Advertisement

Challenges in Corporate Foundation Governance

  • David RenzEmail author
  • Lonneke Roza
  • Frans-Joseph Simons
Chapter
Part of the Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies book series (NCSS)

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the challenges experienced by those who govern corporate foundations. Based on three key theoretical perspectives (agency theory, resource dependency theory, and institutional theory) and insights drawn from interviews and informal conversations with leaders and decision-makers in more than a dozen corporate foundations in the United States and the Netherlands, we offer a theory-based framework in which the most common governance conditions and dynamics are identified. The framework defines three questions posing key challenges, based on 11 correlated tensions in hybrid organizations: (1) Why do corporate foundations exist and to what end? (2) Who really governs a corporate foundation and with what orientation? (3) To whom are corporate foundations accountable and for what? The chapter demonstrates that, although corporate foundations are subject to multiple and divergent logics posing tensions and challenges, the dynamics experienced vary by the type of corporation and are not always considered as problematic, relative to the way they are experienced as problematic by other types of hybrids (e.g., social entrepreneurs). Notwithstanding that there is always a tango between the corporate foundation and both community and corporate stakeholders.

Keywords

Corporate foundations Governance Comparative Challenges Hybrid organizations 

References

  1. Abzug, R., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2001). Nonprofit boards: Crucibles of expertise or symbols of local identities? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30(1), 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anheier, H. K. (2005). Nonprofit organizations: Theory, management, policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Billis, D. (Ed.). (2010). Hybrid organizations and the third sector: Challenges for practice, theory and policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Bromley, P., & Meyer, J. W. (2014). “They are all organizations” the cultural roots of blurring between the nonprofit, business, and government sectors. Administration and Society, 49(7), 939–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Child, J., & Rodrigues, S. B. (2003). Corporate governance and new organizational forms: Issues of double and multiple agency. Journal of Management and Governance, 7(4), 337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornforth, C. (2014). Nonprofit governance research: The need for innovative perspectives and approaches. In Cornforth, C., & Brown, W. A. (Eds.). Nonprofit Governance: Innovative Perspectives and Approaches. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of “creating shared value”. California Management Review, 56(2), 130–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dalton, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, C. M. (2007). 1 The fundamental agency problem and its mitigation: Independence, equity, and the market for corporate control. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 1–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 14(4), 411–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (Vol. 17, pp. 1–38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Ebrahim, A. (2003). Accountability in practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development, 31(5), 813–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Cambridge university press.Google Scholar
  14. Freeman, R. E., Dunham, L., & Liedtka, J. (2001). The soft underbelly of stakeholder theory: Towards understanding community. Darden School Working Paper.Google Scholar
  15. Galaskiewicz, J. (1997). An urban grants economy revisited: Corporate charitable contributions in the Twin Cities, 1979–81, 1987–89. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 445–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gautier, A., Pache, A. C., & Chowdhury, I. (2013). Nonprofit roles in for-profit firms: The institutionalization of corporate philanthropy in France. In Academy of management proceedings (Vol. 2013, No. 1, p. 17464). Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management.Google Scholar
  17. Huse, M. (2009). The value creating board: Corporate governance and organizational behaviour. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2009). The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(2), 268–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaquette, O. (2013). Why do colleges become universities? Mission drift and the enrollment economy. Research in Higher Education, 54(5), 514–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones, M. B. (2007). The multiple sources of mission drift. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kania, J., Kramer, M., & Russell, P. (2014). Strategic philanthropy for a complex world. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 12(3), 26–33.Google Scholar
  23. Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the Most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  24. Marquis, C., & Lee, M. (2013). Who is governing whom? Executives, governance, and the structure of generosity in large US firms. Strategic Management Journal, 34(4), 483–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Masulis, R. W., & Reza, S. W. (2015). Agency problems of corporate philanthropy. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(2), 592–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller-Millesen, J. L. (2003). Understanding the behavior of nonprofit boards of directors: A theory-based approach. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32(4), 521–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pesqueux, Y., & Damak-Ayadi, S. (2005). Stakeholder theory in perspective. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 5(2), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations. A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  30. Phillips, R., Freeman, R. E., & Wicks, A. C. (2003). What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 479–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–92.Google Scholar
  32. Smith, S. R. (2010). Hybridization and nonprofit organizations: The governance challenge. Policy and Society, 29(3), 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Renz, D., & Andersson, F. (2014). Nonprofit governance: A review of the field. In C. Cornforth & W. A. Brown (Eds.), Nonprofit governance, innovative perspectives and approaches (pp. 17–46). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Renz, D. O. (2004). Governance of nonprofits. In D. Burlingame (Ed.), Philanthropy in the U.S: An encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  35. Schervish, P. (2014). High-tech donors and their impact philanthropy: The conventional, novel and strategic traits of agent-animated wealth and philanthropy. In Handbook of research on entrepreneurs’ engagement in philanthropy (pp. 148–182). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Useem, M. (1984). The inner circle: Large corporations and the rise of business politics in the U.S. and U.K. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Waddock, S. A., & Boyle, M. E. (1995). The dynamic of change in corporate community relations. California Management Review, 37(4), 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weisbrod, B. A. (1998). The nonprofit mission and its financing: Growing links between nonprofits and the rest of the economy. In To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector (pp. 1–22). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Young, D. R. (2002). The influence of business on nonprofit organizations and the complexity of nonprofit accountability: Looking inside as well as outside. The American Review of Public Administration, 32(1), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zadek, S. (2004). The path to corporate responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 82(12), 125–133.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Midwest Center for Nonprofit Leadership, Henry W. Bloch School of Management, University of Missouri-Kansas CityKansas CityUSA
  2. 2.Rotterdam School of Management (RSM), Erasmus University RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations