This chapter reviews literatures of the selected variables that form the framework of the study. The definitions and characteristics of Volunteers are introduced. The literatures of perceived justice, volunteer motivations and commitment are discussed.
The hypotheses are derived from the review of literatures.
Volunteer
The behavior of volunteer was originated from the military in the early 1750s, which the term was used to describe civilians who were willing to serve the military in times of emergency (Christiansen-Ruffman, 1990; Karl, 1984). The term volunteer is to describe individuals who provide unpaid service for religiously based charity organizations, e.g. Volunteers of America. On the other hand, the term volunteer is derived from a word in the Hebrew bible as a meaning to freewill offering or offered willingly (Cnaan, Handy, & Wadsworth, 1996). An individual who is described to offer willingly can be interpreted in many kinds of devotions such as offering knowledge, expertise, support, love, and money to others.
The term volunteer has been broadly defined as voluntarily giving time and talents to deliver services or perform tasks with no direct financial compensation (President’s Task Force on Private Sector Initiatives, 1982) to a more narrow definition of volunteer “who choose to volunteer to act in recognition of a need, with an attitude of social responsibility and going beyond one’s basic obligation” (Ellis &
Noyes, 1990, p. 4). In the financial report of volunteer in 1988, the American Red Cross (1988) defined the act of volunteering as “individuals who reach out beyond the
confines of paid employment and normal responsibilities to contribute time and service to a non-profit cause in belief that their activity is beneficial to others as well as satisfying for themselves” (p. III-11).
In a content analysis, Cnaan, Handy, and Wadsworth (1996) have proposed four characteristics to describe volunteer. The first characteristic is the nature of act.
Volunteers act upon free will; individual is willingly to contribute or devote without pay and that he or she is relatively uncoerced. The second characteristic is the nature of the reward or remuneration. Volunteers do not expect any returns or rewards of the volunteering activity; volunteers pay for their own expenses when contributing to the social welfares. The third characteristic is the structure; volunteers may be managed under formal or informal organizational structures. In a formal structure, volunteers have policies and regulations to follow when implementing voluntary services. The fourth characteristic is the intended beneficiaries, who can be strangers of a different nation, culture, religion, or ethnical background, or just friends and neighbors.
Under the analysis of the four key characteristics of volunteer, Cnaan et al. (1996) found that each characteristic to contain key categories of defining someone as a volunteer. Table 2.1 indicates the four dimensions and their relevant categories as follows:
Table 2.1.
Pure and Broad Definitions of the Term Volunteer
Dimension Categories
Free Choice 1. Free will (the ability to voluntarily choose) 2. Relatively uncoerced
3. Obligation to volunteer Remuneration 1. None at all
2. None expected 3. Expenses reimbursed 4. Stipend/low pay
Structure 1. Formal
2. Informal
Intended Beneficiaries 1. Benefit/help others/strangers 2. Benefit/help friends or relatives 3. Benefit oneself (as well)
Note. Adapted from “Defining Who is a Volunteer: Conceptual and Empirical Considerations,” by R. A. Cnaan, F. Handy, & M. Wadsworth. 1996, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(3), p. 364-383. Copyright 1996 by the Sage Publications.
For example in the first dimension, the free will dimension contains key categories that describe the pure and broad definitions of the volunteer behavior that range from (1) free will (the ability to voluntarily choose), (2) relatively uncoerced, and (3) obligation to volunteer. Thus, a student who helps the street dog as part of the school mandated social service is a volunteer obligation. In contrast to the purist form of volunteer, the student helps the street dog with his or her free will is the act without coercion or obligation.
Based on Cnaan’s et al. (1996) conceptual and empirical study, they suggested
that the public perception of the term volunteer is closely associated with the net cost of the giver, not the recipients. The net cost is defined as total cost minus total benefits of the volunteer. The costs of the volunteer (giver) include components like time and effort spent in volunteering, in contrast to benefits that include tangible (monetary) rewards as well as enhanced social status and possible future opportunities in business contacts, work experience, promotion and skill acquisition. They concluded that “the greater the net costs to the volunteer, the purer the volunteering
activity and hence the more the person is a real volunteer” (Cnaan et al., 1996, p.375).
Characteristics of Volunteer
To further assess the definition of volunteer, Cnaan and Cascio (1998) compared ten significant differences between volunteers and paid employees to prevent the findings about paid employees to be generalized on volunteers. The differences are indicated as follows:
1. Volunteers are not motivated monetarily (Pearce, 1993, p. 10), while paid employees are instrumentally rewarded.
2. Volunteers have only a moral and emotional commitment to their organizations, whereas paid employees also have an instrumental commitment.
3. Most volunteers work only a few hours a week, while most employees work full-time.
4. Many volunteers are affiliated with more than one organization, while employees are affiliated with only one.
5. Volunteers are less dependent on their workplace than the employees.
Volunteers can leave anytime without worrying about the next paychecks, pension rights, health care benefits, or where they will work next.
6. Volunteers are often recruited directly (informally) and tend to “try-out” a position, whereas employees usually go through a formal hiring process and generally accept a position only after careful deliberation.
7. Volunteers make no legal allegation regarding inadequate compensation or discrimination in the workplace (Perrow, 1970).
8. Volunteers do not always feel bound by norms and values of an organization.
For example, they may pay less attention to the requirement to report and follow bureaucratic instructions (Cooley, Singer, & Irvin, 1989). Volunteers may feel more independent in applying their own values and norms because they are not being paid to do the job (Fagan, 1986).
9. Volunteers who cause damage may not be liable, but the organization will surely be.
10. Agencies may be reluctant to evaluate the work of volunteers because such evaluations may seem to question volunteers’ effort.
Nevertheless, a few characteristics of the volunteers described above may not apply across all volunteers who serve in different voluntary organizations. For instance, although volunteers are generally perceived as self-starters and self-select themselves into the organization; however, they may volunteer for other reasons than
just purely altruistic motives (Bussel & Forbes, 2002). In other words, volunteers may not get instrumental rewards directly from the organization, but seek indirect benefits such as gaining social networks, as a way to know potential business contacts or seek a better job. Nowadays, as the baby-boomer generation enters the age of retirement, many volunteers came from the workforce who retired from the private sector and are working full-time in non-profit organizations, especially those in the religious charity organization, and are also affiliated to only one organization rather than many organizations.
According to the reviewed definitions of volunteer listed above, this study intend to focus on volunteer as “a person who, out of free will and without wages, works for a non-profit organization which is formally organized and has as its purpose service to someone or something other than its membership” (Jenner, 1982, p.30). The researcher hopes to investigate volunteers who devotes in a formal, structured voluntary organization that accompanied policies and regulations in managing volunteers. Moreover, it is interesting to study how volunteers’ perception on
organizational justice may impact their commitment in the organization. Since Cnaan and Cascio (1998) also pointed out that the most important differences between paid and volunteer employee is that of motivation, the researcher would like to understand how different types of motivations would impact volunteers’ level of commitment.
Organizational Commitment
In the past decades, a vast majority of studies conducted on organizational commitment were to examine the attitudes and behaviors of the employees in the for-profit sector workplaces (Goulet & Frank, 2002). Researches of organizational commitment have been made to find ways in improving how workers feel about their jobs so that they would become more committed to their organizations.
Organizational commitment can be interpreted as a pattern of behaviors, a set of behavioral intentions, a motivating force, or an attitude (Dunham, Grube, &
Casteneda, 1994; Liou & Nyhan, 1994). Organizational commitment has been researched in two approaches: behavioral and attitudinal approach. The attitudinal approach is the most widely studied that views commitment as a “the identity of the person is linked to the organization” (Sheldon, 1971, p.143) or when “the goals of the organization and those of the individual become increasingly integrated or congruent”
(Hall, Schneider, & Nygren, 1970, p.176-177).
Definition of Organizational Commitment
The term commitment derived from various psychological researches that explore the linkage of the employee and the organization. Through extensive reviews of theories and empirical findings on employee-organization linkages, Mowday, Porter, and Steers (1982) conceptualized the term organizational commitment.
Reichers (1985) summarizes the early work of researchers who have different definitions and operationalization of organizational commitment in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2.
Definitions and Operationalization of Organizational Commitment
1. Side-Bets — Commitment is a function of rewards and costs associated with organizational membership; these typically increase as tenure in the organization increases (Alutto, Hrebiniak,
& Alonso, 1973; Farrell & Rusbult, 1981).
2. Attributions — Commitment is a binding of the individual to behavioral acts that results when individuals attribute an attitude of commitment to themselves after engaging in behaviors that are volitional, explicit, and irrevocable (Becker, 1960; Kiesler & Sakumura, 1966; Salancik, 1977; O’Reilly & Caldwell, 1980).
3. Individual/Organizational goal congruence
— Commitment occurs when individuals identify with and extend effort towards organizational goals and values. The Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ), developed by Porter and his colleagues, is the primary operationalization of this definition (Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974; Morris & Sherman, 1981; Angle & Perry, 1981; Stumpf & Hartman, 1984).
Note. Adapted from “A Review and Reconceptualization of Organizational Commitment,” by A. E. Reichers. 1985, The Academy of Management Review, 10(3), p. 465-476. Copyright 1985 by the Academy of Management.
The first definition of organizational commitment derived from the side-bet theory, which was referred as investments or the gains or losses that may occur if the individual choose to stay or leave the organization. An individual may commit to the
organization because of high economic costs (e.g. pension accruals) or social costs (e.g. friendship ties with co-workers).
The second definition of commitment is related to the behavioral approach that defined commitment through the attribution theory, which explains how individuals attempt to determine the cause of their behavior in commitment (e.g. why people do what they do). For example, the individual decided to commit to an organization because the boss paid him well. The attribution theory is closely related to the concept of motivation.
The third definition of organizational commitment is associated with the affective approach of commitment, which involves matching the individuals’ values with the organization’s goals. Mowday, Steers, & Porter (1979) defined organizational commitment as “the relative strength of an individuals’ identification with and involvement in a particular organization” (p.27). Specifically, the organizational commitment involves (a) a belief in and acceptance of organizational goals and values, (b) the willingness to exert effort towards organizational goal accomplishment, and (c) a strong desire to maintain organizational membership. They further developed the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ), as the principal measurement to assess individual’s identification and involvement in a particular organization.
Model of Organizational Commitment
To further assess Mowday, Porter, and Steers’ (1982) and Reichers’ (1985) review on organizational commitment, Allen and Meyer (1990) advanced the attitudinal concept of organizational commitment into a three-component model of
organizational commitment (shown in figure 2.1) that revolves around three general themes: affective attachment, perceived costs, and obligation. In the three general theme of commitment, Allen and Meyer (1990) proposed the dimensions of organizational commitment into the affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. They suggested that individuals with strong affective commitment remain because they want to, and those with strong continuance commitment feels they need to remain, while those with strong normative commitment believes they ought to remain.
Figure 2.1. A three-component model of organizational commitment. Adapted from
“A Three-Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment,” by J. P.
Meyer and N. J. Allen. 1991, Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), p. 68.
Copyright 1991 by the JAI Press Inc.
Affective Commitment. The affective commitment is “the attachment of an individual’s fund of affectivity and emotion to the group” (Kanter, 1968, p.507), while also described as the followers’ affective attachment to the goals and values toward the organization without any instrumental concerns (Buchanan, 1974). Mowday et al., (1979) defined commitment as “the relative strength of individuals’ identification with and involvement in an organization” (p.27). In fact, individuals with strong affective commitment will remain in the organization because they want to (Meyer & Allen, 1991).
Continuance Commitment. In the perceived cost concept of commitment, it is viewed as individuals’ tendency to “engage in consistent lines of activity based on the recognition of costs or (lost side-bets) that leads the individual to discontinue the activity” (Becker, 1960, p.33). The perceived cost reflects cost-based commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1984). Individuals view increases in pay and promotional opportunities as the costs and are associated with their intentions of leaving the organization.
Normative Commitment. The obligation concept of commitment describes that
individuals’ view commitment as a belief about one’s responsibility to the organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Wiener (1982) defined the reason that individuals show behavior of commitment is solely because “they believe it is the right and moral thing to do” (p.421). In addition, the obligation-based commitment requires individuals to show loyalty, make sacrifices and cannot criticize the activity
or organization (Wiener & Vardi, 1980).
Volunteers and Affective Commitment
Gamm and Kassab (1983) noted that volunteers are critically important human resources for determining organizational and societal productivity. These authors believe that if volunteer programs are well managed then volunteers are likely to continue their contributions and influence others to become volunteers. Since volunteers are non-paid individuals and they choose to do the job from their own
“freewill” without any force or obligation, volunteers’ emotional attachment to the organization takes place in evaluating their loyalty to the organization. Moreover, Dailey (1986) stated that volunteers’ decision to join the voluntary organization is
largely determined by the degree of fit between personal needs and goals of the organization.
Kanter (1968) has described affective commitment as “the attachment of an individual’s fund of affectivity and emotion to the group” (p.507). Moreover, affective orientation of commitment was also claimed as “the relative strength of individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular organization (Mowday, Porter, &
Steers, 1982, p.27). Allen and Meyer (1990) described affective commitment as the sense of emotional attachment to the organization. An individual may feel an emotional bond with an organization, for example, one feels that he or she is part of the family for the organization and feels as if the organization’s problems are one’s own. Even though volunteers are not paid, they still desire to feel wanted, appreciated and invested. Thus, affective commitment applies to on volunteers because it serves to
describe the psychological attachment or tie between volunteers’ internal self and the organization. Affective commitment is also an approach to explain their retention behaviors for the voluntary organization. Therefore, the affective commitment is considered as the most appropriate type of commitment for understanding volunteers’
intentions to remain in the organization.
Some demographical factors such as country of residence, work status, certification, and supervisory roles are linked to affective commitment. In multi-national companies, support such as organizational socialization, training, social and logistic support are provided to improve expatriate’s well-being, which in turn, fosters the affective commitment (Aycan, 1997; Homans, 1958). Similarity, in a multi-national voluntary organization, volunteers serving in a foreign country (i.e.
United States, Thailand, and Australia), need to learn to overcome language barriers, comply with the country’s laws, and adapt to cultural differences when interacting with local residence, authorities, and community. Thus, they are more likely to experience frustrations in delivering the voluntary organization’s values to the local community. Thus, country of residence is a control factor because it may affect volunteers’ level of commitment in the organization.
Independent Sector (2002) claimed that volunteering is strongly associated with the income. Salaried or working individuals have more tangible assets and resource to contribute and support relief programs, thus, work status is controlled. Time spent in the organization may affect individual’s affective commitment (Tornikoski, 2012);
therefore, tenure or years of volunteering service is also controlled. Certification was
also controlled because those who are delegated with more responsibilities in the voluntary organization are expected to retain and bring in more members for the organization. Moreover, supervisory role is another control factor in this study. Those who carry supervisory roles in the organization need to lead and manage members in achieving the organization’s goals and mission (Allen & Meyer, 1990).
Volunteer Motivations Types of Motivations
Early theories of motivation were formulated in the 1950s. The best-known theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Maslow (1954) proposed that every human being exists in a hierarchy of five needs –physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization. “To be motivated means to be moved to do something” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.54). McGregor (1960) presented two distinct views of human beings, which are the Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X suggests that managers believe employees do not like their work and need to be directed and forced to perform the job, while Theory Y assumes managers do not need to supervise employees because they like their career naturally and will take full responsibility in their jobs. On the other hand, Hertzberg’s (1964) two-factor theory explained that to determine whether an individual will have a successful or failed outcome will depend on two attitudinal factors – motivational and hygiene factors. Hygiene factors (i.e.
company policy, supervision, work conditions, salary, and relationship with peers or supervisor) will lead to individuals’ dissatisfaction toward job. Motivational factors are factors such as achievement, recognition, advancement, and growth that will
motivate an individual to feel satisfied about their job. These are the factors that people find to be intrinsically rewarding. Furthermore, McClelland (1961) developed the theory of needs, which posits that people seek for three needs –need for achievement (desire to excel), need for power (desire to control) and need for affiliation (desire for close interpersonal relationships).
Contemporary studies have advanced the discussion of motivation into intrinsic and extrinsic types. The self-determination theory (SDT) distinguishes different types of motivation based on different reasons or goals that give rise to an action (Ryan &
Deci, 2000). Motivation is mainly differentiated into intrinsic motivation – doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable and extrinsic motivation – doing something because it leads to a separable outcome. In addition to intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, amotivation is also presented to describe a state, which an individual may lack an intention to act (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Ryan and Deci (2000) defined intrinsic motivation as “the doing of an activity for its inherent satisfaction rather than for some separable consequence” (p.55). The intrinsic motivation was first acknowledged through an experimental research in animal behavior that found many organisms displayed exploratory, playful, and curiosity-driven behaviors without reinforcement or reward (White, 1959). Extrinsic motivation refers to “the construct that pertains whenever an activity is done in order to attain some separable outcome” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.60). Extrinsic motivated individuals usually do an activity for instrumental purposes. Ryan and Deci (2000) applied SDT to propose and explain that extrinsic motivations are presented with
various forms – external regulation, introjection, identification and integration. The taxonomy of human motivations is presented in figure 2.2 to show the variability of different types of motivation.
Figure 2.2. A taxonomy of human motivation. Adapted from “Intrinsic and Extrinisc
Figure 2.2. A taxonomy of human motivation. Adapted from “Intrinsic and Extrinisc