building a committed hospice volunteer workforce-do variables at the experience stage matter?

Journal of Community & Applied Social PsychologyJ. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 24: 422–438 (2014)Published online 16 January 2014 in Wiley Online Library(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/casp.2182

Building a Committed Hospice VolunteerWorkforce—Do Variables at the Experience Stage Matter?

CLAUDIA SCHUSTERSCHITZ1*, MAGDALENA FLATSCHER-THÖNI1,ANDREA M. LEITER-SCHEIRING2 and WILLI GESER2

1UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Tyrol, Austria2Leopold-Franzens University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Tyrol, Austria

ABSTRACT

Volunteers are crucial to the survival of non-profit organisations, who therefore have a fundamentalinterest in sustaining voluntary engagement over time. A central variable regarding sustained voluntaryengagement is volunteers’ organisational commitment, which has so far been a neglected researchissue. The study at hand therefore explicitly focuses on hospice volunteers’ commitment. Starting fromthe assumption that variables at the experience stage of volunteerism may be relevant in predictingvolunteer commitment, questionnaire data on volunteers’ motives, motive fulfilment and role identitywere collected in a sample of hospice volunteers (N=276). Results of multiple regression analysesshow positive relationships between altruistic motive fulfilment and a volunteer role identity on theone hand and volunteer commitment on the other. Observed interaction effects imply that altruisticmotive fulfilment is of importance both at the initial phase of volunteering and for long-term volunteers.Moreover, interaction effects provide evidence that the fulfilment of egoistic motives is of particularimportance amongst volunteers to whom egoistic motives are central. Thus, the fulfilment of altruisticmotives and facilitating the development of a volunteer role identity should be permanent concerns inbuilding a committed workforce. Egoistic motive fulfilment in contrast is of special relevance, whenegoistic motives for volunteering are strong. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Key words: commitment; motives; motive fulfilment; role identity; hospice volunteers

Modern societies are often said to lack prosocial values, such as solidarity and humanity.In sharp contrast to this perception is the fact that a considerable number of people spendtheir time to engage in volunteer work. Such voluntary engagement is especially high notonly in the United States (44%, cf. Finkelstein, 2008a) but also in wealthy Europeannations, such as the Netherlands (42%), Sweden (48%), England (44%), Germany (36%)and Austria (43.8%) (GHK, 2010).

*Correspondence to: Claudia Schusterschitz, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics andTechnology, Institute of Applied Psychology, Eduard-Wallnöfer-Center I, A-6060 Hall, Tyrol, Austria.E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 3 December 2013

Building a committed hospice volunteer workforce 423

These figures can be seen as living proof of solidarity and humanitarian acting. And theystress the volunteers’ contribution to welfare work. As volunteers are pivotal to the survivalof non-profit organisations, these organisations show a fundamental interest in building andsustaining volunteers’ unpaid engagement. A central variable regarding the maintenance ofvolunteerism is organisational commitment (Dávila, Díaz-Morales, Pasquini, & Giannini,2010). Organisational commitment is described as ‘a bond or linking of the individual tothe organisation’ (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990, p.171). A common notion is that commitment is‘a stabilizing and obliging force that gives direction to behavior and binds a person to a courseof action’ (Felfe, Schmook, Schyns, & Six, 2008, p. 82). These definitions already imply apositive influence of commitment on tenure and retention. Being investigated extensivelyin the context of profit organisations, especially affective commitment has shown strong cor-relations with positive organisational outcome variables, such as job satisfaction, reducedturnover intentions, organisational citizenship behaviours or enhanced job performance(Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002; Vandenberghe, Bentein, &Stinglhammer, 2004). In spite of this evidence for its positive impact, organisational commit-ment so far ‘has received very little attention in studies on social and community participa-tion’ (Chacón, Vecina, & Dávila, 2007, p. 629). Consequently, studies on volunteercommitment are rare (Van Vianen, Nijstad, & Voskuijl, 2008). Ironically, the question ofhow to get individuals committed is particularly pressing in the context of unpaid work.Unlike paid employees, volunteers are not linked with an organisation for monetary reasons,basically making it easier for them to leave. Because of this lacking ‘stick of a paid contract’(Van Vuuren, De Jong, & Seydel, 2008, p.316), one could imagine commitment not only as acentral management issue in voluntary organisations but also as an obvious candidate forvolunteer researchers. However, this is not the case.Predictors of length of engagement in contrast received considerable attention in volunteer

research. We are of the opinion, however, that this focus on length of engagement falls short,because tenure alone does not ensure a meaningful contribution to the volunteer organisa-tion. Committed volunteers in contrast can not only be supposed to remain with theorganisation but also be motivated volunteers, who perform well and engage inorganisational citizenship behaviours (Meyer, Becker, & Vandenberghe, 2004). The studyat hand therefore explicitly focuses on predictors of volunteer commitment, therebyaddressing an existing research gap. In selecting potential predictors of volunteer commit-ment, we build on prominent approaches applied in past research on volunteerism, namelyon Omoto and Snyder’s (1995, 2002) volunteer process model, and on the role identitytheory (Piliavin & Callero, 1991).

THE VOLUNTEER PROCESS MODEL

In their volunteer process model, Omoto and Snyder (1995, 2002) defined stages of thevolunteer process, within which different variables are considered relevant.At the antecedent stage, their research focused on volunteers’ motives and led them to

develop the so-called functional approach, which nowadays presents one of the mostwidely accepted explanatory approaches to volunteerism (Clary et al., 1998; Omoto &Snyder, 2002). The focus of the functional approach (Clary & Snyder, 1991) lies on themotive that is met through voluntary engagement. Accordingly, the functional rationaleis that volunteers volunteer, because volunteering serves certain underlying motives.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 24: 422–438 (2014)

DOI: 10.1002/casp

424 C. Schusterschitz et al.

The functional research revealed six central motives of volunteering—the value function,the understanding function, the social function, the career function, protective andenhancement motives (Finkelstein, 2008a). Volunteer researchers in German-speakingcountries build on a similar taxonomy of volunteer motives (Bierhoff et al., 2007). Thistaxonomy includes social ties, personal experience, social responsibility, self-esteem/recogni-tion, social influence, job compensation, career, political responsibility and self-experience ascentral functions of volunteerism. A frequent classification of volunteers’ motives is that inmotives with other orientation, that is, altruistic motives, such as the social responsibilitymotive or the value function, and in motives with self orientation, that is, egoistic motives,such as career motives or self-esteem/recognition (Davis, Hall, & Meyer, 2003).

The second stage of the volunteer process model refers to actual volunteer experiences.In a functional perspective, a promoting factor at the experience stage is that volunteers’initial motives for volunteering are met (Clary & Snyder, 1999). Indeed, more recent worksindicate that voluntary engagement, rather than just being a question of motive strength, isdependent on whether personally relevant motives are satisfied. This functional rationale isin line with the person-environment fit approach, which has recently been applied toexplain volunteer satisfaction, affective commitment and turnover intentions (Van Vianenet al., 2008). A similar reasoning and according empirical evidence is also provided byDavis et al. (2003). They found motive fulfilment to significantly predict volunteersatisfaction, a variable showing strong correlations with volunteer commitment (Dávila& Chacón, 2007). Furthermore, Clary and colleagues (Clary et al., 1998; Clary & Snyder,1999), as well as Stukas, Daly, and Cowling (2005), stressed the relevance of motivefulfilment in predicting voluntary engagement.

ROLE IDENTITY THEORY

The role identity theory (Piliavin & Callero, 1991) starts from the premise that everybodyoccupies multiple roles. One of these possible roles is that of a volunteer. Once developed,this role identity makes volunteers feel that their engagement is a central part of who theyare (Van Dyne & Farmer, 2005). Thereby, it motivates them to engage in behavioursconsistent with their self-concept, thus contributing to sustained voluntary engagement(Finkelstein & Brannick, 2007).

ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT

Commitment is considered a multidimensional concept, comprising the componentsaffective, normative and calculative commitments (Allen & Meyer, 1996). Affectivecommitment refers to an employee’s emotional bond and identification with, as well asto his/her involvement in the organisation. Normative commitment is based on values,such as loyalty, that cause feelings of obligation to stay with an employer. Calculativecommitment finally binds an individual to an organisation, because cost-benefit compari-sons make leaving seem too costly and staying the better alternative (Schusterschitz,Geser, Nöhammer, & Stummer, 2011). The few existing works on volunteer commitmentsuggest affective commitment as the most relevant dimension (Van Vianen et al., 2008).Dawley, Stephens, and Stephens (2005), for example, found affective commitment to bemost strongly related to the fulfilment of volunteer board member roles. Similarly,


DOI: 10.1002/casp


Preston and Brown (2004), as well as Stephens, Dawley, and Stephens (2004), reported thestrongest correlations with volunteers’ performance for the affective commitmentdimension. The study of Dávila et al. (2010) finally shows relations between affectivecommitment and intention to remain. In the literature, the following interpretations areoffered for such findings. Affective commitment, representing emotional attachment, issaid to go along with the inherent and intrinsically motivated desire to sustainorganisational membership and is thus assumed to make volunteers likely to contributeto the organisation, irrespective of extrinsic rewards (Dawley et al., 2005; Van Vuurenet al., 2008). Normative commitment, reflecting feelings of obligation and loyaltytowards the organisation, is considered more reciprocal and contractual in nature and thusdeemed of lower importance amongst volunteers (Dávila et al., 2010). Finally, also contin-uance commitment, with its exchange theoretical foundation, is considered less relevantamongst unpaid employees (Van Vuuren et al., 2008). Considering the reported findingsand the related theoretical considerations, we focus on affective commitment.

AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO THE PREDICTION OF VOLUNTEERCOMMITMENT

As commitment leads to continued action or activity, we can assume committed volunteers tocontinue volunteering. In this perspective, commitment is closely related to sustainedvolunteering. Therefore, variables of the functional approach and role identity theory mayalso be of value in predicting volunteer commitment. To explore this notion, the predictivevalue of motives, motive fulfilment and volunteer role identity regarding volunteer commit-ment will be tested. In doing so, we intend to reveal whether the initial motives or theexperience stage variables count the most in building a committed volunteer workforce.The consideration of these variables was inspired by Penner’s (2002) model of

sustained volunteerism, which integrates motives, motive fulfilment and the role iden-tity. These variables stem from two largely separate research traditions: the functionalapproach and role identity theory (cf. Finkelstein, 2010). Past research of Finkelsteinand colleagues (Finkelstein, 2008b; Finkelstein & Brannick, 2007; Finkelstein &Penner, 2004; Finkelstein, Penner, & Brannick, 2005) stresses the usefulness of thisapproach. In our point of view, motives, their fulfilment and volunteer role identityare variables to be combined, because they may have differing impacts on volunteeroutcomes (e.g. tenure, satisfaction and commitment) throughout the volunteer experi-ence. A similar view is held by Chacón et al. (2007). They identified satisfaction ofmotives as the most relevant variable with respect to the duration of service in theshort term, whereas volunteer role identity is the better predictor when it comes tosustained volunteerism. This temporal and dynamic perspective on sustainedvolunteerism is inherent in all models presented earlier. The common view is thatdifferent variables account for the initial decision to volunteer, whereas others aredeemed responsible for the maintenance of voluntary engagement over time. Inline with that, in her more recent work, Finkelstein (2008b, p.1355) declared that‘… individual motives comprise an important antecedent to the decision to volunteer.One’s experiences during the initial phase of volunteering—in particular the degree towhich the motives are fulfilled and the strength of a volunteer role identity—determinewhether helping is sustained.’


DOI: 10.1002/casp


To our knowledge, the integrated approach to volunteering so far has solely been used inpredicting volunteer activity (Chacon et al. 2007; Finkelstein, 2008b) but has not beenapplied to the prediction of volunteer commitment.

HYPOTHESES

Van Vianen et al. (2008) found motives to be unrelated to volunteer commitment. In ourview, results might have been different, if besides volunteers’ motives, motive fulfilmenthad been considered. This thought is expressed by Van Vianen and colleagues (2008,p.155), who, on the basis of a person-environment fit approach, stated that ‘…the needsof the individual and the supplies of the work environment should correspond with eachother’. These assumptions, together with the according evidence reported earlier, implythat motives for volunteering only contribute to positive organisational outcomes to theextent that they are fulfilled. It also seems plausible to assume that motive fulfilment isonly relevant for such motives that are of high personal relevance, that is, for motives highin motive strength. This notion can be derived from the matching hypothesis, according towhich positive volunteer outcomes, such as volunteer commitment, are dependent onwhether personally relevant motives for volunteering are fulfilled (Clary & Snyder,1999; Houle, Sagarin, & Kaplan, 2005). Furthermore, it is supported by strong correlationsobserved between altruistic motives and their fulfilment on the one hand and egoisticmotives and their fulfilment on the other (Davis et al., 2003). Thus, in the predictionof volunteer commitment, we suggest an interaction effect of motive strength withmotive fulfilment.

H1: Motive strength interacts with motive fulfilment in predicting volunteers’ affective commitmentin such a way that the relationship between motive strength and volunteers’ affective commitment isstronger in cases of high motive fulfilment than in cases of low motive fulfilment.

Past research also stresses a positive influence of volunteer role identity on voluntaryengagement. In the context of blood donations, role identity has been found to influencenot only intentions to continue (Charng, Pillavin, & Callero, 1988) but also future actualdonations (Piliavin & Callero, 1991). Penner and Finkelstein (1998) revealed a positiveinfluence of AIDS volunteers’ role identity on their organisational involvement. Grubeand Piliavin (2000) finally provided evidence that a volunteer role identity is positivelyrelated to hours spent volunteering and negatively to the intention to leave. More recently,findings of Finkelstein and colleagues (Finkelstein et al., 2005) have shown a volunteerrole identity to go along with hours spent volunteering and service duration. Consideredas a whole, these results suggest a favourable influence of a volunteer role identity onvolunteers’ work attitudes and behaviours. Hence, it is plausible to argue that a volunteerrole identity also fosters volunteer commitment:

H2: Volunteer role identity is a significant predictor of volunteer commitment.

According to the findings of Chacon and colleagues (2007, p.629), ‘the variables whichinfluence a person’s decision to become a volunteer are not necessarily those that lead to aperson’s continuing to be a volunteer a year later…’. Putting this line of reasoning forward,


DOI: 10.1002/casp


Finkelstein (2008b), on the basis of her findings, concluded that relationships among vari-ables, for example, amongst motive fulfilment and volunteer time or amongst role identityand volunteer time, may change over time, that is, throughout the volunteer experience.She pointed to the relevance of motives for the decision to volunteer, while later on,variables at the experience stage, namely motive fulfilment and the strength of thevolunteer role, gain importance (Finkelstein, 2008b). Similarly, we assume the influenceof these variables on volunteer commitment to change depending on volunteer tenure.So, the contribution of motives, motive fulfilment and role identity to the prediction ofvolunteer commitment is expected to vary depending on volunteer tenure. This interactionbetween tenure on the one hand and motives, motive fulfilment and role identity on theother will be tested in our third hypothesis.

H3: Volunteer motives (H3a), motive fulfilment (H3b) and role identity (H3c) interact with tenure in

their influence on volunteer commitment. With respect to motives, we assume the relationship

between motives and volunteer commitment to be weaker amongst volunteers with a long tenure

than amongst those with a short tenure (H3a). The relationship between motive fulfilment and

volunteer commitment we posit to be stronger amongst volunteers with a long than amongst those

with a short tenure (H3b). Likewise, we assume a stronger relationship between the presence of a

volunteer role identity and volunteer commitment amongst volunteers with a long compared to

those with a short tenure (H3c).

METHODS

Data on motives, motive fulfilment, and volunteer role identity were collected in a sampleof hospice volunteers (N = 276) from three Austrian federal states (Tyrol: N= 88; UpperAustria: N= 98, Vorarlberg: N= 90).

Procedure

In recruiting hospice volunteers for our study, we first contacted the holding organisa-tions of the three federal states. Upon their agreement, we presented the project atregularly held hospice team leader meetings. These meetings gave us the opportunityto respond to open questions, as well as to hand out the questionnaires. Hospice teamleaders then informed their team members about the research project and distributedthe questionnaires together with prepaid and addressed envelopes. Hospice volunteerswilling to participate finally filled in the questionnaires and returned them per mail.The response rate was 40%.

Study sample

About 90% of the surveyed hospice volunteers are female. More than 70% are married orlive in a domestic partnership, and almost four-fifth have at least one child. The mean agewas 58 years. The typical hospice volunteer in the study at hand volunteers 3.5 h a week formore than 5 years.


DOI: 10.1002/casp


Volunteers’ motives

Motives and motive fulfilment were assessed using the Scales of the Attitude Structure ofVolunteers, developed by Bierhoff, Schülken, and Hoof (2007). This German-speakingmeasure of volunteer motivation comprises eight scales, assessing eight motives forvolunteering, six of which correspond to those operationalised by the Volunteer Functions In-ventory (Clary et al., 1998): (i) social attachment; (ii) self-experience; (iii) self-esteem; (iv)social influence; (v) professional balance; (vi) career; (vii) social responsibility; and (viii)political responsibility. Example items for these scales are as follows: ‘I work as a hospicevolunteer…’, (i) ‘because I hope to meet people to whom I feel related through our commonwork’; (ii) ‘because of the opportunity to learn about my own strength’; (iii) ‘because it en-hances my self-esteem’; (iv) ‘because my volunteering friends influenced me to do so’, (v)‘because I consider volunteering for the Hospice services as a meaningful compensation tomy paid job’; (vi) ‘because I hope for new contacts that are beneficial to my business ormy career’; (vii) ‘because I am of the opinion that it is important to help others’; and (8)‘because I feel the need to contribute to changes in society’. Reliabilities range from α = .71to α= .85 and thus can be considered as good, with the exception of the professional balancescale (α = .60) (Bierhoff et al., 2007). On the basis of Bierhoff et al. (2007), these eight mo-tives can be classified into the two dimensions of egoistic (social attachment, self-experience,self-esteem, social influence, professional balance and career) and altruistic motives (socialand political responsibility). In the present study, we followed the suggestion of Bierhoffet al. (2007) regarding the composition of the egoistic and altruistic motive dimension.Accordingly, the scores for these dimensions were computed on the basis of the mean valuesin the items of the egoistic (α= .80, 20 items) and altruistic (α= .66, six items) motive scales.In our regression analyses, the altruistic and egoistic motive dimensions entered as predictorsof volunteer commitment.

Motive fulfilment

The motive fulfilment items (e.g. ‘Through my work as a hospice volunteer I made friends’)are based on a motive fulfilment measure by Davis et al. (2003). Like the motive items, themotive fulfilment itemswere aggregated into two dimensions: the egoistic (α= .74, five items)and the altruistic motive fulfilment (r= .29, p< .01, two items), respectively.

Role identity

Role identity was measured with the five-item volunteer role identity scale (α = .79) byFinkelstein et al. (2005), which is based on the scale originally developed by Callero,Howard, and Piliavin (1987). An example item of the role identity scale is ‘Volunteeringfor the hospice services is an important part of who I am.’

Organisational commitment

To assess volunteers’ affective commitment, the organisational commitment subscale(α = .74) of an extended and revised version of the Job Diagnostic Survey (Kil, Leffelsend,& Metz-Göckel, 2000) was used. An example item of the 6-item commitment scale is ‘Iam proud to tell others I work for the hospice services’.


DOI: 10.1002/casp


Respondents made their judgements on these measures on 6-point Likert scales (1 = ‘notat all true’ to 6 = ‘very true’).

Tenure

To assess tenure, respondents indicated for how many years/months they have beenvolunteering for the Hospice services.

RESULTS

Means, standard deviations and intercorrelations were computed to understand the vari-ability and interdependence of the measures (Table 1).As the mean values presented in Table 1 lie above a value of 3 on the 6-point rating

scale, mean values in all study variables can be considered as rather high. Especially highare the mean values for altruistic motive fulfilment and commitment.To test the research hypotheses, hierarchical regression analyses were conducted. Predictor

variables were centred, as recommended by Aiken and West (1991). Collinearity statisticsshow that VIFs <2.86. Predictors were entered stepwise. In the first step, we entered thedemographic variables age, tenure and sex for control purposes. Motive scales were enteredin the second and the motive fulfilment scales in the third step. In the fourth step, we enteredthe respective interaction terms (altruistic motives x altruistic motive fulfilment; egoisticmotives x egoistic motive fulfilment). Role identity was added in the next step. In the finalstep, interaction terms between the motive and motive fulfilment scales and role identity onthe one hand and tenure on the other were entered. Results of the regression analyses areshown in Table 2.The findings in Table 2 suggest that all the predictor variables explain 49% of the variance

in volunteer commitment. The hierarchical regression analyses show a significant effect ofage on commitment. Furthermore, it can be seen in Table 2 that every step, with the exceptionof Step 6, leads to significant changes in F. This effect is strongest in Step 3, because of theadditional consideration of altruistic and egoistic motive fulfilment (change in R2 of .27).Similarly, the addition of the role identity variable in Step 5 leads to a substantial change inF and contributes to an additional explanation of variance (change in R2 of .11). Moreover,

Table 1. Means, standard deviations and intercorrelations of all measures

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Tenure 5.26 4.052. Age 57,6 9.58 0.31**3. Weekly hours 3.52 2.22 0.10 0.20**3. Altruistic motives 3.92 0.93 0.15* 0.10 0.064. Egoistic motives 3.05 0.97 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.62**5. Altruistic motivesfulfilment

5,16 0.73 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.34** 0.25**

6. Egoistic motivesfulfilment

4,56 0.86 0.09 0.04 0.05 0.22** 0.48** 0.35**

7. Role identity 4.77 0.78 0.01 0.04 0.18** 0.25** 0.27** 0.50** 0.46**8. Commitment 5.23 0.62 0.02 0.12 0.24** 0.29** 0.26** 0.57** 0.38** 0.61**

*p< .05. **p< .01.


DOI: 10.1002/casp

Table 2. Regression analyses on predictors of hospice volunteers’ commitment

Commitment

B SD B β

Model 1Sex 0.02 0.13 0.01Age �.08 0.04 �0.13Tenure �.02 0.04 �0.04

R 0.13F 1.29

Model 2Sex �0.01 0.12 �0.01Age �0.07 0.04 �0.12*Tenure �0.04 0.04 �0.06Altruistic motives 0.12 0.05 0.20**Egoistic motives 0.08 0.05 0.13

R 0.32**F 5.63Change F 11.97**

Model 3Sex �0.01 0.10 �0.01Age �0.08 0.03 �0.14*Tenure �0.05 0.03 �0.08Altruistic motives 0.05 0.04 0.08Egoistic motives �0.01 0.04 �0.02Altruistic motives fulfilment 0.27 0.03 0.46**Egoistic motives fulfilment 0.13 0.04 0.22**

R 0.62**F 20.87Change F 52.92**

Model 4Sex 0.00 0.10 0.00Age �0.08 0.03 �0.14*Tenure �0.05 0.03 �0.09Altruistic motives 0.05 0.04 0.08Egoistic motives �0.09 0.05 �0.14Altruistic motives fulfilment 0.24 0.04 0.40**Egoistic motives fulfilment 0.19 0.04 0.32**Altruistic motives x fulfilment �0.04 0.04 �0.07Egoistic motives x fulfilment 0.12 0.04 0.20**

R 0.63**F 17.59Change F 4.19*

Model 5Sex �0.05 0.09 �0.03Age �0.08 0.03 �0.14**Tenure �0.06 0.03 �0.09Altruistic motives 0.04 0.04 0.07Egoistic motives �0.08 0.05 �0.13

(Continues)



DOI: 10.1002/casp

Table 2. (Continued)

Commitment

B SD B β

Altruistic motives fulfilment 0.14 0.04 0.24**Egoistic motives fulfilment 0.11 0.04 .19**Altruistic motives x fulfilment �0.05 0.03 �0.09Egoistic motives x fulfilment 0.12 0.04 0.20**Roll identity 0.24 0.03 0.41**

R 0.71**F 24.41Change F 51.91**

Model 6Sex �0.04 0.09 �0.02Age �0.08 0.03 -0.13**Tenure �0.05 0.03 �0.09Altruistic motives 0.04 0.04 0.07Egoistic motives �0.06 0.05 �0.10Altruistic motives fulfilment 0.16 0.04 0.27**Egoistic motives fulfilment 0.09 0.04 0.15*Altruistic motives x fulfilment �0.05 0.03 �0.08Egoistic motives x fulfilment 0.10 0.04 0.16*Roll identity 0.24 0.03 0.41**Tenure x altruistic motives �0.02 0.04 �0.03Tenure x egoistic motives 0.00 0.04 0.00Tenure x altruistic motives fulfilment 0.09 0.04 0.16*Tenure x egoistic motives fulfilment �0.02 0.04 �0.04Tenure x role identity �0.03 0.04 �0.05

R 0.72*Adjusted R2 0.49F 16.74Change F 1.20

*p< .05. **p< .01.


findings in Table 2 show several mediation effects. With regard to the mediation effects, it isremarkable that the influence of altruistic motives on commitment is mediated throughaltruistic motive fulfilment (Sobel test: z=4.58, p< .00). Likewise, the effects of altruistic(Sobel test: z=5.69, p< .00) and egoistic motive fulfilment (Sobel test: z=5.49, p< .00)on commitment are mediated through a volunteer role identity.The findings in Table 2 further indicate effects of altruistic motive fulfilment

(β = .27, p< .01), egoistic motive fulfilment (β = .15, p< .05) and role identity(β = .41, p< .01) on volunteers’ affective commitment. Thus, in line with our assump-tion, only variables at the experience stage (Finkelstein, 2008b), namely motive fulfil-ment and role identity, contribute to the prediction of volunteer commitmentindependently of each other, whereas neither altruistic nor egoistic motives show animpact on volunteer commitment as soon as the experience stage variables are added.Finally, results pictured in Table 2 show interaction effects of egoistic motives withegoistic motive fulfilment (β = .16, p< .05) and of tenure with altruistic motive fulfil-ment (β = .16, p< .05) in the prediction of volunteer commitment.


DOI: 10.1002/casp


The observed interaction between the fulfilment of egoistic motives and egoisticmotive strength is in line with our first hypothesis (H1), within which we arguedfor interaction effects between motive fulfilment and motive strength in the predictionof volunteers’ affective commitment. To further analyse the observed interaction,simple slope analyses were conducted (Aiken & West, 1991). These analyses implythat the fulfilment of egoistic motives fosters the commitment of volunteers whoseegoistic motives are low (β = .22, t = 2.91, p< .00). This positive influence of egoisticmotive fulfilment on commitment is even stronger for volunteers who hold strongegoistic motives (β = .56, t = 5.97, p< .00). On the basis of these findings, the interac-tion effects between motive strength and motive fulfilment postulated in H1 can beconsidered confirmed with respect to egoistic motives but not regarding altruisticmotives. Hence, in contrast to egoistic motive fulfilment, the fulfilment of altruisticmotives seems to foster volunteer commitment independently of the strength of altru-istic motives for volunteering.

Providing evidence for a direct positive effect of volunteer role identity (β = .41, p< .00)on volunteer commitment results lend support to H2.

In our third hypotheses, we argued that relations of volunteers’ motives (H3a), motivefulfilment (H3b) and role identity (H3c) with volunteer commitment may change dependingon volunteer tenure. The present findings show the assumed interactions for altruisticmotive fulfilment (β = .16, p< .05) and thus support H3b at least partly. The results ofthe simple slope analyses imply that the fulfilment of altruistic motives promotes thecommitment of volunteers with short tenure (β = .47, t= 6.04, p< .00) and, much stronger,the commitment of volunteers with long tenure (β = .72, t= 10.37, p< .00). As no otherinteraction effects could be verified, H3a and H3c are not confirmed.

DISCUSSION

Building a committed volunteer workforce, who is motivated to contribute toorganisational success and to sustain its engagement over time, is a central issue for volun-teer organisations. Considering this fact, one would assume a great deal of research to bedevoted to volunteer commitment. Surprisingly, the opposite is the case. Examinations ofsustained volunteerism have so far been marked by a focus on volunteer tenure, while thereare comparably few studies on volunteer commitment (Van Vianen et al., 2008). Observa-tions based on our own data set, however, suggest that with the focus on tenure alone wemay fall short of our expectations. In detail, we found highly significant correlations ofcommitment with involvement in volunteer work, assessed via weekly hours spentvolunteering (r = .24, p< .01), and volunteers’ willingness to engage in continuing hospicespecific education (r = .41, p< .01). Tenure in contrast was unrelated to these behaviouralindicators of volunteering in our research.

Therefore, the main concern of the work at hand was to reveal meaningful predictors ofvolunteer commitment. Our central tenet was to show that variables contributing tosustained volunteerism may also be helpful in predicting volunteer commitment, ascommitment also leads individuals to sustain a course of action over time. Specifically,the authors of the current paper deemed variables affecting the volunteer experience,namely the fulfilment of personally relevant motives (Davis et al., 2003) and the presenceof a volunteer role identity (Grube & Piliavin, 2000), particularly worth investigating.


DOI: 10.1002/casp


Taken together, the present work stresses the applicability of functional and role iden-tity variables to the prediction of volunteer commitment, insofar as these variablesindependently of each other and in interaction with tenure explained 49% of the variancein volunteer commitment. Because of the present findings, both altruistic motive fulfil-ment and a strong volunteer role identity go along with higher levels of volunteercommitment. These results fit in well with past research, identifying motive fulfilment(Clary & Snyder, 1999; Davis et al., 2003) and role identity (Grube & Piliavin, 2000;Finkelstein et al., 2005) as central variables, once the volunteer behaviour has beeninitiated. Also in line with previous findings is the fact that the statistical effect ofmotives on volunteer commitment is not observable anymore as soon as motive fulfil-ment is added (Davis et al., 2003; Penner, 2002; Van Vianen et al., 2008).While generally agreeing with these findings in past volunteer research, our work does

not lend full support to them. On the basis of previous works (e.g. Chacon et al., 2007),we hypothesised in H1 that the fulfilment of motives of high personal relevance contrib-utes to the prediction of commitment. According to our findings, this holds true for thefulfilment of egoistic motives but not of altruistic ones. Thus, in line with our expecta-tions, the fulfilment of egoistic motives particularly facilitates a stronger commitmentof volunteers with strong egoistic motives. Altruistic motive fulfilment, in contrast,fosters volunteers’ commitment, independently of the underlying motive strength. Thelatter finding definitely contradicts our supposition, even though, in some ways, itcorresponds with previous results showing a positive relationship between altruisticmotive fulfilment on the one hand and volunteer satisfaction or hours volunteered onthe other (Davis et al., 2003; Finkelstein, 2008a, 2008b). These studies, however, didnot examine the potential interaction effects between motive strength and motive fulfil-ment. Our unexpected finding of altruistic motive fulfilment influencing volunteercommitment independently of the personal relevance of altruistic motives so far hasnot been discussed thoroughly in the literature. In interpreting this finding, one has tobear in mind that the observed positive relationship between altruistic motive fulfilmentand commitment not only means that commitment is stronger the better altruistic motivesare met. It also implies that commitment to the hospice organisation is lower and the lessaltruistic motives are satisfied. In this context, we believe that a closer look has to betaken at the question of why volunteers’ commitment suffers from the inadequate fulfil-ment of altruistic motives, even if altruistic motives do not play a central role. An answerto this question can be found when one considers the special orientation of hospiceservices, distinguishing them from other volunteer organisations. Hospices offer a veryspecial kind of service: end-of-life care. Taking this special kind of service offered andthe associated ideology into account, hospice services, compared with other volunteerorganisations, are supposed to hold particular altruistic orientations. Because of thatperception of hospices as particular altruistic organisations, altruistic motive fulfilmenton the part of the volunteers is taken for granted within this organisation. If, however,these expectations remain unmet, because the volunteer organisation fails to act in linewith what it stands for, the lacking fulfilment of altruistic motives presumably influencesorganisational commitment negatively, regardless of the importance of altruistic motives.Besides contributing to volunteer commitment independently of altruistic motive strength,

altruistic motive fulfilment seems decisive throughout the whole volunteer experience. Indetail, the observed interaction between altruistic motive fulfilment and tenure together withthe subsequent simple slope analyses suggests that motive fulfilment is of relevance to


DOI: 10.1002/casp


volunteer commitment at the beginning of the volunteer experience, but even more soamongst long-term volunteers. The latter finding diverges somewhat from previousresults. In a sample of hospice volunteers, Finkelstein (2008b) found altruistic motivefulfilment to be of relevance to volunteer activity at 3months of service, although at12months satisfaction of egoistic motives was important. Thus, her findings indicatethe relevance of altruistic motive fulfilment to be decreasing and those of egoisticmotives to be increasing with time. This does not fit in well with the current evidencefor altruistic motive fulfilment being influential for both short-term and long-termvolunteers’ commitment, with the influence on commitment being still stronger amongstlong-term volunteers. The diverging insights of Finkelstein’s (2008b) and our researchmay be because the analyses focus on different outcome variables and, even more impor-tant, build on completely different samples with a completely different time horizon ofthe volunteer experience: although Finkelstein observed new volunteers during their firstyear in a longitudinal design, the present cross-sectional sample mainly consists of long-term volunteers with a mean tenure of 5 years. As there are only a few individuals(n = 36) with a volunteer tenure of up to 1 year in our sample, we are not able to saywhether within the first year, altruistic versus egoistic motive fulfilment has a differentimpact on volunteer commitment. By explaining the current finding of altruistic motivefulfilment as being of the highest relevance in the long run, it should also be taken intoaccount that, unlike new volunteers, long-term volunteers can be assumed to have losttheir idealistic picture of the organisation in favour of a more realistic one. On the basisof their own experiences, they have learned that all is not gold that glitters. Normally,these negative experiences would go along with lower commitment, but as long as cen-tral motives for volunteering, namely altruistic motives, are fulfilled, volunteers sustaintheir organisational commitment. Following this line of reasoning, altruistic motive ful-filment seems to have compensatory effects on the commitment of long-term volunteers.

The finding that having developed a volunteer role identity is favourable to volunteercommitment is consistent with previous works. These works stress the positive influenceof adopting a role identity on desirable work attitudes and behaviours, such as volunteertenure and activity level, or organisational citizenship (Grube & Piliavin, 2000;Finkelstein, 2006; Penner & Finkelstein, 1998; Penner, Dovidio, Piliavin, & Schroeder,2005). Seemingly, individuals, who consider their work as a hospice volunteer as a centralpart of who they are, also have positive attitudes and show positive behaviours towards theorganisation enabling them to pursue their voluntary engagement. Because of our findings,this positive effect holds true throughout the volunteer experience, because in the presentsample, tenure and role identity are uncorrelated and do not interact regarding theirinfluence on tenure. So, taking over a hospice volunteer role identity has positive effectson volunteer commitment, which are independent of tenure. On the one hand, this maybe explained by the fact that hospice volunteers receive special trainings before performingtheir volunteer activity. Such trainings can be assumed to promote the development of avolunteer role identity, before actually starting volunteer work. Consequently, in termsof practical implications, other volunteer organisations may also seek to get theirvolunteers involved from the very beginning or even earlier, by offering such trainingson the job. On the other hand, when it comes to hospice volunteerism, potential volunteersmay already have a detailed idea of their future volunteer task, namely caring for theterminally ill. This aspect may also contribute to an early development of a hospicevolunteer role identity.


DOI: 10.1002/casp


In summary, the research at hand extends the explanatory value of functional and roleidentity variables to volunteer commitment. In doing so, it points to the particularrelevance of variables at the experience stage of volunteering, namely motive fulfilmentand taking over a volunteer role identity, with respect to volunteer commitment. Thus,in terms of practical implications, it clearly shows that variables at the experience stageof volunteering do matter in fostering volunteer commitment. On the basis of these results,volunteer organisations and especially hospices would be well advised to focus on thefulfilment of altruistic motives and to support the development of a volunteer role identity,when it comes to building a committed volunteer workforce. Admittedly, altruistic motivefulfilment may be taken for granted, as the unpaid engagement in end-of-life care itself canbe understood as a merely altruistic act. Beyond that, however, organisations mayadditionally contribute to altruistic motive fulfilment by stressing the altruistic contributionof both the organisation and the volunteer. The organisation may stress its altruisticorientation by ensuring and convincingly communicating that the human and financialresources of the organisation are invested exclusively to benefit their clients. The volun-teers’ altruistic contribution may be underlined in annual reports, in performanceinterviews or by regularly informing them about positive feedback from the immediatefamily. For the development of a volunteer role identity, experiencing one’s contributionas central to the volunteer organisation, perceived value similarity with the organisation,social networks associated with one’s voluntary engagement and organisational prestigeare deemed beneficial (Grube & Piliavin, 2000). So, volunteer organisations should seekto get and keep volunteers involved in the volunteer organisation and activity, as well asto establish and maintain a positive public image. Finally, on the basis of our findings,volunteers whose engagement is primarily based on egoistic motives should be identifiedso that their egoistic motives can be satisfied by assigning them suitable volunteeractivities (Houle et al., 2005).Beside its implications, the present work also has its limitations. One limitation is the

focus on personal predictors of volunteering. By concentrating on the fulfilment ofrelevant motives and role identity, the present work is able to stress the explanatory valueof these variables with respect to volunteer commitment. At the same time, however, thepossible contribution of situational predictors, such as concrete work and organisationalexperiences, is ignored. Hence, we do not know which concrete experiences lead thevolunteer to experience motive fulfilment or support his/her role identity, and, as aconsequence, commit him/her to the volunteer organisation. In this context, loss ofcontrol or feelings of overload in caring for the terminally ill may be variables to be con-sidered in future research. For the benefit of the organisation, subsequent studies may wantto analyse the impact of social support, for example, through supervision, or of leadership onthe experience of motive fulfilment and the development of a volunteer role identity.Another limitation pertains to the fact that the present findings are based on cross-sectionaldata. Therefore, we cannot ensure that the implicit causal ordering between our predictor(motives, motive fulfilment and role identity) and criterion variables (affective commitment)is indeed the proposed one. To establish clarity concerning the suggested causalrelationships, studies with a longitudinal design are needed. A further limitation may be seenin our concentration on hospice volunteers, raising concerns regarding the generalisability ofthe current results vis-à-vis other types of volunteers. Future studies may therefore seek toconsider other volunteers than hospice ones. The 40% response rate together with the highmean value in organisational commitment could reflect a trend of less committed volunteers


DOI: 10.1002/casp


not to participate in the survey. If so, this also limits the generalisability of the presentfindings. Finally, the use of the same rating scale for all study variables may have contrib-uted to common method variance. Hence, the observed relationships may be overestimated.

Being the first work that simultaneously tests the applicability of variables of thefunctional approach and the role identity theory on the prediction of volunteer commit-ment, our study admittedly leaves these and presumably some other questions open. Atthe same time, however, the paper at hand has made it obvious that regarding volunteercommitment variables at the experience stage of volunteering seem to matter most. So,rather than selecting the committed volunteers on the basis of their initial motives, it seemsmore promising to commit volunteers to the organisation by fulfilling personally relevantmotives and supporting the development of a volunteer role identity.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

For participation in our survey, we thank the heads as well as the volunteers of the hospicesin the Tyrol, Upper Austria and Vorarlberg. The research reported in the paper at hand wasfunded by the Jubiläumsfonds zur Förderung der Forschungs- und Lehraufgaben derWissenschaft of the Österreichische Nationalbank (OeNB).

The funding source neither had involvements in study design, data collection, data analysisand interpretation, nor was it involved in the writing of the article and its submission.

REFERENCES

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Allen, N. J., &Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organisation:An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 49, 252–276.

Bierhoff, H. W., Schülken, T. & Hoof, M. (2007). Skalen der Einstellungsstruktur ehrenamtlicherHelfer (SEEH). Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie, 6(1), 12–27.

Chacón, F., Vecina, M. L., & Dávila, M. C. (2007). The three-stage model of volunteers’ duration ofservice. Social Behaviour and Personality, 35(5), 627–642.

Callero, P., Howard, J. A., & Piliavin, J. A. (1987). Helping behaviour as role behaviour: Disclosingsocial structure and history in the analysis of prosocial action. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(3),247–256.

Charng, H., Pillavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1988). Role identity and reasoned action in theprediction of repeated behaviour. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 303–317.

Clary, E. G., Ridge, R. D., Stukas, A. A., Snyder, M., Copeland, J., Haugen, J.,…Miene, P. (1998).Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1516–1530.

Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1991). A functional analysis of altruism and prosocial behaviour:The case of volunteerism. In M. Clark (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology,12, (pp. 119–148.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical Implica-tions, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(5), 156–159.

Dávila, M. C. & Chacón, F. (2007). Prediction of longevity of volunteer service: A basic alternativeproposal. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10 (1), 115–121.

Dávila, M. C., Díaz-Morales, J. F., Pasquini, M., & Giannini, M. (2010). Organisationalcommitment in Spanish and Italian volunteers: A comparative study. Europe’s Journal ofPsychology, 2, p. 32–46.


DOI: 10.1002/casp


Davis, M. H., Hall, J. H., & Meyer, M. (2003). The first year: Influences on the satisfaction, involve-ment, and persistence of new community volunteers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29(2), 248–260.

Dawley, D. D., Stephens, R. D., & Stephens, D. B. (2005). Dimensionality of organisational commit-ment in volunteer workers: Chamber of commerce board members and role fulfilment. Journal ofVocational Behaviour, 67(3), 511–525.

Felfe, J., Schmook, R., Schyns, B., & Six, B. (2008). Does the form of employment make adifference? -Commitment of traditional, temporary, and self-employed workers. Journal ofVocational Behaviour, 72(1), 81–94.

Finkelstein, M. A. (2006). Dispositional predictors of organisational citizenship behaviour: Motives,motive fulfilment and role identity. Social Behaviour and Personality, 34(6), 603–616.

Finkelstein, M. A. (2008a). Volunteer satisfaction and volunteer action: A functional approach.Social Behaviour and Personality, 36(1), 9–18.

Finkelstein, M. A. (2008b). Predictors of volunteer time: The changing contributions of motivefulfilment and role identity. Social Behaviour and Personality, 36(10), 1353–1364.

Finkelstein, M. A. (2010). Individualism/Collectivism: Implications for the volunteer process. SocialBehaviour and Personality, 38(4), 445–452.

Finkelstein, M. A., & Brannick, M. T. (2007): Applying theories of institutional helping to informalvolunteering: motives, role identity and prosocial personality. Social Behaviour and Personality,35(1), 101–114.

Finkelstein, M. A., & Penner, L. A. (2004). Predicting organisational citizenship behaviour: Integratingthe functional and role identity approaches. Social Behaviour and Personality, 32(4), 383–398.

Finkelstein, M. A., Penner, L. A., & Brannick, M. T. (2005). Motive, role identity, and prosocial per-sonality as predictors of volunteer activity. Social Behaviour and Personality, 33(4), 403–418.

GHK (2010). Volunteering in the European Union. London: GHK, retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/pdf/doc1018_en.pdf. (accessed 05.03.2012).

Grube, J. A. & Piliavin, J. A. (2000). Role identity, organisational experiences, and volunteer perfor-mance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1108–1119.

Houle, B. J., Sagarin B. J., & Kaplan, M. F. (2005). A functional approach to volunteerism: Dovolunteer motives predict task preference? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27(4), 337–344.

Kil, M., Leffelsend, S. & Metz-Göckel, H. (2000). Zum Einsatz einer revidierten und erweitertenFassung des Job Diagnostic Survey im Dienstleistungs- und Verwaltungssektor. Zeitschrift fürArbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 44, 115–128.

Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, andconsequences of organisational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171–194.

Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment and motivation:A conceptual analysis and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 991–1007.

Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, andnormative commitment to the organisation: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, andconsequences. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 61, 20–52.

Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivations, longevity ofservice and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 68(4), 671–686.

Omoto, A. M. & Snyder, M. (2002). Considerations of community : The context and process ofvolunteerism. American Behavioural Scientist, 45(5), 846–867.

Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organisational influences on sustained volunteerism: Aninteractionist perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 447–467.

Piliavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1991). Giving blood: The development of an altruistic identity.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behaviour:Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 14.1–14.28.

Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and structural determinants of volunteer-ism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 771–785.

Preston, J. B. & Brown, W. A. (2004). Commitment and performance of nonprofit board members.Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 15(2), 221–238.


DOI: 10.1002/casp

http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/pdf/doc1018_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/pdf/doc1018_en.pdf


Schusterschitz, C., Geser, W., Nöhammer, E., & Stummer, H. (2011). Securely attached, stronglycommitted? On the influence of attachment orientations on organisational commitment. Zeitschriftfür Personalforschung, 25(4), 335–355.

Stephens, R. D., Dawley, D. D., & Stephens, D. B. (2004). Commitment on the board: A model ofvolunteer directors’ levels of organisational commitment and self-reported performance. Journalof Managerial Issues, 16, (4), 483–504.

Stukas, A. A., Daly, M., & Cowling, M. J. (2005). Volunteerism and social capital: A functionalapproach. Australian Journal on Volunteering, 10(2), 35–44.

Vandenberghe, C., Bentein, K., & Stinglhammer, F. (2004). Affective commitment to the organisa-tion, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behaviour,64, 47–71.

Van Dyne L., & Farmer, S. M. (2005). It’s who I am: Role identity and organisational citizenshipbehaviour of volunteers. In Turnipseed, D. L. (Ed.), Handbook of organisational citizenshipbehaviour. New York: Nova Science Publishers, (chapter 9, pp.181–207).

Van Vianen, A. E. M., Nijstad, B. A., & Voskuijl, O. F. (2008). A person-environment fit approachto volunteerism: Volunteer personality fit and culture fit as predictors of affective outcomes. Basicand Applied Social Psychology, 30, 153–166.

Van Vuuren, M., De Jong, M. D. T. & Seydel, E. R. (2008). Commitment with or without a stick ofpaid work: Comparison of paid and unpaid workers in a nonprofit organisation. European Journalof Work and Organisational Psychology, 17(3), 315–326.


DOI: 10.1002/casp

building a committed hospice volunteer workforce-do variables at the experience stage matter?

Documents