Recruitment Strategies for Encouraging Participation in Corporate Volunteer Programs

ABSTRACT. Perhaps due to the numerous commu-nity and company benefits associated with corporatevolunteer programs, an increasing number of nationaland international firms are adopting such programs.A major issue in organizing corporate volunteerprograms concerns the strategies that are most effec-tive for recruiting employee participation. The resultsof this study suggest that the most effective strategiesfor initiating participation in volunteer programs maynot be the same as the strategies that are most effec-tive in terms of maximizing the number of volunteerhours contributed by employees. More importantly,the results suggest that the most effective recruitmentstrategies depend on the age of the employee. Theresults were discussed in terms of matching therecruitment strategies with the characteristics of thepotential volunteers and the nature of the volunteerproject.

KEY WORDS: corporate volunteer programs,employee age differences, recruitment strategies

1. Introduction

Despite the rapid growth and tremendous con-tributions of corporate volunteer programs, therehas been very little systematic research devotedto understanding the most effective methods ofdeveloping or implementing these programs(Steel, 1995). A corporate volunteer program isdefined as any formal organized company support

for employees and retirees who wish to volun-teer their time and skills in service to the com-munity (Wild, 1993). There are numerous typesof corporate volunteer programs which differ ona variety of dimensions (Solomon et al., 1991).For example, corporations have adopted manydiverse types of support such as providing releasetime from work so that employees can partici-pate in volunteer programs and organizing groupactivities in which employees work together as ateam to offer their assistance on a communityproject. Another dimension on which programsvary is the targets of the volunteer activities.Some of the most commonly targeted areas areeducation, health and welfare, services for youthgroups and senior citizens, and the environment(Solomon et al., 1991).

While corporate volunteer programs providenumerous benefits for the community, a numberof corporate benefits associated with volunteerprograms have also been identified (Wild, 1993).Most of the corporate benefits can be groupedinto a classification scheme consisting of threecategories. These categories include PersonnelBenefits, Indirect Community Benefits, andBottom-Line Benefits (Steel, 1995).

Personnel benefits of volunteer programsinclude having a positive influence on the atti-tudes of employees. This assertion is supportedby a survey of 156 companies which found thatemployee morale was up to three times higherin companies that were actively involved involunteer programs (Lewin, 1991). Anotherstudy reported that volunteer programs wereassociated with greater company loyalty, partic-ularly if the CEO was directly involved in thevolunteer program (Carroll, 1990). Finally, astudy conducted at Pacific Northwest Bell

Recruitment Strategies for Encouraging Participation inCorporate Volunteer Programs

Dane K. Peterson

Journal of Business Ethics 49: 371–386, 2004.© 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Dane K. Peterson is a professor of Quantitative BusinessAnalysis at Southwest Missouri State University. Hehas published in a number of journals such asOrganizational Behavior & Human DecisionProcesses, Journal of Applied Psychology,International Journal of Information Management,Personnel Review, and others.

reported that volunteer work was significantlyrelated to both job satisfaction and organizationalcommitment (Stebbins, 1989).

Since employees prefer to work for com-panies that demonstrate community involvement,volunteer programs help recruit and retain highlyqualified employees (Caudron, 1994; Backhaus etal., 2002; Wild, 1993). Volunteer programs arealso an effective means for developing andimproving job related skills (Caudron, 1994).Among the numerous skills enhanced throughvolunteer programs are written and verbalcommunications skills, time-management, nego-tiations, teamwork skills, budgeting and planning,and people management (Wild, 1993). Somevolunteer programs have been so successful inenhancing employee development that manycompanies perceive less need to rely on theservices of external training programs and pro-fessional development seminars (Caudron, 1994).

Indirect community benefits of volunteerprograms include strengthening the stability ofthe local community and creating a healthierenvironment where companies operate (Steel,1995; Wild, 1993). Another indirect communitybenefit associated with corporate volunteerprograms is an improvement in community/government relationships (Steel, 1995). Volunteerprograms have emerged as a key strategy bycorporations to alleviate public anger and distrustwhen jobs are lost as a result of corporatescandals, downsizing, mergers, or acquisitions(Miller, 1997). In addition, providing release timefor executives to serve on the board of directorsfor community and nonprofit agencies offersexecutives the opportunity to interact withgovernment and community leaders. Executivesclaim that working together with governmentand community leaders on nonprofit projects inan atmosphere of trust and cooperation allevi-ates much of the friction that exists between thevarious groups (Wild, 1993).

Perhaps the greatest indirect communitybenefit associated with volunteer programs is amore favorable corporate image. One of the mosteffective methods of enhancing a corporation’spublic image is through the contributions of timeand talent from corporate employees (Wild,1993). This assumption is supported by a survey

demonstrating that over three times as manyindividuals view “volunteering the help ofemployees” as a more impressive means ofshowing support for the community than “givinga large sum of money” (PR Newswire, 1998).While the public generally dismisses corporatecontributions as a tax advantage for the companyor an attempt to draw attention to the company,the public is less likely to view the donation ofcorporate time and talent as self-serving (Hesset al., 2002). Thus, a long-lasting communityvolunteer program is more likely to improve theimage of the corporation than financial contri-butions (Alperson, 1995).

An example of a bottom-line benefit associ-ated with volunteer programs is provided by asurvey involving 188 companies in which astrong connection was observed between volun-teer programs and both return on assetsand return on investments (Lewin, 1991).Improvements in corporate performance may beattributed in part to increased employee produc-tivity, possibility resulting from greater companyloyalty and enhanced job related skills developedthrough participation in volunteer programs(Backhaus et al., 2002). In addition, a morefavorable corporate image achieved throughvolunteer programs may influence the decisionsof numerous stakeholders, including consumersand investors (Hess et al., 2002). For instance, theperceptions of a corporation’s image influencesconsumer preferences and buying behavior(Maignan et al., 1999; Sen and Bhattacharya,2001) and investors often prefer companies thathave demonstrated strong community involve-ment (Heinze et al., 1999; Social InvestmentForum, 1999; Stone, 2001).

Given the vast array of benefits of corporatevolunteer programs, it is perhaps not surprisingthat many firms are devoting significant time andresources in support of corporate volunteerprograms. (Hess et al., 2002). Estimates of thenumber of firms in the United States supportingcorporate volunteer programs range from 79 to92 percent (Miller, 1997). A survey of the 1,800largest companies in the U.S. revealed that overhalf of the firms include community service aspart of their company’s mission statement andone-third of the companies use employee

372 Dane K. Peterson

volunteer programs as part of their strategy toaddress critical business issues (Wild, 1993).

Currently, a number of national and interna-tional firms are in the process of developing orexpanding their participation in corporate vol-unteer programs (The Consulting Network,1991). However, there is little available empiricalevidence regarding the optimal methods fordeveloping and implementing a corporate vol-unteer program (Solomon et al., 1991). Only afew case studies and anecdotal reports fromcompanies with an existing program are presentlyavailable and many of the records for thesevolunteer programs are incomplete (Hess et al.,2002). Keeping track of volunteer activity withinthe corporation can be difficult because volun-teer structures tend to be informal and change inresponse to both internal and external factors(Steel, 1995). An investigation on record keepingreveals that less than one-third of the companiescollect any type of data on their volunteerprograms (Wild, 1993). While some corporationshave attempted to measure the effectiveness oftheir volunteer programs, few are satisfied withthe results (Alperson, 1995).

One of the most pertinent issues for organi-zations planning to develop a corporate volun-teer program concerns the best strategies formotivating employee participation (Shannon,1991). It has been suggested that directors ofcorporate volunteer programs should simply useall practical strategies available to encourageemployee participation (Solomon et al., 1991).However, others warn against employing everymeans possible for encouraging participation(Clary and Snyder, 2002). The concern is thatoverselling a volunteer program could cause theemployees to feel pressured to participate andresult in the view that participation is manda-tory rather than voluntary. When individuals feelobligated to volunteer, their intrinsic motivationto participate may diminish (Clary and Snyder,2002).

Therefore directors of corporate volunteerprograms might have greater success by selectingonly the most effective recruitment strategies.Several studies on volunteerism in general suggestthat the recruitment of volunteers will be mosteffective when the strategies used to encourage

participation match or appeal to the specificmotivations of the volunteers (Clary et al., 1994).Thus a carefully developed marketing plan thatmatches the most effect strategies with theemployees’ motives is generally recommended(Clary et al., 1994).

A number of investigations have examined themotives for participating in volunteer programs(Clary et al., 1998; Cnaan and Goldberg-Glen,1991; Grube and Piliavin, 2000; Harrison, 1995;Warbuton and Terry, 2000). Fischer and Schaffer(1993) have classified the most commonlyidentified motives for volunteering into sixcategories. These six categories are presented inthe first column of Table I along with a briefdescription of each motive.

The second column of Table I presents sixstrategies that are frequently used by corporatevolunteer programs to encourage employeeparticipation (Miller, 1997; Wild, 1993). Sinceprior research implies that the strategy that willbe most effective depends on which motive ismost applicable for an individual, it would seemobvious that directors of corporate volunteerprograms would want to adopt the strategies thatthat are most likely to appeal to the primarymotives of their employees. With this objectivein mind, the strategies presented in Table I areordered so as to match the motives presented incolumn 1 for which the strategy might be mosteffective. That is, a strategy that might beeffective for individuals who are altruisticallymotivated to help may simply involve publicizingand stressing the need for volunteers. A groupparticipation strategy may be most effective forindividuals motivated by a desire for socialrelationships. Employees motivated by statusrewards may be most effectively encouraged toparticipate through the use of articles, awards,and commendations recognizing the employee’svolunteer contributions.

This study explored the degree to which eachof the six strategies listed in Table I was relatedto participation in corporate volunteer programs.It is possible that the relationship between thestrategies and volunteer participation may beconfounded or influenced by a number of indi-vidual variables known to be related to volunteerparticipation. Thus, several individual variables

Recruitment Strategies for Corporate Volunteer Programs 373

were included in the investigation for controlpurposes as well as to examine how one indi-vidual variable, the employee’s age, maybe relatedto which strategies are most effective. The fol-lowing section describes the individual variablesincluded in this study and briefly summarizes theempirical findings regarding how these variablesrelate to volunteerism in general.

1.1. Individual variables

Gender. Research on the relationship betweengender and volunteerism has produced mixedresults. Some studies suggest females are morelikely to volunteer (Hodgkinson and Weitzman,1992), while others report that males are morelikely to volunteer (Wymer and Samu, 2002).However, most studies have reported no differ-

ences between male and female participation involunteer programs (Chambre, 1989; Penner,2002; Smith, 1994; Sundeen, 1990). The con-flicting results may be partially attributed to howvolunteerism is measured. For example,Gallagher (1994) observed that men belong tomore voluntary organizations, but they do notdevote any more time to volunteer activities thanwomen. Thus, it might be expected that maleswould be more likely to participate in a corpo-rate volunteer program, but not necessary devoteany more time to the volunteer activities.

Social connections. Individuals who spend moretime socializing and have more social connectionsare more likely to volunteer (Smith, 1994;Wilson and Musick, 1997). Social connectionshave been measured both directly and indirectly(Wilson and Musick, 1997). A direct method


TABLE ISix commonly cited motives for volunteering matched with six commonly used recruitment strategies in

corporate volunteer programs

Motivations Recruitment strategies

1. Altruistic – motivated by the desire to be useful, 1. Publicizing information concerning the needs helpful to those in need, and wanting to in the community and the opportunities to contribute to society. volunteer.

2. Social relations – motivated by the desire to 2. Organize Team Projects in which employees interact with others, socialize, and make new work together as a group on a volunteer friends. project.

3. Ideological – motivated by a specific cause the 3. Offer a Matching Incentive program in which individual believes is highly important (e.g., fight the company makes a financial donation to a against AIDS). cause chosen by the employee in return for a

specified number of volunteer hours contributed by the employee.

4. Status reward – motivated by indirect rewards, 4. Recognize employee volunteer contributions such as publicity, goodwill, and status in the through articles, awards, and commendations, community. etc.

5. Material reward – motivated by tangible benefits, 5. Encourage participation in volunteer projects such as prizes, free passes, and awards offering that develop job related skills or benefit the exclusive privileges. company and acknowledge the participation in

job Performance Evaluations.

6. Time – motivated because the individual either 6. Offer Release Time or hours off from work to has or does not have sufficient time to participate in volunteer activities.participate in volunteer activities.

involves a self-assessment of the amount of timespent socializing. An example of an indirectmeasure of social connection would be thenumber of children currently living in the house-hold. The indirect measure assumes that parentswith children still living in the household willhave more social contacts and higher rates ofsocial interaction because their children will drawthem into community activities (Wilson andMusick, 1997). Thus, it would be expected thatboth a self-assessed degree of socializing and thenumber of children in the household would bepositively related to volunteerism.

Income. Research has consistently demonstrateda positive relationship between income andvolunteerism (Penner, 2002; Smith, 1994). Of allthe individual variables investigated, income maybe the best predictor of volunteerism (Morgan,1986). Studies in the U.S. have shown thatindividuals making over $75,000 a year are threetimes more likely than individuals making lessthan $10,000 a year to participate in volunteeractivities (Hodgkinson, 1995). Thus, it wasanticipated that a positive relationship would existbetween income and participation in corporatevolunteer programs.

Church attendance. While neither differences inreligious beliefs or strength of convictions arerelated to volunteerism, religious behavior orfrequency of church attendance is positivelyrelated to volunteerism (Penner, 2002; Wilsonand Musick, 1997). In addition, it has beenreported that church members are more likelyto volunteer than nonmembers (Fischer andSchaffer, 1993). Therefore, it was anticipated thatthere would be a positive relationship betweenfrequency of church attendance and participationin corporate volunteer programs.

Age. Studies suggest that volunteerism generallyincreases with age until an individual’s healthbegins to limit his or her ability to participate involunteer activities (Midlarsky and Kahana, 1994;Wilson and Musick, 1997). Since the focus ofthis study was on business professionals who arecurrently employed by companies with a volun-teer program, it would seem unlikely that health

would be a limiting factor for these individualswho are still capable of working. Thus, it wasexpected that there would be a positive rela-tionship between age and participation in cor-porate volunteer programs.

Age may also be related to the primary motivefor volunteering. Studies have found thatyounger adults are more likely to be motivatedby material and status rewards than older adults(Frisch and Gerrard, 1981; Gidron, 1978;Independent Sector, 1990). Thus, strategies inwhich volunteers are recognized through awardsand commendations as well as strategies whichacknowledge employee participation in jobperformance evaluations may be the most effec-tive for younger employees. Conversely, researchshows that as individuals grow older they aremore likely to volunteer for altruistic reasons(Frisch and Gerrard, 1981; Herzog and House,1991; Omoto et al., 2000). In addition, olderadults are also more likely to be motivated bysocial relationships (Fischer and Schafer, 1993;Okun, 1994; Okun et al., 1998) and forideological reasons (Cohen-Mansfield, 1989;Independent Sector, 1990). Thus, strategiesinvolving publicizing a need for volunteers,group volunteer projects, and matching incen-tives programs might be the most effective strate-gies for motivating older employees.

1.2. Purpose of the study

This study examined a number of aspectsregarding the relationship between recruitmentstrategies used by companies and participationin volunteer programs. The criterion measuresinvestigated include whether or not employeesparticipated in a company volunteer program, thenumber of volunteer hours contributed byparticipates during the past year, and the numberof employees participating in the various types ofcompany volunteer programs (e.g., participatingin matching incentives programs, team projects,release time, etc.)

One of the goals of this exploratory investi-gation was to examine which of the strategieslisted in Table I would be most effective in termsof both encouraging participation in volunteer


programs and the number of volunteer hourscontributed by participants. Since there does notappear to be any relevant data regarding whichstrategies might be most effective, the followingnull hypotheses were tested to determine whichstrategies are related to each criterion measure.

Hypothesis 1: After controlling for the indi-vidual variables, there will be no significantrelationship between any of the sixstrategies and whether or not an employeeparticipates in a company volunteerprogram.

Hypothesis 2: After controlling for the indi-vidual variables, there will be no significantrelationship between any of the six strate-gies and the number of volunteer hourscontributed in the past year by participantsin corporate volunteer programs.

A second purpose of this study was to deter-mine if the strategies that are most effective arerelated to the age of the employee. Based onresearch suggesting that younger adults are morelikely to be influenced by status and materialrewards, it was expected that strategies recog-nizing participation in volunteer projects andacknowledging participation in job evaluationswould be most effective for younger employees.Therefore, the following research hypothesis wastested.

Hypothesis 3: After controlling for the indi-vidual variables, there will be a significantrelationship between hours volunteered byyounger employees and strategies based onRecognizing the efforts of volunteers andacknowledging volunteer work in jobPerformance Evaluations.

Since volunteer behavior of older employeesis most likely to be influenced by altruistic, socialrelations, and ideological motives, it was expectedthat the first three strategies listed in Table Iwould be the most effective for older employees.Thus, the following research hypothesis wastested.

Hypothesis 4: After controlling for the indi-vidual variables, there will be a significantrelationship between hours volunteered byolder employees and strategies based onPublicizing volunteer information, orga-nizing Team Projects, and MatchingIncentives programs.

A similar relationship was expected betweenparticipation in various types of corporate vol-unteer programs and the age of the employees.Thus, the following hypothesis was tested.

Hypothesis 5: Younger volunteers will be morelikely to cite participation in companyprograms that involve Recognizing theirvolunteer efforts and acknowledging vol-unteer work in job Performance Evalua-tions, whereas older employees will be morelikely to mention participation in companyprograms involving Team Projects andMatching Incentives.

2. Method

2.1. The questionnaire

A mail survey procedure was used in this study.The survey was first pre-tested in two MBAclasses with a total of 76 students. Most of thegraduate students either had current or previousexperience working full-time in a professionalposition. Based on the results obtained from thepre-test with MBA students, a few changes weremade in the wording and clarity of the items.Items included on the survey relevant to thisstudy are presented in the appendix.

The items for the individual variables wereadapted from a study by Wilson and Musick(1997). The six strategies for encouraging par-ticipation were adapted from Wild (1993).Respondents indicated the extent to which eachrecruitment strategy was used in their organiza-tion by circling a value between one – StronglyDisagree and seven – Strongly Agree. It wasdecided that a Likert scale format would be moreuseful than a yes/no format since some strate-gies could be used by the company, but notwidely publicized or available to all employees.


To ensure honest responses and reduce poten-tial biases from socially desirable response ten-dencies, this study took numerous steps to ensurethe anonymity of the respondents. For instance,the survey was mailed directly to the respondent’shome address, the cover letter stressed that noattempt would be made to identify the respon-dents, described how the respondents wererandomly selected, and pointed out that nomarkings were used to identify the respondentson the survey or the return envelop.

2.2. Respondents

To obtain a sample of business professionals froma number of diverse functional areas and organi-zations, the sampling frame in the present studyconsisted of names on a computerized list ofalumni from a large mid-western state universityin the U.S. The random selection option wasused to randomly select 1,000 names from acomputer database of individuals who earned adegree from the College of BusinessAdministration between the years 1981 and 1997and were presently residing in the U.S. Over halfof the respondents on the mailing list werecurrently residing in one of six states located inthe mid-west. However, 41 of the 50 states wererepresented on the mailing list.

A cover letter, the survey, and a self-addressedpostage paid envelope were mailed to the indi-viduals randomly selected for the study. Of the1,000 surveys mailed, 12 were returned asundeliverable. The number of completed surveysreturned was 361, representing a 36.2 percentresponse rate. The number of useable surveys wasreduced to 337 after eliminating respondents whowere deemed unsuitable for this study (e.g.,currently unemployed, self-employed, businessowner, or provided incomplete information,etc.). Of the 337 useable surveys, 254 (or 75.4%)indicated their place of employment had sometype of company volunteer program. Only the254 respondents employed by companies with avolunteer program were used in the analysis.

The sampling frame used in this study did notprovide a sufficient number of minority respon-dents to include race as a control variable (less

than 2%). In addition, education was notincluded as a control variable since the highestdegree earned by the majority of respondents wasa Bachelor’s Degree. More specifically, three ofthe respondents had completed an AssociatesDegree, 181 had completed a Bachelor’s Degree,and 70 had completed a graduate degree.

Job titles of the respondents indicated a widerange of business professionals. Some of the jobtitles listed by the respondents included: accoun-tant, financial analyst, loan officer, sales repre-sentative, programmer/analyst, manager, humanresource director, and sales manager. Similarly,the types of employing firms for the respondentsexhibited a high degree of diversity. Someexamples include: government, manufacturing,distributor/warehouse, transportation, retail,insurance, financial, accounting, technology, andtelecommunications. There was also considerablevariation in the size of the employing firms.Seventy-nine of the respondents worked for acompany with less than 100 employees, 42worked for a company with between 100 and499 employees, 33 worked for a company withbetween 500 and 999 employees, 63 worked fora company with between 1,000 and 9,999employees and the remaining 37 worked for anorganization with more than 10,000 employees.

3. Results

The means, standard deviations, and correlationsamong the variables are presented in Table II.The summary statistics indicate that Publicizingthe need for volunteers and opportunity forvolunteer programs was the most commonly usedstrategy. Providing Release Time from work,Matching Incentives programs, and acknowl-edging volunteer work in formal jobPerformance Evaluations were the least usedstrategies.

Of the 254 respondents employed by acompany with a volunteer program, 175 respon-dents indicated they had participated in a vol-unteer program during the past year. To examinewhich strategies best predicted volunteerism andtest Hypothesis 1, a logistic regression analysiswas conducted. Initially, the six individual



TA

BL

E I

IM

eans

, st

anda

rd d

evia

tion

and

cor

rela

tion

coe

ffic

ient

s

Var

iabl

eM

ean

S 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10

11

12

13

01.

Vol

unte

er

00.6

89

00.4

6402

. H

ours

ind

ivid

ual

vari

able

s 51

.200

50.4

00a 0.

68b

03.

Gen

der

00.5

35

00.5

00

0.02

–0

.060

04.

Soci

aliz

ing

2.83

00

.966

0.

09

0.12

–0

.100

05.

Chi

ldre

n 1.

081.

23

a 1.3a 0

0.06

–0

.030

–0.1

1006

. In

com

e 2.

89

1.28

a 0.

15a

0.04

0.

05

0.05

0.

1007

. C

hurc

h 33

.300

33.6

0000

.127

a 0.23

b0.

11

0.06

a 0.

23b

a 0.14

a

08.

Age

str

ateg

ies

38.9

008.

55

a 0.33

ba 0.

47b

0.08

–0.1

20–0

.117

0.06

0.

0309

. P

ublic

izin

g 5.

31

1.53

a 0.

17b

a 0.16

b–0

.050

a 0.16

a0.

16a

a 0.14

a0.

06

0.05

10.

Team

pro

ject

s 4.

19

1.83

a 0.

26b

a 0.33

b0.

09

a 0.14

a0.

05

0.12

0.

07

a 0.23

b0.

57b

11.

Mat

chin

g 2.

38

1.95

a 0.

24b

a 0.34

b0.

05

0.09

–0

.080

0.08

0.

08

a 0.23

b0.

18b

0.27

b

12.

Rec

ogni

tion

4.

07

1.79

a 0.

26b

0.12

–0

.040

0.04

0.

11

a 0.17

b–0

.060

0.06

0.

56b

0.55

b0.

18b

13.

Eva

luat

ion

2.60

1.

61

a 0.23

ba 0.

25b

0.04

0.

07

0.09

a 0.

15a

0.02

0.

11

0.44

b0.

46b

024b

0.51

b

14.

Rel

ease

tim

e 2.

84

1.99

a 0.

16a

a 0.18

b–0

.030

a 0.17

ba 0.

21b

a 0.19

ba 0.

18b

0.01

0.

53b

0.47

b0.

19b

0.42

b0.

53b

Vol

unte

er (

0 –

No,

1 –

Yes

), G

ende

r (0

– F

emal

e, 1

– M

ale)

, So

cial

izin

g (1

– L

ow,

5 –

Hig

h).

ap

< 0

.05.

bp

< 0

.01.

variables were entered as a block. The overallmodel with the individual variables as predictorswas significant (chi-square = 50.89, p < 0.01).The significance of each individual variable issummarized in Table III. As shown in Table III,participation was significantly related to bothmeasures of social connectedness, self-assessedsocializing and number of children. In addition,volunteerism was related to the age of theemployees. To determine which of the sixrecruitment strategies might be most effective forincreasing participation in volunteer programs,the strategies were added to the individualvariable model using a forward selection proce-dure. Only two of the strategies entered themodel (results of this analysis are not shown inthe table). The two strategies that significantlyadded to the predictive accuracy of volunteerismwere Recognition and Matching Incentives(p < 0.05). The failure of the other strategies toenter the model may be attributable to high col-inearity as illustrated by the significant correla-tions among the strategies in Table II.

To determine which strategies increased vol-unteerism and avoid problems associated withcolinearity, a separate logistic regression analysis

was conducted for each strategy to examine if thestrategy significantly increased prediction ofvolunteerism after controlling for the individualvariables. The results are presented at the bottomof Table III. Only Publicizing volunteer oppor-tunities and Release Time from work did notaccount for significant improvement in the pre-diction of volunteerism over the individualvariables. Thus, the first null hypothesis wasrejected for recruitment strategies involving TeamProjects, Matching Incentives, Recognition andPerformance Evaluation, all of which wereassociated with increased participation.

To test Hypothesis 2, a regression analysis wasconducted on the data obtained from the 175employees participating in a volunteer program.The dependent measure was the number ofvolunteer hours contributed. The individualvariables were entered first as a block. The resultsare shown in Table IV. The number of volun-teer hours was significantly related to gender,income, church attendance, and age. To investi-gate which strategies might contribute to theprediction of the number of hours volunteeredafter controlling for the individual variables, sixregression analyses were conducted with each


TABLE IIILogistic regression coefficients, standard errors, odds ratios, p-values, and –2 log likelihood for volunteering

β SE Exp (β) P –2LL

Intercept only 314.92

Individual variables 264.04Intercept 5.940Gender 0.092 0.304 1.099 0.756 Socializing 0.368 0.166 1.445 0.027 Children 0.321 0.149 1.378 0.031Income 0.155 0.117 1.167 0.185Church attendance 0.004 0.005 1.004 0.390 Age 0.135 0.027 1.140 0.000

StrategiesPublicizing 0.137 0.099 1.146 0.167 262.13Team projects 0.212 0.087 1.235 0.015 258.00Matching incentives 0.257 0.098 1.293 0.008 256.23Recognition 0.310 0.091 1.364 0.000 251.53Performance evaluation 0.292 0.110 1.339 0.008 256.34Release time 0.132 0.085 1.141 0.120 261.55

strategy added to the model in a separate analysis.The results are summarized in the bottom ofTable IV. As shown in Table IV, Team Projects,Matching Incentives programs, and acknowl-edging participation in job PerformanceEvaluations were all significantly related tovolunteer hours. Thus, the second null hypoth-esis was rejected for three of the six recruitmentstrategies.

To investigate potential differences associatedwith the age of the employees, a median split wasused to divide the employees into two agegroups. The younger employees were defined asthose 37 years of age or less and the olderemployees were defined as those over the age of37. Based on this categorization, 123 employeeswere included in the younger age group, while131 employees were included in the older agegroup. The mean age for the younger group was32.87 and the mean for the older group was44.52. The criterion measure used to testHypothesis 3 and 4 was the number of volun-teer hours with zero hours assigned to employeeswho did not participate in a volunteer programduring the past year. A Tobit regression analysiswas conducted for each age group followingthe same procedure used to test the previoushypotheses. The results are presented in Table V.

For the younger employees, self-assessed social-izing, the number of children in the household,and income were all significant predictors ofvolunteer hours. Adding each strategy to theindividual variables in a separate analysis resultedin two significant predictors, Recognition ofparticipation in volunteer programs and acknowl-edgement in job Performance Evaluations.Therefore, the results support the third hypoth-esis.

For the older employees, the only significantindividual variable was church attendance. Asshown in Table V, the strategies that significantlyimproved prediction of volunteer hours aftercontrolling for the individual variables were TeamProjects, Matching Incentives programs, andacknowledgement in job PerformanceEvaluations. Therefore, the results generally sup-ported the fourth hypothesis. The only deviationfrom the hypothesis was that PerformanceEvaluation rather than Publicizing the need forvolunteers was significant.

Participation in each of the various types ofcompany volunteer programs is summarized inTable VI for the 175 employees involved in avolunteer program during the past year. Asshown in Table VI, 38 of the 74 volunteers inthe younger age group participated in a Team


TABLE IVStandardized regression coefficients, t-statistic, p-values, and coefficient of determination for hours volunteered

B SE P R2

Individual variables 0.275 Gender –0.172 –2.475 0.014 Socializing 00.097 01.421 0.157Children –0.037 –0.522 0.602Income –0.166 –2.470 0.015Church attendance 00.315 04.394 0.000 Age 00.389 05.628 0.000

StrategiesPublicizing 00.085 01.203 0.231 0.281Team projects 00.178 02.541 0.012 0.302Matching incentives 00.187 02.767 0.006 0.307Recognition 00.007 00.101 0.920 0.275Performance evaluation 00.193 02.864 0.005 0.309Release time 00.117 01.646 0.102 0.286

Project during the past year compared to 68 ofthe 101 volunteers in the older age group. Thedifference between the two groups was signifi-cant. The only other significant difference was interms of Recognition for volunteer efforts.Younger employees were more likely to beinvolved in a volunteer program that recognizedtheir participation in volunteer activities. Thus,the results provide partial support the fifthhypothesis.

3. Discussion

Since corporate volunteer programs not onlyprovide benefits for the community but also forthe corporation, many firms are in the processof developing or expanding their participation incorporate volunteer programs. A major obstaclein developing a corporate volunteer program isthe recruitment of employee volunteers. Theresults of this study demonstrated that strategiesbased on Matching Incentives, Team Projects,


TABLE VTobit regression coefficients, p-values, and log-likelihoods by employee age

Under 37 38 and over

Coef. P LL Coef. P LL

Individual variables –432.6 –588.97

Intercept –45.23 43.430Gender 0–3.55 00.798 –11.42 0.326 Socializing 012.14 00.012 003.73 0.535Children 015.26 00.002 018.26 0.093Income 007.86 00.033 0–5.69 0.215Church attendance 00–0.136 00.318 001.06 0.000

StrategiesPublicizing 004.67 00.120 –431.39 005.39 0.185 –588.09Team projects 003.75 00.149 –431.56 015.30 0.000 –577.26Matching incentives 004.13 00.118 –431.39 010.97 0.000 –580.32Recognition 013.62 00.000 –415.63 0–1.43 0.678 –588.88Performance evaluation 012.30 00.000 –423.12 007.25 0.040 –586.87Release time 004.31 00.085 –431.14 004.32 0.144 –587.90

TABLE VIParticipation by employees in corporate volunteer programs

Under 38 38 and over P-value

Sample size 74 101

ProgramsTeam projects 38 (51.4%) 68 (67.7%) 0.023 Matching incentives 12 (16.2%) 28 (27.7%) 0.073Recognition 59 (79.7%) 62 (61.4%) 0.010Performance evaluation 35 (47.3%) 38 (37.6%) 0.201Release time 26 (35.1%) 34 (33.7%) 0.772

and Performance Evaluation were all associatedwith the number of volunteer hours contributedby employees. Matching Incentives andPerformance Evaluation programs may be aneffective means of increasing volunteer hoursbecause corporate rewards may be directly tiedto the number of hours devoted to the volun-teer activities. For instance, the amount offinancial funds donated by a company in aMatching Incentives programs often depends onthe number of hours contributed by theemployee. On the other hand, Team Projects maybe an effective method of increasing volunteerhours through peer pressure from other membersof the project team. Thus, in situations in whichthe number of hours contributed is critical, TeamProjects, Matching Incentives, and PerformanceEvaluation recruitment strategies would appearto be optimal.

In terms of increasing participation in corpo-rate volunteer programs, Team Projects,Matching Incentives, acknowledging participa-tion in Performance Evaluations, and Recogni-tion of volunteer efforts all appear to beeffective. Of these strategies, the evidence tendsto suggest that Recognition, which was notrelated to number of hours volunteered, mightbe the most effective for increasing participation.Perhaps for many companies, recognition forvolunteer activity is based simply on theemployee’s participation and is not necessarilytied to the number of hours contributed. Thus,this strategy may be most applicable for episodicor short-term volunteer activities. That is, in anumber of cases, such as the March of DimesWalkathons, volunteer programs may be a oncea year event or require only a limited amount oftime. In these situations, a Recognition strategymay be highly useful.

Most importantly, the results of this studyprovide evidence that the most effective strate-gies depend on the age of the employees.Recruitment strategies based on Recognition andPerformance Evaluation were highly effective foryounger employees, while Team Projects,Matching Incentives and PerformanceEvaluations strategies were the most effective forolder employees. These results are consistent withmost lifespan development theories. That is,

younger adults are often highly concerned withestablishing their career. Thus, they tend to focuson acquiring skills and the credentials necessaryto successfully achieve goals related to monetaryrewards and financial security (Berk, 1998). As aresult, they are generally motivated by materialand status rewards.

As people approach middle age, they becomeincreasingly aware of their social responsibilitiesand develop a greater concern for society(Midlarsky and Kahana, 1994). Consistent withmany theories on lifespan development, as peopleenter middle age they show a greater interest inideological issues. Although interest in politicaland social causes often develops in early adult-hood, younger adults are often too preoccupiedwith the achievement of personal goals to devotetime to ideological causes (Berk, 1998). Onceissues relating to material rewards are resolved,individuals often become more interested inpursuing ideological issues. Thus specific causesthat are viewed as highly important by middleaged and older adults become a primary motivefor volunteering (Fischer and Schaffer, 1993).

Another primary volunteer motive for middleaged and older adults is related to a possibledecrease in the number of social connections.With the onset of middle age, there is often aperception that opportunities for further careeradvancement may be limited. Thus, middle-agedemployees may be less likely to pursue educa-tional and other career development activitieswhich involve social connections. Also, many ofthe social contacts established as part of parent-hood may diminish for middle aged and olderadults as their children become less dependent onthem. Thus, middle-aged and older adults mayseek out volunteer activities as a means orremaining socially connected (Ward, 1979).

Since it is generally assumed that the recruit-ment strategies should match the primary motiveof the recipients (Clary et al., 1994; Okun,1994), the results of this study would seem tohave several practical implications. Corporatevolunteer programs with a desire to targetyounger employees may achieve greater successusing Recognition and Performance Evaluationstrategies (i.e., strategies associated with statusand material rewards). Conversely, middle aged


and older employees may be most effectivelymotivated by social relations and ideologicalreasons which suggest that strategies such as TeamProjects and Matching Incentives programswould be highly effective.

These results may also have some theoreticalimplications for understanding the relationshipbetween age and motives for volunteering. Manyof the previous attempts to determine themotives behind volunteerism relied on verballystated reasons provided by the volunteers.However, people often provide rather simplisticexplanations for their behavior and in many casesare unaware of the factors that influence theirown behavior (Nisbett et al., 1982). Thus, someresearchers believe that relying on volunteers toprovide explanations for their behavior is not anadequate method of investigating volunteermotives (Okun et al., 1998). However, assumingthat the recruitment strategies listed in Table Iare reasonable methods of appealing to theassociated motive listed in the first column ofTable I, this study provides evidence on whichmotive may be most applicable for older andyounger adults without relying on explanationsprovided by the volunteers. That is, the mosteffective recruitment strategy may represent anindirect method of investigating volunteer moti-vations.

While this study did not provide directevidence of a link between the motives and thestrategies listed in Table 1, the finding that themost effective strategy depends on the age of thevolunteer at least suggests that there are likely tobe differences in the volunteer motivation ofyounger and older adults.

In conclusion, a couple of issues should benoted. First, all of the usual limitations associatedwith survey research apply to the findingsreported in this study. For this study, the mostimportant limitation associated with mail surveysis that participation is typically influenced by thelevel of interest in the topic. Thus, it is possiblethat the individuals involved in corporate vol-unteer programs would be more likely to returnthe survey. Therefore, even though the intent ofthe survey may not have been obvious and otheritems were included on the survey, it is quitepossible that the results presented in this studyoverestimate the actual percentage of employeesinvolved in corporate volunteer programs.Similarly, the number of firms participating involunteer programs and the strategies and typesof support used to promote corporate volunteerprograms may not provide accurate estimates ofthe actual amount of involvement in volunteerprograms by the population of business organi-zations.


Appendix

Survey Items

Gender? (Check one) ________ Female ________ Male

Your age? ________

Number of children under the age of 21 currently living in your household? ________

Your annual income? (Check one)

________ Under $25,000 per year

________ Over $25,000, but less than $50,000 per year



________ Over $100,000 per year


Which of the following do you believe best describes yourself? (Check one)

________ I spend much less time socializing than most people

________ I spend less time socializing than most people

________ I spend about as much time socializing as the average person

________ I spend more time socializing than most people

________ I spend much more time socializing than most people

Based on the definition of a company volunteer program provided in the cover letter, does your place of employ-ment currently have a volunteer program? (Check one)

________ Yes ________ No ________ Not applicable

If you answered Yes, proceed with next questions below.If you answered No or Not Applicable proceed to Section B (not shown here).

To what extent does your place of employment use each of the following methods to encourage participationin volunteer projects?

1. Our company makes information available to employees concerning the needs in the community and theopportunities to volunteer?

2. Our company organizes group activities in which employees work together as a team on a volunteer project?3. Our company offers a matching incentive program in which the company makes a financial donation to a

cause chosen by the employee in return for a specified number of volunteer hours contributed by theemployee.

4. Our company recognizes employee volunteer contributions through articles, awards, and commendations,etc.

5. Our company encourages participation in volunteer projects that develop job related skills or benefit thecompany and acknowledge the participation in job performance evaluations.

6. Our company offers release time or hours off from work to participate in volunteer activities.

During the past year, have you participated in any volunteer activities that are in any way associated with oracknowledged by the corporate volunteer program? (Check one)

________ Yes ________ No ________ Not Applicable

If you answered Yes, proceed with next questions below.If you answered No or Not Applicable proceed to Section B (not shown here).

Approximately how many hours did you devote to volunteer activities during the past 12 months? ________

Which of the following types of support for participation in corporate volunteer programs apply to yourvolunteer activities during the past year. (Check all that apply)

________ I have participated in a team project involving a group of employees working together on avolunteer activity.

________ I have participated in a matching incentive program in which the company made a financial donationin return for the hours I volunteered.

________ I have been recognized by the company through articles, awards, and commendations, etc., for myvolunteer work.

________ I have received acknowledgement of my volunteer work in job performance evaluations.

________ I have received release time to participate in volunteer activities.

References

Alperson, M.: 1995, ‘Giving Strategies that AddBusiness Value’, The Conference Board Report#1126, New York, NY.

Backhaus, K. B., B. A. Stone and K. Heiner: 2002,‘Exploring the Relationship Between CorporateSocial Performance and Employer Attractiveness’,Business & Society 41, 292–318.

Berk, L. E.: 1998, Development through the Lifespan(Allyn & Bacon, Needlham Heights, MA).

Carroll, P. B.: 1990, ‘Chivas Regal Report onWorking Americans: Emerging Values for the1990s’, Wall Street Journal (August 10), B6.

Caudron, S.: 1994, ‘Volunteer Efforts Offer Low-CostTraining Options’, Personnel Journal 73, 38–44.

Chambre, S. M.: 1989, ‘Kindling Points of Light:Volunteering as Public Policy’, Nonprofit andVoluntary Sector Quarterly 18, 249–268.

Clary, E. G. and M. Snyder: 2002, ‘CommunityInvolvement: Opportunities and Challenges inSocializing Adults to Participate in Society’, Journalof Social Issues 58, 581–591.

Clary, E. G., M. Snyder, R. D. Ridge, P. K. Mieneand J. A. Haugen: 1994, ‘Matching Messages toMotives in Persuasion: A Functional Approach toPromoting Volunteerism’, Journal of Applied SocialPsychology 24, 1129–1149.

Clary E. G., M. Snyder, R. D. Ridge, J Copeland,A. A. Stukas, J. Haugen, and P. Miene: 1998,‘Understanding and Assessing the Motivations ofVolunteers: A functional approach’, Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 74, 1516–1530.

Cnaan, R. A. and R. S. Goldberg-Glen: 1991,‘Measuring Motivation to Volunteer in HumanServices’, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 27,269–284.

Cohen-Mansfield, J.: 1989, ‘Employment andVolunteering Roles for the Elderly: Characteristics,Attributions, and Strategies’, Journal of LeisureResearch 21, 214–227.

The Consulting Network: 1991, ‘ManagingCorporate Support: Response to Changing Times’,The National Center on Philanthropy.

Fischer, L. R. and K. B. Schafer: 1993, OlderVolunteers: A Guide to Research and Practice (SagePublications, Newbury Park).

Frisch, M. B. and M. Gerrard: 1981, ‘Natural HelpingSystems: Red Cross Volunteers’, American Journalof Community Psychology 9, 567–579.

Gallagher, S.: 1994, ‘Doing their Share: ComparingPatterns of Help Given by Older and YoungerAdults’, Journal of Marriage and Family 56, 567–578.

Gidron, B.: 1978, ‘Volunteer Work and its Rewards’,Volunteer Administration 11, 18–32.

Grube, J. A. and J. A. Piliavin: 2000, ‘Role Identity,Organizational Experiences, and VolunteerPerformance’, Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin 26, 1108–1119.

Harrison, D. A.: 1995, ‘Volunteer Motivation andAttendance Decisions: Competitive Theory Testingin Multiple Samples from a Homeless Shelter’,Journal of Applied Psychology 80, 371–385.

Heinze, D., S. Sibary and A. Sikula: 1999, ‘Relationsamong Corporate Responsibility, Financial Sound-ness, and Investment Value in 22 ManufacturingIndustry Groups’, Ethics & Behavior 9, 331.

Herzog, A. R. and J. S. House: 1991, ‘ProductiveActivities and Aging Well’, Generations 15, 49–54.

Hess, D., N. Rogovsky and T. W. Dunfree: 2002,‘The Next Wave of Corporate CommunityInvolvement: Corporate Social Initiatives’,California Management Review 44, 110–125.

Hodgkinson, V.: 1995, ‘Key Factors InfluencingCaring, Involvement, and Community’, in P.Schervish, V. Hodgkinson and M. Gates (eds.),Care and Community in Modern Society ( Jossey-Bass,San Francisco, CA).

Hodgkinson, V. and M. Weitzman: 1992, ‘Giving andVolunteering in the United States’, IndependentSector (Washington, DC).

Independent Sector: 1990, ‘Giving and Volunteeringin the United States, Findings from a NationalSurvey Conducted by the Gallup Organization’Washington, D.C.

Lewin, D.: 1991, ‘Community Involvement,Employee Morale, and Business Performance’,IBM Worldwide Social Responsibility Conference.

Maignan, I., O. C. Ferrell and G. T. Hult: 1999,‘Corporate Citizenship, Cultural Antecedents andBusiness Benefits’, Journal of the Academy ofMarketing Science 27, 455–469.

Midlarsky, E. and E. Kahana: 1994, Altruism in LaterLife (Sage Publishing, Thousand Oaks, CA).

Miller, W. H.: 1997, ‘Volunteerism: A New StrategicTool’, Industry Week (September 1), 13–16.

Morgan, J. N.: 1986, ‘Unpaid Productive Activityover the Life Course’, in Committee on an AgingSociety (ed.), Productive Roles in an Older Society(National Academy Press, Washington, DC).

Nisbett, R., E. Borgida, R. Crandall and H. Reed:1982, ‘Popular Induction: Information is notNecessarily Informative’, in D. Kahneman, P.Slovic, and A. Tversky (eds.), Judgment underUncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge).


Okun, M. A.: 1994, ‘The Relationship betweenMotives for Organizational Volunteering andFrequency of Volunteering by Elders’, Journal ofApplied Gerontology 13, 115–126.

Okun, M. A., A. Barr and A. R. Herzog: 1998,‘Motivation to Volunteer by Older Adults: A Testof Competing Measurement Models’, Psychologyand Aging 13, 608–621.

Omoto, A. M., M. Snyder and S. C. Martino: 2000,‘Volunteerism and the Life Course: InvestigatingAge-Related Agendas for Action’, Basic and AppliedSocial Psychology 22, 181–197.

Penner, L. A.: 2002, ‘Dispostional and OrganizationalInfluences on Sustained Volunteerism: AnInteractionist Perspective’, Journal of Social Issues 58,447–467.

PR Newswire: 1998, ‘Money can’t Buy Love,According to New Survey’, September 8.

Sen, S. and C. B. Bhattacharya: 2001, ‘Does DoingGood always Lead to Doing Better? ConsumerReaction to Corporate Social Responsibility’,Journal of Marketing Research 38, 225–244.

Shannon, J. P.: 1991, The Corporate ContributionsHandbook (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco,CA).

Smith, D. H.: 1994, ‘Determinants of VoluntaryAssociation Participation and Volunteering: ALiterature Review’, Nonprofit and Voluntary SectorQuarterly 23, 243–263.

Social Investment Forum: 1999, ‘1999 Report onResponsible Investing Trends in the United States’,Social Investment Forum (Washington, DC).

Solomon, S. W., B. O. Ragland, R. E. Wilson andM. Plost: 1991, ‘Encouraging Company Employeesto Volunteer’, in J. P. Shannon (ed.), The CorporateContributions Handbook ( Jossey-Bass Publishers, SanFrancisco, CA).

Stebbins, S. J.: 1989, ‘The Influence of CommunityService Volunteer Work on Perceptions of Job

Satisfaction and Organizational Commitmentamong Oregon Employees of Pacific BellNorthwest’ Ann Arbor Michigan, UnpublishedDoctoral Dissertation.

Steel, K.: 1995, ‘Managing Corporate and EmployeeVolunteer Programs.’ in T. D. Connors (ed.), TheVolunteer Management Handbook (Wiley & Sons,New York, NY).

Stone, B. A.: 2001, ‘Corporate Social Responsibilityand Institutional Investment: A Content Analysis-Based Portfolio Screening Model for SociallyResponsible Mutual Funds’, Business & Society 40,112–117.

Sundeen, R.: 1990, ‘Family Life Course Status andVolunteer Behavior’, Sociological Perspectives 33,483–500.

Warburton, J. and D. J. Terry, 2000, ‘VolunteerDecision Making by Older People: A Test of aRevised Theory of Planned Behavior’, Basic andApplied Social Psychology 22, 245–257.

Ward, R. A.: 1979, ‘The Impact of Subjective Ageand Stigma on Older Persons’, Journal of Gerontology32, 227–232.

Wild, C.: 1993, ‘Corporate Volunteer Programs:Benefits to Business’, The Conference BoardReport #1029, New York, NY.

Wilson, J. and M. Musick: 1997, ‘Who Cares? Towardan Integrated Theory of Volunteer Work’, AmericanSociological Review 62, 694–713.

Wymer, W. W. and S. Samu: 2002, ‘Volunteer Serviceas Symbolic Consumption: Gender andOccupational Differences in Volunteering’, Journalof Marketing Management 18, 971–989.

College of Business Administration, Glass Hall 234,

Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, MO 65804,

U.S.A.


Documents

Recruitment Strategies for Encouraging Participation in Corporate Volunteer Programs