Mark Hager
http://www.mhager.net/
Mark A. Hager is Associate Professor of Nonprofit Studies in the School of Community Resources & Development at Arizona State University, where he serves as director of graduate studies for the nonprofit degree programs. He is editor-in-chief of Nonprofit Management & Leadership. He was formerly Senior Research Associate in the Center for Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute.
His research includes studies of the scope, dimensions, administration, and financial operations of and reporting by nonprofit organizations. Hager earned his Ph.D. in organizational sociology at the University of Minnesota with a study of the causes of nonprofit organization closure. In addition to book chapters, research reports, and professional presentations, his work on the behavior of nonprofit organizations has appeared in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Nonprofit Management & Leadership, Public Administration Review, , Public Management Review, the Journal of Volunteer Administration, Nonprofit Quarterly, and the American Behavioral Scientist.
He is a member of the ASU graduate faculty in the School of Community Resources & Development, the School of Social Work and the sociology programs in the School of Social and Family Dynamics.
Mark A. Hager is Associate Professor of Nonprofit Studies in the School of Community Resources & Development at Arizona State University, where he serves as director of graduate studies for the nonprofit degree programs. He is editor-in-chief of Nonprofit Management & Leadership. He was formerly Senior Research Associate in the Center for Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute.
His research includes studies of the scope, dimensions, administration, and financial operations of and reporting by nonprofit organizations. Hager earned his Ph.D. in organizational sociology at the University of Minnesota with a study of the causes of nonprofit organization closure. In addition to book chapters, research reports, and professional presentations, his work on the behavior of nonprofit organizations has appeared in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Nonprofit Management & Leadership, Public Administration Review, , Public Management Review, the Journal of Volunteer Administration, Nonprofit Quarterly, and the American Behavioral Scientist.
He is a member of the ASU graduate faculty in the School of Community Resources & Development, the School of Social Work and the sociology programs in the School of Social and Family Dynamics.
less
InterestsView All (7)
Uploads
Papers by Mark Hager
effective from ineffective programs. Alternatively, structural contingency and strategic
human resource management theories suggest that managers make adoption decisions
based on how organizational circumstances dictate the applicability or efficacy of particular
practices. We test propositions that universalistic adoption of “best practices,” contingent
adoption of practices, and configurational adoption of bundles of practices are associated
with program outcomes of recruitment ease, retention of volunteers, and the net benefits
that volunteers bring to organizational operations. With all sets of tests garnering limited
empirical support, we conclude that human resource practice in volunteer administration is
loosely coupled with outcomes, but that some organizations do—and many more should—
manage according to the singular context of their institutional and external environments.
you actually do it. Kill your nonprofit, that
is. You work so hard to make it go, and
most days you want it to fly free and carry
your dreams for a better world. But not every
one is like you. Clearly (from what we see out
there) some people really do want to kill their nonprofit. So this article is for them, not for you.
This is for those people who really do long for a
darker world.
the United States are more or less
public
or
private
given multiple
conceptualizatio
ns of what is meant by these terms across disciplines.
An overview of foundations is provided for the purpose of highlighting
differences in structure, operations, and missions or objectives. A
hegemonic definition and description of the
private
nature of
grantmaking foundations is presented, and argued to be a perspective
that fundamentally conditions how foundati
ons operate and how they
relate
to external stakeholders. Different foundation types are
contrasted in the context of four other contested conce
ptualizations of
public
and
private
: regulation of institutional activity; pursuit of a
public interest, purpose, or good; impact on others; and distribution of
benefits to whole or part of a whole. The analysis concludes that
grantmaking foundations have
unique institutional claims to a mix of
public and private dimensions beyond the hegemonic perspective that
foundations should operate and be seen as primarily
private
entities.
effective from ineffective programs. Alternatively, structural contingency and strategic
human resource management theories suggest that managers make adoption decisions
based on how organizational circumstances dictate the applicability or efficacy of particular
practices. We test propositions that universalistic adoption of “best practices,” contingent
adoption of practices, and configurational adoption of bundles of practices are associated
with program outcomes of recruitment ease, retention of volunteers, and the net benefits
that volunteers bring to organizational operations. With all sets of tests garnering limited
empirical support, we conclude that human resource practice in volunteer administration is
loosely coupled with outcomes, but that some organizations do—and many more should—
manage according to the singular context of their institutional and external environments.
you actually do it. Kill your nonprofit, that
is. You work so hard to make it go, and
most days you want it to fly free and carry
your dreams for a better world. But not every
one is like you. Clearly (from what we see out
there) some people really do want to kill their nonprofit. So this article is for them, not for you.
This is for those people who really do long for a
darker world.
the United States are more or less
public
or
private
given multiple
conceptualizatio
ns of what is meant by these terms across disciplines.
An overview of foundations is provided for the purpose of highlighting
differences in structure, operations, and missions or objectives. A
hegemonic definition and description of the
private
nature of
grantmaking foundations is presented, and argued to be a perspective
that fundamentally conditions how foundati
ons operate and how they
relate
to external stakeholders. Different foundation types are
contrasted in the context of four other contested conce
ptualizations of
public
and
private
: regulation of institutional activity; pursuit of a
public interest, purpose, or good; impact on others; and distribution of
benefits to whole or part of a whole. The analysis concludes that
grantmaking foundations have
unique institutional claims to a mix of
public and private dimensions beyond the hegemonic perspective that
foundations should operate and be seen as primarily
private
entities.