Degasperi, Nivea Coelho; Mainardes, Emerson Wagner

doi:10.1016/j.rausp.2017.08.002

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista de Administração (São Paulo)

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Social Responsibility • Rev. Adm. (São Paulo) 52 (4) • Oct-Dec 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rausp.2017.08.002 copiar

¿Qué factores motivan la donación de dinero? Un estudio sobre motivadores externos

Autoría SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumen

El objetivo en este estudio es identificar los factores motivadores externos que favorecen la donación individual de dinero. Se ha adoptado como metodología un estudio descriptivo, cuantitativo, con sección transversal. Para la recopilación de datos se ha elaborado un cuestionario con 49 afirmaciones que tenían como base las variables motivacionales externas de donación individual regular de dinero encontradas en la literatura sobre el tema. El cuestionario, previamente puesto a prueba, se ha aplicado a 1073 brasileños, donantes regulares de dinero, y se ha realizado el análisis factorial exploratorio. Como conclusión, se han identificado ocho factores externos que, en la opinión de los encuestados donantes, motivan la donación individual de dinero: confianza, recompensa, influencias de liderazgo, características de la organización, influencias del ambiente, beneficios personales, características de los beneficiarios e intereses futuros. Se espera que estos ocho factores, juntos, puedan convertirse en una herramienta útil para mejorar la gestión de las organizaciones de caridad, sobre todo en la definición de campañas y otras estrategias de marketing destinadas a atraer a nuevos donantes y a recaudar fondos en ocasiones favorables a la donación individual de dinero.

Palabras clave:
Filantropía; Donación individual; Motivadores para la donación; Donación en efectivo

No.	Variables	Definition of variables
01	Campaigns geographical amplitude	Donors tend to donate more for national campaigns (^{Casale & Baumann, 2013}Casale and Baumann, 2013 Casale, D., & Baumann, A. (2013). Who gives to international causes? A sociodemographic analysis of us donors. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, .; ^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
02	Appearance of the donation beneficiary	A beneficiary with a good image tends to be more likely to be considered worthy of donation (^{Sargeant & Woodliffe, 2007}Sargeant and Woodliffe, 2007 Sargeant, A., & Woodliffe, L. (2007). Gift giving: An interdisciplinary review. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 12(4), 275-307.)
03	Donor service	Donor service is essential for maintaining the donation of money and/or goods (^{Mainardes et al., 2015}Mainardes et al., 2015 Mainardes, E. W., Laurett, R., Degasperi, N. C. P., & Lasso, S. V. (2015). Personal characteristics and external motivators as antecedents to the act of money and/or goods donation. In International congress of the International Association on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14, 2015, Vitória (ES). Anais... Vitória: IAPNM.)
04	Beneficiaries seen as innocent	Donor's perception of beneficiary being innocent increases donation propensity (^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
05	Catastrophe	Individuals tend to donate in times of environmental catastrophes and public calamities (^{Smith and McSweeney, 2007}Smith and McSweeney, 2007 Smith, J. R., & McSweeney, A. (2007). Charitable giving: The effectiveness of a revised theory of planned behaviour model in predicting donating intentions and behaviour. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 17(5), 363-386.)
06	Climate conditions	Individuals are more likely to donate money to charity when the weather is mild, neither too hot nor too cold (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2007}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2007 Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2007). Understanding philanthropy: A review of 50 years of theories and research. In 35th annual conference of the Association for Research on Nonprofit and Voluntary Action, Chicago.)
07	Trust in the organization	When the beneficiary organization inspires trust, individuals are more willing to make donations (^{Van Iwaarden et al., 2009}Van Iwaarden et al., 2009 Van Iwaarden, J., van der Wiele, T., Williams, R., & Moxham, C. (2009). Charities: How important is performance to donors?. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(1), 5-22.)
08	Trust in the organization's leadership	The donor knowing the founder or director of the beneficiary organization can influence the donation process (^{Bowman, 2006}Bowman, 2006 Bowman, W. (2006). Should donors care about overhead costs? Do they care?. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(2), 288-310.)
09	Contribution value	Low, regular and fixed donation contribution tends to increase donation of money (^{Mainardes et al., 2015}Mainardes et al., 2015 Mainardes, E. W., Laurett, R., Degasperi, N. C. P., & Lasso, S. V. (2015). Personal characteristics and external motivators as antecedents to the act of money and/or goods donation. In International congress of the International Association on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14, 2015, Vitória (ES). Anais... Vitória: IAPNM.)
10	Conditional cooperation	Individuals donate more money when they have the information that other individuals also donate (^{Wiepking & Heijnen, 2011}Wiepking and Heijnen, 2011 Wiepking, P., & Heijnen, M. (2011). The giving standard: Conditional cooperation in the case of charitable giving. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16(1), 13-22.)
11	Credibility of the organization	The credibility of the beneficiary organization tends to influence the donation process (^{Kelly, 1995}Kelly, 1995 Kelly, K. S. (1995). Utilizing public relations theory to conceptualize and test models of fund raising. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72(1), 106-127.)
12	Influential donors	Releasing influential donor names can promote positive donor engagement (^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
13	Leadership effect	Observing other individuals donating can influence donation (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2007}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2007 Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2007). Understanding philanthropy: A review of 50 years of theories and research. In 35th annual conference of the Association for Research on Nonprofit and Voluntary Action, Chicago.)
14	Seasonal effects	Individuals tend to donate more in the fourth quarter of the year (^{Banks & Tanner, 1999}Banks and Tanner, 1999 Banks, J., & Tanner, S. (1999). Patterns in household giving: Evidence from UK data. International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 10(2), 167-178.)
15	Efficiency and effectiveness of the organization	The beneficiary organization being efficient and effective in using the resources and executed projects tends to obtain more donors (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011c}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011c Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). Testing mechanisms for philanthropic behaviour. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16(4), 291-297.; ^{Scaife et al., 2012}Scaife et al., 2012 Scaife, W., McDonald, K., & Wiepking, P. (2012). Motives and barriers to bequest giving. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(1), 56-66.)
16	Companion influence	Individuals accompanied at the time of being invited to make the donation are more likely to donate (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011b}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011b Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924-973.)
17	Requestor's gender	Male individuals tend to donate more when they receive requests from attractive women (^{Landry et al., 2005}Landry et al., 2005 Landry, C., Lange, A., List, J. A., Price, M. K., & Rupp, N. G. (2005). Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: Evidence from a field experiment. National Bureau of Economic Research.)
18	Image of the organization	The image that donors have in relation to the beneficiary organization contributes to the donation (^{Michel & Rieunier, 2012}Michel and Rieunier, 2012 Michel, G., & Rieunier, S. (2012). Nonprofit brand image and typicality influences on charitable giving. Journal of Business Research, 65(5), 701-707.)
19	Celebrity influence	Using a celebrity as a spokesperson tends to increase donation (^{Michel & Rieunier, 2012}Michel and Rieunier, 2012 Michel, G., & Rieunier, S. (2012). Nonprofit brand image and typicality influences on charitable giving. Journal of Business Research, 65(5), 701-707.)
20	Economy influence	Individuals tend to donate less in case of economic recession (^{Breeze & Morgan, 2009}Breeze and Morgan, 2009 Breeze, B., & Morgan, G. G. (2009). Philanthropy in a recession: An analysis of UK media representations and implications for charitable giving. In NCVO/VSSN researching the voluntary sector conference, September)
21	Church influence	Frequency of church attendance increases the amount donated (^{Schuyt et al., 2004}Schuyt et al., 2004 Schuyt, T., Smit, J., & Bekkers, R. (2004). Constructing a philanthropy-scale: Social responsibility and philanthropy. Order, 501, 5704.)
22	Acquaintances influence	An individual can donate because their acquaintances actively support this behavior (^{Grace & Griffin, 2006}Grace and Griffin, 2006 Grace, D., & Griffin, D. (2006). Exploring conspicuousness in the context of donation behaviour. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(2), 147-154.)
23	Influence of commemorative dates	At commemorative dates, individuals tend to be more prone to donation (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2007}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2007 Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2007). Understanding philanthropy: A review of 50 years of theories and research. In 35th annual conference of the Association for Research on Nonprofit and Voluntary Action, Chicago.)
24	Employer influence	When an individual is induced by an employer to make donations (^{Amos, 1982}Amos, 1982 Amos Junior, O. M. (1982). Empirical analysis of motives underlying individual contributions to charity. Atlantic Economic Journal, 10(4), 45-52.)
25	Brand image of the organization	The brand image of the beneficiary organization tends to influence donors (^{Michel & Rieunier, 2012}Michel and Rieunier, 2012 Michel, G., & Rieunier, S. (2012). Nonprofit brand image and typicality influences on charitable giving. Journal of Business Research, 65(5), 701-707.)
26	Mission of the organization	Clarity about the mission of the beneficiary organization may favor donation (^{Bowman, 2006}Bowman, 2006 Bowman, W. (2006). Should donors care about overhead costs? Do they care?. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(2), 288-310.)
27	Religious motivation	Individuals tend to donate to religion in exchange for spiritual benefits or eternal salvation (^{Amos, 1982}Amos, 1982 Amos Junior, O. M. (1982). Empirical analysis of motives underlying individual contributions to charity. Atlantic Economic Journal, 10(4), 45-52.)
28	Political motivation	Individuals tend to donate to the beneficiary organization to build up a political image (^{Amos, 1982}Amos, 1982 Amos Junior, O. M. (1982). Empirical analysis of motives underlying individual contributions to charity. Atlantic Economic Journal, 10(4), 45-52.)
29	Lack of public funding	Individuals donate more money and/or goods when they realize that the beneficiary organization does not receive government aid (^{Mainardes et al., 2015}Mainardes et al., 2015 Mainardes, E. W., Laurett, R., Degasperi, N. C. P., & Lasso, S. V. (2015). Personal characteristics and external motivators as antecedents to the act of money and/or goods donation. In International congress of the International Association on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14, 2015, Vitória (ES). Anais... Vitória: IAPNM.)
30	Tax benefit	It refers to tax benefits when making donations (^{Wiepking, 2009}Wiepking, 2009 Wiepking, P. (2009). The state of giving research in Europe: Household donations to charitable organizations in twelve European countries. Amsterdam University Press.)
31	Participating in specific groups	The individual who is part of a particular group (e.g., Association, Club) tends to increase the donation (^{Wiepking & Maas, 2009}Wiepking and Maas, 2009 Wiepking, P., & Maas, I. (2009). Resources that make you generous: Effects of social and human resources on charitable giving. Social Forces, 87(4), 1973-1995.)
32	Interest in sweepstakes	Donate and win a ticket to participate in a prize draw (^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
33	Interest in future service	Donor may require that organization in the future (^{Amos, 1982}Amos, 1982 Amos Junior, O. M. (1982). Empirical analysis of motives underlying individual contributions to charity. Atlantic Economic Journal, 10(4), 45-52.)
34	Social pressure	Individuals feeling pressured to donate tend to donate less (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2007}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2007 Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2007). Understanding philanthropy: A review of 50 years of theories and research. In 35th annual conference of the Association for Research on Nonprofit and Voluntary Action, Chicago.)
35	Reciprocity	The individual tends to donate for reciprocity, for example, when one receives an invitation from any organization for a dinner (^{DeHaven, 2010}DeHaven, 2010 DeHaven, B. (2010). Principles of persuasion for nonprofit fundraisers (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Akron.)
36	Public acknowledgment	Publicly acknowledging the donor's name tends to increase donation (^{DeHaven, 2010}DeHaven, 2010 DeHaven, B. (2010). Principles of persuasion for nonprofit fundraisers (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Akron.)
37	Rules and regulations	Beneficiary organizations being subject to well-defined donation rules and regulations tend to increase receiving donations (^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
38	Reputation of the organization	The reputation of the beneficiary organization tends to interfere in the decision of the individual to make the donation (^{Guy & Patton, 1989}Guy and Patton, 1989 Guy, B. S., & Patton, W. E. (1989). The marketing of altruistic causes: Understanding why people help. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6(1), 19-30.)
39	Receiving reward	Benefits perceived by the individual when making donations. Ex: gifts, among others (^{Bendapudi et al., 1996}Bendapudi et al., 1996 Bendapudi, N., Singh, S. N., & Bendapudi, V. (1996). Enhancing helping behavior: An integrative framework for promotion planning. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 33-49.)
40	Consciousness of need	When the donor becomes aware of the need to donate to that purpose (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2007}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2007 Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2007). Understanding philanthropy: A review of 50 years of theories and research. In 35th annual conference of the Association for Research on Nonprofit and Voluntary Action, Chicago.)
41	Identification of the donor	The individual uses some object to be identified as a donor (^{Grace & Griffin, 2009}Grace and Griffin, 2009 Grace, D., & Griffin, D. (2009). Conspicuous donation behaviour: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 8(1), 14-25.)
42	Receiving gifts	Individuals tend to donate more to obtain a present from the beneficiary of the donation (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011b}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011b Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924-973.)
43	Being invited to donate	The request/invitation tends to increase donors' donation (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011b}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011b Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924-973.)
44	Donation request held personally	The individual tends to accept the donation request when it is done personally (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011b}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011b Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924-973.)
45	Physical appearance of the requestor	Individuals who are more physically attractive tend to get more donation (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011b}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011b Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924-973.)
46	Type of organization	The type of organization and the cause it advocates interfere with the decision to donate (^{Okten & Weisbrod, 2000}Okten and Weisbrod, 2000 Okten, C., & Weisbrod, B. A. (2000). Determinants of donations in private nonprofit markets. Journal of Public Economics, 75(2), 255-272.)
47	Transparency in accountability	Transparency in accountability tends to be fundamental for maintaining the donation (^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
48	Use of media and technology	Media use via technology tends to increase donation (^{Van Leeuwen & Wiepking, 2013}Van Leeuwen and Wiepking, 2013 Van Leeuwen, M. H., & Wiepking, P. (2013). National campaigns for charitable causes a literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 219-240.)
49	Use of the "love" concept	Using the concept of "love" in campaigns can promote donation (^{Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011c}Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011c Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). Testing mechanisms for philanthropic behaviour. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16(4), 291-297.)

Factor	Variable	Factor loading
F1	Trust in the organization	.760
	Credibility of the organization	.632
	Trust in the organization's leadership	.616
	Catastrophe	.591
	Consciousness of need	.536
	Image of the organization	.535

F2	Receiving gifts	.748
	Identification of the donor	.737
	Reciprocity	.691
	Receiving a reward	.684
	Public acknowledgment	.450
	Physical appearance of the requestor	.427

F3	Leadership effect	.616
	Seasonal effects	.605
	Influential donors	.574
	Conditional cooperation	.565
	Requestor's gender	.536
	Celebrity influence	.528
	Efficiency and effectiveness of the organization	.495
	Companion Influence	.485

F4	Type of organization	.653
	Transparency in accountability	.644
	Use of media and technology	.608
	Use of the "love" concept	.563
	Being invited to donate	.508
	Rules and regulations	.484

F5	Church influence	.682
	Acquaintances influence	.672
	Influence of commemorative dates	.526
	Economy influence	.456
	Employer influence	.456
	Brand image of the organization	.405
	Lack of public funding	.382

F6	Contribution value	.596
	Mission of the organization	.590
	Political motivation	.555
	Tax benefit	.543
	Religious motivation	.465

F7	Physical appearance of the requestor	.750
	Donor service	.559
	Campaigns geographical amplitude	.543
	Beneficiaries seen as innocent	.518
	Climate conditions	.492

F8	Participating in specific groups	.648
	Interest in future service	.543
	Interest in sweepstakes	.501

Components	Rotation sums of squared loadings			Cronbach's alpha
	Total	% of variance	% accumulated
1 - Trust	3.95	8.60	8.60	0.802
2 - Reward	3.92	8.53	17.13	0.812
3 - Leadership influences	3.71	8.07	25.21	0.84
4 - Characteristics of the organization	3.15	6.85	32.07	0.801
5 - Environmental influences	2.78	6.05	38.12	0.795
6 - Personal benefit	2.57	5.59	43.71	0.75
7 - Characteristic of beneficiaries	2.53	5.51	49.23	0.712
8 - Future interest	1.92	4.17	53.41	0.62

Departamento de Administração da Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade da Universidade de São Paulo Avenida Professor Luciano Gualberto, 908, sala F184, 05508-900 São Paulo / SP Brasil, Tel./Fax 55 11 3818-4002 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rausp@usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author at: Avenida Fernando Ferrari, 1358 CEP 29075-505, Vitória, ES, Brazil. E-mail:ncdegasperi@gmail.com (N.C. Degasperi).

Factor 1 - trust	Factor 2 - reward
Trust in the organization	Receiving gifts
Credibility of the organization	Identification of the donor
Trust in the organization's leadership	Reciprocity
Catastrophe	Receiving a reward
Consciousness of need	Public acknowledgment
Image of the organization	Physical appearance of the requestor
Factor 3 - leadership influence	Factor 4 - characteristics of the organization
Leadership effect	Type of organization
Seasonal effects	Transparency in accountability
Influential donors	Use of media and technology
Conditional cooperation	Use of the concept of "love"
Requestor's gender	Being invited to donate
Celebrity influence	Rules and regulations
Efficiency and effectiveness of the organization
Influence of the companion
Factor 5 - environmental influences	Factor 6 - personal benefits
Church Influence	Contribution value
Acquaintances influence	Mission of the organization
Influence of commemorative dates	Political motivation
Economy influence	Tax benefit
Employer influence	Religious motivation
Brand image of the organization
Lack of public funding
Factor 7 - characteristics of beneficiaries	Factor 8 - future interests
Physical appearance of the requestor	Participating in specific groups
Donor service	Interest in future service
Campaigns geographical amplitude	Interest in sweepstakes
Beneficiaries seen as innocent
Climate conditions