Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Organizational Supererogation and the Transformation of Nonprofit Accountability1

Organizational Supererogation and the Transformation of Nonprofit Accountability1 This article advances the moral philosophical concept of supererogation as a sociological process through which organizational action outstrips externally imposed evaluative demands. It illuminates this process by following 200 nonprofits in the San Francisco Bay Area from 2002 to 2016, when they became subject to myriad accountability obligations. Interviews, surveys, and content analyses show that nonprofits chafed against compulsory reporting and evaluative standards, regarding them as ill-suited to their work and goals. Contrary to current perspectives in organizational theory, however, nonprofits neither minimized external scrutiny nor conformed to external criteria. Instead, they disclosed more information than required. Despite nonprofits’ misgivings about oversight obligations, they nevertheless identified with the broader ideal of accountability these demands represented. Navigating this tension, nonprofits repurposed newly salient evaluative practices as tools through which unique goals and values could be given facticity. Through supererogation, nonprofits surpassed mere compliance and pursued accountability in organizationally distinctive ways. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Sociology University of Chicago Press

Organizational Supererogation and the Transformation of Nonprofit Accountability1

American Journal of Sociology , Volume 128 (4): 46 – Jan 1, 2023

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-chicago-press/organizational-supererogation-and-the-transformation-of-nonprofit-UhZuqYq1TT
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Copyright
© 2023 The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0002-9602
eISSN
1537-5390
DOI
10.1086/723799
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article advances the moral philosophical concept of supererogation as a sociological process through which organizational action outstrips externally imposed evaluative demands. It illuminates this process by following 200 nonprofits in the San Francisco Bay Area from 2002 to 2016, when they became subject to myriad accountability obligations. Interviews, surveys, and content analyses show that nonprofits chafed against compulsory reporting and evaluative standards, regarding them as ill-suited to their work and goals. Contrary to current perspectives in organizational theory, however, nonprofits neither minimized external scrutiny nor conformed to external criteria. Instead, they disclosed more information than required. Despite nonprofits’ misgivings about oversight obligations, they nevertheless identified with the broader ideal of accountability these demands represented. Navigating this tension, nonprofits repurposed newly salient evaluative practices as tools through which unique goals and values could be given facticity. Through supererogation, nonprofits surpassed mere compliance and pursued accountability in organizationally distinctive ways.

Journal

American Journal of SociologyUniversity of Chicago Press

Published: Jan 1, 2023

There are no references for this article.