Difficult Volunteers and Resolution Techniques

CHAPTER_11_Volunteer_and_Staff_Relations.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >Difficult Volunteers and Resolution Techniques

CHAPTER 11

Volunteer and Staff Relations Nancy Macduff, MACE

Macduff/Bunt Associates

In Volunteers: The Organizational Behavior of Unpaid Workers (Pearce, 1993,p. 177), the author devotes a section of her book to the research data on the rela- tionship between volunteers and staff. In an early version of the book she refers to that relationship as “the dirty little secret of volunteerism.” The author of the chapter had the opportunity to read and comment on the draft of the book’s manuscript. I applauded her bravery in dramatically underscoring the seriousness of the issue of volunteer and staff relations. Regrettably, the editors of her book sanitized it to read: “The tension that can exist between volunteers and employee co-workers remains one of the unpleasant secrets of nonprofit organizations” (Pearce, 1993, p. 142). It is unfortunate that her original statement did not survive the editor’s pencil. It is likely that the relationship between volunteers and staff is more complex and critical than one might assume (Netting, O’Connor, Thomas, & Yancey, 2005).

The relationship between volunteers and staff has had the attention of both schol- ars and those who manage volunteer programs for many years. In 1988, Mausner reviewed practitioner literature reporting on the views of Marlene Wilson and Ivan Scheier, two noted practitioner writers, among others. Wilson and Scheier stated that ignoring the relationship of volunteers and staff would impact future volunteer engagement. Ignore the relationship and the organization runs the risk of dissatisfied volunteers abandoning traditional organizations forming new nonprofits or self-help groups and neighborhood associations (Wilson, 1981). Another study reported that more than 65% of staff reported conflicts with volunteers of a minor nature. They in- cluded such things as personality conflicts, volunteers not pulling their weight, a lack of communication, disagreement over how to handle situations, and negative atti- tudes toward volunteers by staff (Wandersman & Alderman, 1993, cited in Rogelberg et al., 2010).

Converse to such negative reports, a more recent study reported that 80% of em- ployees described volunteers as knowing what they are doing, being hard-working, open-minded, well-trained, friendly, and independent (Rogelberg et al., 2010).

255 The Volunteer Management Handbook : Leadership Strategies for Success, edited by Tracy D. Connors, John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2011. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ashford-ebooks/detail.action?docID=697552. Created from ashford-ebooks on 2022-05-04 10:35:37.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

This was in organizations using standard volunteer management processes and with a designated manager of volunteers.

No matter the study, writer, or results, there was the admonition to guard against poor volunteer-staff relations, with attendant advice to help everyone work happily together. There was even some discussion describing the character- istics of an effective volunteer-staff partnership, the symptoms of poor rela- tions, how to survey the relationship, or what to do to improve the situation (Mausner, 1988).

It is the relationship between volunteers and staff that can influence the success or failure of a program, fundraising event, changes in leadership, and the ability to make positive organizational changes. When people work together as teams, at all levels of an organization, agency, or program, efficient and effective services are delivered to clients, patrons, or members. Harmony is achieved not by accident but by attention to the needs of both sides of this vital equation. Nonprofit leaders can- not take for granted such harmony. The experience of both staff and volunteer im- pacts stress and morale, both of which impact the organization’s ability to deliver services (Rogelsberg et al., 2010).

Defining the Volunteers and Staff Team

A set or group of people who work together for a common goal is a team. Another type of team is those players forming one side in certain games and sports. In this context the team is a thing—a group, an association, an entity. Change the grammati- cal usage, however, and team becomes people’s willingness to act for the good of the group rather than their own self-interests.

In selecting members for a board of directors or advisory board, one issue consid- ered by nominating committees is a candidate’s ability to rise above the single issue to look at the big picture and thus the welfare of the entire organization. Sometimes vol- unteers are asked to set aside ways in which they have operated for years and move into a new mode. Those who do have subordinated what is good for them personally and put the organization’s needs first. The good of the team takes precedence. This same philosophy applies to the direct service volunteer who works with clients, mem- bers, patrons, or leads an event or function. Working with the paid staff in an equal partnership is essential. Volunteers and staff share involvement on an equal footing (Mausner, 1988).

The team is also used to describe transport or conveyance. The joint working rela- tionship between volunteers and paid staff in the Boy Scouts allows children to build their citizenship skills; in orchestras it brings music to the community; in hospice it provides skilled and sensitive support to the dying and their families; in libraries it fights censorship; and in humane societies it supports the work of caring for a com- munity’s unwanted and unloved animals. Volunteers and staff have the capacity to transport and carry over the cares and concerns of other people into creative solu- tions. “A team’s performance includes both individual results and what we call collec- tive work-products” (Katzenbach & Smith, 1993, p. 114). Those work products reflect the joint contributions of the members. The effective volunteer-staff team is greater than the participation of any one member.

256 Volunteer and Staff Relations

The Volunteer Management Handbook : Leadership Strategies for Success, edited by Tracy D. Connors, John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2011. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ashford-ebooks/detail.action?docID=697552. Created from ashford-ebooks on 2022-05-04 10:35:37.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Characteristics of the Effective Volunteer-Staff Team

The literature on volunteer and staff relations stresses the importance of two elements: the use of standard volunteer management resources and the presence of a desig- nated individual to manage the volunteer operation. One study showed overwhelm- ingly that when “volunteer management strategies” were employed, the better the relationship between paid staff and volunteers (Rogelberg et al., 2010). The greater the intentionality of managing the volunteer and staff team, the less intention to leave the organization, less stress, and more stability in the organization.

Utilizing practitioner literature and academic studies over time results in a consistent list of what constitutes the ideal volunteer and staff team. (Fisher & Cole, 1993; Macduff, 1996; Mausner, 1988; McCurley & Lynch, 2004; Rogelberg et al. 2010; Scheier, 2003; Wilson, 1976)

& Teams are a manageable size. “Virtually all effective teams we have met, read or heard about, or been mem-

bers of have ranged between 2 and 25 people. The majority of them have num- bered less than 10” (Katzenbach & Smith, 1993, p. 112). In most voluntary organizations, this means that the large group of 100C volunteers and 12 staff are in subgroups or teams. Those serving on the advisory board or board of directors are one team, the people who work every other Thursday in the organization’s office are another team, the committee that plans the annual fun-run fundraiser is yet another.

& People are appropriately selected to serve on a team. Putting together the right combination of volunteers and staff in terms of per-

sonality, skills, influence, communication styles, and ability to perform is impor- tant. The more time and care spent in selecting the right combinations for the team, the greater the chances of success. It is wise to acknowledge that the “shared vision” for a project or endeavor can be different between volunteers and staff based on such things as values, age, educational level, or socioeconomic group (Mausner, 1988).

& Team leaders are trained. Whether team leaders are unpaid volunteers or paid staff members, they de-

serve and should be required to receive training. Leaders who think they must do all the jobs or have little capacity to delegate make poor team leaders. Find a Tom Sawyer, someone who knows not only how to paint the fence but also knows how to get others to do it. This is someone who has the makings of a team leader, who must plan, delegate, and motivate.

& Teams are trained to carry out their tasks. The board of directors or advisory board is a team. They need training on

how to carry out their responsibilities and tasks. For example, they must under- stand the fundamental differences between governance and administration. Gov- ernance is the policy-making role of the board. Administration of the policy is the responsibility of the staff. Volunteers serving as school aides need to understand appropriate and inappropriate behavior in relationship to the children. The teacher (staff) and volunteer aide need to have an understanding of the same set of expected behaviors.

Characteristics of the Effective Volunteer-Staff Team 257

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

& Teams are the foundation of the organization. Voluntary organizations, whether or not they are staffed by paid personnel,

are founded on the notion of people working together for a common good. Such a foundation means everyone affiliated with the organization is in some way con- nected to everyone else. Working together effectively and efficiently is the foun- dation that builds and strengthens the organization or agency.

& Volunteers and staff are supported by administration. Managers and administrators of organizations need to understand the impor-

tance of their commitment to the working team—both volunteers and staff. Any program is enhanced through a formal policy statement that outlines the role of volunteers and explains the nature of the volunteer-staff relationship. It is evident that presence of standard volunteer management strategies improves the chance for harmonious volunteer and staff relations, which in turn leads to positive employee perceptions of experiences with volunteers (Rogelberg et al., 2010).

& Teams have goals and objectives. Effective volunteer-staff teams create a shared vision for their work. Usually,

they develop a plan with purposes, goals, objectives, and work plans to guide their efforts. “Effective teams develop strong commitment to a common approach, that is, to how they will work together to accomplish their purpose” (Fisher & Cole, 1993, p. 26). Trust cannot be ordained. It develops when people work to- gether successfully. Having a plan helps to build the mutuality of experience that builds trust over time. Two primary elements are essential to effective volunteer and staff relationships: trust and shared power (Mausner, 1988).

& Volunteers and staff trust and support one another. People come to trust each other when they have shared positive experien-

ces. A lack of trust creates imbalance between volunteers and staff (Mausner, 1988). In a voluntary organization, this means that everyone knows the purpose of the organization and the tasks at hand. Goals are developed by members of the team working together. Some orchestra boards of directors, for example, de- cide how much money is to be raised by a guild or association during their bud- get building process and do not consult with the volunteers whose responsibility it is to raise the money. This undermines trust and support among governance volunteers, fundraising volunteers, and the staff who must work with both.

& Communication between volunteers and staff is both vertical and horizontal. The common notion about communication deals with the sending and

receiving of messages. Communication is really about sending “meanings” (Wil- son, 1976). It is less a language process and more a people process. It involves the active and continuous use of such things as active listening, providing feed- back, telephone trees, regular e-mails or texts. The messages aim at clarifying perceptions; reading body language; and noticing symbols that communicate meaning. It travels in all directions in the organizational structure—up, down and horizontally. Leadership volunteers communicate with direct-service volun- teers. Staff communicates with volunteers all the time. Hierarchical blocks to communication are bridged when volunteers and staff work together effec- tively. It is also true that working together is best facilitated by good communication.

258 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

& The organizational structure promotes communication between volunteers and staff.

Volunteers and staff need policies, procedures, and structures that permit and encourage them to communicate. A group of volunteers who raised a great deal of money for an organization and led educational programs had a small office (read closet) in the administrative offices of a large nonprofit group. In a manage- ment shuffle, the new executive director saw no reason why these women (the group was largely female) could not work out of their homes. The small office was then available for storage. Volunteers who could once walk down the hall and talk with paid staff colleagues about their plans and activities were now forced to deal with the voice and e-mail structure. Appointments were needed to share information. This is an example of the organization creating roadblocks to effective communication.

& The work of volunteers and staff has real responsibility. Millions of volunteers stuff envelopes each year for organizations, agencies,

and programs. Seems like an unimportant job except that it provides information, education, and news to constituents, clients, or members. Most volunteers know this and willingly fold and stuff for hours because it is a real job with real responsi- bility. All jobs need to be described clearly as to how it aids in accomplishing the mission of the organization.

& Volunteers and staff have fun while accomplishing their tasks. Harmonious relationships between volunteers and staff are readily apparent

in the amount of fun exhibited during planning meetings, at activities, or during evaluation sessions. A group of volunteers and staff recruiting parents to serve as leaders of youth clubs heard many people say no before someone would agree to serve. A volunteer came to a meeting and said, “I think I have heard the worst excuse yet for not volunteering. A woman told me yesterday she couldn’t be a leader of her son’s club because she ironed.” This brought laughter all around and generated other “best excuse” stories. Someone produced a notebook and the “funny excuses” were recorded. The recording of best excuses was institution- alized by the group and it went on for years. New members, volunteers, and staff were indoctrinated with readings from the book by returning members. The hu- mor and affection exhibited by the group built a sense of fun and reinforced the concept of mutual responsibility. Never underestimate the impact of fun on vol- unteers and/or staff.

& There is recognition for the contributions of volunteers and staff. Volunteers publicly recognize the work of staff. Staff publicly acknowledges

the efforts of volunteers. There are both formal and informal expressions of appreciation for the work accomplished by groups. Management or administra- tion encourages this and organizes ways to make it easy for the recognition to occur. This effort at recognition is consistent, public, and visible.

& Volunteers and staff celebrate their successes. Celebrations with food, frivolity, and friendship are a hallmark of effective

volunteer and staff relationships. These activities are often spontaneous and in- expensive. It can be as simple as a visit to a local coffee shop or pizza parlor. They are encouraged by the leadership of the organization and might often be led by them. Budgets in nonprofit organizations are planned to pay for

Characteristics of the Effective Volunteer-Staff Team 259

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

celebratory events to herald the effectiveness of the volunteers and staff who work together to achieve the mission of the organization.

& The entire organization sees itself as portioning and encouraging the health of volunteer and staff relationships.

Building effective volunteer and staff relationships works only when every- one in the organization sees him or herself as part of a volunteer-staff partnership and actively promotes such relationships.

Managing Different Types of Volunteer-Staff Teams

There are three different types of teams: volunteer-staff teams that make or do things, teams that run things, and teams that recommend things. The next descriptions give some idea of how they might be managed effectively.

Volunteer-Staff Teams that Make or Do Things

These groups provide the most direct service—stuff envelopes, visit shut-ins, deliver library books, walk dogs, take blood pressure, lead Girl Scout or 4-H clubs, teach nu- trition, weigh rice into one-pound sacks, and make soup for the homeless. The work these teams do has no end date because their activities are ongoing. Managers need to observe and assess these types of teams on a continuing basis. By measuring produc- tivity and performance on a regular basis, alterations are made in how work groups are organized; the training they receive; and client, member, or patron responses. Feedback must be quick, clear, concise, and continual.

Volunteer-Staff Teams that Run Things

The board of directors, an advisory committee, or a group overseeing some functional activity of the organization or agency is a team that is in effect governing. The key here is to help the team avoid being like the make- or do-things groups described above. If the volunteers and staff want to organize as a team, they must have goals and objectives separate from those encompassed in the mission of the organization.

Boards of directors, for example, often focus their planning on accomplishing the mission of the organization, to the exclusion of the development of their own skills as governance volunteers. The board needs separate and distinct goals and objectives, apart from the organizational goals and objectives. These might include such things as communication skill training, risk management presentations, or skills to manage conflict.

Governance groups, boards of directors, or advisory groups frequently have teams within the larger group. Standing or ad hoc committees make up smaller teams, but they are in no way the only small team within the larger group. As executive direc- tor of a nonprofit organization for almost 15 years, the author developed a team rela- tionship with five succeeding presidents of the board, and in several cases the team was enlarged to include other officers. The volunteer and staff pairing allowed for creativity in problem solving, leadership development of others, program innovation, policy direction, and organizational change. These small teams did not operate to

260 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

exclude others; rather they operated to develop the plans and strategies to enable other volunteers and staff to perform as effectively as possible.

Volunteer-Staff Teams that Recommend Things

Nonprofit and voluntary groups rely heavily on task forces, advisory panels, and proj- ect groups. These are groups with a short time period to accomplish their tasks or solve a problem. A special team dissolves after making recommendations for a pro- gram. Initially, this is a task force type of group—a group that must get off to a fast start and meet deadlines for recommendations or activities.

The key component of building teams that recommend is an early and clear role definition and the opportunity for volunteers and staff to create their own goals and objectives. The relationship between volunteers and staff can be enhanced if members are selected carefully. This is often the time to put together individuals, volunteers, and paid staff, and have a track record of working effectively in a group. It is also important to include people who will ensure that the recommendations are carried out.

Building effective volunteer-staff teams involves more than implementing training programs on communication. It includes knowing the types of teams that can be formed, what skills its members need, how to match tasks with skills and interpersonal style, and how to address the challenges faced by the teams.

A band that played an open-air concert at a county fair had several members who sang, played, and worked the front of the stage. Additional musicians behind them served in a more supportive role. The obvious harmony of this team came from their agreement about programming, their communication while on-stage, the fun they had with each other, and their willingness to listen to all members, those in front and those further back, in order to enhance the concert. This musical team was a delight to hear. “Usually when this occurs it is that the unique and separate talents of all those in- volved were somehow blended into a whole that was greater than all of its parts” (Wilson, 1976, p. 181). It is also the ideal to which all volunteer and staff teams should subscribe.

Recognizing the Symptoms of Poor Volunteer-Staff Relationships

In some organizations there is a lack of communication that influences the very sur- vival of the institution. Volunteers and staff are locked in adversarial roles detrimental to the health of the entire organization (Rogelberg et al., 2010). This usually begins gradually and at first is noticed by few staff or volunteers. Symptoms include the in- creasing use of “us and them” language. Volunteer managers hear things like, “They always do things like this to us.” “We would never do something like that to them.” There is uncertainty among volunteers and staff about roles and responsibilities. Indi- viduals are often uncooperative about working on joint projects. They do not commu- nicate directly, but go around each other to get questions answered and problems solved. There is a risk volunteers will leave and paid staff resign (McElroy, Morrow, & Rude, 2001, p. 424, cited in Rogelberg et al., 2010).

Volunteers and staff often carve out territory and guard it tenaciously (McNair, 1981, p. 3, cited in Mausner, 1988). For example, programs become the sole property

Recognizing the Symptoms of Poor Volunteer-Staff Relationships 261

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

of staff, volunteers stake out a fundraising event and won’t entertain suggestions from staff, or board members go into secret meetings to establish budgets and do not con- sult direct service volunteers or paid staff.

When volunteers and staff have poor relations there is little information sharing. In territorial environments information is power. “Withhold information and you are in control” is the philosophy. A large city orchestra had to cancel its concert season due to a severe money shortage. Leaders asked season ticketholders to donate the pur- chased tickets and not to request refunds. Several months after this dramatic action the president of the volunteer association knew little about any plans to improve the financial situation, despite the fact that the association would be expected to raise sev- eral hundred thousands of dollars to help balance the budget.

Withholding of information is a way for the board and senior staff to demonstrate their ownership of the budget. It is also a flashing road sign warning that the relation- ship between volunteers and staff is not healthy. How can management and voluntary leaders determine the current state of volunteer-staff relations and then develop strat- egies to improve the staff-volunteer work environment to increase productivity? The first step is to conduct an audit of current volunteer-staff relations, and the second is to implement appropriate steps or strategies to improve the relationship between the two groups.

Volunteer-Staff Climate Audit

The volunteer-staff climate audit (see Exhibit 11.1) assesses the current state of volun- teer-staff relations and provides a way to monitor changes in the working environ- ment. It is distributed to randomly selected members of staff, volunteers, clients/ patrons/members, and perhaps people outside the organizational family who regu- larly interact with staff and/or volunteers (if an outsiders’ perspective is needed).

The process begins with the organization of an audit committee, which is led by a volunteer-staff team. Members include volunteers from all areas of the organization and representatives of staff (including people who do paid-staff support work). The person who coordinates or manages volunteers is a likely candidate to provide staff support to this committee. The audit committee needs the support of management and administration with a budget and the resources to carry out its assignment. The commitment of leaders in the organization to an assessment of volunteer-staff rela- tions will be judged not just by words but by the actions taken to support the efforts designed by the audit committee. The audit committee should follow all the recom- mendations for effective teams listed later in this chapter. Their work begins with a purpose statement and a list of goals and objectives that are measurable, achievable, demanding, flexible, and observable.

A random sample of volunteers, staff, and clients should be surveyed, with each group receiving one-third of the questionnaires. For example, if you want to survey 300 people, each group is sent one-third of the questionnaires. If you add outsiders to the group, they receive half the number distributed to the three main internal groups. In the sample of 300, only 50 outsiders would receive questionnaires. The number distributed depends on the size of the organization, how many volunteers it uses, how long it will take to compile the results, and the cooperation expected from those completing the form.

262 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

The audit can be distributed electronically with a program such as Survey- Monkey, Google Apps, or via regular mail. Whether electronic or snail mail the total survey includes: a cover letter explaining the purpose of the activity, who is conducting the survey, how confidentiality is maintained, when the results are available, and how a respondent can see the results. If the survey is mailed, it should include a stamped return envelope.

EXHIBIT 11.1 Volunteer-Staff Climate Audit

Directions: Read each situation and decide how frequently it occurs: Usually, or Sometimes, or Rarely. Circle the appropriate number. Try to respond to each situation.

Situation Usually Sometimes Rarely

1. “They never” or “we always” are words heard when staff members refer to volunteers.

1 2 3

2. Volunteers ask for credits or measures of their worth. Examples: paid parking, discounts mileage allowance, etc.

1 2 3

3. Volunteers and staff both use such words as “together, we, our project” (meaning staff and volunteers), etc.

3 2 1

4. Reports on volunteer activities during management meetings come from other staff, not just the person responsible for volunteer coordination.

3 2 1

5. Volunteers are visible on board of directors or advisory board committees.

3 2 1

6. Decisions affecting volunteers are made by staff without consulting the volunteers.

1 2 3

7. Decisions affecting staff are made by volunteers without consulting the staff.

1 2 3

8. Volunteers say “thank you” to staff publicly. 3 2 1 9. Staff treats volunteers who serve on the board of

directors or advisory board with more respect than other volunteers.

1 2 3

10. Projects are planned collaboratively between staff and volunteers.

3 2 1

11. Volunteers focus on the past rather than on future possibilities.

1 2 3

12. Volunteers jump appropriate organizational structure lines to get answers to their questions from staff.

1 2 3

13. Staff are too busy to explain the rules of the game to volunteers.

1 2 3

14. The leaders of the organization (staff and/or volunteers) are visible at volunteer events.

3 2 1

15. Volunteers are asked to give input and assistance in most organizational projects, not just fundraising.

3 2 1

16. Staff says “thank you” to volunteers publicly. 3 2 1 17. “They never” or “we always” are words heard when

referring to staff. 1 2 3

TOTAL

Recognizing the Symptoms of Poor Volunteer-Staff Relationships 263

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Scoring: Add the numbers vertically in each column. If there are situations for which you did not check any boxes, add 2 points for each situation. Then add the three subtotals for your grand total. 38 to 51 means you have excellent volunteer-staff relations (but don’t let up); 28 to 37 means you are doing some things right but could use tuning up in some sections (the situations can help you identify those areas); 17 to 36 means that you have a serious problem and need to take action immediately. Grand total_____________________________

Please provide the following demographic data to help increase the validity of this research:

Male_________Female_________I am a volunteer_________Paid staff_________

I have volunteered for: ______Yrs ______Months ________Weeks ____Hrs.

My age range: 14–25_____

26–35_____ 36–45 _____ 46–55 _____ 56–65 _____ 66C _____

The audit committee tabulates the responses and prepares a statistical report for later deliberation. The first step in the deliberation is to have the person who was responsi- ble for tabulation explain or clarify statistics without offering opinions. Then, the group discusses conclusions they can infer or draw from the statistics provided. Last are recommendations based on the conclusions of the group. The presence of a neu- tral third party familiar with statistical analysis might help the deliberations.

The final report is a copy of the statistics, the conclusions, and the recommenda- tions. The co-chairpersons are responsible for delivering written copies of the report to those in leadership positions. They can also present an oral report to interested groups within the organization, like at a meeting of volunteers or a regular paid staff meeting. The results of the audit are shared with the leadership of the organization, volunteer leaders, and the staff management team.

People participating in the audit may want to see the results. A decision on the wider distribution of the results of the audit is made jointly by the members of the organizational leadership team and the audit committee.

Why Assess Volunteer-Staff Relationships?

A manager of volunteers thought she had a serious problem with volunteer and staff relations. A study was conducted to evaluate the attitudes of volunteers and paid staff toward each other as employer and volunteer (Macduff, 1991). The result of the vol- unteer-staff attitude survey questionnaire was that “paid staff and volunteers generally have positive attitudes toward one another’s performance” (Macduff, 1991, p. 355). The use of a quantifiable measure of attitudes of staff and volunteers provided infor- mation for a volunteer advisory committee and allowed the director of volunteers to enhance what was essentially a healthy situation.

There were some areas that needed improvement. She discovered, for example, that turnover was only a problem among volunteers assigned to work with an un- trained (and sometimes unresponsive) supervisor. This supervisor was unsure about

264 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

volunteer performance standards (Macduff, 1991) for jobs. There are remedies for this.

An experienced and capable volunteer manager can misread cues on the state of volunteer and staff relationships. It is easy to do. The use of the volunteer-staff climate audit is a method to reduce overreaction, identify specific areas of concern, and de- velop a plan to improve the relationships throughout the organization.

Causes of Poor Volunteer-Staff Relationships

Pearce (1993) suggests three causes for the negative tension that can exist between volunteers and staff: professional status, profiting from charity, and management systems. Paid staff have a higher status than volunteers. The status is greater in propor- tion to the degree of specialized training for the occupation. The tension caused by the difference in status was reduced in several of the studies she reviewed when vol- unteers were seen as officeholders and there was “a careful deference on the part of paid [staff] members” (Pearce, 1993, p. 144).

The notion of profiting from charity is twofold. First is the idea that once there are employees in an organization, you have the volunteers and staff working at cross pur- poses. The volunteers are raising money to fund worthwhile causes, while employees’ goals are related to good wages and benefits. Secondarily, volunteers are perceived by some employees as being a direct threat to their livelihood. For example, in the mid- 1970s New York City had a budget crisis and 40,000 city jobs were lost. The mayor’s solution was to enlarge the volunteer contingent. Despite the mayor’s pledge that no department would replace employees with volunteers, some departments did just that. “Incidents like these can do little to reassure public employees that volunteers pose no threat to their livelihood” (Brudney, 1990, p. 33). Pearce’s review of the research backs up the notion that some hostility between volunteers and staff can be traced to job threat. She found that “those employees who were most hostile to volunteers were the ones most threatened by them” (Pearce, 1993, p. 145).

The third cause of tension between volunteers and staff falls in the lap of manage- ment systems. It appears that blurring the lines between volunteers and staff is a way to reduce the potential damage from hostility. This creates partnerships and reciproc- ity (McNair 1981, cited in Mausner, 1988). This is especially true when paid staff leave their positions only to return to the organization or agency as volunteers. It is as if neither volunteer nor employee see the work as “just a job” but rather as a calling (Pearce, 1993).

Susan Ellis, in From the Top Down (1986) discusses the refusal of an employee to accept an assigned volunteer as a symptom of poor relations. “As long as salaried staff are given the choice or act as though they have the choice of accepting volunteers as co-workers, top administration is sending messages about volunteers” (p. 63). This is a management problem. Sometimes the refusal to work with volunteers is based on inaccurate stereotypes. No one wants to work with a person who is in- competent, paid or unpaid. Ellis contends that a well-managed volunteer program recruiting the right people for the right jobs should be an expectation of management. Staff are more encouraged to see volunteers as co-workers when the person has been screened and trained properly.

Causes of Poor Volunteer-Staff Relationships 265

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Pearce concludes a comments section on volunteer and staff relations by saying that there is a better chance of improved relations “when volunteers become more employee-like” (Pearce, 1993, p. 178). This happens when the selection, orientation, training, and supervision of volunteers is done using standards similar to those used for staff. Pearce also suggests that volunteer and staff relationships are an area requir- ing more research. To truly understand the underlying causes of the tension between volunteers and staff, more volunteer managers and administrations must collect quan- tifiable data.

Despite the lack of abundant hard evidence on the causes of tension, it seems clear that standard volunteer management strategies can help reduce tension. Build- ing teams of volunteers and staff as coworkers seems like a successful strategy to enhancing communication and thus effectiveness (Rogelberg et al., 2010).

Sequential Process to Build the Volunteer-Staff Team

Volunteers and staff who work together to achieve the mission of the organization are a team. The committee that plans a fundraising event, the executive committee of the board of directors, individuals who work with staff to deliver direct service to clients, members or patrons, and those who provide support services are all part of the volun- teer staff team. All the teams working together make up the organizational team. To build an effective and efficient volunteer team requires a sequential process.

Attention to each of these steps can enhance the opportunity for volunteers and staff to work together more effectively.

1. Begin the process of building effective relationships by allowing members of work teams to develop their own goals and objectives. People who have a hand in defining the outcomes are generally more committed to seeing that they are achieved. A fundraising team can establish a time line and target financial goals or benchmarks for measuring success. The goals belong to the team and are ar- rived at by volunteers and staff working together.

Once a work team of volunteers and staff has determined goals and objec- tives they are written and distributed to all members, thus becoming tools to eval- uate progress. With a board this would be an annual strategic plan. Each member of the volunteer-staff team makes a personal commitment to the goals by agreeing to take some responsibility for their completion.

2. Internal role expectations are those written and unwritten rules that describe the appropriate behavior of both volunteers and staff. For example, many boards and committees have an established internal expectation that members may have three excused absences from regularly called meetings. After the third absence their membership in the group is called into question. Some groups enforce this rule, others do not. By clarifying the role expectations, ambiguity is reduced and each half of the equation—volunteer and staff—knows what is expected.

It is also important to address the issue of multiple expectations and possible overload. For example, the paid secretary to an executive director was asked to represent support staff on a planning committee. Her job was to participate in committee deliberations, not to take notes and type up the minutes. That role

266 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

had to be clarified for her. She did volunteer to do much of the note-taking for the group. The chair of the committee was careful to ask if it was too much or if she was feeling that the group expected her to do this. As time passed other members of the team picked up the message and both volunteers and staff agreed to share secretarial work. This is also an example of what could have become role conflict being resolved through effective communication.

Another type of role conflict happens when board members are also direct service volunteers. As board members they discuss governance issues, while as direct service volunteers they are concerned with issues that directly affect clients or members. “As association members, they are ‘owners’ of the organization; as ‘direct service volunteers’ they are workers obligated to perform in accordance with directives and subject to performance surveillance” (Pearce, 1993, p. 178). Role confusion can result if a volunteer or staff also receives the services of the organization or agency. Clarity and conscious attention to the roles for volunteers and staff keep lines of demarcation clear. This means position descriptions for everyone.

3. External role expectations are another area of concern for volunteer managers, vol- unteers, and staff. Each group needs to know with whom it is appropriate to share their concerns, praise, suggestions, or turmoil. Are they only allowed to talk to an immediate supervisor? That is an unrealistic expectation. It is better to help both volunteers and staff understand the importance of knowing the limits and scope of their own influence and how using it will affect the team with which they work. A persistent problem for nonprofit organizations is when one spouse is a direct-ser- vice volunteer and the other serves on the board. The board spouse frequently brings administrative concerns to meetings dealing with governance issues. Simi- larly, the direct-service spouse may share information on new policy directions with friends among the volunteers when no firm decisions have yet been made. Helping people deal with their loyalties and appropriate avenues of communica- tion is important to positive relationship between volunteers and staff.

4. Communication between volunteers and staff is critical. Are two newsletters pro- duced to keep people informed about the organization—one for staff and a differ- ent one for volunteers? Could they be folded into one? The volunteer manager can map the flow and frequency of communication among volunteers and staff. This helps identify areas of weakness. It is also critical that all volunteers and staff be participants in the information flow, which should cross status and authority lines.

5. Decisions made by effective work teams are determined uniformly. The group needs to decide on a process for decision making. Leaders should not assume that everyone wishes to use a consensus model. Discuss alternatives and let the group make a con- scious decision. The discussion includes those involved in the process of making de- cisions. Many people might be consulted, but only a few might make the final decision. There are two other important issues to address before beginning work on a project: 1) the problem-solving techniques to be used by the group is discussed and agreed to, and 2) the way conflict is to be managed is determined. If volunteers and staff have been working together on a team for years, this information needs to be reviewed annually whether or not there are new members.

6. Leaders of volunteers and staff must be skilled. This means appropriate training must be provided to staff who supervise volunteers and to volunteers who

Sequential Process to Build the Volunteer-Staff Team 267

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

supervise other volunteers. It is not optional. Leaders need skills as facilitators, meeting managers, problem solvers, and conflict resolvers. Volunteers and staff work harmoniously when they are led by people with good “people” skills.

7. All groups have norms, whether or not they acknowledge them. These are the unwritten rules that guide organizational and personal behavior. The best norms are those that encourage positive relationships between volunteers and staff. For example, the way volunteers and staff greet newcomers is often an indication of the state of volunteer-staff relationships. There are rarely policies about greetings, but they can immediately tell volunteers and staff if a team spirit exists in a group. For instance, volunteers arrive at a meeting and find that the attendees are all paid staff. No one greets them or helps them find seats. A paid staff person attends a meeting of all volunteers. The staff person is not included in the discussion or consulted about decisions that must be carried out by other staff members. Inclu- sion or exclusion is the basis of many organizational norms. If the organization runs with staff in-groups or volunteer in-groups, others can be excluded, and that does not build effective volunteer-staff teams.

Tips to Enhance Volunteer-Staff Relations

Tips to enhance volunteer-staff relations are presented next.

& The position of the volunteer manager is challenging, time consuming, and vital. Coordinating volunteer programs is a complex professional job that requires a variety of skills and strategies. Most programs are in hot competition with other organizations for qualified volunteers. Recruiting and retaining volunteers is a key factor in overall organizational success. It is also a major challenge requiring the attention of a professionally trained manager of volunteers. Building a strong vol- unteer-staff team means delegating tasks and responsibilities. An effective volun- teer manager learns to delegate to others because it results in efficiency, productivity, and highly motivated people.

& Training on team building enhances volunteer-staff relations. Knowledge of team- building strategies helps both volunteers and staff manage more effectively. Send- ing volunteers and staff together to a team-building workshop sends a clear mes- sage about the goals of the organization.

& Volunteers find alternative lines of communication in an organization when they do not get their questions answered. Staff and volunteers in leadership roles need to monitor constantly the types, forms, and frequency of communication to mem- bers of the work team. Make use of all social media applications: blogs, wiki, Twitter, instant messaging, or e-mail.

& Open, honest evaluation of tasks and positions within the organization, both vol- unteer and staff, is done on a regular schedule. Volunteers need to evaluate their own efforts and have opportunities to assess staff who work directly with them. This is a joint effort, not a session where staff outlines a list of transgressions. Vol- unteers can improve only if they identify and plan to correct weaker elements of their performance. Similarly, when a staff member works on an event or program, the evaluation process is done jointly.

268 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

& Volunteers and staff are evaluated on supervision and management competen- cies. The organization’s performance appraisal form or process includes an area that assesses staff ability to work effectively with volunteers. If a staff member does not work with volunteers, that portion of the performance appraisal is marked “Not Applicable.” If management does not take volunteer-staff team work seriously enough to evaluate staff on a regular basis, why should the staff? Similarly, volunteers in leadership roles are evaluated on how they might enhance their skills. The person conducting the assessment for the volunteer is the paid staff or volunteer to whom they report. For example, the president of the board of directors and the chief executive of an agency meet annually to discuss their respective performances as it relates to the management of volunteers and staff, and both fill out a standardized management competen- cies form, which asks for self-evaluation. During the performance review meeting they share their respective forms and make adjustments based on the other’s observations of their work. This is not part of the chief executive’s formal evaluation.

& Clear communication means: & Straight talk from both volunteers and staff & Active listening by volunteers and staff & Emphasis on building a team-work environment & Volunteer work areas in close proximity to staff & Pay volunteers by means of a constant flow of information & Staff working continuously with volunteer leadership to understand the larger

needs and goals of the organization & “Thank yous” coming often to volunteers, publicly, even when volunteers con-

tributed only part of the total job & Monitor how often volunteers are included in planning for new projects. For

example, a director of volunteers in a large urban setting uses as one measure of volunteer-staff relations how consistently the volunteers are invited to participate in discussions of service goals or projects. This means everything from determin- ing how to stuff envelopes to meeting with the director of development at a prob- lem-solving session on reaching a targeted group for contributions. This volunteer manager knows things are okay if requests increase for the special expertise that volunteers bring to the team.

& The volunteer coordinator is seen by both volunteers and staff as fulfilling a key role. One important responsibility for that person is to communicate the views of volunteers to the paid staff and explain the roles and responsibilities of paid staff to the volunteers.

& Mutually define roles and responsibilities. & Paid staff and volunteer relations are often improved through training and orienta-

tion that is specifically about working in a nonprofit organization. The training session might focus on the concept of paid staff and volunteers working to reduce barriers that might exist between the two groups.

& Volunteers can sometimes see themselves as operating to the side, away from the organization. A team approach to volunteer-staff relations means that everyone works together to further the mission. Decisions that affect the volunteers and the service they deliver or the money they raise are arrived at jointly with

Tips to Enhance Volunteer-Staff Relations 269

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

paid staff. Volunteers consult staff as they make decisions about how they will carry out an event or activity.

& Some staff members, representing the entire staff, may be on the volunteer boards; some direct service volunteers, representing all direct service volunteers, may be on the board of directors or the advisory committee. Paid and unpaid staff also make good contributing members of management committees.

Conclusion

Every volunteer program or nonprofit organization faces unique problems and chal- lenges in building an effective team, but efforts to build such a team have a practical, powerful payoff. Teams can deliver results efficiently and effectively when their mem- bers truly work together. The power of the team is in creating the kind of environment that enables individuals and organizations to perform at their peak.

Farmer Jones and Farmer Chin owned two dray horses they used to haul produce wagons to market. They decided to sell their horses. Farmer Alvarado decided to buy the two horses, hook them up to a larger wagon and carry more produce to market. The horses were raised differently; the food they ate, how they were disciplined, the shelter they had from the weather, the love and affection from their owners, and the weight of their wagons were all different. The farmer and the horses had to develop the means to work together. By pulling together they were able to accomplish the mission of getting more produce to market for Farmer Alvarado (E. Macduff, personal communication, 1965). These horses represent the choices volunteers and staff face. They can pull the organizational wagon to market, reaping many rewards, or pull it into kindling.

References

Brudney, J. (1990). Fostering volunteers programs in the public sector. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp. 244.

Ellis, S. (1986). From the top down: The executive role in volunteer program success. Philadelphia, PA: Energize Associates.

Fisher, J. C., & Cole, K. M. (1993). Leadership and management of volunteer pro- grams. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993, March–April). The discipline of teams. Har- vard Business Review. Volume 71, 111–120.

Macduff, N. (1991). Attitudes of volunteers and paid staff on job performance. Presented at the 1991 meeting of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA), Chicago, IL.

Macduff, N. (1996). Volunteer recruitment and retention. Walla Walla, WA: MBA Publishing.

Mausner, C. (1988, Summer). The underlying dynamics of staff-volunteer relation- ships. Journal of Volunteer Administration, 6 (4), 1–19.

McCurley, S., & Lynch, R. (2004). Volunteer management: Mobilizing all the resources of the community. Toronto, Canada: Heritage Arts, Downers Grove, IL.

270 Volunteer and Staff Relations

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

McNair, R. H. (1981). Citizen participation as balanced exchange: An analysis and strategy. Journal of the Community Development Society, 12 (1), 1–19.

Netting, F. E, O’Connor, M. K., Thomas, M. L., & Yancey, G. (2005). Mixing and phas- ing of roles among volunteers, staff, and participants in faith-based programs. Nonprofit and Volunteer Sector Quarterly, 34 (2), 179–205.

Pearce, J. (1993). Volunteers: The organizational behavior of unpaid workers. London, UK: Routledge.

Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., Conway, J. M., Goh, A., Currie, L., & McFarland, B. (2010, Summer). Employee experiences with volunteers: Assessment, descriptions, ante- cedents, and outcomes. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20 (4), 423–444.

Scheier, I. (2003). Building staff/volunteer relations. Philadelphia, PA: Energize, Inc. Wandersman, A., & Alderman, J. (1993). Incentives, costs, barriers for volunteers:

A staff perspective on volunteers in one state” Review of Public Personnel Administration, 13 (1), p. 67–76.

Wilson, M. (1976). The effective management of volunteer programs. Boulder, CO: Management Associates.

Wilson, M. (1981, Spring). Reversing the resistance of staff to volunteers. Voluntary Action Leadership, 21.

References 271

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .