What is in a theme? Professionalization in nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations research

• Author: Angela Marberg,Hubert Korzilius,Hans Kranenburg
• Published date: 01 September 2019
• Date: 01 September 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21355

RESEARCH ARTICLE

What is in a theme? Professionalization in nonprofit

and nongovernmental organizations research

Angela Marberg | Hubert Korzilius | Hans van Kranenburg

Institute for Management Research, Radboud

University Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Correspondence

Angela Marberg, Institute for Management

Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, PO Box

9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Email: janan@xs4all.nl; a.marberg@fm.ru.nl

This study examines 1,418 articles in three leading jour-

nals in the field of nonprofit organization studies from

1990 to 2010. Using topic modeling to detect dominant

themes, we were able to trace the development of the aca-

demic research on nonprofit and nongovernmental organi-

zations over two decades. We found remarkable changes

with regard to an increasing use of professional, manageri-

alist terminology such as that used in for-profit organiza-

tions. This is significant given the potential of the research

agenda to influence developments in the nonprofit sector.

KEYWORDS

nonprofit, professionalization, themes, topic modeling

1|INTRODUCTION

The professionalization of the nonprofit sector has been the subject of considerable research (Banks,

Hulme, & Edwards, 2015; Dart, 2004; Maier, Meyer, & Steinbereithner, 2016; Nickel & Eikenberry,

2009; Sandberg, 2012; Suykens, De Rynck, & Verschuere, 2018). Some scholars of nonprofit and

nongovernmental organizations (NPOs and NGOs) argue that professionalization threatens the origi-

nal purpose of the organizations by weakening their grassroots ties and forcing them to enact donor

policy rather than follow their own agendas (Banks et al., 2015; Evans, Richmond, & Shields, 2005).

Others argue that NPOs and NGOs are already hybrids—“organizations with two or more sectoral

characteristics”(S. R. Smith, 2014, p. 1495)—as the lines between market, state, and third-sector are

clear in theory but blurred in practice (Dees, 1998; Evers, 2005). In addition, reliance on funding

from government and donors makes NPOs and NGOs more susceptible to managerial professional-

ism (Claeyé & Jackson, 2012; Frumkin & Galaskiewicz, 2004; Verbruggen, Christiaens, & Milis,

2011). For instance, Claeyé & Jackson (2012, p. 617) found that stakeholder pressures led to “mim-

icking and internalizing the managerialist discourse emanating from the global governance structure

of international aid and are becoming more business-like”by NPO managers. However, it should be

noted that their research also pointed to a hybrid situation representing a combination of managerial-

ist and humanist discourses.

Received: 22 August 2017 Revised: 23 January 2019 Accepted: 28 January 2019

DOI: 10.1002/nml.21355

Nonprofit Management and Leadership. 2019;30:113–131. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/nml © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 113

Language is a critical element in the adoption of professionalization by organizations (Oakes,

Townley, & Cooper, 1998). The adoption of managerialist vocabulary is one of the indicators of the

professionalization process (Apple, 2005; Banks et al., 2015; Fairclough, 1993; Lynch, 2013; Oakes

et al., 1998; Roberts, Jones, & Fröhling, 2005). The words we use to communicate about—and the

labels we affix to—organizations and their functions are not simply a matter of description; they can

also impact organizational legitimacy and success (Meyer & Rowan, 1977).

Previous studies have identified themes in NPO and NGO literature (Anheier, 1990; Brudney &

Durdon, 1993), reviewed the academic literature on these organizations becoming more business-like

(Maier et al., 2016), and discussed changing organization discourse (e.g., Eikenberry, 2009; Korff,

Oberg, & Powell, 2015; Laasonen, Fougère, & Kourula, 2012). Our study builds on that research by

analyzing a large corpus of NPO and NGO research and showing the development of research themes

over time.

To reduce researcher influence on the identification of themes, Ryan and Bernard (2003) call

for research using automated procedures for theme discovery. This study responds to that call. We

use topic modeling to identify themes and vocabulary in academic literature on NPOs and NGOs.

Topic modeling enables us to extract topics from literature texts. We are not aware of any other

studies in the NPO and NGO literature that have used such procedures for theme detection. Our

approach aims to discover what theme development reveals about the way NPOs and NGOs are

discussed and described in the academic literature. More concretely, we seek to answer the follow-

ing research question: To what extent does the academic research on NPOs and NGOs reflect pro-

fessionalization in its nomenclature? This study focuses on a large corpus of NPO and NGO

research and shows the development of research themes over time. It provides an overall picture of

NPO and NGO research development and the trend toward the use of terminology associated with

managerial professionalism from 1990 to 2010. Thematically categorizing the words and terminol-

ogy, researchers use in their studies over time may reveal a particular focus, emphasis, or shared

understanding.

The outline of the study is as follows: We will first discuss and elaborate on professionalization

and the use of themes in research. Next, we will describe how the themes detected in three leading

journals on NPOs and NGOs—Nonprofit Management & Leadership (NML), Nonprofit and Volun-

tary Sector Quarterly (NVSQ), and Voluntas—are an expression of a developing narrative over time.

We will then outline our methodology for theme identification, provide examples from the journals

and present our results. Finally, we will examine the contributions and limitations of our research,

and conclude by offering some final remarks.

1.1 |Professionalization

Evetts's (2003, 2006, 2011) seminal work on professionalism provides a detailed account of the con-

cept from a sociological perspective. She distinguishes between occupational and organizational pro-

fessionalism, the former being more traditional and the latter more contemporary (Evetts, 2006).

Evetts (2011) states that “Accounts of change describe a shift from notions of partnership, collegial-

ity, discretion and trust to increasing levels of managerialism, bureaucracy, standardization, assess-

ment and performance review”(p. 407). This research focuses on the contemporary understanding of

professionalism, and refers to professionalization as the process or exercise of realizing (contempo-

rary) professionalism. Evetts (2011, p. 407) indicates that the “exercise of professionalism is now

organizationally defined and includes the logics of organization and the market: managerialism and

commercialism.”

114 MARBERG ET AL.