Steering the volunteering – Data Envelopment Analysis of volunteers’ retention efficiency in civil society units
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(2).2020.19
-
Article InfoVolume 18 2020, Issue #2, pp. 219-230
- Cited by
- 744 Views
-
109 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Civil society is positioned somewhere in the area between business, government, and private sector. As civil society organizations are not profit-oriented, they are often relying on the engagement of volunteers, i.e., workers who are not paid for their effort. Successful management of human resources in organizations that depends on volunteers’ work can prove even harder than managing employees’ work in business entities. Many factors influence someone’s work effort, productivity, and devotion far beyond technical conditions, so it is impossible to separate someone’s work from the rest of his/her personality traits. In civil society organizations, attracting, motivating, and keeping volunteers willing to conduct needed tasks and actively participate in the organization’s activities might be quite challenging. For this paper, a survey was conducted among 42 organizations of civil society units (CSUs) that use the help of volunteers to fulfill their activities. To analyze relative efficiency of the civil society units, appropriate input and output variables were selected, and analysis was conducted with non-parametric DEA method. It was decided to take 4 inputs and 2 outputs in the analysis. The obtained results show that 69% of 42 CSUs are relatively efficient, 31% relatively inefficient, and 26.19% below the average. The results of the analysis enabled the identification of efficient and inefficient units. The reference set was calculated for each inefficient unit to determine which inputs cause better performance output. The calculated projections can be useful to CSU’s managers and serve as a benchmark for detecting the source of inefficiency within their humanitarian organizations. They can also serve as guidelines for improving inputs and thus achieving higher levels of outputs, i.e., duration of volunteering and the number of volunteers.
Acknowledgment
This paper is financially supported through project ZP UNIRI 10/17 by the University of Rijeka.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M54, C67, L31
-
References30
-
Tables5
-
Figures3
-
- Figure 1. Organizations in the sample
- Figure 2. Importance of volunteers’ skills
- Figure 3. Graphical representation of the CCR and BCC models
-
- Table 1. General results
- Table 2. Efficiency results concerning basic models
- Table 3. Reference set table
- Table 4. Example of CSU projections
- Table 5. Comparison between efficient unit from the reference set and associated inefficient unit
-
- Anderoni, J. (2015). Charity and Philanthropy, Economics of. In James D. Wright (Editor-in-Chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 3) (pp. 358-363). Oxford: Elsevier.
- Bains, S., Lie, M., & Wheelock, J. (2006). Volunteering, self-help and citizenship in later life. A collaborative research project by Age Concern Newcastle and the University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
- Cooper, W., Seiford, L., & Tone, K. (2006). Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and Its Use. Springer.
- Croatian Ministry of Public Administration. (2019).
- Despotis, D. K. (2002). Improving the discriminating power of DEA: Focus on globally efficient units. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(3), 314-323.
- Dolnicar, S., & Rendle, M. J. (2004). Marketing Research for Volunteering: A Research Agenda 2004.
- Dyson, R. G., Allen, R., Camanho, A. S., Podinovski, V. V., Sarrico, C. S., & Shale, E. A. (2001). Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 245-259.
- Epstein, M. J., & McFarlan, F. W. (2011). Measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of a nonprofit’s performance. Strategic Finance, 27-34.
- Ficher, L. R., & Schaffer, K. B. (1993). Older Volunteers, A Guide to Research and Practice. SAGE Publications. Newbury Park.
- Holmes, K., Smith, K. A., & Baum, T. (2010). Volunteers and volunteering in leisure: Social science perspectives. Leisure Studies, 29(4), 435-455.
- Huang, L.-H. (2019). Well-being and volunteering: Evidence from aging societies in Asia. Social Science & Medicine, 229, 172-180.
- Jaffee, D. (2008). Organization theory: Tension and change (International edition). Boston: McGraw Hill.
- Jardas Antonić, J., Vretenar, N., & Host, A. (2017). Governing ICT Business Management and Achieving Digital Maturity of Public Administration (4th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences & Arts SGEM 2017, pp. 431-442).
- Kim, H., & Lee, C. W. (2018). Efficiency analysis for nonprofit organizations using DEA: Focused on humanitarian assistance organizations in South Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 165-180.
- Kim, M., Trail, G. T., Lim, J., & Kim, Y. K. (2009). The role of psychological contract in intention to continue volunteering. Journal of Sport Management, 23, 549-573.
- Kummerfeldt, W. D. (2011). Human Resource Management Strategies for Volunteers: A Study of Job Satisfaction, Performance, and Retention in a Nonprofit Organization. Capela University.
- Lovrencic, D., Vretenar, N., & Jezic, Z. (2017). The Challenges of Establishing Food Donation System (International Scientific Conference ITEMA 2017 CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, pp. 622-629).
- Mintzberg, H. (2009, July-August). Rebuilding Companies as Communities. Harvard Business Review.
- Mintzberg, H., & Caldwell, C. (2017). Leadership, “communityship,” and “the good folk. International Journal of Public Leadership, 13(1), 5-8.
- Oxford Living Dictionaries. (2019).
- Parsons, E. (2004). Charity shop managers in the UK: becoming more professional? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 11(5), 259-268.
- Parsons, E., & Broadbridge, A. (2007). Charity, Retail or Care? Gender and managerialism in the charity retail sector. Women in Management Review, 22(7).
- Raab, R. L., & Lichty, R. W. (2002). Identifying subareas that comprise a greater metropolitan area: The criterion of county relative efficiency. Journal of Regional Science, 42(3), 579-158.
- Rabar, D. (2010). Ocjenjivanje efikasnosti poslovanja hrvatskih bolnica metodom analize omeđivanja podataka. Ekonomski pregled, 61(9-10), 511-533.
- Starnes, B. J., & Wymer, W. W. Jr. (2001). Conceptual Foundations and Practical Guidelines for Retaining Volunteers Who Serve in Local Nonprofit Organizations: Part II. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 9(1-2), 97-118.
- Tofallis, C., & Sargeant, A. (2000). Assessing charities using data envelopment analysis. In A. Neely (Ed.), Performance Measurement: Past, Present and Future. Cranfield University: Centre for Business Performance.
- Visbal-Cadavid, D., Martínez-Gómez, M., & Guijarro, F. (2017). Assessing the Efficiency of Public Universities through DEA. A Case Study. Sustainability, 9(8), 1416.
- West, S., & Pateman, R. (2016). Recruiting and Retaining Participants in Citizen Science: What Can Be Learned from the Volunteering Literature? Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1(2), 15.
- Williamson, O. E. (2002). The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3).
- Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Ross, D. (2007). The Machine that Changed the World. Simon & Shuster, London.