Managerial Development Programs for Executive Directors and Accountability Practices in Nonprofit Organizations

• Author: Jiwon Suh,Young-joo Lee
• Published date: 01 December 2018
• Date: 01 December 2018
• DOI: 10.1177/0734371X16674783
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16674783

Review of Public Personnel Administration

2018, Vol. 38(4) 431 –450

© The Author(s) 2016

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0734371X16674783

journals.sagepub.com/home/rop

Article

Managerial Development

Programs for Executive

Directors and Accountability

Practices in Nonprofit

Organizations

Young-joo Lee1 and Jiwon Suh1

Abstract

Facing the potential leadership deficit and mounting pressures for performance

and accountability, government and nonprofit organizations have become more

interested in providing training and development programs for their executives.

However, existing research falls short in explaining the utility of managerial

development programs in achieving performance and accountability in public and

nonprofit contexts. This study examines how executives’ participation in various

managerial development programs is associated with the adoption of organizational

practices for financial, client-service, and performance accountability, using a survey

of nonprofit human services organizations. The results reveal that organizations

whose executives participated in managerial development programs are more likely

to have such practices. In particular, the results show that participation in general

management and administration training and regular mentoring is positively associated

with accountability practices in all three areas. Overall, the findings suggest that

providing incumbent executives with training and development opportunities is as

important as recruiting qualified individuals in ensuring organizational accountability

and performance.

Keywords

Managerial development, nonprofit organizations, mentoring, accountability

1University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, USA

Corresponding Author:

Young-joo Lee, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 West Campbell Rd. GR 31, Richardson, TX 75083,

USA.

Email: ylee@utdallas.edu

674783ROPXXX10.1177/0734371X16674783Review of Public Personnel AdministrationLee and Suh

research-article2016

432 Review of Public Personnel Administration 38(4)

Introduction

Today’s government and nonprofit organizations are under increasing pressure for

organizational accountability (Anheier & Salamon, 2006; Wong & Welch, 2004). The

growth of the nonprofit sector and the increased partnership between government and

nonprofit organizations, coupled with the rapid development of information technol-

ogy, has increased the citizens’ demand and expectation for accountability in both

government and nonprofit organizations. The growing demand for accountability, in

turn, has led to accountability-centered reforms in these organizations, assessing and

evaluating their performance in a wide range of areas (Dubnick, 2005; Jones & Mucha,

2014). As Kearns (1994) states, the modern definition of accountability is not limited

to the answerability to a higher authority or oversight agency, but itinvolves managing

diverse expectations of stakeholders, within and outside of the organization (Romzek

& Dubnick, 1987). Therefore, organizations do not only comply with the external

control mechanisms required by law, but they also proactively adopt diverse measures

for financial, service, and performance accountability.

Research suggests that executives’ capacity in terms of managing human resources,

financial resources, and stakeholder relationships is a key element in determining

organizational accountability regardless of sector (Hambrick & Mason, 1984; Rainey

& Steinbauer, 1999). Day and Lord’s (1988) study of top-level leaders in both the

private and public sectors reports that executive leadership explains 20% to 45% of the

variance in organizations’ performance. In the public sector, the bureaucratic structure

ensures that top executives have the authority and control over the agency’s operations

to keep it accountable. In the nonprofit sector, the CEO is responsible for the effective

governance of the organization while the ultimate legal accountability is in the hands

of the board of directors. The public management literature emphasizes the impor-

tance of management in determining organizational success (Fernandez, 2005; Meier

& O’Toole, 2002) and suggests that top executives play a pivotal leadership role in

managing and ensuring organizational accountability (Heimovics, Herman, &

Coughlin, 1993; Romzek & Dubnick, 1987). In particular, research finds that execu-

tives’ goals and standards regarding organizational performance and accountability

drive the adoption of organization-wide performance-oriented practices (Rutherford &

Meier, 2015).

While executives’ leadership and their performance and accountability standards

may be products of the personal traits, and therefore, not be entirely taught (Allio,

2005; Van Wart, 2003), scholars agree that a great extent of managerial knowledge and

capacity can be developed through training. Empirical research supports the impor-

tance of executive development, reporting that managerial training increases organiza-

tional effectiveness and accountability (M. J. Burke & Day, 1986; Phillips, 2003;

Seidle, Fernandez, & Perry, 2016). Hence, there has been a continued interest in the

landscape of executive training programs, and today’s organizations invest in manage-

rial training and development to improve their performance and accountability

(Phillips, 2003; Seidle et al., 2016; Teitel, 2005). Managerial development is defined

as “the process by which managers acquire various skills and knowledge that increases