A Study of The Relationships Between Organizational and Motivational Factors and Volunteering Behavior in A Hospice Environment

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing
in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
Bell & Howell Information and Learning

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS
BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL AND MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS AND
VOLUNTEERING BEHAVIOR IN A HOSPICE ENVIRONMENT
by
Trudi I. Webb
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Nova Southeastern University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of
DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
2000
UMI Number; 9996957
Copyright 2001 by
Webb, Gertrude Use
All rights reserved.
_ ___ _®
UMI
UMI Microform 9996957
Copyright 2001 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
3 -0 9 -2 0 1 1 2 - 29PM FROM HOSPICE BY THE SEA 4 0 7 + 3 9 4 + 4 5 1 5 P. 2
•V
A Dissertation
Entitled
A S T U D Y O F T H E R E LA TIO N SH IPS
B E T W E E N O R G A N IZ A T IO N A L A N D M O T IV A T IO N A L FA C TO R S A N D
V O L U N T E E R IN G B E H A V IO R IN A HO SPICE E N V IR O N M E N T
By
Trudi I. Webb
W e hereby certify that this Dissertation submitted by Trudi L Webb conforms to acceptable standards
and as such is fu lly adequate in scope and quality. It is therefore approved as the fu lfillm e n t o f the
Dissertation requirement for the Degree o f Doctor o f Business Administration.
Approved:
(A J L s { /L ^ Q V ____________________
W illiam Snow, Ph.D. Date
RobertTreziosi, D .P .A . " Dat e
c fl £ - , 9-000________
David M w ton, D .B .A . s? ^ Date •
______________
Joseph L . Bafloun, Ph.D. / ’
t _ - f . ----------------------------------------------- — -------------------- to <£>C >

J. Pra^ton Jones, D .0 .A } Date
Asjmciate Dean, School o f Business
and Entrepreneurship
Nova Southeastern University

2000
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the
language of others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate
credit is given where I have used the language, ideas, expressions or writings of
another.
Signed:
Trudi I. Webb
ABSTRACT
A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS

BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL AND MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS AND
VOLUNTEERING BEHAVIOR IN A HOSPICE ENVIRONMENT
by
Trudi I. Webb
In this study, the researcher investigates what motivates people to
volunteer in a non-profit, hospice setting. McClelland’s (1985) social motives
theory is used in this study in which he posits that persons are motivated based
on their affiliation, power, or achievement needs. The researcher focuses on the
extent to which the affiliation motive influences adults to volunteer for hospice
type work, to be more productive, to influence the number of hours for which they
volunteer, and the extent to which the demographics (age, gender, length of
service) of the volunteers influences their commitment to volunteer work. In this
study 215 members of the volunteer component of a large non-profit hospice
were surveyed. Of these, 155 of their responses were usable (72%). The data
did not support the need for affiliation as a motivating factor for volunteering.
Volunteers did not have significantly higher needs for affiliation than their needs
for achievement as measured by Pearson correlation. And, the idea that the
volunteer who is motivated by the affiliation motive would be more productive
was not supported. There were no significant correlations found in the data
using the affiliation sub-scale of the Personal Values Questionnaire. Further, the
idea that the motivation displayed by the volunteer as measured on the Cnaan
Goldberg-Glen Motivations to Volunteer Questionnaire would positively impact
the number of hours that volunteers would dedicate to hospice was not
supported. This was borne out by both correlational and discriminate analysis.
Finally, the notion that certain demographic variables (age, gender, length of
service, future intent to increase volunteer commitment) would be suggestive of
the volunteer’s commitment to hospice volunteer work was partially supported.
Discriminate analysis revealed that age and future intent were significant.
Analyses of volunteers in other work settings deserves further research.
DEDICATION
I dedicate this work to the memory of my parents, Use and Erich Schuler.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
To my mentor, teacher, committee chair and most importantly, my friend, Dr.

William Snow, who was always there providing me with the motivation in
achieving my goal.
For the support given to me by my committee members, Dr. Robert Preziosi and
Dr. David Morton.
To the board of directors of Hospice By The Sea, Inc., who believed in me

enough to support me and make this a reality.
To Mary Fischer, without whose support, patience, help and incredible computer
skills I would never have accomplished this.
To Duke University for extending me the courtesy of access to their extensive

research library.
And to my family, my children, Joanna and Eric, who offered support and
understanding, and my husband John who was there for me every step of the
way offering encouragement, motivation and strength and always demonstrating
incredible patience.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem.............................................................. 5

Purpose of the Study...................................................................... 6
Theory Being Tested...................................................................... 7
Importance of the Study................................................................. 8
Research Questions...................................................................... 8
Definition of Terms........................................................................ 9
Summary.......................................................................................... 10
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 12
Building of Volunteer Organizations............................................. 13

The Evolution of Motivation Theories......................................... 14
Values.............................................................................................. 18
Volunteer Motives.......................................................................... 21
Motivation Theories and the Mature Volunteer......................... 27
Volunteer Characteristics............................................................. 31
Socio-economic Status................................................................. 35
Volunteer Locations...................................................................... 37
Summary.......................................................................................... 39
III. METHODOLOGY 44
Research Questions and Hypotheses........................................ 44

Research Design........................................................................... 47
Sample Population........................................................................ 47
Instrumentation.............................................................................. 48
Validity and Reliability................................................................... 49
Chapter Page
Data Collection............................................................................ 51
Proposed Data Analysis............................................................ 52
IV. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS 54
Demographic Summary.............................................................. 55
Research Questions and Hypotheses...................................... 59
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS........................................... 69
Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses............................... 69

Assumptions and Limitations ...................................... 72
Implications................................................................................. 75
Suggestions for Future Research............................................ 75
BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................... 77
REFERENCES........................................................................................ 84
Personal Values Questionnaire................................................. 91

Motivation for Volunteering Survey........................................... 95
v iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
1 Frequency Distributions of Volunteers by Age 55
2 Frequency Distributions of Volunteers by 56

Length of Service

Monthly Commitment of Volunteer hours

Future Volunteer Plans
5 Correlations of Mean Scores for the 60

Personal Values Questionnaire
6 Mean Scores for Three Subscales of the 61

Personal Values Questionnaire
7 Correlations of the Volunteers’ Commitment and 63

the PVQ Affiliation Subscale
8 Correlations of the Future Commitment and 64

the PVQ Affiliation Subscale
9 Relationship between Affiliation and 65

Volunteers’ Commitment
10 Mean Scores for Cnaan Goldberg-Glen 67

Motivation to Volunteer Questions
within Affiliation Subscale
11 Relationship between Affiliation and 78

demographic variables
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The use of volunteers in non-profit organizations has, in many cases,
made the difference between the survival and failure of the organization. Some
have suggested that the reason people do things such as volunteering is due not
only to a conscious motive, but also as a result of certain external trigger events
such as an invitation to join a group (Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989).
David McClelland identified three social motives which are most influential
in driving one’s behavior: achievement, power and affiliation (McClelland, 1966).
According to Webster, affiliation is defined as
the act of associating with or uniting with, as a member or

branch to a larger or principle body; to join or associate with.
People who value affiliation prefer doing things with people, but do not
spontaneously spend time chatting with people unless affiliation is called for or
unless the other person starts the conversation. In contrast, people with a strong
affiliation motive will on their own initiative seek out people to spend time with
because they enjoy their company (McClelland, 1966).
Closely tied in with motivational issues is the equally important value
system of an individual and specifically that of a volunteer. According to
Rokeach (1973), “...a ‘ value system’ is an enduring organization of beliefs
concerning preferable modes of conduct or end-states of existence along a
continuum of relative importance...they (values) predispose behavior and are
reflected in both attitude and personality”. Religious, environmental, human
rights and other issues are all part of a value system that aids in the
determination of an individual to a commitment of volunteerism for a specific
organization or cause (Mahoney & Pechura, 1980).
Motives and values are related to behavior in different ways. Motives are
unconscious, natural drives which have been influenced by early emotional
experiences. Values, however, are cognitive aspects of individuals which have
been developed or adapted as a result of one’s life experiences (McClelland,
1966).
Adult volunteers tend to exhibit increased performance when they are
motivated by the need for affiliation. Marlene Wilson (1976) states in her book,
The Effective Management of Volunteer Programs, affiliation oriented people
basically want a buddy. Wilson further observed that the motivation of a person
can be determined by responses to non-directive questioning.
Aitkensen and Reitman (19 56 ) conducted an experiment which
demonstrated that young women with high affiliation needs worked harder
because they were more interested in pleasing the experimenter. In addition,
Zajonc (1 9 6 5 ) found evidence that social affiliation improves the performance of
an individual even when performing simple tasks.
Litwin and Stringer (1968) also noted in an experiment that member
satisfaction was high under leaders with a strong need for affiliation. Further,
members with a high need for affiliation typically exhibited warmth and regard for
others.
McClelland (1987) indicates that individuals with high affiliation needs will
act in various ways to avoid conflict, competition and negative feedback from
others. In the negative sense, persons that are motivated by the need for
affiliation have the potential to sacrifice organizational programs ( e.g., volunteer
fund raising) in order to be accepted and viewed as good persons by their peers,
superiors and subordinates.
To aid in the determination of why an individual volunteers, Gillespie and
King (1985) conducted a study to develop a correlation between volunteer
demographics with reasons for volunteering. The respondents were asked to
select from a list of twelve values the one that corresponded the most with their
reason for volunteering. Regardless of age, sex or marital
status all volunteers tended to give the same reason for volunteering but at
widely disparate rates. The three most frequent answers were “to help others”,
“to help the community”, and “to obtain job training and skills”. The latter two
were a radical change from any previous studies which had always resulted in
“interest in the activity”, and “enjoy doing volunteer work”.
Lammers (1991) substantiated the “educational” value finding in a study of
147 volunteers. The respondents were asked their initial motive for volunteering.
In the “motive” variable “to learn a new skill” was the most significant reason for
volunteer commitment.
In a comparison study between paid employees and volunteers it was
found that “work-content” (relating to the work itself and achievement at work)
and “work-context” factors (convenience of work as it relates to time and location
and lack of stress at work ) were strong volunteer retention factors (Gidron,
1984).
In a later study Gidron (1985) analyzed three categories of variables
(personal, organizational and attitudinal) and identified the variables in each
category that predicted differences between the “stayers” and “leavers”. In the
personal category “previous experience as a volunteer” played a positive role in
the retention of volunteers. In the organizational category “length of service,
preparation, and type of task” played positive roles. In the attitudinal
category ‘recognition”, “task achievement”, “work itself’ and “other volunteers”
were the positive factors in the retention of volunteers. It was also concluded
that the issues motivating a volunteer to stay with an organization did not
necessarily mean that the opposite was true as to why a volunteer leaves.
In yet another study, motivational factors for volunteering involved
altruistic motives as an overall major decision factor, “to practice ideals and
conviction", and “to help others less fortunate” and “to be good neighbors” (Frisch
& Gerrard, 1981).
But among the younger group of volunteers (under age 18) “career
exploration a nd development”, "develop social contacts”, “hobby or
extracurricular activity”, and “learn how to relate to people” were among the
strongest motivational factors (Frisch & Gerrard, 1981).
Educational levels of volunteers were also found to play an important role
in determining who would continue with an organization and who would drop out.
Some form of higher education was associated with volunteer retention along
with the positive features of the volunteer experience, task satisfaction and team
relations (Lammers, 1991). It was also established that if an individual
volunteered with an organization as a youth s/he would likely become a volunteer
with that organization as an adult. The volunteer would also likely provide
financial support to the organization (Frisch & Gerrard, 1981).
Statement of the Problem
Why do people volunteer? Why do people who have retired from a job, or
people who work long hours in a current job consider taking on additional
responsibilities on a volunteer basis? The question suggests a paradox: why
does a busy person with alternative responsibilities such as job and family
decide to volunteer time without any tangible or otherwise apparent benefit. Is
there a psychological reward that volunteers receive?
Once a volunteer is recruited, how likely is that individual to remain with
the organization, to become disinterested or to disappear? Each turnover of a
trained volunteer is of great concern to the organization who has invested the
time and money on the training of these individuals, only to possibly lose them to
another organization who is better prepared to meet their motivational needs
(Gidron, 1984; Lammers, 1991; Mahoney & Pechura, 1980).
This information is vital if an organization is to successfully recruit
individuals into becoming volunteers. But equally important is the ability of the
organization to keep the volunteer especially afters/he has been trained.
Motivational needs must be determined to successfully accomplish this purpose.
Motivation in volunteerism, in a hospice environment, is the focus of the
present study. Of all the scientific investigations that relate to adult volunteers,
motivation is one of the least studied and least understood (Cohen-Mansfield,
1989). This researcher plans to examine McClelland’s need for affiliation theory
as it relates to the adult volunteer. More specifically, this researcher will study
volunteers in a hospice environment.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine the relationships between
organizational factors, individual factors and volunteering behavior in a hospice
environment. As can be seen, there is a wide variety of what constitutes the
most important reason for volunteering. And the reasons change with the
demographic variables. In today’s society, where salaries and job titles provide
tangible benefits such as prestige and assumed importance, volunteerism is a
behavior that is important to examine.
Awareness of motivations for volunteering is of the utmost importance to
individuals who recruit and maintain a volunteer pool for non-profit and
human service agencies. If adequate training is conducted with the volunteer
pool, patients have the potential to receive services comparable to those
provided by professionals. Further, the agencies may also experience a
reduction in the paid staff numbers with an accompanying increase in the
quality of care (Frisch & Gerrard, 1981).
But the development and implementation of an on-going, viable
volunteer program is an intricate process that requires extensive knowledge
regarding potential volunteers ( Lammers, 1991). Specifically, it is important
to know what motivational factors can be attributed to the desire to become a
volunteer in the first place, And, it is important to determine the reasons that
the volunteer continues to remain with the organization over a period of time
(Gidron, 1984).
Theory Being Tested
The main focus of this study centers on what motivates the hospice
volunteer. David McClelland’s (1981) theory of motivation suggests that people
have three major motivations, with one being predominant: Achievement,
Affiliation and Power. In this study the researcher will examine McClelland’s
need for affiliation as it relates to the adult volunteer. It is hypothesized that the
motivation of affiliation will be strong in the hospice volunteer population, as
many of the research subjects are family members of former patients.
Importance of the Study
Society has benefited from volunteer efforts since colonial times. Because
of declining human resources, volunteers will be an increasingly important
human resource to aid organizations, especially those in the hospice
environment. The efforts to incorporate volunteers into a hospice environment
involves the need to identify those factors which may increase the likelihood that
individuals will continue to be recruited and retained in the volunteer workforce.
It is important to study volunteerism so that individual antecedents such as
affiliation motivations may be better understood.
A knowledge of these factors is important to both the organization and the
patient with whom the volunteers will work for several reasons. Most volunteers
work side-by-side with paid employees and are placed in sensitive patient-
volunteer relationships. These relationships require a strong time commitment
on the part of the volunteer in addition to h/her investing time in extensive
training. Therefore, if the volunteer should resign after making a patient
commitment and after having completed the requisite training, the effects could
be harmful to the patient and the organization.
Research Questions
This study will attempt to answer four research questions regarding
hospice volunteer work and the value/motivator of affiliation.
1. Does the need for affiliation motivate adults to volunteer for hospice type
work?
2. Will the volunteer motivated by affiliation be more productive in the hospice
environment?
3. Does the supervisor’s motivations impact the performance of the hospice

volunteer?
4. What demographics may contribute to hospice volunteers commitment to the

work?
These research questions, the related hypotheses and proposed statistical
methods to be used in testing them will be explored more fully in Chapter 3 of
this study.
Definition of Terms
In this study, the researcher will use the following terms. The definitions of
these terms are provided in order to help ensure more clarity of meaning and
intent for the reader.
Achievement: Individuals who most value doing things well, outperforming

others, making wise use of their time and resources to achieve more, and who
are driven by an interna! standard of excellence.
Affiliation: individuals who most value avoiding conflict and maintaining good
relations with a concern about separation or disruption of relationships, and who
have an overall view of group activities as social events.
Altruistic motivation: behavior accomplished so as to be in service to others

with which no tangible benefit is associated.
Egoistic/materialistic motivations: behavior accomplished that seeks obvious

psychological and or educational benefits.
Hospice: organization that delivers “quality of life” services to community
members, including but not limited to counseling and medical treatment.
Influence: Those factors— parents, peers, role models, groups or organizations,

media, religious institutions, logic and reason, emotions, incentives and rewards,
and experiences—that influence an individual’s values.
Motives: The natural and unconscious drives which a person gravitates to over
time that are influenced by early emotional experiences and are, perhaps,
genetic. These are difficult to change.
Personalized Power: Used by individuals for self-aggrandizement, wielding it at

the expense of others.
Power: Individuals who most value positions of prestige and influence so that
they can impact what happens, take forceful actions that affect people, provide
unsolicited support or advice, and act in ways that generate strong positive or
negative emotions in others.
Social motivations: behavior that is accomplished with social interaction with

others as the benefit.
Socialized Power: Used by individuals for getting something done for some
larger good.
Values: those factors— activities, behaviors, qualities, beliefs, goals— that a

person believes are important to do, follow, or strive toward. While one may not
always think about h/her values, h/she is aware of them and can consciously
identify them.
Volunteers: Individuals who give their time to an organization without benefit of

any tangible rewards.
Summary
This study, then, is about the relationship between organizational factors,
individual factors and volunteering in a hospice environment. This researcher will
explore these areas with the idea that gaining more clarity on what motivates
people to volunteer and what contributes to their retention or termination is
10
important to examine especially in today’s healthcare environment. Further, the
framework for this study is David McClelland’s social motives theory which
includes three primary motives: achievement, affiliation and power.
In the next chapter, this researcher will explore existing literature by
established researchers on the subjects of motivation, turnover, and social
motives. Where available, meta-studies will be referred to and explored because
they provide rich and robust summaries of relevant data and information. A
summary of this researcher’s conclusions based on the literature review and
interpretation thereof will also be included.
11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The purpose of this chapter is to review the concepts of volunteering, and
motivation to volunteer. This chapter provides a summary of the relevant
literature pertaining to these concepts and their relevance to this study.
Volunteerism is a side of human nature that is not highly emphasized in
popular culture or by sociologists (Sabini, 1996). The most effective view to take
in understanding volunteer motivation is based on research that explores the
question of why people decide to collaborate with an organization as volunteers.
The notion of persons volunteering is not new. In fact, volunteering is
rooted in core religious beliefs— helping those less fortunate, giving to others—
and therefore was an integral part of our founding fathers thinking and actions
(Batson & Ventis, 1982). Over the years, volunteering has become a positive
force in helping serve those in need. To that end, the major staffing needs of
such organizations as the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the AIDS Foundation,
and United W ay are met with volunteers, persons without whom these
organizations could not exist or be very limited in their scope of activities.
12
Building Volunteer Organizations
Before the turn of the century, volunteerism was still viewed as service
work associated with the same religious groups that established the colonies
(Chambre, 1987). These religious volunteers were advocates and service
providers for the society’s poor, sick and elderly (Salmon, 1985). As our country
continued to emerge, large metropolitan cities came into being. These heavy
population centers all had concerns about such major social issues as crime and
unemployment. As a consequence, volunteers rushed to provide assistance to
these unfortunate and needy persons championed largely by religious
organizations.
Post 1865, religious groups continued to champion the idea of
volunteering using it as a “vehicle” to help others less fortunate. From these
efforts came the eventual founding of numerous volunteer organizations which
are still in existence today. Although religious volunteerism declined during the
first half of the 20th century due to the professionalism of human services,
volunteers were incorporated into public programs (Monk and Cryns, 1974).
Since the 1970s, changes in the society, demographics and the economy
have greatly affected the nature of volunteering (Manser, 1987). Adults are more
educated; they are healthier, thereby living longer; and they are financially more
sound, thus able to enjoy a greater degree of freedom during retirement
(Stafford, 1987). The women’s movement progressed; women and ethnic
minorities achieved a strong foothold in the workplace, and the concept of
corporate social responsibility became more pronounced. As a result, greater
13
numbers of older adults were getting involved in volunteering activities, and new
forms of voluntary activities developed. These activities included self-help or
other support groups; neighborhood block organizations, consumer and public
interest advocates, and political action groups (Manser, 1987). Volunteerism
was expected to rise within the population as the number of people with more
income and education continued to increase. These are the people who typically
do volunteer work (Fischer, Mueller & Cooper, 1991).
The Evolution of Motivation Theories
Robbins (1996) explains the 1950’s was a successful decade in the
development of motivational concepts. The theories evolved during this period
have provided a foundation for research and real-world application of
motivational theories in contemporary times.
In order to better understand the reasons why people volunteer, a
summary of three landmark need or content motivation theories from the
behavioral sciences research may better help to explain the motivations of
people (Wilson, 1976). Need or content motivation theories focus on identifying
variables that influence one’s behaviors. These theories have evolved from
researchers who attempted to identify which needs are most important to
individuals.
Abraham Maslow (1954) suggested that people are needy beings through
his theory of a “hierarchy of needs.” Maslow’s hierarchy of needs are as follows:
1. Physiological—the basic physical needs of food, water, air, sex, shelter

2. Safety/security—the need to be safe from harm, to have security
3. Social—the need for affiliation or closeness with others; to be liked
14
4. Esteem—the need to be recognized as a person o f value; to be
rewarded
5. Self-Actualization— self-fulfillment and personal growth.
Needs can be ranked in order of importance, from the most basic level to
the highest. Maslow divided these needs into several categories. The lowest
level need may also be referred to as an efficiency need (i.e., basic need for
survival), while the other levels have been termed growth needs. The highest
level of the hierarchy, self-actualization, is also a growth need but appears later
in one’s maturational development. This need is different from other growth
needs as the lower levels infer an aspect of developmental deficiency versus the
extra or stretch aspect inferred through self-fulfillment (Shram, 1985).
Based on Maslow’s hierarchy, each person’s unfulfilled needs at the
different levels will motivate behavior (Schram, 1985). According to the theory,
when a lower level need is satisfied (e.g., efficiency needs), the next higher need
level is activated and becomes a motivator. As each level is satisfied, the lower
level no longer serves as a motivator. For example, after an unemployed person
secures a job and steady income (e.g., fulfilling the safety/security need), he or
she may feel the need to join some sort of social group in order to make friends
and gain a feeling of belonging (e.g., social need is the next level in the hierarchy
and is activated as a motivator). Moreover, people descend the hierarchy when
the more basic need is suddenly not met (Maslow, 1954). This is not to say that
two levels cannot be motivating at the same time, merely that the needs at lower
levels take precedence (Shram, 1985).
15
Maslow argues that as growth needs become satisfied, they do not
necessarily dissipate or disappear. Rather, the achievement will provide internal
motivation— the person will want more. In Maslow’s view, satisfying higher level
growth needs will create a desire for more growth (Maslow, 1954).
The second theory to be examined is the “Motivation-Hygiene Theory,
also known as the two factor theory, as proposed by Frederick Herzberg (1959).
Herzberg utilizes the factors affecting people and how they work and separates
them into two categories. The first category, called “hygiene factors,” is
associated in general with a person’s work environment, and these factors
typically serve as dissatisfiers or de-motivators. Hygiene factors include policies,
administration, supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations, status,
security and salary. These factors, Herzberg suggests, do not motivate people to
do better work when the factors are present; instead, they negatively motivate
when they are not present (Herzberg, 1959).
However, hygiene factors must be paired with Herzberg’s second category
of work-related factors: “motivators.” These factors include achievement,
recognition for accomplishment, challenging work, increased responsibility, and
growth and development opportunities. As the name of the category indicates,
these are the factors that do motivate and encourage people to perform at their
best levels (Herzberg, 1959).
Herzberg (1966, 1968) later expanded his theory to include two additional
yet unrelated classes of human needs: physical needs which motivate action
16
according to tension reduction, and psychological pleasure thorough growth
(Lawler, 1976).
The third cornerstone researcher is David McClelland and his social
motives theory. McClelland (1956) believes that there are three motivators
associated with work-related activities—the need for achievement, the need for
power, and the need for affiliation. Each motive, whether it is a desire for power,
achievement, or affiliation, leads to a different kind of behavior.
A desire for achievement ideally results in excellence or improved
performance. Individuals with a high need for achievement are focused on tasks,
task completion, and personal improvement. In addition, they have a need for
regular and consistent feedback (Chusmir, 1985). The person with an
achievement need will be productive as long as there is an opportunity to earn
something. These people extract satisfaction from the work itself.
Alternatively, the need for power results in influencing others, either
positively Gr negatively. Characteristics of people with power needs include
the desire to know, understand and communicate the goals of the organization.
The person with a need for power seeks to take a leadership role and provide
direction or control the direction that the department or organization will take
(Chusmir, 1985).
The individual who is motivated by affiliation seeks others with whom to
interact. “The affiliation need has to do with establishing, maintaining or
restoring a positive, affective relationship with another” (McClelland, 1956). The
individual with affiliation needs places an emphasis on human relationships, and
17
fulfills the need through relationships with others. People with affiliation needs
will make decisions about the work they do based on the people they work with
as opposed to the job requirements. People motivated by the need for affiliation
hope to find themselves with other people and to enjoy companionship (Chusmir,
1985).
McClelland’s three need categories have consistently been supported
empirically (Chusmir, 1985). Of particular interest to this researcher is the notion
his theory postulates that motivation is altered as one progresses from young to
mature adult.
Within individuals, motivation is complex. Motives may be disguised either
consciously or subconsciously by an individual, or, there may be a mixture of
reasons why a particular person acts in a certain way (Moore, 1985). The
behaviors that people engage in will lead to the goals that have been set.
According to McClelland (1956), motives start with thoughts, and one’s thoughts
will affect actions. Theoretically, individuals set personal goals (consciously or
subconsciously) in response to a combination of environmental influences.
McClelland asserts that individuals will act, but the intensity of the drive will vary
according to the situation.
Values
Not surprisingly, values influence the choices that people make—the
areas in which they choose to invest energy (Rivers, 1992). Much of what has
been learned about interpersonal work values has been drawn from research
accomplished in the social psychology field.
18
Some of the early research about values relied ►on the work done by
Spanger (1928). His research concluded that one’s personality could be
understood through a study of one’s values. Although h e could not provide a
clear definition of values, he chose to conceptualize the^se through six
classifications: aesthetic, economic, political, religious, s o c ia l, theoretical
(Spanger, 1928). Vemon and Allport (1931) capitalized on these classifications
and developed them into an empirical study. However, their
research drew much criticism because the six classifications seemed more
concerned with personality aspects of definition (Braithwaite and Scott, 1991).
As abstract as values are, Kluckhom, Tolman, AHport and others argued
that values should take a prominent role in the development of a theory of
behavior. It was Kluckhom (1951) who provided the firstf systematic definition:
A value is a conception explicit or implicit, distinctive of an

individual or characteristic of a group of the desirable which
influences the selection from available modes, m eans and
ends of action (pg. 395).
Kluckhom recognized that values do not exist in a vacuum. The
suggestion, then, is that values are characteristics of th e social environment and
are embedded within the social interaction process (Braithwaite and Scott, 1991).
Rokeach (1973) proposed the notion of value systems, and provided a
means to link values with behavior (Braithwaite and Scott, 1991). These value
systems were measured along two continuums: terminal values (end states) and
instrumental values (modes of conduct). To measure th ese distinct concepts,
Rokeach constructed an instrument of 36 questions.
19
From his research, Rokeach (1973) suggested that values are similar to
beliefs in that they both have components of cognition, affect and behavior.
He argued that it was one’s values which were instrumental in the
attainment of preferred end states. Rokeach concluded that values are
cognitions about what is preferable, and individuals will cognitively know the way
to behave. Beliefs are pre-dispositions to behavior. Further, values are affective
to the degree that an individual will feel a state of emotion. Therefore, values are
distinct concepts inextricably linked to one’s belief system (Rokeach, 1973).
It is important to note that values are not the same as motives.
McClelland (1985) provides a detailed description of the research on the
differences between motives and values. While values influence the choices
people make, motives reflect the pleasure that people gain through certain kinds
of activities. This pleasure leads people to carry out activities even though there
is no specific prompt or demand for the action. McClelland (1985) notes there is
a strong, self-conscious component to measure values, whereas, measures of
motives tap ongoing thought patterns that people do not consciously try to shape.
Although they appear similar, the correlation between measures of motives and
values is quite low (Rivers, 1992)
Values associated with motives are generally measured through the
Personal Values Questionnaire (McBer & Company, 1993). The instrument is
the result of several decades of research by McClelland on motives and values
and their contribution to understanding behavior.
20
Volunteer Motives
Many researchers (Sills, 1957; Anderson & Moore, 1974; Adams,1980; King
1984; Moore, 1985; Fitch, 1987; Stiff, Dillard, Somers, Kim, & Sleight,1988)
studying helping behavior have largely gained information through controlled field
studies. From the results of these studies, psychologists have proposed different
motivations for helping behavior.
Most studies suggest motives can be divided into three categories (Fitch,
1987):
1. Altruistic—with a goal of increasing other's welfare

2. Egoistic—with a goal of increasing the helper’s welfare
3. Social obligation—with a goal of repaying a debt to society
Traditionally, the motivation to volunteer has been thought to fall
somewhere in the realm of altruism. Altruistic motivation involves an act carried
out with the intent to benefit others without expecting anything in return. The
various altruistic reasons given by people for volunteering have to do with a
desire to meet the needs of someone else (Smith, 1981).
Rosehan (1970) originally set out to differentiate between those
individuals who performed the dramatic acts of altruism which make headlines
and those individuals who behave altruistically in “small,” everyday ways.
Rosehan (1970) defined “normative altruism” as daily helpfulness, characterized
by low personal risk and cost to the altruist. Autonomous altruism, the “heroic”
helping, is not always supported by societal norms such that the impetus for
volunteering is believed to “originate" more from the individual (e.g., helping Jews
21
in the midst of Nazi Germany). After intensive interviews, Rosehan found few
differences (e.g., an individual’s motivations for volunteering or family
backgrounds) between one’s “heroes” and everyday altruists. Those who only
contributed financially to the Civil Rights Movement (i.e., the normative altruist)
had parents who tended to limit their helpful activities to their own sphere of
family and colleagues. The autonomous altruists had relatively few friends or
family members who were sympathetic to their activism, while the financial
supporters (i.e., the normative altruists) tended to have quite a few supporters.
In fact, the normative altruists tended to only help at the behest of a friend
or a similarly ephemeral event, such as a newspaper story. Rosehan was
disappointed by the seeming inability of parental behavior to differentiate
normative from autonomous altruists. As discussed earlier, he then divided the
active helpers into the partially and fully committed; after making this distinction,
he discovered that the fully committed activist was more likely to have parents
who both preached and practiced helpfulness than the partially committed
activist.
Rosehan’s research (1970) is important because it was the first to look at
specific types of altruism in conjunction with specified socialization factors.
Earlier researchers, on the other hand, included a wide variety of social
activities (e.g., anything from job related groups to recreational groups) in their
definitions of volunteerism. Moreover, Rosehan divided volunteers into groups
on the basis of both theoretical and empirical information. In doing so, he led the
22
way to not only predicting who will volunteer, but also to predicting who will
volunteer in different ways.
Pure altruism alone rarely explains a volunteer’s motivation, and the
motives people have may not be clear even to themselves (Moore, 1985). Smith
(1981) states there is no empirical evidence to justify the belief in altruistic
motivation. “Persons who say they volunteer for altruistic reasons just do not
admit that they have some sort of self-satisfying reason for volunteering”
(Schram, 1985, p.14). Yet this itself is a proposition that is difficult to either
substantiate or disprove. Not everyone is reflective, in the ways social scientists
might be.
Green, Arons and Cross (1984) examined the relationship between
altruistic and non-altruistic motivations to volunteer and the perceptions of
volunteer college students at a mental hospital. Their findings concluded that
non-altruistic motives were offered more frequently, and the most frequent
response was the broadening of one’s experiences.
Within the egoistic motivation theory, there are two core models that are
described in the literature. The negative relief model is grounded in the
principles that if an individual is in distress, this will cause one to feel badly and
put one in a negative mood (regardless of responsibility), and that helping the
individual in distress will provide one relief from the negative mood (Smith,
Keating & Stotland (1989). The model predicts, according to the researchers,
that any pleasant experience will dissipate the negative feeling caused by seeing
another in distress and will nullify the need to offer help.
23
A second theory of egoistic motivation is the joy hypothesis. Smith, et al.
(1989) argued that an important and frequently recognized reason for helping is
the happiness one experiences after another has received assistance. As such,
the person in need is feeling better, and the volunteer helper vicariously picks up
on the joy (relief) of the person in need. The negative-relief model and the joy
hypothesis model overlap as both consider helping behavior to be inherently
egoistic.
Rubin & Thorelli (1984) found that motivation to volunteer is higher in
individuals with egoistic needs who perceive the benefits of the volunteer
experience as being able to fulfill those needs. A study of college students
revealed their primary motivation to volunteer to be self-interest as evidenced by
their rating egoistic responses higher than the other responses (Fitch, 1987).
Benefits derived from egoistic/materialistic motivations are obvious rewards
(including job training, skills acquirement, and networking with others).
Along with altruistic and egoistic/materialistic motivations, social exchange
theory can be used as a foundation to assess social motivations. While altruistic
behavior, by definition, seeks no obvious benefit for the individual, social
exchange theory suggests that feeling good about one’s self (psychic rewards) is
of benefit to the volunteer. This altruistic idealism was discussed by Serow
(1991) in his work with college students. He referred to the benefits derived from
helping others through community service as “psychic rewards." Social
exchange theory as a basis for “helping” behavior is also evidenced in the
egoistic component of volunteer motivations.
24
Social Exchange theory is based on utility theory, which says that every
person will allocate his or her resources so that optimum utility is achieved
(Shram, 1985). The idea is that the benefits derived from the resources allocated
will be equal to the costs of expending the resources. Thus, the maximum return
is achieved. However, since benefits and costs will be unique for each individual,
general motivators are difficult to identify. So although utility theory provides a
reasonable theoretical explanation of involvement, it does nothing to identify
general patterns of motivation.
A special form of the utility theory is the human capital theory (p.15). In
this case, the resources (e.g., time .energy, personal skills) allocated to
volunteering are considered human capital investments. The return on such
investments are improved skills, knowledge, or health that will positively influence
future monetary income and psychological well-being. Such a theory would
explain Fitch’s (1987) finding that one of the major motives for college students
being involved in volunteer work is career experimentation.
Motivation by social obligation may be defined as volunteering to fulfill a
sense of social and moral responsibility (Fitch, 1987). Social exchange theory
argues that, as long as the benefits outweigh the costs, the behavior which
brings about those benefits will continue (Fitch, 1987; Stiff et al. 1988). The
social reasons for volunteering focus on being with other people, making new
friends and associating with others irrespective of the activity. This
motivation, like egoistic/materialistic motivation, is relatively obvious. Some
individuals become volunteers to meet new friends, develop relationships or to fill
25
time previously given to interaction with family members (Morrow-Howell & Mui,
1989; Rubin & Thorelli, 1984).
Socialization theories posit that people can be socialized for volunteer
work (Stiff et al. 1988). They learn that it is part of their role in society or part
of their duty as citizens to volunteer. This occurs because parents participate in
volunteer work, and this serves as a model for their children. Therefore,
volunteer activity inherently becomes a part of children’s behavior when parents
role model these activities. More specifically, a working class parent may provide
an adult role model that is different from the middle- or upper-class example.
With respect to gender, boys and girls learn from their parent’s what their roles
as men and women should include, and which may result in their being socially
active in ways that are traditionally male or female.
Exchange theory claims available resources will be allocated in such a
way that the benefits derived will exceed the costs (Rubin & Thorelli, 1984). This
hypothesis was investigated by Rubin and Thorelli (1984) in a study of Big
Brothers and Big Sisters volunteers. They found that such a setting
provides little in the way of egoistic rewards and that the more strongly a
volunteer was motivated by egoistic benefits, the shorter was his or her length of
participation. It is interesting to note that while the socialization theory talks
about duty and obligation, need fulfillment theory and all the utility theories
emphasize the self-interest of volunteering. Thus, activities chosen were those
where the benefits exceeded the costs by the greatest amount.
26
Volunteering will continue as long as the rewards are greater than what the
volunteer gives (Rubin & Thorelli, 1984). The above example perhaps points to
the limits of utility theory or at least self-interest as an explanation.
Social exchange theory is an appropriate backdrop against which
altruistic, egoistic/materialistic and social motivations will be discussed. It is
difficult at times to comprehend an individual participating in behavior that, at
least on the surface, has no benefits or promise of rewards.
Motivation Theories and the Mature Volunteer
An alternative to trait and strict behavioral theories takes an interactionist
perspective which posits that both person and situation factors, as well as their
interactions, must be understood (Davis-Blake & Pfeffer, 1989; Schneider, 1987).
This implies that both the characteristics of the person and the characteristics of
of the organization (i.e., the environment) work together as predictors of
behavior, and that the interaction of these characteristics will provide a better
predictor than one or the other alone (Chatman, 1989; Ekehammar, 1974;
Pervin, 1968; Terborg, 1981).
Cavan, Burgess, Havighurst, and Goldhammer first proposed the Activity
theory in 1949 with the publication of Personal Adjustment in Old Age . They
suggest the reason many elderly are motivated to do volunteer work is tied to
their desire to compensate for the loss of roles, primarily associated with work
and family. In retirement many older people need the structure and status of
work-related activities that volunteering can provide. Volunteering is also
27
pictured as a good substitute for the losses mature adults sustain in the family,
especially that of widowhood. Thus, the Activity Theory suggests that
volunteerism is desirable to many older adults because it restores the sense of
well-being and compensates for role losses in other areas (Chambre, 1984).
Chambre’s research (1984) was critical of the Activity Theory. Chambre
reasoned that if the above theory was correct and volunteerism was a good
substitute for work and family role loss in the elderly, then volunteer work should
correlate more highly with widowhood and retirement than with
marriage and employment. To test her hypothesis, Chambre did a secondary
analysis of the national ACTION, 1975, survey. The results of her study
indicated that older adults who were married and who were still employed were
more likely to volunteer than were the widowed and retired. Thus she rejected
the Activity Theory as the primary rationale for why older adults are motivated to
participate in volunteerism (Chambre, 1984).
When all ages are being considered, volunteers give three types of
reasons—altruistic, social and material. Older adult volunteers list altruism, social
reasons, and personal enjoyment as the primary reasons for helping others.
Thus, while the reasons they give for volunteering are similar, there are some
differences. Besides altruistic and social reasons, volunteers from all age groups
look to volunteer activities to give them some sort of material, generally financial,
gain, such as to prepare them for employment or to improve their chances of
advancement in their job. On the other hand, older volunteers are not looking for
material gain, but they like the enjoyment of the volunteer work experience itself.
28
An error appears to have been made by those who did the empirical
studies on older adult volunteer’s motivation (Fengler, 1984; Morrow-Howell and
Mui, 1989). When each of these researchers talk about “reasons given
for volunteering” by respondents of surveys, they primarily make reference to the
percentages of various reasons given and then generalize as to people’s motives
in volunteering. But that may be an inappropriate conclusion. When people
discuss motivation, they are talking about causation; that is, the intrinsic and
extrinsic factors that help explain why persons behave the way they do in
response to some stimuli. (McClelland, 1995). Percentages, on the other hand,
are considered descriptive statistics. Descriptive statistics, however, are focused
on the central tendency of distribution of data and the spread of the distribution of
the data. (Kidder and Judd, 1986). Thus, descriptive statistics provide little, if
any, data about what causes people to be motivated to volunteer.
The 1974 Census Bureau survey on volunteerism (Americans Volunteers.
1975) was a joint project of the Labor Department and ACTION, the federal
agency responsible for volunteer programs. They reported the following data
associated with reasons for volunteering
Reasons 1974
Wanted to help others 53%

Had sense of duty 32%
Enjoy volunteer work itself 36%
Had child in program 22%
Could not refuse 15%
Had nothing else to do 4%
Hoped would lead to paying job 3%
Other 7%
29
(more than one response was possible; thus,
total percentage exceeds 100%.)
After reviewing the results of the 1974 survey, McLaughlin (1984) concluded an
altruistic intent along with the enjoyment of volunteering provided sufficient
motivation for millions to give themselves to others.
The American Association of ‘Retired Persons (AARP) commissioned two
surveys in the 1980s on volunteerism, both of which asked the respondents to
give reasons why they participated in volunteerism. In 1981, they interviewed
1001 adults age 55 and older. Of that number, 304 stated that they were
volunteers. While not stated specifically in the document available, the sample
appears to have been a random sample, since application was applied to older
people in the country (Nelein and Straw, 1988).
The researchers took a similar approach for a subsequent survey in 1987.
They doubled the sample size, but lowered the age of the respondents to 45 and
above. Of this group, nearly 25% (n= 491) stated they were volunteers who, like
the first survey, were 55+ years old. With this adjustment, one can make a
comparison with the earlier survey. The sample was randomly selected and has
a sampling error of no more than 2.2+ points with a 95% confidence
interval. The reasons given for volunteering in the two surveys are listed below:
Reasons 1981 1987
Personal enjoyment/fulfillment 28% 45%

Responsible to society/obligation/duty 23% 23%
Keeps me active 15% 11%
People need help 13% 20%
Other 14% 15%
(Nelein and Straw, 1988)
30
The final category of reasons for volunteering are the material motives,
i.e., reasons that would in some way bring benefit to the individual.
After reviewing 26 separate works, Morrow-Howell and Mui (1989) give a
good summary of the literature concerning motivation in volunteerism. In their
study, they proposed that volunteers are motivated by either altruistic, material or
social reasons. They note that in response to surveys people generally give
several reasons for volunteering. Thus, a decision to volunteer must be “a
multifaceted phenomenon” (p.22).
Volunteer Characteristics
Research has been conducted in an effort to define the characteristic traits
of volunteers. These studies have explored demographic characteristics as well
as socio-economic factors such as education and training, health and
employment. These studies have described contemporary volunteers, the
number of volunteers, their distribution in terms of geography and demographics,
and the organizations for which they volunteer.
Manser (1987) states that the typical volunteer in the United States in
1974 was “a married white woman between 25 and 44 who held a college degree
and was in an upper income bracket” (p.843). He went on to say that since
1974, greater proportions of men and older adults are involved in volunteerism.
Gallup (1986) reports a somewhat different picture. He discovered that
those who were most likely to volunteer were church members, people who were
college educated, and those who were 50+ years of age. The Gallup
31
organization started to collect a series of data on volunteers in 1988. Their
research indicated that 54% of adults volunteered in 1989; 51% in 1991 and 54%
in 1993 (Giving and Volunteering, 1994). In 1965, less than one in five
Americans were participating in formulas volunteering activities. Yet, in 1989,
one in two people were involved in either formal volunteering (defined as
providing regular hours to a non- profit organization) or informal volunteering
(such as helping neighbors or baby-sitting) (Chambre, 1991).
Gender studies have shown that volunteers are usually female (Clary &
Orenstein, 1991; Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen, 1991; Lammers, 1991; Hettman &
Jenkins, 1990; Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989; Williams, 1986; Drummond, 1980).
Gillespie and King (1985), after reviewing national survey data, found that the
national average of the volunteer population to be 70% women.
Regarding assignments in which volunteers engage, gender studies have
shown that males and females tend to volunteer for different types of
assignments. While men seemed to enjoy the recreational and work related
activities, women prefer education and health-related work (Fischer, Mueller &
Cooper, 1991). These same researchers indicate that there is little difference
between the two genders and the amount of volunteering that they do. This was
not always the case, however. Older women used to volunteer more than older
men, however, that does not appear to be the case any longer.
Older men and women also volunteered for different reasons. Morrow-
Howell and Mui (1 9 8 9 ) learned from their studies that elderly women
volunteered for an altruistic reason and a social reason, but men only
32
volunteered for altruistic reasons. They explained the difference exists because
men have a better social support system than women. A weakness in this
finding is seen in the fact that 90% of the volunteers were women
(Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989).
Several researchers have found that younger, mature adults were more
likely to volunteer than those who were older (Fisher etal, 1991; Chambre, 1987;
Monk & Cryns, 1974; Rosenblatt, 1966). Observations of various surveys
suggest that as adults grow older, the numbers of volunteers decreases (Fisher
et al. 1991). Monk and Cryns (1974) suggest that the decline in volunteering
associated with growing older might be a result of comparing differing population
members involved in different studies. Chambre, (1987) found that this decline in
volunteering does not occur until the age of 77. Her research suggests that there
is a correlated decline in social activity at the same age. However, one in ten
adults over the age of 80 continues to participate in volunteer activities in some
way (Chambre, 1987).
Much like the findings when volunteering among all ages is considered,
regular church attendance is associated with volunteer activities. Older people
who are Protestants and Jews volunteer more than Catholics. (Chambre, 1987)
In a statewide survey of Minnesota, Fisher, Mueller and Cooper (1991)
found that married people are more likely to volunteer that the unmarried. They
offer several possible reasons for this. It may be that married people have more
time to volunteer than those who are single because in a marriage, there are two
33
people to manage the work. Another possibility is that married couples have a
wider social network around them, and therefore have more opportunities to
volunteer. Perhaps because transportation is more readily available,
volunteering is accommodated more readily. Married people tend to have more
money than single individuals which again makes it easier for married people to
volunteer time.
Ozawa and Morrow-Howell (1988) learned from their research that adult
volunteers with high levels o f good health spent more time volunteering. Fisher,
Mueller & Cooper (1991) staled that their data revealed elderly people with
functional deficits are less likely to volunteer. Chambre (1987) disagrees and
states that the evidence is inconclusive as to whether or not health influences
volunteering. Although she does point out that volunteering is a part of a more
active lifestyle for some older adults, Chambre (1987) concludes that this is a
reflection of the volunteers’ Icfestyles. The volunteers in her study were involved
in a variety of social and leisure activities, whereas the non-volunteers tended not
to join groups and had a more passive lifestyle (Chambre, 1987).
Differing from younger volunteers, the elderly, almost without exception,
reported altruistic and social reasons for serving others. Their help was not given
to receive back some materials gain. The three-fold classification of reasons
given for volunteering mentioned earlier does not fit these data. “Thus,
volunteer activities are not an end in themselves, not a means” (Morrow-
Howell Mui, 1989, p.29).
34
Sixty-five percent of the respondents stated that they began
participation in the volunteer program because they had been asked, not
because they themselves took the initiative to learn about the program and got
involved. Therefore, the reason many of the volunteers were working in the
program was not just in response to internal motives, but also to an external
“trigger” event—the request for help (Morrow-Howell and Mui, 1989).
A third finding from this study is that older men seem to give different
reasons for volunteering than elderly women. The men in the study primarily
gave altruistic reasons, while the women gave both an altruistic and a social
reason. A weakness in this finding is seen in the fact that 90% of the volunteers
were women (Morrow-Howell and Mui, 1989).
Socio-economic status
*
There are three indicators of social position: education, type of
occupation and income. Morrow-Howell and Mui (1989) have completed an
extensive study exclusively on motives among older volunteers in the United
States, and included these three indicators in their study. They indicate other
researchers have tried to find a relationship between the reason given for
volunteering and various social demographic characteristics with varying degrees
of success.
Many researchers have found a relationship between education and
volunteerism (Fisher, Mueller & Cooper, 1991; Ozawa & Morrow-Howell, 1988;
Nelein & Straw, 1988; Chambre, 1987; Monk & Cryns, 1974).
35
Fisher, Mueller and Cooper (1991) found that people with higher levels of
education and with greater income are more likely to volunteer, and to volunteer
more time than those with less education. The primary reason for the
associations found between socio-economic status and volunteers seem to focus
on monetary worth. These individuals have the time to volunteer because the
income or other monies they have permit them to provide their own
transportation, foods, and to purchase appropriate clothing or other necessary
supplies and materials.
In their study, conducted between September, 1984, and August, 1985,
Morrow-Howell and Mui interviewed 83 elderly people who were participating
in a self-help volunteer group of older adults in St. Louis. The average age was
65. Similar to the neighborhood in which they served, the racial mix of the
volunteers was 26% white and 74% black. Ninety percent of them were women.
Fifty-four percent lived alone, 13% lived with their spouses, the remainder lived
with other people. The average income was $400.00 a month. Over half of them
(53%) had completed less than the eighth grade; only 9% received any formal
education beyond high school (Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989).
Fengler (1984) investigated the relationship between older volunteers,
employed, or who worked in a meal site program, with a measure of life
satisfaction. He concluded there is little evidence to suggest that older people
volunteer as a substitute for employment. In the research, Fengler systematically
selected elderly aged 65 and over who lived in a four-county area of Vermont.
His survey indicated that they were interested in other things. He mentioned
36
various motives the respondents gave as reasons for their volunteering: 1)
“meeting and making friends,” 90%; 2) “helping others,” 90%; 3) making “use of
abilities and talents," 50%; 4) “getting out and being active," 50%; 5) “passing
time,” about 33%; 6) “learning things,” about 33%; 7) “flexible hours,” about 33%;
and 8) “recognition for service,” about 33% (Fengler, 1984).
The quality of the occupation, and the rewards of the experience probably
differ according to social position. The more educated and more affluent will
more than likely receive volunteer assignments that may stroke their egos, while
those with less training and less money often receive more menial tasks
(Chambre, 1987).
Volunteer Locations
It is helpful to leam where people who engage in voluntary activities
actually work. Fisher, Mueller, and Cooper (1991) point out that a large
percentage of volunteering in the Unites States is through religious organizations.
They cite a 1989 Gallup poll where active church members, who attend religious
services at least once a week, are the most likely to volunteer their time. The
researchers further state that the willingness of active church members to
volunteer was probably due to three reasons. First, volunteering is part of normal
church work. Second, churches commonly teach values that encourage
members to help care for the needs of others. Third, churches have a structure
within the local organization that can serve as a network for recruiting, directing,
and encouraging volunteers, and training lay leaders.
37
A 1983 Gallup poll found that 23% of volunteers worked in an informal
setting, 19% served in association with a church, and 16% worked in some form
of education. The survey also discovered that 13% worked in health care, 11%
in community action, 10% in recreation and fund raising, 7% in citizenship or
work-related activities, and 6% in social welfare and politics (Manser, 1987).
Manser (1987) categorizes the findings of a 1981 national survey to
illustrate the various activities in which volunteers participate. They are listed as
follows:
1. Individual to individual service—home meal deliveries, transportation, friendly

visits, and shared expertise
2. Advocacy—speaking up for the rights and entitlements of another and helping

change institutions for the good of others;
3. Government work—serving on local, state, and federal boards and committees

in order to plan, make policy, transfer information, or evaluate public
programs;
4. Self-help programs—either neighborhood activities or groups like Alcoholics

Anonymous, that have to do with overcoming certain problems;
5. Fund raising efforts—for programs like the United Way, for a university, or
some special program; and
6. Governance—serving on boards of directors and similar groups in the private

sector.
38
Summary
Research into the motivations of volunteers has been extensive. Much of
it concludes that there are many reasons that may explain why different people
volunteer (Grieshop, 1985; Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989; Van Til, 1985). More
recently, Chambre,(1987) suggests that there is still a need for research in this
area since volunteers are initially guided by different motives. Morrow-Howell
and Mui (1989) learned a large percentage (80%) of the volunteers who quit did
so due to their original motives not being fulfilled.
The primary method many researchers have chosen to study what
motivates older adults to be involved in volunteerism, other than to try to tie
motivation to a particular theory, is simply to ask elderly volunteers, via survey
instruments, the reasons they are participating.
Several studies indicate that the number of people who are participating in
voluntary activities is rising, especially over the last two decades. How much a
rise depends upon one’s definition of volunteerism (Manser, 1987). This study
examined the costs and benefits of volunteering using gender, age, educational
level, and other demographic information.
The importance of interpersonal work values have been described as
indicators for human action (McClelland, 1983). No statistical methods other
than the use of percentages and frequencies were mentioned in the article.
Indeed, in light of most of the above theories, it does seem that volunteers
expect something in return for their efforts. Clark and Wilson (1961) provide a
39
framework for distinguishing among volunteers’ expectations from participation
and the kinds of incentives offered to encourage their participation. Their
framework divides incentives into three broad categories.
The first is material incentives which are tangible rewards such as money,
goods, or services. The second is intrinsic incentives which are intangible. They
derive in the main from the act of associating and include such rewards as
socializing, congeniality, the sense of group membership and identification, the
status resulting from membership, fun and conviviality, the maintenance of social
distinctions, and so on. Their common characteristic is that they tend to be
independent of the precise ends of the association.
Finally, the third is purposive incentives which are intangible but derive
from the specific ends of the organization rather than just associating with other
people. An example of such an incentive would be the prospect of getting certain
legislation passed as a result of lobbying and public education efforts. The idea
behind incentive theories is that organizations must provide some kind of
incentive in exchange for the contributions of individuals and in this case
volunteers.
Some of these studies examine the motivation for helping behavior as a
psychological or intrinsic phenomenon (Batson, et al., 1979; Stiff, et al.; Crandall
& Harris, 1991). Schiebe (1970) suggests that values must be examined within
the context of social behavior, and it is within the role theory that researchers
researchers have found an appropriate means to study ongoing social behavior.
40
This would appear to be the key to understanding superior ad subordinate
interactions, as first suggested by Dienesch and Liden (1986).
However, research about the influences that values of leaders (e.g.,
managers and supervisors) has had on the worker in an organization has been
minimal (Hunt, 1991). Meglino, Ravlin and Adkins (1992) found significant
congruence on values between superiors and subordinates and this was
significantly related to performance outcomes, employee satisfaction and
commitment.
Smith et al. (1989) agreed with those who would argue whether empathic
concern is an issue.
Morrow-Howell and Mui (1989) found that the volunteers gave an average
of 2.3 reasons each for why they were participating in the volunteer program.
Generally, this answer had two facets-an altruistic part and a social
part. In other words, the volunteers gave of their time and energy so that they
might help others and also meet some of their own needs.
Latham and Lichtman (1984) studied two theories of why people
participate in the infrastructure of religious organizations. First, the status group
theory claims that volunteerism is a result of the status, honor, and recognition
that membership grants individual members. Second, the group dynamics
perspective claims that the degree to which an individual perceives that he or she
is wanted and needed by the organization determines the rate of volunteerism.
Both of these perspectives seem to be congruent with the helping literature’s
41
egoistic theories—i.e., the individual is believed to participate in church activities
for ultimately selfish reasons.
Interestingly, Latham and Lichtman (1984) did not consider other-oriented
motivations in their design. They mailed surveys to each member of eleven
Southern Baptist churches in a midwestem urban area. The responses to the
survey resulted in two sub-scales that are important to this discussion: the
instrumentality of church membership (the group status items), and cohesion of
church membership (the group dynamics items). The results of the study
indicated that the instrumentality theory was a weak predictor of organizational
commitment, while results were notably more consistent with the cohesion/group
dynamics theory. In other words, individuals who were found to be highly
committed to the church organization did so because of the power of group
cohesion and group dynamics.
The successful selection, motivation and retention of volunteers, then, is
based on common sense and research. In other words, the quality of a
volunteer’s relationship with an organization will have much to do with how long
that individual decides to stay. More specifically, “quality” includes the person/job
fit, group cohesion, training, education and development and leadership
interaction.
Through a comprehensive and consistent selection process, then, an
organization will likely be more effective in ascertaining the individual needs of its
volunteers and be able to respond to them more completely. This in turn, has the
42
potential to motivate the volunteers and enhance their remaining with the
organization. Thus, the organization and the volunteer can benefit.
43
CHAPTER 111
METHODOLOGY
In this chapter the researcher describes the procedures that will be used
to conduct the research study. The sections in this chapter include the a)
research questions and hypotheses b) research design, c) population and
sampling, d) instrumentation to be used, e) validity and reliability of the
instruments to be used, f) proposed data collection, and proposed data analysis.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
There are four research questions which are the genesis of this study
which is about hospice volunteerism and the value/motivator of affiliation. The
research questions are:
1. Does the need for affiliation motivate adults to volunteer for hospice type
work?
The resulting hypotheses that will be used to test this research question include
the following:
He: There is no or a negative impact on attracting adults to volunteer for

hospice type work that includes the affiliation social motive.
H1: There is a positive impact on attracting adults to volunteer for hospice

type work that includes the affiliation social motive.
44
The first research question seeks to establish the relationship between the
volunteer respondent and the affiliation scores from the Personal Values
Questionnaire (McClelland, 1990). To test these hypotheses, correlations will be
used. The Pearson r will be significant at the .05 level.
2. Will the volunteer motivated by the affiliation social motive be more productive
than they might otherwise be in the hospice environment?
the following:
Ho: There is no or a negative impact on the productivity of volunteers in a

hospice environment that includes the affiliation social motive.
H2: There is a positive impact on the productivity of volunteers in a

hospice environment that includes the affiliation social motive.
The research question seeks to establish the relationship between the
volunteer’s affiliation scores from the Personal Values Questionnaire
(McClelland, 1990) and the hours of work invested on a monthly basis. To test
these hypotheses, correlations will be used. The Pearson r will be significant at
the .05 level.
3. Does the respondents’ motivations positively impact the number of hours

dedicated to volunteering at Hospice?
the following:
Ho: There is no or a negative impact on the number of hours dedicated

to volunteering by hospice volunteers based on their motivations.
H3: There is a positive impact on the number of hours dedicated

to volunteering by hospice volunteers based on their motivations.
45
The research question seeks to explore if there are any relationships between
the respondents’ motivation scores from the Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen Motivation
to Volunteer Questionnaire (1991) and the volunteer’s subsequent hours of work
or resulting productivity. To test these hypotheses, correlations will be used.
The Pearson r will be significant at the .05 level. In addition, discriminant
analysis will be used to determine if there is any relationship between the sub
populations identified through the participants’ demographic data and any of the
respondents’ motivating values as described in the questionnaire.
4. Do hospice volunteers’ demographics (age, gender, length of service) and

the hours dedicated weekly to volunteering reflect the volunteer’s commitment
to the volunteer work?
the following:
Ho: There is no or a negative impact on a hospice volunteer’s

commitment to the volunteer work and volunteer demographics.
H4: There is a positive impact on a hospice volunteer’s commitment to

the volunteer work and volunteer demographics.
The research question seeks to explore if there are any relationships between
the volunteer’s affiliation scores from the Personal Values Questionnaire
(McClelland, 1990) or the hours of work invested on a monthly basis and any
aspect of demographic information. To test these hypotheses, discriminant
analysis will be used to determine if there is any relationship between the sub
46
populations identified through the participants’ demographic data as described in
the questionnaires.
Research Design
The design of this study will be a descriptive correlational study which is
the type of descriptive research that can be used to help determine the extent of
a relationship that exists between variables. Correlation can be a useful
technique in making predictions (Ary, Jacobs & Razavieh, 1990). Borg and Gall
(1989) have found that the correlational method has two purposes:
1. to explore the relationships between variables, and
2. to predict scores on a variable from subjects’ scores and other variables
It is important to note that although a correlational method can be used to
explore cause and effect relationships, the researcher cannot infer cause and
effect relationships for the variables.
The research study will also be descriptive in that demographics will be
used in the analysis. Descriptive research can be used to determine the nature
of the group as it exists at the time the study is being conducted (Ary, Jacobs &
Razavieh, 1990).
Sample Population
The population for the study will be 200 volunteers selected from a not-for-
profit, hospice organization in southern Florida. A simple random sample method
will be used to select volunteers from the overall population.
47
Instrumentation
The instruments that will be used in this study is the Personal Values
Questionnaire (PVQ) as published by McBer Publishing. Values associated with
motives are generally measured through the Personal Values Questionnaire
(McBer & Company, 1993). The PVQ was originally developed in the late 1980s
by David McClelland, and was called the Personal Motives and Values
Questionnaire. The instrument is the result of several decades of research by
McClelland on motives and values and their contribution to understanding
behavior. After several administrations, the instrument was modified in 1990 to
it’s current form, a self-scoring form.
The values of achievement, affiliation and power that individuals have are
assessed by asking respondents to rank what is important to them. The PVQ
instrument consists of 36 questions arranged in three subscales: achievement,
affiliation and power. Each question is rated using a six point scale from a low
score of “0” corresponding to “not important to me; ” to a high score of “5” which
corresponds to “extremely important to me.” Ten of the 12 questions in each
subscale are used for scoring the PVQ.
In addition to the PVQ, the Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen Motivation to
Volunteer Questionnaire (1991) will be used. This instrument was developed to
determine the primary motivators (values) for volunteering in a human services
settings of volunteer participants in their study. This instrument consists of 28
questions divided into the three subscales which are similar to the three scales
within the PVQ: altruistic, social and material. Each question is rated using a 5
48
point scale from a low score of “1” corresponding to “very little” to a high score
of “5” which corresponds to “very much.”
Validity and Reliability
Validity of an instrument refers to the extent to which an instrument
measures the variables the researcher wants to measure. The extent to which
an instrument represents the content of interest ( i.e., the valuing of affiliation) is
referred to as content validity. This form of validity cannot be accurately
measured in terms of a statistical number, but more in terms of its relevancy to
the specific area of interest(Ary et al, 1990).
Hay-McBer Publishing has been collecting data on the PVQ since 1990.
There is a high level of discriminant validity between motives and values, in that
motives do not correlate significantly positively. Validity data show a significant
correlation (p= .01) between the climate index and the sub-scale of achievement
(Rivers, 1992). In this study, climate referred to the results of work efforts
including performance measures of work effectiveness. In addition, there was
significant construct validity with Affiliation and Style index ( p=.05) (Rivers, 1992)
In the study, style referred to the work environment.
Reliability of this instrument refers to the degree of consistent
measurement of the variables being measured across multiple presentations. By
correlating the scores obtained from the same subjects on different occasions, a
researcher can estimate the reliability of a research instrument. This is referred
to as test-retest reliability (Ary et al, 1990).The test-retest reliability for the PVQ is
49
highly, positively correlated with measured correlation coefficient (r) scores
ranging between .80 and .845 across the three subscales (Affiliation = .80;
Achievement = .825; Power = .845). These scores were measured using a
population of 3800 participants (McBer-Hay, 1998).
Developmental research using the Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen Motivation to
Volunteer Questionnaire (1991) indicates the validity and reliability are adequate.
Cnaan and Goldberg-Glen (1991) used orthogonal factor analysis with varimax
rotation to identify internal structures of the motives in the questionnaire. In this
analysis, 22 of the 28 motives were loaded on one factor, with the remaining 6
loaded onto two other factors. All loading scores were between .31 and .65
(Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen, 1991, pg. 280).
Cronbach’s alpha was used to test the reliability of the scaling of the 22
motives loaded on the first factor (Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen, 1991, pg. 280).
Alpha is a standard measure showing the relationship between the inter
correlation of the items composing the scale and the number of items. Generally,
a scale is considered to possess adequate reliability if alpha is greater than .7,
although it has been suggested that in field studies like this one, alphas of .6 or
greater are adequate (Ary et al.,1990). The research indicated a high level
of reliability (alpha = .86). The reliability of the motives loaded on the second
factor was only alpha = .47. For the two items loaded on the third factor, the
Pearson moment coefficient correlation was significant but very low (r = .11, p <
.05). (Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen, 1991, pg. 281).
50
These findings, together with their inability to justify the theoretical base of
any of the factors, suggest the motivation to volunteer is an unidimensional
phenomenon (Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen, 1991, pg. 281). Further analysis revealed
the motivation to volunteer score was significantly correlated with commitment,
that is, number of hours per month devoted to volunteer work (r= .25, p < .001).
In addition, volunteers scored significantly higher on the 22-motives from the first
loading factor than did non-volunteers (3.01 vs. 2.50; t = 3.01, p < .001). In sum,
the validity of the unidimensional scale of motive to volunteer was pragmatically
supported (Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen, 1991, pg. 281).
The procedures of adapting questions found to be reliable and valid in
other contexts for new survey instruments is standard procedure (Wilkerson and
Kellogg, 1994). While the use of questions from one survey for another does not
wholly substitute for direct reliability and validity checking of the instrument, it at
least provides evidence of face validity and a measurement of content validity.
Data Collection
A data collection package consisting of a copy of the PVQ instrument, the
Motivation to Volunteer Questionnaire (1991), a letter explaining the research
study and a stamped, pre-addressed envelope for returning the completed
questionnaire will be collated for the purposes of collecting data. These data
collection packages will be coded to help identify non-respondents, and then
mailed to the identified random sample of volunteers from the identified
organization.
51
Dillman (1978) suggests that all aspects of the mailing can have an affect
on the return rate, and therefore, one must pay attention to all details. Fowler
(1988) suggests methods for improving the response rates of survey
administration. For example, Fowler suggests that a second letter be mailed to
non-respondents ten days after the initial mailing of the data collection packages.
In addition, it may be necessary to send follow-on packages to non-respondents.
Another suggestion is to place telephone calls to the non-respondents. The use
of these types of follow-on actions will be explored in an effort to increase the
response rate of the data collection instruments.
Proposed Data Analysis
The research questions will be used by the researcher to investigate the
strength of relationships between various individual and organizational factors
related to volunteering and motivation for same. The statistic to be used will be a
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient Q^. The Pearson (r) statistic is a
useful symmetric coefficient for measuring the strength of a linear relationship. It
assumes that both variables are normally distributed in the population ( Schefler,
1988). A scale suggested by Davis (1971) helps to describe the strength of a
relationship between two variables: .01 and .09 indicate a negligible relationship;
coefficients between .10 to .29 indicate a low or weak relationship; coefficients
between .30 to .49 indicate a moderate relationship; coefficients between .50 to
.69 indicate a substantial relationship; and coefficients at or above .70 indicate a
high or very strong relationship.
52
In addition to the question of relationship between the variables,
discriminant analysis will be used to determine if there is any relationship
between the sub populations within the total sample population and any
demographic characteristics. Hair et al., (1992) states that the purpose of
discriminant analysis is to determine relationship between a single nonmetric
(categorical), dependent variable and the set of metric, independent variables.
The independent variables will include gender, age, and length of service
as a hospice volunteer. The categorical, dependent variables will include
whether the volunteers have had family members who were Hospice patients.
An alpha of .05 will be used to determine statistical significance. The data
will be analyzed with the SPSS/PC+ computer software ( Norusis, 1988).
53
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS
The purpose of this chapter is to summarize the study results in which four
hypotheses were tested using the methodology described in the previous
chapter. First, the chapter begins with a description of the sample. Second, the
results of the analyses which tested each of the hypotheses is presented.
Finally, the results of additional, ad hoc analyses are presented.
The overall hypothesis of the current study proposed that an affiliation
social motive would impact the degree to which people volunteer in a hospice
environment. Using various statistical analyses, these hypotheses were tested
and the results analyzed.
In this study, data was collected by distributing the questionnaires to the
participants in four separate sessions. These sessions were all accomplished at
the volunteer facility where an administrative resource was available to provide
instructions describing the procedures for completing the survey instruments and
to answer any procedural questions from the participants. Following completion
of the instruments by the participants, the administrative resource collected them
from the participants and returned them to the researcher for her analysis and
interpretation.
The sample size was 215 volunteers from Hospice. More than 72 % of
this total (155) provided usable surveys. Insufficient responses to the survey
54
questions were the key source of incomplete data which required the rejection of
60 surveys.
Demographic Summary
The demographics of the sample included 32 males (21%) and 122
females (79%). These demographics are further portrayed using frequency and
descriptive analyses.
In the survey instruments, the participants’ ages were classified into five
categories between 26 years to over 65 years of age. The largest age group was
over 65 years, equivalent to 59% of the total sample. Of the total population
participating in the study, only one individual did not provide age information. In
Table 1, the researcher provides an overall demographic analysis of the
volunteers, showing the percent and frequency of participation by age group.
Table 1
Age
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
I otai kb to 30 years 6 3.5 3.5 "s ir
36 to 45 years 11 7.1 7.1 11.0
46 to 55 years 13 8.4 8.4 19.5
56 to 65 years 32 20.6 20.8 40.3
more than 65 years 92 59.4 59.7 100.0
Total 154 99.4 100.0
Missing System Missing 1 .6
Total 1 .6
Total 155 100.0
55
The participants’ length of service was classified into four categories
ranging from less than 3 years to over 9 years. The majority of the participants
have less than three years of service (45.8%). Two participants failed to provide
their length of time with Hospice. Table 2 provides the frequency and
percentage of participants by length of service.
Table 2
Length of service
Valid Cumulative
valid less tnan three years ----- 7IT 45.2 45.8 45.8
3 to 6 years 39 25.2 25.5 71.2
6 to 9 years 25 16.1 16.3 87.6
more than 9 years 19 12.3 12.4 100.0
Total 153 98.7 100.0
Missing System Missing 2 1.3
Total 2 1.3
Total 155 100.0
The hours of volunteer service dedicated on a monthly basis was
classified into four categories ranging from less than 4 hours to over 12 hours
per month. The majority of the participants contribute more than 12 hours each
month (38.6%). Table 3 provides the frequency and percentage of participants
by volunteer hours committed each month.
Table 3
m onthly volunteer hours

Valid Cumulative
valid less tnan 4 nours 41 26.5 26.8 " " 26TB"
4 to 8 hours 23 14.8 15.0 41.8
9 to 12 hours 30 19.4 19.6 61.4
more than 12 hours 59 38.1 38.6 100.0
Total 153 98.7 100.0
Missing System Missing 2 1.3
Total 2 1.3
Total 155 100.0
The participants’ intent for continuing service was divided into three
categories of volunteer commitment: to increase; to decrease or to make no
change to the current level of commitment. Four participants chose not to reply
to the question. The majority of the participants indicated no plans to alter their
level of volunteer commitment (57.4%). Table 4 provides the frequency and
percentage of participants’ commitment based on their intent for volunteering at
hospice in the future.
57
Table 4
Future volunteer plans

Valid Cumulative
valid increase nours — 50" 38.7 39.7 39.7
decrease hours 2 1.3 1.3 41.1
no change 89 57.4 58.9 100.0
Total 151 97.4 100.0
Missing System Missing 4- 2.6
Total 4 2.6
Total 155 100.0
Closer Inspection of the data indicate that males and females are very
similar in several aspects of their volunteering. Twelve percent of both males
and females have more than 9 years of service at hospice. More importantly,
38% of males and 40 % of females intend to increase their volunteer
commitments in the future. More than 34 % of the male volunteers do so at a
level of 12 hours per month or greater. However, 39% of the females volunteer
the same 12 hours or more per month.
The scores of the three subscales of the Personal Values Questionnaire
were reviewed for each age group. Overall, it appears that all three values of
affiliation, achievement and power decline overtime. The chart below reflects
the median sub-scale score for each age group:
58
AGE group AFF ACH PWR
26 —35 years 3.9 4.15 2.75
36 —45 years 3.7 3.75 2.2
46 —55 years 3.4 3.45 2.15
56 —65 years 3.55 3.4 2.4
over 65 years 3.1 2.85 2.35
Research Questions and Hypotheses
The first two research questions addressed the strength of relationships
between the volunteer participants and three social motives of affiliation,
achievement and power as measured by the Personal Values Questionnaire
(PVQ). The PVQ has a five point anchored scale which rates the perceived
extent to which the participant values affiliation, achievement and/or power.
The first research question analyzed was: Does the need for affiliation
motivate adults to volunteer for hospice type work? This researcher used the
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r) for the perceived values
analysis.
Hypothesis 1 posited that there would be a positive impact on attracting
adults to volunteer for hospice type work that includes the affiliation motive.
While the affiliation motive was found to provide a trend in the stated direction,
this hypothesis was not supported. The affiliation and achievement subscales
each had mean ratings of 3.0 or greater, and were shown to be strongly
59
correlated, with no significant differences between the two mean scores. The
overall mean score for the power motive was also correlated, but not as strongly
as with Achievement and Affiliation. There was a significant difference found
between Affiliation and Power, as well as between Achievement and Power
subscales based on comparisons of mean scores. Therefore, the null hypothesis
cannot be rejected.
Table 5
Correlations of PVQ SubScales
Descriptive Statistics
Std.
Mean Deviation
acn 3.4064 1.6071
AFF 3.4404 .6372
pwr 1 .9952 .9541
Correlations
ach AFF pwr
Hearson acn 1.000 .470* .298*
Correlati AFF .470* 1.000 .316*
on pwr .298* .316* 1.000
Sig. ach .000 .000
(1-tailed) AFF .000 .000
pwr .000 .000 -
**• Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

(1-tailed).
The mean scores for the three PVQ sub-scales of achievement, affiliation
or power social motives are shown in Table 6.
Table 6
Mean Scores for all questions within Affiliation Subscaie
Statistics
N Std.
Valid Missing Mean Deviation
u i - uiose menaiy cooperative relations w/otners 153 2 4.0458 1.0472
Q6 - Freedom to talk; socialize 152 3 3.2763 1.1051
Q9 - Having time w/ my family 151 4 3.8940 1.1784
Q12 - Not separated from people 1care about 149 6 3.9463 1.0892
Q19 - To work w/others who are close friends 152 3 2.3816 1.4645
Q23 - Maintaining close relationships w/those I
152 3 4.1447 .9994
care about
Q26 - To spend a great deal of time w/others 152 3 3.2039 1.2729
Q31 - Opportunity to be on a team 151 4 2.9603 1.1655
Q33 - Having plenty of free time w/ friends 151 4 3.0397 1.1482
Q35 - Being well liked 152 3 3.4079 1.1060
Mean Scores for all questions within Achievement Subscale
Statistics
N Std.
u z - Continual opportunities tor
150 5 3.4933 1.3449
growth/development
Q5 - Opportunities for difficult, more challenging
151 4 3.1788 1.2005
work
Q7 - Continuously new.exciting, goals; projects 151 4 3.2053 1.2183
Q10 - Feedback about how I am doing 152 3 3.1842 1.2203
Q13 - Opportunities to create new things 150 5 2.9533 1.2114
Q18 - Concrete ways to measure my performance 150 5 2.6267 1.1789
Q22 - Doing things better than done before 148 7 3.1757 1.1648
Q27 - Maintaining high quality work standards 152 3 4.5066 4.2113
Q32 - Challenging projects that stretch my limits 151 4 3.1656 1.0981
Q34 - Personally producing high quality work 151 4 4.1258 .8664
61
Mean Scores for all questions within Power Subscale
Statistics
N Std.
U3 - Possessions tnat are impressive to otners 152 3 .9934 1.H28
Q8 - Important positions which give me
recognition 151 4 1.6291 1.3297
Q14 - Opportunities to influence others 151 4 2.5695 1.2356
Q16 - Doing things w/strong effect on others 151 4 2.9470 2.6902
Q17 - Position w/prestige 151 4 1.5762 1.2829
Q21 - Taking forceful action 150 5 2.1000 1.4130
Q24 - To be in a lead position supervising others 150 5 1.8933 1.3958
028 - Opportunities to influence my group's
decisions 150 5 3.0267 1.1812
Q30 - Opportunities to become well known 150 5 1.6533 2.8141
Q36 - To exercise control in the org 149 6 1.5973 1.2888
The second research question this researcher explored was: Will the
volunteer motivated by the affiliation social motive be more productive than they
might otherwise be in the hospice environment? Productivity was measured as
the number of hours the volunteer participants indicated they dedicated to the
hospice environment each month. In addition, the participants were asked to
indicate their intentions to volunteer in the future.
Hypothesis #2 predicted that the productivity of volunteers would be
positively impacted by those individuals motivated by affiliation as compared to
those motivated by the achievement and/or power social motives.
Pearson correlation analyses were completed by the researcher to
determine if there were any relationships between the affiliation social motive sub
scale and the number of volunteer hours the participants contributed each month.
62
As with hypothesis #1, no significant correlations were found. Further, a
correlation analysis was conducted to determine if there was any relationship
between affiliation and the participant’s intentions to increase the number of hours
the volunteer committed to volunteering. The results of these correlations are
found in Tables 7 and 8. This research found that there are no significant
correlations in any of the analyses. Therefore, the null hypotheses cannot be
rejected.
Table 7
Correlations of Volunteer’s Time Commitment and
the PVQ Sub-Scale o f Affiliation
Std.
Mean Deviation
a FF 3 .4 4 0 4 .6 3 7 2
monthly volunteer
2.6993 1.2359
hours
Correlations
monthly
volunteer
AFF hours
F’earson ai-i- 1.O00 .040
Correlati monthly volunteer
.040 1.000
on hours
Sig. AFF .318
(1 -tailed) monthly volunteer
.318
hours
63
Table 8
Correlations of Volunteer's Intent to Increase Commitment and
the PVQ Sub-Scale o f Affiliation
Std.
Mean Deviation
Al-h 3.4404 .6372
Future volunteer plans 2.1921 .9779
Correlations
Future
volunteer
AFF plans
Hearson A i-h 1.bo0 .013
Correlati Future volunteer
.013 1.000
on plans
Sig. AFF .441
(1-tailed) Future volunteer
.441
plans
The third research question which this researcher investigated was: Does
the participants’ motivations positively impact the number of hours dedicated to
volunteering at hospice? This researcher developed a scale to measure the
elements comprising the affiliation social motive from within the Cnaan Goldberg-
Glen Motivation to Volunteer Questionnaire (CGGMVQ) instrument.
Using orthogonal factor analysis with varimax rotation to identify the
affiliation motive in the questionnaire, 7 of the 28 questions were all loaded on one
factor, with all loading scores between .38 and .70.
64
Cronbach’s alpha was used to test the reliability of the scaling of the 7
questions loaded on the single factor. The results indicate a high level of
reliability (alpha = .64). Pearson moment correlation coefficient was significant
but very low (r= .12, p < .05).
Hypothesis #3 seeks to establish a relationship between the affiliation
score of the CGGMVQ and the study participants’ hours dedicated to
volunteering. A discriminant analysis was used to investigate this question. The
stepwise method was used because of the exploratory nature of the question.
The groups were based on the participants’ hours of volunteering (less than 4
hours per month; greater than 12 hours per month).
The analysis provided an eigenvalue of .03 for an estimated chi-square of
4.075 with 3 degrees of freedom which was not significant at the .05 level, (p <
.254). Table 9 summarizes these data.
An analysis of variance further confirms no significant difference in the
level of volunteering (number of hours volunteered) and the affiliation score on the
sub-scale of the CGGMVQ. (F (3, 141) = 1.71; p <_.287). Therefore the null
hypothesis cannot be rejected. The mean scores for the affiliation sub-scales of
CGGMVQ are shown in Table 10.
Table 9
Wilks' Lambda (U-statistic) and
univariate F-ratio with 3 and 144 degrees o f freedom
65
Variable Wilks' Lambda F Significance
Affiliation .977101 1.37345 .2.535
Table 10
Mean Scores fo r Cnaan Goldberg-Glen questions
within Affiliation Subscale
Statistics
N Std.
Valid Missing Mean Median Deviation
q iza - Most people in my community volunteer Ttil 4 1.?616 .9914
_i
o
c
c
c
q17a- Opportunity to develop relationships
153 2 3.2941 3.0000 1.2348
w/others
q18a- Opportunity to work w/different ages 153 2 3.0588 3.0000 1.3824
q21a- Relative/friend a Hospice patient 148 7 3.1216 3.0000 1.8104
q22a - Similar previous experience 151 4 2.5762 2.0000 1.6266
q23a- Similar experience; better able to relate 150 5 2.6533 2.5000 1.5927
q25a- Previous contact w/ Hospice pros 149 6 2.1946 1.0000 1.5452
The fourth research question asked: Do hospice volunteers’ demographics
(age, gender, length of service) and the hours dedicated weekly to volunteering
reflect the volunteer’s commitment to the volunteer work? The research question
seeks to explore if there are any demographic predictors which relate to the
number of hours the study participants dedicate to volunteering.
To test these hypotheses, discriminant analysis was used. The
independent variables of age, gender, length of hospice service and the
participants’ intent to increase their volunteer commitment were entered into he
function. All four variable yielded a Wilk’s lambda, but only age and future intent
were significant at the .05 level.
66
These same two variables were found to contribute the most to the overall
discriminant function as well. The standardized canonical correlations revealed
the variable, age, accounted for most of the variance in the volunteerism
productivity, with future intent also representing a strong coefficient relationship.
The standardized coefficients and Wilk’s lambda for each of the independent
variables entered into the function are shown below in Table 11. The estimate of
predictive capability, however, was not strong as only 24.8% hit ratio was
obtained. Therefore, the hypothesis that demographic characteristics could be
used to predict a volunteer’s commitment to the volunteer work was partially
supported.
Table 11
Wilks' Lambda (U-statistic) and
univariate F-ratio with 3 and 144 degrees of freedom
Variable Wilks' lambda Coeff F Sipnificance
AGE .92204 .77134 4.0584 .0084
FUTURE .93473 .61185 3.3515 .0208
GENDER .99653 .19210 .1674 .9182
LOS .98538 -.04423 .7120 .5463
67
Pooled within-groups correlation matrix
Variable AGE FUTURE GENDER_______ LOS
AGE 1.00000
FUTURE .06497 1.00000
GENDER -.18449 .04425 1.00000
LOS .32793 .07274 -.06296 1.00000
68
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In this chapter, the researcher discusses the results of the study and the
hypotheses presented in the previous chapter. First, there is a summary and
explanation of the findings of each hypothesis and its related variables. The
research questions posed in Chapter 1 are addressed and the supporting data is
evaluated. Next, the limitations and general implications of the research findings
are discussed. Finally, the chapter concludes with suggestions for further
research and extensions of this study.
Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses
One question that this research attempted to answer was what type of
motivations stimulate an individual to volunteer in a hospice environment. Each
hypothesis sought to establish a relationship between the dependent variable of
affiliation as measured by the Personal Values Questionnaire (1985) and by the
Cnaan & Goldberg-Glen Motivation to Volunteer Questionnaire (1991). It was
expected that the volunteer would be motivated to spend time due to a desire to
develop relationships, thus being motivated by affiliation. If affiliation was the
primary motivation or value, then affiliation would be expected to be significantly
greater than other motives, values or needs such as achievement or power. The
69
hypotheses were assessed using Pearson-product moment correlations and/or
discriminant analysis.
Hypothesis #1 proposed that the need for affiliation motivates adults to
volunteer for hospice type work. However, the data did not support this
hypothesis. The volunteers did not have significantly higher needs for affiliation
than their needs for achievement as measured by Pearson correlation. There
were significant differences for achievement and power, as well as affiliation and
power, but because affiliation was not deemed to be the primary motivation, this
hypothesis was rejected.
The lack of support for a volunteer’s need for affiliation is surprising to this
researcher, as it was the foundation on which subsequent hypotheses were laid.
One naturally begins to generate a myriad of questions such as what are the
motivating factors which motivate one to volunteer in the hospice environment?
A discussion of the impacts of this finding are forthcoming, as well as means by
which to remedy this non-supported finding in future research.
Hypothesis #2 proposed that the volunteer motivated by affiliation will be
more productive as measured by the number of hours committed to volunteering
in the hospice environment each month. Using the affiliation sub-scale of the
PVQ, there were no significant correlations found in the data with this question
either. However, this is not wholly surprising, as the affiliation mean score was
not found to be significantly different from that of achievement mean score in the
first hypothesis. As alluded to previously, the lack of a relationship between the
affiliation motive and one’s commitment or intent to volunteer in the future
70
suggests that there may be other variables to consider when looking at what
contributes to a person’s willingness to volunteer in a hospice environment.
Hypothesis #3 proposed that the motivations displayed by the volunteer in
the area of affiliation as measured on the Cnaan Goldberg-Glen Motivations to
Volunteer Questionnaire (1991) will positively impact the number of hours that
volunteers dedicate to hospice. Originally, the CGGMVQ questionnaire was
written based on altruistic, social and egoistical motivating factors. But this
researcher determined to overlay the motivating factor of affiliation and measure
volunteer motivations using different questions. Ultimately, it may be possible to
discover deeper meanings for one’s volunteer motivations. However, despite
the development of a reasonable reliable sub-scale deemed to be affiliation by
this researcher, the hypothesis was not supported either through correlation or
discriminate analysis. A factor analysis of the mean scores of the CGGMVQ
questions yielded 10 different factors, none loaded strongly on any single factor.
This, of course, suggests there are underlying variables which may be impacting
the resulting correlations.
The fourth research question sought to determine which demographic
variables (age, gender, length of service, and future intent to increase volunteer
commitment) would be suggestive of the volunteer’s commitment to the hospice
work. As with the previous research question, discriminant analysis was used
to determine any relationship. This hypothesis was partially supported as two
variables, age and future intent, were found to be significant. However, the
estimate of predictive capability was weak with only a 24.8% hit ratio obtained.
71
Thus this hypothesis is partially supported, but not necessarily with an ability to
generalize this finding.
Assumptions and Limitations
An implicit assumption of this research has been that the motive of
affiliation is a predictor of volunteerism in a hospice environment, and could be
used to the organization’s advantage in business processes such as
selection/staffing. This assumption has driven the design of the study, choice of
subjects, and questionnaire selection.
The one-group correlational design of this study poses a limitation to this
research. The design was chosen due to the difficulty of conducting true
experimental designs in applied business settings, including challenges of
randomized groups and controlling who is exposed to the “experimental
treatment.” Future research would benefit well to include a control population—
population of people who have never volunteered, as well as a population of
people who have volunteered at hospice environment but left. This would
provide some valuable insight as to hospice volunteer motives.
The number of subjects in this study poses another limitation to the
research. In this study 155 volunteers responses of 215 volunteers were
analyzed. This sample population represents only half of the total volunteer
population in this facility. A larger sample size might have been more
representative and thus provided a better measure of the determinant variables
and their relationships to volunteerism. The survey results would have been
72
more informative and powerful if more participants had been included. The
likelihood of significant results increases as the subject population increases.
If volunteers from more than one hospice had been available, a larger
number of persons could have been evaluated. This would have increased the
ability to generalize the results of the study across a wider population.
Further, the participants who were tested may not have been indicative of
the total population. The subjects were chosen because they were available and
on-site on given days and willing to complete the survey instruments at that time.
As with the study completed by Morrow-Howell and Mui (1989), the majority of
the study participants were women, and in general were people over 65 years
old. Thus, the demographic characteristics of the volunteers should be taken
into consideration so that overgeneralization does not take place.
Finally, this study is limited given the specific focus of the research. The
focus is on identifying a specific characteristic or value which predicts
volunteering in a hospice environment, exclusive of extrinsic rewards, work
related conditions, or specific individual needs which may or may not contribute
to motivation.
There are many variables which may have had an impact on results.
Thus, it is important to consider the effects of threats to validity. Isaac and
Michel (1981) identify several threats that may have influenced this study in ways
beyond what has been discussed by this researcher.
The motivations of the study participants could be attributed to external
events occurring within the individuals that would allow the volunteers to be
73
available to participate. For instance, an individual may have moved into the
area and sought to replicate volunteering in this new location because s/he is
comfortable with the previous routine activity.
Next, interactive effects of selection may explain the positive results
obtained in the study. Isaac and Michel (1990) state that there are some
situations in which participants’ real values, beliefs, attitudes, and/or behaviors
are different from those accepted by common social norms. Thus, participants
might answer in a “socially desirable” way that is in keeping with those accepted
norms.
This researcher’s championing of this process and being present when the
surveys were completed may have added reactive effects of testing. This
included writing letters, holding meetings and encouraging the volunteers to
participate in this study and to remind them of its importance. The majority of the
participants were selected in part because the researcher expressed an
expectation for volunteers to participate. This communication process (and
perhaps others less obvious) may have influenced the participants to complete
the surveys in a positive way.
The reactive effects of experimental procedures may have been
influenced by their (volunteers) knowledge that certain outcomes were expected
of them, implied or real. This may have resulted in the participants altering their
answers accordingly. This researcher’s expectations that affiliation would result
in predicting willingness to volunteer also may have influenced the results.
74
Some of the key explanations for the results obtained are summarized
above. Many of the limitations of this study could have been resolved by a
different research design. Next, recommendations for future research are
presented.
Implications
Overall, there is a lack of empirical evidence supporting the conceptual
relationships between motivating values and volunteerism. Therefore, the motive
of affiliation as a predictor of volunteerism cannot be utilized with a high degree
of confidence in the hospice setting.
If employees with high affiliation needs are more suited for volunteering in
a hospice environment, then there may be something about the hospice
environment which motivates the individuals to volunteer.
Confirmation of this hypothesis by future research would add knowledge
to the field of the hospice volunteerism selection process for the individual as well
as for management.
Suggestions for Future Research
While this researcher used only hospice volunteers as subjects the study
may be extended to include volunteers working in other medical care settings
such as physician’s offices, outpatient clinics, hospital medical centers and
others. This would strengthen the generalizability of results to include volunteers
in for-profit medical care settings versus not-for-profit medical care settings.
75
The methodology used in this study may be extended to other geographic
areas. The first logical extension of the research is to repeat this study in other
hospice environments, in areas of the United States other than southern Florida.
The procedural model developed in this study could be applied to these
additional data collected to determine whether affiliation is a motive for
volunteerism in these additional areas. This would essentially be a test of the
generalization of motivation to volunteer. The data from both studies could then
be combined to build a more confident profile of the hospice volunteer.
In addition, a longitudinal study would allow one to look at volunteer
motivations over time. However the high percentage of volunteers over 65 does
not lend itself to longitudinal studies.
76
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alderfer, C.P. (1972). Existence, relatedness and growth: Human needs

in organizational settings. New York: Free Press.
Armenta, M.M. (1984). Death anxiety, purpose in life, and duration of

service in hospice volunteers. Psychological Report, 54 (3), 979-984.
Ary, D . ; Jacobs, L.C.; & Razavieh, A. (1990). Introduction to research in

education. (4th edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Atkinson, John William (1974). Motivation and achievement. New York:

Halstead Press.
Batson, Daniel C. & Flory, J. D. & Dyke, J. (1990). Goal relevant

cognitions associated with helping individuals high on intrinsic, end religion.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 29 (3), 346 - 360.
______________ , Daniel C. & Ventis, W.L. (1982). The religious

experience: A social-psychological perspective. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Berkowitz, Leonard & Lutterman, Kenneth (1968). The traditional socially

responsible personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (2 6 ), 169 -
189.
Borg, W.R. & Gall, M.D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction

(5th edition). New York: Longman Publishers.
Braithwaite, V.A & Scott, W. A. (1991). Values. In P. J. Robinson’s
Caty, S. & Tamlyn, D. (1983). Hospice volunteers: A recruitment profile.

Dimensions Health Service, 60 (12), 22 - 30.
Chambre, S.M. (1991). The volunteer response to the AIDS epidemic in

New York City: Implications for research on volunteerism. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 20 (3), 267 - 287.
________ (1987). Good deeds in old age: Volunteering by the new

leisure class. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
________ (1984). Is volunteering a substitute for the role loss in old age?
An empirical test of the activity theory. The Gerontologist, 24 (3), 2929-297.
77
Clary, E.G. & Orenstein, L (1991). The amount and effectiveness of
helping: The relationship of motives and abilities to helping behavior. Personality
and Social Psychology, 17 - 58 - 64.
Cnaan, Ram A. & Goldberg-Glen, Robin S. (1991). Measuring motivation

to volunteer in human services. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 27
(3), 269 - 284.
Cchen-Mansfield, J. (1989). Employment and volunteering roles for the

elderly: Characteristics, attributes, and strategies. Journal o f Leisure Research,
21(2), 2 1 4 -2 2 7 .
Coleman, Joseph G. (1966). A discovery of commitment. The Social

Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 365 ( May), 12
- 20.
Davis, J. A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Dawis, Rene (1991). Vocational interests and value preferences in M. D.

Dunnette & L. M. Hough (eds.) Handbook of industrial and Organizational
Psychology, (2nd edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist’s Press.
Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design
method. New York: John Wiley Publishers.
Eitzen, Daniel (1970). A stud of voluntary association memberships

among middle class women. Rural Sociology, 35 (1), 84 - 91.
Ellis, S.J. & Noyes, K.H. (1990). By the people: A history of Americans as
volunteers. Revised ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Enzle, Michael; Roggeveen, John & Look, Sharon (1991). Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 27, 468 - 479.
Fengler, A.P. (1984). Life satisfaction of subpopulations of elderly: The

comparative effects of volunteerism, employment and meal site participation.
Research on Aging, 6 (2), 189-212.
Fischer, L.R.; Mueller, D.P. & Cooper, P.W. (1991) Older volunteers: A
discussion of the Minnesota Senior Study. The Gerontologist, 31 (2) 183 - 194.
Fisher, J.C. (1988). Impact of anomia and life satisfaction on older adult
learners. Educational Gerontology, 14, 137-146.
78
Fishman, D.B. (1966). Need expectancy as determinants of affiliative
behavior in small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 4 , 155 -
164.
Fitch, R.T (1987). Characteristics and motivations among college

students volunteering for community service. Journal o f College Student
Personnel, 28 (5), 424-431.
Fowler, J.F. Jr. (1988). Survey research methods ( revised edition).

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Frisch, M.B. & Gerrard, M. (1981). Natural helping systems: A survey of

Red Cross Volunteers. American Journal of Communication Psychology, 9, 567
-57 9.
Gallup, G. Jr. (1987). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion. Wilmington, DE:
Scholarly Resources, Inc.
Gillespie, D. F. & King, A. (1985). Demographic understanding of

volunteerism. Journal o f Sociology and Social Welfare, 12 (4), 798 - 816.
Gidron, Benjamin (1987). Volunteer work and its rewards. Volunteer

Administration, 11 (3), 18 - 32.
__________(1984). Predictors of retention and turnover among service

volunteer workers. Journal of Social Service Research, 8 (1) Fall, 1 -1 6 .
Goodman, C.C. (1984). Natural helping among older adults. The

Gerontologist, 24 (2) 138 - 143.
Gora, Jo Ann & Nemerowicz, Gloria. (1991). Volunteers: Initial and

sustaining motivations in service to the community. Research in the Sociology of
Health Care, 9, 233 - 246.
Green, S.K.; Arons, A. & Cross, R. (1984). Volunteer Motivation and its
relationship to satisfaction and future volunteering. Paper submitted to APA,
Toronto Canada.
Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (1992).
Multivariate data analysis with readings. (3rd edition). New York: MacMillan
Publishers.
Hersey , P. & Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of Organizational

Behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
79
Herzberg, Frederick._______ (1981). Motivation people. In P. Mali (
ed.) Management Handbook. New York: Wiley and Sons.
__________(1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees?

Harvard Business Review, 46 (1) January -February), 53 - 62.
________ , Mausner, B & Snyderman, B.(1959). The motivation to work.

New York: Wiley.
Kidder, L..H. & Judd, C. M. (1986). Research Methods in Social Relations

(5th edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Williams.
Kluckhorn, C. (1951). Values and value-orientations in the theory of

action: An exploration in definition and classification. In T. Parsons & E.A. Shils
(eds.) Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Kreitner, R. & Kinicki, A. (1992). Organiztion Behavior. 2nd edition.

Homewood, III.: Irwin.
Lammers, J. C. (19 91 ). Attitudes, motives, and demographic predictors

of volunteer commitment and service duration. Journal of Social Service
Research, 14 (3-4), 125 - 140.
Manigart, P. & Prensky, David (1982). Recruitment and retention of

volunteers: Problems in the armed Belgian forces. Armed Forces and Society, 9
(1), 9 8 -1 1 4 .
Manser, G. (1987). Volunteers. In A. Minahan (ed.) Encyclopedia of

Social Work, 2, 842-850. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of Social
Workers.
Maslow, Abraham H. ( 1970). Motivation and personality, (2nd edition).

New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
________ (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review,

50, 370 - 396.
McClelland, David C. (1987). Human motivation. Cambridge, MASS:

Cambridge University Press.
________ (1984). Motives, personality and society: Selected papers. New

York: Praeger Publishers.
________ (1982). Motivation and Society. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.
80
_______ (1965). Toward a theory of motive acquisition. American
Psychologist, 20, 321-333
_______ (1962). Business drive and national achievement. Harvard

Business Review, 40, 99 - 112.
_______ & Atkinson, J.W.; Clark, R.A. & Lowell, E.L. (1961J. The
achieving society. Princeton, N .J .: D. Van Nosstrand.
________ (1952). The achievement motive. New York: Appleton-

Century-Crofts.
________ & Bumham, David H. (1976). Power is the great motivator.

Harvard Business Review, (54), 100 - 110.
McGregor, Douglas. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York:

McGraw - Hill Publishers.
Monk, A. & Cryns, A.G. (1974). Predictors of voluntaristic intent among

the aged. The Gerontologist, 14 (5), 425-429.
Moore, L (1985). Motivating Volunteers.. Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver

Volunteer Centre.
Morrow-Howell, Nancy & Mui, Ada (1989). Elderly volunteers: Reasons

for initiating and terminating social service. Journal of Gerontological Social
Work, 13 (3-4), 21 - 34.
Nathanson, ilene L. & Eggleton, Elizabeth (1992). Motivation versus

program effect on length of service: A study of four cohorts of ombudservice
volunteers. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 19 (3-4), 95 - 114.
Nelein, J. & Straw, M. (1988). Attitudes of Americans over 45 years of

age on volunteerism. Washington, D.C.: Hamilton, Fredericks and Schneider.
Norusis, M.J. (1992). SPSS/PC+Professional statistics version 5.0.

Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.
Ozawa, M.N. & Morrow-Howell, N. (1988). Services provided by elderly

volunteers: An empirical study. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 13 (1 &
2), 65-80.
81
Pinder, Craig (1977). Concerning the application of human motivation
theories in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, (21) 384 -
397.
Quigley, Barbara; Gaes, Gerald & Tedeschi, James (1989). Does asking
make a difference? Effects of initiator, possible gain, and risk on attributed
altruism. Journal of Social Psychology, 129 (2), 259 - 267.
Robbins, Stephen (1991). Organization Behavior, 6th ed. New York:

Wiley Publishers.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York: The Free
Press.
Rosehan, D. L. (1970). The natural socialization of altruistic autonomy. In

J.R. McCaulay & L Berkowitz (eds.) Altruism and helping behavior., 251-268.
Orlando FLA: Academic Press.
Rubin, A. & Thorelli, I.M. (1984). Egoistic motives and longevity of

participation by social services volunteers. Journal o f Applied Behavioral
Science, 20 (3), 223 - 235.
Sabini, John (1996). Social Psychology. New York: Norton and Co

Publishers.
Salmon, R. (1985). The use of aged volunteers: Individual and

organizational considerations. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 8 (3 &4),
211 - 221 .
Schefler, W.C. (1988). Statistics: Concepts and applications. Menlo

Park, CA: Benjamins/Cummings.
Serow, Robert C. (1991). Students and volunteerism: Looking into the

motives of community service participants. American Educational Research
Journal, 28 (3), 543-556.
Schram, V.R. (1985). Motivating volunteers to participate. In L.F. Moore

(ed). Motivating Volunteers, 129-137. Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver Volunteer
Centre.
Skinner, B.F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Knopf Publishers.
______ (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement. New York: Appleton -

Century -Crofts Publishers.
______ (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: McGraw - Hill
Publishers.
82
Simon, Edwin. (1991). Volunteerism revisited: A renewed value in social
welfare and Jewish communal services. The Jewish Social Work Forum, 27, 31
-4 5 .
Smith, D. H. (1981). Altruism, volunteers and volunteerism. Journal o f

Voluntary Action Research, 10, 21-36.
Smith, K.D.; Keating, J.P. & Stotland, E. (1989). Altruism recovered: The
effect of denying feedback on a victim’s status to empathic witness. Journal o f
Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 641 - 650.
Stiff, J.B.; Dillard, J.P.; Somers, L.; Kim, H. & Slight, C. (1988). Empathy,
communication and pro social behavior. Communication Monographs, 55 (2),
1 9 8 -2 1 3 .
Unger, Lynette S. (1991). Altruism as a motivation to volunteer. Journal

of Economic Psychology, 12, 71-100.
Williams, J.A. (1986). The multi-dimensionality of joining. The Journal o f

Wilson, Marlene (1976). The effective management of volunteer

programs. Boulder, CO: Volunteer Management Associates.
Zajonc, Robert (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269 -274.
Zischka, Pauline & Jones, Irene (1987). Special skills and challenges in
supervising volunteers. The Clinical Supervisor, 5 (4), 19 - 30.
83
REFERENCES
Alderfer, C.P. (1972). Existence, relatedness and growth: Human needs

in organizational settings. New York: Free Press.
Armenta, M.M. (1984). Death anxiety, purpose in life, and duration of

service in hospice volunteers. Psychological Report, 54 (3), 979-984.
Ary, D . ; Jacobs, L.C.; & Razavieh, A. (1990). Introduction to research in

education. (4th edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Atkinson, John William (1974). Motivation and achievement. New York:

Halstead Press.
Batson, Daniel C. & Flory, J. D. & Dyke, J. (1990). Goal relevant

cognitions associated with helping individuals high on intrinsic, end religion.
Journal for the Scientific Study o f Religion, 29 (3), 346 - 360.
______________ , Daniel C. & Ventis, W.L. (1982). The religious

experience: A sociaf-psychological perspective. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Berkowitz, Leonard & Lutterman, Kenneth (1968). The traditional socially

responsible personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (26 ), 169 -
189.
Borg, W.R. & Gall, M.D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction

(5th edition). New York: Longman Publishers.
Braithwaite, V.A & Scott, W . A. (1991). Values. In P. J. Robinson’s
Caty, S. & Tamlyn, D. (1983). Hospice volunteers: A recruitment profile.

Dimensions Health Service, 60 (12), 22 - 30.
Chambre, S.M. (1991). The volunteer response to the AIDS epidemic in

New York City: Implications for research on volunteerism. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 20 (3), 267 - 287.
________ (1987). Good deeds in old age: Volunteering by the new

leisure class. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
________ (1984). Is volunteering a substitute for the role loss in old age?
An empirical test of the activity theory. The Gerontologist, 24 (3), 2929-297.
84
Clary, E.G. & Orenstein, L (1991). The amount and effectiveness of
helping: The relationship of motives and abilities to helping behavior. Personality
and Social Psychology, 17 - 58 - 64.
Cnaan, Ram A. & Goldberg-Glen, Robin S. (1991). Measuring motivation

to volunteer in human services. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 27
(3), 269 - 284.
Cohen-Mansfield, J. (1989). Employment and volunteering roles for the

elderly: Characteristics, attributes, and strategies. Journal o f Leisure Research,
21(2), 2 1 4 -2 2 7 .
Ccleman, Joseph G. (1966). A discovery of commitment. The Social

Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 365 ( May), 12
- 20 .
Davis, J. A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Dawis, Rene (1991). Vocational interests and value preferences in M. D.

Dunnette & L. M. Hough (eds.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, (2nd edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist’s Press.
Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design
method. New York: John Wiley Publishers.
Eitzen, Daniel (1970). A stud of voluntary association memberships

among middle class women. Rural Sociology, 35 (1), 84 - 91.
Ellis, S.J. & Noyes, K.H. (1990). By the people: A history of Americans as
volunteers. Revised ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Enzle, Michael; Roggeveen, John & Look, Sharon (1991). Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 27, 468 - 479.
Fengler, A.P. (1984). Life satisfaction of subpopulations of elderly: The

comparative effects of volunteerism, employment and meal site participation.
Research on Aging, 6 (2), 189-212.
Fischer, L.R.; Mueller, D.P. & Cooper, P.W. (1991) Older volunteers: A
discussion of the Minnesota Senior Study. The Gerontologist, 31 (2) 183 - 194.
Fisher, J.C. (1988). Impact of anomia and life satisfaction on older adult
learners. Educational Gerontology, 1 4 ,137-146.
85
Fishman, D.B. (1966). Need expectancy as determinants of affiliative
behavior in small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 4, 155 -
164.
Fitch, R.T (1987). Characteristics and motivations among college

students volunteering for community service. Journal of College Student
Personnel, 28 (5), 424-431.
Fowler, J.F. Jr. (1988). Survey research methods ( revised edition).

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Frisch, M.B. & Gerrard, M. (1981). Natural helping systems: A survey of

Red Cross Volunteers. American Journal of Communication Psychology, 9, 567
-5 7 9 .
Gallup, G. Jr. (1987). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion. Wilmington, DE:
Scholarly Resources, Inc.
Gillespie, D. F. & King, A. (1985). Demographic understanding of

volunteerism. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 12 (4), 798 - 816.
Gidron, Benjamin (1987). Volunteer work and its rewards. Volunteer

Administration, 11 (3), 1 8 -3 2 .
_________ (1984). Predictors of retention and turnover among service

volunteer workers. Journal of Social Service Research, 8 (1) Fall, 1 -1 6 .
Goodman, C.C. (1984). Natural helping among older adults. The

Gerontologist, 24 (2) 1 3 8 -1 4 3 .
Gora, Jo Ann & Nemerowicz, Gloria. (1991). Volunteers: Initial and

sustaining motivations in service to the community. Research in the Sociology of
Health Care, 9, 233 - 246.
Green, S.K.; Arons, A. & Cross, R. (1984). Volunteer Motivation and its
relationship to satisfaction and future volunteering. Paper submitted to APA,
Toronto Canada.
Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (1992).
Multivariate data analysis with readings. (3rd edition). New York: MacMillan
Publishers.
Hersey , P. & Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of Organizational

Behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
86
Herzberg, Frederick._______ (1981). Motivation people. In P. Mali (
ed.) Management Handbook. New York: Wiley and Sons.
__________(1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees?

Harvard Business Review, 46 (1) January -February), 53 - 62.
________ , Mausner, B & Snyderman, B.(1959). The motivation to work.

New York: Wiley.
Kidder, L..H. & Judd, C. M. (1986). Research Methods in Social Relations

(5th edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Williams.
Kluckhom, C. (1951). Values and value-orientations in the theory of

action: An exploration in definition and classification. In T. Parsons & E.A. Shils
(eds.) Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Kreitner, R. & Kinicki, A. (1992). Organiztion Behavior. 2nd edition.

Homewood, III.: Irwin.
Lammers, J. C. (1991). Attitudes, motives, and demographic predictors

of volunteer commitment and service duration. Journal of Social Service
Research, 14 (3-4), 1 2 5 -1 4 0 .
Manigart, P. & Prensky, David (1982). Recruitment and retention of

volunteers: Problems in the armed Belgian forces. Armed Forces and Society, 9
(1), 9 8 -1 1 4 .
Manser, G. (1987). Volunteers. In A. Minahan (ed.) Encyclopedia of

Social Work, 2, 842-850. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of Social
Workers.
Maslow, Abraham H. (1 9 7 0 ). Motivation and personality, (2nd edition).

New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
_______ (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review,

50, 370 - 396.
McClelland, David C. (1987). Human motivation. Cambridge, MASS:

Cambridge University Press.
_______ (1984). Motives, personality and society: Selected papers. New

York: Praeger Publishers.
________ (1982). Motivation and Society. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.
87
_______ (1965). Toward a theory of motive acquisition. American
Psychologist, 20, 321-333
_______ (1962). Business drive and national achievement. Harvard

Business Review, 40, 99 - 112.
_______ & Atkinson, J.W.; Clark, R.A. & Lowell, E.L. (1961). The
achieving society. Princeton, N .J .: D. Van Nosstrand.
________ (1952). The achievement motive. New York: Appleton-

Century-Crofts.
________ & Burnham, David H. (1976). Power is the great motivator.

Harvard Business Review, (54), 100 - 110.
McGregor, Douglas. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York:

McGraw - Hill Publishers.
Monk, A. & Cryns, A.G. (1974). Predictors of voluntaristic intent among

the aged. The Gerontologist, 14 (5), 425-429.
Moore, L (1985). Motivating Volunteers.. Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver

Volunteer Centre.
Morrow-Howell, Nancy & Mui, Ada (1989). Elderly volunteers: Reasons

for initiating and terminating social service. Journal of Gerontological Social
Work, 13 (3-4), 21 - 34.
Nathanson, llene L. & Eggleton, Elizabeth (1992). Motivation versus

program effect on length of service: A study of four cohorts of ombudservice
volunteers. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 19 (3-4), 95 - 114.
Nelein, J. & Straw, M. (1988). Attitudes of Americans over 45 years of

age on volunteerism. Washington, D.C.: Hamilton, Fredericks and Schneider.
Norusis, M.J. (1992). SPSS/PC+Professional statistics version 5.0.

Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.
Ozawa, M.N. & Morrow-Howell, N. (1988). Services provided by elderly

volunteers: An empirical study. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 13 {1 &
2), 65-80.
Pinder, Craig (1977). Concerning the application of human motivation

theories in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, (21) 384 -
397.
88
Quigley, Barbara; Gaes, Gerald & Tedeschi, James (1989). Does asking
make a difference? Effects of initiator, possible gain, and risk on attributed
altruism. Journal of Social Psychology, 129 (2), 259 - 267.
Robbins, Stephen (1991). Organization Behavior, 6th ed. New York:

Wiley Publishers.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature o f Human Values. New York: The Free
Press.
Rosehan, D. L. (1970). The natural socialization of altruistic autonomy. In

J.R. McCaulay & L Berkowitz (eds.) Altruism and helping behavior., 251-268.
Orlando FLA: Academic Press.
Rubin, A. & Thorelli, I.M. (1984). Egoistic motives and longevity of

participation by social services volunteers. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 20 (3), 223 - 235.
Sabini, John (1996). Social Psychology. New York: Norton and Co

Publishers.
Salmon, R. (1985). The use of aged volunteers: Individual and

organizational considerations. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 8 (3 &4),
211 - 221 .
Schefler, W.C. (1988). Statistics: Concepts and applications. Menlo

Park, CA: Benjamins/Cummings.
Serow, Robert C. (1991). Students and volunteerism: Looking into the

motives of community service participants. American Educational Research
Journal, 28 (3), 543-556.
Schram, V.R. (1985). Motivating volunteers to participate. In L.F. Moore

(ed). Motivating Volunteers, 129-137. Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver Volunteer
Centre.
Skinner, B.F. ( 1974). About behaviorism. New York: Knopf Publishers.
______ (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement. New York: Appleton -

Century -Crofts Publishers.
______ (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: McGraw - Hill
Publishers.
89
Simon, Edwin. (1991). Volunteerism revisited: A renewed value in social
welfare and Jewish communal services. The Jewish Social Work Forum, 27, 31
-45.
Smith, D. H. (1981). Altruism, volunteers and volunteerism. Journal of

Smith, K.D.; Keating, J.P. & Stotland, E. (1989). Altruism recovered: The
effect of denying feedback on a victim’s status to empathic witness. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 641 - 650.
Stiff, J.B.; Dillard, J.P.; Somers, L.; Kim, H. & Slight, C. (1988). Empathy,
communication and pro social behavior. Communication Monographs, 55 (2),
19 8-2 13 .
Unger, Lynette S. (1991). Altruism as a motivation to volunteer. Journal

of Economic Psychology, 12, 71-100.
Williams, J.A. (1986). The multi-dimensionality of joining. The Journal of

Wilson, Marlene (1976). The effective management of volunteer

programs. Boulder, CO: Volunteer Management Associates.
Zajonc, Robert (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269 -274.
Zischka, Pauline & Jones, Irene (1987). Special skills and challenges in
supervising volunteers. The Clinical Supervisor, 5 (4), 19 - 30.
90
PVQ
PERSONAL
VALUES
QUESTIONNAIRE
McBER & COMPANY
Name: _____
Position: ___
Organization:
Date:
Q u estio n n a ire
M c B e r & C om pany
T ra in in g Resources G rou p
116 H u n tin g to n Avenue
Boston, M assachusetts 02116
(6 1 7 ) 4 3 7 -7 0 8 0
PERSONAL VALUES QUESTIONNAIRE
In str u c tio n s
P lease use th e scale b e lo w to ra te h o w im p o rta n t each ite m is to y o u . W rite the nu m b er o f th e

a lte rn a tiv e y o u select in th e space to th e le ft o f each ite m .
T h is q u e s tio n n a ire is designed to h elp y o u u n d e rs ta n d som e o f y o u r o w n values. Please

c o m p le te th e q u e s tio n n a ire fra n k ly ; y o u r answ ers w ill be k e p t c o n fid e n tia l. T h ere are no rig h t
o r w ro n g answ ers—y o u r o p in io n is a ll th a t m atters.
0 = N o t im p o rta n t to m e
1 = O f little im p o rta n c e to m e
2 = O f som e im p o rta n c e to m e
3 = Im p o rta n t to m e
4 = V e ry im p o rta n t to m e
5 = E x tre m e ly im p o rta n t to m e
Your Item
R ating
______ 1. Close, friendly, cooperative relations w ith others a t w ork.
______ 2. C ontinual opportunities for personal grow th and developm ent.
3. Possessions that are impressive to others
______ 4. A calm , orderly, w ell-organized environm ent in w hich to w o rk and live.
______ 5. O pportunities to take on m ore d ifficu lt and challenging goals and responsibilities.
______ 6. The freedom and opportunity to talk and socialize w ith others a t work.
______ 7. Continuously new, exciting, and challenging goals and projects.
8. Im p o rtan t positions and projects that can give m e some recognition.
9. H aving plenty o f tim e to spend w ith m y fam ily.
______ 10. Feedback on how w e ll I am doing or progressing tow ard m y objectives.
______ 11. The confidence th at m y fa m ily is financially secure.
92
1 = O f lit t le im p o rta n c e to m e
3 = Im p o rta n t to m e
Your Item
R ating
______ 12. N o t being separated from the people I really care about.
13. Opportunities to create new things.
14. Opportunities to influence others.
15. Independence to do as I see fit, w ith o u t interference from others.
______ 16. D oing things th at have a strong effect on others.
17. A position w ith prestige.
18. Concrete ways to be able to measure m y ow n performance.
19. To be able to w ork w ith people w ho are also m y close friends.
20. Taking forceful action.
______ 21. Feedback on how w ell I am doing or progressing tow ard m y objectives.
22. Personally doing things better than they have been done before.
23. M aintaining close relationships w ith the people I really care about.
______ 24. To be in a leadership position in w hich others w ork fo r me or lo o k to me for

direction.
25. A clear sense o f w hat others expect o f me.
26. To be able to spend a great deal o f tim e in contact w ith other people.
_______ 27. M a in ta in in g high standards for the quality o f m y w ork.
28. Opportunities to influence the decisions that are made in any group I am part of.
93
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1 = O f lit t le im p o rta n c e to m e
3 = Im p o rta n t to me
Your Item
R ating
29. C lear tasks and responsibilities.
30. O pportunities to becom e w id ely known.
______ 31. T h e opportunity to be p a rt o f a team.
32. Projects th a t challenge m e to the lim its o f m y ability.
33. H aving plenty o f free tim e to spend w ith m y friends.
34. Personally producing w o rk o f high quality.
35. Being w ell like d b y people.
______ 36. Th e opportunity to exercise control over an organization o r group.
94
Volunteering Study
Motivation for Volunteering
Please take a few minutes to complete this Survey. This information is being gathered as p a rt o f a study to look at the reasons why
people volunteer. The results w ill be used to develop programs to recruit volunteers. Please use the follow ing scale when answering
the questions; and, please mark one answer fo r each question only.
5 = Very much
4 = Much
3 = A fair amount
\o 2 = A little
L/1
1 = Very little
To what extent did each o f the fo llo w in g items contribute to yo u r decision to volunteer?
Very A Fair Very

Much Much Amount A L ittlQ Little
1. It is my expectation that people w ill help each other. 5 4 3 2
2. I believe in Hospice’s specific goals. 5 4 3 2
3. I f l did not volunteer, there would be no one to carry 5 4 3 2

out this volunteer work.
4. I did not have anything else to do with my time. 5 4 3 2
5. I was lonely. 5 4 3 2
Adapted from Cnaan Goldberg-Glen Motivation to Volunteer Questionnaire

Volunteering Study
Very A Fair Very

Much Much Amount A Little Lillk
6. 1 have more free lime (i.e., retired, widowed) 5 4 3 2
7. I wanted to gain some practical experience towards 5 4 3 2

paid employment.
8. I wanted to broaden my horizons. 5 4 3 2
9. Being involved with Hospice is considered prestigious. 5 4 3 2

10. Volunteering for others makes me feel better about myself. 5 4 3 2
11. Volunteering in Hospice provides challenging activities. 5 4 3 2
12. Most people in my community volunteer. 5 4 3 2
13. Helping people in need improves my attitude toward 5 4 3 2

my own life situation.
14. Volunteering creates a better society. 5 4 3 2
15. Employers expect their employees to provide volunteer 5 4 3 2

community service.
16. Volunteering is an opportunity to change social injustices. 5 4 3 2
17. Volunteering is an opportunity to develop relationships 5 ' 4 3 2
with others.
Volunteering Study
Very A Fair Very

Much Much Amount A Little L illis
18. Volunteering is an opportunity to work with different 5 4 3 2

age groups.
19. Volunteering is an opportunity to do something 5 4 3 2
worthwhile.
20. Volunteering is an opportunity to return good fortune. 5 4 3 2
21. A relative or friend is/was a patient o f Hospice. 5 4 3 2
2 2 .1 have past experiences providing similar service. 5 4 ■ 3 2

2 3 .1 am able to better relate to the patients’ situation because 5 4 3 2
o f my own similar experience.
24. This volunteering gives me an opportunity to vary my 5 4 3 2
weekly activities.
2 5 .1 have had previous contact with professionals at Hospice. 5 4 3 2
26. Volunteering at Hospice enables it to provide more care 5 4 3 2

for less money.
27. It is a way to continue a family tradition o f helping 5 4 3 2
people in need.
28. This is an excellent educational experience. 5 4 3 2
Volunteering Study
Background Information (Optional). This information is being requested in order f o r us to create a profile o f the typical volunteer
at Only summary data w ill be used; thus, please do not sign this Suiwey,
Please check ( f ) the appropriate space:
29. 1 presently volunteer: ____ less than 4 hours/month 30. I am: Male
4 to 8 hours/month Female
8 to 12 hours/month
more than 12 hours/month
vo
00
31. M y age is: ____ under 25 years o f age 32. I have been volunteering:_____ less than 3 years
26 to 35 years o f age 3 to 6 years
36 to 45 years o f age 6 to 9 years
46 to 55 years o f age more than 9 years
56 to 65 years o f age
over 65 years o f age
33. 1 plan to: ____ increase the hours I volunteer

decrease the hours I volunteer
not change my volunteer hours
Again, please do not sign this Survey, And, thank you fo r your helpI

A Study of The Relationships Between Organizational and Motivational Factors and Volunteering Behavior in A Hospice Environment

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

A Study of The Relationships Between Organizational and Motivational Factors and Volunteering Behavior in A Hospice Environment

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

Bell & Howell Information and Learning

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

All rights reserved.

Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company

RobertTreziosi, D .P .A . " Dat e

t _ - f . ----------------------------------------------- — -------------------- to <£>C >

Nova Southeastern University

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS

In this study, the researcher investigates what motivates people to

volunteer in a non-profit, hospice setting. McClelland’s (1985) social motives

on their affiliation, power, or achievement needs. The researcher focuses on the

service) of the volunteers influences their commitment to volunteer work. In this

study 215 members of the volunteer component of a large non-profit hospice

volunteer who is motivated by the affiliation motive would be more productive

Goldberg-Glen Motivations to Volunteer Questionnaire would positively impact

service, future intent to increase volunteer commitment) would be suggestive of

the volunteer’s commitment to hospice volunteer work was partially supported.

Analyses of volunteers in other work settings deserves further research.

To my mentor, teacher, committee chair and most importantly, my friend, Dr.

To the board of directors of Hospice By The Sea, Inc., who believed in me

To Duke University for extending me the courtesy of access to their extensive

Statement of the Problem.............................................................. 5

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 12

Building of Volunteer Organizations............................................. 13

Research Questions and Hypotheses........................................ 44

IV. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS 54

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS........................................... 69

Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses............................... 69

Personal Values Questionnaire................................................. 91

Table Title Page

1 Frequency Distributions of Volunteers by Age 55

2 Frequency Distributions of Volunteers by 56

3 Frequency Distributions of Volunteers by 57

4 Frequency Distributions of Volunteers by 58

5 Correlations of Mean Scores for the 60

6 Mean Scores for Three Subscales of the 61

7 Correlations of the Volunteers’ Commitment and 63

8 Correlations of the Future Commitment and 64

9 Relationship between Affiliation and 65

10 Mean Scores for Cnaan Goldberg-Glen 67

11 Relationship between Affiliation and 78

The use of volunteers in non-profit organizations has, in many cases,

such as an invitation to join a group (Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989).

in driving one’s behavior: achievement, power and affiliation (McClelland, 1966).

According to Webster, affiliation is defined as

the act of associating with or uniting with, as a member or

because they enjoy their company (McClelland, 1966).

Closely tied in with motivational issues is the equally important value

system of an individual and specifically that of a volunteer. According to

Rokeach (1973), “...a ‘ value system’ is an enduring organization of beliefs

continuum of relative importance...they (values) predispose behavior and are

reflected in both attitude and personality”. Religious, environmental, human

determination of an individual to a commitment of volunteerism for a specific

organization or cause (Mahoney & Pechura, 1980).

unconscious, natural drives which have been influenced by early emotional

experiences. Values, however, are cognitive aspects of individuals which have

been developed or adapted as a result of one’s life experiences (McClelland,

Adult volunteers tend to exhibit increased performance when they are