FUTURING VOLUNTEERING QUEENSLAND INC

VOLUNTEER MANAGEMENT

report

a world where everyone can make a difference

Volunteering Qld

1.0 Executive Summary This report provides the findings from Volunteering Queensland Inc’s Futuring Volunteer Management Forum, May 2013. This forum brought together 84 volunteer managers from SouthEast Queensland to assess the changes affecting local volunteerism and the strategies required to keep the sector relevant over the coming years. At this forum, each volunteer manager provided information on the following topics; 1. 2. 3. 4.

Trends affecting volunteering within their organisation Challenges affecting volunteering within their organisation Best practices for recruitment and retention Critical changes necessary for a bright volunteer management future

Findings indicate that volunteer managers share several experiences and ideas about the future of volunteering in South-East Queensland. For trends, participants reported the wider structural changes present throughout Australia and internationally are also present in South-East Queensland, primarily an increase in university student volunteering combined with legislative and technological change. More specific trends occurring in South-East Queensland were also identified, the most frequently being ‘volunteer & position mismatch’ followed by ‘young volunteer disengagement’. In terms of challenges, ‘volunteer & position mismatch’ was again mentioned, this time as the most common difficulty facing volunteer managers and was followed by ‘limited resourcing of programs’. Best practices for retention were ‘volunteer recognition’ and ‘volunteer inclusion’ and this highlights the importance of correctly implementing these fundamental procedures. Best practice recruitment was ‘using online resources & websites’, further suggesting that technology is becoming important for contemporary volunteers to locate opportunities. Finally, of the five critical changes the most common were ‘increased volunteer training opportunities’ and ‘increased promotion of volunteering’. Here also, the need for ‘more networking events for volunteer managers’ was consistently emphasised. Taken together, these findings indicate that South-East Queensland volunteer managers in 2013 are experiencing a range of complex and emerging challenges which are consistent with wider national and international developments in volunteering. Interestingly, however, findings suggest that certain ‘typical’ issues (e.g., training and volunteer-position matching) and conventional best practices (e.g., volunteer acknowledgement and inclusion) also remain important. Therefore, when preparing for changes expected over the coming years, the integration of both new and conventional approaches appears necessary. Collectively, it is hoped that this report can therefore become a useful and informative resource to aid planning for a bright volunteering future; available to Volunteering Queensland Inc, policy makers, researchers and volunteer managers alike.

Report by Nathan St John and Mark Creyton. Access this Futuring Volunteer Management Report & Dataset online at volunteeringqld.org.au/policy

01

“This forum brought together 84 volunteer managers from SouthEast Queensland to assess the changes affecting local volunteerism and the strategies required to keep the sector relevant over the coming years” 02

2.0 Background & Rationale for the Forum In Queensland, volunteers and the volunteer managers (VMs) that guide them make a significant contribution to the community. These individuals comprise Queensland’s 1.2 million volunteer-base and contribute an estimated $13.4 billion to the state’s economy1. In 2006, Queensland registered the equal highest volunteer participation rate alongside the ACT at 38 percent and 2010 estimates suggest one in three Queenslanders had volunteered in the past year1, 2. Overall, the state’s participation rate has increased annually since 19952 and is predicted to continue to expand from 2011 to 20213. Clearly then, the services that VMs and volunteers provide throughout Queensland are substantial and likely to remain high over the coming years. Large-scale changes and social trends are, however, also influencing the voluntary sector in Australia and internationally, and will most likely have significant implications for Queensland. These include shifts across technological, social, economic, legislative and demographic domains4, 5. Collectively, these are transforming the traditional notions of volunteerism, from agegroups and motivations through to durations of commitment and expectations. And whilst traditional participation remains high6, volunteer organisations and the volunteer-base that serves them are changing. As a result, there is wide agreement that the entire enterprise of volunteering is ‘at a cross-road’7 or in ‘transition’8 towards new models of engagement. Drawing together Australian9, 10 and international research11, 12, 13, the five key structural trends predicted to shape volunteering in Queensland over the coming years include; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Technological Changes; Episodic Volunteering; University Student Volunteering; Legislative Changes; and Corporate Volunteering.

Despite the opportunities and challenges offered by these trends, no systematic research has yet determined their level of influence on volunteering in Queensland, and more specifically, in South-East Queensland (SEQ). Therefore, the Futuring Volunteer Management Forum 2013 (FVMF) was convened to determine if these changes are present in SEQ, and invited VMs operating in this area to discuss these themes. Given that previous national and international research converges on these trends it was predicted that SEQ VMs would report similar patterns. However, the FVMF aimed to not only assess these wider changes, but gain insights into other more localised trends which may also be influencing the area. Moreover, the forum was used to document the challenges, best practices, and critical changes that VMs believe are required to keep volunteering relevant and adaptive over the coming years. Overall then, the FVMF can been seen as a first step towards understanding how emerging patterns are affecting the SEQ voluntary sector, whilst also informing a wider strategic approach to reposition Queensland’s volunteering efforts to capitalise on these changes. This transition, if effectively managed, can help ensure that volunteering in SEQ sustains its relevance, capacity and participation rate over the coming years. If poorly managed, opportunities to channel shifting sources of volunteers and optimise emerging technologies may be missed.

03

“And whilst traditional participation remains high, volunteer organisations and the volunteer-base that serves them are changing”

04

3.0 Methodology 3.1 Data Collection The FVMF was held at Volunteering Queensland Inc head office in Brisbane on 17 May 2013 as part of National Volunteer Week. A high level of interest was shown by prospective participants for this half-day interactive event with 130 VMs expressing interest and a total of 84 taking part (76 paid staff, 8 volunteers). The organisational representation of these participants is presented below (Figure 1). As can be seen, a large cross-section of SEQ organisations were present, with representatives of community and health/disability organisations being the most common. Figure 1: Breakdown of organisations present at the FVMF 2013. These Icons indicate the type of organisation each participant represents.

Children & Health & Emergency Education Environment Government Youth Disability Community

8

19

33

2

8

3

3

Sport

Other

4

4

A series of four worksheets were compiled to gain VM feedback and insight across four central research themes. Worksheets were administered to each participant who then worked in groups to provide written and anonymous answers. Worksheet themes included; Worksheet One: What are the trends affecting volunteering and volunteer management in your organisation? Worksheet Two: What are the challenges affecting volunteering and volunteer management in your organisation? Worksheet Three: Discuss your best practices in the recruitment of or retention of volunteers. Worksheet Four: What are the five critical changes for ensuring a bright volunteer management future?

3.2 Data Analysis Each of the 84 participant’s worksheet responses were transcribed into Microsoft Excel for qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis14. Here, each worksheet topic was analysed individually to identify, categorise and arrange responses under key themes. Content analysis, which involves searching for pre-determined themes in textual data, was used on Worksheet One to determine if the five structural trends discussed previously were identified by the FVMF participants, and by extension, are present in SEQ. Thematic analysis, in contrast, includes no pre-determined categories and comments are instead read and re-read until particular themes emerge. Once these key themes have been identified and can account for the complete dataset, each response can be categorised and counted. This technique was used for Worksheet Two, Three and Four, and also for responses in Worksheet One which did not constitute structural trends. Across all worksheets the total number of responses relevant to each theme was then calculated and the results of these analyses are presented in the next section. For each worksheet only the five highest rated themes were considered for further analysis, however, the remaining categories can be viewed in the Futuring Volunteer Management Dataset available online at volunteeringqld.org.au/policy

The Noun Project Icons: Child designed by Benjamin Orlovski, Health designed by Benni, Community designed by Dmitry Baranovskiy, Education & Environment designed by OCHA Visual Information Unit, Federal Government designed by Iconathon, Rugby Ball designed by Alessandro Suraci.

05

Environment

3

06

4.0 Key Findings 4.1 Trends

4.1.1 Structural Trends Present in South-East Queensland The results from Worksheet One are presented in Figure 2 (below) and indicate that all five of the predicted structural trends are present in the SEQ voluntary sector. Specifically, university student volunteering was the most frequently mentioned, followed by legislative changes and technological changes. The growth of university student volunteering was reported on 17 occasions. VMs highlighted a rapid increase in university students now seeking professional skill development via service learning placements and internships in SEQ. Despite the increasing supply of volunteers this trend generates, VMs also noted that university student volunteers are short-term, high turn-over, frequently absent, and also, students do not foresee the implications these habits have for volunteering organisations. Legislative changes were second with 16 mentions. The growing complexity and risk-averse nature of legislative frameworks (e.g., security checks) and Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) procedures were proposed as slowing volunteer recruitment in SEQ. Specifically, volunteers and organisations are ‘bound in red-tape’, with security checks (e.g., Blue Cards) and safety and liability concerns (e.g., taking on elderly volunteers), increasingly slowing the volunteering process. Following this, technological changes were reported on 15 occasions. The need for volunteering organisations to provide online models of engagement has been increasing and VMs identified growing pressures to recruit and train volunteers via websites and social media. Two barriers to technological adaptation mentioned were the resistance of older volunteers to technological tools and training (e.g., using iphones) and VMs themselves feeling under-skilled to capitalise on the emerging opportunities of technology. Trends toward corporate volunteering and episodic volunteering were also expressed, however, at a less influential rate. Corporate volunteering was referred to 10 times. VMs reported that SEQ is experiencing more employer-based groups volunteering for short-term projects (i.e., feeding the homeless). However, associated difficulties included aligning corporate groups to projects that match their large size, time-demands and expectations. Finally, episodic volunteering was cited 8 times. Notably, the demand for ‘short-term’ engagement in a specialised project is increasing and this was seen as beneficial to a small number of volunteer programs. However, for the majority of VMs, high turn-over and low post-event interest were problems inherent in this trend. Specifically, it appears to be difficult to get a 6 to 12 month commitment from most volunteers in SEQ. Figure 2: Structural Trends Present in the South-East Queensland Voluntary Sector

University student volunteering

17

Legislative changes

16

Technological changes

15

Corporate volunteering

10

Episodic volunteering

8

Number of times VMs reported each trend

The Noun Project Icons: Government building design by Mohamed Ibrahim, University & Information technology design by OCHA Visual Information Unit, Volunteer designed by Dima Yagnyuk, Brief Case design from Stock Illustration.

07

4.1.2 Specific Trends Present in South-East Queensland Five regionally-specific trends, which did not constitute structural changes, were also identified using Worksheet One and are provided below (see Figure 3). Here, volunteer & position mismatch was the most frequent, followed by young volunteer disengagement and insufficient training. The issue of volunteer & position mismatch in SEQ was referred to 19 times. VMs highlighted an increasing disconnect between volunteer skills and the positions on offer. Problematically, volunteers with higher skill-sets are being placed in low-skilled roles, becoming bored and leaving; alternatively, low-skilled applicants are being denied positions because certain skills are required (e.g., grief and counselling work). Across the sector then, skills are increasingly unutilised and more people are being placed in unengaging roles. The second trend emphasised young volunteer disengagement and was mentioned on 18 occasions. This trend did not refer to students, but ‘young people’ as 18 to 24 year olds. Low recruitment and low retention were both identified. VMs noted that the older volunteer-base is not being replenished with a younger generation, and the lack of targeted youth recruitment strategies was seen as the problem. Decreasing rates of retention of those who do join was attributed to a growing preoccupation with personal (as opposed to social or organisational) goals, leading to attrition despite high investment in training and registration. Thirdly, insufficient training was identified 14 times. Primarily, VMs stressed that providing compulsory training is increasingly expensive and time-consuming. Also, there is growing demand for online training and the need to up-skill older volunteers in internet literacy. Furthermore, VMs themselves expressed the need for more skill-specific training to understand and adapt to the challenges of a changing sector. Changing volunteer expectations also registered 14 mentions. VMs highlighted a shift in volunteer expectations as those with higher skills demand challenging positions as opposed to mundane roles. Expectations are expanding with ‘meaningful’, personal and/or professionally beneficial roles appearing to be new, yet common, volunteer motivations across SEQ. Challengingly, this leads to high turn-over upon project completion and low recruitment for traditional roles. Finally, ageing volunteers was referred to 11 times. VMs noted that more retirees are using their free time to benefit SEQ communities. However, they are commonly resistant to organisational change, technology and training and reluctant to move-on from more able-body roles to allow young people entry. Furthermore, an over-supply of aged volunteers was seen as reducing the diversity of volunteers present in organisations. Figure 3: Specific Trends Present in the South-East Queensland Voluntary Sector

11

19

Volunteer & position mismatch Young volunteer disengagement Insufficient training Changing volunteer expectations

14

Ageing volunteers

18 14

Number of times VMs reported each trend

08

4.2 Challenges Facing South-East Queensland Worksheet Two explored the challenges in SEQ and results are provided below in Figure 4. Findings indicate volunteer & position mismatch was the most common challenge followed by limited resourcing of programs. Volunteer & position mismatch was referred to 33 times. Comments were similar to the previous section (as mismatch was also a specific trend) where the dual challenge is placing high and low-skilled volunteers in appropriate roles. Respondents reported the difficulty and time-consuming aspects of “getting this connection right” throughout SEQ and that, as an added difficulty, matching must suit the organisation’s current needs and also the volunteer’s availability and location. The second challenge was limited resourcing of programs with 31 mentions. VMs reported that resource constraints make program delivery extremely difficult. A lack of time to oversee programs, as VMs are often volunteers themselves, was common. Having ad-hock policies and procedures (e.g., templates, application forms or info-packs) were similarly proposed as a constraint, as was a shortage of physical equipment, including printers, computers and office space, for volunteers on-site. Thirdly, low volunteer retention was reported 23 times. Despite high enthusiasm, resource-intensive training and legal registration (i.e., criminal history checks), a challenge for SEQ is high volunteer drop-out. Given the resources required for orientation, a trend toward only one to three months of engagement is highly problematic. This also puts pressure on long-term volunteers who then experience burn-out. The fourth challenge, also mentioned on 23 occasions, was inadequate volunteer & VM training. Providing volunteer training was said to be difficult in a time-poor, zerobudget and complex legislative environment. VMs noted this was compounded by limited free or subsidised training offered in SEQ. VMs themselves are also challenged by limited training, especially in areas like ‘best practices of contemporary volunteer management’, and ‘managing different personality types and conflict’. In 18 instances, the last challenge of inadequate funding was reported. Across SEQ, VMs reported the difficultly of recognising volunteer contributions, providing training and expanding program operations on a limited budget. Adding to this is the inaccessibility of external funding and grants for many organisations coupled with the perception that many VMs do not receive adequate budget dollars to implement current programs. Figure 4: Key Challenges Facing the South-East Queensland Voluntary Sector

33

Volunteer & position mismatch

31

Limited resourcing of programs Low volunteer retention

23

Inadequate volunteer & VM training

23

Inadequate funding

18

Number of times VMs reported each challenge

09

4.3 Best Practices for South-East Queensland Figure 5 below outlines the five best practices. Here, volunteer recognition was the most beneficial for retention whilst for recruitment using online resources & websites was seen as most effective. Volunteer recognition registered 38 responses and, to VMs, personalised volunteer acknowledgement will ‘keep them coming back’ in SEQ. Best practice recognition includes; awards, lunches, birthday cards and Christmas functions. Including CEOs and paid staff in these events, whilst providing online photographs and statistics of contributions, was also emphasised. Recognition was the absolute best practice for retention and was mentioned on 10 more occasions than other strategies. The next two best practices for retention, with 27 responses each, were volunteer inclusion and providing adequate training. Inclusion comprises treating volunteers as staff by integrating them with the organisation. Furthermore, consulting volunteers for decision-making and keeping them ‘in on things’ was seen as critical to long-term retention. Here again, facilitating CEO and volunteer interactions was considered beneficial. Providing adequate training was also crucial for retention. To VMs, proper training (and trainers) empowers volunteers to effectively contribute, and hence, their involvement and interest is maintained. Training here refers to orientation but also refresher courses to keep current volunteers informed. Providing training booklets and mentors at orientation was highlighted, whilst for longer-term retention, offering qualifications and CV building training was seen as effective. The best practice recruitment strategy, scoring 26, was using online resources & websites. Here, high-traffic websites (i.e. Seek ‘Go-Volunteer’) were considered crucial and simultaneous advertisements on multiple SEQ volunteer websites further improved this approach. Moreover, clearly describing roles and skills required in position descriptions was proposed to ‘weed-out’ inappropriate candidates and entice those most suitable to apply. Online newsletters were also seen as good for recruitment; and innovatively, online volunteer management software (i.e., ‘Volunteer Impact’) was proposed as a best practice project management tool. The final best practice, with 23 mentions, was effective volunteer & position matching; this covers both recruitment and retention and aims to better align volunteer skills with positions. In practice, VMs should be candid and selective in position descriptions and information sessions whilst using private and not-for-profit sector networks to help place applicants. Moreover, high standards should be maintained by saying ‘thanks, but no thanks’ to unsuitable volunteers. Figure 5: Best Practices for the South-East Queensland Voluntary Sector

Volunteer recognition

Volunteer inclusion

38

27

Providing appropriate training

27

Using online resources & websites

26

Volunteer & position matching

23

Number of times VMs reported each best practice

The Noun Project Icons: Award design by David Lopez, Group designed by Alexandra Coscovelnita, Tools designed by Joe Richardson, Computer designed by Patrick Morrison, Arrows designed by Alex Fuller.

10

4.4 Critical Changes for South-East Queensland Worksheet Four findings are presented in Figure 6 (below). The top ranking critical change was increased training opportunities, followed by increased promotion of volunteering and more networking events for VMs. The critical change of increased training opportunities registered 37 mentions. Chiefly, free or subsidised training for volunteers and VMs was proposed. For VMs, more specific workshops/forums and professional development opportunities were called-for (e.g., ‘managing and training difficult volunteers’). To formalise this process, VM accreditation to train volunteers was also put forward (i.e., Cert IV in Work Place Training). For volunteers, centralised training programs prior to organisational placement were emphasised. Secondly, changes to increase promotion of volunteering were reported 32 times. The emphasis here was on championing new models of volunteering, such as university student, corporate and episodic volunteering. VMs reported that ‘changing the view’ of volunteering is an essential adjustment for a changing sector. Other requests were for more media exposure, a Volunteer Expo and expansion of National Volunteer Week. The third change, listed 18 times, was more networking events for VMs. Significant benefits were believed to occur via networking events like the FVMF, and VMs called for forums of similar scope in the future. Sharing best practices, strategies and funding/grant information was seen as an efficient way to pool knowledge and adapt to changes across the SEQ sector. Volunteering Queensland Inc was requested to facilitate this process via more frequent events. Simplifying legislation & policy was mentioned 15 times and was the fourth change. VMs flagged the likely efficiency gains in recruitment and retention if simplified legislation was provided. For example, this could be provided via a centralised ‘one stop shop’ (possibly on the Volunteering Queensland Inc website) where relevant legislative and policy advice could be accessed. To limit registration time and costs, VMs outlined the need for reduced volunteer regulation or a ‘trial period’ prior to receiving Blue Cards, police checks and formal registration. Finally, increased support provided by Volunteering Queensland Inc also recorded 15 mentions. VMs stressed multiple strategies Volunteering Queensland Inc could implement to ensure a bright volunteering future. For example, volunteer-position matching databases, an up-to-date legislative information webpage and a monthly newsletter outlining events, staff movements and new research. Moreover, Volunteering Queensland Inc could become the registration point for Blue Cards etc, which would help conserve the resources of smaller organisations. Figure 6: Critical Changes for the South-East Queensland Voluntary Sector

37

32

Increased training opportunities Increased promotion of volunteering More networking events for VMs

18

15

15

Simplifying legislation & policy Increased support provided by Volunteering Queensland Inc

Number of times VMs reported each challenge

11

“Volunteer Managers reported that ‘changing the view’ of volunteering is an essential adjustment for a changing sector.” 12

5.0 Discussion The FVMF 2013 explored the trends and issues present in the SEQ voluntary sector, with a focus on preparing for the future by understanding the present. Collectively, the findings indicate that in 2013, VMs are indeed experiencing a pattern of change consistent with national and international trends. Interestingly, however, ‘typical’ volunteering issues, SEQ-specific changes and conventional best practices were equally relevant and important to the participants. The forum’s first aim was to determine if, and to what extent, the five structural changes (listed in the introduction) are impacting SEQ. The prediction, that each trend would be present, was confirmed. In terms of contributing factors, the major shift toward university student volunteering in SEQ can be seen as part of an emerging model of national undergraduate engagement. Conceivably, this is the result of rising tertiary enrolment both in Queensland and Australia4, 15 with an increased focus on civic engagement by university administrators and employers16. Promisingly, given that over one million university students are currently enrolled in Australia17, and over 40 percent are likely to volunteer18, this trend has been proposed as “perhaps the easiest demographic to target in order to increase the participation of young people in volunteering”19. A similar movement is well established and serviced in the UK and North America16, with multiple volunteering programs available across the higher education spectrum. Whilst a similar shift has occurred later in Australia, tertiary institutions and voluntary organisations have begun to recognise and channel this expansive pool of volunteers (e.g., service learning is now part of the Queensland University of Technology curriculum). Returning to the FVMF findings, as a key SEQspecific trend mentioned alongside this wider structural change was ‘young volunteer disengagement’ (see section 4.1.2), utilising this growing number of undergraduate volunteers could also be useful in addressing this more localised issue. Overall then, university volunteering is a burgeoning global trend that is impacting SEQ, and if managed strategically, could help sustain high levels of future participation. Secondly, the legislative changes reported in SEQ, and the bottleneck this places on participation, reflects wider national concerns that stringent regulatory volunteering frameworks are constraining sector-wide growth. Specifically, since 2001, volunteer-protection has been legislated across Australian states to reduce risk and embed a ‘duty of care’ in the sector20, and a similar international trend exists21. Despite these positive intentions, increased compliance costs and rising legislative complexity are seen as restricting recruitment. Across Australia, VMs report that increased risk-management policies are severely constraining, with background checks, OH&S and volunteer insurance being most problematic22. In a related survey, almost half of volunteer coordinators reported the cost and effort of history checks and OH&S compliance was limiting volunteer recruitment and retention23. Strikingly, similar issues were highlighted at the FVMF as affecting SEQ, with the “time taken to get started” seen as reducing local demand for volunteering. Indeed, the gains to both recruitment and retention obtainable if SEQ legislation were simplified was emphasised at the forum as one ‘critical change necessary for a bright volunteering future’ (see Section 4.4). Arguably then, the systemic tightening of regulatory frameworks is limiting volunteer uptake in SEQ, and may continue to be a challenging trend over the coming years. As predicted, technological change, the internet and social media are also influencing SEQ, reflecting national and global patterns13. This is unsurprising given the wide cultural adoption of these mediums for both information access and communication. In particular, the 27 percent of Australians aged 18 to 24 who volunteer are more likely to use the internet or social networks to search and connect with volunteer organisations20 and this will potentially increase with younger generations. Adults, however, are also connected; a recent sample of Australian volunteers agreed that websites and socially networked volunteer organisations are vital to future participation23 (and this may include recruitment, engagement and retention). Moreover, corroborating US work suggests that these websites may help sustain the sector by making participation more accessible9. FVMF findings therefore indicate that, in SEQ, similar opportunities

13

and pressures exist to create accessible online volunteering options. And challengingly, although the best practice recruitment strategy mentioned at the forum was ‘using online resources & websites’ (see Section 4.3), VMs still reported feeling under-skilled in this area. The reported increase in corporate volunteering and episodic volunteering identified at the forum also coheres with national and international patterns, though to a lesser extent. Corporate volunteering has emerged primarily from the Corporate Social Responsibility movement via incentivising private sector engagement in community projects 24, 25. Internationally, this provides ‘one of the fastest-growing areas of volunteering’5 and is offered by 55 to 80 percent of North American organisations26. In Australia since 2003, corporate volunteering has become more common, formalised and popular to staff 24, 25 with approximately one quarter of private organisations now providing employee volunteering programs27. Given this context, it is interesting that this trend did not rate higher at the FVMF. Nevertheless, being reported on 10 occasions still emphases its relevance and suggests corporate engagement in SEQ has the space to rapidly expand in future. It is similarly notable that episodic volunteering did not rate higher. This structural trend, toward more short-term event-based participation, is a key shaper of contemporary volunteering in Europe, North America28 and Australia10. Indeed, episodic demand has grown to such an extent that “it is universal for new volunteers to want short-term assignments”28. Nationally, 43 to 53 percent of organisations now offer episodic projects whilst 60 per cent offer greater flexibility regarding when and how volunteers participate27. In light of this, the FVMF findings of only 8 instances in SEQ, is surprising. However, re-inspecting the data indicates that both university student and corporate volunteering are, by definition, episodic, but were classified under these other trends. Therefore, the true impact of episodic engagement is likely to be higher in SEQ than that reported here. Taken together then, both corporate and episodic volunteering are active trends in SEQ, and provide significant opportunities to enhance the future of volunteering. Interestingly, upon stepping back from these five trends, it is clear that SEQ is similar to many other regions where “the quantitative amount of volunteering may not have changed, but its qualitative nature appears to be undergoing radical transformation”8. An additional finding from the FVMF, which may further help explain this transformation, is the SEQ-specific trend of ‘changing volunteer expectations’ from mundane to meaningful roles (see Section 4.1.2). A related body of research suggests volunteer motivations, across the world and nationally, are similarly changing from traditional community altruism to expectations of personal engagement and professional benefit8, 10. Whilst this does not mean that socially-driven motivations have ceased in SEQ, it implies that more diverse and individualistic reasons for participation may be appearing22, 29. This may help to partly explain trends toward episodic, corporate and university volunteering, which operate firstly to satisfy the demands and 
expectations of those volunteering, then engage them in a social cause (e.g., students typically volunteer to increase employability via civic engagement30). Based on the data presented here it appears that this shift is occurring in SEQ, and despite the associated decline of the “traditional community volunteer”, these new motivations must be acknowledged in order to understand, and potentially capitalise on, changing volunteer interests. Indeed, increased promotion of volunteering aimed at breaking down traditional ‘mundane’ engagement and repackaging the benefits of participation along these more personal and professional themes, was among the critical changes mentioned at the forum for ensuring a bright volunteering future (Section 4.4 above). Importantly, the second aim of the forum focused on the general ideas and experiences of VMs, and the challenges, best practices and changes required to future-proof the sector. From this, three key areas can be distilled, and notably, many of these are long-standing problems as opposed to emerging changes. Firstly, volunteer-position matching is arguably the most significant issue for SEQ VMs. Tellingly, ‘volunteer & position mismatch’ was both the most frequent SEQ-specific trend and the biggest challenge facing VMs; whilst strategies to improve this process were proposed as a key best practice. As it is well recognised that placing a volunteer in a role that is commensurate with their skills and expectations leads to lower attrition31, it is likely

14

this mismatch problem in SEQ may also be leading to the additionally reported challenge of ‘low volunteer retention’ (see Section 4.2). Promisingly, voluntary sectors across the world have started using the internet and volunteer-matching databases to address this limitation13 and related approaches may be useful in SEQ. Secondly, the problem of ‘insufficient training for both volunteers & VMs’ was similarly common across the FVMF research topics. Remarkably though, training issues appeared across every Worksheet; as a SEQ-specific trend, a key challenge, a critical change and a best practice. Evidently, this more ‘typical’ and generic volunteering issue appears just as important and relevant to VMs, and the future of volunteerism, as the aforementioned structural changes. In combination though, a future where more volunteers participate for less time (i.e., episodically via corporate or university student sources) yet still require intensive training from resource and time constrained VMs, is likely to provide a complex challenge to the sector over the coming years. Related to this, and perhaps contributing to the lack of training available, were the two other key challenges raised by VMs at the forum; namely a continual shortage of organisational resources coupled with low support and funding (see Section 4.2). Apart from this, the third and final general area raised at the forum was, more encouragingly, the key best practices for the sector. According to VMs, these have remained essentially unchanged, and are frequent volunteer acknowledgement and genuine volunteer inclusion. In a changing sector these fundamental procedures remain essential, even in resource poor environments, to ‘keep volunteers coming back’ both now and into the future. Finally, although the FVMF has outlined several issues facing SEQ certain limitations to this research require consideration. The findings must, firstly, be approached with caution as content and thematic analyses are partly determined by the subjective judgement of the researcher, and may therefore be susceptible to bias. For the FVMF data this means that deciding how to categorise responses and what themes are most relevant depended to a large extent upon interpretation. Moreover, as only one researcher undertook this process (and improved results may occur via obtaining the inter-rater reliability of two or more32), there is a higher likelihood that subjective interpretations influenced the findings. In an attempt to make this process transparent, readers should view the Futuring Volunteer Management Dataset at volunteeringqld.org.au/policy to better understand the categorisation process. Secondly, although over 350 individual responses were provided at the forum, only those which were judged most relevant to the overarching themes were included for further analysis. Therefore, certain important issues in SEQ may have again been overlooked due to this process or due to the underrepresentation of certain organisations, social causes or individuals at the forum.

15

16

6.0 Conclusion In summary, the traditional enterprise of volunteering appears to be changing in response to a number of larger socio-demographic trends. Tying together the findings of the FVMF 2013, it appears that these trends are also highly influential in the operational, and everyday, context of SEQ volunteering. Sustaining high and active civic participation, building social capital and developing community capacity in the region may, therefore, increasingly depend upon technological, legislative, corporate and university engagement. Optimistically, as other Australian states and international communities confront parallel issues, various models and casestudies are available for both practical and inspirational guidance. In light of these larger changes and the adaptive leadership required to manage them, however, entrenched and conventional volunteer management issues remain in SEQ and cannot be overlooked. Insufficient training, inefficient systems of volunteer placement and the continual challenge of low organisational and budgetary support collectively contribute to these problems. And although a focus on only managing the larger structural changes is not a panacea to these traditional issues, it is possible that an integrated approach (e.g., using technology to better match volunteers with positions) may help with their shared resolution. Overall then, SEQ volunteering is indeed in ‘transition’ towards new models engagement, however, resolving traditional issues also remains equally important for a bright future. It is hoped that this research can contribute to this future.

17

“SEQ volunteering is indeed in ‘transition’ towards new models engagement, however, resolving traditional issues also remains equally important for a bright future” 18

7.0 References Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. 2013. Volunteering in Queensland: a statistical snapshot. Brisbane: Queensland Government.

1

Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. 2008. Volunteering in Australia: Changing Patters in Voluntary Work 1996 – 2006. Canberra: Australian Government.

2

Flick, Mardi, Michael Bittman and Jenny Doyle. 2002. The Community’s Most Valuable [Hidden] Asset – Volunteering in Australia. Sydney: The Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales.

3

Finlay, Justine and Maree Murray. 2005. Possible Future: Changes, Volunteering and the Not-ForProfit Sector in Australia. Australia: The Smith Family.

4

Haski-Leventhal, Debbie. 2010. Volunteerability, Recruitability and Recent Trends in Volunteering. Sydney: Centre for Social Impact, University of New South Wales.

5

Volunteering Australia. 2011. Insights from the National Survey of Volunteering Issues 2011. Melbourne: Volunteering Australia. 6

Wilson, Carla. 2001. The Changing Face of Social Service Volunteering: A Literature Review. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Social Development.

7

Hustinx, Lesley and Frans Lammertyn. 2003. “Collective and Reflexive Styles of Volunteering: A Sociological Modernisation Perspective”. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 14(2): 167 – 187.

8

Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. 2006. Impact of Key Contemporary Issues, Trends and Innovations on Queensland’s Volunteering Sector. Brisbane: M & P Henderson & Associates Pty Ltd.

9

Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. 2012. Contemporary Practices and Research in Volunteering: A Literature Review. Brisbane: M & P Henderson & Associates Pty Ltd.

10

Young, Matt and Jon McChesney. 2013. “Contemporary Trends in Recreation Volunteerism”. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 84(6): 25 – 28.

11

Merrill, Mary. 2006. “Global Trends and Challenges for Volunteering”. The International Journal of Volunteer Administration, 24(1): 9 – 14.

12

Leigh, Robert. 2011. State of the Worlds Volunteerism Report: Universal Values for Global Wellbeing. United Nations Volunteers.

13

Van den Hoonaard, Deborah. 2012. Qualitative research in action: a Canadian primer. Ontario: Oxford University Press.

14

Edwards, Daniel. 2011. Student Demand: Trends, Key Markets and the Movement Towards Demand-Driven Enrolment. Melbourne: Joining the Dots Research Briefing, Australian Council for Educational Research.

15

Holdsworth, Clare and Jocey Quinn. 2011. “The Epistemological Challenge of Higher Education Student Volunteering: Reproductive or Deconstructive Volunteering?” Antipode, 44(2): 386 – 405.

16

Australian Education Network (AEN). 2013. “Student Numbers at Australian Universities”. AEN University and College Guide, www.australianuniversities.com.au/directory/student-numbers/

17

McCabe, Tamara, Katherine White and Patricia Obst. 2007. “The importance of volunteering functions to university students”. Australian Journal of Volunteering, 12(2): 50 – 58. 18

Left Right Think Tank. 2011. Youth Volunteering Policy Paper: Increasing Engagement and Participation. Brisbane: Left Right Think Tank. 19

19

Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. 2011. National Volunteering Strategy: Australian Volunteers, Inspiring the Volunteer In You. Canberra: Australian Government. 20

Warburton, Jeni and Catherine McDonald. 2009. “The challenges of the new institutional environment: an Australian case study of older volunteers in the contemporary non-profit sector”. Ageing and Society, 29(5): 823-840.

21

House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family, Community, Housing and Youth. 2008. The Value of Volunteering: A Discussion Paper on Volunteering in the Community and Welfare Sector. Canberra: Australian Government.

22

Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. 2010. National Volunteering Strategy: Consultation Report. Canberra: Australian Government. 23

Volunteering Australia. 2009. National Survey of Volunteering Issues 2009. Melbourne: Volunteering Australia. 24

Cavallaro, Lisa. 2006. “Corporate Volunteering Survey: The Extent and Nature of Corporate Volunteering Programs in Australia”. Australian Journal on Volunteering, 11(1): 65 – 69.

25

Basil, Debra, Mary Runte, Michael Basil and John Usher. 2011. “Company support for employee volunteerism: Does size matter?” Journal of Business Research, 64: 61 – 66.

26

Volunteering Australia. 2011. National Survey of Volunteering Issues 2011. Melbourne: Volunteering Australia. 27

Ellis, Susan. 2012. “New Trends in Volunteering and How to Tap Into Them”. Non-profit World, 30(2): 22 – 24. 28

Bryen, Leonie and Kym Madden. 2006. Bounce-back of Episodic Volunteers: What Makes Episodic Volunteers Return? Brisbane: Centre of Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies (Working Paper No. CPNS 32), Queensland University of Technology.

29

Handy, Femida, Ram Cnaan, Lesley Hustinx and Kang Chulhee et al. 2010. “A Cross-Cultural Examination of Student Volunteering: Is it all about resume building?” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(3): 498 – 523.

30

Deslandes, Moira and Louise Rogers. 2008. “A Volunteer Training Framework” Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 48(2): 355 – 368. 31

Armstrong, David, Ann Gosling, John Weinman and Theresa Marteau. 1997. “The Place of Inter-Rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: An Empirical Study” Sociology, 31(3): 597 – 606.

32

20

This report was published in December 2013 © Volunteering Queensland Inc