Corporate Ideology and Causal Attributions of Poverty
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HABITAT'S HAMMER: CULTURAL TOOLS AND VOLUNTEER COGNITIONS AT WORK IN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY By JAMES W. ROBINSON Bachelor of Arts University of Oklahoma Norman, Oklahoma 1974 Master of Arts University of Tulsa Tulsa, Oklahoma 1978 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December, 2004 i C O P Y R I G H T By JAMES W. ROBINSON December, 2004 ii HABITAT'S HAMMER: CULTURAL TOOLS AND VOLUNTEER COGNITIONS AT WORK IN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY Thesis Approved: ___________________ Jean Van Delinder____________________ Thesis Adviser ____________________David Knottnerus____________________ ____________________Beth S. Caniglia_____________________ ___________________George E. Arquitt_____________________ ______________________John Shook________________________ ____________________Alfred Carlozzi______________________ Dean of the Graduate College iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For their meaningful contributions to my biases and the ability to reflect on them I would like to thank Dr. Jean Van Delinder, Dr. J. David Knottnerus, Dr. Beth Caniglia, Dr. Ed Arquitt, Dr. John Shook, and, most of all, my wife, Laura. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. DISCERNING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE CULTURE OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AND VOLUNTEER WORKER COGNITIONS ….………………………….…………………………………...1 Purpose…………………………………………………………………...…...1 The Organizational Setting: Habitat for Humanity…………….…...………...2 A Social Psychology and Organizational Theory Approach……………..…...5 A Mixture of Quantitative and Qualitative Methods………...…..….………...7 The Interplay Between Culture and Cognition.……………………..………...9 II. ATTRIBUTING CAUSES TO POVERTY: FROM COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND DOMINANT IDEOLOGY TO COMMON SENSE…........................................................….…..…..……..….11 Introduction……………..……………….…………………….….…...….....11 Attributing Causes to Poverty……..…………………………..…….……….12 Culture and Cognition…………….………………….…………………...….20 Summary……………………………………………………….…………….30 III. METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………………......32 Introduction………………………………..……………………………..….32 The Quantitative Approach Within the Bricolage……………………….......35 Qualitative Approaches Within the Bricolage…………………….................39 Summary….……………………………………………………………….....48 IV. THE ORGANIZATION AND ITS TYPIFICATIONS……………………….52 Introduction……..……………….….……………………………………….52 The Organization and Its Interface with Volunteers……....……………..….54 Typifications ……………………………..…………………..………….….57 Conclusions………………..……..………………………………………….63 V. INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS……………………………………………….….64 Introduction………………………………………………….……………….64 Habitat for Humanity’s Institutional Logics v. Unbridled Individualism...….66 The Relative Importance of Structrualistic Institutional Logics…….........….85 Individualistic Institutional Logics……………………………………….….89 Low-income Participants Typified: Selection, Partnership, and Transformation………………………………………………………..….93 v Chapter Page Summary…………………………………………………………………....100 VI. COMMITTED VOLUNTEERS IN SETTLED TIMES...………………… ...102 Introduction….……………….…………………….………………….…...102 Committed Member Attributions…………………………….………….....107 Habitat for Humanity’s Influence on Committed Member Attributions......110 Dialectics of Culture and Cognition …….………………………………...115 Committed Members and the Mission of Habitat for Humanity………......116 Committed Volunteers and Individualistic Institutional Logics…….…......123 VII. DISCERNMENT, SELECTION, PARTNERSHIP, AND TRANSFORMATION…………………………………………………….. ...130 Kinds of Poor People and Unbridled Individualism………………….…....130 Family Selection Based on Need and Merit…………………………….....140 Partnership and Transformation…………………………………………...146 Socialization, Institutionalization, and Categorical Changes……………...151 A Summary of the Qualitative Portion of the Bricolage………….…….....152 VIII. NEW VOLUNTEERS……………………………………………………......157 IX. THE CONSEQUENCES OF CONTRADICTIONS………………………. ...162 Introduction….……………….……………………………………….…...162 Qualitative Reflections on the Quantitative Results…………………….....162 Kinds of Poor People, Unbridled Individualism, Empathy, Settled Times, and Contradictions……………………………………………...164 The Consequences of Contradictions…………...….…………….………...176 Future Research…………………………………………………………....181 POSTSCRIPT……………………………………………………………......183 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………… ...189 APPENDIXES…………………………………………………………………………. ...198 APPENDIX A—ATTRIBUTIONS FOR CAUSES OF POVERTY IN THE UNITED STATES: 1969-1993….…………………......199 APPENDIX B—HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AFFILIATE FACT SHEET ...200 APPENDIX C—DETAILING THE QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN… ...201 APPENDIX D—DESCRIPTION OF INTERVIEWEE SELECTION PROCEDURES: PRETEST POSTTEST…………………....203 APPENDIX E—INTERVIEW SCHEDULE A (PRETEST)…………..……....206 APPENDIX F—INTERVIEW SCHEDULE B (POSTTEST)……..…..……....209 vi Page APPENDIX G—INDIVIDUALISM VS STRUCTURALISM INDEX…….....210 APPENDIX H—CONSENT FORM FOR SCHEDULE A AND B INTERVIEWEES…………………………………………....225 APPENDIX I—CONSENT FORM FOR SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS……….…..…………………….……………...227 APPENDIX J—RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS FORM FOR SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS….................................229 APPENDIX K—INITIAL TEMPLATE ANALYSIS CODEBOOK— BIOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS OF FULLER MATERIAL ...231 APPENDIX L—DESCRIPTION OF INTERVIEWEE SELECTION PROCEDURES: SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS…...233 APPENDIX M—AFFILIATE COVENANT….………….…………………....235 APPENDIX N—EXAMPLES OF COMBINED INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS …………………………..………………………....238 APPENDIX O—CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMITTED VOLUNTEERS...244 APPENDIX P—CHARACTERISTICS OF NEW VOLUNTEERS COMPARED TO THE CONTROL GROUP……………......251 APPENDIX Q—SAS PROGRAMS………………………..………………......254 APPENDIX R—SAS OUTPUT….……...…………………………………......266 APPENDIX S—OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL…………………………… ...278 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. UNBRIDLED INDIVIDUALISM…………………………………………….27 II. THE DOCUMENTS: CITATIONS AND PUBLICITY EXCERPTS….…......46 III. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY’S STRUCTURALISTIC INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS……………………………………………….68 IV. COMBINED INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS: CONSTITUTIVE OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY…………………………………...…..…….86 V. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY’S COMBINED INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS: CONSTITUTIVE OF GOAL ATTAINMENT PROCESSES.…….87 VI. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY’S OTHER INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS…. ….88 VII. THE OCCURRENCE OF STRUCTURALISTIC INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS WITHIN THE COMBINED INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY………………………….………… ….89 VIII. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY’S INDIVIDUALISTIC INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS……………………………………………….90 IX. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY’S MIXED INSTITUTIONAL LOGIC: SELECTION BASED ON NEED AND MERIT………………..…….......96 X. CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMITTED VOLUNTEERS………………...106 XI. COMMITTED VOLUNTEERS’ INDIVIDUALISM VS. STRUCTURALISM INDEX SCORES…………………………………...109 XII. MEAN INDIVIDUALISM VS. STRUCTURALISM INDEX SCORES WITH VARIANCES BY GROUP AND TEST……....161 XIII. BELIEFS ABOUT CAUSES OF HOMELESSNESS NASHVILLE 1987………………………………………………...……...166 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. TEMPLATE ANALYSIS PROCESS…………………..……………..…….42 2. IDEOLOGY, ATTRIBUTIONS, EMOTIONS & HELPING INTENTIONS…………………………………………………….…......168 3. UNBRIDLED INDIVIDUALISM, ATTRIBUTIONS, EMOTIONS & HELPING…………………………………………………………….....169 ix CHAPTER I DISCERNING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE CULTURE OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AND VOLUNTEER WORKER COGNITIONS For the needy shall not always be forgotten, and the hope of the poor shall not perish for ever.—Psalm 9: 18 Purpose We live in a socially and economically stratified world. Some people have great abundances of wealth, power, and prestige while others have very little—some do not even have enough material wealth to adequately clothe, feed, or shelter themselves. Those with great material abundance are commonly referred to as the rich and those with little in terms of worldly, material possessions are most often thought of as the poor. In contemporary times there have been a variety of organized efforts to deal with the problems of the poor. Such efforts vary in their approaches, based to some extent upon their explanations of how poverty is created and maintained. There is no question that poverty is a social phenomenon. The question is what type of social phenomenon is poverty? Is it simply the individual behaviors and personal characteristics of the poor themselves that result in their placement at the bottom of the social and economic hierarchy? Is such placement, on the contrary, a result of broad social and economic forces over which the poor have no influence? I contend that how an organization that deals with poverty related issues answers this question, to some extent, determines how it 1 attempts to solve the problems of the poor.1 The purpose of my investigation is to capture, at the organizational level, the interplay between culture and cognitions centered on the issue of poverty from a social psychological and organizational theory perspective. I focus here on how the explanations individuals give for the causes of poverty and the social and cultural mechanisms from which these explanations arise are influenced by and influence the poverty relevant elements of organizations in which they are embedded. This study looks at how an organization involved in poverty work, Habitat for Humanity International, influences the attributions its members hold toward the causes of poverty and how elements of this organization’s culture and social structure are influenced by the poverty relevant cognitions of its members. The Organizational Setting: