Search

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

Capacity-building initiatives are popular among nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) worldwide. In response to a lack of valid and reliable capacity measures for NGOs working on various social issues, Shumate and colleagues developed an 8-dimension, 45-item NGO capacities instrument, based on data from U.S. NGOs. However, the proliferation of international research on NGO capacity raises questions about the degree to which such an instrument equally applies in other countries. To allow meaningful comparisons of NGO capacities across countries, we examine the measurement equivalence of this NGO capacity instrument across a matched sample of Chinese (N = 119) and U.S. (N = 150) NGOs. Findings suggest a new NGO capacity instrument, which comprises seven factors and 28 items and better accounts for the capacity of both Chinese and U.S. NGOs. Based on the new instrument, a series of comparative analyses highlight the influence of institutional factors on NGO capacities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars suggest three partnering strategies that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) can use to pursue strategic relationships in civil society networks: (a) the development of overlapping ties associated with network closure, (b) adopting an intermediary role between two disconnected organizations associated with brokerage, and (c) complying with the match-making demands of third-party organizations. Collaborative relationships among 489 NGOs were examined over a 14-year period (1990-2004) to determine which of these strategies NGOs use and when. The network demonstrated a strong preference for closure at the beginning of the observation period, after which time partnerships settled into a more stable pattern of intra-sector collaboration after 1996. Brokerage and constrained-choice strategies were not prevalent at any point over the observation period. Results are discussed in terms of network evolution and implications of the observed NGO preferences for closure. The potential benefits of emergent stability are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Board members play a significant, yet largely unexamined, role in nonprofit collaboration. Processes, such as finding prospective partners, creating common ground with a partner, and establishing appropriate collaborative governance implicate nonprofit board members. In contrast to the scholarship of the role of interlocking directorates as potential networks for nonprofit collaboration, this paper examines the role of board members' social and human capital on nonprofit collaboration with other nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Drawing on online survey data from 636 nonprofit organizations, this paper finds that board social capital—but not board human capital—is positively related to the presence and number of within‐sector and cross‐sector nonprofit collaboration. However, board human capital enhances nonprofit‐government collaboration, when board social capital is also high. The results provide a novel perspective in nonprofit collaboration and board management research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using the symbiotic sustainability model as a framework, this research investigates how many and with which businesses top nonprofit organizations report partnerships. We examined the websites of the 122 largest, most recognizable U.S. nonprofits. These websites included information about 2,418 business–nonprofit (B2N) partnerships with 1,707 unique businesses. The results suggest key differences with previous research on how U.S. Fortune 500 companies report B2N partnerships. Leading nonprofits report more B2N partnerships than U.S. Fortune 500 companies do. Furthermore, nonprofits do not maintain industry exclusivity in reporting B2N partnerships, like their business counterparts do. Finally, social issue industries do not exert the same isomorphic pressures on B2N partnerships that economic industries do. New propositions that extend the symbiotic sustainability model are presented to account for nonprofits’ unique goals for capital accumulation in B2N partnering and the industry characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the amount of research on digital inter-organizational networks among Chinese non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has increased greatly. However, few studies have examined the offline networks of Chinese NGOs. To fill this gap, the present study investigates the size and spread of offline Chinese NGO networks. In particular, we examine two competing hypotheses: the influence of organizational capacity and the influence of board affiliations asguanxion the size and spread of the ego-centric networks of NGOs. To test our hypotheses, we conducted surveys among 119 Chinese NGOs. The results of the ordinary least squares regression supported ourguanxihypothesis: the number of organizational affiliations that the members of a board of directors have was positively related to the size of Chinese NGO networks, controlling for geographic region, social issue area, age, and revenue of the NGOs. In addition, asguanxi, board affiliations influenced the spread of NGO networks via the size of NGO networks. This study contributes to the research on Chinese inter-organizational communication networks in general and to Chinese NGO offline networks, NGO capacity, andguanxiculture in particular. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01490.x Byline: Michelle Shumate (1) Author Affiliation: (1)University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign