PD
atua86
Faith-Based_Organizations_Enga.pdf
R U N VER .S�TY
Faith-Based Organi,m1tions Engaged nn Communi1ty iEconomfic Devdopm€oi
DANIELLE DAVIS
A dissertation submitted to the faculty of Point Paik Univei5ity in partiai fuifillment of the requirements for the deg,e&
John H. Pearson, Ph.D. Provost
of Doctor of Philosophy in Community Engagement
Pittsburgh, PA
January 10, 2020
Approved by:
.D., Chair
�2_?:2;&;_ Dennis Frketich, Ed .. D
.aw��� Carol Wdoten, Ed.O.
@ 2020 Danielle R. Davis
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Running Head: FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Faith-Based Organizations Engaged in Community Economic Development
Danielle Davis
Point Park University
Prepared and Submitted in Partial Completion of the
PhD in Community Engagement to:
Patrick M. Mulvihill, Ed. D - Chair
Dennis D. Frketich, Ed. D
Carol C. Wooten, Ed. D
January 10, 2020
ProQuest Number:
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Published by ProQuest LLC (
ProQuest
). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All Rights Reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
28157404
28157404
2020
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Abstract
This single case study illuminates experiences, perceptions, and challenges that faith-based
organizations (FBOs) face when engaged in community economic development (CED) activities.
The findings provide insight into the nature of faith-based practitioners within various
governance structures and their ability to maintain the organizational development required to
execute strategies efficiently and effectively. The researcher studied and interpreted this
phenomenon in its natural settings (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005) to understand why there appears to
be a shortage in the capacity of FBOs to engage in CED. Three central questions guide this
study: 1) What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate in order to
effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED? 2) What perceived management challenges
do FBOs face related to the implementation of programs and services designed to contribute to
the sustainability of CED? 3) What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to
religiosity while engaged or attempting to engage in CED? The results identified sustainable
models and best practices. Utilizing an Empowerment theory, the study examined a framework
by which faith-based practitioners and organizations may be empowered to navigate the trends
and environmental influences (Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011) that determines community
economic impact. Data were collected through an organizational self-assessment and reflection
tool, demographic survey, and semi-structured interviews. Three empowerment themes emerged:
a) empowering people to engage in CED,
b) empowering communities to solve neighborhood problems, and
c) empowering regional stakeholders to address social and economic injustices on a
strategic and regional level through the implementation of policies.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 3
Keywords: Faith-Based Organizations, Community Economic Development, Leadership,
Servant Leadership, Management, Program Development, Empowerment Theory, Pittsburgh,
Capacity, Economic Development, Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Model, Universal
Church, Religion, Economy, Empowerment, Next Generation Organizations, Faith-Based
Iniatiatives, Faith Communities
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4
Dedication
“But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God
all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26, King James Version). I dedicate this dissertation to my
family who has sacrificed much to see me cross the finish line of this doctoral journey and to
those who supported me as the first generation to pursue a terminal degree. Thank you, mom, for
enduring the times that I was unable to spend with you; grandma, for sharing how proud you are
of my perserverance; and sister, that has been an encouragement every step of the way. I love
you all very much as well as my nieces and nephews!
To my children and grandchildren, I could not have done this without you. Know that
there is a king and queen in you desiring to show forth your gifts and talents. Daughter, though
you may not see it now, queen, there is greatness in you and you will do all that you are called to
do. Son, without a test, there is no testimony, king, and the time is coming when you too will say
anything is possible. Granddaughters and grandsons, I expect great things from you. I love you.
I also dedicate this work to those faith-based practioners who find themselves in an
identity crisis between that which you do and that of who you are; this is for you too. Being an
ordained minister in the world of business and economic development has not always been easy;
I have found myself in an identity crisis for years until I engaged in this research, as with many
other men and women of faith. Remember, that to whom much is given, much is required (Luke
12:48, King James Version), and with God all things are possible.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 5
Table of Contents
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. 7
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. 8
Chapter One ................................................................................................................................ 9
Problem Statement......................................................................................................... 11
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................... 12
Significance of the Study ............................................................................................... 13
Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................. 15
Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 18
Limitations/Delimitations .............................................................................................. 18
Definition of Terms ....................................................................................................... 19
Chapter Summery .......................................................................................................... 24
Chapter Two: Literature Review ............................................................................................... 25
Critical Analysis ............................................................................................................ 26
Overview of FBOs ......................................................................................................... 29
The Role of the FBO within CED .................................................................................. 42
CED: A Newer Paradigm............................................................................................... 55
Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................. 62
Identification of Gaps and Limitations of the Literature ................................................. 88
Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................... 88
Chapter Three ........................................................................................................................... 91
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................... 91
Research Design ............................................................................................................ 92
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 6
Methodology ................................................................................................................. 96
Data Collection Methods ............................................................................................. 107
Analysis of Data .......................................................................................................... 113
Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................ 115
Chapter Four: Findings............................................................................................................ 117
The Study and the Results............................................................................................ 117
Emergent Themes from Analysis ................................................................................. 143
Engaging FBOs in CED Findings ................................................................................ 155
Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................ 213
Chapter Five: Discussion ......................................................................................................... 215
Restatement of Purpose of the Study ............................................................................ 216
Methodology ............................................................................................................... 217
Interpretation of the Findings and Implications for Theory and Practice ....................... 218
Discussion of Important Lessons from the Study and Their Application to Theory ...... 238
Summary of Conclusion .............................................................................................. 250
Appendix A: Interview Questions Modified from Assessment ................................................. 251
Appendix B: Is Your Organization Next Generation Self-Assessment ..................................... 253
Appendix C: Request to Use the Next Generation Assessment ................................................ 256
Appendix D: Participant Demographics Characterizing Minimum Requirements .................... 257
Appendix E: Overview of Participant Sample.......................................................................... 258
Appendix F: Demographic Informaiton for Data Collection Form ........................................... 259
Appendix G: Certification Page ............................................................................................... 260
References .............................................................................................................................. 261
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 7
List of Tables
Table 1. A Framework for Transdisciplinary Teamwork ........................................................... 83
Table 2. Research Questions................................................................................................... 118
Table 3. Pseudonyms for Organizations .................................................................................. 123
Table 4. Participants by Roles within Organizations ............................................................... 125
Table 5. Next Generartion Organizations’ Nine Key Traits – Analytic Codes ......................... 131
Table 6. Next Generation Organization Interview Questions and Protocol .............................. 132
Table 7. Matrix for Interview Questions ................................................................................. 134
Table 8. FBO Leaders’ Perceptions on What Stakeholders do to Engage in CED and Why .... 172
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8
List of Figures
Figure 1. Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................... 63
Figure 2. Flow Chart of the Pilot Study .................................................................................... 103
Figure 3. Hierarchy of Strategic Intent..................................................................................... 129
Figure 4. NVivo Word Cloud .................................................................................................. 139
Figure 5. Shelbyville Word Frequency List .............................................................................. 145
Figure 6. Shelbyville Word Frequency with Stemmed Words .................................................. 147
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 9
Chapter One
Faith-based organizations (FBOs) were once among the greatest champions for anti-
poverty movements such as Community Economic Development (CED) and possess economic
policy criteria for sustainability. As cited by Shin et al. (2011), “Urban community development
workers from faith-based organisations have a long history that can be traced back to volunteer
groups such as the Catholic Worker Movement, which was founded in 1933” (Forest, n.d.).
Possession of these ecomonic policies for FBOs, according to Underwood, Hackney, and
Friesner (2015), suggests they have ecosystems to provide a continuous flow of resources,
community centeredness to create employment, and institutional legitimacy where members
within a community may benefit from economic development. Other research suggests workers
of FBOs have additional neworks and unique dimensions of support, and that FBOs as faith
“communities” have unique resources for economic development that are viable institutions
within the inner city (Reese, 2004; Shin et al., 2011).
Though they have unique benefits, FBOs’ ability to thrive and survive is contingent upon
how relevant they are to today’s society (Brinckerhoff, 1999; Roozen, 2015). Nechako (2014)
defines CED as “an inclusive and participatory process by which communities initiate and
generate their own multiple bottom-line solutions to economic problems” (p. 1). CED and other
anti-poverty efforts continue to be a national, regional, and local concern to FBOs, politicians,
leaders, and community members. Highlighting the experiences, perceptions, and challenges
encountered by FBOs in CED illuminates historical content that may affect future development
in the greater Pittsburgh region. The findings of this study serve as a reference point for how
different types of FBOs are empowered to engage and sustain CED efforts. They increase the
reader’s awareness of opportunities for FBOs through the development of leadership,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 10
organizational processes, and management systems. At the same time, results explain the current
and previous positions of FBOs in CED movements and the effects an environmental trend has
on their operations.
Simon (2002) describes the CED movement as one fueled by the tendency toward
decentralizing public administration, channeling the development of local markets, and
encouraging changes in the contours of urban politics. He explains how it, as a grassroots affair,
influences new strategies by neighborhood activists through a network of large-scale efforts. Past
efforts of FBOs, universities, and community organizations include: (a) training, (b) technical
assistance, (c) capacity building, (d) networking, e) applied research, and (f) professional
development (Principles of Community Development, 1996; The Department of Communities
and Local Government, 2017).
Using strategies and complex processes like CED increases the quality of life for a
geographically defined place, where people interact through important activities, and functions to
serve its residents (Gallardo, 2015). To explain the difference between community development
and CED, Gallardo (2015) presents community development as “people planning to change a
specific situation in their communities,” while CED is a “process that allows residents to
mobilize and build assets to improve their quality of life in a sustainable way” (p. 3). He goes on
to argue that for CED to be effective there is a need to identify solutions and deploy resources
and programs where multiple players get involved to sustain the efforts, including FBOs.
Equally important, the previous CED movement involved experiential efforts focusing on
urban renewal and redevelopment. Newer initiatives perhaps are results from FBOs’ reactions to
previous failures from the movement (Haber, 2016; Simon, 2002). During the Clinton
administration, which embraced efforts like CED concerning the War on Poverty, some
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 11
communities and FBOs were able to get federal funding. The funding was for large-scale public
and private investment, social services, and physical improvements (Simon, 2002). Although
CED definitions, funding, and movements changed over the years, FBOs remained engaged.
However, since CED’s emergence in the 1960s it has always been a strategy to address economic
disadvantage, especially for black Americans (Clay, Jr. & Jones, 2009; Haber, 2016). As new
generations engage in these initiatives, it is unclear whether FBOs still hold true to their
convictions about CED as an initiative “to fight homelessness, lack of jobs, drug abuse, violence
and crime, and to provide quality child care and medical care as well as homeownership
opportunities” (Clay, Jr. & Jones, 2009, p. 1). Perhaps FBOs have concentrated on a subset of
these primary areas, since CED also is a response to “other quality-of life-matters needed for
human existence” (Clay, Jr. & Jones, 2009, p. 1). A common argument is that there is a
contemporary CED movement focused on market-based principles to stimulate communities.
Some FBOs may believe there are greater outcomes in activities that do not include
redevelopment.
Problem Statement
Prior to this study, evidence suggested that FBOs in the greater Pittsburgh region
minimally engaged in CED due to a lack of capacity and systematic constraints arising from
religious affiliation. Faith communities’ discouragement of economic inclusion partially resulted
from the political landscape with limited outcomes from CED initiatives. Further, research shows
FBOs can make an impact through CED initiatives because there remains a need for resources,
access to funding, and aid to the underserved (Wallace, Myers, & Holley, 2004). If faith
communities do not currently have the tools to reduce discrimination as well as revitalize and
empower communities through CED, then how can efforts be sustained to “reconnect the vision
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 12
and goals of the local government to the preferences and opinions of the stakeholder” (Purnsley,
2017, p. vi).
Purpose of the Study
This study’s intent is to empower FBOs and practitioners engaged or willing to engage in
CED in the greater Pittsburgh region. Research shows that many FBOs struggle to engage in
CED due to a lack of experience, capacity, and skills in leadership and management, resulting
from religious ideologies, political landscapes, insufficient resources, and an inability to
demonstrate impact. If these organizations understood how to position their personnel and
operations in a way that would sustain their CED efforts, more might participate, and those that
currently do may become more efficacious. This means it could help to improve communities in
need. Using organizational development (OD) practices such as the Next Generation
Organization may help FBOs transition with today’s trends and environmental influences. By
identifying FBOs’ experiences, challenges, and perceived tangible barriers while engaged in
CED activities, it may uncover best practices, models, and processes for practitioners,
communities, and the individuals they serve.
Past studies indicate possible reasons for the shortage of FBOs in this field:
administrative cost, federal funding, staffing, resources, characteristics, typologies, decline in
attendance, and changes in organizational structure (Mitchell, 2016; Roozen, 2015; Sloan &
Grizzle, 2014). Mitchell (2016) notes that, “They make up one of the largest cohorts of
organizations in providing community and health services around the globe” (p. 58). An
“analysis by Clarke and Ware recognizes that FBOs are understood in a wide variety of ways in
the development literature” (Mitchell, 2016, p. 58). In 2018, there is anecdotal evidence that
shows FBOs currently engage in grassroots CED activities. Research focuses on efforts around
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 13
the development of housing, job preparation, business opportunities, and feeding programs for
low-income people (Simon, 2002). Extensive research on the role of FBOs (Bielefeld &
Cleveland, 2013; Reese, 2004; Wallace et. al, 2004) has revealed that critics of public welfare
claim that religiously based services provide a number of benefits over secularly run programs;
where are the FBOs in today’s CED movements?
This study provides objectivity as to why FBOs’ involvement in CED is important, as it
also helps in combatting inequalities and anti-poverty initiatives. FBOs often go beyond charity
to meet the economic, social, physical, and spiritual needs of the individuals and families that, in
turn, strengthens communities. Much of this is due to the leadership’s decisions. Perhaps what
Gallardo (2015) shared is true, that “with committed leaders and a clear vision of where the
community wants and needs to be, CED can move communities forward in a comprehensive
way” (p. 2). The study provides insight into the nature of FBOs and their leaders, operating
within various governance structures, and the challenges they perceive by engaging in this
manner, including religiosity and lack of leadership or management experience.
Significance of the Study
FBOs are in a unique position to provide community aid because many of them have
existed within the community for many years, allowing them to observe changes and “felt” needs
of their members through engagement with constituents over time (Sanders, 2012; Wallace,
Myers, & Holley, 2004). However, much of the literature looking at FBOs’ programs and service
activities focuses not only on these long-standing community ties, but on larger-scale
development. Furthermore, these studies typically focus on “charitable assistance, relief and
social services” (Lunn, 2009, p. 943) as opposed to activities that support CED. Moreover, recent
studies on FBOs’ involvement in CED are broad in scope, examining international and national
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 14
impact rather than focusing on granularity (Guyadeen & Seasons, 2018; Lunn, 2009; The Annie
E. Casey Foundation, 2006). Consequently, as a case study the researcher chose to examine the
specific CED activities and challenges faced by FBOs in the greater Pittsburgh area.
In the greater Pittsburgh region, which includes the City of Pittsburgh and Allegheny
County, many community and economic development initiatives have increased over the past
couple of years. These two separate political units in Western Pennsylvania (Our Origins, 2017)
are working together on many programs and initiatives to educate, train, and advocate for the
constituents. Many of these strategies relate to employment, land bank properties, home
ownership, gentrification, and dislocation of families due to redevelopment throughout the
region. Several of these initiatives are associated with FBOs. The faith-based practitioner’s
engagement activities may range from serving on committees, leading community development
efforts, and advocating for policy changes, to providing programs and training. Furthermore,
numerous new initiatives have emerged from non-political entities such as community
development corporations, foundations, and FBOs. A number of them include efforts toward
engaging with younger generations to prevent gaps and keep up with the trends and
environmental changes.
Cornelius and Wolfred (2011) suggest there are major trends and environmental
influences demanding that organizations embody new ways of pursuing mission impact,
articulate their effectiveness to others, and be more sophisticated in utilizing management tools
and leadership strategies. These trends include those which take place in the economy and
political arena such as inclusivity, power changes, and advocacy for equality (The Department of
Communities and Local Government, 2017). Some other environmental influences include
concerns about potential impacts on program spending, percentage of budget spent on missions
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 15
or religious activities, and long-term financial decisions (Sloan & Grizzle, 2014). Consequently,
the researcher found a need to examine FBOs from an organizational development perspective to
understand this phenomenon.
By illuminating the experiences, perceptions, and challenges that FBOs face when
engaged in CED activities, this study may assist policymakers, foundations, and other
stakeholders in larger economic plans for the greater Pittsburgh region. Providing data on FBOs
could demonstrate traits that can assist with the next generation of economic planning. It can also
help to improve practices within the field. This study as a whole deepens one’s ability to
understand the nature of FBOs and how leadership, management, and religiosity aid in
sustainable CED. According to Mayor Bill Peduto, through the Pittsburgh p4 Initiative, an
objective is to “drive economic prosperity through equitable development that generates wealth
and ownership position” (Four Performance Measures Report, 2016, p. 13). This may be an
opportunity for FBOs to get involved, for those that are not already.
Theoretical Framework
Essentially, the theoretical basis of CED is empowerment, and from the perspective of
FBOs, it is largely dependent on specific economic or societal capital being available for creating
or sustaining local initiatives. The research on FBOs is comprised of theories and models that
offer development strategies and illustrate empowerment processes relevant to that which
supports leadership and management needs for potential engagement in CED. The three models
provide theoretical frameworks related to CED: holistic faith-based development, servant
leadership, and faith-based management with empowerment as a thread.
To that end, the researcher chose the Empowerment Theory as the overarching
framework with which to analyze the data and help answer the research questions. The related
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 16
concepts, assumptions, and generalizations used explain the current phenomenon of FBOs’
engagement in CED (Roberts, 2010). Zimmerman (2003) describes the concept as an approach
to intervene and bring about social change through an ability to adapt on various levels, where
the practitioner's plans do not impose on the community. The theory distinguishes the differences
between empowering processes and outcomes, provides sample mechanisms of empowerment to
increase individual competencies and proactive behaviors, explains natural helping systems and
its relationship to organizational effectiveness, and increases community competence and access
to resources (Zimmerman, 2003).
The Empowerment Theory framework used in this study briefly incorporates the theory
with that of FBOs, leadership, and management, similar to the Holistic Faith-Based
Development Model. This model is a tool for describing the theory of holistic faith-based
development and a conceptual map for those who desire to engage in such activities (Wallace et.
al, 2004). The model is intentional about “developing strategies to minister holistically to the
human, economic, and community development needs of individuals and families both within
and outside their congregations” (Wallace et. al, 2004, p. 2). It was important to use this model
since, according to Wallace et. al (2004), it “is based on the belief that holistically healthy
individuals and families are the backbone of holistically healthy faith-based organizations
and…neighborhoods and broader communities” (p. 12). The model provides processes that may
reduce challenges to engaging in anti-poverty efforts such as CED (Wallace et. al, 2004).
Based on the work of Wallace, Myers, and Holley (2004), the researcher used a
qualitative research design utilizing the Empowerment Theory and model, adapted to fit a faith-
based perspective to examine CED. It may help to determine CED outcomes and “practices
driven by community goals” because, according to Dyal-Chand and Rowan (2014), these
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 17
“practitioners focus on the question of how best to alleviate poverty and produce local economic
development by creating a means of sustainable income for people below the poverty line” (p.
867). The Annie E. Casey Foundation (2006) explains that this “model presents a framework
where faith-based organizations are uniquely equipped to transform individual lives and entire
communities” (p. 7).
The Leadership Theory assists with levels of analysis regarding the effectiveness of the
leader or practitioners to influence change and empower others. The combination of theories
indicates how certain activities using the resources, skills, and power of a community may
produce valuable outputs and outcomes (Co-operatives UK, 2018). Lastly, the Management
Theory explains how organizations as systems require a level of efficiency, which often is
experienced through a holistic approach that includes an ability to adapt, empower staff and
volunteers, and work toward a shared vision (Wallace et. al, 2004). Managing adaptively could
improve organizational effectiveness and assist in using an asset-based approach with individuals
like with the CED Change Theory, and again reduce the complexities of engaging in such a way
(Auspos & Caba, 2014; Co-operatives UK, 2018).
The study contains, as recommended by Roberts (2010), reviews of the theories and the
conceptual framework appropriate from experts in these fields. The concepts include processes
by which people gain control over their lives, leaders that transform environments through
service, and the importance of having managerial competencies. Other theories mentioned in the
study act as filtering tools to guide data collection, analysis, and interpretation of findings
(Roberts, 2010). CED is already a complex process; adding variables related to FBOs makes it
even more intricate. Understanding the thoughts of diverse theorists may influence CED
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 18
practitioners, FBOs, and policymakers to consider other frameworks when measuring
effectiveness and performance of programs and services.
Research Questions
This qualitative study explores FBOs that are engaging, have engaged, and or want to
engage in CED using a holistic faith-based perspective. A focus is on the organization as a whole
which includes the leadership, as in those running the organization, management, as in the day-
to-day policies and practices, and the implications of religiosity while engaging in economic
development activities. Three central questions guide this study:
1) What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate in order to
effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED?
2) What perceived management challenges do FBOs face related to the implementation
of programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED?
3) What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while
engaged or attempting to engage in CED?
Limitations/Delimitations
Though the following limitations exist, this study and the chosen methodology highlight
the experiences, perceptions, and challenges that FBOs face when engaged in CED activities—
assuming this phenomenon is explainable. According to Bryant (2004), “it is important to
identify delimitations and limitations” because it may help others assess the quality of the study
and possibly pattern future studies (p. 57). The author defines delimitations as the factors that
prevent the researcher from claiming the findings as true for all situations, which limits the
relevancy to other populations or individuals. Bryant (2004) explains that the limitations pertain
to any restrictions that apply to the methodology used to gather and analyze data.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 19
A delimitation of this study is that the unit of analysis is limited to FBOs engaged in or
previously engaged in CED events, projects, and initiatives within the greater Pittsburgh region.
Only organizational decision makers, their employees, and those they referred participated in the
study on their behalf. The organizational and government structures vary as well as the number
of employees, members, and those served. The results will only account for organizations “that
matched the selection criteria established for the study” (Roberts, 2010, p. 138); therefore,
findings are not generalizable to all FBOs in all cities or regions of the world.
A limitation to this study is the organizations that have engaged in CED initiatives on a
short-term basis with minimal documentation or recollection of experience to support their
efforts. This affects the study because it does not provide enough support to determine the
relevance of the study. As with any research project, the reliability and validity are contingent
upon evidence. Interviews, demographic surveys and a document analysis captured the evidence
in this case. Therefore, the researcher sought to understand the fullness of how each site selected
has been engaged in CED and requested data to support that engagement.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, it is important to explore and explain a variety of working
definitions and key terms. Defined are the following terms: capacity, capacity strategy, CED,
economics, economic development, economic development activities, empowerment,
empowering processes, Empowerment Theory, felt needs, innovation, next generation
organization, OD, organizational mission, organizational resources, program, religiosity, self-
actualization needs, social needs, strategic management, strategic planning, and strategy.
Capacity, as defined by Williams (as cited in Eisinger, 2002), is “a set of attributes that
help or enable an organization to fulfill its missions” (p. 2). Defined by Light (as cited in Worth,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 20
2017) it is “everything an organization uses to achieve its mission, from desks and chairs to
programs and people” (p. 187). Hudson divides capacity (as cited in Worth, 2017) into “internal
and external elements” (p. 187). He further explains that building an organization’s capacity is
about systematically investing in developing internal systems (e.g., people, processes, and
infrastructure) and external relations (e.g., with funders, partners, and volunteers) so it can
realize its mission and achieve greater impact (Worth, 2017, p. 187). Capacity strategy “is an
operation with the right facilities to produce the needed output at the right time” (Eisinger, 2002,
p. 449).
CED, as defined by the North Carolina Community Development Initiative, “is a tool that
enables individuals and communities that may otherwise be at the margins of society to help
themselves up the ladder of opportunity to greater levels of self-sufficiency” (para. 2). Soifer,
Pickering-Bernheim, Costa, and McNeely (2014) define it as the practice of revitalizing the
economic, physical, and social infrastructures and networks of a specific low-income community
or set of neighborhoods. The authors explain that it “includes input and direction from the
affected residents, thus (empowering both the individuals and institutions within the
geographically defined area” (p. 7). Based on Soifer, Pickering-Bernheim, Costa, and McNeely’s
(2014) work, it “benefits residents of that community” and “makes sure that various
discretionary practices are avoided in the work” (p. 7).
Economics, according to Certo (2003), is “the science that focuses on understanding how
people of a particular community or nation produce, distribute, and use various goods and
services” (p. 171). More specifically, economy is defined as “consisting of two groups—
households and firms—that interact in two markets: the goods and services market in which
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 21
firms sell and households buy and the labor market in which households sell labor to business
firms or other employees” (Taylor & Greenlaw, 2014, p. 24).
Economic development is defined by some as “the expansion of capacities that contribute
to the advancement of society through the realization of individual, firm and community
potential” (Feldman, Hadjimichael, Kemeny, & Lanahan, p. 12, 2014). Phillips and Pittman (as
cited in Lyon, 2015) suggest it is “An activity and or investment that leads to increasing a
community’s or region’s economic base through job creation or retention” (p. 71).
Economic development activities focus at the individual and family level on increasing
people’s financial knowledge, power, and resources; at the organizational level for churches are
the tithes, offerings, and pledges of its members; and at the neighborhood level and beyond is the
line of businesses (Wallace et. al, 2004, p. 1). Some of the most common activities are “business
operations, housing, and training and job services mixed with other social services” (Reese,
2004, p. 52).
Empowerment, as defined by Zimmerman (as cited in Wallace et. al, 2004), is
multidimensional, describing both a value orientation for action and a theoretical framework for
organizing and developing knowledge (p. 7). The Holistic Empowerment Theory adapted by
Wallace et. al fits a faith-based perspective and examines the processes by which people of faith,
their organizations, and their neighborhoods gain control over their lives and the outcomes of
empowering processes (2004, p. 7). Empowering processes are the mechanisms by which people,
FBOs, and neighborhoods become empowered (Wallace et. al, 2004, p. 7). Zimmerman (2003)
explains, “The value orientation of empowerment suggests goals, aims, and strategies for
implementing change. Empowerment theory provides principles and a framework for organizing
our knowledge” (p. 43).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 22
Felt needs, as defined by Yang (2003), are perceived by individuals experiencing a
problem. Perkins (1993) suggests that felt needs differ with each person and place, but
incorporate a need to belong, be significant and important, and have a reasonable amount of
security. Kramer describes them (as cited in McMahon, 1970) as “what people with problems
recognize as the elements necessary to improve their situations” (p. 26). They are about people’s
“own perceptions about their needs” (Juan, 2013, p. 13).
Innovation, as defined by Certo (2003), “is the process of taking useful ideas and turning
them into useful products, services, or methods of operation” (p. 514). Palmer, Dunfer, and Akin
(2009) write that it “refers to the encouragement of creativity” (p. 140).
Next generation organizations are “a description of certain behavioral characteristics and
organizational practices in non-profits that are adapting to the changing environment” (Cornelius
& Wolfred, 2011). The next generation organizational assessment is a tool to determine whether
an organization has the characteristics.
OD is the process that emphasizes changes in an organization by changing its members
and bases these changes on an overview of structure, technology, and all other organizational
ingredients (Certo, 2003, p. 287). Organizational mission “is the purpose for which, or the reason
why, an organization exists” (Certo, 2003, p. 174). Organizational resources “are all assets
available for activation during normal operations; they include human resources, monetary
resources, raw materials resources, and capital resources” (Certo, 2003, p. 8). Organizations
sometimes seen as political arenas and agents, experience both internal conflict and players
operating on a field crammed with competitors pursuing their own interests (Bolman & Deal,
2013, p. 226). They also are “powerful tools for achieving the purposes of whoever calls the
shots, as agents they operate in complex ecosystems—interdependent networks of organizations
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 23
engaged in related activities and occupying particular niches…business, public policy, business-
government, and society” (Bolman & Deal, 2013, p. 226).
Program is “a single-use plan designed to carry out a special project in an organization
that, if accomplished, will contribute to the organization’s long-term success” (Certo, 2003, p.
196). Rogers et al. (as cited in Harden, 2006) write, “Program theory approach is seen as ‘an
explicit theory or model of how the program causes the intended or observed outcomes and an
evaluation that is at least partly guided by this model’” (p. 483).
Bergan and McConatha’s definition of religiosity (as cited in Holdcroft, 2006) is “a
number of dimensions associated with religious beliefs and involvement” (p. 91). Holdcroft
(2006) provides synonyms that are often used to describe religiosity, but for the purposes of this
paper the researcher considered a few such as religiousness, faith, belief, devotion, and holiness.
Self-actualization needs “are Maslow’s fifth, and final, set of human needs—reflecting
the human desire to maximize personal potential” (Certo, 2003, p. 359). Social needs “are
Maslow’s third set of human needs—reflecting the human desires to belong, including longings
for friendship, companionship, and love” (Certo, 2003, p. 358).
Strategic management is “an integrated approach to managing the organization that is
based on the strategic plan and includes the entire cycle of strategy formulation, implementation,
and evaluation (Worth, 2017, p. 173). Strategic planning, as defined by Certo (2003), “is long-
range planning that focuses on the organization as a whole” (p. 182). It is also described by
Worth (2017) as “more than a strategy” which “begins where the organization is, defines some
new place where it wants to be, and develops a plan to get there, all in the context of its mission
and values and the realities of the environment in which it operates” (p. 172).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 24
Certo (2003) defines strategy as “a broad and general plan developed to reach long-term
organizational objectives; it is the end result of strategic planning” (p. 168). Whereas, strategy
formulation is defined as “the process of determining appropriate courses of action for achieving
organizational objectives and thereby accomplishing organizational purpose…tools include
SWOT analysis” (Certo, 2003, p. 176).
For the purpose of this paper, sustainability—a common term used in the area of
development—“refers to engaging in practices that result in availability of resources, services,
and quality of life for future generations” (Gallardo, 2015, p. 2).
Chapter Summary
Many organizations, businesses, and government agencies are involved in CED
initiatives including FBOs. Determining if this is true for the greater Pittsburgh region may
strengthen the likelihood of further equitable development as recommended by practitioners,
foundations, and urban planners. CED will improve the conditions of residents, leaders, and
neighborhoods through the introduction to best practices, tools, and resources. It increases the
capacity of the organizations by empowering them through partnerships, government funding,
and skilled workers. This study may help practitioners to develop, refine, and realize the visions
of FBOs (Wallace et. al, 2004) and their leaders. This is achieved through empowering
organizations for successful outcomes by providing current data to support their efforts, access to
strategies and or models, and resources. FBOs may increase their engagement if they are
empowered to operate effectively and efficiently.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 25
Chapter Two: Literature Review
The researcher assessed books, peer-reviewed articles, journals, and other sources about
faith-based organizations (FBOs), leadership, empowerment, management, and community
economic development (CED). The literature referenced through searches from the researcher’s
university, local libraries’ databases, and online search engines such as Google Scholar informs
this chapter. The five sections of the review include: (1) the emergence of FBOs, (2) the role of
FBOs within communities, (3) CED, (4) theoretical framework, and (5) identification of gaps
and limitations of literature. Section four’s discussion of how engagement advances from
organizational performance in CED examines the concept of empowerment within three theories:
(a) servant leadership, (b) faith-based management, and (c) the holistic faith-based empowerment
model.
The chapter explains the nature and importance of the phenomenon studied and the gaps
and limitations found. The literature cited supports the theoretical argument made and establishes
the author’s understanding of the major ideas and findings pertaining to the topics. It
incorporates a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the theories in previous studies and
builds upon the materials. As stated by Creswell (2014), “this process helped to determine
whether the topic was worth studying and provided insight into ways to limit the scope of
inquiry” (p. 57). These steps assisted in identifying common threads of other studies such as the
concept of empowerment, provided a framework for establishing the importance of this study
and benchmarks for comparison, and led into the methods of study (Creswell, 2014).
By performing the review, the researcher discovered that the history of FBOs in the areas
of politics, community organizing, advocacy, and supporting lower wealth communities is just
part of their engagement in economic development locally and abroad. It suggests that FBOs
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 26
engaged in CED approaches previously focused on economic development in neighborhoods
utilizing a process of community building (Cordero-Guzmán & Auspos, 2006). Watson (2012)
explains, “FBOs can make contributions to society at large, including social concerns that
American society” face” (p. 18). While this is important, there was also a need to perform a
critical analysis of literature to support the study.
Critical Analysis
Existing literature on CED and FBOs integrates many of the variables that are present in
the research questions and the study. The variables include leadership, management, and
religiosity, and the literature includes primary, secondary, and major works. The analysis
examines where the variables intersect relative to engaging in CED and where potential patterns
exist, such as basic assumptions, perceptions, differences in worldviews, challenges, and
governance, that can serve as either advantages or disadvantages (Biebricher, 2011; Vidal, 2001)
to the implementation of initiatives. It reveals that with the trends and environmental influences
affecting the demands placed on non-profit organizations (Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011),
including those that are secular (Biebricher, 2011), it is important for FBOs to measure their
impact and justify their existence (Parkinson, 2006), especially if pursuing external funding.
Research on non-profits and FBOs shows the existence of environmental influences
which put pressure on organizational performance, impact, and strategy (Anderson, 2016;
Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011). Some of these include variables such as a lack of vested interest
from others, a shortage in funding, the size or impact of the organization, location, struggles with
communication to stakeholders, and an inability to demonstrate capacity to provide programs
and or services (Anderson, 2016; Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011). Other data suggest that the size of
the FBOs could also determine the impact of federal funds as it relates to the successes and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 27
failures in addressing community issues (Lampkin & Raghavan, 2008; Vidal’s, 2001). Better
positioned to conduct the kind of urban ministry that focuses on development and has a greater
impact are the larger congregations (Vidal, 2001). Likewise, Biebricher (2011) argues that
smaller FBOs may not have the capacity to enter into the “3Ps”—Public-Private Partnership—
due to an inability to “identify funding opportunities, write proposals, manage multiple funding
streams, report their activities to funders, and deliver the social service programs” (Devita &
Wilson, 2001, p. 1008). Lilly’s (2013) publication considers how “Locating places to serve in
one’s community can seem like a daunting task,” and that the “church will have a more
meaningful impact if the partnerships that are developed are strategic…through a ‘laser’ focus
instead of a ‘shotgun’ approach” (p. 15).
The content analysis illuminated key strategies and themes and explained previously
hidden issues that can be avoided by FBOs in future practice (Mills, Durepos, & Wiebe, 2010),
especially as it relates to government initiatives. A majority of the recent literature refers to
government-related practices and initiatives such as President Bush’s first executive order of
establishing the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives at the White House in 2008
(Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013; Chand & Patterson, 2007; Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011; Kramer et
al., 2002; Vital, 2001). Some literature introduces other trends affecting CED such as funds
directed to revitalizing distressed regions for job creation, economic development, and the
development of small business enterprises (The White House, 2008). With these trends, there
also follows innovative ideas and an evolving interest around the topic of FBOs’ engagement in
CED both locally and nationally.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 28
The Emergence of FBOs
FBO engagement in CED activities is not a new approach to reducing poverty and
establishing movements to help those in need (Anglin, 2004; Bradley, 2009; Cordero-Guzmán &
Auspos, 2006; Lunn, 2009; Reese, 2004; Sanders, 2013; Schneider, 2012; Vidal, 2001; Wallace
et al., 2004). Literature does seem to suggest that over the years, these institutionalized religious
or congregational systems’ involvement decreased or became limited to certain activities rather
than to approaches that include the “community” aspect of economic development (Sanders,
2013; Schneider, 2012). Though there are several examples of successful faith-based CED
initiatives, Reese and Clamp (2000) also note, “There are many issues and pulls on community
leaders and congregations that can make it difficult to decide on where and how to begin a faith-
based community economic development (CED) initiative” (p. 5).
However, CED as an approach or strategy to solving economic woes is a direct result of
both the advocacy of faith-based leaders such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the federal
government. This is important to know because as Bezdek (2018) expresses, “Large systemic
injustices continually reproduce the oppression, subordination, and disempowerment of low-
income communities and communities of color, in particular, imposing mass incarceration,
inequitable educational opportunities, and the persistence of poverty wages” (p. 20). Clay and
Jones (2009) explain how previous movements, political strategies, and initiatives of FBOs “led
to the enactment of the Economic Opportunity Act (EOA) and the Community Action Program
(CAP) to assist with the War on Poverty in the 1960s” (p. 260). An overarching goal of CED
initiatives as well as FBOs is to discern and respond to the pressing needs of the community
(Reese & Clamp, 2000).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 29
The issue is that a significant amount of literature on FBOs today does not reflect a
holistic approach such as CED to empower community members but focuses instead on isolated
services for individuals. Recent literature focuses on activities such as job seeker services,
financial literacy programs, spiritual growth assistance, and influencing service in vulnerable
populations (Noyes, 2009). During certain political eras in the past, articles and literature focused
on strengthening the capacity of these organizations to engage in CED and government
initiatives such as the Charitable Choice, Welfare to Work, and social service programs
(Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013; Clerkin & Grønbjerg, 2007; Kyle, 2004). Limited current
evidence supports the need for such organizations and engagement in CED, which is why the
following is a historical review of the emergence of FBOs.
Overview of FBOs
As with other organizations, it is important to take a holistic perspective in researching
FBOs, which are defined as a “separately organized and administered entity established…to
perform a specific ministry, program, or service” (Wittberg, 2012, p. 541). Faith communities
supporting specific FBOs are usually associated with either a religious entity, national beliefs, or
denominational structures within a geographical area (Schneider, 2012). They consist of
networks of individuals connected to a particular mission such as CED due to their personal
beliefs (Schneider, 2012). FBOs and religious institutions play a major role in society; this
network of support is critical, especially in low-income communities (Reese & Clamp, 2002).
Schneider (2012) explains that ignoring faith community-specific culture and structures leads to
missed aspects of support systems for FBOs created to address community needs.
Despite the religious affiliation, FBOs have engaged in CED with a goal of fighting
poverty and inequality from the bottom-up through an under-theorized concept called
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 30
empowerment (Haber, 2016). This community-controlled approach includes activities that foster
capacity building, increased employment, entrepreneurship and small business, access to
resources, affordable housing, and that which contributes to urban redevelopment (Haber, 2016).
Through a sustainable theoretical framework, FBOs may successfully increase engagement in
economic efforts, empowering not only the organization but also those they serve: their staff,
volunteers, and communities.
To understand the phenomenon of FBOs engaged in CED, one must examine the
strengths and weaknesses of such organizations, as in what strategies and techniques
practitioners use and why. There are no set one-size-fits-all approaches for FBOs as they vary in
age groups, gender, race, nationality, and styles of culture (Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013). They
can include schools, restaurants, bookstores, retail properties, secondhand facilities, hospitals,
automotive dealers, universities, and private organizations. FBOs differ in hierarchical structure,
bureaucratic procedures, sizes, and missions. With the Social Gospel Movement, many chose to
secularize to remain competitive and meet community needs for government funding, respond to
market forces, and respond to crisis (Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013). There should be an
examination of characteristics including how faith, mission, and proven management concepts
and ideas serve as tools for action. The research provides arguments both for and against FBOs’
effectiveness in their approaches to offering programs and services, their participation in for-
profit activities, and their role in CED.
Characteristics and Typologies
Several characteristics, typologies, qualities, and key terms describe faith communities.
FBOs such as para churches, faith-based service providers, congregations, houses of worship,
religious institutions, charities, and even social service organizations generally have attributes
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 31
and characteristics in common (Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013; Vidal, 2001; Wallace, Myers, &
Holley, 2004). According to Bielefeld and Cleveland (2013), they may have a more modern
framework than in times past because this allows them to work with governments and
differentiate themselves from the places of worship and religious affiliations.
What they have in common is what Purnsley (2017) characterizes as group-based belief
systems, opportunity roles structures, support systems, and forms of leadership that are all
intraorganizational processes of organizational empowerment. These group-based belief systems
termed by Lunn (2009) have three distinctions: religion, spirituality, and faith. Support systems
and social networks may have low, medium, and high influences on religious practices (Bielefeld
& Cleveland, 2013). On a broader level, Sanders (2012) exclaims, “the church’s (which may be
deemed a group-based belief system) desire to engage in activities is driven by their theological
beliefs and as an outreach effort into the community to draw more residents to Christ” (pp. 94-
95).
Some FBOs or faith communities are well known for their denomination affiliation,
religiosity, and or investment and offerings. Wallace et al. (2004) illustrate how “African
American congregations are significantly more likely than white congregations to be located in
poor communities and likely to provide services that meet the needs of the poor” (p. 2). Other
characteristics include the ability to assist with skill building, meeting physical and spiritual
needs, providing training and practical assistance, performing work that enriches the lives of
families, transforming communities, and lots of volunteerism (Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013).
They are often associated with engagement beyond social service, as in civic engagement, social
justice, trust, advocacy, asset building, preventive care, needs assessment, and mobilizing
communities for calls to action (Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 32
FBOs being characterized as opportunity role structures, according to Purnsley (2017),
“refers to chances for all members to engage in meaningful roles at varying levels of the
organization” (p. 976). Sanders (2012) states, “clergy with a social mission or ‘this worldly’
theology are more likely to be engaged in social issues and, hence more likely to participate in
community and economic development activities that address social issues” (p. 134). Another
example of this is the Youth-Adult Partnership (Y-AP) engagement model, which, as explained
by Wu, Kornbluh, Weiss, and Roddy (2016), offers youth diverse and meaningful roles as
council members, leaders, or program representatives. This is one form of empowerment.
Purnsley (2017) defines a support system as “the degree to which organizational members
provide and receive emotional and other types of support” (p. 976). Qehaja, Kutllovci, and Pula
(2017) advise that there is strategic‑level support tools found in these systems. They can range
from understanding a concept to Haber’s (2016) description of grassroots movements such as the
Black Power movement that pushed for economic self-determination, community control over
local governmental functions, direct democracy, and cooperative living.
The last of Purnsley’s (2017) characteristics explored in detail is leadership. Maton and
Salem (as cited in Forenza, 2016) define it as another component of intraorganizational
empowerment and a process that facilitates empowerment through (a) the action of a leader and
(b) a leader’s effect on organizational members. Wilke and Speer (2011) define it as “the
qualities of key individuals in a setting and their ability to empower members,” and much of the
research supports their perspective (p. 976).
A theological uniqueness found regarding FBOs includes typologies. Bielefeld and
Cleveland’s (2013) typologies of FBOs fall within three major assessment categories: (a)
organizational control through funding resources and decision making processes, (b) self-
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 33
identification within participation and outcome measures, and (c) program implementation that
incorporates the selection of services, integration of religious elements, and participation in
religious activities. Sidon and Unruh (as cited in Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013), use terms such as
faith-permeated, faith-center, faith-affiliated, faith background, faith-secular partnership, and
secular to describe influence levels of FBOs. They further describe organizational control as an
influence of personnel selection, financial support, and expressions of faith. Furthermore,
research suggests that environment and religious content influence programs. Typologies of
one’s faith or religion are expressed through imagery, prayer, values, regular activities, cultures,
ideas, and ways members connect. Lunn (2009) distinguishes religion as an institutionalized
system of beliefs and practices, spirituality as the personal beliefs that relate to a supernatural
phenomenon, and faith as the human trust in a transcendent reality. The next section explores
religion as a concept.
Religiosity and the FBOs
According to Brinckerhoff (1999), “It doesn’t matter if the faith behind the mission is
obvious from the name or not. What matters is that the faith was there at the
beginning…throughout its growth and development, and…the actions and policies of the
organization today” (p. 4). Brinckerhoff (1999) defines faith-based as “one that is closely aligned
with a religious faith or denomination of a faith” (p. 3). The United States Federal Registry
(2017) researchers perceive that “Religious faith, in its many expressions, is a key aspect of
American life and culture” (p. 49300). Some people may be surprised that there are schools,
hospitals, shelters, financial institutions, and many more structures that have a religious
affiliation. Historically, these organizations were influential not only in communities but also
through a collective voice in the political arena.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 34
On the other hand, many of these organizations fall into the category of community
service organizations. In Brinckerhoff’s (1999) overview of faith-based community service
organizations, he explains how they provide “one or more community services to both believers
and nonbelievers, which may have to deal with more secular issues, such as legislation,
licensing, funding streams, government regulations, and the like” (p. 4). The U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) has previously awarded $817 million dollars to FBOs, and in
2017 reported its dedication to engaging in partnerships with a number of sectors to administer
programs and funding without discrimination based on religion.
Sanders (2012) suggests that one important religious expression for African Americans
during slavery was through the formal institution of the church. She continues to note how
“faithbased and faith-based partnerships…share many of the same norms—religious scripture,
social mission, religious symbols (i.e., the Cross), that they can draw upon to establish a base of
trust” (Sanders, 2012, p. 46). Lockhart’s (2005) literature reveals that even with similar
interactions with clients’ faith-integrated programs, they spent more time in classes and in
informal activities with their clients, demonstrating a higher concern regarding developing
relationships with their clients than others (p. 55).
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS) commitment, bolstered by
the Attorney General’s Memorandum for All Executive Departments and Agencies issued on
October 6, 2017 pursuant to Executive Order 13798, is the basis for this research. It specifically
speaks to “a long history of providing an array of important services to people and communities
in need of health care, education, social services, and other charitable services in the United
States” (p. 49301), but not economic development. Research related to economic development
activities mainly seems to be written in the early 2000s. Sanders’ (2012) research purports that
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 35
through partnerships with FBOs, tangible and non-tangible perceived benefits exist. Thus, there
is a need to identify current opportunities, understand these perceived benefits, and reveal
challenges to engaging in CED.
According to Clarke and Ware (2015), though concerned with the spiritual well-being of
their members, there is an interest in the participation in activities such as business development,
entrepreneurship, trade union leadership, advocacy, workforce programs, real estate purchases,
and investment. James (as cited in Clarke & Ware, 2015) explains, “Faith is widely understood
as the acceptance of some ultimate reality beyond this realm and that achieving the highest level
of well-being requires us to have insight into or right relationship with this unseen order” (p. 39).
The terms faith and religion, often used interchangeably, have distinct differences according to
an iterative search of literature.
Research suggests that one could have faith in something without an association to
religion; but there is no religion without faith. An example is the tendency that people have to
believe, or have faith, that when they sit in a chair it will hold them. This belief has no religious
connotation, but it demonstrates a type of faith. For the purpose of this chapter, faith has to do
with an individual's spiritual foundation. Whereas Bearsdsleys writes (as cited in McFarlane,
2011), “Religion refers to a set of interrelated beliefs…with attitudes and practices…about
human nature, the nature of the universe, how people should live, and the best methods to seek
the truth about reality and values” (p. 98). Research proposes that an intrinsic link exists between
religiosity and the calling that many pursue through their vocation (Dik & Duffy, 2009;
Douglass, 2015). Generally, values are displayed in acts of service, the workplace, and for
clergy, through a pursuit toward a mission. In other words, there is a mandate to express these
beliefs, practices, and values because of a religious foundation which contributes to faith.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 36
Resultantly, FBOs share a mandate also to pursue a mission, as Brinckerhoff (1999)
explains, which results in both worldly good and spiritual growth (p. 4). Wallace et al. (2004)
echo this thought, stating that many FBOs develop strategies to minister holistically to the
human, economic, and community development needs, both within and outside their
congregations. Sanders (2012) proposes that most churches do not fall into one singular category
of activist, civic, sanctuary, or evangelistic, but will constitute variations or degrees of them. She
further explains that clergy with a mission or worldly theology are more likely than others to
engage in social issues and participate in community and economic development activities.
Lockhart (2005) advises, “Except for the reinvented government program, all of the mission
statements affirm the value of creating self-esteem in their clients and in demonstrating respect to
them” (p. 50). Whatever the case, the individuals serving often do so with such passion and
commitment; however, how they do this varies. Sandra (2012) purports that “religion
can…become an opiate for those individuals whose focus is solely on getting into heaven and
not addressing the present conditions in which they and others live” (p. 28).
Thus, the research demonstrates how faith and or religion could be the means for
motivation and provide individuals with a sense of fulfilling their calling. It has been the
motivation behind relief and development work amongst the poor, as well as addressing social
issues (Clarke & Ware, 2015; Sanders, 2012). Many of these individuals would say, “God does it
through them” (Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 2) as a part of their religious duties. Usually considered a
way of serving others or fulfilling their calling, they spend countless hours feeding the homeless,
teaching, rehabilitating houses, and meeting other needs. Faith or religion may influence the
methods used to implement the work. This perception is “found in FBOs of all faiths, including
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 37
not just Christian, but also Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish and Muslim organizations” (Clarke & Ware,
2015, p. 41).
A number of articles contrast how an individual’s faith or religion influences the program
types accessible through secular, non-profit, and faith-based entities. Lockhart (2005) writes,
“faith-based and secular programs have different 'self-understandings of how they can be most
successful in working with clients with secular programs focusing more on skill development
whereas non-profit and religious programs focus on personal and social needs” (p. 46). He
investigates two programs run by non-profit organizations composed of Protestants from
mainline, conservative, and traditionally black churches. Their leaders would refuse government
funds rather than give up the religious elements of their programs (Lockhart, 2005, p. 49). This
may be a result of how, though the government at times supports and protects religious rights,
this association with religion has presented challenges for FBOs’ ability to serve due to policies
(Sanders, 2012).
Saperstein (as cited in Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013) presents a number of policy reasons
to avoid direct government financing, even though the Supreme Court held this funding to be
legal if monies are used for secular purposes. This poses potential threats to a number of things
such as 1) religious autonomy, 2) dilution of religious mission, 3) a reduction in ability to hold
the government accountable, 4) limitations on the benefits of competition, 5) weakened support
from individuals, and 6) increased divisiveness and lack of evidence of efficacy of faith-based
programs (Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013, pp. 479-478).
Alexander (as cited in Bielefeld & Cleveland, 2013) argues, “the capacity of FBOs to
play major roles as government contractors is limited” (p. 476). FBOs are limited by: 1) financial
and human resources, 2) potential conflict between market orientation and organizational
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 38
mission, 3) operational ability, 4) traditional funding systems limiting the impact of government
funding, 5) flexibility, and 6) the infusion of large sums that could destabilize them (Bielefeld &
Cleveland, 2013).
Benefits and Unique Challenges
The perceptions of FBOs’ involvement in CED vary. Even those who advocate for these
organizations have admitted the unique challenges. For instance, Brinckerhoff (1999) infers,
FBOs both have baggage and benefit from ties to a certain religion or denomination (p. 13).
Lunn (2009) suggests that the avoidance of religion in development literature may attribute to
modernism and be seen as an impediment to economic advancement (p. 939). Shirley (2010)
writes that congregations called to help develop and sustain local communities should: 1) have
infrastructure which may be accomplished using government funding, 2) run in a more business-
like fashion which can be achieved through certain practices, and 3) be measurable through
systematic approaches. Watson (2009) writes, “the most important aspect of Faith-based
organizations is the impact on social concerns in American communities as they are often placed
in areas that suffer from violence, homicide and poverty” (p. 21).
FBOs seem to have some special benefits to their role in communities, politics, social
services, and CED. Partnering with or utilizing an FBO in efforts can help with credibility in the
community, provide a platform for entities mandated to work with indigenous populations,
reduce bureaucracy, lend significant access to stakeholders, and increase, inform, and outreach to
a large number of individuals for recruiting. In the past, initiatives sought to influence the
community on a number of fronts including economic prosperity, homeownership, increased
civic engagement, improvement in the jobless rate, and building bridges into the banking
community (Sanders, 2012).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 39
Other benefits of FBOs include an opportunity to work holistically with clients rather
than in isolation when engaged in CED. Brinckerhoff (1999) says, “the foundation of faith
provides a supplementary dimension that empowers and forces your efforts” (p. 18). Hula,
Jackson-Elmoore, and Reese (2007) write, “faith-based programs provide intangible benefits that
include empathy, hope, optimism, and emotional support” (p. 73). They continue by arguing,
“An analysis of the quality and efficiency of service activity emphasizes short-term benefits
provided by FBOs,” but long-term benefits can also be identified through research (Hula,
Jackson-Elmoore, & Reese, 2007, p. 84).
Short-term examples include financial resources, education, and training programs which,
as Anglin (2004) explains, “impart information or build skills, generally offering only one
session of modest duration (as little as an hour or as long as a week)” (p. 212). In addition, the
author writes, “Often technical assistance is used for crisis intervention in a project or portfolio
or as part of an audit of troubled assets and organizations” (Anglin, 2004, p. 212). Offering long-
term solutions with the “impact of substantial investments in education on community
development goals, such as transformation of target neighborhoods” has potential (Anglin, 2004,
p. 222). Hula, Jackson-Elmoore, and Reese (2007) explain, “When congregations are directly
involved in a social service or community development project, they tend to focus on activities
that can be handled by a small volunteer force capable of carrying out well-defined tasks within a
specific time limit” (p. 72).
As an alternative, Wallace et al. (2004) explain, “A key benefit of church-owned for
profit entities is that they can provide revenue to support the church’s human development work,
both sacred and secular, and thus reduce dependency on external funds from government,
foundations or other sources” (p. 14). The authors propose that large-scale development can be a
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 40
long-term, systematic, sustainable development strategy (Wallace et al., 2004). With an
entrepreneurial perspective, an FBO’s goal as an empowering and empowered organization may
shape its own future and benefit those it serves (Wallace et al., 2004). Hula, Jackson-Elmoore,
and Reese (2007) record, “It has been argued that faith-based services are more effective because
of the potentials faith itself can bring to both clients and providers... This creates an interesting
political quandary where the critical advantage [exists and]…may need to be limited because of
church/state concerns” (p. 82).
Research demonstrates some unique challenges faced by FBOs that prohibit true freedom
to serve as they desire. In the article “The Free Exercise of Religious Identity,” it is clear that one
challenge faced by FBOs is religious freedom, which is the right to define and pursue an identity
through a religion or faith. However, imposed in such a way that it negates the rights of others
poses a problem. Lucas (2017) writes, “Grounded in religious freedom, these arguments suggest
that individuals have a right to operate businesses or conduct their professional roles in a manner
that conforms to their religious identity” (p. 54). Another argument by Yaghi (2007) is that
“Over-religiosity could lead decision makers to see everything inside and outside the
organization through religious lenses, limiting by that their ability to change managerial
strategies, change values, or gain new skills” (p. 366).
Resultantly, even with this freedom FBOs must be careful to stay within the laws. As
Brinckerhoff (2009) notes, “People of faith have their world view strongly affected by their
spiritual perspective,” interpersonal conflicts between individuals can happen, and the potential
to collaborate with other organizations may be affected (p. 7). This can limit effectiveness
because, as Kyle (2004) demonstrates, local economic development (LED) has an emphasis upon
job creation, economic development, and public-private partnerships in line with modem policy
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 41
objectives accepted by a majority of governments and development institutions, and not
necessarily on religious beliefs (p. 33).
Lockhart (2005) provides further insight into this phenomenon by explaining, “For the
faith-based, arms-length non-profit organizations often created by churches and other faith
institutions to enable direct involvement, a host of more specific challenges awaits” such as:
• reconciling distinct interests of the parent organization and subsidiary,
• fighting perceptions that church moneys and development/service moneys are
fungible,
• dealing with stakeholders who scrutinize the professional activities of the service
provider subsidiary according to the faith messages of the church, and
• personal statements of a charismatic pastor (p. 50).
Multiple determinants may limit FBOs from engaging in CED such as time, funding, capacity,
staffing, religious affiliations, leadership and management skills, comfort levels, etc. According
to Hula, Jackson-Elmoore, and Reese (2007), “there are at least three broad political dimensions
on which faith-based organizations must be evaluated: (1) level and nature of service activity, (2)
quality and efficiency of service activity, and (3) long-term political impacts” (p. 79). Biebricher
(2011) documents that they often lack experience when it comes to meeting federal funding
requirements. Hula, Jackson-Elmoore, and Reese (2007) state that “Fundamental issues of the
quality and efficiency of service activity also need to be addressed through additional research”
(p. 82). Reese argues that (as cited in Hula, Jackson-Elmoore, & Reese, 2007) few FBOs limit
service to those outside of their faith, and further research is needed of the programs to examine
clients and self-selecting behaviors. FBOs are providing limited service or “boutique” services if
faith-based service provision is viewed as an alternative to the public sector or they do not have
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 42
the capacity. Hula, Jackson-Elmoore, and Reese (2007) explain that FBOs may not be
sustainable long-run options and resources.
Qualities of Successful FBOs
An FBO’s success is contingent upon their ability to “foster holistic change in their
communities” and “develop vital economic development ministries”; but they also need
organizational development and resource, programmatic, network, and political capacities
(Bizer, 2008, p. 22). According to Brinckerhoff (1999), success is also dependent upon seven
other key characteristics. The keys that FBOs should have are a foundation of faith and focus on
mission, volunteers who knowledgeably and competently fill key roles, and multiple staff who
use their gifts and encourage the use of others. FBOs are also to pay close attention to markets,
demonstrate excellent stewardship in finance, strategic planning, and resource management, and
have flexibility with a focus on achievable growth (Brinckerhoff, 1999). Bizer (2008) explains
that this includes “increasing business management and leadership skills and developing a tool
kit to implement asset development” (p. 22). Lastly, Brinckerhoff (1999) suggests the following
replicable management strategies and techniques for FBOs: (1) assess organization’s strengths
and weaknesses, (2) clearly define staff roles and responsibilities, (3) empower and evaluate paid
staff, (4) recruit and retain volunteers, (5) wisely steward finances, (6) improve leadership skills,
(7) conduct marketing campaigns, and (8) regularly create plans.
The Role of the FBO within CED
Further exploring the relationship between FBOs and CED, the researcher explains
several steps. The first step was to provide a brief synopsis of: 1) the related concepts and 2) the
information gathered from the related scholarly sources. Some of these related concepts include
the church, entrepreneurship, capacity, capital, economy, characteristics, employment, small- and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 43
medium-sized enterprises, government, policy, motivation, behaviors, and servant leadership.
Thus, it is just as important to research the interconnectedness of FBOs and empowerment. The
following literature provides further insight into just how important these concepts are to
economic growth and outcomes.
Sanders (2012) states, “Many of these institutions of faith have been in the community
for more than a decade, which affords them an intimate glimpse into the history and life of the
neighborhood” (p. 1). This is true in Western cultures; however, most of the literature is on
international development and typically focuses on “charitable assistance, relief and social
services” (Lunn, 2009, p. 943). As part of the historical background on faith-based engagement
in CED, it is important to understand the major thoughts, issues, controversies, and arguments
that influence the study.
Literature on FBOs and their involvement in development dates as far back as the 1900s.
Ackers (1993) provides conclusive information dating back to 1976 that shows that the concept
of the church’s involvement in economic activities is not new. In fact, one of its sources, The
Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, suggests that (as cited in Ackers, 1993) “The
influence of the 'Protestant Ethic' on business entrepreneurship and trade union Leadership has
been an import theme of English economic history” (p. 67).
Lunn (2009) poignantly states, “Whilst superficially religion has appeared to be absent
from development, some note that the whole field actually has clear religious—specifically
Christian—roots and concepts which are essential to its vision and practice” (p. 940). The
author’s reasons for there appearing to be an absence of FBOs represented in development are
due to the lack of data to support their existence, the difficulty in quantifying impact and
outcomes, and the systematic omission or devaluing of religion in scholarship. Lunn (2009)
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 44
alleges that there is a trickle of growth and recognition in this area, and the development
community reports shying away from it. The researcher hopes further data could explain this
phenomenon.
Several discoveries related to the influence of FBOs on other topics such as human,
social, and financial capital and the connection to economic growth evolved through an
additional survey of literature. Moon (2007) states, “Many megachurches and congregations
from traditional church organizations developed separate nonprofit 501c (3) corporations to
utilize the human and financial resources at their disposal in community development efforts” (p.
14) in an attempt to increase their capital and capacity. The data preserve the idea of how crucial
these capitals are in any program, education, or service attempts to: 1) bridge the gap in equality
of wealth distribution, 2) reduce barriers of employment, and 3) sustain economic development
strategies.
Community Capital Building
The universal church functions not only to provide a religious foundation or spirituality,
but also to serve as a catalyst to build a community. Historically, faith has been the motivation
behind much relief and development work amongst the poor. Faith can also influence the
methods to implement the development work; this dual citizenship or intersection approach can
be found in FBOs of all faiths including not just Christian, but also Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, and
Muslim organizations (Clarke & Ware, 2015, p. 41). Cordero-Guzmán and Auspos’ (2006)
research suggests that there are “contributions that community building can make to economic
development” and vice versa, of which FBOs are familiar (p. 199).
One accomplishes community building, according to Cordero-Guzmán and Auspos
(2006), through increasing local access to goods and services, expanding the entrepreneurial
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 45
base, expanding employment opportunities, giving neighborhoods control over ownership of
local resources, and connecting residents and businesses to the economy (p. 199). Lockhart
(2005) suggests that “FBOs have been found to generate social capital...the social ties that
engender civil society, particularly if these ties are conjoined with trust and norms of
reciprocity...enabling people to do things more effectively than if they were not connected to
these relationships” (p. 46).
Clarke and Ware’s (2014) article further explains, “FBOs are reviewed as key
participants in civil society, active across a variety of development-related fields including
conflict resolution and reconciliation, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, environmental
protection and conservation, politics and social movements and social welfare and development”
(pp. 44-45). Entwistle (2008) writes, “One of the major roles of pastors and their churches is to
support and grow a community of believers that is not only spiritually healthy, but also
economically viable” (p 48).
Lastly, literature states, “FBOs play a very significant role in the provision of social
services, often on behalf of governments unable to establish the trust and relations required to
engage in difficult communities” (Clarke & Ware, 2014, p. 45). When it comes to all facades of
development, FBOs are important. Examples of this include the African Methodist Episcopal
(AME) Church, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), the National Baptist
Publishing Board, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP) (Moon, 2007, pp. 4-6). Lockhart (2005) suggests that poverty-to-work programs also
create social capital in both secular and faith-based programs (p. 57). On the other hand,
congregations and FBOs being socioeconomically heterogeneous can make them effective sites
for programs seeking to develop social capital of the poor (Lockhart, 2005, p. 58). He
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 46
recommends that “Tying congregations into faith-based coalitions or partnerships with secular
organizations can further help the poor gain bridging social capital and other resources that
traverse denominational, racial, economic and geographic division” (2005, p. 58).
They can also contribute to the success or failure of entrepreneurial endeavors. Moon
(2007) explains, “Well-established African American congregations and denominations began to
embrace entrepreneurship as a key component in their community development initiatives, using
the resources of their membership base before branching out to embrace their neighborhoods and
the community at large” (p. 13).
Religion and Entrepreneurship
Dougherty, Griebel, Neubert, and Park (2013), in the article “A Religious Profile for
American Entrepreneurs,” examine religion and entrepreneurship and describe characteristics of
entrepreneurs and their relationship to the American culture. Cordero-Guzmán and Auspos
(2006) propose that CED programs could increase local access to consumer goods and services,
expand the local entrepreneurial base, and expand local employment opportunities (p. 199).
Within their analysis of this concept, Fairlie states (as cited in Dougherty et al., 2013),
“According to the Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity, a small subset of working adults
starts 543,000 new businesses per month” (p. 401). While he adds that there is “ethnographic
evidence that entrepreneurs may cluster within certain types of congregations” (as suggested in
Dougherty et al., 2013), it may be important to examine the engagement of such activities of
FBOs (p. 403).
The article further explains, “The initiative and creativity of entrepreneurs are highly
prized in capitalist society. Entrepreneurs help [to] fuel the American Dream” (Dougherty et al.,
2013, p. 401). Dodd and Golsis (as cited in Dougherty et al., 2013) suggest that religion is “an
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 47
understudied social dimension of entrepreneurs” (p. 401). There is a controversy though about
whether “The Church” should engage in “worldly” or “secular” activities such as
entrepreneurship and CED. To avoid such criticisms, many create a separate business enterprise.
In other words, they become entrepreneurs referred to as faith-based entrepreneurs.
Dougherty et al. (2013) state that the “Protestant reformers like Luther and Calvin
emphasized that God called individuals to serve Him in nonreligious occupations” (p. 401). They
go as far as to say that for some FBOs, “religion provides motivation for entrepreneurship”
(Dougherty et al., 2013, p. 401). This idea is supported by Cole’s (2014) study which insists that
“religious institutions shape the entrepreneurial process for marginalized groups and in
supporting entrepreneurs, individuals who endeavor to create new economic activity” (p. 1).
Entwistle (2008) states, “It is the role of the church, and specifically the pastor to
complete the instillation process, aiding the development of positive contributing entrepreneurial
members of their community” (p. 12). She further explains, “A pastor should not be encouraging
entrepreneurial activity for personal wealth and gain, but rather for the improvement of
individuals and their communities utilizing their gifts to positively impact others” (Entwistle,
2008, p. 128). In doing so, there is a need for collective action with others such as business,
government, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which CED programs encourage.
This could be why Entwistle states, “The church is convicted to instill in entrepreneurs integrity,
honesty, diligence, fairness, and stewardship...a sense of responsibility to contribute to the social
and economic development of their communities” (2008, p. 12).
Contrarily, the researcher describes only one noteworthy argument against this
relationship. Fabricius (2013) voices his disagreement against such ideas in the article “What
Profiteth the Entrepreneurial Church?,” suggesting that “it is a vision 'according to the flesh' the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 48
deceit of the self evident” (p. 24). He goes on to state, “the church that Lord Mawson proposes is
a church that is engaged in extremely important work, particularly insofar as it supports the
vulnerable and marginalized” (Fabricius, 2013, pp. 24-25). One could say the desire for
entrepreneurship is not “self evident.” That passion might be to create a platform for developing
skills and opportunities for wealth building for one’s family and others, with the ability and
freedom to work from a motivation of zeal and perceived “calling.” Fabricius (2013) believes, “it
is a church that must be…careful that, though it gains the whole world, it risks losing its soul” (p.
25).
Dougherty et al. (2013), on the other hand, point to the influence of faith and religion on
entrepreneurship. Dana (as cited in Dougherty et al., 2013) notes that “the values promoted by
some faith traditions encourage entrepreneurship... The Amish are instructive, Amish values of
hard work, self-sufficiency, and asceticism readily translate to self-employment” (p. 402).
Although generally overlooked, these characteristics and behaviors are common to FBOs and
support the need for such engagement in CED. Moon (2007) writes, as faith-based entrepreneurs,
black ministers run the risk of credibility; yet meaningful group economic development and
entrepreneurship take place when religious institutions and that stable leadership, membership,
and financial resources establish organizations (p. 4). Cole’s (2014) exploratory study proposes,
“religious institutions shaped decision-making and confidence in ways that gave some adherents
an ‘extra-social’ legitimacy making it easier to deviate from established norms and practices of
industries in the business world” (p. 18). It further reveals, “both Muslims and Mormons also
pointed out that their respective religion’s holy writs provide the general frameworks for all
types of human activity, including providing frameworks for business related decisions in
economic activity like entrepreneurship” (Cole, 2014, p. 41).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 49
Community Development
CED is a link between community development and economic development. The U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines it as “activities that build
stronger and more resilient communities through an ongoing process of identifying and
addressing needs, assets, and priority investments” (What is Community Development?, 2017,
para. 1). It “may support infrastructure, economic development projects, installation of public
facilities, community centers, housing rehabilitation, public services, clearance/acquisition,
microenterprise assistance, code enforcement, homeowner assistance and many other identified
needs” (para. 1).
Accordingly, Perkins (1995) writes that this specific calling is one referred to as Christian
community development (CCD), established by practical biblical principles that evolved from
creative long-term solutions to meet the felt needs of the poor. It includes the need to belong, be
significant and important to others, and have a reasonable amount of security (Perkins, 1995, p.
20). It also “means bettering the quality of other people’s lives—spiritually, physically, socially,
and emotionally—as you better your own” (Perkins, 1995, p. 21). “Avenues to create jobs,
schools, health centers, home ownership, and other enterprises of long-term development”
(Perkins, 1995, p. 23) add significantly to their lives. He also writes that it creates opportunities
for leadership, affirms dignity, and empowers them to meet their own needs, which is a “holistic”
approach. Therefore, community development is just as important as economic development, and
together they make up the framework of CED.
Economic Development and Small Business
Economic development distinguished by the activities involved in the process should
either increase or stabilize the wealth of a community, city, county, state, nation, or country.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 50
These activities are inclusive of the use of technology to reduce the carbon footprint, the
structure of a roadway, as in how it provides access, and the number of jobs available, which is
different from community development. Feldman et al. (2014) offer a definition for it as “the
expansion of capacities that contribute to the advancement of society through the realization of
individual, firm and community potential” (p. 12).
Economic development is also referred to as “the development of capacities that expand
economic actor's capabilities” and how the government becomes a means wherein stakeholders
can come together to promote “well being and prosperity” (Feldman et al., 2014, p. 3). Thus,
“economic development occurs when individual agents have the opportunity to develop the
capacities that allow them to actively engage and contribute to the economy” (Feldman et al.,
2014, p. 5). Schumpeter (as cited in Feldman et al., 2014) states that economic development
“involves transferring capital from established methods of production to new, innovative,
productivity-enhancing methods” (p. 6).
In other words, this concept is a series of processes that involves many factors including
the collaboration of government, FBOs, businesses, and individuals. It alludes to the fact that
although short-term solutions may be possible, generally, to see real growth, one must look at it
from a long-term perspective. Economic development, according to Feldman et al. (2014), 1) is
about positioning the economy on a higher growth trajectory, 2) is the product of long-term
investments in the generation of new ideas, knowledge transfer, and infrastructure, and 3)
depends on functioning social and economic institutions and on cooperation between the public
sector and private enterprise (p. 1).
This may include trainings, programs, and services provided by FBOs, universities, and
for-profit and non-profit entities for employment and small businesses. Feldman et al. (2014)
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 51
further explain that economic development “depends on education so that workers can more
fully participate in the economy, social and cultural patterns of behavior that encourage initiative
and engagement, and co-operation rather than adversarial relationship between government and
business” (p. 2). Feldman et al. (2014) explain that “economic development preserves and raises
the community's standard of living through a process of human and physical infrastructure
development based on principles of equity and sustainability” (p. 11).
Community development and economic development, as Cordero-Guzmán and Auspos
(2006) purport, are both affected as strategies by certain kinds of businesses and business
development strategies. The authors note that they are more likely than other strategies “to
generate jobs for local residents, improve resident access to consumer goods and services, or
contribute to the development of local role models and community leaders” (Cordero-Guzmán &
Auspos, 2006, p. 207). They further explain that the CED literature “suggests that small business
assistance programs must address two primary problems that plague their target businesses: the
need for capital for start-up and expansion purposes, and the need for ongoing management
support and other technical assistance” (Cordero-Guzmán & Auspos, 2006, p. 229).
A prime example of how this plays out in practice is from Choi’s (2010) research on
ethnic entrepreneurship as a key factor of CED. His study reveals that of the majority of
respondents which were Protestant Christians (85%), first generation immigrants (89%), and
small business owners (60%), about 41% shared that they had received support from their church
or church members in starting new businesses or in job searches in the past (Choi, 2010, p. 380).
Choi (2010) also reports, they later tended to be more independent for advancement and growth
(p. 380). He suggests using his case for other minority groups for further study because “It is
necessary to compare how other racial or ethnic groups use their social capital to develop their
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 52
ethnic entrepreneurship” (Choi, 2010, p. 380). In doing so, he documents a model for other
groups such as FBOs that could be empowered to promote the growth of small businesses and
entrepreneurship. The problem lies in the overall perception of the role of faith in development.
Internal and External Perceptions
This study includes research on internal and external perceptions of FBOs to ensure that
the reader understands the phenomena, and that their organizational identity does not hinder
future possibilities for them. All perceptions influence the culture both within and outside the
organization. FBOs can increase economic opportunities for communities, build on the strength
of past successes, and encourage greater participation. They increase the awareness of
underutilized economic resources, thus increasing opportunities for communities. Research that
considers the internal and external perceptions of FBOs engaged in CED can either influence or
discourage their engagement.
Bolman and Deal (2013) write, “The world we perceive is, for the most part, constructed
internally” (p. 36). Internal perceptions include a closer view of what the members of an
organization believe themselves to be and represent. Vidal (2001) writes, “Faithbased
practitioners feel strongly that they bring something distinctive and valuable to community
development, something eminently worthy of respect; if research and researchers are perceived
as not showing that respect—valuable learning opportunities will be lost” (p. 22). Pecukonis and
Wenocur argue (as cited in Ohmer, 2008), “organizational collective efficacy is an organization
or group’s perception of its problem-solving skills and ability to improve the lives of its
members” (p. 856). Ohmer (2008) states, “the more well-run and effective they perceived their
organization, the greater the benefits members received from their involvement” (p. 865).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 53
There have been arguments for and against FBOs’ involvement in development activities
such as CED. Vidal’s (2001) research suggests that some external perceptions are that FBOs
only want to engage in this arena because of the money. He reports that “one of his interview
subjects said, ‘It’s insulting; they come with dollar signs in their eyes’” (Vidal, 2001, p. 22). This
point of view possibly changes if there is adequate research to prove this argument wrong.
McFarlane (2011) writes, “Western society is still under the powerful influence of religion” (p.
95). He further states that due to “a radical shift in economies and politics, declining moral
individual and collective values have resulted in a strain on the influence of religion as many
abandon faith and beliefs for materialism and mundane happiness” (McFarlane, 2011, p. 95).
Sanders’ (2012) research on FBOs’ partnership formation may explain the lack of
engagement in CED as a result of perceptions relative to social capital, trust between
organizations, the networks organizations are embedded in, organizational ecology, the external
environment between sectors and organizational capacity. It suggests that it may be perceived
that caring for the needy is the responsibility of the government. Yet, Sanders (2012) argues that
“Before an…organization can act on changing something in the social, political, economic, or
even natural environment, there first has to be the recognition of…a need” (p. 131). Ohmer
(2008) argues that clergy say, “FBOs, not secular nonprofit organizations or government
agencies, would best provide services to the needy” (p. 139).
Anglin (2004) writes that clergy assume they are capable of addressing some of these
needs, “which imply the capacity to deliver diverse services under the rubric of community
development” (p. 139). Ohmer’s (2008) study demonstrates that “the most important factor-
related members’ personal and collective benefits was their perceptions of their organizations’
ability to produce tangible community improvements, including improved housing, businesses,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 54
and social services” (p. 867). Cordero-Guzmán and Auspos (2006) propose, “To the degree
that…community organizations are actually involved in planning, implementing, organizing, or
overseeing local economic development activities, other community-building effects are likely to
result,” and this includes FBOs (p. 204). Each perception may be an influence of communication.
Marketing and Communication
Though there are arguments for and against marketing by religious organizations and
churches according to Gawronski and Majkowska (2018), this researcher found it important to
discuss the benefits for FBOs engaged in CED. The purpose is not to deny the attitude of how
the use of these methods could appear to be secular in nature; but to demonstrate how using them
may help with effectiveness (Gawronski & Majkowska, 2018). Since FBOs already participate in
marketing strategies, Brinckerhoff (1999) suggests it is important to reinforce the idea that they,
just like every organization, need to focus and refine their efforts.
He writes that faith is a competitive marketplace (Brinckerhoff, 1999). The same is true
for for-profit or non-profit organizations that engage in CED. Brinckerhoff (1999) writes,
“within each of the main belief structures are hundreds if not thousands of different choices” of
faith (p. 161). If “people have choices” regarding their faith and engaging in CED is a matter of
importance to them, it is important for FBOs to make them aware of their values and existence
(Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 161). Research suggests that FBOs do this in an intentional way that does
not hinder their integrity and is quantifiable (Brinckerhoff, 1999; Gawronski & Majkowska,
2018). Therefore, if they desire to be or are engaged in CED, their communication efforts should
reflect that.
FBOs are competing in many areas and for different purposes such as attendance,
volunteer work, members, contributions, and in some cases, staff (Brinckerhoff, 1999). They are
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 55
also competing with the social expectations of people (Gawronski & Majkowska, 2018).
Brinckerhoff (1999) argues that marketing skills “can be adapted and adopted to do more
mission, more efficiently and effectively” (p. 161). Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural
Development (2015) writes, any organization engaging in CED should be highly visible; it keeps
them competitive and causes others to know they are an asset to initiatives. Marketing is a way to
do is this.
CED: A Newer Paradigm
Distinguished as the middle ground between the other approaches, CED is one of three
approaches bringing about change to ecosystems on a micro or macro level (Shaffer, Deller, &
Marcouiller, 2006). Community development and economic development are the other two
approaches. They do not at times have clearly recognized lines between them in practice or
among some literature; but they do function within different frameworks. Additionally, by their
outcomes politically, socially, financially, and or organizationally there are boundaries within
each of them. Research suggests that each of these approaches is necessary in practice and
demonstrates multiple theoretical foundations that can serve in an empowering way (Shaffer,
Deller, & Marcouiller, 2006).
Economic Development
Economic development is a regional or global attempt to stabilize the economy. Its
primary focus is on job creation, despite having similar goals for the local economy in creating
capital, functioning in a competitive market, and maximizing resources. As stated earlier, its
definitions vary. In the research, key elements apply to economic development that relate to this
portion of the text. These five basic objectives, according to Hendricks, St. Clair, and Robertson
(2017), include:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 56
1. make existing employers more competitive,
2. encourage new employers,
3. capture more local dollars,
4. attract new employers, and
5. access outside sources of capital (The Elements of Economic).
While economic development can be hard to understand, research should be clear in
distinguishing this from other strategies because though community development is contingent
upon it, it is unique in approach, processes, and geographical parameters. The recipe for
economic growth, according to Taylor and Greenlaw (2014), is investing in labor productivity,
human capital, and technology and increasing physical capital.
To understand economic growth, using living standards of an average person, there can
be a focus on gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (Siebeneck & Yoon, 2017; Taylor &
Greenlaw, 2014), which is a measure of nationwide growth calculated as the sum of GDP of the
United States and the District of Columbia. This is very different from the strategies of CED as
described by the research.
The Community Action Partnership (CAP) describes CED's purpose as one that “is to
revitalize communities, develop and rehabilitate affordable housing, promote sustainability,
attract investments, build wealth, encourage entrepreneurship, and create jobs” (Community
Economic Development, para. 1). CAP is a national membership organization that “provides
technical assistance, training, and other resources,” which is “funded by the Community Services
Block Grant (CSBG), a federal program that allocates funding to states to combat poverty across
the United States” (About Community Action Partnership, para. 1). Overall, it provides strategies
that if initiated afford solutions to a community’s economic problems. CED, if implemented
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 57
correctly, increases opportunities to “build long term community capacity and foster the
integration of economic, social and environmental objectives” (About Community Action
Partnership, para. 2).
Referring to the literature provided by Clay and Jones (2009), it appears that “The
concept of CED had its roots early in the 1900s in the notorious historical dialogue between
Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois” (para. 12). These activists, among many others,
were in pursuit of “the best way to achieve economic and political power” specifically for
African Americans (Clay & Jones, 2009, para. 12). The authors explain how the Civil Rights era
from the 1950s to the 1970s, with grassroots campaigns to achieve legal equality, played a role in
“large-scale political strategies, which embraced local economic realities, to redress inequality”
(Clay & Jones, 2009, para. 12).
During this time, “In response to this growing dissatisfaction, civil rights organizations
such as the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) devised strategies to explicitly
address economic disadvantage” (Clay & Jones, 2009, para. 13). These urban renewal initiatives
“ushered in specific policy frameworks targeted at geographically defined communities, aimed to
redress concentrated poverty and urban disinvestment” (Clay & Jones, 2009, para. 15). Anglin
(2004) suggests, “The emergence of faith-based community development as a policy tool
provides a new reason to ask if organizations and institutions in poor communities can play a
part in revitalization” (p. 2).
As with Clay and Jones (2009), there is a contemporary CED movement focused on
market-based principles to stimulate communities. Consequently, “Community organizations and
[community development corporations] act as financial intermediaries, providing technical
assistance to local entrepreneurs and developing shopping centers, supermarkets, and other real
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 58
estate projects” (Clay & Jones, 2009, para. 17). The authors note, “The focus of this work…also
called a place-based strategy…involves the notion that bottom-up social change involving active
community participation must take place within geographic areas” (Clay & Jones, 2009, para.
17).
For that reason, it is important to note that even with “The Economic Opportunity Act of
1964” (About Community Action Partnership, para. 2), these organizations require innovative
ways to continue their missions. One such initiative is the creation of a “Network of locally-
focused Agencies serving low-income populations” (About Community Action Partnership,
para. 2). Another is the creation of community development corporations (CDCs) and
amendments that increased the federal government's commitment to use them as vehicles of
community-based development and authorized a more comprehensive range of activities (Clay &
Jones, 2009, para. 17).
Another initiative is “the comprehensiveness movement,” which “purported to bring
residents back into the equation by supporting their place as leaders of a wide range of planning
and programmatic activity” (Anglin, 2004, p. 17). Anglin (2004) writes that it “showed no
particular benefit to community residents” if they “do not possess the skills and experience,”
because it “relies on professional skills and knowledge” (Anglin, 2004, p. 17). Unfortunately,
drivers for these initiatives are often local, regional, and national political agendas. Although
they are to be a reflection of what the community needs to thrive economically, generally, they
are not.
As we see in the news today, times have not changed much, considering the decreases in
funding for community organizations that assist residents in education, trainings, financial
support, etc. Anglin (2004) notes that over 15 years ago, “Much like the broader economy,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 59
shifting economies troubled the fragile efforts of small- to medium-sized efforts of CDCs” (p.
16). Although there are many debates about the cause, research suggests there remains a need to
provide the services and support for these organizations. Consequently, although there is a new
political environment, current initiatives to address these concerns continue.
On another note, community development has evolved into a mature field characterized
by institutions and organizations that perform a solid service to low-income communities
needing development (Anglin, 2004, p. 22). Depending on the movement, industry, or field of
the practitioners, there are various terms used such as “community development.” Anglin (2004)
writes, “The community development corporation and similar community-based development
organizations…evolved into building a socially and economically vibrant community that
attracted economic investment and created jobs, economic opportunity, and social mobility” (p.
1). He adds, “the past 40 years have seen significant investment by government, philanthropy,
and the private sector” (Anglin, 2004, p. 2). Entwistle (2008) writes, “Successful community
development necessitates the involvement of the entire community” (p. 4). That idea includes
those within the faith communities; William H. Lockhart’s (2005) research supports this
inclusion process, as the author writes:
Since many such poverty programs were being outsourced to both for- profit and non-
profit service providers...faith-based advocates incorporated into the 1996 legislation a
'Charitable Choice' provision that allowed FBOs to receive government funds without
having to give up several faith-related practices (p. 45).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 60
Elements of CED
Missouri State University Center for Community and Economic Development (CCED),
previously referred to as CDEP, provides some key components to consider for FBOs engaged in
CED. The primary activities include: 1) Training, 2) Technical Assistance, 3) Capacity Building,
4) Networking, 5) Applied Research, and 6) Professional Development (Principles of
Community Development, 1996). Each described in more detail in the following paragraphs
assists practitioners with strategies for institutional and organizational elements.
Training. Education as a tool for social change may create empowered and self-
sufficient individuals and communities, as well as facilitate sound decision-making and preserve
the democratic values of self-determination (CCED, 1996). It affords opportunities for residents
and other stakeholders to gain skills, increase awareness, understand issues, identify alternative
solutions, and learn about strategies to mobilize resources (CCED, 1996).
Technical assistance. Technical assistance for citizens and their organizations is critical
to the development of healthy, sustainable, democratic communities (CCED, 1996). Universities,
consulting firms, and community resources with the goal of assisting with CED are available to
provide this support.
Capacity building. The CCED (1996) defines capacity building as the activities
designed to improve the ability of citizens and their organizations. The overarching goal is “to
solve immediate specific problems and also improve their ability to solve future community
problems” (CCED, 1996). As with other aspects of CED, it requires a certain level of expertise.
The authors also claim it always results in an improvement in the skills sustained over an
extended period. Using the well-worn biblical metaphor, when one is engaged in capacity
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 61
building, they are not only getting a fish, they “are learning how to fish” (CCED, 1996). The
outcomes of capacity building often include the following:
• improved organizational structures,
• increased and improved citizen participation,
• greater community/organizational self-reliance,
• improved leadership abilities, and
• stronger community-based organizations at the local level (CCED, 1996).
When successful capacity building is accomplished, the power of active and engaged citizens to
bring about positive social transformation is improved (CCED, 1996).
Networking. For many reasons networking can be important. It may increase the
relationships for individuals and organizations. The CCED (1996) defines it as a process for
establishing ongoing communication, cooperation, and or mutual assistance that occurs in three
stages: identifying the relevant relationships, developing those relationships, and utilizing the
relationships to enhance the effectiveness of specific endeavors. They note, “Networking serves
to build relationships with others who may have information, expertise, access, or resources
required for the successful implementation of community and economic development strategies”
(CCED, 1996).
Applied research. The CCED (1996) confirms that it is important to develop and
implement research activities to help address problems of distressed communities. They define
applied research as “the thoughtful creation, interpretation, communication, or use of knowledge
with the community, based on the ideas and methods of recognized disciplines, professions, and
interdisciplinary fields” (CCED, 1996). They further provide anticipated outcomes of this type of
research:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 62
• a greater awareness of alternative strategies to address specific issues,
• an increase in the community's awareness of the economic, social, political,
environmental, and psychological impacts associated with alternative solutions,
• a heightened ability to recognize potential root causes of community concerns, and
• an improved capacity to develop and implement effective public policy initiatives that
address the causes of community decline rather than the symptomatic treatment of
persistent problems.
Professional development. Professional development activities may include a range of
deeds such as training, participation in projects, positions on boards and committees, webinars,
and other actions that will increase the skill, knowledge, and understanding of an individual. All
of these components are key to sustained CED, which also assists with community
empowerment. As Clay & Jones (2009) write, a community achieves this by exerting ongoing
influence over local decision making such that efforts are responsive to community needs.
Theoretical Framework
Theories “guide the researchers as to what issues are important to examine (e.g.,
marginalization, oppression, power) and the people who need to be studied” (Creswell, 2014, p.
98). Used as a broad explanation for behavior and attitudes (Creswell, 2014, p. 98), the theories
provide background for launching this research in ways that connect it with current debates
(Mason, 2002). Within this section, the researcher compares and contrasts competing theories,
explores how they apply to the problem of engagement for FBOs and the theoretical proponents
of CED, and justifies the theoretical foundation of the dissertation. Analyzing the literature led to
the following theoretical framework seen in Figure 1. The literature on leadership, management,
and religiosity intersected around empowerment which is why these theories were chosen.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 63
Figure 1
Theoretical Framework
Note. Illustrates the combination of theories into a theoretical framework (Harpst, 2008; Qehaja, Kutllovci, and Pula, 2017; Moynihan & Van Mart, 2013; Wallace, Myers, and Holley, 2004; Wong and Davey, 2007; Van Dierendonck, 2011; Zimmerman, 1995).
First, the theory of holistic faith-based development and empowerment informs this
research because, as Wallace, Myers, and Holley (2004) suggest, with it “both the pressing felt
needs of individuals as well as larger, more systemic needs of organizations and neighborhoods
are met” (p. 23). This empowerment theory is qualitative in nature, and in combination with a
case study method of analysis and design helped with the investigation of the subjects of FBOs
and CED.
Secondly, as Wong and Davey (2007) suggest, “The spirit of the leader as a servant may
be just what is needed to implement a strengths-based paradigm…practiced and taught by Jesus
more than 2000 years ago… Potentially… [using the theory] can transform leadership, the
workplace and society” (pp. 9-10). The Servant Leadership Model also informs the research as
Van Dierendonck (2011) identifies important characteristics which include empowering and
developing people and stewardship.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 64
Thirdly, the faith-based management framework informs this research because it appears
to be the missing link in most of the research. A management approach is popular in most
organizational settings; however it seems to be absent from FBOs in which the adoption of such
practices could increase the quality of services and offerings that empower their staff, members,
and geographical target areas.
Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Theory and Development
Empowerment theory adapted to fit a faith-based perspective examines the processes by
which people of faith, their organizations, and their neighborhoods gain control over their lives
and the outcomes of empowering processes (Wallace et al., 2004). Empowering processes are the
mechanisms by which people, FBOs, and neighborhoods become empowered (Wallace et al.,
2004). Wallace, Myers, and Holley (2004) provide a theory of holistic faith-based empowerment
development that aims to be a solution “to the revitalized urban communities” (p. 5). They
explain that other organizations and agencies assumed the church’s historic role in providing
social services, but that its influence remains because leaders of these organizations are
associated with some faith institution (Wallace, Myers, & Holley, 2004, p. 4). According to
Wallace, Myers, and Holley (2004), “churches are potentially key empowering settings in which
people have opportunities to share leadership, develop group identity, learn skills and participate
in key organizational tasks (Zimmerman, 1995; Maton & Salem, 1995; Speer & Hughey, 1995)”
(p. 8).
Examples of programs that seek to empower FBOs include those geared toward
increasing their ability to assist poor communities, build capital and capacity in areas of
leadership, recruit, train, and carry out the community organizing necessary to strengthen impact
(Anglin, 2004). Anglin (2004) writes, “Community organizing…empowers residents to hold the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 65
political system accountable for improving social services, housing, and other public policies that
support a viable community” (p. 15).
Anglin (2004) continues, “Catholic social teaching in the 20th century made increasingly
strong links between economic empowerment and justice” (p. 29). The author notes that “The
importance of the Black Church in the story of community development is directly proportional
to the economic oppression of African Americans both before and after Emancipation” (Anglin,
2004, p. 30). This research suggests that “Long before CDCs appeared, the Black struggle for
justice and civil rights had an economic-empowerment agenda” (Anglin, 2004, p. 30).
William W. Biddle (as cited in Anglin, 2004), “a deeply religious sociologist affiliated
with the National Council of Churches, urged congregations to join the community development
movement” (p. 31). The community development movement includes several initiatives such as
those of the “Advocates of Black Community Development (ABCD) in Canton, Ohio,” about
whom Anglin (2004) writes, “they began work as a separate corporation developed by a small
United Methodist congregation” (p. 31). The author notes, “ABCD changed its name in 1987 to
Association for Better Community Development and continues today as a powerful faith-based
model working to ‘reduce poverty, to foster self-reliance and to bring about empowerment of the
community that we serve’” (Anglin, 2004, p. 31). In her study, additional evidence supports how
“African-American churches are particularly active on behalf of asset building and economic
empowerment, for which informal support includes providing church space and pulpit ‘air time’
for mortgage lenders and homeownership counselors” (Anglin, 2004, p. 46).
Anglin (2004) defines faith-based community development as:
The practice by organizations from the faith sector to produce services that increase the
assets of poor neighborhoods and expand the socioeconomic opportunities for their
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 66
residents [which helps] to empower poor communities by employing their own social
capital in ways that benefit not only their own members but also individuals and families
who are not members (p. 153).
Leadership Theory
The theory shows how it is important to understand and accept the complexity and
demands of leadership, the role of the leaders, and their relationship to performance. First, in
order to understand the concept one must define leadership. A second step is to show the
association with either an individual’s abilities or a list of principles (Moynihan & Van Mart,
2013). With a focus on faith-based leaders, this study shows, leadership theories may strengthen
skills from a managerial perspective as well as reveal approaches to organizational change
(Moynihan & Van Mart, 2013). Gallardo (2015) shows the importance of who is involved in
these efforts when he expresses that “with committed leaders and a clear vision of where the
community wants and needs to be, CED can move communities forward in a comprehensive
way” (p. 2).
Choosing faith-based leaders was important to this study since they are the ones most
committed to FBOs in practice, and by educating them with theories their performance may be
improved. They have started and maintained initiatives that not only change the lives of
individuals but also revitalize underserved communities and transform neighborhoods (The
Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2006). Their effectiveness and when they are assessed depends upon
their abilities, skills, and capacity to engage followers and change systems. The analysis shows
faith-based leaders to be known for their support of programs and services, yet it is missing
information on these other factors. In fact, the literature indicates that they generally concentrate
their efforts on things such as spirituality, feeding the homeless, assisting the poor, and providing
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 67
shelter. Limited information exists on which theories, models, or best practices are used in these
activities, but research does mention other activities such as those related to children and youth.
It is also true, though, that many business leaders who start out with visions of excellence
often see their hearts absorbed by day-to-day challenges (Harpst, 2008); this is also the case with
faith-based leaders. A challenge for CED practitioners and faith-based leaders is distinguishing
between how to plan and execute through these complexities with a balanced strategy. Harpst’s
(2008) belief is that this “is the most foundational capability any organization can have” (p. 2).
His theoretical perspective about leadership is that “progress in a variety of best practices
and technology…created the foundation for a next-generation program that will overcome the
barriers” (Harpst, 2008, p. 2). In his book, he provides a framework for strategy and a
methodology for execution. They may help with determining what promise to commit to with
stakeholders, how to deliver the commitment, and how to overcome complexities (Harpst, 2008).
His methodology claims to provide best practices that ensure team members understand and
regularly perform actions to achieve the organization’s goals” (The Six Disciplines
Methodology, para. 1). This is important to leadership as it helps to 1) develop a strategic vision,
2) initiate change, 3) align all systems, 4) encourage teamwork, 5) improve quality and
processes, and 6) provide chances to review, adjust, and excel. See appendix.
Servant Leadership
The complexity of leadership demonstrates why CED leaders may need to use a variety
of theories, competencies, skills, and styles to perform well, influence others, and operate in
systems. Spears’ (2005) article on the servant leadership (SL) theory offers CED practitioners
ways to apply principles for institutional philosophies and models, theoretical and ethical bases
for formal and informal education and training programs, and deepening roles in community
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 68
leadership. It can affect personal growth and transformation for both institutions and individuals
(Spears, 2005). He notes that in practice, SL is an important framework for long-term change and
effects by managers and leaders that prove efficient for quality improvement and systems
thinking. He admonishes readers that to create meaningful change, one should start with SL as
the foundation and build upon it with other approaches (Spears, 2005). Not all leadership
theories approach business or CED from a service perspective; yet, certain models seem to
demonstrate how leaders empower followers by example.
According to Maxwell (2007), unlike other governance models and theories, leaders as
servants are different because this approach focuses on how far they can advance and serve
others. The article “Best Practices in Servant Leadership” by Wong and Davey (2007) explains
how the concept of a leader as a servant has gained increasing acceptance in leadership and
organizational literature (p. 3). They recommend the SL approach in order to provide direction in
the marketplace (Wong & Davey, 2007, p. 2). Ebener and O’Connell (2010) write, “The servant
leader is more inclined…to empower rather than to flex positional power by commanding and
controlling the response of followers” (p. 332).
They continue by saying:
If leaders place themselves in humble service to their organization, recognize the gifts
and talents of others, and call them forth through empowering actions, then the people
will respond with organizational citizenship behaviors by helping each other, taking
initiative, participating in various activities, and taking responsibility to continuously
develop themselves as potential leaders of their organizations (Ebener & O’Connell,
2010, p. 332).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 69
Wong and Davey (2007) suggest that one needs to blend a servant's heart with leadership skills,
abilities, and characteristics. The characteristics they must possess are 1) capacity for productive
work, 2) vision for the right direction, 3) intellect and knowledge, 4) people skills, 5) team-
builders, 6) motivators, 7) heart, 8) communicators, 9) optimists, 10) courage, 11) self-
knowledge, and lastly, 12) character (Wong & Davey, 2007, pp. 9-10). Using an SL approach
within faith-based organizations addresses the need for resources in CED.
Servant Leadership Profile Assessment:
I. Character-Orientation Being - What kind of person is the leader? Concerned with
cultivating a servant's attitude, focusing on the leader's values, credibility and motive.
II. People-Orientation (Relating: How does the leader relate to others?) Concerned with
developing human resources, focusing on the leader's relationship with people and his/her
commitment to develop others.
III. Task-Orientation (Doing: What does the leader do?) Concerned with achieving
productivity and success, focusing on the leader's tasks and skills necessary for success.
IV. Process-Orientation (Organizing: How does the leader impact organizational
processes?) Concerned with increasing the efficiency of the organization, focusing the
leader's ability to model and develop a flexible, efficient and open system (Page & Wong,
2005, pp. 16-17).
The Law of Addition
Capacity building and effectiveness – law of the lid. According to Maxwell (2007),
personal and organizational effectiveness is proportionate to the strength of leadership and
abilities in people skills, planning and strategic thinking, vision, and results (pp. 8, 10). The
Annie E. Casey Foundation (2006) notes, “The pastor or ministry director’s experience,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 70
education, and ability to lead congregations or offer programming vary” (p. 2). With this
variance, it is hard to determine what the organization is in need of without an assessment.
Known as a leader’s lid is the principle that their ability determines the level of effectiveness
(Maxwell, 2007). This principle suggests that for the FBO to have great impact, the influence of
its leaders and organizational influence should be greater (Maxwell, 2007).
In fact, Clay and Jones (2009) recommend that leadership challenges be addressed as
first-phase CED practitioners who learned on the job are “aging out.” The research suggests that
“the leadership structure in community development is aging and nearing a natural transition
point” (Anglin, 2004, p. 14). Accordingly, the industry could benefit from standardization of
training efforts (Clay & Jones, 2009). “Supporters of this view…point to the perceived
dominance of professionals and intermediaries with expertise in real estate and economic
development instead of those with acute knowledge of, and passion for, the community” (Anglin,
2004, pp. 14-15). The author reports, “CDC practitioners express a significant desire to define
the scope and standards of their practice” because “it lacks professional definition, resulting in
the loss of talented people” (Anglin, 2004, p. 19). Perhaps using Harpst’s (2008) Six Disciplines
Methodology in the appendix can help in this process.
Other challenges include “The question of people of color in leadership positions”
(Anglin, 2004, p. 20). On one side, critics say not enough people of color lead CDCs where
people of color predominate, nor do many intermediaries and foundations have people of color in
significant leadership positions (Anglin, 2004, p. 21). Research suggests, “The assertion that
community development institutions need to reflect the communities they serve cannot be
disputed” (Anglin, 2004, p. 21). As in times past, the industry is still experiencing a number of
challenges (Clay & Jones, 2009) with ensuring that opportunities are available for community
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 71
members at a level playing field. According to Clay and Jones (2009), a human capital crisis
limits organizational capacity and there is a need to respond to the demands of funders,
intermediaries, and neighborhood residents.
Inspiration – the law of influence. As purported by Maxwell (2007), titles do not have
much value when it comes to leading; they can buy time, either to increase one’s level of
influence or undermine it. For him, some people emerge as leaders because of their character,
relationships, knowledge, intuition, experience, past success, and abilities. Hibels (as cited in
Maxwell, 2007) “believes that the church is the most leadership-intensive enterprise in society”
(p. 18). He goes on to say, “Positional leadership often doesn’t work in voluntary
organizations…the thing that works is leadership in its purest form: influence” (Maxwell, 2007,
pp. 18-19).
Development – the law of process. Leadership development is not a one-time event, but
a process. According to Maxwell (2007), daily development occurs through five phases of
growth, encourages development, matures people, is a culture issue, changes people, and is
difficult. In 2018, Gary Harpst’s Six Discipline Methodology evolved into a management system
for purpose-driven leaders, wherein “The foundation of the system is the Six Disciplines process.
It shows…leaders how to”
• clarify strategy,
• manage change,
• align for both “running and changing” the business,
• engage people in doing what is important each day,
• encourage continuous improvement, and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 72
• implement organization development that prepares for the future (A Management
System, para. 5).
Ebener and O’Connell (2010) write, “The question of whether the people in an organization are
learning, growing, and developing as leaders is critical to the establishment of whether the
organization has servant leadership” (p. 330). They continue by saying, “Members of the clergy
study theology and philosophy in preparation for parish ministry, and then find themselves in
situations where they need to know more about leadership, management, and administration”
(Ebener & O’Connell, 2010, p. 331). Furthermore, Ebener and O’Connell (2010) write, “The
training provided for nonprofit managers and leaders is woefully inadequate to the challenges
that they will face…leaders in the church are attracted to…working with people, not doing
financial management or administrative paperwork (Kim, 2005)” (p. 331). Moreover, McKenna,
Yost, and Boyd (2007) write, “For pastors, leadership may not be captured in either doing what
is right or doing the right thing, but may be more effectively captured in significant life events
that have impacted not only their leadership, but their overall character, vocation, and sense of
identity.” Brinckerhoff (as cited in Ebener & O’Connell, 2010) suggests, “They are motivated by
mission, not money” (p. 331).
McBrient (as cited in Ebener & O’Connell, 2010) states, “To connect their work back to
mission…clergy need to open up more opportunities for laypeople to use the gifts and talents
they have toward the administration of the business side” (p. 331). Drucker (as cited in Ebener &
O’Connell, 2010) has “advised pastors to call forth leadership in laypeople to cover for their
possible weaknesses in areas such as financial management and to be mindful of their strengths
in other areas of ministry such as liturgy and faith formation” (p. 331).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 73
Finally, Ebener & O’Connell (2010) write, “many nonprofit organizations, including the
Catholic church, are hierarchical organizations where the power distance between those in
management and those on the front lines is not conducive to the elements of servant leadership”
(p. 331). To reiterate they state, “Servant leadership begins with a motivation to serve rather than
to be served” (Ebener & O’Connell, 2010, p. 331). Ebener & O’Connell (2010) also suggest,
once a leader embraces that approach and uses the behaviors it will transform the culture and the
structure.
On another note, Reinelt and McGonagill (2009) write, “Instead of just focusing on
individual leader development – it is increasingly attractive to consider four other levels of
leadership investment: the team level, the organization level, the community level and the field
level” (p. 1). They continue by saying that although an individual may be responsible for the
performance of an organization and the influences of those within it, various approaches may
increase the capacity to produce results. The Leadership Development Investment Framework
(McGonagill & Reinelt, 2010) is just one of many tools used to assist in programs and initiatives
that contribute to the growth of leaders; it “has five types of capacity development that can be
supported and catalyzed at each level: individual capacity, team capacity, organizational
capacity, network capacity and systems change capacity” (p. 5).
Power – the law of empowerment. Maxwell (2007) describes the law of empowerment
in this way: “only secure leaders give power to others” (p. 141). This power can range from
decision-making and so on; but more specifically, he writes that it includes empowering them
“by identifying leaders; building them up; giving them resources, authority, and responsibility;
and then turning them loose to achieve” (Maxwell, 2007, p. 145). The three main reasons he
gives that impede these actions and serve as barriers to empowerment are a desire for job
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 74
security, resistance to change, and lack of self-worth (Maxwell, 2007, pp. 145-146). He writes,
“The main ingredient for empowering others is a high belief in people,” suggesting that “If you
believe in others, they will believe in themselves” (Maxwell, 2007, p. 150).
Vision – the law of buy-in. Maxwell (2007) believes that “People buy into the leader,
then the vision,” and “Having an understanding of that changes your whole approach to leading
people” (p. 171). In other words, if people buy into you, then they buy into the vision you
represent. He goes on to say, “Every message that people receive is filtered through the
messenger who delivers it… You cannot separate leaders from the causes they promote”
(Maxwell, 2007, pp. 172-173). The leader should think about how to earn credibility with
individuals and “Develop a strategy with each person. If you make it your primary goal to add
value to all of them, your credibility factor will rise rapidly” through some of the following
ways:
• developing a good relationship with them,
• being honest and authentic and developing trust,
• holding yourself to high standards and setting a good example,
• giving them the tools to do their job better, and
• developing them as leaders (Maxwell, 2007, p. 178).
Understanding how the organization works and the roles within it in order to increase
buy-in and maximize the use of all resources—especially time, talent, and treasure—is crucial.
Though this is not always easy, it is possible through the acts of planning, communicating, and
executing the vision. The more people involved in this process, the better the chances of it being
innovative, strategic, and realistic. Too often leaders and managers take on these roles
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 75
themselves and then face challenges with execution and evaluation. Consequently, it leaves the
organization at a disadvantage to pursue funding, collaborations, and meeting community needs.
All organizations should have a strategic vision; FBOs are not exempt. Harpst (2008)
provides the Six Disciplines Methodology as one example of how to build organizations that
execute strategies through processes, coaching, software, and leadership development.
Planning – the law of navigation. Brinckerhoff (1999) explains that planning in all its
various forms is a skill that good managers need to learn and practice regularly. In doing so he
suggests that we can organize ourselves and better realize what God wants us to do
(Brinckerhoff, 1999, pp. 191-192). He believes that good stewardship demands careful planning,
assessment of community wants and needs, looking at the organization thoroughly, and figuring
out what the focus should be (Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 132). Brinckerhoff (1999) purports, “if you
don’t know where you are going, the only way you get there is by accident” (p. 192). He
continues by explaining how “developing plans…makes good use of your resources and
embodies your responsibilities as a steward” (Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 192). Though no one can
guarantee that circumstances will remain the same, there should still be a sense of focus and
purpose for your organization.
Knowing the number of benefits from the planning process, according to Brinckerhoff
(1999), may allow you to get ahead of the curve as you stay abreast of the trends, anticipate
future changes, and then customize the services to fit the market. He writes, “Good planning
keeps you from reacting to and chasing needs” (Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 194). Secondly, planning
as a benefit allows for opportunities to coordinate activities as you set goals, identify tasks, and
move toward implementation. Thirdly, it allows for a culture that is participatory, which
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 76
decreases conflict since others take ownership in the process. Brinckerhoff (1999) states, it “can
become an excellent communications tool” (p. 195).
Through the process of planning, FBOs should consider a few things according to
Brinckerhoff (1999):
1. Get Ready
2. Retreat or Advance
3. Gather Information
4. Set Goal and Objectives
5. Get Outside Comment
6. Final Draft and Adoption
7. Implementation and Evaluation
8. Start Over
9. Planning Timeline
Brinckerhoff (1999) says that good planning helps practitioners find the way to best use the gifts
they have to do God’s will in an efficient, effective way (p. 216). Individuals need to get outside
comments and include people in their plans and organization (Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 217). The
planning process should include strategic, marketing, and capital plans and integrated
management of the FBO. This positions the organization to be able to sustain activities on a
long-term basis.
Another way to say it is that there needs to be an organized strategy with a plan to
innovatively execute, repeatedly learning from the process. Harpst (2008) writes that there
should be a holistic approach to running an organization, earlier referred to as the Six Disciplines
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 77
Methodology. It is “a series of cycles: annually, quarterly, weekly, and daily” (Harpst, 2008, p.
95).
He writes, “Sustainability, the capacity of an organization to maintain the necessary
balance between strategy and execution…requires a complete program consisting of four tightly-
integrated elements” (Harpst, 2008, p. 78). They include a repeatable methodology,
accountability coaching, execution system, and community learning (Harpst, 2008, pp. 78-79).
The author suggests that these elements drive organizational learning and understanding
and provide nurture to stay the course, a system in which to engage everyone, and opportunity to
share and reinforce best practices (Harpst, 2008, pp. 78-79).
Management Theory
Leadership and management. Harpst (2008) writes, a business made of people,
strategy, business processes, technology, and expertise requires purpose, careful design,
management, and maintenance. It is not just necessary to examine leadership; one must also look
at managerial competencies. In addition, McKenna, Yost, and Boyd (2007) in their analysis of
pastoral interviews examining the learning agility of development, reveal factors and strategies
including management. The situational factors and personal strategy taxonomies built on
previous research identifies elements in the ability of leaders to learn from experience. They fall
into five broad categories: Drawing on God and Others, Learning from Results, Stepping to the
Edge, Managing the Ministry, and Managing Change (McKenna, Yost, & Boyd, 2007, p. 198).
They write, “Supportive organizational cultures (4.0%) created an environment where the pastor
could grow and develop…negative challenges also served as powerful developmental catalysts”
(McKenna, Yost, & Boyd, 2007, p. 196).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 78
Management in practice. Qehaja, Kutllovci, and Pula (2017) write, “Various authors
have presented a different number of tools for strategic analysis by specifying them as a guide
for managers” (p. 586). Stonehouse and Pemberton (as cited in Qehaja, Kutllovci, & Pula, 2017)
state, “strategic management can be conceptualized as a set of theories and frameworks,
supported by tools and techniques, designed to assist managers of organizations in thinking,
planning and acting strategically” (p. 585). For the purposes of this study, the primary focus is on
Faith-Based Management: Leading Organizations That Are Based on More Than Just Mission
framework that is part of Peter C. Brinckerhoff’s Mission-Based Management Series.
Brinckerhoff’s (1999) Faith-Based Management book suggests that there are guidelines
for FBOs that include “proven management strategies and techniques developed at some of the
world's most successful places of worship and faith-based service organizations. It also supplies
a complete action plan for quickly implementing them in your organization” (n. p.).
Yaghi (2007) presents in his Islamic case study several values associated with FBOs that
require some consideration as it relates to management and organizational culture. He writes that
there are “three major sets of values that dictate the process and outcomes of various
decisions…which [shape]…behavior, namely: (1) solidarity and cohesiveness; (2) guardianship
and managerial tasks as spiritual duties and religious obligations; and (3) emphasizing the
organizational mission and values” (Yaghi, 2007, p. 361). Middleton (as cited in Yaghi, 2007)
notes, “In order to understand the linkages between internal and external forces…management
should secure continuity, stability, and integrity within the institution by focusing on the
organization’s survival as the ultimate goal of the management” (p. 359).
After the organization grows, there is still a concern that the pioneers use their seniority,
dedication of time, and resources of influence to transfer their values to the organization. Yaghi
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 79
(2007) explains, others assume “that adhering to these values is the best way to manage, make
decisions, and achieve organizational goals,” but that is not necessarily the case (p. 366). “If the
same group of people remains in power for a long time, the organization might develop
vulnerability to hosting an organizational culture that enhances rigid patterns of decision making
and management” (Yaghi, 2007, p. 366). According to Yaghi (2007), “although volunteerism
tends to dominate the staffing traditions in small faith-based organizations, certain training and
professional mentorship should be put in place to provide the staff with professional skills” (p.
366).
Furthermore, “Training and development can also improve the relationship between
founders and constituents by regulating managerial practices and separating them from the
founders” (Yaghi, 2007, p. 367). In other words, the author explains, “preparing qualified
volunteers to manage the organization would replace the founder-decision maker model with a
new model that is constructed around the idea of professionalism and qualified managerial staff”
(Yaghi, 2007, pp. 367-368). Thus, “developing a strong system of accountability where
management and decision making are separated from those individuals who founded the
organization would institutionalize Islamic centers and enhance constituents’ confidence in
them” (Yaghi, 2007, p. 368). These principals can also apply to other FBOs.
Wong and Davey (2007) provide two new approaches to management that may assist
FBOs as they shift from just process and outcome to people and the future. Each approach is
explored further in the following paragraphs. The researcher provides an overview of how
“positive psychology” and “servant leadership” assist with the soft skills necessary to empower
and transform individuals, families, and communities.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 80
Managerial competencies. Boyatzis (2011) explains, “Outstanding leaders, managers,
advanced professionals and people in key jobs, from sales to bank tellers, appear to require three
clusters of behavioral habits as threshold abilities and three clusters of competencies as
distinguishing outstanding performance. The threshold clusters include”
1) expertise and experience,
2) knowledge (i.e., declarative, procedural, functional, and meta-cognitive), and
3) an assortment of basic cognitive competencies such as memory and deductive
reasoning (Boyatzis, 2011, p. 92).
He furthered purports, “Competencies can be considered to be a behavioral approach to
emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence. They are defined…as used in the ESCI and ESCI-U
[phases]” (Boyatzis, 2011, p. 92). Boyatzis (2011) notes, “Emotional Intelligence, Social
Intelligence, and Cognitive Intelligence (i.e., EI, SI, and CI) are convenient phrases with which
to focus attention on the underlying emotional and social components of human talent” (p. 92).
The author notes that, “Knowing the point at which a person’s use of a competency tips them
into outstanding performance provides vital guidance to managers and leaders” (Boyatzis, 2011,
p. 92).
Managerial discipline. Harpst (2008) writes, “The majority of us just don’t know how to
put together all the key steps of strategy, planning, organizational alignment, execution
management, innovation and measurement” (p. 36). Therefore, it requires knowledge and
practice of certain business disciplines. He explains that through interviews, issues such as
“communication, accountability, alignment, leadership transition, and control” surfaced (Harpst,
2008, p. 26). Peter Senge (as cited in Harpst, 2008) notes, “Systems thinking is a discipline for
seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 81
patterns of change rather than static snapshots” (p. 35). He identifies several other disciplines
such as Business Intelligence (BI) and Performance Management (PM) that he purports are
generally only affordable to larger companies. Through research, he designed the Six
Disciplines® For Excellence, which “identified six fundamental disciplines that need to be
incorporated into a single, repeatable methodology. These disciplines include setting strategy,
developing plans, organizing and aligning resources, managing execution, enabling innovation,
and encouraging organizational learning” (Harpst, 2008, p. 94). Harpst (2008) claims, “every
organization that is serious about excellence and execution must practice some defined
methodology as the foundation of its efforts” (p. 94).
Strategic vision. Harpst (2008) suggests that many business leaders talk about their
vision, the first discipline, and possibilities, “But they don’t like taking the time to plan the steps
for getting there” (p. 104). He submits that not just faith-based leaders or managers struggle with
this, and “this tendency…exists in everyone else within the organization” (Harpst, 2008, p. 104).
Leaders and managers are key to understanding the vision with the “company community”
(Harpst, 2008, p. 149), and they should be attentive to achievement and progress. Furthermore,
Bolman and Deal (2013) explain, “Symbols take many forms in organizations. Myth, vision, and
values imbue an organization with deep purpose and resolve” (p. 248). Consequently, it is not
enough to talk about the vision; a greater emphasis should be placed on being strategic in
achieving it. Lastly, they write, “Vision turns an organization’s core ideology, or sense of
purpose, into an image of the future. It is a shared fantasy, illuminating new possibilities within
the realms of myths and values…it imbues an organization with spirit, resolve, and elan”
(Bolman & Deal, 2013, p. 250).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 82
Initiate change. Initiating change is not always easy; it depends on the types of change,
the management of the steps, and the team involved in it. This is true for organizations and
communities. There needs to be a framework of some kind that has proven to be successful. The
discipline of “having a repeatable document business-building methodology is the accumulation
of knowledge by individuals and teams. Defining a process and then documenting changes to
that process reinforces the learning” (Harpst, 2008, p. 98). According to Harpst (2008), “we need
others to help make change last within our organizations” (p. 108). He further explains that
though setting strategy and operating goals is the responsibility of senior leadership, the teams
are responsible for the implementation. That is why it is important to incorporate best practices
that incorporate what Worstell states (as cited in Harpst, 2008) as “continuous improvement, and
an empowered workforce exercising ownership, responsibility, and accountability” (p. vi).
Whiteside, Tseyb, and Cadet-James’ (2011) research illustrates this concept in the following
framework: it is “Congruent with Wallerstein’s (1992) ecological approach to empowerment, the
attributes featured across individual, team, organisation, and social domains…[which] can be
used to engage, stimulate, reflect, monitor, and evaluate transdisciplinary teams and
organisational change” (pp. 230-231).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 83
Table 1
A Framework for Transdisciplinary Teamwork
Note. Reprinted from A framework for transdisciplinary teamwork, by Whiteside, M., Tseyb, K., and Cadet-James, Y., 2011, Australian Social Work, 64(2), 230.
Align all systems. Harpst (2008) explains, “The majority of us just don’t know how to
put together all the key steps of strategy, planning, organizational alignment, execution
management, innovation, and measurement” (p. 36). The author recommends a balanced
scorecard to help “align business activities with strategy and monitor performance toward
strategy goals” (Harpst, 2008, p. 65). He adds, “As the business changes, the ‘current’ approach
slowly becomes less aligned with other goals of the company” (Harpst, 2008, p. 66). This
alignment should include activities, people, processes, decisions, resources, and priorities
(Harpst, 2008). He writes, “In a perfectly aligned organization, all of these items would fit
together with no wasted energy or effort” (Harpst, 2008, p. 114).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 84
Staff and Volunteers
Together, towards one goal. Harpst (2008) defines teamwork as a subgroup with a
shared purpose who depends on each other to learn and grow. According to him, “An
organization’s leadership team is the small group of senior leadership who are ultimately
responsible for the overall direction of the company…this group makes the critical choices that
determine strategy, including mission, values, strategic position, and the goals statement”
(Harpst, 2008, p. 145). He continues in saying, “The group’s decisions, leadership, and
management skills have a huge impact on the success of the organization” (Harpst, 2008, pp.
145-146). Harpst (2008) explains that there is another community of importance responsible for
the organization engaged as part of this discipline of teamwork. It includes “the middle layer of
organizations…with a special set of interests and characteristics…called initiative teams”
(Harpst, 2008, p. 146).
Improve quality and process. Harpst (2008) purports, “Over the past several decades, a
variety of programs, initiatives, and standards have evolved specific to quality improvement,
performance, and business excellence” (p. 49). For FBOs this is important for organizational
advancement. He continues to write, “The initial success of a business depends primarily on the
ability to build top quality products or services” (Harpst, 2008, p. 92). Quality management is
one of the six fundamental disciplines; if one of the perceptions that hinders FBOs from
engaging in CED is about quality, and if it “varies unacceptably, the actual steps completed can
be compared to the steps listed in the process to eliminate process errors as a possible cause”
(Harpst, 2008, p. 100).
Accountability and measuring performance. Bolman and Deal (2013) purport that a
single person within an organization is not the only one responsible and accountable for ensuring
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 85
effective tasks, processes, and circumstances for satisfaction. Although it is a focus of leaders
and managers, the team should share the weight. They also explain how achieving this comes
through performance control measures that “motivate individual efforts, particularly when
targets are reasonably clear and calculable” (Harpst, 2008, p. 53). Harpst (2008) suggests that
there should be a scorecard of some kind, so as “to translate a mission statement and overall
business strategy into specific, quantifiable goals, and to measure the organization’s
performance” (p. 55). Harden (2006) also explains how the faith-based program theory model
might guide policymakers in establishing new guidelines for supporting and evaluating faith-
based programs. The theory aims to evaluate “all spiritual and/or activities based on religious
beliefs and values of a faith” “along with other contextual factors that influence components for
transformational purposes” (Harden, 2006, pp. 484, 487). Lastly, the authors describe how action
planning is connected to measuring results, as they note that it “specifies methods and time
frames for decisions and actions” and “works best when it is easier to assess how a job is done
than to measure its products” (Harpst, 2008, p. 54).
Communication. In Perkin’s (1995) book Restoring At-Risk Communities: Doing It
Together & Doing It Right, within his “concept of the proclamation of the gospel known as the
‘wheel of ministry,’” he explains that “effective communication of the message of salvation
consists of five parts: call, evangelism, social action, economic development, and justice, all
grounded in the church” (pp. 37-38). Brinckerhoff (1999) writes that in order to communicate
our intentions, wishes, and beliefs more clearly, there must be trust, an understanding of what the
other person hears, the ability to listen, and a willingness to practice successful techniques (p.
148). He writes, “In Communication…the most important part of the equation is trust and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 86
successful communications go hand in hand with a supervision philosophy that sees management
as a support function rather than a fiefdom” (Brinckerhoff, 1999, p. 158).
Program theory. Harden (2006) proposes a new faith-based program evaluation theory
and tools to demonstrate limited differences in FBOs’ ability to achieve effective outcomes. He
determines that religious beliefs and values do not have to conflict with systems and processes
and can be operationalized without affecting those who evaluate them (Harden, 2006, p. 483).
According to Harden (2006), “the outcomes may be social and/or spiritual in nature because of
the program components that make up the intervention as a whole” (p. 487). Although many
would agree that “cross-participation in secular and spiritual activities could affect the program
outcomes,” the author is clear that they are two distinctive factors (Harden, 2006, p. 492). Lastly,
Harden (2006) writes:
By reducing the number of variables related to religious beliefs and values to normative
program logic and contextual patterns, we may be able to measure how and when faith
and spirituality make a difference in social interventions of faith-based organizations (p.
502).
McDavid and Hawthorn (as cited in Guyadeen & Seasons, 2018) describe programs, generally,
as a means to an end whereby resources are transformed into activities to produce an intended
outcome. Guyadeen and Seasons (2018) explain, though “the scale at which programs operate
can vary—for example, international, national, or local—they include a defined set of activities
needed to achieve an objective” (p. 99). Many use programs as tools to strategically accomplish
CED goals.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 87
Using the proper tools to measure and evaluate programs is essential for not only FBOs
but any use of public and private funds. It is important for an investigator to consider a theory
specifically designed for faith-based evaluation to demonstrate impact. Harden (2006) writes:
An investigator’s lack of understanding regarding faith and spirituality can be a serious
hindrance to responsible systematic inquiry in faith-based program evaluation.
Developing an understanding of the essentials of what constitutes a faith-based
organization, a faith-based program, and faith and spirituality is a reasonable and
necessary requirement to impose on program evaluators. Therefore, before offering the
new conceptual framework and tools for conducting faith-based program evaluation, a
brief discussion about three basic essentials is needed to establish a minimal level of
competence for potential evaluators (p. 484).
Harden (2006) writes, “First, it is essential to understand what constitutes a faith-based
organization and a faith-based program” (p. 484). He also posits, “The second essential is in
understanding the extent to which faith and spirituality may be components of a faith-based
program” (Harden, 2006, p. 485). Lastly, he notes, “The third essential to understand is how
spiritual transformation is conceptualized in view of the action that is taken” such as CED
(Harden, 2006, p. 486).
Review, adjust, and excel: Organizational development. According to an online blog,
another action of leadership and management is to use the discipline of Organizational
Development to determine capabilities for growth. Six Disciplines writes:
Leaders work together to conduct a thorough self-examination of external factors over
which the organization has no control including trends related to regulations, the
economy, technology and competitors. Internally the group evaluates gaps between
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 88
current and best practices. They also consider how well the current strategy is being
executed and separately whether the current strategy is a good one. Added to this is an
evaluation of the strength of people in the organization (2018, para. 9).
Identification of Gaps and Limitations of the Literature
Considering gaps and limitations of the literature is important to any body of research. It
is necessary to note that the literature fails to provide recent works on faith-based management.
The main resource published in 1999 has no updated editions nor competitive materials. While
this is true, it does provide practitioners with applicable best practices, templates, and systematic
instructions to implement certain management skills. Secondly, much of the literature specific to
FBOs’ involvement in CED is also outdated. Lastly, research written between the years of 2000
and 2008 regarding this phenomenon may no longer apply since it clearly presents data specific
to that political and socio-economic period. Consequently, there are limitations as to the progress
made in measuring the participation and evaluation of FBOs, their organizational capacity, and
their ability to maintain efforts on a long-term basis.
Chapter Summary
This literature review provides a critical analysis of this study’s research, showing the
connection of FBOs engaged in development initiatives such as CED. It demonstrates that with
any type of development, certain key factors or characteristics determine the success of an
economic strategy. Leadership and management of these initiatives are important as well as
including the whole community. Entwistle (2008) writes, “Successful community development
necessitates the involvement of the entire community” (p. 4). That idea includes those within the
faith communities. Sustainability of successful initiatives is often challenging due to different
perceptions and limits to long-term systematic processes. CED is no different and requires
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 89
residents, business owners, FBOs, and the support of the government to meet the strategic
objectives.
Former President Barack Obama encouraged support at each level of government to
include FBOs as strategic partners to tackle the growing needs of the economic challenges,
although it remains to be seen how long these initiatives will continue. This review of literature
shows the existence of environmental influences which put pressure on organizational
performance, impact, and strategy (Anderson, 2016; Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011). Some FBOs
have the capacity to enter into strategic arrangements with the government like a “3P”—Public-
Private Partnership. Others may benefit from additional support to do so. Yet, the research
proves that FBOs may be great resources to strengthen these initiatives locally, regionally, and
nationally while also increasing the capacity of individuals and community.
The function of FBOs is generally on a local level, unlike that of a federal or state
governmental organization; but that does not negate how their efforts help sustain broader
efforts. Most of their activities relate to building the capacity of individuals, which in turn
strengthens the human and social capital for the community and region. This is one way to
demonstrate the relationship between economic development and an FBO. Some authors define
capacity as “essential to innovation and entrepreneurship” (Feldman et al., 2014, p. 17). They
continue to suggest, “The greater the capacity in the total population, the more likely that
unexpected ideas can take hold and innovation will eventually successfully propel the economy
forward” (Feldman et al., 2014, p. 18).
Their argument is “that government has a vital role in promoting capacities that enable
the fullest variety of human endeavors and potential, including a variety that cannot be foreseen”
(Feldman et al., 2014, p. 18).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 90
Those occupying the middle and lower rungs of the income distribution are unable to
follow the American Dream because they lack the capacities to fully participate in the
economy. If this cycle continues there's potential for subsequently ever greater
divergence in the income and opportunity, leaving those who are disadvantaged less able
to gain access to education, finance and opportunity. Moreover, as Brenner and Pastor
(2013) emphasizes, the increasingly unequal distribution of income inhibits
entrepreneurship, slows economic growth and destabilizes the economy of American
cities (Feldman et al., 2014, p. 19).
This is why FBOs must play a vital role in CED as a partner to governments, universities,
private companies, and other stakeholders for the greater good. First, the role of the private
sector, as Feldman et al. (2014) explain, is to make money and survive. Second, society is
concerned about what would increase the quality of life, which the authors describe as “the
ultimate vision of economic development for democratic governments” (Feldman et al., 2014, p.
19). Third, Feldman et al. (2014) continue with the important point that “prosperity and quality
of life are synonymous with the concept of the good life, which encompasses a sense of material
comfort as well as psychological satisfaction and health (Lane, 1999)” (p. 19). The conclusive
information suggests that there is a need to increase the capacity of individuals in the community
and those serving it; FBOs engaged in CED activities is an option.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 91
Chapter Three
This qualitative study uses semi-structured interviews to illuminate the experiences,
perceptions, and challenges of FBOs engaged in CED in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.
Through the selection of two organizational assessment tools, the researcher sought to identify
certain characteristics within FBOs that are consistent with management and leadership
strategies according to Brinckerhoff (1999) and Cornelius and Wolfred (2011). This chapter
reviews the investigative methods used to understand the phenomenon of FBOs, how religious
expression influences engagement, and procedural techniques to collect data.
Purpose of the Study
Through examining FBOs that have engaged in CED, the researcher illuminates
strategies and techniques for success that provide the opportunity to fill gaps in the field. For
example, there appears to be an existing gap in the operational practices of management,
theoretical consideration of empowerment for FBOs, and regional interest of this topic. FBOs
should engage in CED because of the natural tendency to assist the underserved and
neighborhoods that lack resources. The findings can serve as a model for other organizations and
practitioners, as they provide evidence to support how religiosity does not have to reduce
engagement when incorporated with appropriate leadership and management best practices.
Confirmed by Mason (2002), this “Qualitative research aims to produce rounded and
contextual understandings on the basis of rich, nuanced and detailed data” (p. 3) regarding FBOs.
Through a series of investigative methods including semi-structured interviews and an archival
data analysis, the qualitative case study approach allows the researcher to illuminate the
experiences, perceptions, and challenges that FBOs face when engaged in CED activities.
Although contrary to much of the previous research primarily related to methodology to evaluate
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 92
the operations and outcomes of faith-based social service programs, as Belfield and Cleveland
(2013) explain, this type of inquiry expands the body of scholarly knowledge related to CED.
Research Design
A reasonable way to examine this phenomenon is to design qualitative research using a
case study approach. Creswell (2006) believes that this “involves the study of an issue explored
through one or more cases within a bounded system” (p. 73), such as within the context of FBO
engagement in CED. Mason (2002) explains that the sense of concern with how the social world
is interpreted, understood, and experienced is one example of the qualitative nature of this type
of research. Further, a case study approach, according to Yin (1989), allows an investigation to
retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events such as organizational and
managerial processes. On this point, Creswell (2014) notes that it is a design of inquiry in which
the researcher develops an in-depth analysis of a case, often an activity of one or more
individuals.
As one of five primary qualitative research designs, this strategy to use a case study
seemed most appropriate to provide specific direction for procedures (Creswell, 2014) that focus
on meaningful elements in a complex social world (Mason, 2002). FBOs are complex in many
ways, but most familiarly in their religious association. In practice, this design prepares
researchers, as Mason (2002) writes, to identify which organization, practices, policies, people,
and documents to examine. Creswell (2014) writes, “The historic origin for qualitative research
comes from anthropology, sociology, the humanities, and evaluation” (p. 42). Mason (2002)
suggests that a common element of this design should be “Based on methods of data generation
which are both flexible and sensitive to the social context in which data are produced” (p. 3).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 93
The intended outcome from this qualitative research strategy takes longer, as it requires
greater clarity of goals during the design stages. Moreover, unlike the analysis of running a
computer program like a quantitative study, as Berg (2009) explains, it is more important to
determine the quality of the FBOs’ activities in CED. He writes, “Quality refers to the what,
how, when, and where of a things…certain experiences cannot be meaningfully expressed by
numbers” (Berg, 2009, p. 3) in understanding empirical results. As with any other research, Berg
(2009) confirms that the purpose is to discover answers through systematic procedures. It allows
the researcher to examine various social settings and the individuals within them (Berg, 2009).
Therefore, he further explains that it provides a means of access to unquantifiable facts and an
opportunity to talk to representatives of the organization of study. Not only that, it allows
researchers to discuss “processes human beings use to create and maintain their social realities,”
which are derived from “symbolic interactionist perspective” (Berg, 2009, p. 9).
Symbolic interactionist perspective from Berg’s (2009) view “involves a set of related
propositions that describes and explains aspects of human behavior that is learned and
communicated in linguistic symbols. These symbols may include sounds and gestures that mean
something to a group of individuals, which somehow need to be interpreted from a research
standpoint. Thus, with many FBOs there generally are terms, objects, and rituals that only make
sense to those associated with them and their religious culture. Berg (2009) explains that (as
cited in Blumer, 1969) symbolic interaction is the account of meaning for human beings that may
be intrinsic through various things and experiences which must be understood as social products
formed through such activities (p. 10). It is also called the Chicago School Orientation as Berg
(2009) explains, which evolved into other perspectives and resulted in several tools such as The
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 94
Twenty Statements Test (TST) that answers the question “Who am I?” and provides a measure of
self-concepts (p. 11).
Therefore, the design of this research is an appropriate strategy due to the nature of
qualitative research and case studies. The Naturalistic Paradigm, as purported by Lincoln and
Guba (1989), which was founded on a relativist ontology, “mandates an openness with
respondents that precludes deceiving and objectifying them” (p. 227). The authors argue that
inquirers respond to twin problems of positivism by having no underlying premises of the way
things work or one single truth. Instead, the research becomes about a shared experience,
perception, or challenge; thus, to use deception in the study would be counterproductive (Lincoln
& Guba, 1989, p. 227).
From a researcher standpoint, it is necessary to use this approach in understanding the
meanings of the individuals, practitioners, FBOs, and other stakeholders in order to reveal
generalizable patterns of their behavior (Berg, 2009). As with the previously mentioned TST, it
assists the researcher to reveal certain capacities that allow individuals and organizations to
develop and employ symbols in aspects of the world around them (Berg, 2009, p. 13). Similarly,
it helps to categorize them in an external and internal manner. Berg (2009) notes that it can make
sense of the patterns found, assists in examining the Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Theory,
and acts as a signpost for the research questions to predict what will be learned in the study
(Creswell, 2014).
For example, the structured questions help the researcher qualitatively understand the
phenomenon and existing literature (Berg, 2009). In addition, Creswell (2014) suggests that in
this type of study, inquirers state research questions in two forms to explore a central
phenomenon and sub-questions used during interviews or observing documents (p. 185). Stake
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 95
(2010) suggests that the question should come before the method because you “ask what do you
need to know; then, how to go about finding it” (p. 72). He notes that the research question helps
the researcher to organize by content that informs what method of inquiry to use and separates it
from the researcher’s own expertise.
There are several ways this assists the researcher in getting answers, learning better how
to research, and collecting and analyzing data. Stake (2010) argues that our understanding of the
phenomenon studied may be fragmented and context-bound if the researcher organizes their
thoughts around the methods (p. 71). In order to become more specialized in the field of CED, it
is important to frame questions and research in a way that lays out the plan for gathering data and
performing an analysis. The organization of the research around the questions instead results
from reading relevant content and the associated knowledge gained. In this type of study, Stake
(2010) proposes that researchers should ask questions of substance and novelty, that answer
questions they are curious about, and that relate somehow to other research in the field. He
continues by advising researchers to “Begin the research questions with the words what or how
to convey an open and emerging design” (Stake, 2010, p. 185). Furthermore, he also explains
that this type of study might require many pages of description to answer questions of quality, as
well as to explain how they articulated and interpreted the data that led to the generalizations.
Stake (2010) explains that qualitative data require various methods and do not fit easily
into statistical analysis; therefore, the methods selected for gathering data fit the research
question and style of inquiry the researcher prefers (pp. 89-90). From a practitioner’s standpoint,
there are reasons to use interviews as a method to collect data, as it allows opportunities to obtain
unique information, collect a numerical aggregation of that information, and find out more about
CED.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 96
Methodology
The purposely selected methodology helps to obtain and analyze the results of the data.
First, there is a restatement of the research problem and a reiteration of the underlying
assumptions (Organizing Your Socials Sciences, 2018). Second, the details of the different
methods chosen to investigate the problem are articulated. Third, the researcher provides an
overview of how the data collected by the semi-structured interviews and archival data analysis
offer a range of ways to answer the research questions (Organizing Your Socials Sciences,
2018). Accordingly, it shows how the chosen methods assist in the aim of the study. Also
included is a discussion of problems that occurred and ways other researchers might adopt and
replicate the study (Organizing Your Socials Sciences, 2018). Lastly, the section exemplifies
how the interpretative group of methods focus on understanding the phenomenon of FBOs
engaged in CED in a comprehensive, holistic way (Organizing Your Socials Sciences, 2018).
In undertaking a case study of this nature, the researcher understands that the results
might assist policymakers, foundations, and other stakeholders in larger economic plans for the
greater Pittsburgh region. It provides relevant information pertaining to how religiosity
influences the leadership, management, programming, and sustainability of FBOs and why there
appears to be a lack in capacity to engage in CED. It documents the CED practitioners’,
partners’, participants’, and other stakeholders’ internal and external perceptions, experiences,
and challenges, providing a holistic way to examine FBOs’ engagement in literature. The
researcher obtained the information through semi-structured interviews and an analysis of
archival data from several pre-selected sites.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 97
Research Site
According to Creswell (2010), “Qualitative researchers tend to collect data in the field at
the site where participants experience the issue or problem under study,” called a ‘natural
setting’ (p. 234). Therefore, the sites chosen for this study include several FBOs in the greater
Pittsburgh region that have engaged in CED. Another qualification for participation in the study
is based on the level of access provided to review organizational, governance, and other
necessary documents that inform the research. In addition, the researcher required that
participants of the site consent to data collection methods of stakeholders such as administrators,
employees, partners, recipients of services, or funding sources.
With this in mind, the following sites were selected:
• a non-FBO, referred to as a local government office of Shelbyville engaged in a faith-
based partnership on behalf of the city’s mayor;
• a non-profit center, referred to a Jonestown, established to create financial wealth and
jobs and provide opportunities for skill building, entrepreneurship, or another means;
• an umbrella department of an educational facility affiliated with a national church
later referred to as Fredericksville;
• a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-
reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial
education; and
• Dublinville, a Christian-based church that focuses most of its services around its
surrounding community as a direct legacy of its original founder with several profit-
generating subdivisions.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 98
The organizations identified to participate in the study include one government
organization with access to most of the faith-based activity in the region, two faith-based
community organizations with very different geographical challenges, one multicultural
educational facility with urban focused intiatiatives, and a local national affiliate non-profit.
These organizations engage in various ways throughout the region, and therefore, participated in
the study. The intent in selecting the different types of organizations is to illuminate different
perceptions, approaches, and experiences.
Research Questions
The case study is the methodological approach used to illuminate the perceptions,
experiences, and challenges of FBOs engaged in CED. It investigates FBOs as critical sources
for economic development activities that help provide job readiness skills, access to
employment, education, business ownership, and wealth building in impoverished
neighborhoods. As recommended by Creswell (2010), the researcher asked three central
questions to guide the inquiry:
1) What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate to effectively
contribute to the sustainability of CED?
2) What perceived management challenges do FBOs face related to the implementation
of programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED?
3) What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while
engaged or attempting to engage in CED?
Researcher Bias
The most appropriate way to evaluate data and provide an accurate validation of findings
is to implement strategies in a study. This approach demonstrates aspects of the study’s validity
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 99
and reliability. It ensures insight for readers that is dependable because of relevant findings.
Gibbs (as cited in Creswell, 2014) writes, “Qualitative validity means that the researcher checks
for the accuracy of the findings by employing certain procedures, while qualitative reliability
indicates that the researcher’s approach is consistent across different researchers and different
projects” (p. 251). With a case study research design, the expected findings include an in-depth
description of the themes that emerged (Clark & Creswell, 2015).
The design affords readers with the specific number of strategies used to ensure the
accuracy and credibility of the findings (Clark & Creswell, 2015) and methods employed, such
as the following: (a) acknowledgement of bias—self-reflection on personal views and
experiences and works to set them aside, (b) triangulation—using corroborating evidence, and c)
detailed descriptions. Creswell (2014) notes that it is important to communicate in a clear,
straightforward manner and use appropriate language. This is accomplished in this study by
avoiding language or words that are biased against persons because of gender, sexual orientation,
racial or ethnic group, disability, age, or religious beliefs.
Additionally, a description of the researcher’s bias on the topic is noted from both a
personal and professional standpoint. According to Creswell (2014), “in qualitative research, the
role of the researcher as the primary data collection instrument necessitates the identification of
personal values, assumptions and biases at the outset of the study” (p. 256). Additionally, there is
a discussion of the plan to manage potential bias.
Influenced by a desire to apply the skills, knowledge, and practices obtained through the
doctoral processes and other educational opportunities, the researcher intends to work within the
industry of CED. Specifically, the researcher intends to help address unique challenges related to
entrepreneurship, small business performance, workforce development, non-profit capacity
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 100
building, and connections to resources. As a lifelong Pittsburgh resident with an awareness of the
city’s transformations, there is an interest in a revitalized and diversified economy. The
perceptions of the conditions of poverty and challenges within the communities are shaped by
experiences as a resident, student, social service provider, ordained minister, and business owner
and involvement in government and diversity initiatives.
To manage potential bias, the following precautions are employed to protect the
participants:
1) research objectives are articulated verbally and in writing, 2) written permission
obtained to proceed with the study, 3) research exemption form filed with the
Institutional Review Board, 4) data collection methods and instruments explained, 5)
accessible transcriptions, written interpretations, and reports, 6) rights, interests and
wishes considered during data reporting, and 7) opportunities for anonymity identified
(Creswell, 2014).
Ethical Considerations
Criticisms of research tend to take place because of the ethical concerns regarding
privacy, utilization of data, and validation of findings. The researcher agrees with Creswell
(2014) that “First and foremost, the researcher has an obligation to respect the rights, needs,
values, and desires of the informant(s)” (p. 257). Therefore, she planned “to engage in ethical
practices and to anticipate the ethical issues prior to the study that will likely arise” (Creswell,
2014, p. 114). In doing so, there are several procedures implemented to reduce these concerns.
For instance, to demonstrate respect for the site as suggested by Creswell (2014), practices put in
place helped build trust and conveyed the extent of involvement.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 101
In order to ensure that participants receive the same treatment, there are clear guidelines
on the expectations of the interviews and other data collection methods (Creswell, 2014). More
specifically, a number of measures to circumvent deceiving participants and collecting harmful
information include the avoidance of leading questions, sharing personal impressions, and
disclosing sensitive information (Creswell, 2014). To the best extent possible, the researcher
involves participants as collaborators, respects potential power imbalances and exploitation, and
discusses the purpose of this study and data usage (Creswell, 2014). Lastly, to maintain
anonymity and keep the documents secure, the researcher reports multiple perspectives and
contrary findings, assigns fictitious names, and develops composite profiles of participants
(Creswell, 2014). This decision to conceal many of the organization names is because they are
small enough that participants of the study may be revealed. Vainio (2012) explains,
“Anonymity is one of the core principles of research ethics and is usually regarded as the
mechanism through which privacy and confidentiality are maintained” (p. 685).
Pilot Study
Creswell (2014) writes that to identify a beneficial research problem, it is important to
identify it before beginning the study; therefore, “To guard against this, proposal developers can
conduct pilot projects, needs assessments, or hold informal conversations to establish trust and
respect with the participants so that inquirers can detect any potential marginalization” (p. 136).
Consequently, there was a pilot test of instruments used for interviews with an outside group of
participants. The group consisted of faculty, cohort, and committee members. The pilot served
several purposes, but specifically, “to establish the content validity of scores on an
instrument…to improve questions, format, and scales” and to “incorporate their comments into
final instrument revisions” (Creswell, 2014, p. 207).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 102
As part of this pilot, questions from an organizational assessment provided some
structure to the interview process and participants were encouraged to reflect on the process and
give feedback. Therefore, comments and concerns were collected and analyzed to influence the
focus on the use of instruments, order of questions, and general framing of the engagement.
Modifications to the processes have empowered the researcher to reduce challenges with the
willingness of participants who agreed to share their life experiences, and to shape how the
narrative is situated within the case study. This determines whether there are challenges in the
ability to restory data and identify commonalities because, as Creswell (2007) notes, “when
individuals tell their stories, they do not present them in a chronological sequence. During the
process of restorying, the researcher provides a causal link among ideas” (p. 56). To restory
means, according to Lawler (2012), “the way that the individual incorporates and uses story to
create the reality of their persona” (p. 25). Therefore, the researcher used processes similar to the
following flow chart from the Malaysian Family Physician (2006) in Figure 2:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 103
Figure 2
Flow Chart of the Pilot Study
Note. Illustrates processes of pilot studies. Reprinted from Doing a pilot study: Why is it essential?, by Hasson, Z., Schattner, P., and Mazza, D., 2006, Malaysian Family Physician, 1(2- 3), para. 4, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453116/.
Dikko (2016) explains that this pilot study helps to ascertain how well the research
instruments work in the study and assists the researcher in identifying potential problems and
areas that require adjustments. Furthermore, as cited by Dikko, “Where an interview is used as
the research instrument, a pilot study helps to do the following”:
1. Highlight ambiguities and difficult and unnecessary questions and discard or modify
some.
2. Record the time taken to complete the interview to determine whether it is reasonable.
3. Determine whether each question elicits an adequate response.
4. Establish whether replies can be properly interpreted in relation to the information
required (van Teijlingen & Hundley, 2001).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 104
5. Determine whether the researcher has incorporated all the questions necessary to
measure all concepts (Berg, 2001).
6. Allow the researcher to practice and perfect interviewing techniques (Berg, 2001) (p.
522).
Limitations
According to Creswell (2014), “each type of data collection has both limitations and
strengths”; as a result, there is a description of the consideration of “how the strengths can be
combined to develop a stronger understanding of the research problem or questions” (p. 264).
This portion of the study includes limitations, restrictions, and constraints that affect the
dissertation outcomes. To reduce the limitations, the researcher collected multiple forms of data
and spent considerable time in the natural setting gathering the following three basic types of
information (Creswell, 2014):
• interviews with unstructured and open-ended questions, few in number, to elicit
views and opinions from the participants,
• collection methods of qualitative documents, both public (e.g., newspapers, minutes
of meetings, official reports) and private (e.g., personal journals and diaries, letters, e-
mails), and
• processes of categorization of qualitative data such as photographs, art objects,
videotapes, website pages, e-mails, text messages, social media text, or any forms of
sound (p. 239-240).
Sample Size and Selection
The study includes representative samples that contain the following elements: (a) the
participants selected to contribute in this research and (b) an explanation of purposive
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 105
sampling used to justify any generalizations. Selection was based upon an affiliation with an
FBO located in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The interview questions include
demographic information to collect data on age, gender, educational background, religious
affiliation, work experience, length of time engaged in activities, community involvement, and
ethnicity.
Purposeful sampling used to justify any generalizations influenced the participation
selection. Another objective for this study is to understand FBOs located in urban communities
within Pennsylvania. More specifically, communities within the greater Pittsburgh region which
includes Allegheny County were chosen because of the diversity and inclusion controversies
around the economic initiatives, gentrification, and poverty challenges. For these reasons, it is
important to examine how FBOs may engage in ways that increase capital for CED because of
the natural tendency to assist the underserved and neighborhoods that lack resources.
Several communities of the greater Pittsburgh region, although not included in the
interviews, are part of the archival data analysis; however, for inclusion in this study, the local
FBOs were located within this geographical area. They were identified by various means such as
direct relationship to the researcher, referral, and knowledge of their engagement in CED. A non-
profit center, referred to as Jonestown, was identified through local community engagement
activities. The leader of Dublinville, a Christian-based church associated with profit-generating
subdivisions, volunteered to be interviewed during an inquiry about faith-based research. One of
the dissertation committee members suggested a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on
providing opportunities for self-reliance. To illustrate the importance of understanding the
regional role of FBOs from a government’s perspective, the sample includes data from a
department of the City of Shelbyville. A leader of an umbrella department of an educational
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 106
facility affiliated with a national church later referred to as Fredericksville agreed to participate
at the researcher’s request. The preliminary research discussions led to referrals for data
collection including recipient of services and partnering agencies.
FBOs or referrals outside of the greater Pittsburgh region were excluded from
participation in the interview process. This decision permitted unique inquiry from those directly
related to the geographical location studied. However, data sources included in the literature
review that informed the direction of the study consist of urban and suburban community
experiences.
The chosen setting for this study consists of what Yin (2009) defines as a field or social
experiment. He writes that it pertains to research about whole groups of people from different
areas, as in the FBOs, the communities they serve, and other stakeholders. Therefore, as
purported by Yin (2009), this study has limited participants because “Most field experiments will
not be able to support the participation of a sufficiently large number of communities to
overcome the severity of the subsequent statistical constraints” (p. 12).
Consequently, the events appropriate for illuminating this phenomenon include
interviewing participants as often as possible within their community and natural setting. Face-
to-face interviews allow opportunities to review documents and artifacts and make observations
during the interviews. As an alternative, the researcher used other means such as Skype or phone
interviews.
During this time, the researcher used interview questions derived from the two
organizational assessments to assist in the process of data collection. This provided some
structure to the interview without hindering participants from including additional information
not considered in the selection of questions.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 107
To reiterate, the types of data collected through semi-structured interviews and
documents used prepared the researcher for an analysis on FBOs engaged in CED. The following
sections will provide further details about the data collection and analysis methods along with the
strengths and weaknesses.
Data Collection Methods
As opposed to quantitative methods, qualitative studies rely on methods that incorporate
“text and image data, have unique steps in data analysis, and draw on diverse designs” (Creswell,
2010). The author clarifies that the researcher is the key instrument in qualitative research.
Creswell (2010) writes that researchers collect data themselves through examining documents,
interviewing participants, and possibly using a protocol instrument (e.g., questionnaires) like the
organizational assessments used in this study. Considering these things, it is also just as
important to identify where and how the data will be stored. Consequently, maintaining the data
in a confidential fashion helps protect the identity of organizations.
Therefore, the coded data to protect identities are stored for a period of four years,
accessible only to the researcher. The electronic files stored in Dropbox are password protected,
and all hard copies of data and materials are secured in a locked filing cabinet. The published
findings are without the use of names or identifying information except in cases where granted
written permissions. This information is available if granted written permission by the
participants and if sanctioned by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) guidelines. This is
especially critical since, as Harrison, Birks, Franklin, and Mills (2017) clearly state, “Interaction
between participants and the researcher is required to generate data, which is an indication of the
researcher's level of connection to and being immersed in the field” (para. 22). It is important to
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 108
determine which instrument(s) to use during this process to guide how this interaction takes
place.
Interviews
In qualitative interviews, according to Creswell (2010), the researcher’s interviews
involve unstructured and generally open-ended questions that are few in number and intended to
elicit views and opinions from the participants (p. 239-240). The Is Your Organization Next
Generation? assessment questions found in Appendix A were adapted to develop the final set
(Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011). Five semi-structured interviews per organization informed data
from participants that included three pastors, two faith-based leaders that serve as executive
directors, and an executive leader within the city government who engages with different
denominations. This totaled 15 interviews by way of telephone, face-to-face, and other means
such as Skype. All face-to-face interviews were completed at a neutral location which was quiet
enough for the participant to respond freely.
Based on the information gathered from taking notes and the recorded interview, the
researcher summarized the content for participants to obtain approval of quotes and validate the
data. “Asking participants for feedback about the…tentative interpretations or conclusions and
requesting their own perspectives…can contribute to the quality and trustworthiness of the
analysis and can bring the participants into an empowered position as they take ownership of the
results” (Fassinger & Morrow, 2014, p. 80). Resultantly, one week after the interviews, they
were sent to the participants. The sample included data gained from at least one partner,
parishioner, staff, and recipient of services engaged in CED activities. As illustrated by Creswell
(2010), for this qualitative study the researcher chose to conduct different types of semi-
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 109
structured interviews using an audiotape for later transcription with e-mail, face-to-face, and
telephone options (p. 242).
Interview Guidelines
The researcher developed and used a protocol for the interviews relating to how to ask
questions, record answers, transcribe data, and utilize storage mechanisms. Although the
interviews were taped, the researcher chose not to employ observation and note taking. Copies of
materials used in interviews and other relevant data are included in the appendix. Creswell
(2010) explains that interview protocols include the following components:
• a heading (date, place, interviewer, interviewee),
• instructions for the interviewer to follow so that standard procedures are used from
one interview to another,
• the questions (typically an ice-breaker question at the beginning followed by four to
five questions that are often the sub-questions),
• probes for the four to five questions, to follow up and ask individuals to explain their
ideas in more detail, or to elaborate on what they have said,
• spaces between the questions to record responses,
• a final thank-you statement to acknowledge the time the interviewee spent during the
interview, and
• researchers typically develop a log to keep a record of documents collected for
analysis in a qualitative study (p. 244).
Instrumentation
The questions were influenced by the Compass Point Non-Profit self-assessment and
reflection tool to examine whether nine key characteristics are present in an FBO. The researcher
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 110
chose it because of the ability to identify whether an organization is prepared to deal with the
changing demands and environmental influences. The Annie C. Casey Foundation suggests that
it can help to determine whether the organization is a next generation organization. The
foundation also states, “At the forefront are two trends: a focus on mission impact including its
measurement to articulate an organization’s effectiveness and accomplishments, and
transparency about the impacts organizations are actually achieving has led to a better
articulation of success” (Next Generation Organizations, para. 5). Brinckerhoff (1999) supports
these ideas and offers another assessment tool to identify other characteristics such as
management skills. Therefore, the researcher chose it to offer insight into other areas such as
marketing, financial stewardship, and empowerment. With the researcher being the key
instrument for this case study, these other tools seemed most appropriate because they address
the aim and align with her worldview (Harrison, Birks, Franklin & Mills, 2017, para. 28).
Document Analysis
In a study of this type, it is not uncommon for researchers to, as Creswell (2010) put it,
collect qualitative documents that may include newspapers, minutes of meetings, official reports,
letters, and e-mails. It was practical to include this method of data collection because it provides
additional information that illuminates past, present, and predictive outcomes, challenges,
experiences, and successes. However, to manage the data collection, some strategies from
Creswell (2010) were implemented from each of the participating organizations:
• Keep a journal during the research study.
• Analyze public documents (e.g., official memos, minutes, records, archival material).
• Examine autobiographies and biographies.
• Conduct chart audits (p. 243).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 111
The following is a discussion of how any missing data and attrition affected the study. It
includes why the data are missing, methods implemented to minimize this challenge, and ways to
prevent the challenge in future research. Lastly, it demonstrates how the missing data hindered
the validity of the analysis.
Validity and Reliability
The researcher employed strategies that assisted with demonstrating the validity and
reliability of the study. According to Creswell (2004), “Objective data result from empirical
observations and measures. Validity and reliability of scores on instruments lead to meaningful
interpretations of data” (p. 200). Therefore, as Creswell (2004) suggests, in order to perform
rigorous data collection the researcher provides detailed information about the survey instrument
used in the study. She discusses the instrument design used, how it informs the data for research,
and how it influences interview questions.
One of the primary tools, Is Your Organization Next Generation?, an assessment (see
Appendix B) developed by CompassPoint Nonprofit Services, has been used by other
organizations that were interested in increasing their capacity (Cornelius & Wolfred, 2011). By
email, the researcher requested permission to use and or modify if necessary, which was granted
in writing (see Appendix C). The studies of one organization, the Annie E. Casey Foundation,
exemplify how the assessment tool is reliable and offers valid results. In 2011, they provided a
report which showed how the “methods of management for nonprofit organizations are
undergoing changes to embrace new ways of pursuing mission impact.” This report “outlines the
trends and environmental influences that have driven the demands for change, as well as
provides a picture of what the ‘next generation organization’ looks like” (Next Generation
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 112
Organizations, para. 1). Within the report, there are two examples of how nine characteristic
traits are demonstrated in organizations.
Dikko (2016) says, “With every research design, instruments chosen for the collection of
data must pass the tests of validity and reliability before they can be considered good measures”
(p. 521). The Next Generation Report as well as the report titled Ready to Lead validate the need
for a different style of leadership in the non-profit sector, in which there appears to be a war for
talent. They also demonstrate the reliability in determining whether the organization is ready to
move toward these changes using assessments, research, interviews, and case studies. Cornelius,
Corvington, and Ruesga (2008) argue that this type of research is necessary if we want to address
leadership concerns because “As the Baby Boomers retire from their…positions over the coming
decades, the small pool of next-generation leaders say they are both concerned and ill-prepared”
(para. 1).
Therefore, it is important to select reliable tools when collecting data. Sekaran (as cited in
Dikko, 2016) writes, parallel tests with different wordings or sequences of questions should
result in the same data. Whereas, validity according to Dikko (2016) is the process of
implementing an instrument in a pilot study, which ensures that the measure used fits around the
theories for which the test is created.
Positionality
The purpose here is to acknowledge the author’s positionality in relation to FBOs’
engagement in this industry. Clark and Creswell (2015) advise, “the findings that emerged from
the data analysis process should be accurate and credible representations of the gathered data and
participants’ experiences” (p. 364). As illustrated earlier, there are three parts of the researcher’s
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 113
identity that influence this research: 1) the position as clergy, 2) religious convictions, and 3)
current engagement in CED activities.
The researcher’s positionality as clergy provides access to gatekeepers in different FBOs.
As a clergy member of a local church, religious convictions of the importance of working with
those within indigenous communities influences the perceptions of needs. Previous and current
engagement in the field positions the researcher as a perceived authority figure with a level of
expertise. For example, she has designed and implemented a government strategic plan that
increased engagement of FBOs by 75% and is currently involved in plans for her resident
community.
Analysis of Data
The researcher chose a naturalistic inquiry approach for data analysis. Therefore, the
design of this research is naturalistic, emergent, and purposeful in the investigation of the
research problem (Organizing Your Social Sciences: Qualitative Methods, 2017). It is organic as
it studies real-world examples (Organizing Your Social Sciences, 2017) of FBOs’ leadership and
management, as well as how religiosity plays a factor. With a developing element it allows
opportunities to pursue new paths of discovery (Organizing Your Social Sciences, 2017). The
University of Southern California (2017) explains that case studies are “‘information rich’ and
illuminative,” and “they offer useful manifestations of the phenomenon of interest”; therefore,
they are purposeful.
Fassinger and Morrow (2014) influence this type of study as they write, “respectful social
justice research is the value of interpersonal relationships and serving the needs of the
community in which the research is being conducted…ensuring the opportunity for ‘meaningful
participation’ by the members of the community under investigation” (p. 78). They go on to say,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 114
“the mutual meaning-making process that should characterize all social justice research can
contribute to the empowerment of research participants. Participants are [then] viewed and
treated as research consultants and co-researchers in order to communicate respect and empower
them” (Fassinger & Morrow, 2014, p. 78). The authors posit, “Social justice research that is
relationally oriented requires more of researchers than simply providing a summary of the
results” (Fassinger & Morrow, 2014, p. 79); therefore, it is important to understand that this
qualitative study is an ongoing process. Subsequently, as they purport, the researcher is
deliberate about taking the findings back to the communities, presenting them in a form that will
be useful to many, and making the results available to all, not just those who actively participated
in the research (Fassinger & Morrow, 2014, p. 79).
Maxwell (2009) also influences the design as he suggests that it should include goals, a
conceptual framework, research questions, methods, and validity as an applied social research
project. The goal describes the central research problem through the conceptual framework that
informs the research. The design incorporates the use of questions to gain an understanding,
methods for a structural approach for comparability of data across sources and researchers, as
well as plausible alternative interpretations (Organizing Your Social Sciences, 2017). To avoid
challenges, the researcher understood the responsibility to engage the dissertation committee
members and participants as co-researchers by explaining analytic procedures and conventions to
them (Fassinger & Morrow, 2014).
Additionally, as Fassinger and Morrow (2014) explain, “Summarizing and disseminating
the results or outcomes of social justice research provides a final opportunity for researchers to
demonstrate their respect for participants and their responsiveness to community needs” (p. 81).
To understand this phenomenon, the researcher uses analytic processes such as coding narrative
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 115
data and interpreting statistical patterns to gain perspectives from the questions, ideas, or
responses. Consequently, the use of NVivo software for the qualitative analysis of both textual
and audiovisual data sources assisted with collecting and importing data, organizing and coding
them, assigning attributes for comparisons, adding interpretations, performing queries and
searches, and visualizing the data (NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis, para. 1). These are some of
the best practices regarding data gathering, analysis, and reporting. According to Fassinger and
Morrow (2014), “Researchers should use dissemination activities as a means of advocating for
marginalized communities, both within the community and with outside audiences” (p. 81).
Chapter Summary
This chapter explored the qualitative research design utilized and described the data
collection process and analysis. There is a great likelihood that performing studies on CED
organizations can provide descriptive information about the needs of FBOs that engage or intend
to engage in such activities. This includes economic initiatives and practices like entrepreneurial
trainings, programs, and activities. For the purpose of this study, the research found that
qualitative data helps to demonstrate whether certain success factors affect FBOs’ engagement in
economic development activities.
Most of these activities and wealth building programs for the underserved and
communities in poverty have been provided by these organizations. Using specific processes in
collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data, the main objective was to demonstrate that the
research is reliable and valid. The provided information about the participants of the study, data
collection procedures, methodological approaches, tools, and research design helped to
illuminate the perceptions, experiences, and challenges of FBOs engaged in CED. The results led
to an understanding of whether religiosity, leadership, or management influences success.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 116
This chapter reflects the data analysis and its relationships to the research questions,
demographic survey, and theoretical framework used for the study. Interviewed for the study
were thirteen participants. Having structured interview questions allowed the researcher to
understand the phenomenon from an organizational perspective of FBOs engaged or desiring to
engage in CED. All participants were associated in some way to an FBO. The data generated
could answer whether FBOs may increase their engagement if they are empowered to operate
effectively and efficiently in leadership and management, and whether their religious association
could hinder this. The three themes that emerged from this data include: (a) interest in increasing
the capacity of people to engage in CED on a tactical level, (b) community-based capacity
building projects to solve neighborhood problems on an operational level, and (c)
implementation of policies from regional stakeholders that address social and economic
injustices on a strategic and regional level.
Through a reiteration in this chapter of the introduction to the study, problem statement,
overview of participants, and assessment used to conduct the study, readers gain further
understanding to the datum. Collecting data through a survey provided demographic information
about individual participants. The assessment used to administer the interview questions assisted
with triangulation and took place through semi-structured face-to-face interviews. These semi-
structured interviews transcribed by the researcher totaled over 150 pages of data requiring
analysis. All of this—the surveys, interviews, and document analysis from this qualitative case
study method—examined how FBOs in the Southwestern PA programs and initiatives support
CED. Further details as well as the researcher’s response to the results of the data are found in
Chapter 5, which reveals the conclusions and provides recommendations for future study.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 117
Chapter Four: Findings
The Study and the Results
The study examined FBOs engaged in CED and the internal and external perceptions as it
relates to leadership, management, and religion. This chapter presents in detail the results of the
analyses completed by the researcher using tables, graphics, and vignettes from the interviews. It
reflects how the model, theories, and assessment tools answer three research questions using data
obtained from five organizations chosen to participate in this qualitative case study. The process
includes an analysis of 13 transcripts from semi-structured interviews. To ensure the accuracy
and credibility of the findings (Clark & Creswell, 2015) and methods employed, triangulation
helped to compare and contrast the interview responses and demographic surveys. There are five
levels of analysis used for data reduction: (a) analytic coding, (b) open coding, (c) theoretical
coding, (d) descriptive coding, and (e) NVivo coding (Cope, 2009). Key themes emerged from
distilling the data further and applying it to the Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Model and
Empowerment Theory.
Though being analyzed through the lens of CED, these themes are similar to what
Wallace et al. (2004) refer to as “domains in which faith-based interventions seek to bring about
development” (p. 12). The themes and levels of domains are empowerment processes for people,
communities, and regional, social, and economic justice initiatives with outcomes from strategic,
operational, and tactical planning and execution. These themes help to illuminate what
conditions FBOs need to engage, experiences of previous engagement activities from various
perspectives, and the kind of challenges that affect the FBOs, partners, and communities. The
themes reflect from multiple perspectives the perception of FBOs engaged in CED within a
developing urban region, as well as what interviewees believe is and is not working.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 118
Research Questions
As stated previously, this qualitative case study explores FBOs that are engaging in, have
engaged in, and or want to engage in CED using a holistic faith-based perspective. A focus is on
the organization as a whole, which includes the leadership, as in those running the organization;
management, the day-to-day policies and practices; and the implications of religiosity while
engaging in economic development activities. The following provides each of the three central
questions that guide this study:
Table 2
Research Questions
1. What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate in order to effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED?
2. What perceived management challenges do FBOs face related to the implementation of programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED?
3. What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while engaged or attempting to engage in CED?
The next section provides a greater understanding of the interview compilation as it gives further
details of the organizations and participants.
Sample
Thirteen participants were included in the study: one government representative, four
leaders of FBOs, and four staff of FBOs, as well as four others. Among the others represented in
the sample were one professional from the FBOs’ partnering organizations. Appendix D shows
the participant demographics that characterize the minimum requirements as discussed in chapter
three.
These invited individuals participated because they engaged in CED in various ways
throughout the region and some on a national level. The total years in CED as part of their
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 119
profession varied among the participants sampled, and eight employed participants of the sample
worked in the sector. Ninety-two percent of participants were engaged in CED at the time of the
study and had engaged over the past five years. The remaining participants worked primarily in
other fields with a desire to engage in CED or served as a partner representative.
The gender and age of the participants varied within each organization. There were six
males and seven females interviewed (that self-disclosed as such). Of the 12 FBO participants,
three were under the age of 40, two were between the ages of 30-39, and only one was under the
age of 26, which was not an intentional sample proportion. The remaining sample population
was 50 years or older.
Organization size, employee makeup, community relationships, and populations served
also varied among participants. All participants stated they reside in the community that the
applicable FBO serves. The sample population varied by the number of years they have resided
in the community between two and eight. Of the 12 participants sampled, nine were full-time,
two were part-time, and one was a volunteer. Eleven of the 12 participants sampled were
currently engaged in CED at the time of the study, and only one was not.
The number of employees within the organizations varied with only one organization
sampled having more than 100. No interviewee acknowledged having only one employee. Four
of the participants sampled stated they had two to five employees. Another participant
acknowledged having five to 10 employees. Two of the 13 participants sampled had 10-20
employees. The remaining population of sampled organizations was of the next largest tier, with
three of them having 20-40 employees.
Many of the participants worked full-time for the FBOs, whereas two were part-time and
one was a volunteer. Thirty-three percent of the participants had been in the position for more
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 120
than 12 years, which included two of the leaders. Five participants acknowledged witnessing a
crime in the community in the past two years, which represents 58% of the sampled population.
Only three of the 12e acknowledged the use of government grants as a financial source for the
organization and noted that they owned or rented property.
Six of the 12 participants sampled said that they owned their facility, two of which were
FBOs. The remaining six participants said they rented their facility. Two of the FBOs
acknowledged that they owned and rented their properties. Therefore, 50% of the FBOs owned
and the other 50% rented their current facility.
Three of the 12 sampled participants acknowledged currently utilizing government grants
to provide services or products, and only one was an FBO. Participants reported that those
receiving services or participating in programs were primarily of the black race or ethnicity.
However, 25% surveyed shared that they provide services or programs to those of the Hispanic
groups, while 33% acknowledged working with Caucasians, and only .8% with Asians or other
groups. More information about the sampling is in Appendix E.
Data Collection
The 13 interviews with men and women currently engaged in CED at the time of the
study serve as the primary source of research data for this study. The different organizational
structures, positions within the company, and partnering agencies served as the basis for the
questions asked. After the first interview with the non-FBO, the remaining interviews took place,
were coded both manually and using NVivo, a qualitative data analysis software, and reviewed
for themes. The demographic surveys and interviews provided substantiating evidence for further
analysis and the researcher used it to create an organizational structure for the findings (Cope,
2009).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 121
Demographic collection instrument results. The researcher collected data through a
demographic form distributed both electronically and in-person to 12 FBO interviewees. The
focus was to determine the experience of the participants representing the four preselected
organizations as well as the characteristics of the subject population. Participation in the study
required either being an employee of an FBO or an affiliate located within the region of Western
Pennsylvania. The interviewees, identified by various means, either had a direct relationship with
the researcher or were referred for her consideration. Knowledge of their engagement in CED
also influenced the choice of some interviewees’ participation. The interview included 12
questions, both closed-ended and open-ended, assessing whether the individuals represented the
target population for engaging in CED through its affiliation with the FBO. The form allowed the
researcher to gather baseline data before the interviews to determine the pool of leadership
structure as asserted by Anglin (2004) and those engaged in CED.
According to the demographic information collected from the interviewees, the
researcher identified a diverse sample for participation. The diversity ranged from the
interviewees' age and gender to the number of employees per organization, the ethnicity of
recipients of service, and types of CED initiatives. It also ranged from the occupation of space
(meaning whether or not they rented), employment status (as in full-time, part-time, etc.),
residency (whether they lived in the community where the organization was located), time with
the organization (how long they worked there in that role), and acknowledgment of crime within
the community they served (more specifically, whether they witnessed a crime). The results
conclude that the interviewees consisted of both male and female participants with diverse
backgrounds, ethnicities, races, classes, and geographic locations. All of the interviews were
semi-structured. Interviewees completed a demographic form revealing characteristics about the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 122
FBOs, the community(s) they served, and their level of engagement and possible impact (see
Appendix F).
Not everyone who participated in the interview expounded on how they individually
participated in CED to identify patterns, commonalities, and relationships (Cope, 2008).
Therefore, the questionnaire used combined the data, identified themes, and determined each
participant’s relationship to the type of engagement in which they participated. For instance, one
faith leader said they engaged in CED through micro-business enterprises in housing, while
another, an FBO partner, acknowledged engagement in development in their community and
hoped to solidify the collaboration with them.
Another acknowledged being engaged in landmark and community development. One
part-time FBO staff person acknowledged engaging as a volunteer builder. A partnering
organization reported that an FBO engaged in CED through programs such as adaptive reuse,
social enterprise, pre-school, and transportation. Another full-time FBO staff person reported
their engagement in community collaborations, neighborhood visioning plans, and board service
for community development. Lastly, several participants noted they engaged in business
development.
Descriptive information on interview compilation. In analyzing the data, each of the
organizations is made up of people with different leadership styles, geographical locations,
experiences, strategies, structures, and challenges. Among those interviewed were one faith-
based community organization, one multigenerational, multicultural urban church with a social
enterprise, one faith-based educational institute, and a local faith-based nonprofit with a national
model. Each FBO chosen revealed if they exemplified the previously mentioned model, levels of
empowerment, and overarching theories of this research. Prior to this study, the researcher did
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 123
not have evidence that any sites had implemented any form of the model, though data revealed a
theme of empowerment throughout the interviews. The interest in selecting the different types of
organizations was to illuminate different perceptions, approaches, and experiences of those that
are faith-based.
The researcher identified participants with an alphanumeric system: FBOs were marked
with a letter and a number. Leaders were marked with the letter “L,” staff with the letter “S,” and
partners with the letter “P.” To protect the confidentiality of the organizations and their
participants, pseudonyms identify the information and findings. Shelbyville represents the non-
faith-based organization in this study, also referred to as the NFBO or non-FBO. Jonestown
represents FBO #1, further referred to as FBO #1. Table 3 provides additional information about
the other organizations represented in this study.
Table 3
Pseudonyms for Organizations
Pseudonym Name Organization ID
City of Shelbyville Non-FBO
Jonestown FBO #1
Fredericksville FBO #2
Jamestown FBO #3
Dublinville FBO #4
Once the IRB approved, the researcher distributed an introduction letter with a request to
participate and then followed up to solidify interview dates. The letter provided each invitee with
a brief description of the study, directions on how the demographic survey applies to the design,
and how to move forward in the research. The survey included 12 quantifiable questions
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 124
distributed via email and in person. Each participant returned the survey within seven days of
distribution. The researcher made herself available for follow-up conversations to clarify
relevancy and integrate a process of member checking (Baxter & Jack, 2008); this helped to
assure accuracy. The interviews began and the responses were confidentially stored throughout
the entire process and later analyzed. They contributed to most of the substantial data on the
engagement of FBOs in CED and in identifying the key themes for this case study.
The following table reflects the participants by roles within the organization along with
the pseudonym name and identifiers for further reference.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 125
Table 4
Participants by Roles within Organization
Within this case study research, the investigator collected and integrated quantitative
survey data and multiple types of qualitative interviews in an attempt to reach a holistic
understanding of the phenomenon being studied (Baxter & Jack, 2008). The first interview was
with the non-FBO, Shelbyville. It establishes a structure for the chapter, shows the relationships
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 126
of FBOs and government, and serves as a determinant for the interview compilation. It provided
an additional framework outside of the IRB process by which the researcher was able to pilot the
interview protocol and fine-tune the questions (Baxter & Jack, 2008) for the FBOs. The process
used for this interview was that from a non-structured interview from a grounded theory
perspective, as purported by Baxter & Jack (2008), upon which each interview was built
thereafter.
This being the first interview, it allowed the researcher, according to Baxter & Jack
(2008), to try and “elicit rich, focused, meaningful data that captures, to the extent possible, the
experiences of participants” (p. 812). The researcher chose this site due to its collaborations with
multi-faceted FBOs in different communities with a vast array of strategic intents. The interview
provides insight into some external perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats
(SWOT) of FBOs’ leadership, management, and religious affiliation. The data revealed key
themes of analysis relating to influence change for people, community problem solving, and
social and economic justice initiatives (Shaffer, Deller, & Marcouiller, 2006). The researcher
captured data from this site’s initiatives with faith-communities to empower youth, individuals,
and clergy with a focus on various areas such as employment, small business, housing, and other
economic development areas discussed later in this chapter.
The interview reflects that initiatives of Shelbyville promote engagement of FBOs in
CED, with an understanding that it encompasses an aspect of a holistic approach to community
problem solving (Shaffer, Deller, & Marcouiller, 2006). The interview permitted the researcher
to determine whether the Is Your Organization Next Generation? assessment tool used for the
interview protocol for FBOs would provide the necessary means to gain valid and complete data
and mirror the characteristics of the sample according to Maxwell (as cited in Baxter & Jack,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 127
2008), based on the non-FBO’s responses. It answers questions relative to the perception that
several regional development initiatives in certain communities, of which Shaffer et al. (2006)
wrote, are defined within spatial connotation, and it provides a basis for how the researcher could
conduct the remaining interviews seeking to gain information on success or failure of FBO
engagement.
Therefore, the chosen interview compilation methodology helped to determine which
factors influence these decision-makers’ behaviors on such a complex topic. It provided a
framework to launch the study, establish rapport with the FBO participants, and proceed with the
inquiry goals of the research (Baxter & Jack, 2008) for understanding. The remaining 12
interviews then helped to show the relationships of FBOs engaged in CED within the City of
Shelbyville. It allowed the researcher to solicit multiple perspectives from different communities
and organizational structures, as well as gain an awareness of how it has influenced engagement
in CED.
Though this concludes how and why the researcher used these interviews in this manner,
the following section provides an overview of the FBO interviews and shows the relationship
with Shelbyville’s initiatives. The selected informant sampling strategy allowed the researcher to
include FBOs that could speak directly to this phenomenon and provide relevant data from a
document analysis (Young et al., 2018). Those who voluntarily participated in the study by way
of written consent are described further in the participant overview. Supporting data also
includes demographic information collected from the survey responses and details regarding the
interview results. The interviews supplied data to understand these relationships and strategic
intents. In the following section, the researcher provides descriptive information about each
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 128
organization that assists readers with an understanding of the process of collecting the data and
the results obtained.
Case study data gathering process. In January 2018, the researcher sought to research
local FBOs that engaged or provided evidence of some interest in engaging in CED. The
investigator pursued IRB authorization to include each one of the organizations. A critical
component to understanding this dynamic was to engage an NFBO that could broaden the
perception of FBOs as a community. By the permission of the IRB committee, the researcher
was able to include one government organization as the NFBO. With access to most of the faith-
based activity in the region and beyond, the researcher chose this site’s participation ensuring
that enough data represented the FBOs’ engagement in CED. Consequently, the researcher first
interviewed the NFBO and then concluded the data collection with interviews from direct
representatives of individual FBOs.
The non-FBO allowed the researcher to assess the strategic intent of FBOs and perform a
situational analysis on a national and regional level within CED. This sheds insight on the
external perception of the FBOs’ outcomes and challenges from a stakeholder’s point of view. A
completed SWOT analysis helped to determine the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and
threats to their engagement operationally and regionally. It helped to illuminate the NFBO
interviewee’s perspectives on engagement on a macro and micro level. Figure 3 from the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, Department of Training (2014)
depicts the framing of the interview analysis processes.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 129
Figure 3
Hierarchy of Strategic Intent
Note. Reprinted from Strategic planning, by U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2014, U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, Department of Training, retrieved from http://tdept.cgaux.org/stafftraining/13-30pig.pdf.
The remaining interviews relating to the FBOs allowed the researcher to analyze the data
from a meso level. To understand this phenomenon within CED, the researcher looked at the
assigned responsibilities of the participants, their ability to sustain and improve performance, and
potential needs for success. A completed interpretative phenomenological analysis helped
identify themes to understand how each interviewee makes sense of this phenomenon (The
Oxbridge Research Group Ltd., 2019). This provides a more in-depth internal view of outcomes
on both an operational and tactical perspective. The researcher provides results of 13 interviews
over six months without interpretation and discusses the interpretation in chapter five.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 130
Data Analysis Process
The interviews, the primary data used for the study, were coded manually using
qualitative analysis software. The researcher analyzed the interviews individually, and then
grouped them with the applicable FBO for further review and coded each batch relationship to
one another. A series of coding processes took place to identify descriptions, themes, and
theoretical applications. The researcher added clarifying questions to the interviews as necessary.
After manually coding the transcripts, the researcher uploaded them into NVivo for
further analysis, and the building of the codebook began to assist with the structure. Applying
open, descriptive, and NVivo codes to the 13 interviews aided in the comparative analysis and
revealing of themes. Each process helped the researcher integrate coding, complete a data
reduction, and make sense of it critically. Coding results included over 35 codes from the non-
FBO manual coding process, 100 from the descriptive coding, and about 12 from the thematic
coding, as shown in the findings.
In the final analysis phase, the researcher used selective coding to answer the interview
questions and connect the emergent themes to the models, theories, and assessment tool to show
any relationships. The researcher applied the vignettes and codes to the findings. Participant
responses were placed in italics to distinguish between them and comments by the researcher.
The researcher omitted some information and bracketed other areas showing data but also
protecting confidentiality. The paragraph section headers used show the categories and codes of
the findings. There were nine analytical codes embedded in the interview questions representing
the key traits of Next Generation Organizations. The researcher provides further information in
the theoretical coding summary.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 131
Analytical codes, interview questions, and protocol. All scripted interviews with the
FBOs resulted from using an assessment; this was not the case for the NFBO. Therefore, only
one of the 13 did not participate in the administration of the Is Your Organization Next
Generation? assessment, which determines whether there appear to be the nine key traits within
the FBO. However, the researcher did search for the related codes using the NVivo software to
discover any similarities or differences from the non-FBO’s perspective as it related to the
research questions. The researcher divided this self-assessment instrument into three parts as a
method of triangulation within the data amongst the leader, partner, and staff person of the FBO.
It helped to illuminate the experiences, perceptions, and challenges that FBOs face when
engaged in CED activities. It permits opportunities to look at organizational management
structures and leadership practices (Cornelius & Wolford, 2011) from various standpoints
including those of partners, staff, leaders, stakeholders, and recipients.
Table 5
Next Generation Organizations’ Nine Key Traits – Analytic Codes
1. Impact Driven = (A) 2. Finance & Business Savvy = (B) 3. Continuous Learning = (C) 4. Shared Leadership = (D) 5. Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E) 6. Ambiguity of Work-Life Boundaries = (F) 7. Constituents as Thought Partners = (G) 8. Boards as Value Add = (H) 9. Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I)
All questions within the assessment measure the FBOs in the following areas: 1) impact
driven, 2) finance and business savvy, 3) continuous learning, 4) shared leadership, 5) wired for
policy advocacy, 6) ambiguity of work-life boundaries, 7) constituents as thought partners, 8)
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 132
boards as a value add, and 9) multicultural and culturally competent. Refer to the following table
for more information.
Table 6
Next Generation Organization Interview Questions and Protocol
Impact Driven = (A)
1. What can you tell me about the organization’s mission and vision, as in, how it serves as a driver to make an impact on the community?
2. Describe how the organization is utilizing the community, board, staff, and volunteers to help with accomplishing its mission.
3. What forms of outreach and engagement does the organization use to make the community aware of what is offered?
4. Describe how the engagement with community and stakeholders develops. 5. Describe the outcomes (positive and negative) of engagement. 6. Describe the business model and formal structure (e.g., processes involved,
benchmarking, mapping, focus groups/seminars). Is there an office or representative in the community?
7. Does the organization have clearly defined objectives and deliverables for engaging in CED?
8. Does the organization appear to have discovered that something was missing that prompted your engagement in CED?
Finance & Business Savvy = (B)
1. What can you tell me about the organization’s business and financial savviness that demonstrates an ability to provide services and offerings?
2. Describe what support for the organization is successful or needed. 3. What are the desired returns from engaging in CED? 4. Describe how funding, communication, day-to-day activities, and business
support align with community needs.
Continuous Learning = (C)
1. Describe how the organization learns to support CED. 2. What/how does the organization learn from national or government policy? 3. What/how does the organization learn from national/regional/local
stakeholder groups? 4. Is there a process between the gathering of knowledge and policy
formulation? What is this process? How long does this take? Shared Leadership = (D)
1. What and how do the organization, staff, and board learn from each other? 2. How is knowledge transferred? 3. How do you decide what principles or best practices are usable and why?
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 133
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E)
1. In what ways have CED initiatives changed over the past five years and why?
2. What has driven the change of the CED sector? 3. Local and national policy agendas perhaps? 4. How do organizational stakeholders view CED? 5. Describe from what the CED support policy agenda is driven. Why and
how? 6. What could improve the CED agenda? 7. How important is funding history to CED (e.g., CSBG funding, CDCs,
Community Action Agencies, partnerships)? 8. How does/should the organization capture what is important to develop
CED from national policy, local support organizations, and community groups?
Ambiguity of Work-Life Boundaries = (F)
1. Is there anything that has come to mind about the organization’s team, board, or volunteers while we have been talking today that speaks to how they demonstrate work-life balance?
Constituents as Thought Partners = (G)
1. Which stakeholders or support organizations are most important for engaging in CED and why?
2. How significant are they and what are the most important characteristics? 3. What do they offer that is unique and how does it compare to others? 4. In what ways do local and national entities influence the organization and its
capacity to engage in CED? 5. How do stakeholders or support organizations capture local objectives and
goals from the community and voluntary groups?
Boards as Value Add = (H)
1. Describe the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers and how they assist the organization to fulfill its mission and vision.
2. Describe the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers that may be needed to strengthen the organization’s capacity to fulfill its mission and vision.
3. Describe the governing board’s roles and responsibilities, along with the structure of its meetings.
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I)
1. Describe the organization in relation to the neighborhood where the community members are (i.e., demographics – do the staff, board, and members commute or live in the neighborhood?).
2. What neighborhood issues are the organization currently attempting to address?
3. What kind of interactions does the organization have with its members or the population it serves?
4. What things would the organization need to further engage with its members and the community?
5. What do you find to be the biggest challenges in the organization’s ability to work within the culture of a disadvantaged neighborhood?
6. Has the organization demonstrated an ability to reach out to disadvantaged populations to help fulfill the mission?
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 134
The researcher asked the FBO leader 15 questions: three questions about impact, one
about finance, two about continuous learning, one about shared leadership, three about policy
advocacy, three about constituents, one about the board, and two about cultural competency.
Afterward, the researcher asked an FBO staff or board member 16 questions within those same
areas but with an added question about the work-life boundaries. Lastly, the FBO partner’s
interview included 11 questions but excluded any regarding continuous learning, shared
leadership, and work-life balance. This interview included the question about the organization’s
mission and vision intentionally comparing their response to that of the FBO leader.
Refer to Table 7 for more information on the matrix for interview questions and its
relationship to the Is Your Organization Next Generation? Assessment.
Table 7
Matrix for Interview Questions
Research Question Servant Leadership (SL)
1. What perceived leadership experience do faith-based organizations need to demonstrate in order to effectively contribute to the sustainability of community economic development?
Impact Driven = (A1) What can you tell me about the organization’s mission and vision, as in, how it serves as a driver to make an impact on the community?
Impact Driven = (A2) Describe how the organization is utilizing the community, board, staff, and volunteers to help with accomplishing its mission.
Impact Driven = (A3) What forms of outreach and engagement does the organization use to make the community aware of what is offered?
Impact Driven = (A8) Does the organization appear to have discovered that something was missing that prompted your engagement in CED?
Finance & Business Savvy = (B2) Describe what support for the organization is successful or needed.
Continuous Learning = (C1) Describe how the organization learns to support community economic development.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 135
Shared Leadership = (D2) How is knowledge transferred?
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E6) What could improve the community economic development agenda?
Ambiguity of Work Life Boundaries = (F1) Is there anything that has come to mind about the organization’s team, board, or volunteers while we have been talking today that speaks to how they demonstrate work life balance?
Constituents as Thought Partners = (G1) Which stakeholders or support organizations are most important for engaging in community economic development and why?
Constituents as Thought Partners = (G2) How significant are they and what are the most important characteristics?
Constituents as Thought Partners = (G3) What do they offer that is unique and how does it compare to others?
Boards as Value Add = (H3) Describe the governing board’s roles and responsibilities, along with the structure of its meetings.
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I1) Describe the organization in relation to the neighborhood where the community members are (i.e. demographics? Does the staff, board, members commute or live in the neighborhood?)
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I2) What neighborhood issues is the organization currently attempting to address?
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I3) What kind of interactions does the organization have with its members or population it serves?
Faith-Based Management (FBM) 2. What perceived management challenges do faith-based organizations face related to the implementation of programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of community
Impact Driven = (A6) Describe the business model and formal structure?
Processes involved, benchmarking, mapping, focus groups/seminars. Is there an office or representative in the community?
Impact Driven = (A7) Does the organization have clearly defined objectives and deliverables for engaging in CED?
Finance & Business Savvy = (B1) What can you tell me about the organization’s business and financial savviness that demonstrates an ability to provide services and offerings?
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 136
economic development?
Finance & Business Savvy = (B4) Describe how funding, communication, day-to-day activities, and business support align with community needs.
Continuous Learning = (C4) Is there a process between the gathering of knowledge and policy formulation? What is this process? How long does this take?
Shared Leadership = (D3) How do you decide what principles or best practices are usable and why?
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E7) How important is funding history to community economic development? E.g., CSBG funding, CDCs, Community Action Agencies, partnerships.
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E8) How does/should the organization capture what is important to develop CED from national policy, local support organizations, and community groups?
Constituents as Thought Partners = (G5) How do stakeholders or support organizations capture local objectives and goals from community and voluntary groups?
Boards as Value Add = (H1) Describe the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers and how they assist the organization to fulfill its mission and vision?
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I6) Has the organization demonstrated an ability to reach out to disadvantaged populations to help fulfill the mission?
Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment 3. What can faith- based organizations do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while engaged or attempting to engage in community economic development?
Impact Driven = (A4) Describe how the engagement with community and stakeholders develop?
Impact Driven = (A5) Describe the outcomes (positive and negative) of engagement?
Finance & Business Savvy = (B3) What are the desired returns from engaging in CED?
Continuous Learning = (C2) What/how does the organization learn from national or government policy?
Continuous Learning = (C3) What/how does the organization learn from national/regional/local stakeholder groups?
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 137
Shared Leadership = (D1) What and how does the organization, staff, and board learn from each other?
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E1) In what ways have community economic development initiatives changed over the past 5 years and why?
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E2) What has driven the change of the community economic development sector?
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E3) Local and national policy agendas perhaps?
Wired for Policy Advocacy = (E4) How do organizational stakeholders view the community economic development?
Constituents as Thought Partners = (G4) In what ways do local and national entities influence the organization and its capacity to engage in community economic development?
Boards as Value Add = (H2) Describe the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers that may be needed to strengthen the organization’s capacity to fulfill its mission and vision?
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I4) What things would the organization need to further engage with its members and the community?
Multicultural & Culturally Competent = (I5) What do you find to be the biggest challenges in the organization’s ability to work within the culture of a disadvantaged neighborhood?
Coding process. The manual open coding process was used in the first cycle of the
analysis, followed by the use of NVivo 10 software to check for additional codes in the second
cycle, which each “represent[s] and capture[s] a datum’s primary content and essence” (Saldana,
2008, p. 3). The interviews were first manually coded line-by-line using their “own unique code”
as part of the preliminary analysis or initial coding (Saldana, 2008, p. 5). Those manual codes
included all of the nine characteristics of the assessment tool, in the form of either words,
sentences, or phrases. After completing this process, the researcher uploaded the interview
transcripts, documents, and demographic forms in the NVivo software.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 138
NVivo analysis. The qualitative data analysis software, NVivo 10, helped organize the
electronic documents, categorize the data, and identify the emergent themes (Cope, 2008).
Added to the codebook were the previously mentioned nine analytic codes, demographic survey
results, and related interview responses. The software permitted the researcher to store and
organize the data in a way that it could be separated into cases as well as manual and auto-theme
nodes. The researcher did not always agree with the codes and continued to use NVivo features
that would eliminate non-applicable codes, such as phrases like “you know what I mean” and
words used as fillers or pauses in between thoughts.
Part of the analysis was to look for patterns and consistencies among the coded datum
(Saldana, 2008) which could include similarities, differences, causation, or sentiments. During
this cyclical process, the researcher then transferred the information into a Microsoft Excel
spreadsheet under the nine categories or analytic codes. Using the word-frequency query on the
group of 13 interviews, the researcher looked for additional codes yielding the following word
cloud.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 139
Figure 4
NVivo Word Cloud
The researcher performed different frequency queries, but this figure reflected data explicitly
related to the theoretical coding and concepts for engaging in CED.
Theoretical coding summary of results. All of these methods and tools helped with the
analysis of data. The analyzed data determined if the results yielded any components of Servant
Leadership, Faith-Based Management, and or the Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Model.
After entering the manual coding into NVivo, the researcher linked the new codes to the existing
open codes. The researcher used existing codes as categories and transferred coded datum from
interviews into the nodes to show a relationship (Saldana, 2008). After analyzing both the codes
and grouping of categorized codes, NVivo helped show direct relationships for the following
theoretical coding.
The paragraph section headers point to the codes drawn from interview questions,
qualitative software, and description of the relationship to the theories discussed in chapter two.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 140
Further, refinement into subcategories as described by Saldana (2008) allowed the researcher to
transcend the data toward themes and theoretical frameworks to systematically organize
concepts. The following nine key traits of Next Generation Organizations serve as the analytical
codes used to organize the data. The researcher included vignettes that linked to the traits and
helped to build the thematic coding for the initial categories. The data was then refined and
divided into several theoretical codes (Cope, 2008).
Next Generation Organizations’ Nine Key Traits
Impact Driven. Impact driven is a trait that Cornelius et al. (2011) describe as “The
drive to achieve (that) permeates their organizational culture and working style” (p. 8). Cornelius
et al. (2011) define this trait as “the foundational ingredient for a next generation organization,
and all other traits are largely a means toward this end” (p. 8). Assigned to this trait were over
500 open codes. Broken into segments, data from this trait includes: how the organizational
mission and vision drive the impact on the community and how others are used to accomplish
this mission. The data also includes the FBO’s forms of outreach and engagement plus how it
develops and the outcomes, its business model and formal structure, and the objectives and
deliverables for engaging in CED. All of this data permitted the researcher to examine the
necessity of FBO engagement.
Finance and Business Savvy. Assigned to this trait were over 200 words, phrases,
sentences, and vignettes. Cornelius et al. (2011) state that “Financial transparency is a core
practice at next generation organizations,” and that “people at all levels of the staff and board are
comfortable talking about and planning for the financial viability of their organization” (p. 9).
Data from this trait describes the FBOs’ perceptions, experiences, and challenges relating to
business and financial savviness to provide services and offerings, needed support for success,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 141
the desired returns for engaging in CED, and how funding, communication, and activities align
with community needs.
Continuous Learning. Within this trait, the researcher segmented information that helps
to inform how the FBOs learn to support CED and determine how they learn from national,
regional, and local policies and stakeholder groups. It also provides data that reveals any
processes between the gathering of knowledge and the FBOs’ policy formation, if at all.
Attributed to this trait were 150 codes that the researcher analyzed for determining an FBO’s
ability to facilitate the learning of its people so that it is continuously transforming itself
(Cornelius et al., 2011).
Shared Leadership. The researcher analyzed over 140 coded segments determining
whether the FBOs “intentionally develop the leadership capabilities of staff so that multiple
people are contributing to the leadership process” (Cornelius et al., 2011, p. 12). It reflects how
the FBO staff, volunteers, and leadership learn from each other, how knowledge is transferred,
and what decisions determine the use of principles and best practices.
Wired for Policy Advocacy. According to Cornelius et al. (2011), “Community
organizing skills are of equal importance to skills in fundraising, financial management, board
development, and strategic planning” (p. 13). Determining if this trait existed helped the
researcher to determine the FBOs’ overall knowledge around CED. It also allowed her to gain an
understanding of their perceptions of any changes relative to CED and if applicable, why the
changes occurred. If the perceived changes exist, the data reveals their understanding of what has
driven it and any association to local or national agendas. It also yielded an understanding of
how the FBOs perceive their stakeholders’ view of CED, the support policy agenda, what could
be improved, the importance of funding history, and how they capture this data, if applicable.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 142
Multicultural and Culturally Competent. Cornelius et al. (2011) state, “Next
generation organizations go beyond valuing demographic diversity in their workforces… are
effective in working across communities and with people from cultural and social backgrounds
that are different from their own” (p. 14). Applied to this trait were about 170 coded segments.
The codes related to the organizational makeup of the FBOs and neighborhood issues they are
attempting to address. They also related to the perceptions of the interaction with those they
serve, what they need to continue engaging, challenges with engaging disadvantaged
neighborhoods, and whether they demonstrate an ability to reach this population.
Ambiguity of Work-Life Boundaries. This trait yielded the smallest amount of data
collected; discovered were only 30 direct coding segments. Cornelius et al. (2011) write, “next
generation organizations, much like a quintessential start-up, wholeheartedly embrace ROWE—
results only work environments” (p. 15). This trait informs how the FBOs’ staff perceives they
are demonstrating work-life balance. Analyzing this trait helped in determining whether the
respondents differed from those within other age categories from the demographic results.
Constituents as Thought Partners. Codifying this trait resulted in capturing data that
helped to understand the perceptions, experiences, and challenges with stakeholder engagement,
their significance, and offerings. This process also reveals how FBOs capture local objectives
and goals. It also yields information about ways local and national entities influence the FBO as
an organization and its engagement with stakeholders. According to Cornelius et al. (2011),
“Next generation organizations design programs and services with a different mindset about
constituents. Clients are equal partners…staff has influence in the organization” (p. 16). There
were almost 95 coded segments attributed to this trait.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 143
Boards as Value Add. The open code Boards as Value Add had almost 150 vignettes
relating to how the FBOs utilize others to accomplish their missions, what skills, if any, are
needed or were available, as well as the board roles and responsibilities. According to Cornelius
et al. (2011), “The next generation board derives its priorities from organizational needs and
judges itself not by efficiency measures, but by the quality of its leadership as it relates to
organizational impact” (p. 17).
Shared in the next section with supported data used in the analysis from participant
responses are related results from these traits. This section also shows the relationship with each
major theme. Cope (2010) explains that this process, data reduction, helps the researcher handle
the large amounts of data by distilling along with key themes. Another part of this process is to
present further findings organized by the research questions using “descriptive codes that come
directly from the statements of subjects” (Cope, 2010, p. 283).
Emergent Themes from Analysis
Three empowerment themes emerged from the Nvivo analysis and theoretical coding
results. The themes derived from the relationship to the nine analytical codes, auto-coded data
from the word frequency query, and other descriptive codes. The empowerment themes include
(a) interest in increasing the capacity of people to engage in CED on a tactical level, (b)
influence of community-based capacity building projects to solve neighborhood problems on an
operational level, and (c) implementation of policies from regional stakeholders that address
social and economic injustices on a strategic and regional level.
Each of the themes resulted from the analysis processes. The first theme focused on
individuals served or impacted through the organizations. The second theme has a direct tie to
the geographical location of the FBOs’ service areas that represent community neighborhoods.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 144
The difference with the last theme is that it reflects relationships with the larger faith-community
beyond the FBOs that participated and its ties to government initiatives. Therefore, it is a result
of multiple relationships and perceptions of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of
FBOs engaging in CED with Shelbyville. In the following section, explained are more details of
the themes after a discussion on the relationship between the organizations.
Relationships between Shelbyville and FBOs
The Shelbyville leaders collaborated with many non-profits, government agencies,
higher-education facilities, and for-profit entities around a concerted effort to increase the
capacity and resources for regional development activities. To their surprise, there was limited
engagement with the faith community. Resultantly, some strategic planning efforts commenced
toward a shared plan to engage FBOs. Initiatives began with FBOs around numerous issues or
resource gaps to attempt to solve community problems, giving those interested opportunities to
become involved. Based on the data, there were questions around how this affects future
decision-making processes, social and economic justice activities, and rules of engagement for
people around these efforts. The initiatives offered FBOs an opportunity to strengthen strategic
and operational efforts regionally by engaging them tactically in CED.
With a strategic intent to influence change in their communities, some implemented
initiatives were in the form of programs, grantmaking, collaborations, and outreach to
community members from these leaders. Other efforts, according to the data, were to reduce
gentrification through increasing affordable housing units and economic inequality through
business development training and technical assistance throughout Shelbyville, Pennsylvania. As
this strategic planning process evolved, FBOs became potential resources to increase the
capacity for sustainable community change efforts. The goals and action plans established were
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 145
based on their shared vision, mission, and values, as well as the background on some of the
FBOs’ previous experiences and challenges. Though not all of the four FBOs directly
participated in Shelbyville’s initiatives, their interview responses helped to determine whether
they were benefactors. Comparatively, the responses also give context as to why they may not
have been benefactors, answering questions about whether it was not due to being engaged or
having limited engagement, etc.
Macro-Level Engagement
On a macro level, according to some of Shelbyville’s leaders, there were several
perceptions of faith-communities that could have either hindered or encouraged their
engagement nationally or regionally in CED and other efforts. As the non-FBO explained it,
“Everybody's interested in community development, affordable housing, but when you're talking
about faith-based endeavors, it, it was just a disconnect.” This reflection happened when the
Obama Administration began initiatives to engage FBOs nationally. Efforts spread throughout
the nation, serving as a model to engage FBOs as resources to address the needs of people and
communities, as well as social and economic injustices. At the same time, government agencies
were also encouraging private-public partnerships, initiatives, and similar types of engagement
relative to CED. During the word frequency query for this participant, provided in figure 5
below, “church,” “faith,” “community,” “development,” “people,” “housing,” and providing
“help” were among the top seven areas of concern.
Figure 5
Shelbyville Word Frequency List
Word Length Count Weighted Percentage (%) Similar Words church 6 64 2.25 church, churches faith 5 43 1.51 faith community 9 38 1.34 communities, community
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 146
development 11 32 1.12 develop, developed, developer, developers, developing, development
people 6 31 1.09 people housing 7 19 0.67 house, houses, housing help 4 18 0.63 help, helping initiative 10 18 0.63 initiative, initiatives organizations 13 18 0.63 organization, organizations talk 4 18 0.63 talk, talked, talks want 4 18 0.63 want, wanted, wanting, wants financial 9 17 0.60 financial, financially never 5 17 0.60 never think 5 17 0.60 think, thinking
Among those who aligned themselves with the national focus was the City of Shelbyville,
which embarked on several initiatives regionally as a non-FBO to address these needs. As a
leading representative of Shelbyville, the interviewee had experiences that explained planning
assumptions, environmental factors, industry-specific data, political knowledge, and their
understanding of the outcomes. The interview yielded data about the performances of FBOs and
the interviewee’s assessment of their engagement. Though several attempts were made to
encourage, inform, and collaborate with FBOs in CED on a regional level, according to the
participant, “it did not result in all success stories.” Nor did the efforts result in the knowledge of
the regional impact of engagement with FBOs they would have liked to see in CED. This
participant’s word frequency query in Figure 6 reflects their 15 most frequently auto-coded
topics of discussion during the interview relative to their experiences in CED. At the center of it
all, the participant emphasized the “church,” “faith,” “community,” and “development,” and this
figure demonstrates a perception of an underpinning of what happens with the “people,” which is
discussed further in this chapter.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 147
Figure 6
Shelbyville Word Frequency with Stemmed Words
Micro-Level Engagement Based on Leadership, Management, and Religiosity
In order to sustain CED, there is a perceived need to engage FBOs within Shelbyville in
several ways, according to the interview data. The data suggest that FBOs should engage within
not only the faith-communities but also the following industries: “the political, education,
housing and redevelopment, business and entrepreneurship, arts and cultural industries,
workforce development, and financial wealth building arenas.” This point is important to note, as
it was a theme first argued by the non-FBO interviewee and then reflected in the FBO related
interviews. The non-FBO interviewee stated that in Shelbyville, there was a need to “establish a
rapport” and “a relationship with FBOs.” The participant explained a need “for interaction” and
“for programming” to fulfill “a real deep dive into social service delivery or…development
within the community.” To this participant, policies and clearly defined engagement activities
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 148
could assist with social and economic injustices and initiatives in neighborhoods geared toward
solving community problems.
This perceived need for a relationship is supported by data gathered from some of the
FBOs that participated in this study. Some of the participants noted that they should have been
aware of how government policy, decisions, agendas, activities, and legislations “impact our
funding base,” affect the “building codes,” and influence the “national landscapes.” Others
eluded to the fact that “it is communication with your public officials” that may help to “meet the
needs of individuals in the community.” For another interviewee, these relationships are
important because they may help to answer questions about “concentrated poverty, why it
exists,” and whether it is “a byproduct of nature” or “a product of…systematic policy.” The
following paragraphs detail this further while extracting more data from both the non-FBO and
each of the three representatives of four FBOs that participated and showing ties to the research
questions.
The results reflect how the non-FBO participant justified the need to engage FBOs in the
political arena to sustain CED. They concluded that “there was a lot of opportunity” to engage
them in community problem solving, and they perceived that some FBOs were socially and
economically empowered to have a real impact. However, it was also expressed that factors such
as “race,” “size,” and “economic status of the congregants” determine engagement. When
continuing to answer questions to help clarify these perceptions, they replied, “When I say small,
I mean not only for the African American community, I'm talking both that there's not a lot of
people and at the same time not putting the money in because they are disadvantaged.” Later, in
conclusion, the participant stated, “there's probably very little chance of them doing something
so external as [brick] and mortar community development. Unless it is for their church.” The
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 149
potential types of engagement were recorded, but the participant explained, “getting to specifics
was difficult” when engaging the “faith-based community” employing “a mode of social service
delivery, connection, and development.”
The number of complaints from the participant about the efforts to engage FBOs
compared to the successes was disproportionately balanced. For one thing, they perceived that
those currently in leadership with the FBOs “have the capacity” and “know-how” to prepare
those next in line to be impactful. The participant explained that some of the FBOs that did
engage in the initiatives demonstrated business savviness and the capacity to grow in their
learning; but “they just do not want to do it.” This was captured when they stated, “A lot of them
would say they are, but no one else sees it out in (the) general community. That’s why the
churches get so much criticism.”
The interviewee suggested that these criticisms are imposed because of the leadership,
management practices, and religious association of FBOs. They questioned, “What is it? They’re
not marketing their accomplishments of what they’re doing? Or is it so internal to their
membership that there is no external facing outreach...Are there too many strings attached?”
Though some might object to this perception, these are some of the questions posed by the non-
FBO interviewee and their response to questions about the FBOs’ impact through their programs
and services. To further their point, the participant stated, “the older the pastor, the less likely
you’re going to get a lot of forward-thinking, external community development mindset,” which
offers insight into the concept of Next Generation Organizations. On the one hand, there are
these perceived challenges to addressing the needs of people, communities, and social and
economic injustices; and on the other hand, you have the argument of an “older congregation’s
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 150
inability to think outside of the box” that also determines whether the FBO succeeds in having
real community impact.
During this time, they found that some FBOs were socially and economically sound with
quite a bit of “infrastructure in place” to help sustain initiatives in community problem solving,
but others were not. They explained that though few FBOs they worked with presented attributes
of being “financially sound” with the infrastructure in place to assist with development and make
an impact within communities, many were minimally engaged in CED via assisting families
through programs and services. The interviewer argued that the level of impact was not
externally known and questioned whether it was only known internally. They also argued that
they saw a need for FBOs to increase growth enhancement for the younger generations and be
more innovative in their offerings. They went on to say that many initiatives are taking place like
“feeding the hungry,” but “What I had found, is that unless a church is already equipped as a
developer, a CDC of some kind, they have some type of development arm”; they did not and
“were not interested in brick and mortar development.”
In the course of working toward these relationships with FBOs, the participant explained
that their level of engagement, challenges, and successes depended on where they were located.
They stated, “African American churches in predominantly African American communities,
that's where there was traction,” or in communities that were experiencing revitalization or
disinvestment. The interviewee posited their location and racial background as attributes of what
is called “their community” and the FBO leadership’s involvement depends upon the perceived
needs of that community. Though “there were bumps in the roads” according to this interviewee,
the interest to engage FBOs resulted from what they considered to be strengths of “the faith-
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 151
based community.” Discussed on a meso level and explained further in the FBO interview
finding analysis are references to other challenges, perceptions, and experiences.
Final Meso FBO Participation Results
On the meso level, the researcher studied the experiences of FBOs as groups within a
larger community of faith, and the interactions between the groups with each other and their
partners. Some perceived strengths fell under the auspice of social and economic capitals;
however, they referenced other things such as denominations, demonstrating their faith
publically, and following the pattern of “scripture.” The non-FBO interviewee touched on many
perceived leadership experiences FBOs need to demonstrate to contribute effectively to the
sustainability of CED. According to this participant, there were opportunities to say, “here [are]
some resources to help people to be able to build, to be able to grow their community in terms of
wealth, you have to teach.” Successful CED initiatives that incorporate FBOs, according to this
participant, would look like “not only are they doing [brick] and mortar, but they also tackle the
very peripheral issues that also developed [in] the community.” Additionally, the participant
explained, “[They] are also collaborating with people in the church… in nonprofits…
organizations on financial inclusion, on building wealth and teaching people.”
The remainder of the chapter highlights data from a demographic survey, interview
questions, and responses from the FBOs reflecting the relationships across the codes. The goal
was to gather data from 13 interviewees representing all four FBOs and one interview from a
non-FBO that worked with many of them. From the data, the researcher includes a brief
commentary of interviewee experiences from all 13 interviews. These interviewees each served
as a spokesperson for themselves and their relationship to the FBOs. The following information
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 152
reflects the diverse experience, generational engagement, as well as relationship with the
community of its origin and compares that to the non-FBO results.
There were 13 total participants in the study and four served as the primary leaders of the
organizations represented as either Johnstown, Fredericksville, Jamestown, or Dublinville. Each
interviewee has some relationship to an FBO, as a leader, staff, or partnering organization that
engages in or desires to engage in CED. Of the four FBOs, each had one leader participant that
was primarily responsible for the decision making, though they were held accountable to a board
or staff member(s). The FBOs also had a partner and staff or board participant to describe their
perceptions of the organization. To protect the participants’ identities, the researcher excluded
specific information about their relationships with the non-FBO, the roles and responsibilities,
and lengths of time in their positions. Thus, within the study, the reader is privy only to a general
overview of the participants, their understanding of how the City of Shelbyville could influence
their direct impact, and the perceptions of whether it was an interest.
To qualify the perception of the non-FBO that “there are other pastors out there
beside[s]” those frequently called upon to speak on behalf of the faith community as a whole,
who are doing the work, the participating FBOs’ data were analyzed. The data reflects levels of
diversity from one another and years of experience with their current organizations and
engagement within CED. With approximately 70% of them having fewer than 10 years’
experience in their role, others had 10 years or more experience. Ninety-one percent had
experience with CED. Fifty percent had more than five to 10 years of experience in such
activities. Two of the four leaders were directly involved in the creation of the FBO, its
programs, and initiatives. The four staff or board members interviewed also varied in experience,
being new to either working with an FBO or engagement in CED. Similarly, the non-FBO and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 153
partner organization’s experience varied in its relationship with the FBO and engagement in
CED. The remaining overview of the FBOs and findings yields data around leadership,
management, and perceived challenges of religiosity.
Jonestown – FBO #1 Overview
Faith-Based Organization, number one (FBO1), Jonestown, was established about 20
years ago as an attempt to reduce the number of drug-related shootings in the community.
According to the FBO’s literature, a part of its motto is to empower children, families, and
communities using both traditional and non-traditional innovative programs and services. All of
the programs and services were established to create financial wealth and jobs and provide
opportunities for skill-building, entrepreneurship, or other means. As a formal non-profit
organization still claiming its association with a local church, it has partnered with over 50 other
entities and individuals to fulfill its mission over the years. In doing so, it has been accredited for
its outstanding impact on engagement, education, and culturally relevant initiatives. This FBO
promotes its programs and services through community meetings, events, online platforms,
partners, and friends, as well as print mediums. Though it has achieved many accomplishments
for its award-winning approaches in its advocacy around the need to invest in children and
families, it still maintains its roots beginning with the church.
Fredericksville – FBO #2 Overview
Faith-Based Organization number two (FBO2), Fredericksville, with over 30 years of
experience engaging with the public through its religious association, prepares leaders for local,
state, national, and international challenges to promote healthy communities. This FBO began
and maintains its’ initiatives under the umbrella of an educational facility affiliated with a
national church. In 2019, the FBO offered instruction, research, and community engagement
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 154
around academic, advocacy, and programmatic activities. With 31% of its students being a
minority, it is located predominately in an African American community with which, within the
last couple of years, they have begun to engage. This FBO provides a comprehensive cross-
cultural experience within the areas of service, justice, and Christian education. Since 1991,
through its flexible programs, both community members and others have benefitted from the
opportunities to learn how to apply their faith as practitioners. The FBO helps develop
individuals for ministry purposes and prepares those seeking to serve in other areas such as
business, education, arts, or work within the communities. With its association with a higher
educational institution in Southwestern PA, it just recently began to engage in local CED related
activities.
Jamestown – FBO #3 Overview
Faith-Based Organization, number three (FBO3), Jamestown, has a national affiliation
that was founded in 1976; with the help of supporters and volunteers of all faiths, this site was
incorporated 20 years later to assist with the goal to eliminate poverty. It now serves its 13
communities, both urban and rural, toward empowerment through collective efforts with other
FBOs as well as public and private entities. This FBO publically discloses that it is a faith-based
ministry that impacts insecurities for families through some initiatives and types of engagements.
As an anti-poverty approach, FBO3 focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-
reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial education. Most of
how it accomplishes its’ goals are through partnering with others, relying on the support and
structure provided by its national affiliation, and utilizing volunteers. This FBO has access to
glean from best practices and efforts from those in 50 states and 70 countries, as well as from its
stakeholders for its programs for asset building, affordable housing, and economic stability.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 155
Dublinville – (FBO) #4 Overview
Faith-Based Organization, number four (FBO4), Dublinville, is a Christian-based church
that focuses most of its services around its surrounding community as a direct legacy of its
founder, who is not the current pastor. At its foundation, it uses biblical principles in establishing
programs and services, developing its board and employees, and demonstrating the values of
business development for the transformation of others. Through several collaborative efforts, it
engages the community through faith-based activities, agriculture, arts, business training,
education, and employment. The FBO offers opportunities for many to learn about the
community as well as African American heritage through some of its initiatives, including
STEM education for local youth. It is one of the four FBOs that established a community and
economic division, concentrating on making a greater impact through its serving. The interview
questions allowed the researcher to delve deeper into the experiences of the FBOs and obtain the
following findings.
Engaging FBOs in CED Findings
RQ1: FBOs’ Perceived Leadership Needs to Sustain CED
In summarizing and comparing the qualitative results of the four FBOs interviewed, the
data suggests there are perceived leadership experiences needed to contribute effectively to the
sustainability of community economic development. The theoretical coding revealed that there is
a relationship between there being an interest in CED and its effects on people and an effort to
identify ways to address community problem solving as well as social and economic injustices.
The researcher discovered the themes through an interpretative phenomenological analysis. The
interview results drawn from the aforementioned assessment were analyzed on individual
experience with these phenomena. The FBOs’ responses were then compared to the non-FBO’s
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 156
and one another, to either validate or refute the perceptions, experiences, and challenges. Lastly,
the data for this research question on perceived leadership needs was analyzed specifically to
determine if it yielded any Servant Leadership components. As one participant stated, “I don't
think we operate really any differently than any other organization would. I mean, you want the
best-qualified people to work with.”
Theme 1: Empowered People on an Individual Level
Based on Shelbyville’s non-FBO interview, some perceived leadership experience FBOs
need to demonstrate to contribute effectively to the sustainability of CED includes the ability to
empower others to address community problems as well as social and economic injustices. The
participant explained that FBOs would get less criticism is they functioned within their strength,
which is to use the “trust” and “connectivity” they have with people to help with the
“handholding” necessary to “build the community up.”
They argue that whether the FBO is “small” or “large,” unless it is a “disadvantaged
church” or one of many “disadvantaged parishioners,” people can be empowered by its
leadership. They defined small in this case as “100 members or less,” or, as an organization that
struggles with being able to “cover its own expenses.” Therefore, small was defined not only by
the size of the organization but also by the financial accountability of the leaders. They
explained, “in non-predominant African American churches, you can have a small
congregation… But the individuals who attend, have money.” This participant defined
disadvantaged as those parishioners or leaders who are not empowered with the skills, resources,
or generational knowledge required for success.
An experience with FBOs they provided described how they were engaged “to educate,
mentor, and actually help with the books” of businesses. The hope was to assist “black
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 157
businesses” specifically “with administrative matters, payroll, personnel, paperwork, [and]
overhead.” Concerns were expressed that “Black businesses know their skill, they know their
trade, but they are not the best” in these areas, as was the perception that some FBOs have the
“capacity” and “know-how” to help, but “they don't want to do it.” Another concern about FBOs
that was expressed during these engagements is that their leaders “would say they are [were
helping], but no one else sees it out in [the] general community. That's why the churches get so
much criticism.” In summary, the Shelbyville interview suggests that if an FBO is engaged in
CED, they can empower others by “thinking outside the box. Thinking in terms of impact. Not
on tradition, but on real impact.”
A question that was presented to this interviewee is “What would a successful, impact
driven, faith-based organization look like in the areas of community economic development?”
The responses to this question: “not only are they doing [brick] and mortar, but they also tackle
the very peripheral issues that also developed in the community,” and going beyond, saying,
“we’re gonna pray.” They went on to challenge FBOs by saying, “if you’re serious about it, and
it’s really not about the church, it’s really just about the community,” then “go talk to the
mayor…talk to City Council.” They argued to the leaders, “You're putting yourself on the same
level. It's just that you got a different pipeline.”
The Shelbyville non-FBO interview data revealed several attributes to being socially and
economically empowered for CED. They argued, “we're always talking about the charity part,
[and] giving. We have free clothes, we have free this, we have that, but we don't talk about
enabling.” Instead, they responded that they would like FBO leadership to have a “forward-
thinking, external community development mindset.” Their additional criticism of FBOs
engaged in CED was based on the perception that “it's all old heads…I'm so sick of seeing silver
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 158
hair...where the young people at?” They also explained successful FBOs engaged in CED
collaborate with people in the church and nonprofit organizations on financial inclusion, building
wealth, and teaching people about affordable housing, homeownership, and education. Of the
many examples provided, the conclusion was that FBO activities should drive impact.
Impact driven. Data gathered from both the leader and partner of the four FBOs yielded
the following information about leadership relative to the Impact Driven = A1 trait, analytical
coding. Each of these participants confirmed that their organization existed to fulfill the need of
the communities in which they served. They discussed the FBO’s mission and vision relative to
how it serves as a driver to make an impact on the community. Three of the leaders expressed
that they were “embedded in” the neighborhood because the FBO’s original leaders who founded
the organization saw a need (Leader 4). Another participant stated that the FBO was “a
neighborhood-based ministry” (Staff 4). Emphasized by almost all participants during the
interviews this concept of neighborhood-based practices and policies emerged in the coding
process.
One participant from FBO4 stated their mission was to “love God, love people, live like
Jesus,” reflecting a concept present within each of the participants (Leader 4), although not
spoken that directly. This FBO’s staff person described their desire to impact as one “all geared
towards trying to provide and connect people to opportunities” (Staff 4) when they referred to
their mission. This participant also described their perception of the FBOs’ responsibility to
those in the community with the following statement: “Where there are situations and
circumstances, challenges, and problems that are in line with the gifts and skill sets that we have
– we feel like it’s our task to make earth look more like heaven” (Leader 4). This participants’
perspective was that this approach was necessary for FBOs to engage in CED. They stated,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 159
“[W]hen you think about the things that people do on Sundays or throughout the week, really
their service to the church, but they're volunteering. We're trying to recreate that in the
community” (Leader 4).
FBO1 spoke of how they desire to have an impact on the community through
empowering “individuals and families to tap into their natural talents” and “connect them to
opportunities.” The leader explained that empowering other people is done by providing them
with “resources, training, teachings,” and “education.” This participant explained, “we want to
teach them how to fish so they could feed themselves and their families and maybe somebody
else's family” (Leader 4). In addition to teaching people how to support themselves, they noted,
“We want to teach them how to own the pond that they're fishing in. So that they can… put
people to work” (Leader 1).
FBO2 expounded further on how they employ best practices around and are empowered
by others, as one leader noted, “we value partnership…we value mutuality…we value
diversity…[and] we help to formulate collaborations” to fulfill the mission and vision of the
organization and impact the community (Leader 2).
FBO3 demonstrated their best practices as they sought to fulfill “a need in the community
for affordable housing that was not being met,” and raved about “the pleasure of meeting or
knowing most of those families” (Partner 3). Their partner explained an experience where one of
their families had become volunteers themselves as a board member and the other made lunches
for certain projects. This participant stated, “We knew that they had [the] potential to really be
contributing to the community far beyond their own needs.” These experiences were a direct
result of FBO3’s mission “to create [an] impact on the community by serving in a leadership
role” (Leader 3).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 160
When either the staff or board representative was asked question A2 to describe how the
organization is utilizing others to help with accomplishing its mission, the findings showed that
FBOs, to forward their mission, used others to “create” or “connect people to opportunities” and
for:
• “community outreach and events,”
• “committees,”
• “administering their programs and services,”
• “governance,”
• “mentoring opportunities,”
• “advisory capacities,” and
• “grant[s].”
Others responded that they use others in the following manner:
• “Expose students to the context in which they can be called into minister…trying to at
least create opportunities where those contexts or connections are” (Staff 2);
• “we rely on community partners who contract with us and then we provide
transportation to youth in the community” (Staff 4);
• “community partners, other nonprofit organizations, kind of that intermediary to
provide services to the community” (Staff 4); and
• “buy into the mission and understanding that we serve this community, we're here for
this community” (Staff 4).
To gain an understanding from the partner’s perception of the FBO’s ability to be impactful to
the community, they were asked question A3. This question is about forms of outreach and
engagement FBOs use to make the community aware of what is offered. Forms of outreach and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 161
engagement range from “camps,” “programs,” “artistic work,” “mission trips,” “a bible study,”
“meetings,” “events,” “reaching out into the churches,” “social media,” “public relations,”
“through other departments,” and “flyers.” One participant’s perspective of FBO4 is that its
outreach and engagement is “probably a weaker point,” and another responded that FBO3 “has
struggled with [it] a little bit.” A third participant explained that FBO2’s potential partnership on
a mixed-use building “opens engagement for people to look at a faith-based [organization] in a
different perspective,” and thereby, changes a previous perception of this FBO: “they want one
side…[of the community] and we want the other.” Other respondents describe their community
awareness efforts in the following ways:
• “moved from that sort of missiological adventure [to] more of an investigation of
justice or lack of justice” (Staff 2);
• “feel like the community's not aware. People do great work and then there's always
people that are just unaware…such a transient community that you have to get geared
up to really do the outreach every year and not assume that, ‘Well, hey, I've done this
before where I'm already working with these’…have to do on a consistent basis”
(Partner 4);
• “community outreach meetings that were not well attended…the misconception is
that you have to give us. It's not a handout, it's a hand-up” (Partner 3); and
• “I think the thing that we don't do enough of is engaging the community…hoping to
do more of that” (Staff 4).
Further information from the respondents explained that this engagement developed in many
ways:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 162
• “informally…or by providing an ‘opportunity to ask questions’ such as ‘what sort of
things that you like, what are things that you don't like’” (Staff 1);
• “They have developed through just personal relationships. Through other nonprofits
that service communities in different ways. My personal relationships and the various
committees or boards” (Staff 2);
• “they contact us because…somebody else told them about us” (Staff 3); and
• “we have been in this community…we have only done neighborhood-based ministry”
(Staff 4).
As the final question (A8) about the leadership experience needed to effectively contribute to the
sustainability of CED, the leader was asked if the FBO discovered something was missing that
prompted the engagement. Two of the leaders explained a desire to meet the “felt needs” of
community members. Others explained that it was through their experience, “Hand in hand with
the community outside,” with the people in the community that they understood their needs.
Leader 2 stated they have been working to “discern how do we get involved with community
economic development.”
One participant responded, “this work ought to be central to the ethos of the entire
institution” (Leader 2) as they spoke about CED. The third participant (Leader 3) explained, “the
emphasis was to create change where you defined the paradigm that existed in the
community…community members felt that they were often left out of the conversations with the
City of [Shelbyville].” Another participant explained that they identified a need in the
community because, in their experience, it was “difficult for a lot of these young boys to get
jobs,” “there [were] a lot of shootings,” and they were “burying black boys between the age of
14 and 26” (Leader 1). They further explained the challenges they saw: “single parent
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 163
homes…children need to see a balance of both men and women in their lives…[and] positive
role models” (Leader 1).
Participant four, as the leader of the organization, expressed their concerns about a
perceived injustice by stating, “only other neighborhoods in our city has places and spaces where
people can work and just hang out and meet people” (Leader 4). When they described their drive
for impact and expected outcome of their efforts, “the idea is that the children, in particular, will
have opportunities to go places and do things that they otherwise wouldn't.” Cornelius et al.
(2011) write, “For next generation organizations, success is defined as mission impact,” and they
“are obsessively results-oriented and welcome new ways of thinking about solutions” (p. 8).
Finance and business savvy. Cornelius et al. (2011) purport, “Next generation
organizations…effectively manage to a dual bottom line: financial viability and positive social
impact” (p. 8). To gain an understanding from the partner’s perception of the FBO, they were
asked to describe what support for the organization is successful or needed from question B2.
The findings resulted in the following list as it relates to leadership:
• “fundraising” (Partner 1);
• “money” (Partner 1);
• “Volunteers. Volunteers are the backbone…you need those skilled volunteers that
know how to do <a trade> the less you have to pay for the services to be done”
(Partner 3);
• “donate their services…donate the supplies” (Partner 3);
• “the people that we have on the board…their jobs are in finance or are CPAs” (Staff
4);
• “support and helping them get the word out” (Partner 4);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 164
• “platforms” (Partner 4); and
• “opportunities for them to share your message with people” (Partner 4).
The previous summary of responses shows the relationship between leadership and finances, but
the next sections speak to the roles of continuous learning and leadership.
Continuous learning. Cornelius et al. (2011) define continuous learning as being
“similar to Peter Senge’s definition of the ‘learning organization’” with five characteristics:
systems thinking, personal mastery, effective use and discarding of mental models,
organizational shared vision, and team learning (p. 10). Therefore, the researcher chose to ask
question C1 of the leader for purposes of understanding their perception of how the organization
learns to support CED. FBO4’s leader said that they learned to support CED “from the
community…Jump on a train that they’re on and take that ride with them…learn why they’re
going in that direction.” They continued to say, “you can learn from the smallest child in the
community to the oldest citizen in the community.” Each of the other FBO leaders’ perceptions
was similar and expanded these thoughts further to include being in a “partnership,” learning
“qualitatively,” “talking to people,” “observing,” “seeing what’s going on in the community,”
“reading the paper,” “being in the schools,” "through other organizations,” and “through the
church.” The results help to determine the FBO’s ability “to facilitate the learning of an
organization’s people so that it is continuously transforming itself” (Cornelius et al., 2011, p.
11).
Shared leadership. A staff or board member was asked question D2, how is knowledge
transferred? Pearce, Wasaneer, and Manz (2014) write, “all leadership is shared leadership; it is
simply a matter of degree—sometimes it is shared completely while at other times it is not
shared at all” (p. 277). Asking this question generated the following responses and helped to
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 165
determine if “value participatory democracy” exists within the FBO (Cornelius et al., 2011, p.
12). This means they may have a say in the world around them and can influence the decisions
(Hauben, 2014). For these FBOs, knowledge is transferred through individual and group
meetings that include a “staff meeting,” “in-service weeks,” "in-depth professional
development,” and “meeting with the board of directors.” Staff 3 stated that these meetings and
discussions “[give] you the chance to ask questions or clarify something,” and that “Everybody
needs to know what everybody’s doing.” Other participants stated that it is transferred through
“communication,” “on the ground working,” and “directly with the families,” and through
methods such as “things are documented,” “chain of command,” “planning a work project,”
“then we want people to kind of bring that information back what you learned and how you
applied it.” The participants spoke also of how technology is used to transfer knowledge through
email and web-based project management tools. Others spoke about how “you've seen the rising
up of community organizations and…other groups that have said, well, no, we've got to have a
stake in what's happening in our communities” (Leader 2).
Wired for policy advocacy. According to Cornelius et al. (2011), a job description of the
leader includes public policy work in pursuit of structural changes that would eliminate or reduce
the need to exist. Consequently, the researcher felt that having multiple participants answer the
following questions would supply adequate data. The partner was asked question E5 to describe
their perception of the FBO’s understanding of the CED support policy agenda. The leader was
asked question E6 regarding their understanding of what could improve the CED agenda. The
partner’s perceptions varied from “I don’t know” (Partner 2) to more explicit information,
referring to the FBO’s community and not the overall national CED support policy agenda. They
responded that CED locally was driven by:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 166
• “the voices of the people, what the community wants, what you want for your
children, what you want for yourself, and what you want for your community as a
whole” (Partner 1);
• “it's always to improve the community” (Partner 3);
• “town hall meetings” (Partner 3); and
• “commissioners meet monthly and have board meetings and set the policies for the
city” (Partner 3).
However, Partner 4 spoke from a general perspective of CED and not on behalf of the FBO,
responding as follows regarding CED support policy:
• “it’s driven by money and for people to make money”;
• “ways for wealthy people to make a lot of money and, oh, they can invest in these
poor communities”;
• “what happens is if I'm just investing and my purpose is to make money – I'm not
investing in things that make the community better inherently”;
• “We're going to get people to put money in these communities and that'll be a good
thing because that's what they need”; and
• “they never thought about if you take that much capital and you invested in these
types of communities that are in disarray and you do it in a quick time period – you
also leaving no room for any other narrative other than displacement.”
The leaders’ responses are similar as they shared some insight on the social injustices:
• “What I'm seeing today [is] a lot of educated, conscientious folks who are saying,
who know their rights, who know…and or are learning...just how this game is
played” (Leader 2).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 167
• “And are having…a more diverse…pool of people at the table that are making these
decisions” (Leader 2).
• “Now, is it where it needs to be? Oh my gosh, not at all” (Leader 2).
• “You get these stakeholders who have deep pockets that feel they can just buy these
organizations… And these folks might get enamored by all that… and ended up
caving in on what they think or should be good for the community” (Leader 2).
• “Then you have players that come to the table and I've witnessed speak circles around
those who have the community's best interest in mind, but just don't have the
knowledge base and the expertise to be able to speak reputably in these types of
audiences” (Leader 2).
• “There's still a long way to go as it relates to just having the knowledge base and
having the right players in the right seats” (Leader 2).
• “The change is because people have been more enlightened as to what needs to
happen” (Leader 1).
As it relates to the economic injustice around the property and land ownership, the participant
responses include:
• “People are buying up pieces of property… that other people aren't thinking
about…buying them up in droves…they have control of the land…building with
people who are called developers or investors…they have a plan for all that land that
they bought in your community” (Leader 1).
• “That was the model. And I think it's still, in some ways it's still kind of like the
model…So community development for some people is really still brick and mortar.
It's not people” (Leader 1).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 168
Comments around local, national, and regional advocacy and policy include:
• “I think that the only thing that is changing the initiatives…community development,
CDC initiatives, is the people that are engaged. So there are people that are engaged
now who care more about people who have seen this model, that doesn't work”
(Leader 1).
• “I'm more on the doer side than trying to be on the cutting edge of what's happening
with regard to policy and all of that” (Leader 4).
• “I don't really think about it as trying to impact the entire field of community and
economic development. That's not how I think about the work. Then again, maybe I
should. But, I don't want to sacrifice execution to do that” (Leader 4).
• “So, there's a certain sense of urgency that I feel about this work and particularly as
things are heating up in the city around real estate and so on and so on. I think you
have a window of time, particularly if you're talking about acquiring property –
there's a window [of opportunity] and people from around the country and buying up
<neighborhood> and the rest of [Shelbyville]” (Leader 4).
• “I don't spend a whole bunch of time trying to figure out the policy and sort of macro-
level stuff really is—I’m pretty homocentric in my energy effort, research and work”
(Leader 4).
• “Right now I feel there is a shift in, to a certain degree, some turmoil as far as
community and economic development policies and just overall opportunity that's
presented at higher levels, federal and state levels” (Leader 3).
• “The current administration puts [an] emphasis on the state to take responsibility of a
number of different community development areas and arenas of opportunity. So, that
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 169
obviously then further, I'll say, limits state resources because now that you have an
influx of organizations coming forward that used to depend on the federal
government might have now limited or no access to funding” (Leader 3).
The next section demonstrates whether there is consistent thought among the staff of FBOs and
how “they don't demonstrate work-life balance… Being involved in so many different
organizations that are there trying to address the need…it creates an imbalance in the personal
ecosystem” (Staff 2).
Ambiguity of work-life boundaries. Cornelius et al. (2011) submit a concern about the
previous generation of leadership and write, “next generation leaders believe that maintaining
good work/life balance is essential to staying effective in their jobs” (p. 15). The researcher
chose to address the only question that falls within this category (F1) to staff or board members
associated with the FBOs to learn more about their experience demonstrating work-life balance.
The findings show:
• “when you're working with people, it's hard because you get so invested, you want to
keep going” (Staff 1);
• “you should enjoy your time” (Staff 1);
• “unless you take care of yourself first, you're not really going to be providing your
best work” (Staff 1);
• “their mission permeates all of that and not in the sense of it takes it over, but it's a
part of that without being all of the slices. It's just part of who we are” (Staff 3);
• “I think we encourage people” (Staff 4);
• “I really believe it's an individual decision” (Staff 4);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 170
• “I get started at six in the morning, it could have just ended at 1:00 AM…I don't
encourage anyone else to do that” (Staff 4); and
• “[I] want people to have that balance because I think people are happier when they
have work-life balance” (Staff 4).
In addition to demonstrating work-life balance, responses from the non-FBO suggest that an
initiative that they engaged in “basically told them that the faith-based community is out there.”
The participant stated that we “need to know this,” and the next section on being multi-cultural
and culturally competent provides data to understand this analytically. It supplies insights into
experiences around best practices, concerns, and the influence of the leadership in sustainable
efforts for people, community change efforts, as well as social and economic injustices.
Multicultural and culturally competent. The researcher referred to question I2, what
neighborhood issues is the organization currently attempting to address, to the staff or board
member to better understand this phenomenon from their perspectives. The responses varied
from trying to directly address “community divestment,” “economic justice,” “public health,”
“environmental justice,” “revitalizing the community,” and “safe, decent affordable housing” to
“inevitable redevelopment” or “indirect gentrification.” A participant expressed their concerns
by stating, “most of the people that live here have lived here for generations. And so, would it be
right to have a whole new community and the people that stayed here…for decades if they
weren't there to enjoy it?” (Staff 1). The participant followed up by saying, “how do we make
sure that we develop the community and keep the community here so that they can kind of reap
the benefits?” (Staff 1).
Cornelius et al. (2011) state that Next Generation Organizations “partner with others to
build their capacity as agents of multicultural responsiveness and equity” (p. 14). Thus, the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 171
researcher posed two questions to the FBOs’ partners. They were asked question I1, which is to
describe the organization in relation to the neighborhood where the community members are and
whether those that work there or serve in leadership roles commute or live in the neighborhood.
One partner of FBO1 responded that 75% of the full-time and part-time staff potentially came
from the community. FBO2’s partner stated, “not that I know of,” when asked this question.
Most of the responses came from the partners of FBO3 and FBO4. Both of these individuals
explained how, if the individual did not currently live in the community, they have a connection
in some way.
Each partner explained how the FBOs diversify the team by including community
members or those they serve as board members or employees. Partner 3 explained, “Staff lives
primarily in the communities in which we serve…there is…direct pride…if they don’t currently
reside there, at one time, did.” They continued to say, it “brings a perspective that we will never
have because we've never been,” and “they actually have input and say in policy-making
decisions of the board on how it's going to affect the families.” Partner 4’s responses were quite
similar as they stated that FBO4 had a “good mix” of staff, saying, “not too young, not too old”
and “a couple of staff that live in [the] community.” However, they did explain that there were
more that commute into the neighborhood than that explained by the other partner.
More descriptive information was provided when the researcher asked question I3 about
the kind of interactions the FBO has with its members or the population it serves. One partner
primarily spoke of the executive director’s interactions and said the FBO leader “feeds the
kids…gives them support…influence[s] a kid to want to be or be intrigued or curious about
technology.” Partner 2 shared how FBO2 “extended that invitation, an open invitation to
participate in different classes.” FBO3’s partner referred to how “They do events… at Christmas
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 172
time” and “They keep in touch with all of those <types of clients>.” This partner also explained
that in times of crisis, if the FBO “is not able to provide that assistance, then they're referring
them to who can.” One story was shared about how leadership “got them through to the point
where he found a job,” in reference to an interaction with someone they served. FBO Partner 4
spoke of how most of the engagement happens through the programs either in the school, during
the weekends, or in vacation bible school, and both parents and kids are engaged. They
continued to add, “As far as the community economic development - also I think through the
actual worship services where some people come here,” and further explained that this FBO has
several spaces where people come to connect (Partner 4).
Constituents as thought partners. Cornelius et al. (2011) write, “Next generation
organizations understand that those to whom they are accountable are in the best position to
participate in problem solving” (p. 16). The researcher asked three questions of the FBO leader
to help the readers understand their perceptions about engaging others in CED, as in its
significance and to discover any specific characteristics. The researcher captured their responses
in the following table for question G1, which asks which stakeholders or support organizations
are most important for engaging in CED. The text that follows adds context as the leaders
explain why these stakeholders are important and may demonstrate whether they understand who
is accountable to whom in CED.
Table 8
FBO Leaders’ Perceptions on What Stakeholders Do to Engage in CED and Why
FBO Leader 1 FBO Leader 2 FBO Leader 3 FBO Leader 4
stakeholders who have developed relationships with
community representatives
[the answer varies] depending on programs and projects, it can vary
at the city level, the Urban Redevelopment Authority – the city
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 173
the people in the community
owns a lot of this property.
[those who have] developed a track record for serving people
folks that are living, working, worshiping, playing in these communities to be able to be at the table… to have the knowledge base to have that proper conversation.
ultimately every stakeholder has value…It's just identifying what bucket they best fall into
residents of the neighborhood
[those who] have a track record for doing good organizational work
[this depends,] it really is having the right watchdogs and making sure that these organizations are properly diversified to have the checks and balances are necessary.
even those outside of the community can share their experience, their best practices
The City itself is usually important
people who live in these houses
If the stakeholders have [a] passion to help, and assist, and create real change, I'm always a firm believer [that] knowledge will catch up to passion.
taxing bodies,[for] being able to get NPPs [Neighborhood Partnership Program] tax credits
people who walked these streets
developers
[people] who keep the lights on [in the community]
people who have access to resources and the ability to marshal architects and permitting and all of that. entrepreneurs, business people, and people who are willing to risk capital to improve things. small business[es], [and] large business[es]
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 174
FBO Leader 1 stated, “the organizations are here to empower the stakeholders,” and “it's
the people, the taxpayers, that are the stakeholders.” They expressed that it is “the blueprint for
the community…the story of the community…that helps people to understand…what the next
move needs to be.” This participant further explained, “The community has actually developed
those blueprints through their lives and through their experiences.”
FBO Leader 2 stated, “we need to make sure that everyone is coming to the table and
doing the work that they're supposed to be doing justly and as they proposed…and not rendering
a different outcome than what was initially negotiated.”
FBO Leader 3 suggested that it is about “being able to utilize the resource talents,
expertise at the appropriate time and place,” and that the “most significant attributes then would
fall in passion.”
FBO Leader 4 expressed their belief that “it really is the infrastructure of the City in
particular that helps facilitate…they have control, that's a big deal,” when they spoke about
which stakeholders are important to engage in CED. They went on to explain why they included
businesses as important stakeholders and stated, “business development, creation because that
creates jobs…Then entrepreneurs have [the] passion and the desire to see things change.”
All of these responses demonstrate how the participants see their stakeholders, perceive
their significance, define what characteristics are important to them, and determine whether they
consider them as unique. In summary, Cornelius et al. (2011) state, Next Generation
Organizations’ “staff and board understand cultural competence and aspire to improve in
appreciation, recognition, and understanding of individuals’ cultural differences and similarities”
(p. 14).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 175
Boards as value add. Cornelius et al. (2011) write, “Instead of power struggles with the
executive director over roles and responsibilities, the next generation board is viewed through an
asset-based lens” (p. 16). Servant Leadership, according to Patterson (2003), suggests,
“Empowerment is the ability to serve followers to achieve their full potential through
highlighting their strengths and placing them in opportunities to be successful” (p. 19).
Therefore, the researcher found it necessary to ask the FBO leaders for a description of the
governing boards’ roles and responsibilities, and the structure of their meetings (question H3).
This provides data relevant to their perceptions, experiences, and challenges. The findings
showed that the FBOs’ boards were engaged in the governance of the organizations, as well as
the programmatic components available to their stakeholders. Two of the four leaders explained
that the board served as a “committee” member for “strategy,” “program development,”
“financial decision making,” human capital needs, and other areas of support for the executive
director.
One participant explained how their board has “respect and admonish [sic] for there to be
more work done throughout the community…given us a full stamp of approval as [it] relates to
community engagement” (Leader 2). This same interviewee explains that “economic
development, a lot of times is really difficult for some people to understand how that fits within
an institute….And in [particular] how it fits within an [organization]…as [it] relates to a type of
faith, a place of faith.” They concluded their comments by saying, “it's really hard sometimes for
people to see beyond, um, like I said, the first faces of ministry… Should this be in churches and
not necessarily where we're educating people who are leading churches?” (Leader 2).
FBO4 explained that some of their board serves as “deacons and trustees” within the
ministry, though this was not expressed by the other participants. These board members are
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 176
“apprised of the various projects,” and they “approve the annual budget” and “talk to the
congregation, [to] get their feedback” (Leader 4). This expression of the role and responsibilities
is similar to what is defined by management theories and practices, which is discussed further in
the following section.
RQ2: FBOs’ Perceived Management Challenges in Implementation
To examine the perceived management challenges in the implementation of programs
and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED, data were analyzed to answer
research question 2. More specifically, the researcher sought to determine if it yielded any Faith-
Based Management components. The non-FBO participant spoke about the financial challenges
that FBOs have when trying to engage in CED, and they perceived that there are limitations to
their business savviness and management capabilities. Their understanding of these limitations
was based on the capacity of the organization in size or financial positioning. Many comparisons
of “smaller versus larger” organizations were provided. They even discussed the importance of
the FBOs’ structure and those that belonged to “consortiums of some sort.” The participant
explained that success in impact is also dependent on their business model and formal structure,
as in whether or not they are a CDC, social enterprise, or for-profit or non-profit organization.
During the non-FBO interview, there were many comments about the need to
demonstrate the FBOs’ impact when engaging with external entities overall. However, the main
point this interviewee’s data revealed is that there are questions about their outcomes. They
complained about the number of meetings that took place during their initiatives and described
them as “democracies” within themselves. One of the FBO leaders also used this term as they
explained how they wanted to avoid this type of behavior in their organization. The non-FBO,
however, experienced this because of attempting to have a clear understanding of what a faith-
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 177
based initiative looks like within politics, even in engaging with the FBOs. They asked questions
like “How do you define it?” Further responding with a smirk, the participant stated, “I don't
think an outcome is me sitting through meetings with pastors and what have you.” They also
questioned this by saying, “we talk about issues” but “What are your outcomes?”
The interview data spoke clearly to this non-FBO’s perception of how management
decisions were or were not addressing the needs of people and the social and economic
injustices. They explained, “You know, there are programs within the churches. Some of the
larger churches particularly, but…I don't see a major impactful outreach.” Another concern
expressed during the interview and mentioned earlier is those referenced as having “the
disadvantage,” this was frequently about minority populations. However, the majority of the time
it spoke directly about the African American race and those living in poverty. In one reference,
the participant explained, “Let's face it, in the African American community and in poor
communities, there aren't that many people equipped to do much of anything outside…as far as
broad-based development outside of taking care of their home, or, a small apartment building.”
They went on to explain by saying, “There's really just not the resources or the history of having
passed down resources” and other things such as “knowledge,” “education,” “networks,” and
“connections to be able to do development.”
Theme 2: Empowered Communities for Solving Neighborhood Problems
According to the data, the business model and formal organizational structure may
determine the levels of engagement of FBOs in CED and determine whether they can empower
communities to solve neighborhood problems. The non-FBO interviewee stated, “What I had
found, is that unless a church is already equipped as a developer, a CDC of some kind, they have
some type of development arm” or are “financially sound, [aren’t] interested, in that; not in
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 178
development.” Some of the FBOs engaged with this participant were described as having a
development arm that was already established. Though the FBOs’ activities were related to
aspects of CED, it was “programming…but not development.” Further explained, it was more
specific to other initiatives like day camps, “feeding the hungry,” and “giving out free glasses,”
and in “predominantly non-African American churches…they were not interested in [brick] and
mortar.” A strategy implemented to engage multiple FBOs was to offer opportunities on both
large and small projects, and this was done in consideration of “The ones that are not financially
sound. The smaller churches…congregations…revenues, that could not compete with overhead
and administrative costs.” Lastly, they expounded by saying that the levels of “Just
programming” were not enough to demonstrate enough community impact, “but [in] the African
American churches in predominantly African American communities…there was traction.”
Impact driven. However, when the FBO leaders were asked to describe the business
model and formal structure, processes involved, benchmarking, mapping, focus groups/seminars,
and questions about their representative in the community (question A6), it yielded different
responses. The findings showed that FBO1 prides itself in several areas, like in having a “motto,
one of empowerment” and providing programs within its community. They stated “[our]
operation and all of our employees are here…all of our programs are based here with the
exception of the ones that we replicate in other communities or in public schools…programs are
micro enterprise-based” (Leader 1).
Whereas, the findings reveal that FBO2 was concerned about how they:
could end up being colonizers ourselves … if our methods are [in] certain ways…how
then do we replicate our footprint?... [W]e have <individuals> embedded within the
community…stems collaboration as far as having the ideas and methodologies…not just
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 179
the methods that we see as beneficial for us…methods that the community sees as being
beneficial for their own development (Leader 2).
Now, FBO3 spoke more about how their day-to-day activities and outreach:
[The activities are] designed by using the practice model… [We] extrapolate some of the
best practice methods to proceed forward into our communities in which we serve… We
have a diverse board both [of] members that reside in the community and those away
from the community involved in business activities in the community… [W]e do have
[an] outreach in which we can get an assessment of the community and its needs, but
primarily at this time, it's through volunteers (Leader 3).
Lastly, FBO4 discussed how ownership and business development were important to them: “our
church owns and operates our businesses…community and economic development
division…<type of> Company actually is a separate, a separately incorporated C
Corporation…our offices are located here” (Leader 4).
When the staff or board member answered questions about whether the organization has
clearly defined objectives and deliverables for engaging in CED, the findings varied. One
responded: “Yeah…economic goals…we review our programs and any other events coming on
to make sure that they actually tie into that mission and that vision” (Staff 1). Another answered:
Not to where I would like to see it…we're trying to figure out how we can walk alongside
the residents… How we can help. Help that community flourish…[how] we can benefit
by being a relationship with them…we're trying to examine how we could take our
resources [and] use them…for capacity building with the various entities... But it is our
hope that we can be active, more active in that venture (Staff 2).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 180
One stated that a “catchphrase” is used within the organization between staff, leaders, and
volunteers to describe their business model (Staff 3). The final respondent spoke more to various
aspects of management principles, as they explained their goals of sustaining their CED and how
all the components of the organizational structure are meant to feed into one another. They stated
that they foresee:
a business with the purpose of once it's profitable…the idea being that [the] money that
comes through there then feeds the other…maybe afterschool programs or other things
going on in the community… [T]he profits that come from the…company were used for
the afterschool program… [A]ll of those pieces have very specific objectives… [W]e
asked the program managers [to] do a logic model…speaking to what are your outcomes,
how are you going to measure those things? [K]ept very separately…we work on
education, employment, and entrepreneurship (Staff 4).
This data shows a relationship to the FBOs’ finance and business savviness, which is referred to
in the next section. According to Grønbjerg, as cited in Hall & Kennedy (2008):
managers of nonprofit agencies must be able to determine whether their organizations
have the resources and staying power necessary to partner successfully with a
government agency—the professional capacity to deliver the services involved, the fiscal
resources to withstand the transaction costs involved, and the organizational depth and
sophistication to weather the reporting and monitoring burdens that accompany such
contracting arrangements.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 181
Finance and Business Savvy
Therefore, the researcher asked the staff and board question B1 to understand more
explicitly the organization’s business and financial savviness, which demonstrates an ability to
provide services and offerings. The findings showed that there was a relationship to:
• “positive relationships,” credibility and impact… “we're in a unique position here
because we have a tight connection with the foundation community here in
[Shelbyville]…small-time donors, they are often repetitive…when we submit grants
and you know, things like that, we do what we say we're going to do… I think that's
why something like <redevelopment project> is feasible in our future and other
community development…people that are familiar with us know that if we get
funding or anything like that, that the money will be used, you know, for exactly what
we say [it] is going to be used…the goal is the same to provide really the
fundamentals to individuals so that they can make their community strong in turn”
(Staff 1);
• “financial resources” and “ability to raise funds…much of it is designed for
maintenance of…our own…or for supporting the educational delivery methods…the
ability to raise funds for those various things and to be able to weather the storm of
the 2008 economic collapse, sort of demonstrates our financial savviness” (Staff 2);
• board governance “…people that are currently on the board take that very
seriously…they're not just waiting for a donation…actively seeking grants” (Staff 3);
and
• limited liabilities and revenue generation “…one of the things that the church has
committed to is remaining debt-free… [W]e own private property in the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 182
community…have a couple of functioning businesses… [We are] reaching out into
the broader Christian community, business community to see where there’s people—
because they're people who…really have a heart for community and economic
development, seeing that this community is being revitalized” (Leader 4).
After asking the staff and board to describe how funding, communication, day-to-day activities,
and business support align with community needs (question B4), they responded:
• “our slogan here would be ‘everything is about people’… It’s for their families”
(Staff 1);
• “Unfortunately they are misaligned at this point…institutionally we haven't taken the
time or made the investment to really delve into the community needs in order to find
ways in which our resources and the things that we can bring to the table align with
those needs…to be a thought partner. To be a development partner or anything of that
sort… The <department> has. But the institute, institution has not… The
<department> has for the last four years been involved in community meetings,
establishing relationships for various constituents… Have created seminars that
would identify, I mean that would meet identified needs…has shepherded and
designed programs and workshops and things of that nature. That would address the
felt needs that were coming from the community” (Staff 2);
• “without any of those skills, you can't advocate it…employees and volunteers with
appropriate skills to maintain and grow—it is an honest to God business…itself isn't a
nonprofit, it serves a nonprofit…if you don't have appropriate skills for these very
specific areas, you're not helping anyway” (Leader 3); and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 183
• “we kind of look and come do this assessment of the community…the <company>
it’s kind of in response to things that happened in this meeting...looking to see what
are things that helped to normalize the neighborhood… I think some of that is even
listening to what people are saying…we don't chase funding…then what we say
while we’re doing this, “Oh, there's somebody that would fund the work that we're
doing.” So, I think we start with kind of the mission, the work that we're doing and
then say, “Oh, there's somebody that would partner with us in the work.” And so, I
think kind of have to be grounded in what we're doing and then seeking out people
who would want to support that work as opposed doing it the other way” (Staff 4).
Hall & Kennedy (2008) write, “Credibility is measured not only by the congruency of such data
with the indicators of programmatic success that have been developed, but also by the source,
quality, and quantity of the evidence gathered and the methodology used” (p. 313). This learning
process is explored through the interview processes of the FBOs, and their shared experiences
and perceptions provide further insight.
Continuous learning. In this section, FBO leaders’ information is shared about question
C4 regarding their processes between the gathering of knowledge and policy formulation and the
timing of such activities. The findings show that some:
• “developed from relationships...look at what the realities were within the
community…we built with people in the community…standard compliances that we
have to deal with, with respect to organizations that may fund us…there has to be a
policy for people not just for organization…you have to be thinking about what's
more important…every organization is under the threat of becoming a bureaucracy
that is not relevant” (Leader 1);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 184
• “engaged the community…take a lot of our major stakeholders out into the
community, taking them on walking tours. We introduce them to community
members. Let's just do one survey and ask all of our questions together while we
provide some of the resources and the, you know, the footwork as far as going
canvassing and going door to door. And so while religious organizations tend to have
what we would call first spaces, food pantries and uh clothing banks and stuff like
that. We've been doing a lot of educating of the folks that sit around our tables as
relates to third spaces. That this may not be something that you would see as [a]
direct ministry, but guess what it is and these are the impacts on the community”
(Leader 2);
• “gathered information…from really diverse portals…working with
volunteers…working on our own internal assessments of project
developments...working with our partnership…being able to kind of extrapolate all of
that information and then ultimately taking it back…filtering it down and sharing it
with some members that sit on our strategic planning committee…other internal and
external stakeholders…come up with a truly engaged process to implement a policy
that can create, I'll say, real-time change in the community” (Leader 3); and
• “Haven't really focused on policy… It’s been more programs, real estate, people
stuff…that may be a limitation… Pray, think, read, study, pray some more” (Leader
4).
Though these perceptions are true to these individual FBOs, Hall & Kennedy (2008) suggest that
all “Organizations are also charged with the responsibility of training indigenous leaders to join
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 185
in program delivery” (p. 318). Thus, the researcher chose to include the following on shared
leadership to understand this phenomenon.
Shared leadership. The leaders’ responses to the question on shared leadership (D3)
gives insight on how they decide which principles or best practices are usable and why. The
findings show that they are determined in multiple ways:
• “from people that you're working with…context is still king and queen… We
wouldn't try to take exactly what we do in <community> try to go to
<community>…and do the exact same thing because that's a different context… [our]
best practices…we find out what's best from the people in the community…then we
build our programs around that… We get that feedback and then we can make
adjustments… [W]hen Jesus was walking in different places back in the time when he
lived on earth and people wanted something, he would ask them a question. It's not
that he didn't know, but he would still [ask]… So Jesus was focused…on dealing with
felt needs…a lot of what drove his mission and his actions was compassion for
people” (Leader 1);
• “We look at just what our guiding principles are and that feeds into all the work that
we do…that also feeds into our curriculum…required readings, not just old, old dead
white guys. But you have alive and breathing black women…making sure that we are
approaching whatever topic, whatever issue um out of these core values” (Leader 2);
• “best practices that are utilized certainly comes from a lot of just trial and
error…being able to take those assessments, gauging what works, what doesn't work
from our own internal perspective…have that shared dialogue, utilizing that
international practice model…having the opportunity to connect with community
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 186
leadership bodies… We share stories, problems, achievements, and work together
again to develop that best practice from a leadership standpoint” (Leader 3); and
• “evidence-based best practices in the literature…look to scriptures…there's
biblical precedent for a similar situation…read widely…pray hard” (Leader 4).
To measure other organizational elements about the FBOs, the researcher continued further
questioning about policy advocacy, the effects of governmental funding on management
practices, roles of constituents and boards, and subtleties of organizational behavior around
disadvantaged populations.
Wired for policy advocacy. The staff/board answered question E7 about how important
funding history is to CED and this yielded little data about CSBG funding, CDCs, Community
Action Agencies, and partnerships. Although each of the participants felt that funding history
was important, none of them spoke directly to the point of this question; many of them spoke
from an overall funding perspective. It did reveal that they felt funding history was important in
getting future support, demonstrating what the organization is capable of, and solidifying
whether the organization operates with integrity.
The staff/board continued by answering how the organization does/should capture what is
important to develop CED from national policy, local support organizations, and community
groups (question E8). The participants responded:
• “directly from the students or the families themselves…feedback from them both
in informal conversations…annual survey…data sharing partnership…getting
feedback from them if the services that we provide are sufficient in addressing those
issues” (Staff 1);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 187
• “the organization should capture this information…by making sure it's in the
stream of conversation and information flow on how those things took place and how
those things are planned to be done going forward. [S]o we need to be part of
conversations as well as in some ways find ways where it makes sense to be part of
the actual implementation, uh and development of policies, and the things that
[emanate] from the policies” (Staff 2);
• “You need to have a model with almost anything…it's important to see how it
worked and what didn't work…we have Penn State New Kensington…[and the]
demographic information that they share” (Staff 3); and
• “Talking to people…you’re reading, you’re understanding what’s going on…
[W]e’re a nonprofit, but you need to know what’s going on in the business
sector…[be in] communication with your public officials… [W]e talked to our state
representative, we talked to our councilman… [We] have conversations and let them
know what we’re doing and we also asked what they’re doing…this is what’s on our
agenda, what’s on your agenda? How does it meet the needs of individuals in the
community?” (Staff 4)
Kearns (2003) writes, “the faith-based initiative poses a management dilemma for leaders of
small religiously oriented organizations that want to enhance their social services” (p. 117), and
some of the strongest support appears to come from constituencies including urban African
American ministries. Consequently, the researcher captured data in this section about this
analytical code.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 188
Constituents as thought partners. The staff and board responses to question G5 showed
how stakeholders or support organizations capture local objectives and goals from the
community and voluntary groups. Responses included:
• “community meeting…discussions” (Staff 1);
• “community conversations and the meetings that are in place that we can participate
in…through other programs that we would invite people to where we can sort of
inquire and solicit that kind of information…organizations that are doing
significant work are invited to come in and share with us what it is they do what
their needs are. So the opportunities are created for students to participate through
volunteering. Volunteering with those organizations. One, it increases the capacity of
the organizations and two, it creates an information stream for students to be better
informed on how they can apply their faith once they graduate from here” (Staff 2);
• “that's something we need to be doing as opposed to that's already been
done…<community> has not been that supportive in the years that we’ve been there
which is crazy considering the need that's there” (Staff 3); and
• “I don't know that we do a great job for people who aren't in our…church
community …they're sharing not only what the organization is doing but getting
feedback from community members…monthly meetings” (Staff 4).
Since the board of directors may assess organizational strength, the researcher included the
following section to gain real insight into the complex dimensions of FBOs.
Boards as value add. Question H1 addressed to the staff or board asked them for a
description of the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers, as well as how they
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 189
assist the FBO to fulfill its mission and vision. The findings show that this is done in a variety of
ways:
• “their experiences and backgrounds help really develop a strategic plan as well as
provide, I'll say, the blueprints for having accurate assessments with the community
moving forward” (Leader 3);
• “Meetings…conversations…brainstorming…feedback” (Staff 1);
• “We have lawyers. We have preachers, engineers, architects,
accountants…theologians and biblical archaeologists…sociologists, university
administrators… Business leaders, entrepreneurs…financially…through their own
relationships with people that are of well means…sit on various board
committees…audit…they use their skills to help make sure that we are good stewards
of what it is we have” (Staff 2); and
• “the people that we have on the board…their jobs are in finance or are CPAs…in the
board there’s this built-in skillset…he teaches financial literacy…cooks a
lot...someone who's very approachable and you can talk to. She's very emotionally
supportive...she does these steam classes…get it clean, get it organized, make it
attractive. He knows grant writing inside and out…experience in establishing
501(c)(3)s” (Staff 3).
Since Hall & Kennedy (2008) purport that “Many observers expect public problem solving to be
enhanced by these forms of partnerships,” which is consistent with the perception of the non-
FBO, the researcher included the next section to learn more about the FBOs’ competencies.
Multicultural and culturally competent. The researcher found it important to ask the
partners question I6 to identify their perceptions of how the FBOs demonstrate an ability to reach
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 190
out to disadvantaged populations to help fulfill the mission. The results vary in many ways; one
participant responded that the organizations served as a platform to “mentor…he knew how to
grab hold of the need of what <community> needed in this community…culturally diverse
(Partner 1).”
One participant provided a dual-sided answer to whether any of these competencies are
demonstrated by stating:
yes and no because as I say that there is a process in which they have to go by... Giving a
different perception of who they are [as] opposed to who we are. We have that stigma
that sometimes people believe in, “Here as a white organization and you really don't care
about black people,” which is not always the truth. It's about people learning who, what
and where, and what decisions can be made that they can collaborate together and be a
good partner…it's been over the last year or so or more… Or, even is there a true
partnership here? (Partner 2)
Then the last participant agreed by saying, “Yes. And, I think primarily due to the afterschool
program…the kids…that's where a lot of their dollars are spent” (Partner 4).
RQ3: FBOs Overcoming Perceived Challenges of Religiosity
To understand the phenomenon of perceived challenges of religiosity while engaged or
attempting to engage in CED, the following analyzed data determine if it yielded any of the
Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Model components. Referring back to the non-FBO
interviewee, there are perceptions that religiosity influences engagement in CED. The participant
felt as though there was “a disconnect” between FBOs and their non-FBO counterparts. In their
experience when trying to establish collaborations, it was as if others “do not know how to
approach the faith-based community.” Through various meetings, outreach efforts, and the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 191
building of relationships, they tried to identify successful engagements. The participant
explained the desire to work together, be of service to one another, and strengthen the FBOs’
opportunities to collaborate in community problem-solving. But the respondent said, “I think that
we haven't even broached the surface of the water. I think it's an iceberg. It's like there's so much
below. We're still below water.” However, these types of engagements did enlighten other
entities: “It basically told them that the faith-based community is out there.” Although, within
their organization, the participant responded, “we still don't have the buy-in,” as they continued
to pursue faith-based endeavors. This was a direct consequence of the religious association of the
organization and not of the size, structure, or offerings.
It is perceived that FBOs have a strength of being financially sound, though smaller
congregations “compete with overhead” and “administrative cost” to engage in development. On
the other hand, they are strong in “developing a good rapport” with the community and providing
programs, events, and services. The perception was that larger churches engage in “deeper
aspects of social service delivery” and “development” with the communities. However,
depending on physical location and infrastructure, they did not appear interested in “local
community development” because it was not a relevant issue to their physical address. There
were criticisms as noted, “with all the efforts that were put into the external outreach and
forming a consortium of the faith-based community…all the good things that happened there.
Now it's up to the churches to step up.”
An area in which the participant hoped FBOs will step up and assist is “financial
inclusion or empowerment…with the faith-based community, I personally don't see a lot of that.”
Though the interviewee did say, “you don't need to hold somebody's hand forever. Eventually,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 192
somebody has to be able to walk on your own and if they don't walk on her own and you know,
well, well, so we did our efforts.”
Though this interviewee collaborated with and supported FBOs in Western Pennsylvania
through many initiatives, they included themselves when referring to the faith community. Their
identity as a person of faith was demonstrated quite passionately, as they stated, “We're not a
priority” and “it was just a disconnect.” Many of these initiatives included those to empower
youth, individuals, and clergy with a focus on various areas such as employment, small business,
housing, and other economic development areas. The participant responded that most of the time
spent “was busy trying to define it,” as in what the initiative would look like and be measured by.
Stated frustratingly, “Everybody's interested in community development…but when you're
talking about faith-based endeavors, I never got the support from people within the
administration that were people of faith.” They then went on to say, “there were very few, if any,
people who were” open in their “profession of faith.”
The participant continued to share the concerns as they described their experience and
explained, “Nobody's thinking about church per se…that could relate to the initiative… That had
some vesture in the initiative because of who they were.” Their perception is that “that passion
comes from what you're interested in, what your experiences are, who you are.” As the
participant shared concerns regarding FBOs, they stated, “if we're talking about faith and we're
going back to scriptures and how it started out, it was broad, it was very broad…I think man has
narrowed things so doggone much.” The recommendations they made were for them to “pray
outside, except people that come their way. Reach out to nonprofit organizations, reach out to
government, have that conversation.”
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 193
Several social implications seem to be relevant in the data, such as how FBOs themselves
are a community with its own identity, culture, and type of engagement overall. The interviewee
suggested there were several challenges with engagement that include the cultural, generational,
and external means of outreach, as well as communication. Consequently, the data suggest that
these challenges include an FBO’s ability to innovate, share knowledge, and extend services
beyond the members or geographical location. Other concerns were that of programs, race,
capacity, trust, mentor/mentee relationships, developers, and risk-taking. Depending on the type
of FBO and its relationships to consortiums or other forms of collaboration, that influenced the
leader’s perceived ability to be empowered to engage its organization.
An implication from this interviewee derived from when they spoke about the financial
challenges that FBOs face when trying to engage in CED. It is perceived that there are
limitations to the business savviness of the FBOs’ leaders and the different formal structures.
These types of challenges seem present mostly in smaller versus larger organizations, or even in
those that belong to consortiums of some sort. Other implications seemed to come up such as
race, funding, capacity, resources, wealth, impact, business, affordable housing, and relationships
with development or developers. For instance, they reported, “And for the African American
community we found that the small developers were aligned with churches.” However, there
were mainly concerns about the capacity to engage in larger or socially relevant projects.
The interviewee posed a question: “Are there too many strings attached” when people
engage the FBOs? Other statements followed such as this: “If you do seek the help…Jesus didn't
ask for any attachments. He just did it and then he depended on that person to make the right
decision. But he didn't sit there [and say], I'll do this, if.”
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 194
Another one of their perceptions is that there is a need to expose and increase the
network. They stated, “sometimes it's not just manna from heaven, it's individuals that are placed
in your life that you never expected. And they may not be from your church.” The interviewee
expounded further by saying, “They may not even be a person of faith, but they're being used for
a greater purpose. So they have to quit being so narrowly defined. And be broadly defined.”
They shared, “So I don't know what the churches are doing now.”
This respondent provided some feedback for FBOs on their perception of what it is going
to take to become socially and culturally relevant to the community. Toward the end of the
interview, the participant made other comments such as, “We have yet to even rise to the level
of the surface of the water; let alone get to the peak of the iceberg, which is above water. We are
so far under.” The interviewee said, “There's so much to do and it's just that, risks you have to
take and thinking outside the box and getting back to, what the overall…33 A. D. mission was.”
They admonished the FBOs to “Go back hundreds, couple thousands, go back a couple [of]
thousand years, revisit that and now let's talk?”
Theme 3: Empowered Regional Stakeholders for Social and Economic Injustices
This study intends to illuminate the perceptions, experiences, and challenges FBOs face
when engaged in CED in the Greater Shelbyville region. The prior section is an analysis of a
high-level overview from a non-FBO who has participated in initiatives of this nature on a
broader scale. Shaffer et al. (2006) argue that “the primary academic disciplines of economics,
sociology, political science, and planning bring significant insights to the table” (p. 73). The
authors continue to explain how CED “requires a unique blending of all relevant disciplines” (p.
73). The remainder of the results references the underlying themes of economic, political, social,
and cultural competencies found within the interviews of four FBOs on a micro-level. Shaffer et
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 195
al. (2006) argue, “By considering the underlying economic, social, and political forces at play,
the community can better focus on the issues at hand” (p. 73).
Impact driven. The staff and board responses to how the engagement with community
and stakeholders develops assist readers on these matters. The findings show several ways this
can take place:
• “Informally…taking advantage of having those conversations…weekly staff
meeting…find out what each program is doing that kind of feeds into our mission.
…we’ll have [a] presentation to the community about our plans for developing <the
property>. And so…then there’ll be the opportunity to ask questions” (Staff 1);
• through (internal departments)... “They have developed through just personal
relationships…with [an] urban focus, the city focus through congregations… Through
other nonprofits that service communities in different ways. My personal
relationships and the various committees or boards…by looking at the injustices
globally, [connecting] them to the same sorts of injustices locally, that creates an
overlap <within departments>” (Staff 2);
• direct inquiries… “they contact us because they heard somebody else told them
about us. Or, they'll find our website…actually go into the <company>…getting
involved with the volunteer <workers>…rescue mission…providing temporary
shelter for these disaster victims” (Staff 3); and
• community affiliation… “we have been in this community… And, we have only
done neighborhood-based ministry…it's not to say that people who take advantage of
our programs—everyone comes from <the community>… I think the thing that we
don't do enough of it, engaging the community… We kind of see what the need is and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 196
we're like, ‘Okay, we can meet this’… hoping to do more of that…but I think it'll be
good to hear from people who live here and to say, ‘What would you like to see us
doing more of?’” (Staff 4).
The partners were asked question A5 to describe the outcomes (positive and negative) of
engagement with their respective FBO. The findings vary and show that the FBOs:
• interact with all types of families “…no racial barriers…paid homage to all the
community…the designing leading up to that included input from students, parents,
staff, and then just general community members” (Partner 1);
• provide different offerings “…classes that they extended to the community to learn
community organizing, community engagement, learning exactly how that whole
faith-based does business…personnel participated in the meeting and was willing to
open their doors up to have a much bigger meeting for community engagement,
learning racial bias…they didn't know the community…as we talked about our vision
and they talked about some of the things that they were leery of, we had the
opportunity to meet again and walk the community” (Partner 2);
• outreach to inform others and encourage participation in programming “…
people got a better understanding…[of] the requirements… We did get a few families
from those outreach events…for the amount of effort and time that went into
preparing those events, we didn't get the response that we would have liked to have…
We would bring in refreshments and things for 50 people and maybe you had 10 if
you were lucky...orientation sessions” (Partner 3); and
• “influence change and community narratives…they've been pretty filled to
capacity for the most part with the elementary school programs… I think that the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 197
outreach has been positive there…they host a couple of annual events…they get
families that come out and learn about STEM and STEAM activities…some negative
stuff. And, I think that comes from what people only get part of the story and not the
whole narrative...sees this <company> and they don't know who runs it or what it
really means and what they're really about… ‘Why are all these white people here?’
‘Right?’ And then, when you learn, this organization is associated <with this church>,
you take that negative energy and you associate it with that group…the
people…[they] have a fuller sense of what they're doing and what it's all about, have
a different kind of feeling… Those people will speak for you…community
engagement work is still kind of at the surface level” (Partner 4).
Finance and business savvy. The FBO leaders were asked question B3 to inform the
researcher on the desired returns from engaging in CED. The findings show the following as
important to them:
• “strengthening people and demonstrating an impact…educated child…comes
back into the community and begins to do some work…make their own mark on
society…start their own businesses…impacting young people in the
community…influencing other young people to do better...develop trust…vital
relationships...learn how to work together…for the good of the overall good of the
community...going through the process of caring for each other…listening to each
other's stories…learning more about each other so that trust can be there…have a
track record for doing good organizational work” (Leader 1);
• “education, just behaviors, and reflection of religious values…work to enhance the
education of every single one of our students… stakeholders want to see how does
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 198
this impact our bottom line...how has this enhanced their perspectives, their lives,
their education…are we doing this work equitably...faithful to the process and
especially when we say we're followers of Jesus…walking, in true partnership with
our community partners…white institutions to take on roles that do harm...very
conscientious of not living into that legacy” (Leader 2);
• “collaborative efforts for the community…driven around at this time working to
create partnerships and shared community plan development… We want to get away
from projects in a silo...get a shared synergy…synergy with the other nonprofits,
government agencies, and public/private partnerships that we can establish so that
when we do build…hopefully start to spark that renaissance that we desire for the
community…utilize my skillsets…to better create opportunities for others…with
emphasis on an integrative place-based strategy really engaging people…is critical to
establish a sense of ownership, pride, and ultimately community…to utilize what gifts
and talents I have to see others move forward” (Leader 3); and
• “Transform lives” (Leader 4).
Continuous learning. Staff and board responses to question C2 shed light on what and
how the organizations learn from national or government policy. The findings show:
• “The policy is learned because it's shared…relay that back to the staff of how it
impacts us…between the executive director and the management team…filter out that
information” (Staff 1);
• “the practice of theology can influence positively or negatively to [the]
development of policies and that there is a need to know…need to understand why
that concentrated poverty exists and is it a byproduct of nature… Or is it a product of
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 199
[a] systematize[d] policy, systematic policy...if it is a result of policies then what's
behind the creation of those policies…causation theory…rather than just dealing with
the symptoms being committed to looking at the root causes of those symptoms and
from a theological framework” (Staff 2);
• “not fully understood as relevant [as] it is to the organization…I don't know that
there's that much…year-to-year…probably mostly the tax laws of the
donation…change the building codes” (Staff 3); and
• “I don’t know…you have to be aware of what's going on…thresholds for deductions
to charitable organizations… ‘Oh, that then will impact if there are people that aren't
getting it for the right reasons’…how might that impact our funding base because the
other piece is that our congregation is by far the major supporter of this work. …how
might it impact your, you know, your day-to-day work. …doing research, keeping
your ears open, your eyes open, things that are going on. …business tax credits for
nonprofits…businesses can be given…a tax write off for donating. …it's, like, in lieu
of taxes, they're donating money to your nonprofits. …‘Oh, we should probably
investigate that to see if that could be, you know, an additional funding source for
us’” (Staff 4).
The staff and board responses to question C3 on what and how the organizations learn from
national/regional/local stakeholder groups yielded the following:
• “Learned from community engagement meetings…find out what the climate had
said that everybody else is working in…professional development…state of arts
education” (Staff 1);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 200
• “Environmental factors that could affect programs and services…we cannot be
ignorant of the fact that things that might happen overseas do have effects here in this
country… And things that might happen in this country do have an effect overseas...
So where there is an inextricable linkage network that creates a context for which we
are called into… It expands our, it broadens our focus and it broadens the number of
resources we can call on to help us make sure we have the right tools. The right things
in place to adequately train students for ministry” (Staff 2);
• “Business and operational practices…we have learned a lot—on the very practical
level—from organizations like Goodwill or St. Vincent de Paul to help us as a resale
shop, most specifically as that's just retail... What's the best way to sell this or attract
customer[s]?” (Staff 3); and
• “Learned from collaboration…we sit on a steering committee… We collaborate
with other nonprofits…a countywide kind of umbrella organization that…keeps
program providers abreast of policy changes… And so, we try to make sure that we
have representatives from our staff that go to those various meetings…so that we’re
understanding what are the things that are happening at a policy level that might
impact us or if there are particular programs that maybe we could participate in.
…taking advantage of those learning opportunities to just see how it might impact us”
(Staff 4).
Shared leadership. The staff and board responses to question D1, what and how the
organization, staff, and board learn from each other, show:
• “Learn from staff meetings…giving their update so that you can make that
connection…collaboration within the team…formalized setting” (Staff 1);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 201
• “Learn about shared governance without shared responsibility… And when you
have shared responsibility then there's also shared…ownership to some extent…any
organization or any network of organizations only functions well when roles are
clear, skill sets are clear, assets are clear, [the] purpose is clear and the mission is
clear and outcome, expected outcomes are clear” (Staff 2);
• “Learn diversity…we each come from a different background…different
viewpoints” (Staff 3); and
• “Learn to function organizationally instead of silos…staff meetings a couple of
times a month where everyone comes together. …what am I working on, how does
my work, you know, kind of crossover with yours? ...how can I make you aware of
what's going on with me because there might be some way that you can support that.
…we work[ed] with a consultant a couple of years ago…in his report, he's like, ‘I
don't know how you get anything done because [there are] all of these silos.’ So, I
think people learn kind of within their area of expertise, like, what they're responsible
for. But, we also work very hard to kind of maintain the idea that we're one
organization and that the overall mission is… So, one of the things we did to address
that was our communications manager created a PowerPoint…so it doesn't matter if
you're new… I’m trying to do things like that so people have an understanding of
kind of what the larger picture is. …the ones that I run as executive director—we're
always doing some sort of learning. …we're going through a book. And so, we try to
focus on business books, leadership books or maybe reading an article together. …it's
important for people to have [a] shared language. …you need dedicated time to really
focus deeply on work and what are [the] strategies to do that, right? ... I think that
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 202
helps to kind of build that culture. …we do updates and so people are sharing what's
going on in their program…[and] present a problem of practice” (Staff 4).”
Wired for policy advocacy. The FBO leaders responded to question E1 in a variety of
ways when they described how and why they perceived changes in CED initiatives over the past
five years. The findings show:
• “People are more informed…because people have been more enlightened as to what
needs to happen…we've seen over the years, has been people who've come into
communities first… And then next thing you know, people are buying up pieces of
property…they have control of the land…they're building with people who are called
developers or investors and then they have a plan for all that land that they bought in
your community… That was the model…for some people [it] is really still brick and
mortar…the only thing that is changing the initiatives, you know, community
development CDC initiatives [are] the people that are engaged… So there are people
that are engaged now who care more about people who have seen this model, that
doesn't work… That has displaced people and send[s] people into other communities
where they didn't grow up… That cause[s] people not to be able to afford to stay in
their own homes…a lot more proactive talking and communicating with the people
who are in the community who grew up in the community… It's happening more now
and I believe the foundation community is beginning to have more of a commitment
to the communities as well…it makes things look pretty, but it doesn't do something
that's pretty in the lives of the people… I believe that capitalism drives these
things…development itself is about profit…it kind of pushes people to the side… I
think politics absolutely has some role in it…if certain governmental departments are
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 203
responsible for allocating funds into communities…to empower the people in the
communities…that money never makes it to the community…then the developer can
come in and do whatever the heck they want to do… That's injustice and that's more
power to the capitalists” (Leader 1);
• “People are more educated where they once found themselves objectified…isn't
my official, um, wheelhouse… Where residents who have found themselves in many
ways, in some regards, I'll venture to say even objectified. …finding themselves
falling victim to what's happening around them without their say, without their
acknowledgment…feeling in many regards powerless…you've seen the rising up of
community organizations…and just other groups that have said, well, no, we've got to
have a stake in what's happening in our communities. …what I'm seeing today [is] a
lot of educated, conscientious folks who are saying, who know their rights…and or
are learning, um just how this game is played. …there's a more diverse, uh, more
diverse pool of people at the table that are making these decisions... Now, is it where
it needs to be? Oh my gosh, not at all… Because then you get these stakeholders who
have deep pockets to feel they can just buy these organizations lunch and wine and
dine them for the day… And these folks might get enamored by all that…and ended
up caving in on what they think or should be good for the community because of this
one event… Or you'll see some times where, um, you don't have all of the, um, the
knowledge base within some of these communities… Where you don't have
necessarily the urban planner or the financiers or the attorneys that would know the
intricacies of what it takes for community economic development... Where then you
have players [who] have come to the table and I've witnessed speak circles around
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 204
those who have the community's best interest in mind, but just don't have the
knowledge base and the expertise to be able to speak reputably in these types of
audiences…the proper conversations that need to be had for fair and just economic
development within our communities to take place” (Leader 2);
• “a lot more emphasis on collaboration…funders are more intrigued when there is a
collective synergy of resources and talents to be utilized. …working to solve
community issues that you're addressing them or attempting to address them
holistically…there can be a shared vision...previous practice and community
economic development did a lot of great things, but it was only impactful for a
limited time. It faded because there [weren’t] other elements there to support that true
and sustainable change” (Leader 3); and
• “I don’t know” (Leader 4).
To understand this from each respective FBO, their partner was asked a similar question about
what has driven the change of the CED sector (question E2). The findings show these changes
are taking place because:
• “they're revitalizing” (Partner 1);
• “New development, new housing, bringing different people into the community…
Concerned Citizens—had an idea and her idea was to change the community”
(Partner 2);
• “made specific efforts…clean up the neighborhood…those improvements, it makes
everyone around them want to do the same thing” (Partner 3); and
• “change is difficult for me to speak to… I don't feel like I've been in it that long…you
have this conversation that [is] starting to happen around gentrification…it feels like
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 205
there are more people at least willing to listen and attempt to find ways that
you're not displacing people from the community as you're developing it… I don't
feel like there's a lot of people that have real tangible solutions and it's
complicated…no easy fixes and it takes a collective approach because you can have
all the best intentions in the world, you know, for not displacing people…community
comprehensive plans…they're going to try to do that around the other parts of the
city… I don't know if it will extend to the county at all, but those things can be
helpful because most people—I won’t say most—a lot of people I find don't want to
displace people… They don't want to exacerbate the situation in terms of poverty or
displacement or gentrification. …they do want to make money if they are private
investors, right? …unless you come to them in advance, with your story and a
strategy where they could still make some money and not displace people—they're
going to just make money, which if you just do that, it is going to displace people and
cause lots of other challenges. …you've got to work together on it” (Partner 4).
The leaders’ responses to question E3 about whether or not local and national policy agendas are
driving these changes vary, and their perceptions are as follows:
• “revitalize and help the community to come together as a whole…the consultants
that have shown us their blueprints and plans and what they want to do in the five
areas…economical changes coming which is needed since the steel mills have closed
down and it became, kind of like, destitute… Funding is a lot… Knowing how to
have a proposal that people will engage in is one thing, but when they see it, it's a
totally different ball game” (Leader 1);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 206
• “Shifts in policy and governance…feel there is a shift in, to a certain degree, some
turmoil as far as community and economic development policies…just overall
opportunity that's presented at higher levels, federal and state levels. …shifts away
from what the previous administration has established or desired to establish.
…there's just limited resources that are made available. The current administration
puts emphasis on the state to take responsibility [for] a number of different
community development areas and arenas of opportunity. …limits state resources
because now that you have an influx of organizations coming forward that used to
depend on the federal government [they] might have now limited or no access to
funding. [HUD] certainly has had some cuts…organizations have to adapt, obviously.
Have to become more creative…changes in the administration’s policies… even the
tax code which affects and influences charitable donations. …it's all about involving
the community and getting support from the community… That could be local banks,
that could be other development firms…grants available…capacity-building grants...
And, the local affiliates are required to pay a tithe to the international affiliate”
(Leader 3); and
• “Focus…I pay some attention to that… I think that the risk becomes sometimes we
focus too much on… I don't think what happens in Washington is going to make or
break what happens in [Shelbyville]…more focused on the doing, the dreaming of
what can be…then, gathering resources and then trying to execute it...that's not good
necessarily. It just is” (Leader 4).
The partners’ responses to question E4 on how the FBOs’ stakeholders view CED yielded the
following:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 207
• “if you're not involved in change, then change will happen because you don't use
your voice…stakeholders look at the success of your organization… If a stakeholder
felt that there was a lot of negative issues in your organization, then there would be
no stakeholders to contribute to your organization” (Partner 1);
• “wanting to even just do new development in our community…the disinvestment
and feeling secure enough to want to build a new building and bring a business here”
(Partner 2);
• “As an asset… Not everybody…we've come up against neighbors who don't want
that in their neighborhood or particularly politicians who have an agenda…it
improves people's lives…by improving the [p]eople's life, you're improving the
community, you're improving the neighborhood…some politicians who have been
very supportive of it” (Partner 3); and
• “my partners view it as, I think, from an ownership mentality…if we're not playing in
that space, it's not our community… A lot of people hear that and they think about
just development. And so, you got to own stuff and you got to have some money and
you got to have something to be able to play. And so, when you look at what they've
done, if they had a problem with what was happening on a lot of the properties
around their building, they bought them. …think that's why they're engaged in it
because you know, you can't talk about this other stuff, transforming the community,
changing the community if you're not engaged in [the]community and economic
development. You got to develop the people and you got to develop the space, right?
And, I think they're both of those spaces…they view it as something that must be
done, especially for the churches if they don't believe that churches are supposed to
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 208
be in a space and just be there…gentrification because so many folks in the
community feel powerless...organizations just feel powerless in terms of these
things… Because we don't have big money…a lot of us don't have relationships with
access to that kind of capital…and you don't feel like you have the opportunity to
actually make a difference, all of that stuff is threatening… I think that there are
community leaders that are really actively engaged in that process and really
interested in how this stuff connects. So, a lot of folks I've talked to we're talking
about jobs and housing and employment and education and how all of that stuff ties it
together to build a community and business district...the economic piece, people have
got to get comfortable with—we live in America, it’s capitalism, people trying to
make money. …the point is—that's a driver and we can't pretend like it's not. …that's
where a lot of times the community and the businesses don't, can't meet eye to eye
anywhere because sometimes I think as a community, we forget that the only way, the
reason that <someone> has $5 million to invest, it's because somebody made $5
million. …you got to deal with that fact and try not to get taken advantage of, but at
the same time understand what everybody's needs are and what the pros and the cons
of it, right? …in a lot of cases the people giving it aren't giving it for nothing. Even
these foundations that are giving away money, they're sitting on endowments that
have been invested and that [in] a lot of cases [are] continuing to make money.
…they're still making money too” (Partner 4).
Constituents as thought partners. The partners answered question G4, in what ways do
local and national entities influence the organization and its capacity to engage in CED? The
findings show:
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 209
• “They had to go nationally to their board to talk about the process” (Partner 2);
• “There is both local and national… So locally, it's all about involving the community
and getting support from the community. That could be local banks, that could be
other development firms. Nationally, there were always grants available through
<international affiliate> that were always capacity-building grants…at one point in
time, got us into a little bit of trouble because each year that you applied for those
capacity-building grants—each year you had to step your game up. And, each year as
you stepped your game up, you had to come up with more—they gave you less than
you had to come up with more and you had to do more… And, the local affiliates are
required to pay a tithe to the international affiliate… So, you do more than just build
in your own neighborhood, your own community, but you’re helping…around the
world” (Partner 3); and
• “local folks influence it by sharing their vision for what <the community> looks
like…and sharing in the mission to try to improve the community. So, people come
into them or have ideas and really want to get moving on something and I think
they're willing to listen, …for example, the one partner who is now you leasing their
space—they didn't tell them what they couldn't transform it into, but they did select a
partner that would transform their space into something that was valuable to the
community. … I think they try to stay aware of trends happening nationally because,
you know, they want—like a lot of us, we want our young people to be, you know,
prepared to compete [on] a national stage… We don't want them to just have limited
opportunities because of where they were born, right, what their zip code is… We
want them to be able to do the stuff that a lot of these other kids can do… They travel
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 210
a lot and see a lot of things and that absolutely feeds into the work that they do”
(Partner 4).
Boards as value add. The partners answered question H2 as they described the skills of
individual board members, staff, and volunteers that may be needed to strengthen the
organization’s capacity to fulfill its mission and vision. The findings show:
• “different skills and personalities that contribute…creative thinking just outside of the
box… We’re definitely not looking to do things just because they were always done a
certain way…artists…communication…being able to relate to and with people
administrative…putting together the policies and procedures…able to sufficiently
network with outside people” (Staff 1);
• “speak up when there's issues that need to be discussed and resolved…he’s strategic
about who's on his board…think a two-year window to be on the board and then he
changes…you have an attorney on the board, you have a pastor on the board, you
have, a community advocate on the board, two of those on the board. You have
people who can go out and have a voice with a name or title attached to them…not
that I'm saying titles mean a lot, but sometimes the title can get you into doors where
somebody else couldn't get into that door…we come to a happy medium with the
disagreements. We’re not walking out of the board meeting with, I guess, negative
feelings or negative attitudes or anything of that nature. We try to resolve things
before we leave all those board meetings. So, I think what he has on that board is,
like, culturally diverse and he has the right people in place” (Partner 1);
• “I didn't really think that I've really thought about it. I mean, you know, needing each
other, other than the development coming in and building the building and bringing in
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 211
a new business and the community, but as far as what they have other than if they
have classes and people in the community and go up and learn from their classes. But
other than that…” (Partner 2);
• “Fundraising capabilities…volunteers…contractors…do everything on a
shoestring…how to have the biggest impact…able to have a vision of what's the
best...place, where people want to come and spend money because that money is
helping you to build…finance people…people that understand how to do…people
skills that can work directly” (Partner 3); and
• “Communication support… Fundraising… Volunteer… Everybody is tired,
everybody is taxed. You're not able to do your best work…more volunteers always
help you could get more support, more hands to lift some of that work. It allows the
team, the core team, to really go further and take the next step” (Partner 4).
Multicultural and culturally competent. The staff or board further responded to
question I4 about multicultural and cultural competence, and explained which things the
organization would need to further engage with its members and the community? The findings
show:
• “additional interest from the community at large…the perspectives of everyone in
the community…the more people we’re able to engage with, the better we're able to
predict what the needs really are…even racially…making sure that those perspectives
are known for the whole group…manpower…more money to pay people…to host
events” (Staff 1);
• “The will… You know they were able to build a wall because folks had a mind to
work” (Staff 2);
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 212
• “More money, more volunteers… The more resources you have, the more you can
accomplish… There’s plenty of people out there that want to do this, they just don’t
know it yet” (Staff 3); and
• “money, right? it's going to take money to build that building…we have a commercial
kitchen under construction now. So, we're going to use that to do some workforce
development to help expand our catering arm…but also to help people in the
neighborhood who want to bring to scale their food-based businesses. …the
construction costs money. And so, I think that’s the [case] for a lot of things in the
neighborhood that money would really answer those things. …it's not money that you
know, ‘Oh, the people need to be paid more’ …money allows you to do things and to
provide jobs and to do training and things like that” (Staff 4).
The leaders explained in answering question I5 what they find to be the biggest challenges in the
organization’s ability to work within the culture of a disadvantaged neighborhood. The findings
show:
• “the disadvantage is a strength and a weakness…the closeness of everybody in the
community…people talk and everybody knows everybody…services that are being
provided are being duplicate[d]… Let’s make sure we're working in concert with each
other as opposed to somebody else trying to do something somebody else has been
doing for years…people just want to do what they want to do…they don't ask
anybody, they just go [a]head and do it” (Leader 1);
• “to see that they're worth it…to see that we're worth it… We're worth being
educated by them. …they're disadvantaged, but how, what advantages do they have?
… What privilege do they have?… And some of them may have the privilege of
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 213
seeing what poverty looks like. …They are experts in racial discrimination. …we
have experts in what it looks like to mobilize a community. It's one thing to look at a
community that's changing, what does it mean for the community to actually be a part
of that process? ... It's a matter of seeing that advantage and then for those that are
really smart, taking advantage of that advantage and actually making those right
partnerships” (Leader 2);
• “the ability to meet the growing need…with limited resources…a population that's
aging each and every day…opioid epidemic…there's a number of different
things…being able to have those resources to meet those growing challenges I think
were the hardest difficulties” (Leader 3); and
• “the challenges of poverty and people having a met need…it's not uncommon for
you to have your car broken into, a building [was] broken into…just normal stuff that
in some ways I don't even know that’s unique to disadvantaged neighbors…that's city
life in some ways… But, they're largely driven by the fact that people were
economically challenged. …if we're talking about just criminal activity, you can talk
about <neighborhood> where you have all this huge concentration of bars. So, there
are different types of crimes. …The biggest challenge of a place like <the
community> that was particularly most visible is when you have a shooting—Then
when somebody gets killed with a weapon, that's a big deal that ends up being
covered well in the news and all that” (Leader 4).
Chapter Summary
This chapter reflects the data analysis and its relationships to the research questions,
demographic survey, and theoretical framework used for the study. There were thirteen
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 214
participants interviewed for the study. Interview questions were structured to understand the
phenomenon from an organizational perspective of FBOs engaged or desiring to engage in CED.
All participants were associated in some way with an FBO. The data generated could answer
whether FBOs may increase their engagement if they are empowered to operate effectively and
efficiently in leadership and management and whether their religious association could hinder
this. The three themes that emerged from this data include: (a) interest in increasing the capacity
of people to engage in CED on a tactical level, (b) influence community-based capacity building
projects to solve neighborhood problems on an operational level, and (c) implementation of
policies from regional stakeholders that address social and economic injustices on a strategic and
regional level.
Through a re-iteration in this chapter of the introduction to the study, problem statement,
an overview of participants, and assessment used to conduct the study, readers gain further
understanding of the data. Collecting data through a survey provides demographic information
about individual participants. The assessment used to administer the interview questions assisted
with triangulation and took place through face-to-face semi-structured interviews. These semi-
structured interviews transcribed by the researcher equaled over 150 pages of analyzed data. All
of this, the surveys, interviews, and document analysis from this qualitative case study method
examine how FBOs in the Southwestern Pennsylvania programs and initiatives support CED.
Further details, as well as the researcher’s response to the results of the data, are found in chapter
five. It reveals the conclusions and provides recommendations for future study.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 215
Chapter Five: Discussion
In this chapter, the researcher gives meaning to the results and links them to past theory,
literature, and practice for future implications. The purpose of this qualitative case study is to
empower FBOs and practitioners engaged or willing to engage in CED in the greater Pittsburgh
region. This chapter provides a restatement of the purpose, summary of the study, review of the
problem, and analysis of the data collected from the sample population. An examination of the
findings and conclusions with interpretation from the data analysis is also presented in this
chapter. The discussion includes data gathered from demographic forms and semi-structured
interviews with each of the 13 participants yielding three major findings that helped show how
FBOs’ experiences, challenges, and perceptions influence engagement. The empowerment
themes include: (a) interest in increasing the capacity of people to engage in CED on a tactical
level, (b) influence community-based capacity building projects to solve neighborhood problems
on an operational level, and (c) implementation of policies from regional stakeholders that
address social and economic injustices on a strategic and regional level. The remainder of the
chapter includes an application to theory and practice, limitations, important lessons,
recommendations for further research, and the study’s unique contributions to literature.
To understand the various elements of this phenomenon, how it contributes to CED, and
ways to integrate into an effective organizational development process, the following research
questions were considered:
(R1): What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate in order to
effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED?
(R2): What perceived management challenges do FBOs face related to the implementation of
programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED?
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 216
(R3): What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while engaged
or attempting to engage in CED?
This chapter concludes with future research possibilities, an additional discussion on how further
research compares to past studies and this study’s unique contributions to the faith-community in
the broader context, the literature on CED, and faith-based management.
As presented in the literature review, the theory of holistic faith-based development is
used to provide a framework of the importance FBOs have in CED and how they can be
empowered to engage in such activities and initiatives using the Holistic Faith-Based
Empowerment Model. This framework includes two other theories, Servant Leadership, and
Faith-Based Management, to answer research questions and examine phenomena. The literature
reviewed the levels of analysis of empowerment, CED, and characteristics of leadership and
successful FBOs using proven management practices and techniques. The data reveal key
findings presented in chapter four relating to influencing change for people, community problem
solving, and social and economic justice initiatives (Shaffer, Deller, & Marcouiller, 2006). To
demonstrate its importance, a restatement of the purpose of the study is provided.
Restatement of Purpose of the Study
Again, this study intends to empower FBOs and practitioners engaged or willing to
engage in CED in the greater Pittsburgh region. Previous research shows that many FBOs
struggle to engage in CED due to a lack of experience, capacity, and skills in leadership and
management, resulting from religious ideologies, political landscapes, insufficient resources, and
an inability to demonstrate impact. The researcher questioned if these organizations understood
how to position their personnel and operations and sustain their CED efforts, would more
participate or could these things help those currently engaged become more efficacious? If the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 217
answer to these questions is yes, FBOs could help to improve communities in need and function
as Next Generation Organizations able to transition with today’s trends and environmental
influences. In the following interpretation of the findings, the researcher provides details that
help answer these questions and the associated themes that were discovered.
Methodology
To help determine whether leadership, management, and religiosity influence
engagement in CED, the research questions were applied to these topics and the researcher
conducted a case study using semi-structured interviews. Consequently, a case study of this
nature results in data that may assist policymakers, foundations, and other stakeholders in larger
economic plans. Looking at the faith-community as a whole, the researcher included a
representative from a government organization as part of the sample population and compared it
to the data of four FBOs as another part of the purposeful sampling (Capella University, 2018).
The theories permitted the researcher to analyze this data for levels of domains around
empowerment. These levels of empowerment are discussed further in the interpretations. In total,
13 practitioners were interviewed. Demographic information was gathered from a survey
instrument that provided insight into experiences, background, age, race, etc., about the
interviewees. Interviewees were asked about their experiences and approaches relative to CED,
which allowed the researcher to assess for the strategic intent of FBOs and perform a situational
analysis. The Is Your Organization Next Generation? assessment questions used for inquiry
during the interviews focused on their strategies and permitted opportunities to look at
organizational management structures and leadership practices (Cornelius & Wolford, 2011).
The interviews covered direct validation of aspects of faith-communities and CED that
influenced the researcher’s interpretation and meaning of the case.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 218
Interpretation of the Findings and Implications for Theory and Practice
The researcher examined the internal and external perceptions of FBOs engaged in CED
within Southwestern PA; in doing so, the findings show noteworthy themes and characteristics of
several theories. Selected excerpts from data gathered from interviews with a non-FBO and
leaders, staff, and partners of FBOs lend to the knowledge about engagement and the following
interpretation. After analyzing the data, three themes were identified that help answer the
research questions for this study. The empowerment themes include: (a) interest in increasing the
capacity of people to engage in CED on a tactical level, (b) influence community-based capacity
building projects to solve neighborhood problems on an operational level, and (c)
implementation of policies from regional stakeholders that address social and economic
injustices on a strategic and regional level. The findings speak to qualities of a Next Generation
Organization within faith-communities and leadership attributes for effective engagement. They
also speak to managerial practices that lend to the success of organizations and how an
association with faith is perceived to affect engagement in CED.
The interpretations of the findings could help future researchers and practitioners
understand this phenomenon and illuminate what conditions FBOs need to engage in CED.
Knowing the perceptions, themes, and findings assist with future considerations for those who
share in questioning the engagement of FBOs in CED and can impact collaboration for regional
decisions. To determine if the previous literature on FBOs is conclusive regarding what is
needed for engagement in CED in a sustainable manner, the researcher examined the City of
Shelbyville’s initiatives on a macro and micro level. However, the data from each organization
was studied on a meso-level to reveal how local FBOs engaged in CED compared to past
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 219
research. For the purpose of this case study, references to the challenges, perceptions, and
experiences are interpreted and discussed mainly on a meso-level.
Final Meso FBO Interpretation and Implications for Theory and Practice
As stated in chapter four, on the meso-level, the researcher studied the experiences of
FBOs as groups within a larger community of faith and the interactions between the groups with
each other and their partners, such as the one non-FBO participant. Their perceived strengths
varied from having social and economic capital, trust, and capacity to bring about community
change. On the other hand, there are some perceived challenges referenced in the data, as in their
lack of willingness to engage in “brick and mortar” development and limited ability to
demonstrate real “outcomes.” According to the non-FBO participant, there were opportunities to
partner or grow in their capacity to impact the community that not everyone took advantage of.
For those who were involved, they did not necessarily succeed in this type of engagement
for many reasons. Unfortunately, with the change in the landscape in many urban communities
of those who are more socially conscious, unless an organization demonstrates some level of
social responsibility, community members are taking a stand. No longer is it acceptable to be
within a community and not participate in planning sessions, advocate in some capacity, or as
others would say, give back to those who are your neighbors. This stance suggests that if you are
not providing relevant products and services, then many are not patronizing these organizations.
In other words, according to two of the FBO leaders, unless you are meeting the “felt needs” of
the people in the neighborhood, then you are not helping at all. FBOs are not exempt from this,
and as previously mentioned, past studies indicate various possible reasons for the shortage of
FBOs in this field: administrative cost, federal funding, staffing, resources, characteristics,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 220
typologies, a decline in attendance, and changes in organizational structure (Mitchell, 2016;
Roozen, 2015; Sloan & Grizzle, 2014).
The remainder of this section highlights data from interview questions, responses from
the FBOs, and the researcher’s interpretations of the relationships between the two. The
researcher includes a brief commentary of interviewees that reflects the diversity within the
experiences, generational engagement, as well as relationship with the community of its origin
and compares that to the non-FBO results. Vignettes from representatives from either Johnstown,
Fredericksville, Jamestown, or Dublinville that have some relationship to the research question
and theme are presented as the researcher interprets the findings. Thus, the section allows the
reader to gain a general overview of the participants, their perceptions, experiences, and
challenges compared to one another, especially that of the City of Shelbyville. It is then followed
by the researcher’s interpretation of the findings.
As previously noted, the researcher attempted to qualify the perception of the non-FBO
that “there are other pastors out there,” besides those frequently called upon to speak on behalf of
the faith community as a whole, who are doing the work. Ninety-one percent of the FBO
participants had experience with CED and the data suggests that since many of them were not
implants, then some of this work was most likely in the greater Pittsburgh area. Included below
is an overview and interpretation of the major findings organized by the research questions and
applicable theme. The interpretations of the researcher follow and are organized into three
sections: (1) the response of non-FBOs, (2) the responses of the FBOs, and (3) the researcher’s
understanding of the phenomenon. Each theme is described in further detail in the following
sections. The interpretative phase shows the meaning of the case based on the research questions.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 221
Relationship between Shelbyville and FBOs
The Shelbyville leaders collaborated with many organizations including FBOs around a
concerted effort to increase the capacity and resources for regional development activities.
Again, to their surprise, there was limited engagement with the faith-community, though there
was an opportunity to strengthen strategic and operational efforts by engaging them tactically in
CED. On a macro level, there were several perceptions of faith-communities that could have
either hindered or encouraged their engagement. As the non-FBO stated, “Everybody's interested
in community development, affordable housing, but when you're talking about faith-based
endeavors, it, it was just a disconnect,” and presented other criticisms of the faith-community
important to note in this study. It sets the tone for the interpretation of the FBO responses.
The non-FBO participant explained that FBOs would get less criticism if they functioned
in several specific ways. Firstly, they can operate within their strength to use the trust and
connectivity, they have with people to “build the community up.” Secondly, to “educate, mentor,
and actually help with the books of black businesses,” thus empowering the owners with the
ability to engage in CED. The perception that some FBOs have the capacity and know-how to
help, but “they don't want to do it” was not revealed in previous literature. However, others argue
that FBOs struggle with demonstrating their impact, which is consistent with the following
statement from the non-FBO: leaders “would say they are, [were helping] but no one else sees it
out in [the] general community. That's why the churches get so much criticism.” Thirdly, to help
practitioners and researchers understand how to tactically apply strategies, allocate resources,
and monitor progress.
The researcher asked the non-FBO an open-ended question: what would a successful,
impact driven, FBO look like in the area of CED? Their responses showed they would be a)
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 222
“doing brick and mortar,” b) “tackling peripheral issues that develop in the community,” c)
“going beyond saying ‘we’re gonna pray,’” and d) “forward[-]thinking, with an external
community development mindset.” Lastly, they would address the criticism that “it's all old
heads” and answer the question “where the young people at?” This is a common argument with
other researchers that suggest practitioners in this field are aging out and there is a concern about
how to prepare the next generation of leadership, which is why the researcher chose the Next
Generation Organization tool for the FBO interviews. Comparing this information with the
responses to the research questions gives context as to why an FBO may not have been
successful in the area of CED, answering questions like whether it was due to not being engaged
or having limited engagement, etc.
(R1): What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate in order to
effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED?
The first interpretation to satisfy the researcher’s expectation of the relevance of FBOs’
leadership within CED conveys a need for leaders to empower people. Though the interviews
provide some perceived leadership requirements, for the purposes of this research design,
information within the Servant Leadership theory is mainly discussed. The interviews reveal that
there are key practices that overlap between leadership, the structures of organizations, and what
is needed to effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED. Discussed next is the
empowerment theme revealed from data, including an interest in increasing the capacity of
people to engage in CED on a tactical level. The interpretations are organized into three sections:
(1) the response of non-FBOs, (2) the responses of the FBOs, and (3) the researcher’s
understanding of the phenomenon.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 223
Empowered people on an individual level. The FBO participants’ responses look at
organizational management structures and leadership practices (Cornelius & Wolford, 2011)
from various standpoints including those of partners, staff, leaders, stakeholders, and recipients.
Their responses speak to a) the drive to achieve which permeates the culture, b) financial
transparency and viability, c) facilitated learning of its people, d) leadership development, e)
community organizing skills, f) results-only work environments, g) constituent value, h) working
with diverse communities and people from cultural and social backgrounds, and lastly, i)
prioritizing and judging the quality of leadership and impact (Cornelius et al., 2011).
The FBO results suggest that there should be an empowerment of others to engage in
CED on a tactical level. Based on the responses, the drive for this is expressed in several ways:
a) be “embedded in” or invested in the neighborhood, b) “love God, love people, live like Jesus,”
c) “connect people to opportunities” and “tap into their natural talents,” d) “value partnership,
mutuality, diversity, and collaborations,” e) “create [an] impact on the community by serving in
a leadership role,” and lastly, f) “create change where you define the paradigm.” Thus, the results
appear to say that FBOs may empower people on several levels. The individuals can be
empowered themselves, they can then empower others to support themselves, and each may also
be empowered to contribute “to the community far beyond their own needs.”
It could be that their ability to effectively manage a dual bottom line determines whether
they have a positive social impact (Cornelius et al., 2011). FBO partners suggest, for them to be
successful, they need “fundraising,” “money,” “skilled board and volunteers,” “donations,” and
“platforms and opportunities for them to share [their] message with people.” Some of the FBO
leaders perceive that, as a learning organization, this is done by being in a “partnership,”
“learning qualitatively,” “talking to people,” “observing,” “seeing what’s going on in the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 224
community,” “reading the paper,” “being in the schools,” “through other organizations,” and
“through the church.” Other responses suggest that this information can be transferred
individually and collectively, as mentioned in chapter four, through various means and methods.
Through “communication,” whether “on the ground working” or “directly with the families,”
“things are documented,” and staff adheres to the “chain of command”; whether “planning a
work project” or not, “we want people to kind of bring that information back what you learned
and how you applied it.”
The responses around the FBOs’ ability for community organizing skills and whether
they were wired for policy advocacy are more ambiguous. Many FBO partners and leaders failed
to explicitly answer some of the questions as intended. Only one FBO spoke about their direct
involvement around community organizing. However, another shared that they “think that the
only thing that is changing the initiatives, community development CDC initiatives, is the people
that are engaged.” They continued explaining how “there are people that are engaged now who
care more about people, who have seen this model, that [the previous one] doesn't work.”
Another FBO leader who acknowledged only recently being engaged in CED perceived
that it has changed in that there is “a more diverse…pool of people at the table that are making
these decisions.” The other data suggest that each participant understood the need for community
organizing though it did not yield responses for many of the direct questions for CED policy and
changes. On the other hand, many of the respondents shared their perceptions of injustices
related to CED explaining how “it’s driven by money and for people to make money.” This
participant continued by stating, “if you take that much capital and you invested in these types of
communities that are in disarray and you do it in a quick time period—you [are] also leaving no
room for any other narrative other than displacement.”
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 225
A concern from the previous generation of leadership was maintaining a good work-life
balance (Cornelius et al., 2011), and the interviewees seemed to have these same concerns. One
staff member responded “when you're working with people, it's hard because you get so
invested…you want to keep going”; but at the same time, another acknowledged, “unless you
take care of yourself first, you're not really going to be providing your best work.” An important
point here is that there is a significant difference in age between these two respondents—maybe
20 years between them. This could demonstrate the concerns from the authors in the difference
of previous leadership behaviors. Another noteworthy response that speaks to leadership is that
of one participant who stated, “their mission permeates all of that and not in the sense of it takes
it over… It’s just part of who we are.” Lastly, one of the staff stated that their FBO “want[s]
people to have that balance because I think people are happier when they have work-life
balance.”
The FBO leaders believed that engaging stakeholders is important when engaging in
CED and provided insight into which ones they perceived were most important. The answers
varied from “the organizations are here to empower the stakeholders” to “we need to make sure
that everyone is coming to the table and doing the work that they're supposed to be doing justly.”
Additional responses suggest stakeholders who have developed relationships with the people in
the community, “folks that are living, working, worshiping, playing in these communities,”
“ultimately every stakeholder has value,” and “the city itself is usually important.” A final
response serves as a great segue into the next section as it reads: “If the stakeholders have [the]
passion to help and assist and create real change, I'm always a firm believer knowledge will
catch up to passion.”
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 226
Passion is one of the many words used in the responses to explain why and how FBOs
should be working with diverse communities and people from cultural and social backgrounds.
An FBO partner suggested that this is one of the “most significant attributes.” Pride, diversity,
perspective, and age are among the other variables. One participant spoke of the importance of
having people from the community involved since it brings “direct pride,” and another responded
that it “brings a perspective that we will never have because we've never been”; further responses
suggest that a “good mix” includes working with those who are “not too young, not too old.”
These interactions take place through “programs and services,” “one-on-one encounters,”
“community activities,” “worship services,” “committees,” and “board association.”
If viewed through an asset-based lens, then boards add value to an organization according
to Cornelius et al. (2011) as well as the FBO participants’ responses. The findings show that
boards engage in the governance of the organization and programmatic components. Based on
two leaders, the board serves as a “committee” member for “strategy,” “program development,”
“financial decision making,” human capital needs, and supporting the executive director. One
participant spoke of the level of “respect” they have for the executive director and acknowledged
that the FBO’s board “encourage[s] work” and “community engagement.”
In closing, the non-FBO suggested that an initiative that they engaged in “basically told
them that the faith-based community is out there.” The participant stated that they “need to know
this.” It supplies insights into experiences around best practices, concerns, and the influence of
the leadership in sustainable efforts. FBOs’ results seem to take this same position as they
attempt to address neighbor issues in “community divestment,” “economic justice,” “public
health,” “environmental justice,” “revitalizing the community,” and “safe, decent affordable
housing” to “inevitable redevelopment” or “indirect gentrification.” One participant posed the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 227
question, “how do we make sure that we develop the community and keep the community here
so that they can kind of reap the benefits?” Research by Cornelius et al. (2011) suggests that a
solution is to “partner with others to build their capacity as agents of multicultural
responsiveness and equity” (p. 14). Many of these responses reflect that some FBOs are using
“connectivity” to “build the community up.”
The answers to the following provide more context on how this can be done as well as
what FBOs are doing to address the second primary criticism of how they “educate, mentor, and
actually help-black businesses,” thus empowering the owners with the ability to engage in CED.
However, in context, the non-FBO inferred this was primarily a concern for non-African
American FBOs; the researcher is including this information to demonstrate organizations are
addressing these issues. Addressed in this section is also the third criticism from the non-FBO,
which is that an impactful and successful FBO has all of the following: a) “doing brick and
mortar [development],” b) “tackling peripheral issues that develop in the community,” c) “going
beyond saying ‘we’re gonna pray,’” and d) “forward[-]thinking, external community
development mindset.” Thus, it reflects how FBOs influence community-based capacity building
projects to solve neighborhood problems on an operational level, using Faith-Based Management
practices as a response to the next question.
(R2): What perceived management challenges do FBOs face related to the implementation of
programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED?
Empowered communities for solving neighborhood problems. According to the
responses, the business model and formal organizational structure may determine the levels of
engagement of FBOs in CED and determine whether they can empower communities to solve
neighborhood problems. A perception of the non-FBO interviewee “is that unless a church is
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 228
already equipped as a developer, a CDC of some kind, they have some type of development arm”
or were “financially sound, weren't interested, in that; not in development.” They also explained,
“The ones that are not financially sound. The smaller churches…congregations…revenues, could
not compete with overhead and administrative costs.” Their experience, again, is that “there was
traction with the African American churches in predominantly African American communities.”
In context, learning more about the model and structure, as well as the racial background of the
congregation and its physical location lend to an understanding of this phenomenon.
Learning more about the FBO’s business model and formal structure provides
information that helps determine the level of impact it may make. Knowing about the processes
involved, benchmarking, mapping, focus groups/seminars, and questions about their
representative in the community yields information about management practices. For instance,
one participant stated, “all of our programs are based here (the community) with the exception of
the ones that we replicate in other communities or in…public schools.” Having a replicable
model according to participants may increase the organizational capacity to grow and at the same
time have a greater impact. Another example from a different respondent suggests that “using the
practice model…extrapolate some of the best practice methods to proceed forward into our
communities in which we serve.”
It also lends to the overall knowledge about the FBO’s finance and the business savviness
that may affect their ability to solve neighborhood problems and some of what the non-FBO
describes as successful engagement in CED. Responses about the business structures varied;
some of the FBOs rented and others owned their property. In fact, one participant stated that “our
church owns and operates our businesses…community and economic development division.”
Answers to questions about objectives, deliverables, and expected outcomes for engagement
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 229
varied as well. Though all of the participants said they had clearly defined objectives and
deliverables, their responses were diverse in that they were centered on “economic goals,”
“programmatic activities,” “a business with the purpose of once it's profitable…feeds other
[parts of the programs and services].”
FBOs spoke of tools such as “a logic model” and “assessment” to help define and
measure objectives and outcomes. Though many of these organizations would be considered as
“disadvantaged” according to the non-FBO, the data suggests that they are making an impact and
dealing with the “peripheral issues” within the community. It also suggests that they may also
have the resources and staying power necessary to successfully partner with a government
agency, according to Grønbjerg, as cited in Hall & Kennedy (2008). Grønbjerg, as cited in Hall
& Kennedy (2008) states that any organization that wants to partner with a government agency
needs the professional capacity to deliver services, fiscal resources for associated costs, and
organizational depth for reporting and monitoring burdens of such contracting.
These are only a few things that speak to this concern. FBO responses suggest that
management capacity is also about “positive relationships,” credibility, impact, “financial
resources and ability to raise funds,” “board governance,” as well as “limited liabilities and
revenue generation.” Their responses also suggest that management activities ensure that
funding, communication, day-to-day activities, and business support align with community needs
as well as demonstrate professional capacity.
One respondent said, “everything is about people,” and another suggested that “these
things need to align with one another so that they would address the felt needs of the
community.” This FBO’s criticism is that its organization has not “taken the time or made the
investment to really delve into the community needs in order to find ways in which our resources
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 230
and the things that we can bring to the table align with those needs.” Another respondent stated,
“it is an honest to God business…if you don't have appropriate skills for these very specific
areas, you're not helping anyway.”
This interviewee added a different perspective in that management practices should also
include doing an “assessment of the community” and “looking to see what are things that helped
to normalize the neighborhood… I think some of that is even listening to what people are
saying.” Lastly, a management practice that one respondent spoke of is the need to focus on the
mission and not chase money. The interviewee stated, “I think kind of have to be grounded in
what we're doing and then seeking out people who would want to support that work as opposed
doing it the other way.” Hall & Kennedy (2008) explain that credibility is also measured by “the
source, quality, and quantity of the evidence gathered and the methodology used” (p. 313); all of
the previously mentioned tools, activities, and processes are achieved through organizational
learning.
To learn more about the FBO’s continuous learning and shared leadership processes, the
researcher asked questions about processes between the gathering of knowledge and policy
formulation. This speaks to the management’s ability to go beyond saying “we’re gonna pray”
and be “forward-thinking.” It also provides which principles or best practices are usable and
why. Participants explained that their processes of continuous learning were “developed from
relationships” and being engaged in the community and obtained from “gathered information.”
However, one respondent stated that they “Haven't really focused on policy… It’s been more
programs, real estate, people stuff…that may be a limitation.” On the other hand, the FBOs
explained that they also determine principles or best practices through a process of learning.
They stated that these determinations are to be made “from people that you're working with,”
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 231
“guiding principles,” “shared dialogue, utilizing that international practice model…having the
opportunity to connect with community leadership bodies,” “evidence-based best practices in the
literature,” “scriptures,” and “by pray[ing] hard.”
A repeated occurrence of limited data about CED was provided when staff and board
members were asked to respond to questions about funding history to show their capacity for
policy advocacy. As they spoke from an overall funding perspective, it revealed a consensus that
knowing funding history is important to getting future support, and that it demonstrates the
organization’s capabilities and whether the organization operates with integrity. How to capture
what is important to develop CED yielded some responses like that it occurs “directly from the
students or the families themselves,” “talking to people,” “reading,” and “understanding what’s
going on.”
However, one participant responded that “You need to have a model” and that “it's
important to see how (if) it worked and what didn't work.” Another responded that the
organization should capture this information, “by making sure it's in the stream of conversation
and information flow.” One participant did share an experience where the “foundations that
initially said, ‘Well, we won't give a grant to the church, but if you can find a fiduciary to pass
this money through them, we'll do it without exception.’” However, they were able to get
funding independently in the future and the interviewee described the experience further by
stating, “And, there [were] really only two foundations that did that, but the second time that
they gave money because we demonstrated that we, you know, operate with integrity, with our
finances and you know, provided audits and all that.”
Mirroring the results somewhat from the leadership responses, the interviewees, when
asked questions about constituents as thought partners relating to management practices, still
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 232
seemed to think this was important. In fact, this is how they capture local objectives and goals
from the community and voluntary groups, through “community meeting…discussions,” “other
programs,” and “organizations that are doing significant work are invited to come in and share
with us.” Two of the four FBOs had different responses, as in “that's something we need to be
doing” and “I don't know that we do a great job.” These last responses are not reflected in the
leadership responses to similar questions.
In describing the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers and how they
assist the FBO to fulfill its mission and vision, the responses varied but spoke more to
management companies. For instance, one respondent expressed “that their experiences and
backgrounds help really develop a strategic plan as well as provide, I'll say, the blueprints for
having accurate assessments with the community moving forward.” Another provided a list of
skilled individuals in different professional capacities, “We have lawyers. We have preachers…
engineers, architects, accountants…theologians and biblical archaeologists…sociologists.
university administrators… Business leaders, entrepreneurs.”
However, this interviewee also shared that those who help them accomplish their mission
and vision also do so “financially…through their own relationships with people that are of well
means…sit on various board committees…audit…they use their skills to help make sure that we
are good stewards of what it is we have.” Other responses were similar: “the people that we have
on the board…their jobs are in finance or are CPAs…in the board there’s this built-in skill set,”
and spoke to how the executive director “knows grant writing inside and out…experience in
establishing 501(c)(3)s.” Since organizational strength may be assessed by the board of directors,
the researcher included these questions as well as questions about the FBO’s ability to be
multicultural and culturally competent.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 233
In conclusion, the non-FBO was clear in stating criticisms about the faith-community
demonstrating organizational impact; this last question specifically speaks to FBOs’ ability to
reach out to disadvantaged populations to help fulfill the mission. The findings and results vary
for many reasons as the question is based on the partners’ perceptions. Some felt as though they
answered this question already in their other responses, while those who did respond answered
yes, no, or both.
One partner said yes and no because of how long it is taking them to form a partnership
with one of the FBOs; they question whether “there a true partnership here.” On one hand, they
have been engaged to do so, but on the other, “it's been over the last year or so or more,” they
responded. They further went on to explain they are trying to prevent a “stigma that sometimes
people believe in, ‘Here as a white organization and you really don't care about black people,’
which is not always the truth.” The non-FBO expressed that this was their perception as well of
those that were not either located in disadvantaged communities or African American churches.
On the other hand, another partner answered yes in that they have been impactful “due to
the afterschool program” and it is perceived that “they invested a lot of their dollars” in this
offering. So again, the answers varied. Throughout the interviews, the respondents did express
other ways FBOs demonstrated organizational impact in “entrepreneurship,” “employment,”
“homeownership, “business ownership,” “wealth building,” and more for a variety of people,
including “youth,” “families,” and “adults.” So then, the question becomes what can be done to
overcome these perceived challenges and experiences that are associated with religiosity or
faith? The responses to the next question should assist in understanding this.
(R3): What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while engaged
or attempting to engage in CED?
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 234
Aside from the previously mentioned criticisms of the faith community to engage in
CED, there are other concerns about their ability to address other social and economic injustices
that this research contributes to. The results suggest that there is a need to empower regional
stakeholders for the implementation of policies that address social and economic injustices on a
strategic and regional level. These social and economic injustices include those resulting from
the biases toward FBOs and their ability to engage in CED, CD, and other related activities that
work toward “building up communities.” The responses also suggest that there are biases
towards those who identify with a faith. This perception and challenge was discovered when the
non-FBO participant identified themselves as being a person of faith, working in CED initiatives,
and feeling that “We're not a priority” and “it was just a disconnect.” Additionally, there are
biases based on the response that there are many injustices toward African Americans as well as
“disadvantaged” individuals and communities.
Empowered regional stakeholders for social and economic injustices. Again, this
study intends to illuminate the perceptions, experiences, and challenges FBOs face when
engaged in CED in the greater Shelbyville region. As with chapter four, the remainder of the
results in this section references the underlying themes of economic, political, social, and cultural
competencies found within the interviews of four FBOs. It provides insight on how the
engagement with community and stakeholders develops, the outcomes (positive and negative),
and desired returns. The content also speaks to how the organizations learn from national or
government policy, stakeholder groups, and each other within the organization, as well as their
perception of CED. More information is provided regarding what the partners perceive as needed
skills within the organization. Lastly, the perceptions are captured around which things the
organization needs to further engage with its members and the community, as well as what the
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 235
leaders find to be the biggest challenges in the organization’s ability to work within the culture of
a disadvantaged neighborhood. All of this information yields data about the organization and its
perceived impact on people, communities, and regional stakeholders.
To demonstrate organizational impact and any information related to the research
question, the staff and board responses suggest this is done “informally,” “through (internal
departments),” “direct inquiries,” and “community affiliation.” Partners were asked to describe
the outcomes (positive and negative) of engagement with their respective FBO. In summary, the
responses vary and show that each FBO “interacts with all types of families,” “provides different
offerings,” “outreach to inform others and encourage participation in programming,” and
“influence change and community narratives.”
The FBO leaders were asked to inform the researcher on the desired returns from
engaging in CED that they described was important to them. They responded, “strengthening
people” and demonstrating their impact, “education,” “just behaviors and reflection of religious
values, collaborative efforts for the community, and to “transform lives, primarily.” However,
other responses help answer the research question. Those responses include that “stakeholders
want to see how does this impact our bottom line. And we have to be able to show,...how has this
enhanced their perspectives, their lives, their education.” They explained, “And answering
questions like… ‘are we doing this work equitably... faithful to the process and especially when
we say we're followers of Jesus,’” is the desired return.
One participant responded that the desired return is “influencing other young people to do
better...develop trust…vital relationships...learn how to work together…for the overall good of
the community.” Another response indicated that the desired return is “driven around at this time
working to create partnerships and shared community plan development… We want to get away
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 236
from projects in a silo...get a shared synergy.” This leader expounded further by saying, “to
better create opportunities for others…with emphasis on an integrative place-based strategy
really engaging people…is critical to establish a sense of ownership, pride, and ultimately
community…to utilize what gifts and talents I have to see others move forward.”
To further understand how the organization continues to learn, staff and board were asked
to shed light on their perceptions of what and how the organization learns from national or
government policy. The responses suggest that the policy is learned because it is shared, “the
practice of theology can influence positively or negatively [the] development of policies,” and
there is a need to know. But the others responded, “I don’t know,” yet alluded to the possibilities
in saying, “probably mostly the tax laws of the donation…change the building codes”
“thresholds for deductions to charitable organizations,” “how might that impact our funding base
because the other piece is that our congregation is by far the major supporter of this work,” and
learning more about how policy affects others that “get a tax write off for donating.”
Learning opportunities from inside and outside the organization vary. The responses
suggest that stakeholder groups’ lessons learned for FBOs come from “community engagement
meetings” and “collaboration.” In addition, it is perceived that FBOs learn “environmental
factors that could affect programs and services” and business and operational practices from
them. Alternatively, lessons learned for FBOs from each other come from “staff meetings,” and
things are learned “about shared governance without shared responsibility,” “diversity,” and “to
function organizationally instead of silos.”
The next questions posed to the leaders focused on whether or not local and national
policy agendas are driving changes to CED. The changes were perceived to revitalize and help
the community to come together as a whole due to “shifts in policy and governance,” and they
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 237
require a perceived “focus.” The partners either confirmed or denied these responses when they
spoke on their perception of how the FBO’s organizational stakeholders view CED. Their
responses suggest, “if you're not involved in change, then change will happen because you don't
use your voice,” and that “wanting to even just do new development in our community” is
important.
Other responses suggest that FBOs view CED as “an asset and from an ownership
mentality…if we're not playing in that space, it's not our community.” One partner expounded
about an FBO, saying, “that's why they're engaged in it because you know, you can't talk about
this other stuff, transforming the community, changing the community if you're not engaged in
[the] community and economic development.” They continued saying, “You got to develop the
people and you got to develop the space, right?”
To expound on this trait of constituents as thought partners, the researcher asked, in what
ways do local and national entities influence the organization and its capacity to engage in CED?
One responded, “So locally, it's all about involving the community and getting support from the
community… Nationally, there were always grants available through <international affiliate>
that were always capacity-building grants.” Another respondent stated, “local folks influence it
by sharing their vision…and sharing in the mission to try to improve the community…I think
they try to stay aware of trends happening nationally.” Though these responses yield data that
can be helpful for research and practice, they do not speak in-depth about CED.
To further understand the relationship between whether the perceived boards added value
and its challenges with the association to religiosity, the partners were asked an additional
question. They were asked to describe the skills of individual board members, staff, and
volunteers that may be needed to strengthen the organization’s capacity to fulfill its mission and
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 238
vision. Their perceptions are that FBOs need “different skills and personalities that contribute,”
“to speak up when there's issues that need to be discussed and resolved, others for development,”
“fundraising capabilities...volunteers…contractors,” and “communication support.”
Lastly, the staff and board were asked to explain which things the organization would
need to further engage with its members and the community, and the leaders were asked what
they find to be the biggest challenges in the organization’s ability to work within the culture of a
disadvantaged neighborhood. The staff responded, “additional interest from the community at
large,” “the will,” and “More money, more volunteers.” Leaders responded that the biggest
challenges are “the closeness of everybody in the community,” “services that are being provided
are being duplicate[d],” “to see that they're worth it…to see that we're worth it,” “the ability to
meet the growing need,” and “the challenges of poverty and people having a met need.”
In closing, presented in this data, not many of the internal perceptions of the FBOs relate
to the challenges of their association with religion or faith. This perception currently seems to be
more common from external stakeholders. Although, one participant described a bias for
obtaining funding because they were a church; eventually, they were able to get funding based
on their ability to demonstrate outcomes and integrity. Most of the FBOs speak to their
relationship with faith as the foundation for why they serve, how they serve, and the impact it
has on empowering people, communities, and stakeholders. This does not mean that there is no
validity to this argument; it does mean that these responses do not suggest that it is a primary
challenge or experience of these FBOs.
Discussion of Important Lessons from the Study and Their Application to Theory
In this section, the researcher discusses many important lessons learned through this
study and its application to theory and practice. As stated in the introductory chapter, this study
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 239
intends to identify best practices to assist FBOs and practitioners to engage in CED. The non-
FBO and FBOs each spoke about their initiatives, activities, and experiences they used as a
strategy for assisting others and building the community, and how they connected to their faith.
The participant responses show that not only do levels of engagement vary, but the responsibility
and levels of accountability vary, as well. With the complexity of CED, FBOs, and neighborhood
issues, there are no one-size-fits-all approaches to provide. However, there are potential
frameworks that can support planning on strategic, operational, and tactical levels through the
use of theories and models.
Therefore, this research demonstrates an application of theories by confirming
relationships between the leadership, management, and religiosity of FBOs engaged in the
practice of CED activities, as well as their influence on the organization’s success or lack
thereof. When comparing the results from the data with the model and theories, both similarities
and differences exist that help to understand this phenomenon. These similarities and differences
exist in individual perceptions of what leadership and management skills are needed to make an
impact on the community and be successful. It lends to an understanding of the roles and
responsibilities of FBOs in CED and what they are doing to assist with building the communities
and the people within them. At the same time, it provides insight into how religiosity may affect
their success or engagement either positively or negatively.
Some theories suggest that FBOs can make a real difference in the lives of others and
their communities if given the opportunity and if they have the capacity to engage. Though there
are criticisms against the faith-community, there also are many perceived strengths attributed to
them that may allow them to be successful overall. The study allows the researcher to determine
whether a lack of characteristics of successful organizations exists. If so, it was discovered
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 240
during the analysis. The findings helped to determine if there were any practices, behaviors,
and/or models that undermine the chances to engage in CED. Additionally, the analysis helped to
determine how FBOs demonstrate their outcomes, steward funding, and handle social and
economic injustices. The results of this study imply that there are characteristics of leadership,
management, and faith that exist in their engagement that are of importance to CED.
FBOs’ approach to solving community problems may require a broadening of
perspectives, according to the data and what researchers say about CED as a way of
development. Shaffer, Deller, & Marcouiller (2006) write that this holistic approach of blending
economic development and community development combined should incorporate some
elements of society/culture, rules/institutions, and decision making. They report that with every
community there are spatial and nonspatial dimensions that require an aspect of implementation,
communication network, economic transaction, and thinking beyond its boundaries (Shaffer et
al., 2006). With this in mind, FBOs may still be champions for anti-poverty strategies if they are
empowered to leverage their resources, foster and embrace technological change and innovation,
and demonstrate characteristics of the community’s culture they desire to serve (Shaffer et al.,
2006).
In supplying goods and services to the community, an FBO’s management may not
clearly see the connections to engagement in CED and that which is taking place around them.
They may not know which rules aggregate preferences and efforts in the goals of the community
or how to balance contradictions between their vision and that which governs other parties
(Shaffer et al., 2006). For instance, the leaders may not see how the well-being of residents has
an interdependence among the businesses there or how many of these things affect CED as it
relates to tax systems and mechanisms for acquiring and controlling capital (Shaffer et al., 2006).
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 241
Or, they may not see how the gaps in services can be attributed to the businesses’ interpretation
of socioeconomic characteristics that influence resident and stakeholder decisions (Shaffer et al.,
2006).
It is important to CED that there is an awareness of these things by FBOs, as well as a
working knowledge of how rules of the game function within specific institutions. Shaffer et al.
(2006) define these institutions as rights, obligations, or rules that either facilitate or impede
activities; set the framework for bargaining processes, settling transactions and resolutions,
distribution of income, and allocation of resources and capital. It can include local, regional, and
federal governments, institutions, churches, as well as civic, business, and social organizations
(Shaffer et al., 2006). To effectively engage in the modern-day CED Movement, FBOs may
need to be aware of the informal societal and cultural rules as they relate to these institutions and
the business climate. This means knowing what the attitudes of the community are toward
change, experimentation, entrepreneurship, institutional capacity, and communication levels, as
they are important matters according to Shaffer et al. (2006). Therefore, FBOs engaged in CED
may need to look through this blended lens and broaden their perspectives. In doing so, perhaps
the following recommendations for further research may help them and others interested in these
topics.
Implications for Theory and Research
Chapter two includes descriptions of several theories and models. These theories include
Servant Leadership, Faith-Based Management, and empowerment theory. The theoretical
contribution of the Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Model helps to establish a linkage
between empowering processes to domains of empowerment. The model, according to Wallace
et al. (2004), is a tool for describing the theory of holistic faith-based development. It, as well as
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 242
the other theories, all describe facets of empowerment suitable for this study of FBO engagement
in CED. Further implications of how they apply to this research are discussed in the following
sections.
Servant leadership. The Servant Leadership Model and theory informs the research as
Van Dierendonck (2011) identified important characteristics, which also included empowering
and developing people and stewardship. Servant Leadership theory includes characteristics,
constructs, and principles of many kinds, but Brewer (2010) explains that the fundamental
concept is placing others before self. This theory also suggests that seven constructs exist within
the leaders who participated in the study, based on the responses and according to Patterson
(2003), such as 1) Agape Love, 2) Humility, 3) Altruism, 4) Vision, 5) Trust, 6) Empowerment,
and 7) Service, which is the heart of it. Though referred to differently by Maxwell (2007) as the
laws of leadership, the general idea is that in every organization there are critical aspects of
leadership needed to be successful. The results suggest that these organizations and their staff
and leaders can influence others, get buy-in for the vision and mission, navigate around
conditions, add to the organizations’ resources, talents, and funding, as well as have a
willingness to sacrifice, and so forth. The results of this study imply that these are some of the
characteristics present within the FBOs that participated as well as aspects of empowerment.
Some of the results of this study align with the previously mentioned research on the
Servant Leadership theory that is perceived to be important for empowerment. According to
Patterson (2003), empowerment is “the ability to serve followers to achieve their full potential
through highlighting their strengths and placing them in opportunities to be successful” (p. 19).
Though not all of the constructs were spoken of directly from the participants, many of their
responses confirmed that the Servant Leadership model existed within the FBOs and contributed
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 243
to the empowerment of others in many ways. In addition, several other characteristics and
principles attributed to FBOs and were considered to be perceived strengths by the non-FBO
participant and their partners. One of them is the posture of a servant.
The servanthood of individuals is, according to the responses, important to engaging in
CED, as the results imply it takes a lot of resources to meet the growing needs of the community.
Though CED is often used interchangeably with community development, one of its distinct
differences is that CED provides opportunities to the people in the community (Shaffer et al.,
2006). Each of the participants interviewed in this study seemed to view serving individuals,
families, youth, and community residents as a priority in their organizational goals. Some of
them, possibly to their detriment, fail to demonstrate work-life balance. They often go to bed late
and start early the next day, working towards their mission.
Though this may be true for some, it is not encouraged by the leaders that were
interviewed. However, with the gap in Shelbyville “for programming” and the desire for FBOs to
fulfill “a real deep dive into social service delivery,” many participants demonstrated how their
organization serves in this capacity. Based on their responses, each of them not only is currently
engaged in this manner, they have been for more than 10 years. Not only that, but many also
spoke of plans to continue enhancing the well-being, welfare, and quality of life of people as
their vision for those that are willing to receive their services (Shaffer et al., 2006). The desire to
help those in need is a primary element of CED and is consistent with what is at the heart of
Servant Leadership, which is serving others before themselves.
Faith-based management. The faith-based management framework informs this
research because it appears to be the missing link in most of the research. A management
approach is popular in most organizational settings but seems to be absent in FBO research in
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 244
which the adoption of such practices could increase the quality of services and offerings that
empower its staff, members, and geographical target areas.
Faith-Based Management was also selected as a model to determine, what, if any,
practices, competencies, disciplines, systems, or processes may be needed to engage in CED.
Though one participant responded, “I don't think we operate really any differently than any other
organization would,” on a macro level, it is reflected in chapter two that some of the literature
disagrees with this perception. This perception also seems to exist on a meso-level for the non-
FBO interviewed in this study, who stated, “the faith-based community is out there,” but at the
same time stated there was “a disconnect” when trying to engage with them. A major criticism
for FBOs that is an external perception is that they do not do well with outreach, marketing, and
making others aware of their offering. It appears as though FBOs explicitly make those in their
immediate circles aware of their programs and services, but not the community at large. This
criticism is not new for FBOs, as Brinkerhoff (1999) suggests that Faith-Based Management is
one solution to this problem with marketing.
Brinkerhoff (1999) argues that FBOs differ radically from other organizations having to
operate in a secular world. He says that for them to be successful they must have a foundation of
faith and still focus on the mission. The leadership is balancing both volunteers and staff while
providing opportunities for them to use their gifts. Like other successful organizations that
should be aware of market trends, they value excellent stewardship and at the same time remain
flexible within the structure of faith; not losing their identity to the secular world but still having
a focus on achieving growth in this world of funding, regulations, marketing, competition, and
cash flow. These are some of the characteristics of management that apply to all organizations.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 245
Further discussion on this is found in the interpretation of the findings as the researcher
expounds on the data results from the interviews.
Holistic faith-based development theory. As previously mentioned in chapter two,
FBOs have unique benefits as it relates to religiosity (Brinckerhoff, 1999; Hula, et al., 2007;
Rakodi, 2016, Wallace et al., 2004). Benefits of FBOs include an opportunity to work
holistically with clients and not in an isolated fashion when engaged in community economic
development. Brinckerhoff (1999) says, “the foundation of faith provides a supplementary
dimension that empowers and forces your efforts” (p.18). Hula, Jackson-Elmoore, and Reese
(2007) wrote that faith-based programs provide intangible benefits that include empathy, hope,
optimism, and emotional support (p. 73). The data seems to confirm Wallace et. al, (2004)
research that FBOs are central to the well-being of poor African Americans and revitalizing
communities.
Therefore, the theory of holistic faith-based development was selected to determine how
FBOs assist with those they serve or employ to gain control over and improve their lives
(Wallace et al., 2004). The theory allowed the researcher to look at the data through a strengths
and ability lens, rather than a deficit lens (Wallace et al., 2004). The Holistic Faith-Based
Empowerment Model, according to Wallace et al. (2004) is a tool for describing the theory of
holistic faith-based development. As a multipurpose analytic tool, it is used in this study with the
empowerment processes and outcomes of the FBOs to compare and contrast internal and
external perceptions. These perceptions are from a non-FBO and FBOs. As a practitioner, the
researcher chose this tool to examine what the authors Wallace et al. (2004) describe as holistic
development strategies.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 246
These strategies were compared to those used by the interviewees with the intent that
others will consider the findings for use in the three empowerment themes. Those empowerment
themes are, as the authors call them, levels of analysis and domains. For the purposes of this
study, the data suggest they include (a) empowering people through increasing their capacity to
engage in CED on a tactical level, (b) empowering communities through influencing
community-based capacity-building projects to solve neighborhood problems on an operational
level, and (c) empowering regional stakeholders that address social and economic injustices on a
strategic and regional level through the implementation of policies.
Limitations
In chapter three, a limitation of this study is provided that may have affected the validity
and generalizability of the results. The following paragraphs describe the limitations experienced
and topics requiring closer examination. It suggests that the participation of organizations
engaged in CED initiatives on a short-term basis with minimal documentation or recollection of
experience to support their efforts would present a challenge. It would not provide enough data
evidence to analyze and determine a relationship with the research questions for validation. The
evidence, in this case, is captured by interviews and a document analysis of each FBO site
selected. This limitation was not presented; however, the following were:
• The limited number of FBOs that participated may not have allowed for a more in-
depth understanding of this phenomenon.
• Due to the large quantity of data and the use of semi-structured interviews, there may
be additional undiscovered information that can help inform the reliability.
• The Is Your Organization Next Generation assessment tool has compounded
questions that did not permit the interviewee an opportunity to answer one at a time,
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 247
and on several occasions, they only answered a part of the question, yielding no data
for some of the others.
• Scripting out the introduction to the interview could have helped with the consistency
of interviews and the practice of interviewing itself.
To address some of these limitations, the researcher plans to continue to develop this study by
doing additional research and learning more Nvivo Software techniques to further analyze the
data and makes the following recommendations for future research.
Recommendations for Further Research
The researcher recommends the following for future research based on information “from
the data” as well as “the methodological, research design, or other limitations of the study”
(Capella University, 2018, p. 53). First, to examine why many of the participants were not able
to identify questions specifically around CED policy and funding related practices, a
recommendation is to study this further. Perhaps it will yield a greater response through the use
of a quantitative methodology. Secondly, because there were only four FBOs studied as part of
purposeful sampling, a recommendation is to do a broader sample and continue to examine this
phenomenon. Thirdly, due to the amount of data obtained by using the Next Generation
Organization assessment, the researcher limited the analysis to one theory per question.
Therefore, another recommendation is to analyze the data using each theory to gain a more in-
depth view of the implications. Lastly, the research design, in hindsight, was complex;
consequently, the researcher recommends using a tool with fewer interview questions. Most
likely, it will allow for a more efficient way of obtaining information that will be most suitable
for practitioners.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 248
Recommendations for Policy Considerations
If addressing disparity in the Pittsburgh region requires a collective effort, said Maxwell
King, president of the Pittsburgh Foundation, adding faith-based empowerment processes to
policies may be a solution (Pittsburgh Quarterly Magazine, 2016). The results suggest that there
is a need to empower regional stakeholders for the implementation of policies that address social
and economic injustices on a strategic and regional level. These social and economic injustices
include the biases toward FBOs and their ability to engage in CED, CD, and other related
activities that work toward “building up communities.” The data also suggest that there are
biases towards those who identify with a faith. This perception and challenge was discovered
when participants identified themselves as being persons of faith, working in CED initiatives,
and feeling “We're not a priority” and “it was just a disconnect.” Additionally, based on the
response, the biases include many injustices toward African-Americans as well as disadvantaged
individuals and communities.
Therefore, the researcher recommends that policies around diversity, equity, and
inclusion which consider the experiences, perceptions, and challenges of FBOs. In doing so, this
may allow opportunities to reconsider current policies around FBOs, persons of faith, and other
biases such as those related to African-Americans. In closing, this and previous research reflect
what FBOs face when engaged in CED activities. Data show that many participants, though
engaged in CED, could not define it or speak to the implications of policy, government
influence, or history. By considering the results of this research, many more FBOs may engage
in CED and other initiatives if granted the opportunities, training, and resources.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 249
Discussion of How Further Research Extends, Differs From, or Replicates Past Studies
Further research extends the knowledge of this phenomenon as it illuminates the
experiences, perceptions, and challenges that FBOs face when engaged in CED activities. More
specifically, the findings provide insight into the nature of faith-based practitioners within
various governance structures and their ability to maintain the organizational excellence required
to execute strategies efficiently and effectively. It demonstrates the distinctive leadership and
management values, principles, and characteristics that guide practitioner behavior and actions in
places of worship and community service organizations, without disregarding the role religiosity
plays in their motivation. This research does present a unique contribution to CED literature that
is provided in the next section.
Unique Contribution of the Intended Dissertation Study
This dissertation addresses some of the mechanics of how empowerment theory, Servant
Leadership, and Faith-Based Management contribute to the literature on CED. What makes it
unique is that it incorporates some management practices and skills that apply to FBOs, which
are often overlooked. Secondly, although there have been attempts to include FBOs as partners
with the government to fulfill some of the social woes, in 2017 there was a change in the
political environment. This change has looked very threatening to any organization seeking
support for social services and community organizing.
Therefore, the study seeks to help to remove obstacles to participation by FBOs in the
delivery of publicly funded services and activities and ensure that those with a history of
providing health, education, and other support to low-income people are not excluded from CED.
The hope is that FBOs receive accommodation, equal treatment, and respect for their religious
beliefs and moral convictions from others and improve our understanding of their role in
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 250
implementing programs and activities that advance the goals and objectives of CED. Lastly,
though many studies over the past decade focused on understanding the phenomenon of capacity
issues for FBOs and collaborative opportunities, there is a difference in the geographical location
of this research. In the following summary, the researcher presents the concluding thoughts about
this study and how it influences FBOs’ participation.
Summary and Conclusion
The results of this study suggest that there are three empowerment themes related to
FBOs engaged in CED: (a) interest in increasing the capacity of people to engage in CED on a
tactical level, (b) influence community-based capacity building projects to solve neighborhood
problems on an operational level, and (c) implementation of policies from regional stakeholders
that address social and economic injustices on a strategic and regional level.
Further, the results suggest a need for the FBOs to be empowered themselves to have the
capacity to partner with governmental agencies and to understand CED overall. Previous
research speaks to the challenges with partnering with government agencies: there was a gap in
research that spoke to the lack of knowledge FBOs have about CED. In fact, as the researcher
interviewed each of the participants it was clear that though many of them were engaged in CED,
they could not define it or speak to the implications of policy, goverment influence, or history.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 251
Appendix A
Interview Questions Modified from Assessment
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 252
Organization Leader Organization Staff Organization Partner
1. What can you tell me about the organization’s 2. Describe how the organization is utilizing the 3. What forms of outreach and engagement does mission and vision, as in, how it serves as a community, board, staff, and volunteers to help the organization use to make the community driver to make an impact on the community? with accomplishing its mission? aware of what is offered?
6. Describe the business model and formal 4. Describe how the engagement with community 5. Describe the outcomes (positive and negative) structure? Processes involved, benchmarking, and stakeholders develop? of engagement? mapping, focus groups/seminars. Is there an office or representative in the community? 7. Does the organization have clearly defined
objectives and deliverables for engaging in 8. Does the organization appear to have CED? discovered that something was missing that prompted your engagement in CED?
3. What are the desired returns from engaging in 1. What can you tell me about the organization’s 2. Describe what support for the organization is CED? business and financial savviness that successful or needed?
demonstrates an ability to provide services and offerings?
4. Describe how funding, communication, day-today activities, and business support align with community needs?
1. Describe how the organization learns to suppor2. What/how do the organization learn from community economic development? national or government policy?
4. Is there a process between the gathering of 3. What/how do the organization learn from knowledge and policy formulation? What is this national/regional/local stakeholder groups? process? How long does this take?
Shared Leadership 3. How do you decide what principles or best 1. What and how do the organization, staff, and practices are usable and why? board learn from each other?
2. How is knowledge transferred?
Wired for Policy Advocacy 1. In what ways have community economic 7. How important is funding history to community 2. What has driven the change of the community development initiatives changed over the past 5 economic development? E.g. CSBG funding, economic development sector? years and why? CDCs, Community Action Agencies,
partnerships. 4. How do organizational stakeholders view the 3. Local and national policy agendas perhaps? community economic development?
8. How does/should the organization capture what 6. What could improve the community economic is important to develop CED from national 5. Describe what is the community economic development agenda? policy, local support organizations and development support policy agenda driven
community groups? from, why and how?
Ambiguity of Work Life 1. Is there anything that has come to mind about Boundaries the organization’s team, board, or volunteers
while we’ve been talking today that speaks to how they demonstrate work life balance?
Constituents as Thought Partners 1. Which stakeholders or support organizations 5. How does stakeholders or support organizations 4. In what ways do local and national entities are most important for engaging in community capture local objectives and goals from influence the organization and its capacity to economic development and why? community and voluntary groups? engage in community economic development?
2. How significant are they and what are the most important characteristic?
3. What do they offer that is unique and how does it compare to others?
3. Describe the governing board’s roles and 1. Describe the skills of individual board 2. Describe the skills of individual board responsibilities, along with the structure of its members, staff, volunteers and how they assist members, staff, volunteers that may be needed meetings? the organization to fulfill its mission and to strengthen the organization’s capacity to
vision? fulfill its mission and vision?
1. Describe the organization in relation to the 2. What neighborhood issues is the organization 1. Describe the organization in relation to the neighborhood where the community members currently attempting to address? neighborhood where the community members are (i.e. demographics? Does the staff, board, are (i.e. demographics? Does the staff, board, members commute or live in the 4. What things would the organization need to members commute or live in the neighborhood?) further engage with it members and the neighborhood?)
community? 5. What do you find to be the biggest challenges 3. What kind of interactions does the organization in the organization’s ability to work within the have with its members or population it serves? culture of a disadvantaged neighborhood?
6. Have the organization demonstrated an ability to reach out to disadvantaged populations to help fulfill the mission?
Impact Driven
Mulitcultural & Culturally Competent
Finance & Business Savvy
Continuous Learning
Boards as Value Add
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 253
Appendix B
Is Your Organization Next Generation Self-Assessment
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 254
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 255
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 256
Appendix C
Request to Use the Next Generation Assessment
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 257
Appendix D
Participant Demographics Characterizing Minimum Requirements
Respondent ID FBO Association Respondent Role FBO Organizational Characteristics Q1 Age
Q2 Gender
Q3 Number of Employees
Q5 Employment
Status
Q10 Years
Residing in Community
Q11 Position Status
10 Years or More
0 Non-FBO - City of Shelbyville Government Representative
local government office of Shelbyville engaged in a faith-based partnership on behalf of the city’s mayor N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
9 FBO #1 - Jonestown Leader
a non-profit center established to create financial wealth and jobs and provide opportunities for skill building, entrepreneurship, or another means 56-59 Male 20-40 Full-time 8+ Yes
5 FBO #1 - Jonestown Staff
a non-profit center established to create financial wealth and jobs and provide opportunities for skill building, entrepreneurship, or another means 18-25 Female 20-40 Full-time 8+ No
11 FBO #1 - Jonestown Partner
a non-profit center established to create financial wealth and jobs and provide opportunities for skill building, entrepreneurship, or another means 50-55 Female 20-40 Full-time 8+ No
3 FBO #2 - Fredericksville Leader an umbrella department of an educational facility affiliated with a national church 40-45 Female 2-5 Full-time 8+ No
4 FBO #2 - Fredericksville Staff an umbrella department of an educational facility affiliated with a national church 56-59 Male 100+ Full-time 8+ Yes
2 FBO #2 - Fredericksville Partner an umbrella department of an educational facility affiliated with a national church 60-65 Female 2-5 Part-time 8+ No
1 FBO #3 - Jamestown Leader
a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial education 36-39 Male 5-10 Full-time 3-5 No
6 FBO #3 - Jamestown Board
a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial education 50-55 Male 2-5 Full-time 8+ No
10 FBO #3 - Jamestown Partner
a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial education 56-59 Female 2-5 Volunteer 8+ Yes
12 FBO #4 - Dublinville Leader
a Christian-based church that focuses most of its services around its surrounding community as a direct legacy of its original founder with several profit-generating subdivisions 50-55 Male 10-20 Part-time 8+ Yes
8 FBO #4 - Dublinville Staff
a Christian-based church that focuses most of its services around its surrounding community as a direct legacy of its original founder with several profit-generating subdivisions 50-55 Female 20-40 Full-time 8+ No
7 FBO #4 - Dublinville Partner
a Christian-based church that focuses most of its services around its surrounding community as a direct legacy of its original founder with several profit-generating subdivisions 30-35 Male 10-20 Full-time 5-7 No
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 258
Appendix E
Overview of Participant Sample
Respondent ID FBO Association Respondent Role FBO Organizational Characteristics
Q3 Number of Employees
Q4 Other If Other Specify
Q9 Own or Rent?
Q11 Position Status
10 Years or More
9 FBO #1 - Jonestown Leader
a non-profit center established to create financial wealth and jobs and provide opportunities for skill building, entrepreneurship, or another means 20-40 Hispanic, Caucasian Rent Yes
5 FBO #1 - Jonestown Staff
a non-profit center established to create financial wealth and jobs and provide opportunities for skill building, entrepreneurship, or another means 20-40 Rent No
3 FBO #2 - Fredericksville Leader an umbrella department of an educational facility affiliated with a national church 2-5
Hispanic, Asian, Caucasian, Other Own No
4 FBO #2 - Fredericksville Staff an umbrella department of an educational facility affiliated with a national church 100+ Own Yes
1 FBO #3 - Jamestown Leader
a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial education 5-10 Rent No
6 FBO #3 - Jamestown Saff or Board
a national affiliate FBO that focuses its efforts on providing opportunities for self-reliance to individuals and helping them acquire access, skills, and financial education 2-5 Hispanic, Caucasian Own No
12 FBO #4 - Dublinville Leader
a Christian-based church that focuses most of its services around its surrounding community as a direct legacy of its original founder with several profit-generating subdivisions 10-20 Rent, Own Yes
8 FBO #4 - Dublinville Staff
a Christian-based church that focuses most of its services around its surrounding community as a direct legacy of its original founder with several profit-generating subdivisions 20-40 Rent, Own No
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 259
Appendix F
Demographic Information for Data Collection Form
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 260
Appendix G
Certification Page
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 261
References
Ackers, P. (1993). The 'Protestant Ethic' and the English labour movement: The case of the
Churches of Christ. (1993). Labour History Review, 58(3), 67-72.
Albana Berisha, Q., Enver, K., & Justina Shiroka, P. (2017). Strategic management tools and
techniques usage: A qualitative review. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Et Silviculturae
Mendelianae Brunensis, 65(2), 585-600. doi:10.11118/actaun201765020585
Allegheny County. (2017). Our origins. Retrieved from
http://www.alleghenycounty.us/About/History/County-Inception.aspx.
American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
Anderson, J. T. (2016). Barriers to clergy leadership in church-public school partnerships.
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social
Sciences Collection. (Order No. 10158445)
Anglin, R. V. (2004). Building the organizations that build communities: Strengthening the
capacity of faith- and community-based development organizations. Center for Faith-
Based and Community Initiatives. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development. Retrieved from
http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/buldOrgCommunities.pdf.
Annie E. Casey Foundation, The. (2006). At a glance: The role of faith-based organizations in
achieving the six core results. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Retrieved from http://www.aecf.org/resources/the-role-of-faith-based-organizations-in-
achieving-the-six-core-results/.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 262
Arnold, N. W., & Brooks, J. S. (2013). Getting churched and being schooled: Making meaning
of leadership practice. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 16(2), 44-53.
Association of Religion Data Archives (ARDA), The. (2010). Metro-area membership report:
Pittsburgh, PA, metropolitan statistical area: Religious traditions. Retrieved from
http://www.thearda.com/rcms2010/r/m/38300/rcms2010_38300_metro_name_2010.asp.
Biebricher, T. (2011). Faith-based initiatives and the challenges of governance. Public
Administration, 89(3), 1001-1014. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01911.x.
Bielefeld, W., & Cleveland, W. S. (2013). Defining faith-based organizations and understanding
them through research. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(3), 442-467.
doi:10.1177/0899764013484090.
Bizer, R. C. (2008). Faith based community development institute: An institute for faith-based
practitioners. School of Community Economic Development. Hooksett, NH: Southern
New Hampshire University. Retrieved from
https://academicarchive.snhu.edu/bitstream/handle/10474/339/sced2008bizer.pdf?sequen
ce=1&isAllowed=y.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations artistry, choice and leadership
(5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2011). Managerial and leadership competencies: A behavioral approach to
emotional, social and cognitive intelligence. Vision (09722629), 15(2), 91-100.
doi:10.1177/097226291101500202.
Brinckerhoff, P. C. (1999). Faith-based management: Leading organizations that are based on
more than just mission. New York, NY: John Wiley.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 263
Certo, S. C. (2003) Modern management (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education,
Inc.
Choi, H. (2010). Religious institutions and ethnic entrepreneurship: The Korean Ethnic Church
as a small business incubator. Economic Development Quarterly, 24(4), 372-383.
doi:10.1177/0891242410375426.
City-Data.com. (2017). Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Advameg, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.city-
data.com/city/Pittsburgh-Pennsylvania.html.
Clarke, M., & Ware, V. (2015). Understanding faith-based organizations: How FBOs are
contrasted with NGOs in international development literature. Progress in Development
Studies, 15(1), 37-48. doi:10.1177/1464993414546979.
Clay, R. A., Jr., & Jones, S. R. (2009). A brief history of community economic development.
Journal of Affordable Housing and Community Development Law, 18(3), 257-268.
Retrieved from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/jrlaff18&div=25&start_page=257
&collection=journals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab=srchresults.
Coles, R. S. (2014). Religious institutions and entrepreneurship among marginalized groups.
Brigham Young University. BYU ScholarsArchive. Retrieved from
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/4143.
Community Economic Development. (2017). Community action partnership (CAP). Retrieved
from https://www.communityactionpartnership.com/menus/community-economic-
development-ced.html.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 264
Compion, S., Ofem, B., Ferrier, W., Borgatti, S., Cook-Craig, P., Jensen, J., & Nah, S. (2015).
The collaboration networks of economic development organizations in Eastern Kentucky.
Journal of Appalachian Studies, 21(1), 105-127. doi:10.5406/jappastud.21.1.0105.
Cordero-Guzmán, H., & Auspos, P. (2006). Chapter 4: Community economic development and
community change. New York, NY: Baruch College. 196-265. Retrieved from
http://www.baruch.cuny.edu/mspia/faculty-and-staff/documents/6-Chapter4-Cordero-
ARCC-07.pdf
Cornelius, M., and Wolfred, T. (2011). Next generation organizations: Nine key traits. San
Francisco, CA: CompassPoint Nonprofit Services. Retreived from
https://www.compasspoint.org/sites/default/files/documents/CompassPoint_Next%20Gen
eration%20Orgs_2011_0.pdf.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dandridge, N. S., & Dandridge, A. B. (2012). Building healthy communities: A guide to
community economic development for advocates, lawyers, and policymakers. Journal of
Affordable Housing & Community Development Law, (2), 167.
Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2009). Calling and vocation at work: Definitions and prospects for
research and practice. Counseling Psychologist, 37(3), 424-450.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 265
Dougherty, K. D., Griebel, J., Neubert, M. J., & Park, J. Z. (2013). A religious profile of
American entrepreneurs. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 52(2), 401-409.
doi:10.1111/jssr.12026.
Dyal-Chand, R. & Rowan, J. V. (2013-2014). Developing capabilities, not entrepreneurs: A new
theory for community economic development. Hofstra Law Review, 42, 839-904.
Retrieved from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Welcome?message=Please%20log%20in&url=%2FHOL%2F
Page%3Fhandle%3Dhein.journals%2Fhoflr42%26collection%3Djournals%26id%3D867
%26startid%3D%26endid%3D932.
Ebener, D. R., & O'Connell, D. J. (2010). How might servant leadership work? Nonprofit
Management & Leadership, 20(3), 315-335.
Entwistle, R. (2008, October). Entrepreneurship and youth: The critical role of the Christian
community in development. A paper presented at the Baylor Symposium on Faith and
Culture Bottom-up Approaches to Global Poverty: Appropriate Technology, Social
Entrepreneurship, and the Church. Waco, TX. Retrieved from:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.586.1273&rep=rep1&type=pdf
.
Exec. Order No. 13798. 82 Fed. Reg. 21675 (May 4, 2017).
Fabricius, K. (2013). What profiteth the entrepreneurial church? Reform Magazine, 24-25.
Faith Center for Community Development, Inc. (2006). Achieving the six core results: The role
of faith-based organizations. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation. Retrieved
from http://www.aecf.org/resources/achieving-the-six-core-results/.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 266
Feldman, M., Hadjimichael, T., Kemeny, T., & Lanahanm K, (2014). Economic development: A
definition and model for investment. Retrieved from
http://www.eda.gov/tools/files/research-reports/investment-definition-model.pdf.
Fink, A. (2009). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Fuline, D. J., Jr. (2013). Community development through entrepreneurship education: The
perceived efficacy of community colleges and their entrepreneurship programs. Retrieved
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences
Collection. (Order No. 3551613)
Gu, Q. (2009). Self-employment among older workers: Assistance programs, liquidity
constraints and employment patterns. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
Full Text: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (Order No. 3386153)
Haber, M. (2016). CED after #OWS: From community economic development to
antiauthoritarian community counter-institutions. Fordham Urban Law Journal, (2), 295.
Hammer, J., & Pivo, G. (2017). The Triple bottom line and sustainable economic development
theory and practice. Economic Development Quarterly, 31(1), 25-36.
doi:10.1177/0891242416674808.
Harden, M. G. (2006) Towards a faith-based program theory: A reconceptualization of program
theory. Evaluation Review, 30(4), 481-504. doi:10.1177/0193841X05285078.
Harpst, G. (2008). Six disciplines execution revolution: Solving the one business problem that
makes solving all other problems easier. Findlay, OH: Six Disciplines Pub.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 267
Hasson, Z., Schattner, P., and Mazza, D. (2006). Doing a pilot study: Why is it essential?
Malaysian Family Physician, 1(2-3), 70-73.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453116/.
Hendricks, C., St. Clair, C., and Robertson, W. (2017). The elements of economic development.
Columbia, MO: Curators of the University of Missouri.
Hernandez, G. (2013). Indigenous perspectives on community economic development: A north-
south conversation. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit & Social Economy Research / Revue
Canadienne De Recherche Sur Les OSBL Et L'économie Sociale, 4(1), 6-24.
Hula, R., Jackson-Elmoore, C., & Reese, L. (2007). Mixing God's work and the public business:
A framework for the analysis of faith-based service delivery. Review of Policy
Research, 24(1), 67-89. doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2007.00268.x.
Jenssen, J. I. (1999). Entrepreneurial networks: A study of the impact of social networks and
resource assess on the start-up of new organizations. Bergen, Norway: Norwegian
School of Economics and Business Administration.
Kramer, F. D., Nightingale, D. S., Trutko, J., Spaulding, S., & Barnow, B. S. (2002). Faith-based
organizations providing employment and training services: A preliminary exploration.
Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/60376/410436-Faith-Based-
Organizations-Providing-Employment-and-Training-Services.PDF.
Kyle, P. (2004). Building capacity for community economic development: The case of the Kat
River Valley, South Africa (Doctoral thesis). University of Sussex, Brighton, England.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 268
Ladzani, W. M., & Vuuren, J. J. (2002). Entrepreneurship training for emerging SMEs in South
Africa. Journal of Small Business Management, 40(2), 154-161. doi:10.1111/1540-
627x.00047.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1989). Ethics: The failure of positivist science. The Review of
Higher Education, 12(3), 221-240. doi:10.1353/rhe.1989.0017.
Lockhart, W. H. (2005). Building bridges and bonds: Generating social capital in secular and
faith-based poverty-to-work programs. Sociology of Religion, 66(1), 45-60.
Lopez, S., & Scandroglio, B. (2007). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Norman K.
Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.). Revista de Antropología Iberoamericana, 2(2), 392-
397.
Lowe, J. S., & Shipp, S. C. (2014). Black church and black college community development
corporations: Enhancing the public sector discourse. Western Journal of Black
Studies, 38(4), 244-259.
Lucas, L. S. (2017). The free exercise of religious identity. UCLA Law Review, 64(1), 54-115.
Lunn, J. (2009). The role of religion, spirituality and faith in development: A critical theory
approach. Third World Quarterly, 30(5), 937-951. doi:10.1080/01436590902959180.
Lyon, K. H. (2015). The evolving role of higher education in community engagement and
economic development. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The
Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (Order No. 10117980)
Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
Maxwell, J. C. (1998). The 21 irrefutable laws of leadership: Follow them and people will follow
you (1st ed.). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 269
Maxwell, J. C. (2007). The 21 irrefutable laws of leadership: follow them and people will follow
you (10th anniversary ed.). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
McFarlane, D. A. (2010). Religion and business: Identifying relationship gaps and
influences. Conflict Resolution & Negotiation Journal, (4), 115-122.
McGonagill, G., Consulting, M., & Reinelt, C. (2010). Leadership development in the social
sector: A framework for supporting strategic investments. The Foundation Review, (4),
57. doi:10.4087/FOUNDATIONREVIEW-D-10-00030.
McKenna, R. B., Yost, P. R., & Boyd, T. N. (2007). Leadership development and clergy:
Understanding the events and lessons that shape pastoral leaders. Journal of Psychology
and Theology, (3), 179-189.
Michigan State University. (2017). Principles of community development. The Community and
Economic Development Program.
Mississippi State University. (2015). Community economic development: Key concepts.
Retrieved from http://gcd.msucares.com/sites/gcd.msucares.com/files/community-
economic-development-key-concepts.pdf.
Moon, F. (2007). Faith-based entrepreneurship. Library Faculty and Staff Publications and
Presentations, Paper 6. Retrieved December 10, 2015 from
http://digitalscholarship.tnstate.edu/lib/6.
Ohmer, M. L. (2008). The relationship between members' perceptions of their neighborhood
organization and their involvement and perceived benefits from participation. Journal of
Community Psychology, 36(7), 851-870.
Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Buchanan, D. A. (2017). Managing organizational change: A multiple
perspectives approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 270
Peake, W. O., & Marshall, M. I. (2006). What do we really know about entrepreneurs? An
analysis of nascent entrepreneurs in Indiana, working paper # 06-14. Dept. of
Agricultural Economics. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University. Retrieved from
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/28622/1/wp060014.
Perkins, J. (1993). Beyond charity: The call to Christian community development. Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker Books.
Perkins, J. (1995). Restoring at-risk communities: Doing it together and doing it right. Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
Placido, N., & Cecil, D. (2014). Implementing best practices for needs assessment and strategic
planning systems: Social work and faith based organization collaboration—A case
study. Social Work & Christianity, 41(1), 79-94.
Point Park University. (2015) Seminar in leadership, communities and engagement. Pittsburgh,
PA.
Principles of Community Development. (2017). Primary activities of the CEDP. MSU Center for
Community and Economic Development. Retrieved from
https://msu.edu/unit/cua/student%20handbook/problem%20solving.htm.
Purnsley, J. E. (2017). Community economic development: An inclusive approach to foster
economic development in a small community. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (Order No. 10280832)
Rakodi, C. (2016). Religion, religious organisations and development: Scrutinising religious
perceptions and organisations. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 271
Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the
role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433.
doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.21794663.
Reese, L. A. (2004). A matter of faith: Urban congregations and economic development.
Economic Development Quarterly, (1), 50-66.
Rudestam, K. E. (2007). The method chapter - Sage Publications. Retrieved from
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/14649_Chapter5.pdf.
Salkind, N. J. (2012). 100 questions (and answers) about research methods. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Salkind, N. J. (2014). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (5th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Sanders, T. N. (2012). From isolation to collaboration: African American faith-based
partnerships & local community development. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (Order No. 3536178)
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Seminar in Leadership, Communities and Engagement, Syllabus. (2015, August). Pittsburgh, PA:
Point Park University.
Shin, H. J., Eriksson, C. B., Walling, S. M., Lee, H., & Putman, K. M. (2011). Race, resource
utilisation, and perceived need among urban community development workers from
faith-based organisations. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 14(10), 999–1012.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2010.545946.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 272
Shirley, J. H. (2010). Congregation activism: Faith-based leadership. NAAAS & Affiliates
Conference Monographs, 1540-1575.
Simms, M. C., McDaniel, M., Fyffe, S. D., & Lowenstein, C. (2015). Barriers & bridges: An
action plan for overcoming obstacles and unlocking opportunities for African American
men in Pittsburgh. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
Smith, D. (2013). Community economic development, regionalism, and regional equity:
Emerging strategies and changing roles for CED attorneys. Journal of Affordable
Housing & Community Development Law, 21(3/4), 315-334.
Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. New York, NY: Guilford
Press.
Stephens, H. M., Partridge, M. D., & Faggian, A. (2013). Innovation, entrepreneurship and
economic growth in lagging regions. Journal of Regional Science, 53(5), 778-812.
doi:10.1111/jors.12019.
Taylor, T., & Greenlaw, S. A. (2017). Economics. OpenStax CNX. Retrieved from
http://philschatz.com/economics-book/contents/m48590.html.
Treuhalft, S. (2015). All-in cities: Building an equitable economy from the ground up. Oakland,
CA: PolicyLink. http://allincities.org/sites/default/files/AIC_2016-update_WebOnly.pdf.
Treuhalft, S. (2015). Embedding equity into economic development. Montclair, NJ: Shelterforce.
Retrieved from https://shelterforce.org/2016/07/20/embedding-equity-into-economic-
development/.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 273
Treuhaft, S., Glover-Blackwell, A., & Pastor, M. (2011). America's tomorrow: Equity is the
superior growth model. Oakland, CA: PolicyLink. Retrieved from
http://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/SUMMIT_FRAMING_SUMMARY_WEB.
PDF.
Trident Press International. (1998). The new international Webster's pocket grammar dictionary
of the English language. Unknown, NC: Trident Press International.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2014). Strategic planning. U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary,
Department of Training. Retrieved from http://tdept.cgaux.org/stafftraining/13-30pig.pdf.
Underwood, D. A., Hackney, D. D., & Friesner, D. (2015). Criteria for sustainable community
economic development: Integrating diversity and solidarity into the planning process.
Journal of Economic Issues, 49(4), doi:10.1080/00213624.2015.1105050.
University of Southern California. (2017). Organizing your social sciences research paper:
Qualitative methods. Library Guides. Retrieved from
http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/qualitative.
Vega, G., & Kidwell, R. E. (2007). Toward a typology of new venture creators: Similarities and
contrasts between business and social entrepreneurs. New England Journal of
Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 1-15. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/neje/vol10/iss2/4.
Vidal, A. C. (2001). Faith-based organizations in community development. U. S. Department of
Housing and Community Development: Office of Policy Development and Research.
The Urban Institute.
Vidal, A. C. (2012). Faith based organizations. The Urban Institute. Retrieved from
http://www.urban.org.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 274
Wallace, J. M., Jr., Myers, V. L., & Holley, J. (2004). Holistic faith-based development: Toward
a conceptual framework. Rockefeller Institute of Government. Retrieved from
http://www.rockinst.org/pdf/faith-based_social_services/2004-04-holistic_faith-
based_development_toward_a_conceptual_framework.pdf.
Watson, C. N. (2012). Faith-based organizations and their contributions to society. Research
Papers: Paper 323. Retrieved from
http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1397&context=gs_rp.
Watson, E. E. (2012). Toward transformational leadership development in the local church: A
synthesis of insights from instructional design, adult learning theory, the new testament,
and organizational research (Doctoral dissertation). South African Theological
Seminary, Bryanston, South Africa.
Whiteside, M., Tsey, K., & Cadet-James, Y. (2011). A theoretical empowerment framework for
transdisciplinary team building. Australian Social Work, 64(2), 228-232.
doi:10.1080/0312407X.2010.537351.
Wilke, L. A., & Speer, P. W. (2011). The mediating influence of organizational characteristics in
the relationship between organizational type and relational power: An extension of
psychological empowerment research. Journal of Community Psychology, 39(8), 972.
doi:10.1002/jcop.20484.
Williams, E., III. (2013). Building the capacity of faith-based organizations to support prisoner
re-entry. Retrieved from https://ontrackconsulting.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/fbcb.pdf.
FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 275
Wong, P. T., & Davey, D. (2007). Best practices in servant leadership. Presented at the Servant
Leadership Research Roundtable, School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship,
Regent University. Retrieved from
http://regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/2007/wong-davey.pdf.
Worth, M. J. (2017). Nonprofit management: Principles and practice (4th ed.). Los Angeles,
CA: SAGE.
Writing Center, The. (2015). Learn how to write a review of literature. University of Wisconsin-
Madison. Retrieved from https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/ReviewofLiterature.html.
Wu, H. J., Kornbluh, M., Weiss, J., & Roddy, L. (2016). Measuring and understanding authentic
youth engagement: The youth-adult partnership rubric. Afterschool Matters, (23), 8-17.
Yaghi, A. (2007). Decision making in a faith-based environment: Organizational culture versus
decision content. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 27(3), 355-370.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
Zimmerman, M. A. (2000). Empowerment theory. Handbook of Community Psychology, 43-63.
doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4193-6_2.
- Dissertation Copyright Page
- Faith-Based Organizations Engaged In CED - Danielle Davis Final
- Scan0044
- Danielle Davis - Final 7.4.20
- Chapter One
- Problem Statement
- Purpose of the Study
- Significance of the Study
- Theoretical Framework
- Research Questions
- Limitations/Delimitations
- Definition of Terms
- Chapter Summary
- Chapter Two: Literature Review
- Critical Analysis
- The Emergence of FBOs
- Overview of FBOs
- Characteristics and Typologies
- Religiosity and the FBOs
- Benefits and Unique Challenges
- Qualities of Successful FBOs
- The Role of the FBO within CED
- Religion and Entrepreneurship
- Community Development
- Economic Development and Small Business
- Internal and External Perceptions
- Marketing and Communication
- CED: A Newer Paradigm
- Elements of CED
- Training. Education as a tool for social change may create empowered and self-sufficient individuals and communities, as well as facilitate sound decision-making and preserve the democratic values of self-determination (CCED, 1996). It affords opportu...
- Technical assistance. Technical assistance for citizens and their organizations is critical to the development of healthy, sustainable, democratic communities (CCED, 1996). Universities, consulting firms, and community resources with the goal of assis...
- Capacity building. The CCED (1996) defines capacity building as the activities designed to improve the ability of citizens and their organizations. The overarching goal is “to solve immediate specific problems and also improve their ability to solve f...
- Networking. For many reasons networking can be important. It may increase the relationships for individuals and organizations. The CCED (1996) defines it as a process for establishing ongoing communication, cooperation, and or mutual assistance that o...
- Applied research. The CCED (1996) confirms that it is important to develop and implement research activities to help address problems of distressed communities. They define applied research as “the thoughtful creation, interpretation, communication, o...
- Professional development. Professional development activities may include a range of deeds such as training, participation in projects, positions on boards and committees, webinars, and other actions that will increase the skill, knowledge, and unders...
- Theoretical Framework
- Holistic Faith-Based Empowerment Theory and Development
- Leadership Theory
- Servant Leadership
- The Law of Addition
- Capacity building and effectiveness – law of the lid. According to Maxwell (2007), personal and organizational effectiveness is proportionate to the strength of leadership and abilities in people skills, planning and strategic thinking, vision, and re...
- Inspiration – the law of influence. As purported by Maxwell (2007), titles do not have much value when it comes to leading; they can buy time, either to increase one’s level of influence or undermine it. For him, some people emerge as leaders because ...
- Development – the law of process. Leadership development is not a one-time event, but a process. According to Maxwell (2007), daily development occurs through five phases of growth, encourages development, matures people, is a culture issue, changes p...
- Vision – the law of buy-in. Maxwell (2007) believes that “People buy into the leader, then the vision,” and “Having an understanding of that changes your whole approach to leading people” (p. 171). In other words, if people buy into you, then they buy...
- Management Theory
- Leadership and management. Harpst (2008) writes, a business made of people, strategy, business processes, technology, and expertise requires purpose, careful design, management, and maintenance. It is not just necessary to examine leadership; one must...
- Management in practice. Qehaja, Kutllovci, and Pula (2017) write, “Various authors have presented a different number of tools for strategic analysis by specifying them as a guide for managers” (p. 586). Stonehouse and Pemberton (as cited in Qehaja, Ku...
- Managerial competencies. Boyatzis (2011) explains, “Outstanding leaders, managers, advanced professionals and people in key jobs, from sales to bank tellers, appear to require three clusters of behavioral habits as threshold abilities and three cluste...
- Managerial discipline. Harpst (2008) writes, “The majority of us just don’t know how to put together all the key steps of strategy, planning, organizational alignment, execution management, innovation and measurement” (p. 36). Therefore, it requires k...
- Strategic vision. Harpst (2008) suggests that many business leaders talk about their vision, the first discipline, and possibilities, “But they don’t like taking the time to plan the steps for getting there” (p. 104). He submits that not just faith-ba...
- Initiate change. Initiating change is not always easy; it depends on the types of change, the management of the steps, and the team involved in it. This is true for organizations and communities. There needs to be a framework of some kind that has pro...
- Align all systems. Harpst (2008) explains, “The majority of us just don’t know how to put together all the key steps of strategy, planning, organizational alignment, execution management, innovation, and measurement” (p. 36). The author recommends a b...
- Staff and Volunteers
- Together, towards one goal. Harpst (2008) defines teamwork as a subgroup with a shared purpose who depends on each other to learn and grow. According to him, “An organization’s leadership team is the small group of senior leadership who are ultimately...
- Improve quality and process. Harpst (2008) purports, “Over the past several decades, a variety of programs, initiatives, and standards have evolved specific to quality improvement, performance, and business excellence” (p. 49). For FBOs this is import...
- Accountability and measuring performance. Bolman and Deal (2013) purport that a single person within an organization is not the only one responsible and accountable for ensuring effective tasks, processes, and circumstances for satisfaction. Although ...
- Communication. In Perkin’s (1995) book Restoring At-Risk Communities: Doing It Together & Doing It Right, within his “concept of the proclamation of the gospel known as the ‘wheel of ministry,’” he explains that “effective communication of the message...
- Program theory. Harden (2006) proposes a new faith-based program evaluation theory and tools to demonstrate limited differences in FBOs’ ability to achieve effective outcomes. He determines that religious beliefs and values do not have to conflict wit...
- Review, adjust, and excel: Organizational development. According to an online blog, another action of leadership and management is to use the discipline of Organizational Development to determine capabilities for growth. Six Disciplines writes:
- Identification of Gaps and Limitations of the Literature
- Chapter Three
- Purpose of the Study
- Research Design
- Methodology
- Research Site
- Research Questions
- Researcher Bias
- Ethical Considerations
- Sample Size and Selection
- Data Collection Methods
- Interviews
- Interview Guidelines
- Instrumentation
- Document Analysis
- Validity and Reliability
- Positionality
- Analysis of Data
- Chapter Summary
- Chapter Four: Findings
- The Study and the Results
- Research Questions
- Sample
- Data Collection
- Demographic collection instrument results. The researcher collected data through a demographic form distributed both electronically and in-person to 12 FBO interviewees. The focus was to determine the experience of the participants representing the fo...
- Descriptive information on interview compilation. In analyzing the data, each of the organizations is made up of people with different leadership styles, geographical locations, experiences, strategies, structures, and challenges. Among those intervie...
- Case study data gathering process. In January 2018, the researcher sought to research local FBOs that engaged or provided evidence of some interest in engaging in CED. The investigator pursued IRB authorization to include each one of the organizations...
- Data Analysis Process
- Analytical codes, interview questions, and protocol. All scripted interviews with the FBOs resulted from using an assessment; this was not the case for the NFBO. Therefore, only one of the 13 did not participate in the administration of the Is Your Or...
- Coding process. The manual open coding process was used in the first cycle of the analysis, followed by the use of NVivo 10 software to check for additional codes in the second cycle, which each “represent[s] and capture[s] a datum’s primary content a...
- NVivo analysis. The qualitative data analysis software, NVivo 10, helped organize the electronic documents, categorize the data, and identify the emergent themes (Cope, 2008). Added to the codebook were the previously mentioned nine analytic codes, de...
- Theoretical coding summary of results. All of these methods and tools helped with the analysis of data. The analyzed data determined if the results yielded any components of Servant Leadership, Faith-Based Management, and or the Holistic Faith-Based E...
- Next Generation Organizations’ Nine Key Traits
- Emergent Themes from Analysis
- Relationships between Shelbyville and FBOs
- Macro-Level Engagement
- Micro-Level Engagement Based on Leadership, Management, and Religiosity
- Final Meso FBO Participation Results
- Jonestown – FBO #1 Overview
- Fredericksville – FBO #2 Overview
- Jamestown – FBO #3 Overview
- Dublinville – (FBO) #4 Overview
- Engaging FBOs in CED Findings
- RQ1: FBOs’ Perceived Leadership Needs to Sustain CED
- Theme 1: Empowered People on an Individual Level
- Impact driven. Data gathered from both the leader and partner of the four FBOs yielded the following information about leadership relative to the Impact Driven = A1 trait, analytical coding. Each of these participants confirmed that their organization...
- Finance and business savvy. Cornelius et al. (2011) purport, “Next generation organizations…effectively manage to a dual bottom line: financial viability and positive social impact” (p. 8). To gain an understanding from the partner’s perception of the...
- Continuous learning. Cornelius et al. (2011) define continuous learning as being “similar to Peter Senge’s definition of the ‘learning organization’” with five characteristics: systems thinking, personal mastery, effective use and discarding of mental...
- Shared leadership. A staff or board member was asked question D2, how is knowledge transferred? Pearce, Wasaneer, and Manz (2014) write, “all leadership is shared leadership; it is simply a matter of degree—sometimes it is shared completely while at o...
- Wired for policy advocacy. According to Cornelius et al. (2011), a job description of the leader includes public policy work in pursuit of structural changes that would eliminate or reduce the need to exist. Consequently, the researcher felt that havi...
- Ambiguity of work-life boundaries. Cornelius et al. (2011) submit a concern about the previous generation of leadership and write, “next generation leaders believe that maintaining good work/life balance is essential to staying effective in their jobs...
- Multicultural and culturally competent. The researcher referred to question I2, what neighborhood issues is the organization currently attempting to address, to the staff or board member to better understand this phenomenon from their perspectives. Th...
- Constituents as thought partners. Cornelius et al. (2011) write, “Next generation organizations understand that those to whom they are accountable are in the best position to participate in problem solving” (p. 16). The researcher asked three question...
- Boards as value add. Cornelius et al. (2011) write, “Instead of power struggles with the executive director over roles and responsibilities, the next generation board is viewed through an asset-based lens” (p. 16). Servant Leadership, according to Pat...
- RQ2: FBOs’ Perceived Management Challenges in Implementation
- Theme 2: Empowered Communities for Solving Neighborhood Problems
- Impact driven. However, when the FBO leaders were asked to describe the business model and formal structure, processes involved, benchmarking, mapping, focus groups/seminars, and questions about their representative in the community (question A6), it ...
- Finance and Business Savvy
- Continuous learning. In this section, FBO leaders’ information is shared about question C4 regarding their processes between the gathering of knowledge and policy formulation and the timing of such activities. The findings show that some:
- Shared leadership. The leaders’ responses to the question on shared leadership (D3) gives insight on how they decide which principles or best practices are usable and why. The findings show that they are determined in multiple ways:
- Wired for policy advocacy. The staff/board answered question E7 about how important funding history is to CED and this yielded little data about CSBG funding, CDCs, Community Action Agencies, and partnerships. Although each of the participants felt th...
- Constituents as thought partners. The staff and board responses to question G5 showed how stakeholders or support organizations capture local objectives and goals from the community and voluntary groups. Responses included:
- Boards as value add. Question H1 addressed to the staff or board asked them for a description of the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers, as well as how they assist the FBO to fulfill its mission and vision. The findings show tha...
- Multicultural and culturally competent. The researcher found it important to ask the partners question I6 to identify their perceptions of how the FBOs demonstrate an ability to reach out to disadvantaged populations to help fulfill the mission. The r...
- RQ3: FBOs Overcoming Perceived Challenges of Religiosity
- Theme 3: Empowered Regional Stakeholders for Social and Economic Injustices
- Impact driven. The staff and board responses to how the engagement with community and stakeholders develops assist readers on these matters. The findings show several ways this can take place:
- Finance and business savvy. The FBO leaders were asked question B3 to inform the researcher on the desired returns from engaging in CED. The findings show the following as important to them:
- Continuous learning. Staff and board responses to question C2 shed light on what and how the organizations learn from national or government policy. The findings show:
- Shared leadership. The staff and board responses to question D1, what and how the organization, staff, and board learn from each other, show:
- Wired for policy advocacy. The FBO leaders responded to question E1 in a variety of ways when they described how and why they perceived changes in CED initiatives over the past five years. The findings show:
- Constituents as thought partners. The partners answered question G4, in what ways do local and national entities influence the organization and its capacity to engage in CED? The findings show:
- Boards as value add. The partners answered question H2 as they described the skills of individual board members, staff, and volunteers that may be needed to strengthen the organization’s capacity to fulfill its mission and vision. The findings show:
- Multicultural and culturally competent. The staff or board further responded to question I4 about multicultural and cultural competence, and explained which things the organization would need to further engage with its members and the community? The f...
- Chapter Summary
- Restatement of Purpose of the Study
- Methodology
- Interpretation of the Findings and Implications for Theory and Practice
- Final Meso FBO Interpretation and Implications for Theory and Practice
- Relationship between Shelbyville and FBOs
- (R1): What perceived leadership experience do FBOs need to demonstrate in order to effectively contribute to the sustainability of CED?
- Empowered people on an individual level. The FBO participants’ responses look at organizational management structures and leadership practices (Cornelius & Wolford, 2011) from various standpoints including those of partners, staff, leaders, stakeholde...
- (R2): What perceived management challenges do FBOs face related to the implementation of programs and services designed to contribute to the sustainability of CED?
- Empowered communities for solving neighborhood problems. According to the responses, the business model and formal organizational structure may determine the levels of engagement of FBOs in CED and determine whether they can empower communities to sol...
- (R3): What can FBOs do to overcome perceived challenges related to religiosity while engaged or attempting to engage in CED?
- Empowered regional stakeholders for social and economic injustices. Again, this study intends to illuminate the perceptions, experiences, and challenges FBOs face when engaged in CED in the greater Shelbyville region. As with chapter four, the remaind...
- Discussion of Important Lessons from the Study and Their Application to Theory
- Implications for Theory and Research
- Servant leadership. The Servant Leadership Model and theory informs the research as Van Dierendonck (2011) identified important characteristics, which also included empowering and developing people and stewardship. Servant Leadership theory includes c...
- Faith-based management. The faith-based management framework informs this research because it appears to be the missing link in most of the research. A management approach is popular in most organizational settings but seems to be absent in FBO resear...
- Holistic faith-based development theory. As previously mentioned in chapter two, FBOs have unique benefits as it relates to religiosity (Brinckerhoff, 1999; Hula, et al., 2007; Rakodi, 2016, Wallace et al., 2004). Benefits of FBOs include an opportuni...
- Limitations
- Recommendations for Further Research
- Recommendations for Policy Considerations
- Discussion of How Further Research Extends, Differs From, or Replicates Past Studies
- Unique Contribution of the Intended Dissertation Study
- Summary and Conclusion
- Appendix A
- Interview Questions Modified from Assessment
- Appendix B
- Is Your Organization Next Generation Self-Assessment
- Appendix C
- Request to Use the Next Generation Assessment
- Appendix D
- Participant Demographics Characterizing Minimum Requirements
- Appendix E
- Overview of Participant Sample
- Appendix F
- Demographic Information for Data Collection Form
- Appendix G
- Certification Page
- References
