This biographical study explores the composition of civil society elites in the United Kingdom by analyzing 154 biographies of governance and executive leaders from the most resource-rich civil society organizations. Drawing on concepts from elite and nonprofit leadership studies, the research explores internal homogeneity—similarities within the group—and external homogeneity—common traits with other societal elites. Findings reveal a predominantly White, male, and highly educated civil society elite, with governance leaders exhibiting stronger elite markers than executive leaders. Career types show a divide between “boundary crossers” from other sectors and “insiders” with nonprofit trajectories, the former possessing more elite characteristics. The civil society elites share remarkable similarities with other elites in their education background. The results reveal processes of elite reproduction and elite integration at the top of British civil society, with potential consequences for the representational capacity of major civil society organizations and their independence from other elites.
AbzugR. (1996). The evolution of trusteeship in the United States: A roundup of findings from six cities. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 7(1), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.4130070110
2.
AbzugR.DiMaggioP.GrayB. H.UseemM.KangC. H. (1993). Variations in trusteeship: Cases from Boston and Cleveland, 1925-1985. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 4(3), 271–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01398150
3.
AbzugR.GalaskiewiczJ. (2001). Nonprofit boards: Crucibles of expertise or symbols of local identities?Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764001301003
AltermarkN.HadjievskaM. I.JohanssonH. (2022). Personalisation at the top of civil societies? Legitimation claims on civil society elites in Europe. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 25(4), 758–788. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481221129390
6.
AnheierH. K.GerhardsJ.RomoF. P. (1995). Forms of capital and social structure in cultural fields: Examining Bourdieu’s social topography. American Journal of Sociology, 100(4), 859–903. https://doi.org/10.1086/230603
7.
AshleyL.EmpsonL. (2017). Understanding social exclusion in elite professional service firms: Field level dynamics and the “professional project.”Work, Employment and Society, 31(2), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017015621480
8.
BernsteinS. R.FredetteC. (2024). Decomposing the impact of leadership diversity among nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 53(1), 79–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764020977698
BourdieuP. (1977). Reproduction in education, society, culture. Sage.
11.
BourdieuP. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
12.
BourdieuP. (1986) Forms of capital. In RichardsonJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.
13.
BourdieuP. (2020). Habitus and field. General sociology: Vol. 2. Lectures at the Collège de France (1982-1983). Polity Press.
14.
CookA. C. G.FaulconbridgeJ. R.MuzioD. (2012). London’s legal elite: Recruitment through cultural capital and the reproduction of social exclusivity in city professional service fields. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 44(7), 1744–1762. https://doi.org/10.1068/a43605
15.
CousinB.KhanS.MearsA. (2018). Theoretical and methodological pathways for research on elites. Socio-Economic Review, 16(2), 225–249.
16.
DeanJ. (2020). The good glow: Charity and the symbolic power of doing good. Policy Press.
17.
DiMaggioP. (1982). Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status culture participation on the grades of U.S. high school students. American Sociological Review, 47(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094962
DommettK.HindmoorA.WoodM. (2017). Who meets whom: Access and lobbying during the coalition years. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(2), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117701755
20.
EngelstadF. (2018). Models of elite integration. In BestH.HigleyJ. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 439–457). Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
FredetteC.Sessler BernsteinR. (2019). Ethno-racial diversity on nonprofit boards: A critical mass perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(5), 931–952. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764019839778
22.
FriedmanS.LaurisonD. (2019). The class ceiling: Why it pays to be privileged. Bristol University Press.
23.
FriedmanS.SavageM. (2017). Inequality and the class ceiling. Renewal: A Journal of Labour Politics, 2, 31–40.
24.
FultonB. R.OyakawaM.WoodR. L. (2019). Critical standpoint: Leaders of color advancing racial equality in predominantly white organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 30:, 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21387
25.
GreenF.KynastonD. (2019). Engines of privilege: Britain’s private school problem. Bloomsbury Publishing.
GriffithsD.LambertP. S.BihagenE. (2014). Measuring the potential power elite in the UK and Sweden. European Societies, 16:5:, 742–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2014.941376
28.
GulbrandsenT. (2020). Business elite as elected representatives in voluntary organizations in Norway. Politics and Governance, 8(3), 130–141. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i3.2994
29.
GuoC.MussoA. J. (2007). Representation in nonprofit and voluntary organizations: A conceptual framework. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 308–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764006289764
30.
HallP. D. (1987). Abandoning the rhetoric of independence: Reflections on the nonprofit sector in the postliberal era. Journal of Voluntary Action Research, 16(1–2), 11–28.
31.
HallP. D. (1992). Inventing the nonprofit sector, and other essays on philanthropy, voluntarism, and nonprofit organizations. Johns Hopkins University Press.
HarrisE. E. (2014). The impact of board diversity and expertise on nonprofit performance. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 25(2), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21115
36.
HarrisM. (2001). Boards: Just subsidiaries of the state? In HarrisM.RochesterC. (Eds.), Voluntary organisations and social policy in Britain: Perspectives on change and choice (pp. 171–184). Palgrave.
37.
HarrisonY. D.MurrayV. (2012). Perspectives on the leadership of chairs of nonprofit organization boards of directors: A grounded theory mixed-method study. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 22:, 411–437. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21038
38.
HarveyC.MacleanM. (2008). Capital theory and the dynamics of elite business networks in Britain and France. The Sociological Review, 56(Suppl. 1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2008.00764.x
39.
HigleyJ.BurtonM. G. (2006). Elite foundations of liberal democracy. Rowman & Littlefield.
40.
HjellbrekkeJ.Le RouxB.KorsnesO.LebaronF.RosenlundL.RouanetH. (2007). The Norwegian Field of Power Anno 2000. European Societies, 9(2), 245–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616690601002749
41.
Hoffmann-LangeU. (2018). Theory-based typologies of political elites. In BestH.HigleyJ. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 53–68). Palgrave Macmillan.
42.
HolgerssonC.HvenmarkJ. (2023). Gender in nonprofit organizations: A critical review and research agenda. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 34(1), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21560
HwangH.PowellW. (2009). The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(2), 268–298. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.2.268
45.
IecovichE. (2005). The profile of board membership in Israeli voluntary organizations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 16(2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-005-5696-2,161–180
Ivanovska HadjievskaM.StavenesT. (2020). Maintaining registration and tax benefits: Consequences for professionalisation of voluntary membership organisations in Norway and the UK. Journal of Civil Society, 16(2), 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2020.1733282
48.
JohanssonH.MeeuwisseA. (2024). Civil society elites exploring the composition, reproduction, integration, and contestation of civil society actors at the top. Palgrave Studies in third sector research. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40150-3_1
KangC. H.CnaanR. A. (1995). New findings on large human service organization boards of trustees. Administration in Social Work, 19, 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1300/J147v19n03_02
51.
KirchW. (2008). Test of homogeneity, chi-square. In Encyclopedia of public health. Springer.
52.
LeeJ.ScaramuzzinoR. (2024). Mirroring the masses? A cross-national comparison of civil society elite composition. In JohanssonH.MeeuwisseA. (Eds.), Civil society elites. Palgrave studies in third sector research. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40150-3_3
LeeY. (2019). Scarce as hen’s teeth: Women CEOs in large nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 29(4), 601–610. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21354
55.
LeeY. (2023). The color of nonprofit leadership: Nonprofits with a CEO of color. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 33(4), 865–878. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21545
56.
LeRouxK. (2009). The effects of descriptive representation on nonprofits’ civic intermediary roles: A test of the “racial mismatch” hypothesis in the social services sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(5), 741–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764008318710
57.
LeRouxK. (2020). Racial diversity and organizational performance in the US nonprofit sector. In Race and public administration (pp. 119–139). Routledge.
58.
LindelleeJ.ScaramuzzinoR. (2020). Can EU civil society elites burst the Brussels bubble? Civil society leaders’ career trajectories. Politics and Governance, 8(3), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i3.2995
59.
LundingJ. A.EllersgaardC. H.LarsenA. G. (2021). The established and the delegated: The division of labour of domination among effective agents on the field of power in Denmark. Sociology, 55(1), 110–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520928220
60.
MangsetM. (2017). Elite circulation and the convertibility of knowledge: Comparing different types and forms of knowledge and degrees of elite circulation in Europe. Journal of Education and Work, 30(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2017.1278903
61.
McKnightD.ChandlerP. (2012). The complicated conversation of class and race in social and curricular analysis: An examination of Pierre Bourdieu’s interpretative framework in relation to race. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44, 74–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2009.00555.x
MiddletonM. (1987). Nonprofit board of directors: Beyond the governance function. In PowellW. (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (1st ed., pp. 141–153). Yale University Press.
64.
Miller-MillesenJ. L. (2003). Understanding the behavior of nonprofit boards of directors: A theory-based approach. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32(4), 521–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764003257463
NeveuE. (2018) Bourdieu’s capitals sociologizing an economic concept. In MedvetzT.SallazJ. J. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Pierre Bourdieu (pp. 347–374). Oxford University Press.
67.
Norris-TirrellD.RinellaJ.PhamX. (2018). Examining the career trajectories of nonprofit executive leaders. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(1), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764017722023
ReevesA. S.FriedmanS. (2024). Born to rule: The making and remaking of the British elite. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
70.
ReidW.TurbideJ. (2012). Board/staff relationships in a growth crisis: Implications for nonprofit governance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(1), 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764011398296
71.
ReskinB.McBrierD. (2000). Why not ascription? Organizations’ employment of male and female managers. American Sociological Review, 65(2), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240006500204
72.
RiveraL. A. (2012). Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms. American Sociological Review, 77(6), 999–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412463213
73.
RoustetsaariI. (2015). Elite recruitment and coherence of the inner core of power in Finland: Changing patterns during the economic crises of 1991-2011. Lexington Books.
74.
SantilliC.ScaramuzzinoR. (2021). Trajectories of civil society leaders in Italy: Individual careers, organizational structures, and ideological affiliations. SAGE Open, 11(4).
75.
ScaramuzzinoR. (2020). Perception of societal influence among civil society leaders: An elite perspective. Journal of Civil Society, 16(2), 174–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2020.1769326
76.
ScaramuzzinoR.LeeJ. (2024). Mapping civil society elites: Multi-dimensional measure of resource stratification in civil society (MMRSC). Interest Groups & Advocacy. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41309-024-00205-x
77.
SchattschneiderE. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. Holt, Rinehart and Wins.
78.
ShaikoR. G. (1996). Female participation in public interest nonprofit governance: Yet another glass ceiling?Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(3), 302–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764096253003
StapleyE.O’KeeffeS.MidgleyN. (2022). Developing typologies in qualitative research: The use of ideal-type analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221100633
81.
StewartA. J.KuenziK. (2018). The nonprofit career ladder: Exploring career paths as leadership development for future nonprofit executives. Public Personnel Management, 47(4), 359–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026018783022
82.
SuarezD. F. (2010). Street credentials and management backgrounds: Careers of nonprofit executives in an evolving sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(4), 696–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764009350370
83.
The Sutton Trust. (2019). Elitist Britain 2019: The educational backgrounds of Britain’s leading people. The Social Mobility Commission.
84.
WilliamsG.FilippakouO. (2010). Higher education and UK elite formation in the twentieth century. Higher Education, 59, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9229-6
85.
ZweigenhaftR. L.DomhoffG. W. (2018). Diversity in the power elite: Ironies and unfulfilled promises. Rowman & Littlefield.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
