By studying two municipalities in Tokyo that have different environmental conditions in terms of resource allocations, this article examines whether the relationship between for-profit and nonprofit organizations providing long-term care has changed since the introduction of the Long-Term Care Insurance (LTCI) system in Japan. LTCI allocates most resources based on process control, and thus access to resources is easier by conforming to regulations and standards. Findings indicate that for-profit providers behave like nonprofit providers in such an environment. However, when commercialized services are provided besides legally defined LTCI services, outcome control comes into effect in addition to process control. This study finds that the differences between for-profit and nonprofit providers are maintained in this type of environment.Theoretical as well as policy and management implications are discussed, and this article concludes with the directions for future research.
Anheier, H., & Kendall, J. (Eds.). (2001). Third sector policy at the crossroads: An international nonprofit analysis. London : Routledge.
2.
Ascoli, U., & Ranci, C. ( 2002). Dilemmas of the welfare mix: The new structure of welfare in an era of privatization. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Barbetta, G.P., Turati, G., & Zago, A.M. ( 2007). Behavioral differences between public and private not-for-profit hospitals in the Italian national health service. Health Economics , 16(1), 75-96.
5.
Baruch, Y., & Ramalho, N. ( 2006). Across for-profit and nonprofit sectors communalities and distinctions in the measurement of organizational performance and effectiveness . Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(1), 39-65.
6.
Baum, J. ( 1996). Organizational ecology. In H. Cynthia & W. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 77-114). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Baum, J., & Oliver, C. ( 1996). Toward an institutional ecology of organizational founding . Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1378-1427.
8.
Baum, J.A.C., & Mezias, S.J. ( 1992). Localized competition and organizational failure in the Manhattan hotel industry, 1898-1990. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 580-604.
9.
Carroll, G., & Wade, J. ( 1991). Density dependence in the organizational evolution of the American brewing industry across different levels of analysis. Social Science Research, 20, 271-302.
10.
Clotfelter, C. T. (Ed.). (1992). Who benefits from the nonprofit sector?Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Cooney, K. ( 2006). The institutional and technical structuring of nonprofit ventures: Case study of a U.S. hybrid organization caught between two fields . Voluntas, 27, 143-161.
12.
Dekker, P. ( 2001). What crises, what challenges? When nonprofitness makes no difference. In H. K. Anheier & J. Kendall (Eds.), Third sector policy at the crossroads: An international nonprofit analysis (pp. 61-68). London : Routledge.
13.
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.
14.
Eikenberry, A.M., & Kluver, J.D. ( 2004, March/April). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk? Public Administration Review , 64(2), 132-140.
15.
Freeman, J.H., & Audia, P.G. ( 2006). Community ecology and the sociology of organizations . Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 32, 145-169.
16.
Galaskiewicz, J., & Bielefeld, W. ( 1998). Nonprofit organizations in an age of uncertainty: A study of organizational change. New York: Alidine De Gruyter.
17.
Galaskiewicz, J., & Bielefeld, W. ( 2001). The behavior of the nonprofit organizations. In H. K. Anheir (Ed.), Organizational theory and the non-profit form (pp. 6-32). London: Center for Civil Society.
18.
Grønbjerg, K.A., & Salamon, L.M. ( 2003). Devolution, marketization, and the changing shape of government-nonprofit relations. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The state of nonprofit America (pp. 447-470). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
19.
Guo, B. ( 2006). Charity for profit? Exploring factors associated with the commercialization of human services nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(1), 123-138.
20.
Hannan, M., Carroll, G., Sundon, E., & Torres, J. ( 1995). Organizational evolution in a multinational context: Entries of automobile manufacturers in Belgium, France, Germany, and Italy . American Sociological Review, 60, 509-528.
21.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. ( 1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929-964.
22.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. ( 1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
Harris, J. ( 2003). The social work business. London: Routledge.
24.
Jones, M.B. ( 2007). The multiple sources of mission drift. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 299-307.
25.
K municipality 2005 LTCI Report. (2005). K municipality Division of LTCI Operation.
26.
Laratta, R. ( 2009). Ethical climate in NPOs: A comparative study. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 29.
27.
Leiter, J. ( 2005). Structural isomorphism in Australian nonprofit organizations . Voluntas, 16(1), 1-31.
28.
Lipman, H., & Schwinn, E. ( 2001, October 18). The business of charity: Nonprofit groups reap billions in tax-free income annually. Chronicle of Philanthropy , p. 25.
29.
Lomi, A. ( 1995). The population ecology of organizational founding: Location dependence and unobserved heterogeneity. Administrative Science and Quarterly, 40, 111-144.
30.
Meyer, J.W. ( 1983). Institutionalization and the rationality of formal organizational structure. In J. W. Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality (pp. 261-282). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Statistics Bureau. (2007). Japan National Census. Tokyo: Author.
32.
Orru, M., Biggart, N.W., & Hamilton, G.G. (1991). Organizational isomorphism in East Asia. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 361-389). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33.
Powell, W.W. ( 1991). Expanding the scope of institutional analysis . In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 183-203). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34.
Salamon, L.M. ( 2001). The nonprofit sector at a crossroads: The case of America . In H. K. Anheier & J. Kendall (Eds.), Third sector policy at the crossroads: An international nonprofit analysis (pp. 17-35). London : Routledge.
35.
Salamon, L.M. ( 2003). The resilient sector: The state of nonprofit America . In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The state of nonprofit America (pp. 3-61). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
36.
Scott, R. ( 1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
37.
Scott, W.R., & Meyer, J.W. ( 1991). The organization of societal sectors: Propositions and early evidence. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 108-140). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38.
Sloan, F.A. ( 1998). Commercialism in nonprofit hospitals. In B. A. Weisbrod (Ed.), To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector (pp. 151-168). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
S municipality 2005 LTCI Report. (2005). S municipality Division of LTCI Operation.
40.
Smith, P.R. ( 2002a). Privatization, devolution, and the welfare state: Rethinking the prevailing wisdom. In B. Rothstein & S. Steinmo (Eds.), Restructuring the welfare state: Political institutions and policy change (pp. 78-101). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
41.
Smith, P.R. ( 2002b). Social services. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The state of nonprofit America (pp. 149-186). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
42.
Suda, Y. ( 2004). Accountability dilemma faced by nonprofit-human service providers in the US and Japan (In Japanese). Japanese Journal of Research on Household Economics, 61, 20-28.
43.
Suda, Y. ( 2006). Devolution and privatization proceeded and the centralized system maintained: A twisted reality faced by Japanese nonprofit organizations . Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly , 35(3), 430-452.
44.
Suda, Y., & Asakawa, N. ( 2006). Strategies developed and dilemmas experienced by skilled-nursing homes under the Long-Term Care Insurance System: An exploratory study. Japanese Journal of Social Services, 4, 1-12.
45.
Suzuki, W. ( 2002). Hieiri Homon Kaigojigyosha ha Yuri ka [Are nonprofit in-home help service providers advantaged]? Kikan Shakaihosho Kenkyu, 38, 74-88.
46.
Swaminathan, A., & Wiedenmayer, G. (1991). Does the pattern of density dependence in organizational mortality rates vary across levels of analysis? Evidence from the German brewing industry. Social Science Research, 20, 45-73.
47.
Tucker, D., Baum, J., & Singh, J. ( 1992). The institutional ecology of human service organizations . In Y. Hasenfeld (Ed.), Human services as complex organizations (pp. 47-72). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
48.
Tucker, D., Singh, J., & Meinhard, A. ( 1990). Organizational form, population dynamics, and institutional change: The founding patterns of voluntary organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 22, 151-178.
49.
WAM-NET (2004). The Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare. Retrieved on February 19, 2004 , from http://www.wam.go.jp.
50.
Weisbrod, B. A. (Ed.). (1998). To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector. New York: Cambridge University Press.
51.
Weisbrod, B.A. ( 2004). The pitfalls of profits. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2(3), 40-47.
52.
Wolch, J. ( 2001). Decentring America’s nonprofit sector: Reflections on Salamon’s crises analysis. In H. K. Anheier & J. Kendall (Eds.), Third sector policy at the crossroads: An international nonprofit analysis (pp. 51-60). London: Routledge .
