INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
H ie quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy snbm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
O versize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
orig in al is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.

A Bell & Howell information Company
300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600

FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION
OF NONPROFITS: A CASE STUDY OF EXTENSION
ASSISTED ORGANIZATIONS IN MICHIGAN
By
Rockfeler Peter Herisse

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department o f Agricultural and Extension Education
1995

UMI Number:

9605875

Copyright 1995 by
Herisse, Rockfeler Peter
All rights reserved.

OMI Microform 9605875
Copyright 1995, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized
copying under Title 17, United States Code.

UMI
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48103

ABSTRACT
FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION
OF NONPROFITS: A CASE STUDY OF EXTENSION
ASSISTED ORGANIZATIONS IN MICHIGAN
By
Rockfeler Peter Herisse
Many nonprofit organizations are being encouraged to develop and operate
within various communities in the state of Michigan. Because the Michigan State
University Extension (MSUE) is one of the driving forces behind them, a better
understanding o f the support provided to these organizations after their conceptualiza­
tion was needed. Further, there was also a need to identify the activities and process­
es that these organizations underwent to maintain viability, and survive to become
permanent entities in the nonprofit community. This research was therefore descrip­
tive and exploratory with purpose:

to understand and expose how three nonprofit

organizations in Michigan, some initially sponsored by MSUE at the time o f concep­
tualization, arrived to now be considered as effective institutions. The methodology
applied to develop the theories for this study involved in-depth, structured open-ended
interviews, and an inductive grounded theory approach to data collection, codification
and analysis.
Overall, the findings from this study suggested that organizations were better
advised to operate within the limits of their definitions for effectiveness while they
express and accumulate the "trappings of institutionalization." Transformational

leaders and characteristics o f transformational leadership contributed to the framework
of institutionalization variables that an analyst or organization practitioner could use to
measure their movement along the institutionalization continuum.

Copyright by

Rockfeler Peter Herisse

In Memoriam
Marie Thdrese Hdrissd Louis

Dedicated With Love
To
Ms. Rose Brune Jean-Pierre H6rissd
Mr. Max Raoul Hdrissd
(Parents)
Mr. Alfred Ordlien
Ms. Marie Alice Hdrissd Louis
(Godparents)
Ms. Justine Jean-Pierre Estime
Ms. Marie Sulfida Jean-Pierre
(Primary/Natural Educators)

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

As human species, we are all interconnected in the web o f life. Beginning
with the most supreme being Yahweh (Jehovah) and on to His/H er many celestial and
terrestrial creations, sincere gratitude is felt and expressed here in these words.
For the assistance provided me toward the accomplishment of my academic
goals, I express heartfelt thanks to Dr. Harrison Gardner, Dr. James E. Jay, Dr.
Frank A. Fear and Dr. Frank L. Brewer. I am also grateful for the financial support
provided by Michigan State University (MSU), Drs. Richard Brandenburg, Dozier
Thornton and Karen Klomparens allowing me the opportunity to learn here and
conduct this research.
Harrison Gardner, as major professor and dissertation director, was invaluable
to my growth as a doctoral student. His wisdom, compassion and intellect facilitated
the successful completion of the dissertation. His richness of character and persis­
tence are endearing examples that I will apply for the rest of my days.
James E. Jay was instrumental in both my academic and professional career
related to Michigan State. His capable leadership made it possible for me to be
relocated and accepted here in the Department of Agricultural and Extension Educa­
tion. Through frequent and constructive interactions, he guided my thinking to the
focus on nonprofits and the refinement of professional standards. I am grateful for

his wisdom, friendship, generosity, scholarship and our many philosophical jaunts
during my tenure at the University.
Frank A. Fear fueled my already existing interests in organizations. As a
major proponent of the scholar-practitioner, he helped me give meaning to the
experiences I was gaining while serving as an administrator for a nonprofit. For
many others, he personifies and serves as an example of a transformational leader.
Frank L. Brewer gave me most insightful guidance early when considering
processes for the doctorate. He introduced me to the examples of nonprofit work in
the international setting always cognizant of my focus on international development.
Throughout, he has been probing, effective and most supportive.
Other individuals and circumstances may go unmentioned by name and are not
slighted by their absence. For example, my many fine colleagues in the Department
of Agricultural and Extension Education and the College o f Agriculture and Natural
Resources, the professional and student support staff for the Department (especially
Ms. Diane Davis and Ms. Mary Pierce), my early experiences in organizations with
help from Mr. James Dugan, Mr. Hector Pagan and Mr. Clinton Gardner, all have
been most helpful. Thank you. I am also grateful to the national society for Minori­
ties in Agriculture, Natural Resources and Related Sciences (MANRRS), my personal
organization theory learning laboratory, the participants in this study, and those
considered my "Holistic Friend in the Membership" (You know who You are—"Let us
now begin to create our world!").
In all, this work was made possible in part by the love and inspiration
expressed and felt from Ms. Rose Brune Jean-Pierre and family, Ms. M arie Alice

Herissd Louis and Herisse family, Mr. Jacques Louis, Ms. Tracy V. Dunbar,
cousins, sisters and brother, my gods, and the Arawak spirit. Thank you.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE

PAGE

LIST OF F IG U R E S ....................

xiii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE S T U D Y ....................................
Introduction to the S t u d y ......................................................................................
The Problem ...........................................................................................................
Purpose o f the Study ............................................................................................
Operational D e fin itio n s .........................................................................................
Research S e t t i n g .....................................................................................................
Philosophical G r o u n d in g .......................................................................................
Overview o f the Research D e s ig n ........................................................................
Assumptions ...........................................................................................................
Limitations o f the Study .......................................................................................
Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................

1
1
5
8
9
11
12
12
13
14
15

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITER A TU R E...................................................
Review o f Literature .............................................................................................
Systems Theory Applied to O rganizations.........................................................
Organizational Development (OD) and the E n v iro n m e n t..............................
Towards a Contingency Theory on Organizational Effectiveness ...............
Policy/Program Adjustments and Organization Effectiveness..................
Association Management and Organization E ffectiveness........................
On Leadership T h e o ry .................................................................................
Managerial Point o f Impact and its Effect on O rg a n iz a tio n s..................
Organizing Toward Institutionalization (P erm an en ce)....................................
Summary on Institutionalization.....................................................................
Institutionalization as a Condition of Being S u stain ab le...........................
Framing the Seven-C’s o f Organizational Sustainability...........................
Communication Within Effective Organizations .................................
Control Functions for Effective Organizations ....................................
Culture O f and Within Effective O rganizations....................................
Capital Use and Formation Within Effective O rganizations...............
Consensus on Values (Coherence) Within Effective Organizations .
Compliance Within Effective O rganizations..........................................
Commitment Within Effective O rg an izatio n s.......................................
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................

17
17
18
22
27
33
37
37
42
46
47
48
51
52
54
56
59
61
66
67
69

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d).
TITLE

PAGE

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ...............................................................
Methodology ...........................................................................................................
Research D e s i g n .....................................................................................................
Selection o f Study P articipants........................................................................
Number o f Study P a rtic ip a n ts ........................................................................
Description o f Participating O rganizations...................................................
Tuscola 2001, Inc..........................................................................................
Michigan Agricultural Stewardship A ssociation....................................
Youth Development Corporation, Inc.......................................................
Data Collection M e th o d s .......................................................................................
Use o f Interviews in Organization R esearch ................................................
Other Qualitative Methods in Organization Research ..............................
Participant O b se rv a tio n ..............................................................................
Review o f Official, Internal and External D o c u m e n ts ........................
Data A n a ly s is .....................................................................................................
Application o f Data Coding P r o c e s s e s .........................................................
Open C o d i n g ...............................................................................................
Axial C o d i n g ...............................................................................................
Selective C o d i n g .........................................................................................
Outsourcing R e s u lts ...............................................................................................
Reliability and V a lid ity .........................................................................................
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................

72
72
73
76
79
80
80
83
85
87
88
90
91
92
93
95
96
96
97
98
99
102

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS FROM THE CASES-DESCRIPTION
AND T H E O R Y ........................................................................
Findings From the Cases: Description and T h e o ry ..........................................
Qualitative Studies and the Concept of M e a n in g .............................................
Nuances o f Qualitative Research ..................................................................
Results From an Early Ongoing A n a ly s e s ...................................................
Identified Organizational C haracteristics............................................................
Coding and Categorizing S trateg ies...............................................................
Validation o f the Cases S tu d ie d ...............................................................
Category One—Organizationally Related T h e m e s .......................................
C o h e re n c e .....................................................................................................
C o lla b o ra tio n ...............................................................................................
C om m unication............................................................................................
C o n s iste n c y ..................................................................................................
Creed (Mission S ta te m e n t)........................................................................
C u ltu r e ...........................................................................................................
D iv e rsity ........................................................................................................
Goal R ev isio n ...............................................................................................

104
104
106
107
109
110
Ill
115
117
117
120
122
127
128
131
132
134

x

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d).
TITLE

PAGE

CHAPTER FOUR (cont’d).
Category Two--IndividuaIly Related T h e m e s .................................................
C a r i n g ...............................................................................................................
C o lla b o ra tio n ...................................................................................................
Commitment ...................................................................................................
C om m ittees/M em bership..............................................................................
C om m unication................................................................................................
Coordination ...................................................................................................
L e ad ersh ip .........................................................................................................
Category Three—Environmentally Related T h e m e s ........................................
C a p ita l...............................................................................................................
C o lla b o ra tio n ...................................................................................................
C om m unication................................................................................................
Community Validation .................................................................................
F lexibility /A d ap tab ility.................................................................................
Organizational T ransform ation ......................................................................
Summary on the Report From the C a s e s ................................................................
Relational Levels o f I n q u i r y ....................................................................................
Additional Models Addressing Organizational D y n a m ic s ............................
Towards a New Institutionalization P arad ig m .......................................................
Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................

136
137
142
146
150
152
155
157
160
160
163
166
169
171
173
174
174
180
181
185

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
R EC O M M E N D A T IO N S.............................................................
187
Summary .....................................................................................................................
187
Purpose ..................................................................................................................
188
Methodology .....................................................................................................
189
F in d in g s ..................................................................................................................
193
Area of Inquiry O n e .......................................................................................
193
Area o f Inquiry Two ....................................................................................
195
Area o f Inquiry T h r e e ....................................................................................
196
. . . On Organizational L e a d e rs h ip .......................................................
197
. . . On Institutionalization......................................................................
198
. . . On the Role o f E x ten sio n ................................................................
198
C o n clu sio n s..................................................................................................................
200
Axioms and Generalizations Drawn from this S tu d y .....................................
202
R eco m m en d atio n s......................................................................................................
204
Recommendations for Nonprofits and E x te n s io n ...........................................
204
Recommendations for Future R esearch .............................................................
206

xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d).
TITLE

PAGE

Appendix A: Informed Consent Form

......................................................................

208

Interview Questions for the Study on "Factors Associated
with the Institutionalization of Nonprofit Organizations:
A Case Study o f Extension Assisted Organizations in
Michigan" .............................................................................................

210

Appendix C: Memo Sent to Extension Personnel via C E E N e t.............................

215

Appendix D: Interviewee Summary F o r m ................................................................

216

Appendix B:

Appendix E:

Appendix F:

Key Themes Drawn from the Transcribed Notes on the
Interviews with the Case Study Participants ..................................

217

Methodological Appendix ...................................................................

218

BIBLIOGRAPHY

............................................................................................................

247

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE
1

PAGE
Organizational stages in the development of social
sy ste m s..................................................................................................

19

2

Contingency models of organization e ffe c tiv e n e s s.......................

28

3

Managerial functions

.........................................................................

38

4

M ajor leadership frames, proponents and p rem ises......................

40

5

A comparison o f management characteristics: Centralized
and internal orientation versus decentralized and external
o rie n ta tio n ............................................................................................

45

6

The institution building universe.......................................................

50

7

Data collection p ro c e d u re ...................................................................

75

8

M ajor themes related to the three cases

9

Seven institutionalization variables

10

Senge’s learning disciplines

........................................

114

.................................................

142

.............................................................

179

11

The twelve C ’s o f institutionalization..............................................

182

12

Hypothetical linear model o f institutionalization

185

.........................

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Use every letter you write, every conversation you have, every meeting you
attend to express your fundamental beliefs and dreams. Affirm to others the
vision o f the world you want. You are a free, immensely powerful source of
life and goodness. Affirm it. Radiate it. Think day and night about it and
you will see a miracle happen: The greatness of your own life.
—Dr. Robert Mueller, Former U.N. Assistant Secretary General

Introduction to the Study
In the last decade of the 20th century, writings on the growing population of
diligent laypersons mobilizing to positively change their communities were common­
place in postmodern America. Preceding their zeal was a group of visionaries who
had done much to provide a rich literature on the sociology of organizations. The
literature, with references in the BC era, does well in schematically depicting the
typologies that were present in the marketplace. There is room, however, to augment
the theory governing the establishment and sustenance of effective organizations.
Sofer (1972) generalized that ". . . there is a persisting strain in all work
organizations toward the maintenance or increase in rationality or efficiency with
which resources are related to ends" (p. 224). As he saw it, this pressure emanates
from " . . . sources outside the organization" (Sofer, 1972, p. 224). From within, the
pursuit was marginally different and could be associated to inter-organizational
dialogues or the significance its members ascribed to the organization’s work and

1

2
worth. An increasing number o f collections could attest to the growing interest in the
topic o f organizational effectiveness (Scott, 1981, p. 317). Still, some analysts
eschewed the topic on grounds o f subjectivity. Scott (1981) quoted W. Ross Ashby
as saying: "There is no such thing as ’good organizations’ in any absolute sense.
Always it is relative; and an organization that is good in one context or under one
criterion may be bad under another" (p. 317). This high variability in the structure of
organizations contributed to the indefinite nature of the literature on organizational
effectiveness.
Callen and Falk (1993) exposed Fama and Jensen’s (1983) argument that an
initial assessment o f organizations would be to assume that nonprofit organizations are
generally inefficient by comparison to profit-seeking organizations (p. 50). Such an
analysis is a forced comparison o f dissimilar variables. Going beyond that argument,
they maintained that the nonprofit organizational form is optimal for charitable
activities because charities, unlike profit-seeking institutions, have access to low-cost
capital (low-interest loans) from donors (p. 50). This apparently inconsistent posture
is further proof that they were not exactly sure of the complexities involved in
theorizing for voluntary associations. Other evidence was available detailing why
broad theories were applied with difficulty in this area. And as further revelation,
nonprofits found themselves conducting business in an equally competitive environ­
ment that profit-seeking organizations operated. These developments were particular­
ly significant within the agricultural sector because o f the implications for the greater
society. There was available testimony that " . . . farmers are searching for improved
modes o f organization to help them relate adequately to a society in which the

fortunes o f individuals are increasingly tied to the fortune o f large scale organiza­
tions—voluntary and otherwise" (Morrison, 1969, p. 8). This truism remained as a
part of the consciousness o f waning late 20th century family farmers and the hallmark
o f the American cooperative movement.
An early call went out by the National Program of Research for Agriculture
recommending a substantial increase in research on problems of people and their
organizations at a rate disproportionately larger than that recommended for technical
and other research (Morrison, 1969, p. 8). The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
Extension system (formerly Cooperative Extension Service, now Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service, a merger o f Cooperative State Research
Service and Extension System-USDA [CSREES]), itself an outstanding organization,
was analyzed for its entrepreneurial development role in the communities (Jones,
1987). CES was among the many institutions offering education as an aid to entre­
preneurship development. At times, entrepreneurs appeared at the same rate as
community builders and organization founders. Yet, the significance o f voluntary
associations in the food system and natural resources sector failed to appear in all the
chronologies o f organization theory (see Shafritz & Ott 1987, p. 10-18). Meanwhile,
there was adequate historical evidence from the first agriculture clubs in Pennsylvania
and granges in the U.S. that the system of organizing was already established in the
farm sector.
Similar convincing arguments for the need to study organizations stemmed
from the fact that associations were our best manifestation o f democracy (de Tocqueville, 1900; Nall, 1967; Weber 1947) and served as the basis of other new major

institutions, such as political parties, unions, and religious organizations (Smith &
Freedman 1972, p. 20-21). Voluntary associations " . . . performed an important role
in integrating changing West African societies" (Little, 1965); they promote the
modernization o f society (Smith & Freedman 1972; W eber 1947); and they help
immigrants recreate traditional institutions within their new environment by reinforc­
ing traditional values and institutions and providing an education in modem ways
(Anderson, 1971; Schlesinger, 1944; Wirth, 1951). At the end of fiscal year 1992,
U.S. charities numbered 546,100, up 49% from the 36,000 that existed in 1985 (Gold
1993, p. 46).
The mitigating role o f nonprofit organizations could be seen by considering the
case o f Haitians and subsequent Haitian-Americans in the diaspora. Some accounts
suggest that they had at least 1,000 community organizations (estimate from 1994)
functioning in the United States. Some of these nonprofits were registered with the
Internal Revenue Service as such and recognized within the benefiting milieu. Most
were only recognized by their beneficiaries and donors. If indeed these associations
extended services beyond those made possible by the community at-large (i.e.,
fundraising for hunger relief in Haiti; acculturation; galvanization and coordination of
other Haitian/Haitian-American organizations, etc.), the collective greater good, it
follows, would have been to assure their longevity and viability. However, although
there was no complete information about the state o f these entities, organization
theorists and extension practitioners continued to encourage new organization start-ups
but often provided little in the form of consistent help to sustain effective associations.

5
The Problem
As the postmodern society members of the late 20th century and its leading
theorists extolled the virtues o f organizers and their resulting organizations, there was
bound to be a continued proliferation of these enterprises. The focus o f this study
was on associations, also known as nonprofits, not-for-profits, charitables, foundations
and tax-exempts. [Similar to the existing literature, this study used these terms
interchangeably.] "Far more Americans now participate in the activities o f nonprofit
organizations than in those of profit-seeking organizations. About half o f the organi­
zations and enterprises in the United States is now non-profit in nature" (Oleck,
1988). In 1990, there were close to one million of these organizations in the U .S.,
causing organizational researchers to take notice and add to the existing literature on
organization theory (Dobbs, 1991 p. 68). In the process, some basic conclusions
were reached about the nature o f these organizations, the people involved in them,
their form and functions and the interactions that they maintained. This study went
beyond those conclusions to be informed about their staying power as functional
organizations.
Schein (1965) defined an organization as "the rational coordination of the
activities o f a number o f people for the achievement o f some common, explicit
purpose o r goal, through division o f labor and function and through a hierarchy of
authority and responsibility (p. 8). John Dewey (1944), speaking during a time
considered by most as "the managerial revolution," viewed the world as a greater
system. The organizations existing within the world were considered subsystems
providing balance and symmetry that are essential for a democracy (p. 20-21). He

6
referred to these subsystems as groups rather than associations as was done by Sofer
(1972). From this identification, the sense of interrelated parts and symmetrical
functions usually associated with organizations is lost. The concept of groups
communicates these relationships in a crude and uninventive fashion. The result,
however, is still a formal entity with discernible elements for comparison and
analysis.
The literature on these associations could be categorized into two types. The
first was an academic literature in which voluntary associations were "objectively"
studied and modeled by university researchers. The second was practitioner literature
in which individuals involved in the daily routines and maintenance of these organiza­
tions offered anecdotal stories, advice and "how-to" prescriptions (Gartner, 1993, p.
103; Porras & Robertson, 1987). There were reasons for this dichotomy. The
marketplace was invigorated by an evolving class of nonprofit managers and entrepre­
neurs looking for the winning edge to lead their organizations. Academics, mean­
while, were striving to track the enterprising managers and frame their organizations.
During some organizational assessments, their question simply was, "What is going
on here?" Otherwise, they were in search of those strategies and organizational
designs that worked better than some others considered less effective. The result was
a further segmentation o f the literature on organization theory.
At issue was the extent to which organizations and their founders parlayed
their initial accomplishments into sustainable, effective organizations. According to
Gartner (1993):

7
The voluntary association organizer must consciously appeal to the interests
and needs o f other individuals in order for an association to grow in members.
Through increases in the number and commitment o f members come power for
the voluntary organization to effect change, (p. 105)
The implications were directly related to agricultural extension and its effort to
empower others and stimulate the emergence o f new leaders in the communities. The
voluntary association organizers, as a product of these empowerment campaigns,
believed that organizations were the best vehicle for solving social and community
problems (Gartner, 1993, p. 105). In their minds, individual action has less potency
than the combined and coordinated efforts of many individuals working together
(Gartner, 1993, p. 105). Many examples could be found in Michigan where individu­
al work with certain communities had yielded organizations that had gone beyond
expectations and continued to positively impact communities. One o f the cases from
this study exemplified this sentiment.
The Cooperative Extension System, albeit federated in structure, had been able
to withstand the threats and challenges of the marketplace. Its flexibility and organi­
zational development strategies had a tremendous influence on the lives of many
people reaching into the very fabric of their communities. However, larger organiza­
tions such as Extension and their programs, as well as the larger social system,
invariably facilitated the start-up o f new organizations that could barely strive to fulfill
their objectives, let alone remain viable well beyond the start-up years. Case in
point, "how-to" business manuals, such as Schilit’s (1990), thoroughly listed the types
o f activities necessary to form an association. Still, the question remained: How do
these foundations move beyond those steps in the start-up manuals to maintaining
effectiveness and thus become institutionalized organizations?

8
Purpose of the Study
The purpose o f this study was to identify the characteristics of effective and
institutionalized organizations initially assisted by the Michigan State University
Extension (MSUE—formerly Michigan State University Cooperative Extension
Service) in the state o f Michigan as a basis for analysis and modeling by newly
inspired organizations. This task was completed by pursuing the following three
broad questions:
1.

How do organizations establish the necessary procedures to deal with

change(s) in the marketplace?
2.

How does effectiveness contribute to the institutionalization o f non­

3.

How do the following Seven-C’s—Communication, Control, Culture,

profits?

Commitment, Capital, Compliance, and Consensus on values (Coherence)—contribute
to the institutionalization o f the nonprofits identified for this study?
W arner (1969) detailed some research needs in farm organizations and
suggested some of the above as possible research questions. Other examples o f such
questions pertained to the organizations’ adjustment(s) of policies and programs over
time to compensate for the changes in the marketplace. For this study, however, the
specific objectives were to:
1.

Address the research questions through literature reviews, interviews,

document reviews and participant observations;
2. Define institutionalization and the efforts made by three nonprofits in
Michigan to accomplish that status; and

9

3.

Develop a conceptual framework, by using the findings from this study,

that may serve as a new model for analysis and use by emergent organizations.

Operational Definitions
The following terms added to the full understanding o f the problem. The
contribution is even more pronounced when they are seen in context to the grounding
effect they have had on the literature. This effect was expressed by representing the
pioneering or best thinking currently available on these key terms. While there may
have been varying definitions of these key terms, those selected for this study are as
follows:
Communication—"The process by which information, decisions and directives are
transmitted among actors and the ways in which knowledge, opinions, and attitudes
are formed o r modified by interaction" (Loomis, 1960 p. 30).
Compliance—The art or process o f obeying another’s desire, proposal, demand or
coercion (Etzioni, 1961).
Culture—"The integrated pattern o f human behavior that includes thought, speech,
action, and artifacts and depends upon man’s [sic] capacity for learning and transmit­
ting knowledge to succeeding generations" (Wilson, Goodall, Jr. & Waagen, 1986,
p. 127).
Control—"To engage in a set o f behaviors that will ensure that the planned perfor­
mance (goals) is actually accomplished" (Wilson, Goodall, Jr. & Waagen, 1986,
p. 247).
Effectiveness—The extent to which group objectives are obtained (Zander, 1985
p. 147). This concept was magnified in the review o f literature section.

10
Institutionalization—"The process through which organizations are given structure, and
social action and interaction are made predictable. .

a process marked by a

routinization o f charisma, codification and standardization of ends, beliefs and norms
o f a system (Loomis, 1960 p. 36 and p. 205). The process o f becoming an institu­
tion.
Leadership—Assisting followers to transcend their own self-interests for the good of
the group, organization and society; to consider their long-term needs to develop
themselves rather than their needs of the moment; and to convert from followers into
leaders (Bass, 1990, p. 53). To manage attention and meaning; to articulate visions
o f what is possible; and to empower the collective effort of the followers (Bennis,
1984). "The process o f influencing others to achieve mutually agreed upon purposes
for the organization" (Patterson, 1993, p. 3). Please see transformational leadership.
Legitimacy—"A structural characteristic of a group as seen by members o f its
audience; it develops from pre-existing sentiment patterns in reference to the interests
o f those members and the performance of the group in the decision-making process"
(Sim, 1956, p. 11).
Organizations—" A collectivity oriented to the pursuit o f relatively specific goals and
exhibiting a relatively highly formalized social structure" (Scott, 1981, p. 21).
"Associations o f persons grouped together around the pursuit o f specific goals"
(Sofer, 1972, p. 3).
Values—"The criteria employed in selecting the goals o f behavior" (Scott, 1981,
p. 14). The basic philosophy of an organization; its base (Peters & Waterman, Jr.,
1984, p. 15). "Conceptions, explicit or implicit, distinctive of an individual or

11
characteristic o f a group, of the desirable that influences the selection from available
modes, means, and ends o f action" (Hellriegel & Slocum, 1974, p. 22).
Research Setting
The research involved three distinct nonprofit organizations operating in
Michigan. Michigan is a midwestem state dominated by the automotive, agriculture
and tourism industries respectively. While based in East Lansing, on the campus of
Michigan State University, the researcher first communicated with the leaders o f the
prospective participating organizations and secured their willing involvement in the
case study. They also agreed to involve individuals from the staff, general member­
ship, leadership, board o f directors, collaborators and users o f their organizations’
services. One o f the three organizations, Youth Development Corporation, Inc., was
represented and operated out o f Lansing, Michigan. This urban capital city boasted a
population o f about 200,000 inhabitants and numerous nonprofit community organiza­
tions.
The other two organizations were Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Associa­
tion based in Kalkaska, Michigan and Tuscola 2001, Incorporated with headquarters
in Caro, Michigan. These cities were described as rural and representative o f the
activities undertaken by the nonprofit organizations. For example, the one organiza­
tion that concentrated on agriculture, natural resources and wildlife concerns was in a
farm-dominated area. The other organization had multiple purposes and was taxonomically categorized under community and economic development signifying the
many concerns faced by most o f rural North America during the latter part of the
20th century.

12
Philosophical Grounding
As a constructivist exploration, this research rests on the assertion that there
may be multiple and paradoxical "truths" from the cases as experienced by the
subjects. Furthermore, as Guba and Lincoln (1989) defined it, " . . . truth is the best
informed and most sophisticated construction on which there is consensus" (p. 84).
Later, the concept o f consensus was projected on the cases in this study for further
iteration and implied even greater subjectivity. The result of this philosophizing
method is an interactive, defining and analysis, redefining and reanalysis, until a
dually constructed "truth" is achieved or discovered. Lincoln and Guba (1985) called
this process the naturalist paradigm while Bogdan and Bilken (1992) related it to the
philosophical approaches known as phenomenology and symbolic interactionism.
The significance of symbolic interactionism rests on its logic, which allows for
individuals in similar situations or having similar experiences, to develop similar
conceptions and attribute certain effects to certain causes. Patterns, regularities,
cultural nuances, cause and effect relationships, among other searches, can continue
throughout the iterative processes. Doing so is necessary because knowledge that is
generated or reinvented within this constructivist framework is viewed as relative to
the time and context in which it is generated and to the individuals involved in
generating and interpreting it. Still, the interconnectivity o f nonprofits and ubiqui­
tousness o f "truth" render organization theory development metaphysical.

Overview of the Research Design
The methodology o f this qualitative study was in-depth, structured, openended, tape-recorded interviews o f three organizations, their members, leaders,

13

directors, collaborators and users. An inductive, constant comparative approach to
data analysis was applied. Glaser and Strauss’ (1967) proven methodology as used in
this study focused on generating theory closely related to the phenomena studied
rather than validating it.
Using archival data, researching material artifacts, interpreting language, and
using on-site participants to research stories and myths were popular qualitative
procedures (Van Maanen, Dabbs, Jr. & Faulkner, 1982). The goal was to find
evidence or recommendations from respondents supported by their experiences that
organizations had manifested characteristics, such as adaptability, coordination,
growth, use o f the environment, and flexibility among other possible characteristics at
various levels toward institutionalization. In qualitative research, particularly those
that use interviews as this study did, the researcher was advantaged by developing a
relationship o f familiarity and comfort with potential interviewees.

Assumptions
Organization and organizational development theory building processes were
undergirded by many assumptions. The first assumption was that this study would
identify representative participants and invoke the applicable theoretical frames to this
topic. This was a well-grounded assumption considering the variabilities found
among organizations in the nonprofit sector. There was a need, however, to sort
through propositions, generalizations, conceptions and prescriptions as the dichoto­
mies in the literature were reviewed.
The second assumption was that this study would secure willing and commit­
ted respondents to help address the core research questions. The subjects would not

14
only need to be experienced in organizational development. They would need a
historical perspective on their own organization’s experiences and its efforts toward
institutionalization. Moreover, there would need to be a willingness to allow for the
perusal through and exposure o f the organization.
Third, it was assumed that all organizations would strive for institution status.
Not many tax-exempts cited within their goals and objectives the growth and institu­
tionalization o f their endeavors, yet they were implied. The researcher had been
involved in a case wherein this goal was in the vision of the organization’s leader. It
occurred while the researcher served as an administrator for a U.S.-based nonprofit.
The executives o f the organization were at the critical stage o f programming for long­
term viability and adjusting for the emergent environment through strategic planning.
They were advised to envision the functioning of their non-profit in the 21st century.
This futuring exercise was received in askance by the group. Inquiring further, one
official was asked, "What will happen to the organization once all your goals and
objectives have been met?" The response was as sure as it was short; "Then we will
cease to exist."
One last assumption was that this study would deal with effectiveness and
institutionalization and not the efficiency of those organizations. The difference could
be found in the qualitative nature of the former over the quantitative focus o f the
latter.

Limitations of the Study
Perhaps the most significant of the limitations of this study is that it would be
taking place after the fact. The participants in this study accomplished a particular

15
feat pursued by many others. Not as a primary witness, the researcher attempted to
frame the steps taken by those in the study to arrive at their status.
The events reported in this study might have been sufficient to understand all
the processes leading to effectiveness and institutionalization. Those processes would
need to be assessed according to several conditions, situations and time. In essence,
this study did not encompass all there is to establish effective institutions in the
marketplace.
There was an inherent limitation borne by the subjective nature of the research
methodology. For situational reasons and that organizations were live entities with
distinct personalities, this study would not generalize to all organizations. Instead, as
a qualitative study, the primary concern was on particularizability or, in Erickson’s
(1986) terms, discovering universals as manifested concretely and specifically, not in
abstraction or generality (p. 130).
Another limitation was the small sample size. The decision to limit the size of
respondents revolved around the exploratory nature of the research, that non-profit
organizations were the subjects and the goal o f building theory as opposed to general­
izing findings. Reliability and validity were addressed in this study, although the
latter often does not create a problem for ethnographies. The specific focus of this
study was on generating theories rather than validating them.

Chapter Summary
This study was conducted to better understand the processes that organizations
were undergoing to become lasting and successful entities within the community of
nonprofit organizations (being referred to here as institutionalized organizations or

16
institutions). There were particular variables that appeared in the preliminary analysis
o f the phenomena and review of the literature. Once reviewed, it appeared that the
literature was broken down into two categories--"how-to" guides and theoretical
explorations—creating a dearth for scholars of organization and organizational
development theory. Concomitantly, the literature revealed the most effective method
for generating the related theory involved qualitative and interactive meaning iteration
and reiteration. Qualitative research approaches were found as an underapplied yet
useful practice because of the dynamic nature of organizations and the particulariza­
bility o f data jointly generated while using such methodologies. The existing body of
knowledge would be advanced from the findings, "truths" and meanings brought
forward by this study.

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Min anpil, chaj pa lou. (Translated: Many hands, load ain’t heavy.)
—Haitian proverb

Review of Literature
The varying approaches to presenting the literature on organizations contribut­
ed to the extensive breadth and depth of the construct predicating the discipline.
Previous work on this area had used the systems approach. It was a methodology
used to understand the totality of the phenomena, here, being the institutionalization
o f nonprofit organizations. With the systems approach, the viable parts and their
interrelationships were explainable both to internal and external stakeholders. Hence,
an organization was viewed as a network member with a number of elements that act
interdependently. Otherwise, nonprofits were sub-systems o f a multicomplex
suprasystem system. Schoderbeck et al. (1975) referred to the concept saying that:
The systems approach is a Gestalt type of approach attempting to view the
whole with all its interrelated and interdependent parts in interaction. The
systems oriented researcher employs the holistic method. This approach forces
him [her] to acquire an adequate knowledge of the whole before he [she]
proceeds to an accurate knowledge of the workings o f its parts, (p. 13)
Scott (1981) noted that:
A large and growing number o f organization theorists look [in] to general
systems theory as a source o f ideas to improve the design of organiza­
tions. . . . The orientation of this group is pragmatic and applied: they seek to
change and improve organizations as viewed from a managerial perspective,
not simply to describe and understand them. (p. I l l )

17

18
But how did these systems and sub-systems develop? More was needed before
arriving at this and other related questions. A detailed and descriptive exploration
about the systems approach was used to guide our thinking. The systems way of
looking at nonprofits contributed to, enriched, and steered the discussion to the most
salient topics related to these associations.

Systems Theory Applied to Organizations
According to Katz and Kahn (1978, p. 22), problems of relationships, of
structure, and of interdependence are the basic concerns o f systems theory. Such
concerns were not new to the nonprofit community as they were covered in the
literature on nonprofits. However, it is the dependency o f living systems on their
external environment, whether biological organisms or social organizations, which
makes them considered as open systems (Katz & Kahn, 1978, p. 22). A simplistic
understanding o f the development of human groupements, formal organizations and
ultimately social systems, as shown in Figure 1, demystifies the emergence of such
systems and their supporting subsystems. As an example, organizations have systems
o f authority, status, and power, and people in organizations have varying needs from
each system. Wheresoever these systems and sub-systems dimly appear, the conclu­
sion should be that their existence is in another form but still along the continuum of
social systems development. Supporting this posture, Scott (1992) viewed the
openness o f systems dependent on continuing exchanges among members and linked
by shifting coalitions o f participants.
The analysis here, more broadly than usual, was intended to frame organiza­
tions as multiple overlapping sub-systems mutually pursuing growth and development.

19

Individuals
Groupings
Tribes

Mobs
Gangs
Task Forces

Organizations
Foundations
Institutions

N ations
S ocieties
C ivilization s

Autocratic Systems
Communalistic Systems
Democratic Systems
Tribalistic Systems
© Rockfclcr P. Hcrissc 1995

Figure 1. Organizational stages in the development of
social systems.

Dewey (1944) defined growth as the cumulative movement of action toward a later
result. Development as used here is the process by which the members o f a society
expand themselves and their institutions in ways that enhance their ability to mobilize
and manage resources to produce sustainable and justly distributed improvements in
the quality o f life consistent with their own aspirations (Herisse, 1991, p. 8-9). The
system ultimately developed would have been initialized by and with individuals or

20
groupings and leads to changes that improve communities, develop societies, and
build nations.
Brown and Covey (1987), Agrys (1987) and Porras and Robertson (1987) were
but a few o f the Organization Development (OD) practitioners revising the paradigm
to now include nation-building as one of the planned change impacts. Parsons (1951)
and Loomis (1960) pioneered the sociological concept, social system, which is
composed o f the patterned interaction o f members. Loomis (1960) further explained
that "It is constituted o f the interaction of a plurality of individual actors whose
relations to each other are mutually oriented through the definition and mediation of a
pattern, structured and shared symbols and expectations" (p. 4). M oreover, it is the
uniformity o f their behavior, not the people themselves, which make up "society."
Dewey (1947) echoed this understanding, stating that:
Persons do not become a society by living in proximity. They do not even
compose a social group [organization] because they all work for a common
end. If, however, they were all cognizant of the common end and all interest­
ed in it so that they regulated their specific activity in view o f it, then they
would form a community, (p. 4-5)
"The concept o f the social system enables the analytic observer to move from a given
sub-system to the larger societal system and back again" (Loomis 1960, p. 4). As a
knowledge base, the construct also allows the understanding o f social actions in
general.
The implications o f the revised elements o f OD were more visible when traced
along the social systems development continuum. As seen earlier, in the background
and tangentially, we were enlightened by theories of nation and community building.
Here, however, the focus was directed to the resulting systems rather than if OD

21
theory could be transferred across the cultures and entities (i.e., organizations) found
within the sub-systems. Figure 1 above postulated a sequence in the development o f
social systems. This construct was more concerned with the clustering o f these sub­
systems and the timeline along which they emerge. Note that the "mobs" taxonomy
was used to explain the informal and sporadic collectives akin to those o f the 1994
Los Angeles Uprising in California. The connectivity of each cell to its antecedent
and back to Time Factor One (Tribes, (loose) Groupings . . ., etc.) is self-evident.
These systems continue to survive where: one individual dominates the autocratic
system (i. e., benevolent dictator); groups and committees direct the communalistic
system (i.e., management by the board); each person has a vote though s/he may
assign leadership and assume followership in democratic systems; no clear leadership
value is articulated in the tribalistic system—power is either a hereditary trait or
ascribed through use o f historical data, charisma and/or energy.
A first impression would be that these theorists are myopic or their theory is at
best an oversimplification. The gross oversight would be to ignore, as Scott (1981)
postulated, " . . . the great complexity o f organizations as one type of system and the
danger o f misapplying or overextending analogies based on the operation of other less
complex systems" (p. 111). There are, however, operational requirements (problems)
commonly shared by all organizations. Scott (1981, p. 9) identified the following:
(a) All must define (and redefine) their objectives, (b) all must induce participants to
contribute services, (c) all must control and coordinate these contributions, (d) re­
sources must be garnered from the environment and products or services dispensed,
(e) participants must be selected, trained [sic], and replaced, and (f) a working

22
relationship with the neighbors must be achieved. Beyond the aforementioned
requirements, Scott (1981) emphasized that "All organizations are beset by a common
curse. A high proportion of the resources utilized by any organization is expended in
maintaining the organization itself rather than in achieving the specified goals" (p. 9).
And it is when these resources are depleted that effectiveness and sustainability are
threatened. To better explain this occurrence, analysts used the natural selection
model originated in biology with the work of Darwin. This model, championed by
Hannan and Freeman (1977) and Aldrich (1979), gives primary attention to the
environment as a set of influences shaping the structure, function and fate of the
organization (Scott, 1981, p. 115).

Organization Development (OD) and the Environment
There were two approaches in which organizational interaction with the
environment were discussed. Mulford (1981) pointed to these as (a) natural selection,
and (b) the resource dependence models. The former emphasized that organizations
are differentially selected for survival on the basis o f the fit between organizational
structure and (or) activities and environmental characteristics (p. 99). Meanwhile, the
latter view suggested that organizations may not be able to generate internally all the
resources or functions required to maintain themselves. Therefore, they must enter
into transactions and relations with other organizations to get resources (Mulford
1981, p. 99). Furthermore, ". . . the resource dependence model focuses upon
organizations as active and capable of both responding to and even altering their
environments" (Mulford, 1981, p. 99-100).

23
From a longitudinal study o f start-ups in the minicomputer industry, Romanelli
(1989) explored the effects o f environmental resources, competitive conditions at the
time o f founding, and strategies organizations use during its early years to exploit
environmental conditions (p. 369). Her findings suggested that founders can over­
come hazards o f start-up by tailoring strategies to environmental conditions (p. 369).
There were some specific descriptors brought to light in her study. With regards to
these new organizations (here they are coined as "firms" because o f their profit
motive), Romanelli (1989) concluded the following:
•
•

•
•

The more organizations competing, the more difficult it is for firms,
especially new firms, to gam er and control necessary resources,
both environmental conditions at the time of founding and character­
istics of firms’ early activity patterns influence the likelihood of early
survival,
lack o f resources restricts the amount of power that an organization can
exercise over market and competitive conditions, and
the availability o f resources for organizing hinges jointly on the exis­
tence of some untapped demand or needs for a product or service and a
sufficient absence of competition that the new organization can exploit
the available resources quickly, (pp. 369-371)

As Scott (1981) pointed out, "The environment is perceived to be the ultimate
source o f materials, energy, and information, all o f which are vital to the continuation
of the system" (p. 120). In a different light, the environment was viewed as the stage
upon which organizations perform; and it was, in Scott’s (1981) words ". . . becom­
ing more complex and turbulent over time" (p. 134). The concept o f "change," albeit
dominant from the old paradigm, was consistent with the general aims of organization
development (OD). The postmodern paradigm contrarily included terms like transfor­
mation, re-invention, re-engineer and pointed out the human relational dynamics of
the process. In other words, the human element or "somebody" had to be involved to

24
operate the system. Bennis (1969) described OD ’s basic characteristics as the
following:
First o f all, it is an educational strategy adopted to bring about a planned
organizational change. The strategies differ enormously. . . . The second
characteristic is that the changes sought for are coupled directly with the
exigency or demand the organization is trying to cope with. . . . A third
characteristic is that OD relies on educational strategy which emphasizes
experienced behavior. . . . Fourth, change agents are for the most part, but
not exclusively, external to the client system. . . . Fifth, OD implies a collabo­
rative relationship between change agent and constituents o f the client sys­
tem. . . . A sixth characteristic is that change agents share a social philosophy,
a set o f values about the world in general and human organizations in particu­
lar which shape their strategies, determine their interventions, and largely
govern their responses to client systems, (pp. 10-13)
The relativity o f terms such as "change" to environment and organizational
development is both distinct and pervasive. The relationship is one o f symbiotic
compatibility; one function can naturally lead into the next. With the connection made
between open systems and the environment again, Katz and Kahn (1978, pp. 23-27)
identified the following characteristics as being evident in all open systems: (a) Some
form o f energy from the external environment is imported, (b) the energy available to
them is transformed, (c) some product is exported into the environment, (d) cyclical
exchanges are pursued and maintained, (e) activities are avoided that would otherwise
cause their demise (the authors call this characteristic negative entropy where organi­
zations lose inputs and die), (f) information is received, feedback is given and faults
are corrected if necessary, (g) open systems remain steady and dependable in their
operation, (h) open systems specialize and concentrate on given purposes, (i) func­
tions are integrated and coordinated, and (j) equifinality. Other members of open
systems can arrive to perform similar functions without having had the same begin­
nings.

25
Missing from the foregoing view is the manner in which organizational needs
(inclusive o f individual ones) are met. The circumstances during which individual
needs conflict with those of the organization create crucial moments for organizations
and their pursuit of mutual coexistence. As an example that will be explored later
within the literature, compliance and coherence are threatened. However, a pattern
was developing which suggested the opportunity to study organizations within the
open systems milieu and the characteristics that could tell the story o f their existence.
W hile referring to foundations as "client systems or sub-systems," Bennis
(1969) proposed a series of questions that must be raised when considering those
associations. These questions are listed and discussed as the following:
1.

"Are the learning goals of organizational development appropriate? To

what extent do the goals relate to the effectiveness of the client system?" (p. 44)
2.

"Is the cultural state of the client system ready for organization

development?" (p. 45)
3.

"Are the key people in the client system involved in or informed of the

organizational development program?" (p. 47)
4.

"Are the members of the client system adequately prepared and

oriented to organization development?" (p. 47)
Hence, the practicality o f OD theory and practices is sufficient cause to apply the
process when these "client systems or sub-systems" confront "change" in the market­
place. Reaffirming this stance was Howard H. Bell, president emeritus of the
American Advertising Federation in Washington, DC. Sabo’s (1993) interview on
"Award Winning Leadership" quoted him saying, "Associations that don’t provide

26
services members demand or don’t keep up with these changing times will fall by the
wayside. Successful association managers are leaders, not followers. They keep their
organizations on the leading edge o f change (p. 123). A similar interview with
Kathryn E. Johnson, Executive Vice President o f the Healthcare Forum —an interna­
tional organization based in San Francisco, California resulted much the same. She
said:
Organizations need to be in a constant state of renewal and reexamination. An
important element o f reinventing ourselves has been to co-design the organiza­
tion’s future with staff and members. Board members may be the champions
of change, but members must be engaged in such a way that they feel they
own the organization’s vision (Quoted in Sabo 1993, p. 125).
Loomis (1960) suggested, regardless of how organizations are viewed, ". . . Social
change is the most constant aspect of group existence. . . . Social change may start in
any part o f the system, through changes in the external system [pattern] of the
group. . ." (p. 9). Furthermore, he continued, ". . . once in existence a social
system [organization] cannot help changing, even if all its external conditions are
constant" (p. 10).
If one continues with the systems frame for giving meaning to organizations,
one clear caveat to this discussion must be continually reiterated. The human
dimension o f social organizations does not lead itself to natural characteristics like
physical and biological systems; they are fabrications by and with humans. As such,
Kast and Rosenzweig (1985) suggested about organizations " . . . they can be estab­
lished for an infinite variety of [goals] and objectives and not follow the same life
cycle pattern of birth, maturity, and death as biological systems" (p. 108). Katz and
Kahn (1978) said:

27
Social structures are essentially contrived. People invent the complex patterns
o f behavior that we call social structure, and people create social structure by
enacting those patterns o f behavior. Many properties of social systems derive
from these essential facts. As human inventions, social systems are imperfect.
They can come apart at the seams overnight, but they can also outlast by
centuries the biological organisms that originally created them. The cement
that holds them together is essentially psychological, rather than biological.
Social systems are anchored in the attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, motivations,
habits, and expectations o f human beings, (p. 37)
The foregoing discussion was aimed at establishing parameters for the framing of
nonprofits, the dynamic environment within which they operate, and the role of the
OD practitioner. Still unanswered, however was the correlation between organiza­
tional effectiveness and the institutionalization of those effective organizations.

Later

in this work, seven psychosocial characteristics (i.e., communication, control, culture,
commitment, capital [as a resource], compliance and coherence) and their impact on
the effectiveness and institutionalization (permanence) of organizations are discussed.

Towards a Contingency Theory on Organizational Effectiveness
Until this point, the systems perspective with its concern for the whole picture
was applied to bring forth knowledge to bear on organizations, organizational
development, and M SUE’s role.

As the focus now turns to organization effective­

ness, the systems perspective was used to describe the contingency view on organiza­
tions. Kast and Rosenzweig (1985) effectively presented this vantage point as
follows:
The contingency view of organizations . . . suggests that an organization is a
system composed o f subsystems and delineated by identifiable boundaries from
its environmental suprasystem. The contingency view seeks to understand the
interrelationships within and among subsystems as well as between the organi­
zation and its environment and to define patterns o f relationships or
configurations o f variables. It emphasizes the multivariate nature of organiza­
tions and attempts to understand how organizations operate under varying

28
conditions and in specific circumstances. Contingency views are ultimately
directed toward suggesting organizational designs and managerial actions most
appropriate for specific situations, (p. 116)
In short, the contingency view, whose models are represented in Figure 2, was the
midpoint between universal principles of organization and the distinctive nature of
organizations that often insist upon situational analyses.

As a reinvention exercise, a

traditional model o f organizations—one that assumes a coherent and explicit set of
collective goals toward which every action is directed and results are measured—was
explored for organization effectiveness.

Goal Model

Focus on organizational
goals, tasks, production
Focus on satisfaction of
internal constituencies

Social Justice/
E cological
Functional Model

Focus on internal and
external constituencies
Focus on consequences of
the organization on society
© Rockfeler P. Herisse 1995

Figure 2 . Contingency models of organization effectiveness.

Many researchers had struggled with the processes associated with organiza­
tional effectiveness. Thus far, the discussion had revolved around the complexity in
studying organizations due to their high degrees o f variability and ubiquity. Some
authors (Hannan & Freeman, 1977; Pennings, 1975) argued that effectiveness cannot

29
be a scientific concept. This concept was especially difficult to fully capture for
nonprofit organizations. The same variability in defining organizations prevailed once
again. In a celebrated summarizing effort, Cameron (1978) suggested studies showed
that different concepts of organization lead to a variety of definitions and approaches
to organizational effectiveness and act upon their beliefs, that nonprofit organizations
differ in effectiveness. Moreover, that same literature had been greatly enriched since
the work o f pioneers like Barnard (1938), Georgopoulos and Tannenbaum (1957),
Likert (1967), Parsons (1960) and Etzioni (1964), just to name a few.
In a broad sense, organizational effectiveness could have been defined as the
capacity for being effective or o f producing effects. The gain from this view of
effectiveness was its relationship to operative goals and obtained results, to stake­
holders and members of the organization, and to the general characteristics and
processes o f an organization. Thus, from the many possible views of organizational
effectiveness, this study was justified in focusing on the following three points. The
first was based on how organization is being defined within this work. Namely, the
only purpose o f an organization was to ensure efficient task performance for the
attainment o f desired results. Otherwise stated, effectiveness is the organization’s
ability to achieve its operative goals among others. In support o f this perspective was
the goal model championed by Georgopoulos and Tannenbaum (1957), Etzioni
(1964), Price (1972), Steers (1975), and Campbell (1977), and the process model with
greater focus on managerial processes and the internal health of the organization.
Internal processes and procedures and the leaders’ role are directly related to organi­
zational effectiveness (Argyris, 1964; Bennis, 1966; Likert, 1967).

30
The second paradigm was derived from work by Miller and Rice (1967) and
Keeley (1978). The former (Miller and Rice) suggested that the primary task of any
organization is to satisfy the needs o f its members, volunteers and/or employees. The
latter (Keeley), with the philosophical grounding from work by Barnard (1938), Cyert
and March (1963), and Friedlander and Pickel (1968), is coined the participantsatisfaction model. The major premise of Keeley’s (1978) model was that organiza­
tional effectiveness is related to the interests of various participants. As a parallel
D ’Aunno (1992) described the Multiple Constituency (MC) model to measuring
organizational effectiveness. "MC shares the view that an organization is effective if
it at least minimally satisfies the interests of multiple constituencies associated with it"
(D ’Aunno, 1992, p. 346). Undergirding this premise was the assumption that
organizations ultimately exist for human benefit. In the related literature on mem­
bers’ motivation to participate in organizations, ideas of personal-satisfaction, selfinterest, and returned gratification are mentioned (Handel, 1983; Phillips, 1982;
Vandenberg, 1993). More specifically, broad motives for membership and participa­
tion included the following: (a) altruism or caring for the issue the group is working
on, (b) self-interest, (c) transaction (where something is expected in return directly),
and (d) social needs—friends, belonging, conforming, involvement, responsibility, etc.
From the foregoing it was discernible that the identifiers attracting individuals to
organizations also defined the extent to which that organization was effective in both
meeting its operational goals (Bluedom, 1980) and distributing power, resources, and
appointive requirements (Davis, 1982).

31
The third paradigm that was applied for this study focused on the societal
benefits and client groups’ needs as the benchmark of organizational effectiveness.
These had already been shown in the motivation/participation discourse. Three
models supported this third paradigm on organization effectiveness. They are listed
and described as the following: (a) Keeley’s (1978) social justice model emphasizing
the satisfaction o f interests held by various participants, (b) the functional model
(Fremont, 1975; Merton, 1956; Parsons, 1960) where the organization’s effectiveness
is determined by the social consequences of its activities, and (c) M iles’ (1980) eco­
logical model that assumes that organizations’ effectiveness can be assessed in terms
of their ability to minimally satisfy goals imposed upon them by their various
constituencies. The implications from these three paradigms and subsequent six
models were related to the approaches that this and other studies could take to assess
and discuss organization effectiveness.
There was sufficient rationale for choosing this one classification scheme
among the many other possible means for measuring organization effectiveness.
Doing so enabled the researcher to deem this study’s subjects effective. In support,
Goodman and Pennings (1977) contributed the following characteristics for studies of
organizational effectiveness: (a) an explicit view of the organization; (b) a precise
definition o f effectiveness; (c) a domain in which the concept of effectiveness may be
said to function; (d) the perspective of different groups, i.e., constituencies, that
determine the type o f criteria and the level of effectiveness desired; (e) a framework
which defines determinants of organizational effectiveness; and (f) an adequate
research strategy. Here, in strong concurrence with Bluedom (1980), rather than

32
looking at studying the effectiveness of nonprofits we were applying effectiveness
determinants to test if they would lead to organizational permanence. Already, we
had noted the relativity between motivation/participation theory to that o f effectiveness
assessment. Still uncertain, however, was the extent to which these constructs would
explain permanence as a characteristic of nonprofits. In her study on the organiza­
tional effectiveness o f universities, Handel (1983) showed that the contingency views
were not suited for studying universities because of their anarchistic nature. Yet
universities, like other organizations, were open systems and, with their dynamism
noted, should have responded favorably to rational models similar to those depicted
above. Cameron (1986) identified some shortcomings to the contingency approaches
shown in Figure 2. Some o f the potential problems for researchers applying these
perspectives that she noted include: (a) Values and preferences vary from one group
to another, and it is difficult to resolve such conflicts; (b) a group’s preferences are
sometimes difficult to identify, even for the group itself; (c) preferences vary over
time; (d) contradictory preferences are sometimes held by a group; and (e) how to
identify constituents to participate in an assessment is often ambiguous. Yet the
pragmatism and flexibility of these approaches made them attractive and provided
guidelines that were applied even in this study. Effectiveness measures therefore
required an analysis o f face goals, as well as satisfaction from stakeholders and
collaborators in the environment. By reviewing the record on members, clients,
previous experiences and the experience with or perceived other actors (organizations)
in the environment, a certain picture of the organization’s effectiveness would become
discernible.

33
Policy/Program Adjustments and Organization Effectiveness
Loomis (1961) did well to magnify the work of Talcott Parsons whom many
lauded as the leading theorist of the "social system" concept. "Parsons defines the
boundary between those objects which are constituents o f the system and those which
are part o f its environment by the test of particularism . . ." (Loomis, 1961, p. 349).
His approach to relating with policy and program adjustments as precipitated by the
environment reached proactivism. He called for "adaptation." Loomis (1961)
suggested that "The recruitment of labor, most often by contract, and the mobilization
o f capital are . . . the chief adaptive problems of a going concern" (p. 337) for
organizations.
Recurring themes were found under the monikers, environment, change and
adaptation. Corwin (1974) for example, in a celebrated and summative effort,
identified how an organization could be more easily changed. The sweeping nature of
his postulates was derived from the exhaustive literature reviewed covering writers
representing diverse and interwoven thought patterns and tracing several overlapping
macro-theories o f change. From Corwin’s (1974) findings, the propensity for
organizational change was high:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

If it is invaded by liberal, creative and unconventional outsiders with
fresh perspectives;
If those outsiders are exposed to creative, competent, flexible socializa­
tion agents;
If it is staffed by young, flexible, supportive, and competent boundary
personnel, or "gatekeepers";
If it is structurally complex and decentralized;
If it has the outside funds to provide the "organizational" slack neces­
sary to lessen the cost of innovation;
If its members have positions that are sufficiently secure and protected
from the status risks involved in change; and

34
7.

If it is located in a changing, modem, urbanized setting where it is in
close cooperation with a coalition of other cosmopolitan organizations
that can supplement its skills and resources, (p. 698)

Since the time o f his study, surely some of these clauses had been challenged and
refuted as they drew from works by Durkheim, Dewey, Rogers, Newcomb and
Tarde. From a perspective standpoint, Tarde’s reference was from 1890. While
postmodern thinking drew from classical theorists, even Emile Durkheim ’s institution­
alized dysfunction and anomie theories had to bear the litmus test of relevance for late
20th century situations and entities.
Later, Crandall (1993) interviewed Robert Rosen, author of The Healthy
Company (1992), probing into his organizational health concept. Rosen was in the
process o f integrating all that was available on the management of people in the
workplace into a coherent body o f knowledge that would help manage human capital.
When asked how organizations are to manage (adjust) to changes in the environment,
he said:
The key is continuous learning. Continuous learning means creating a work
force o f lifelong learners who are constantly upgrading their talents and skills.
It also means creating an environment that allows people to learn so that they
make mistakes, fall down, learn from their mistakes, and grow. (Crandall
1993, p. 54)
Loomis (1960) cited W. E. M oore who posited the following thesis:
The theory o f acculturation, that is, of cultural diffusion and resultant change,
indicates that an innovation is most acceptable if in both form and degree it
represents only a small departure from customary standards and practices.
(p. 81)
Thus far, the literature had merely traced and described a phenomenon germane to all
associations. Still missing was the procedural approaches to adjusting policies and

35
programs. These approaches, while dyadic, existed as noted earlier. The methods to
address these issues were nestled within the organization development construct.
The fact is, over time and from crisis to crisis, change had taken place. The
social system and sub-systems would no longer function routinely. The prescription
was for these foundations to respond contrarily to those for-profit cohorts who
allowed the economy to naturally redress the environment. Even there, the truth was
that some businesses gained and others lost precipitating bankruptcy and then extinc­
tion. At some intervals it would be useful to use the business, profit-seeking industry
analogies. Voluntary associations or foundations had common pursuits—sustainability.
On this point Rosen (1993) stated " . . . that an association is a company. . . . All
organizations are dependent on their social and intellectual capital, their brain
power . . . " (cited in Crandall 1993, p. 58).
In their book Profiles of Excellence. Knauft, Berger and Gray (1991) identi­
fied " . . . four hallmarks o f excellence . . . " for nonprofit organizations (p. 1-2).
They stated that the following may appear at varying intervals over the life o f the
organization but are suggested to represent the ideal effective organization. Organiza­
tions, they argued, must have the following: (a) a clearly articulated sense o f mission
serving as the focal point o f commitment for all affiliates and the guidepost to
measure its success and make adjustments over time, (b) an individual who truly leads
the organization and creates a culture that enables and motivates the organization to
fulfill its mission, (c) an involved and committed volunteer board that relates dynami­
cally with officers and the marketplace, and (d) an ongoing capacity to attract

36
sufficient financial and human resource. To reinforce their suppositions, they cited
Brian O ’Connell saying:
An effective voluntary organization has a capacity to keep the real mission in
focus no matter how frenzied things become or how great the pressure to move
into new areas. This means that all important decisions are made with the
organization’s ’reason for being’ in the forefront." (p. 5)
Raison d ’etre also keeps for-profit organizations afloat.
The discussion, thus, leads the researcher back to the OD processes as would
be invoked for any organization whether non- or for-profit at the end o f the 20th
century. Forbes and Butterfield (1993) aptly covered the topic with landmark
prescriptions. In their words (Forbes & Butterfield, 1993, pp. 36-42):
Reshaping your association in the image o f the 21st century is not only
possible, it’s essential. . . . Here is how to do it.
1.
Commit your association to quality management by:
a. achieving fitness to standard;
b. achieving fitness to need; and
c. achieving fitness to future needs.
2.
Streamline the policy-making process.
3.
Adopt a system of strategic management.
4.
Empower your staff.
5.
Make peace with your chapters or affiliates.
6.
Reconsider your nonprofit status.
7.
Make your service corporation a cash cow.
8.
Rethink your membership marketing.
9.
Move from confrontation to cooperation.
10.
Stay on the cutting edge of communication technology.
11.
Lead the education revolution.
As Forbes and Butterfield (1993) noted, the leadership (and management) must be
prepared to see beyond today’s crises, and scan the future for social, economic and
political (in the holistic sense, see Bolman & Deal, 1991), technological and environ­
mental opportunities and threats (p. 42). According to Forbes and Butterfield (1993),

37
an organization, after applying these recommendations, would be poised to enter the
new century in a winning position.

Association Management and Organization Effectiveness
On Leadership Theory
The human relations school, with its leading proponent E. Mayo, made lasting
contributions to the literature on leadership. Earlier, T. Parsons’s (1960) social
system model was used to frame organizations in the context o f change and the
environment. "From the human relations perspective, leadership was conceived
primarily as a mechanism for influencing the behavior of individual participants"
(Scott, 1981, p. 87). This perspective was singled out here for its effort directed at
transforming organizations—modifying and improving them as social environments
much as was the purpose o f this work. Moreover, there was evidence that managers
who subscribe to this philosophy tended to:
view her/his workforce as a human resource [and] will attempt to take a
variety o f actions, such as trying to create a general work atmosphere where
subordinates will feel their contributions are noticed and appreciated and
encouraging them to try new ideas so that they can discover the full range of
their talents." (Wilson, Goodall, Jr., and Waagen, 1986, p. 48)
Blau, cited in Scott (1981) said: "Although managerial authority in organizations
contains important leadership elements, its distinctive characteristic. . . is that it is
rooted in the formal powers and sanctions the organization bestows upon managers"
(p. 88). Duly empowered, Scott (1981) concluded, "Managers must expend as much
time and energy in relating to environmental demands as in directing the internal
affairs o f the organization. Balancing and reconciling—as well as buffeting and

38
segregating—are the primary administrative tasks in contemporary organizations
(p. 259).
The managerial responsibilities of a leader thus rested upon the anticipated
charge o f that leader. Implied here is that the organization moved beyond the stage
of rationalizing the need for identified leadership to expedite the managerial functions
shown in Figure 3 as described by Lievegoed (1973).

------------Goal-setting
Policy-making
I— Planning
I— Organization
1nnovation
Control (evaluation)
Figure 8. Managerial functions.

With this schema, Lievegoed (1973) explained that the board may receive proposals
of goals from lower participants but it must ratify them whenever available or
establish new goals for the organization. Next, the board will need to remember its
own policies and carefully develop those that will draw upon the strengths of the
organization and flexibly fit within the totality of the operations. "Once objectives
and policies are known, planning should be no more than a question of technical
implementation. . . . O rganization becomes a supporting service function . . . "
(p. 108). Innovation as a matter o f policy and state of mind is the remuneration of
new pursuits in support of organizational goals (i.e., the suggestion box system).
Finally, control becomes evaluation measuring the value of achievements against the
general policy and other set guidelines (pp. 107-109). Lievegoed (1973) added a
seventh task called integration that provided ". . .a n unfailing watchfulness to see

39
that none o f them falls behind, and to ensure that all six come to life . . . " (p. 109).
Although the focus of the foregoing discussion was on for-profit organizations and
employer-employee relationships, Lievegoed’s description of these functions chal­
lenged participatory goal setting models proposed by theorists for and from the
Northern (technologically advanced) context (P. Drucker, D. M cGregor, etc.). The
approach instead o f the function signaled caution. Wilson, Goodall, J r., and Waagen
(1986) identified other varied approaches to viewing leadership that included the traits
approach, the situational approach, the contingency approach, the behavioral ap­
proach, and the relational approach. Figure 4 charts these varied approaches, their
leading advocates and the year in which they were brought to light, and the theories
that undergirded them.
Missing from the above list, among other leading leadership theories, is Peter
F. Drucker (1954) and his pioneering style of leadership that he called management
by objectives (MBO). Lievegoed (1973) summarized Drucker’s work as one calling
for " . . . management by objectives, assistance, and training [sic]" (p. 139). Manag­
ers employing MBO principles since its inception had gained major influence over
foundation leaders’ (as well as one U.S. president’s) administrative functions. In
short, Drucker (1954) believed that "Self-control is always more efficient than control
from outside. Only [I] can know whether [I] have worked marginally or well" (cited
in Lievegoed, 1973, p. 138). The final analysis found work highly oriented towards
objectives, done by groups in horizontal joint consultation and accounted for by
vertical managers and horizontal process managers who supervise training [sic] and
development (Drucker, 1954). As a result of MBO, the traditional flow-charts of

40
organizational leadership have been revamped causing astonishment among scholars
when they saw straight-line authority or upside down pyramids.

Leadership
Models

Leading
Proponent(s)

The Traits
Approach

Kurt Lewin
Chester Bernard
Charles Bird

The Situational
Approach

Ralph Stogdill
C.W. Downs
T. Pickett

The Contingency
Approach

Fred Fielder
Julia T. Wood

The Behavioral
Approach

John Dewey
B.F. Skinner

The Relational
Approach

A.H. Maslow

Year
Proposed

Major Premises

1939

Effective leaders are naturally endowed
with ability to lead. A leader with
her/his desirable traits, needs to display
social leadership as well as task-orient­
ed leadership.

1974

Leadership requirements are defined by
the situation. Leadership potential may
be drawn from physical, psychological
or functional characteristics as deter­
mined by the environment.

1967

1910

1954

Leader finds the most effective leader­
ship style according to the observable
conditions o f the situation. Leader’s
analysis of the situation depends on
contingencies produced by the environ­
ment.
Every decision must ultimately be
expressed as a behavior. Leader con­
trols group’s overall behavior and
performances by providing stimuli as
reinforcements.
Leader’s needs explain how social
relationships can be coordinated with
organizational goals to maximize per­
formance satisfaction and productivity.

Figure 4 . M ajor leadership frames, proponents and premises.

At this point in this study, the terms manager and leader were used inter­
changeably. The suggestion was that a manager could manifest the traits o f a leader
and vice versa. The leader, almost as a rule, however, would have the vision to
create a culture and the ability to articulate and enforce that vision (B. O ’Connell,
cited in Knauft et al., 1991, p. 15). True leaders, stated O ’Connell, have the

41
. vision to see beyond the horizon, along with sensitivity to really feel human
needs, plus an almost contradictory toughness to build an organization capable of
translating the vision and sensitivity into change" (p. 9). Bennis and Nanus (1985),
pioneers in defining leadership, stated that "An excellent manager can see to it that
work is done productively and efficiently, on schedule, and with a high level of
quality” (p. 92). However, they wrote, it is the leader’s role to help people know
pride and satisfaction with their work while supplying the vision for the organization.
"Great leaders often inspire their followers to high levels o f achievement by showing
them how their work contributes to the worthwhile ends" (Bennis & Nanus, 1985,
p. 93).
The research conducted to arrive at the Knauft et al. (1991) conclusions used a
case study method that was commonly done when analyzing organizations. The aim
was to profile the characteristics o f excellent organizations. Their approach to the
often troublesome and non-generalizable task was to conduct a focus group with
nonprofit executives from which they ascertained that the best leaders:
•
•
•
•
•

Have clear goals and a vision to look beyond the day’s crisis, . . . the
immediate horizon;
Exhibit a willingness to stand up and be shot at;
Have the courage to make extremely tough decisions;
Understand their constituents’ motivations and identify intimately with
their needs and concerns; and
Exhibit a special presence that enables them to motivate and inspire
their constituents, staff, and volunteers beyond the authority conferred
by a title, (p. 9-10)

M oreover, and significantly, whether by symbols or symbolic interaction, the leader
must be able to give meaning to the culture, climate and the general momentum s/he
helped inspire.

42
Managerial Point o f Impact and its Effect on Organizations
Many studies had focused on the leadership traits of the entrepreneur founding
the association. "The entrepreneur like the charismatic leader W eber (1947) de­
scribed, is the earliest and most important creator of the organization’s priorities and
shared assumptions" (Boeker, 1989, p. 389). In a study examining the effects of the
founding events on the evolution o f subunit importance in the semiconductor industry
from 1958 to 1985, Boeker (1989) arrived at major postulates that tentatively ex­
plained the role o f a well-prepared leader (manager) in the success o f an organization
in the marketplace.
He stated that the logic supporting the need for effective specialists providing
managerial services and thereby contributing to organizational success is inherent with
founding processes. Further, the founder often spends a period of time during which
s/he provides the leadership until the foundation gets a suitable foothold in the
marketplace. Within the transnational context (both domestic and international)
organization founders often invest their private holdings (cash, home, car, etc.) to
register, promote and initialize services. During an open discussion among interna­
tional development scholars at Michigan State University, one audience member, in a
moment o f shear enlightenment said: "No wonder why these organizations become a
"cash cow" or means to social security for some founders. Such investments make
pulling away to allow newcomers an opportunity to transform from the original
imprint a hardship."
In a study focused on for-profit organizations (firms), Smith (1967) showed
parallels between the backgrounds o f entrepreneurs (organizers) and the structure of

43
the organizations they formed. H e also noted that " . . . there is a strong tendency for
the structure o f the [firm] to reflect the type of entrepreneur who builds it" (Smith,
1967, p. 93). To further support his argument for the entrepreneur’s influence at
founding, Boeker (1989) cited Kimberly’s 1975 case study of the creation o f a new
medical school. He found that the founder and first dean played a predominant role
in shaping the organization’s initial form and mission: "Call him an entrepreneur, a
leader, or a guru, the fact is that his personality, his dreams, his flaws, and his talents
were largely responsible for the school’s early structure and results" (cited in Boeker,
1989, p. 392). Boeker’s convincing deduction was the likelihood that founding
entrepreneurs would structure their organizations based on their background, values,
experience and beliefs.
Furthermore, that original imprint (foundation) ultimately becomes the basis
for permanence by future leaders. Scott (1983), along with other institutional
theorists, had shown that organizations develop patterns o f authority and standard
operating procedures that over time, take on the status of objective social fact. By
repetitious enactment and unquestioned enforcement, the operation becomes a matter
o f fact and familiarity. One o f those institutional theorists was Salancik (1977) who
explained how organizational members have a natural tendency to become committed
to decisions and strategies previously adopted and persist in courses o f action long
after they have outlived their usefulness, good or bad.
Boeker’s (1989) study of the semiconductor industry set a precedence for the
author’s study. It supported previous views and findings, namely: (a) The charac­
teristics o f existing organizations are a product of routines and repertoires established

44
earlier in their development, (b) founding entrepreneurs create organizations in which
their own functional background is reflected in the greater importance of that same
function in the new organization, and (c) when a new organization is begun a great
number o f internal and external resources must be compiled and coordinated for
greater useability (Boeker 1989). The critical element in Boeker’s (1989) findings
was for individuals in nonprofits, managers and founders alike to strive to accomplish
group ownership o f the organization. There was no one (set of) identifiable owner(s)
of the, say, United Way or Girl Scouts of America or national society for Minorities
in Agriculture, Natural Resources and Related Sciences or 4-H. Ownership was a
variable o f significance but was best pursued along its relationship to sentiments of
commitment to the organization and the extent to which members strive to achieve
consensus on varying values (here called coherence) and issues.
The foregoing led the author to what can be called postmodern or, as was
defined earlier, transformational leadership. Clearly, new patterns for managing
executive leadership had emerged as a result of the following changes (Schmid,
1992):
1.

2.
3.

4.

Turbulent, uncertain and highly politicized environment characterized
by a lack o f and/or diminishing pool of resources, diversifying target
populations, and increasing privatization of public services.
Environmental structural changes causing the organizations’ structure
and the role o f management to change.
Professional and volunteer staff now seeks personal development
professional fulfillment and autonomy while demanding [and rightly so]
to participate in policy and decision making.
Constituencies (donors and stakeholders alike) are also favoring visible,
measurable effects that are significant for the target population, (p. 112113)

45
Schmid (1992) argues that these changes obligate leaders to develop patterns of
management based on the decentralization of authority and an external orientation.
Figure 5 delineated this new paradigm and the application o f its characteristics in this
postmodern era. The literature had answered the question of a need to hire a full­
time and well-prepared professional to ensure organizational effectiveness in the
marketplace. The competition over scarce resources and the volatile environment
insisted that organizations do so. For educational organizations, the recommendation
was equally pressing noting continuing " . . . emphasis on opening the organization to
participation, diversity, conflict reflection, and mistakes" (Patterson, 1993 p. 66).

Characteristic

Centralized Management
and Internal Orientation

Decentralized Manage­
ment and External
Orientation

Centralized/Decentralized
authority

Centralization of authority

Delegation o f authority

Organizational Orientation

Internal orientation

Management o f external envi­
ronment

Perception o f organization’s
goals

Operational efficiency

Organizational effectiveness

Leadership objectives

Satisfaction of the individual’s and
organization’s needs

Attainment of power and con­
trol of resources

Nature of management

Ad hoc, "proficient superficiality"

Comprehensive and strategic

Focusing on the subsystem

Production, maintenance

Adaptation and development

Strategies of adaptation

Domain defensive

Domain offensive

Openness to new options

Relatively little

Considerable

Patterns of leadership

Transactional

T ransformational

Figure 5 . A comparison of management characteristics: Centralized and internal
orientation versus decentralized and external orientation.

46
Organizing Toward Institutionalization (Permanence)
The following section o f the literature review was designed to answer the
question about the correlation between organizational effectiveness and their capacity
as an institution. The author sought to answer the question about the direct effect that
seven psychosocial variables had on the institutionalization o f nonprofit organizations.
First, however, it was important to understand the context within which we were
considering institutionalization or "institution" status. For example, was the construct
being applied as commonly done in laypeople’s terms (i.e., marriage, religion, etc.)
o r did it incorporate concepts related to processes that would ultimately lead to the
development o f social structures and nation building. The latter view more poignantly
characterized the implied aims o f this study. Later, those same descriptors were used
as selection criteria for the three participating cases in this study. A more detailed
description of this application is offered in Chapter Three.
It did not suffice, however, to rest on the existing typologies that frame
institutions. The systems approach generally applied throughout this study did not
permit any such oversimplification. Contingently, an open systems perspective was
needed for institutionalization because o f the dynamism predominating the environ­
ment. Furthermore, such an approach was necessary if the experiences of the
participants suggested a new take on institutionalization process. The ethnographic
researcher must always be open and flexible to experience emerging paradigms before
his/her very own eyes. The anticipation was that if there was a postmodern view on
institutionalization, ethnographic research was going to allow that form to emerge.
Otherwise, if the existing theory on institution building held, it would be held

47
considering the experiences o f the leaders, members, stakeholders and donors of the
organizations participating in the study.
Summary on Institutionalization
Earlier, institution was defined as the result where organizations become
sustainable and permanent fixtures in the environment (suprasystem). There were
many approaches used to frame this concept causing some authors difficulty in
discussing its related issues. Perhaps one of the most common viewpoints on
institutions was that o f Lowie (1948) noting that a person cannot belong to an
institution as s/he does to an association. Lowie’s (1948) definition of organizations
included entities such as the family, the church, and the state. And as most postmod­
ern societies had come to accept, institutions are marriage, law, kinship, property,
religion and education. This perspective was rooted in the time o f its conceptualiza­
tion. Lowie (1948) went further to suggest that the most important sociological
institutions are probably kinship, marriage, law, property, religion, and education.
Other scholars, often with a different take, have since redefined this rhetoric as
deemed appropriate for their day. Theirs is but only one way of looking at institu­
tions. Selznick (1957) for example considers institutionalization as
. . . a process. It is something that happens to an organization over time,
reflecting the organization’s own distinctive history, the people who have been
in it, the groups it embodies and the vested interests they have created, and the
way it has adapted to its environment, (p. 16)
Also included in Selznick’s definition of institutionalization was the process of
translating an organizational mission into an operative client-servicing system involv­
in g ] a series o f critical decisions about the nature of the clientele, the mobilization

48
and allocation o f resources, development of ties with other organizations in the
community, establishment o f a service technology, and the recruitment and training of
personnel. Hasenfeld and English (1974, cited in Hasenfeld, 1983, p. 60) recommend
the leadership get involved in the following critical areas to facilitate institutionaliza­
tion:
1.

2.
3.
5.

Formulation of the service mission o f the organization within the
context o f the opportunities, constraints and contingencies presented by
the environment;
Negotiations and mediation between the organization and external inter­
est groups to gain legitimation and procure resources;
Selection o f the o f the service technologies to carry out the mission of
the organization; and
Initiation and implementation of changes in the organization in response
to environmental exigencies and changing intraorganizational configura­
tions.

Having already defined organizations, this study focused on institutions as the
progression o f organizations that is, otherwise, to establish a stable set of functions up
to such point when they can be considered permanent actors in the marketplace.

Institutionalization as a Condition o f Being Sustainable
At the end o f the 20th century the case for governments in developing
countries aiming to make organizations effective instruments for societal change and
development was beginning to gain momentum among countries faced with the
privatization agenda. Thus the international development literature proves valuable in
understanding the finer points of institutionalization. Melvin G. Blase (1986), for
example, did an exceptionally thorough review and analysis of case studies focusing
on institution building as posited by some leading international agriculture develop­
ment theorists. Scholars within that discipline for a distinct time period had been

49
involved in a phase during which much focus was placed on the issue of institution
building for organizations involved in development management. "While there was
concern for internal efficiency of such organizations, the main emphasis was on their
capability and effectiveness for development purposes" (cited in Blase, 1986, p. 18).
Similar concerns have been expressed for this study. In fact, as Hasenfeld (1974)
reported, studies o f social service agencies suggest that the degree o f institutionaliza­
tion is a major factor in determining its effectiveness.
Blase (1986) credited Milton J. Esman and H.C. Blaise (1966) for the concep­
tualization o f the institutionalization framework to which much o f the literature
referred (p. 68). "Basic to Esman’s approach is the assumption that the efficient
assimilation o f new physical and social technologies requires that the environment
provide supporting values, norms, processes and structures. . ." (p. 69). It was not
clear, however, whether Esman and institution building, as an assumed generic social
process, accounted for those organizations that aspired only to the fulfillment of goals
and objectives (goal attainment). Hasenfeld (1974) referred to studies that suggested
that the degree o f institutionalization of the nonprofit was a major factor in determin­
ing its effectiveness. Duncan (1975) conducted a series of case studies that contribut­
ed to the literature (cited in Blase, 1986, p. 13-17). He maintained that an organiza­
tion could be considered to be institutionalized when there is reasonable evidence that:
1.
2.
3.
4.

It has survived over a period of time, i.e., it continues to do what it
was designed to do;
It has achieved a degree of autonomy in determining its program via
budgetary means or through the influence of its leadership;
It is accepted and valued by its clientele, by the public and by its
cooperators and competitors as a part of the environment; and
It has some impact on the environment, i.e., the changes it sponsors
are tolerated, if not applauded and possibly even copied.

50
Esman et a l.’s (1966, cited in Blase, 1986) basic concepts included institution
variables thought necessary and sufficient to explain the systemic behavior in an
institution. The relationships o f those elements are depicted in Figure 6 (Blase 1986,
p. 69).

Processes

Institution

Linkages:

Institution Variables:
Leadership
Doctrine
Program
Resources
Internal Structure

T ransactions

Enabling linkages
Functional linkages
Normative linkages
Diffused linkages

Figure 6 . The institution building universe.

The institution variables dealing with intrinsic concerns have been the focal
point of the discussion thus far. However, every organization is dependent upon
other sub-system cohorts for its authority and resources making its linkages with other
entities vitally important (Blase, 1986, p. 70-71). The processes are sequential
linkage transactions carried out with other segments of the system. First, according
to Blase (1986), enabling linkages are pursued with entities that control the allocation
of authority and resources the organization needs for survival. Next, functional
linkages are sought with complementary organizations and those which constitute real
or potential competition. Then, Blase (1986) concluded, the system as a whole places
guidelines for institutions through normative linkages in the form of sociocultural
norms, operating rules and regulations that can either act as obstacles to or facilitate
the process o f institution building. An example of this process was the charter

51
granted by Congress to the National Future Farmers of America organization (now
the National FFA) as they approached institution status. "Institutionalization is a
matter o f degree, not o f absolute presence or absence" (cited in Loomis, 1960, p. 36).
To the extent where these norms and values failed to exist, Durkheim (1951)
indicated that a condition called anomie or under-institutionalization can exist that is
characterized by high suicide rates. Finally, Blase (1986) stated that the organization
establishes diffused linkages in the form of relationships with specific institutions and
organizations. This category includes relationships established through news media
and other channels with the public in general "for the crystallization and expression of
individual and small group opinion" (Blase, 1986, p. 71). These findings compelled
the author to note the extent to which these intrinsic and extrinsic processes were
followed by the organizations analyzed in this study.
Framing the Seven-C's of Organizational Sustainability
The following discussion focuses on the modeling and theoretical framework
grounding this study. While many theorists had already made substantial contribu­
tions towards an understanding o f these elements and their individual manifestation in
organizations, the literature failed to assess the intervening results o f these variables
in organizations. Consider once again the naturalistic view o f organizations posited
earlier in this work. The interdependent units in organizations contributing to their
maintenance and survival in dynamic environments required different tools and
pathways to maneuver through the suprasystem. Biological systems, as natural
theorists viewed organizations, did not nor can they successfully operate in a vacuum.
A framework, while not absolute in its presentation, was needed to express how other

52
elements can together impact the effectiveness and sustainability of nonprofits. In the
long run (at least by Chapter Five), the author hoped to arrive at a better understand­
ing o f these variables and others still undetermined and their overall effect on the
institutionalization process.

Communication Within Effective Organizations
A popular thought in the literature of organizational behavior was that commu­
nication is an essential in all organizational processes. It is the glue that holds
organizations together. Through communication, organizational members can
accomplish both individual and organizational goals, implement and respond to
organizational change, coordinate organizational activities, and engage in all organiza­
tionally relevant behaviors (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1993, p. 632). Communication
is one o f the vital processes that breathes life into an organizational structure. Peters
and Waterman (1982) noted the following:
The nature and uses o f communication in the excellent companies are remark­
ably different from those o f their non-excellent peers. The excellent compa­
nies are a vast network o f informal, open communications. The patterns and
intensity cultivate the right people’s getting into contact with each other,
regularly, and the chaotic/anarchic properties o f the system are kept well under
control simply because of the regularity of contact and its nature. . . The
intensity o f communications is unmistakable in the excellent companies.
(p. 121-122).
Their work was to frame excellent companies in the environment as noted earlier and
they saw the merits o f effective communication strategies every time. But what was
it that made communication effective? How was it manifested?
Ivancevich and Matteson (1993) suggest that communication processes contain
five key elements: (a) the com m unicator (oftentimes sender), who initiates the

53
communication; (b) the message, which expresses the purpose o f the communicator;
(c) the m edium , which is the channel or carrier used for transmission; (d) the
receiver, for whom the message is intended; and (e) feedback, an indication to the
communicator that the message was received and understood. According to these
authors, these elements are exercised and move in varying directions throughout the
organization. The most common direction is downward from the positional leader on
to the lower participants o f the organization. Kreps (1990) identified several func­
tions o f the reverse scenario where communication originates from the bottom.
Upward communication does the following:
1.

2.
3.
4.

It provides mangers with feedback about current organizational issues
and problems and information about day-to-day operations that they
need for making decisions about directing the organization.
It is management’s primary source of feedback for determining the
effectiveness of its downward communication.
It relieves members’ tensions by allowing lower-level organization
members to share relevant information with their superiors.
It encourages members’ participation and involvement, thereby enhanc­
ing organizational cohesiveness. (p. 203)

Is upward communication important? The literature cited evidence that the failure of
the United States to prepare for the attack on Pearl Harbor was a communication
error. Higher ranking military intelligence failed to respond to a communication of
the impending attack sent by lower-ranking officers. With the need for effective
communication playing such a major role in organizations, methods to improve the
practice had become important tools for systems OD practitioners.
Zander (1993) proposed the following methods to improve communication
within organizations:
•

Make sure that members know one another’s duties, talents, and
problems so they can efficiently ask for and offer suitable information.

54
•
•
•

•
•

Help members be comfortable with one another by providing opportuni­
ties for them to associate freely at meetings and at special occasions.
Demonstrate to a member that his or her ideas have been useful to
colleagues.
Make differences o f opinions visible to members because if members
are friendly, they will want to develop a common view and talk with
one another to do so.
Promote cooperative relations among members and reducing rivalry
among them.
Explain and demonstrate to members that the organization depends on
open communication among all members and staff, (p. 152-153)

Note that these recommendations cover the four possible directional flows o f commu­
nication which include downward, upward, horizontal and diagonal. Though these
methods also account for interpersonal communication, they inadequately address the
barriers (i.e., noise or static) to effective communication since organizations them­
selves introduce "noise" into human communication (Townsend, 1976).
According to Townsend (1976), the significance of "noise," otherwise known
as sources o f discrepancy, is more pronounced when it affects internal and external .
communication. Clearly less noise is expected during internal communication.
However, noise can occur internally as a result of poor equipment, turbulent internal
environment, actors’ (communicators’) inability to clearly communicate, or hidden
agendas pursued by communicators causing them to misinform, purposely "muffle"
the communication. Furthermore, as Townsend (1976) pointed out, ". . . Even the
best transmitters will fail if the intended recipients are unable and/or unwilling to
receive and act on the messages" (p. 470).
Control Functions for Effective Organizations
The control o f and within organizations was presented in the literature as a
dichotomy enforced formally and informally. Power, authority and legitimacy were

55
the formal elements of control. The informal elements consisted of norms, mores and
folkways. It was well accepted, nevertheless, that all organizations control their
members (Scott, 1981, p. 275). Consistently found in this literature was the general
proposition that control affects participation, loyalty, and organizational productivity
(Boynton & Elitzak, 1982, p. 8). Using that same literature for guidance in their
research on member control o f farmer cooperatives, Boynton and Elitzak (1982)
hypothesized that variation in member perceptions of control can be explained by:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Ease o f access to cooperative personnel;
Quality o f information about the cooperative;
Participation in cooperative activities;
The perceived effectiveness of avenues of influence in the cooperative;
Satisfaction with cooperative performance; and
Status characteristics, (p. 11)

Using Durkheim’s (1951) social concept of anomie mentioned earlier, it was
established that norms and mores served a fundamental function in the preservation
(or in this case, control) o f social systems and their members. Similarly, if organiza­
tions failed to show evidence of a distinctive normative structure and some regular
patterns o f participant behavior, their existence became less discernible. Control in
organizations, Etzioni (1964) argued, is particularly crucial:
The artificial quality of organizations, their high concern with performance,
their tendency to be far more complex than natural units, all make informal
control inadequate and reliance on identification with the job impossible. Most
organizations, most o f the time cannot rely on most o f their participants to
internalize their obligations to carry out their assignments voluntarily, without
additional incentives. Hence, organizations require formally structured
distribution o f rewards and sanctions to support compliance with their norms,
regulations, and orders, (p. 59)
Control, therefore, was manifested in many functions related to all organizations.

56
Power, on the other hand, as defined by Scott (1981), is the potential for
influence based on one person’s ability and willingness to sanction another person by
manipulating rewards and punishments important to the other person (p. 277). The
common design for organizations clearly defines a hierarchy of power indicating one
position’s control over another. The expression of power under those circumstances
is situational and may take many forms. As an example, Etzioni reported that expert
power which may develop in situations where lower participants in an organization,
because o f their access to information (e.g. a secretary) wield enough power to
control certain critical functions and positions within it. Loomis (1960) also called
this form o f power voluntary influence (control). The goal here was to determine the
lines o f demarcation for power within effective organizations and the extent to which
empowerment is valued.

Culture O f and Within Effective Organizations
Organizational culture had become quite popular during the last half of the
20th century and was well documented in the literature of organization development
and organization behavior. The concept was nearly always discussed in light of the
values which undergirded it. In short, values are the criteria applied in selecting the
goals o f behavior (Scott, 1981). As an example, Loomis (1961) stated that "An
interweaving of values and needs is the stuff of culture, is defined by culture, and is
transmitted through the society by the process of social interaction between actors
whose personalities are constituted by the roles socially assigned to them" (p. 22).
Schein (1985) defined culture as:

57
A pattern o f basic assumptions—invented, discovered, or developed by a given
group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and integra­
tion—that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, has to
be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in
relation to their problems, (p. 9)
Ralph Linton’s (1945) widely accepted definition of culture as

. . the configuration

o f learned behavior and results o f behavior whose component elements are shared and
transmitted by the members o f a particular society" (cited in Nord, 1976, p. 188)
prevailed in current practices o f assessing cultural differences in organizations. The
1990s view was in pursuit of diversity and strength in organizations.

Both o f these

vantage points, however, contributed to the prevalence of the concept. M ore was
known about the former than the latter. Throughout the 20th century these issues
emerged as important because the U.S. society was founded on the tenets o f democra­
cy which called for the inclusion of all peoples in every facet o f the system. M ore­
over, the geographic and demographic trends indicated that organizations would be
well-advised to capitalize on the strengths and benefits tenable from different cultures.
As Morgan (1986) wrote:
One o f the easiest ways o f appreciating the nature o f culture and subculture is
simply to observe the day-to-day functioning of a group or organization to
which one belongs, as if one were an outsider. . . . The characteristics of the
culture being observed will gradually become evident as one becomes aware of
the patterns o f interaction between individuals, the language that is used, the
images, the themes explored in conversation, and the various rituals o f daily
routine. And as one explores the rationale for these aspects of culture, one
usually finds that there are sound historical explanations for the ways that
things are done. (p. 121)
This study was designed to attempt to discern the extent to which these cultures
evolved as a matter o f history or a reaction to the increasing cultures shaping our
environment. Though difficult, there was adequate information about the nature of

58
culture that could contribute to the exercise. The organizational culture was often
value-based. Peters and Waterman (1982) gave prime direction, noting that "The
[leader] not only creates the rational and tangible aspects o f organizations such as
structure and technology, but also is the creator of symbols and ideologies, language,
beliefs, rituals and myths" (p. 104). Thus, the way leaders end up controlling
culture, often subtly, includes language and slogans, legends and models, systems and
sanctions, as well as self-modeling (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1993, p. 487). The
foregoing suggested that history alone would not frame the organization’s culture.
According to Ivancevich and Matteson (1993), other key segments o f organizational
culture included: (a) the ways o f structuring and why; (b) the ways of communicating
and why; (c) the way that space, as a resource, is allocated and why; (d) the way the
business o f the organization is conducted (e.g. meetings); (e) the nature and purpose
of the organization; (f) the nature o f the publicly affirmed role models (spokespeople);
and (g) the way that organizational effectiveness and efficiency are defined. There
were still other possible segments which might have determined relationships of these
variables with the overall pursuit o f the organization.
Nord (1976) cited W eber’s explanation for the rise of capitalism as a relation­
ship between economic growth and cultural motivation. In The Protestant Ethic and
the Spirit o f Capitalism. Weber maintained that the value orientation of Protestantism
was instrumental in producing behavior conducive to the accumulation o f capital
necessary for industrial development (cited in Nord, 1976, p. 203). One other
relationship worth mentioning is that of culture and commitment.

59
Capital Use and Formation Within Effective Organizations
The literature on financing nonprofits was linked directly to the previous
reports on the environment and its effects on nonprofits. "Because human service
organizations are dependent on external donors to finance their operations, they are
highly dependent on their environment, and consequently, readily affected by changes
in it" (Hasenfeld, 1983, p. 9). Weber (1947) defined the elements to which all these
organizations subscribe or somehow adhere as the following:
1.

2.

3.
4.
5.

Authority is legally and rationally based and is distributed hierarchi­
cally—explains the urgency to formally register organizations and file
articles o f incorporation with the State among other formalities;
Responsibilities for operating decisions are delegated to the various
work units-explaining the creation and use of committees and volunteer
work teams in many organizations;
Roles and positions are specialized—explaining the detailed offices,
positions and responsibilities;
Many activities are formalized and standardized—same as above; and
The rules governing the behavior of staff are applied universallyexplaining fairness and equity.

Missing from the above list is the fact that they were all pursuing the same philan­
thropic dollar. In 1994, over 80% of the total contribution to nonprofits came from
the private sector or individuals making donations. Consequently, capital was initially
viewed as the middle or enabling link to the other elements o f institutionalization
because it (human capital as volunteers and financial capital) was viewed as the
lifeblood o f all organizations.
Hasenfeld (1983) citing Brager and Holloway (1978) listed the three sources of
instability affecting the acquisition of funds by nonprofits:
1.
2.
3.

The shifting availability of funds;
The conditions associated with their use; and
The dependence o f the organization on funding sources.

60
One o f the better known tactics o f organizations as an adjustment to this instability
involved goal adjustments or undergoing program innovations in pursuit of the money
train. The results o f these financially induced innovations were often quite obvious
even leading to the demise of some organizations. The literature suggested that the
organization’s purpose, mission and goals ought to buffer against the financial pull of
new foundation initiatives or government program announcements announced through
Requests for Proposals (more commonly known as RFPs in the nonprofit community).
Many agreed on the merits o f government funding and the historical "tree of
money" appeal to nonprofits. As Rosenbaum (1981) noted, government funding
allowed agencies and organizations to expand their operation to meet a broader range
o f needs and for services to be delivered more efficiently by taking advantage of
existing networks that [may] have been built up over many years. However, there
continued to be problems of conflict over specific accountability requirements,
payment schedules, "de-obligating" funds [author’s personal experience], and increas­
ing bureaucratic hoops. Moreover, Rosenbaum (1981) reported, the RFPs and
subsequent grants affect the basic management and governance of voluntary institu­
tions and, in turn, their ability to continue serving in an independent and innovative
role. Compounding matters was the U.S. Department of Treasury’s, Financial
Management Service report (January 1993) recommending the General Accounting
Office, as a matter o f law, require agencies and grant recipients to adhere to specific
performance measures. A Performance Measurement Guide (November 1993) was
subsequently issued pursuant to the Government Performance and Results Act of
1993. Essentially if the leader was not careful and judicious in the pursuit o f capital

61
s/he could place the organization in an unrelenting relationship with the federal
government twice removed from the stakeholders it started out serving.
The foregoing was intended to recapitulate the realities o f capital formation in
nonprofits as opposed to deterring leaders away from program innovation and
proposal development exercises that could bring in needed revenues. The caution
however was that proposals ought to sell ideas not organizations. The minute they
start doing the latter, it was advised that organizational leaders should rethink the
approach and overall intention for responding to the RFP. As a safeguard to the
effects o f overly consuming government grants, Rosenbaum (1981) recommended the
following:
1.

2.

3.

4.

Voluntary organizations should establish and use administrative services
consortia to provide the professional services necessary for dealing with
government contracts and grants.
Voluntary organizations should refuse to accept grants and contracts
which impose overly-burdensome bureaucratic accountability require­
ments.
Voluntary organizations should not accept government funds until and
unless Boards of Directors make a conscious affirmative decision that
the government-supported program is compatible with the central
mission o f the organization.
The institutions o f the voluntary sector acting through their sub-sector
associations and umbrella organizations, should develop and adhere to
minimum standards o f accessibility and openness that will assure ade­
quate clientele and donor participation in the planning, delivery and
evaluation o f services, (p. 88)

Consensus on Values (Coherence') Within Effective Organizations
Another important reported continuum contributing to the analysis of effective­
ness o f organizations is the degree o f consensus that is a measure of the degree to
which the organization is integrated as a collectivity (Etzioni, 1961, p. 128). The
context was set with Dewey’s (1947) note that "Community building involves

62
communication. Consensus demands it." (p. 5). Etzioni (1961), while comparing
complex organizations, offered a thorough typology of consensus-spheres that were
consistent with his descriptors o f organization types. The spheres Etzioni (1961)
identified are the following:
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

Consensus on general values—values that are customary to the organi­
zation in question, such as societal or community values, often include
ultimate values.
Consensus on the organizational goals—the general business of the
organization.
Consensus on means, policies or tactics—the degree of consensus about
what means, policies or tactics are to be used.
Consensus on participation in the organization—for nonprofit organiza­
tions (the focus o f this study), this kind of consensus is reflected in
agreement about the frequency o f participation.
Consensus on performance obligations—the degree of consensus about
the duties and responsibilities organization members are to carry out.
Consensus on cognitive perspectives—concurrence about facts; assumes
a common language, a shared frame of reference, (p. 128-130).

Effective operation was the ultimate aim o f organizations and thereby the end sought
through consensus. The question remained, however; consensus on what?
The literature was replete with studies on the role o f consensus on values.
Drawing from the " . . . historical ethos of religious charity and philanthropy," which
was first characterized by the Native Americans at Plymouth Rock, Bush (1992)
wrote, the early nonprofit managers operated in a manner that encouraged volunteerism and collective engagement to resolve problems facing their communities (Bush,
1992, p. 391-392). As a point of contention, some "apply-side" [author’s terminolo­
gy] scholars o f OD theory were suggesting for nonprofit managers to emulate the
competition-based management approach inherent in private sector theory and practice
(i.e., Dabbs, 1991; Schilit, 1990). This view was equally refuted. In his scholarly

63
work "Survival of the Nonprofit Spirit in a For-Profit World" Bush (1992) argued
that:
administration in the voluntary sector should be mission based and mission
driven; be grounded in the historical traditions of altruism, compassion and
philanthropy; remain sensitive to the key value of volunteerism and to the
phenomenon o f the volunteers themselves; continue to act as mediating
structures between the individual, the community, and the public and private
organizations o f modem society; emphasize cooperation and collaboration over
conflict and competition in the administration of sector organizations; and
develop and practice a type of leadership compatible with the values and
differences inherent in the independent sector, (p. 391)
Rather than myopic, this view appears most utopian. Instead o f mission based,
Bolman and Deal (1991) had made convincing arguments that administration and
organizations should be values based, mission driven.
According to Scott (1974), there was another vantage point to understanding
consensus in nonprofits.

He stated that "The values of conservative theory corre­

spond to American utilitarian beliefs that hold material growth to efficacious, material
abundance to be limitless, and consensus to be the natural manner o f human relation­
ships" (p. 244). Speaking further on this set of values, he submitted that:
These values are interlaced through the paradigmatic structure o f contemporary
management theory and practice in that organization growth creates organiza­
tional abundance, or surplus, which is used by management to buy off internal
consensus from the potentially conflicting interest group segments that compete
for resources in organizations (Scott, 1974, p. 244-245).
According to the author, consensus depended on management’s success in creating
organizational surpluses (abundance) through growth to share among the stakeholders.
Therein lay the cruxes o f the paradigmatic values that controlled the classical and
systems models that have served as theoretical grounding throughout this study.

64
A most provocative contribution was made by Houghland, Jr. and Christenson,
(1982) regarding this intricately woven construct. Their approach was to look at
values as "economical sets o f high-level guidance systems." Their reason was
because " . . . values are likely to influence individuals’ decisions about the organiza­
tions in which they will participate, and organizational participation, in turn, is likely
to reinforce or to modify member’s values" (Houghland, Jr. & Christenson, 1982, p.
9). The American values they identified were categorized under social and personal
values. The social values (Houghland, Jr. & Christenson, 1982) were the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Moral integrity
Patriotism
Political democracy
Helping others
National progress
Equality (racial) [sic]
Equality (sexual), (p. 11)

The personal values (Houghland, Jr. & Christenson, 1982) were the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Personal freedom
Work
Being practical and efficient
Achievement
Material comfort
Leisure
Individualism, (p. 11)

They measured these values across several types o f organizations ranging from farms
to labor unions using aggregate-level data that limited their ability to make definitive
statements about the effects of organizational experience on values. The implications
o f their findings applied to new organization entrepreneurs looking for a base of
support from the environment and targeting those groups who share the values o f the
potential nonprofit [significant assuming the values-based organization orientation].

65
Schutz (1956) reported that another important aspect of consensus involves
decision-making. At the onset, the organization must decide how it will arrive to
final decisions. Customarily and by Robert’s Rule, majority and unanimity make up
the modus operandi. "If consensus is not required," Schutz (1956) explained,
"decisions can often be made more quickly, but delay will probably result, due to the
unacknowledged members having various ways of resisting once the decision has been
made and the action is undertaken" (p. 552). Consensus essentially means that
everyone in a group feels that the group understands her/his position and feelings
about a decision. Schutz (1956) expertly handled this explanation with the following
example:
Let us suppose that a group, perhaps a committee, has gotten together with the
task o f deciding a particular issue. The issue has come to a vote, and the vote
is fairly decisive, say six to two. The two people in the minority, however,
do not really feel that they have had an opportunity to express their feelings
about the issue. Although they are committed to go along with the decision,
they have an inner reluctance to do so. This covert reluctance may manifest
itself in any o f the symptoms already mentioned. Perhaps the most common
symptom is a loss o f interest, although this situation could be expected to give
rise to any o f them. (p. 552)
Intuitively clear, yet he continued:
Another good indicator o f lack of consensus is any attempt by a member to
postpone a decision by further discussion or by further action o f some kind.
Comments like, "What is it we are voting on?" or "W eren’t we supposed to
discuss something else first?" or "I have no objection to that, but . . ." a ll
indicate that the individual is not yet ready to cast a positive vote for a given
decision. S/he probably has no objection that ought to be brought out into the
open and discussed. [After] allowing the objector to raise his/her point for
discussion . . . the objector will be more likely to go along with the final
decision--or may eventually carry the day because s/he reflected] some
objections that other people had but were not aware of. (p. 552-553)
These studies pointed out that when in pursuit of organizational effectiveness,
discussion o f previously "covert factors" is extremely important. Transformational

66
leadership suggested the identification and proper handling of these opportunities
should they arise in the emerging institution.

Compliance Within Effective Organizations
One of the most prominent contributions to the sociology of organizations was
the Etzioni (1961) typology of organizations. In his famed work A Comparative
Analysis of Complex Organizations. Etzioni (1961) categorized organizations by the
types o f compliance systems they use. According to Etzioni (1961) normative
organizations use moral control to influence the behavior of their members (e.g.,
religious organizations, voluntary associations). Utilitarian organizations use remu­
neration (reward) as a basis for control of their members (e.g. factories, corpora­
tions). Finally, coercive organizations are those that use force or coercion to control
their members (e.g. prisons, armies). In some circles compliance was said to occur
when an individual accepts influence from another person or from a group because
s/he hopes to achieve a favorable reaction from others (Kelman, 1961, cited in Nord,
1976, p. 513). Nord (1976) succinctly dissected these typologies with the following:
The compliance system used by the organization also raises distinctive struc­
tural issues that must be resolved. A normative compliance system is highly
dependent on the ability of the staff to develop effective interpersonal relations
with the clients and to serve as models for identification. A utilitarian system
requires that the organization controls the necessary resources that are desired
by the client. A coercive compliance system must ensure that the client will
not escape the system, or develop mechanisms to counteract and neutralize the
coercive measures, (p.7)
Etzioni’s (1961) purported to describe not only the behavior o f and within organiza­
tions but member commitment as well.

67
Pearce (1983), however, working with a sample of 101 respondents from 14
service organizations, developed a series of hypotheses that failed to support many of
the hypotheses drawn from Etzioni’s (1961) work. In fact, she concludes,

. . it

appears as if Etzioni’s (1961) compliance-based classification o f organizations is not
as useful in understanding internal influence processes as had been hoped" (Pearce,
1983, p. 28). With t = 3.31 and a p-value < .0001 one-tail, the first hypothesis
derived from Etzioni (1961) that "Those holding positions of formal authority in
utilitarian organizations are more influential than their counterparts in normative
organizations. . ." was not supported (Pearce, 1983, p. 23, 27). H er poignant
question was, "Why are members’ reports contrary to the hypothesis drawn from
Etzioni’s (1961) theory, and laymen’s [sic] understanding o f these organizational
types?" (p. 27) Pearce’s (1983) study and that of other scholars continued to raise
reservations about the relevance o f Etzioni’s (1961) compliance systems concept.
While not directly testing his typology in this study, it was interesting to note and
explore the applications o f the compliance concept to the institutionalization process.
Commitment Within Effective Organizations
In framing effective organizations, there was a concern in the literature for the
level o f commitment expressed by organizational members to its mission and purpose.
For this study commitment was defined as a sense of identification, involvement, and
loyalty expressed by a member toward the organization. As Gouldner (1958, March)
noted, "Every social system, the modem organization included, requires that its
members have some degree o f loyalty to it as a distinctive social structure. This
would seem all the more likely if the organization operates in a threatening

68
environment" (cited in Glaser, 1968, p. 164). He further maintained that " . . .
organizations presumably place less stress on loyalty when their mood is one o f selfconfidence and security, and when they are on the rise vis-£-vis their competitors"
(Gouldner, March 1958 cited in Glaser, 1968, p. 165). Thus, in a more general
sense, organizational commitment refers to the nature of the relationship of the
member to the system as a whole (Grusky, 1966 cited in Glaser, 1968, p. 188).
Administratively, early nonprofit founders and managers " . . . ran organiza­
tions in a manner best characterized by spiritual and religious fervor, evangelical
hope, and deep faith that commitment to mission would preserve the organization both
in good times and bad" (Bush, 1992, p. 391). Yet this study began with questions
about whether commitment alone could carry or propel a nonprofit through and
beyond the turbulence o f the environment. Intuitively, commitment could have been
suggested as the cornerstone o f the elements needed for institutionalization. This
intuition could have held as truth on the simple fact that commitment was a humanis­
tic resource. Paradoxically, however materialistic (capital, supplies, office space,
etc.) resources were also needed to breathe life into organization functions and
general maintenance—but which was more important?
Maslow’s (1954) needs motivation theory was applicable as factors determin­
ing the level o f commitment were considered. "Convergence o f belief and reality
would tend to strengthen commitment, while divergence should cause a decrease in
commitment" (Grusky, 1966 cited in Glaser, 1968, p. 188). Glaser (1968) cited
Grusky’s (1966) work on career mobility which yielded the following conclusions:
1.

In general, strength o f organizational commitment was positively
associated with seniority;

69
2.
3.

4.
5.

Managers who experienced maximum career mobility were generally
more strongly committed to the organization than were less managers;
Managers who were moderately mobile did not show any uniformity in
their pattern o f commitment that distinguished them from the less
mobile managers; and in eight out o f nine comparisons,
Managers with a high school education showed a stronger commitment
to the organization than did managers with college experience; and
Female managers were more strongly committed than male managers
on each o f the indexes, (pp. 189-190)

Other myths (similar to those debunked by the Glaser study) continued to pervade the
literature and cloud the picture that could be had about nonprofits. As a result o f the
exploration into these and other elements, it was perceived that a more holistic
assessment o f the processes toward institutionalization could be developed.

Chapter Summary
This chapter began with a review and analysis of the literature on organiza­
tions and organization development. First the process was framed using the systems
approach. Applying systems thinking to organization studies gave the advantage of
experiencing (or at least pursuing) the entirety of the organization. Organizations
were discussed and described as open systems. Therefore, the systems approach
permitted the view o f organizations as multiple overlapping sub-systems mutually
pursuing growth and development. Still, during this framing o f nonprofits, a unique
take on the significance of organizations and organizing and what they mean to the
suprasystem was offered. Organizations were shown as integral stages in the
development o f social systems.
The literature review was a significant component of this study. It was to be
applied in generating information and answering key questions raised about nonprof­
its. One o f those questions dealt with the nature of the relationships between effective

70
organizations and the environment. A full section of the chapter dealt with the major
findings identified during the review. Again, the systems approach was applied. The
significance was pronounced by the "living" characteristics often assigned to nonprof­
its. Through this review process, the going prescriptions for dealing with the
turbulence and dynamism of the environment were brought to light.
Also accomplished within this chapter was a contingency view on organization­
al effectiveness. The contingency view of organizations is tangential to the systems
concept by seeking to mitigate the interrelationships among subsystems as well as
between the organization and its environment. A holistic framing of organizational
effectiveness was needed to complement the general sweeping nature o f the study.
This portion o f the literature was relatively dense and made manageable by applying
the contingency view. A functional framework was offered that captures four
contingency models of organizational effectiveness.
The questions about program adjustments and the impact felt by managers and
leaders within the study were also resolved by the review of literature. Specific
recommendations were made for emerging organizations concerned program and
policy adjustments, over time, to cope with the constant market fluctuations. Along
those same lines, the leadership role and functions of management throughout this
process were made clear for aspiring OD practitioners. For example, the impact
enjoyed by founding members was reviewed so to better prepare future conceptualizers o f nonprofits.
Having fulfilled the one objective (Objective 1) directly linked to the review of
literature, a detailed discussion on the institutionalization paradigms(s) was presented.

71
From the literature, some seven specific psychosocial variables were identified as
being significant to the institutionalization process. A summary on institutionalization
was presented to contextualize the existing paradigm. Each of the psychosocial
variables were described in detail to measure the extent to which they could collec­
tively contribute to the institutionalization of nonprofits. The researcher, by using
ethnographic methods to arrive at the experiences and understand the meaning made
by the organization, intended to generate theory that would add considerable depth to
the existing body o f knowledge on OD.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

In education as well as other areas of social practice, [the] case study is a
legitimate methodological option for researchers to consider when designing a
study. . . . The qualitative case study is a particularly suitable methodology for
dealing with critical problems of practice and extending the knowledge base of
various aspects o f education.
—Sharan B. Merriam, 1988

Methodology
The major purpose of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive description of
the procedures used to frame organizations as institutions in the marketplace. The
theoretical construct supporting this process will help answer some questions raised
for this research. Moreover, the reviewed literature guided the methodology and
principles used for collecting and analyzing the data.
The entry statement to this chapter is a relic o f the old paradigm o f qualitative
studies. Almost every effort o f that sort, especially for doctoral dissertations, had to
"legitimize" the selection o f qualitative over quantitative methods o f data collection
and subsequent analysis. During this research, a new paradigm had emerged relative
to organizational research that suggested otherwise. In a summarizing note, Patton
(1980) addressed this emerging paradigm principle, concluding that:
The issues o f selecting methods should no longer be one o f the dominant
paradigm versus the alternative paradigm, o f experimental designs with
quantitative measurement versus holistic-inductive designs based on qualitative
measurement. The debate and competition between paradigms should be

72

73
replaced by a new paradigm—a paradigm of choices. The paradigm of choices
recognizes that different methods are appropriate for different situations.
(p. 20)
The broad acceptance o f this new paradigm was due in part to the growing applica­
tions o f qualitative studies and the increasing concurrent use of both qualitative and
quantitative methodologies. Technological advances had enabled researchers to
quantify beyond the naturally quantifiable discrete variables. In organizational studies
an example o f simultaneous application was in the treatment o f continuous variables
like commitment and compliance that could take on any value along a scale or
continuum. Organizational inquiry was replete with these types o f truth patterns. In
fact, the much discussed dynamism of organizations in many cases could have
potentially lead to many cases o f heteroscedasticity where there was no uniformity of
the data distribution on a scattergram. This condition was critical in quantitative
efforts to develop new theory. Theory formation in qualitative studies, however, rely
more on the experiences and the meanings given to specific phenomena.

Research Design
The major question pursued for this study was posed to generate theory on
associations’ founding, management, effectiveness, and permanence. Other salient
questions also were expected to guide the theory development process. Qualitative
methods were used to generate the data that would help develop a theory closely
applicable to other organizations. As an attempt to clarify and give meaning to
naturally occurring phenomena, qualitative designs were open-ended and interpreta­
tive. Case studies, field studies, and occasional field experiments had been used to
analyze effectiveness [of organizations] (Lawler et al., 1985). Qualitative research

74
was more concerned with the meaning of what is observed. Since organizations are
so complex, the following characteristics of qualitative research, explained by Van
Maanen (1983), proved it ideal for studying organizations:
1.
2.

3.
4.

5.

6.

A nalytical induction. Qualitative research begins with the close-up,
firsthand inspection o f organizational life.
Proxim ity. Researchers desire to witness firsthand what is being
studied. If the application of rewards is what is being studied, the re­
searcher would want to observe episodes of reward distribution.
O rd in a ry behavior. The topics of research interest should be ordi­
nary, normal, routine behaviors.
D escriptive em phasis. Qualitative research seeks descriptions for what
is occurring in any given place and time. The aim is to disclose and
reveal, not merely to order data and to predict.
S h rin k in g variance. Qualitative research is geared toward the expla­
nation o f similarity and coherence. Greater emphasis is placed on
commonality and on things shared in organizational settings than on
things not shared.
E nlighten th e consum er. The consumer o f qualitative research could
be a manager, a member or a donor. A major objective is to enlighten
without confusing him/her. This enlightenment is accomplished by
providing commentary that is coherent and logically persuasive.
(p. 255-56)

Using these inherent characteristics of qualitative research, a procedural guide was
developed as a means to collect the data. Figure 7 is an outline of that procedure.
The study began with telephone conversations to assess the willingness of
certain organizations to participate in the study. Then, consent forms, sample of
which can be found in Appendix A, were sent to potential participants in this study.
One o f the critical steps in this study was identifying the organizations whose experi­
ences would be the crux o f this study. There was a need to secure willing participa­
tion from three organizations that represented three program areas of the Michigan
State University Extension (MSUE). There were more of these nonprofits serving the
agriculture and natural resources programs. The Michigan Agricultural Stewardship

75
Induction and Introduction
Meet with MSU Extension to identify participants
Establish criteria for participation and selection
Preliminary contact with three organizations’ leaders

Participant Observation and Interviews
Telephone contact with organization representatives
Letter and consent form mailed to each participant
Introductory meeting with participating organizations
Participate in organization meetings as an observer
Interview organization stakeholders and beneficiaries
Interview users and clients of the organizations

Sharing and Verifying Results
Invite feedback to transcripts from interviewees
Invite feedback to analytical summary from interviewees
Follow-up on summaries and other feedback
Submit final analysis for validation and more feedback
Insert revised and validated write-up in document
Figure 7 . Data collection procedure.

Association was ultimately selected to represent that constituency. One organization
had to represent the community and economic development component o f MSUE.
Tuscola 2001 was selected as the nonprofit serving that program area. Finally, a
third organization had to represent the children, youth and families program area of
Michigan State Extension. Youth Development Corporation, Incorporated, with its
headquarters in Lansing, MI was chosen to represent that program area. Those three
organizations were analyzed in depth through this case study.

76
Selection of Study Participants
Glaser and Strauss (1967) outlined a theoretical sampling procedure for
selecting participants. This process includes data and material collection, analysis for
patterns, formulation o f new questions, and follow-up on new sources of information
based on the information (knowledge) being acquired. Particular attention was placed
on the three organizations ultimately selected to respond to the major questions of this
study. Sample questions used to conduct the formal interviews are presented in
Appendix B. The institutions’ respective leaders were each sent a consent form. It
detailed and described to the readers the scope of the study, as well as the rights o f its
participants. Such consent not only satisfied University policies for proper use of
human subjects but also it introduced the study so as to acquaint future respondents
with the process. In qualitative research, particularly those that use interviews, the
researcher is advantaged by developing a relationship of familiarity and comfort with
potential interviewees. The resulting informality facilitates inquiry by probing with
questions omitted from those planned or specific to the particular organization being
studied.
The literature review allowed key discoveries about past methodologies that
had been applied to the study o f organizational effectiveness. However, cases of
organizations pursuing institutionalization were underrepresented. From the dialogue
in Chapter Two, one can surmise that such coverage would continue to be scant
considering the general perception held about nonprofits and the "achievement" of
institution status. It was almost as if such status was looked upon as the natural
processes o f aging wine and rum—the higher the vintage, the better the quality. Good

77
reasons existed for this metaphor. Most institution building scholars included an age
(number o f years in existence) variable in their definition o f institutionalization.
Thus, as the organization naturally arrived to that specified "age," it was considered
an institution. Meanwhile, that same literature contained references where institution­
alization was linked to effectiveness. It did not suggest that those organizations were
possibly operating along a continuum consisting of time, effectiveness, years in
operation, member commitment, among other intervening variables. This study had
the implicit goal to do that.
Though grounded in sociological, psychological, education and organization
theories, this qualitative study’s relationship to agricultural extension, particularly
Extension (MSUE), and the roles individuals in the profession had served and could
continue to play in the institutionalization of nonprofits, was especially followed.
Pursuing this broad understanding, a few MSU Extension personnel were contacted to
identify organizations that may have received assistance from MSUE during concep­
tualization. While they personally were not involved, they were able to cite several
organizations that began through empowerment efforts by MSUE agents. During this
process, a provocatively leading recommendation was offered and adopted. To the
extent that this study was an Extension Education effort, it was suggested that the
cases represent the main Extension program areas (i.e., agriculture and natural
resources; community and economic development; and children, youth and families).
Now settled on the population, the vacation and travel schedules o f key informants
hampered the continuous work of identifying "ideal" participants. A new method was
invoked.

78
The advent o f computing technology was slowly and effectively infiltrating the
normal operations o f nonprofits. Many organizations, not-for-profits and nonprofits
alike, had explored and continued to participate as wayfarers "on the information
superhighway." MSU Extension’s CEENet and the Pennsylvania State University’s
Penn Pages were but two examples of the growing number of organizations communi­
cating internally with their members and externally with their stakeholders, beneficia­
ries and suppliers (donors). As a past and adjunct member of the former organiza­
tion, the researcher drafted a memo—shown in Appendix C—that was circulated
instantaneously to the complete list of 640 MSU Extension faculty and staff both in
residence and off-campus. Responses to the request for potential participants identi­
fied the Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA), the Youth Develop­
ment Corporation (YDC) and Tuscola 2001 among many other appropriate and
eligible organizations. A detailed description of these organizations is included in this
chapter.
In selecting these organizations, the researcher focused on organizations that
were said to (a) have received initial or founding support from MSUE, (b) represent­
ed one o f the Extension program areas, (c) were nonprofit in nature, and (d) showed
signs o f permanence (could have been considered as an institution). Using the
aforementioned approaches, the researcher also applied Glaser and Strauss’ (1967)
recommendation to select the population as a group of people with a great likelihood
to provide information related to the problem area. The success o f this study,
therefore, was based on their willingness to allow the careful study of their effective
organizations.

79
Number of Study Participants
Three organizations were selected. Two instruments were applied in collecting
the data for this study. The researcher—the ’human instrument’ in constructivist
terminology—was necessary and became familiar with the purposes o f the organization
and comfortable with the humanistic machinations within the nonprofit (Bogdan &
Biklen, 1992; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The structured instrument shown in Appendix
B was used to probe for the opinions of leaders, emerging leaders and members/users
o f the institutions. Prior to contacting those individuals within and in the operating
environment o f the institutions two in-depth conversations (interviews) were conducted
with two key officials from each organization. These discussions were conducted
prior to the formal interviews. They were used to frame the study and clarify aspects
that were, up until that point, unclear. As the literature on ethnographic studies
suggested, a summary form shown in Appendix D was used to frame the context of
the meetings.
The detailed review of the effectiveness concept from the review o f literature
led to the identification of the types of individuals who would be needed as respon­
dents for this study. Those individuals did prove useful. After discriminating from
organizational and societal goals for the organization, it was important to identify
those individuals or organizations from the environment, with previous working
relationships, who could corroborate the notion of the organization’s effectiveness.
During the initial contact, this information about users and beneficiaries in the
environment was solicited from the contact person. Out of those, three referrals from

80
each organization were pursued. In addition, two individuals (members) from each
organization were selected to participate in face to face interviews with the researcher.

Description of Participating Organizations
A clear frame o f reference was needed during discussions about nonprofits.
The notion that organizations vary from one another was almost clichd and had been
thoroughly covered by this author. Still important was the understanding o f contextu­
al matters and the perspective from which the emerging theories arose. Perspective in
ethnographic explorations was significant. The researcher had often battled the cries
against subjectivity as if there was ever "real," "full," or "complete" objectivity in
any research-qualitative or otherwise. The very selection of the research topic was a
subjective act. In deference to this concern, the author secured the consent from the
organization leaders participating to give details about their organization, their
history, purpose, mission, status, major contributions and plans for the future. Most
o f this information was readily available from the organization’s respective constitu­
tion and by-laws, articles o f incorporation, informational brochures, advertisements,
project papers and/or annual reports. Each selected organization manifested unique
characteristics and functions that otherwise made them ideal for participation in the
study. The following sections describe the participating organizations, their formation
and raison d ’etre.

Tuscola 2001. Inc.
W hat began as a project during the spring of 1989 soon gave way to a
concerted, county-wide effort to promote Tuscola County, Michigan. Tuscola 2001,

81
Inc. is the result o f a partnership among the Tuscola County Cooperative Extension
(now Michigan State University Extension Tuscola County), Economic Development
Corporation and Tuscola County Board of Commissioners. Later Great Lakes Junior
College joined the alliance to begin developing an organization and a broader plan
involving community commitment. The impetus for their organizing effort was easily
explained by the growing incidence of stifling rural communities (small towns) or the
rapid demise o f the same across the U.S. landscape.
The organization was, according to news reports from the local print media
". . . a county wide effort on the part of leaders, residents, employers, students and
concerned citizens dedicated to making Tuscola County a better place to live, work
and play." Noting MSUE’s early involvement, the organization developed a "Blue­
print for Action" based on community assets, needs and goals. The document listed
their anticipated goals for economic, educational and employment goals by the year
2001 (hence the name Tuscola 2001). The organization founders began by building
seven core committees—agriculture and natural resources, government, business and
personal services, education, manufacturing, tourism and retail—and then contacting
and coalescing county wide leaders in business, education, government and other areas
within the community.
Tuscola 2001, Inc. operated under section 501 (c)(6) o f the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) Code governing organizations. This nonprofit determination was
granted to business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of
trade, professional football leagues and others with related activities. These organiza­
tions were primarily supported by membership dues and other income from activities

82
substantially related to its exempt purpose. Their contributions to the organizations
were not exempted by the IRS but were deductible as trade or business expenses if
ordinary and necessary in the conduct o f the taxpayer’s business.
Although the organization could have permissibly engaged in any amount of
legislative activity germane to the common business interests of Tuscola 2001
members, it continued to choose not to do so. The organization maintained an
apolitical posture citing the following call to action:
Tuscola 2001, Inc. will improve the quality of life for the residents of our
county by making this a better place to raise a family, locate a business, get an
education, find a job or spend [our] leisure time. The projects of Tuscola
2001, Inc. are designed to enhance the business climate o f the county, advance
the employability of our workforce, create new leadership and make the most
o f [our] recreational resources for the future.
These items related to the appropriate labeling and registration with the IRS and state
governing boards were significant for all organizations. Tuscola 2001 was registered
in the State o f Michigan, headquartered in an office in Caro, Michigan, engaged in
(holistic—according to the author) community and economic development and recog­
nized by and held a charter from the Governor of Michigan.
By most accounts, the literature suggested Tuscola 2001, Inc. was an institu­
tion. The time variable was missing here and conspicuously so as it would be
presented later during theory formulation processes inherent within this work. A
more important reason, however, for showcasing effective organizations such as this
one (and the other two in this work) is the implication to other communities and
leaders who will view this work as a "guide" and implement strategies similar to
those o f Tuscola 2001, for example, hoping to arrive at similar effectiveness and
community building. After all, as Bogdan and Biklen (1992) point out, it is common

83
that "Some qualitative researchers hope to empower their research informants and
encourage them to gain control over their experiences in their analyses of them"
(p. 49).
Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association.
In the area o f agriculture and natural resources, many organizations could have
been selected for this study. Agricultural organizations dated back to the 1600s in the
U.S. Some organizations like the Grange, Farm Bureau, Cotton Clubs, New Farmers
of America and Future Farmers o f America (FFA) had either withstood the changes
in the environment, changed their scope and purpose, ceased to exist or reinvented
themselves to better relate to the new demands of the marketplace. As an example,
the FFA was no longer an all-boy organization of future American farmers; it had
become the National FFA organization. Beyond the fact that previous research had
adequately covered the relevance and contributions of these organizations to the
profession, postmodern inquirers had to answer a different set o f questions about the
nature o f agriculture and natural resource organizations in general. Some of these
questions have been raised in this study. A review o f the Michigan Agricultural
Stewardship Association (MASA) permitted a different level of analysis o f the
evolving dynamics o f organizational life, organizational theory and our general
understanding about organizations.
The Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association was a statewide, nonprofit
educational organization committed to the development and use of sustainable farming
systems. The nonprofit was officially formed in January 1991 by a group of innova­
tive farmers and agricultural professionals. Many o f those professionals and others

84
who had used the services of MASA considered it an effective organization and thus
the reason for its inclusion in this study. Individually, some members had the view
that the organization would " . . . become known as the environmentally concerned
organization in agriculture, but one concerned about economics as well" (Personal
Interview with member from MASA). Some others aspired to develop a network of
members doing on-farm research and talking to each other about farm practices that
were sustainable and that work for them. For a successful network to function,
people were needed to have sufficient local participation to better express conditions
to which the varying communities could relate.
Another reason for including MASA in this study stemmed from one of its key
missions which was to form a new and collaborative relationship with the scientists
and extension specialists at the state land grant university. MSU Extension played a
prominent role in the start-up o f this organization; now one of its key administrators
(as o f January 1995) was on the Advisory Board of the organization. At first glance
the researcher was able to determine the relationship between the established and
emerging organization.
From its informative newsletters and other bulletin statements, the mission of
MASA indicated that the organization worked to: (a) Increase awareness and educate
the public on sustainable agriculture issues; (b) promote research that will determine
the sustainability o f alternative farming systems; (c) aid in the development o f sustain­
able agricultural techniques for use on Michigan’s Farms and assist in their adoption
by Michigan Farmers; and (d) encourage cooperation between producers, agribusi­
ness, researchers and government agencies for the development o f sustainable farming

85
systems. Soil conservation, water quality and wildlife issues were also concerns of
MASA members. The organization was driven by the belief that Michigan producers
needed access to practical, readily usable information on sustainable farming systems.
The organization conducted field days, workshops and farmer meetings throughout the
year to educate its members about ways to reduce some of their negative ecological
impacts associated with agricultural production and to farm more profitably. The
organization participated in the establishment of on-farm demonstration and research
plots, designed by farmers and agricultural professionals to compare conventional and
alternative production methods.

Youth Development Corporation. Inc.
Many different results emerged from the Model Cities-City Demonstration
Agency Program o f the early ’70s. Some of the related activities dissipated with the
same momentum that originated them. The reality of their circumstance was that new
organizations, projects and ideas continually predominated the environment. Often
the intent of the founding members was to mitigate the conditions of a turbulent
environment, with increasing challenges and opportunities, and a diminishing pool of
resources. Related to that intention was the hope that elements within the environ­
ment could be bundled to maintain some of the more quality programs started.
One o f these programs serving the Lansing, Michigan Tri-County area youths
was the Youth Development Corporation, Incorporated (YDC). Model Cities phased
out in 1975 yet YDC continued to serve young adults from three Lansing area
counties, Ingham, Eaton, and Clinton, the governmental unit o f East Lansing and the
city o f Lansing. The nonprofit endured with the following mission: Youth

86
Development Corporation will assist youth [sic] with their self-development by
providing guidance towards a meaningful self-reliant future. Survival, however, was
achieved despite dramatic decreases in funding from a maximum of $1.5 million
dollars (budgeted for 3 years) and 40 employed staff to a current (as o f FY 19941995) budget o f $196,000 and six employees (four full- and two part-time), and
approximately 20 volunteers. Interns from Michigan State University and other local
colleges made up a large percentage of the volunteers, all of whom contributed to the
work o f the Capital Area United Way participating association.
The nonprofit was identified primarily as a delinquency prevention program
with supplemental funds from Housing, Education, and Welfare Departments and the
Law Enforcement Administrative Assistance program. Over the course o f the years
and in pursuit o f its mission, YDC had provided outreach, youth councils and
seminars, youth employment and other efforts to better serve its constituents. It also
had attempted different collaborative arrangements to stay active and relevant to real
needs by securing moneys within the areas o f employment, career exploration and
counseling, delinquency, diversion and prevention, individual and family counseling,
and information and referral systems.
Selecting YDC to participate in the study followed the same procedure that
yielded the identification o f Tuscola 2001, Inc. and MAS A. One o f the field staff
representative o f MSUE responded to the electronic inquiry (via CEENet) with
information about an organization she had worked with when she was employed in the
Lansing area. She even thought the organization "by now" was defunct since they
always had had financial problems. The researcher then decided to include this

87
organization in the sample as one that made many attempts towards institutionalization
and failed. YDC was expected to shed some light on what not to do in pursuit of
effectiveness and permanence. In addition to the perception that the M SUE employee
was involved with YDC’s founding, the organization was viewed as a failed attempt
to contrast the other two cases. Regardless of its standing in the marketplace, the
organization represented one o f the Extension program areas (Children, Youth and
Families).
The researcher became informed about the status and characteristics o f the
organization after the first introductory telephone conversation. First, the contact
person revealed that the organization was still operating albeit under stressful Financial
conditions. Further inquiry proved that the organization maintained and continued to
pursue the same mission since its founding; it had done so for 21 years to date. The
leaders o f the organization were considered talented, dedicated and respected
individuals within their respective communities. According to the "traditional"
definition o f institution outlined in the literature and covered exhaustively in Chapter
Two o f this work, YDC was an institutionalized organization as proven by the City of
Lansing budget. Now, fascinated with this typology and its expression across the
three cases in this study, the researcher set out to deconstruct the institutionalization
paradigm. The YDC experiences were viewed as crucial elements to reframing the
institution building paradigm.

Data Collection Methods
One o f the more popular complaints about case studies, the methodology of
choice for this study, was the difficulty to generalize from one case to another.

In

88
reality, could we ever arrive at a case representative of all organizations? The
problem lies in the very notion o f generalizing to other case studies. As Yin (1984)
noted, "An analyst should try to generalize findings to ’theory,’ analogous to the way
a scientist generalizes from experimental results to theory" (p. 39). Toward this end,
data was collected and then used to develop a theory relative to the phenomena and
circumstances surrounding the organization. Even for respondents who indicated they
had no previous experience with organization theory, it was most fascinating to
witness the application and development of theory (some o f which was already
expressed) in the review of literature.
Data collection was pursued using in-depth personal interviews, document
analyses, archival data, statistics and participant observation. During the personal
interviews, it was important to note the sentiments of the members as well as that of
the users o f the organization. The question guiding this line of inquiry was the extent
o f the relativistic inquiry on institutionalization. This method was consistent with
postmodern thought which suggested that you can only know something from a
certain position. Note that the postmodernists emphasized interpretation and writing
as central features o f research (Van Maanen, 1988).

Use o f Interviews in Organization Research
Interviews are a satisfactory way to get at people’s understanding of their own
behavior, or their definitions o f the situation. The open-ended interview enables the
maximization o f respondents’ rich breadth of experience. Further, this method
enables the researcher to reformulate the problem and modify questions and categories

89
during the course o f the investigation. Bogdan and Biklen (1992) adequately ex­
plained the use o f interviews in qualitative research saying that:
. . . interviews can be used in two ways. They may be the dominant strategy
for data collection, or they may be employed in conjunction with participant
observation, document analysis, or other techniques. In all of these situations
the interview is used to gather descriptive data in the subjects’ own words so
that the researcher can develop insights on how subjects interpret some piece
o f [their] world, (p. 96)
Merriam (1988) highlights another way that interviews could be used. Key infor­
mants must be identified. She recites and emphasizes that the interviewer convey the
idea that early interviews are part of a preliminary exploration that will lead to
identifying key informants. As identified by Taylor and Bogdan (1984) the following
issues were discussed with the interviewees prior to every interview:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The researcher’s motives and intentions and reasons for conducting the
investigations.
The protection of respondents through the use o f pseudonyms.
Deciding who has final say over the study’s content.
Reward for the organization (i.e., in-kind service, consultation, etc., if
requested).
Logistics with regard to time, place, and number of interviews to be
scheduled en total, (p. 87-88)

The literature reported all of the foregoing usually goes well assuming key character­
istics o f the interviewer. For example, Merriam (1988) quoting from Whyte (1982)
reiterated:
Like the therapist, the research interviewer listens more than he [she] talks,
and listens with a sympathetic and lively interest. He finds it helpful occa­
sionally to rephrase and reflect back to the informant what he seems to be
expressing and to summarize the remarks as a check on understanding, (cited
on p. 75)
This particular researcher had undergone interviewing exercises prior to this case
study through some classroom and fieldwork. This experience was important

90
considering, as Merriam (1988) noted, the particular interaction between the inter­
viewer and respondent will determine the type of data extracted (p. 75).
The full interview process lasted from 31 March 1995, when the initial
telephone conversations were held to schedule first interviews, to 31 May 1995 when
the last comments were required from respondents for final validation. The last
respondent’s validated comments actually arrived on 8 June 1995 slightly extending
the anticipated schedule for this study. Throughout that time span, the researcher
participated as an observer in board meetings, consulted with individuals whom the
interviewees identified as knowledgeable users who could support their notion of
institutionalization, and reviewed an extensive list of documents (secondary archival
data) so to remain consistent with this deconstructionist (or postmodern) approach to
theory generation. The author had learned through literature review and experience
that from this method, writings in the form of text in papers, manuscripts, articles,
and books cannot be taken for granted and do become objects to study (Van Maanen,
1988). Each interview lasted for a minimum of 1 hour and 30 minutes. Most o f the
participants were great conversationalists and so willing to share their experiences
with someone (particularly the author) whom they believed was able to help them give
meaning to their experiences as members or leaders within organizations.

Other Qualitative Methods in Organization Research
Using archival data, researching material artifacts, interpreting language, and
using on-site participation to research stories and myths are popular qualitative
procedures (Van Maanen, Dabbs, Jr. & Faulkner, 1982). The goal during
this research was to find evidence or recommendations of the characteristics that

91
institutions show. Organizational criteria, such as adaptability, coordination, growth,
use o f the environment, and flexibility, among other possible characteristics, were
particularly sought. Previous experiences and repeated references in the literature
substantiated this expectation. Leadership standards and practices were among those
attributes closely monitored while conducting this investigation, since the effects of
organizational leadership were so well-documented in the literature (Berkowitz, 1987;
Dyson & Dyson, 1989; Mayer, 1981; Rich, 1980; Williams, 1985).

Participant Observation
Negotiating the role of a participating observer is often complex during
ethnographic studies. The researcher must become a "natural" part o f the scene while
hoping to gain full cooperation and trust from the individuals being studied. Bogdan
and Biklen (1992) summarized the intricacies of this method, saying:
Becoming a researcher means internalizing the research goal while collecting
data in the field. As you conduct research you participate with the subjects in
various ways. You joke with them and behave sociably in many ways. You
may even help them perform their duties. You do these things, but always for
the purpose o f promoting your research goals. You carry with you an imagi­
nary sign. . . . The sign says, "My primary purpose in being here is to collect
data. How does what I am doing relate to that goal?" If what you are doing
does not relate to collecting data, you should take that as a warning that you
may be slipping out o f your research role. (p. 90)
In the pursuit o f "meaning" created in part by the participants, one important bit of
good advice was discretion. Bogdan and Biklen (1992) suggested that even the field
notes taken ought to convey no damaging information in case someone else finds the
notes. Further, they suggested for the notes should be collected conspicuously so as
not to "spook" the subjects.

92
Review o f Official. Internal and External Documents
Items such as memos, minutes from meetings, newsletters, policy documents,
proposals, codes o f ethics, dossiers, students’ records, statements o f philosophy, and
news releases were materials that could be viewed by postmodern ethnographic
researchers as "data" (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 135-136). From these papers, the
researcher was able to probe into the "official perspective" on the organization and to
identify communication patterns existing within the nonprofit. The significance of
this writing was expressed as part of the deconstructionist paradigm. And equally
significant, external communication in the form o f newsletters, memos to donors,
clients and collaborators in the environment, news releases, annual reports and other
public statements, were important in determining the official perspective held by the
organization. For this study, communication was an essential variable. Exactly how
that communication manifested in the organization was going to be discerned from
these and other materials made available to the researcher. Guba and Lincoln (1981)
citing Clark (1967) listed the following questions one might ask prior to using
documents:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

What is the history of the document?
How did it come into my hands?
What guarantee is there that it is what it pretends to be?
Is the document complete, as originally constructed?
Has it been tampered with or edited?
If the document is genuine, under what circumstances and for what
purposes was it produced?
Who was/is the author?
What was [s/he] trying to accomplish? For whom was the document
intended?
What were the maker’s source of information?
What was or is the maker’s bias?
To what extent was the writer likely to want to tell the truth?

93
•

Do other documents exist that might shed additional light on the same
story, event project, program, context? If so, are they available,
accessible? Who holds them? (p. 238-239)

Still, like any other source o f data, documents had their limitations and advantages.
They could have been prepared without a research agenda in mind, and for that same
reason they would be non-reactive—that is, they would not be affected by the research
process.
Data Analysis
One of the forms that was applied to generate related theory was the Glaser
and Strauss (1967) constant comparative method--a research design for multidata
sources. Defined by Glaser and Strauss (1967), the constant comparative method:
. . . is not designed (as methods o f quantitative analysis are) to guarantee that
two analysts working independently with the same data will achieve the same
results; it is designed to allow, with discipline, for some of the vagueness and
flexibility that aid the creative generation of theory, (p. 103)
The steps o f the constant comparative method as identified by Glaser (1978) include
the following: (a) Begin collecting the data; (b) look for key issues, recurrent events,
or activities in the data that become categories of focus; (c) collect data that provide
many incidents o f the categories o f focus with an eye to seeing the diversity o f the
dimensions under the categories; (d) write about the categories you are exploring, at­
tempting to describe and account for all the incidents you have in your data while
continually searching for new incidents; (e) work with the data and emerging model to
discover biased social processes and relationships; and (f) engage in sampling, coding,
and writing as the analysis focuses on the core categories. Though these may appear
as steps, Glaser (1978) does well to note that these "steps" go on all at once. As an

94
As an example o f this particular study, the data was collected and analyzed simulta­
neously. Ongoing analysis proved most helpful in that it enabled the pursuit of
clarification on emerging themes and theories otherwise unanticipated. Ongoing
analysis was applied in this study for instances where the data supported the theory
that was originally framed by the researcher categorically or as a part of the literature
review process in Chapter Two. The constant comparative proved most useful since
this study was one o f multiple-site participant observation. Bogdan and Biklen (1992)
conclude with the following remarks:
While we recommend holding back attempts at full-fledged, ongoing analysis,
some analysis must take place during data collection. Without it, the data
collection has no direction; thus the data you collect may not be substantial
enough to accomplish analysis later. Although you usually collect more data
than you need or can ever use, a focus will keep the task manageable, (p. 154)
Echoing this view, McCracken (1988) stated that:
Qualitative methods are most useful and powerful when they are used to
discover how the respondent sees the world. This objective o f the method
makes it essential that testimony be elicited in as unobtrusive, nondirective
manner as possible. . . . It is important that the investigator allow the respon­
dent to tell his or her own story in his or her own terms. However, it is just
as important that the interviewer exercise some control over the interview.
Qualitative data are almost always extraordinarily abundant. Every qualitative
interview is, potentially, a Pandora’s box. Every qualitative researcher is,
potentially, the hapless victim of a shapeless inquiry. The scholar who does
not control these data will surely sink without a trace, (cited in Vandenberg,
1991, p. 63)
The aims and practices o f this study considered these possible points faibles and
confirmed the same through accepted validation techniques both during and after
analysis.
The researcher invoked the recommendation to conduct analysis in the field.
Bogdan and Biklen (1992) suggest doing so ". . . t o leave you [the researcher] in

95
good stead to do the final analysis . . . " after leaving the field (p. 154). Speaking to
would-be researchers, they made the following suggestions regarding field analysis:
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Force yourself to make decisions that narrow the study. Begin data
collection within broad areas and narrow down the scope of data
collecting to the more specific.
Force yourself to make decisions concerning the type o f study you want
to accomplish. Qualitative studies have many alternate applications.
Develop analytic questions. These are important because they give
focus to data collection and help organize it as you proceed.
Plan data-collection sessions in light of what you find in previous
observation. Decide if you want to spend more time at one place then
another after asking yourself, "What is it that I do not yet know?"
W rite many "observer’s comments" about ideas you generate. Record
important insights that come to you during data collection before losing
them.
W rite memos to yourself about what you are learning. These memos
can provide a time to reflect on issues raised in the setting and how
they relate to larger theoretical, methodological, and substantive issues.
Try out ideas and themes on subjects. Key informants and subjects
who are unusually perceptive and articulate can be used as resources in
preliminary analysis.
Begin exploring the literature while you are in the field. In addition to
reading in the substantive area o f your study, just reading widely,
especially in qualitative studies in unrelated fields, can help in analysis.
Play with metaphors, analogies and concepts. Expand the analytic
horizons by trying to raise concrete relations and happenings observed
in a particular setting to a higher level of abstraction.
Use visual devices. Drawings, graphs, models, graphics and charts
help you visualize complexities that are difficult to grasp with words.
(p. 154-164)

These suggestions, in the most part, were followed during this research and proved
most helpful to arrive at a theory or set of theories based on the realities of felt
experiences and the meaning given by the principal actors in the cases.

Application of Data Coding Processes
Coding is best described as a process that involves separating out relevant,
meaningful portions or segments o f data; identifying topics, themes, or categories;

96
labeling the segments appropriately; and re-assembling all the disjointed portions
according to the topic, theme or category (Tesch, 1990, p. 115-116). Strauss and
Corbin (1990) covered this topic best by identifying the varying levels of coding as
open, axial, and selective. The aim through coding is not the reduction o f data but
rather a taxonomic exercise which may end up increasing the amount o f information
available for analysis. Most researchers, however, use codes as shorthand devices to
label, separate, compile, and organize data. After sorting through many observations,
they employed a coding mechanism that fits the data, rather than forcing the data into
the codes. And since the constant comparative method strongly emphasizes process,
the categories developed in this study were not treated separately as single topics.
Rather, as treated by qualitative theorists, they were woven together into a processual
analysis through which they could make educated speculations and give meaning to
the experiences and activities occurring around them.

Open Coding
Basic building blocks o f theory are identified and labeled through this process
(Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 74). Categories of the data are developed using key
concepts and thoughts in light o f the magnitude of the phenomena being studied. This
coding can be and were in the form of memos or observer comments made systemati­
cally while coding, beginning with the first interviews or observations.

Axial Coding
Using action/interaction strategies within the data, connections can be made
between categories consistent with the established coding paradigm. The notes or

97
data are assembled and further categorized to discriminate them from other categories.
This process may end up bridging several categories which is a significant develop­
ment for the grounded theorist. Going through these final stages during axial coding
allowed the researcher to reveal relationships between categories that otherwise would
not have been noticed.

Selective Coding
A "core category" is selected to which other categories are related. This
method explains only a portion o f the constant comparative approach. For as basic to
that approach is the discovery o f new theory through analysis rather than verification
o f preexisting theories. The danger in this coding process is that it restricts the range
o f relationships certain categories naturally have. The experienced researcher is
better positioned to code selectively than the novice. One question is, "What if the
wrong code is selected as the anchor code for the remaining categories?"
In all, two procedures are integral components of the coding process during
data collection and analysis. The first is making comparisons; the other is asking
questions. The former is a continual process where meaningful data segments are
compared with others to determine ways in which the segments are alike or different.
This process is what Glaser and Strauss (1967) called the "constant comparative
method." This method was applied with a procedural cohort—asking questions.
Appropriate labels and categories (earlier referred to as a taxonomic process) were
used in conjunction with the many levels of possible questions (i.e., who, what,
when, how, why, etc.) during continued comparisons.

98
This research began with open coding where key words and short notes written
in the margin o f the transcripted interview enabled continuing analysis. The research­
er also generated notes during the informal and unstructured conversations which
preceded every interview. Doing so was considered most important since it was, at
best, an expression o f the enthusiasm of the interviewees. The researcher sought to
make "light chat" to develop trust with the interviewees. However, in a "let’s-getdown-to-business" mode, the interviewees almost as a rule quickly began discussing
their experience as organization members/users/directors/donors or whatever role they
were serving at the time. Salient themes from both formal and unstructured interac­
tions were later drawn from the data or record and collated into the table shown in
Appendix E. This axial codification was most useful in that it lead to major discover­
ies otherwise observed during the initial stages of this study. While on a pilot run of
the methodology and formal "guiding" set of questions, uncoded discoveries were
significant albeit inconclusive. A method for bringing closure and asserting the
significantly relevant meaning to the findings was made possible by coding the
validated responses.

Outsourcing Results
Once the data were collected, the content assessed by the respondent and
analyzed by the researcher(s), the final step was to distribute this information to
participants in the study. This process was finalized after the researcher reviewed the
transcripts and crossmatched the recorded comments with those transcribed to make
sure that it read well (e.g., without Ah’s and Umm’s and insignificantly natural
colloquiums, like, "you know"). This process was coined outsourcing and borrowed

99
from the business terminologies used to express a return back to the source or any
interaction with originating points o f information or service. The preference for this
term was related to the "massaging" which took place during the collection, interpre­
tation (meaning making) and analysis of the data. Both parties were involved and
made significant contributions to the resultant truth.
The careful ethnographer is mindful, as was the case during this exercise, to
allow the respondents (subjects) to express the truths about their experiences and
circumstances for a better understanding of those experiences. Being mindful also
meant noting pauses (though they were edited from the transcripts for space/paper
conservation and better readability), interruptions, room layout, respondent’s behav­
ior, mood, appearance and conduct, and the effective use of time. The field notes
expressed such observations and mindfulness.

Reliability and Validity
W hile reliability is most concerned with the replicability of research findings,
validity is concerned with the accuracy of these findings (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982).
In general, as Bogdan and Biklen (1992) note, qualitative researchers do not exactly
share the expectation held by quantitative researchers that there will be consistency in
results o f observations made by different or the same researcher over time (p. 48).
Imagine the scenario o f an ethnographic replication of an organizational study already
described as a dynamic process. The information collected, as in these cases, are
highly contextual, multifaceted and in a high state of flux. Still, as Merriam (1988)
observes, "Reliability and validity are inextricably linked in the conduct of research"
(p. 171).

100
There are concerns with comprehensiveness and accuracy o f the data. For
researchers in studies like this one, "Reliability is a fit between what they record as
data and what actually occurs in the setting under study" (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992,
p. 48). As it relates to organizational studies, Bogdan and Biklen’s (1992) observa­
tion may be even more poignant considering the turbulence in the environment o f
nonprofits. Reliability thus becomes a meaningful pursuit only to the extent that the
time factor can remain constant. A follow-up researcher would need to re-create the
conditions o f the environment, as well as the other elements existing within the
organization (at the exact proportions) to fairly assess reliability in a follow-up study.
Hence, rather than asking revisionists to arrive to similar results, Lincoln and Guba
(1985) suggest thinking about the "dependability" or "consistency" of the results
obtained from the data.
The step-by step rationale accounting of the decisions made during this study
and a careful audit trail describing how the data were collected and key decisions
made during this study, all of which appear in this work, speak to the pursuit of
"consistency" by the researcher. For further authentication, the interviewees were
asked for permission to tape record their responses. By using the tape recorder, the
researcher was better able to show verbatim comments from respondents (Appendix
F) and thereby control for internal reliability. This process also speaks to Lincoln
and Guba’s (1985) prescription for gaining and assuring credibility. The researcher
made a point to establish a good rapport with the respondents and to maintain eye
contact as one exercise to show trust and trustworthiness.

101
One approach to controlling validity was through restatements o f responses
throughout the interviews. These restatements were strategically positioned during the
dialogue to prevent interfering with or distracting the respondents. Restatements were
effective for confirmation o f meaning. Those restatements also contributed in part to
a member validation process that served as a means to reduce threats o f validity.
Also note that by triangulation, both internal validity and reliability were controlled
by the researcher. Distinct efforts were made to use multiple sources of data—namely
interviews, document reviews, member and donor perceptions and literature reviews.
The researcher assumed the history and maturation of the respondents naturally
contributed to the status o f the institutions to date. Data collection methods helped
reduce the possible distortions that also threatened internal validity. M oreover, the
nature o f the questions asked during the interview were such that any o f the organiza­
tional leaders could answer if one or more of the identified respondents was to
become unavailable. The potentiality of such an outcome was considerably high when
dealing with nonprofits, considering the high turnover ratio of members and "leaders"
often mandated by the charters o f the organizations.
Researchers o f organizations (usually as ethnographers) often show less
attention to threats of external validity. This threat addresses the extent to which
research findings can be generalized and compared across other groups. It is
expected that the themes and experiences, while unique in their own right, may appeal
to other organizational entities on a similar course. Merriam (1988) cited Stake
(1978, p. 6) observing that:
When explanation, prepositional knowledge, and law are the aims of an
inquiry, the case study will be at a disadvantage. When the aims are

102
understanding, extension of experience, and increase in conviction in that
which is shown, the disadvantage disappears, (p. 173)
Further, as Erickson (1986) suggested,

. . The primary concern of qualitative

research is particularizability, rather than generalizability" (p. 130). And so was the
aim o f this study. Similar to other recent research studies on organizations, real-life
examples were deemed instrumental in finding key factors contributing to the effec­
tiveness and institutionalization o f voluntary associations.
After undergoing the careful processes for collecting the data and the details of
interaction with the many respondents/informants for this study, one key point must
be mentioned. The assumptions made during this study and those that will be made
during any replication effort are crucial to the implementation o f this and other
organizational studies. As an experienced interviewer, it was possible that the
research could have brought to light the salient experiences to make the new prescrip­
tions for the end users of this research. The ethical choice, however, was to continue
the exploration to secure a full representation of a diverse range of perspectives.
Once again, there was a general underlying assumption that all organization are not
alike and are motivated by different sets of criteria.

Chapter Summary
In this chapter, a broad overview on the methods and procedures used to
conduct the case studies was presented. Unlike qualitative studies o f the past, when
many researchers used this approach sparingly, this study did not present a republica­
tion o f the valor in that method. The chapter began with a discussion about the
research design and the plans that would be pursued to complete data collection.

103
Participants in the case study and the selection process applied to invite them to
participate as co-researchers was the next section of this chapter. Then a section on
the number o f participants followed by a short overview describing the three partici­
pating organizations was presented. Next, the methods for collecting the data were
outlined. As part o f that outline, there was a discussion on the use of interviews and
their relevance to this type of research. Presenting this section did not preclude the
inclusion of other qualitative methods for collecting data. After data collection, the
analysis, coding and validation processes were discussed. These components were the
final areas covered in this chapter. The outsourcing results section was intended as
method to validate the data collected from the interviewees. The reliability and
validity sections o f this chapter were used to discuss how these major threats to the
study were addressed.

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS FROM THE CASES-DESCRIPTION AND THEORY

As I look back on my life’s work, I’m probably most proud o f having helped
to create a company that by virtue of its values, practices and success has had
a tremendous impact on the way companies are managed around the world.
And I am particularly proud that I ’m leaving behind an ongoing organization
that can live on as a role model long after I ’m gone.
—William R. Hewlett, Co-founder,
Hewlett-Packard Company, 1990
Cited in Built to Last, 1994

Our commitment must be to continue the vitality of this company—its growth
in physical terms and also its growth as an institution—so that this company,
this institution, will last through another 150 years. Indeed, so it will last
through the ages.
—John G. Smale, Former CEO,
Procter & Gamble, 1986
Cited in Built to Last, 1994

Findings From the Cases: Description and Theory
The principal concern, consistent with the purpose o f this study, was to
identify the characteristics o f effective and institutionalized organizations initially
sponsored by the Michigan State University Extension as a basis for modeling by
newly-inspired organizations. A systems approach was used to present the findings:
(a) the characteristics o f the three cases were specified; (b) the areas of inquiry stated
as research questions in Chapter One were explored and discussed; and (c) the
emergent models and theories from the exploration of the cases were compared and

104

105
presented. The findings are now presented in several sections. The first section
provides a general overview about the development of this study and the choice of
methodology used to generate theory about the phenomena described in Chapter One.
The next section provides a comparison of the findings from the three cases by
highlighting the major themes that emerged from the data collected. This section is
further segmented taxonomically as means to validate the relevance o f the themes that
emerged. The third section explores related theories on the phenomena identified for
this study (e.g., organizational effectiveness, institutionalization, organizational
administration, etc.) and presents a relational compendium on those models. Finally,
in the fourth section, a model that emerged from the constant comparative method
generated from the data collected, is presented.
Up to this point, specific areas of inquiry guided the research and thus enabled
the construction o f a directly related theory. Furthermore, such guides allowed the
researcher(s) to develop a conceptual framework that led to the institutionalization
paradigm described in the fourth section of this chapter. The early posture of this
study was for the new model to be recommendable for emerging organizations.
Those specific areas o f inquiry were the following: (a) How do organizations
establish the necessary procedures to deal with change(s) in the marketplace? (b) how
does effectiveness contribute to the institutionalization of nonprofits? and (c) how do
the following Seven-C’s—Communication, Control, Culture, Commitment, Capital,
Compliance, and Consensus on values (Coherence)—contribute to the institutional­
ization o f the nonprofits identified for this study? As part of the final analysis,
various concepts were brought together with the researcher(s)’ validated intuitions,

106
observations, and experiences to give further meaning or a more applied sense to this
study.
Qualitative Studies and the Concept of Meaning
It became clear at first conceptualization of this study that meaning or sense
making was an important attribute of studies on organizations and organizational
effectiveness. The clarifying moment was during preliminary investigations by the
researcher with a nonprofit based in Quito, Ecuador known as Fundagro. In 1986,
the development-focused non-governmental organization (NGO—the transnational
counterpart to nonprofits) received a grant of approximately $6,000,000 from the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to carry out their mission
throughout the mostly agrarian country. [Ecuador had a population o f 12 million
inhabitants and was a member of the Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC)]. As a result of changing programmatic thrusts within USAID, the organiza­
tion shifted its resource base and relied on returns on investments, strategic financing
and focused programming to compensate for the discontinued external support. To
them, this situation was "a critical incident" and "a turbulence in the environment"
precipitated by changes.
Meanwhile, the association had already positioned itself as a mainstay in the
Ecuadorian suprasystem and the transnational network of NGOs. Within 9 years of
operation, it had pursued and realized the "traditional" "standards" for institutional­
ization. Fundagro’s claim to institution status was corroborated by: (a) a six-story
building proximately juxtapositioned to the Ministry of Agriculture with the name
"Fundagro" on the edifice, (b) a large (albeit decreasing) network o f paid employees,

107
(c) a satisfied and cooperating citizenry deeming the NGO’s purpose legitimate, (d) a
growing number o f similar NGOs forming throughout the developing world to
facilitate their own country’s development in addition to internal spin-off NGOs, (e) a
functioning international office in the U.S. (Miami, FL) further signifying the strength
o f their spin-off ideas and validation by the community at-large, (f) a significantly
powerful pool o f board members and organizational leaders who are decision-makers
in varying sectors of the suprasystem, and, most importantly, (h) a mission statement
with many built-in implications for longevity and growth. All these were accom­
plished close to the often repeated 10-year period for institution status. Upon
discovery o f this phenomenon the questiosn were, "W hat’s going on here?" and
"What is the implication to the existing meaning o f the institutionalization of non­
profits from this development?" Other questions emerged and were related to the
NGO’s ability to modify its programs to cope with the changes in the environment
and survive well beyond the imminent termination of support from large sponsors like
USAID.

Nuances of Qualitative Research
The discovery with Fundagro called for further review and positional (in terms
o f theory) reassessment. This early inclination to "switch" is consistent with the
nature o f qualitative research; data collection and analysis are simultaneous activities
in qualitative research (Merriam, 1988, p. 119). The descriptive nature of qualitative
research often leads to such discoveries. Merriam (1988) continued the discussion on
this characteristic o f ethnographies thusly:

108
Analysis begins with the first interview, the first observation, the first docu­
ment read. Emerging insights, hunches, and tentative hypotheses direct the
next phase o f data collection, which in turn leads to refinement or reformula­
tion o f one’s questions, and so on. It is an interactive process through which
the investigator is concerned with producing believable and trustworthy
findings. Unlike experimental designs where validity and reliability are
accounted for before the investigation, rigor in a qualitative case study derives
from the researcher’s presence, the nature of the interaction between research­
er and participants, the triangulation of data, the interpretation of perceptions,
and rich, thick description, (p. 119-120)
Therefore, it was not uncommon to arrive at new themes or develop new thrusts for
the study after preliminary findings. The importance of organizational meaning was
becoming relatively clear yet there was no available literature to explain this phenom­
enon. Intuitively, it was thought that the organization was so well situated within the
Ecuadorian environment that it symbolized effectiveness and would naturally impart a
positive meaning to the rest of the development community. This intuition later came
to mean validation by the community for legitimacy as an institution.
At the time o f the discovery, it meant leaving Ecuador after nearly 3 months,
returning to Michigan State University to regroup, further reviewing the literature,
and reframing the points o f inquiry for the case study. After all, one o f the more
intriguing observations from the early discoveries was whether an organizational case
study was "really" going to allow the generation of new theory(ies). The question
was made significant from the understanding of meaning or sense making in organiza­
tions. Bogdan and Bilken (1992) elaborated on the concept of meaning with the
following:
How do people negotiate meaning? How do certain terms and labels come to
be applied? How do certain notions come to be taken as part o f what we
know as "common sense"? What is the natural history o f the activity or events
under study? . . . [Qualitative researchers] do not search out data or evidence
to prove or disprove hypotheses they hold before entering the study; rather,

109
the abstractions are built as the particulars that have been gathered are grouped
together. . . . The question is not whether a particular piece of research is or
is not absolutely qualitative; rather it is an issue of degree, (p. 29-32)
Concomitantly, the same was being said about institutionalization—it is not whether an
organization is an institution, it is a matter of its location on the institutionalization
continuum. Such a statement was made possible by the ongoing and analysis-in-thefield mode applied by the researcher.

Results from Earlv Ongoing Analyses
The issues and themes that emerged while in the field caused the researcher to
marginally reframe the study. First, one organization was not going to allow a
sufficiently significant measure o f the typologies identified for organizational effec­
tiveness and permanence. Next, there was a need to reassure the correctness of the
methods being applied (described in Chapter Three) by reviewing the literature and
comparing the experiences o f others. Then and finally, organizational case study
was confirmed as the appropriate methodology because it was generating new theory
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1990) purposely pursued in this study.
However, when that theory began to challenge the well-positioned institutionalization
paradigm, the phenomenological perspective was revisited.
The concept o f institutionalization is not a scientific one generalizable to a
wide variety of settings but rather a relativistically specific "folk concept." Borrow­
ing the term from Freidson (1986), the folk concept validates qualitative studies like
this one. Alone, it indicates that the investigation be phenomenological in character.
As applied in this study, phenomenology is where the related individuals (members,
stakeholders, donors and collaborators) determine: (a) the extent to which their

110
organization was an institution; (b) the way they worked to accomplish that status (for
the benefit of future institution-aspiring organizations) through activities, policies and
continuance; and (c) the consequences or implications for the new self-defined and
environmentally supported meaning of institution. After all, the emergent theory had
theoretical underpinnings in sociology and anthropology—disciplines, like education,
considered social sciences. Moreover, it was derived in the same fashion that Ritzer
(1975) defined paradigm—a loose collection of logically held together assumptions,
concepts, or propositions that orient thinking and research. The ensuing research and
its subsequent findings were derived from the new in-the-field discoveries (drawn
from the experiences o f the participants) to chart a new line of investigative inquiry.
Still, unconvinced by the discoveries in Ecuador with Fundagro, the researcher
reapplied the guiding set o f questions (Appendix B) with the information gained from
the cases, participatory observations, and respondents. Once again, the result was a
deviation from the formal questions to more poignant questions in pursuit of salient
themes and unanswered questions generated by interviewees, more observations and
the related literature.

Identified Organizational Characteristics
This section describes the major characteristics found among the participants
identified for this study. In describing the participating organizations, researcher
observations o f each organization and their actors were documented and are now
reported. To generate the data, organization members, users from the environment,
leaders (employees included), and the researcher’s participatory observations were
used. This approach to data generation is the essence of triangulation—an accepted

Ill
procedure for establishing validity in case studies. Earlier, Lincoln and Guba (1985,
p. 288) had proposed using terms like truth value for internal validity, transferability
for external validity, and consistency for reliability. Other methods described in
Chapter Three also contributed to controls for these research threats. Their useful­
ness and relevance became pronounced during the theory formation component of the
analysis stage. Note that ongoing analysis was applied for this study. However, the
codification o f the data was greatly enhanced by the research notes on the margins of
the transcripts, questions posed during exchanges with researcher/participants and
general intuitions that emerged.

Coding and Categorizing Strategies
The data were coded openly and axially and then categorized according to the
prominent themes found in the voluminous transcripts from audio tapes. The
individual respondents were assigned symbolically fictitious names consistent with the
"contract" appearing in Appendix A. The three organizations were assigned a random
ordering to further protect the anonymity of the participants. The respondents from
each organization were then assigned an ordering based on the sequence in which they
were interviewed. Finally, the complete list of respondents was assigned alphabetical
name pairings with numbers indicating their location within the whole research and
order interviewed for that organization respectively. Taxonomically, the gender and
affiliation to the respective three cases should be discernible. For example, Aaron
(A,) and Abel (A2), interviewed simultaneously, were two males representing Michi­
gan Agriculture Stewardship Association (MASA) thus the masculine names.
Meanwhile, Erzule (B3) and Filo (B4) were two females interviewed in the second

112
group (B) and they shared their experiences with the Youth Development Corporation,
Incorporated (YDC). Imani (C3) was the third female of the group; she was the third
interviewee from Tuscola 2001 in group (C) and the last respondent for the study.
Using similar taxonomies for definition, the following male respondents also contrib­
uted to this study: Bopha (A3—signifying the third respondent of the first group);
Calembert (Bp-signifying the first respondent of the second group); Dambala (B2~
signifying the second respondent of the second group); Gddd (C,—signifying the first
respondent o f the third group); and Hotep (C2—signifying the second respondent of the
third group).
The foregoing was to indicate a randomly assigned numerical ordering of
MASA, YDC and Tuscola 2001. Within these broad categories were those individu­
als who, as a result o f their shared experiences, meaning making, validation of their
experiences and other noteworthy contributions to this study, were also considered as
researchers. Overall, there were reasons for emphasizing the ordering and numerical
pairings o f the respondents (or co-researchers, as being described here). Any careful
test for consistency in this study will show instances where earlier discoveries served
to direct or redirect the researchers towards theory formation. Stated otherwise, there
were instances during this study where the original set of guiding questions (shown in
Appendix B) gave way to newly formulated questions—those that arose from observa­
tions about and interactions with a previous respondent. As Merriam (1988, p. 171)
argued, "Just as a researcher refines instruments and uses statistical techniques to
ensure reliability, so too the human instrument can become more reliable through

113
training [sic] and practice." The intent from such a test of consistency will be for
auditing instead o f replicating this study.
Characteristics found during summative analyses led to categories related to
the source o f the themes. The three descriptive categories that were used to organize
the findings were organizationally related, environmentally related and individually
related. O f course, categorizing the themes as such suggested linear relationships.
This implication was precipitated by taxonomic nomenclature alone; the categories
were strictly descriptive labels. Taxonomies seldom resolve all discrepancies nor do
they purely codify. In fact, their application is the cause of great disparities in the
environment. (This contention was validated by the literature on "race" relations and
the "race" mythos, biological species, caste systems and organizational types to name
just a few examples). There are reasons why the findings were more than linear.
The reasons are related by and large to controls for external validity already explained
in Chapter Three.
Generalizing was purposely left to those organizations aspiring to accomplish a
similar status to the cases in the study. Cross-cases were used for a more grounded
transference o f the findings from this study. In that mode, the straight line relation­
ship became suspect. One benefit from the linear approach to categorizing the data
was expressed by the emergence of similar themes across the categories. Those
themes are listed below in Figure 8. The implication o f this phenomenon pointed to
movement along that institutionalization line. The organizational continuum intuitive­
ly experienced from the Ecuador experience was a significant "working hypothesis"
(Cronbach, 1975). A guru of quantitative methods, Cronbach (1975, p. 124-125) had

114
Community validation—the meaning ascribed to the organization by others for legitimacy.
Creed—mission statement or official charge for the organization; the overall organizational
pursuit.
Consistency—as related to the mission, role and service; the approach to performance.
Communication—internally and externally, the activity that all organizations must maintain
Capital—human labor, ideas, finances, buildings, etc. contributing to the overall opera­
tions.
Commitment—required element from the organization to its mission and its members to
same.
Collaboration—linkages and partnership established to gain legitimacy and improve
efficiency.
Coordination—accounting for organizational functions; can occur at varying organizational
levels.
Coherence—coming together on the values, purpose, doctrine and ethic of the organization.
Caring—an ethic about the performance of the organization both intrinsically and extrinsically.
Diversity—in people, programs, funds, services; varying so to avoid stagnancy and
obsolescence.
Leadership—transformational; mutual agreements; visionary; values based;
shared/meaningful.
Organizational transformation—the "how" of modifications and adjustments made over
time.
Committees/Membership-the major actors in organizations making everything possible.
Goal revision—constant renewal needed by organizations in light of environmental
dynamism.
Culture—the operational environment and attitude of the organization.
Flexibility/Adaptability—responding to changes in the environment and internal dealings.
F igure 8. M ajor themes related to the three cases.

proposed working hypotheses to replace the notion o f generalizations in social science
research. In the following categories, the findings point to interrelational characteris­
tics that suggest viewing the experiences within these cases as solely linear. At best,

115

these categories and the themes described within them are by and large descriptive.
They describe the experiences organization members and three organizations that
represent the key program areas served by Michigan State University Extension.
These experiences were related to the processes these organizations underwent to
accomplish a certain level o f effectiveness and permanence.
Seventeen major themes were identified from all the data sources. Figure 8
above showed these major themes. These themes can also be found in Appendix E
along with the code identifying their source. Also in the Appendix, they are listed
alphabetically and easier to follow. The process for arriving to these themes as well
as selected verbatim comments are presented in Appendix F. Each thematic cohort in
Figure 8 was described instead o f being defined because o f the importance o f meaning
or sense making in these organizations. They were validated by the respondents and
researcher via the mail, telephone conversations, electronic mail (E-mail), facsimile
transmissions (FAX), and the researcher’s review of the audio recordings, comments,
observations and notes from the field.

Validation o f the Cases Studied
The case o f Erzule (B3), who alphabetically represented the sixth (or Eth)
respondent out o f the 10 total respondents, and numerically was the third person
contacted about Youth Development Corporation, Incorporated (YDC) served as a
fine example o f the validation process. The setting for the interview with Erzule was
normally fine; her office was, though small for her positional leadership and rank,
well-lighted and accessible. An impressive and autographed lithograph o f three
historically significant men of the United States adorned the extreme wall. She had

116
the latest technological gadgets—computer, laser printer, telephone, etc.— and a
secretary bringing in her lunch. She appeared in tune and quite connected with her
environment that included YDC. Her office, however, was one o f a four-partitioned
albeit large suite. The resultant "rooms" (more like cubicles to the researcher) all
shared one common ceiling.
Within certain configurations, noise has a tendency to travel beyond the
unrestrictive perpendicular walls. In retrospect, Erzule may have spoken in an
inaudible tone leading to difficulties during transcription. The researcher had to listen
through a "Humm" caused by the recording volume setting at high resonating against
the background normal-decibel conversations carried on by Erzule’s office suite
mates. Out o f the "Humm" the salient themes from her comments were extracted and
cross-matched with notes taken that afternoon by the interviewer/researcher. Doing
so led to a six-page transcript that was sent to Erzule for validation, urging her to
review for content accuracy according to her experiences and perceptions about YDC,
their effectiveness and general institutionalization processes.
The interview with Erzule was only the gravest of this circumstance. Inter­
viewing Aaron and Abel in a cafeteria (the only logical location considering the
circumstances at that time) was the worst before that experience. Though unintended
for this study, one o f the age-old communication axiom held that "noise" or "static" is
always a great possibility during communication and can manifest in many different
ways. This time, the potential damage was barely avoided with careful methodologi­
cal applications by the researcher.

117
Each o f the three categories that will follow in the next sections will be
described with miniethnographies and examples of verbatim comments from the
interviewees, exchanges between interviewer and respondents, and observations,
thoughts and preliminary analyses by the researcher. Only the most salient o f these
are used. There were some instances where these themes could have been attributable
to more than one o f the categories selected here. For each category, the relationship
o f the theme identified and how it is manifested will be discussed. As described
earlier, participants will be identified with the following symbolic names: Aaron,
Abel, Bopha, Calembert, Dambala, Erzule, Filo, Gddd, Hotep, and Imani. These
names correspond to the sequence in which the interviews were conducted and the
respective three cases in this study (namely MASA, YDC and Tuscola 2001).

Category One—Organizationally Related Themes
In the context o f the institutionalization o f nonprofits, many themes appeared
to resonate from those functions that the case organizations undertook or that can be
viewed from an organizational level. Items in bold express added emphasis by the
researcher.

Coherence
In Chapter Two, coherence was discussed from the vantage point of the values
upon which the organization is based. With consensus on those values (here called
coherence), the organization was said to better drive towards a common mission.
This variable was discussed to some extent by each of the ten respondents. Some did
so more intensely than others. In the reverse case, there were related reasons for

118
simply implying the significance o f this variable to their organization’s effectiveness.
Aaron and Abel almost avoided the concept of values in their discussion. In the
researcher’s notes, the words "unanswered question" appear in the margin. The
questions were: "What are the values of MASA?" and "Is there consensus about and
commitment to them?" Instead of listing samplars or words that could have otherwise
fit into tables and word lists, Aaron offered this axiom: "When an individual feels
that they have something to offer then they become committed and committed to
sharing."
Other comments made earlier during the interview suggested that the concept
o f sharing was rooted in the value system of MASA. Aaron, with reverent corrobo­
ration from Abel, felt that MASA members had been able to "learn from each other
through sharing." There were other supporting evidence for this deduction. In a
Summer 1994 MASA publication entitled "Collaboration W orks!", one member was
quoted as saying "I firmly believe we are all in this together and the sharing of each
other’s strengths will help us move to the future" (p. 2). Though stated otherwise,
Bopha reiterated the sharing construct. He said that "MASA values collaboration."
Bopha’s response to the question, "What do you consider as the values of the organi­
zation?" was the following:
The values are embodied in the mission statement. A very strong value that
came to the floor is that this was going to be a farmer-directed organization.
It can be seen in the bylaws in terms of who the leadership is in the organiza­
tion; how often there can be a president who is not a farmer. This value is a
very strong one—a farmer-oriented organization. It is not being directed by
any institution. I think one of the values that I have seen expressed most often
with MASA is the value o f collaboration. People value their connection and
contacts with others. I think there is a value placed on individual initiative.
In MASA people don’t generally wait until someone gives them permission to
start implementing an idea, they take the initiative. I think there’s a value on

119

inclusion, that you do not have to ascribe to any particular philosophy to
become a member. MASA doesn’t only welcome members who have said
"Yes, I am carrying the banner of sustainable agriculture." It has included
members all the way from people who are very strongly proponents o f organic
agriculture to those who are more in the mainstream of agriculture as it is
practiced in the state.
The reservations to this question as expressed by Aaron and Abel stemmed, in part,
from the varying definitions existing for sustainable. Aaron was asked a preliminary
question that he clarified by repeating the question saying: "Are you asking if there
is consensus within the MASA organization?" Aaron asked. Quickly, the interviewer
responded, "Right." His response was still, "I don’t think so." Yet elsewhere,
specifically in a publication prepared by MASA on collaboration and its value to the
organization, Aaron was quoted as saying:
But I just think one of the greatest things that came out of this was the people
I met and the tru s t that I can put in those people, and the value of relation­
ships that I built that will last forever. And, you know, like they say, 'friends
are forever’ and I think that’s what we developed among ourselves and among
each other.
There was no guessing with Calembert since he responded to the values of the
Youth Development Corporation (YDC) by answering in the first person. Doing so
may speak to his positional leadership status in the organization. Asked "What would
you say are the core values o f this organization . . . ?" Calembert’s response was:
"I th in k I value th e individual, and the fact that every individual has the right to do
well, and that we need to be there when they are ready to exercise that right." With
this concept o f organizational coherence serving as what is being argued here as the
core for organizational effectiveness, it was helpful to assess the progress o f these
organizations in light o f their stated values.

120
Collaboration
Organizational collaboration emerged as a dominant and intense theme in this
study. Its relevance to institutionalization and organizational effectiveness was
expressed by the respondents’ comments during interviews. One organization among
the three cases even devoted two bulletins promoting the virtues o f collaboration. In
their pamphlet entitled "Collaboration: Working Together to Solve Problems" printed
in July 1994, Christopher Lufkin is quoted as saying:
The collaboration process is a dynamic one and I think that we need to really
work at remaining open to new people as they are interested. . . . Certainly
the idea o f collaborating together is going to be a powerful force, particularly
in the future.
The axiom generated from this theme was: "Collaboration gives legitimacy." The
strength o f this generalization was measured and continually evaluated for the other
cases.
The importance of doing so stems from the myriad meanings associated with
collaboration. YDC used other terminology to express the same concept, for exam­
ple. Calembert offered the following:
I get involved in a lot o f interagency kinds o f community things because I
think that is critical too: 1) To keep us in tune of what else is going on in the
community, and 2) to keep people aware that we are here and of what we are
doing. So I end up doing a lot of those. I try to involve our staff in some of
those too because I think it is important to be identified in the community.
But also, I recognize there are other problems going on that we may not be
dealing with. I mean a good example o f that is a teen parent network that we
are involved with. I sit on one committee [pointing to space on the left] and
one o f my staff sits on that [pointing to space on the right] committee. Well,
the first year or so, all I was offering was input on suggestions for how they
might get these people more employable because that’s part o f the program —to
get these people employed. Their major emphasis at the time was the parent­
ing aspect—how to be better parents, nutrition . . . a lot o f emphasis laid to
that. Down the road somewhere was ways to be self supporting which
employment fits into. Now, we’re doing all the reading, math and skills

121
assessments for them. They send us the clients; we do all the assessments;
they pay us to do the assessments. So in the long run, financially, it benefited
me [speaking for the organization YDC]. That wasn’t my intent when I
started. I thought, here’s an organization that is going to need at some point
and time at least access to people that can help young people find jobs. We
want to be there to offer suggestions and ways to better get there. So some of
those kinds o f things you get involved in the community either can pay off
financially but oftentimes it just pays off with recognition.
In the foregoing, Calembert described a classic case of collaboration with an organiza­
tion and the merits or benefits he had gained for YDC. Yet he refrained from calling
it collaboration. Similarly, Bopha often referred to collaboration as ’’partnerships and
linkages." The name appeared specifically in the MASA-sanctioned publication of
July 1994. In the "Collaboration . . . " bulletin, Christine Lietzau was quoted as
follows:
I think a collaborative model has developed and I think how I would describe
it would be partnership. W e have new partnerships that we never thought
would happen—we have people talking together that we thought would never
talk together —and so it’s developed, at least for us, a model for how to
proceed for the future.
Whether it is called collaboration, partnership or linkage, the situation was still one of
establishing trust, sharing and expressing commitment, and equally distributing
accountability, risk and credit. For the MASA organization, the specific strategies to
build collaboration as listed in their "Collaboration Works!" pamphlet were the
following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Traveling seminars;
Hands-on activities;
Leadership training;
Regular meetings;
Team-building exercise;
Networking;
Teaching each other; and,
Learning from each other.

122
MASA made a concerted effort toward collaboration because they credit it to their
effectiveness and status as an institution. Speaking about YDC, Erzule made a more
direct observation about the significance of collaboration to the organization’s place
on the institutionalization continuum:
The question is one of limited or finite resources in a small community. The
issue is do you "arrive" through competition. Increasingly the buzzword is
you’re gonna "arrive" thro ugh collaboration. There may need to be some
mergers o f organizations. So instead o f competing for the same dollar, people
can visibly gain more stakeholders and show that they’re doing their part to
join forces and provide services efficiently. W e’ve seen a little bit of this in
rural cities--St. John’s in Michigan—and w e’re either going to see a lot more
o f that or less services.
Another distinct model o f such collaborations was expressed by one of the
cases in Tuscola 2001, Inc. Their model of collaborating government agencies and
civic agencies promised a resolution to "big government" and exemplified community
empowerment. Since their existence embodied the political rhetoric of that time, it
was relatively easy to secure an Executive Declaration from the Governor of Michi­
gan. Even with the enabling legislation from the Governor—arguably one of the
higher levels o f collaboration—the organization had to continue with its dynamic,
need-based programming, "commitment to the county," and effective communication
strategies to keep all the linkage partners focused on the mission for which they came
together.

Communication
One o f the most intensely mentioned organizational variable from the 10
participants in this study was communication. The manifestation o f this organization­
al function had been said to determine the fate of many organizations. Tuscola 2001

123
had a proactive approach to organizational communication. They invited to their
meetings the individuals to whom they would otherwise communicate the results.
Most of these individuals usually sent a proxy to assure that they would receive a
report o f the deliberations during the meeting. The organization was unique in that it
was created as a non-profit community development activity/group. The individuals
whom they invited to these meetings had a natural professional (and sometimes
social/personal) interest to see the organization and thereby the community do well.
The organization was most reliant on the success o f these communications because
doing so allowed it to stay close to the pulse of the community needs.
G6d6 identified communication as a major concern for Tuscola 2001. In fact,
when asked, "How do you see this organization any different or do you hope it to be
any different five to ten years from now?" G£dd offered, "I hope that we would have
a better communication system with other organizations in the county." He also
thought that communication would be the most important issue or problem facing the
organization—particularly " . . . communication between the different organizations
that we are working with (i.e., government, the Chamber, the Council, the Council of
Chambers, and each little township board)." Gddd concentrated much energy on
Tuscola 2001’s communication; he made sure that goals were communicated. He was
recorded saying "It is most important to have a goal in an organization, communicat­
ing it and reaching it." His take on the value of communication was maintained by
the nine other participants in this study, all of whom made repeated observations
about the significance o f this organizational function and its overall meaning.

124
The concept o f meaning as related to organizational communication was
expressed in other ways during this study. When new meanings were arbitrarily
assigned to questions posed by the interviewer, it validated this approach to draw out
the truths and phenomena about institutionalization (explained in Chapter Three).
There were some good examples of this meaning making during communications with
the case study participants. Imani was asked, "How does the organization (Tuscola
2001) deal with the changes that are constantly going on in the environment?" Her
response resonated from the popular meaning of environment, different from the
environment concept used by students of organization theory which refers to the
organizational suprasystem explained in Chapter Two. Imani made the meaning
abundantly clear with the following:
Tuscola 2001 constantly deals with changes in the environment. The environ­
ment to us means wetlands, P.A.116, bam preservation, water, park preserva­
tion, river planning and preservation, farm land, trees, open spaces, and clean
air to say a few. Tuscola 2001 is how the people o f Tuscola county want their
environment to be.
The same occurred during face to face communications with G6d6 about the "environ­
ment." The "meaning" example that appeared most glaring dealt with his response to
the question about his leadership style (transformational, positional, transactional,
etc.). From the validated transcript of the interview with Gddd, the following was
recorded.
R : How would you describe yourself as a leader?
G£de: I think I ’m a doer.
R : You think there’s a difference between a leader and a doer?
G£d6: Ah, yeah. I ’m not a politician. I ’m more in the engineering of things.
I see a problem and resolve it.

125
R: And what are the major effects that you have on this organization as a
president, a chairperson or as a "doer" as you call yourself?
G6de: W ell, I ’m not sure I could answer that. I’m not sure I could answer
that. That would be somebody else’s opinion.
One similar definitionally-based meaning "conflict" took place during the
interview with Bopha. The following exchange went on between him and the
researcher while speaking about his experiences with the Michigan Agricultural
Stewardship Association (MASA).
R: Has there been a critical incident (faced by MASA)?
B opha: There certainly have been responses that the organization has made to
opportunities.
Clearing the meaning, the researcher followed up with, "Critical, meaning a major
landmark event, not necessarily something bad that happened to the organization."
There are many other examples o f this meaning making during the data collection
phase o f this study. Bopha’s exchange was consistent with other discoveries made
possible by his participation in this study. For example, he noted how the very name
o f MASA "communicated" to the general public. Specifically, Bopha said:
A lot o f thought by these members went into what the name would be. They
consciously decided we’re not going to call it sustainable because you get hung
up in definitions of w hat sustainable m eans. But agricultural stewardship
talks about an ethic. I mean here’s a value right in the name. It talks about
the ethic o f stewarding resources that are needed for the future o f agriculture,
but also it is an organization that needs to be a steward o f the entire agricul­
ture enterprise so that they are involved in the issues concerning preserving
farmland and preserving the quality of life in rural areas as well as exploring
specific techniques that are less environmentally damaging in agriculture.
Stewardship seemed to be a concept that could give you a lot of buy in. It is
sort o f like, if you’re against agricultural stewardship, you’re sort o f against
mom and apple pie. This organization has avoided getting into the conversa­
tion about the definition o f sustainable agriculture and I think that’s been a
real plus.

126
The idea o f what the organization’s name communicated was echoed by other
respondents. Hotep gave multiple examples starting with the National FFA organiza­
tion—formerly the Future Farmers o f America—to the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts of
America. His detailed analysis o f the phenomenon was expressed with the following:
"Boy Scouts", I don’t know when it was created . . . , but they have the
wrong name. You can’t use the word "boy"; even "scout" is suspect. Youth
seems to be the right term for the beginning of the 21st century. And I am
saying as an institution, either Boy Scouts o f America will have to change
their name o r they won’t last very far into the 21st century. Their organization
was built in a period when boys and girls were separated and that separation
was institutionalized. [I’m using the word institutionalized in a larger sense
but I think social arrangements get institutionalized just like organizations
become institutionalized.] In that first 50 years of the century there has been a
major shift in that; in the last 100 years there has been even more of a shift.
In the first 50 years of this century there was great fighting to get the right to
vote for women, the right to own property, the right to have bank accounts, all
those rights. When you get that kind of male/female equity you can’t have
youth groups that are identified and get the kind of support that Boy Scouts of
America got 50 years ago with a name like that. That is just my opinion. I ’m
not singling them out, but I think that is a problem for any institution and the
symbols it creates. You could have a very beautiful logo but if somebody else
has a very similar logo and they do terrible things, you probably will have to
change your logo because you’re going to be accused o f being like them.
The situation described by Hotep above was reiterated by Erzule but in an
even broader sense. H er take was to frame institutions and their established names in
a struggling state. In that mode, she commented how their very existence was
threatened though they had "arrived."
Even those [institutions] th a t have "arrived" are struggling. The YMCA
may merge with the YWCA or Boy and Girl Scouts may merge in the future.
4-H has changed some o f its image from rural to urban to reflect the reduced
rural population. That is what will challenge them in the future.
The focus now turns to the characteristics related to the adjustments these organiza­
tions made or might have to make to remain institutionalized.

127
Consistency
Tim e is a crucial variable in the study of institutionalization. Over time, the
analyst must be able to view the mission statement of the organization. The organiza­
tion must be consistent in the mission it sets out to pursue. Many respondents noted
this characteristic o f institutionalized organizations. O f greatest impact was the
observation made by Erzule regarding YDC. Throughout her discussion, she referred
to institutionalized organizations as having "arrived." The point of an organization’s
consistency may appear as an oxymoron in that goal revision was also recommended
by various respondents in this study. Still, there is a point where the organization can
decide it will have an enduring creed. From conceptualization, the organization can
decide that it will rally support based on its creed. As Hotep suggested, "The
doctrine has to bring people to the institution." Erzule posited the following:
Part o f being "arrived" is being like corporations: merge to have new
products and services. Look at the automobile dealers. They no longer just
sell Chevys they also sell Hondas. . . . Organizations who are large enough
are able to shift their services like the Catholic Social Services for example.
Catholic social services serves every age group, refugees, youth, seniors with
Meals on Wheels, and non-Catholics, too. But Youth development Corpora­
tion is unique in that while other organizations added or changed their youth
services, Youth Development Corporation is still providing the same employ­
ment service for youth they started with. The only addition has been to piggy­
back with MSU for mentoring/tutoring in addition to counseling and job search
strategies.
Based on the time factor, YDC offered the only true test o f consistency. The
organization had been operation for over 20 years. Although they had not operated
for that long a period, the other case study participants realized that component or
variable as critical to their maintaining institutionalization status.

128
Creed (Mission Statement!
The final portion of the statement from Hotep above suggested a certain
amount o f flexibility in the mission statement. This penchant for flexibili­
ty/adaptability affects the mission and is evidenced by theme’s explicit emergence.
Meanwhile, as an organizationally related theme, the organization’s creed was viewed
as a theme of significance second only to organizational communication. A quantita­
tive analyst would quickly note that the theme was mentioned at equal frequency with
organizational diversity. Appendix E charts the respondents’ perspectives that support
this determination. The essence o f an organization is its mission statement or
"doctrine" to use Hotep’s repeated reference. He used the term as a means to put a
handle on institutions, saying, "I would call a group of human beings an institution if
they endure with the same doctrine for a long, long time."
One other attribute of case studies worth mentioning now is their propensity to
lead to emulation. The cases have a general tendency to add functionality to the
phenomena studied. This study was pursued in light of considerations that emerging
institutionalized organizations would find sufficient examples from these cases to
emulate themselves. First, however, it was worth understanding what was meant by a
mission statement. Bryan’s (1988, p. 104-105) applied work defined and suggested a
process for better understanding mission statements. There, he defined a mission
statement (or creed or doctrine), saying the following:
A mission statement is a declaration of organizational purpose. They are
usually short, not more than a page, and often no more than a punchy slogan.
The . . . statement should . . . answer six questions: 1. Who are we? 2. In
general, what are the basic social and political needs we exist to fill or the
social and political problems we exist to address? 3. In general, what do we
want to do to recognize or anticipate and respond to these needs and problems?

129
4. How should we respond to our key stakeholders? 5. W hat is our philoso­
phy and our core vales? 6. What makes us distinctive or unique?
In other cases, like that o f Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA),
for example, the mission statement was used to define the organization. The ex­
change between the researcher and Aaron and Abel, amidst the noise and bustle of a
downstairs cafeteria, went thusly:
R: When you’re asked to briefly describe MASA what do you say?
A aron a n d Abel: I can’t do it briefly. Oh, (maybe to a non-aggie) when I do
it briefly I refer back to our mission statement. I think our mission statement
says a lot. Our mission statement lays out in a paragraph or two what w e’re
about and what we intend to do. And I think the people that helped put that
mission statement together were committed to what they were doing. They
came forward with some o f the best that was inside o f them to develop a
mission statement. And it talks about a process of research and dissemination
o f agricultural systems that are economically feasible and economically sound
and environmentally safe and I think that says a lot.
Another application o f the mission statement came up during the exchange with
Dambala speaking about his experiences with the Youth Development Corporation
(YDC). From the transcript o f our recorded interview, the following was drawn:
R: First what are the values of YDC?
D am bala: Basically we’re set up to help youngsters find employment. Let’s
see, here’s our mission statement: (reading from a brochure) Youth Develop­
ment Corporation will assist youth with their self-development by providing
guidance towards a meaningful self-reliant future. Does that mean anything to
you? Who wrote these things anyway? (Observer’s Comment: This was
posed more like a rhetorical question].
From the researcher’s field notes, the observation was made that there was a bit of
cynicism in the tail portion o f Dambala’s response. His (rhetorical) question appeared
sardonic to the researcher because o f the general attitude (reverence) Dambala
expressed for the organization, its services and its mission.

130
Having had this and other experiences with respondents during the study
caused an adjustment by the researcher for better sense making during the interview
with Hotep. He eloquently and repeatedly mentioned the importance o f an organiza­
tion’s "doctrine." Noting the significance of meaning in communication, the follow­
ing statements and question were made and posed to illicit a clarifying response from
Hotep. The researcher is on record having said: "You refer back and forth and are
consistent with the notion of doctrine. Let me understand this notion. Is it the same
thing that other folks call a mission or a mission statement?" H otep’s answer was
elaborate and definitive on the theme. He went on to say:
It is similar. Yes, a general overall mission statement could be the same as a
doctrine. In fact in some languages it is better to say mission than it is to say
doctrine. Sometimes in the English language the word mission connotes the
wrong kind o f thing. The concept of doctrine is sometimes defined as the
essential rationale. Why does the world need this organization if it is an
organization that is becoming institutionalized? That is why leadership has to
be able to do something. Leadership has to be able to state the doctrine.
Excellent leadership can write words that will communicate the doctrine. A
doctrine is a very slippery elusive kind of phenomenon; it is this sort of great
idea.
We are sitting here at Michigan State University. Somebody had the
idea that science and higher education should be applied to practical things that
people have to do in their everyday work. That was the central doctrine like
all the doctrines that get misunderstood and they tried to apply that doctrine in
various places in the early 1800s. . . . I would argue educational institutions
tend to last (some o f them) a long long time. Even though they may change
their mode o f operating and change their curriculum to fit the needs of the
time, they can continue if they (the educational institution) institutionalize their
curriculum.
Let’s say they decide to have driver education for everybody in East
Lansing, Michigan because it is important for them to drive a car. Now let’s
assume that 50 years have gone by. W e’re all moving around with a belt
hooked on our shoulders and we fly from place to place, and for mass trans­
port there are automobiles but nobody uses a personal motorcar. If you keep
in the schools driver education, I could see in the curriculum committee they’ll
have big discussions saying well it is good for coordination o f the eyes and
hands; it is a noble thing; we already have the textbooks and people trained to
teach it; so we keep it anyway. You can institutionalize it. You get the

131

course within the curriculum. But when it becomes absolutely obsolete, then it
will die. If the whole institution’s doctrine is encompassed by it, then the
institution will also die. [Though] it may hang on for quite a while. . . .
Every human group has some kind of doctrine.
Included in efforts to generate a mission, organizations often spend time to
define their goals. The goals give structure to the specific pursuits of the organiza­
tion. Noting the major themes generated from the respondents, the participating
organizations benefitted from having the flexibility to ad a p t to the environment by
revising th e ir goals on a regular basis.

Culture
This theme was one the o f less significance based on respondents’ comments.
The purpose for representing it here was because it made up a portion o f one of the
areas o f inquiry for this study. From Chapter One, the third area of inquiry was to
answer the following question: How do the Seven-C’s—(Communication, Control,
C u ltu re, Commitment, Capital, Compliance and Consensus on values (Coherence)—
contribute to the institutionalization of the nonprofits identified for this study? The
literature was appearing definitive that at least these seven variables, strategically
engineered to all begin with the letter C, by and large contributed to the institutional­
ization o f nonprofits. The culture theme was determined possibly significant in many
o f the cases but not stated. In Appendix E, this characteristic is expressed with the
symbol P (a capital and bolded letter p). Validation of this theme came in the form
o f concurrence with an original model designed by the researcher that laid out the
seven C ’s in a grid. Towards the end of each interview, the respondents were asked
to validate the model in a similar fashion that police ask eyewitnesses to finger the

132
culprit from the precinct’s book o f mug shots. The responses to such requests ranged
from Gede’s "You can keep adding and adding to that . . . " t o Dambala’s "That’s too
profound, too academe for me . . .

to comments from Aaron and Bopha that led to

the reframing o f the institutionalization paradigm. The exchange with Aaron went
thusly:
R: You know, we have talked about all these variables (showing and pointing
to the words on the computer generated graphic)—control, communication,
culture, capital, consensus on the MASA values that we are calling coherence,
compliance, and commitment—as being so important to the organization. Are
there any other variables missing, based on your experiences, that would add
to this symbol, that would say, these are the things that organizations need to
have to be effective and to be institutions?
A aron: I guess I ’d have a hard time identifying. I guess if there is anything
within this organization or within my farming operation that I would like to try
to avoid is a set o f immovable parameters that the organization or my farming
operation could move into or out of or if the situation demanded it. I think
w e’re finding that flexibility in so many things today is an important compo­
nent.
If there was any doubt to the significance of the culture theme to the institu­
tionalization process, Hotep removed some. It was less an issue o f viewing the
culture theme in askance. The fact was that the culture was all around their organiza­
tions. Hotep explained how with the following statement: "I see cu ltu re as a larger
thing; they (institutions) ten d to all be in a culture. Culture will control certain
things and culture will enhance certain things and it is always th ere."
Diversity
The concept o f diversity had emerged in various dialogues during this study.
When it first emerged, it prompted an observer’s comment that suggested sentiments
of that the comment was initiated as a patronizing gesture. Later, the theme emerged

133

again. The repeated mention o f the concept validated its relevance as theme for this
study and the institutionalization process for nonprofits. Aaron and Abel specifically
called for "organizational diversity." Calembert and Dambala were more focused on
a "diversity o f people." Calembert’s and Dambala’s situation is that their organiza­
tion exists in an environment that is predominately unionized. Having these
organizational types in the environment of potential participants (leaders, volunteers,
collaborators, board members, etc.) required for the organization to be inclusive of
those individuals. When the union member was brought into the fold of membership
or "supportship," it was anticipated that s/he would bring in the union as well.
The same truism was expressed for dealing with largely unionized environ­
ments in Detroit, Michigan and southeastern Michigan in general. Without those
validating support from these diverse individuals, programs seemingly began on a
failing note. Lastly, some respondents like Erzule and Imani referred to a need for
"diversity in programs and services." This last call was consistent with the literature
and other less significant comments generated from two o f the ten respondents. From
the literature, however, the dominating definition of diversity refers to the ways
people in organization differ taxonomically. "Experts" o f the subject had developed a
litany o f descriptors to validate the concept. As it relates to people, diversity
emerged as a response to long-standing denials to access and opportunity for particu­
lar segments o f the community. Now, with the community variable looming so large
as a determinant o f institutionalization, the diversity meaning was being incorporated
into organization who otherwise would have been content with homogeneity.

134
The respondents from these cases address the diversity issue in a multifaceted
manner. Aaron said:
I think that the organization, whether it be Michigan Agricultural Stewardship
Association, whether it be the North Central Regional, Minnesota Project, the
M IFFS Project, Michigan Farm Bureau or any other, they have to be that
diverse to represent the diversity that is within the industry. There’s no one
organization that can do it all. No one individual can do it alone. I firmly
believe that for individuals as well as organizations.
Even more poignantly, Hotep added "If an organization wants to be institutionalized it
can not stay with one outside donor." The diversity construct was thus applied
organizationally in terms of people, programs, services, and sources of support.

Goal Revision
This theme addressed one of the areas of inquiry for this case study (area of
inquiry one). One specific intent was to identify what organizations do over time to
deal with changes in the marketplace. Understanding this concept requires a general
understanding o f what goals are. A goal is different from that which will be dis­
cussed in the next section. An organization may have tangential missions and use
different goals to fulfill those missions. The participants in this study were in general
agreement that effective institutions revised their goals often on their way towards
institutionalization. Most reasons were related to the dynamism o f the environment in
which nonprofits performed their services. Another reason was that the mechanisms
for addressing "age-old" problems changed over time due to changes in resources.
Here resources referred to capital, ideas, human (members on committees, leadership,
etc.) and willing partners.

135
Imani, relating to her experiences with Tuscola 2001 and from her professional
expertise as a community developer, made the point abundantly clear. Though the
question was posed for with meaningful intent, the response was unanticipated and
useful for this theory building process. The exchange was the following:
R: Is there a correlation, in your opinion, between effectiveness and institu­
tion status?
Im ani: There is a correlation between effectiveness and an institution but not
that great. You do not have to be around 20 years to be effective. The
question [for an organization] is does it reach its goals. Do the goals keep
changing? Tuscola 2001 goals keep changing. Tuscola 2001 must revisit their
goals every couple of years. Tuscola 2001 constantly deals with changes in
the environment.
According to G6d6, however, there would be greater frequency in the goal revision
process for Tuscola 2001. In his words, "We must annually look to change the goals,
otherwise the organization will cease to exist."
Hotep may have contributed the definitive posture on the concept of goal
revision, how it has been pursued by institutions, and the relationship of the construct
to institutionalization. Speaking mostly in a professorial tone and consistent with the
expert taxonomy assigned him by the researcher, he offered the following:
The main idea o f an institutionalized organization is that it is valued in and of
itself. Earlier you mentioned FFA. There are things like that which people get
associated with over time. They develop alumni, they develop loyalty, they
develop commitment and if they are designed to achieve a certain purpose then
that’s great. But then those who are committed to it will try to achieve that
purpose. Now let’s say that they do achieve that purpose, then what. If
something is institutionalized and there is no longer that purpose because it has
been achieved, in a few cases they have been able to keep the institution
anyway. They redefine th e goals and they say that they are similar.
The concern with infantile paralysis is an example. A foundation was
set up for that thing. It worked on that for a while. That foundation was
valued greatly and it became institutionalized. But then the Saulk vaccine
came along and it became in the USA a much less serious thing. So then what
to do? W hat if you were on the staff o f the foundation; if you were the

136
director o f personnel and you had 30 people working under you and they all
have a family? Women and children are involved in the organization. Then
you don’t like to see it die. So then what they did is they left the infantile
paralysis business and got into clean air and lungs. They kept some o f the
same symbols. They changed the name a little bit. And the "institution"
continued; but I would argue that that is a rare event. In most cases if they
get organized for some purpose and it is a noble purpose and people in the
world like it and want to support it and are willing to contribute to it, work for
it, suffer for it, etc., it becomes institutionalized. Some of those, the excep­
tions, are the religious organizations. They could last 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,000 years,
especially if they are not too discrete and concrete a b o u t w hat they are
try in g to do. If they keep their doctrine sort of flexible and very broad in
general, those institutions can last a long long time.
This example was one o f many provided on this theme. Once again, the relevance of
the time aspect appeared. As a relatively young organization, Michigan Agricultural
Stewardship Association (MASA) had then undergone a limited number o f goal
revision sessions. The leadership and membership o f that organization, at the least,
as a result o f this study could understand the significance of goal revision to the
institutionalization process.

Category Two—Individually Related Themes
Earlier in Chapter One, Schein’s (1965) definition of organizations as ". . . the
rational coordination o f the activities of a num ber of people for the achievement of
some common, explicit purpose or goal, through division of labor and function and
through a hierarchy o f authority and responsibility . . . " was used to suggest the
importance o f the individual on organizations. In the most simplistic and as postulat­
ed in Figure 1, social systems begin with individuals and lead to complex higher
orders. W eber and other leading thinkers of his time (particularly from the humanist
school) always saw the value o f the human component on organizations. Earlier, both
Bopha and Calembert supplied reiteration of this premise when they spoke about

137
valuing individual initiative and the individual respectively. The individual’s
contributions and interactions formed the organizational script. They wove the
organizational fabric that enveloped the organization and kept it relevant. With the
following themes, those scripts, the fabric and those responsible for them are brought
to life. Within each category, emphasis is added with bolded lettering.

Caring
One o f the weaker represented themes in all o f this study was that of caring.
Since this study applied qualitative methodologies, the impact o f this theme to the
community o f nonprofits and institutions compelled its presentation here. A p-value
for significance, an R-squared index, or a negative correlation coefficient would
probably have a stifling effect on this important construct. However, in the broad
sense, its coverage here is consistent with a call echoed by Beck (1992, p. 455),
urging academicians and practitioners " . . . to move toward the creation and support
o f a competent and caring society [and for educators] to recognize and practice a
caring ethic." The concept is also consistent with the transformational leadership,
repeatedly observed during this study, that would be the hallmark of the postmodern
era and probably others beyond.
These reasons partially provided a rationale for this discussion on caring.
Another reason is that it encompasses concepts like diversity that was identified as a
major theme in this study. The caring theme was itself indeed one of the findings
from the cases. From Appendix F, it is clear that caring was a significant experience
for at least 3 o f the 10 respondents. It was also experienced by the researcher during
sessions undertaken as a participant observer. Those three respondents admittedly

138
were predominately reflecting an experience with an organization that had care
implicitly embedded in its creed. Speaking about Youth Development Corporation
(YDC), Calembert explained that he was in :
. . . a people-oriented business, and if the staff morale is low in the agency,
they w on’t have the kind o f enthusiasm to provide the kinds of services w e’re
providing these kids. Kids can see that; young people can see in a hurry that
you essentially don’t care. To me, that is one thing I want people to recognize
YDC for. ’This is an organization I come to who cares about me. And
therefore, because they care for me, I will probably get what I want. ’ [Obser­
v er’s Comment: Calembert was talking in the role o f the observant and
satisfied student user o f YDC]
Erzule saw the care construct in a different though parallel plane.
You see I think that’s important that those students have a part in that opera­
tion. I also think its important that those of us who really care about the kids
and their learning find some computers to donate to them so that they can
teach the kids to use computers now not mimeograph machines because
businesses are already beyond that. . . . The students may not use the latest
technology but they are treated with care.
This last notion o f care posited by Erzule is the essence o f what was proposed as
"caring ethic for organizations."
The difficulty in presenting a coherent dialogue on this topic stems from
similar difficulties generally found in attempts to define institutionalization. As Beck
(1992, p. 456) restated, "Caring does not readily lend itself to an operational defini­
tion for few actions can be universally as caring." Much like institutionalization was
analyzed (in this study) through use of certain variables, caring was said to be best
understood in terms of its goals. Overall, the chief goal o f caring is human growth
and development. From Milton M ayeroff s seminal work On Caring (1971), she
(Beck, 1992, p. 456) quotes: "To care for another person, in the most significant
sense, is to help him [her] grow and actualize himself [herself]."

139

Human Relationist Fromm (1956) stressed how love for others is inextricably
linked to care, respect, responsibility and knowledge of one’s self. With the follow­
ing statements, the connection moved ever closer (Fromm, 1956, p. 50):
To love somebody is the actualization and concentration o f the power to
love . . . [and] love o f one person implies love of [mankind] as such. . . .
From this it follows that my own self must be as much an object o f my love as
another person. The affirmation of one’s own life, happiness, growth,
freedom is rooted in one’s capacity to love. . . . If an individual is able to love
productively, he loves himself [herself] too, if he [she] can love only others,
he [she] cannot love at all.
There was a relationship component associated with the caring being advocated for
organizations and the individuals involved in them. Too, there was a tendency to
segment this notion of caring as one origination from female theorist (once again
exposed is the failings o f taxonomies). Beck (1992) dissected the works o f Carol
Gilligan (author o f In a Different Voice. 1982) which challenged traditional (male)
ways o f understanding moral development. First, she used the term "interdepen­
dence" to describe the aforementioned relational quality in organizations. Then, as
Beck (1992) aptly summarized, ". . . she suggested that male theorists had tended to
see morality built on an ethic of justice as superior to that built on an ethic o f caring"
(p. 457). Finally, she wrote that, "When interdependence exists between people,
they are motivated ". . . t o act responsibly toward self and others and thus to sustain
connectivity . . . [and an] ethic o f caring" (Beck, 1992, p. 459). To date, the
evidence from the literature was that these relationships thrive where a sense o f
community is stressed. Beck (1992) provided a summary of Bellah et a l.’s Habits of
the Heart (1985) work in which the authors " . . . concur that the development of
community is important, perhaps essential, for caring, growth-inducing human

140
relationships" (Beck, 1992, p. 460). By and large, they wrote of the alienation and
isolation that have resulted from America’s overwhelming commitment to individual­
ism and suggest that a sense o f membership in a community is needed as a counter­
balance. Also in Beck’s (1992) summary, attention is brought to their call for the
celebration o f our interrelatedness (relationship), if which occurs, society would be
transformed so that:
. . . there would be no fear o f social catastrophe or hope of inordinate reward
motivating us to exaggerate our own independence. . . . With such a change,
we might begin to understand why, though we are all, as human beings,
morally deserving o f equal respect, some o f us begin with familiar or cultural
advantages or disadvantages that others do not have. O r perhaps, . . . we
might begin to make moral sense of the fact that there are real cultural differ­
ences among us, that we do not all want the same thing, and that it is not a
moral defect to find other things in life of interest besides consuming activi­
ties. In short, a restored social ecology [resulting in community] might allow
us to mitigate the harm that has been done to disadvantaged groups without
blaming the victims or trying to turn them into carbon copies of middle-class
high achievers. (Cited by Beck, 1992 p. 460 from Bellah et a l.’s (1985)
Habits o f the Heart, p. 289)
These discoveries were not being arrived at in vacuums. The foregoing would
have otherwise appeared most irrelevant and out place for this study as was originally
thought o f Bopha’s philosophical filibuster. From our findings about the significance
of caring and the caring ethic, there was room to include this genuine concern he had
for the fate our world and their social systems that undergird it. Because o f nomen­
clature and selective uses of terminologies, it first appeared that Bopha’s comments
were tangential and rebellious to the institutionalization paradigm. Closer analysis of
the following proved otherwise. Here were Bopha’s views:
. . . The premise o f the interview when we started was that this is about
institutionalization and I ’m not sure that it is. I believe that we are in a very
unique time right now, in a unique time in the history o f our species on this
planet. I heard somebody say this a couple o f weeks ago at a session and it

141
really hit me. If you look at the eras that we have lived through—the ice age,
the stone age, the agricultural age, the industrial age, the information age—that
we are the first generation to, not only live in at least two majors ages that we
have been through on this planet, but over a transition time as well. I mean,
if you think o f the time when we moved from the middle ages to the industrial
age through the renaissance, there were several generations who just lived in
the transition time between these two ages.
W e are living when things are changing at such a greater pace than it
ever has before. We are faced with living part of our life in one age and the
rest o f our life in another age and living through the transition. This has never
happened before. I think that it is apparent that the institutions that were
created in society to tak e eare of, for example, an industrial age, are largely
irrelevant. I mean they are still around but they’re undergoing tremendous
upheaval because through this transition time and into a new age, they can’t
function the way they did before. I believe that we are heading into a time
when institutions need to come and go. To view success as institutionalization
and here for a long time, that may denote failure as often as it denotes suc­
cess. That success might look more like groups of people with com m on
vision a n d com m on aspirations com ing together aro u n d im p o rtan t issues
collectively exerting leadership for change and that 10 years down the road,
when the issue they came together on is no longer a critical issue, that effort
dissolves and these people a re now together in a much different group. It
may not even be the same group. But individuals who were involved in this
have now sort of moved and are now involved in some other im p o rtan t social
m ovem ent.
I believe that the Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association is part
o f a social movement. So from that perspective the institutionalization is not
what is important. W hat is im p o rtan t is the capacity building of people,
th a t people need to, in th is tim e, in this transition state th a t we are in, on
th is planet, people need to be im proving and enhancing th e ir skills of
living on th e planet an d living with each other. W e need to develop th e
kinds of relationships th a t are necessary fo r us to come to g eth er a n d then
move a p a r t in this fluid k in d of organizational an d association s tru c tu re so
th a t we can m eet the social needs th a t are going to come a t us. And they
[the social needs] are going to come at us very quickly. As soon as we
rigidify ourselves into an institution, then our mindset starts to become, "What
do I need to do to keep this institution alive?" Even though the institution may
largely become irrelevant to the social movements that need to happen, our
mindset is still how do we keep the institution alive and we start acting in
ways that no longer look like the vision of who we are, the vision of who we
were when we created ourselves.
The "caring ethic" concept will most likely have to be the inner core of this move­
ment Bopha so earnestly spoke about.

142
Collaboration
One o f the stronger themes that emerged during this study was that o f collabo­
ration. Repeatedly, this concept was addressed by the 10 respondents as what
individuals in organizations needed to do to stay viable in this ever changing world.
Note that from all earlier discussions (from Chapters One through Four ) and up until
this point, collaboration was omitted as a variable in the analysis o f institutionalized
organizations. Figure 9 was drafted intuitively as a test model to help respondents
better capture the meaning o f the variables identified from the literature. Those
variables were the basis that area of inquiry three proposed to answer: How do the
following seven-C’s-Com m unication, Control, Culture, Consensus on values (Coher­
ence), Capital, Commitment, and Compliance—contribute to the institutionalization of
the nonprofits identified for this study?

C om m u nication

U)
O'

<7 »

Capital

Figure 9 . Seven institutionalization variables.

The end sought was the extent to which these variables were related to their individu­
al experiences within the respective organization. This was the model shown to

143
respondents Aaron and the rest so as to formulate a theory for the third area of
inquiry. Approvingly, most of the respondents thought the model "fine," noting
where G6d6 said, "You can keep adding and adding to that" (speaking o f the variables
on the model). In that sense, most of the respondents validated their individual
experience with the seven institutionalization variables. In a manner almost reminis­
cent o f when a hypothesis is disproved in a quantitative study and the researcher must
accept the null, Bopha clarified the significance of the collaboration theme to the
individual in organizations. Prior to seeing the "Seven Institutionalization Variables"
model, he had postulated that the process of winning grants for one’s organization is
first about relationships and linkages, then it is about having excellent coherent ideas.
His comments capture the essence of the theme as voiced by the other respondents
with respect to the individual’s role.
There were several examples from the transcripts of these observations.
Bopha said:
Within every institution there are individuals. Another way to look at it is to
find the individuals inside those institutions who are able to be connected with
the large institution and at the same time they are able to p a rtn e r with groups
of people who are looking at doing things in a different way and who are able
to respond more quickly and adeptly at changing environments.
There, Bopha used the term partnering as opposed to the common collaborate
suggesting the activity o f individuals in a dynamic environment. Hotep also used the
term partnering while simultaneously refuting the notion of individualism in the
postmodern era. His statements were:
Nothing about the present is institutionalized. . . . I think that we are in the
era where a collaborative mode is increasingly necessary compared to an
individualistic control type. The individualistic type o f mode is not as desired
as it may have once been.

144
As more data were generated along the collaboration theme, it became clear
that the thinking o f the "Seven Institutionalization Variables" was not as holistic (or
systems-based) as first anticipated. Not only did the collaboration theme emerge,
others like compliance and control were rarely mentioned with any degree of convic­
tion. There were adequate explanations for their omission from the dialogue and
observations engaged with study participants and some organizational members. It
was found that these two variables were antithetical to the transformational leadership
advocated and applied by the participants in this study. The modem concept of
control was reframed to be consistent with the nomenclature o f postmodern ideolo­
gies. As for compliance, earlier challenges to the derivation o f that construct caused
the applicability to postmodern organizations and transformational leaders suspect.
The related themes, however, had to be addressed in turn.
First, regarding the collaboration that must be undertaken by individuals within
organizations, Bopha and the researcher engaged in the following:
R: Usually new organizations try to establish those relationships. The
common way is by keeping track of people that they meet over a period of
time, otherwise they try to pursue them through boards of directors.
W hat . . . (question not completed)
Bopha: There is a third way. Break down the mindset o f what an organiza­
tion and an institution is. Collect around you other organizations, those people
who have the relationships, those people who have the vision that is encom­
passed in the vision o f your organization and then you have the relationship
intact. You don’t have to do it through boards.
R: One o f the themes that I am pursuing deals with institutionalization and
how it may end up affecting other nonprofit organizations. For example, it is
getting more and more difficult to find a successful and long lasting organiza­
tion that has shown, over 10 or 15 years or more, that it has been able to meet
its goals and continues to grow. MAS A was able to do that without necessari­
ly the many years o f experience often required. Is this going to be a

145
reoccurring trend or what was special about the MASA approach that made it
overcome the usual climb o f the 10 to 15 years?
Bopha: Partnerships and relationships. Getting grants is no different than
anything else in life; it is done through relationships. You always need to
have great ideas. But there are many more good ideas than there is money to
support them. What is the difference between a good idea that gets supported
and a good idea that floats out there and never gets supported. I believe it has
to do with how well you articulate the idea and how well it can fit into another
organization’s vision for what they are doing and relationships. And we had
all three.
Then, Bopha addressed the specific application of the theme to the existing
model. Note that those two previous exchanges occurred at varying times throughout
the interview. Hence, it suggests consistency, relevance and significance. This
concern was paramount for the researcher and was expressed during this exchange
during which more theory emerged.
R: Some o f the reoccurring themes that I have been able to identify are:
capital, commitment from the members, culture within the organization, a
certain amount o f control that the leadership applies or allows, flexibility to
allow the members to that which they are capable, and some others [now
pointing to the graphic shown with Figure 9], Would you say that this is
consistent with what you have seen with MASA [Michigan Agricultural
Stewardship Association] or with what institutions can do?
Bopha: I think that they are all important.
R: You have added collaboration to these seen here. In a sense you haven’t
termed them exactly as such but you hit on many o f them as being presented
in this framework.
Bopha: Now you have to put an 8th C in there. Where are you going to put
it?
R: There is a way. It will have to be done, of course depending on how
effective or how important it has been for your organization.
Bopha: Very! M ore important than any o f these. M ore important than
compliance. Com pliance is not nearly as im portant as collaboration.
Culture, communication and commitment; if you have the rest capital comes.

146
I don’t know, control. I guess it depends on how you frame it. It is definitely
a very important aspect or an important issue.
Indeed, the control variable was reframed and better understood as coordination
facilitated by the leadership.

Commitment
For this study in general, commitment was one of the three most significant
and repeated observations (see Appendix E). Every one of the 10 respondents
reiterated the importance and value of commitment to their organization. It was even
observed during a board meeting for one of the participating organizations. A fail­
safe demonstration o f commitment will always be the willing and effective participa­
tion o f all your board members at mid-week meetings scheduled for 7:00 a.m . Since
the Tuscola 2001 aims to serve the whole Tuscola County, the meetings are scheduled
at sites throughout the County. This schedule often necessitated (at least for the
researcher) mornings that began as early as 5:00 AM to make on-time arrival.
Commitment is what the individual members bring to the organization.
Oftentimes it is said to be inspired or caused to be felt by some "thing" or some
"one." During the industrial age or even the modem era, an inspirational or even
transactional leader could often be found responsible for such induced "motivation."
The transformational leadership promoted by this study and its participants suggested
otherwise. Though situational and probably underrepresented by these three cases,
nonprofit institutions are more effective with self-induced commitment. This line of
inquiry was pursued comparatively with several of the participants with the results
that formulated a formal theory about the commitment variable as related to the

147
institutionalization continuum. From the tone of the questions, a fair assessment was
that the researcher was still thinking and operating in a classical, outdated and nontransformational mode though it was the major premise of this study.

Interaction

with Aaron and Abel o f the Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA)
went thusly:
R: Do you think that the members of the (MASA) organizations are inspired
to feel commitment? How do you as the leader or how does the organization
as a whole get them to that stage?
A aron: I guess we have a tremendous team of committed individuals. I think
they have the ability, capability to see where they can do things that would
have an impact and they don’t really need to be forced into doing that.
They’re ready to take on that roll. I think pride. I think they take it on with
pride that they can do. Certainly at times we talk to each other about what
some o f these things might lead to, how they can be an asset to the MASA
organization. But I wish we had more individuals who had the time. . . . I
think they do have the commitment. There’s a lot of commitment out there
but simply put, it becomes a time factor.
R: What about MASA do you think drives or commands so much commit­
ment from its members? I mean every organization kind of looks for that.
Particularly if you are talking about volunteers. You need commitment from
volunteers to get the job done. And if you are talking about committees,
committee work is, like one organization told me, where the life o f the
organization is. What is it about MASA that makes people feel so committed?
A aron: I think most individuals in the MASA organization really believe that
they have something to offer and are willing to share that and the fact they are
committed to sharing as best they can. Even if it’s just the people who show
up at the annual meeting, you know once a year they touch other people,
associate with them. Just to make the commitment to come to that annual
meeting, that’s a commitment within itself. And it’s hard to measure how
much real commitment those individuals that show up to that annual meeting
have expressed throughout the year. . . . I would almost bet that throughout
the year they have done a lot of other things in their daily lives and in their
daily farming operations that have helped to further the organization.
Intrigued by this phenomenon, clarification of this experience within MASA
was pursued in the interview with Bopha. This method of asking people exposed to

148
the same phenomena parallel questions was intentional. For one, it served to validate
the theory being generated. Triangulation in qualitative studies can occur along
multiple points in the study. The following interaction with Bopha evidenced the
commitment experienced by Aaron, Abel, Bopha himself, and the many other MASA
members.
R: It was an interesting thing to note that two of the MASA members whom I
interviewed and asked how, as leaders of the organization, they are able to get
the people to be committed to the organization. The answer was, ’with
relative ease’ or at least nothing special had to be done because commitment is
self-sustained. I was wondering how that is made possible. W hat does an
organization do to keep self-sustaining commitment and keep the people
continuously motivated without any control or other activities?
Bopha: I would ask the question the other way around. It is not apparent to
me how control or coercion or any other means can keep people committed
because commitment comes from the heart. The way you keep people com­
mitted is to build a vision o f what can be accomplished through a collective
action. That vision, being so compelling to the people who are committed to
it, they stay involved. The actions that are being taken by the organization are
viewed as consistent with that vision and consistent with that commitment.
People will always come and go for lots of various reasons, but you don’t
compromise your vision.
You say we believe we can create an agricultural future that is going to
be more environmentally safe and agronomically sound and economically
profitable. We do believe that; we do believe that is necessary; we believe
that stewarding the agricultural industry and resources in this state for the
future are vitally important to all of us and you don’t waiver from it. I believe
that true commitment comes when individuals can understand how they can
contribute to an effort that is larger than them. A lot o f people think that
commitment comes from receiving services and "well if you have an organiza­
tion that can meet people’s needs of what they want and what they need and
the services that they require then people will stay committed." No, I don’t
believe that. I think that the higher commitment is one that is going to be
developed based on what I can contribute to my community and not what I
take from it. MASA is simply providing a vehicle for people who have this
kind o f vision for an agricultural future to contribute to a community who is
doing this work.
To this point, the focus had been on the individual’s role and the expression of
commitment. Hotep ultimately made the connection between this most important

149
theme and institutionalization. He provided an example that will better educate
organization conceptualizes (earlier referred to as entrepreneurs) on their decision­
making prior to undertaking a cause through a nonprofit association. Hotep supported
his views by stating the following:
Institutionalization requires a certain com m itm ent. If there are 12 institu­
tions with the exact identical doctrine then why should individuals stay in one
compared to going to the others. Resources are absolutely necessary because
you have two institutions with the same doctrine. One o f them was creative,
getting resources for decades and the next decade it sort o f fails at getting
attendance, getting the resources from the outside world. . . . So where is the
commitment to the institution? This is a phase of dealing with institutionaliza­
tion. An organization can become institutionalized, it can become deinstitu­
tionalized and that is usually a step towards its reincarnation or its disappear­
ance.
Becoming deinstitutionalized was mentioned here for the first time and makes perfect
logical sense. Still interested in the "how" o f commitment in these nonprofits,
Calembert was asked to share his experience as a leader with Youth Development
Corporation (YDC).
R: The members who you talked about within the organization, how are they
inspired to commitment—to the values and to the goals o f YDC?
C alem bert: Well I think the main thing is that you keep them involved with
that (the goals). By dialoguing with them periodically how what they are
doing fits into it (the goal). I think what is real critical with the Board of
Directors or volunteers is to constantly keep them fed with success stories—
things that say to them what we are doing is working. W e just received an
award from the Lieutenant Governor’s office for our mentoring program.
That does a lot. You take that letter from the Lieutenant Governor to the
Board meeting and let them read the letter. That does a lot for them. Because
now, when they are out talking to people about YDC, I say, by the way did
you get a chance to see in the paper that we won an award for this. And part
o f this is ju st what you can get into. Oftentimes you are always dealing with
financial things, maybe a problem. . . . It’s real easy to get hung up on those
kinds o f things and not recognize the other things you are doing.

150
Committees/Membership
This theme is most related to the individual in that they collectively make up
the committees or the membership of organizations, regardless the form. From
Figure 1 depicting the developmental stages of social systems, the membership
breathed life in most of those social systems. For many organizations, the member­
ship is their lifeblood. Members invigorate the organization’s purpose while directly
involved in establishing it. They also perform the work of the organization by
participating in committees and volunteering to achieve their creed. More critically
for certain nonprofit types, these members pay dues which make up the financial
resources needed to subsidize sanctioned activities.
G6d6 was most passionate in his description of the role committees played in
Tuscola 2001.
G£d£: . . . as chairperson now I can understand that it’s not always happen­
ing at the board meeting. I t’s happening in th e com m ittees. I th in k th e
com m ittees is where o u r w ork is being done. The reports come back. The
reports say we are doing good or not. But we support the committees. In our
board meeting, our board should be supporting our committees very strongly,
and with some monies at times. Now we started the Tourism and the Bam
committees. They had no clients. But they were raising clients to get this
thing started we appropriated some funds for the bam committee. But they
paid us back you see, now they paid us back and they went on. They needed
that little bit o f start. So the board can do that. We added support with
membership we go to the meetings and help structure the committees and then
they elect their presidents o f their organization and their treasurer and their
secretary. We fund the group. We back out o f it. You don’t want to run
their committee. That’s my theory as a board member. They run their
programs.
At first glance, this committee structure appeared as a peculiar mean to engineer an
organization. Noting their effectiveness, it may have been most appropriate instead;
their goals were being met. Furthermore, the popular concepts o f coalition building

151
within organizations and task assignments to break down organizations into divisible
parts for flexibility had been advocated in other areas of the nonprofit and organiza­
tion development literature. Nonprofits could engineer many varying forms. Still, as
was seen from the evidence of the cases, what keeps them on the path toward
institutionalization, over time, is their creed and the coherence of the membership to
accomplish the myriad goals. Whether they organize or function as committees
within the organization is largely irrelevant.
The other aspect o f organizational membership dealt with the value brought to
the organization by the membership. Aaron noted this need and thus engaged the
interviewer as follows:
R: . . . What do you think would be the most important issue or problem
facing this organization over the next year or so?
A aron: New m em ber grow th. I think we have to continue to bring on some
new members and there are different ways that I suppose we can do that. I
hope we continue to generate interest among non-members and make ourselves
available to individuals in a positive way that they feel like we have something
to offer them.
Gddd also considered the idea o f membership growth for Tuscola 2001, although he
conceded the difficulty o f getting people from the county involved initially. Often­
times, the difficulty stemmed from organizations’ desire to have coherence as a
predetermined condition for membership. MASA had other ideas about the potential
members and who they ought to be. Bopha addressed M ASA’s handling of that
particular concern. For MASA, the founding members who wrote the mission
statement for the organization agreed that:
. . . generally that you do not have to ascribe to any particular philosophy to
become a member. MASA doesn’t only welcome members who have said
"Yes, I am carrying the banner of sustainable agriculture." It has included

152
members all the way from people who are very strongly proponents of organic
agriculture to those who are more in the mainstream o f agriculture as it is
practiced in the state.
For many o f these organizations, the membership concern was more acute for board
membership. This area o f organizational life and the organization literature was
saturated and well-researched. Sufficient data existed on the processes organizations
generally go through to accomplish effective boards and effective board performance.
For Aaron and Abel o f MASA, they looked for a team; people who can work
together; people who are ’closer to the pulse’ of the goings-on in the industry; a
combination o f name recognition and service they could provide. For younger
organizations, it was often difficult to acquire board members who otherwise did not
have a sensitivity for the doctrine. Without that sensitivity and commitment, an
organization risked having a board in name alone. Before institutionalization and
without effective collaborative linkages, an organization was well-advised to seat the
working board o f committed and active members within the respective community. In
fact, the laws to incorporate a nonprofit in the state of Michigan require the identifi­
cation o f such individuals.

Communication
This theme was also observed and experienced as an individually related
phenomenon. Earlier, it was noted that organizational communication was necessary
for its (the organization’s) viability. Though the organization may endorse a commu­
nique, individuals enact it. People are at the root o f communication and are by and
large affected by it. Thus, there are reasons for having this variable appear in this
category as well. In the example o f Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association

153
(MASA), Abel said, "I would hope that every opportunity we get we should share
(communicate) those goals and aspirations that we are working on." Once the
organization initiates the process, communication continues on another level, from
person to person, for assistance, to give meaning to the announced "goals and
aspirations" or to act upon the received communication. Noting the significance of
individually related communication and how it manifested in their organization, Aaron
and Abel openly discussed their " . . . trouble determining who should receive the
newsletter because o f the types o f information that is shared in the new sletter."
The whole MASA organization had placed great emphasis on the individually
related communication. Early in their formation, they incorporated the services of
Michigan State University Extension (MSUE) for individual communication skill
building. This service was afforded two of the three cases and felt needed by a third.
Individual communication skills were directly related to the leadership capacity of that
individual. MSUE had a successful track record o f providing that service throughout
the State. They were encouraged to continue doing so with evidence from organiza­
tions like MASA and others mentioned by some respondents but not included here in
this study.
F or Youth Development Corporation (YDC) individually related communica­
tion meant referrals. As Calembert said, "Fifty percent of our referrals come from
word o f mouth. That’s the best PR you can get. And it’s free." Here, people are
communicating with people. YDC was able to tap into communication mechanisms
that translated to increased organizational effectiveness. Evidence, however, was
gained only after those individuals who received that information walked through the

154
doors for YDC services. Therefore, another process that could be called interpreta­
tion to action augmented this continually evolving communication model.
The additional process to the communication model (here called "interpretation
to action") was found as part o f the experience o f some respondents in this study.
Filo called it "good follow through on the part o f the leadership." This category was
significant because o f the importance of perspectives and meaning making in commu­
nication. Consider a basic example of a communication from ABC Community
Foundation to nonprofits via internet announcing a Request for Proposal (RFP).
W hile using the communication technology (computer, fax modem, internet, e-mail,
etc.), the executive director o f DEF, Inc. notices the communication under the
Gopher-established nonprofit organizations category.
Here was how the five processes explained this communication. The com m u­
n icato r was the ABC Community Foundation with a message about an RFP and
available funding. The message was developed through a mutually shared m edium
called internet and sent electronically via fax modems attached to computers. The
researching executive director engaged in the communication was the receiver o f the
electronic message. S/he followed the instructions on the communique and gave
feedback to the Foundation by indicating DEF, Inc.’s interest in the new funding
category and receipt of the instructions on how to apply for the grant. Now what
does this all mean to the receiver/executive director? From what perspective was the
message viewed? What meaning was applied to the content of the message? These
questions legitimize a concern for interpretation to action in communication. If the
meaning o f the communique is perceived as disingenuous and worthless, then the

155
executive director may opt to ignore this particular communication. And the cyclical
nature o f communication suggests that the meaning and interpretation that ABC
Foundation would have about DEF, Inc. is that they are not serious and the executive
director is ineffective for not pursuing financing opportunities after determining a fit
in goals and values. Noting the above scenario, follow-through resounded as a
critical element for most of the organizations. Though he did not call it "interpreta­
tion to action, Townsend (1976) did point out that " . . . Even the best transmitters
will fail if the intended recipients are unable and/or unwilling to receive and act on
the messages" (p. 470). Furthermore, he noted that "Only through information
transmission can the efforts of people be coordinated so that the organization can
respond effectively to its environment" (p. 471).

Coordination
The initial literature review to frame this study identified control as a variable
applied by effective organizations on the verge of institutionalization. That literature,
by and large, dated back to the modem era during which control, positional leader­
ship, and management by objectives, were the crux of the organizational development
(OD) paradigm. That construct, however, undervalued the creativity and post-modern
standards for organizations. As a result, some OD practitioners moved from control
to coordination.
Understandably, the control phenomenon was still applied in some OD circles.
In certain instances, the concept o f coordination was broadly adopted or understood to
be going on. Hence, many of the respondents spoke to the need for control within
organizations since they witnessed much of it in their organizations. Their validation

156
o f the control concept was made using the initial setting institutionalization variables
depicted in Figure 9. Control was not "thrown out" in the manner compliance was
done by Bopha. The researcher was led to modifying the concept (at least in name)
when repeated references were made to flexible organizations, changing goals, and
flexible leadership. Hotep’s comments served as an example of this oxymoronic
posture. It can be attributed to nomenclature and taxonomy. In one instance, he
talked about a move away from control in the US and a ". . . a genuine kind of
participation among the collaborators where you [the organization] can get good
"coordination." The following exchange between the researcher and Hotep was
exemplary.
R: Is there room for control along the operations of the leadership or the
manifestation o f the organization’s institution status?
H otep: Yes, there is always some kind of control. If I am looking at an
organization or institution, one of the variables that I look at is who are
controlling the program—any specialized people within the institution, leaders
o f the institution, or the clientele of the institution? An institution where the
insiders want to control the whole program and not let the outsiders o r the
clientele have a chance on it—and they can do that—then one can predict that
the program is not going to succeed over time. . . . In all human interaction
there are features o f control. They will control various things and that is
different from using the sort of control.
To further pronounce this theme, Hotep used an example o f a jazz group.
Organizations can indeed function more like jazz ensembles where the band leader
says, "a one, a two, a one two three," and on goes the music. The coordination
comes in with regards to the fundamental operation of the ensemble. Hotep said:
They have to, however, have some degree o f coordination, because if they are
going to do their certain thing in a restaurant tonight, they all have to be there.
If one guy decides not to go and he happens to be the base player, and they
can’t do it without him, then they are in trouble; so they have to coordinate.

157
The jazz band metaphor works in that it suggests a certain amount of fluidity as
expressed by each artist. In such an environment, the ensemble member has an
opportunity to take initiative (a value identified by Bopha), be in "control" o f his/her
individual improvisation (called a "run" by jazz musicians and fanatiques), and
contribute within the framework o f a team. The leader of this organization type is
one who is flexible and transforming as opposed to rigid and constraining.

Leadership
The leadership concept was always looked upon as a critical component to
organizational effectiveness and the institutionalization process. For Calembert to
refrain from the term "leadership" explicitly may speak to his positional role in the
organization. All the other respondents specifically mentioned leadership as a
component of institutionalized organizations. This situation may be akin to Gddd’s of
Tuscola 2001 who saw "leader" as a near pejorative term. Still, Calembert talked
about leadership-related concepts. Policy and procedural guidelines were his hall­
mark. He continually stressed his concern for order, organization and rules. He
lived by his words—if his work environment was to serve as evidence. His office was
neat and orderly, albeit small and windowless. He was able to refer to file cabinets
and a Rolodex when asked for specific information. Those activities were managerial
and, at best, functional/transactional leadership. From the earlier section, this culture
necessitates control for both rewards and punishment.
Meanwhile, transformational leadership was the recommended style for
institutionalized organizations. This type of leadership " . . . arises when leaders are
more concerned about gaining overall cooperation and energetic participation from

158
organization members than they are in getting particular tasks performed" (Mitchell &
Tucker, 1992, p. 32). In most o f the literature, leadership was said to be a modem
concept. Mitchell and Tucker (1992) laid out postmodern prescriptions for school
executives in their descriptive comparison of transformational leadership. Their work
(1992) validated the posture taken for leadership in this study and was expressed
thusly:
If leaders are working in cultural settings where goals are unclear or organiza­
tional members do not agree about them [no consensus, to use the phraseology
o f this study] effective leadership requires an approach that transforms the
feelings, attitudes, and beliefs o f their followers. Compliance is not enough
under these circumstances; it is important to get followers to believe in
themselves and in the goals of the organization [and to commitment, using the
phraseology of this study]. Transformational leaders are "people oriented;"
rather than focus on tasks and performance, they build relationships and help
followers develop goals and identify strategies for their accomplishment. . . .
Managers . . . rely more on transactional than transformational relationships.
[To them] . . . task definition is more important than nurturing interpersonal
relationships. . . . Transformational leaders see themselves as responsible
more for redefining educational goals than for implementing existing pro­
grams. (p. 34)
The case may be that the leaders in the three cases applied transformational leadership
intuitively, because it worked best for their respective organization. Consider, for
example, G6dd and his empowerment of committees in Tuscola 2001. Those commit­
tee members saw their contributions to the organizational goals as testament o f their,
(in Imani’s words,) "concern for the county."
Though Hotep’s comments used less explicit words than those o f Mitchell and
Tucker (1992), he nearly approached the transformational leadership construct. The
following exchange validated this finding.
R: In your dealings with institutions what kinds of leaders have you found
manifesting within these institutions to keep them as such?

159
H otep: Tick off a few criteria (selecting fingers from hand to hand while
going down a mental list): They u n d erstan d th e doctrine; they are com m it­
te d to th e doctrine; they are able to explain it a t all levels; they understand
it well enough so they explain the doctrine to the s ta ff o f the organization
even though they are all in it and some of them even longer than the leader.
The leader has to explain, ’we are here building a cathedral, we are not here
just putting brick together’--the reasons why the world needs this organization.
The leader has to be able to explain th a t [doctrine] inside an d outside to
potential donors, to resource providers, whoever they m ay be, a n d also to
clients. That sometimes requires a leader that can speak nine languages or
speak one language at many different levels to people o f different kinds. Then
there is a factor o f shear energy and long hours o f hard work. The leaders I
have encountered [who] really carry their institutions, tended to be both men
a n d women of unusual vigor. Maybe they are not physically all that strong,
but they could hang in there day after day, after d ay-long days and short
nights; get less sleep than everybody else; get to work earlier than most of the
others; be there after the others are gone; sleep in the vehicle, whether it be a
car, boat or a train or whatever; and be ready to work as soon as they land at
the next place. I think that kind of characteristic tends to pervade successful
institutions over the years.
There are other kinds of things that help institutions, but it su re helps
to know som ething about the various program s th a t th e institution has.
He or she m ust u n d erstan d the doctrine; that is critical. If the organization,
let say, is a health care organization and it is going to employ physicians and
nurses and technicians o f various kinds, it is also going to build buildings, use
equipment and it’s going to have a transportation system and a communication
system. Whoever the leader is can’t understand all of that and couldn’t be
technically competent in all of those things. He or she has to have enough
sanity to deal with it all. Another characteristic is flexibility. The world
changes and the institution has to sort of ride with the changes o f the current.
That means that the leadership has to be quite flexible. If its flexible enough,
when the way to achieve the rationale of the doctrine is to do different pro­
grams than they did last year, flexible leadership figure that out, how to adjust
to it and help the staff. Plus the staff, hopefully they will be flexible people
and leader type of people in it. But the staff, and I ’m not talking only about
paid staff, they might be volunteers, they might be members or whatever.
When they learn how to do something well and it seems to work, they won’t
like to change. The doctrine has to bring people to the organization [and keep
them committed].
The idea o f youth and vigor in organizations was experienced and reiterated by Gede
speaking for Tuscola 2001. Specifically G6dd said:
Am I interested in the 2001 project? Yes, and I want to see it grow. I think
probably a younger President next time with some more energy would be

160
good. Too many gray hairs. Diversity; and I am going to be requesting that
because when you get older you get certain ideas and when you are younger
you get certain more and this organization should not end up with gray hairs.
This recommendation is also consistent with findings convincingly derived and
reported by Vandenberg (1993) in her study o f neighborhood associations in Michi­
gan.
Category Three—Environmentally Related Themes
In Chapter Two, detailed attention was afforded the "environment" and its
affect on organizations. The environment was a significant concept for organizations
because they did not operate in vacuums. The interrelation between and among them
served as evidence o f a fluid co-existence of "open systems" that shared resources
(human, capital, ideas, facilities, donors, etc.). As it relates to institutionalization,
the environment played a certain role that otherwise defined organizations along the
institutionalization continuum. These roles were part of the experiences shared by the
participants in the three cases. For meaning, the environment was considered as the
suprasystem or the collectivities o f organizations pursuing either similar or even
tangential goals. Regardless o f their creed, the following themes, namely capital,
collaboration, communication, community validation, flexibility/adaptability, and
organizational transformation, were viewed as being related to conditions in the
environment. Emphasis will be indicated by bolded words, terms and/or phrases.

Capital
Since most o f these organizations had a nonprofit motive, the capital theme
had different meaning to the various respondents in this study. At the onset, it was

161
expected that capital was the driving variable for the organizations’ sustenance. Yet
the respondents barely mentioned capital as a significant observation in their
organizational experiences. Considered within these experiences were interactions
and activities outside their respective organization or lives highlighted by this study.
These experiences by and large emanated from the broader environment within which
these organizations operated. Moreover, the environment, over the years, had
developed mechanisms to check and balance organizations’ procurement o f capital.
Still, Gddd o f Tuscola 2001 was not completely ready to identify this variable as
being a major factor for his or other organizations striving for institutionalization.
Even with the phone ringing (twice in total), unfazed, he went on with his comment
saying, "Well it takes a little capital, not a lot, surprisingly, not a lot."
Hotep had a different experience and made remarks suggesting a different
meaning to the capital needs for nonprofits. He addressed the granting and institu­
tionalization processes nonprofits endured throughout their existence. He offered the
following remarks:
H otep: If a young organization has enabling linkages and linkages outside to
provide its resources, it has a chance of being institutionalized. If it doesn’t, it
is not going to get the resources ju s t because it claim s to be a n institu­
tion. . . . Even if everyone could agree that they need programs like that and
even if some government o r non-government organizations are willing to
provide funds for it, there is going to be a time limiting factor because nobody
can get money forever. Nobody says you get money forever and that [they]
will give you X amount o f money, as we do in this country, on an annual
basis. I shouldn’t say nobody because some people have died and left a will
which states that, but their will is probably not infinite. If it is enough money,
than it can become institutionalized.
That is how some o f the foundations become institutionalized. A very
wealthy family [for example], forget how they accumulate the wealth, if they
decide that they are going to incorporate it as a foundation and take all of their
capital and use only the interest of the earnings from it to do something, it is
relatively easy for them to become institutionalized. That thing has then a

162
guarantee o f resources for a long time. Now you say, what about its pro­
grams? Well, staff will invent a program if they don’t have them. If staff
invents a program that is illegal or something like that, they may end up not
surviving. Some things have started without leadership, without programming,
without organization, but with a constant flow of resources. If they don’t have
any programs or projects that implement that doctrine—as long as they still
have their resources—they may last a long long time. . . . We don’t need all of
them to start with.
On the flip side, Bopha validated G6de’s experiences saying o f the identified institu­
tionalization variables, " . . .

Culture, communication and commitment. If you have

the rest capital comes." From the major theme Diversity, it was found that the
resources ought to come from varying sources. The base point of this discussion was
that the environment had created its own discriminating variables and factors to
determine which organizations would continue receiving grants. Erzule clarified this
constant dollar chase and the overall process for nonprofits as it related to institution­
alization or, to use her phraseology, "to arrive."
Erzule: I think all organizations aspire to have stable basic funding and would
like recognition and community support and there’s never enough of that.
Even those that have "arrived" are struggling. . . . One way to have "arrived"
is to really tap in to regular dollars. . . . The second way that organizations
(sort of) "arrive" is to tap a local source o f funding. In many communities
there are two sources o f local funds: community foundations and United Way.
Lansing has a new community foundation. Many larger communities like
Detroit, Grand Rapids and communities throughout the country have sizable
foundations that are local funding sources with businesses and individuals
contributing. So I ’m talking about funding dollars right now.
In order to get local funds, its a little bit more complex. Its not a
matter o f excellent grant writing or getting to people who know Washington
and work to lobby. It’s a little different. First of all, foundation funds are
generally smaller locally. They may support programs for a number o f years
but it may be at a scale where they withdraw support gradually. United Way,
Community Chest (in some communities) typically will have a board and they
will review applications and they will fund organizations year after year after
year, presuming they meet certain guidelines. Now that’s changing too. A lot
o f communities are saying we want a different process for application; ’we
want a different way to determine how organizations are funded.’ So right
now it’s really uncertain as to which organizations will receive funds for next

163
year through United Way. There’s no guarantee of funds for the same
organizations. Increasingly, people who contribute money, even $10 or $25 a
year, are saying we want our money to go to this specific organization. So
donors themselves scatter and disperse funds so that a small group of the board
members isn’t making that decision. What this has done is to create a lot of
publicity that has to go on about that organization to the community. Every $5
and $10 contributor to the United Way has the power to decide what to fund.
It’s costly and requires publicity for small nonprofit organization. It is harder
than influencing two or three key people.
Overall, Erzule made even more far reaching comments which stemmed from her
experiences. She pointed to the self-serving nature of philanthropy to date. "And the
statistics prove this," she said. Continuing, she remarked, "If it’s new and not
proven then folks will not come around to support it." Erzule’s point made Bopha’s
comments resonate considering his mention of Michigan Agricultural Stewardship
Association’s (M ASA’s) million dollar grant being the result o f partnerships, relation­
ships and linkages. The relationship was established along several planes of organiza­
tional levels for general accountability and therefore expanded the circle of relation­
ships for the organizations involved.

Collaboration
Collaboration was already shown as being related to that which organizations
and individuals do. In an even greater context, the environment demanded collabora­
tion. The responses almost suggested that without collaboration, an organization
seldom moved along the institutionalization continuum. Echoing a point made earlier
by Hotep, Erzule asked rhetorically, "How many of these types of organizations or
institutions can the environment support?" With limited and diminishing resources
being available in the environment, this question was asked repeatedly. This observa­
tion invariably led to many more organizations coming together to: share rent in

164
office buildings; jointly sponsor conferences and national meetings; share mailing lists
o f their membership; partner to submit proposals as a consortium of concerned
organizations; and, organize in still more innovative ways than these mentioned here.
Using the term coalition, Hasenfeld (1983, p. 76) posited some main ideas that
contributed to the understanding o f collaboration. He identified the following
conditions as being most conducive for collaboration: (a) Each organization on its
own is relatively powerless against those who control the resource it desires (i. e.,
money, legitimation, clients, favorable legislations, service programs); (b) there is the
right amount o f complementariness and compatibility of interests among the organiza­
tions; and (c) each organization perceives a payoff that exceeds the costs o f collabo­
rating. The associated costs to collaborations limited their existence over time and
thus their institutionalized potential. Hasenfeld (1983) used the example o f six civil
rights organizations in the U.S. to stress the point of how the Urban League,
NAACP, SCLC, SNCC and the Negro American Labor Council collaborated from
1963 to 1965 by overlooking their differences and organizing the successful March on
Washington. Doing so for these seven organizations led to the passage o f landmark
civil rights legislation that later brought unprecedented rights for white women and
anti-discrimination legislation to "protect" African Americans/Blacks, Hispanics,
Native Americans and other "people of color." The ultimate culmination of that
collaboration was its demise.
Having already detailed the importance of collaboration, Bopha provided the
definitive understanding of how the environment promoted collaboration. The
following exchange clarified the meaning.

165
R: W hat is it about being an institution has to do with what the environment
says you undertake?
Bopha: Maybe this is where the whole point of collaboration comes back in.
One o f the basic values that MASA has employed from the start is that we are
not doing it alone; that you collaborate with others. So you utilize the
stren g th th a t a n institution can bring. You don’t say, I ’m not going to
collaborate with Farm Bureau because there are people there who are trying to
support the status quo in agriculture, while we are trying to move ahead.
Instead you say Farm Bureau has a lot of strengths to offer in what we are
doing so lets team with them. All of a sudden you have MASA who is being
supported by Farm Bureau every time there is a grant being written; you have
the president of Michigan Farm Bureau writing a letter o f support, and the
director o f MDA writing a letter o f support, and the Dean o f MSU College of
Agriculture and Natural Resources writing a letter of support. You don’t have
to be an institution to be able to rely on the legitimacy o f institutions that are
there. You can do it by partnering with them.
R: So, in a sense, institutions in the environment still have a role to play and
organizations can still aspire to get to that particular status?
Bopha: They can, but another way to look at it is to say I don’t aspire to get
to that status, but my greatest aspiration is to move towards the vision that we
have articulated. And if the best way to do th a t is to collaborate with others
a n d And th e common g ro u n d where those visions overlap then you do it.
You borrow legitimacy from others; you receive a grant from the Kellogg
Foundation; that can bring you legitimacy overnight.
A more summative take on the collaboration concept had to be discussed.
Though it could be seen as related to the environment, individuals and organizations,
collaboration prevailed most significantly in one level. Bopha touched on it briefly in
the passage above while purposefully switching from "we (MASA) are not doing it
alone; you collaborate." Individuals were really at the core of collaboration. In
earlier sections where it was suggested that organizations could choose to "partner" or
collaborate, it was mentioned with the assumption that the individuals operating within
the organization concept (detailed in Chapter Two) was applied. It was found that
true relationships are pursued by individuals who shared values and other ethics. The

166
individuals, after having expressed those same values, ethics (diversity, caring or
otherwise), and similar goals and/or mission for their organizations measured and
analyzed the extent to which potential collaborators had points of commonality. Next,
the leadership followed through and communicated intentions to collaborate. All the
while, they were mindful that one aspect of their respective organization could keep
them from ever becoming a "merged" entity the way Hotep and Erzule predicted for
Boys and Girls Scouts.

Communication
Environmentally, communication dealt with those interactions, planned or
otherwise, that organizations undertook with others in the suprasystem. This form of
communication might have been in the name or image that an organization conveyed,
its stature or its effectiveness as an organization (or the illusion thereof). Speaking of
Youth Development Corporation (YDC), Calembert said:
. . . I t ’s real critical too that we do not focus a 100% on that [delinquency]
because I also think it’s important that the organization not be labeled as an
organization that’s only for troubled kids. For instance if you’re an employer,
and I come with somebody, and you know that I work with ex-offenders and
that’s it. You know the person I ’ve got is an ex-offender and that puts a
certain judgm ent on that person before you ever even talk to them, based on
the fact that I brought them. I think that it is real critical that we don’t label
our clients by virtue o f them coming to us. The only label is that between 16
and 21 but not necessarily troubled kids because you want an employer to
make a decision on whether they are going to take this young person based on
the young person not based on whether they think there may be some problems
because o f who is sending them their way. We have had some funding
sources ask us to focus 100% on people who are in the court system or who
have come out o f the court system. And I said no. Seventy to 80% maybe,
not one hundred. Because I want the onus not to be on the kids. I want there
to be enough "good kids" (if you want to call them that) that are in the
program so that an employer doesn’t automatically judge a kid by the organi­
zation.

167
In the preceding passage, Calembert expressed how the organization’s name could
communicate something potentially damaging for the rest of his organization. Bopha
nearly touched this point with his observation for the word "stewardship" in the name
of his organization—Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association.
Another sense on the communication with the environment or that is environ­
mentally related dealt with the status or perceived status o f the organization. Already,
it was explained that an organization can call itself an institution even without having
"arrived" or achieved the "many trappings of institutionalization." In such cases
(most notably from the researcher’s previous experience as a nonprofit executive) the
key was to communicate "an illusion of bigness." During a conversation, that
concept was coined and explained by a graphics artist at Michigan State University
after many years’ experience working with small nonprofit/community organizations.
Almost similar to the way YDC used "nice paper stock" (in Erzule’s words), an
organization could communicate that it had become institutionalized even while really
closer to being deinstitutionalized on the continuum. Such illusions often served to
attract collaborators, grants and donors, and legitimacy from the environment. The
caveat, however, was that illusions were seldom institutionalized. An organization
that communicated mostly illusion would die once the community realized it had been
disingenuous in its communication.
A final part o f that communication with the environment or that was environ­
mentally related was the external communication of the organization’s name.
External communication was more precarious in that it was highly susceptible to noise
and other disturbances from the environment. Townsend (1976) noted that "Only

168
through information transmission can the efforts of people be coordinated so that the
organization can respond effectively to its environment" (p. 471). Organizations
communicated their intentions, missions, goals, program objectives, needs for
resources, and other critical information through use of available media. By the end
o f the 20th century, this media had become more sophisticated to then include
satellites, computers (internet) and fax modems; those were media. By name alone,
however, organizations communicated to the outside public and thus were able to emit
significant messages with staying power. Consider for example two organizations;
one was named Rebels Without a Cause (RWC); another was called Reformed
Wayward Children (RWC). While the acronyms suggest sameness, intuitively, it was
safe to argue that the RWC communicating "reform" and "children" would be better
received and thus legitimized. The key words in their name communicated causes
most in the environment would support. The key then was in selecting an organiza­
tional name that: (a) quickly and effectively identified the cause of the organization,
(b) easily transferred into a "punchy" call name with an acronym, (c) communicated
in the language spoken by the client-system; and (d) stood alone without previous
tarnish from a defunct organization or competition from an already existing entity
already with that name. Most o f the foregoing dialogue dealt with organizational
marketing which was by and large communication. There were many examples,
however, of organizations with names that incorporated "youths," "environment,"
"American," and "international," to name just a few of the "buzzwords" that ushered
in the 21st century. Concepts associated with the future, fairness and equity also
appeared to convey sentiments meritorious of support.

169
Community Validation
The direct relationship expressed by a category and its thematic underpinnings
was exemplified by community validation and the environment. For this study, the
community was the environment. By community, scholars of organizational develop­
ment (OD) and organization theory meant the stakeholders, members (and even the
subsequent committees they work on within the organization) donors, collaborators,
and other institutions all o f which made up the larger suprasystem. The other
component was made up o f those individuals in the community whose interactions
with organizations served to validate the work that they did. W eber (1947) identified
that relationship between the community and professions. Hasenfeld (1983), among a
host o f OD practitioners, made the same correlation between organizations and their
surrounding communities. The same concept o f legitimacy was found essential for
organizations along the institutionalization continuum.
When Filo was asked to comment on the value of Youth Development
Corporation (YDC) as perceived by the community, her response appeared mixed and
somewhat inconsistent. The fact was that she responded at varying levels. When
asked, "What is the perception o f YDC by the community?", she said:
Parents are appreciative. Teachers are not involved directly but they are
appreciative. I have never heard anything negative about the organization.
Never have I heard, "This [organization] is a waste o f time." They may have
difficulty in getting hard concrete data to prove that YDC works. I like this
program because of the holistic approach to serving the children. They
achieve visibility in the community through their board of directors.
At one level, she spoke about the overall constituents for whom she was qualified to
speak after 12 years as guidance counselor in the community. Her credibility
commanded attention when she said, "The broad community is down on the

170
population that YDC serves. A theme is needed; something that strikes the heart of
the community." At another level, she gives personal validation with statements like,
"I like this program. . ." and by participating in studies like this one about the
organization.
Community validation, therefore, was expressed in many forms and at multiple
levels. Reiterating the "organizations as living organisms" metaphor expressed earlier
in Chapter Two, Hotep said, "There is a natural life cycle for institutions [here
meaning institutionalized organizations] just as there is for organizations." He went
on to say, "If an organization becomes institutionalized the value in and o f itself
seems to be best, the critical part of the definition." Hotep used the term "value in
and o f its e lf to communicate the idea of community validation. He provided a
thorough understanding o f the relationship to the institutionalization concept with the
prompting, "So, the definition o f institution extends beyond the variables?" Hotep’s
informed reply was:
I don’t think that the variables define an institution. The variables are charac­
teristics that an analyst can use in describing it and comparing one of them
with another or in making some forecast about how long it is going to last or
what to do. If in the beginning stage, you have a new organization and you
want to institutionalize it, what can you work on. The variables are handy.
But I don’t think it [the organization] gets defined as an institution except sort
o f historically. This one was an institution because it lasted a long time and
because people valued it in and of itself. They valued it in spite of what it
was doing.
Nation states and sovereign states tend to get a little o f this—’That is
my country and I ’m a citizen of it. I hope it is always right, but right or
wrong it is my country’—so they tend to become institutionalized. Now we
have a lot o f countries changing names, changing all the time so even that
doesn’t go forever. We have military occupations and countries which
eventually become colonies for someone else. Sometimes that lasts 300 year,
but even after the 300 years are over, sometimes they can go back and go to
the old institutions and in that phenomenon some institutions go underground.

171
Hotep was speaking at a higher and more global level, highly related to the bottom
resulting box o f Figure 1 in Chapter Two explaining social systems. It was refreshing
to have been able to follow his diatribe. Off the digression he remarked:
. . . When has a thing become institutionalized? Without the time dimension,
people have to value it—maybe not for the particular program at the moment,
but by the value in and o f itself; by the name and their perception o f the
doctrine; and that is probably a more important thing.
Bopha had a different idea on how these organizations would arrive to that
stature, if at all. Follow the exchange with him, reported in other sections of this
study, while discussing institutionalization as an organizational pursuit and validation
in the form o f legitimacy from the community.
R: So in a sense, institutions that are in the environment still have a role to
play and organizations can still aspire to get to their particular statuses?
B opha: They can, but another way to look at is to say I don’t aspire to get to
that status, that my greatest aspiration is to move towards the vision that we
have articulated. And if the best way to do that is to collaborate with others
and find the common ground where those visions overlap then you do it. You
borrow legitimacy from others, you receive a grant from the Kellogg Founda­
tion; that can bring you legitimacy overnight.
Associated effects were the organizations’ ability to gauge and read the environment.

Flexibility/Adaptability
The findings thus repeatedly pointed to certain amounts of flexibility and
adaptability in both the organizations and the individuals interacting within them.
Still, as a significant observation from 8 of the 10 respondents, these themes were
related to conditions induced by the environment. Furthermore, they addressed area
of inquiry one o f this study purposed to answer how organizations establish necessary
procedures to deal with changes in the marketplace. The answer, in part, was through

172
flexibility in the organization (leadership, membership, policies and programs, etc.)
and adaptability as predicated by the environment. Bopha provided a clear testament
o f the adaptation of these concepts within the Michigan Agricultural Stewardship
Association (MASA) saying, "The more fluid we can keep this organization, probably
the better off w e’re all gonna be." When asked, "Could it be perceived as an aim to
arrive at that fluidity in organizations or is it a natural process?" his answer was quite
detailed and replete with examples o f academic institutions. Bopha expressed that:
It is sort o f hard to say what that looks like as a goal. If you read the litera­
ture in business and industry and the management and leadership literature, all
over the place right now, it talks about the importance o f being flexible, of
organizations and institutions having a great deal of flexibility to deal with the
changing environment. And I think that is one of the reasons, for instance, it
is so difficult for a university to deal with changing environments. It is
because we have built in such rigidity. W e built rigidity in budgets. W e built
rigidity in curriculum. We built rigidity in terms of who is here. You get
promoted and tenured and most people stay here for a career. That doesn’t
allow a whole lot of flexibility in being able to adjust an institution to meet
current needs as they come very quickly. We may have a faculty at a univer­
sity who is largely trained in one age and has a world view in one age, who is
being asked to educate our young people who will live most of their life in a
completely different age. And my God, that’s a challenge.
Speaking on experiences with the same MASA organization earlier, Aaron had
already made the point to allow certain amounts o f flexibility in his leadership style,
the organization and his private business. Evidence of a need for flexibility in
Aaron’s private business stems from the fact that he farmed 1,000 acres farm and did
custom harvest work on 4,000 [acres] more. He grew wheat and soybeans, but his
major crop was hay, most o f it for cash sale all o f which complement his 60 brood
beef cows and Holstein cows (MASA Newsletter, December 1994).
For Tuscola 2001 and Imani, adaptability meant "revisit[ing] their goals every
couple o f years . . . [to] constantly deal with changes in the environment." Doing so

173

suggested an even greater sort o f transformation parallel to that observed for the
leadership within institutionalized organizations.

Organizational Transformation
One of the exit questions for this study was intended to set up for closing the
interview. The respondents were asked to make some concluding remarks or
observations based on their experiences. In most instances, the comment centered
around environmentally related activities that their organizations had arbitrarily
endured along the path to institutionalization. This exchange between the researcher
and Aaron o f MASA was a representative example
R: Overall what do you see the MASA Organization 10-15 years from now?
A aron: It’s hard to say because I guess I would hope that the MASA organi­
zation would always have the capability to adapt and adopt whatever its
members demanded out o f it at any one point in time. My opinion is that the
organization that is not responding to its members’ needs perhaps would end
up, I don’t know if failure is the right word, but would end up at something
less than what its potential was. The future of the agriculture industry would
dictate what the MASA organization is 15 years from now.
Throughout this report o f the findings from the cases, Hotep gave many
examples o f organizations that transformed by changing their "doctrine" (termed creed
in this study) to keep the institution alive when the purpose had been achieved.
Adding to those Hotep examples (the National FFA, French Institute of Illumination,
Michigan Agricultural College, etc.), Calembert pointed to two examples of immi­
nently transformed organizations. One of these organizations was the Veterans of
Foreign Wars; the other was Schools for the Blind. In the case of the former, the last
foreign war took place so long ago that mostly the grandchildren of the veterans’
descendants were still living. For the latter, the advent of technology, better nutrition

174
and prenatal care by mothers is making it possible for more children bom without
health deficiencies such as low birth weight, no eyesight or hearing or high mortality.
Similarly, technologies had and would likely continue to assist organizations transform
to stay viable until or even beyond the time when their organizational goals had been
accomplished.
Summary on the Report From the Cases
The foregoing categories and themes represented under them were derived
from the 10 respondents interviewed for this study. They represented and shared
observations from their experiences acquired while affiliated with the Michigan
Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA), Youth Development Corporation
(YDC) or Tuscola 2001. They were reported as miniethnographies to give the reader
a full working sense o f the research environment and a better perspective of the
experience that was being shared by the respondents. This method o f reporting was
selected here, from other styles o f reporting that would have otherwise required flow
charts and graphs, because of the researcher’s experience with that method after
having acquired it in a class setting from Susan Florio-Ruane, here at Michigan State
University, who many had regarded as having contributed one of the better miniethno­
graphies to the literature.

Relational Levels of Inquiry
Predecessors in this genre included such authors as Peters and Waterman
(1987) and Collins and Porras (1994). While focused mostly on macro for-profit
enterprises (big businesses; fortune 100 or better) they wrote In Search of Excellence

175
(1987) and Built to Last (1994) respectively. In the process, they enhanced the
literature on subjects related to organizational "excellence," visioning in organiza­
tions, and organizational renewal [transformation as used in this study] to name just a
few o f the diverse categories o f inquiry. Another of these informed works was
presented by Senge (1990) who was also considered a pioneer of this form. Similar­
ly, Senge’s (1990) seminal work applied systems thinking to arrive at his celebrated
concept of organizational learning. The reason offered was because " . . . Systems
thinking leads to experiencing more and more of the interconnectedness o f life and to
seeing wholes rather than parts" (Senge, 1990, p. 375).
Max Weber (1947), the leading proponent of legitimacy and bureaucratization,
established the sociological connectedness between professionalization and the mutual
development they endure as members in organizations. Drawing from his work,
Hasenfeld (1983) incorporated concepts in his work on human service organizations
that were consistent with findings on bureaucracy and its impact on the suprasystem.
Schon (1983) made the connection to organizations more explicit saying:
The more an organization depends for its survival on innovation and adaptation
to a changing environment, the more essential its interest in organizational
learning. On the other hand, formal organizations also have a powerful
interest in the stability and predictability of organizational life. . . . Surprise,
which is essential to learning, is inimical to smooth organizational functioning.
Thus organizations evolve systems of error detection and correction whose
function is to maintain the constancy of variables critical to organizational life.
They are "dynamically conservative." Significant organizational learninglearning which involves significant change in underlying values and knowledge
structure—is always the subject of an organizational predicament. It is neces­
sary for effective organizational adaptation, but it disrupts the constancies on
which manageable organizational life depends, (p. 327-328)
Here, the assumption was that the organization and its individual members were
committed to learning; had arrived at a level where they could be considered, in

176
Freirian terms, conscientized; and were willing to endure because, as Illitch (1970)
said, education is lifelong. These assumptions were necessary because there were no
definites on the relationship between "effectiveness" and "institutions." Ferreting
through these concepts required some learning assumably gained by the respondents
over the years and throughout their experiences with their respective organizations.
Each key qualitative term was given adequate exploration during this study.
The correlation observed was at best marginal. Alone, effectiveness was viewed as
an ambiguous variable and predictor though this study settled on viewing organiza­
tional goals as one key predictor. Institutions were said possible if only they were
named so by a new association o f individuals (as few as 2 to 10) coming together
under a shared creed (doctrine or mission statement or purpose) and commitment.
Bridging the two required a definition of the terms, particularly for institutions.
Based on a priori understanding o f institution, Question Number Two was pursued in
this study. The intent was to determine how effectiveness contributed to the institu­
tionalization of nonprofits.
For Imani in Tuscola 2001, the relationship was somewhat nebulous (reading
from her response alone). When asked, "Is there a correlation, in your opinion,
between effectiveness and institution status?" her response was,
There is a correlation between effectiveness and an institution but not that
great. You do not have to be around 20 years to be effective. The question is
does it [the organization] reach its goals. Do the goals keep changing?
Contrarily, Bopha’s experiences that included his roles with Michigan Agricultural
Stewardship Association suggested otherwise. Follow a similar exchange with him on
the topic:

177
R: W hat is the relationship that you see between effectiveness and what would
be termed as institutions?
Bopha: I don’t see a whole lot of parallel. I can look at huge institutions that
by many standards would be termed pretty ineffective at responding to current
needs and current social situations. On the other hand, I have seen new
organizations of people, new associations of people, new collaborations, in a
very short order, with very little of what we would call institutional infrastruc­
ture, be able to respond very rapidly and very effectively to meet the needs of
constituents or meet the needs of stakeholders or meet the needs of neighbor­
hoods or whatever. It might even be an inverse relationship between the
extent o f institutionalization and the ability to respond effectively.
The two terms may not have been "parallel" but they do have a relationship that can
best be identified by the extent o f the learning engaged by the organization and its
members. Further insight is gained on Imani’s conceptualization (otherwise, her
personal definition) o f institution and institutionalization [or her current level of
learning] with the following exchange between her [Imani] and the researcher
R: W here do you see the organization 10-15 years from now?
Im ani: I see Tuscola 2001 becoming an institution, well-established where
people make use o f the organization as a common practice, where the brain­
storming, networking and the combining o f county resources are common
practices.
At one level she defined, in fixed terms, when an organization became an institution.
The verdict was still being discussed. Next, she made the association to certain key
variables, most o f which have been identified by this study, that the analyst would use
within that time period to assess the extent of their institutionalization. Finally, she
made the connection to "people. . . use" suggesting concurrence with the "value in
and o f itself," "community validation," and legitimacy that Hotep, this study’s
participants, and Weber had expressed respectively while reporting their findings.

178
The examples from Imani and Bopha served to provide greater meaning to the
principles o f organizational learning.
Senge’s (1990) leadership disciplines and their inherent characteristics are
depicted in Figure 10. The three levels were indicated on the left column while the
related characteristics were shown on the right. Senge’s (1990, p. 373-374) five
organizational learning disciplines were best explained by three distinct levels,
namely:
•
•
•

practices: what you do.
principles: guiding ideas and insights.
essences: the state of being that comes to be enjoyed naturally by
individuals or groups with high levels of mastery in the discipline.

Describing the construct shown above in Figure 10, Senge (1990) stated:
. . . the disciplines o f building shared vision and team learning differ from the
other three in that they are inherently collective in nature. The practices are
activities engaged in by groups. The principles must be understood by groups.
And the essences are states of being experienced collectively, (p. 375)
He devised these disciplines to explain the collaborative application o f the emergent
"state o f being" that uniquely alters the practitioner in certain very basic ways. This
direct effect on the individual was referred to as personal disciplines. Still, as Senge
(1990, p. 375) concluded, "There is a common sensibility uniting the disciplines—the
sensibility o f being learners in an intrinsically interdependent world." Organizations
and individual members were the players giving meaning to these disciplines and
embodying the interactive learning that would be necessary for success.

179
L earning Disciplines an d
C haracteristics

Levels

Systems Thinking
Essences
Principles
Practices

° Holism

° Interconnectedness

° Structure Influences Behavior ° Policy
Resistance ° Leverage
° System Archetypes ° Simulation
Personal M astery

Essences

° Being ° Generativeness
° Connectedness

Principles

° Vision ° Creative Tension vs. Emotional
Tension ° Subconscious

Practices

° Clarifying Personal Vision ° "Holding"
Creative Tension ° Making Choices
M ental M odels

Essences

° Love of Truth

° Openness

Principles

° Espoused Theory vs. Theory-in -use
° Ladder o f inference ° Balance Inquiry
and advocacy

Practices

° Distinguishing Data from Abstractions
Based on "Data" ° Testing Assumptions
° Left-Hand Column
Building S hared Vision

Essences

° Commonality of Purpose

° Partnership

Principles

° Shared Vision
Compliance

° Commitment vs.

Practices

° Visioning Process—sharing personal
visions; listening to others; allowing
freedom o f choice ° Acknowledging
Current Reality
Team L earning

Essences

° Collective Intelligence

° Alignment

Principles

° Dia Logos
Discussion

Practices

° Suspending Assumptions ° Acting as
Colleagues ° Surfacing Own
Defensiveness
° "Practicing"

Figure 10. Senge’s learning disciplines.

° Integrated Dialogue and
° Defensive Routines

180
Additional Models Addressing Organizational Dynamics
Research by Peters and Waterman (1982) revealed a construct made up of
seven key variables to explain what they were calling organizational "success" and
"excellence." Their focus on private sector for-profit organizations does not detract
from their findings and resulting theories. In fact, they cited work before theirs by
Harold Leavitt (1978) who designed the "Leavitt Diamond" consisting of: (a) task,
(b) structure, (c) people, (d) information, (e) control, and (f) environment. The
model above served to show relationships between these particular variables and
"excellence" as pursued by managers. Their own copyrighted McKinsev 7-S Frame­
work (Peters & Waterman, 1982) was well received by the decision sciences and
broader business community. Still, the interconnected model below was a tool
serving managers as "a useful way to think about organizing": (a) strategy, (b) struc­
ture, (c) style, (d) systems, (e) staff, (f) skills, and (g) shared values. In their model,
Peters and Waterman (1982) differentiated between the "hardware o f organizations"
(namely strategy and structure) and the "software o f organizations" (the remainder of
the S’s). Their copyrighted graphic centered "Shared Values" as the inner core of the
spherical model. At the apex are Strategy, Structure and Systems. All the "S"
variables end up being connected to the central core and to one another with straight
lines. Therefore, a direct relationship is understood between Structure through Shared
Values to the Staff (people). One o f the lasting contributions from their modeling
was the validation o f intuitive deductions gained while theorizing on organizations.
An unfair characterization o f these processes would have been to label them as
"gimmick," commercialization or "cook-booking" for organizational development.

181
Contrarily, they were tools, as Hotep (in this study, just as Peters and Waterman and
Leavitt before him) suggested, that an analyst could use to measure the extent to
which an organization is realizing the conditions explained by the model. Consider,
for example, the four C ’s of Americorps and Vista. After celebrating 30 years (19651995) o f operation, it was important for them to show that they had remained viable
in part because of: (a) change, (b) commitment, (c) community, and (d) capacity
building. Another example from Ford Motor Company was dissected by Collins and
Porras (1994) in their postmodern review of and insightful work on "visionary" forprofit companies. Specifically, they pointed to the company’s Mission-ValuesGuiding Principles (MVGP) model. The intent was beyond offering proscriptions for
new organizations. Instead, they showed how different models can become incorpo­
rated into the very fabric o f effective [in their words, "visionary"] organizations.

Toward a New Institutionalization Paradigm
This study began with an a prori understanding of institutionalization, support­
ed by evidence in the literature that certain key variables contributed to the under­
standing o f institutions and institutionalization of nonprofit organizations. Those
variables are shown below in Figure 9 and included capital, commitment, communi­
cation, coherence, compliance, control, and culture. The findings from this study,
however, expanded that particular understanding and was best expressed in Figure 11
also shown below. From the original postulate shown in Figure 9, additional
variables were identified by the respondents representing the three nonprofit organiza­
tions. In some instances, certain variables were caused to be replaced or repositioned

182

C om m unication

U
<r*)
•a
V

o

PS

Capital

0

Figure 9 . Seven institutionalization variables.

C om m u nication
Culture

U>
<T>
•aV

C om m unity
«O
0
Figure 11. The twelve C ’s of institutionalization.

183
because they were either not experienced by the case study participants or were of
marginal significance.
In Figure 11, the variables are strategically positioned because of their
relationship to the institutionalization process and how they were experienced by the
respondents in the three cases. Com m unication appears at the summit of our model
while C om m unity undergirds the core concepts. It is the milieu through which and
with whom organizations and their manifestation of the listed variables is undertaken.
Hence this variable incorporated the C om m ittee/M em bership theme. As supporting
variables along the sides of the model are Com m itm ent and C oherence (Consensus
on Values) on the left and C oordination and C ollaboration on the right. These
variables were viewed as facilitators for institutionalization—they made the process
possible by giving it meaning. Furthermore, they allowed for the incorporation of the
L eadership theme that emerged in this study. Note that the transformational leader
performs more coordinating and collaborative roles than s/he controls or dictates. At
the core o f the institutionalization process were C ontinuity and C reed. Repeatedly,
time and doctrine were mentioned as the variables of significance when determining if
an organization has been institutionalized. Without continuity, the analyst is unable to
measure the full magnitude o f an organization’s claim to institution status. Then,
over time, the analyst would look to the organization’s creed and assure that it too has
endured through Consistency in its methods, purpose, values, effectiveness and
relevance among other variables. The C aring and C u ltu re variables also appear at
the top o f the model suggesting their enveloping nature within institutions. As Hotep
reminded about culture, ". . . it is always there.” The caring mode now appearing in

184
this model emerged from a strain o f behaviors, attitudes and ethical ideologies
observed from the three cases and their members. The literature best labeled this
observation as a Caring ethic. This same ethic allows for broader consideration to
themes like Diversity identified in this study. Over time, however, there may be an
even more appropriate terminology to explain this phenomenon. At best, its overall
significance to the institutionalization process may become magnified. In the same
light, the C ap ital variable was traditionally viewed as very crucial. In this study
however, as Bopha said, " . . . if you have the rest [of the variables] capital comes."
Note how the variables are related and interconnected with a network of
straight lines. The conclusion about these variables, however, does not suggest a
linear relationship among them. Then the next step would have been to rank order
them according to when and how they appeared within every one o f the three
organizations. Insofar that this case study found transformational leaders at their
conceptualization with clear ideas about a creed—a calling statement to act—it falls
short of making definitive proscriptions to the same. The process for other organiza­
tions in the surprasystem and other soon-to-be-conceived ones is situational. A model
o f that linear relationship among the variables resembles the following, Figure 12.
After accounting for all the assumptions, a quantitative analyst could measure a
particular organization’s movement toward institutionalization. For them, there may
be some merit in determining the exact relationship these variables may have amongst
one another and to the overall institutionalization continuum. For example, is the
relationship one o f exponential significance where the whole formula is raised to the
T-power? As such, as time is raised or increased, the institution would move "T"th

185
At any point in Time: Time——— ^ - X
INST= F( IG+AEN V+N+OG+SG+Ci)
Where:
INST= institutionalization
IG= individual goals
ENV= environment
N= number of alternative organizations
OG= organizational goals
SG= societal goals
Ci= communication, caring...community
Figure 12. Hypothetical linear model of institutionalization.

degree toward institutionalization. The relationship may even be one o f quadratic
significance. The whole formula may be placed over N suggesting that an organiza­
tion will move closer, further along the institutionalization continuum to the extent
there are no other organizations in the environment meeting their stated function.
This study, however, consistent with its predetermined aims, presented a
framework o f key variables that emerging organizations could use to analyze their
journey along the institutionalization continuum. The framework, Figure 9, was
strengthened with the emergence o f more holistic psychosocial variables uncovered in
this study and depicted in Figure 11.

Chapter Summary
This chapter was presented in four sections. In the first section, a general
overview about the development o f this study was provided. It was in that section
where the researcher’s preliminary trials with the Ecuadorian non-governmental
organization Fundagro were discussed. Also described in that first section was the

186
choice o f methodology used to generate theory about the phenomena precipitating this
study. The Ecuadorian experience structured and validated the qualitative methodolo­
gies applied to generate the theories in this study.
The second section provided a comparison of the findings from the three cases
by highlighting the major themes that emerged from the data collected. In all, 17
themes were identified. They were later coded and categorized under three broad
terms that explained the emanating points of the themes. This taxonomic segmenta­
tion validated the relevance o f the themes that emerged.
The third section explored related theories on the phenomena identified for this
study (e.g. organizational effectiveness, institutionalization, organizational administra­
tion, etc.), but mostly from a managerial and for-profit perspective. The relational
compendium on those models presented served to validate other intuitively conceived
theories and approaches within nonprofits.
Finally, in the fourth section, a model that emerged from the constant compar­
ative method and generated from the data collected, was presented. Furthermore, to
the extent that the model suggested a linear relationship between and among the
institutionalization variables, another model was framed for alternate analyses and
further review in another study.

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Nothing about the present is institutionalized. . . . I think that we are in the
era where a collaborative mode is increasingly necessary compared to an
individualistic control type. The individualistic type o f mode is not as desired
as it may have once been.
—Hotep, Case Study Respondent

In the first section of this final chapter, a brief overview o f the research
purpose, procedures and major findings are presented. It is presented as an overall
summary o f the research. Next, there is a discussion on the conclusions generated
from the participants’ views about institutionalization and organizational effectiveness
and the relativity o f those views to the literature summarized in Chapter Two. Then,
the recommendations for the Michigan State University Extension recommendations
are provided based on the findings and conclusions generated by the data from this
case study. Finally, axioms and generalizations generated from this study as well as
suggestions for future research in this genre are presented.

Summary
The purpose o f the research, questions that were answered and the methodolo­
gy used to answer those questions are presented in this section. It begins with the
purpose o f the study, revisits the methodology applied in this study and lastly presents
the more salient findings from the three cases and ten respondents who participated in
the study.
187

188
Purpose
Considering the magnanimous charge historically undertaken by the Michigan
State University Extension (MSUE—formerly Michigan State University Cooperative
Extension Service) in the State to educate and assist communities, it was important to
document the impacts of that role on certain nonprofit organizations. If indeed
organizations were going to be empowered or encouraged to begin processes that
would enable them to ’’help themselves,” MSUE had to become familiar with those
conditions needed to help those organizations achieve effectiveness and maintain that
status. This study focused on three specific cases representing the core MSUE
program areas, namely Agriculture and Natural Resources; Community and Economic
Development; and Children, Youth and Families. Overall, its purpose was to
determine the characteristics o f institutionalized nonprofits in Michigan as a basis for
modeling and analysis. The following three broad research questions guided this
study:
1.

How do organizations establish the necessary procedures to deal with

change(s) in the marketplace?
2.

How does effectiveness contribute to the institutionalization of non­

3.

How do the following Seven-C’s—Communication, Control, Culture,

profits?

Commitment, Capital, Compliance, and Consensus on values (Coherence)—contribute
to the institutionalization of the nonprofits identified for this study?

189
Methodology
The study began with a set of seven psychosocial variables that emerged
intuitively and from the literature on organizational development (OD). A holistic
and systems approach were used in considering the variables and experiences that
were to be uncovered during this study. Those experiences were critical and gave
meaning to much of the study. The concept o f meaning was a repeated construct for
this study and required a closer review. The application o f this concept and its broad
implications to this study was dissected in Chapter Four. In a greater sense, the
researcher was viewed as a human instrument. As such, the researcher had the
flexibility in controlling some of the developments in the study and pursuing some
areas that emerged with greater relevance and significance than others. An example
o f how this was done could be explained by the researcher’s moving away from the
prepared questions in Appendix B to inquire about other salient themes.
The participants in this study were viewed also as researchers in this study.
Their discoveries during the research, while engaged in the interviewing processes,
enabled them to better understand some finer elements about their organizational life.
For some participants, this involvement was expressed when their comments steered
the researcher far away from the planned questions. One of the benefits of qualitative
research is its tendency to allow some flow and directional guidance by the partici­
pants. Their questions, comments and observations helped direct the interviewer to
lines o f questioning previously overlooked or otherwise deemed inappropriate.
The research began with its own approach to answering the broad questions
raised about Extension-assisted nonprofits and their "institution" status. These

190
approaches were considered as specific objectives which were to: (a) Address the re­
search questions through literature reviews, interviews, document reviews and
participant observations; (b) define institutionalization and the efforts made by three
nonprofits in Michigan to accomplish that status; and (c) develop a conceptual
framework by using the findings from this study, that may serve as a new model for
analysis and use by emergent organizations. This fine tuning o f the study took place
after a first attempt to conduct this study in the international setting. While in
Ecuador, the methodology held, but certain observations and experiences caused
ambivalence about the discoveries being made. The literature was most helpful in
answering some o f the questions generated for and during this study. Still there was
a theory generating component to this process. Here, as an iterative process, it
required clear conceptualizations o f the phenomena, detailed communications with
data sources, and an effective data retrieval mechanism for further reviews and
analyses. Moreover, the researcher was compelled to expand the cases to be studied
for a broader sense on the experiences that would emerge.
Three organizations were selected to participate as cases in this study. In
qualitative research, a low number of cases allowed for in-depth analysis and the
discovery of truths that would have otherwise been overlooked or unreachable through
a survey. The participating organizations were selected according to (a) their
founding relationship with the Michigan State University Extension (MSUE) or
whether MSUE was the incubator for their founding; (b) the organization’s nonprofit
status; and (c) the organization’s scope of work in light of the three MSUE program
areas.

191
The Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA), with its head­
quarters in Kalkaska, Michigan was selected to represent the agriculture and natural
resources program area.
Youth Development Corporation, Incorporated (YDC) was the second case in
this study. They were selected based upon the recommendation o f an Extension
professional who had worked in the Lansing, Michigan MSU Extension office.
During the interviews, it was discovered that YDC did not receive Extension support
during their founding. The nonprofit, with its headquarters in Lansing, Michigan was
retained as a case in this study because of its tax-exempt status, the timing in which
the discovery was made, and the expectation that it would provide a classic example
o f an organization that attempted movement along the institutionalization continuum
but failed (based on the agent’s comments). Another benefit to keeping YDC as a
case in this study was experienced after the data were collected. It was an important
discovery when the researcher noted the extent to which collaboration was stressed
and how MSUE had done so with other organizations. YDC had collaborated with
other Michigan State University (MSU) units, even to the point where one o f the
respondents (Erzule), employed by MSU, served to validate YDC, its programs,
services and existence.
The third case for this study was Tuscola 2001, Inc. Based in Caro, Michi­
gan, this nonprofit operated within the community and economic development
program area o f MSU Extension Tuscola County. It was examples of developments
within organizations like Tuscola 2001 and MASA that made the areas of inquiry in
this study even more compelling. They had not reached the classic 10 to 15 years in

192
existence standard for institutionalization yet they showed many of the "trappings of
an institution." Tuscola 2001 was an example of community empowerment in the
true form advocated by MSUE. The investigation of this research, therefore, was to
explore the next steps undertaken by both the organization and the enabling agent
Michigan State University Extension. Though Bopha, one of the respondents in this
study disagreed, Hotep and the researcher saw these enabling institutions as "dino­
saurs." Their continuation served to make possible the proliferation of organizations
like Tuscola 2001. The data were provided to corroborate this view on organizations
and assess the role Extension could play in the marketplace.
For the data collection component that did not require document and literature
reviews and participant observation, strict methods were applied that would lead to
triangulation and validation o f the data. First, an introductory telephone conversation
was conducted with each o f the three organizations’ representatives. The researcher
collected data as a participant observer in some instances. This level o f participation
was made possible after a sufficient number of interactions with the organizations’
representatives during which trust in the researcher was gained. Structured openended interviews were conducted with the 10 respondents selected to participate in
this study. On average, the tape-recorded interviews lasted 2 hours. The transcripts
from the tape-recorded interviews were later sent to the respective interviewees for
validation.
Data analysis was an iterative process greatly simplified by the transcripts and
the sophistication o f word-processing computer applications that were available in the
latter part o f the 20th century. The 10 interviews were grouped according to their

193

experiences or the organization about which they commented. From these interviews,
salient themes were extracted, environmental conditions were observed and ongoing
analyses were conducted as new themes emerged. After coding the significant
themes, they were categorized according to the points from which they emanated or to
which they were related. The relational categories for the emerged themes were
organizational, individual and environmental. Finally, after integrating the themes
and expounding on their manifestation in the three organizations, a theoretical
framework emerged that could serve emergent organizations or analysts gauging the
institutionalization o f nonprofits.

Findings
This research began with designs to be descriptive, theoretical and holistic.
Grounded theory methodologies were applied to generate the findings and related
axioms. From the 10 respondents’ opinions based on their experiences, the research­
er arrived at specific findings that addressed institutionalization of nonprofits in the
food, agriculture and natural resources sector. Also in the process, other discoveries
regarding nonprofits’ interaction with the dynamic environment and the fulfillment of
organizational goals were made. Those findings and related discoveries, listed and
briefly described below were the following.

Area o f Inquiry One
How do organizations establish the necessary procedures to deal with change(s)
in the marketplace?

194
The process o f dealing with an organization’s environment dated back to its
founding. During the conceptualization o f organizations, the founding members must
consider the conditions o f the environment, its current effect on nonprofit
organizations, the number o f nonprofits currently existing in the environment serving
a closely related purpose, and the methods being applied to cope with their environ­
ment. Then, the founding members must extrapolate those conditions to test how
they will fare in the future with those and spin-off (related) problems during the
crucial early years o f their organization. If an organization was late in applying this
founding principle, the next possible strategy was to undergo constant renewal, and
renewal without the inducement from the environment. Those organizations were
encouraged to maintain a proactive stance to opportunities as opposed to a reactive
mode from crisis to crisis.
Since organizations were human creations, it was suggested that the cement or
"glue" that bonded them together had to be psychological and/or psychosocial. One
psychosocial element said to contribute to organizations’ dealing with changing forces
in the environment was learning. One scholar called for "continuous learning." By
this process, and consistent with the way Illitch (1970) defined education, organiza­
tions would have lifelong learners involved with them who constantly upgraded and
their talents and skills. It also meant creating a subculture or mini-environment
within the organization that emulated the larger social structure yet flexibly so that
mistakes and learning could simultaneously take place.
The nonprofit leader still unconvinced by these findings could consider
pursuing the following the stabilizing elements as to cope with the environment:

195
(a) a clearly articulated sense o f mission, replete with guiding principles; (b) a leader,
untiring, who enables, articulates, creates and motivates; (c) a committed and
functional membership, volunteers and board; (d) a capacity to attract collaborators
and partners for resources.

Area o f Inquiry Two
How does effectiveness contribute to the institutionalization of
nonprofits?
The relationship o f these two variables was not as direct as first intuitively
perceived. Instead of linear, the relationship was situational. In all, this study found
that effectiveness was a varying concept instead of a scientific one. From a relativistic domain, an analyst was able to evaluate the extent to which an organization’s
effectiveness would lead to its permanence. Those analyses would require assess­
ments o f the organization’s face goals (those listed and broadly communicated),
satisfaction from stakeholders and collaborators in the environment, and review of the
record on members, clients, and previous experiences with other actors in the
environment.
From the participants in the study, direct experiences were mixed on the
relationship between institutionalization and effectiveness. This inconclusivity was
attributed to meaning and interpretation of the institutionalization concept. One
finding was that the relationship between the two terms was slight and prevailed when
the organization was able to change its goals. Imani was of the mind that effective
organizations constantly changed their goals. The findings from this study supported
that mindset. Then, it followed that once an organization was able to stay viable,

196
change its goals to stay current with the changes over time, and remain effective, an
organization could become institutionalized.
Bopha disagreed because o f his experiences with looking at institutions that
were ineffective—yet they were not deinstitutionalized. His posture to disassociate the
two concepts would have been better understood if his measures for effectiveness
were known. For example, his measures would be assessed on whether they included
societal goals, organizational goals (functional goals), membership involvement,
community validation, and leadership succession, to name just a few of the effective­
ness variables related to nonprofit organizations.

Area o f Inquiry Three
How do the following Seven-C’s—Communication, Control, Culture, Commit­
ment, Capital, Compliance, and Consensus on values (Coherence)—contribute to the
institutionalization o f the nonprofits identified for this study?
Most o f the seven institutionalization variables held as determinants with which
an analyst could assess the "propensity to institutionalize" for nonprofit organizations.
In arriving to this finding, some key assumptions were made. First, it was unclear
that all organizations aspired to institution status albeit most referred to themselves as
such. On the normative side, organizations were discouraged from having institu­
tionalization as a goal. Pro form a or "cookie cutter" aspirations for organizations
were found to be constraining and antithetical to the kinds of organizations that would
usher in and survive well beyond the 21st century.
O f the institutionalization variables dismissed from this study, one was rejected
on the lack o f psychosocial merits. The leadership style reported by the 10 case study

197
participants rejected the notion o f requiring compliance from the membership. Even
when the researcher purposely solicited answers using the terminology, the respon­
dents progressed to explanations about self-induced and -motivated members borne by
the organizational creed, culture and commitment. Thus, the findings on compliance
suggested that the new mode o f organizations and standards for their successful
operations precluded this typology from infiltrating the postmodern institutions.
Similarly, the control variable that failed to emerge from respondents spoke to
modem and classical standards. Organizational leadership was found as a critical
element to the institutionalization o f nonprofits. That type o f leadership was accom­
panied with requirements for the overall organization, its operations and players. The
leader in these postmodern institutions, instead o f controllers, were coordinators,
facilitators and flexible untiring individuals.
. . . On Organizational Leadership. This research was intended to be descrip­
tive, constructivist, but not revisionist. The literature was found replete with scholars
who capably reported on the topic. Some of their theories, by and large, were held
even in this study that set for alternate lines o f inquiry. Consider for example the
findings from Vandenberg (1993) lauding transformational leadership and the need for
youth, vigor and energy in presidential or key leadership positions. This study found
several respondents of the same mindset. G6de, the position leader of Tuscola 2001
noted this truism. He said that he would personally engage the leadership succession
processes for his organization. Though he talked about structure and form for
Tuscola 2001, noting the successes of his predecessor, he relied on the committees—
empowerment, a hallmark o f transformational leadership.

198
The transformational leadership that was advocated in this study also led to the
variable types dominating this study. Those variables were found within the experi­
ences o f the case study participants and ultimately gave way to the theoretical
framework found applicable in the analysis of institutionalized nonprofits.
. . . On Institutionalization. Institutionalization was found to be a "folk
concept" that could be assessed through phenomenological inquiry. Those inquiries
were best suited for dynamism in the subject matter. They seldom dealt with
concretes or definites that could otherwise be quantified. Institutionalization was
found to be a degree; it was a continuum along which organizations could move by
accomplishing certain "trappings of institutions." Institutions were said to achieve
those "trappings" with a strong, endearing, and well communicated creed; with
symbols like a logo or an insignia, a uniform, a flag, a song, a myth; by developing
alumni associations and other mass followings; and by providing a service or serving
a function that causes it to be in great demand by the validating community.
. . . On the Role o f Extension. This study began with a critical analysis of
Michigan State University Extension’s (MSUE) practice of empowering community
organizations in multiple categories. In Michigan, those categories were agriculture
and natural resources; children, youth and families; and community and economic
development. Extension was found to have played a major role in the formation of
two o f the three organizations that participated in this case study. Bopha, a founding
member o f the Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA), better
explained that role during the following exchange with the researcher.
R: I understand the that Extension had a role in the original founding of the
organization. Could you speak to that a bit?

199
Bopha: Well, to the extent to which I am em ployed as a n Extension Special­
ist, absolutely. To the extent to which we had out of th e 40 people, about 4
o r 5 of which were Extension field staff, yeah Extension was involved. To
the extent to which Extension ultim ately p u t some funding to help pay for
th e cost associated with this kind of conferencing an d w orkshop, traveling,
an d facilitato r expense, yeah Extension was involved. . . . MASA is an
independent organization. But there happen to be people who are Extension
professionals who also see value in being members or leaders in the MASA
organization. . . . But Extension is not playing th e role of housing the office
o f MASA or anything like that.
Leadership development was one other service found to have been provided by
Extension to the two organizations it assisted during their founding. The list of
organizations that it had assisted in the same form was quite lengthy in the late 20th
century when this study was conducted. The third organization (the one that did not
receive Extension support at founding) indicated that they would welcome leadership
development sessions with Extension or any other mode o f collaboration. Therefore,
the role that Extension played in the community of nonprofits was found important
albeit insufficiently far reaching.

Compounding this finding was a different posture

among the ranks about the normative role o f Extension with nonprofits.
Imani was also an Extension Specialist working with a nonprofit organization
the same way that Bopha worked with MASA. She was of the opinion that:
The services that MSU Extension can provide Tuscola 2001 are similar to
those provided to 4-H. The services include office space, secretary and office
support. Information and university resources including current data are very
important for any project that Tuscola 2001 may research. The ongoing
assistance form the community development agent has been the driving force
that has motivated the Board and provided a form o f security for the organiza­
tion.
Contrary to Im ani’s views, Bopha expressed that:
The m ost im p o rtan t aspect, I think, is helping people build th e leadership
capacity they need to independently function in th e ir organization. If we
don’t do that and we are there being the enablers, we are the ones writing the

200
bylaws and we are the ones organizing the meetings, we are the ones organiz­
ing the funding—when I say we, I mean Extension—you are creating a co­
dependent relationship that then is very hard to break down the road. We [in
MASA] are then much better off, if this is the direction we want to take from
the very start, to make it very clear that this is not an organization that is
going to be run by Extension or that it is going to be built by Extension. We
[Extension] are here to provide some resources from the university, whether it
be resources in technical understanding, whether it be resources in education
or in research—on-farm research in this case—or whether it be resources in
leadership developm ent. That is who we are as a university, we a re not
h ere to ru n organizations o r to set u p organizations. Our job has to do
with education and knowledge sharing.
Regardless o f the level, the finding from this study still suggested a continued and
(according to some) an increased involvement by Extension in its support programs
for nonprofit organizations.

Conclusions
At the onset of this study, the researcher encountered a phenomenon where
*

start-up non-profit organizations expressed the characteristics of institutionalized
entities. When this incident was observed in the international setting, away from the
guidance of experienced researchers and the collective wisdom from literature, it was
presumed, at best an anomaly. After confirming the methodology, revisiting the
literature on organizational development, institutionalization and organizational
effectiveness, the "new discovery" became an emerging approach to institutionaliza­
tion encouraged by the conditions o f the postmodern era and the environment of the
late 20th century.
The process began, first, with organizations and their members simply
assuming the institution name. Without the necessary "trappings of institutionaliza­
tion," new organizations were calling themselves "institutes" or "institutions." In the

201
latter part o f the 20th century, there were many informal discussions at Michigan
State University about the need to curtail the granting of "institute" status to Universi­
ty units. The last ones granted up until that time (this printing) were the Julian
Samora Institute and the David Walker Research Institute. A new "litmus test" was
being created for organizations and their members. Tangentially, institutions that had
the "trappings" wrestled with the processes to keep their organization intact. Strong
institutions like the United Way, the NAACP and the National FFA Organization for
both intrinsic and extrinsic reasons were challenged by the conditions of the environ­
ment leading into the 21st century.
The National FFA Organization scenario, since it was related to the food,
agriculture and natural resources system, had more relativity to this study and was
considered in light o f the findings and conclusions from this study. Moreover, the
researcher, advantaged by having served as a consultant for the organization on
matters relating to organizational marketing and development, was more familiar with
this case. For months, Congressional discussions in Washington, DC about reorga­
nizing the Federal government threatened to abolish or "reinstitute" the U .S. Depart­
ment o f Education. That Department granted the FFA organization its legitimizing
order in the form o f a Federal Charter in 1950.
Possible scenarios o f realignment were drafted and the National FFA pro­
actively began to position themselves to "save their Federal Charter." Admittedly,
the Organization served an important role that was validated by a membership over
428,109 in 1995. The conclusions from this study would cause the transformational
leaders within the National FFA Organization or the Agricultural Education profession

202
(assuming, o f course, that there were any), to rethink about "saving the Federal
C harter." Learning from the transformational leaders whose experiences with
institutionalization were detailed in this study, the Organization would reassess the
merits o f a Federal Charter. The inflexibilities and stifling conditions it breathed into
the organization would invariably cause them to transform the Organization, with the
same caring ethic Erzule and Dambala spoke about in this study, for it to really serve
all the potential youths and adolescents.
The final result o f this result was a model depicted in Figure 11 that organi­
zations can use to assess their movement along the institutionalization continuum.
The end result from such analyses would be to operate at higher levels o f effective­
ness as opposed to a mad rush to institutionalization status—to be "arrived." Since
time (expressed as continuity and consistency) and creed were so critical in the
institutionalization process, organizations would be well advised to stay within the
limits o f their definitions for effectiveness while they express and accumulate the
"trappings o f institutionalization."

Axioms and Generalizations Drawn From This Study
The following postulates and oversimplifying generalizations emerged from the
interviews and other activities (personal un-recorded conversations) undertaken
throughout this study. They reflect the general learning mutually shared by the
researcher and case study participants. These "soft" theories were reported sequen­
tially and without rank ordering.
1.

When an individual feels that they have something to offer then they

become committed and committed to sharing.

203
2.

Nonprofits never truly "arrive." They are in a constant state of

renewal and transformation.
3.

Collaboration gives legitimacy.

4.

An organization doesn’t have to be an institution to be able to rely on

the legitimacy o f institutions that are already there. It can do it by partnering with
them.
5.

The way to keep people committed is to build a compelling vision of

what can be accomplished through a collective action.
6.

True commitment comes when individuals can understand how they can

contribute to an effort that is larger than they.
7.

If people listen, are committed, allow give and take and compromise,

then diversity will work.
8.

Excellent leadership can write words that will communicate the

doctrine.
9.

The doctrine has to bring the people to the institution.

10.

The leader who understands and upholds the doctrine can be opportu­

nistic about all o f the other variables (whatever they may be) of institutionalization.
11.

In all human interactions there are features of control.

12.

If an organization has a doctrine (which it arguably must have), one of

the functions o f leadership is to help people see that their own objectives and goals
are coherent to that doctrine.
13.

A young organization that has enabling linkages and linkages outside

has a great chance o f being institutionalized.

204
14.

An organization that does not have enabling linkages (partners,

collaborators, etc.) will not get the necessary resources just because it claims institu­
tion status.
15.

For an organization to be an institution is to first call itself one; over

time, with an enduring doctrine, it can become institutionalized.
16.

If an organization wants to be institutionalized it can not stay with one

outside donor.
17.

The process o f winning grants is first about relationships and linkages,

then it is about having excellent and coherent ideas.

Recommendations
This chapter concludes with a set of recommendations for practice and future
research. The recommendations reflect the breadth of the learning facilitated by this
study for all the participants. Otherwise, they stand to capitalize on delimitations that
might be resolved with ulterior methodologies or "human instruments."

Recommendations for Nonprofits and Extension
1.

Extension should continue to provide leadership development seminars

as part o f its regular programming in Michigan Counties.
2.

Extension should continue to provide leadership development seminars

for community/nonprofit organization leaders as part of its ongoing programs.
3.

Extension should provide seminars or materials that would serve

aspiring nonprofit organizers early in the organizing process.

205
4.

Extension should conduct an assessment of community/nonprofit

organizations it has inspired or assisted to date. These organizations would then
become partners/collaborators in meeting the needs or facing the identified issues in
the Michigan communities.
5.

Scholars and practitioners in Extension should be encouraged to devel­

op written materials on topics that will prove useful to nonprofit organizations and
their leadership/membership.
6.

Extension should actively seek out collaborators while remaining

objective to partner with client groups underrepresented by the rigid three core
category (agriculture and natural resources; children, youth, and family; and commu­
nity and economic development) programming mode.
7.

The Extension organization should revisit its own creed and determine

the cause o f the alternating views about its normative role with nonprofits.
8.

As a grantmaking institution, Extension and other donor institutions

should review their policies for awarding grants being sure to stress collaboration,
community validation and creed. Doing so will enable more small organizations to
partner and overcome the stigma of newness and organizational inexperience.
9.

Extension should identify partners to fulfill the needed task o f inform­

ing nonprofits about communication, information technologies and communicating
with the environment .
10.

Extension should pursue and advocate the merits o f organizational

flexibility, adaptability and the broad spectra of diversity (programs, people, partners,
paraprofessionals, services, leadership, informants, etc.).

206
11.

Extension should identify partners to assist in the dissemination of

knowledge about the merits o f collaborating, with entities that share their values and
mission, as means to increase their propensity to receive favorable funding consider­
ation.
Recommendations for Future Research
The following recommendations for future research draw from delimitations in
this study and discoveries made both prior to implementing the U.S.-based study and
after undergoing the in-depth case study analyses with the 10 respondents involved.
1.

Qualitative researchers would be advantaged by having experiences in

interviewing techniques, analyzing and coding qualitative data, and reporting the
findings. This experience could be gained from the classroom or a pilot run of the
intended study.
2.

Qualitative methods should be applied to assess the merits of "The

Twelve C ’s o f Institutionalization" identified in this study.
3.

Whenever possible, the researcher should attempt to experience/observe

the phenomena being investigated. Though participant observers require skill and
tact, in most cases, doing so will heighten the perspective.
4.

This study should be attempted with a larger sample size leaving the

study still the range for in-depth case studies (1-10) while increasing the cross
references who would validate the findings and theories.
5.

Careful selection processes should be applied when identifying the case

study organizations and the individual organization members/stakeholders/users/
collaborators/donors/etc. who will participate in the study.

207
6.

The researcher should be very flexible and attentive throughout the re­

search process, always being sure to review salient themes and how they relate to the
research aims and the questions prepared for the interview.
7.

Quantitative methodologies might be applied to larger sample size of

organizations and respondents that would alternately measure the prominence o f the
institutionalization variables including those depicted in Figure 11.
The following research questions were generated in light of the findings and
conclusions from this study.
1.

Do all nonprofits aspire to institutionalization statuses?

2.

W hat

is the effect of information technologies on organizational effec­

W hat

is the mathematical significance of the time variable on the

tiveness?
3.

institutionalization of nonprofits?
4.

W hat

is the significance of segmenting the environment between institu­

tions and organizations?
5.

How do nonprofits invoke the transformational leadership typology in

their organizations and daily operations?

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Appendix A

Informed Consent Form
Dear Organization Leader:
The Michigan State University Department of Agricultural and Extension Education is
studying your organization in hopes to identify those characteristics which make it
effective and able to stay the Environment to then become an institution. I am
conducting this study as a doctoral candidate in the Department under the auspices of
Dr. Harrison Gardner. We are planning on talking with organizational leaders, select
personnel and clients/ beneficiaries o f the institution. Our interest is in the way these
people interact, the things they do, and the effects they have on the organization. For
the purpose o f this study, we are using terms like organization, voluntary association,
and nonprofit interchangeably. Here, institutionalization is the process whereby
organizations become sustainable.
This research will follow a case study approach. We anticipate that the individuals
visited will allow us to record their perceptions about institution building and surviv­
ability in the marketplace. We are especially interested in determining leadership’s
handling o f capital, communication, consensus on values (coherence), commitment,
control, and culture and their effect on organizational sustainability.
As a participant you have the following rights:
°
°
°
°
°
°
°
°

You will be asked to respond to structured open-ended questions for up to 2
hours.
Responding is voluntary: you can refuse to participate or otherwise withdraw
at any time.
You will receive a written transcript of the interview and a summary of the
research findings.
You will be invited to provide reactions to the written transcripts.
The interview and all related materials will be strictly confidential through use
o f codes.
Excerpts o f the interview may be used in sections o f the final research report
or presented through various media.
Your name and other identifying characteristics will not be associated with
any excerpts or included in any report.
You may be asked for a follow-up interview and/or site visit. Such return
visits would be entirely optional.

208

209
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study. Should you have any comments
or questions after returning your signed copy of this form, you may contact me,
Rockfeler Herisse, directly at: Michigan State University, 409 Agriculture Hall, East
Lansing, MI 48824, phone 517- 355-6580, FAX 517-353-4981, E-mail
22355rph@ msu.edu.
I understand the research and procedures as described above, and voluntarily agree to
participate in this study.

Name (Print)

Signature

Date

APPENDIX B

Appendix B

Interview Questions for the Study on "Factors Associated with the
Institutionalization o f Nonprofit Organizations: A Case Study of
Extension Assisted Organizations in Michigan"

INTERVIEW WITH IDENTIFIED RESPONDENTS
Name:
Title:
Institution:
Date:
Time:
Location:
Interviewer:

1.

Introduction
1.1.

I am ...

1.2.

This is a case study during which we will visit with your key personnel
to record their perceptions on your status among other organizations in
the marketplace. We are especially interested in the determining the
effect o f leadership’s communication [strategies], consensus on values
(coherence) [building processes], commitment [building processes],
control, capital [usage and allocation] and culture on organizational
sustainability.

1.3.

I will be taking notes for later use in writing about our findings.
Everything you say will be considered confidential. (Organization) will
be identified as a participant in the project, but all materials used in our
study will be presented in a manner that will not permit the revelation
o f sensitive information or respondents who wish to maintain their
anonymity.

210

211
1.4.

(Organization) will have an opportunity to review the write-up prior to
its publication. For the purpose of this study, we are using terms like
organization, foundation, voluntary association, non-profit and philanthropy(ies) interchangeably. Here, institutionalization is the process
whereby organizations become sustainable.

1.5.

Before we begin, are there any questions you have about the project?

2. Background
2.1.

I would like to begin by asking some general questions about you and
about your appointment to your current position.

2.2.

When were you brought in to this position?

2.3.

W hat was your position before that?

2.4.

How were you selected for this position? (If search committee probe
for membership, process).

2.5.

There probably were a number of people who could have been consid­
ered for your position. What do you think are the most important
reasons why you were selected?

2.6.

Who preceded you in the position?

2.6.1. In what ways would you describe yourself as similar to or as different
from your predecessor?
2.6.2. How have you been able to continue the vision of the original found­
ers? (Probe for the precise vision as articulated in original framing
papers).
2.6.3. What continued support did you continue to receive from founding
members or organizations that helped you get started, if any?
2.6.4. What additional support, if any, did(does) the institution need from
those founding supporters? (Probe for how Foundation/Extension/
Founder(s) can help).

3.

Goals and Values
3.1.

When you are asked to briefly describe (Organization), what do you
say?

3.1.1 What do you think is a really important function served by the organi­
zation?
3.2.

What are the major goals of (Organization)?

3.3.

Are the organization’s goals communicated; to whom and how?

3.4.

In what ways do you hope the organization will be different five years
from now than it is today?

Taking Charge
4.1.

What were your first impressions of (Organization) when you took
office?

4.2.

When you arrived, did you have a plan in mind about what you wanted
to accomplish?

4.2.1. W ere there things that concerned you during the first few months of
your appointment that no longer seem important to you?
4.3.

What were the most important problems or things you had to deal with
immediately when you became president (vice president, etc.) or first
came on board?

4.3.1. Why did you think that these problems were so important?
4.3.2. How did you deal with them?
4.3.3. What were the outcomes for the organization and for you?
4.4.

To what institutional problems or areas do you give the most attention
now?

4.5.

If a colleague came to you and said, "I’ve just accepted the presidency
o f an institution very much like this one. Can you give me any advice
about what I should do my first few months in office," what would you
say?

4.6.

What do you as (state position of respondent) have to do to get the job
done?

4.7.

How are organization members inspired to feel commitment to (Organi­
zation)?

213
5.

Identifying Leaders
5.1.

So far, we have been talking about the presidency and other hired
administrators who are expected to function as leaders. In most organi­
zations, there are other people who have leadership roles as well. I ’d
like to ask you about these people.

5.2.

Do you think there are some other important "leaders" in this organiza­
tion?

5.2.1

Why do you consider them to be important "leaders" in this organiza­
tion?

5.3.

I ’m interested in the ways in which people in this organization work
together. Could you describe your working relationship with the future
leaders you have mentioned?

5.3.1. (Probe for board, administrative, community leaders not mentioned in
5.3)
5.4.

There has been a lot of talk about the need for good leadership, and
lately, a lot about empowerment in organizations. How would you
describe "good member leadership"?

5.4.1. How about good board leadership?
5.4.2. How about good leadership among senior administrators other than the
president?
5.5.

6.

How necessary is it for organizations to hire full-time, well-prepared
specialists to ensure organizational success in the marketplace?

Critical Incident
6.1.

W hat do you think was the most important event or incident in this
organization since its founding?

6.1.1. Could you describe it in more detail?
6.2.

Who played leadership roles?

6.2.1. How do you relate to those incidences? What lessons were learned?
6.3.

How have (Organization) policies and programs changed to deal with
crises?

214
7.

Leadership Effectiveness
7.1.

How would you describe yourself as a leader?

7.2.

What do you think are the major effects you have had on this organiza­
tion as president?

7.2.1. Which o f these has given you the greatest sense o f accomplishment?

8.

7.3.

How do you tell if you are being effective as a leader?

7.4.

How does leadership relate to organizational effectiveness?

The Future
8.1

W hat do you think will be the most important issue or problem facing
this organization over the next year or so?

8.1.1. What leads you to say that?
8.1.2. How are you likely to be involved in it?
8.1.3. How is it likely to turn out?
8.2.

How does (Organization) respond to changes in the environment?

9.

Is there anything else you would like tosay aboutleadership in and survivabil­
ity o f this organization, or in the administration of nonprofits in general.

10.

Exit

APPENDIX C

Appendix C

Memo Sent to Extension Personnel via CEENet
To
From
Subject
Date

All Extension Personnel
Rockfeler P. Herisse
Graduate Assistant Needs Your Help!
January 25, 1995

GRADUATE ASSISTANT NEEDS YOUR HELP!
I am a doctoral candidate in AEE working on the institution­
alization of nonprofit organizations.
As you are involved
in one of Extension's three program areas, maybe you've been
helping some of these non-profits or witnessed their demise.
We need your help in identifying three to four of these
effective nonprofits.
We are particularly interested to
know if these organizations serve one of the three program
areas, did the organization fail after conception or is it
still operating successfully, and who is a contact person
there?
Thank you in advance for your support in identifying these
four nonprofit organizations.
The results of this study
will be disseminated at the next Extension Conference here
at Michigan State University.
Rockfeler Herisse, Graduate Assistant, Agr'l. & Extension
Education
Michigan State University, 409 Agriculture Hall, East Lan­
sing 48824
Your reply can be made by CEENet message to anraee to my
attention.
You may call me at my AEE office:
517-355-6580.
My E-mail address is 22 3 55rph@msu.edu.
Thanks again.

215

APPENDIX D

Appendix D

Interviewee Summary Form
______ Pre-Interview

Number of participants:

Date:

Location:

Time:

Status o f room location (draw if necessary):

Duration of interruptions (if any):

Duration o f meeting:
Topics Discussed:

Describe Interaction:

_______

Post-Interview

Date:

Time:

Number of participants:
Location:

Status o f room location (draw if necessary):

Duration o f meeting:

Duration of interruptions (if any):

Major Themes:

Describe Interaction:

216

APPENDIX E

Appendix E

Key Themes Drawn From the Transcribed Notes on the Interviews
With the Case Study Participants
Thematic Categories

Source and Respondents’ Validated Perspectives
a3 B, B2 B3 B4 c, c 2 C3
s
s s
s s
s
s s
s

Caring

A|
s
p

Coherence

s

s

Collaboration
Commitment
Committee/Membership

S
S

s

p
s
s

s

s

Communication

Capital

s

s

s

P
S
s

p
s
s

p
p
s

s

s

s

s
S

s

S

s

S

s

s

s

S
S

s

S

S

s

S

S

S

s

s
S

S
S

S
S

s

s

s
s

s
s
s

s

s
s
s
s

s

s

p

s

P

P

s

s

s

s

s

s

s

s
S

s

s

s

s

s

Culture

s

s
S

p
s

s

S

s

S

s

s

s

s

s
s

s

s
p
p

p
p
s

S

s

s

S
s

p
s
p
s

s
s
s
s
s
s

p

s

P
s

s

S

s
s

P

Diversity
Flexibility/Adaptability
Goal revision

p
s
s

s

s
s
s
s

s

s

s

s

Community validation

s

s

s
s

Consistancv
Coordination

p
p

p

Creed

Leadership
Organizational
transformation

s

s
s
s

p

s

s

s

s
s

s
p

Value Codes: S = significant and repeated observation; s = less significant-implied but
not stated; P = possibly significant but not stated.
Other Salient Themes

Source

Brainstorming
Conflict
Consensus
Culture
Follow through
Networking
Organizational focus
Youthful leadership

Imani (C3)
Hotep (C2)
G6d6 (C,)
Hotep (C2)
Filo (B4)
Imani (C3)
Calembert (C,)
Filo (B4)

217

APPENDIX F

Appendix F

METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX
Qualitative studies, particularly those that use interviews, generate volumes of
data. Noting that characteristic, this description of the research process, the sources
of data, the types collected and the methods used to code, categorize and present the
findings, is offered in this section.

Data Collection
The 10 respondents were contacted by telephone in the week preceding the
intended interview. They were informed about the study and solicited for participa­
tion. Once their tentative interest was confirmed, they were sent consent forms
(Appendix A) to sign. This process took some time since each organization represen­
tative had to secure approval from their board prior to allowing the investigation of
their organizations.
Each interview began with a greeting and a statement o f gratitude for the
signed consent form and willingness to participate in the study. The introductory
statement used with each respondent is shown in Appendix B. Slight modifications
were made to fit the name of the organization and individual being interviewed. Then
they were asked if there were any questions or clarifications they needed to have
answered or given before continuing with the interview.
List of Interviewees
Respondent (s):
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

A,—Aaron and A2—Abel
Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association (MASA)
East Lansing, Michigan
April 12, 1995
1:00 PM to 2:30 PM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

A3—Bopha
Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association
East Lansing, Michigan
May 2, 1995
10:00 AM to 11:45 AM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

218

219
Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

B,~Calembert
Youth Development Corporation, Inc. (YDC)
Lansing, Michigan
April 13, 1995
2:00 PM to 4:30 PM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

B2—Dambala
Youth Development Corporation, Inc. (YDC)
Lansing, Michigan
April 27, 1995
10:00 AM to 11:30 AM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

B3—Erzule
Youth Development Corporation, Inc. (YDC)
East Lansing, Michigan
May 3, 1995
1:30 PM to 2:50 PM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

B4~Filo
Youth Development Corporation, Inc. (YDC)
Lansing, Michigan
May 4, 1995
9:00 AM to 10:00 AM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

C ,-G & te
Tuscola 2001,Inc.
Vassar, Michigan
April 6, 1995
3:00 PM to 5:30 PM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Respondent:
Affiliation:

C2-H o tep
Lansing community member. Institutionalization
expert.
East Lansing, Michigan
May 18, 1995
10:30 AM to 11:55 AM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

220

Respondent:
Affiliation:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Interviewer:

C3—Imani
Tuscola 2001, Incorporated
East Lansing, Michigan (via E-mail, phone, FAX)
May 30, 1995
2:15 PM
Rockfeler P. Herisse

Additional Sources
Observed a Tuscola 2001 Board Meeting from 7:30 a.m . to 9:00 a.m . on
April 12, 1995 in Caro, Michigan. Attending this meeting required some
members and the researcher to leave their homes as early as 5:00 a.m . O f the
three cases, this organization had the only scheduled board meeting within the
study’s time frame. Participating as an observer was significant in that the
researcher was able to witness communication within the group, application of
transformational leadership, various stakeholders and collaborators, and
validation from the community at-large.
Publications, Documents and Other Materials
Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association
American Farmland Trust and Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association.
April (1993). Michigan Sustainable Agriculture Project—1992: Onfarm research and demonstration results. Washington, DC: American
Farmland Trust.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (1)2. July 1992.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (1)3. December 1992.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (2)1. March 1993.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (2)2. June 1993.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (3)1. January 1994.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (3)2. April 1994.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (4)1. January 1995.
MASA. The land steward: Newsletter of the Michigan Agricultural Stew­
ardship Association. (4)4. December 1994 [sic].
MASA. (July 7, 1994). "Collaboration: Working together to solve prob­
lems." A pamphlet. Kalkaska, MI: MASA.
MASA. (Summer 1994). "Collaboration W orks." A bulletin. Kalkaska, MI:
MASA.

221
Youth Development Corporation. Incorporated
YDC. Youth Do Count News. Quarterly Newsletter of the Youth Develop­
ment Corporation. March, 1995.
YDC. Individual Employment Services 13-21 Year-olds. Organizational
brochure.
YDC. Youth Development Corporation, Incorporated Annual Report 1994.
YDC. Youth Development Corporation, Incorporated Concept Paper.
Lieutenant Governor, State of Michigan. (February 14, 1995). Letter to the
Board o f YDC.
Henry R. Pattengill Middle School, Lansing School District. (February 17,
1995). Letter to the Director of Y.D.C.
Tuscola 2001. Incorporated
Tuscola 2001, Inc. (June 1991). Tuscola 2001: Action plan for the future.
Tuscola 2001, Inc. Tuscola 2001: Action Plan for the Future. Organizational
brochure.
Tuscola 2001, Inc. (April 12, 1995) Agenda and invitation to attend Board of
Directors Meeting.
Tuscola County Advertiser. (March 25, 1992). Tuscola 2001. (123)34.
Caro, MI.
Tuscola 2001, Inc. (December 14, 1994). Agenda for the Board of Directors
Meeting.

Identifying and Categorizing Themes
The Interviewee Summary Form in Appendix D was used to transcribe and
record major themes identified during the interviews. The key points related
to those topics identified in the literature and relevant to the study were
recorded and shown in Appendix E. The overall interaction was recorded and
gave a better sense o f the meaning these themes had to the respondent and
her/his organization. For validation, the themes were compared against the
transcripts from the interviews. Furthermore, each respondent was asked to
review this/her own transcripts and assure that his/her true experiences and
viewpoints were accurately presented. Once validated comparatively, the
themes were transposed onto large newsprint and labeled for each respondent.
Printing and posting the cross-section of validated themes allowed for easy
identification, correlation and adjustments to fit into the model. Those themes
and their source were also shown in Figure 8.
Sample Verbatim Comments from Transcripts of Select Participants
Aaron—Michigan Agricultural Stewardship Association
Q:
How are you (collectively) able to continue the vision of the founding
members I mean the original vision that you and others shared initially, how
are you able to keep that vision intact today?

222
R:
W ell, I guess I believe that our organization will evolve into whatever
it evolves into. As the agricultural industry and the structure of that industry
continues to evolve and change over a period of time. I guess and I would
hope as president o f that organization that we as an organization don’t expect
too much too fast because I think our organization will develop and become
what it wants to become as the industry that we represent and talk about
changes, adapts, and adopts many different technological changes that are
going on in the world.
Q:
W hat about other organizations? I understand that Extension played a
role in the initial founding o f the organization?
R:
W ell, Extension plays a role in an awful lot o f things that happen
within the agriculture industry at many levels. And there are many many
opportunities within the agriculture industry that Extension has an opportunity
to play a role and that’s something that’s been developed over time that’s just I
guess an accepted fact that Extension has resources and there are resources to
be used and quite frankly it’s too bad that an awful lot of things that are
attempted don’t get some Extension help and Extension resources before they
proceed too much. . . .
Q:
Who sought whom at that time? Extension sought you out or were you
so involved within the same community that it just happened they knew about
your need?
R:
No, I guess at that time we were still together because you know
Extension was part o f bringing this effort forward in the first place and still at
that point in time. I would say . . . it was a gentlemen’s agreement but we
were in a partnership at that point in time. And I think you know Extension
was helping us get our feet on the ground, helping us become something that
we could become, showing us some of the potentials that we had if they were
developed right. They were there when we needed that help in doing leader­
ship training and exploring some o f the alternative ways we had to go—could
go. I guess Extension was kind o f holding our hand. And I hope we used it
wisely.
Q:
Now related to that mission statement what do you think is the really
important function that MASA serves?
R:
MASA is to be a vehicle to transfer information about such systems not
to anyone and I believe this. Whether they are members or non-members.
We have information I think it’s our duty to disseminate that to whoever might
benefit from it.

223
R:
I guess what I ’m referring back to is the strategic planning we did. We
kind of set forth a set of goals and objectives to implement or help us imple­
ment and fulfill our mission statement. . . .
Q:
What about MASA do you thinks drives or commands so much com­
mitment from its members? I mean every organization kind of looks to that.
Particularly if you are talking about volunteers. . . . W hat is it about MASA
that makes people feel so committed?
R:
I think most individuals in the MASA organization really believe that
they have something to offer and are willing to share that. And the fact they
are committed to sharing as best they can. . . . I would almost bet that
throughout the year they have done a lot of other things in you know in their
daily lives and in their daily farming operations that have helped to help
further the organizations.
Q:
Now those things that we’ve mentioned before, the capital that we just
talked on, the commitment that the organization members feel, the control that
the president and leaders and board have o f the organization, consensus on
values the organization has in regards to sustainable farming methods for the
environment, how do you think or to what extent do you feel that these
elements contribute to organizational sustainability?
R:
The organization is sustainable. The industry that we’re associated
with, being agriculture, is never, in my opinion, going to cease to be better
information and as long as that is the situation there will always be things that
this organization can do and I just believe that we have to be a part of that.
So I don’t see us not needing to put resources into generation and dissemina­
tion o f these types o f information.
Q:
Those elements that w e’ve talked about before—if you didn’t have them
could MASA be what it is today?
R:
No. For any organization to stay around—to have any influence-it has
to provide results and no extra generation dissemination o f this information at
this point. Had we not have done that I don’t know how many positive results
we could show our members that we had done.
Q:
Is there anything else that you would like to say in general about the
survivability o f this organizational or nonprofits in general?
R:
No. I guess not. I hope w e’re around as long as we are needed and I
hope that as long as we are needed we can contribute to fulfilling those needs.

224
Q:
About the future o f the organization—what do you think would be the
most important issue or problem facing this organization over the next year or
so?
R:
New member growth. I think we have to continue to bring on some
new members and there are different ways that I suppose we can do that.
’Cause I hope we continue to generate interest among non members and make
ourselves available to individuals in a positive way that they feel like we have
something to offer them.
Q:
now?

Overall what do you see the MASA Organization 10-15 years from

R:
It’s hard to say because I guess I would hope that the MASA organiza­
tion would always have the capability and the ability to adapt and adopt
whatever its members demanded out of it at any one point and time. Because
my opinion that the organization that is not that then that means that it is not
responding to its members’ needs and perhaps would end up—I don’t know if
failure is the right word—but would end up at something less than what its
potential was. The future of the agriculture industry would dictate what the
MASA organization is 15 years from now.
Q:
ou know, we have talked about all these variables—control, communica­
tion, culture, capital, the consensus on the values that we are calling coher­
ence, compliance and commitment—being so important to the organization.
Are there any other variables that you have seen . . . that organizations need
to have to be effective and to be institutions?
R:
I guess I ’d have a hard time identifying. I guess if there is anything
within this organization or within my farming operation that I would like to try
to avoid to set a set o f immovable parameters that the organization or my
farming operation that could move into or out of or if the situation demanded
it. I think w e’re finding that flexibility in so many things today is an impor­
tant component.

B opha—M ichigan A gricultural S tew ardship Association
Q:
Tell me about the original conceptualization of the Michigan Ag. Stewardship
Association.
A:
Really it started with posing a question: "Is their a constituency in sustainable
agriculture that needed to be identified in this State?" M yself a n d
were both
known to be working in the area of research in education of sustainable agriculture
and we would be getting calls from people, from farmers and others around the state
being asked questions and other technical issues and other kinds of issues. At some
point, when we saw these kinds o f organizations showing up in other states we

225
wondered, "Is there a need for this kind of identifiable constituency group in Michi­
gan?" W e really posed that question to a group of about 90 people who gathered on
campus for one afternoon. These were people involved in our extension staff. The
invitation was also issued to people involved in soil and water conservation districts
around the State. . . Based on that one meeting it was apparent that yes there was an
identifiable constituency that wanted a voice and that was interested in organizing.
Q:

How was the initial leadership identified for the organization?

A:
The way that we identified the initial leadership was asking extension staff and
the soil and water conservation staff who in their communities are considered leaders
and are interested in sustainable agriculture, from that the group self selected. We
asked two questions: Are any o f you interested in on-farm research projects; and are
any o f you interested in participating in a leadership development program? Out of
the roughly 90 people that were there, 40 said yes. So we created a leadership
development program that, from our prospective, was focused on building some of
the necessary skills it takes for people to be effective leaders in different kinds of
settings. But those people who came together were also very interested in using that
time together to put the structure around an organization. So we used our time
together in those leadership sessions doing both the communication skill building and
understanding individual leadership style stuff. At the same time, time would be set
aside for looking at bylaws for the organization and for creating a mission and goal
statement for the organization.
Q:
I understand the that Extension had a role in the original founding of the
organization. Could you speak to that a bit?
A:
Well, to the extent to which I am employed as an extension specialist,
absolutely. To the extent to which we had out of the 40 people, about 4 or 5 were
Extension field staff, yeah Extension was involved. To the extent to which Extension
ultimately put some funding to help pay for the cost associated with this kind of
conferencing and workshop, traveling, and facilitator expense, yeah Extension was
involved.
Q:
How is Extension continually involved with MASA or its continued support
for the organization?
A:
I don’t really view it in terms of support. I view it in terms o f a partnership.
In Extension, we have been very careful to try to create Extension as partner with
MASA and not as an organization that is supporting it or somehow holding it up or
anything else. MASA is an independent organization. But there happen to be people
who are Extension professionals who also see value in being members or leaders in
the MASA organization. So, there is a lot of overlap. There is a lot o f cross fertiliza­
tion. But Extension is not playing the role o f housing the office of MASA or
anything like that.

226
Q:
W hat is the commentary about the initial founding entity and then the growing
process through which an organization can become partners or co-user in whatever
the environments may be for whatever the benefits may be?
A:
W ell, I think it’s important if that’s the way you want it to happen you have to
know that from the start. So the most important aspect, I think, is helping people
build the leadership capacity they need to independently function in their organization.
If we don’t that and we are there being the enablers, we are the ones writing the
bylaws and we are the ones organizing the meetings we are the ones organizing the
funding—when I say we, I mean Extension—you are creating a co-dependent relation­
ship that then is very hard to break down the road. We are then much better off, if
this is the direction we want to take from the very start, to make it very clear that this
is not an organization that is going to be run by Extension or that it is going to be
built by Extension. W e [Extension] are here to provide some resources from the
university—whether it be resources in technical understanding, whether it be resources
in education o r in research, on-farm research in this case or whether it be resources in
leadership development. That is who we are as a university; we are not here to run
organizations or to set up organizations. Our job has to do with education and
knowledge sharing.
Q:

W hat else consisted of that founding vision?

A:
It was a vision for what this organization could provide both to its membership
and to others outside the membership to learn more about sustainable agriculture and
it was basically that MASA was going to be a group of people dedicated to fostering
and sharing information about an agriculture that was agronomically sound and
environmentally safe and economically profitable.
Q:

So in a sense you are reiterating the mission statement?

A:
Right! . . . and the mission that was developed by the members of the
organization. It was not a mission statement that I developed. It was not a mission
statement that was somehow got laid on them. It was one that they spent time
internally developing.
Q:
. . . W hat does an organization do to keep self-sustaining commitment and
keep the people continuously motivated without any control or other activities?
A:
I would ask the question the other way around. It is not apparent to me how
control or coercion or any other means can keep people committed because commit­
ment comes from the heart. The way you keep people committed is to build a vision
o f what can be accomplished through a collective action. That vision, being so
compelling to the people who are committed to it, they stay involved. The actions
that are being taken by the organization are viewed as consistent with that vision and
consistent with that commitment. People will always come and go for lots o f various
reasons, but you don’t compromise your vision. You say we believe we can create an

227
agricultural future that is going to be more environmentally safe and agronomically
sound and economically profitable. We do believe that; we do believe that is
necessary; we believe that stewarding the agricultural industry and resources in this
state for the future are vitally important to all of us and you don’t waiver from it. I
believe that true commitment comes when individuals can understand how they can
contribute to an effort that is larger than them. A lot o f people think that commit­
ment comes from receiving services and "well, if you have an organization that can
meet people’s needs of what they want and what they need and the services that they
require, then people will stay committed." No I don’t believe that. I think that the
higher commitment is one that is going to be developed based on what I can contrib­
ute to my community and not what I take from it. MASA is simply providing a
vehicle for people who have this kind of vision for an agricultural future to contribute
to a community who is doing this work.
Q:
What about the goals of the organization, how is the organization able to
continue on pursuing its goals and objectives with the changing elements of the
environment over time?
A:
You have to understand that it is not an old organization so we don’t have a
real long track record, but there are a number of very talented individuals that have
committed their time and energy to this organization. It is that talent and energy
collectively that creates the possibility of achieving those goals. It is individuals
willing to take the initiative individually and collectively.
Q:
The time limit factor is brought up again. Where to you see the organization
10, 15, or 20 years from now?
A:
It sort o f concerned me that even the premise o f the interview when we started
that this is about institutionalization and I ’m not sure that it is. I believe that we are
in a very unique time right now, in a unique time in the history of our species on this
planet. I heard somebody say this a couple of weeks ago at a session and it really hit
me. If you look at the eras that we have lived through—the ice age, the stone age, the
agricultural age, the industrial age, the information age—that we are the first genera­
tion to, not only live in at least two majors ages that we have been through on this
planet, but over a transition time as well. I mean if you think of the time when we
moved from the middle ages to the industrial age to the renaissance. There were
several generations who just lived in the transition time between these two ages. We
are living when things are changing at such a greater pace than it ever has before,
that we are faced with living part o f our life in one age and the rest of our life in
another age and living through the transition. This has never happened before. I think
that it is apparent that the institutions that were created in society to take care of, for
example, an industrial age, are largely irrelevant. I mean they are still around but
they’re undergoing tremendous upheaval because through this transition time and into
a new age, they can’t function the way they did before. I believe that we are heading
into a time when institutions need to come and go. To view success as institutional­
ization and here for a long time, that may denote failure as often as it denotes

228
success. That success might look more like groups of people with common vision
and common aspirations coming together around important issues collectively exerting
leadership for change and that 10 years down the road, when the issue they came
together on is no longer a critical issue, that effort dissolves and these people are now
together in a much different group. It may not even be the same group. But
individuals who were involved in this have now sort of moved and are now involved
in some other important social movement. I believe that the Michigan Agricultural
Stewardship Association is part o f a social movement. So from that perspective the
institutionalization is not what is important. W hat’s important is the capacity building
of people, that people need to, in this time, in this transition state that we are in, on
this planet, people need to be improving and enhancing their skills o f living on the
planet and living with each other. We need to develop the kinds of relationships that
are necessary for us to come together and then move apart in this fluid kind of
organizational and association structure so that we can meet the social needs that are
going to come at us and they’re gonna come at us very quickly. As soon as we
rigidify ourselves into an institution, then our mindset starts to become, "What do I
need to do to keep this institution alive"? Even though the institution may largely
become irrelevant to the social movements that need to happen, our mindset is still
how do we keep the institution alive and we start acting in ways that no longer look
like the vision o f who we are, the vision of who we were when we created ourselves.
Q:
What is an institution to you? How do you see MASA in the sense o f an
institution?
A:
Institution probably isn’t the right word. We need to be thinking o f new ways
to communicate. It may never be about a building. It may never be about a paid
staff. All that stuff that we thought of as institutions, it may never be about a
bureaucracy with procedure books at all, but so often we view those things as signs of
success. I am not at all sure that those signs really mean success any more. In some
cases they might. In this kind o f situation I am pretty convinced that it doesn’t. The
more the fluid we can keep this organization, probably the better off w e’re all gonna
be.
Q:
Could it be perceived as an aim to arrive at that fluidity in organizations or is
it a process?
A:
It is sort o f hard to say what that looks like as a goal. If you read the literature
in business and industry and the management and leadership literature all over the
place right now it talks about the importance of being flexible, o f organizations and
institutions having a great deal of flexibility to deal with the changing environment.
And I think that is one o f the reasons for an instance it is so difficult for a university
to deal with changing environments. It is because we have built in such rigidity. We
built rigidity in budgets. We built rigidity in curriculum. W e built rigidity in terms
o f who is here. You get promoted and tenured and most people stay here for a
career. That doesn’t allow a whole lot o f flexibility in being able to adjust an
institution to meet current needs as they come very quickly. We may have a faculty

229
at a university who is largely trained in one age and has a world view in one age,
who is being asked to educate our young people who will live most of their life in a
completely different age. And my God, that’s a challenge.
Q:
W hat is the relationship that you see between effectiveness and what would be
termed as institutions?
A:
I don’t see a whole lot o f parallel. I can look at huge institutions that by many
standards would be termed pretty ineffective at responding to current needs and
current social situations. On the other hand, I have seen new organizations of people,
new associations of people, new collaborations, in a very short order, with very little
o f what we would call institutional infrastructure, be able to respond very rapidly and
very effectively to meet the needs of constituents or meet the needs of stake holders
or meet the needs o f neighborhoods or whatever. It might even be an inverse
relationship between the extent o f institutionalization and the ability to respond
effectively.
Q:
W hat about the component of being an institution that has to do with what has
been called legitimacy and what the environment has to say about what you under­
take?
A:
M aybe this is where the whole point o f collaboration comes back in. One of
the basic values that MASA has employed from the start is that we are not doing it
alone; that you collaborate with others. So you utilize the strength that an institution
can bring. You don’t say I ’m not going to collaborate with Farm Bureau because
there are people there who are trying to support the status quo in agriculture while we
are trying to move ahead. Instead you say Farm Bureau has a lot of strength to offer
in what we are doing so lets team with them. All o f a sudden you have MASA who
is being supported by Farm Bureau every time there is a grant being written; you
have the president of Michigan Farm Bureau writing a letter of support and the
director o f MDA is writing a letter of support and the Dean o f MSU College of
Agriculture and Natural Resources is writing a letter of support. You don’t have to
be an institution to be able to rely on the legitimacy o f institutions that are there.
You can do it by partnering with them.
Q:
So in a sense institutions are in the environment still have a role to play and
organizations can still aspire to get to those particular statutes?
A:
They can, but another way to look at is to say I don’t aspire to get to that
status, but my greatest aspiration is to move towards the vision that we have articulat­
ed. And if the best way to do that is to collaborate with others and find the common
ground where those visions overlap then you do it. You borrow legitimacy from
others, you receive a grant from the Kellogg Foundation; that can bring you legitima­
cy overnight.

230
Q:
In a sense we are moving toward a reframing of institutions and institutional­
ization. The whole paradigm is shifting or changing evidenced from what I have been
able to gather from the interviews. One interviewee told me, "We have a statement
from the Governor. W e have a charter; we are a chartered organization. But so
what"? he said. "That still doesn’t pay our bills or stay consistent in defining the
goals o f the organization." . . . What will be the effect on the environment if all of a
sudden we have new concepts o f when an organization is an institution?
A:
All you have to do is look around because it is happening. I don’t think that is
something that anybody controls. I don’t think it’s something that there’s one person
with a switch who says all o f a sudden, "OK, we now have a different concept." I
think that many o f us already have a different concept and so the implications are
what you are seeing right now. One of those implications is the Michigan Ag.
Stewardship Association and how it is structured and how it grew and what it is about
and I believe that you can find other such examples. I’m not saying that that’s the
only one.
Q:
One o f the themes that I am pursuing deals with institutionalization and what it
may end up doing for the rest of the organizations. For example, it would be to find
a successful and long lasting organization that has shown over 10 or 15 years that it
has been able to reach its grasp and continue to grow. MASA was able to do that
without the number o f years o f experience; is this going to be a reoccurring trend or
what was special about the MASA approach that made it overcome the usual climb of
the 10 or 15 years?
A:
Partnerships and Relationships. Getting grants is no different than anything
else in life; it is done through relationships. You always need to have great ideas.
But there are many more good ideas than there is money to support them. What is
the difference between a good idea that gets supported and a good idea that floats out
there and never gets supported. I believe it has to do with how well you articulate the
idea and how well it can fit into another organization’s vision for what they are doing
and relationships. And we had all three. We had some people with great ideas in
MASA. W e have people with those ideas fitting well into where other organization
see themselves going for the future, but they are so involved in taking care of
business right now. I believe Farm Bureau also sees itself as in the future, heading
towards much o f the same vision for agriculture as MASA does. But an organization
like Farm Bureau is so tied to what they are doing day to day, and the services that
they’re providing day to day, that they don’t have the time, energy and personnel to
look ahead like that. They are acting on today’s problems and MASA is acting on
tom orrow ’s promises. So you have that and then you have relationships . . . .
Q:
Usually new organizations try to establish those relationships. The common
way is by keeping track o f people that they meet over a period time, otherwise they
try to pursue them through boards o f directors. W hat . . . (question not completed)

231
A:
There is a third way. Break down the mindset of what an organization and an
institution is. Collect around you other organizations, those people who have the
relationships, those people who have the vision that is encompassed in the vision of
that organization, and then you have the relationship intact. You don’t have to do it
through boards. There are some people who say give me a position on a board, title
and I ’m with you . . . .
Q:

Is MASA considered to itself as effective?

A:

Very.

Q:

By what standards or criteria is that effectiveness measured?

A:
Probably by standards o f activity towards goals and by standards of impact and
standards of influence. It’s not by standards o f buildings or membership or wealth o f
board members or status of board members.
Q: Some o f the reoccurring themes that I have been able to identify are capital,
commitment from the members, culture of the organization, a certain amount of
control that the leadership applies or allows, flexibility to allow the members to that
which they are capable. Would you say that this is consistent with what you have
seen with MASA or with what institutions can do?
A:

I think that they are all important.

Q:
You have added a collaboration to those that I have seen, or at least talked
about the communication piece as well. In a sense you haven’t termed them as such
but you hit on many of those and it is being presented in a type of framework.
A:

Now you have to put an 8th C in there. Where are you going to put it?

Q:

. . . How important it has been for your organization?

A:
Very, more important than any of these. More important than compliance.
Compliance is not nearly as important as collaboration. Culture, communication and
commitment; if you have the rest, capital comes. I don’t know, control? I guess it
depends on how you frame it. It is definitely a very important aspect or an important
issue.
Q:
Are there any other general comments that you would like to make about
effective organizations or the whole concept o f institutions?
A:

I think that what you are doing is really fascinating work.

232
Calembert—Youth Development Corporation
Q:
I ’m sure you have been able to see some of the background information on the
development o f the organization. How have you been able to continue the vision of
the original founders?
R:
I think the original reason it was set up was primarily as a delinquency
prevention and that was the original intent. I think we’ve carried that mode of
operation through everything we have done. When you look at what we are doing
now, it’s different from what they did in 1971 when they started, but what you do to
prevent delinquency, and the types of problems you’re seeing in delinquency, are
vastly different now than in 1971. If you look at our programs now you will still find
a high percentage o f kids who have been involved with the court because we are still
trying to do something to keep them from getting even further into the system or
prevent them from getting into the system in the first place.
Q:
And what continued support do you get from the founding members or from
organizations that helped you get started?
R:
W ell, we originally started under model city, the city of Lansing and the city
of Lansing still provides support. There is no model city anymore. We get money
from the general fund and the city o f Lansing; that’s the been the one cord that’s gone
all the way through from the beginning to now. Some of the other federal monies
etc. have changed their whole dynamics and some of those things have changed over
the years, and some things have been in and out, but the city has consistently been
through all that.
Q:
W ere there any additional players in the conceptualization—the founding—o f the
organization that you know of?
R:

No, the city was the main force.

Q:
What additional support would you envision or is expected, anticipated from
the city or from those founding people?
R:
Well, I don’t know that you I cause the city’s support has decreased because
part o f their support was federal dollars and other dollars. They have been in the past
and we got a little bit more money this year than last year which was the first time in
several years we got an increase. Their pot of money gets smaller and there are more
people who want it. I anticipate an increase this next year because our new mayor
has youth as a major focus. As a matter of fact they’ve just let it be known that there
is some money specifically outside of the normal realm of where we get our dol­
lars. . . .
Q:
I ’m going to move on the goals and the values of the organization. When you
are asked to briefly describe Youth Development Corp., what do you say?

233
R:
I ’d say we are primarily a delinquency prevention program and our primary
focuses are currently youth employment and in counseling, and those are the primary
areas we focus on right now.
Q:
And so by that would it be safe to say that it’s the really important function
that the organization serves, the delinquency aspect of it?
R:
Yeah, right. I think it’s critical, it’s real critical, too, that we do not focus
100% on that, because I also think it’s important that the organization not be labeled
as an organization that’s only for troubled kids. For instance if you’re an employer
and I come with somebody and you know that I work with ex-offenders and that’s it,
you know the person I ’ve got is an ex-offender and that puts a certain judgm ent on
that person before you ever even talk to them. Based on the fact that I brought them.
I think that it is real critical that we don’t label our clients, label our clients by virtue
o f them coming to us. That the only label is that between 16 and 21 but not necessar­
ily troubled kids, because you wan* an employer to make a decision on whether they
are going to take this young person based on the young person, not based on whether
they think there may be some problems because of who is sending them their way. . .
Q:
In what ways do you hope the organization will be different 5 years from now
than it is today?
R:
Well, I think I’ll always hope that financially we would be better off. . . . I
don’t know that you need necessarily to say you have more money; what you do need
is to be able to say it’s more stable. That you are not every year scrambling to see
how the pieces are gonna fit together. I mean it would be nice if somebody could
guarantee you a level that you could learn to live with that level. . . .
Q:

W hat about the issue that the organization serves delinquency cases?

R:
I would love to think sometime that any organization that serves delinquency
could work themselves out o f business. But I ’m also realistic to know that you’ll
never do that. So I think I would see us still focusing on that group and the programs
might be different 5 years from now because what works or what seems to be
working may be different. And I that’s important to keep an eye on. You don’t get
stagnant in what you do based on "I’m comfortable with this." Sometimes you have
to say, okay, this worked in 1970; 1995 it ain’t gonna work. . . .
Q:
W hat would you say are the core values of this organization or o f those that
you tried to maintain as a leader in this organization?
R:
I think I value the individual. And the fact that every individual has the right
to do well. And that we need to be there when they are ready to exercise that right.
Also, I think it’s important that we recognize the fact that sometimes people come
here to get help who really aren’t ready. It’s more like I need to do this because
Mom and Dad are saying that I need to be doing something but I ’m not real

234
committed at this point. Or it’s almost like the other day I was talking to somebody;
it’s the difference between wanting a job and wanting a paycheck. I mean there’s a
clear difference there. Yeah, I ’d love to get money, but do I really want to work for
it. That’s another thing. You know, I think we really need to be there when they
want a job. You know, like when they’ve decided there is a reason to do this, and I
insist to staff here if a kid doesn’t work out for whatever reason, they stop showing
up, whatever happens, that we always keep the door open; that we don’t say because
you flupped here you can’t come back. We always say to them, you know w e’re here
when you get ready to get help; I ’m here, call. We have enough clients who come in
now and they do nothing and a year from now they’re whole motivation their whole
attitude is different. . . .
Q:
When you first came into office did you have in mind some things you wanted
to accomplish?
R:
Yeah, I definitely wanted to get beyond. When I first came here, I remember
they had a press conference of sorts. Because the previous director had a lot of flack
with the mayor. The newspaper wanted to know what it is I was going to do to get
the mayor off YDC’s back. So my ti\ thing I said I ’m not talking about the previous
director and his problem with the mayor. I ’ll tell you what I ’m going to do is that
w e’re not going to give the mayor anything to find wrong with YDC. And knowing
that particular mayor he will have to find something else to pick on because that was
his style. He liked to have a whipping boy. And YDC was it when I came here and
six months later it was somebody else because he no longer had anything negative to
find. And that’s my way of operation. . . .
Q:

Was volunteer usage in YDC heavy in the past?

R:

When I first came here there was very little, very little volunteers at all.

Q:
Do you have intentions, or at least what is the status of the voluntary nature of
this organization, or the listed—the registered—voluntary nature of this organization?
R:
Well, we have usually from 10 to 20 regular volunteers at any one time. And
so there are certain jobs we count on volunteers doing. I mean one o f our programs
we have a part-time staff member and the rest of the staff in that program is totally
volunteers or interns (people we don’t pay). That program has been going for 8
years. They consistently have been able to get the volunteers and interns to keep that
program going like that. In our mentoring program, we currently have 21 mentors all
of whom are volunteers. And the one part-time staff member who works with that
part o f the program. W e got a half time person being able to serve one-on-one 4
hours per week 21 kids essentially. You are getting a much better, and to me that is
much more effective use o f your dollars. To have somebody there who can train
people, to teach them what you want them to do. Who will do that on a volunteer
basis. Plus you’re benefiting society in the sense that volunteerism does something
for the people who volunteer.

235

Q:
W ere there some things that concerned you during the first few months of
your appointment that no longer seem important to you now today?
R:
Yeah! I spent the first year I was here writing personnel policies, organi­
zational policies, administrative procedures, and things like that. W e change them
every now and then but there’s not a major overhaul. I mean when I came in and a
lot o f those things didn’t exist or it was all verbal. There was not anything written
that says this is it. So I probably spent the first year writing lots o f those things and
now I go we go back and review those things on an annual basis but typically they are
relatively minor changes made. So I don’t spend a lot o f time doing that. I didn’t
spend as much time writing for grants and so on. Now I spend a lot more time
writing for grants and deal with money issues than I spent then.
Q:
Could you speculate on the intent during the framing of the organization?
Does or did the constitution suffice to get the people along, through the formative
years and to coordinate the million dollars that they got for the first years o f opera­
tion?
R:
Yeah, I think so. I think they had the basic framework. I think the problem
was more internal; you know, I think people basically knew what YDC was doing but
inside the organization I don’t think it was as clear as to how you do and clear lines
o f communication and clear lines of who does what. And those kinds of things, those
were more the problems than I think programs were well founded and people knew
what the program wanted to do. M ore of the problem was things like how do I get
paid. You know that’s an exaggeration. I meant that’s do we get paid on Fridays or
can I do this or can I do that? which are more internal kinds of things rather than
what programs are doing or how we are doing? I think that that was I felt like that
has always been YDC’s strengths. The program will do and serve what it was set up
to serve. That has always been clear and people have always understood that and felt
that was valued. . . .
Q:

Now to what institutional problems or areas do you give the most attention?

R:
Right now probably money. Just because that’s the most critical, and from my
prospective it’s the most critical, because if I can solve that problem then programs
are there that are needed. The staff feels like they don’t have to worry about whether
they are going to get a pink slip next week. And they can put their effort into their
job. I think that’s probably the number one thing right now. I think we have got
programs that we think are working effectively. I would like to expand some of
those. But if you don’t have the money to expand, then at least be able to continue at
the level you are at. This is important anyway.
Q:
If a colleague were to come to you and say I ’ve just put in for the presidency
o f an institution very much like this one, can you give me any advice about what I
should do my first few months in office. What would you say to her/him?

236
R:
I think I would say listen to the people that already there see what they think
o f the organization, how they are feeling, what direction they think the organization is
going in. Both staff and board. Then also be particularly attuned to what the
community thinks. Your level o f support in the community is critical to your
success. I think I said earlier on the tape 50% of our referrals come word o f mouth.
If I don’t get that 50% o f those referrals then I am gonna dry up essentially because
I ’ve lost a major portion of clients, plus that also means I ’ve lost community support
because people aren’t telling people there is a good program down the street. That’s
the best PR you can get. And its free. . . .
Q:
And the members that you talked about within the organization—how are they
inspired to the commitment to the values and to the goals of YDC?
R:
Well, I think the main thing is that you keep them involved with that. By
dialoguing with them periodically how what they are doing fits into it. I think it’s
real critical with like the Board o f Directors or volunteers is to constantly keep them
fed with success stories. Things that say to them what we are doing is working. We
just received an award from the Lieutenant Governor’s office for our mentoring
program. That does a lot. You take that letter from the Lieutenant Governor to the
Board meeting and let them read the letter that does a lot for them. ’Cause now when
they are out talking to people about YDC I say by the way did you get a chance to
see in the paper that we won an award for this. . . .

Erzule--Youth Development Corporation
Q:
When do you consider an organization an institution?
R:
In the past you’ve "arrived" in one or two ways. Well, I ’m not talking about
voluntary associations. One, during the years o f the 60’s and 70’s, you turned to
federal grant dollars, and if you got the right combination of board members and staff
working on federal funds. Once you’re hooked in to a particular type o f federal
funds, for example, funds that were earlier earmarked for youth job vocation training.
Those funds were pretty consistent from year to year. It has just been in very recent
years that has not been consistent. And frequently, even organizations that are
saying, "Oh, we will get [some] federal dollars as happened last year," turned around
and said, "No, you’re not because Congress didn’t pass that bill. So they end up
scrambling. So, one way to have arrived is to really tap in to regular dollars. Some
boards have unique fundraisers on the board. Board members are valued who can
speak on your behalf to the community about you and to provide the kind of commu­
nity support that may be needed to getting the word out to the broader community
about your services.
The second way that organizations (sort of) "arrive" is to tap a local source of
funding. In many communities there are two sources of local funds: Community
Foundations and United Way. Lansing has a new community foundation. Many
larger communities like Detroit, Grand Rapids and communities throughout the

237
country have sizable foundations that are local funding sources with businesses and
individuals contributing. So I ’m talking about funding dollars right now.
In order to get local funds, it’s a little bit more complex. It’s not a matter of
excellent grant writing or getting to people who know Washington and work to lobby.
It’s a little different. First o f all, foundation funds are generally smaller locally. They
may support programs for a number o f years but it may be at a scale where they
withdraw support gradually. . . . There’s no guarantee of funds for the same organi­
zations. Increasingly, people who contribute money, even $10 or $25 a year, are
saying we want our money to go to this specific organization. So donors themselves
scatter and disperse funds so that a small group o f the board members isn’t making
that decision. What this has done is to create a lot of publicity that has to go on
about that organization to the community. Every $5 and $10 contributor to the
United Way has the power to decide what to fund. It’s costly and requires publicity
for small nonprofit organization. It is harder than influencing two or three key
people.
In addition, United Way has review panels. They go out visit and talk with volun­
teers, talk with everyone outside the organization. They determine whether the
organization is worthy for that award. The review panel offers a different way of
assessing the need and the people saying they can address those needs. And suppos­
edly, that’s designed in such a way that is as objective as possible, as fair as possible,
to new organization.
Another criteria for funding is if their services are in demand. And this has a two­
fold ramification. You find in nonprofits that they really don’t want to offend anyone
so they’ll sometimes serve more than their staff has ability to deal with quality. Part
of that is because everybody is a potential funder and after all we serve the public and
can’t say no. So you see staff juggling a lot of responsibilities really trying to be as
broad based as possible. Sometimes serving a wider variety of services that they
maybe aren’t equipped or staffed to do well. And those are some o f the pitfalls.
Whatever the service, it is something the media as well as the community accepts and
feels they have a need for. The media may say we have done enough stories on
literacy; we are looking for stories on street gangs. See if your services can tap this.
Part o f being "arrived" is being like corporations: merge to have new products and
services. Look at the automobile dealers. They no longer just sell Chevys; they also
sell Hondas. Because if the U.S. economy is down you can also depend on the
Japanese economy. And so to some extent, for some organizations who are large
enough to be able to shift their services like the Catholic Social Services for example.
Catholic social services serves every age group, refugees, youth, seniors with Meals
on Wheels, and non-Catholics, too. But Youth development Corporation is unique in
that while other organizations added or changed their youth services, Youth Develop­
ment Corporation is still providing the same employment service for youth they
started with. The only addition has been to piggy-back with MSU for M entoring/Tu­
toring in addition to counseling and Job Search Strategies.

238
Q:

In what conditions did you find YDC when you first began working with it?

R:
It was located on Michigan Avenue. It was a small one-room operation. Now
it is approximately a small three-room operation. They certainly are operating on a
very lean budget, with very committed staff and board members. They really
maximize their volunteers. They maximize the community people. You can see that
they have to fight for everything they get, every piece o f equipment. The floors are
worn, everything is old. When you’re institutionalized, maintenance is easier. An
organization says, "Geez, we should be funding your services but you bought new
carpeting. I don’t wanna pay for carpeting, I ’m contributing to your kids, not your
carpeting. So you never really see the kind of maintenance that is needed for an
organization to look like it’s "arrived." And what does that mean for young people.
Most o f them feel that most organizations should look like the corporate model of
glossiness—big desk, clean and modem looking. When you walk into that place
people have said that their reaction is sort of horrifying because its depressing, "It
looks like a pit. Do these people know what they’re doing?" So it doesn’t look like
they have "arrived." But that’s that double-edged sword again—if they really looked
like they’ve arrived. Some funders like foundations only fund start-up projects for
services. I ’ve heard, ’Oh gosh this organization must not be struggling because look
at the kind o f paper they’re using, fancy type for this newsletter. They could be
printing this on cheap quality stock or something like that. So you’ve got that double­
edge sword for different populations; kids you serve versus funding sources.
Nonprofits have to walk a fine tightrope and look not overly successful but not so bad
that people feeling uncomfortable there. YDC had a newsletter that students mimeo­
graphed. One aging mimeograph machines is used; you can hardly find them any
more. Students do some o f the writing. Occasionally there might be a typo. You
see I think that’s important that those students have a part in that operation. I also
think it’ important that those o f us who really care about the kids and their learning
find some computers to donate to them so that they can teach the kids to use comput­
ers now—not mimeograph machines—because businesses are already beyond that.
The question is one o f limited or finite resources in a small community. The issue is
do you "arrive" through competition; increasingly the buzzword is you’re gonna
arrive through collaboration. There may need to be some mergers of organizations.
So instead o f competing for the same dollar, people can visibly gain more stake­
holders and show that they’re doing their part to join forces and provide services
efficiently. W e’ve seen a little bit o f this in rural cities, St. John’s in Michigan and
w e’re either going to see a lot more o f that or less services.
Q:

W hat do you think the implications are going to be?

R:
That’s a good question. I think right now people like the idea because w e’re
in lean years. I don’t think a nonprofit is ever truly "arrived." I think it is always a
challenge. I think the board turns over and tries to develop new programs, services
and funding sources; continuously renewing who your funders are. Training board

239
members and the continual public educational process is undervalued as effort goes to
maintaining the organization. You sort of can say that I have "arrived" as an
institution when you’re constantly changing to meet the needs of the changing publics
that you serve and are accountable to.
Q:

Do you think all organizations aspire to become institutions?

R:
I think all organizations aspire to have stable basic funding and would like
recognition and community support and there’s never enough of that. Even those that
have "arrived" are struggling. The YMCA may merge with the YWCA or Boy and
Girl Scouts may merge in the future. 4-H has changed some of its image from rural
to urban to reflect the reduced rural population. That is what will challenge them in
the future.

Imani—Tuscola 2001, Inc.
Q:
Do you consider Tuscola 2001, Inc. an effective organization? Why or why
not?
R:
I consider Tuscola 2001 a very effective organization. Tuscola 2001 is only
using 25% o f its potential. An example of the effectiveness that 2001 has is the Caro
Airport. The village o f Caro came to the Tuscola 2001 Board with a possible project
that they needed assistance with. Tuscola 2001 acted as the spearhead to organize the
county people, leaders, government people, concerned citizens to form an Airport
Authority. Tuscola 2001 continues to monitor the project each month through a 2001
board member. Tuscola 2001 is made up of leaders, citizens, board of commissioners
joined together acting as a catalyst to implement, evaluate, and follow up on a
project. Some o f the characteristics that lend to Tuscola 2001’s success are a broad
base o f county members, strong leadership, great team effort, collaboration among
leaders, agencies, and a strong sense of county. It also helps to have accomplish­
ments and projects to build on. Tuscola 2001 moves their monthly meeting around
the county and hosts village, township leaders, special projects and concerned citizens
for input and networking.
Q:

To what do you attribute the organization’s effectiveness?

R:
The effectiveness o f Tuscola 2001 success can be attributed to keeping the
organization in the private sector. The members do not look for government to do it
for them. As stated in question til the strong sense of belonging to a team of
concerned citizens that can work together identified by the strategic plan o f the
county.
Q:

Do you consider Tuscola 2001 an institution?

R:
Tuscola 2001 is not old enough to be an institution. It is not well enough
established but moving in that direction.

240
Q:
Is there a correlation, in your opinion, between effectiveness and institution
status?
R:
There is a correlation between effectiveness and an institution but not that
great. You do not have to be around 20 years to be effective. The question is does it
reach its goals. Do the goals keep changing? Tuscola 2001 goals keep changing.
Tuscola 2001 must revisit their goals every couple o f years.
Q:
How does the organization deal with the changes that are constantly going on
in the environment?
R:
Tuscola 2001 constantly deals with changes in the environment. The environ­
ment to us means wetlands, P.A .116, bam preservation, water, park preservation,
river planning and preservation, farm land, trees, open spaces, and clean air tosay a
few. Tuscola 2001 is how the people of Tuscola county want their environment to
be.
Q:

W hat additional services can Extension provide the organization?

R:
The services that MSU Extension can provide Tuscola 2001 are similar to
those provided to 4-H. The services include office space, secretary and office
support. Information and university resources, including current data, are very
important for any project that Tuscola 2001 may research. The ongoing assistance
from the community development agent has been the driving force that has motivated
the Board and provided a form o f security for the organization.
Q:

W here do you see the organization 10-15 years from now?

R:
I see Tuscola 2001 becoming an institution, well-established where people
make use o f the organization as a common practice, where the brainstorming,
networking and the combining o f county resources is a common practice.
H o te p
K sc d a *oo(, I^ c .
Today, I am speaking with an expert on institutionalization, hoping to get a different
take on the discoveries on the institutionalization process and how some o f these
organizations are now being considered institutions without necessarily meeting all
major elements o f an institution.
Q.

How has the definition o f institutionalization come about to date?

A:
These institution variables that you were referring to, like the doctrine and the
linkage that provides an enabling legislation, or some other enabling linkage, and the
leadership and the organization and resources, etc., those are variables which an
analyst can use to examine a process, but I don’t think that is what defines an
institution. I would call a group o f human beings an institution if they endure with

241
the same doctrine for a long, long time. They organize for some purpose; if they
could achieve that purpose then they can disband and that’s the end o f it—it never
becomes institutionalized. But if they have sort of an ongoing sort of purpose and
they organize for that purpose and they stay together for that purpose and it lasts a
relatively long period of time (not necessarily 10, 100, or 1000 years because it
varies). I ’m also assuming that no institution is permanent. There is a natural life
cycle o f institutions just as there is of organizations. If an organization becomes
institutionalized, it is valued in and of itself. It seems to me that that is the most
critical part o f the definition. . . .
This idea that it is valued in and of itself—you mentioned FFA. There are things like
that which people get associated with over time. They develop alumni, they develop
loyalty, they develop commitment, and if they are designed to achieve a certain
purpose then that’s great. But then those who are committed to it will try to achieve
that purpose. Now let’s say that they do achieve that purpose, then what. If some­
thing is institutionalized and there is no longer that purpose because it has been
achieved, in a few cases they have been able to keep the institution anyway. They
redefine the goals and they say that they are similar. . . . Some o f those—the excep­
tions are the religious organizations—they could last 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,000 years especially
if they are not too discrete and concrete about what they are trying to do. If they
keep their doctrine sort of flexible and very broad in general, those institutions can
last a long long time.
I would argue educational institutions tend to last (some of them) a long, long time
even though they may change their mode of operating and change their curriculum to
fit the needs o f the time they can continue. If an educational institution institutional­
izes its curriculum. . . . You can institutionalize it. You get the course within the
curriculum. But when it becomes absolutely obsolete, then it will die. If the whole
institution is encompassed by it, then the institution will also die. It may hang on for
quite a while. . . .
Every human group has some kind o f doctrine. There is some rationale for why they
participated. They see that the individuals are going to get something out of it. And
it promises them some thing—maybe just an opportunity to serve others, maybe just
an opportunity to suffer, but it is something or they wouldn’t do it. These are the
important variables, but the extent to which they become institutionalized depends on
how the combination is put together and whether or not it gets maintained with the
linkages and whoever enables it. You can pass a law. We have lots o f organizations
which die even though the laws are still in the books. So they did get authorized but
another thing is resources. Somebody has to provide them resources. Resources can
be money, can be people, can be buildings, can be ideas. Resources can come from
their clientele or can come from outside from their sponsors but there has to be some
flow o f resources. We have that quite often in public institutions. There is a law in
the books saying there must be one o f these. But nobody is willing to give money to
it. And you come back and say why they don’t. And I would come back and say,
the organization, its doctrine, its program, is not sufficiently valued by its clientele or

242
its clientele doesn’t have sufficient clout among the larger group involvement that is
required and therefore it doesn’t continue. Sometimes they get classified like a
dinosaur. The trappings o f the institution are attractive. They will have a label; they
will have a flag; they will have a logo; they might even have a song or two and it has
people with great memories, who are alumni of it and they are loyal to it. It can
continue even after the program becomes obsolete or it fails to change with the times
in terms o f uprooted and didn’t make it in an earlier stage it isn’t delivering anything.
It could last for a while like but I’m suggesting sort o f a life cycle. As those things
creep in, the institution either figures out new programs. If its doctrine is still sound
in terms o f general principles, but the kinds o f ways of achieving it didn’t work,
don’t work any more, it can change its program and continue. But if it keeps the
same programmatic course even when there is no need for it, then the institution itself
gets weakened and may very quietly disappear. It may take a long time for it to
disappear or a new one will be bom out of it. It might keep the trappings. I mean if
it has a good symbol; if it has a logo that everybody likes or a name—like brand
name. . . .
Q:

So the definition of institution extends beyond the variables?

A:
I don’t think that the variables define an institution. The variables are
characteristics that an analyst can use in describing it and comparing one o f them with
another o r in making some forecast about how long it is going to last or what to do.
If in the beginning stage, you have a new organization and you want to institutionalize
it, what can you work on. The variables are handy. But I don’t think it gets defined
as an institution except sort o f historically. This one was an institution because it
lasted a long time and because people valued it in and of itself. They valued it in
spite o f what it was doing. Nation states, sovereign states, tend to get a little of this.
That is my country and I ’m a citizen of it. I hope it is always right, but right or
wrong it is my country so they tend to become institutionalized. Now we have a lot
o f countries changing names, changing all the time so even that doesn’t go forever.
We have military occupations and countries which eventually become colonies for
someone else. Sometimes that lasts 300 years, but even after the 300 years is over,
sometimes they can go back and go to the old institutions and in that phenomenon
some institutions go underground.
Q:
You stress the concept o f time. How relevant or how important is the time
variable o r concept as it relates to institutions?
A:
In the idea of institutionalization, it is very important. We could organize a
thing today and call it an institution. We set up a Herisse a n d ______ Research
Institute and we call it an institution. We name it that and we may even get a license
for that and may be get some kind of charter for that. So in two days we became an
institution. Probably who ever is providing our funds if they don’t do it the next
week you w on’t see it, if we had some letterhead we would probably cross it out,
because we don’t exist any more even though we called it an institution. When has a
thing become institutionalized? Without the time dimension, people have to value it.

243
Maybe not for the particular program at the moment, but by the value in and of itself,
by the name and their perception o f the doctrine, and that is probably a more impor­
tant thing. When forces, political, military or whatever determine to destroy an
institution, and we have plenty o f that in our days, it is a lot easier to destroy the
buildings and the program and even the flow of resources than it is to destroy the
doctrine. If the doctrine was sound and appropriate and the people had loyalty to it,
they will go underground to protect that doctrine. They may end up in new buildings
or without buildings. I mean they may have to change their programs. So I say the
doctrine is a key, huge variable in terms of institutionalization, but it is only a
variable. Because there are a lot o f things that can have a doctrine. You can write a
statement and say that is our doctrine. If some people believe in it, they agree, 5 or
10 people share the same doctrine they can institutionalize something around that
doctrine. The other predicament is leadership. If there is zero leadership, if there
are people who are really committed to this sort o f doctrine, this rationale, this raison
d ’etre for the organization, but none of them want to do any work and none o f them
will come to meetings, there will be no continuity which is the time dimension which
is a necessity if you’re going to call it an institution.
Q:
In your dealings with institutions what kinds of leaders have you found
manifesting within these institutions to keep them as such?
A:
Tick off a few criteria. They understand the doctrine; they are committed to
the doctrine; they are able to explain it at all levels, they understand it well enough so
they explain the doctrine to the staff of the organization even though they are all in it
and some o f them even longer than the leader. The leader has to explain we are here
building a cathedral, we are not here just putting brick together. The reasons why the
world needs this organization. The leader has to be able to explain that inside and
outside to potential donors, to resource providers, whoever they may be and also to
clients. That sometimes requires a leader that can speak 9 languages or speak one
language at many different levels to people of different kinds. Then there is a factor
o f shear energy and long hours of hard work. The leaders I have encountered really
carry their institutions, tended to be both men and women o f unusual vigor. Maybe
they are not physically all that strong, but they could hang in there day after day,
after day— long days and short nights; get less sleep than everybody else; get to work
earlier than most o f the others; be there after the others are gone; sleep in the vehicle,
whether it be a car, boat or a train or whatever and be ready to work as soon as they
land at the next place. I think that kind of characteristic tends to pervade successful
institutions over the years. There other kinds o f things that help institutions, but it
sure helps to know something about the various programs that the institution has. He
or she must understand the doctrine that is critical. . . . Another characteristic is
flexibility. The world changes and the institution has to sort of ride with the changes
o f the current. That means that the leadership has to be quite flexible. If it’s flexible
enough, when the way to achieve the rationale of the doctrine is to do different
programs than we did last year, flexible leadership figure that out, how to adjust to it
and help the staff. Plus the staff, hopefully they will be flexible people and leader
type of people in it. But the staff, and I ’m not talking only about paid staff, they

244
might be volunteers, they might be members or whatever. When they learn how to
do something well and it seems to work, they don’t like to change. The doctrine has
to bring people to the institution. What tends to happen is the doctrine is there and
times change and the kinds of programs that are appropriate to achieve that doctrine
at one period o f time after some years are now different. This is where we come
back to distinguish an organization from an institution. We can organize to clean the
water, but it is not going to be institutionalized. Over time as conditions change, if
we are committed to the doctrine the people should have ample safe drinking wa­
ter. . . .
Q:
You are consistent with notion of doctrine. Let me understand this notion a
little bit more clearer. Is it the same thing that other folks call a mission or a mission
statement?
A:
It is similar. Yes, a general overall mission statement could be the same as a
doctrine. In fact, in some languages it is better to say mission than it is to say
doctrine. Sometimes in the English language the word mission connotes the wrong
kind o f thing. The concept o f doctrine is sometimes defined as the essential ratio­
nale. Why does the world need this organization if it is an organization that is
becoming institutionalized. That is why leadership has to be able to do something.
Leadership has to be able to state the doctrine. Excellent leadership can write words
that will communicate the doctrine. A doctrine is a very slippery, elusive kind of
phenomenon; it is this sort of great idea. . . . You could have a very beautiful logo
but somebody else has a very similar logo and they do terrible things. You probably
have to change your logo because you’re going to be accused of being like them. . . .
The essential doctrine is more than the name, the logo, the leadership, the organiza­
tion, the structure, and the resources. When it gets institutionalized, I mean . . . you
accuse me coming back to doctrine over and over again, I would argue yes because
that is the thing that is most likely to become institutionalized and will carry the
others. . . . FFA in schools is going to teach such and such subject and lots of people
are going to join because they want to be farmers in the future. In a community,
when 80% o f the people there who are coming from farming families, that was a
good thing. In a community where 2% are coming from farming families, it is
unlikely that the others will want to be "future farmers."
Q:
W hat would it mean to the overall world of organizations if we were to look at
institutions differently. For example, a foundation that has historically said that we
will only give moneys to institutions and with a specific time definition o f when one
can consider them institutions and so therefore young start-up organizations will not
get . . . (Example not completed)
A:
Someone else is gonna take the risk. They’re sort of protecting their money.
If you survive as an institution over a period o f time then we will have confidence in
you and then we might give you money.

245
Q:
W e are back to leadership . . . moving away from that transactional type to a
more community-centered, committee-driven entity. What is your take on that type
of leadership?
A:
I think that we are in the era where a collaborative mode is increasingly
necessary compared to an individualistic control type. Now I ’m saying that but if the
institution has top leadership based on controls and they don’t want to be collabora­
tors. Y ou’re looking at the changing role and I think that that is a definite direction
caused in part by the excessive specialization o f our present year. People with all
kinds o f expertise tend to become overspecialized in a narrow segment. So to deal
with the major problems (their lost) we all lost. Even some o f the money that was
won, take some sort o f team effort, by a collaborative group. The world—the
individualistic type o f mode—is not as desired as it may have once been. Institutions
want their top roles to work cooperatively rather than individually. The changing
world and the changing environment caused in the excess o f specialization that people
in all kinds o f sets of expertise have a tendency to become over specialized in our
own segment. To deal with the major problems in the world even the minor prob­
lems take cooperation. W hoever is providing the leadership, the leadership has to
appreciate the contributions o f the great variety of talents and not only those in his or
her field. . . . Nothing about the present is institutionalized; you can say well, I
would like to go to this department at MSU because they have these three great
scholars there and you might get there and find that those three don’t even speak to
each other. Then maybe the only time that they meet is on your committee meeting
or they don’t even know each other that well. It seems to me that is not feasible to
take advantage o f what information and learning is about now. So now the challenge
for the leadership is to stimulate, enhance, encourage and reward the collabora­
tion. . . . Institutionalization requires a certain commitment and that is why if there
are 12 institutions with the exact identical doctrine then why should individuals stay in
one compared to going to the others. Resources are absolutely necessary because you
have two institutions with the same doctrine. One of them was creative getting
resources for decades and the next decade it sort of fails at getting attempts getting
the resources from the outside world. I’m a biochemist and I can’t get reagents in my
lab by anyone in the town, but if I go to the university they all give all o f those
things. So where is the commitment to the institution and this is a phase o f dealing
with institutionalization an organization can become institutionalized it can become
deinstitutionalized and that is usually a step towards its reincarnation or its disappear­
ance.
A:
There is another one like cooperation which I don’t see here, but from a
leadership perspective it seems the easiest one to implement is communication. The
next one is probably cooperation, then there is another one coordination. And you
can do all of those without collaboration. Collaboration to me implies a genuine kind
o f participation among the collaborators where you can get good coordination in a
military organization for example or simply in an orchestra. When a director holds
up his baton all o f the musicians are coordinated and they won’t play his first note
until he gives the signal and when he cuts it at the end, if they’re gonna stay in that

246
orchestra, they all stop playing. They are not collaborating in the sense that, "should
we drag that note out a little longer or should we have a little faster," they discuss
that before and after. A jazz group is different; a jazz group they’re sort o f collabo­
rating with each other. There w on’t be one guy standing. One guy might start the
pace off and get the group started. That is more like collaboration. Their coordinat­
ed effort though is in some ways needed. They have to have some degree of coordi­
nation. Because if they are going to do their certain thing in a restaurant tonight we
all have to be there. If one guy decides not to go and he happens to be the bass
player and they can’t do it without him then they are all in trouble, so they have to
coordinate. Collaboration is a somewhat different thing, some o f the things that you
have here like control some of that has to be there in any organization, but the control
is very different with coordination without collaboration. With the mechanism for
doing all o f that is communication. If leadership can’t communicate it will be very
hard to do any o f the other things. Culture I see as a larger thing; they tend to all be
in a culture. Culture will control certain things and culture will enhance certain
things and it is always there. If the leadership can’t get any commitment, coherence
might itself.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, R. (1971, February). Voluntary associations in history. American
Anthropologist. 73. 209-222.
Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the individual and the organization. New York:
Wiley and Sons.
Argyris, C. (1987). Reasoning, action strategies, and defensive routines: The case
o f OD practitioners. In R. W. Woodman and W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Re­
search in Organizational Change and Development (pp. 89-128). Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press, Inc.
Bango, D. H. (1989). The start up guide. Dover, NH: Upstart.
Barnard, C. (1938). The functions o f the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U.
Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research
and managerial applications. (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Beck, L. G. (1992, August). Meeting the challenge of the future: The place of a
caring ethic in educational administration. American Journal of Education.
100. 454-496.
Bennis, W . G. (1966). The concept o f organizational health. In W. G. Bennis
(Ed.), Changing organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bennis, W. G. (1969). Organization development: Its nature, origins and prospects.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bennis, W. G. (1984). The four competencies of leadership. Training and Develop­
ment Journal.
38(8), 14-19.
Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985) Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New
York: Harper and Row.

247

248
Bluedom, A. C. (July 1980). Cutting the Gordian knot: A critique o f the effec­
tiveness tradition in organizational research. Sociology and Social Research.
64(4), 477-496.
Boeker, W. (1989, September). The development and institutionalization o f subunits
power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 34. 388-410.
Bogdan, R. C ., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Boynton, R. D ., & Elitzak, H. (1982, April-September). Member control of farmer
cooperatives: Level and causal factors. Journal o f Voluntary Action Research.
11(2/3), 7-21.
Brown, L. D ., & Covey, J. G. (1987). Development organizations and organization
development: Toward an expanded paradigm for organization development. In
R. W. Woodman and W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in organizational
change and development (pp. 59-87). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.
Bryson, J. M. (1988). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cameron, K. S. (1978). Measuring organizational effectiveness in institutions of
higher education. Academy of Management Journal. 23.
Cameron, K. S., & Whetten, D. A. (Eds.). (1983). Organizational effectiveness: A
comparison o f multiple models. New York: Academic Press.
Collins, J. C ., & Porras, J. I. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits o f visionary
companies. New York: HarperBusiness.
Corwin, R. G. (1974). Strategies for organizational innovation. In Y. Hasenfeld
and R. A. English (Eds.), Organizations: A book of readings (pp. 698-720).
Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.
Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology.
American Psychologist. 30. 116-127.
Crandall, D. (1993, August). Managing the healthy association. Association
M anagement, pp. 52-164, 187.
Cyert, R. M ., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

249
D ’Aunno, T. A. (1992). The effectiveness of human services." In Y. Hasenfeld
(Ed.), Human Services as Complex Organizations (pp. 341-361). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Dabbs, G. (1991, September-October). Nonprofit businesses in the 1990’s: Models
for success. Business Horizons. 34, 68-71.
Davis, K. E. (1982, April-September). An alternative theoretical perspective on race
and voluntary participation. Journal of Voluntary Action Research. 11(2/31.
126-142.
De Tocqueville, A. (1900). Democracy in America. New York: Colonial.
Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press.
Dewey, J. (1947). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
Drucker, P. F. (1954). The practice of management. New York: Harper and Row.
Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Witrock (Ed.), Handbook o f research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 119-161). New
York: McMillan.
Etzioni, A. (1964). Modem organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Etzioni, A. (1975). A comparative analysis of complex organizations. New York:
Free Press o f Glencoe.
Fama, E. F ., & Jensen, M. C. (1983, June). Separation o f ownership and control.
Journal o f Law and Economics. 26. 301-25.
Fremont, J. L. (1975). Using Parson’s Functional Analysis in the study o f public
organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 207. 59-70.
Forbes, P. S ., & Butterfield, B. (1993, March). Reshaping your association for the
21st century. Association Management, pp. 36-42.
Friedlander, F ., & Pickel, H. (1968). Components of effectivess in small organi­
zations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 13. 289-304.
Fromm, E. (1956). The art of loving. New York: Harper and Row.
Gartner, W. B. (1993, Winter). Organizing the voluntary association. Entrepre­
neurship. Theory and Practice. 17. 103-06.

250
Georgopolous, B. S ., & Tannenbaum, A. S. (1957, October). A study o f organiza­
tional effectiveness. American Sociological Review. 22. 534-540.
Glaser, B. G. (1968). Organizational careers: A sourcebook for theory. Chicago,
IL: Aldine.
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of
grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology.
Glaser, B. G ., and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory:
Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
Gold, J. S. (1993, August 3). Finding gems among the rhinestones. Financial
W orld. 162(12), 46-58.
Goodman, P. S. & Pennings, J. M. (Eds.). (1977). New perspectives on organiza­
tional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hannan, M. T ., & Freeman, J. (1977). Obstacles to comparative studies. In P. S.
Goodman and J. M. Pennings (Eds.), New perspectives on organizational
effectivness (pp. 106-132). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Handel, C. C. S. (1983). Organizational effectivenss of universities: A sociotechnical analysis. A dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Hasenfeld, Y., and English, R.A. (Eds.). (1974). Organizations: A Book o f Read­
ings. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Hasenfeld, Y. (Ed.). (1992). Human services as complex organizations. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Hellriegel, D ., & Slocum, J., Jr. (1974). Management: A contingency approach.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Herisse, R. P. (1991). The design of an educational needs assessment: A model for
Petits Bourgeois of Port-auPrince. Hai'ti. M aster’s thesis. University Park,
PA: The Pennsylvania State University.
Illitch, I. (1970). Deschooling society. New York: Harper and Row.
Ivancevich, J. M ., & Matteson, M. T. (1993). Organizational behavior and manage­
ment (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.

251
Jones, I. A. (1987). Some trends in the development of entrepreneurship in the
United States and the analysis o f the role of the cooperative extension service
in entrepreneurial education. Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
East Lansing.
Kast, F. E ., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1985). The modem view: Systems and contin­
gency concepts. In Organization and management: A systems and contingency
approach (4th ed.). New York: McGraw- Hill.
Katz, D ., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). Organizations and the system concept. In The
social psychology o f organizations (2nd ed.) (pp. 18-34). New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
Keeley, M. (1978). A social justice approach to organizational evaluation. Adminis­
trative Science Quarterly. 22. 272-292.
Kreps, G. L. (1990). Organizational communication. New York: Longman.
Knauft, E. B., Berger, R ., & Gray, S. T. (1991). Profiles of excellence: Achieving
success in the nonprofit sector. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lawler, E. E ., Mohrman, A. M ., Mohrman, S. A., Ledford, G. E ., Jr., & T. G.
Cummings and Associates. (1985). Doing research that is useful for theory
and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
LeCompte M. D ., & Goetz, J. P. (1982). Problems o f reliability and validity in
ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research. 52(1). 31-60.
Lievegoed, B. C. J. (1973). The developing organization. London: Tavistock.
Likert, R. (1967). The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lincoln, Y .S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Little, K. (1965). West African urbanization: A study o f voluntary associations in
social change. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Loomis, C. P. (1960). Social systems: Essavs on their persistence and change. New
Jersey: D. Van Nostrand.
Loomis, C. P. (1961). Social theories. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand.
Lowie, R. H. (1948). Social organization. New York: Rinehart and Co.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.

252
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merton, R. (1957). Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.
Miles, P. H. (1980). Macro organizational behavior. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
Mitchell, D. E ., & Tucker, S. (1992, February). Leadership as a way of thinking.
Educational Leadership. 22(5), 30-35.
Mulford, C. L. (1981, July-December). Interorganizational relationships in three
communities: Implications for community development." Journal o f Voluntary
Action Research. 10(3/4). 99-119.
Morrison, D. (Ed.). (1969). Farmers’ Organizations and Movements (Research
Bulletin No. 24). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Agricultural
Experiment Station.
Nall II, F. C. (1967). National associations. In W. L. W arner (Ed.), The emer­
gent american society: Large scale organizations (Vol. I) (pp. 276-313). New
Haven, CT: Yale University.
Nord, W. R. (Ed.). (1976). Social psychology in organizational behavior (2nd ed.).
Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
Oleck, H. (1988). Nonprofit corporations, organizations, and associations. En­
glewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Patterson, J.L . (1993). Leadership for tomorrow’s schools. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Peters, T. J., & W aterman, R .H ., Jr. (1982). In search of excellence. New York:
W arner Books.
Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and process in modern societies. Glencoe, IL: The
Free Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Porras, J. I., & Robertson, P. (1987). Organization development theory: A topology
and evaluation. In R. Woodman and W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in
organizational change and development (Vol. 1) (pp. 1-57). Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
Pennings, J. M. (1975). The relevance of the structural contingency model for
organizational effectivness. Administrative Science Oarterlv. 20. 393-407.

253

Phillips, M. (1982, April-September). Motivation and expectation in successful
volunteerism. Journal o f Voluntary Action Research. 11(2/31. 118-125.
Ritzer, G. (1975). Sociology: A multiple paradigm science. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Romanelli, E. (1989). Environments and strategies of organization start-up: Effects
on early survival. Administrative Science Quarterly. 34. 369-387.
Rosenbaum, N. (1981, January-March). Government funding and the voluntary
sector: Impacts and options. Journal of Voluntary Action Research. 10(11. 8289.
Sabo, S. R. (1993, August). Award winning leadership. Association Management.
123-25.
Salancik, G. R. (1977). Commitment and the control o f organizational behavior and
belief. In B. M. Staw and G. Salancik (Eds.), New Directions in Organiza­
tional Behavior (pp. 1-54). Chicago: St. Clair.
Schein, E. H. (1965). Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. San
Franciso: Jossey-Bass.
Schilit, W. K. (1990). The entrepreneur’s guide to preparing a winning business
plan and raising venture capital. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Schlesinger, A. M ., Sr. (1994, October). Biography of a nation of joiners. Ameri­
can Historical Review. 50. 1-25.
Schmid, H. (1992). Linking organization and environment. In Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.),
Human services as complex organizations (pp. 98-117). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Schoderbeck, P. P. et al. Management systems conceptual consideration. Business
Publications Inc.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practicioner: How professionals think in action.
New York: Basic Books.
Schutz, W. C. (1976). Interpersonal underworld. In W. R. Nord (Ed.), Social
psychology in organizational behavior (2nd ed.) (pp. 546-565). Santa Monica,
CA: Goodyear.

254
Scott, W. G. (1974, June). Organizational theory: A reassessment. Academy of
Management Journal. 17(2). 242-254.
Scott, W. R. (1981). Organizations: Rational, natural, open systems. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative
Science Quarterly. 32. 493-511.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice o f the learning
organization. New York: Doubleday Currency.
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration. New York Harper.
Shafritz, J. M ., & Ott, J. S. (1989). Classics of organizational theory. Chicago:
The Dorsey Press.
Sim, F. M. (1956). Elements o f legitimacy of a voluntary association: A case study
o f the Flint Suburban Forum. Master’s thesis, Michigan State University, East
Lansing.
Smith, C ., & Freedman, A. (1972). Voluntary association perspectives on the
literature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Smith, N. R. (1967). The entrepreneur and his firm . East Lansing: Michigan State
University, Bureau o f Economic Research.
Sofer, C. (1972). Organizations in theory and practice. New York: Basic Books,
Inc.
Strauss, A. L ., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1984). Introduction to qualitative research methods
(2nd ed.). New York: Wiley and Sons.
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New
York: Falmer Press.
Timmons, J. A. (1990). New venture creation (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Townsend, R. (1976) Conflict within the organization. In W. R. Nord (Ed.), Social
psychology in organizational behavior (2nd ed.) (pp.470-478). Santa Monica:
Goodyear.
Van Maanen, J. (Ed.). (1983). Qualitative methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage.

255
Van Maanen, J., Dabbs, J. M ., Jr., & Faulkner, R. R. (Eds.). (1982). Varieties of
qualitative research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Vandenberg, L. L. (1993). Leaders’ perpectives on neighborhood organization
leadership: The motivation-participation-ownership triangle. Doctoral disserta­
tion. Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Van Maaen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago:
University o f Chicago.
Warner, W. K. (1969). Some needs in farm organization research. In D. E. M orri­
son (Ed.), Farm ers’ organizations and movements (pp. 11-22). (Research
Bulletin No. 24). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Agricultural
Experiment Station.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory o f social and economic organization. In A. M.
Anderson and T. Parsons (Trans, and Eds.). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Wilson, G. L ., Goodall, J. H. L ., & Waager, C. L. (1986). Organizational commu­
nication. New York: Harper & Row.
Wirth, L. (1951). Urbanism as a way of life. In P. K. Hatt and A. J. Reiss, Jr.
(Eds.), Reader in urban sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Zander, A. (1985). The purposes of groups and organizations. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
—
Zander, A. (1993). Making boards effective. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.