JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH

2017, VOL. 43, NO. 5, 593–608

https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2017.1355867

The ABCE Model of Volunteer Motivation

Matti Ullah Butta, Yu Houb, Kamran Ahmed Soomroc, and Daniela Acquadro Marand
a
Business Administration Department, National College of Business Administration and Economics (NCBA&E), Lahore, Pakistan; bSchool of
Management, Institute of Human Resources Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China;
c
Management Sciences Department, Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology (SZABIST), Clifton, Karachi, Pakistan;
d
Dipartimento di Psicologia, Universit
a degli Studi di Torino, Italy

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
To meet the growing social service needs of our societies, the social services and other Volunteer Functional perspective;
organizations need to understand the needs and motives of their volunteers to keep them retained. motivation; NGO
Although volunteer motivation scales are available and tested, different organizations have to
amend and add volunteering motives to best fit their organization and environment. Furthermore,
not much guidance is available to volunteer organizations to understand or measure motivation of
their volunteers raising a need for a unified model that can be a guideline for managers. This study
discusses different approaches to volunteering motivation and links them into four areas of
affiliation using an ABCE model: affiliation (A), beliefs, (B) career development, (C) and (E) egoistic.
Participants were 496 volunteers from a variety of NGOs including 239 (48.2%) from an international
Faith Based Organization (FBO). Findings show that although differences exist in volunteering
motivation the actual best fit was an ABCE model. Future research is needed on testing the scale
with different cultures and different organizations. A deeper knowledge of volunteer motivations
will enable organizations to prosper and utilize the continuous experience of the volunteers and
their engagement, thereby ensuring enhanced quality social service delivery.

Introduction
Innumerable social service organizations around the
world require a number of volunteers to meet
the growing social service needs of our societies. These
volunteers are a great resource to better improve
the quality of services offered, to help organizations
be more effective, to build communities, to promote
equality and so on. It is challenging for the social ser-
vice organizations to retain volunteers requiring a
deeper understanding of volunteer motivational fac-
tors, and methods of retaining volunteers (as volun-
teers are not financially or legally bound to serve)
(Welty Peachey, Lyras, Cohen, Bruening, & Cunning-
ham, 2014; Alfes, Shantz, & Bailey, 2016). Volunteers
may have alternate opportunities to which they might
wish to devote their time, investment and attention
that could draw them away from volunteering activi-
ties in the agencies that need them the most. Accord-
ing to Clary and Snyder (1991), people volunteer until
the volunteer experience satisfies their motive (or
motives) on the basis of their choices and preferences.
Individuals in volunteer groups normally devote their
time because of external and circumstantial factors
(Agostinho & Paço, 2012) that can include motivation,
values and expectations. In the absence of monetary
compensation, volunteers do have some motive (or
expected reward for volunteering) such as personal,
social or indirect economic gain (Gidron, 1978;
Saksida, Alfes, & Shantz, 2016). Ryan, Kaplan, and
Grese (2001) and Gage and Thapa (2012) also write
that the extrinsic and Intrinsic motives to volunteering
(Newton, Becker, & Bell, 2014) go beyond simple
altruism and can also include other factors, such as
career advancement, love of the game/activity, and
social gains.
Understanding, exploring and measuring volunteer
motives has been a focus of many researchers. Much of
this volunteer motivation literature has been developed
in social psychology and is based on five models consist-
ing of one (Cnaan & Goldberg-clen, 1999), two (Frisch

CONTACT Daniela Acquadro Maran, PhD daniela.acquadro@unito.it Assistant Professor, Dipartimento di Psicologia, Universit
a degli Studi di Torino, Via
Verdi 10, 10124, Torino (I).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/wssr.
© 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
594 M. U. BUTT ET AL.

& Gerrard, 1981), three (Morrow-Howell & Mui, 1989), Clary et al. (1998) created the six-dimensional model
four (Neely & Lengnick-Hall, 2013) or six (Clary et al., based on a functionalism approach (the same action
1998) volunteering motives. Titmuss (1971) and Pinker can serve different functions). Neely and Lengnick-
(1979) argued in their books on welfare and social policy Hall (2013) suggested four dimensions of volunteering
that the commitment to help others is a unified whole, motivation that they called the unfolding model of
although it might be driven by a combination of differ- volunteer motivation. These two theories will be dis-
ent motives. Cnaan and Goldberg-clen (1999) also cussed in more detail.
found empirical support for a unidimensional construct
for volunteer motivation. The two-factor theory came Functional Approach to Volunteer Motivation
later with the concept of altruism. Batson (1991) defined
The functional approach to volunteering is grounded
altruism as “a motivational state with the ultimate goal
in the concept that a great deal of human behavior is
of increasing another’s welfare.” Thus various authors
motivated by different needs and goals and that moti-
have divided motives for volunteering between altruistic
vation varies among individuals (Clary et al., 1998).
and non-altruistic motives in the two-factor models.
Clary and Snyder (1991) adapted this notion in their
Frisch and Gerrard (1981) also identified altruistic and
Volunteer Function Inventory (VFI) to study the fac-
self-serving motives, suggesting a two-dimensional
tors that motivate volunteering. According to this
model of volunteer motivation. Cnaan and Goldberg-
study, the decision to be an active volunteer is deter-
clen (1999) concluded that volunteers are actually
mined by the perceived potential of volunteering to
driven by a combination of different factors; hence, they
serve six specific functions, i.e., Enhancement (to feel
are both selfless and selfish. The three-factor solution
useful and important and to improve one’s self-
added a motivation factor related to socialism, as in
esteem), Career (to obtain experience for a career or
Fitch (1987), who developed a 20-item scale to study the
to benefit one’s career), Social (to strengthen relation-
motivations of volunteering students and found altru-
ships with home members or others), Values (to
ism, social obligation and selfish motives to be the main
express humanitarian and altruistic concerns), Protec-
sources of motivation. Morrow-Howell and Mui (1989)
tive (to escape any negative feelings, to defend the
also suggested three dimensions, i.e., altruistic, social
ego) and Understanding (to explore one’s own
and material (gaining some influential skills or power).
strength by volunteering, having new experiences and
As argued by Sigmund and Hauert (2002), altruistic
undergoing skills training). The VFI has been widely
activity should be considered to have occurred when it
used by many researchers from different countries
has benefitted others and harmed the person perform-
and in different languages. For example, the English
ing the activity. Patel and Wilson (2004) underlined
version was used by Stukas, Hoye, Nicholson, Brown,
that altruism does not exist as a selfless act because
and Aisbett (2016) in Australia. A Spanish version
denying help to someone is also denying one’s sense
was used by Davila and Fuertes (2003) and Davila and
of self and, thus, helping others can also help oneself.
Ambientales (2009) in Spain; the Chinese version was
The four-factor model and six-factor model of motiva-
developed by Wong, Chui, and Kwok (2011) in Hong
tion are less based on altruism, although altruism is
Kong; and a Portuguese Version was used by
present in them to a limited degree. The six-factor
Agostinho and Paço (2012) and Ferreira, Proença,
model is based on the function theory of motivation.
and Proença (2012) in Portugal.
The functional approach of volunteer motivation
focuses on a volunteer’s motivation to satisfy one or
Amendments to the VFI
more of his/her needs or motives. It also implies that
different individuals can have different reasons or Although the VFI is extensively and widely applied in
motives for doing the same volunteer work. In the lit- motivational research, there are substantial variations
erature, this approach seems widely used and more in the number of functions especially when applied
accepted (Stukas, Daly, & Clary, 2006). Several authors to specific context and type of volunteer organiza-
have defended functional theories of motivation by tions (Erasmus & Morey, 2016). Clary et al. (1998)
focusing on individual motives for helping and volun- validated the use of the VFI for both volunteers and
teering (Clary et al., 1998; Clary & Snyder, 1999; non-volunteers and suggested that future studies may
Omoto & Snyder, 2002). Clary and Snyder (1991) and indicate systematic, domain-to-domain variation in

the categories of motivations as being salient to vol-
unteers and prospective volunteers. This suggestion
further opened the door for researchers to explore
the volunteer motivation approach and discuss addi-
tional possible motivation categories. Wilson (2000)
argues that volunteering can take many forms such
that even highly generalized value questions would
fail to capture this variation. Hence, different authors
have tried to add more variables to the VFI according
to the type of organization and volunteering work.
Allison, Okun, and Dutridge (2002) interviewed
195 volunteers from a non-profit organization and
asked them to list their motivations for engaging in
volunteer work. Religiosity, enjoyment and team
building were the three new variables found. A mega
study on volunteers in Western Australia by Esmond
and Dunlop (2004) modified the VFI to a Volunteer
Motivation Inventory (VMI) with 10 variables and
suggested also studying religiosity, societal and gov-
ernmental factors. Bierhoff, Sch€ ulken, and Hoof
(2007) suggested that social and political responsibility
should be included as functions in the VFI. Van
Vianen, Nijstad, and Voskuijl (2008) used a motiva-
tional scale with seven motives, adding the variable
“pastime” to the VFI. Rokach and Wanklyn (2009)
also found enjoyment to be a source of motivation for
some volunteers. Some researchers added area-specific
items for example in sports volunteering, Hallmann
and Harms (2012) included the item “love of the
game” to study volunteer motivation. Jiranek, Kals,
Humm, Strubel, and Wehner (2013) added the social
justice function as a variable in the VFI. Again, Gage
and Thapa (2012) included a single item related to
religion to study volunteer motivation through the
VFI. It can be noticed that although a number of
authors (more recently Dennis, Scanlon, and Sellon
(2017) and Erasmus and Morey (2016) and previous
mega studies like one by Garland, Myers, and Wolfer
(2008)) have studied volunteering in religious organi-
zations, the studies have not amended VFI to include
items related to believes and most of the studies have
focused the factor qualitatively.
Unfolding Model of Volunteer Motivation
Neely and Lengnick-Hall (2013) used the unfolding
model of turnover, the theories of reasoned action
(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) and planned behavior
(Ajzen, 1991), and the person-organization fit model
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 595
(Kristof, 1996) to devise a theory called the unfolding
model of volunteer motivation. Based on the theory of
the unfolding model of turnover (Lee, Mitchell, &
Mitchell, 1994) in which individuals have multiple
paths to come to a decision to decide to stop working
for an organization, Neely and Lengnick-Hall (2013)
proposed and proved that there are multiple paths
through which a person decides to volunteer in an
organization. These four paths were identified as the
trigger path (any trigger event encourages an individ-
ual to decide to volunteer), the social path, the instru-
ment path (to gain skills and abilities) and the
religious or spiritual path.
Overview of Volunteering Motives
The functional approach of volunteerism has been
widely used; however, as discussed, a number of
authors have felt the need to amend or add additional
motives. The unfolding model of volunteer motivation
provided 4 directions that can lead to volunteering
activity. It is further proposed that the different func-
tional motives also present four directions: affiliation
(A), personal values and beliefs (B), career develop-
ment (C) and egoistic motives (E). Additional motives
can actually be adjusted in these directions. Along
with explaining how the VFI adjusts into these four
directions, three additional motives of beliefs, organi-
zation and socialization are also included in the
directions.
Affiliation (A)
People are motivated to volunteer because of their
family members, friends and the people living around
them and because of a desire to socialize. This direc-
tion can be called affiliation and can be divided into
two motives, i.e., social motives as studied by Clary
et al. (1998) in the VFI and the need of an individual
to socialize with people society (socialization).
Although only social motives were apparently studied
in the VFI, item 29 (“volunteering is a way to make
new friends”) under the enhancement motive actually
represents the socialization motive. Other researchers
have also studied this motive as being separate from
the social motive; however, the two motives still
fall under the same direction. Neely and Lengnick-
Hall (2013) also considered these motives to be the
social path that results in volunteering activities.
596 M. U. BUTT ET AL.
Law, Shek, and Ma (2011) stated that no item in the
VFI directly relates to socialization (i.e., “getting along
with peers”) motive as being one of the motives
behind volunteer service participation. Socialization,
according to Law et al. (2011), is different from the
social function in VFI, which merely refers to the
influence from the people around volunteers and can-
not represent the distinct socializing purpose of partic-
ipants. People, especially adolescents, spend much
time with their peers, and the peer system is becoming
more important in adolescent development (Hartup,
2005). Through participation, volunteers work and
socialize with their peers. They tend to consider
whether their peers will join the service and whether
they will accept or praise the activity (Law et al.,
2011). In a survey by Dworkin, Larson, and Hansen
(2003), participants reported experiences of forming
new peer relationships, developing a deeper under-
standing of their peers and having experiences that
reflect the acquisition of social capital in youth activi-
ties. Wu, Wing Lo, and Liu (2009) also suggested that
making new friends should be an additional function
for the motivation of volunteers, which is similar to
the arguments of Law et al. (2011) regarding socializa-
tion. Drawing on the above-mentioned considera-
tions, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 1: In relation to the established volunteer
functions, it is expected that an equality-based socializa-
tion function to emerge as an independent factor.
Beliefs (B)
Personal values and beliefs are among the main sour-
ces of motivation to volunteering that is represented
by Values motive in the VFI. Although many studies
(more recently Dennis, Scanlon, and Sellon (2017) and
Erasmus and Morey (2016) and previously Garland,
Myers, and Wolfer (2008)) have studied volunteering
in religious organizations, the studies have not
amended VFI to include items related to believes. This
direction, along with values, also includes individual
believes and believe in the Organization.
Given the items and functions of the VFI, it is clear
that the focus of volunteer motivation is measured by
approaches that benefit the volunteers themselves
(self-oriented aspects of volunteer motivation). The
values motive is the only one that is based on benefiting
others and has been found to be one of the most domi-
nant functions (Penner & Finkelstein, 1998). The val-
ues motive is also regarded as an altruistic behavior of
the volunteer; however, Katz and Kahn (1978) argued
that no one behaves for purely altruistic reasons. This
may be clearer when individual beliefs are studied with
the values motive. Although the values motive is based
on benefiting others, the reason to benefit others can be
based on one’s religious beliefs and needs. Thus, the
label of altruistic action is not acceptable in all cases
and can instead be called personal beliefs or being pro-
social. Grant (2012) also argues that the word “values”
can sometimes be confusing, as every motive does
address some values; hence, the word pro-social has
been used to capture the desire to help or benefit others
(Brief & Motowidlo, 1986; Clary & Snyder, 1991;
Grant, 2007). Values are formed by the beliefs of an
individual, and thus, values motives are also expected
to represent individual beliefs.
Religious organizations are also very active in pro-
moting volunteering as religious in general. According
to Berger (2003), NGOs (especially religious NGOs)
have represented a unique hybrid of religious beliefs
and sociopolitical activism at all different levels of
society. Butt, Hu, and Soomro (2015) studied areas of
volunteering that took religious volunteering as a
separate area as a number of volunteers indulge in
faith based volunteering. They concluded that a num-
ber of people are introduced to volunteering by local
mosques in childhood. Hence, local religious centers
(such as mosques and churches) play an important
role in the promotion of volunteering. Researchers
have found a positive association between religion and
volunteering because of religious norms and social
networks (Watt, 1991; Curtis, Baer, & Grabb, 2001;
Lam, 2002; Ruiter & Graaf, 2006; Bekkers & Schuyt,
2008). As religious networks make social connections,
there is an increased likelihood of a person being
asked to volunteer. Similarly, religious norms empha-
size the importance of helping others.
Moreover, according to Cnaan, Kasternakis, and
Wineburg (1993), religious beliefs affect an individual’s
decision to engage a volunteer activity. Bennett (2015)
concludes that people with a religious affiliation volun-
teer more often than people with no religious affiliation
and that people who attend religious services are
almost twice (1.87 times) as likely to volunteer
than are those who do not attend religious services.
An investigation conducted by Lewis, Macgregor,
and Putnam (2013) underlined religiosity as posi-
tively related to multiple civic outcomes. Taniguchi
and Thomas (2011) also concluded that religious

inclusiveness increases not only religious volunteering
but also secular volunteering. These studies highlight
the extensive and exclusive role of religion in motivat-
ing people to volunteer. There is an extensive amount
of literature on the importance of personal belief or
religiosity as a consistent and strong predictor of
volunteering both nationally and cross-nationally
(Wilson, 2000; Ruiter & Graaf, 2006; Wuthnow, 2006;
Musick & Wilson, 2007; Putnam & Campbell, 2012;
Bennett, 2015). However religion or belief has not
been studied as a separate factor that impacts the
motivation of a volunteer, but the factor has been
recommended for inclusion by various researchers
(Allison et al., 2002; Esmond & Dunlop, 2004).
Hypothesis 2: In relation to established volunteer func-
tions, it is expected an equality-based religion function
will emerge as an independent factor.
The motivation to volunteer and to continue in
volunteering activities also depends on the function
of the organization. The organization function is
intended to study the volunteer’s relationship with
the organization (or volunteering activity), his/her
satisfaction with management and its effect on his/
her motives. Although the “organization” function
has not been independently studied by researchers,
the factor, or part of the factor, has been indirectly
addressed by different authors. Farmer and Fedor
(1997) studied the role of organizations’ support in
volunteer participation and turnover intentions.
Esmond and Dunlop (2004) used statements such
as “being appreciated by my agency is important to
me” in the VMI. Similarly, an item about being
respected by staff and volunteers has been included
in the VMI (Esmond & Dunlop, 2004). Questions
regarding the importance of the cause to oneself
has been included by different researchers as well
as by Clary et al. (1998) in the VFI.
Agostinho and Paço (2012) emphasized that satis-
fied volunteers also show higher levels of commitment
to the organization and have better relationships with
their colleagues. A volunteering organization can also
play its role in keeping volunteers satisfied by provid-
ing a good atmosphere and culture in the organization
and by caring for the passion of volunteers. A poor
culture or management in the organization can affect
the motivation of a volunteer, leading her/him to
either stop volunteering or change the organization
(Maran & Soro, 2010; Acquadro Maran, 2014).
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 597
Willems and colleagues (2012) studied 47 items
addressing reasons to quit (a volunteer organization
or volunteering) and presented the 10-Factor Solution.
The factors included “struggles with other volunteers
in the group” and “lack of higher level support,” which
were related to the organization. Indeed, the organiza-
tion and its management, especially proper manage-
ment policies and practices, can become a motivation
to volunteers. Hustinx and colleagues (2010) studied
motivations to volunteer among students in six coun-
tries by modifying the VFI to 15 items. The study
ranked items “work for a cause that is important” as
second (out of 15) most important overall (second
most important for the USA, Canada, Finland and
Belgium and 3rd and 5th in Japan and China, respec-
tively). Similarly, the item “learn more about the
cause” ranked 7th out of 15. The results also showed
the importance of “a cause” for volunteers as a major
motivation for volunteering. Hence, the organization’s
motive is important not only for volunteers but also
for the volunteer organization. Thus, it is hypothesized
that
Hypothesis 3: In relation to the established volunteer
functions, it is postulated that an equality-based organi-
zation function will emerge as an independent factor.
Career Development (C)
Several authors, such as Okun and Schultz (2003),
Greenslade and White (2005), and Moreno-Jimenez
and Villodres (2010), found a weak or non-significant
correlation between values and career, calling the
career function the most distinct from other functions.
However, for students, the career function can be a
well-focused motive for volunteering (see Afroozeh,
2012; Ghose & Kassam, 2014; Handy et al., 2010;
Holdsworth, 2010). Additionally, the understanding
function appeared to be one of the most salient func-
tions, along with values and enhancement motives
(Allison et al., 2002; Chapman & Morley, 1999;
Planalp & Trost, 2009; Widjaja, 2010). Neely and
Lengnick-Hall (2013) argued that there is an instru-
mental path that gives rise to the intention to volun-
teer. Their investigation shows that individuals find
volunteering opportunities when they want to learn or
understand something that is not afforded in their
current employment. Grant (2012) also combined
these two motives into one that he called knowledge
characteristics. These two motives are linked with the
598 M. U. BUTT ET AL.
concept that learning and understanding are related to
the career of an individual, and this direction can be
called career development.
Egoistic (E)
The fourth direction concerns the volunteer’s desires,
wishes and actions related to the individual’s ego. Indi-
viduals may volunteer to protect or enhance their ego,
to be recognized, praised or acknowledged. The VFI
includes two motives that show this direction, i.e.,
enhancement and protective motives. Both are related
to the ego, with one focusing on protecting one’s ego
and the other on enhancing it. Planalp and Trost
(2009) investigated the motivation of 351 volunteers
from 32 hospices in the western part of the United
States. They used three items for each volunteering
motive of the VFI and found that the protective and
enhancement motives appear on the same factor and
same was found later by Brayley et al. (2014). When
Clary et al. (1998) tested the six factors of the VFI, they
found that restricting the volunteering motives to a
five-factor solution would result in enhancement and
protective motives being represented as a single factor.
It is no doubt that the two motives are actually related
to ego, but in different ways.
Current study
Since the volunteers are a fundamental resource for
social service (Mckeever & Pettijohn, 2014), it is impor-
tant to understand their motivation and how the organi-
zation could (or could not) satisfy it. The aim of this
study is to investigate the four hypothesized directions
of volunteer motivation and to explore how the widely
used VFI and other volunteering motives fit into the
presented model. With these directions identified, differ-
ent volunteering organizations with different volunteers
can focus their efforts on satisfying volunteering motives
within these directions. Similarly, based on a single scale
for different volunteers, volunteering motivation can be
compared for the different nature of volunteering activi-
ties, such as sports volunteers versus faith volunteers.
This study also addresses the three additional volunteer-
ing motives of socialization (hypothesis 1), religion
(hypothesis 2), and organization (hypothesis 3) hypoth-
esizing that these volunteering motives appear to be
independent factors from the motives in VFI.
This study was conducted in Pakistan for several rea-
sons. Firstly, one of the authors has experience with
volunteering in this country and was aware of the types
of volunteering behavior and motivation. Secondly, the
country has a long history (of culture, customs, behav-
ior, religion) with other countries from the South Asia
(especially India) (Thapar, 2015). In addition, South
Asia is one of the most populous regions in the world
having an estimated population of 1,823 billion (United
Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
2015). South Asia is also enriched with religious organi-
zations having largest population of Hindus (98%),
Sikhs (90.5%), one-third of Muslims in the World,
35 million Christians and 25 million Buddhists. With
respect to volunteering, India had estimated 3.3 million
NGOs in 2009 which is like one NGO for every 400
Indians (Shukla, 2010). According to the worldwide
report by Charities Aid Foundation (2016), volunteer-
ing in developing countries is more rapidly increasing
with Africa having the largest increase and Asia being
the second. The first four top countries with high
percentage of volunteering are also from developing
countries (USA being at number fifth with 46% volun-
teering). Among 613 million people who volunteered in
the top 10 countries (by volunteering time), 419 million
(68.35%) were from Asia. Whereas this report by Chari-
ties Aid Foundation considers volunteer time given in
Organization, Butt et al. (2015) found more people
engaged in informal volunteering compared to volun-
teering under some organization in Pakistan. Studies
conducted in this area can be attraction for a number
of researchers and NGOs due to religious inclusiveness
(as volunteering is vastly being studied with religious
inclusiveness), extensive population and NGOs and
increase in the volunteering ratios. Although some
research on volunteer motivation have come up from
India (like Ghose & Kassam, 2014), the other parts of
South Asia are not well studied to date (according to
the knowledge of the authors). In 2010, regarding
NGOs in Pakistan, the Minister of Social Welfare and
Special Education stated that there were around
100,000 Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and com-
munity-based organizations (CBOs), 60,000 to 70,000
of which were registered (USAID, 2016) and of course
the number would be more high recently.
Method
Sample
To generalize the scale, volunteers working in different
types of volunteering areas were targeted for

participation. Since young volunteers have been found
willing to take part in volunteering activities in Paki-
stan (Butt et al., 2015; Soomro, Shukui, Butt, & Anand,
2016); the researchers first invited volunteers studying
in a college in Sindh and three universities in the prov-
inces of Punjab and Sindh in Pakistan. Among the col-
lege and university students, 379 general volunteers
were invited into the survey, and their response rate
was 67.8% (N1 D 257). These volunteers were from
different volunteering areas (Butt et al., 2015) except
religious/faith volunteering. Thus the decision to
include participants from religious/faith volunteering
was made in accordance to results from Butt and col-
league (2015) investigation: religious/faith volunteer-
ing is one of the volunteering areas. This means that
the motivation to volunteer could be/could be not
linked to religious/faith motives. To include this vol-
unteering area, data was gathered from the volunteers
of a Faith Based Organization (FBO). Participants
belonging to one of the Islamic universities under the
International FBO Dawateislami, were invited to join
the survey. The organization is involved with 392 reli-
gious universities in Pakistan and 29 internationally,
and encourages volunteering among students (Butt,
2016). Among the FBO volunteers in the Punjab Prov-
ince, 321 were invited, and their response rate was
74.4% (N2 D 239). The inclusion criterion required
being a volunteer for a period of one year or more.
The sample was composed of 496 students. Students
received recruitment information during a class
lecture.
Procedure and Data Collection
This study conformed to the provisions of the Decla-
ration of Helsinki in 1995, revised in Edinburgh 2000
(World Medical Association., 2001). All ethical guide-
lines were followed, as required for conducting human
research, including adherence to the legal require-
ments of Pakistan. The research project was approved
by the ethics committee of the respective universities
before the study began. With the approval of the ethics
committee, participants were asked for authorization
to administer the questionnaire. The cover sheet
clearly explained the research aim, the voluntary
nature of participation, the anonymity of the data and
the elaboration of the findings. Thus, returning the
questionnaires implied consent. Participants volun-
teered in the research without receiving any reward.
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 599
The data were collected by two of the authors and by
designated lecturers trained by the researchers. The
participants were contacted through their academic
courses and were informed that they were participat-
ing in a study to investigate the volunteer motivation.
Moreover, students received recruitment information
through flyers. Data collection involved completion of
a structured questionnaire submitted on paper; all the
participants were informed that participation was
voluntary and that their responses were anonymous.
The self-reported questionnaire took, on average,
twenty-five minutes to complete and was collected
immediately. All the questionnaires were group
administered to students in classrooms, with the
teachers’ permission, before or after a class lecture and
were returned immediately. The study was conducted
in accordance with privacy requirements.
Instrument
The VFI developed by Clary et al. (1998) was primar-
ily used to measure the Volunteer Motivation. After a
pre-test of the questionnaire with 10 volunteers (aged
20–30, 9 males, 1 female), some questions were sum-
marized and some were removed to reduce the num-
ber of questions for the ease of respondents. Some
items were also added from VMI developed in the
study by Esmond and Dunlop (2004). Any question
that was felt to be difficult for the respondents to
understand was amended. New questions about reli-
gion, socialization and organization motives were
added according to the experience of one of the
authors and discussions with other volunteers of a vol-
unteer association in the FBO Dawateislami. All the
volunteering motives were measured on a seven-point
Likert scale (1 D Strongly Disagree; 7 D Strongly
Agree).
In the final inventory (see Table 1), eleven motives
were included that adjusted in the four directions of
volunteer motivation (as discussed in Literature). The
following are the four directions and motives within
those directions
Affiliation (A): It was measured by two volunteer-
ing motives i.e. the social motive (VFI - three items)
and socialization motive (VMI - three items).
Personal Values and Beliefs (B): It was measured by
three volunteering motives i.e. pro-social motive (values
as in the VFI - three items), Organization motive and
Beliefs motive. The organization motive was measured
600 M. U. BUTT ET AL.

Table 1. Volunteering motives: Questionnaire items.

Category Item Source Amendment

Affiliation Direction of Volunteer Motivation

Social Because my friends, family members or closed ones volunteer VFI Combined
Because people I am close to want me to volunteer VFI None
Because people I know share an interest in community services VFI None
Socialization Because I can get social interaction and links through volunteering VMI Wording
Because I look forward to the social events that volunteering affords me VMI None
Because the social opportunities provided by volunteering are important to me VMI None
Believe Direction of Volunteer Motivation
Pro-Social Because I am concerned about those less fortunate than myself VFI None
Because of feeling compassion towards people in need VFI Wording
Because of being concerned about the people I am serving VFI Wording
Organization Because I follow my (Organizational) Leader. Created
Because I feel a big gap in my life if I stop volunteering (in my organization) Created
Because it has an important and needed cause VFI Changed
Because my organization’s culture motivates me to keep volunteering VMI Changed
Religious Because it can reward me in my afterlife Created
Because it makes me a religious person Created
Because it fits in my religious belief VMI None
Career Development Direction of Volunteer Motivation
Career Because it allows me to explore different career options VFI None
Because it makes my resume better VFI Wording
Because volunteering gives me an opportunity to build my work skills VMI None
Because I feel volunteering can find me employment opportunities VMI Wording
Understanding Because volunteering allows me to gain a new perspective on things VFI None
Because I can explore my own strengths VFI None
Because I gain knowledge and experience that is useful in life VFI Changed
Egoistic Direction of Volunteer Motivation
Enhancement Because government is not doing enough and I think I can fill some gap by volunteering VMI Wording
Because volunteering makes me feel important and useful VFI 2 Combined
Because society is not doing enough and I think I can fill some gap by volunteering VMI Wording
Because I feel that Volunteering is a feel good experience VMI None
Protective Because no matter how bad I am feeling, volunteering makes me feel forget about it VFI None
Because by volunteering I feel less lonely and remain busy VFI Wording
Because volunteering helps me work through my own personal problems VFI None

Note. VFI D Volunteer Functions Inventory; VMI D Volunteer Motivation Inventory

with one item regarding cause from the VFI, one item
regarding the organization’s culture from the VMI, and
two new items were created. One item in the religion
motive came from the VMI, and two items were created
after discussions with volunteers from the FBO.
Career development (C): It consisted of two volun-
teering motives i.e. understanding motive (four items
from the VFI) and the career motive (VFI - two items;
VMI - two items).
Egoistic (E): It was measured with three volunteer-
ing motives i.e. protective motive (VFI - three items)
and the enhancement motive (VFI - one item; VMI -
three items).
The questionnaire was adapted for use with a Pakis-
tani audience by translating it from
British English and then back-translating it (White
& Elander, 1992). The translation was performed by
three specialists (in the English language, third sector
and volunteerism) and matched to agree in a final ver-
sion. The translated version was useful for the volun-
teers in FBO who did not study English as a major
and were not that convenient with the English version.
Results
The participants (N D 496) consisted of 257
(51.8%) general volunteers from different volunteer-
ing organizations and 239 (48.2%) volunteers from
the FBO (Table 2). Men were highly dominant
(84.8%). Most of the participants (73.8%) ranged
from 18 to 29 years of age. Of the respondents,
23% had 1 to 3 years of volunteering experience,
while 29.8% had more than 3 years of experience.
8.7% volunteered less than 2 hours a week, 25.9%
volunteered 2–4 hours per week, 29.1% volunteered
4–8 hours per week, 20.2% volunteered 8–14 hours
per week, and 9.0% volunteered more than 14 hours
per week.
Descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis
(EFA) and Pearson’s product-moment correlations
were obtained through SPSS (version 20). Confirma-
tory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using
AMOS (version 21) (Table 3). Factor analysis was
applied to see how the items from the religion,
organization and socialization factors adjust the
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 601

Table 2. Participants’ socio-demographic characteristic.

General Volunteers FBO Volunteers Total

N % N % N %

Sample 257 51.8 239 48.2 496 100

Gender
Male 179 69.6 239 100 418 84.8
Female 78 30.3 0 0 78 15.2
Age Group
14–17 27 10.5 58 24.3 85 17.4
18–24 182 70.8 116 48.5 298 59.7
25–29 39 15.2 31 13 70 14.1
30 or Above 9 3.5 30 12.5 39 8.0
Education
Not Bachelors (Associate) 48 18.7 9 3.8 57 11.2
Studying Bachelors (Associate Degree) 109 42.4 39 16.3 148 29.4
Having Bachelor’s (Associate) Degree or above 100 38.9 128 53.6 228 46.2
Missing 0 0 63 26.4 63 13.2
Volunteering Experience
> 6 months 74 28.8 9 3.8 83 16.3
>1 Year 76 29.6 16 6.7 92 18.2
1–3 Years 48 18.7 65 27.2 113 23
3–5 Years 12 4.7 72 30.1 84 17.4
5 – 10 Years 2 0.8 36 15.1 38 8
More than 10 years 0 0 21 8.8 21 4.4
Missing 45 17.5 20 8.4 65 13
Volunteering Time Given
Volunteering >2 hours 34 13.2 10 4.2 44 8.7
Volunteering 2–4 hours 87 33.9 43 18.0 130 25.9
Volunteering 4–8 hours 58 22.6 85 35.6 143 29.1
Volunteering 8–14 hours 35 13.6 64 26.8 99 20.2
Volunteering more than 14 hours 15 5.8 20 8.4 35 7.1
Missing 28 10.9 17 7.1 45 9.0

Note. Bachelor’s Associate degree is 14 years of Education has been common in Pakistan. FBO Volunteers study religious education in a course of 8 years (consid-
ered equivalent to Master’s Degree as approved by Higher Education Commission of Pakistan). The Bachelor’s degree shown in case of FBO student is based on
either general or Religious Education. The Religious education is not in the English Language.

motivation inventory for the responses. The EFA
included the six motives of Clary and colleagues
(1998) and three additional motives of religion,
organization and socialization. A minimum factor
loading of .30 was used as the threshold to include
items within a factor. Principal-axis factor analysis
with promax rotation was used. Nine factors with
eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were identified. A scree
plot was also used to test the number of suitable fac-
tors. The scree plot showed a considerable drop
after the 1st and 9th variables. The religious, organi-
zation and social interaction motives appeared as
separate independent factors (supporting our three
hypotheses (H1, H2, H3). All items loaded on the
predicted factors, and overall, the results did not dif-
fer from those of previous studies.
To further assess the fitness of the variables, confir-
matory factor analyses were conducted using AMOS
(version 21) (Table 4). Nine factors in different model
combinations were also tested, finding the four-factor
model be the better fit. The nine categories of volun-
teer motivation were combined in the four directions
as hypothesized in this study.
The nine- and six-factor models did not fit at all
(Figure 1). The four-factor model was the hypothe-
sized model, whereas the three-factor model followed
the study of Morrow-Howell and Mui (1989), who
suggested three dimensions, i.e., altruistic, social and
material. In the one-factor model, all nine motives
were combined as one factor. The one-factor model
was better than the three-factor model; however, the
hypothesized four-factor model showed the best
results.
Correlation and Construct Validity
With few exceptions, all the motives were positively
correlated with each other. However, the correlation
was not high enough to cause a problem of multicolli-
nearity (Pallant, 2011). The correlations were signifi-
cant among the volunteering motives in the same
direction of ABCE Model (Table 5). Moreover, the
“organization” motive showed a strong correlation
with enhancement, protective and career motives. The
enhancement motive also showed a high correlation
with the career and understanding motives. Regarding
602 M. U. BUTT ET AL.

Table 3. Results from factor analysis.

Value Cronbach’s a

Organization .824
2. Because I follow my (Organizational) Leader. .856
11. Because it has an important and needed cause .828
13. Because I feel a big gap in my life if I stop volunteering (in my organization) .796
16. Because my organization’s culture motivates me to keep volunteering .794
Career .843
17. Because it makes my resume better .916
38. Because it allows me to explore different career options .848
28. Because volunteering gives me an opportunity to build my work skills .755
22. Because I feel volunteering can find me employment opportunities .695
Enhancement .842
15. Because I feel that Volunteering is a feel good experience .868
26. Because volunteering makes me feel important and useful .828
5. Because Government is not doing enough and I think I can fill some gap by volunteering .788
6. Because society is not doing enough and I think I can fill some gap by volunteering .770
Religious .826
31. Because it can reward me in my afterlife .919
4. Because it makes me a religious person .864
1. Because it fits in my religious belief .798
Pro-Social .759
37. Because I am concerned about those less fortunate than myself .843
20. Because of being concerned about the people I am serving .815
18. Because of feeling compassion towards people in need .809
Protective .730
14. Because by volunteering I feel less lonely and remain busy .856
36. Because no matter how bad I am feeling, volunteering makes me feel forget about it .823
35. Because volunteering helps me work through my own personal problems .736
Social .771
12. Because people I know share an interest in community services .889
27. Because my friends, family members or closed ones volunteer .867
33. Because people I am close to want me to volunteer .732
Understanding .788
29. Because I gain knowledge and experience that is useful in life .851
7. Because volunteering allows me to gain a new perspective on things .824
34. Because I can explore my own strengths .816
Socialization .680
24. Because I can get social interaction and links through volunteering .827
19. Because I look forward to the social events that volunteering affords me .769
10. Because the social opportunities provided by volunteering are important to me .755

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

Table 4. Results from confirmatory factor analysis.

Model x2 df x2 / df CFI RMSEA GFI TLI RMR

Default Model
4 Factor 1004.597 356 2.822 .895 .061 .884 .871 .167
3 Factor 1153.544 358 3.222 .871 .067 .867 .843 .223
1 Factor 1091.620 365 2.991 .882 .063 .875 .859 .193

Note. x2 D chi squared; df D Degree of Freedom; x2 / df D chi-square of df; CFI D comparative fit index; RMSEA D root mean square error of approximation;
GFI D goodness of fit index; TLI D Tucker Lewis Index; RMR D root mean square residual.

correlations with volunteering time, all the volunteer-
ing motives studied showed a strong correlation with
volunteering time; organization, religion and protec-
tive motives showed the strongest correlation, and
socialization, values and social motives showed the
weakest (but still significant) correlation.
Cronbach’s alpha is commonly used test of internal
consistency reliability. A value of less than 0.6 is gen-
erally considered poor, whereas those in the range of
0.7 are considered acceptable, and values over 0.8 are
considered good (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994;
Sekaran, 2003). According to this criterion, all the var-
iables were in an acceptable range. Moreover, the aver-
age variance extracted is an important test for
discriminant validity. The average variance extracted
measures the explained variance of the construct, and
for discriminant validity, the square root of the aver-
age variance extracted should be larger than the corre-
lation of the construct with any of the other
constructs (Zait & Bertea, 2011). The square roots of
 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 603

Figure 1. ABCE Model of Volunteer Motivation.

Table 5. Correlation between the volunteers’ motivation.

N M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Values 496 4.73 1.27 0.458

2. Understanding 496 4.68 1.17 .150 0.476
3. Career 496 4.76 1.18 .175 .249 0.426
4. Enhancement 496 4.52 1.24 .069 .329 .356 0.440
5. Social 496 4.43 1.17 .111 .098 .135 .241 0.480
6. Protective 496 4.33 1.35 .133 .229 .192 .349 .059 0.424
7. Religious 496 5.00 1.42 .261 .195 .197 .220 .088 .246 0.551
8. Organization 496 4.57 1.28 .167 .194 .343 .390 .216 .370 .231 0.450
9. Socialization 496 2.90 1.11 .027 .143 .108 .085 .190 .061 .036 .096 0.379

Note. The Diagonal section shows Average Variance Extracted; M D Means; SD D Standard deviation.

the average variance extracted were not very high, but
they were still greater than the correlation among the
variables, thus confirming construct validity.
Discussion
The ABCE Model of Volunteer Motivation summa-
rizes the motives of volunteering (with functional per-
spectives) into four directions i.e., affiliation (A),
beliefs (B), career development (C), and egoistic (E).
In the use of scale, the English language is kept simple
and understandable for volunteers in areas where
English was not their first language. Along with the
six motives in VFI three additional volunteering
motives i.e. religious motive, organization motive and
socialization motive are studied and analyzed. The
religious motive, as theoretically discussed in earlier
studies, has been included as a motivation factor. The
organization-specific motives are now considered
under organization motive so different organizations
can use the same model for studying volunteer moti-
vation. The socialization motive has been added to
show the desire of social interaction. All three new
motives and the six motives of the VFI were the best
fitted in the hypothesized four-dimensional model
(the ABCE Model of Volunteer Motivation).
Retaining and keeping the volunteering motivated
is challenging for social service organizations that are
heavily dependent on the work of volunteers to carry
on the social work in societies. The model prescribed
by this paper can be adopted by researchers and
organizations to observe the level and degree of moti-
vation of volunteers under different categories or
motives. As the model and the questionnaire cover
broader functions, they can be used for volunteers
from different volunteering areas and organizations.
604 M. U. BUTT ET AL.
The results can be compared for volunteer motiva-
tion, training needs and volunteer retention. The cate-
gories of volunteering in the four factors model can
be a source of guidance to volunteer organizations
and NGOs for allocation of their limited resources.
The task allocation of a volunteer can also be decided
according to the survey results. For example, a volun-
teer motivated by affiliation can be given a task in
which he/she can have social interactions with other
people. It is understandable that an NGO may not be
able to allocate tasks according to the desires/volun-
teering motives of the limited volunteers, and hence,
training sessions and seminars may be introduced to
make volunteers aware of other social needs. Such
training sessions, if effective, could help change the
motives of volunteers as per the needs of society and
the purposes of the respective NGO. The model can
also be used to choose the learning objectives of such
training material to improve the organization’s opera-
tions. For example, volunteers motivated to volunteer
because of pro-social behavior (in belief direction)
can be motivated through training courses addressing
how the mission of the organization can be useful
and beneficial for the community. Volunteers moti-
vated by career development can be taught how vol-
unteering activities can be used to acquire knowledge
and skills that can be useful for career development.
Limitations and Future Directions
Some limits of this research should be underlined.
Firstly, the literature has been analyzed and subjective
judgments have been made to minimize and summa-
rize the number of items. In this study, the effectiveness
of the summarized items has not been compared to the
previous inventory to determine whether the summa-
rized items are accurate enough to represent the full
inventories introduced by Clary et al. (1998), Esmond
and Dunlop (2004) and others. Future studies may help
further explain the effectiveness of the summarized
items presented here compared to those in previous
studies. Furthermore, relations and correlations
between different motives may help improve the model.
In addition to applying the model empirically, some
interesting issues surrounding volunteer retention
remain to be studied. The relationship of volunteer
retention with selected motives can further add to the
literature on volunteer motivation and retention. Reli-
gious motives can be further improved and studies
conducted in volunteer organizations representing dif-
ferent faith. The organization motive needs to be
tested for use of the same scale in different types of
organizations and the intensity of the need to change.
The validity and the impact of including or ignoring
some volunteering motives in our model may be
tested. The possibility of combining certain variables
can also be explored. Moreover the results are not gen-
eralizable unless tested, as the study involved only vol-
unteers in Pakistan, the scale should thus be tested in
other parts of Asia and the world.
Conclusion
The functional approach of volunteering motivation
has been widely used, and the work of Clary et al.
(1998) is highly regarded. Clary and colleagues pro-
vided the VFI to measure volunteer motivation in six
dimensions. Although authors have also written on
uni-dimension, two-dimensional and three dimension
models are present, VFI has been more frequently
used since presented in 1998. However different
dimensions have been added in VFI and amendments
have been suggested by several authors (see Hallmann
& Harms, 2012; Jiranek et al., 2013) especially religion,
socialization and sports related motives. In the litera-
ture, emphasis has been placed on the importance of
religion in motivating and providing opportunities to
volunteer. Religion should not be included within val-
ues or pro-social motives, as Galen, Sharp, and
McNulty (2015) also concluded that religious beliefs
do not lend substantial pro-social advantages. Simi-
larly Socialization motive has been argued to be differ-
ent from Social motive in VFI. The researchers’ work
on volunteer motivation were analyzed to study nine
motives (including religion) and summarized the
items to a total of 30. EFA via SPSS confirmed n
ine different factors, and confirmatory factor analysis
via SPSS AMOS (version 21) suggested a four-factor
model to be the best fit.
Although this paper takes into account only three
additional motives and misses some volunteering
motives studied by other researchers, some motives
were assumed to be part of or closely related to the
motives included in the model. For example, “pastime”
(Van Vianen et al., 2008) and enjoyment function
(Allison et al., 2002; Rokach & Wanklyn, 2009) are
assumed to be well explained by organization, social
interaction and protective motives. The social justice

function (Jiranek et al., 2013) is assumed to be
explained by the pro-social motive in the belief direc-
tion. The organizational or task-specific motives are
assumed to be explained by organization and social
interaction motives in the model. We hope that the
ABCE model will guide and spur future research on
volunteer motivation from different volunteering areas
and organizations. A deeper knowledge of volunteers’
motivation will enable organization to grow up thanks
to the continuous experience of the volunteers and
their engagement to ensure a quality social service.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank Mr. Sabeeh Ullah Butt, Mr.
Muhammad Fahad Khalid, Dr. Muhammad Naseer Akhtar
from Huazhong University of Science and Technology (China)
and Professor Sumeet Gupta of the Indian Institute of Manage-
ment Raipur (India) for their support in the data collection and
analysis.
References
Acquadro Maran, D. (2014). Women’s participation in volun-
tary associations in Italy. In Encyclopedia of quality of life and
well-being research (pp. 7163–7166). Dordrecht, NL, Nether-
lands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_4210
Afroozeh, M. (2012). The study of motivational factors of vol-
unteers in university sport. Scholarly Journal of Education,
1(5), 66–75.
Agostinho, D., & Paço, A. (2012). Analysis of the motivations,
generativity and demographics of the food bank volunteer.
International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Marketing, 261(17), 249–261. doi:10.1002/nvsm
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organiza-
tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–
211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Alfes, K., Shantz, A., & Bailey, C. (2016). Enhancing volunteer
engagement to achieve desirable outcomes: What can non-
profit employers do? Voluntas, 27(2), 595–617. doi:10.1007/
s11266-015-9601-3
Allison, L. D., Okun, M. A., & Dutridge, K. S. (2002). Assessing
volunteer motives: A comparison of an open-ended probe
and Likert rating scales. Journal of Community & Applied
Social Psychology, 255(February), 243–255.
Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-
psychological answer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers.
Bekkers, R., & Schuyt, T. (2008). And who is your neighbor?
Explaining denominational differences in charitable giving
and volunteering in the Netherlands. Review of Religious
Research, 50(1), 74–96.
Bennett, M. R. (2015). Religiosity and formal volunteering
in global perspective. In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen, J. Haers,
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 605
& S. Mels (Eds.), Religion and volunteering (pp. 77–96).
London, UK: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6
Berger, J. (2003). Religious non-governmental organizations:
An exploratory analysis. Voluntas, 14(1), 15–40.
doi:10.1023/A:1022988804887
Bierhoff, H.-W., Sch€ ulken, T., & Hoof, M. (2007). Skalen der
Einstellungsstruktur ehrenamtlicher Helfer (SEEH). Zeits-
chrift F€ ur Personalpsychologie, 6(1), 12–27. doi:10.1026/
1617-6391.6.1.12
Brayley, N., Obst, P., White, K. M., Lewis, I. M., Warburton, J.,
& Spencer, N. M. (2014). Exploring the validity and produc-
tive power of an extended volunteers function inventory
within the context of episodic skilled volunteering by retir-
ees. Journal of Community Psychology, 42(1), 1–18.
doi:10.1002/jcop.21583
Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational
behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710–
725. doi:10.5465/AMR.1986.4283909
Butt, M. (2016). Volunteering, motivation and HRM practices
in faith based organization - dawateislami. Wuhan, PRC:
Huazhong University of Science and Technology.
Butt, M., Hu, B., & Soomro, K. A. (2015). Volunteering activi-
ties in developing countries: A study of youth participation
in Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Management,
7(13), 317–327. Retrieved from http://iiste.org/Journals/
index.php/EJBM/article/view/22146
Chapman, J. G., & Morley, R. (1999). Collegiate service-
learning: Motives underlying volunteerism and satisfac-
tion with volunteer service. Journal of Prevention &
Intervention in the Community, 18(1–2), 19–33.
doi:10.1300/J005v18n01_03
Charities Aid Foundation. (2016). CAF World Giving Index.
Retrieved from https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/publica
tions/2016-publications/download-the-caf-world-giving-
index-2016
Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1991). A functional analysis of
altruism and prosocial behavior: The case of volunteer-
ism. In Prosocial behavior. Review of personality and
social psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 119–148). Retrieved from
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1991-97117-005
Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volun-
teer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 156–159. doi:10.1111/
1467-8721.00037
Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas,
A. A., Haugen, J., & Miene, P. (1998). Understanding
and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A Function
Approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
74(6), 1516–1530.
Cnaan, R. A., & Goldberg-clen, robin S. (1999). Measuring
motivation to volunteer in human services. Journal of
Composite Materials, 33(10), 928–940. https://doi.org/
0803973233
Cnaan, R. A., Kasternakis, A., & Wineburg, R. J. (1993). Religious
people, religious congregations, and volunteerism in human
services: Is there a link? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quar-
terly, 22(1), 33–51. doi:10.1177/089976409302200104
606 M. U. BUTT ET AL.
Curtis, J. E., Baer, D. E., & Grabb, E. G. (2001). Nations of join-
ers: Explaining voluntary association membership in demo-
cratic societies. American Sociological Review. doi:10.2307/
3088873
Davila, M. C., & Ambientales, V. (2009). Assessment of the
volunteer process model in environmental volunteers.
Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 43(1995), 181–186.
Davila, M. C., & Fuertes, F. C. (2003). Adaptacion de instru-
mentos para la evaluacion de aspectos organizacionales en
ONGs. Revista de Psicologıa Del Trabajo Y de Las Organiza-
ciones, 19(2), 159–179.
Dennis, M. K., Scanlon, E. T., & Sellon, A. M. (2017). “It’s a
generosity loop”: Religious and spiritual motivations of vol-
unteers who glean produce to reduce food insecurity. Jour-
nal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work: Social
Thought, 1–23. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/
15426432.2017.1284633
Dworkin, J. B., Larson, R., & Hansen, D. (2003). Adolescents’
accounts of growth experiences in youth activities. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence, 32(1), 17–26.
Erasmus, B., & Morey, P. J. (2016). Faith-based volunteer
motivation: Exploring the applicability of the volunteer
functions inventory to the motivations and satisfaction
levels of volunteers in an Australian faith-based organi-
zation. Voluntas, 27(3), 1343–1360. doi:10.1007/s11266-
016-9717-0
Esmond, J., & Dunlop, P. (2004). Developing the volunteer
motivation inventory to assess the underlying motiva-
tional drives of volunteers in Western Australia a
research project funded by lotterywest. Perth, WA: CLAN
WA. Retrieved from http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/
19906943?selectedversionDNBD28586139
Farmer, S. M., & Fedor, D. B. (1997). Volunteer participa-
tion and turnover intentions: The role of satisfaction,
expectations and organizational support. Academy of
Management Proceedings, 1997(1), 380–384. doi:10.5465/
AMBPP.1997.4989224
Ferreira, M. R., Proença, T., & Proença, J. F. (2012). Moti-
vation among hospital volunteers: an empirical analysis
in Portugal. International Review on Public and Non-
profit Marketing, 9(2), 137–152. doi:10.1007/s12208-012-
0083-3
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and
behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading.
MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Fitch, T. (1987). Characteristics and motivations of college stu-
dents volunteering for community service. Journal of Col-
lege Students Personnel, 28(5), 424–431. https://doi.org/
0021-9789
Frisch, M. B., & Gerrard, M. (1981). Natural helping systems:
A survey of Red Cross volunteers. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 9(5), 567–579. doi:10.1007/
BF00896477
Gage, R. L. I., & Thapa, B. (2012). Volunteer motivations and
constraints among college students: Analysis of the volun-
teer function inventory and leisure constraints models.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 405–430.
doi:10.1177/0899764011406738
Galen, L. W., Sharp, M., & McNulty, A. (2015). Nonreligious
group factors versus religious belief in the prediction of pro-
sociality. Social Indicators Research, 122(2), 411–432.
doi:10.1007/s11205-014-0700-0
Garland, D. R., Myers, D. M., & Wolfer, T. A. (2008). Social
work with religious volunteers: Activating and sustaining
community involvement. Social Work, 53(3), 255–265.
Ghose, T., & Kassam, M. (2014). Motivations to volunteer
among college students in India. Voluntas, 25(1), 28–45.
doi:10.1007/s11266-012-9327-4
Gidron, B. (1978). Volunteerwork and its rewards. Volunteer
Administration, 11, 18–32.
Grant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motiva-
tion to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Man-
agement Review, 32(2), 393–417. doi:10.5465/
AMR.2007.24351328
Grant, A. M. (2012). Giving time, time after time: Work design
and sustained employee participation in corporate volun-
teering. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 589–615.
doi:10.5465/amr.2010.0280
Greenslade, J. H., & White, K. M. (2005). The prediction of
above-average participation in volunteerism: a test of the
theory of planned behavior and the volunteers functions
inventory in older Australian adults. The Journal of
Social Psychology, 145(2), 155–172. doi:10.3200/
SOCP.145.2.155-172
Hallmann, K., & Harms, G. (2012). Determinants of volunteer
motivation and their impact on future voluntary engage-
ment: A comparison of volunteer motivation at sport events
in equestrian and handball. International Journal of Event
and Festival Management, 3(3), 272–291. doi:10.1108/
17582951211262701
Handy, F., Cnaan, R. A., Hustinx, L., Kang, C., Brudney, J. L.,
Haski-Leventhal, D., & Zrinscak, S. (2010). A cross-cultural
examination of student volunteering: Is it all about resume
building? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(3),
498–523. doi:10.1177/0899764009344353
Hartup, W. W. (2005). Peer interaction: What causes what?
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33(3), 387–394.
doi:10.1007/s10802-005-3578-0
Holdsworth, C. (2010). Why volunteer? Understanding moti-
vations for student volunteering. British Journal of Educa-
tional Studies, 58(4), 421–437. doi:10.1080/
00071005.2010.527666
Hustinx, L., Handy, F., Cnaan, R. A., Brudney, J. L., Pessi, A. B.,
& Yamauchi, N. (2010). Social and cultural origins of moti-
vations to volunteer: A comparison of university students
in six countries. International Sociology, 25(3), 349–382.
doi:10.1177/0268580909360297
Jiranek, P., Kals, E., Humm, J. S., Strubel, I. T., & Wehner, T.
(2013). Volunteering as a means to an equal end? The
impact of a social justice function on intention to volunteer.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 153(5), 520–541.
doi:10.1080/00224545.2013.768594

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organi-
zations (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Wiley.
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative
review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implica-
tions. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49. doi:10.1111/j.1744-
6570.1996.tb01790.x
Lam, P.-Y. (2002). As the flocks gather: How religion affects
voluntary association participation. Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 41(3), 405–422. doi:10.1111/1468-
5906.00127
Law, B. M. F., Shek, D. T. L., & Ma, C. M. S. (2011). Explora-
tion of the factorial structure of the revised personal func-
tions of the volunteerism scale for Chinese adolescents.
Social Indicators Research, 100(3), 517–537. doi:10.1007/
s11205-010-9627-2
Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., & Mitchell, R. (1994). Approach:
The unfolding an alternative employee turnover. The Acad-
emy of Management Review, 19(1), 51–89.
Lewis, V. A., Macgregor, C. A., & Putnam, R. D. (2013). Reli-
gion, networks, and neighborliness: The impact of religious
social networks on civic engagement. Social Science Research,
42(2), 331–46. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.09.011
Maran, D. A., & Soro, G. (2010). The influence of organiza-
tional culture in women participation and inclusion in vol-
untary organizations in Italy. Voluntas, 21(4), 481–496.
doi:10.1007/s11266-010-9143-7
Mckeever, B. S., & Pettijohn, S. L. (2014). The nonprofit sector
in brief. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/sites/default/
files/publication/33711/413277-The-Nonprofit-Sector-in-
Brief–.PDF
Moreno-Jimenez, M. P., & Villodres, M. C. H. (2010). Pre-
diction of burnout in volunteers. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 40(7), 1798–1818. doi:10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2010.00640.x
Morrow-Howell, N., & Mui, A. (1989). Elderly volunteers: Rea-
sons for initiating and terminating service. Journal of
Gerontological Social Work, 13(3-4), 21–34. doi:10.1300/
J083V13N03_03
Musick, M. A., & Wilson, J. (2007). Volunteers: A social profile
(Philanthropic and nonprofit studies) (1st ed.). Blooming-
ton. IN: Indiana University Press.
Neely, A. R., & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (2013). The unfolding
model of volunteer motivation. Academy of Management
Proceedings, 2013(1), 12448–12485. doi:10.5465/
AMBPP.2013.12448abstract
Newton, C., Becker, K., & Bell, S. (2014). Learning and
development opportunities as a tool for the retention of
volunteers: A motivational perspective. Human Resource
Management Journal, 24(4), 514–530. doi:10.1111/1748-
8583.12040
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory
(3rd Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Okun, M. A., & Schultz, A. (2003). Age and motives for
volunteering: testing hypotheses derived from socioemo-
tional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 18(2),
231–9. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pubmed/12825773
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SERVICE RESEARCH 607
Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (2002). Considerations of com-
munity the context and process of volunteerism. American
Behavioral Scientist, 45(5), 846–867. doi:10.1177/
000276420204500506
Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS Survival Manual: A step by step guide to
data analysis using SPSS. Crow’s Nest, NSW: Allen &
Unwin.
Patel, L., & Wilson, T. (2004). Civic service in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(4),
22S–38S. doi:10.1177/0899764004269741
Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and
structural determinants of volunteerism. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 525–537. doi:10.1037/
0022-1160
Pinker, R. A. (1979). The idea of welfare (Vol. 9). London:
Heinemann Educational Books.
Planalp, S., & Trost, M. (2009). Motivations of hospice volun-
teers. American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine,
26(3), 188–192.
Putnam, R. D., & Campbell, D. E. (2012). American grace: How
religion divides and Unites Us (1st ed.). New York, NY:
Simon & Schuster.
Rokach, A., & Wanklyn, S. (2009). Motivation to volunteer:
Helping empower sick children. Psychology and Education
Journal, 46(1), 7–25.
Ruiter, S., & De Graaf, N. D. (2006). National context, religios-
ity, and volunteering: Results from 53 countries. American
Sociological Review, 71(April), 191–210. doi:10.1177/
000312240607100202
Ryan, R. L., Kaplan, R., & Grese, R. E. (2001). Predicting
volunteer commitment in environmental stewardship
programmes. Journal of Environmental Planning and
Management, 44(5), 629–648. doi:10.1080/
09640560120079948
Saksida, T., Alfes, K., & Shantz, A. (2016). Volunteer role mastery
and commitment: Can HRM make a difference? The Interna-
tional Journal of Human Resource Management, 5192(Febru-
ary), 1–23. doi:10.1080/09585192.2015.1126335
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill build-
ing approach (4th ed.). Singapore, SGP: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Shukla, A. (2010). First official estimate: An NGO for every 400
people in India. Indian Express. Retrieved from http://
archive.indianexpress.com/news/firstofficial-estimate-an-
ngo-for-every-400-people-in-india/643302
Sigmund, K., & Hauert, C. (2002). Altruism. Current Biol-
ogy, 12(8), 270–272. doi:10.1016/S0960-9822(02)00797-2
Soomro, K. A., Shukui, T., Butt, M., & Anand, V. (2016). Par-
ticipatory governance through youth volunteerism in public
sector of Pakistan. Journal of Public Administration and
Governance, 6(2), 169–180. doi:10.5296/jpag.v6i2.9722
Stukas, A. A., Daly, M., & Clary, G. E. (2006). Lessons from
research on volunteering for mobilizing adults to volunteer
for positive youth development. In E. G. Clary & J. E.
Rhodes (Eds.), Mobilizing adults for positive youth develop-
ment (pp. 65–82). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/0-
387-29340-X_4
608 M. U. BUTT ET AL.
Stukas, A. A., Hoye, R., Nicholson, M., Brown, K. M., &
Aisbett, L. (2016). Motivations to volunteer and their
associations with volunteers well-being. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45(1), 112–132. doi:10.117
7/0899764014561122
Taniguchi, H., & Thomas, L. D. (2011). The influences of reli-
gious attitudes on volunteering. Voluntas, 22(September),
335–355. doi:10.1007/s11266-010-9158-0
Thapar, R. (2015). The penguin history of early India: From the
origins to AD 1300. London, UK: Penguin Book.
Titmuss, R. M. (1971). Welfare “rights”, law and discretion.
The Political Quarterly, 42(2), 113–132. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
923X.1971.tb00061.x
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
P. D. (2015). World population prospects: The 2015 revision,
Volume II: Demographic profiles. Retrieved from https://esa.
un.org/unpd/wpp/Publications/
USAID. (2016). 2015 Civil society organization sustainability
index for Pakistan. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/
pakistan/civil-society-sustainability
Van Vianen, A. E. M., Nijstad, B. A., & Voskuijl, O. F. (2008).
A person-environment fit approach to volunteerism: Vol-
unteer personality fit and culture fit as predictors of affec-
tive outcomes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 30(2),
153–166. doi:10.1080/01973530802209194
Watt, D. H. (1991). United States: Cultural challenges to
the voluntary sector. In R. Wuthnow (Ed.), Between
States and markets: The voluntary sector in comparative
perspective (pp. 45). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Welty Peachey, J., Lyras, A., Cohen, A., Bruening, J. E., &
Cunningham, G. B. (2014). Exploring the motives and
retention factors of sport-for-development volunteers.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(6), 1052–
1069. doi:10.1177/0899764013501579
White, M., & Elander, G. (1992). Translation of an Instrument.
Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 6(3), 161–164.
doi:10.1111/j.1471-6712.1992.tb00145.x
Widjaja, E. (2010). Motivation behind volunteerism. Claremont
McKenna College. Retrieved from http://scholarship.clare
mont.edu/cmc_theses/4
Willems, J., Huybrechts, G., Jegers, M., Vantilborgh, T.,
Bidee, J., & Pepermans, R. (2012). Volunteer decisions
(not) to leave: Reasons to quit versus functional motives
to stay. Human Relations, 65, 883–900. doi:10.1177/
0018726712442554
Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26
(1), 215–240. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.215.
Wong, L. P., Chui, W. H., & Kwok, Y. Y. (2011). The vol-
unteer satisfaction index: A validation study in the
Chinese cultural context. Social Indicators Research,
104(1), 19–32. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9715-3
World Medical Association., W. M. (2001). World medical
association declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for
medical research involving human subjects. Bulletin of the
World Health Organization, 79(4), 373–4. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11357217
Wu, J., Wing Lo, T., & Liu, E. S. C. (2009). Psychometric prop-
erties of the volunteer functions inventory with Chinese
students. Journal of Community Psychology, 37(6), 769–780.
doi:10.1002/jcop.20330
Wuthnow, R. (2006). Saving America?: Faith-based services
and the future of civil society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Zait, A., & Bertea, P. (2011). Methods for testing discriminant
validity. Management and Marketing, 9(2), 8.
Copyright of Journal of Social Service Research is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.