La Filantropia nelle Fondazioni: Determinismo Manageriale Vs Solidarismo Civico

Anteprima

Philanthropy in the Foundations. Managerial determinism Vs Civic solidarism

Researches on foundations’ strategic approach can be broadly classified into two areas. A first body of literature focuses on the deterministic impact that foundations can cause if and when managerially governed. A second body of researchers investigate the solidarist and cooperative role of foundations’ action in supporting the prosperity of other nonprofit organizations. This study relies on a survey administered to the decision makers of the main Italian foundations and investigates the extent of adoption of the two reference models identified in the literature (more deterministic and more solidaristic) and their relationship with performance, governance mechanisms, and strategic profile. Findings show that determinism is associated with higher performances. However, solidarism emerges as a widely adopted model, not unable to bring positive social results. This paper contributes to the current debate on strategic philanthropy conceiving it as the result of the progressive contamination between the deterministic and managerial approach of neoliberalists, that has dominated the beginning of the century, and a more nuanced solidarist and progressivist approach, that characterized nonprofit organizations’ global action since their initial growth.

 Keywords: Strategic philanthropy,Government activities, Control systems

Tabelle_n.4_n.6

Appendice

Bibliografia
  1. Aiken M., Bode I. (2009), Killing the Golden Goose? Third Sector Organizations and Back‐to‐Work Programmes in Germany and the UK, Social Policy & Administration, 43, 3, pp. 209-225.
  2. Antonelli V., Cerbioni F., Parbonetti A. (2002), The rise of cost accounting: evidence from Italy, Accounting, Business and Financial History, 12, 3, pp. 461-486.
  3. Bacq S., Janssen F. (2011), The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23, 5-6, pp. 373-403.
  4. Baldarelli M.G. (2017), Managerial accounting and charity in hospitality enterprises, Management Control, 2, pp.53-69.
  5. Barbetta G.P. (2008), Le Fondazioni di origine bancaria: dalla nascita per caso all’esercizio dell’innovazione sociale, in Turati G., Piacenza M., Segre G. (a cura), Patrimoni & scopi. Per un’analisi economica delle Fondazioni, Edizioni Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli, Torino, 2008.
  6. Battilana J., Leca B., Boxenbaum E. (2009), How actors change institutions: towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship, Academy of Management annals, 3, 1, pp. 65-107.
  7. Bish A., Becker, K. (2016), Exploring expectations of nonprofit management capabilities, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45, 3, pp. 437-457.
  8. Boyns T., Edwards J.R. (1996), The development of accounting in mid-nineteenth century Britain: a non-disciplinary view, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9, 3, pp. 40-60.
  9. Boyns T., Edwards J.R. (1997a), The construction of cost accounting systems in Britain to 1900: the case of the coal, iron and steel industries, Business History, 39, 3, pp. 1-29.
  10. Boyns T., Edwards J.R. (1997b), Cost and management accounting in early Victorian Britain: a Chandleresque analysis? Management Accounting Research, 8, 1, pp. 19-46.
  11. Bromley P., Meyer J. W. (2014), They Are All Organizations” The Cultural Roots of Blurring Between the Nonprofit, Business, and Government Sectors, Administration & Society, 49, 7 pp. 939-966.
  12. Brown W.A. (2005), Exploring the Association Between Board and Organizational Performance in Nonprofit Organizations, Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15, 3, pp. 317-339
  13. Brown W.A., Guo C. (2006), Community foundation performance: Bridging community resources and needs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(2), pp. 267–287.
  14. Brown W.A., Guo, C. (2010), Exploring the key roles for nonprofit boards, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39, 3, pp. 536-546.
  15. Bryson J.M. (1988), A strategic planning process for public and non-profit organizations, Long range planning, 21, 1, pp. 73-81.
  16. Carey G., Braunack-Mayer A., Barraket J. (2009), Spaces of care in the third sector: understanding the effects of professionalization, Health, 13, 6, pp. 629-646.
  17. Carmel E., Harlock J. (2008), Instituting the ‘third sector’ as a governable terrain: partnership, procurement and performance in the UK, Policy & Politics, 36, 2, pp. 155-171.
  18. Carnochan S., Samples M., Myers M., Austin M.J. (2014), Performance measurement challenges in nonprofit human service organizations, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43, 6, pp. 1014-1032.
  19. Center for Effective Philanthropy, CEP. (2007), Beyond the rhetoric: foundation strategy assessment, Boston, CEP.
  20. Center for Effective Philanthropy, CEP. (2009), Foundation Governance: the CEO Viewpoint, Boston, CEP.
  21. Center for Effective Philanthropy, CEP. (2016), The Future of Foundation Philanthropy: The CEO Perspective, Boston, CEP.
  22. Center for Effective Philanthropy, CEP. (2017), Shifting Winds: Foundations Respond to a New Political Context, Boston, CEP
  23. Chandler A.D. (1962), Strategy and Structure. Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise, Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press.
  24. Chandler A.D. (1977), The Visible Hand. The Managerial Revolution in American Business, Boston, Mass, Harvard University Press.
  25. DiMaggio P.J. (1988), Interest and agency and institutional theory, pp.3-22 in L.G. Zucker (ed.) Institutional patterns and organizations: culture and environment, Cambridge, MA.
  26. Freireich, J. Fulton, K. (2009), Investing for social and environmental impact: A design for catalyzing an emerging industry, Monitor Institute, January.
  27. Frumkin P. (2003), Inside venture philanthropy, Society, 40, 4, pp. 7-15.
  28. Fyfe N.R., Milligan C. (2003), Out of the shadows: exploring contemporary geographies of voluntarism, Progress in human geography, 27, 4, pp. 397-413.
  29. Garland D., Darcy M. (2009), ‘Working together?’: The salvation army and the job network, Organization, 16, 5, pp. 755-774.
  30. Gatti M., Chiucchi M.S. (2017), Context matters – Il ruolo del contesto negli studi di controllo di gestione, Management Control, 3, pp. 5-10. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2017-003001.
  31. Golden-Biddle K., Rao H. (1997), Breaches in the boardroom: Organizational identity and conflicts of commitment in a nonprofit organization, Organization Science, 8, 6, pp. 593-611.
  32. Graddy E.A, Morgan D.L. (2006), Community Foundations, Organizational Strategy, and Public Policy, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(4), pp. 605-630.
  33. Hinna A., Monteduro F. (2017), Boards, governance and value creation in grant-giving foundations. Journal of Management and Governance, 21(4), pp. 935-961.
  34. Hoskin K., Macve R.H. (1986), Accounting and the examination: a genealogy of disciplinary power, Accounting, Organisations and Society, 11, 2, pp.105-136.
  35. Hoskin K., Macve R.H. (1987), The genesis of accountability: the West point connections, Accounting, Organisations and Society, 13, 1, pp. 37-73.
  36. Hwang H., Powell W.W. (2009), The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector, Administrative Science Quarterly, 54, 2, pp. 268-298.
  37. Johnson H.T. (1972), Early cost accounting for management control, Business History Review, 46, 4, pp. 466-474.
  38. Johnson H.T., Kaplan, R.S. (1987), Relevance Lost. The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
  39. Kania J., Kramer M., Russell P. (2014), Strategic philanthropy for a complex world, Stanford Social Innovation Review, 12, 3, pp. 26-33.
  40. Kerlin, J.A. (2006), Social enterprise in the United States and Europe: Understanding and learning from the differences, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 17, 3, pp. 246.
  41. Leardini C., Rossi G., Moggi S., Zardini A. (2017), When the Law Shapes Nonprofit Boards: The Key Role of Local Stakeholders, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(1), pp. 47-70. Doi: 10.1177/0899764016634891.
  42. Lindsay C., Osborne S.P., Bond, S.U.E. (2014), The ‘new public governance’and employability services in an era of crisis: Challenges for third sector organizations in Scotland, Public Administration, 92, 1, pp. 192-207.
  43. Maier F., Meyer M., Steinbereithner, M. (2016), Nonprofit organizations becoming business-like: A systematic review, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45, 1, pp. 64-86.
  44. Marano M. (2006), L’accountability e i processi informativi dell’impresa sociale alla luce del d.lgs. 155/2006”. AICCON Working Papers 38-2006, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura e della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
  45. Matacena A. (2012), L’accountability nelle imprese lucrative e sociali. Verso una possibile convergenza? Economia Aziendale Online, 4(1979), pp.171–206.
  46. Miettinen R., Samra-Fredericks D., Yanow D. (2009), Re-turn to practice: An introductory essay, Organization studies, 30, 12, pp. 1309-1327.
  47. Millesen J.L., Martin, E.C. (2014), Community foundation strategy: Doing good and the moderating effects of fear, tradition, and serendipity, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(5), pp. 832-849. Doi: 10.1177/0899764013486195.
  48. Mintzberg H., Lampel J. (1999), Reflecting on the strategy process, Sloan management review, 40, 3, 21.
  49. Morganti M. (2004) Non profit: produttività e benessere. Come coniugare efficienza e solidarietà nelle organizzazioni del terzo settore, Franco Angeli Editore
  50. Ostrower F. (2006). Foundation approaches to effectiveness: A typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35, 3, pp. 510-516.
  51. Panozzo F. (2000). Management by decree. Pardoxes in the reform of the italian public sector. Scandinavian journal of management, 16(4), pp. 357-373.
  52. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. (1999), Philanthropy’s new agenda: Creating value. Harvard business review, 77, pp. 121-131.
  53. Quinn R., Tompkins-Stange M., Meyerson D. (2014), Beyond grantmaking: Philanthropic foundations as agents of change and institutional entrepreneurs, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43, 6, pp. 950-968.
  54. Rao H. (1998), Caveat emptor: The construction of nonprofit consumer watchdog organizations, American journal of sociology, 103, 4, pp. 912-961.
  55. Rogers R. (2015). Why the social sciences should take philanthropy seriously, Society52, 6, pp. 533-540.
  56. Sanders M.L., McClellan J.G. (2014), Being business-like while pursuing a social mission: Acknowledging the inherent tensions in US nonprofit organizing, Organization, 21, 1, pp. 68-89.
  57. Scott W.R., Ruef M., Mendel P., Caronna C.A. (2000), Institutional change and organizations: Transformation of a healthcare field, Chicago: University of Chicago.
  58. Teles S. (2008). The rise of the conservative legal movement: The battle for control of the law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  59. Tomlinson F., Schwabenland, C. (2010), Reconciling competing discourses of diversity? The UK non-profit sector between social justice and the business case, Organization17, 1, pp. 101-121.
  60. Vaara E., Whittington R. (2012), Strategy-as-practice: taking social practices seriously, Academy of Management Annals, 6, 1, pp. 285-336.
  61. Zamagni S. a cura di (2002), Il non profit italiano al bivio, Milano, Egea.