Do the Ends Justify the Means? The Relative Focus on Overhead Versus Outcomes in Charitable Fundraising

17Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Prospective donors are often sensitive to the amount of overhead in charitable fundraising. The present studies examine how differences in one’s personal commitment to a cause moderate the relative focus on overhead versus outcomes in charitable fundraising. Three experiments find that donors who are more committed to the cause are, in fact, accepting of higher levels of overhead. Experiment 1 demonstrates that people are willing to accept a higher level of overhead for causes that are more (vs. less) important to them. Experiment 2 provides process evidence by showing that perceptions of cause importance generally influence how people evaluate the intentions behind charitable fundraising versus its outcomes. Experiment 3 directly manipulates cause importance and demonstrates a downstream effect on actual donations. Together, these studies suggest a more general framework whereby differences in personal commitment change the relative focus on the intentions behind pro-social behavior versus the outcomes achieved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Newman, G. E., Shniderman, A., Cain, D. M., & Sevel, K. (2019). Do the Ends Justify the Means? The Relative Focus on Overhead Versus Outcomes in Charitable Fundraising. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(1), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764018794903

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free