A micro-economic perspective on manager selection in nonprofit organizations
AbstractThis paper recognizes that individuals working in the nonprofit sector can have different motives and investigates which type of manager nonprofit organizations should best employ. It first considers a situation in which the manager is allowed to attract only one employee and later extends the analysis to a situation in which up to three employees can be employed. Analyses mark the importance of a strong commitment to the organization's mission and caution for both a strong self-interest and a strong devotion to the well-being of the clients. Managers with a moderate interest in their own objectives can nevertheless be valuable to the organization. The paper also marks why managers should avoid similar-to-me biases in the selection process and investigates the effects of an increased work pressure on the behavior of the managers and on the attainment of the organizational goals.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal European Journal of Operational Research.
Volume (Year): 192 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor
Economics Simulation Nonprofit Combinatorial optimization;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Handy, Femida & Katz, Eliakim, 1998. "The Wage Differential between Nonprofit Institutions and Corporations: Getting More by Paying Less?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 246-261, June.
- Ortmann, Andreas & Squire, Richard, 2000. "A game-theoretic explanation of the administrative lattice in institutions of higher learning," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 377-391, November.
- Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1995.
"A Survey of Corporate Governance,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1741, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Lucian Arye Bebchuk & Jesse M. Fried, 2003.
"Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem,"
NBER Working Papers
9813, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Pauly, Mark V, 1987. "Nonprofit Firms in Medical Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 257-62, May.
- Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Fried, Jesse M., 2003. "Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics qt81q3136r, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
- Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
- Mooney, Gavin & Ryan, Mandy, 1993. "Agency in health care: Getting beyond first principles," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 125-135, July.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.