Evaluation Research and Institutional Pressures: Challenges in Public-Nonprofit Contracting

This article examines the connection between program evaluation research and decision-making by public managers. Drawing on neo-institutional theory, a framework is presented for diagnosing the pressures and conditions that lead alternatively toward or away the rational use of evaluation research. Three cases of public-nonprofit contracting for the delivery of major programs are presented to clarify the way coercive, mimetic, and normative pressures interfere with a sound connection being made between research and implementation. The article concludes by considering how public managers can respond to the isomorphic pressures in their environment that make it hard to act on data relating to program performance.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 23. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

Social Sector Business Ventures: The Critical Factors That Maximize Success

This paper seeks to help social sector leaders understand the factors that they should consider when launching revenue-generating business ventures. Given that much of the research on social sector business ventures is based on the personal experiences of individual practitioners, there is a wide array of advice for organizational leaders who are thinking about launching business ventures. Consequently, we approach the subject of social sector business ventures in a systematic and analytic way in order to determine what organizational leaders really need to know about launching successful ventures. We introduce a framework called "business in a box" that separates the process of thinking about launching business ventures from the organizational characteristics and dynamics that influence these ventures. We assert that organizational leaders who wish to maximize the success of their business ventures must explore (1) what is "inside" the box (The Business and its Context) to understand the business fundamentals of launching a venture and (2) what is "outside" the box (Assets and Internal Destructive Forces) to understand the forces and dynamics within the organizational context that impact these ventures.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 43. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

A Comparative Study of Inequality and Corruption

We argue that income inequality increases the level of corruption through material and normative mechanisms. The wealthy have both greater motivation and opportunity to engage in corruption, while the poor are more vulnerable to extortion and less able to monitor and hold the rich and powerful accountable as inequality increases. Inequality also adversely affects peoples social norms about corruption and beliefs about the legitimacy of rules and institutions, and thereby makes it easier to tolerate corruption as acceptable behavior. Our comparative analysis of 129 countries utilizing two-staged least squares methods with a variety of instrumental variables supports our hypotheses, using different measures of corruption (the World Banks Control of Corruption Index and the Transparency Internationals Corruption Perceptions Index). The explanatory power of inequality is at least as important as conventionally accepted causes of corruption such as economic development. We also find a significant interaction effect between inequality and democracy, and evidence that inequality affects norms and perceptions about corruption, using the World Values Survey data. Since corruption also contributes to income inequality, societies often fall into vicious circles of inequality and corruption.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 22. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

Attorney General Oversight of Charities

The attorneys general in each of the states have broad powers to regulate nonprofit, tax exempt charitable organizations. In ten states there us active enforcement of the duties of loyalty care of charitable fiduciaries, while in another twenty-nine, the attorney general oversee charitable fundraising. This paper describes the operations of these state offices, the advantages and shortcomings of state regulation, and recent changes in the laws. It contains suggestions for changes in both state and federal law to improve accountability of the charitable sector. This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 41. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

Balancing Margin and Mission: Nonprofit Competition in Charitable versus Fee-Based Programs

Competition in the nonprofit world has intensified in recent years, and nonprofit managers are challenged to devise strategies that will serve both organizational needs and public interest. We propose a framework for thinking about nonprofit competition based on the intersection of two dimensions: the domain of competition, which can be either fee-based or donative activities; and the competitive strategy, which can be either price- or differentiation-based. The experience of the American Red Cross, a prominent nonprofit organization facing competition in both fee-based and donative domains, provides data for the elaboration of the framework, and for tentative conclusions about the implications of nonprofit competition for both margin and mission.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 11. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

Strategic Positioning and the Financing of Nonprofit Organizations: Is Efficiency Rewarded in the Contributions Marketplace?

This article addresses the question of whether operational efficiency is recognized and rewarded by the private funders that support nonprofit organizations in fields ranging from education to social service to arts and beyond. Looking at the administrative efficiency and fundraising results of a large sample of nonprofit organizations over an 11 year period, we find that nonprofits that position themselves as cost efficient reporting low administrative to total expense ratios fared no better over time than less efficient appearing organizations in the market for individuals, foundations, and corporate contributions. From this analysis, we suggest that economizing may not always be the best strategy in the nonprofit sector. This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 2. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

The Public Value Scorecard: A Rejoinder and an Alternative to "Strategic Performance Measurement and Management in Non-Profit Organizations"

Robert Kaplan's Balanced Scorecard has played an important and welcome role in the nonprofit world as nonprofit organizations have struggled to measure their performance. Many nonprofit organizations have taken both general inspiration and specific operational guidance from the ideas advanced in this important work. Their pioneering efforts to apply these concepts to their own particular settings have added a layer of richness to the important concepts. Given the great contribution of this work to helping nonprofits meet the challenge of measuring their performance, it seems both ungracious and unhelpful to criticize it. Yet, as I review the concepts of the Balanced Scorecard, and look closely at the cases of organizations that have tried to use these concepts to measure their performance, I believe that some systematic confusions arise. Further, I think the source of these confusions lies in the fact the basic concepts of the Balanced Scorecard have not been sufficiently adapted from the private, for-profit world where they were born to the world of the nonprofit manager where they are now being applied. Finally, I think a different way of thinking about nonprofit strategy and linking that to performance measurement exists that is simpler that and more reliable for nonprofit organizations to rely upon. The purpose of this paper is to set out these contrarian ideas. This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 18. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

The Role of NGOs in Human Security

Human security is fundamentally concerned with helping people to deal with unforeseeable threats and sudden downturns, whether international financial crises, environmental disasters or incapacitating illnesses. In this paper I argue that NGOs, as one of the most visible sets of actors in the related fields of human development and human rights, can play a significant role in helping to achieve human security. NGOs are especially well suited to action for human security because of their size and reach, closeness to local populations, willingness to confront the status quo, and ability to address transnational threats through coalition-building. While NGOs face many obstacles in reorienting their activities explicitly towards human security, including the cyclical nature of the aid monies on which many of them depend and the high costs of networking, I argue that the human security framework will nonetheless attract many NGOs to its approach.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 12. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

Organization Development for Social Change

The field of organization development (OD) has emerged from efforts to improve the performance of organizations, largely in the for-profit sector but more recently in the public and not-for-profit sectors as well. This paper examines how OD concepts and tools can be used to solve problems and foster constructive change at the societal level as well. It examines four areas in which OD can make such contributions: (1) strengthening social change-focused organizations, (2) scaling up the impacts of such agencies, (3) creating new inter-organizational systems, and (4) changing contexts that shape the action of actors strategic to social change. It discusses examples and the kinds of change agent roles and interventions that are important for each. Finally, it discusses some implications for organization development intervention, practitioners, and the field at large.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 25. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers

Comparative Advantage in Disaster Response

This paper introduces a framework for a systematic analysis of the comparative advantages of various types of emergency responders. Our hypothesis is that one can define and then test comparative advantages across categories of actors and that a policy-making framework can help prepare better disaster responses in the future. We present an analytic framework that categorizes NGOs, governments, militaries and private responders at various levels. This initial theoretical framework provides a structure to begin to analyze comparative advantage. It suggests that there might be better combinations and sequences of responders in given situations. With the basic theory set forth, the framework is tested against data from two cases: 1) the disaster response following the 2004 Tsunami in Sri Lanka and 2) the response in Honduras after Hurricane Mitch in 1998. Ultimately, this work is intended to inspire other researchers interested in questions of disaster response to employ this methodology to develop and publish cases as well, creating a body of analysis that could then be further refined into policy recommendations to improve humanitarian emergency efforts.This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 38. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers