of relationships with fellow volunteers (.47) correlated at the highest level. Presti
(2013) found that social support from peers and supervisors and task support from
supervisors correlated with job satisfaction and intent to remain at about the same
level.Thus, the evidence from these two studies shows that relationships with fellow
volunteers seem to be at least as important as task support from supervisors and may
be even more important in predicting positive volunteer outcomes.
Unsupported best practices
The non-profit management literature recommends a few ‘best practices’ for which
studies so far have not provided support. This does not necessarily mean that these
165
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf
practices do not actually work, as it may only be that the practices have not yet been
adequately tested. Nevertheless, two studies have found that having written policies
for the use of volunteers has no relationship with being able to recruit and retain
volunteers (Hager and Brudney, 2004; Stirling et al, 2011).The best practice of keeping
detailed records of volunteer hours and activities may be useful for the organisation’s
own objectives but has had either no relationship (Hager and Brudney, 2004; Studer,
2015) or a negative relationship (Stirling et al, 2011) with volunteer outcomes. The
best practice of evaluating individual volunteers has only been tested once, and no
correlation was found with volunteer recruitment and retention (Stirling et al, 2011).
The value of evaluating the entire volunteer programme has never been tested.
Another model, psychological contract theory, has potential but has yet to receive
empirical support. According to psychological contract theory (Stirling et al, 2011),
volunteers do not expect to be treated just like paid employees, but expect that their
volunteer experience will meet their emotional and relational needs. While never
stated in writing, this expectation is part of the psychological contract that volunteers
make with the agencies they work with. Because they value emotional and relational
needs, volunteers want ‘appreciation and a caring management approach’ that is
‘limited in autocratic and bureaucratic interactions’ (Stirling et al, 2011: 324). However,
non-profits are becoming more professionalised in their volunteer management
practices, focusing on issues of internal controls, training and accountability rather
than emotions and relationships. As non-profits become more professional and
bureaucratic, volunteers may feel that their psychological contract to receive care,
connection and support is being violated, which may cause them to feel dissatisfied
with their experience and quit volunteering.
To test psychological contract theory, Stirling et al (2011) surveyed 152 organisations
in Australia, testing whether a set of six HRM best practices taken from Hager and
Brudney (2004), and a set of relational best practices derived from psychological
contract theory, predicted whether organisations had adequate numbers of volunteers.
None of the HRM best practices had a positive relationship with having enough
volunteers and only one of the relational best practices – having a volunteer newsletter
– had a positive relationship. Further research is needed to test the value of the
psychological contract model.
Special types of volunteering
Most of the articles listed above tested volunteers in non-profit organisations in which
the majority of workers were paid staff. A smaller number of articles tested volunteer
management practices within small volunteer-run organisations, membership
associations and government agencies; other literatures explored episodic volunteering
and corporate volunteering.Table 3 summarises the articles that describe best practices
for these special types of volunteering.
Volunteering in small volunteer-run organisations
Small all-volunteer organisations – such as sports, leisure and hobby groups, self-help
organisations and neighbourhood action groups – probably make up the majority of
non-profits (Smith, 1997). However, there is almost no published literature on the
nature of effective management practices in these groups. One article (Barnes and
166
Evidence-based volunteer management
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Table 3: Special types of volunteering
Type of volunteering
Articles
Volunteering in small
volunteer-run organisations
Barnes and Sharpe, 2009
Volunteering in membership
associations
Gazley, 2012; Nesbit and Gazley, 2012; Gazley and Brudney, 2014;
Hager, 2014
Public sector volunteering
Brudney, 1999; Brudney and Kellough, 2000; Brudney and Gazley, 2002;
Gazley and Brudney, 2005; Choudhury, 2010; Dover, 2010; McBride et
al, 2011; Nesbit et al, 2012
Episodic volunteering
Hyde et al, 2016
Corporate volunteering
Petersen, 2004; Booth et al, 2009; Peloza et al, 2009; Grant, 2012;
Gatignon-Turnau and Mignonac, 2015; Malinen and Harju, 2017
Sharpe, 2009) studied an all-volunteer organisation that organised leisure activities
in a public park, thus constituting an interactional organisation under public
supervision. The organisation did not comply with the HRM model at all, but
instead integrated its programmes with volunteers’ values, passions and interests and
adopted an informal structure that allowed for maximum volunteer autonomy. This
approach was particularly successful, as the leisure organisation had many volunteers
and its programmes were popular with park users. More qualitative research on small
volunteer groups would be a much-needed addition to the volunteer management
literature.
Volunteering in membership associations
Only a few studies have covered volunteering in membership associations and most
of these looked at volunteers’ demographic characteristics and motivations, not at
management actions (Gazley, 2012; Nesbit and Gazley, 2012; Hager, 2014). However,
one useful study found that many members of professional associations performed
volunteer work that was not formally recognised by their association (Gazley and
Brudney, 2014).As recognised volunteers reported more engagement and satisfaction
than unrecognised ones, the study shows that associations should work harder to
document and recognise their members’ contributions.
Public sector volunteering
While most scholars associate volunteers with the non-profit sector, public sector
volunteers, most of whom work for local government bodies, make up about 25 to
30% of the volunteer labour force in the United States. State and local government
agencies tend to use fewer best management practices than non-profit organisations
(Brudney and Kellough, 2000; Gazley and Brudney, 2005; Choudhury, 2010).The only
study to examine whether HRM best practices correlated with positive outcomes
in the public sector found that most of these practices did positively correlate with
perceived benefits of using volunteers. Best practices with a statistically significant
and positive effect included written policies, liability insurance, orientation, job
descriptions, active recruitment, recognition and evaluation, while formal recordkeeping had no significant effect (Brudney, 1999).
While one might expect that government employees would come into conflict
with volunteers, empirical research has found little evidence of this (Brudney and
167
Christopher Einolf
Kellough, 2000; Brudney and Gazley, 2002). However, concerns about professionalism
can make paid staff reluctant to delegate substantive tasks to volunteers (Dover, 2010;
Nesbit et al, 2012). A study of stipended and non-stipended volunteers in the federal
Experience Corps found that stipends improved retention and made possible a more
diverse volunteer base (McBride et al, 2011).
Episodic volunteering
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Hyde et al (2016) divided episodic volunteers for a sports fundraising event for a
cancer charity into first-time, more experienced and long-term episodic volunteers.
They found that social/enjoyment and benefits motives predicted retention in novices
only, social norms predicted retention in novices and more experienced volunteers,
and commitment predicted retention in more experienced and long-term episodic
volunteers. Satisfaction with the volunteer experience predicted retention in all
three groups.
Corporate volunteering
Much practitioner and popular literature claims that corporate volunteer programmes
have good effects for the community, the volunteers and the corporation, but little
research has tested best practices (Grant, 2012).What studies that exist tested different
aspects of corporate volunteering and their conclusions do not form a clear pattern
or suggest a coherent set of best practices. Gatignon-Turnau and Mignonac (2015)
found that the positive effects of corporate volunteering on employees’ affective
commitment to the company were undermined if the volunteers attributed public
relations motives to the company’s operation of the volunteer programme. Peterson
(2004) tested recruitment strategies and found that team projects, matching incentives,
recognition and allowing volunteer work to positively influence performance
evaluations all encouraged corporate volunteering, while publicising opportunities
and offering release time to volunteer did not encourage volunteering. Peloza et
al (2009) also found no relationship between time off and corporate volunteering
and furthermore found no positive effect of manager support and participation by
co-workers. By contrast, Booth et al (2009) found that offering time off and flexible
hours did encourage volunteering, as did providing logistical support and allowing
volunteers to use company facilities and equipment. Malinen and Harju (2017) found
that engagement in the volunteer job and organisational support for volunteering
both correlated with intent to continue volunteering.
Conclusion
The literature on volunteer management to date is limited.This review found only 81
articles that empirically tested volunteer management practices, far fewer than studies
of the characteristics of volunteers. One set of articles tested the relationship of various
attitudes and motivations to satisfaction, hours worked and intent to remain, and
another tested the effect of specific management practices. In terms of methodology,
nearly all the studies used cross-sectional surveys with convenience samples and
self-reported outcome measures such as volunteer satisfaction and intent to remain.
Longitudinal studies and field experiments are superior methods but rarely used.
168
Evidence-based volunteer management
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
For researchers
The study of effective management practices is relatively new and there is much to
do to improve its quality. The first task is to broaden the scope of the models used.
Most research uses the HRM model and much of this research has supported the
validity of many aspects of this model. Beyond the finding in Hager and Brudney’s
(2004) survey that the amount of communication correlated negatively with having
enough volunteers, researchers have done little to determine whether HRM practices
can have negative effects.
Other models besides HRM show promise. Psychological contract theory
provides specific and plausible predictions about the negative effects of too much
HRM, predicting that volunteers who seek caring and supportive interactions with
management would be alienated by the bureaucratic professionalism of HRM. Social
environment theories are also a promising area for future research, as the limited
current research has shown that social identification, peer support and social norms can
have a powerful effect on volunteer behaviour. Future research should continue to test
these social models and should test ways to best encourage social identification, peer
support and the promotion of social norms that encourage volunteer commitment.
Many methodological changes could make the research on volunteer management
more effective. First, scholars could use existing, validated measures instead of inventing
new ones.This may have been difficult in the past because the literature on volunteer
management is scattered across journals and disciplines, meaning that it was easy
to miss previous work and previous measures. However, there is now no reason to
have so many measures of volunteer satisfaction, including two separate Volunteer
Satisfaction Indexes (Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley, 2002; Vecina et al, 2009). At least
most scholars use common measures of organisational commitment (Nelson et al,
1995; Costa et al, 2006;Vecina et al, 2012, 2013) and volunteer engagement (Huynh
et al, 2012;Vecina et al, 2012;Van Schie et al, 2015). Measures of other constructs can
be validated and replicated in order to better organise the field of volunteer research.
Further problems in the field of volunteer management research involve the use
of the following:
•
•
•
•
non-representative samples;
cross-sectional data;
self-reported surveys/subjective measures of volunteers’ attitudes and opinions;
vague measures of management best practices.
The first problem is that most studies use non-representative convenience samples
of subsets of non-profit organisations, such as volunteer rugby clubs (Cuskelly et al,
2006) and American hospitals (Rogers et al, 2016). Only a few survey non-profits
using nationally representative samples (Hager and Brudney, 2004, 2015; Stirling et
al, 2011; Studer, 2015). When studies only survey volunteers from a small sector of
the non-profit universe, it is impossible to generalise to the broader population of
volunteers, making any findings dubious.
Second, the nearly ubiquitous use of cross-sectional datasets makes drawing
inferences about causality difficult. Some studies try to get around this problem by
using structural equation modelling, but these studies only use measures of volunteer
attitudes and opinions. None involve studies of organisational actions. Only a few
169
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf
studies have sought to follow a group of volunteers over time (Davis et al, 2003;Tang et
al, 2010; Beirne and Lambin, 2013), which would help to advance our understanding
of the relationships between training, supervision, job design and other agency actions
and the level of volunteering intensity. More investment in longitudinal methods
would help to overcome the limitations of cross-sectional surveys. Field experiments
would also be an effective way to test the value of management practices but only
one study to date has used this method (Fisher and Ackerman, 1998).
A third problem lies in the use of self-reported surveys.These are likely to be accurate
when asking volunteers about subjective opinions and feelings such as volunteer
engagement, organisational commitment, general satisfaction and satisfaction with
specific management actions. They are less reliable with outcome measures. Actual
retention measured in a longitudinal survey would be much more reliable than
reported intent to remain; actual volunteer hours recorded by a supervisor would
be more accurate than volunteer hours recalled and reported by the volunteer; and
quality of work evaluated by a supervisor would be more accurate than volunteers’
own estimates of the quality of their work. Future studies should collect data from
both volunteers and the agencies for which they work in order to triangulate data
collection and get more accurate data.
A fourth problem involves the lack of specificity in measuring management
best practices. Many studies use measures of volunteer satisfaction with various
management behaviours, such as communication, supervision and recognition, but
do not ask what specific management behaviours might bring about volunteer
satisfaction.A few studies have looked at specific actions, such as the studies of specific
recruitment practices (Fisher and Ackerman, 1998; Østerlund, 2013) and recognition
practices (Cnaan and Cascio, 1998) mentioned above. Future studies should test the
effectiveness of specific actions rather than asking volunteers to make general ratings
of their satisfaction with a category of management behaviour.
In summary, scholars have much work to do to make the field of volunteer
management research more scientifically rigorous and more useful to practitioners.
Needed improvements include the use of multiple models, consistent and validated
measures, representative samples, longitudinal study designs, avoiding self-reported
measures, and testing specific management behaviours. In addition to improved
research, we need simply more research, replicating existing findings on different
samples using different methods and measures.
For managers
Despite these problems identified with the quality of the extant research, some
preliminary conclusions for volunteer managers seem justified.The 11 best practices
described in this article have all received moderate to substantial empirical support
and seem worth acting on.
Some of the specific suggestions regarding job descriptions, recruitment and
other components of the HRM model are useful. Psychological contract research
demonstrates the value of tempering the HRM model with caring and supportive
interactions and reducing the amount of bureaucracy visible to volunteers. Particularly
promising are the findings regarding peer support.Volunteer managers can encourage
peer support by providing volunteers with the space and time for social interaction,
170
Evidence-based volunteer management
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
and can encourage social attachment to the organisation and the promotion of social
norms by emphasising their organisation’s mission, values and achievements.
One piece of good news for volunteer managers is that the different models
featured in this review – HRM, motive fulfilment, psychological contracts and social
environment – are not mutually exclusive.Volunteer managers can put HRM practices
in place but keep the bureaucratic infrastructure at a minimum from the perspective
of the volunteers, and can focus on caring, supportive interactions with volunteers
instead of the enforcement of policies and rules. Volunteer managers can use the
research on motive fulfilment in their efforts to recruit, train, supervise, evaluate and
recognise volunteers. Encouraging peer support among volunteers and encouraging
social attachment and social norms can occur independently of HRM practices. Of
course, volunteer managers only have a limited amount of time to do all of these
things, so researchers can help them to prioritise through research that clarifies which
of these models and practices is most effective and important.
In conclusion, the volunteer management literature has made a promising start but
its scarcity, narrow scope and weak methodology make it less useful to volunteer
managers than it should be. This does not have to remain the case, however, and the
current state of the literature provides a good foundation for future research. The
past few decades have seen extensive research into the motivations, characteristics,
demographic traits, social networks and resources of volunteers. If academics apply
equal intensity to the study of effective volunteer management, it will be possible
to construct a solid body of knowledge that managers can use to effectively recruit,
train, supervise and retain volunteers.
References
Alfes, K, Shantz, A, Bailey, C, 2016, Enhancing volunteer engagement to achieve
desirable outcomes: What can non-profit employers do?, Voluntas 27, 2, 595–617
Allen, JA, Mueller, SL, 2013, The revolving door: A closer look at major factors
in volunteers’ intention to quit, Journal of Community Psychology 41, 2, 139–55,
doi:10.1002/jcop.21519
Barnes, ML, Sharpe, EK, 2009, Looking beyond traditional volunteer management:
A case study of an alternative approach to volunteer engagement in parks and
recreation, Voluntas 20, 2, 169–87
Beirne, C, Lambin, X, 2013, Understanding the determinants of volunteer retention
through capture-recapture analysis: Answering social science questions using a
wildlife ecology tookit, Conservation Letters 6, 6, 391–401
Boezeman, EJ, Ellemers, N, 2007, Volunteering for charity: Pride, respect, and the
commitment of volunteers, Journal of Applied Psychology 92, 771–87
Boezeman, EJ, Ellemers, N, 2014a,Volunteer leadership:The role of pride and respect
in organizational identification and leadership satisfaction, Leadership 10, 2, 160–73
Boezeman, EJ, Ellemers, N, 2014b,Volunteer recruitment, in K.Y.T.Yu and D.M. Cable
(eds) The Oxford Handbook of Recruitment, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 73–87
Booth, JE, Park, KW, Glomb, TM, 2009, Employer-supported volunteering benefits:
Gift exchange among employers, employees, and volunteer organizations, Human
Resource Management 48, 2, 227–49
Brudney, JL, 1999,The effective use of volunteers: Best practices for the public sector,
Law and Contemporary Problems 62, 4, 219–55
171
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf
Brudney, JL, 2012, Preparing the organization for volunteers, in T.D. Connors (ed)
The volunteer management handbook: Leadership strategies for success, Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley, 55–80
Brudney, JL, Gazley, B, 2002, Testing the conventional wisdom regarding volunteer
programs: A longitudinal analysis of the Service Corps of Retired Executives and
the U.S. Small Business Administration, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 31,
4, 525–48
Brudney, JL, Kellough, JE, 2000, Volunteers in state government: Involvement,
management, and benefits, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 29, 111–30
Brudney, JL, Meijs, LCPM, 2009, It ain’t natural: Toward a new (natural) resource
conceptualization for volunteer management, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly
38, 4, 564–81
Brudney, JL, Meijs, LCPM, 2014, Models of volunteer management: Professional
volunteer program management in social work, Human Service Organizations:
Management, Leadership and Governance 38, 297–309
Caldwell, SD, Farmer, SM, Fedor, DB, 2008, The influence of age on volunteer
contributions in a nonprofit organization, Journal of Organizational Behavior 29, 3,
311–33
Choudhury, E, 2010,Attracting and managing volunteers in local government, Journal
of Management Development 29, 6, 592–603
Clary, EG, Snyder, M, Ridge, RD, Copeland, J, Stukas, AA, Haugen, J, Miene, P, 1998,
Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, 6, 1516–30
Clary, EG, Snyder, M, Ridge, RD, Miene, PK, Haugen, JA, 1994, Matching messages
to motives in persuasion:A functional approach to promoting volunteerism, Journal
of Applied Social Psychology 24, 13, 1129–46
Cnaan, RA, Cascio,TA, 1998, Performance and commitment: Issues in management
of volunteers in human service organizations, Journal of Social Service Research 24,
3, 1–37
Costa, CA, Chalip, L, Green, BC, 2006, Reconsidering the role of training in event
volunteers’ satisfaction, Sport Management Review 9, 165–82
Craig-Lees, M, Harris, J, Lau, W, 2008, The role of dispositional, organizational, and
situational variables in volunteering, Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing
19, 2, 1–24
Cuskelly, G, Taylor, T, Hoye, R, Darcy, S, 2006,Volunteer management practices and
volunteer retention: A human resource management approach, Sport Management
Review 9, 141–63
Davis, MH, Hall, JA, Meyer, M, 2003, The first year: Influences on the satisfaction,
involvement, and persistence of new community volunteers, Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 29, 248–60
Dover, GJ, 2010, Public sector volunteering: Committed staff, multiple logics, and
contradictory strategies, Review of Public Personnel Administration 30, 2, 235–56
Dwiggins-Beeler, R, Spitzberg, B, Roesch, S, 2011,Vectors of volunteerism: Correlates
of volunteer retention, recruitment, and job satisfaction, Journal of Psychological Issues
in Organizational Culture 2, 3, 22–43
Dwyer, PC, Bono, JE, Snyder, M, Nov, O, Berson, Y, 2013, Sources of volunteer
motivation:Transformational leadership and personal motives influence volunteer
outcomes, Nonprofit Management and Leadership 24, 2, 181–205
172
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Evidence-based volunteer management
Erasmus, B, Morey, PJ, 2016, Faith-based volunteer motivation: Exploring the
applicability of theVolunteer Functions Inventory to the motivations and satisfaction
levels in an Australian faith-based organization, Voluntas 27, 3, 1343–60
Farmer, SM, Fedor, DB, 1999,Volunteer participation and withdrawal:A psychological
contract perspective on the role of expectations and organizational support, Nonprofit
Management and Leadership 9, 4, 349–67
Farmer, SM, Fedor, DB, 2001, Changing the focus on volunteering:An investigation of
volunteers’ multiple contributions to a charitable organization, Journal of Management
27, 2, 191–211
Finkelstein, M, 2008, Volunteer satisfaction and volunteer action: A functional
approach, Social Behavior and Personality 36, 1, 9–18
Finkelstein, MA, Penner, LA, Brannick, MT, 2005, Motive, role identity, and prosocial
personality as predictors of volunteer activity, Social Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal 33, 4, 403–18
Fisher, RJ, Ackerman, D, 1998, The effects of recognition and group need on
volunteerism: A social norm perspective, Journal of Consumer Research 25, 3, 262–75
Galindo-Kuhn, R, Guzley, RM, 2002, The Volunteer Satisfaction Index: Construct
definition, measurement, development and validation, Journal of Social Service Research
28, 1, 45–68
Garner, JT, Garner, LT, 2011, Volunteering an opinion: Organizational voice and
volunteer retention in nonprofit organizations, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly 40, 5, 813–28
Gatignon-Turnau,A, Mignonac, K, 2015, Mis(using) employee volunteering for public
relations: Implications for corporate volunteers’ organizational commitment, Journal
of Business Research 68, 1, 7–18
Gazley, B, 2012, Predicting a volunteer’s future intentions in professional associations:
A test of the Penner model, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 42, 6, 1245–67
Gazley, B, Brudney, JL, 2005,Volunteer involvement in local government after 9/11:
The continuing question of capacity, Public Administration Review 65, 2, 131–42
Gazley, B, Brudney, JL, 2014, The extent and nature of informal volunteering in
professional associations, Voluntary Sector Review 5, 3, 313–29
Grant, AM, 2012, Giving time, time after time: Work design and sustained employee
participation in corporate volunteering, Academy of Management Review 37, 4,
589–615
Grube, JA, Piliavin, JA, 2000, Role identity, organizational experiences, and volunteer
performance, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26, 9, 1108–19
Hager, MA, 2014, Engagement motivations in professional associations, Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly 43, 2(suppl), 39S–60S
Hager, MA, Brudney, JL, 2004, Volunteer management practices and retention of volunteers,
Washington, DC: Urban Institute
Hager, MA, Brudney, JL, 2015, In search of strategy: Universalistic, contingent, and
configurational adoption of volunteer management practices, Nonprofit Management
and Leadership 25, 3, 235–54
Haivas, S, Hofmans, J, Pepermans, R, 2013, Volunteer engagement and intention to
quit from a self-determination theory perspective, Journal of Applied Social Psychology
43, 1879–80
Hellman, CH, House, D, 2006,Volunteers serving victims of sexual assault, The Journal
of Social Psychology 146, 1, 117–23
173
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf
Hidalgo, MC, Moreno, P, 2009, Organizational socialization of volunteers:The effect
on their intention to remain, Journal of Community Psychology 37, 5, 594–601
Hill, M, Stevens, D, 2011, Volunteers who manage other volunteers and the
professionalization of volunteer management: Implications for practice, Voluntary
Sector Review 2, 1, 107–14
Hobson, CJ, Heler, K, 2007, The importance of initial assignment quality and staff
treatment of new volunteers: A field test of the Hobson-Heler model of nonprofit
agency ‘volunteer-friendliness’, International Journal of Volunteer Administration 14,
6, 47–56
Hustinx, L, Handy, F, 2009, Where do I belong? Volunteer attachment in a complex
organization, Administration in Social Work 33, 202–20
Huynh, JY, Metzer, J,Winefield, A, 2012, Engaged or connected? A perspective of the
motivational pathway of the job demands-resources model in volunteers working
for nonprofit organizations, Voluntas 23, 870–98
Hyde, MK, Dunn, J, Bax, C, Chambers, SK, 2016, Episodic volunteering and retention:
An integrated theoretical approach, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 45, 1,
45–63
Jamison, IB, 2003,Turnover and retention among volunteers in human service agencies,
Review of Public Personnel Administration 23, 2, 114–32
Karl, KA, Peluchette, JV, Hall, LM, 2008, Give them something to smile about: A
marketing strategy for recruiting and retaining volunteers, Journal of Nonprofit and
Public Sector Marketing 20, 1, 71–96
Kim, M, Chelladurai, P, Trail, GT, 2007, A model of volunteer retention in youth
sport, Journal of Sport Management 21, 2, 151–71
Kulik, L, 2007, Explaining responses to volunteering: An ecological model, Nonprofit
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 36, 2, 239–55
Locke, M, Ellis, A, Smith, JD, 2004, Hold on to what you’ve got: The volunteer
retention literature, Voluntary Action 5, 3, 81–99
Malinen, S, Harju, L, 2017,Volunteer engagement: Exploring the distinction between
job and organizational engagement, Voluntas 28, 69–89
Maslanka, H, 1996, Burnout, social support, and AIDS volunteers, AIDS Care 8, 2,
195–206
McBride, AM, Gonzales, E, Morrow-Howell, N, McCrary, S, 2011, Stipends
in volunteer civic service: Inclusion, retention, and volunteer benefits, Public
Administration Review 71, 870–8
Millette, V, Gagné, M, 2008, Designing volunteers’ tasks to maximize motivation,
satisfaction and performance: The impact of job characteristics on volunteer
engagement, Motivation and Emotion 32, 1, 11–22
Musick, M, Wilson, J, 2008, Volunteers: A social profile, Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press
Nelson,WH, Pratt, CC, Carpenter, CE,Walter, KL, 1995, Factors affecting volunteer
long-term care ombudsman organizational commitment and burnout, Nonprofit
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 24, 3, 213–33
Nencini, A, Romaioli, D, Meneghini, AM, 2016, Volunteer motivation and
organizational climate: Factors that promote satisfaction and sustained volunteerism
in NPOs, Voluntas 27, 618–39
Nesbit, R, Brudney, JL, Christensen, R, 2012, Exploring the limits of volunteerism in public
service delivery: Substituting volunteer labor for paid labor, NewYork, NY: Baruch College
174
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Evidence-based volunteer management
Nesbit, R, Gazley, B, 2012, Patterns of volunteer activity in professional associations
and societies, Voluntas 23, 558–83
Newton, C, Becker, K, Bell, S, 2014, Learning and development opportunities as a
tool for the retention of volunteers: A motivational perspective, Human Resource
Management Journal 24, 514–30
Østerlund, K, 2013, Managing voluntary sport organizations to facilitate volunteer
recruitment, European Sport Management Quarterly 13, 2, 143–65
Peloza, J, Hudson, S, Hassay, DN, 2009, The marketing of employee volunteerism,
Journal of Business Ethics 87, 371–87
Peterson, DK, 2004, Recruitment strategies for encouraging participation in corporate
volunteer programs, Journal of Business Ethics 49, 371–87
Presti, AL, 2013,The interactive effects of job resources and motivations to volunteer
among a sample of Italian volunteers, Voluntas 24, 4, 969–87
Randle, MJ, Dolnicar, S, 2009, Not just any volunteers: Segmenting the market to
attract the high contributors, Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing 21, 3,
271–82
Rogelberg, SG, Allen, JA, Conway, JM, Goh, A, Currie, L, McFarland, B, 2010,
Employee experiences with volunteers: Assessment, description, antecedents, and
outcomes, Nonprofit Management and Leadership 20, 4, 423–44
Rogers, SE, Jiang, K, Rogers, CM, Intindola, M, 2016, Strategic human resources
management of volunteers and the link to hospital patient satisfaction, Nonprofit
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 45, 2, 409–24
Safrit, RD, Schmiesing, R, 2012,Volunteer models and management, in T.D. Connors
(ed) The volunteer management handbook: Leadership strategies for success, Hoboken,
New Jersey: Wiley, 3–30
Smith, DH, 1997,The rest of the nonprofit sector: Grassroots associations as the dark
matter ignored in prevailing ‘flat earth’ maps of the sector, Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly 26, 2, 114–31
Stirling, C, Kilpatrick, S, Orpin, P, 2011, A psychological contract perspective to
the link between non-profit organizations’ management practices and volunteer
sustainability, Human Resource Development International 14, 3, 321–36
Studer, S, 2015,Volunteer management: Responding to the uniqueness of volunteers,
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, online first, http://journals.sagepub.com/
doi/abs/10.1177/0899764015597786
Studer, S, von Schnurbein, G, 2013, Organizational factors affecting volunteers: A
literature review on volunteer coordination, Voluntas 24, 403–40
Stukas, AA, Worth, KA, Clary, EG, Snyder, M, 2009, The matching of motivations
to affordances in the volunteer environment: An index for assessing the impact of
multiple matches on volunteer outcomes, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly
38, 1, 5–28
Tang, F, Morrow-Howell, N, Choi, E, 2010, Why do older adult volunteers stop
volunteering?, Ageing and Society 30, 859–78
Tang, F, Morrow-Howell, N, Hong, 2009, Institutional facilitation in sustained
volunteering among older adult volunteers, Social Work Research 33, 3, 172–82
Van Schie, S, Guntert, ST, Oostlander, J, Wehner, T, 2015, How the organizational
context impacts volunteers: A differentiated perspective on self-determined
motivation, Voluntas 26, 1570–90
175
IP : 165.215.209.15 On: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 17:03:13
Copyright The Policy Press
Delivered by Ingenta
Christopher Einolf
Vecina, ML, Chacón, F, 2005, Positive emotions in volunteerism, Spanish Journal of
Psychology 8, 1, 30–5
Vecina, ML, Chacón, F, Marzana, D, Marta, E, 2013, Volunteer engagement and
organizational commitment in nonprofit organizations: What makes volunteers
remain within organizations and feel happy?, Journal of Community Psychology 41,
3, 291–302
Vecina, ML, Chacón, F, Sueiro, M, 2009, Satisfacción en el voluntariado: estructura
interna y relación con la permanencia en las organizaciones, Psicothema 21, 1, 112–17
Vecina, ML, Chacón, F, Sueiro, M, Barrón, A, 2012, Volunteer engagement: Does
engagement predict the degree of satisfaction among new volunteers and the
commitment of those who have been active longer?, Applied Psychology 61, 1, 130–48
Waters, RD, Bortree, D, 2007, Measuring the volunteer–nonprofit organization
relationship: An application of public relations theory, The International Journal of
Volunteer Administration 24, 6, 57–67
Wisner, PS, Stringfellow, A,Youngdahl, WE, Parker, L, 2005, The service volunteerloyalty chain:An exploratory study of charitable not-for-profit service organizations,
Journal of Operations Management 23, 143–61
176
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
DOI 10.1007/s11266-015-9601-3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Enhancing Volunteer Engagement to Achieve Desirable
Outcomes: What Can Non-profit Employers Do?
Kerstin Alfes1 • Amanda Shantz2 • Catherine Bailey3
Published online: 2 June 2015
Ó International Society for Third-Sector Research and The Johns Hopkins University 2015
Abstract Engagement is a positive psychological state that is linked with a range of
beneficial individual and organizational outcomes. However, the factors associated with
volunteer engagement have rarely been examined. Data from 1064 volunteers of a
wildlife charity in the United Kingdom revealed that both task- and emotion-oriented
organizational support were positively related to volunteer engagement, and volunteer
engagement was positively related to volunteer happiness and perceived social worth and
negatively related to intent to leave the voluntary organization. Consistent with theory,
engagement acted as a mediator between these factors. The implications for future
research and the relevance of the findings for voluntary organizations are discussed.
Résumé L’engagement est un état psychologique positif corrélé à un éventail de
résultats bénéfiques pour les individus et les organisations. Toutefois, les facteurs
liés à l’engagement bénévole ont rarement été examinés. Les données provenant
de 1064 bénévoles d’une association caritative consacrée à la protection de la
nature au Royaume Uni ont révélé que tant les taches que le soutien organisationnel axé sur les émotions étaient corrélés de manière positive à l’engagement
& Catherine Bailey
k.bailey@sussex.ac.uk
Kerstin Alfes
k.alfes@uvt.nl
Amanda Shantz
a.shantz@ieseg.fr
1
Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Warandelaan 2, 5037 AB Tilburg,
The Netherlands
2
Management Department, IÉSEG School of Management LEM-CNRS (UMR 9221), Socle de
la Grande Arche, 1 Parvis de la Défense, Paris 92044, France
3
Department of Business and Management, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9RH,
UK
123
596
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
bénévole, et que ce dernier était corrélé de manière positive au bonheur des
bénévoles et à la valeur sociale perçue, et corrélé de manière négative à l’intention
de quitter l’organisation volontaire. Conformément à la théorie, l’engagement a
agi comme médiateur entre ces facteurs. Les implications pour la recherche future
et la pertinence des résultats pour les organisations bénévoles et communautaires y
sont examinées.
Zusammenfassung Engagement ist ein positiver psychischer Zustand, der eine
Reihe von Vorteilen für Individuen und Organisationen mit sich bringt. Allerdings
sind Faktoren im Zusammenhang mit dem Engagement von Freiwilligen nur selten
untersucht worden. Daten von 1064 ehrenamtlichen Mitarbeitern in einer britischen
Naturschutzorganisation demonstrierten, dass die aufgabenbezogene und emotionale Unterstützung seitens der Organisation vorteilhaft für das Engagement von
Freiwilligen war und sich das Engagement positiv auf die Zufriedenheit der ehrenamtliche Tätigenund derenempfundenen sozialen Wert sowienegativ auf deren
Absicht auswirkte, die Tätigkeit bei der gemeinnützigen Organisation einzustellen.
In Übereinstimmung mit theoretischen Annahmen stellte Engagement eine Mediatorvariable zwischen diesen Faktoren dar. Die Implikationen für zukünftige
Studien und die Bedeutung der Ergebnisse für gemeinnützige Organisationen
werden diskutiert.
Resumen El compromiso es un estado psicológico positivo que está vinculado a
una gama de resultados individuales y organizativos beneficiosos. Sin embargo, los
factores asociados al compromiso del voluntario han sido examinados raras veces.
Datos de 1.064 voluntarios de una organización benéfica para la vida salvaje en el
Reino Unido revelaron que tanto la tarea como el apoyo organizativo orientado por
la emoción estaban relacionados de manera positiva con el compromiso del voluntario, y el compromiso del voluntario estaba relacionado positivamente con la
felicidad del voluntario y el valor social percibido y estaba relacionado negativamente con la intención de dejar la organización voluntaria. Coherente con esta
teorı́a, el compromiso actuó como un mediador entre estos factores. Se tratan
también las implicaciones para investigaciones futuras y la relevancia de los hallazgos para las organizaciones voluntarias.
Keywords
worth
Volunteering Volunteer engagement Retention Happiness Social
The academic literature on the management of volunteers has tended to focus on
identifying organizational factors designed to increase volunteer participation,
motivation, and retention (Studer and Schnurbein 2013; Wilson 2012). This is not
surprising given that voluntary organizations face the conundrum that it is generally
much easier for volunteers to quit their volunteer employer than it is for salaried
workers to quit theirs, thus creating what has been termed the ‘‘important
challenge’’ of retaining a voluntary workforce (Garner and Garner 2011, p. 814).
123
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
597
Research has also demonstrated that the implementation of certain institutional
factors yields positive benefits for volunteers themselves (Tang et al. 2009; 2010),
such as the acquisition and development of skills (Booth et al. 2009), and increased
health and wellbeing (e.g., Ayalon 2008; Pillemer et al. 2010). This may not only
attract and retain volunteers, but may also have a positive impact on local
communities (United Nations Volunteers 2012).
While these studies have advanced our knowledge of some factors which can
make a difference for volunteers and their voluntary organizations, little is known
about the causal mechanism that might explain the relationship between organizational factors and positive outcomes for volunteers (Jenkinson et al. 2013; Lewig
et al. 2007). A notable exception is a study by Lewig et al. (2007) which showed
that burnout and connectedness mediated the relationship between job demands and
job resources with health and determination to continue. In the present study, we
extend this earlier research by proposing and testing a model that examines the
effect of task- and emotion-oriented organizational support on two other dimensions
of volunteers’ wellbeing—their sense of happiness and perceptions of social
worth—in addition to their turnover intentions. More importantly, our study
suggests an alternative mediator which explains the relationship between organizational support, volunteer wellbeing and turnover intentions, namely the extent to
which volunteers are engaged with their volunteer work tasks.
Volunteer engagement, as used in the present study, is a relatively new concept
in the volunteering literature and is defined as a unique, positive, motivational
construct; volunteers who are engaged with their volunteer role are fulfilled,
invested, and energized by their volunteer tasks and feel the ability to express
their true selves in the performance of their volunteer work (Kahn 1990; Schaufeli
and Bakker 2004; Shantz et al. 2014). Volunteer engagement therefore has a
distinct meaning in that it describes the extent to which volunteers psychologically, rather than physically, engage with their volunteer work and is different
from the engagement or participation of volunteers in voluntary work in a
physical sense.
We contribute to the literature in at least three ways. First, we focus on two facets
of volunteer wellbeing that have rarely been explored in previous volunteering
research, namely happiness and social worth. By focusing on these outcome
variables, we provide a broader picture on the ways in which volunteers benefit
from dedicating their time to volunteering activities, and add to the collection of
studies which have demonstrated that volunteering is beneficial for volunteers’
overall satisfaction and wellbeing (e.g., Jenkinson et al. 2013; Lewig et al. 2007;
Pillemer et al. 2010). Examining these outcomes, along with the intent to stop
volunteering, is consistent with Huynh et al.’s (2012) argument that there is a close
association between individual level outcomes for volunteers such as improved
wellbeing, and important organizational outcomes, such as retention.
Second, we develop and test a theoretical model to show that organizational
factors—task- and emotion-oriented support—are associated with enhanced volunteer wellbeing and retention. Previous research has suggested that organizations can
foster volunteering by offering employees the opportunity to participate in
volunteering activities (e.g., Booth et al. 2009; Caligiuri et al. 2013; Grant 2012;
123
598
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
Jones 2010; Rodell 2013). This is usually done as part of corporate volunteerism
programs where employers sponsor release time and regular compensation to enable
interested employees to donate their time to a specific cause. The present paper
takes a more focused perspective by exploring organizational factors that can be
implemented by voluntary organizations to encourage individuals to volunteer in
their free time outside formal work commitments. Specifically, we examine factors
that are within a voluntary organization’s control that can positively enhance
volunteer outcomes in particular (Gagné 2003; Huynh et al. 2012; Studer and
Schnurbein 2013). In this, we respond to the call for research focusing on
organizational factors that are associated with volunteer outcomes (Boezeman and
Ellemers 2007; Craig-Lees et al. 2008).
Third, we contribute to the volunteering literature by analyzing the mechanism
through which task- and emotion-oriented support influence the outcomes in our
study. Specifically, we suggest that organizational factors induce a motivational
process (Huynh et al. 2012; Lo Presti 2013) for volunteers such that they become
more engaged when those factors are present, which results in positive outcomes for
their health and reduces their intent to leave the voluntary organization. We base our
argumentation on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, a framework that has
been used frequently in the paid employment sector. This enables us to shed new
light on the question of whether theoretical explanations about the motivations of
employees in the paid employment sector are comparable to those of voluntary
workers. Hence, the present paper contributes to research on the similarities
between both sectors (Boezeman and Ellemers 2009).
Theory Development and Hypotheses
Theoretical Foundations
‘‘Engagement’’ entered the lexicon of management research with Kahn’s (1990)
ethnographic study of architects and summer camp workers. Kahn defined
engagement as the harnessing of a person’s full self into their work roles, and
emphasized the importance of employee experiences of meaningfulness, safety, and
availability in driving engagement. Kahn’s (1990) theory of personal engagement
suggests that engagement is a motivational concept. Individuals who are engaged
allocate resources toward their role, and they intensely and persistently apply these
resources to role performance. Moreover, this theory asserts that supportive
organizational contexts yield high levels of engagement, which in turn, leads to
positive outcomes since individuals work within settings where they feel safe to
express their true self and connect with others. For example, Huynh et al. (2012)
showed that job resources, such as a socially supportive work context led to higher
levels of engagement among volunteers and Farmer and Fedor (1999) demonstrated
that the extent to which volunteers believe that they receive support from their
voluntary organization influences their attitudes and behaviors.
A second approach to understanding work engagement was proposed by
Schaufeli and Bakker (2004). They argued that work engagement is a ‘‘positive,
123
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
599
fulfilling, and work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigour, dedication
and absorption’’ (p. 295). This definition of engagement is the centerpiece of the JDR model that posits that job characteristics fall into two general categories (Bakker
and Demerouti 2007; Demerouti et al. 2001). Job demands describe aspects of a job
that require sustained effort and are related to physiological and/or psychological
costs. In contrast, job resources refer to aspects of a job that may (1) reduce job
demands and their associated costs, (2) are functional to achieve work goals, and/or
(3) stimulate personal growth and learning (Demerouti et al. 2001). The JD-R model
specifies two processes through which job demands and job resources unfold; job
demands induce a health impairment process, whereas job resources evoke a
motivational process. In the present study, we focus on the motivational process
which is based on the premise that job resources lead to work engagement, which in
turn, is related to a host of positive individual and organizational outcomes (Bakker
and Bal 2010; Xanthopoulou et al. 2009).
What is common to each model of engagement is that organizations have a pivotal
role to play in generating high levels of engagement, by providing employees with
both economic and socio-emotional resources. Moreover, models of engagement
agree that the consequences of engagement are beneficial to both individuals and their
employing organization. For example, Shantz et al. (2013) found a link between
engagement and three aspects of individual performance, and Poulsen et al. (2012)
showed an association between engagement and subjective wellbeing.
Engagement is also an important concept in the context of volunteer work
because volunteers freely give their time to a chosen cause, thereby increasing the
capacity to fully employ and express their true selves into their volunteer activities
(Shantz et al. 2014). Volunteer engagement relates to how volunteers carry out their
role and has significant implications for how organizations operate. Although the
volunteering literature has demonstrated the importance of states and attitudes that
are similar to engagement, research involving paid workers has shown that
engagement more fully explains a range of outcome variables compared to other,
more passive states, such as job satisfaction and commitment (Rich et al. 2010;
Schaufeli 2013). Moreover, volunteer engagement may be especially relevant given
that research in the paid employment context has shown that work engagement
contributes to both employee wellbeing (e.g., Schaufeli et al. 2008) and reduced
turnover intentions (e.g., Alfes et al. 2013).
Antecedents of Volunteer Engagement
Of the few studies that have explored the antecedents of volunteer engagement, most
have focused on individual differences factors, such as autonomy needs, defined as a
desire to freely choose courses of action (Gagné 2003), and prosocial motivation
(Shantz et al. 2014). Building on the notion that the volunteer organizational
environment is more salient for attitudes and behaviors than individual differences per
se (Hustinx et al. 2010), attention has turned to the notion that organizational factors
may influence engagement. Only two studies have examined this proposition in
relation to volunteers. Huynh et al. (2012) found that social support, performance
feedback, and training were positively associated with volunteer engagement. Gagné
123
600
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
(2003) found a moderate association between environments that provide volunteers
with an opportunity to be autonomous and engaged.
More generally, studies have demonstrated that supportive organizational factors
can positively influence volunteers’ dedication to volunteer work and their
willingness to sustain volunteering involvement, which in some ways might be
considered a proxy for engagement. For example, Cuskelly et al. (2006) showed that
volunteer management practices such as training were associated with higher levels
of volunteer retention. Similarly, research on corporate volunteering programs
suggests that employees who are supported by their employer dedicate more time to
volunteering (e.g., Booth et al. 2009).
The organizational context is therefore relevant for volunteer engagement because,
as explained by the JD-R model, the organization provides resources that reduce the
costs of demanding job conditions, are functional in achieving goals, and stimulate
personal growth (Bakker and Demerouti 2007; Demerouti et al. 2001). In the present
study, we examine two organization-level resources that research has found to be
especially pertinent for volunteers, namely, task- and emotion-oriented support.
Task-oriented support includes concrete forms of support that assist volunteers in
overcoming problems experienced during the performance of volunteer work
(Boezeman and Ellemers 2007). It constitutes a resource because it helps volunteers
to manage the costs of taxing job conditions and helps them to successfully
accomplish tasks. For instance, volunteers who prepare food for homeless people
are able to anticipate obstacles in the kitchen, manage the ebb and flow of guests,
and correctly follow health and safety rules, to the extent that the organization
provides them with the necessary task support to carry out the work.
Emotion-oriented support is defined as a form of support that elicits positive
feelings (Boezeman and Ellemers 2007). It is a job resource because it reduces the
psychological costs of demanding job conditions and facilitates personal growth.
Providing emotion-oriented support (e.g., encouragement) to volunteers who serve
food to homeless people, for example, alleviates the stress of cooking for a large
number of guests, and helps volunteers to manage emotions that arise when
confronted with poverty. The provision of appreciation stimulates personal growth,
as appreciation leads volunteers to feel efficacious in their role (Bandura 1982).
Research in the volunteering literature resonates with these arguments. For
instance, Boezeman and Ellemers (2007) argued that task- and emotion-oriented
support send cues to volunteers concerning their status within the organization, and
that volunteers derive feelings of respect and pride as a consequence. Similarly, Lo
Presti (2013) found that social and task support are associated with job satisfaction,
commitment, and intent to remain. Unlike the aforementioned studies, we examine
the relationship between task- and emotion-oriented support with engagement
among volunteers. Moreover, we examine these forms of support via a different
theoretical lens by suggesting that the support provided by the voluntary
organization induces a motivational process in that volunteers are more willing to
immerse themselves in their voluntary work. Doing so is important, as previous
research has demonstrated that engagement is a core underlying mechanism which
is better able to explain how factors in the work environment influence individuals’
attitudes and behaviors, compared to alternative explanations commonly used in
123
Voluntas (2016) 27:595–617
601
organizational research (e.g., Christian et al. 2001; Rich et al. 2010; Schaufeli and
Bakker 2004). Active motivational states such as engagement are likely to be
particularly important in the context of volunteer work because volunteers freely
give the…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Why Choose Us

• 100% non-plagiarized Papers
• 24/7 /365 Service Available
• Affordable Prices
• Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
• Will complete your papers in 6 hours
• On-time Delivery
• Money-back and Privacy guarantees
• Unlimited Amendments upon request
• Satisfaction guarantee

How it Works

• Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
• Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
• Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
• Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
• From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.