In this paper, we articulate how nonprofit legitimacy is generated through the rhetorical construction of symbolic capital by nonprofit organizations. Our analysis demonstrates how symbolic capital responds to and reflects the local values of a donor/volunteer base, thus allowing nonprofits to assuage the potential for dissonance between image and behavior in humanitarian aid. To make this claim, we engage in a rhetorical analysis of one international nonprofit organization headquartered in the United States that conducts most of its humanitarian work in and around Africa. Implications of this study underscore how nonprofits capitalize on organizational identification and point to the value of understanding nonprofit legitimacy as the rhetorical construction of a “donor gaze” and a nonprofit “space of freedom.”
AshcraftK. L. (2005). Feminist organizational communication studies: Engaging gender in public and private. In MayS.MumbyD. K. (Eds.), Engaging organizational communication theory and research: Multiple perspectives (pp. 141-169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
BourdieuP. (1980). The logic of practice (NiceR., trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
5.
BourdieuP. (1991). Language and symbolic power (RaymondG.AdamsonM., Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
BullisC.IeF. (2007). Corporate environmentalism. In MayS.CheneyG.RoperJ. (Eds.), The debate over corporate social responsibility (pp. 321-335). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
CatlawT. J.HuQ. (2009). Legitimacy and public administration: Constructing the American bureaucratic fields. American Behavioral Scientist, 53, 458-481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764209338803
CheneyG. (1983). The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 143-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335638309383643
12.
CheneyG. (1991). Rhetoric in an organizational society: Managing multiple identities. Columbia: University of South Carolina.
13.
CheneyG.LairD. J. (2005). Theorizing about rhetoric and organizations: Classical, interpretive, and critical aspects. In MayS.MumbyD. K. (Eds.), Engaging organizational communication theory and research: Multiple perspectives (pp. 55-84). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
CollingwoodV. (2006). Non-governmental organisations, power and legitimacy in international society. Review of International Studies, 32, 439-454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0260210506007108
16.
CornwallM. (1994). The institutional role of Mormon women. In CornwallM.HeatonT. B.YoungL. A. (Eds.), Contemporary mormonism: Social science perspectives (pp. 239-264). Urbana: University of Illinois.
17.
DeChaineD. R. (2002). Humanitarian space and the social imaginary: Médecins Sans Frontières/doctors without borders and the rhetoric of global community. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 26, 354-369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019685902236896
18.
De ClercqD.VoronovM. (2009). The role of cultural and symbolic capital in entrepreneurs’ ability to meet expectations about conformity and innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 47, 398-420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2009.00276.x
19.
DempseyS. E. (2007). Negotiating accountability within international contexts: The role of bounded voice. Communication Monographs, 74, 311-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750701543485
20.
DempseyS. E. (2009). NGOs, communicative labor, and the work of grassroots representation. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 6, 328-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14791420903348625
DeTurkS. (2011). Allies in action: The communicative experiences of people who challenge social injustice on behalf of others. Communication Quarterly, 59, 569-590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2011.614209
23.
DohertyN.DickmannM. (2009). Exposing the symbolic capital of international assignments. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20, 301-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585190802670664
24.
EisenbergE. M.EschenfelderB. (2009). In the public interest: Communication in nonprofit organizations. In FreyL. R.CissnaK. N. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of applied communication research (pp. 355-379). New York, NY: Routledge.
FossS. K. (2009). Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice (4th ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland.
27.
FullerT.TianY. (2006). Social and symbolic capital and responsible entrepreneurship: An empirical investigation of SME narratives. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 287-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9185-3
28.
GaneshS. (2003). Organizational narcissism: Technology, legitimacy, and identity in an Indian NGO. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 558-594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318903252539
GierynT. F. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 463-496. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.463
31.
GillR.LarsonG. S. (2013). Making the ideal (local) entrepreneur: Place and the regional development of high-tech entrepreneurial identity. Human Relations. doi: 10.1177/0018726713496829
32.
GriggsB. (2003, August4). A mom’s mission: Utah founded mothers without borders to help world’s orphaned children. Salt Lake Tribune, p. A1.
33.
HaydenS. (2003). Family metaphors and the nation: Promoting a politics of care through the Million Mom March. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 89, 196-215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0033563032000125313
34.
HertelB. R.DonahueM. J. (1995). Parental influences on god images among children: Testing Durkheim’s metaphoric parallelism. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 34, 186-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1386764
35.
JamesA. (2006). Everyday effects, practices and causal mechanisms of “cultural embeddedness”: Learning from Utah’s high tech regional economy. Geoforum, 38, 393-413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2006.10.001
36.
KnightG. (2007). Activism, risk, and communicational politics: Nike and the sweatshop problem. In MayS.CheneyG.RoperJ. (Eds.), The debate over corporate social responsibility (pp. 305-318). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
KuhnT. (2006). A “demented work ethic” and a “lifestyle firm”: Discourse, identity, and workplace time commitments. Organization Studies, 27, 1339-1358. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840606067249
39.
LarsonG. S.PearsonA. R. (2012). Placing identity: Place as a discursive resource for occupational identity work among high-tech entrepreneurs. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 241-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318911435319
40.
LewisL. K. (2005). The civil society sector: A review of critical issues and research agenda for organizational communication scholars. Management Communication Quarterly, 19, 238-267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318905279190
41.
LewisL. K. (2012). Becoming useful: Using engaged scholarship as a means to move NPO scholarship forward. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 186-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318911423763
MoiT. (1991). Appropriating Bourdieu: Feminist theory and Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology of culture. New Literary History, 22, 1017-1049. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/469077
MurphyA. G.DixonM. A. (2012). Discourse, identity, and power in international nonprofit collaborations. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 166-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318911424374
48.
NaplesN. A. (2009). Crossing borders: Community activism, globalization, and social justice [2008 Presidential Address, Society for the Study of Social Problems]. Social Problems, 56, 2-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/sp.2009.56.1.2
49.
O’NeillM. (2002). Nonprofit nation: A new look at the third America. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
ParameswaranR. (2002). Local culture in global media: Excavating colonial and material discourses in National Geographic. Communication Theory, 12, 287-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ct/12.3.287
52.
PollR. D. (2001). Utah and the Mormons: A symbiotic relationship. In EliasonE. A. (Ed.), Mormons and mormonism: An introduction to an American world religion (pp. 164-179). Urbana: University of Illinois.
SchoenfeldE.MestrovicS. G. (1991). With justice and mercy: Instrumental-masculine and expressive-feminine elements in religion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 363-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1387274
55.
ShepherdG. S. G.ShepherdG. (1994). Sustaining a lay religion in modern society: The Mormon missionary experience. In CornwallM.HeatonT. B.YoungL. A. (Eds.), Contemporary Mormonism: Social science perspectives (pp. 161-181). Urbana: University of Illinois.
56.
ShirkyC. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York, NY: Penguin.
57.
ShomeR.HegdeR. S. (2002). Postcolonial approaches to communication: Charting the terrain, engaging the intersections. Communication Theory, 12, 249-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ct/12.3.249
58.
SmithD. (2005). These house-negroes still think we’re cursed: Struggling against racism in the classroom. Cultural Studies, 19, 439-454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09502380500219456
59.
SontagS. (1977). On photography. New York, NY: Dell.
60.
SpivakG. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In NelsonC.GrossbergL. (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271-313). Urbana: University of Illinois.
61.
TrontoJ. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York, NY: Routledge.
