A Psychosocial Measure of Social Added Value in Non-profit and Voluntary Organizations: Findings from a Study in the South of Italy
- 259 Downloads
Inspired by the relational framework (Bassi, in: Franz, Hochgerner, Howaldt (eds) Challenge social innovation, Springer, Berlin, pp 325–350, 2012; Donati in Ital J Sociol Educ 5(1):19–35, 2013) and designed to integrate psychological and sociological aspects, a measure of social added value (SAV) was developed and validated. A study was conducted in the South of Italy on a sample of non-profit and voluntary organization members (N = 394) to examine the statistical validity and psychometric properties of the SAV scale. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that a third-order factor model, saturated by two second-order variables (internal and external relational goods) and eight first-order variables (sense of organizational community, quality of internal relations, influence, social responsibility towards members of the organization, users and stakeholders, organizational identification, and quality of external relations) obtained good satisfactory fit indexes. Additional analyses revealed that shared member values were positively associated with SAV and that there were differences among organizations according to their legal forms and the organizational roles available. Theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
KeywordsSocial added value Non-profit organizations Psychosocial measure Reliability and validity analyses
- Anheier, H. K. (2000). Managing non-profit organisations: Towards a new approach. Civil Society Working Paper Series, 1. London, UK: Centre for Civil Society, London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
- Arvidson, M. (2009). Impact and evaluation in the UK third sector: reviewing literature and exploring ideas. In Third Sector Research Centre, working paper 27. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/generic/tsrc/documents/tsrc/working-papers/working-paper-27.pdf. Accessed 5 January 2017.
- Auerswald, P. (2009). Creating social value. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 7(2), 50–55.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
- Bassi, A. (2011). Il valore aggiunto sociale del terzo settore [The added social value of the third-sector]. Verona, IT: QuiEdit.Google Scholar
- Bolton, M. (2002). Voluntary sector added value: A discussion paper. London: National Council for Voluntary Organisations.Google Scholar
- Clark, C., Rosenzweig, W., Long, D., & Olsen, S. (2004). Double bottom line project report: Assessing social impact in double bottom line ventures. New York, NY: Rockefeller Foundation.Google Scholar
- Colozzi, I. (2011). L’urgenza di misurare i beni intangibili: proposte per un percorso [The urgency to measure intangible goods: Proposals for a road map]. Sociologia e Politiche Sociale, 14(1), 183–208.Google Scholar
- Dietz, A. S., & Porter, C. (2012). Making sense of social value creation: Three organizational case studies. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 14(3), 23–43.Google Scholar
- Donati, P. (2013). The added value of social relations. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 5(1), 19–35.Google Scholar
- EESC (European Economic and Social Committee). (2007). The social economy in the European Union. Available at: https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/publications-other-work/publications/social-economy-european-union-1.
- Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks. The triple bottom line of 21th century business. Oxford: Capstone Publishing.Google Scholar
- European Parliament—Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy. (2016). Social economy. Available from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/578969/IPOL_STU(2016)578969_EN.pdf.
- Flynn, P., & Hodgkinson, V. A. (Eds.). (2001). Measuring the impact of the nonprofit sector. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
- Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75–85.Google Scholar
- Kelly, G., Mulgan, G., & Muers, S. (2002). Creating public value: An analytical framework for public service reform. London: Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office.Google Scholar
- Manuti, A., & Bosco, A. (2012). Organizational identification: A contribution to the validation of the psychometric features of two measures. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 39(4), 881–902.Google Scholar
- Miller, J. L., & Faerman, S. R. (2003). Making good board choices: A competing values approach. Nonprofit Quarterly, 10, 48–53.Google Scholar
- Pratt, M. G. (1998). To be or not to be: Central questions in organizational identification. In D. A. Whetten & P. C. Godfrey (Eds.), Identity in organization (pp. 171–207). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In L. Crothers & C. Lockhart (Eds.), Culture and politics (pp. 223–234). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Sarason, S. B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a community psychology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups. Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Valentinov, V. (2005). Explaining nonprofit organization: The social value approach. Journal of Cooperative Studies, 38(2), 22–36.Google Scholar