Being business-like while pursuing a social mission: Acknowledging the inherent tensions in US nonprofit organizing

Abstract

Nonprofit organizations face an increasing expectation to be more business-like. Although scholars have theoretically explored this phenomenon and studied its influence in various contexts, there has been little empirical examination of the ways in which nonprofit practitioners themselves describe and make sense of their organizations and their work as business-like. Specifically, scholars have not explored the ways in which nonprofit practitioners communicatively reconcile the inherent tensions between being business-like and the pursuit of a social mission. Based on findings from an eight-month ethnographic field study of a US nonprofit organization, this article describes the sophisticated ways in which nonprofit practitioners understand, define and negotiate the need to be business-like within the nonprofit context and the central role of communication in that process. Additionally, critical assessment of these findings reveals the political qualities of talking about nonprofit organizing as being business-like, leading to potential transformative redefinitions of the business-like imperative that acknowledge rather than suppress conflicts inherent in the practice of nonprofit organizing.

Becoming Business-Like

“…Whilst the historiography and origins of the nonprofit sector are contested, NPOs are broadly rooted in philanthropy and mutual aid, the latter including self-help and "conviviality [communal socializing including eating]; non-party politics; and the pursuit of serious leisure" (Rochester, 2013, p. 8). Mutual aid in particular underpins claims to the nonprofit sector's distinctiveness, including its innovative approach (Lindsay, Osborne, & Bond, 2014), community involvement (Boateng, 2002), flexibility and client-led services (Clarke et al, 2007), and mission rather than profit focus (Sanders, 2015;Sanders & McClellan, 2014).…”

“…This literature has focused on three levels, firstly examining whole sector changes, particularly the decline in distinctiveness (Carey et al, 2009;Jenkins, 2005;Lindsay et al, 2014); secondly the effects on individual organizations, particularly resulting from increased managerialism (GoldenBiddle & Rao, 1997); and thirdly impacts on individual practitioners' identity (Sanders, 2015;Sanders & McClellan, 2014). Consequently as Maier, Meyer and Steinbereithner argue in this journal, the ongoing debate whether "business-like approaches […] better serve the public good lies at the heart of nonprofit management studies" (2016, p. 65).…”

Nonprofit Influence on Public Policy

“…Retaliation could be proactive such as unannounced organizational audits (Earle, 2013), blacklisting which restricts an NPO's ability to access funding from domestic sources, or passive with ruling and governing elites ignoring organizations and subsequent loss of access. Hence, Russia's managed democracy demonstrate that in a societally constricted context NPOs face a more complex and nuanced consideration when making choices about advocacy and attempting to balance organizational service delivery objectives and social justice goals (Sanders & McClellan, 2014;Tomlinson & Schwabenland, 2009). Therefore in extending Mosley's (2011) framework to managed democratic context where societal space for NPOs is constricted, we argue that we need to establish the subcategory of limited indirect advocacy tactics.…”

“…Nicholson-Crotty (2009) finds that advocacy, in particular its subset of lobbying activities can often lead to costly retribution against NPOs by hostile ruling and governing elites, including the withholding of resources. In turn this means that service providing NPOs have to carefully balance their social justice and public interest goals with their service delivery activities (Sanders & McClellan, 2014;Tomlinson & Schwabenland, 2009). Thus, we now turn to look in more detail at potential advocacy tactics used by service providing NPOs.…”

Developing a Communicative Imagination Under Contemporary Capitalism

“…Not surprisingly, the socio-economic frame informing most of these sites of working and organizing is capitalism. Even if we are interested in organizational practices where profits and losses are not computed, logics of capitalism enforce the dominance of market-based reasoning throughout the culture (e.g., Sanders & McClellan, 2014;Streeck, 2012).…”