When volunteerability intersects employability: a practice-based conceptual topology of occupation-related volunteering and future research opportunities

• In Event: Exploring the Nexus Between Volunteering and Employment

Abstract

Some individuals perform their occupational work as volunteering; they volunteer their occupation-related competencies and resources, and their work and volunteering boundaries blur. Despite multiple terms, including service-learning, pro bono, employee, corporate, and skills-based volunteering (e.g., Granfield, 2007; Haski-Leventhal, Grönlund, et al., 2010; Rodell et al., 2016; Steimel, 2018; van Schie et al., 2018), the link between occupational work and volunteering remains ambiguous. This paper argues that current understandings present a limited view of occupation-related volunteering and suggests reconsidering volunteerability, the availability, willingness, and ability to volunteer at the intersection with employability, taken as the development or maintenance of occupational competencies and resources.
Occupation-related volunteering overcomes current ambiguities: “an individual acting to benefit others without payment or coercion; it involves developing, using, or maintaining their occupational knowledge, skills, and abilities, and drawing upon their economic, social, and cultural capital” (Biermann et al., 2023). Occupation-related volunteering occurs during ‘paid’ work time, in and outside the workplace, and spans work-life stages before, during, and after employment.
This paper considers the individual’s perspective of interacting with beneficiaries and higher education/Universities and employing/home organizations as third parties (Haski-Leventhal, Meijs, et al., 2010) with social constructions of work, volunteering, and occupations. Occupational work and occupation-related volunteering become practices “connected in space and time” (Nicolini, 2017, p. 21). Occupation-related volunteers’ work and volunteering worlds intersect differently from non-occupation-related volunteers, and in this paper, I conceptualize these differences.

Considering the case of professional practice, I conceptualize a two-dimensional typology of occupation-related volunteering: on one axis, how individuals practice their underlying occupational work – as a pre-professional, active, or inactive in professional practice – and on the other axis, whether their volunteering practice involves a home organization or not. This ‘matrix’ illustrates how occupation-related volunteerability, the availability, willingness and ability to volunteer, intersects with their employability, having the occupational knowledge, skills, abilities and economic, social, and cultural capital (e.g., BBM; Wilson & Musick, 1997).

By not isolating the occupational work and its practice, current research ignores the spanning and blurring of occupation and volunteering boundaries (e.g., Anteby et al., 2016; Cruz & Meisenbach, 2018; Taylor, 2004). By correcting this limited view of occupation-related volunteering, volunteering researchers can distinguish non-occupation-related from occupation-related volunteering to concentrate on identifying and answering ‘mysteries‘ (Alvesson & Kärreman, 2011) of this activity, its practice, and practitioners. For example, what occupational practices promote the bidirectional transfer of professional expertise (e.g., McGinigle et al., 2008) or create tensions between paid professionals and their occupation-related volunteering colleagues (e.g., Steimel, 2018)?

The practice-based approach also counters a bias to studying occupational-related volunteering from corporate/firm perspectives, primarily in business, legal and medical faculties. Importantly, it turns the table, establishing an empirical and theoretical basis for volunteering-centric research that reflects occupation-related volunteering’s intersection with occupational work and their practice in diverse organizational, work-life, and cultural contexts. This paper adopts the practice-based approach of individuals becoming, doing, and relating to their occupation (Anteby et al., 2016) to suggest opportunities for volunteering researchers interested in answering questions about occupational employability intersecting with occupation-related volunteerability.

References

Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2011). Qualitative research and theory development: Mystery as method. SAGE.
Anteby, M., Chan, C. K., & DiBenigno, J. (2016). Three Lenses on Occupations and Professions in Organizations: Becoming, Doing, and Relating. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 183–244. https://doi.org/10/ghbrrw
Biermann, K. Y., Breitsohl, H., & Meijs, L. C. P. M. (2023). Occupation-related volunteering: A qualitative systematic literature review, conceptualization, and directions for future research [Manuscript submitted for publication].
Cruz, D., & Meisenbach, R. (2018). Expanding role boundary management theory: How volunteering highlights contextually shifting strategies and collapsing work–life role boundaries. Human Relations, 71(2), 182–205. https://doi.org/10/gcvjdp
Granfield, R. (2007). The Meaning of Pro Bono: Institutional Variations in Professional Obligations among Lawyers. Law & Society Review, 41(1), 113–146. https://doi.org/10/d5zx4f
Haski-Leventhal, D., Grönlund, H., Holmes, K., Meijs, L. C. P. M., Cnaan, R. A., Handy, F., Brudney, J. L., Hustinx, L., Kang, C., Kassam, M., Pessi, A. B., Ranade, B., Smith, K. A., Yamauchi, N., & Zrinscak, S. (2010). Service-Learning: Findings From a 14-Nation Study. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 22(3), 161–179. https://doi.org/10/ddr4vm
Haski-Leventhal, D., Meijs, L. C. P. M., & Hustinx, L. (2010). The Third-party Model: Enhancing Volunteering through Governments, Corporations and Educational Institutes. Journal of Social Policy, 39(01), 139. https://doi.org/10/bjkdc4
McGinigle, K. L., Milano, P. M., Rich, P. B., & Viera, A. J. (2008). Volunteerism among surgeons: An exploration of attitudes and barriers. American Journal of Surgery, 196(2), 300–304. https://doi.org/10/bfzjtc
Nicolini, D. (2017). Practice Theory as a Package of Theory, Method and Vocabulary: Affordances and Limitations. In M. Jonas, B. Littig, & A. Wroblewski (Eds.), Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories (pp. 19–34). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52897-7_2
Rodell, J. B., Breitsohl, H., Schröder, M., & Keating, D. J. (2016). Employee Volunteering: A Review and Framework for Future Research. Journal of Management, 42(1), 55–84. https://doi.org/10/gckfg9
Steimel, S. (2018). Skills-Based Volunteering as Both Work and Not Work: A Tension-Centered Examination of Constructions of “Volunteer”. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 29(1), 133–143. https://doi.org/10/gk8qd9
Taylor, R. F. (2004). Extending Conceptual Boundaries: Work, Voluntary Work and Employment. Work, Employment and Society, 18(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/10/bb3vbm
van Schie, S., Gautier, A., Pache, A.-C., & Güntert, S. T. (2018). What Keeps Corporate Volunteers Engaged: Extending the Volunteer Work Design Model with Self-determination Theory Insights. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10/gg2rw4
Wilson, J., & Musick, M. A. (1997). Who Cares? Toward an Integrated Theory of Volunteer Work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694–713. https://doi.org/10/fv5s4t

Author

• Karin Yvonne Biermann