Analisi delle caratteristiche del processo gestionale dei Centri di Servizio per il Volontariato (CSV) in un’ottica stakeholder management

Partendo dal presupposto che le performance delle Anp dipendono dalla percezione che i vari stakeholder hanno rispetto al raggiungimento della missione, il presente paper analizza il caso dei Centri di Servizio per il Volontariato (CSV). Tali organizzazioni rappresentano una particolare tipologia di azienda non profit (anp) la cui missione è riconducibile ad attività di supporto strategico, organizzativo e tecnico alle piccole organizzazioni di volontariato italiane. L’elaborato presenta i risultati di una ricerca-azione sviluppata con 61 CSV italiani. Scopo della ricerca è stato evidenziare i limiti del sistema di management dei CSV e l’impatto in termini di raggiungimento della missione. Nel paper si ipotizza che tali limiti siano dovuti alla difficoltà di mappare le istanze dei loro stakeholder da parte dei CSV, pertanto si propone un modello di analisi delle stesse, finalizzato a superare gli attuali limiti manageriali dei CSV. ********* (Analysis of the Management Process of Centres for Services for Voluntary Organisations from a Stakeholder Management Perspective Considering the assumption that the performance of Nonprofit Organisations (NPOs) depends upon stakeholders’ perceptions, in an NPO, strategic management of stakeholders entails not only responding to their requests, but also guiding them in order to align their needs, values and objectives with the mission of the organisation. Given the background on the managerial characteristics that distinguish an NPO and a profit organisation, and the different role of a stakeholder approach in these two kinds of organisations, the paper will discuss the strengthens and weaknesses of a particular type of Italian NPO – Centres for Services for Voluntary Organisations (CSVs) – and will suggest that a proactive dialogue between CSVs and their stakeholders could help these organisations align their stakeholders’ claims to the organizational mission and to better define and develop strategies and activities coherent with the mission. The research was carried out using the action research model (Lewin, 1946) and the findings are based on the analysis of a sample of 61 CSVs throughout Italy.) (This paper is only available in italian)

Mission, strategie e valutazione delle performance delle aziende nonprofit in un approccio di stakeholder management

Le aziende non profit (anp) sono particolari organizzazioni che hanno come obiettivo istituzionale non la creazione di profitto in senso economico ma la massimizzazione del valore sociale prodotto a vantaggio della collettività di riferimento. Tale valore è di natura intangibile e la sua definizione e misurazione dipendono in maniera fondamentale dalla percezione dei diversi stakeholder da esso a vario titolo influenzati. Per questo, per le anp il dialogo ed il coinvolgimento dei propri stakeholder nella definizione della missione e poi nelle scelte manageriali che ne conseguono è elemento fondamentale per il raggiungimento di performance soddisfacenti. Le scelte strategiche devono quindi essere orientate al conseguimento degli obiettivi di missione (mission oriented) nel rispetto del modello organizzativo e gestionale di tipo multi-stakeholder. Per queste ragioni nel working paper si sottolinea l’importanza di processi di stakeholder engagement per la definizione e la misurazione degli indicatori di performance: il valore sociale prodotto è tale, infatti, solo se percepito dagli stakeholder coinvolti.******** (Mission, Strategies and Performance Evaluation in Nonprofit Organisations From a Stakeholder Management Approach Nonprofit organisations (NPOs) have emerged as important not-for-profit private actors providing goods or services directly related to their explicit aim to create social value for the community in which they work. In order to maximize its social value creation, an NPO firstly has to define its mission according to stakeholders’ expectations, then it has to carry it out considering how it is defined by stakeholders, and finally it has to measure its performance and account for it related to how their stakeholders evaluate performance achievement. Since the mission achievement and effectiveness of NPOs are not easy to estimate and to assess, it follows that NPO effectiveness is always a matter of comparison, and that NPO effectiveness is a social construction, which depends on the evaluation given by the stakeholders who have an impact on and are impacted by the mission of the organisation. For these reasons, in the present working paper we assert that managers of NPOs have to use strategic stakeholder relationships, and not only adaptive or reactive approaches, in order to negotiate outcomes which reflect win-win situations for different stakeholders.) (This paper is only available in italian)

Coordinated enactment: how organizational departments work together to implement CSR

Research on the implementation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has revealed the critical role of CSR departments vis-a-vis functional departments. While both CSR and functional departments influence CSR implementation, the question of how they work together remains underexamined. We address this question by mobilizing and merging two complementary yet separate perspectives on CSR implementation: "coordination" and "enactment." Building on a comparative case study involving seven large Swiss financial institutions that have established CSR departments and implemented CSR to varying extents, we inductively derive six courses of actions conducing to CSR implementation, involving both coordination and enactment. We distinguish between four courses of actions in the CSR departments (centralizing, coalescing, orchestrating, and consulting) and two courses of actions in the functional departments (decentralizing and tailoring). As our data suggest that coordination and enactment work in tandem, we capture these insights in a model of CSR implementation as coordinated enactment. Our research contributes to the literature by explaining how CSR departments and functional departments enact and simultaneously coordinate CSR at a particular implementation stage, thus illuminating how and why the variance in CSR implementation occurs.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Diagnóstico das ONG em Portugal

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Beyond cognition: how multiple embeddedness can facilitate the implementation of institutional change

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

What a mature CSR team looks like

As climate change, social inequities, and other critical issues grow ever more urgent, many companies have built dedicated departments focused on corporate social responsibility (CSR). But while this is an important first step, the authors’ new research suggests that organizations with the most mature CSR programs are often actually those with the smallest CSR departments. Based on an in-depth analysis of several Swiss firms as well as a review of prior research on CSR implementation, they identify a three-phase process through which many companies progress as their CSR operations advance from high-level vision to on-the-ground impact: A nascent stage in which the CSR department centralizes and coalesces, an intermediate stage in which it decentralizes and orchestrates, and a final stage in which it retreats and consults. Through this process, resources shift from the central CSR team out into functional units, meaning that the size and budget of the CSR department is often a poor indicator of the maturity of its CSR execution. To paint an accurate picture of a company’s performance — and to identify opportunities for improvement — the authors ultimately suggest that it’s essential to recognize these nuances and calibrate expectations and evaluations accordingly

Coordinated Enactment: How Organizational Departments Work Together to Implement CSR

Research on the implementation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has revealed the critical role of CSR departments vis-à-vis functional departments. While both CSR and functional departments influence CSR implementation, the question of how they work together remains underexamined. We address this question by mobilizing and merging two complementary yet separate perspectives on CSR implementation: “coordination” and “enactment.” Building on a comparative case study involving seven large Swiss financial institutions that have established CSR departments and implemented CSR to varying extents, we inductively derive six courses of actions conducing to CSR implementation, involving both coordination and enactment. We distinguish between four courses of actions in the CSR departments (centralizing, coalescing, orchestrating, and consulting) and two courses of actions in the functional departments (decentralizing and tailoring). Since our data suggest that coordination and enactment work in tandem, we capture these insights in a model of CSR implementation as coordinated enactment. Our research contributes to the literature by explaining how CSR departments and functional departments enact and simultaneously coordinate CSR at a particular implementation stage, thus illuminating how and why the variance in CSR implementation occurs