The institutional and technical structuring of nonprofit ventures: Case study of a U.S. hybrid organization caught between two fields

Voluntas

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 137-155

  Cooney, Kate ^a  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Neo institutional theory; Organizational field; Social enterprise; United States

Indexed keywords

NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK; THEORETICAL STUDY;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33748653565     PISSN: 09578765     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11266-006-9010-8     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Adams, C., & Perlmutter, F. (1991). Commercial venturing and the transformation of America's voluntary social welfare agencies. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 20, 25-38.
2. Boschee, J. (1998). Merging mission and money: A board member's guide to social entrepreneurship. Washington, DC: National Center for Nonprofit Boards. Available online: www.communitywealth.org
3. Burawoy, M., Burton, A., Ferguson, A. A., Fox, K. J., Gamson, J., Gartrell, N., Hurst, L., Kurzman, C., Salzinger, L., Schiffman, J., & Ui, S. (1991). Ethnography unbound: Power and resistance in the modern metropolis. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
5. Dees, J. G., & Elias, J. (1998). The challenges of combining social and commercial enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8, 165-178.
6. DiMaggio, P. J., & Anheier, H. K. (1990). Sociology of nonprofit organizations and sectors. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 137-159.
7. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
8. Eikenberry, A. M., & Kluver, J. D. (2004). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk? Public Administration Review, 64(2), 132-140.
9. Eliashberg, J., & Steinberg, R. (1987). Marketing-production decisions in an industrial channel of distribution. Management Science, 33(8), 981-1000.
10. Emerson, J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45, 35-51.
11. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. New York: Macmillan, pp. 119-161.
12. Fligstein, N. (1990). The transformation of corporate control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Fligstein, N. (2001). Social skill and the theory of fields. Sociological Theory, 19, 105-125.
14. Glisson, C. (1992). Structure and technology in human service organizations. In Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.), Human services as complex organizations. Newbury Park: Sage, pp. 184-202.
15. Guo, B. (2006). Charity for profit? Exploring factors associated with the commercialization of human services nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(1), 123-138.
16. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149-164.
17. Hansmann, H. B. (1994). Organization of production in the human services. Working Paper No. 200, Program on Non-Profit Organizations, Yale University.
18. Hasenfeld, Y. (1992). The nature of human service organizations. In Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.), Human services as complex organizations. Newbury Park: Sage, pp. 3-23.
19. Hyde, C. A. (2000). The hybrid nonprofit: An examination of feminist social movement organizations. Journal of Community Practice, 8, 45-67.
20. James, E. (1998). Commercialization among nonprofits: Objectives, opportunities, and constraints. In B. A. Weisbrod (Ed.), To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 271-285.
21. James, E. (1986). How nonprofits grow. In S. Rose-Ackerman (Ed.), The economics of nonprofit institutions. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 85-95.
22. Katz, J. (1988). A theory of qualitative methodology: The social system of analytic field work. In R. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research. Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press, pp. 127-148.
23. Laville, J., & Nyssens, M. (2001). The social enterprise: Towards a theoretical socio-economic approach. In C. Borzaga & J. Defourney (Eds.), The emergence of social enterprises. London: Routledge, pp. 312-332.
24. Leiter, J. (2005). Structural isomorphism in Australian nonprofit organizations. Voluntas, 16(1), 1-31.
25. Lipman, H., & Schwinn, E. (2001). The business of charity: Nonprofit groups reap billions in tax-free income annually. The Chronicle of Philanthropy, October 18.
26. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street level bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
27. Massarsky, C. W., & Beinhacker, S. L. (2002). Enterprising nonprofits: Revenue-generation in the nonprofit sector. Partnership on Nonprofit Ventures, Yale School of Management-The Goldman Sachs Foundation.
28. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
29. Perlmutter, F., & Adams, C. (1990). The voluntary sector and for-profit ventures: The transformation of social welfare? Administration in Social Work, 14, 1-13.
30. Powell, W. W. (1991). Expanding the scope of institutional analysis. In W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 183-203.
31. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1996). Altruism, nonprofits, and economic theory. Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 702-728.
32. Salamon, L. M. (1999). America's nonprofit sector. New York: The Foundation Center.
33. Steinberg, R. (1986). The revealed objective functions of nonprofit firms. Rand Journal of Economics, 17, 508-526.
34. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
35. Strom, S. (2002). Nonprofit groups reach for profits on the side. The New York Times, March 17.
36. Tuan, M. (2003). Measuring impact: REDF workforce development outcome measurement. Available online: www.redf.org
37. Tuckman, H. P. (1998). Competition, commercialization, and the evolution of nonprofit organizational structures. In B. A. Weisbrod (Ed.), To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 25-45.
38. Weisbrod, B. A. (1998). Institutional form and organizational behavior. In W. Powell & E. Clemens (Eds.), Private action and the public good. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 69-84.
39. Weisbrod, B. A. (Winter, 2004). The pitfalls of profits. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2, 40-47.
40. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
41. Young, D. R. (2004). Deploying resources effectively. In S. M. Oster, C. W. Massarsky, & S. L. Beinhacker (Eds.), Generating and sustaining nonprofit earned income. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 247-268.
42. Young, D. R., & Salamon, L. M. (2002). Commercialization and social ventures. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The state of nonprofit America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press, pp. 423-446.