@article{clerkin_swiss_2014, title={Does Charging Nonprofit Volunteers Affect Their Satisfaction?}, volume={24}, ISSN={["1542-7854"]}, DOI={10.1002/nml.21106}, abstractNote={Nonprofits that offer volunteer experiences in foreign countries have long charged fees to their volunteers, but recently some other nonprofit organizations have begun to charge as well. Volunteer attitudes toward such fees have not previously been studied. Product marketing research has suggested that fees can sometimes improve participants’ evaluation of their experience, but public service motivation research seems to suggest that fees will diminish participants’ satisfaction. This study examines the attitudes toward fees of 4,400 volunteers who paid $310 to participate in a week-long project that built and repaired housing in Appalachia. Although a third of volunteers believed that the fee enhanced their appreciation of the program, an equal proportion disagreed. An even larger percentage of the volunteers believed the fee discouraged some volunteers. Concerns with fees were more common among youth volunteers than adult volunteers and among those who volunteered for altruistic rather than for career reasons. Most volunteers, even those critical of fees, were positive about their volunteer experience, but those who were least positive about the fees were also somewhat less positive about their experience. These results suggest that decisions about volunteer fees must balance the benefits of additional funds for enhanced client services against the likelihood of discouraging some potential volunteers, especially younger or more altruistic volunteers.}, number={4}, journal={NONPROFIT MANAGEMENT & LEADERSHIP}, author={Clerkin, Richard M. and Swiss, James E.}, year={2014}, pages={487–501} }
 @article{swiss_2009, title={Management}, volume={69}, ISSN={["0033-3352"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02080.x}, abstractNote={Public Administration ReviewVolume 69, Issue 6 p. 1193-1195 A Pioneer Who Helps Us Recognize What We Know—and Still Don’t Know—about Management James E. Swiss, Corresponding Author James E. Swiss North Carolina State UniversityJames E. Swiss is an associate professor of public administration, School of Public and International Affairs, North Carolina State University.E-mailswiss@ncsu.eduSearch for more papers by this author James E. Swiss, Corresponding Author James E. Swiss North Carolina State UniversityJames E. Swiss is an associate professor of public administration, School of Public and International Affairs, North Carolina State University.E-mailswiss@ncsu.eduSearch for more papers by this author First published: 12 October 2009 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02080.xRead the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume69, Issue6November/December 2009Pages 1193-1195 RelatedInformation}, number={6}, journal={PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW}, author={Swiss, James E.}, year={2009}, pages={1193–1195} }
 @article{frazier_swiss_2008, title={Contrasting views of results-based management tools from different organizational levels}, volume={11}, ISSN={["1559-3169"]}, DOI={10.1080/10967490802095698}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT Do top managers view the implementation of results-based management tools differently than do lower-level workers?A total of 4,186 workers in eight state departments of revenue were surveyed about the deployment and the impacts of nine results-based management tools in their agency. The top hierarchical levels were consistently, and often dramatically, more optimistic than lower-levels. The largest differences were generally found in the assessments of worker participation, and in the assessments of the customer relations tools and cross-functional coordination tools. Follow-up interviews were used to suggest reasons for the consistent perceptual differences. Six overlapping causes were suggested by agency members: top isolation, bottom spin, different perspective ranges, inadequate communication, top selective perception, and lower level cynicism. These findings suggest that management reformers must be prepared to bridge very large perceptual differences between levels, and a number of possible bridging approaches are discussed. The findings also suggest that survey-based public management research will often be misleading if based on surveys of just top managers.}, number={2}, journal={INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL}, author={Frazier, M. Andrew and Swiss, James E.}, year={2008}, pages={214–234} }
 @article{ozturk_swiss_2008, title={Implementing management tools in Turkish public hospitals: The impact of culture, politics and role status}, volume={28}, ISSN={["1099-162X"]}, DOI={10.1002/pad.486}, abstractNote={Abstract}, number={2}, journal={PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT}, author={Ozturk, Ali Osman and Swiss, James E.}, year={2008}, month={May}, pages={138–148} }
 @article{swiss_2005, title={A framework for assessing incentives in results-based management}, volume={65}, ISSN={["1540-6210"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00486.x}, abstractNote={Many governmental results‐based management systems have not produced the expected positive effects. This article analyzes the reasons for this common disappointment by looking at three components of results‐based management—results‐specific information, capacities, and incentives—and concludes that incentives are often the least developed. It then synthesizes a simple framework for evaluating the efficacy of results‐oriented incentives. To be successful, results‐specific incentives must be tailored to fit four program characteristics: timeliness, political environment, clarity of the cause‐and‐effect chain, and tightness of focus. This framework suggests that some systems put too exclusive an emphasis on budgetary incentives and could be strengthened by emphasizing personnel‐system rewards, especially those that look beyond business models.}, number={5}, journal={PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW}, author={Swiss, JE}, year={2005}, pages={592–602} }