Networking Modes and Performance in Israel's Nonprofit Organizations

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21104
• Published date: 01 June 2014
• Date: 01 June 2014

Correspondence to: Rita S. Mano, University of Haifa, Department of Human

Services, Mount Carmel, Haifa, Israel 31995. E-mail: ritamano@research.haifa.ac.il

NONPROFIT MANAGEMENT & LEADERSHIP, vol. 24, no. 4, Summer 2014 © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc 429

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/nml.21104

RESEARCH ARTICLES

Networking Modes

and Performance in Israel’s

Nonprofit Organizations

Rita S. Mano

University of Haifa, Israel

The present article examines the relationship between net-

working modes and performance for 138 nonprofits in Israel.

We draw upon the bridging and bonding concepts and social

exchange theory and introduce the sharing and consulting

networking modes to predict performance in terms of organi-

zational growth in resources. We suggest that differences in

networking modes (1) reflect variations in organizational size

and age and (2) affect organizational growth in resources. We

show that (1) the consulting networking mode is more frequent

among managers of smaller and younger nonprofits, (2) shar-

ing is characteristic of managers in older and larger nonprofits,

(3) sharing has a strong effect on organizational growth, and

(4) the sharing and consulting modes are better predictors of

organizational performance than those of bonding and bridg-

ing. The results indicate that nonprofit growth in organiza-

tional resources is possible with networking when managers

aspire to higher involvement in the networking process due to

the scope and extent of goals.

Keywords: networking, consulting, sharing, bridging,

bonding, organizational age, size, performance

430 MANO

Nonprofit Management & Leadership DOI: 10.1002/nml

NETWORKING IS A PROCESS through which formal and collabo-

rations are formed, creating channels through which infor-

mation about other individuals and groups can be easily

retrieved, tested, and verified (Brass, Galaskiewicz, Greve, and Tsai

2004). Effective networking modes are characterized by high degrees

of coordination, cooperation, and communication, in which goal set-

ting “results from a communicative process in which shared mean-

ings either exist, or are created through a reciprocal relationship”

(Hardy, Phillips, and Lawrence 1998, 71). Sustainable organizations

aim to increase resources (Gazley 2010; Sowa 2009), but, according

to Enjoiras (2009), variations in networking modes (Chang 2003;

Chew and Osborne 2008; Kavanaugh, Reese, and Rosson 2005;

Snavely and Tracy 2002) ultimately define their benefits to the organ-

ization (Brass et al. 2004; Galaskiewicz, Bielefeld, and Dowell 2006).

The study examines how four networking modes used by manag-

ers in Israel’s nonprofits improve organizational growth in resources

(term interchangeably used with the term performance). Extending

earlier studies (Schmid, Bar, and Nirel 2008; York and Zychlinski

1997) the article contends that networking between managers in

nonprofit settings is intended to increase organizational resources

and organizational performance (Hutt and Walker 2006). Drawing

upon the resource-based view (RBV) of organizations, we propose

a set of measurable outcomes indicating growth in resources. We

compare between four networking modes—bonding, bridging, shar-

ing, and consulting—and show that only the two latter—sharing and

consulting—actually improve organizational growth in resources in

Israel’s nonprofits. We also control for variations in organizational

age and size in order to provide evidence of organizational context

effects on the networking–performance relationship. The study does

not examine all possible networking forms in the nonprofit sector but

focuses on those revealed by the field study that tests the networking

modes among managers in 138 individual nonprofit organizations.

Early in the 1970s, social capital theory introduced bonding and

bridging as two major social networking interactions (Granovetter

1973). Putnam (2000) defined bridging as the overall link between

diverse individuals and social groups, and bonding as the overall

connectedness between groups with similar traits. In both interac-

tions the formation of close “ties” has the potential to provide useful

resources, increased access to influence and power, and improved

social and economic status. At the organizational level, network-

ing is a form of collaboration aiming to achieve common goals, but

according to the social exchange approach, variations in networking

occur due to differences in types of goals, extent of collaboration,

networking relationships between partners, and the organizational

context in which the managers are employed. For example, some

managers use networking to attain specific, short-range goals or ad

hoc challenges, whereas others choose networking as a strategic

approach toward achieving long-term goals. Moreover, in some