Preparing financial statement: the restricted accountability of Non-profit
organizations
Massimo Saita1 & Maria Vittoria Franceschelli2
Abstract
Previous research has analyzed the differences between Non-profit and For-profit organizations,
for example divergences in vision, function, organizational structure and motivation.
The present work is a conceptual paper where we have developed a deep analysis of the Non-profit
literature, integrating the Italian literature to the international one within the institutional and
organizational theory framework. Therefore, we have studied the reason why many Non-profit
organizations use to prepare the financial statement used by For-profit organizations, in particular
the economic and financial statement.
We argue that because of normative isomorphism, legitimacy, in particular strategic legitimacy and
because of the fundamental importance, for this type of organization, of internal and external
control, a large number of Non-profit organizations tend to prepare the financial statement similar
to the For-profit ones, also if it often does not fit well with their activities and can been even
disadvantageous.
KEYWORDS: financial statement; Non-profit organization; organizational and institutional
theory; isomorphism; legitimacy
1. Introduction
Prior research on Non-profit literature has been given intensive attention on the traditional
management functions of planning (Powell, 1987; Steiner, Gross et al., 1994; Thibault et al., 1994),
management style and leadership (Grasso, 1994; Bailey & Grochau, 1993; Herman, 1994;
Hemovics et al., 1995; Powell, 1987), organizational structure (Martinez-Brawley & Delevan,
1993; Powell, 1987), and motivation (Perlmutter & Cnaan, 1993).
In this paper, we have considered a wide literature on Non-profit organizations that means that we
have analyzed not only the Italian literature but also the international one; in particular, following
previous research (Maggi et al., 2008), the USA context. This choice was made to give a deep
1
2
Professor of Business Administration and Strategy. University of Milano-Bicocca.
PhD student in Business Administration and Management. University of Milano-Bicocca.
1
overview of the field and to show that the issue is still causing a worldwide debate. Having
identified the international context, also due to the different national legislation, we have focused
on the Italian situation.
In fact, our intent is to develop a deep analysis of the Non-profit literature, integrating the Italian
literature to the international one within the institutional and organizational theory framework. We
want to study the reason why many Non-profit organizations are driven to use the financial
statement used by For-profit organizations also if it often does not fit well with their activities. This
aspect stresses the necessity to develop an appropriate report (Maggi et al., 2008: 186). In fact, we
believe that Non-profits must have their own business theory and standards not based on the “Forprofit financial statements”. This assertion is confirmed if we consider the sector from an additional
point of view: the economic and financial one, whereas the GDP does not measure correctly the
values generated by the Profit and Non-profit sector
Therefore, our analysis does not just analyze the situation of Non-profits but helps to fill the gap
in the literature on why the accounting of Non-profit still appears so anchored and dependent on
the For-profit one. We believe that is very important to comprehend the differences and the
analogies between these two types of organization in order to have a critical approach to the actual
preparation of the financial statement for Non-profit organizations. Therefore, the present work is
a conceptual paper that develops the current Non-profit literature in terms of organizational and
institutional theory. In order to do that, it is structured as follow: first, we have stressed the
importance and defined the Non-Profit organization. Second, we have analyzed the differences
between For-profit and Non-profit organizations, mainly from an accountability point of view.
Finally, we have developed four prepositions and made our conclusions.
2. Literature
2.1 Non-profit organizations.
2.1.1 Importance of the Non-Profit Sector
The Non-profit sector has a great relevance in the economy of every country (Fuchs, 1968;
Ginzberg et al., 1965; Ginzberg, 1975), as in Italy (Borgonovi, 2000). In the last 30 years, the
number of Non-profits has increased all over the word (Young, 1999). For example, in the USA it
has been grown particularly during the second half of the 1900: the share of national income it
represents increased by roughly 33% in the period 1960-1974 (Hansmann, 1980: 835).
2
In 2010, Non-profits accounted for 9.2% of all wages and salaries paid in the United States
(The Nonprofit Almanac, 2012) and according to the National Center for Charitable Statistics
(NCCS), more than 1.5 million Non-profit organizations are registered in the U.S.
The Italian situation is following the same trade: the number of Non-profit organizations increased
by 28% in the period 2001-2011 amounted to more than 300.000 organizations. The number of
people working in this sector has increased by 39,4% and it occupies more than 4,7 million of
volunteers (Istat, 2011). We must keep in mind that in this period the financial crisis has led to an
increase in the unemployment rate, which means that the Non-profit sector was bucking the trend.
2.1.2 Definition of Non-Profit Organization
It seems mandatory to give a clear image of Non-profit organizations. To do so, among many, we
have reported few definitions. We can see that they are different but not in contrast because each
definition is stressing various features.
Non-profit is, in essence, an organization that is barred from distributing its net earnings, if any,
to individuals who exercise control over it, such as members, officers, directors, or trustees
(Hansmann, 1980: 838). This definition emphasizes the importance of the earning, and its
management. Because the scope of these organizations is not the profit, it is fundamental to
understand how to handle it. It is clear that Hansmann is considering the most relevant difference
with For-profit Organizations. But a Non-profit organization is defined also as an organization that
protects, defends, promotes values and rights of individuals and communities, that helps the
production of relational and social goods, and helps to create opportunities for participation and
integration (Pucci and Vergani, 2002: 10, our translation). This definition stresses the importance
of the mission and the aim of this type of organizations and it does not consider the type of activity
carried out; in fact, Non-profits may also carry out commercial activities if marginal compared to
the corporate purpose (Saita, 2015: 14).
Salamon et al. (1992: 135), using a structural/operational definition, defined the third sector as a
collection of organizations that are formal (that is, institutionalized to some extent), private (that
is, institutionally separate from government), non-profit-distributing (that is, not returning profits
generated to their owners or directors), self-governing (that is, equipped to control their own
activities) and voluntary (that is, involving some meaningful degree of voluntary participation).
3
In the Italian context Istat (2011) has defined Non-profit as organization which produces goods and
services that has no obligation to distribute profits or other different gains, even indirectly, as
remuneration to the shareholders (our translation), and the legislation has defined it as the complex
of private organizations, with non-profit aim, sets up to follow civic, solidarity and social
assistance purpose. Implementing the subsidiarity principle and in accordance with their
respective laws or articles of incorporation, these organizations promote and implement activities
of general interest by voluntary and free actions or economic solidarity or production and
exchange of goods and services (Riforma del Terzo settore, 2016, our translation). Finally,
Andreaus et al., (2012) have defined it as an organization, which aim is not the profit but pursues
economic and management balance for the prosecution of the human needs.
The definitions, that identify significant differences between Non-profit and For-profit
organizations, can exert an important impact on the preparation of the financial statement. In this
context, we have developed this paper to understand why it is that many Non-profit organizations
still prepare the financial statement alike the For-profits’ one although not only it does not represent
their real economic situation, but often it hides their mission and values.
2.1.3 Comparison between Non-profit and For-profit organizations
To understand what an organization is, it is used to define what it is not (Elsbach & Bhattacharya,
2001) that in our research means consider and comprehend For-profit organizations. For this
reason, we judge extremely useful a deep comparison between them.
Considering Eusake’s (2003) work, he has individuated six different areas that differ among
private, public and third sector organizations: ownership, revenues, scope of impact, markets,
performance expectations and incentives. According to this study, Hull & Lio (2006) have built a
three-point model for the evaluation of organizational structure and policy that is related to
strategic controls (Hitt et al., 2005), strategic choice theory (Child, 1972), and Porter’s (1990)
discussion on the nature of strategy (Hull & Lio, 2006: 55).
Our research is based in part on this three-point model that we consider extremely useful for our
aim. Hull and Lio (2006) explain how the main difference between Non-profit and For-profit
organizations depends on the difference in vision, strategic constraints and financial constraints.
In fact, to understand how and why an organization acts, we have to consider its vision. In the Forprofit sector, it consists primarily in maximizing shareholder financial value, that means maximize
4
profit. For Non-profit organizations, vision can be equated to an organization’s ideals and goals,
a symbol of what it is and what it does (Hull & Lio, 2006: 55). Therefore, the scope of Non-profit
organizations does not consider its impact on profitability and shareholders wealth as high-priority,
and they are less concerned with financial gain (O’Connor & Raber, 2001). This divergence should
lead to two completely different statements. However, a coordination between mission and
accountability is necessary (Matacena, 1999; Matacena, 2007). This is the reason why Non-profits
can prepare the mission statement that is focus on the organization’s vision and scope; in fact, Nonprofit is a mission-oriented organization (Young, 1999; Francesconi, 2007), and because of that,
the “mission statement” can be useful to show their nature and vision to their stakeholders (Ecchia
& Zarri, 2004).
With strategic constraints we mean the possible actions that an organization can do considering the
possible choices they are faced (Hitt et al., 2005), and depends on the way on how organizations
are organized and the market in which they operate. For the aim of this paper, we have decided to
focus on the organizational constraints. Non-profits and For-profits are organized in a very different
way because For-profits are primarily responsible to their shareholders instead Non-profits to their
supporters and to almost all other stakeholders, more or less equally (Hull & Lio, 2006: 57). In
line with this, when Non-profits face with a number of possible options, they are more limited in
choices, because they need to pursue its own vision and scope, and inform all their supporters and
stakeholders: in fact, Non-profits are considering as a multistakeholder organizations (Borzaga &
Mittone, 1997; Borzaga & Depedri, 2002; Ecchia & Zarri, 2004).
Acquiring money is an essential activity for both types of organization, but the way in which it can
be done is dissimilar. This activity reflects the “financial constraints” that organizations have to
consider. For-profits can raise money by offering products or services, Non-profits mainly by
fundraising. The latter needs to maintain a positive cash flow while providing the highest level of
service possible to their stakeholders (Sansing, 2000). The intention behind the activity of these
organizations is the opposite: For-profits offer products or services to gain money; Non-profits
acquire money to follow their mission and so to make the social change possible.
Here below, Table 1 summarizes the most important differences between Non-profit and For-profit
organizations that we consider relevant for the preparation of the financial statement.
Table 1. Principal differences between Non-profit and For-profit organizations
Non-profit
For-profit
5
Definition
Vision
Organization
al constraints
Financial
constraints
Organizations that are formal, private, non-profitdistributing, self-governing and voluntary3
To protect, defend, promote values and rights of
individuals and communities, to help the
production of relational and social goods, and to
create opportunities for participation and
integration4
Responsible to supporters, employees, clients and
to almost all other stakeholders
Fundraising to follow their mission and so to
make the social change possible
Organization which produces
goods and services to make profit
To maximize shareholder
financial value, that means to
maximize profit5
Responsible to shareholders
Offers products or services to gain
money
2.2. Financial statement
2.2.1 Definition and purposes of the financial statement
Considering the Zappa’s model, within business administration, exist three business systems:
Management, Administration and control, and Organization (Zappa, 1929). The Management
system can be defined as the system by which the company is governed (Corporate Governance);
the Administration and control system manages the business information flow and amounts to
measure the business phenomena; the Organizational system coordinates both resources and
technologies, based on different variables (Saita, 2015). The financial statement is a fundamental
tool for all these Zappa’s systems especially if we make an analysis at the company level, because
it helps to not only manage and administer the company, but also to control it. In fact, stakeholders
can check the economic and financial situation to see if the company is working correctly: internal
stakeholders can see where and if it is possible to make changes and corrections; external
stakeholders, instead, can decide whether start or continue or conclude their relationships with it.
Therefore, the financial statement has several aims and purposes and, because of that, it can be
defined in different ways. The table below summarizes its definition and purposes.
Table 2. Definition and purposes of the financial statement (our elaboration from Saita, 2015).
Standpoint
Law – article 2423 of the Italian
Civil Code
Substantial
Administrative and accounting
Fiscal
Definition and purposes
Document that must be prepared by the Board of Directors of the
company and must be approved by the shareholders
Document that shows the economic, financial and patrimonial
situation, made for the shareholders and third parties
It is the annual output of the administrative and civil law system, or
the general accounts
It is the starting point for the tax return
3
Salamon, 1992.
Pucci L., Vergani E. (a cura di), Il bilancio sociale nel terzo settore. Guida pratica alla re-dazione, Milano, Egea,
2002, p. 10, our translation.
5
Hull & Lio, 2006.
4
6
As we can understand from the table and the explanation above, the financial statement has crucial
significance both at the internal and external level, for all of the three Zappa’s systems.
2.2.2 Main economic differences between Non-profit and For-profit organizations
Social capital
With social capital, we mean the “relations between people, relatively durable, for the promotion
of cooperation and so for the production of material and symbolic values. This network is made by
formal and informal trust relations that stimulate mutuality and cooperation” (Mutti,2008). Social
capital is a fundamental part of Non-profit organizations and it can be bridging or bonding, that
depends on if it brings benefits to all the community or just to the member of the organization
(Ecchia & Zarri, 2004).
It is evident the link between the social capital and the vision and scope of Non-profits (that is to
protect, defend, promote values and rights of individuals and communities, to help the production
of relational and social goods, and to create opportunities for participation and integration, Pucci
& Vergani, 2002). Because of that, we believe that a good statement that represent a Non-profit
should include the social capital as a value produced by the organization.
Donations and volunteers
Non-profits receive most or all of their income in the form of grants or donations (Hansmann, 1980:
840). So, donations are perhaps the main part of the income for the Non-profit (and this is stressed
by the new Italian law that has facilitated donations). In fact, considering that the scope of Nonprofit organizations is to promote values and rights of individuals and communities, when
individuals and communities perceive that the values they believe in have been promoted by the
organization and so they have received a surplus, it is usual that they want to donate money or they
decide to work for the Non-profit as a volunteer. As a consequence, volunteers are offering a
services to the organization, and they work for it but they are not paid. This have an effect on the
value of the organization, so it would be appropriate to also value the volunteers’ working hours,
which might correspond to the remuneration at the market price based on the performance.
7
2.2.3 Financial statement for Non-profits in Italy
We have analysed few of the main differences between Non-profit and For-Profit organizations
from an institutional point of view (vision, strategy and financial complaints) and also from an
accounting point of view; obviously these two field are strongly interconnected. Because of all
these dissimilarities, the Italian legislation has developed few guidelines6 to help Non-profit
organizations to prepare an adequate financial statement. In fact, economic and financial
information is the major reference for the performance evaluation of profit-oriented enterprises.
The fact that the Italian legislation is still developing guidelines support our assertion that many
Non-profits are anchored and are dependent on the For-profit sector. However, the financial
statement is necessary but not sufficient for Non-profit organizations (Matacena, 2002), where is
necessary to evaluate the contribution they make in terms of improving the social welfare of
specific categories of entities and/or community (GBS7, 2009: 8).
3. Discussion and Propositions
Although the significant differences between Non-profit and For-profit organizations, the not-strict
legislation and the detailed guidelines available, most of the Non-profit organizations still continue
to have a “For-profit financial statement” or in any case a financial statement that does not reflect
the organization characteristics.
We have argued that most of the people working in Non-profit organizations are volunteers.
Because volunteers are people who, most of the time, need to gain money to live, we can suppose
that they have a job in another firm. Obviously, they are influenced by their job in the other firm,
and normally they bring their skills and knowledge in the Non-profit, so many Non-profit
practitioners are influenced by For-profit practices.
Furthermore, education and professional network can lead people who works in a Non-profit to act
as if they are working in other organizations as the For-profit ones, and also the employees are
pushed to act in the same way. This phenomenon is called normative isomorphism pressure8 (Di
Maggio & Powell, 1983: 152) that stems primarily from professionalization. For
E.g. Atto di indirizzo n.
/ /
Agenzia per il Terzo settore; OIC Principio n. ; OIC Principio n. .
Gruppo di Studio per il Bilancio Sociale (GBS).
8
DiMaggio and Powell have argued that isomorphism is due to three mechanisms: coercive, caused by the
dependence on common legal environment, pressure from other organizations, similar resources, academic
credentials; mimetic, caused by uncertainty (visible alternatives, technologies); normative caused by education and
professional network.
6
7
8
professionalization we mean the collective struggle of members of an occupation to define the
conditions and methods of their work, to control “the production of the producer” (Larson, 1977)
and to establish a cognitive base and legitimation for their occupational autonomy (DiMaggio &
Powell, 1983: 152). As a consequence, DiMaggio & Powell, viewed normative isomorphism as a
result of professionalization (Mizruchi & Fein, 1999) and it leads organizations to be similar. In
other words, people working in Non-profit organizations can have or had a job in a For-profit,
likewise they can have the same education that lead them to act in the same way as they do in a
For-profit organization. And because the financial statement is prepared by volunteers or
employees, for normative isomorphism they are driven to prepare similar documents regardless of
the type of organization.
Proposition1: workers of Non-profit organization, are driven to prepare financial statement
similar to the For-profit ones because of normative isomorphism.
Non-profit organizations are multistakeholders organizations (Borzaga & Mittone, 1997; Borzaga
& Depedri, 2002; Ecchia & Zarri, 2004) that means that are strongly linked with a great number of
stakeholders that have different interests and different backgrounds. Because the financial
statement shows the actual situation of an organization, and the information should be clear to the
most (Borgonovi, 2008), it seems logical to prepare the “most common document”. Therefore,
Non-profit organizations cannot know if the document it will be read by internal or external
stakeholders, by a donator or an entrepreneur etc.: the preparation of the financial statement is not
related with efficiency and competition but it is connected with the environment condition. In fact,
organizations, especially the Non-profit ones that are interconnected with a wide range of different
stakeholders, when are preparing the financial statement, are looking for legitimacy more than
efficiency (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). So, institutions are bounded by the collective rationality,
and this make organizations very similar (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). With legitimacy, we mean
generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or
appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions
(Suchman, 1995: 574). Suchman has explained that legitimacy is so important because influences
stability, comprehensibility, continuity and credibility. Legitimacy affects how people act toward
organizations and how stakeholders can understand them (Suchman, 1995).
9
Proposition 2a: Non-profit organizations are driven to prepare financial statement similar
to the For-profit ones because they are looking for legitimacy more than efficiency.
Legitimacy can be interpreted in many different ways, depends on why and when organizations
look for it, and on the environment (so other organizations and society) in which the organization
plays (Suchman, 1995). Moreover, there are two main rhetoric on it: strategic and institutional
tradition.
Strategic tradition, (Ashforth & Gibbs, 1990; Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975; Pfeffer, 1981; Pfeffer &
Salancik, 1978) adopts a managerial perspective and emphasizes the ways in which organizations
instrumentally manipulate and deploy evocative symbols in order to garner societal support;
instead institutional tradition (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1991; Meyer & Scott,
1983; Powell & DiMaggio, 1991; Zucker, 1987) adopts a more detached stance and emphasizes
the ways in which sector wide structuration dynamics generate cultural pressures that transcend
any single organization's purposive control (Suchman, 1995: 572).
Because of the importance of the social capital in the Non-profit organizations, which is stressed
above, we can consider the strategic tradition the most important approach. In fact, Non-profit
organizations to survive have to garner societal support that can help them to continue their activity
and to receive their income in the form of grants or donations from the supporters. However, to
achieve this kind of legitimacy, which we can call as “strategic legitimacy”, organizations must be
able to share with their current and potential stakeholders these evocative symbols. To do that the
easiest way is to prepare a document that can be understood by the most.
Proposition 2b: Non-profit organizations are driven to prepare financial statement similar
to the For-profit ones to acquire strategic legitimacy.
In the section on the function and importance of the financial statement, we have argued that it is
used also for the internal and external control (Saita, 2015). In fact, because Non-profits are
considering as a multistakeholder organizations (Borzaga & Mittone, 1997; Borzaga & Depedri,
2002; Ecchia & Zarri, 2004) and they are responsible to their supporters and to almost all other
stakeholders (Hull & Lio, 2006: 57), it is essential to control and create a strong bond between the
organization and its internal and external stakeholders (Ecchia & Zarri, 2004: 2). Non-profit
10
organizations aim is also to create benefits for stakeholders that are different from the shareholders
(Andreaus, 1996; Andreaus et al., 2012).
We have also discussed the fundamental relevance of donators and volunteers for the Non-profit
organizations, which receive most of their income in the form of donations (Hansmann p. 840) and
can act primarily thanks to the works of volunteers. For-profit organizations can receive provisions
in different form: goods, services9 that should be useful to achieve the business purpose: who
confers provisions is a shareholder10. The owners of an organization are internal stakeholders.
Donators have different role than shareholders: they cannot be considered as organization’s
owners. This assertion is clearer if we reflect on volunteers. They provide services for the
organization, but they cannot be regarded as owner as for the For-profits.
Shareholders, and so owners, are considered as internal stakeholders, but donators and volunteers
can be internal or external stakeholders.
Because organizations need internal and external control (Walsh & Seward, 1990), and the
financial statement helps with both of these types of control (Maggi, 2008), especially for
organizations as the Non-profit ones, where internal and external stakeholders are not always and
totally distinguishable, the financial statement is a good way to overcome this problem.
Proposition 3: Non-profit organizations are driven to prepare financial statement similar to
the For-profit ones to make internal and external control.
4. Conclusions and limitations
Despite the intensive attention that has been given to the Non-profit sector, where researchers have
found substantial evidence on the existence of fundamental differences between Non-profit and
For-profit organizations (e.g. Hull & Lio, 2006; Ecchia & Zarri, 2004), there has been surprisingly
little effort made to understand why these organizations are driven to use the financial statement
used by For-profit organizations also if, often, it does not fit well with their activities.
To develop this research question, we felt necessary not to limit our study on the Italian literature,
but to analyze the Italian situation by using various international theories, in particular the
Organizational and Institutional theory. In fact, we believe that Non-profits must have their own
9
Italian civil code, articles 2247, 2253, 2342, 2464.
This is not the case for the Italian SpA.
10
11
business theory and standards that differ from the For-profit sector and it seems that the current
Italian reform on the Third-sector supports our ideas.
We have focused on the analysis of the divergences between Non-profit and For-profit
organizations that are particularly important in relation to the preparation of the financial statement.
We have discussed the differences in vision, in organizational and financial constrains (Hull & Lio,
2006) that have practical implication on the social capital role, on donors and volunteers
importance, and on the relation with stakeholders in general. Despite all, a large number of Nonprofit organizations are driven to prepare the financial statement used by For-profit organizations
also if it often does not fit well with their features. Our research has tried to fill the gap on this
argument. In fact, using the national and international literature, we have argued that because of
normative isomorphism, and so for professionalization, organizations are similar and act in
analogous ways.
Moreover, because Non-profits are multistakeholders (Borzaga & Mittone, 1997; Borzaga &
Depedri, 2002; Ecchia & Zarri, 2004) and need to garner societal support to survive, they are
looking more for legitimacy than for efficiency, in particular for strategic legitimacy (Suchman,
1995), that lead them to prepare the financial statement similar to the one prepared by For-profit
organizations.
At last, because it is particularly important to have an internal and external control, due to their
particular structure, we suggest that many Non-profits are driven to prepare financial statement
similar to the For-profit ones that can help them to develop a more thorough internal and external
control.
The Non-profit sector also suffers from a broader problem related to the world and national
business and finance. In fact we believe that GDP does not measure correctly the values generated
by the Profit and Non-profit sector. Future research would develop this issue that is crucial for the
Non-profit sector. Our research is not without limitations. First, we have focused on the Italian’s
Non-profit, and second, because we have developed a theoretical paper, we have no an empirical
evidence on this phenomenon. Therefore, further research could deeply develop the four
propositions using empirical data, for example analyzing a particular activity involved in the Nonprofit sector.
12
References:
Andreaus M. (1996), Le aziende non profit: circuiti gestionali, sistema informativo e bilancio
d’esercizio, Giuffrè, Milano.
Andreaus, M., Carini, C., Carpita, M., & Costa, E. (2012). La cooperazione sociale in Italia:
un’overview, Euricse Working Paper, N.027 | 12.
Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation.
Organization Science, 1, 177-194.
Bailey, D., & Grochau, C. E. (1993). Aligning Administrative Needs in the Organizational Stage
of Development: Applying Management Theory to Non-profit Organizations. Administration in
Social Work, 17(1), 23-45.
Blackwood, A. K., Roeger, K. L., & Pettijohn S. L. (2012). The Nonprofit Almanac, Urban
Institute Press.
Borgonovi, E. (2000). Le aziende Non-profit e la trasformazione di “valori” individuali in
“valore” economico e sociale: elementi di teoria aziendale, in Zagrandi, A. (a cura di), Aziende
non profit: le condizioni di sviluppo, Egea, Milano.
Borgonovi, E. (2008). Amministrare in modo trasparente tramite i bilanci pubblici. Rivista dei
dottori commercialisti, Supplemento al n.3, 9-17.
Borzaga, C., & Depedri, S. (2002). Peculiarità e modelli delle cooperative sociali, in Centro
studiCGM (a cura di), Comunità cooperative – Terzo rapporto sulla cooperazione sociale in
Italia. Edizioni Fondazione Agnelli, Torino.
Borzaga, C., & Mittone, L. (1997). The Multistakeholder Versus the Nonprofit Organization,
ISSAN Working Paper N. 7, Università degli Studi di Trento.
Child, J. (1972). Organizational structure, environment, and performance: the role of strategic
choice. Sociology, 6, 1-22.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and
collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational
behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18, 122-136.
Ecchia, G., & Zarri, L. (2004). Capitale sociale e accountability: il ruolo del bilancio di missione
nella Governance delle organizzazioni nonprofit, Working Paper n. 3 novembre 2004, Universta’
di Bologna.
13
Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining Who You Are By What You're Not:
Organizational Disidentification and The National Rifle Association. Organization Science, 12:
393-413.
Euske, K. J. (2003). Public, private, non-profit: everybody is unique?. Measuring Business
Excellence, 7(4), 5-11.
Francesconi, A. (2007). Comunicare il valore dell’azienda non profit, Cedam, Padova.
Fuchs V. R., (1968). The service Economy, Columbia University Press, New York
GBS (2009), Il bilancio sociale: La rendicontazione sociale pe le aziende non profit, Documento
di ricerca n.10. Giuffrè Editore, Milano.
Ginzberg, E., Hiestand, D., & Reubens, B. (1965). The pluralistic Economy, New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Ginzberg, E. (1976). The Pluralistic Economy of the United States, Scientific American.
Grasso, A. J. (1994), Management Style. Job Satisfaction, and Service Effectiveness,
Administration in Social Work, 18(4), 89-105.
Hansman, B.H. (1980). The role of Nonprofit Enterprise. The Yale Law Journal, 89(5), 835-901
Hemovics, R. D., Herman R. D., & Jurkiewics, C. L. (1995). The Political Dimensions of
Effective Nonprofit Executive Leadership. Non profit Management and Leadership 5, 233-248.
Herman, R. D. (1994). The Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Hitt, H. A., Ireland, D. R., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2005). Strategic Management: Competitiveness
and Globalization Concept, 6th Edition.
Hull, C., & Lio, B. (2006). Innovation in non-profit and For-profit organizations: visionary,
strategic, and financial considerations. Journal of Change Management, 6(1), 54-64.
ISTAT, 2011. Il censimento delle istituzioni non profit, IX Censimento Generale dell'Industria,
dei Servizi e delle Istituzioni.
Larson, M. S. (1977). The rise of professionalism: a sociological analysis. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Maggi, D., Giordano, F., & Monti, M. (2008). I bilanci di missione nella realtà non profit italiana.
Rivista dei dottori commercialisti, Supplemento al n.3, 185-234.
Maggi, D. (2008). I bilanci di missione delle aziende non profit. Modelli di rendicontazione
sociale. Profili tecnici ed evidenze empiriche, Giuffrè, Milano.
14
Martinez-Brawley, E., & Delevan, S. M. (1993). Centralizing Management and Decentralizing
Service: An Alternative Approach, Administration in Social Work, 17(1), 81-102.
Matacena, A. (2007). Accountability e social reporting nelle imprese sociali, Impresa sociale, 1:
13-39.
Matacena, A. (2002). Il bilancio sociale: eccezionale strumento per comunicare la propria
missione, in Vita, n.4.
Matacena, A. (a cura di) (1999). Azienda non profit. Scenari e strumenti per il terzo settore, Egea,
Milano.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1991). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and
ceremony. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational
analysis, 41-62. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Mizruchi, M. S., & Fein, L. C. (1999). The social construction of organizational knowledge: A
study of the uses of coercive, mimetic, and normative isomorphism. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 44, 653-683.
Mutti, A., (1998). Capitale sociale e sviluppo. La fiducia come risorsa, il Mulino, Bologna.
National Center for Charitable Statistics (NCCS), http://nccs.urban.org/.
O’Connor, J., & Raber, R. W. (2001). The best of both words, Association Management, 30 (1),
113.
Perlmutter, F. D., & Cnaan, R. A. (1993). Challenging Human Service Organizations to redefine
their Volunteer Roles, Administration in Social Work, 17(4), 77-96.
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of
organizational paradigms. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational
behavior, 13, 1-52. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence
perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nation, Harvard Business Review, 68 (2),
Reprinted in Porter, M.E. (1998), On the Competition (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School
Press) 155-95.
15
Powell, W. W. (1987). The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook. Yale University Press,
New Haven.
Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). 7he new institutionalism in organizational analysis.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pucci, L., & Vergani, E. (2002). (a cura di), Il bilancio sociale nel terzo settore. Guida pratica alla
re-dazione, Milano, Egea.
Riforma del Terzo settore, 2016. Decreto Legislativo definitely approved by 26/5/2016.
Saita, M. (2015). Economia d’azienda, Giuffrè, Milano.
Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1992). In search of the non-profit sector. I: The question of
definitions. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 3(2),
125-151.
Sansing, R.C. (2000). Joint ventures between nonprofit and for-profit organization, Journal of the
American Taxation Association (2000 JATA Conference). 22, 89-91.
Steiner, J. R., Gross, G. M., Ruffolo, M. C., & Murray, J. J. (1994). Strategic Planning in NonProfits: Profit from It. Administration in Social Work, 18(2), 87-106.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy
of Management Review, 20, 571-610.
Thibault, L., Slack, T., & Hinings, C. R. (1994). Strategic Planning for Nonprofit Sport
Organizations: Empirical Verification of a Framework, Journal of Sport Management, 8, 218233.
Walsh, J. P., & Seward, J. K. (1990). On the efficiency of internal and external corporate control
mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 15, 421-458.
Young, D.R. (1999). Economic Decisionmaking by Nonprofit Organizations in a Market
Economy: Tensions between Mission and Market, Paper presented at the “Independent Sector
Spring Research Forum”, Alexandra, Virginia.
Zagrandi, A. (a cura di) (2000). Aziende non profit: le condizioni di sviluppo, Egea, Milano.
Zappa, G. (1927). Tendenze nuove negli studi di ragioneria (discorso per l’inaugurazione
dell’anno accademico 1926-27), Venezia.
Zucker, L. G. (1987). Institutional theories of organizations. Annual Review of Sociology, 13,
443-644.
16