Running head: Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival

Alignment Between Perceived and Actual Motivation to Volunteer:

A Case Study of Roskilde Festival

Ísold Hákonardóttir - 63627 ​ Nanna S. Jorgensen - 63615 ​ Ronja D. Petersen - 63601 ​

Supervisor: Oda B. Hustad

Roskilde University

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 1

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 5 1.1. Problem Area 6 1.2. Problem Formulation 7 1.3. Research Question: 8 1.3.1. Sub Questions 8

2. Project Design 8

3. Methodology 9 3.1. Philosophy of Science 9 3.2. Research Design - Single Case Study 12 3.2.1. The Volunteering Survey 12 3.2.2. Interviews 16 3.3. Analysis Strategy 19

4. Theoretical Framework 20 4.2. Literature Review 21 4.2.1. General Surveys on Volunteer Motivation 21 4.2.2. Surveys on Volunteer Motivations at Special Events 22 4.2.3.Monga’s Survey on Volunteer Motivations at Special Events 23 4.3. Theory 24 4.3.1. Rational Choice Theory 24 4.3.1. Monga’s Motivational Survey Framework 27 4.3. Delimitations 30

5. Case Description 32

6. Analysis 35 6.1. Interview analysis 35 6.2. Survey Analysis 44

7. Discussion 55

8. Conclusion 72 8.1. Points for Further Research 74

9. Bibliography 74

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 2

Tables and Figures

Figure 1: The Critical Realist iceberg metaphor. 10

Figure 2: Organizational structure of the Roskilde Festival Group. 32

Figure 3: Bar chart illustrating the distribution of the motivational dimensions. 44

Figure 4: Bar chart illustrating affiliatory motivations by yearly income. 50

Figure 5: Bar chart illustrating free participation component by age. 52

Figure 6: Bar chart illustrating free participation component by student status. 52

Table 1: Perceived volunteer motivations. 39

Table 2: Actual motivations. 44

Table 3: Frequency table of key features of respondents. 45

Table 4: Average of motivations by volunteers and non-volunteers. 47

Table 5: Frequency table of summary of demographics. 48

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 3

Abstract

Roskilde Festival is reliant on the contribution of volunteer workers, and the recruitment of volunteers is therefore important for the festival’s success. Understanding volunteer motivations, and understanding their own perception of volunteer motivations, can help recruiters become more knowledgeable on how their approach of the volunteers affect the success of their recruitment. The aim of this research is therefore to explain and understand the alignment between volunteer motivations and the perception of these by volunteer recruiters at Roskilde Festival. Volunteer motivations are measured through Monga’s (2006) motivational framework showcasing five dimensions involved with the motivation to volunteer. The ranking of these motivations for the volunteers is found through a survey, and the ranking of the recruiters perceived motivational dimensions is found through interviews. A comparison of the rankings show a clear alignment involved with using volunteering as an instrument to get free participation in Roskilde Festival. It also shows several misalignments, namely that volunteers are more motivated by altruistic reasons than they are perceived to be, and that they are less motivated by solidarity reasons than the recruiters perceive.

Keywords: Roskilde Festival, volunteer, motivations, recruitment

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 4

1. Introduction

Festivals increasingly play a larger role in society, as they sustain cultural groups, create pride amongst the locals, and generate income (Crespi Vallbona & Richards, 2007, p. 2). A festival is - defined as “an organized set of special events, such as musical performances” (Cambridge University Press, 2019). Roskilde Festival in Denmark is today the largest music and arts festival in Northern Europe. Since the festival’s first event in 1971, it has grown continuously over the years bringing people from all over the world together through their love for music and culture, as they travel to Roskilde to take part in this weeklong event (Roskilde Festival, n.d.a). In relation to income generated by the festival, it is estimated that in 2009 the money spent by festival goers in the local community of Roskilde was 41,6 million DKK (Rambøll, 2011, p 25).

Roskilde Festival is a 100 % non-profit organization, and after each festival, all proceeds are donated to charity (Roskilde Festival, n.d.b) To lift the task of putting on this non-profit festival, the organization is heavily reliant on their volunteer workers, with 99,9 % of their workforce consisting of volunteers. In fact, on the about page of the festival, the first line states, “We are ​ who we are because of the volunteers” (Roskilde Festival, n.d.a)The definition of volunteering used in this project report has been influenced by the work of Wilson (2000) and Heery and Noon (2017). Volunteering is defined as any activity that involves individuals freely giving their time to a charitable cause, another person, or group. The operations are arranged by an employer and executed by volunteers who choose to take part in the charitable cause. At Roskilde Festival volunteers are provided with free admission to the festival and access to the Volunteer Village which has facilities such as free coffee, Wi-Fi, and massages (Roskilde Festival, n.d.c)). At Roskilde Festival, there are a handful of volunteers who join the different projects of the festival year round, and during the week of the festival, this number increases to 30.000 volunteers.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 5

1.1. Problem Area

In 2012, Roskilde Festival decided to change the minimum work hours required by the volunteers. Before 2012, volunteers put in a minimum of 24 hours, but in 2012 this was raised to 32 hours, with the exception of the volunteers only working during the four musical days, they still remain at 24 hours. Roskilde Festival attributed this increase to the growth of the festival over the precedent years. The festival had experienced that guests started attending the festival earlier each year, not just attending the four days of music, but also the five days of camping prior to the opening of the festival site. In addition to the increase in the length of the festival, the attendance increased as well (Koefoed, 2012). In 2011, 75.000 tickets were sold, and 25.000 volunteers helped the festival take place. In 2012, this increased to 98.000 tickets sold and 32.000 volunteers (Mortensen, 2011). Many of the volunteer organizations who organize different tasks for Roskilde Festival have expressed that they have had a harder time getting volunteers since 2012. According to them, it has been difficult finding volunteers who are willing to work for the required 32 hours, especially from the more mature population. This has created stress for the volunteer organizations, who in some cases have chosen to cut their workforce in half (Dahl, 2018), resulting in poorer service for the festival attendees. In another case, a scout club gave out monetary rewards to other scout clubs if they could provide them with volunteers (Kimer, 2017). The volunteer organizations also express that they have lost some of their experienced volunteers, creating a less stable workforce (Koefoed, 2012). Roskilde Festival argues that an increase in working hours help to boost the morale of the volunteers “A bigger effort results in increased solidarity, funnier community, a performance that lifts and makes a much bigger difference, and results that creates an even bigger pride” (Koefoed, 2012). This shows that volunteer motivations are perceived differently depending on who is observing them.

The characteristics of the relationship between the volunteer and the volunteer organization who employs them is different than the relationship between an employer and an employee. From the traditional perspective of human resource management, workers work for an organization with the knowledge that they get paid for their work, and that they may be promoted

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 6 or fired depending on the quality of their work. This remunerative, or coercive, influencing does not exist to the same degree in the relationship between a volunteer organization and their volunteers. Recruiting the volunteer to follow the organization’s objectives is therefore challenging. Since there is no remuneration for volunteer work, there is an imbalance between the smaller amount of available volunteers relative to the larger amount of volunteers needed. From the perspective of supply and demand, this means that the volunteer organizations will either have to come to terms with a lack of volunteers or try to make volunteering more attractive to attract more supply (Monga, 2006, p. 4). This scenario was exemplified above, where it was described how some volunteer organizations have disclosed that they have offered monetary rewards to other organizations in exchange for volunteer work. There is also an imbalance between the cost for the volunteer if they leave the work midway through their volunteer job in comparison with the cost of that same action for the volunteer organization. Whereas there is no monetary loss for the volunteer, should they quit, the organization loses both the money they spent on training the volunteer and the opportunity cost of having been able to train someone else who could have continued the work (Monga, 2006, p. 4).

1.2. Problem Formulation

In 2012, Roskilde Festival still lacked a third of their volunteers with less than a month to the festival’s start (Schouboe, 2012), and in 2017, the festival estimated that they were short of approximately 1.000 volunteers during the festival (Aurby, 2017). Given the growing popularity of Roskilde Festival and the economic, cultural, and social benefits the event brings with it, it is crucial that the volunteers, who make the event possible, are recruited for the event. An important element in this recruitment is for the organization to understand the motivations of their prospect volunteers (Monga, 2006, p. 5). For this research project, motivation is defined as the internal and external factors prompting the conscious or unconscious desire and energy within individuals to be interested and committed to achieving a goal (Eggert, 2015). Volunteer organizers might emphasize one aspect of volunteering in their recruitment process, thinking that it relates to the volunteer’s motivation, when in fact the volunteer desires to gain something else

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 7 from the experience. As researchers, this has made us interested to investigate if there is an underlying belief amongst the volunteer organizations at Roskilde festival as to why people volunteer, and whether or not this is the same as the actual motivation of the volunteers. This paradigm has led us to ask the following research question:

1.3. Research Question:

What is the alignment between the motivation to volunteer at Roskilde Festival, and the perception that the volunteer recruiters have of motivation to volunteer at Roskilde Festival? 1.3.1. Sub Questions

● What do volunteer recruiters perceive to be the motivation behind the volunteers wanting to volunteer at Roskilde Festival? ● What are the volunteers’ motivation behind volunteering at Roskilde Festival? ● How does the volunteers’ motivation to volunteer at Roskilde Festival, compare with the volunteer recruiters’ perception of their motivations?

2. Project Design

The following chapter includes the structure of this research paper, with short descriptions of each chapter. Chapter 3 includes an overview of the critical realist philosophy guiding the methodology of this report. The chapter also covers how the data is collected through a survey and ten interviews, and how the analysis strategy is used to analyze the data. In chapter 4, the theoretical framework applied during the research process is presented, beginning with a literary review on empirical research conducted on volunteer motivations. This is followed by a description of how the grand theoretical perspective of rational choice theory relates to volunteer motivations, and how the theoretical framework of Monga’s five volunteer motivational dimensions is used to find volunteer motivations at Roskilde Festival. Chapter 5 describes the case of Roskilde Festival. It elaborates on the structure of the organization and explains the mechanics of volunteer recruitment at the festival. Chapter 6 consists of the analysis of the interview data and the survey data, to find the volunteers’ motivations and the recruiters

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 8 perceptions thereof. In chapter 7, the alignment between volunteer motivations, and how these are perceived by volunteer recruiters are discussed. The focus is on the different elements included in the motivational structure of the two comparables. Finally, chapter 8 concludes on the alignment discussed in the previous chapter.

3. Methodology

This chapter includes a description of the philosophical approach applied in this research project. Then the research design of a single case study is presented and the application of the two data collection methods is discussed. This is followed by a description of the methods used to analyze the data sets. Finally, the analysis strategy is presented, explaining the critical realist approach to data analysis applied in this research project.

3.1. Philosophy of Science

In 1975, Roy Bhaskar published A Realist Theory of Science. This publication was the start of a ​ ​ new direction in the philosophy of science, critical realism. Critical realism is an alternative to positivism and constructivism but draws elements from both philosophies. Bhaskar posited that there is a difference between reality and what can be known about reality through empirical research. Human knowledge is limited to a small portion of a greater and deeper reality. Hence, Bhaskar separates human knowledge and reality. In addition to being a philosophy of science, critical realism also serves as a general methodological research framework, however, it is not linked to any specific set of methods (Fletcher, 2017). The focus of critical realism is the study of structures, with the aim to discover the unknown. Critical realism focuses more on how to do research than to theorize about how the world is (Engholm 2014).

A key feature, and distinction of critical realism from other philosophies of science is its ontological and epistemological standpoint. Critical realism unites an interpretive epistemology with a realist ontology. This means that critical realism accepts that a real world exists outside of

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 9 the researcher, however, it is socially constructed and therefore at risk of being interpreted wrongly (Bygstad & Munkvold, 2011). In critical realism, there are three levels of social reality: The real, the actual, and the empirical. The real and the actual can be understood as the ontological part, and the empirical can be understood as the epistemological part of critical realism (Egholm 2014). In other words, the real and the actual represents the existing reality, and the empirical is the researcher’s social understanding of reality, based on their experiences. The “iceberg” metaphor, shown in Figure 1 is often used to illustrate the ontology and epistemology of critical realism. The iceberg is an entity that has multiple levels relating to its existence. Important to note, is that one level is not more real than the other, but all are an essential part of its existence. The mechanisms that govern social reality are causal and cannot exist independent of each other (Fletcher, 2017). The first level is the empirical, which is the subjective experience ​ ​ ​ of the world, the translative level of reality. Common sense is often used to explain events, or objects, at this level and they can be measured empirically. These events are observed by human interpretation and experience. The empirical level is the domain of the material existence and of the social ideas, decisions, meanings, and actions that the material existence is subject to. The middle level is the actual level, which is where objects and events are activated with the effects ​ of powers and structures. Events occur regardless of human experience and interpretation and are often different from what is detected at the empirical level. The last level of social reality is the ​ real. This is the level where causal structures, or mechanisms, exist. The structures and powers of ​ social and physical objects detected at the empirical level are inherited properties to the object's existence (ibid). Critical realism thereby seeks to explain and understand the causal relationship between phenomena and their mechanism (Bygstad & Munkvold, 2011).

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 10

Figure 1: The critical realist iceberg metaphor. Source: Fletcher, 2017, p 183 ​ Taking an outset in critical realism, this project report seeks to explain and understand the alignment, or misalignment, between the volunteers and volunteers recruiters at Roskilde Festival. The empirical level is the observed deficit in volunteers at Roskilde Festival. This phenomenon can be observed and empirically confirmed. The actual level is seen as a rational choice involved in deciding to volunteer, a process that exists whether observed or not. The mechanism that is used to explain the rational choice to volunteer at Roskilde Festival is the factors that motivate individuals to volunteer. The real level is the possible mechanisms that will be examined in this research project, namely, motivations and perceived motivations. This project specifically focuses on trying to understand if there is a relationship in the mechanism between volunteer motivations and the recruiters’ perception of the motivations of individuals that choose to volunteer for them. Hence, trying to understand if a there is a mismatch, or a match, between perceived motivation and actual motivation. The outset of this focus is the speculation that, if recruiters are focusing on a different motivation to recruit volunteers than what actually motivates individuals to volunteer, that might be a causal factor to why there is a deficit in volunteers at Roskilde festival. Therefore, the scope of this project does not cover a

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 11 study on the possible causal relationship between the phenomenon and mechanism, but a study on the relationship between the mechanisms themselves.

3.2. Research Design - Single Case Study

As written by Bryman, “The basic case study entails the detailed and intensive analysis of a ​ single case” (Bryman, 2012, p. 66). As explained above, the case study of Roskilde Festival aims its focus at the motivation of the volunteers at the festival in comparison with what volunteer recruiters believe their motivation to be. As pointed out by Bryman (2012), it is not the focus of a single case study to collect generalizable data aimed at representing a larger category. Therefore, it is not the aim of this case study to generalize its findings of volunteer motivations onto the motivations of volunteers at all festivals. The aim is rather to generate data specific to Roskilde Festival that may be able to help its volunteer organizations understand volunteer motivations in order to help with their recruitment of volunteers. That being said, the researchers of this report find that the case of Roskilde Festival is best categorized as what Bryman identifies as a “representative, typical, or exemplifying” case (ibid, p. 70) as it belongs to the broader category ​ of volunteer motivation at special events. In comparison with other festivals in Denmark who use volunteers, e.g. Smukfest (Smukfest, 2019) and Jelling Festival (Jelling Musikfestival, 2019), the case of Roskilde Festival has not been chosen because of its difference from other festivals, but rather because it exemplifies the broader category of music festivals as special events. As Roskilde Festival is the largest festival in Denmark, they have the largest amount of volunteers to collect data from. By placing Roskilde Festival in the same category as similar special events, and using theories and frameworks compatible with previous case studies on special events, e.g. Monga’s (2006) survey framework, this case study adds on to the existing literature on volunteering at special events.

3.2.1. The Volunteering Survey

In order to investigate the motivations of individuals to volunteer at Roskilde Festival, a survey research has been designed. The survey is designed with the theoretical framework of Monga

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 12 (2006), which will be elaborated on in detail in the theory chapter below. In this section of the methods chapter, the design of the survey will be introduced, and considerations will be reflected upon. The survey will be referred to as the Volunteering Survey for the remainder of this report.

For the survey design of this research, inspiration has been taken from both Bryman (2012) and Fanning’s (2005) guides for survey research. When creating the survey, three goals were kept in mind. First, the research objectives has to be met. Second, the researchers have to have reliable data to analyze. Third, people must want to take the time to answer the questionnaire. To meet the latter goal, the researchers decided to keep the questionnaire short and simple. The time limit was set, so that each respondent should not take more than five minutes to answer the questionnaire. To guide the respondents, the questions were kept short, simple and similar in wording.

A test survey was distributed to better meet these goals. The focus was on the readability and understandability of the questionnaire. There were some minor changes made after the test survey. The main change was to add a sentence in the general instructions stating “The questions ​ all relate to why you volunteered at Roskilde Festival (Not your general believes)”. This was ​ because respondents in the test survey were unsure how to answer questions such as “volunteering creates a better society” since that is their general belief, but is not a contributing factor to wanting to volunteer at Roskilde Festival.

The survey is in the form of an online self-completion questionnaire. A self-completion questionnaire is a similar method to a structured interview, but with the absence of an interviewer to ask the questions. The respondents read the questions themselves on their own time when it suits them. The main advantages of the self-completion questionnaires for this research is firstly, that it is quicker to administer than a structured interview. Secondly, it gives the opportunity to survey a larger amount of respondents (Bryman, 2012). However, some limitations are also included in the method. The data is affected by how the respondents understand the questions, as they might interpret them differently than the researchers. Also, the honesty of the respondents can be questioned, as their perception of themselves might disconnect with reality (Flora 2005). It is also not possible to get in-depth answers from the respondents when conducting a survey.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 13 For the Volunteering Survey, there were 392 participants, which would not have been possible if not for the advantages of the online self-completion questionnaire. The survey was distributed through social media, mainly Facebook, with a link to the survey. The link was posted to Facebook groups dedicated to the recruitment of volunteers for Roskilde Festival but was also given to recruiters to share with their volunteers.

The sampling of the population is a non-probability sample. The reason for this is two-fold, firstly, the access to data on the population is highly restricted, and might not exist. And secondly, one of the aims of the survey was to get as many respondents as possible, by using a probability sampling method, the sample is limited and might not have gotten as many respondents. The online fora, such as Facebook where the survey was distributed, where all publicly accessible, making the sampling a convenience sample, as it is easily available to the researchers (Bryman, 2012). But, the sample also has characteristics of a snowball-sample, because the recruiters who were interviewed in this research, were asked to distribute the survey to their volunteers. Lastly, to evaluate the sample for the survey, it is important to address the sampling bias. Sampling bias, is when there is a certain proportion of the population that has no chance of being selected to participate in the survey (Bryman, 2012). As the survey was distributed online, there could be prospect respondents that do not have access to the internet or are not active Facebook users. What this means for the research is, that the generalization of the data is more restricted. This is also due to the fact that the data of the population is restricted.

The survey was divided into two parts. First part investigated the motivations of volunteers with the use of the Likert scale. The second part consisted five demographic questions. The demographics used in Monga’s (2006) survey were; Gender, age, income and employment status. In the Volunteering Survey, these demographics were used, and the fifth demographic variable of student status was added. This is to see if there could be a relationship between motivations to volunteer at Roskilde Festival and if the respondent is a student or not. The decision to have the demographic questions at the end of the survey was made because of recommendations from Fanning (2005). In her paper she states that the demographic questions can easily make the respondent feel bored and some are therefore likely not go through with the survey.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 14 As mentioned above, the Likert scale was used in this survey to investigate the motivations of individuals to volunteer at Roskilde Festival. The Likert scale can be described as a matrix question with a multiple-indicator or multiple-item measure reflecting a feeling or attitude about a set of statements. The scale is designed to measure the intensity of feelings about a statement (Bryman, 2012). In the Volunteering Survey, the respondents were asked to rate their agreement level of statements relating to their motivations to volunteer at Roskilde Festival. The options at level of agreement were on a five-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree, where the middle answer was “neither agree nor disagree” that indicates neutrality on the statement. One of the limitations of the Likert scale is the interpretation of the answers because individuals interpret this scale differently. In this survey research, the researchers have decided to interpret the middle value, neither agree nor disagree, as a statement of neutrality and that the statement was not a contributing factor the respondent to volunteer at Roskilde Festival. The respondents’ replies for each statement was then scored and all the respondents’ scores were summarised into an overall score. The scores to each level of agreement were given from the negative level to the most positive. The full survey questionnaire with questions adapted from Monga's survey framework, is in Appendix B.

Before starting the analysis of quantitative data, it is important to look into what type of data has been collected in order to determine the analysis technique to analyze it. Each question asked in the survey is a variable that generates a certain type of data that will be used to understand volunteer motivations. The main types of variables in this survey are nominal, dichotomous, and ordinal variables. The nominal variables are variables that are categories that cannot be ranked in order. In this survey, the employment status is a nominal variable. The second type of variable is the dichotomous variables, they are variables that contain only two categories that cannot be ranked in order. In this survey, these variables are gender and students status. For the analysis, the dichotomous variables can be treated as nominal variables. Lastly, this survey contains ordinal variables, these are variables that can be ranked but the difference between categories is unknown or uneven. In this survey, these variables are: Age, because age was divided into categories, e.g. under 19, 20-29, 30-39, etc., yearly income, which was also divided into categories and lastly the motivations. As mentioned above, the motivations are in the form of the

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 15 Likert scale. The variables created with the motivational questions are in the from of a scale of one to five, but because these variables are a statement of feeling or agreement, the distance between the categories is unknown. Therefore will the motivational questions be treated as ordinal variables (ibid).

By considering the type of variables created in the survey, strategies and methods to analyze the quantitative data was chosen. The technique has to fit with the variables, the size and the nature of the variable can have limitations for different types of techniques. By considering the type of information that is generated from each question and what type of information is wished to gain from the variable, the technique to analyze the data was chosen (ibid). The idea behind the survey is to examine the motivations of individuals, and then be able to examine variables and compare them. Likert scale data is analyzed differently than other ordinal measurement scale data. The recommended analysis of Likert scale data is at the interval measurement scale. The Likert scale data is created by calculating the composite score, i.e. mean, to measure central tendency (Boone & Boone, 2012). By using this technique, the variables can be ranked and compared with each other. Furthermore, the idea was to ask the respondents demographic questions to be able to categorize motivations after different demographics.

The two main techniques for analysis of the quantitative survey data are univariate analysis and bivariate analysis. Univariate analysis is where one variable is examined at a time. The main approaches used are frequency tables and diagrams, such as barcharts and pie charts. Bivariate analysis is the analysis of two variables at a time to uncover if there can be found a relationship between them. Important to note is that the aim is not to prove a causal relationship. The main approach used from the bivariate analysis is a contingency table. The aim of making contingency tables between motivations and demographic variables is to see if there is a pattern or relationship in the data (Bryman , 2012).

3.2.2. Interviews

The second data collection method used during the research process is semi-structured interviews. The researchers chose ten interviewees, partially by using defined sampling dimensions. The only defined dimension of the sampling structure was that the interviewee

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 16 needed to be in charge of recruitment. Once the dimension had been defined, contact was attempted to be made to those who fit the criteria. Possible interview subjects were searched for online, on those fora where volunteer recruiters search for volunteers. This was mainly done on the Roskilde Festival recruitment page on the festival’s website, and in a Facebook group, specially created for recruitment purposes called Roskilde Festival - Become a Volunteer. An email was sent to all the appropriate recruiters found on these fora, where several replied back. The first ten recruiters who were available for interviews were chosen, with no regards to other criteria than them being volunteer recruiters. A more thorough description of the interviewees is included in Appendix C. The researchers sought to interview a representative from the Roskilde Festival Group to gain information on how the organization deals with their volunteers. Such a collaboration was not deemed possible by the Roskilde Festival group, which limited the scope of the research.

As mentioned, the interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview structure. This involves bringing a series of open-ended questions to the interview, but also allowing the interview to develop and change throughout. The semi-structured approach allows for the reconstruction of subjective points of views, which fits this case well, as the aim of the interview is to gain information on the interviewees’ perceptions about volunteer motivations (Flick, 2014). The interview style mimicked the responsive interview, where the importance of building a trusting relationship between the interviewer and interviewee is emphasized. This interview style tends to have a friendly and gentle tone, with little to no confrontation, which allows for more give-and-take in the conversation. The pattern of questioning is flexible, and the order of questioning changes, depending on the conversation, and new questions are asked, also called probes, to further explore the experiences and knowledge of each individual expert (ibid). Nine of the ten interviews were conducted and recorded over the phone, and the last interview was conducted via email correspondence due to scheduling issues. The interviews consisted of three parts. First, a series of preliminary questions were asked to gain basic information about the volunteer organization and the interviewee. Second, a more unstructured and open question was asked to obtain analyzable data on the recruiter’s perception of what motivates their volunteers. Although the analysis of the data would be done based on Monga’s (2006) theoretical

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 17 framework, it was important that the question was asked with no reference to the theory applied during the research, as the answers needed from the expert should remain unbiased by the researchers. Finally, the experts were asked if they had anything to add to the interview, that they felt were relevant information to the researcher. A disadvantage of excluding theory from the interviews is that data generated by the interview is limited. It is difficult to determine whether an unmentioned dimension from the theoretical framework signifies that the dimension is not perceived as relevant by the interviewees, or that they simply did not think to mention it. Had the interviewees been presented with the theoretical framework before the interview, the data might have looked different. Another course of action could also have been to let the interviewees take the Volunteering Survey, based on their perceptions on volunteer motivations, to see how they directly score with the actual motivations.

Once the interviews were conducted, they were transcribed. Three interviews have been translated from Danish to English, as those interviewees were not proficient in English. Translation of interviews offers some challenges, especially the risk of altering meanings during the translation. However, the researchers have followed the faithful translation approach, as suggested by Newmark (1988). The approach is aimed at the attempt to create the exact contextual meaning of the original language, within the constraints of the structures of the translated language. Few phrases from the interviews conducted in English have been translated using the same method when an interviewee was not able to express a specific phrase in English, and therefore briefly spoke in Danish.

The finished transcripts of the ten interviews were then coded, which involves identifying the theoretic ideas within the collected data (Halperin & Heath, 2017). Coding is applied in order to categorize the empirical data and prepare it for the analysis. This categorization is based on the applied theory of the research, which in the case of this research paper is Monga’s (2006) five volunteer motivational dimensions. His theory is thoroughly described in the theory section of this report and suggests a framework for assessing volunteer motivations. The coding of the interviews was done by creating five coding categories, each based on one of Mongas’ dimensions. Each time an instance was found that related to a dimension, it was coded for and put in the appropriate category. Two additional categories were created, one involving other

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 18 factors perceived by the interviewees to have an effect on the volunteers’ motivations, and another involving other relevant details the interviewees provided. These two coding categories were included in the coding manual, as the researchers were aware of the possibility of the interviewees providing relevant data, that is not covered by the theoretical framework (Halperin & Heath, 2017).

3.3. Analysis Strategy

The following section presents the analysis strategy for this research paper, which involves the critical realist approach applied to the analysis of the collected data. Within the critical realist approach, different analysis strategies can be followed. The analysis strategy of this research paper is inspired by Bygstad and Munkvold (2011) and Pawson and Tilly (1997). They suggest a set of steps and principles to follow when conducting critical realist research, which involves finding a causal relationship between a set of mechanisms and a phenomenon. They utilize these steps to identify structural components embedded within the mechanisms and understand how these components interact to result in the researched phenomenon. However, as previously mentioned, the goal of this research paper is focused on analyzing the mechanisms of the phenomena and on not confirming their causality. Thereby, this analysis strategy is based on those steps aimed towards achieving this goal.

First, a description of the events that have been observed as having an important influence on the phenomena is presented. This is found in the problem area, where the deficit in volunteers is connected to to the unremunerative relationship between volunteers and their recruiters, as well as the increase in minimum volunteering hours.

Then the key actors of the phenomena are described, which for this case, are the volunteers and volunteer recruiters at Roskilde Festival. This information is found in the methods chapter and in Appendix C, where the interviewees and targeted survey respondents are presented. These first two steps are both important to the research, as it provides the necessary information needed to understand the basis of the analysis.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 19 The third step involves abstracting the case by exploring various applicable theoretical perspectives. Bygstad and Munkvold (2011) express that the researcher should collect the relevant theories, and be able to compare them with each other and integrate them when they are significant. For this research study, several approaches to volunteer motivations were considered. The most relevant of these are included in the literature review, where a handful of theories on how to measure volunteer motivations are presented. The details of the theory that was decided to apply during the analysis, Monga’s theoretical framework on volunteer motivations, is displayed in the theory chapter.

For the fourth step, Pawson and Tilly (1997) suggest some areas of the mechanisms that should be investigated. First, each mechanism is thoroughly analyzed so that the explanation of how it is that the mechanism might have led to a specific outcome in the given context is possible. The thorough analysis of the mechanisms can be found in the analysis chapter, where the two mechanisms are analyzed separately, by applying Monga’s theoretical framework to the data collected through the survey and the interviews respectively. An important aspect of the critical realist analysis strategy is to identify other active mechanisms which could have an effect on the phenomena, that the researchers have not included as key mechanisms (Bygstad & Munkvold, 2011). This is possible for this research paper, as other active mechanisms have been coded for during the data handling of the interviews, as described in the sub-chapter above. The data is based on the factors mentioned by the interviewees that did not pertain to Monga’s (2006) theoretical framework.

4. Theoretical Framework

In this section, existing relevant literature on motivation to volunteer is introduced with the aim to situate the research of this report within it and show how the research of this report adds to the existing literature. Building on the groundwork of previous researchers, the theoretical approach of this report is then explained in the second part of this section.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 20

4.2. Literature Review

This literary review features some of the common survey frameworks used in the context of humanitarian volunteer work and survey frameworks adapted specifically to volunteer motivations at special events.

4.2.1. General Surveys on Volunteer Motivation

One of the more widely used pieces of research on volunteer motivations is done by Clary et al. (1998), who hypothesized that volunteering entails six types of rewards that form the basis behind volunteer motivations. The six rewards, or functions as they call it, are: Values, ​ understanding, enhancement, career, social, and protective function. The values function involves volunteering because of important values, such as aiding those in need. The function of understanding relates to volunteering to gain knowledge or utilize a skill set otherwise unused. Enhancement involves volunteering for personal growth and development. The career function concerns the desire of career-related experience through volunteering. The social function entails volunteering to gain and enhance social relations. Finally, the protective function connects volunteerism to the need to reduce negative feelings or deal with personal issues. Clary et al. (1998) created the Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI) to assess these six functions. The VFI ​ ​ includes a questionnaire containing a total of 48 statements, which the respondents rate from 1, not at all important/accurate to you, to 7, extremely important/ accurate to you. Each statement is linked with one of the six functions, and the ratings of the statements belonging to each function are summed up. This gives an overview of which functions matter to the respondent, and the results can easily be compared to other respondents. The VFI was created based on a sample of humanitarian volunteers, and the theory works from a set of assumptions. The first is that people volunteer to fulfill important personal goals. The second assumption believes that people performing the same volunteer activity might do so for different reasons. The third point assumes that people may seek to fulfil more than one personal goal. Lastly, the success of the recruitment,

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 21 satisfaction, and retention of volunteers is linked to how the experience of volunteering fulfills the important goals of the volunteer.

4.2.2. Surveys on Volunteer Motivations at Special Events

According to Grammatikopoulos, Kourstelios, and Tsigilis (2006), there is a general consensus within the field of voluntarism that motivations for volunteering differ whether the subject of study is humanitarian voluntarism or special event voluntarism. Matthews (2008) defines a special event as a one-time or infrequently occurring event, outside normal programs or activities of the sponsoring or organizing body. He expands the definition by adding that a special event is a gathering of people, typically lasting from a few hours to a few days, that is designed to honor, celebrate, teach, sell, or observe human endeavors. Where the VFI, discussed above, is catered towards humanitarian volunteerism, Farrell, Johnston, and Twynam (1998) focused their study specifically on volunteer motivations at special events by conducting a case study on The Scott Tournament of Hearts in Canada. To research the motivations of the volunteers, they undertook a survey with a sample of 300 volunteers and concluded in their survey that motivation to volunteer at special events is different from that of humanitarian work. They created the Special Event Volunteer Motivation Scale (SEVMS) based on previous work done by Cnaan and Goldberg-Glen (1991) and Getz (1991). Cnaan and Goldberg-glen (1991) hypothesized that volunteers volunteer either due to altruism or egoism, the latter which they later split into material-egoism and social egoism. The altruistic volunteerism occurs when the motivation for volunteering is based on the consideration of others, whereas egoistic voluntarism exists when volunteering for self-oriented reasons (Piliain and Charng 1990; Clary and Snyder 1991). Based on these two principles, the SEVMS involves a questionnaire, like the VFI. However, the SEVMS is only sectioned into four factors: Solidary, purposive, external traditions, and commitment. The solidary factor refers to social interactions, networking and group identification; the purposive factor denotes the desire to contribute to the event and be useful; external traditions relate to external influences, such as time and social environment; and lastly, the commitment factor connects external expectations and personal skill sets with motivation to

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 22 volunteer (Farrell et al., 1998). From their research, Farrell at al. (1998) found that the motivational factor that ranked the highest amongst special event volunteers was a want to make the event a success. Relating this to the work of Getz (1991) and Cnaan an Goldberg-glen (1991), as mentioned above, they found that there was a strong motivation of being affiliated with the event because of the event itself, e.g. because of the event activity or the festiveness of the event (Farrell et al., 1998).

The SEVMS, created by Farrell et al., has been used by other researchers to measure volunteer motivations at special events. In their research on volunteer motivations at the National Special Olympics in Ames, USA in 2006, Rich Engelhorn (2011) surveyed 289 participants in an effort to better understand the motivations of the volunteers. Comparing his results with the results found by Farrell et al., Engelhorn concludes, like Farrell et al., that helping in making the event successful was one of the main motivational factors. He also found that to do something worthwhile, help in creating a better society, and give something back to their community were ranked high by the volunteers. The lowest reasons among the two surveys were reasons for volunteering that related to commitments, family traditions, and external traditions (Engelhorn 2011). The research by Engelhorn gives an insight into why people choose to volunteer at special events, more specifically sports events. Being that Roskilde Festival includes some of the same special event features as the sports events, some insight can be learned from this research.

4.2.3.Monga’s Survey on Volunteer Motivations at Special Events

Also questioning the applicability of volunteer motivations surveys focusing on welfare and humanitarian projects, Monga (2006) based their survey framework on an extensive literary research of both humanitarian volunteer frameworks as well as special events literature. Monga sections motivations to volunteer into five dimensions in their survey to account for the diverse volunteer activities of special events and thereby reflect the complexity of the volunteer motivations. These are: 1) affiliatory motivations, 2) altruistic motivations, 3) instrumentalist motivations 4) egoistic motivations, and 5) solidarity motivations. The instrumentalist dimension includes a survey question on free entry to the special event as a motivational component. Given that the volunteers at Roskilde Festival get a free ticket for volunteering, this element, which is

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 23 not included in the other reviewed surveys, seems highly relevant to include in a survey on volunteer motivation at Roskilde Festival. Furthermore, Monga’s survey framework (2006) does not exclusively focus on sporting events which has been the basis of Farrell et al.’s, survey framework. Using the model they developed, Monga surveyed 487 respondents from five different special event organizations in Australia. Their survey found that the largest factor in volunteer motivations at the special events was that the volunteer wanted to be affiliated with the event. This can be an attraction to the atmosphere at the event, or that they like the activity at the event. Interestingly enough, this ranking was the same for all five of the special event organizations. Each dimension had the possibility of scoring a motivational factor between one and five. After affiliatory motivations, which scored 4,074, egoistic motivations ranked second, with a score of 3,509, followed by the altruistic motivations, with a score of 3,336, second to last was the instrumentalist motivations, with a factor of 2,063, and lastly solidarity motivations scored 1,666.

Given the literary review on motivations to volunteer above, the research team of this report find Monga’s survey most applicable in explaining motivations to volunteer amongst the volunteers at Roskilde Festival, as it has proven to give a more nuanced picture of peoples motivation to volunteer at special events.

4.3. Theory

The following section contains a review of the selected theory for this research paper. First, the grand theory of rational choice is presented, and how the theory applies for the research is explained. Then, short descriptions of the dimensions and components within Monga's theoretical framework, described above, is presented.

4.3.1. Rational Choice Theory

Rational choice theory is a theoretical framework constructed to understand individual decision making and behavior. The theory explains that individuals rationally calculate the expected costs and benefits of every action they face before deciding what to do. Ultimately, an individual will

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 24 always choose the option that benefits themself the most and therefore has the highest benefit and the lowest cost (Buchanan, 2018; Hamilton, 2011). In rational choice theory, rationality refers to behavior that is goal-oriented, reflective, and is consistent regardless of time and place. Acting consistently regardless of time and place refers to the fact that if an individual is faced with the same decision twice, he will decide on the same course of action regardless of the context. As with most theories, rational choice theory involves a set of assumptions that must be agreed upon for the theory to function. Simplistically put, the theory includes the assumption that individuals will always be able to compare all possible courses of action and rank them in a hierarchy from most preferable to least preferable. Embedded within this assumption are two ideas. First, all alternatives are complete, meaning that the individual will always be able to state which option is preferable. Second, all options are transitive, meaning that if the first option is preferred over the second option, and the second option is preferred over the third, then the first option is automatically preferred over the third. With rational choice theory, it is only relevant to order all options from best to worst. It is meaningless to define how much better each option is over the next. Three other assumptions are included within the rational choice theory. First, it is assumed that individuals have perfect information about all possible alternatives. Perfect information eliminates uncertainty, as it entails that the individual has all the information needed to rank the options in a hierarchy, and that he or she is fully aware of all possible outcomes. It is assumed that the individual can assess all available data, the likelihood of events, potential costs and benefits and act accordingly in a consistent manner. Second, in a decision-making process where the outcomes have an effect on different time-points, the individual will be able to discount the future costs and benefits. Discounting is a function generally used in basic economics, and involves the time-value of money, meaning that money earned today is more valuable than money made tomorrow. The function is then used to bring future values to present values, so that they can be compared, and a decision can be made (Collis, Holt & Hussey, 2017). In rational choice theory the same applies, but what is being discounted is benefit-values instead of money-values. Third, in a decision-making process, an individual’s rationality is bound by the difficulty of the decision, the limitation of the individual’s cognition, as well as the timeframe of

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 25 the decision. This is a core psychological assumption in many behavioral theories which was proposed by Simon (1982), who named it bounded rationality.

Several of these assumptions showcase the remnants of the fact that rational choice theory is largely based on economic theories such as utilitarianism and utility theory. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that promotes, that actions are good and correct if they maximize the happiness and well-being for the plurality of a population. Utility theory is based on this, but changes the focus from the well-being and happiness of the population, to the well-being and happiness of the individual decision maker. Utility theory postulates that all decisions are made on the utility maximization principle, which involves the notion that the best choice is the choice that maximizes the utility of the decision maker the most. Utility is the level of satisfaction that a choice gives the individual decision-maker (Hunt & Lauzenheiser, 2011) For utility theory and rational choice theory, it is shown how an individual’s cost-benefit analysis correlates to the utilitarian notion that all human motives come from the desire to increase pleasure and decrease pain, which is involved in the utility maximization of the individual (Bentham, 1969). Also, the thought that an individual will choose what is best for himself, relates to the neoclassical view that all individuals are at their core egotistical (Hunt & Lauzenheiser, 2011).

Rational choice theory states that it can predict how an individual may behave in a given situation, by looking at how the individual has behaved in past situations. This can be done due to the assumption described above, that an individual will behave consistently, and therefor make the same decisions regardless of time and space. However, social scientists only have an indirect entryway to the individual’s internal preferences, as they cannot see the actual thought process of ranking the outcomes, but only see these preferences in the active decisions the individual has made. Thus, social scientists reconstruct the individual’s utility function hierarchy by inferring back from the behavior previously observed, e.g. when an individual is faced with the decision of whether to drink water or soda, his choice can be predicted by empirically looking at what the individual chose in a similar past situation.

Rational choice theory is considered by some researchers as an attractive theory to apply, as it is considered as a complete conception of what drives human actions. Once it has been explained

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 26 that an individual chooses one option over another, because that option was considered more favorable, some researchers argue that they need to know nothing more. Where biology, for example, can describe what physically happens inside the brain of the individual as they make a decision, it cannot give an explanation of why the individual one thing over another as rational choice theory can. However, other researchers have criticized rational choice theory for purely explaining the behavior of individuals in rational terms, and thereby disregarding non-rational human behavior, such as emotional, pathological, and moral behavior. Different researchers thereby disagree on whether or not rational choice theory is a complete conception (Boudon, 1998).

Looking at the greater picture of motivation to volunteer through the lens of rational choice theory, the assumption that the volunteer evaluates the utility they get from volunteering is made. Volunteering is therefore a rational choice that is made based on a motivation within the volunteer. To gain knowledge on what motivates the volunteer the five motivational dimensions from Monga’s (2006) survey are used.

4.3.1. Monga’s Motivational Survey Framework

The theory behind Monga’s survey framework is that one volunteer can have several motivational dimensions for volunteering at a special event, as volunteer motivations at these events are complex. By measuring the scale of motivation of each of the five dimensions, one can gain insight into which of the dimensions are more dominant for volunteers at a special event (Monga, 2006). The following is a description on the theory used to develop the five dimensions.

The justification behind including the dimension, affiliatory motivations, in Monga’s survey ​ ​ framework is based on the findings of Farrell et al.,’s survey on special sports events which allowed them to theorize, that strong volunteer motivations are related to simply being affiliated with the event (ibid). The volunteers’ motivation to be affiliated with the event can be related to: The volunteers’ special attachment or interest in the event activity, that they have been associated

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 27 or involved with the activity previously, or that they are attracted to the unique atmosphere at the event (ibid). The survey questions given for the affiliatory dimension are:

● I wanted to make this event a success ● This event is very close to my heart ● I wanted to be a part of the event ● I am involved in this activity ● I have special interest in this activity

The dimension, altruistic motivations, measures volunteer motivations in relation to volunteers’ ​ ​ desire to help others, and Monga has based the framework for this factor on the literature and research of Callow, Gillespie & King, and Stebbins amongst others (Monga, 2006). As mentioned previously, altruistic reasons for volunteering has originally been theorized to be one of the main motivators in the motivations to volunteer literature. Although its motivational importance is disputed when it comes to special events volunteering, it is still a relevant factor to include (ibid). The survey questions given for the altruistic dimension are:

● I always volunteer as I like to help others ● Volunteering creates a better society ● I wanted to put something back in the community ● I am compassionate towards people in need

The dimension, instrumentalist motivations, is the first of Monga’s two dimensions that measure ​ motivations to volunteer that are driven directly by self-interest. Instrumentalist motivations cover tangible motivational factors such as free entry into the event, e.g. a ticket to a festival. Monga has created this dimension based on the findings of researchers such as Andrew and Gold to cover the theory that some volunteers are motivated by their desire to acquire a personal advantage (Monga, 2006). Thereby, the decision to volunteer is conscious and becomes an instrument in getting what they want. Another example of an instrumentalist motivation to

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 28 volunteer is volunteering to gain skills to further a career (ibid). The survey questions given for the instrumentalist dimension are:

● Opportunity to explore career options ● Broadens my horizons ● Opportunity to develop my skills ● Gain hands on experience ● Build network in my professional area ● An opportunity to collect souvenirs marking the event ● The opportunity for free participation in the event

Egoistic motivations is the second dimension that measures self-interest, however, this one measures self-interests in the volunteer that is related to the ego as Monga has found theorized by Clary, Snyder, & Ridge (Monga, 2006). These are intangible intrinsic motivations such as achieving higher self-esteem by feeling important and needed. Monga emphasizes that egoistic motivations are not to be confused with the negative connotation of the word egoist, where someone is self-centered. It is meant to be understood as a motivation to volunteer based on a personal internal reward. The survey questions given for the egoistic dimension are:

● Volunteering makes me feel good about myself ● It is a fulfilling experience ● It makes me feel needed ● It enhances my self-esteem

The last dimension in Monga’s model for volunteer motivations at special events is solidarity ​ motivations. Monga writes that in researching the literature on solidarity there has been some ​ disagreements in the clarification. An example is that Farrell et al. mixed the factor with egoistic motivations. Instead, Monga has based this dimension on the work of Prestby et al. and Knoke and Prensky (Monga, 2006), clearly defining it as motivations different from egoistic motivations and narrowed in on society and extrinsic desires, such as: social interaction, family traditions,

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 29 interpersonal relationships, and/or friendships (ibid). The survey questions given for the solidarity dimension are:

● It is a family tradition

● My friends were volunteering

● Most people in my community volunteer

● The society expects me to volunteer

● It is part of our society tradition or culture

● An opportunity to make new friends with similar interests

There are limitations involved with trying to understand and explain volunteer motivations. The motivational dimensions overlap to some degree, which makes it difficult to distinguish between them analytically, e.g. one could say that an altruistic motivation in its essence is still egoistic. By attempting to uncover volunteer motivations using this framework, the assumption is made that this is possible (Monga, 2006). Another limitation concerns the ability of volunteers and researchers to distinguish their motivations from each other as several operate at the same time. A final limitation can be found in the fact that motivations can change over time, with one dimension being prominent the first time someone volunteers and replaced by a different motivation the second time (Monga 2006). An attempt to include this variable in the survey of this report have been made by asking the respondent to write how many times they have volunteered.

4.3. Delimitations

To define the scope of what will be included in the research, delimitations have been set to purposively restrict the research, by choosing to disregard some aspects so that other aspects can be analyzed in more detail.

A delimitation has been set for this project report by deciding to solely focus on the recruitment of volunteers at Roskilde Festival, and exclude research into the retention of

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 30 volunteers once they have been recruited. The aspect of time has also not been included in the research, meaning that it is disregarded when the respondents of the survey have volunteered.

As previously explained, this research project is following the approach of critical realism. The aim of the critical realist analysis strategy applied is to determine the causal effect that the mechanisms have on the phenomena within which they operate. However, as the mechanisms involved are remarkably complex in proportion to the resource limitations of this research project, it was decided to delimit the research to focus on the mechanisms themselves, and not on the causal effect they have on the phenomena. Thereby, the research centers around explaining and understanding the alignment between the actual and perceived motivations, and not around how this alignment affects the deficit of volunteers at Roskilde Festival.

Choices were also made on delimiting the interview data. As mentioned in the methods chapter, the interviewees were purposively not asked about any specific aspect of the theoretical framework, as it was considered valuable to get their unbiased perception. This means that any factors left unmentioned was considered by the researchers to not be perceived as an influential factor. It was also decided not to ask the interviewees to rank the factors they perceived to be important to volunteer motivations, instead, importance was based on the numbers of instances mentioned across interviews.

Unfortunately, a mistake was made by the researchers while creating the survey based on Monga’s theoretical framework. Monga suggests seven components belonging to the instrumentalist dimension, however, the Volunteering Survey only includes six. When creating the survey, the component “an opportunity to collect souvenirs marking the event” was ​ overlooked, which unfortunately caused it to be excluded from the survey. Due to the time limitations involved with the project, the researchers decided that it would not possible to recreate the survey, including the missing component. As Monga did not share an analysis for each component, it is not possible to see how it affected his research, and thereby the potential effect that the component could have had on this research cannot be stipulated. The missing component of the instrumentalist dimension delimits the validity of that dimension. The other

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 31 dimensions still remain unchanged from Monga’s framework, and their analysis is thereby unaffected by this error.

5. Case Description

Roskilde Festival is the largest music and arts festival in Northern Europe. The organization behind it is 100% non-profit, and all proceeds are donated to charities all around the globe (Roskilde Festival, 2017a). The festival is almost completely reliant on volunteer work, in fact, 99,9% of the labor power of the festival consists of volunteers (Mortensen, 2011). Their first event took place in 1971, under the name Sound Festival, and was arranged by two local high-school students. Over the course of two days, between ten and twenty thousand festival guests attended the festival and had the possibility of listening to 20 bands on one stage, paying 30 DKK for the ticket. Despite the high number of attendees, the Sound Festival ended with a deficit, and the two high school students had to pay the remaining bills out of their own pockets (Berlingske, 2010). Today, an entire organization called the Roskilde Festival Group is behind organizing and hosting the entire festival. The festival spans over eight days, with over 130.000 attendees in 2017, making it the fourth largest city in Denmark for those eight days. The average age of the festival attendee is 24 years old, and the festival has a gender distribution of 47 % women and 53 % men. In 2017, more than 180 acts, both musical and cultural, performed on nine different stages at the festival (Roskilde Festival, 2017a). The ticket for the entire festival was priced at 1.995 DKK in 2017, and Roskilde Festival experienced a profit of 47.378.786 DKK (Roskilde Festival, 2017b).

Roskilde Festival has evolved a lot since its beginning. Although the festival itself only exists for eight days during the year, organizing a festival of that size requires an extensive amount of time which is an all-year task undertaken by the Roskilde Festival Group. Since 1971, the group has generated 348.689.125 DKK for charitable causes (ibid). The Roskilde Festival Group is the collective title for the Roskilde Festival Charity Society, the Roskilde Festival Fund, and the fund’s subsidiary company, Roskilde Culture Service A/S (see Figure 2). The structure has been designed to ensure the future of the festival, by dividing finance and administration from the

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 32 remaining activities in the organization. Each part of the group has their own board, who have collaborated to hire an executive committee, responsible for the day-to-day management of the Roskilde Festival Group. The Roskilde Festival Charity Society is the part of the organization involved with arranging the Roskilde Festival event, with the purpose of generating funds for the charitable causes of the Roskilde Festival Group. It has been exempted from paying VAT and is therefore not allowed to use their profit on arranging subsequent festivals, and all proceedings are therefore given to charity. The board of the Roskilde Festival Charity Society is administering the festival’s profits to the charitable causes. The second part of the group, the Roskilde Festival Fund, is financially separated from the Roskilde Festival Charity Society. The Fund is not VAT exempted and during the festival days, the fund oversees the sales of a variety of items such as beverages and cigarettes. Should the Roskilde Festival Charity Society find itself dealing with financial issues, it is the responsibility of the Roskilde Festival Fund to support them. The Roskilde Festival Charity Society is the parent company of Roskilde Culture Service A/S, whose primary task is to provide personnel for the projects of the Roskilde Festival Group (ibid). An overview of the structure of the Roskilde Festival Group can be seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Organizational structure of the Roskilde Festival Group

Structurally, the Roskilde Festival Group is a network-based project organization where employees and volunteers collaborate across divisions. The group consists of five separate

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 33 divisions. First, the area division secures the infrastructure and physical framework for the festival. The division oversees the erection and dismantling of the physical infrastructure of Roskilde Festival, such as fences, stages, and toilets. It also ensures that the infrastructure supports the needs of the festival and lives up to the expectations of the guests. The guests and security division ensures that the guests and creative acts feel welcome and secure, and oversees everything from crowd safety management to matters related to health (ibid). The content division is in charge of “Creating unique experiences, with a focus on the overall experience, ​ diversity, and quality” (ibid, p. 35). They oversee tasks such as the development, planning, ​ production, and execution of the creative content of the festival. The culture and communication division attends to the communication, marketing, HR, organizational development, and sustainability efforts of the festival. Lastly, the Sales and Partners division handles the commercial partnerships and commerce and ensures the two operates optimally. They also work to ensure that guests have access to all the products and services they need (ibid).

As mentioned earlier, 99,9 % of the labor force of the festival are unpaid volunteers (Mortensen, 2011). Out of the 130.000 festival guests in 2017, 30.000 of them attended as volunteers (Roskilde Festival, 2017a). The volunteers cover a large variety of tasks, such as booking and curating the musical program, staffing the food and drink stalls, and acting as security at the stages and entrances to the festival (Roskilde Festival, 2017b). Depending on the work task, volunteers can either volunteer for a minimum of 24, 32, or 100 hours. Those volunteers working more than 100 hours are those volunteering throughout the year, and not just during the festival days. The 32-hour volunteers work during the eight festival days around the entrances and camping areas, and the 24-hour volunteers work at the music site, which is open during four days (Roskilde Festival, 2017a).

Not all volunteers are working directly for the Roskilde Festival Group. Others are working for private companies, who mainly oversee some of the food stalls, but the majority of the volunteers are connected to volunteer associations who manages many of the service and sales functions. In 2017, 200 of these associations, which include local sports clubs, cultural associations, etc., provided volunteers for Roskilde Festival. The associations are given a donation of between 760 DKK to 1.060 DKK per volunteer they provide for the festival

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 34 (Roskilde Festival, 2018). The volunteers do not receive a salary for their services but are given free admission to the festival, as well as access to specially designated areas for the volunteers (Roskilde Festival, 2017b). The Roskilde Festival Group attributes much of the festival’s success to the volunteers. They argue that the volunteers are the DNA of the festival and that without the volunteers there would be no festival, which their organizational structure supports (Roskilde Festival, n.d.d).

6. Analysis

The following chapter is an analysis of the two key mechanisms, perceived and actual motivations of the volunteers at Roskilde Festival. For the remainder of this project report, the term actual motivations is used to describe the volunteer motivations found in the Volunteering ​ Survey and the term perceived motivations is used to denote volunteer motivations as they are ​ perceived by the volunteers in the conducted interviews.

The analysis is based on the collected data from the ten interviews conducted with recruiters from Roskilde Festival, and on the data collected from the 392 respondents who took the Volunteering Survey. The theory applied during the analysis is Monga’s (2006) theoretical framework on volunteer motivations. These two analyses comprise the fourth step of the analysis strategy, where the key and other active mechanisms are thoroughly analyzed.

6.1. Interview analysis

The interview analysis includes a coding analysis of the interviews to find out which of the five motivational factors developed in Monga’s motivation framework is ranked highest by the interviewees. The interview analysis also includes other possible factors involved with volunteer motivation and a section on other interesting dimensions of volunteering mentioned by the interviewees. In general, the researchers of this report found the interviewees to be open in sharing their experience with recruiting volunteers. A description of each of the ten

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 35 organizations, including the main activity, number of volunteers, recruitment methods, etc. is found in Appendix C.

6.1.1. Perceived Volunteer Motivations

During the coding of the interviews, it was found that three interviewees recognize that volunteer motivations at Roskilde Festival are complex and not the same for every volunteer. An example of this is the answer given by the interviewee from Organization Nine when asked why they think their volunteers are motivated, “(...)some just for the ticket, others just for the vibe. Some do it for the community feel. In my experience, it is for very different reasons (…)”. A similar answer was given by the interviewee from Organization Ten who said; “It differs a lot between ​ people”. Understanding this complexity compares well with the literature on motivations amongst volunteers at special events, namely that it is complex especially when compared with the motivations found in volunteers of humanitarian organizations. That being said, the coding of the interviews did show that some motivational factors are perceived to be higher than others.

6.1.1.1. Perceived Affiliatory Motivations

Affiliatory motivations represent motivations in the volunteer that are driven by their want to be affiliated with the event, e.g. they are attracted to the atmosphere or they have a special attachment to the event activity in the organization they volunteer for. Five instances of affiliatory components were found through the coding of interview phrases that match the components belonging to the affiliatory dimension in Monga’s motivational framework. One interview had two instances which leaves a total of four organizations who perceive their volunteers to have affiliatory motivations for volunteering (see Table 1). Organization Two and Four mentioned having a special interest in an activity as a motivational component. Both interviewees referred to the climate awareness at Roskilde Festival as having a special interest for their volunteers, e.g. the interview recruiter from Organization Two said that “The volunteers ​ are motivated by the green aspect of the organization, that they are helping making a greener Roskilde”. Interviewees from Organization One, Three, and Four mentioned being involved in ​ ​ the activity of the organization as a motivational component, e.g. the interviewee from

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 36 Organization Three mentioned that the volunteers’ motivation for volunteering initially is “(...)to ​ support the sports club”. Three out of the four organizations whose interviewees mentioned ​ affiliatory motivations for volunteering are sports clubs.

6.1.1.2. Perceived Altruistic Motivations

There were no mentions of altruistic motivations amongst the interviewees. This means that wanting to help others is not at the forefront of their minds as a motivational reason for volunteering at Roskilde Festival.

6.1.1.3. Perceived Instrumentalist Motivations

Instrumentalist motivations signify motivations in the volunteer that are driven by self-interest and a desire to acquire a personal advantage. The choice to volunteer is conscious and volunteering becomes an instrument that provides the volunteer with something they want. When asked the open-ended question, “What do you think motivates your volunteers to volunteer at ​ Roskilde Festival”, all ten out of ten organizations mentioned the ticket as a motivation for volunteering. Many interviewees emphasized it as being the most important factor such as the interviewee from Organization Seven who said, that “Free admission is number one,” and the ​ interviewee from Organization Ten who said, “Quite a few say they primarily do it for the ticket”. The volunteer recruiter from Organization Six said that it is “The ticket mostly” that ​ ​ affect volunteer motivations. Based on the fact that the motivational component, the ticket, was mentioned by all volunteer organizations, it becomes apparent that the volunteer organizations recruiting the volunteers perceive the free participation in Roskilde Festival as a key motivational component for volunteering. Volunteering is thus seen as an instrument to get the ticket. None of the other instrumentalist motivational components, e.g. using volunteering to build a network in one’s professional area, or using volunteering as an opportunity to build one’s skills were mentioned amongst the volunteer recruiters as influencing volunteer motivations. Thus, the high

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 37 ranking of the instrumentalist motivational dimension is based on the component of the ticket alone.

6.1.1.4.Perceived Egoistic Motivations

The egoistic motivational factor measures self-interest in the volunteer that is related to the ego. Organization Five was the only out of the ten interviewees that mentioned a component from the egoistic motivational dimension. When asked about what motivates their volunteers to volunteer, the interviewee mentioned that “We have a lot of focus on praising them.”, which relates to the ​ ​ motivational component, “it enhances my self-esteem”. The other egoistic motivational ​ ​ components were not mentioned by any of the interviewees. That a component from the egoistic motivational dimension is only mentioned once during all ten interviews, indicates that it is generally not considered as having a great influence on the motivation to volunteer.

6.1.1.5. Perceived Solidarity Motivations

The solidarity motivational dimension involves society and extrinsic desires. A total of nine instances were mentioned by six different interviewees. The first two instances are related to volunteering because “it is a family tradition”. Organization Eight mentioned that “It is ​ ​ ​ somewhat a family business. I have two sons who are team leaders for each their team. Also, there is my brother in law, whom I run everything with, my wife, and my sister in law, who has a daughter that also leads one of my teams” Organization One said that “Actually, a lot of the ​ ​ volunteers comes from friends or family of people who already volunteer for us”. The same ​ quote also pertains to the motivational component “because my friends are volunteering”. A ​ ​ total of four interviewees spoke of this component. During their interview, Organization Four pointed out that they often recruit their friends, or friends of friends. Organization Five mentioned that many of their volunteers “(...)have been there for years, or are friends of friends,” and when asked to clarify if they believe that it is important for their volunteers to be able to work with their friends, they replied, “Yes, I do.”. Organization Seven pointed out that ​ ​

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 38 their volunteers often sign up in pairs, which indicates that they are motivated by being able to sign up with their friends. Organization Eight mentioned several instances where they believe that friends play an important role. First, it was pointed out that they do not actually recruit volunteers who do not have some sense of connection to other volunteers within the organization. The interviewee reveals that “The team leaders ensure that they find the volunteers that they ​ want to include in their team, so I do not recruit many new volunteers every year. Most of them are repeaters, and the new volunteers I do recruit, already knows someone from the team.” Later during the interview, the interviewee added that “(...)the new volunteers are of course motivated ​ by having friends working with us, who think it is fun and asks if they want to join the team”. The ​ third motivational component from the solidarity dimension which was mentioned during the interviews relates to being motivated to volunteer for “an opportunity to make new friends with ​ similar interests”. In the interview with Organization Five, the community was pointed out as ​ having an important influence. This is also mentioned by Organization Nine. No instances of the remaining factors within the solidarity motivational factor was found.

The fact that five out of ten interviewees mentioned components from the solidarity motivational dimension, indicates that the dimension is believed to have some impact on the motivation to volunteer. The component of volunteering because of friends was the most frequent answer for the dimension, with four interviewees mentioning it.

Comparing how many instances of each dimension was found throughout the interviews, it was possible to arrange them by ranking as seen in Table 1. It was found that instrumentalist motivations are perceived to be the main motivational dimension by the volunteer recruiters with ten out of ten instances found. As mentioned above, the only component from the instrumentalist category was the ticket. This signifies that in addition to the instrumentalist motivation being seen as the main dimension, the ticket is perceived as the main component for volunteering at Roskilde Festival, across all dimensions.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 39

Table 1: Perceived volunteer motivations

6.1.2. Other Perceived Active Mechanisms

The following section contains an analysis of the additional factors mentioned by the interviewed organizations, which does not fall within Monga’s five volunteer motivational dimensions. The factors that emerged are: a sold-out festival, the music program, and too many required hours. Six out of ten of the organizations brought up how a sold-out festival greatly affects their volunteer recruitment. All six interviewees highlighted how important it is to their recruitment success that the festival sells out. Organization Nine mentioned that “When you get close to the ​ start date of the festival, all the people who did not get a ticket become interested in volunteering”. Organization One emphasized the impact of a sold-out festival: “It is very ​ ​ important that the festival is sold out. We saw that last year, some years it has been totally terrible, when the festival has not sold out (…). So it is really good that they are sold out, it is really important as well”. Organizations Two, Three and Seven agreed that once the festival sells ​ out, they recruit many more volunteers, and Organization Four stated that “I can feel that after ​ the festival sold out, my inbox just boomed because people just wanted a job”. That six out of ten interviewed organizations mentioned the sold-out status of the festival, indicates that the organizations perceive it to be a motivator for the volunteers to volunteer, with Organization One underlining it as being ‘very important’. Of the organizations who did not mention the festival selling out as a factor, Organization Six expresses that their volunteer spots are already filled up,

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 40 even before the festival starts. Therefor they would not feel if a sold-out festival has an impact on their recruitment or not. Organization Four and Six both revealed that the music program of the festival also has an impact on their volunteer recruitment. The interviewee from Organization Four spoke of one of their volunteers mentioning that he disliked the music program at the festival one year, and therefore did not want to pay for the ticket. “I talked to one of my friends who is a volunteer for ​ us, who was like 'well the music program this year is not that good’, so he did not want to pay 2000+ for a ticket, because he only maybe wants to hear one artist. He thought it was pretty good to do a combination. Volunteer, get the ticket, and see some of the music”. Organization ​ Six also correlates the music program to how easy it is to recruit volunteers, however they describe that the more attractive the music is, the more the people want to volunteer. “If there is ​ a lack of good names (artists), then of course we can see it on how fast people will volunteer”. ​ The remaining eight organizations did not bring up the music program as a factor. Out of the ten interviews, six of them have volunteers who work more than 32 hours during the length of the festival. Out of these six, four of them expressed their concern about the increase in the minimum required hours for the volunteers working outside the music site that Roskilde Festival implemented in 2012. Organization Ten has experienced a change in mindset. “Earlier people liked to contribute to something fun, but now we get a ton of emails asking how little we can offer that people have to work for the ticket.” The more volunteers have to work for the ticket, the less attractive volunteering becomes, and for them, 32 hours can be considered too much. Organization Three attributed their problems with finding volunteers completely to the increase in minimum hours. “32 hours are too much. Our members really want to help, but they ​ can’t sacrifice 32 hours on that, especially not when they have to work. We are talking about adults who have a job”. The interviewee from Organization Three later added that 24 hours ​ would not be a problem. Organization Five has also experienced the increase in hours to be an issue. “We use 46 volunteers, but that used to be 80. We can’t find so many volunteers since the ​ hours changed to 32 hours.”. The interviewee asserted that the required hours spent to obtain the ​ ticket seems to be better spent elsewhere “It is a lot of hours to work for the ticket. It is not many ​ hours down in Netto, and then they have made the equivalent of what the ticket costs”. However, ​

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 41 the interviewee also addthat she knows of another volunteer recruiter who also has problems finding enough volunteers, despite them only having to volunteer a minimum of 24 hours. Organization Two has tried to embrace the increase in hours and are attempting to market it as something positive to recruit more volunteers. “We use that as a selling point, that we only have ​ three shifts during the festival, and that our shifts are all of them during the day, we don’t have any shifts during the night”. The remaining two organizations who have been affected by the ​ increase in minimum hours did not bring it up during the interview. The four organizations whose volunteers are just working a minimum of 24 hours, have not been affected by the increase in minimum hours and has therefore not been able to see a causal effect on the subject.

6.1.3. Additional Interview Findings

The interviewees also mentioned other topics relating to volunteer behavior which are interesting to mention since several organizations mentioned the same topic. The topics are: The phenomenon of volunteer dropout before festival start, how the volunteer task can affect the initial motivation to volunteer, the popularity of volunteering for one organization over another, and good versus bad volunteer behavior.

Organization Three, Seven, and Nine mentioned aspects pertaining to the phenomenon of volunteer dropout before festival start. The interviewee from Organization Three said that “We ​ have a lot of volunteers who drop out again (before the festival), which is very normal if they can’t get the shifts they want, they drop out. It’s a little too easy to drop out, but that is how it is when there is no contract”. This statement shows that volunteers are in high demand from the ​ organizations and they do not have a way of keeping them in their job once they have expressed that they want to volunteer. The interviewee from Organization Seven also raised the issue of ​ high volunteer demand. When asked if they had a hard time finding volunteers they said: “yes definitely, they are getting better offers from other groups at the festival”. What is interesting to notice about this answer, is that the high demand seems to lead the volunteer recruiters to somewhat compete for the volunteers. This is described by the interviewee from Organization Nine, who mentioned that there is a tendency amongst volunteers to drop out of one volunteer

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 42 organization because the volunteer finds another organization that they rather want to volunteer for: “The volunteers also “shop around”. They might have promised us to volunteer but then ​ they find another camp”. As the same interviewee also described, this can be related to the kind ​ of work that one organization offers in comparison with another: “some jobs are more attractive ​ than others, e.g. the ones where you only have to work before and after the festival” and that ​ “The jobs outsourced to the volunteer organizations are usually also the ones that are not as attractive, e.g. it’s a bit harder to get people to clean toilets than guard the stage”. ​ In relation to competing for volunteers, a large amount of the interviewees also described why volunteers might choose their organization over another. The researchers of this report found this aspect interesting, because many of the interviewees steered the conversation in the interview towards what their specific organization offers the volunteers rather than keeping the focus on what motivates the volunteers to volunteer in the first place. In general, the interviewees described that the volunteers choose their organization specifically because is a nice place to be, with a good atmosphere where they do a lot to keep their volunteers happy. An example of this is that the interviewee from Organization Six said, “What is unique about our organization is that ​ we are a very stable stand to be at. It is a good environment. Happy people, good food, access to clean toilets, ability to take a break in a quiet place”. The interviewee from Organization Five ​ also mentioned how they take care of their volunteers “I am sure, that what we do for them has a ​ lot to do with it. That we primarily are there for them, and they know they have either a phone they can call, or at the least that they can come over to our basecamp to get a hug or a pad on the shoulder”. The interviewee from Organization One also mentions how their organization ​ might be more attractive to the volunteers both because of how they take care of their volunteers but also because the work tasks that they provide are popular, and the location of their organization is attractive “It has been a sweet spot because they find it good to work for us, and well organized, a good task and very flexible, and we have our volunteers camp. It’s a tent, not for living, but only for staying, very nearby the orange stage, so it’s a good home base to have when you visit the festival, also when you are not working”. These statements show that the ​ volunteer organization perceive the attractiveness of the organization to be a motivational factor for the volunteers.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 43 In their interview, the interviewee from Organization One, reflect on what type of volunteer they want working for them: “A general tendency is that the earlier the volunteers can be recruited, the better, and more stable, they are. I’m not sure if you can make a direct correlation between them, but some years we have had trouble when recruiting outside on the facebook groups where people are seeking for tickets 'oh you can’t get a ticket, but you can get a place as a volunteer here' and the results have been nasty. So many 'swindlers' and 'soldiers of fortunes' but they haven’t been stable workers. I have given up that strategy”.

This statement shows that it is not only the volunteers who think about what type of organization they want to work for but also the organizations that think about what type of volunteers they want.

6.2. Survey Analysis

In preparation of the analysis of the data gathered from the Volunteering Survey, the data was uploaded into Excel and the means of each motivational dimension and its component were calculated. In this section, the results from the Volunteering Survey will be presented. Firstly, the motivational factors will be presented and their overall scores, thereafter each factor will be examined in more detail. A focus will be on motivations and components that could be contributing factors to volunteer at Roskilde Festival.

The results of the survey show that the respondents ranked the altruistic dimension the highest. However, the average scores of the four dimensions, affiliatory, altruistic, instrumentalist, and egoistic, are close to each other, making it difficult to rank them with confidence (see table 2 and figure 3 below). The closeness of the data will be commented on in the discussion chapter. Altruistic motivational factors scored an average of 3,561. Seeing that the middle value of the scale is 3, this means that on average respondents have answered between the values of 3 and 4 which on average is in between the answers “neither agree nor disagree” and “agree”.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 44

Table 2: Actual motivations

Figure 3: Bar chart illustrating the distribution of the motivational dimensions

The survey was distributed to both people who have volunteered and to individuals who have not volunteered. Below is a summary of the main features of the respondents (Table 3). Overall 392 individuals finished the survey, 253 of which have volunteered and 139 which have not. The respondents were asked if they have volunteered and how many times, if the respondent had not volunteered they were asked if they would be interested in volunteering at Roskilde Festival. If the participants were interested in volunteering, they were then directed to the motivational factor questions in the survey. Overall, 75 individuals answered the motivational questions without

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 45 having volunteered. In total there were 333 participants who answered the motivational part of the survey.

Table 3: Frequency table of key features of respondents

The reason for asking people who have not volunteered was to see if there was a difference in motivations depending on if an individual has experienced volunteering for Roskilde Festival. The reason for including possible volunteers is because this research project is focusing on the recruitment process. The results show little difference between the two groups in all motivational factors except for instrumentalist motivations, especially the component of free participation, with the non-volunteers group scoring on average 0,544 higher than respondents who have volunteered (see Table 4 below). This might suggest that to get free participation becomes less of a motivation after having volunteered. This is supported by comparing motivations with how many times the respondents have volunteered. On average, when asked if free participation was a

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 46 motivational factor, respondents who have volunteered more than four times scored less, i.e. under 3,829 on average, than respondents who have only volunteered one to three times, i.e. from 4,418 on average (see Appendix A, Table A6). On the other hand, respondents who have volunteered score on average higher in affiliatory components than instrumentalist components, i.e. 3,470 on average, especially for the component “Roskilde festival is close to my heart” (i.e. ​ ​ 3,728).

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 47

Table 4: Average of motivations by volunteers and non-volunteers In the next section, each factor and its components will be examined and analyzed with consideration to different demographic variables. A summary can be seen in Table 5.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 48

Table 5: Frequency table of summary of demographics

6.2.1. Actual Affiliatory Motivations

The affiliatory motivational dimension includes motivations relating to being affiliated with the event. With an average motivational score of 3,415, affiliatory motivations places as the third

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 49 most influential reason why the respondents choose to volunteers at Roskilde Festival. The highest ranked component in the affiliatory dimension is the question “I wanted to be a part of ​ Roskilde Festival” which scored 4,125 and the lowest ranked component is “I have special ​ interest in the activity” which averaged at 2,942. This leaves quite a large difference between the average scores of each component within this factor, i.e. 1,183.

Respondents with low income, i.e. under 100.000 DKK, are less motivated by affiliatory factors, with an average score under 3,132, than the respondents that have an income over 200.000 DKK, with averages scoring from 3,376 up to 3,811. Figure 4 illustrates affiliatory motivations by yearly income. In the demographic student/ not student, people who are not students have a higher affiliatory motivation than people who are students. The survey data also shows a similar pattern of affiliatory motivations in relation to age, meaning that affiliatory motivations become higher as age increases. Interesting to mention is that the question “I wanted ​ to be part of Roskilde Festival” placed as the second highest motivational component between all 25 components across the five motivational factors. Looking closer into the demographic distribution for this answer, there is not a significant difference in the level of motivation. This means that the motivational average is quite evenly spread between the demographic variables and indicates that all participants are equally motivated by wanting to be a part of Roskilde Festival.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 50

Figure 4: Bar chart illustrating affilitory motivations by yearly income

6.2.2. Actual Altruistic Motivations

The altruistic dimension includes components related to wanting to help others. The average motivational score for altruistic motivations is 3,561, making it the highest motivational dimension amongst the respondents on average. The highest ranked component for this dimension was “volunteering creates a better society” with a score of 4,043, there seem to be a ​ ​ will to volunteer to help create a better society. Over 80% of participants agreed with this statement and only 6% disagreed. The lowest ranked component was the question “I wanted to ​ give something back to the community” with a score of 3,244. This leaves a difference between the average scores of each component of 0,799.

For the respondents aged below 39, the altruistic motivational factor is lower than the average score whereas the people aged 40 and up have a higher altruistic motivation than the average for the altruistic factor. This could signify that as age increases the altruistic motivational factor becomes more significant. A relationship between income and altruistic motivations was not found. Looking into the employment status of the respondents, it is worth noting that, although only a few respondents were retired, i.e. six people, they scored an altruistic motivational factor

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 51 of 4,150. All retired respondents have volunteered several times with majority responding that they volunteered over eight times.

6.2.3. Actual Instrumentalist motivations

The instrumentalist motivational dimension relates to those components involving motivations to volunteer that are driven directly by self-interest. The average motivational score for instrumentalist motivations is 3,210 ranking it four out of five amongst the motivational dimensions. The highest ranked component for this dimension is “Get free participation in ​ Roskilde Festival” with a score of 4,195, making it the highest scoring component across all dimensions in the survey. The lowest ranked component was the question “Get an opportunity to ​ explore career options” with a score of 2,418. This leaves a difference between the two components of 1,777 which is also the biggest variance within two dimensional components.

In general, what makes the average of the instrumentalist dimension as high as it is, is the component involving the free ticket to Roskilde Festival, which means that volunteering becomes an instrument used by the volunteer to get the ticket. The other components in this dimension do not seem to be important motivators for the respondents. Especially the two components related to exploring career options and building a network, scored below three and therefor they do not seem to have any influence on the volunteers motivation to volunteer at Roskilde Festival.

Omitting the age category 70+, there is a clear relationship showing that the motivation to volunteer because of free participation in the festival is higher the younger the respondent is (see Figure 5).

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 52

Figure 5: Bar chart illustrating free participation component by age Free participation in Roskilde Festival as a motivational component also varies significantly depending on whether or not the respondent is a student. Students ranked this component to be motivational with an average measurement of 4,683, whereas non-students ranked it 3,823 on average, showing that free participation motivates students to volunteer more than people who are not studying (see Figure 6). This fits with the relationship seen in the age demographic, as it is more common to be a student when you are younger. Looking at income levels, it is also seen that the respondents with an income level corresponding to that of students see free entry as a higher motivational component as well.

Figure 6: Bar chart illustrating free participation component by student status

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 53

6.2.4. Actual Egoistic Motivations

The egoistic motivational dimension relates to volunteering because of self-interest in the volunteer that is related to the ego. The egoistic motivations dimension scored 3,468, which makes it the second highest motivational dimension. The highest ranked component in the egoistic dimension is the question “It is a fulfilling experience” with a score of 3,744 and the ​ lowest ranked component is “it makes me feel needed” with an average score of 3,198. The ​ difference between these two scores is 0,546 making the overall variance between questions noticeably lower then e.g. the instrumental factor.

A relationship between the demographic variables and egoistic motivations is not observed. The egoistic motivations are fairly evenly spread between demographic groups. One exception of this observation is found among the demographic, retired participants, they scored an average of 3,950 which is the highest scoring group. Note that the number of respondents in this group is six, meaning that it is questionable whether one can generalize based on such a small sample size.

6.2.5. Actual Solidarity Motivations.

Monga defines the solidarity motivational dimension as motivations that are related to society and other extrinsic motivational factors. The average motivational dimension for solidarity motivations is 2,666 ranking it as the lowest score of all five motivational dimensions. The highest ranked component in the solidarity dimension is “Make new friends with similar ​ interest” with the average score of 3,609. This is the only component that has an average score over 3 of the components belonging to this dimension. The lowest scoring component is “Society ​ expect me to volunteer” with the score of 1,902, suggesting that on average respondents do not believe that a societal expectation to volunteer motivates them to volunteer at Roskilde Festival. This could be because of the belief that there is not such an expectation within society, either because that expectation does not adhere to volunteering at Roskilde Festival, or because respondents are not affected by this expectation. Overall, solidarity motivations do not seem to motivate respondents to volunteer at Roskilde Festival.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 54

The survey respondents have scored the motivational dimensions, from highest to lowest as, altruistic, egoistic, affiliatory, instrumentalist, and solidary. There is not a large difference between these scores, hence, it is hard to concretely determine which motivation is a larger contributing factor to volunteer at Roskilde Festival. By looking at the individual components of these dimensions, it can be seen that there are three components which each belong to one of the highest scoring factors, that score higher than others and with higher than the average score of 4. This means that on average respondents agree with the statement. These component are firstly, “get free participation to Roskilde Festival” scoring on average 4,195 with more than 80% of participant agreeing that this component is a motivational factor. Secondly, “wanting to be a part ​ of Roskilde Festival” scored an average of 4,125 and lastly, “volunteering creates a better ​ society” scored 4,043. ​ In general, a strong correlation between volunteer motivations and income was seen in the survey data. Especially a relationship between the component “get free participation to Roskilde ​ Festival” and income. With that said, higher income participants still score over the average of 3,5, meaning that a free ticket can still be a motivational factor for higher income respondents. Interestingly, the component of “wanting to be a part of Roskilde festival” is quite evenly ​ ​ distributed between demographic variables, suggesting that most participants agree with this statement regardless of their demographics. Only 4% of participants disagreed with this statement and over 84% agreed.

7. Discussion

Throughout the discussion, the single components that together create the individual motivational dimensions will be discussed to get a deeper understanding of the alignment between the perceived and actual motivations. The effect of other motivational mechanisms brought up by the interviewees, will also be discussed, to see whether or not a causal connection to the phenomena

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 55 can be determined to exist. Finally, the aspect of the recruiter-volunteer relation is discussed in terms of the supply and demand of volunteers, and how this aspect relates to the case study.

7.1. Alignment of the Altruistic Dimension

The Volunteering Survey found altruistic motivations to be the highest ranked dimension of all five. The will to make a better society was found to be a large motivational component, with over 80% of respondents agreeing. This supports Farell et al.‘s findings, as he found altruistic motivational factors to motivate volunteers. Altruistic motivations have been seen as the center of volunteer motivations, especially for humanitarian volunteering, but researchers, such as Farell et al, found that special event volunteering is different from other types of volunteering. Still, as seen in the literature review, it is believed that altruistic motivations are motivational factors, but not the main motivational factor. Farell et al. also found that wanting to give something back to the community is a motivational factor to volunteer at special events, however, the Volunteering Survey did not find this component to be a significant factor. In Monga´s (2006) research, the altruistic dimension was ranked third of all five dimensions. Monga found that altruistic motivations are contributing factors to wanting to volunteer, but he believes that they are perceived in a different way between special event volunteering and other types of volunteering. One might expect the explanation for this difference in ranking for the altruistic dimension to be the difference in demographics between the research papers, but as mentioned above, the younger participants of the Volunteering Survey, which counts for more than half of the participants, scored lower than the participants over 39.

When the Volunteering Survey is compared to the interview data, a significant disconnect can be seen between the actual and the perceived altruistic motivations. There were no instances of altruistic motivations found in the coding of the interviews. It does seem that people who volunteer at Roskilde Festival find it important to help others. The respondents might find that Roskilde Festival meets their desire to accomplish something worthwhile that is useful to others,

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 56 whether that is to help attendees at the festival, or because of the money that Roskilde Festival raises for charity.

One factor that could be a contribution to this dimension ranking as high as it has, is that the respondents might have misunderstood how to answer the survey question. In the survey, there were instructions on how to answer the questions, where it was stated that the survey was looking into what motivates individuals to volunteer at Roskilde festival, and not the respondents’ general beliefs. There is always a risk that respondents did not read the instructions, or did not understand the meaning of the statement. So when the statement “I volunteer at Roskilde festival because volunteering creates a better society”, is asked, a respondent might answer “I agree” or “I strongly agree” because it adheres to their general beliefs and values, and not because it was a motivating factor to volunteer at Roskilde Festival. On the other hand, by accepting altruistic motivations to be a reason to volunteer at Roskilde festival can be seen as a way for them to justify their choice to themselves. It can be speculated if anyone would volunteer at Roskilde Festival solely based on altruistic motivations, if an individual is looking to volunteer to create a better society, they would surely look to a humanitarian cause to support and devote their time to.

7.2. Alignment of the Egoistic Dimension

Through analyzing the Volunteering Survey, it was determined that the egoistic factor ranked as the second highest motivational factor, with a score of 3,468. This is, however, only 0,053 higher than the third place, the affiliatory factor, and 0,093 lower than the altruistic factor, which ranked the highest. No significant differences were found across demographic variables within the egoistic dimension. When compared to the interview data, a significant disconnect can be seen between perceived and actual volunteer motivations. Whereas the egoistic factor ranked the second highest factor by the volunteers, the interviewees perceived it as being the second lowest, with only one coded instance, “it enhances my self-esteem”. As it is the only instance measured ​ ​ during the ten interviews, it is questionable to determine if this component is perceived as being measurably more motivational than the unmentioned, egoistic components. In comparison to the

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 57 Volunteering Survey, the component is ranked as the second lowest of the four components within the egotistic dimension. The highest ranking component in the egoistic motivational dimension for the survey was “it is a fulfilling experience”, which was not mentioned by the ​ ​ interviewees. The disconnect between the perceived and actual motivations could be explained by different things. For instance, the discourse around self-esteem and mental health, and thereby also the discourse on how volunteering enhances these things, might not be considered by the volunteers as appropriate topics to discuss with their recruiter, who holds a management position over the volunteer. The recruiter would thereby not be aware of this motivational aspect. In ​ relation to Monga’s survey, the egoistic motivations scored the second highest, which corresponds with the Volunteering Survey, but not with the interviewees’ perceptions. The egoistic factor was also found to be of importance to the other reviewed literature on motivational surveys, such as the research done by Cnaan and Goldberg-glen (1991).

7.3. Alignment of the Affiliatory Dimension

In the Volunteering Survey, the affiliatory factor overall places third out of the five motivational factors with an average of 3,415. However, as mentioned previously, the differences in the averages between the affiliatory factor and the egoistic factor are similar, with only a difference between the scores of 0,053. Demographically, it was found that the respondents with an income higher than 200.000 DKK, were more likely to rank the affiliatory factor higher than those with a lower income. The same pattern was seen within the age variable, where the likelihood of ranking the factor high, increased with age. These demographics also scored considerably lower within the instrumental dimension than other demographics. This correlation could be caused by the assumption that younger citizens might not earn as much as older citizens, and thereby the free ticket becomes less important than the feeling of affiliation. A correlation was also found between the component “This event is very close to my heart” and the number of times ​ ​ individuals have volunteered at Roskilde Festival. The longer they have volunteered, there more likely they were to agree with the statement, indicating that the sense of affiliation to the festival grows stronger over time. The ranking of the survey is congruent with the interview analysis,

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 58 which also placed the affiliatory factor third out of the five dimensions. There is then no disconnect between the perceived and actual motivations. Where the two analyses disagree, in on which of the affiliatory components play the larger role. For the survey, it was found that “I ​ wanted to be a part of Roskilde Festival” was the highest scored affiliatory component, whereas zero out of the five interviewees mentioned the component, alluding that they did not perceive it as being of highly motivational. The component also significant outside the affiliatory category, as it ranked as the second highest component out of the 25 within any factor. The least frequently answered affiliatory component for the survey was the “I have special interest in the activity” ​ component. Contrarily, this was highlighted during the interviews as a motivational factor that was perceived important by some interviewees. Both Organization Two and Four mentioned that their volunteers are highly motivated by the green aspect of the work tasks. Interestingly, Organization Two and Four were the only out of the ten interviewed organization who have a clear green function at the festival. Organization Two is involved with the trash collection on the camping site of Roskilde Festival, and Organization Four runs a refund stall. This could possibly relate well to the survey results. Not many of the participants rated “I have special interest in the ​ activity” as important and the interest referred to does not necessarily involve a green aspect. However, a relation could therefore be, that those few volunteers who are motivated by a green aspect, would volunteer for those few organizations who have a green function at Roskilde Festival. Three interviewees also perceived “I am involved in this activity” important to ​ volunteer motivations. The three interviewees, from Organization One, Three, and Four are all sports clubs who have members of the sports club volunteering for them. This component scored fairly low in the survey results, but when compared to the reviewed research in the literature review, it is found that sports events usually score high in the affiliatory factor. In the theory section of this report, it was explained that part of Monga’s reasoning for including the affiliatory dimension in the theoretical framework, was based on a study of volunteer motivations at sports events by Farell et al., which showed affiliatory motivations to be the largest motivational factor amongst the volunteers. Monga’s survey supported this and found that volunteers are motivated by the sense of affiliation and belonging with the event and its participants. In this study, the

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 59 affiliatory motivation factor was not seen as the driving force, except perhaps by three out of the four interviewed sports clubs.

7.4. Alignment of the Instrumentalist Dimension

The analysis of the survey data showed that instrumental motivations amongst the volunteers ranked fourth amongst the five motivational dimensions. In comparison, the coding of the interviews showed that the volunteer recruiters perceive the instrumental motivational dimension to rank number one in their volunteers. At first glance, it appears that there is a misalignment between actual and perceived motivations, however, looking closer at the data collected, and the components within the instrumental dimension, the ranking might not be misaligned. The volunteer respondents ranked the instrumental component “get free participation in Roskilde ​ Festival” at 4,195, which shows a strong motivation to volunteer from this single component. As shown in the analyses, this is the component with the highest ranking across all five of Monga’s motivational dimension. The reason that the instrumental dimension ranked fourth is that other components in this motivational dimension were ranked fairly low by the survey respondents. This was also showcased in the analysis where it was calculated that the greatest difference between two components in a single dimension was found in the instrumental dimension with a difference of 1,777 between the component “Get free participation in Roskilde Festival” which ​ ​ scored 4,195 with the volunteers, and “Get an opportunity to explore career options” which the ​ volunteers scored at 2,418. The large difference between the score of the components is therefore the reason that the instrumental category did not rank higher with the survey respondents. Similarly, the analysis of perceived motivations by the volunteer recruiters showed a focus on the free ticket as well. The coding only found instances of instrumental motivations relating to the component “get free participation in Roskilde Festival” which means that no other instrumental ​ motivational components than the free ticket were mentioned by the volunteer recruiters. Looking at these parameters, the actual and perceived motivations seem to match between volunteers and the volunteer recruiters respectively. Looking at the variance between the

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 60 components in the instrumental dimension, the researchers of this report also find it of the utmost importance to mention the regrettable mistake made in excluding one of the dimensional components in the survey, namely “An opportunity to collect souvenirs marking the event”. The ​ ​ score of this factor could have ranked the instrumental dimension higher or lower, however, it does not affect the comparability of the component involving the free ticket.

Comparing the survey data to that of Monga’s survey of five special events in South Australia, a match between the ranking is found as they both ranked instrumental motivations number four out of the five possible dimensions. In his survey analysis, however, the score of the instrumentalist dimension only scored an average motivational score of 2,063 whereas the volunteers associated with Roskilde Festival scored it as 3,210. As mentioned above, this score might have been lower in the Volunteering Survey had the component “An opportunity to collect souvenirs marking the event” been included. Unfortunately, Monga does not include the ranking of the individual components in his survey, otherwise, this component could have been subtracted from the instrumental dimension’s average and allowed for comparability between the two instrumental dimensions.

In the analysis of the survey data, a connection was found between the motivation of the free ticket and the age of the volunteer. It appears that the instrumental motivation from the free ticket decrease as the age of the volunteer increase. A similar pattern was seen in relation to free participation and income. Students also scored free participation higher in comparison with non-students. As mentioned in the methods section of this report, these three demographics are related as the commonality in Danish society is that the younger demographic study and once they finish their studies they join the job market and earn more money. An increase in income could therefore make the affordability of the ticket less influential in the decisions to volunteer. Several interviewees mentioned, that since the volunteer hours have been raised, volunteering is less attractive to the people who joined the festival because of the free ticket. One interviewee commented on the number of hours worked at a minimum wage job in comparison with the ticket price and the increased hours. This poses the same problematic that was raised in the problem area of this report, namely the causal relationship between volunteer hours and

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 61 volunteer motivations. This issue will be discussed further in the section on Other Motivational Mechanisms.

The information that the average age of Roskilde Festival attendees is 24 years was given in the case description earlier in this report. Recognizing the young demographic of Roskilde Festival and comparing it to the volunteer motivations of the same demographic in the survey, it is seen that the age group, 20 to 29 years old, found the ticket to be of higher motivation than the average score including all ages. This information could be used by the volunteer recruiters to target the specific age group of the volunteers they are interested in. For example, if they want younger volunteers, that match the main demographic at Roskilde Festival, they could recruit based on the motivation of the free ticket.

7.5. Alignment of the Solidary Dimension

The survey respondents in the Volunteering Survey ranked the solidarity dimension fifth out of the five dimensions, with a factor of 2,666. The average score of this dimension is notably lower than the other motivational dimensions which all scored an average above three. Hence, the ranking of the solidarity dimension, as the least influential amongst the respondents, can be said to have a stronger certainty than some of the other rankings who are closer together in their scores. In comparison, the volunteer recruiters perceive the volunteers to be motivated by the solidarity dimension at a higher ranking than the volunteer respondents did themselves. The coding analysis showed that the volunteer recruiters ranked solidarity motivations as the second most important motivational dimension, and so the data shows a misalignment between actual and perceived motivations. Looking closer at the survey data, the components belonging to the solidarity dimension, the component “society expect me to volunteer” got the lowest score out of ​ the dimension with an average of 1,902 amongst the volunteering respondents. This shows that, on average, respondents are not motivated to volunteer based on expectations from society. In regards to this component, the volunteer recruiters did not mention expectations as a motivational component either. Their answers related to the components “it is a family tradition” and ​ ​ “because my friends are volunteering”, which shows that they perceive motivations to volunteer

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 62 as being related to having solidarity with family and friends by volunteering together. In the Volunteering Survey, both the aforementioned categories scored below three points which shows that the respondents do not see it the same way. Interesting to note, is how one volunteer described seeing friends signing up in pairs and that many interviewees describe how they get most of their new volunteers through acquaintances. A reason for this misalignment could be that the volunteering respondents’ motivations simply do not align with the recruiters perceptions, but it could also be that the specific respondents surveyed for some reason do not have a lot of friends who already volunteer. An explanation for this could be that the survey was distributed in English with some respondents being students at an international university. These respondents might not have the same connections to people who already volunteer, as someone who has lived in Denmark their whole life.

The concept of friendships did show to have some significance amongst the volunteering respondents however, as they ranked the component “make new friends with similar interest” at ​ 3,609 points. This could show some alignment between perceived and actual motivations, namely that friendships do play a role in the volunteer’s motivation to volunteer, either because someone already has friends and want to join them, or because someone wants to make friends. However, the volunteer recruiter’s ranking of solidarity motivations does seem higher overall in comparison with how this motivational dimension is felt in the volunteers.

Comparing the Volunteering Survey with Monga’s original survey on volunteer motivations, their survey scored solidarity motivations as the lowest dimension out of five as well, with a score of 1,666. This means that there is exactly one point between the two surveys. The volunteers surveyed in South Australia found solidarity motivations to influence their motivation to volunteer even less influential than the volunteering respondents from Roskilde Festival. An explanation for this could be that the respondents from Roskilde Festival are closer connected to the event than the volunteers in the Australian survey. A reason for this could be if the Australian events only happened one time as opposed to Roskilde Festival which has been running since 1972 thereby gaining regular participants over time. It is important to mention that the information about the age of the five South Australian festivals has not been obtained and therefore this is only stipulations.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 63 A reason for the misalignment between actual and perceived solidarity motivations might be found by looking at how the recruiters find their volunteers. Each organization provided information on how they recruit their volunteers and this information is found in Appendix C. Seven out of ten organizations recruit volunteers through their own friends and family, or friends and family of existing volunteers. This could be the reason why the recruiters perceive the solidarity dimension as the second most important dimension. The recruited volunteer might have made their initial decision to volunteer based on another motivational dimension, and then afterwards, they found an organization to volunteer with through a friend or a family member.

As mentioned in the survey analysis, the results of the survey showed that the average motivational score of the four dimensions; affiliatory, altruistic, instrumental, and egoistic, are close together, making it difficult to rank them with confidence. This differs from Monga’s original survey where the ranking of these dimensions is further apart. The closeness of their ranking could be contributed to a number of factors. As mentioned several times during the report, volunteer motivations have shown to be a complex entity to analyze. As shown in the survey analysis, individual volunteers tend to disagree over what motivates them, which could account for the closeness in the average scores for each dimension. Compared to Monga’s survey results, his scores were not as closely ranked as the results of this survey. This could be caused by a difference in the backgrounds for the two respondent groups, as Monga’s respondents are situated in South Australia, where as the Roskilde Festival respondents are, presumably, largely based in Denmark. The differences between the scopes of the event included in the two surveys might also have had an effect. As mentioned in the case description, Roskilde Festival is the largest music festival in Northern Europe, whereas the Australian events might have a smaller scope, which could result in a more homogeneous sample group. It is, however, important to note, that the scope of the Australian events are unknown to the researchers of this report. In spite of the closeness in scores for Monga’s dimensions in the Volunteering Survey, the dimensions are still possible to rank from the highest to lowest score, though with some uncertainty.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 64 Through the analysis and discussion of the collected data, it became apparent that some differences exist between Monga’s survey and the Volunteering Survey. One reason that could explain this, is a difference between the demographics of the two surveys. Monga (2006) surveyed volunteers from five different special events organizations in Australia. This research is focusing on one Special event that is hosted in Denmark. There are differences in demographics between the respondents in Monga’s (2006) survey and the Volunteering Survey. Firstly, there is a slight age difference between the two. Monga’s (2006) respondents average age was higher, when the respondents of the Volunteering Survey were majority under the age of 39. Secondly, the majority of the Volunteering Survey respondents were women, when in Monga’s (2006) survey, there were more men. But with that said, in neither research was there found to be a significant difference in motivations between genders. Thirdly, Monga’s respondents were on average in higher income groups than participants in the Volunteering Survey. Monga found that demographic variables did not influence the distribution of the five dimensions. In contrast, this research found there to be some relationships between individual components, e.g. wanting free participation, and income. Motivations also seem to vary somewhat between different age groups. These differences between demographics could explain some of the difference between the result of the surveys. But with that said, Monga (2006) did conclude that volunteers do not act due to one particular motivation but multiple.

7.7. Other Motivational Mechanisms

As described in the analysis strategy, an important part of this research paper is to see if mechanisms, other than the key mechanisms, could have an impact on the phenomena of a deficit in volunteers. The factors were able to be categorized as, a sold-out festival, the music program, and too many required hours. To see if these factors could be influential, their frequency of instances was analyzed, and in the following section, are compared to the analyzed data belonging to Monga’s theoretical framework. It is important to note, that the researchers are aware that it is arguable whether this comparison might not be entirely possible. Partially due to the fact that some of the factors could be debated to belong to certain dimensions, but also

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 65 because the dimensions are based on a large amount of empirical research done by Monga, and the other active mechanisms are based on data collected by ten interviews. More research into these factors would improve their academic backings. However, as the goal of the interviews was to collect data on the recruiters’ perceptions on volunteer motivations, and the analyzed data for both analyses originate from the same purpose and method, the comparison is included within this report. This is also in line with the applied analysis strategy, which states the importance of whether active mechanisms, other than the key mechanisms determined by the researchers, could be a part of the causal relationship between mechanisms and the phenomena.

Table 6 shows a ranking which includes the results of both the key mechanisms and the other active mechanisms. This comparison is done by treating the other active mechanisms as motivational dimensions with only one component attached. What is interesting about this table is that it shows whether another active mechanism could be considered as more or less influential than those proposed by Monga’s framework.

A sold-out festival, alongside the solidarity dimension, shows to be the second most frequently mentioned dimension, both with six out of ten instances, ranking it higher than the affiliatory, egoistic and altruistic dimensions. The interviewees have experienced that once the music festival sells out, they receive many more volunteer applications. Their perception is therefore that the sold-out status of the festival has an effect on volunteer motivation as they want access to the festival when no more tickets are available. It can be suggested that this factor could be categorized under the instrumentalist dimension and its component of getting free admission, as it relates to gaining access to the event. An argument against this is, that there is a difference between being motivated to gain admission, regardless of it being free or not, and gaining free admission. However, they both follow the description to the instrumental category which covers desires to acquire a personal advantage, as described in the theory chapter. Were the factor included within the instrumentalist dimension, it would only strengthen its position as being perceived as the most influential factor on volunteer motivations. Despite that the coding did not include degrees of importance for each factor, e.g. adjectives such as very, it is also worth noting that some of the organizations that mentioned the festival selling out, expressed it as being very important.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 66 In relation to the factor of too many hours, only six of the ten interviewed organizations have been negatively affected by this change, as the remaining four are still required to work a minimum of 24 hours, not 32 hours. It is therefore debatable whether or not the two groups can be analyzed under the same category on this factor, as they are inherently different. By analyzing the two groups of organizations together, the factor shares fourth place with the affiliatory dimension. If they are assessed separately, the factor becomes the least important factor for the 24 hours organizations, alongside the altruistic factor, and the second most important factor for the 32 hours organizations. This ranking is based upon only separating the groups for this one factor, it might have different results, were the two groups analyzed separately for all dimensions. This is regarded as unnecessary, as the rationale behind the hours being a relevant variable for other dimensions and factors could not be found. The minimum required hours could affect volunteer motivations in different ways. First, as mentioned by Organization ten, some volunteers are looking to do as little work as possible for the free ticket, making 24 hours more attractive than 32 hours. Second, as mentioned by Organization Three, some volunteers are not able to spend 32 hours on volunteering, as they have other obligations outside of Roskilde Festival, such as a full-time job. Third, Organization Five brings up the issue of the ticket price in relation to working 32 hours, she mentions that it takes fewer hours to earn the ticket through a paid job that by volunteering. The researchers found the idea behind this statement interesting and decided to examine it further. In 2019, the price of the ticket is 2100 DKK and by working 32 hours during the festival, the volunteer has an hourly pay of 65,62 DKK. The average Dane has an income of 133,35 after tax and works an average of 27 hours a week, giving him an income of 83,17 DKK (Danmarks Statistik, n.d.). For the average Dane, it would then only be necessary to work 25,25 hours at their job to earn the ticket, vs. the 32 hours required by some organizations. It is however still more favorable to volunteer for 24 hours. It is important to stress that these calculations are made based on the average Dane and does not apply to all Danish citizens. The tax rate and hourly pay vary within the population, and the average Dane does not come from the same demographic as the average attendee at Roskilde Festival, i.e. the average Dane is 41,5 years old, whereas the average festival attendee is 24 years old (Danmarks Statistik, n.d; Roskilde Festival, 2017b). It should also be noted, that the income of the average Dane

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 67 might already be earmarked for other expenses and he or she could maybe lack the funds to pay for the ticket and not have the opportunity to take on the extra 25,25 hours at their job. Also, as mentioned in previous sections, volunteer motivations are complex and might not pertain to one single dimension, meaning that other dimensions might make it more attractive to volunteer instead of working.

When compared to the results of the analysis on Monga’s dimensions, the musical program ranked as the sixth highest factor, ranking it above the egoistic and altruistic dimensions. Organization Four mentioned how an unattractive music program might motivate people to volunteer, as they do not consider the price of the ticket to worth its value. Building on this argument, some festival attendees might choose not to volunteer, as they are worried that they might have to work during a favorite musical act. Thereby, if the music program is unattractive to the attendee, he or she might be more inclined to volunteer as the risk of working during an attractive act is smaller. These factors are viable for those festival guests who attend Roskilde Festival for other reasons than the music, such as the camping site and atmosphere. Oppositely, Organization Six pointed out how an unattractive music program might result in fewer volunteers. It could be assumed, that when the music program is poor, fewer guests are inclined to attend Roskilde Festival, which decreases the pool of possible volunteers. The contradiction between the two arguments is interesting with one arguing that an unattractive music program might motivate volunteers, and another arguing that it might demotivate volunteers. The two arguments are not mutually exclusive, as volunteer motivations are complex and all volunteers are not necessarily motivated by the same dimensions. The influence of the music program is also debatable, as it was only mentioned by two out of ten organizations. Choosing to volunteer based on the music program at the festival could be regarded as a motivational component belonging to the instrumental dimension. The instrumental dimension involves motivations in the volunteer that relates to volunteering with a desire to acquire a personal advantage. As the music program becomes more advantageous the volunteer then see a higher advantage in volunteering. This was not coded as an instrumental component, as the coding did not show a clear relation to the theoretical framework the coding manual was based upon.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 68 This section has included a comparison between the analysis result of the interview data on Monga’s five volunteer motivation dimensions, and the analysis result of other active mechanisms. By following the analysis strategy, it was found that factors, other than the dimensions suggested by Monga, is perceived by the volunteer recruiters to have an effect on volunteer motivations. To solidify that these new factors are in fact influential, it would be necessary to conduct considerably more research on them. A suggestion could be to conduct a new Volunteering Survey, where these factors are included to see how they are scored by the volunteers.

Table 6: comparison of other factors and motivational dimensions

7.8. Recruiter-Volunteer Relationship

In the problem area of this report, the relationship between the volunteer and the volunteer organization was compared to the relationship of an employee and an employer. Here it was posited, that the volunteer organization does not have the same ability to assert power over the volunteer as an employer has over the employee, and that it makes it harder for the volunteer organization to get and keep volunteers. This problematic is in line with what was mentioned by the interviewee from Organization Three in the analysis of this report under the section, Additional Interview Findings. Referencing the problem with volunteer dropout before the

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 69 festival start, the interviewee mentions, that since they have no contracts binding the volunteers to work for them, it is easy for them to drop out of the work. Recognizing this challenge as part of the volunteer recruitment, it becomes interesting to look into why the volunteer chooses to drop out of volunteering or phrased differently, why the volunteer’s motivation change.

As mentioned by the interviewee from Organization Nine, they perceive that there is a tendency amongst the volunteers to “shop around” amongst the volunteer organizations in an effort to find the one they want to volunteer for the most. A reason for volunteer dropout could therefore be, that the volunteer has decided to work for another organization instead. The interviewee from Organization Nine added that one of the things that makes an organization attractive to the volunteer is the job tasks they offer. The job aspect therefore seems to somewhat be perceived as a component involved with the volunteers' final decision to volunteer. Several of the interviewees mentioned reasons that their organization might be attractive to volunteer with, including the support they give the volunteers, and the work schedule they provide them. The interviewees’ answers show that they see volunteer motivation as a two-step process where the volunteer first decide to volunteer and then decides where to volunteer. It might be that for some volunteers, the motivation to volunteer has another layer within the initial motivational structure, where the volunteer initially is motivated by one, or several of Monga’s five motivational dimensions, but then begins to calculate the rational choice for where to volunteer, based on what the organization offers them, such as the time of the available shifts, the work task, and how well the volunteer organization takes care of them.

This kind of utility maximization also seems to go the opposite way though, as described by the interviewee from Organization One, when they mention the quality of the volunteers that they are looking for. The targeting of specific volunteers based on their motivations can be used to get the type of volunteer that the organization is looking for, or avoid a certain type of volunteer. The interviewee from Organization One described how they have had a negative experience with volunteers who only volunteer based on the instrumental means of attending the festival for free, and that they are not looking for these types of volunteers, because they do not provide good volunteer work. This raises an interesting point in regards to the dynamic of supply and demand of volunteers. It shows that, although the volunteer organizations are price takers they do have a

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 70 standard for how much they are willing to tolerate in order to recruit volunteers. As noted above, it is also interesting to note, that though the volunteer organization wants volunteers, they may be looking for a specific type of person and therefore choose to advertise for their organization in a certain way that leads some prospect volunteers to turn them down. They may get a smaller number of volunteers but get the type of volunteers that they want. In relation to the survey data showing that the instrumental dimension, more specifically the free ticket, is the main motivation for volunteering, Organization One does not seem to be interested in using this information to gain more volunteers, as they are not the kind of workers they are looking for.

In relation to finding the right kind of volunteer, there seems to be a somewhat strong want to recruit volunteers that are already connected to the organization via friends, family, or through being in the organization already. Some organizations mentioned that previous volunteers get a preference and others mentioned that they only recruit through people they know. One could think that the preference of working with an acquaintance, someone you can trust, is more important to the volunteer organization than getting a large number of volunteers because the organization do not want volunteers who drop out or perform subpar work.

A comparison between the rankings of the five motivational volunteer dimensions has shown a misalignment between the actual volunteer motivations, provided by the survey, and the perceived volunteer motivations, given in the interviews. For the survey, the altruistic dimension ranked the highest, whereas it was the instrumentalist dimension for the interviews. The survey respondents ranked the egoistic dimension second, however, the interviewees believed that to be the solidarity dimension. Both analyses resulted in the affiliatory dimension being ranked third. The survey then ranked the instrumentalist dimension as the fourth motivational dimension, and the interviews showed that to be the egoistic dimension. Finally, the solidarity factor ended up the least important dimension for the survey, whereas it was the altruistic dimension for the interviews.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 71 8. Conclusion

Understanding how their own perceptions of volunteer motivations compare to their actual motivations can help recruiters in their recruitment process at Roskilde Festival. A comparison between how volunteers and volunteer recruiters rank five different motivational dimensions shows that there are both misalignments and alignments between actual and perceived motivations.

Motivation to volunteer through solidarity was perceived to be higher than its actual importance in the volunteer. This can be explained by the fact that the recruiters find many of their volunteers through their family and friends and their perception of reality is colored by their own experiences. It appears that the volunteer rather gets their initial motivation from the altruistic beliefs, their ego feeling fulfilled by the experience, and simply just wanting to be affiliated with Roskilde Festival. They then find the volunteer organization after their initial motivation through a family member or a friend. The fact that the altruistic motivation ranks high goes against the recruiters’ perceptions who ranked it as the lowest motivational dimension. A belief that volunteering creates a better society especially seemed to motivate the volunteers. An interesting finding as this also goes against the literature on special events volunteer motivations.

Volunteering as an instrument to achieve something was overall perceived to be higher than the actual motivation, however, a closer look into the components involved with instrumentalist motivations also found an alignment. It showed that both volunteers and recruiters perceive the free ticket to Roskilde Festival as the main motivational component across components in all five dimensions. The research found that this understanding of volunteer motivations is not necessarily used by volunteer recruiters to increase their volunteer numbers as some are not interested in volunteers who just want a free ticket.

Factors other than the five motivational dimensions from Monga’s framework was found to be perceived by the volunteer recruiters as influencing motivation in the volunteer. Several mentioned that when the festival sells out it increases volunteer motivation, and also that a higher number in required volunteer hours decreases motivation to volunteer. These factors add

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 72 complexity to the volunteer motivations. Another complexity mentioned by the interviewees was the volunteers motivation to volunteer in relation to what the different organizations offer in terms of work tasks and how they treat their volunteers. The research therefore shows, that volunteer motivations are even more complex than initially expected, with the volunteer first being motivated by a dimension and then making a rational choice analysis on which organization to volunteer for based on what maximizes their utility.

The aim of the research in this report was to help volunteer recruiters get more volunteers by uncovering perceived and actual motivations so that they can use this information in their recruitment process. An interesting find is that the information might not necessarily be used to get more volunteers but to attract the kind of volunteer that the organization is looking for. It was found that not all organizations are interested in volunteers who just want the free ticket. Some equate this motivation with poor quality of work and they do therefore not look for volunteers with this motivation. Many organizations also expressed that they mostly recruit volunteers through family and friends allowing them familiarity amongst their workers. The conclusion of this report, therefore, is that volunteer motivations at Roskilde Festival are extremely complex. Not only do they involve the initial motivation to volunteer but they also involve rational choice making about the profile of the volunteer organizations. Furthermore, the organizations are not just price takers in the equation of supply and demand of volunteers. Just like the volunteers rationally weigh what they get out of the organizations, the recruiters use the information about the motivations of the volunteer to rationally decide what kind of volunteer they want. This shows that when perceived and actual motivations are aligned it might not affect the way that the volunteer organizations recruit their volunteers, because even though they know the actual motivation of the volunteer, they might not be interested in working with someone who volunteers at Roskilde Festival based on that specific motivational dimension.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 73

8.1. Points for Further Research

As the research interest in the alignment of actual and perceived motivations was sparked by the problematic around a deficit in volunteers, the researchers of this report propose that further research investigates if there is a causal effect where a misalignment was found. Another interesting find was that the volunteer recruiters mentioned several factors that they perceive to motivate volunteers which was not included in the surveys motivational framework. It would be interesting to send out another survey including these factors to find out if the volunteers find these to motivate them as well. A last suggestion for further research involves the finding that recruiters often recruit through family and friends. Taking this train of thought one step further, it could be interesting to see if the strategy to recruit through an acquaintance versus the strategy to recruit through online platforms yields a difference in how valuable the organizations rank the volunteers.

9. Bibliography

Aurby, A. (2017). Roskilde Festival mangler 1000 frivillige - burgerbar frygter for burgersalget. ​ Retreived from: http://nyheder.tv2.dk/lokalt/2017-06-22-roskilde-festival-mangler-1000-frivillige-burgerbar-frygt er-for-burgersalget

Barron, P., & Rihova, I. (2011). Motivation to volunteer: a case study of the Edinburgh International Magic Festival. International Journal Of Event And Festival Management, 2(3), ​ ​ ​ ​ 202-217. https://doi.org/10.1108/17582951111170281 ​

Bentham, J. (1969). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. A Bentham ​ Reader, ed. M.P Mack. New York: Pegasus. ​

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 74

Berlingske (2010). Her er 41 års Roskilde Festival – 1971-74. Retrieved from: ​ ​ https://www.berlingske.dk/samfund/her-er-41-aars-roskilde-festival-1971-74

Boone, D. A & Boone, H. N. (2012). Analyzing Likert Data. Journal of extension, 50(2). ​ Retrieved from https://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/ ​

Boudon, R. (1998). Limitations of Rational Choice Theory. American Journal of Sociology, ​ ​ ​ 104(3), 817-828. doi:10.1086/210087 ​ ​

Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ​ ​

Bygstad, B. & Munkvold, B. E. (2011). In Search of Mechanisms. Conducting a Critical Realist ​ Data Analysis. Retrieved from ​ http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.690.4006&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Cambridge University Press 2019. (2019). Festival. Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus. Retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/festival ​

Charities Aid Foundation. (2018). CAF World Giving Index 2018. Charities Aid Foundation. ​ ​ Retrieved from https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/publications/2018-publications/caf-world-giving-index-2018

Clary, E. G., Ridge, R. D., Stukas, A. A., Snyder, M., Copeland, J., Haugen, J., & Miene, P. (1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1516-1530. ​ https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1516

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 75

Clary, E.G. and Snyder, M. (1991). A functional analysis of altruism and pro-social behavior: The case of volunteerism. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 119–148. Newbury ​ ​ ​ ​ Park, CA: Sage.

Cnaan, R. A. & Goldberg Glen, R. S. (1991). Measuring motivations to volunteer in human - services. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27, 269–284. ​ ​ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886391273003

Collis, J., Holt, A., & Hussey, R. (2017). Business accounting, an introduction to financial and ​ management accounting (Third ed.). London: Palgrave. ​

Crespi Vallbona, M., & Richards, G. (2007). The meaning of cultural festivals. International - ​ Journal of Cultural Policy, 13(1), 103-122. ​

Dahl, S. (2018). Foreninger kritiserer Roskilde Festival: I tænker for meget på penge. Retrieved from https://www.avisen.dk/foreninger-kritiserer-roskilde-festival-i-taenker-ku_504561.aspx ​

Danmarks Statistik (n.d.). Gennemsnitsdanskeren. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/Publikationer/gennemsnitsdanskeren

Delanda, M. (2006). A New Philosophy of Society, London: Continuum. ​ ​

Eggert, M. A. (2015). Motivation Pocketbook. Hampshire: Management Pocketbooks ltd. ​ ​

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 76 Egholm, L. (2014). Philosophy of Science (1st ed., pp. 102-114). Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels ​ ​ Forlag.

Farrell, J. M., Johnston, M. E. & Twynam, G. D. (1998). Volunteer motivation, satisfaction and management at an elite sporting competition. Journal of Sport Management, 12, ​ ​ ​ ​ 288–300.https://web-b-ebscohost-com.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&s ​ id=175ab89e-d140-4337-808c-6de9feeed97c%40sessionmgr103

Fletcher, A. (2016). Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. International Journal Of Social Research Methodology, 20(2), 181-194. doi: ​ ​ 10.1080/13645579.2016.1144401

Flora, C. (2005). Metaperceptions: How do you see Yourself? Psychology Today. Retrieved from ​ ​ ​ ​ https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/articles/200505/metaperceptions-how-do-you-see-yourself

Getz, D. (1991). Festivals, Special Events, and Tourism, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. ​ ​

GHK. (2010). Study on Volunteering in the European Union. Country Report Denmark. ​ ​ Retrieved from https://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/1017981/1668257/National_report_DK.pdf/a03be78c-5e31-467 f-8c52-4f44b6b8d3d2

Grammatikopoulos, V., Koustelios, A., & Tsigilis, N. (2006). Construct validity of the special event volunteer motivation scale for Greek volunteers. Leisure/Loisir, 30(1), 287-305. https://doi-org.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/10.1080/14927713.2006.9651352

Halperin, S. & Heath, O. (2017). Political Research: methods and Practical Skills. 2nd edition. ​ ​ Oxford University Press.

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 77

Heery, E., & Noon, M. (2019). Volunteering. A Dictionary of Human Resource Management.. ​ ​ Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/view/10.1093/acref/9780191827822.001. 0001/acref-9780191827822-e-1882

Heldt, T., & Klerby, A. (2019). Peace, love and well-being: volunteering at the Peace & Love Festival in Borlänge, Sweden. In K. Smith, L. Lockstone-Binney, K. Holmes & T. Baum, Event ​ Volunteering: International Perspectives on the event volunteering (1st ed., pp. 19-23). New ​ York: Routledge.

Hunt, E. K, & Lautzenheiser, Mark. (2011). History of economic thought, a critical perspective ​ (Third ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Kimer, L. (2017). Roskilde Festival: Desperat forening giver dusør for frivillige. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://sn.dk/Roskilde/Roskilde-Festival-Desperat-forening-giver-dusoer-for-frivillige/artikel/659 592

Koefoed,G. (2012). Udmattet Frivillig: Næste år køber jeg billet. Politikken. Retrieved at: ​ ​ https://politiken.dk/kultur/musik/roskildefestival/art5395527/Udmattet-frivillig-N%C3%A6ste-% C3%A5r-k%C3%B8ber-jeg-en-billet

Matthews, D. (2008). Introductions to Special Events and Special Events Production. In Special Event Production: The process. Matthews, D. (ed.) Butterworth-Heineman

Monga, M. (2006). Measuring Motivation to Volunteer for Special Events. Event Management, 10(1), 47-61. doi: 10.3727/152599506779364633

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 78

Mortensen, S.W. (2011). Fakta: Roskilde Festival 2011. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://borsen.dk/nyheder/artikel/1/210345/fakta_roskilde_festival_2011.html

Pawson, R. & Tiley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage. ​ ​

Piliavin, J. A. & Charng, H. W. (1990). Altruism: A review of recent theory and research. Annual ​ Review of Sociology, 16, 27–65. ​ https://www-jstor-org.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/stable/pdf/2083262.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A9fc3 2c9a0eab4979d994c64e937b6dfe

Pettigrew, A. M. (1985). Contextualist Research and the Study of Organizational Change ​ Processes. In Research Methods in Information Systems. Mumford, E., Hirschheim, R., Fitgeralt, ​ ​ ​ G., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (eds). Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp 53-78

Rambøll. (2011). De Danske musikfestivaler: Den kulturelle og økonomiste Betydning. Rambøll. Retrieved from http://dansklive.dk/assets/4-Branchetal/4.2-Publikationer/Musikfestivaler-Rapport_Marts2011_fi nal.pdf

Roskilde Festival (2017a). The Volunteers Guide Book at Roskilde Festival [Online] Retrieved ​ ​ from https://people-pro.roskilde-festival.dk/CompanyDocuments/VrdAtVide_folder_2017_UK_d6ba0 ebc-af58-4569-b671-bb2d0d9b5099.pdf

Roskilde Festival (2017b). Årsskrift 2017. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://roskildefestivalgruppen.dk/media/1207/rf_a-rsskrift_2017.pdf

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 79

Roskilde Festival (2018). Service Functions at Roskilde Festival. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.roskilde-festival.dk/media/1408/service-function-info-2019.pdf

Roskilde Festival (n.d.a). The Festival. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.roskilde-festival.dk/en/about/the-festival/

Roskilde Festival (n.d.b). Non-profit. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.roskilde-festival.dk/en/about/non-profit/

Roskilde Festival (n.d.c). Volunteering. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.roskilde-festival.dk/en/about/volunteering/

Roskilde Festival (n.d.d). About Being a Volunteer. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.roskilde-festival.dk/en/volunteers/about-being-a-volunteer/

Roskilde Festival (2019). Roskilde Festival 2019 is Sold Out!. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.roskilde-festival.dk/en/years/2019/news/roskilde-festival-2019-sold-out/

Schouboe, E. (2012). Frivillige dropper Roskilde Festival. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www.berlingske.dk/redaktionen/esben-schouboe

Simon, H. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. ​ ​

Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. In Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215-240. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Volunteer Motivations at Roskilde Festival 80