University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Toward a surplus of leaders: how church members understand volunteer church leadership

(USC Thesis Other)

Toward a surplus of leaders: how church members understand volunteer church leadership

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Toward A Surplus of Leaders: How Church Members Understand Volunteer Church
Leadership
David Bushnell
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2024

© Copyright by David Bushnell 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for David Bushnell certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Alison Muraszewski
Lawrence Picus
Maria Ott, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
Local Christian churches in the United States face a shortage of volunteer leaders resulting in
low congregational engagement which limits church ability to contribute to society. The purpose
of this study is to discover Christian church member understanding of volunteer church
leadership and what contributes to their decision to serve as a volunteer church leader. This study
used semi-structured interviews with 13 participants from seven churches each with over 1,000
congregants in total weekend worship attendance. The study concludes that church member
understanding is inconsistent. Participants concurrently hold two to five of nine distinct
understandings observed in the data. Barriers to volunteer church leadership were evident and
participants described systems and norms that uphold the barriers. This study recommends a
clear definition of volunteer church leadership. Based on the findings, components for volunteer
leadership role clarity and invitations are offered to tackle barriers and move toward a surplus of
volunteer church leaders.

v
Dedication
To my wife Karen. My greatest champion and cheerleader.

vi
Acknowledgements
This journey began with my wife, Karen, who suggested I consider the Organizational
Change and Leadership program at University of Southern California. I do not regret the
decision and could not have completed it without your constant encouragement, celebration of
small milestones, and sacrifice of years’ worth of nights and weekends spent without me. You
constantly make me a better person and this is yet another example.
As a student of education, I have learned that relating to other students builds selfefficacy. My incredible study group has moved that from principle to reality. Thank you
Courtney Nall, Liz Lockhart, Jennifer Sparks, and Shawn Sieu for your texts, calls, reviews, and
study sessions. I believe that if every doctoral student had your support, the notion of All But
Dissertation would not exist.
A student can only hope for a chair as exceptional as Dr. Maria Ott. Each step of the way
you placed before me just the right amount of stretching for the next step. You constantly stated
your belief in me. Your feedback raised my level of thinking and drew out my best. Thank you to
my exceptional committee members Drs. Alison Muraszewski and Lawrence Picus. Your
affirmation of this research along the way propelled me to a sense of responsibility to contribute
to the literature. Thank you Drs. Marcus Prichard and Eric Canny for your timely help to think
through my conceptual framework.
Author Note
Correspondence concerning this dissertation should be addressed to Dave Bushnell,
subject line Dissertation Inquiry, via email at Bushnell.dave@gmail.com

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures................................................................................................................................ xi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ............................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem................................................................................. 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ...................................................................... 3
Importance of the Study........................................................................................................... 3
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ......................................................... 5
Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................. 6
Organization of the Study........................................................................................................ 7
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................. 8
Leadership In Volunteer Settings ............................................................................................ 8
Brief History of Church Volunteering ................................................................................ 8
Church Size and Leadership Structure................................................................................ 9
Volunteer Leadership........................................................................................................ 13
Volunteer Motivation............................................................................................................. 29
Volunteer Functions Inventory ......................................................................................... 29
Self-Determination Theory ............................................................................................... 31
Self-efficacy...................................................................................................................... 37
Religiosity and Volunteering................................................................................................. 38
Personal Belief Theory ..................................................................................................... 38

viii
Social Network Theory..................................................................................................... 40
Church Environment......................................................................................................... 44
Critical Viewpoint of Volunteering ....................................................................................... 45
Religious Volunteering Absent of Choice ........................................................................ 48
Conceptual Framework.......................................................................................................... 50
Summary................................................................................................................................ 54
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 55
Overview of Design............................................................................................................... 55
Research Setting .................................................................................................................... 56
The Researcher ...................................................................................................................... 57
Data Sources.......................................................................................................................... 58
Method: Semi-Structured Interviews................................................................................ 58
Credibility and Trustworthiness ............................................................................................ 63
Ethics ..................................................................................................................................... 64
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS.................................................................................................... 67
Participants ............................................................................................................................ 68
Research Question One: What is a church member’s understanding of volunteer church
leadership? ............................................................................................................................. 70
Inconsistent Understanding of Volunteer Church Leadership.......................................... 71
Barriers to Volunteer Church Leadership ......................................................................... 83
Pathways To Volunteer Church Leadership ..................................................................... 87
Values Alignment ............................................................................................................. 88
Research Question Two: What contributes to a church member’s decision to serve as a
volunteer church leader?........................................................................................................ 89
Role Clarity....................................................................................................................... 90

ix
Time .................................................................................................................................. 91
Interest............................................................................................................................... 92
Family Support.................................................................................................................. 94
Spiritual Calling................................................................................................................ 94
Resources.......................................................................................................................... 95
Summary................................................................................................................................ 96
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 98
Discussion of Findings .......................................................................................................... 98
Lack of Clear Definition of Volunteer Church Leadership .............................................. 98
Volunteer Leadership Barriers........................................................................................ 100
Boosting Likelihood of Volunteer Leadership ............................................................... 101
Recommendation 1: Clear Definition of Volunteer Leadership.......................................... 102
Recommendation 2: Volunteer Leader Empowerment ....................................................... 105
Recommendation 3: Intentional Invitations......................................................................... 107
Recommendation 4: Enhance Volunteer Leader Motivation .............................................. 109
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................. 110
Recommendations for Future Research............................................................................... 111
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 112
References................................................................................................................................... 115
Appendix A: Interview Protocol................................................................................................. 136
Appendix B: Participant Recruitment Email to Pastors.............................................................. 140
Appendix C: Information Sheet.................................................................................................. 141

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Data Sources 56
Table 2: Participant Characteristics 70
Table 3: Volunteer Leadership Typologies 72
Table 4: Identified Role Typologies 73
Table 5: Participant Needs for Role Clarity 90

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Comparison of Variable-Centered and Person-Centered Analysis 35
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework 53

1
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
Local Christian churches in the United States face a shortage of volunteer leaders
resulting in low congregational engagement which limits church ability to contribute to society
(Addai-Duah et al., 2020; Earls, 2022; Hussey & Tkaczynski, 2014; Parkinson & Hawkins,
2011; Wilhoit, 2009). United States churches are widely acknowledged as crucial organizations
in their local communities (R. A. Cnaan & An, 2018). Congregations provide social programs
that improve the lives of low-income community members (Berger & Neuhaus, 1996). Churches
play a role in adding value to their surrounding citizens ranging from day care, to health care, to
healthy marriages (R. A. Cnaan & An, 2018). Church participation provides an insulating effect
to depression and mental health concerns in adolescents (Miller, 2016). Cnaan and An (2018)
created a deliberately conservative empirical framework that found the average economic
valuation of one local church to the community at $2,511,376. The vital role congregations play
in contributing to the social welfare is woven into American culture (R. A. Cnaan & Boddie,
2002) making the capacity of churches to contribute to society highly important to national wellbeing.
Similar to other nonprofits, churches rely on mobilizing volunteers to accomplish their
work (Addai-Duah et al., 2020). Volunteer church leaders convene other church members to
accomplish a scope of work that advances the church's mission (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016).
Nonprofits, including churches, face a declining number of volunteers (De Clerck, Aelterman, et
al., 2021). A Gallup poll found a 20% drop in church volunteers between 2017 and 2021 (Jones,
2022). This is confirmed by pastors, 77% of whom note a declining number of volunteers and a
need to address developing leaders and volunteers (Earls, 2022).

2
2
Context and Background of the Problem
The experience of congregants in American churches saw a cultural shift that paralleled
the demographic change in the post-World War II years and intensified through the 1990s,
reaching an apex 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As population migrated to the suburbs,
the church became a single source opportunity to meet people with shared values and beliefs
(Cosper, n.d.). The 1970s and 1980s saw a rise in number and visibility of churches over 1,000
people, known as megachurches (Eagle, 2015). These highly visible churches created a
numerical success narrative that resulted in pastors and church staffs seeking to learn
megachurch methodology (Cosper, 2022). Conferences and networks with a training emphasis
on equipping pastors and church staff with leadership skills emerged, publicly highlighting the
leadership role of the pastor and church staff. (Grusendorf, 2017) stated that leadership power
transfers to the pastor and church staff when a congregation reaches 400 in worship attendance.
The impact of this cultural shift on what congregants understand about volunteer church
leadership is unexplored.
The COVID-19 pandemic further changed the American congregant experience. To
observe social distancing practices, churches quickly pivoted to deliver worship services online.
Previously familiar opportunities volunteer and participate in church were interrupted (Froud,
2021). As churches reconvened in person, worship attendance was lower, especially in younger
adults (Benz et al., 2023). Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, church membership in the United
States was already declining, especially in people under age 30. Americans with a Protestant
affiliation declined from 51% in 2009 to 43% in 2019 (Smith et al., 2019). Membership in U.S.
churches overall began a sharp decline in 2000, falling to 47% in 2021, the first time in history

3
3
the number is below the majority. The number is even lower for Americans under the age of 30,
with 36% indicating church membership, down 15 points in the last ten years (Jones, 2021).
These collective shifts in the congregant experience in large American churches leave
uncertainty about how congregants view their opportunities to make significant church volunteer
contributions. While church attendance and membership have declined, religious identity
remained stable through the spring of 2022 (Benz et al., 2023). This disassociating of personal
faith and participation in organized church poses questions about what motivates congregants to
engage in church.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to discover what Christian church members know about
volunteer church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders.
Church members are the candidate population to serve as volunteer church leaders. While a
complete analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for the purposes of this study, the research
will center on church members, the volunteer leadership candidate population. The following
research questions serve to fulfill the purpose of the study.
1. What is a church member’s understanding of volunteer church leadership?
2. What contributes to a church member’s decision to serve as a volunteer church leader?
Importance of the Study
Religious organizations are renowned for having a wide variety of volunteers who
operate in many varied capacities and perform a variety of tasks (Boender, 2015). Cnaan and
Boddie (2001) researched a conservative replacement value for the social services provided by
all churches in Philadelphia combined to be $246,901,440. This makes the social services
replacement value for churches across America a significant number (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2002)

4
4
and concurs with the Supreme Court’s validation of church contribution as “a beneficial and
stabilizing influence in community life” (Walz v. Tax Comm’n of City of New York, 1970).
Policy change brought about by United States Welfare Reform in 1996 aimed to shift helping the
poor to faith based organizations because of their supply of volunteers (R. A. Cnaan & Boddie,
2002). The decline in church participation in more recent years can have an impact on aiding the
poor. The volunteer contribution churches make is energized by volunteer leaders who inspire
fellow church members and people outside church to serve (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016). As
churches face a shortage of volunteer leaders, it is a problem with repercussions to American
society.
The shortage of volunteer leaders is also problematic inside churches. With a declining
number of volunteers, fewer people experience the benefits of volunteering (Bauer & Lim, 2019;
Gordon & Gordon, 2017). Pastors and staff are over-extended, leading to greater experience of
stress in an already stress-filled vocation (Jackson-Jordan, 2013). Most importantly, church
effectiveness to accomplish spiritual vitality, the central mission of the church, is threatened
(Hussey & Tkaczynski, 2014; Parkinson & Hawkins, 2011).
The church relies on congregants participating in service opportunities to contribute to
spiritual formation and establish meaningful relationships within the church (Wilhoit, 2009).
When fewer people are convened to serve, the spiritual vitality of the church declines and
relational ties are weaker. The net result is the church not effectively achieving its mission
(Parkinson & Hawkins, 2011). Churches have intentionally created cultures and strategies to
mobilize church members toward social and political change (Swarts, 2008). Research into the
same factors’ influence on volunteer leader mobilization is missing. Further, there is little
research into the relationship between spirituality and volunteering (Johnston, 2013; Yeung,

5
5
2018). Local churches in the United States are facing a shortage of volunteer team leaders
resulting in low congregational engagement which inhibits church capacity to accomplish its
mission (Addai-Duah et al., 2020; Earls, 2022; Hussey & Tkaczynski, 2014; Parkinson &
Hawkins, 2011; Wilhoit, 2009).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Social cognitive theory was used to address this problem of practice. Social cognitive
theory examines the dynamic relationships between environment, behavior, and the individual.
An individual’s beliefs, goals, and self-efficacy can be informed by the systems that exist in their
surrounding environment, as well as observations about the behavior of others (Bandura, 2012).
As social comparisons are made to similarly competent individuals, individuals decide about
their own performance expectations in a given task which influences self-efficacy (Schunk &
Usher, 2019). Social cognitive theory highlights dimensions that form a person’s understanding
about leadership within the church. The environmental dimension surfaces several factors that
may contribute to the problem including: definition of leadership, stated or unstated requirements
to occupy church leadership roles, and the degree to which a church is accommodating of
volunteers’ availability (Gallagher, 2004; Kaiser & Curphy, 2013; Posner, 2015). Psychological
ownership increases the likelihood that a person will volunteer in non-profit organizations
(Ainsworth, 2020). Social cognitive theory provides a lens highlighting key contributors that
influence psychological ownership. Self-efficacy is a significant influence in motivation
(Bandura, 1997). An individual’s motivation may be informed by their belief that they are both
spiritually mature and possess leadership competencies (Hybels, 2004). The dynamic nature of
social cognitive theory suggests research of the constructs between the dimensions.

6
6
This research followed a qualitative line of inquiry that focused on how people make
meaning of their experiences and the world around them (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Qualitative
research is an inductive process where the researcher is both the means for data collection as well
as the analyzer of the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A qualitative research approach aligns
with the research questions in this study that seek to discover how church members make
meaning of volunteer team leadership within the local church. The study used semi-structured
interviews with some interview questions prepared in advance and the space for follow-up
questions asked during the interview that revealed further details the participant may offer
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The interviews took place in a video conference call using Zoom
technology to allow for a nationwide sample with low costs and make participation more
accessible.
Pastors with a weekend attendance of over 1,000 were approached to recommend
participants for the study. Large churches have transitioned to a power structure model that
marginalizes non-staff leadership (Grusendorf, 2017). This study setting enabled inquiry that
revealed organizational barriers perceived by church members but are invisible to church staff.
Study participants were consistently part of their church for at least two but not yet involved in a
leadership role. These individuals represented the population from which church volunteer team
leaders emerge and provided relevant information about the problem.
Definition of Terms
The following definitions provide contextual clarity for terms and the way they are used
in this study that took place within Christian churches in the United states with over 1,000 people
in worship attendance.

7
7
Congregation: A local community of people who worship with shared norms and rules giving
the participants a sense of unity (R. A. Cnaan & Curtis, 2013)
Volunteer: An individual choosing to engage in acts that benefit people outside their family
without being compensated (von Essen et al., 2015).
Volunteer Church Leader: A volunteer who inspires fellow church members and people
outside church to serve (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016).
Organization of the Study
This dissertation follows a traditional five-chapter model. Chapter One provides an
introduction and outline of the study. Chapter Two highlights the relevant literature and the
conceptual framework for the study. Chapter Three details the research methodology. Chapter
Four examines and analyzes the findings (qualitative). Chapter Five offers proposed
recommendations useful to pastors and church staff to build a greater number of volunteer
church team leaders.

8
8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter offers a review of literature relevant to volunteer church leadership. The
purpose is to discuss the concepts that will ground the investigation of the research questions.
The chapter begins with a review of leadership within volunteer-based organizations. This
includes a summary of church leadership structures and their impact on volunteer church
leadership as well as previous research focused on leadership of volunteers and leadership by
volunteers. Both types of volunteer leadership literature are pertinent to this study since the
current problem involves the leading of volunteers by volunteers. The review continues by
covering research about what motivates people to volunteer. The relationship between religiosity
and volunteering is then discussed, highlighting the research that explores why religious people
volunteer more frequently than non-religious people. The chapter concludes by introducing a
new volunteer research agenda suggested by critical theory.
Leadership In Volunteer Settings
Brief History of Church Volunteering
Christian church volunteering traces back to the origin of Christianity when early
followers met in homes (New International Version., 1996, Acts 5:42). The homeowners
provided the meeting space and related services needed for hosting fellow followers. At this
point, while these services were provided free of charge, the concept was not called volunteering,
but was instead an extension of the Jewish religious tradition in which people provided for the
place of worship in accordance with Biblical instruction (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016). As
Christianity spread and there was an increase in concentrations of Christians in communities,
churches were built for fellow believers to gather and worship. The current understanding of
religious volunteering is a modern social construct (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016).

9
9
The formation of churches is built on the gathering of church members who are willing to
voluntarily contribute to church work. Churches are dependent on volunteers for survival (R. A.
Cnaan & Curtis, 2013). In 2022, 35% of Americans volunteered with religious organizations
(Jones, 2022). Church volunteering includes service both inside and outside the church. Inside
the church, volunteers contribute labor to the tasks that advance the religious beliefs of those in
the church like teaching religious classes for children and adults, as well as fulfill the
organizational obligations of the church like preparing budgets, making coffee, and sweeping
floors (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016). Church volunteers also contribute to serving the social welfare
of the surrounding community. In fact, outside of the government, churches are the largest
provider of social welfare programming (R. Cnaan & Scott, 2021).
Theological underpinning guides churches to proactively engage in alleviating poverty.
Congregations offer support to people living in poverty in ways that help them handle living a
life of unmet needs. Support can include job training, direct financial assistance, and public
advocacy. Churches build collaborative partnerships with other non-profits to improve living
standards in their community (Scott & Cnaan, 2017). This supply of volunteers brought about
policy change by the United States Welfare Reform in 1996 aimed to shift helping the poor to
faith based organizations (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2002). The mobilization of volunteers to serve both
inside and outside the church requires leadership.
Church Size and Leadership Structure
Large and small churches are different in the way they provide leadership to mobilize the
congregation to volunteer. As a church grows, the structure of the church shifts which in turn
impacts how leadership is expressed (McIntosh, 1999). Social networks larger than 150 people
become stretched and a restructure is necessary to sustain engagement of church membership

10
10
(Bretherton & Dunbar, 2020). Subdivisions into smaller groups allow church members
environments to generate relational connections that result in sustained church member
involvement (Whitehead & Stroope, 2015). As the church undergoes this structural
reorganization, the selection and role of volunteer leaders changes (McIntosh, 1999).
Small Church Leadership Structure
Small churches around the world are convened around a person serving as the primary
pastor, who is supported by lay leaders. Lay leaders are volunteer church leaders (R. A. Cnaan et
al., 2016). It is lay leaders in congregations that invite both members and nonmembers into
volunteer activities. Cnaan, et al. (2002) articulated that churches have informal and formal
volunteer leaders. Informal leaders have significant influence within the church due to their
longevity as part of the church. They often occupied a formal volunteer leadership role at some
point and continue to exercise influence outside that role including preserving norms and history
of the church. Informal leaders can be protective and defensive of traditions and ways of doing
things, seeing the church as part of their own identity. It is informal church leaders who often are
barriers to change and innovation in the church. Formal volunteer church leaders occupy defined
roles and contribute to church plans and decisions in an official capacity. Often one to two core
families occupy the formal church leadership roles (McIntosh, 1999) and are selected by the
pastor.
As Cnaan and Scott (2021) described, the relationship between the pastor and lay leaders
has not been researched extensively. In seeking to fill the gap, they surveyed pastors to find the
characteristics they value most in lay leaders. Congregants who are ready to work and offer their
time and energy without complicating other congregant relationships are the most attractive to

11
11
clergy. Religiosity was of low priority for clergy in their volunteer assessment (R. Cnaan &
Scott, 2021).
Large Church Leadership Structure
As a church grows the structure of the church changes to centralize around the paid staff.
McIntosh (1999) outlined the growth changes observed in churches. Leadership in a small
church may be comprised of one to two core families. The social network in a small church is
experienced as a family, or a cell. As the church grows, the social network is stretched, though
leadership power continues to be in the hands of the original core. As the church continues to
grow to medium size, social networks emerge and often a form of representative leadership is
established with decisions made by committees. As a church becomes large, additional staff are
hired and given decision making power. Hires are made based on abilities and skills rather than
family influence. In a large church organizational change is driven from the top with the
authority in the hands of paid pastors and church staff. The church members become the
workforce and the staff become the leaders. Chambre (2020) noted that a mindset develops that
volunteers have low commitment and cannot be relied upon unlike in previous time periods. It is
thought that today’s volunteers have less time to give and stay in the roles for short periods of
time. The narrative perpetuates reliance on paid staff when in fact, historical volunteer trends
show episodic volunteering has been a feature of volunteer-based organizations for a long time.
The level of church member commitment and engagement at large churches is
questionable (Dunaetz et al., 2018). The Megachurch report is a survey of Protestant churches
with worship service attendance of 2,000 or greater. The 2020 Megachurch Report (Bird &
Thumma, 2020) noted that while megachurches have been increasing in size, the frequency of
worshippers attending worship service has been declining since 2015. Additionally, 11% of large

12
12
church worship attenders responded the megachurch is not their home church, they were just
visiting. Another 12% said they attend multiple churches. The combination results in almost a
quarter of megachurch attenders who are divided in their church affiliation. These attenders are
less likely to volunteer or be engaged. Almost 90% of megachurches indicated they are actively
involved in the local community. However, another study stated individuals in smaller churches
are 50% more likely to indicate they have joined others to address a community need than those
in large churches (Polson, 2016). The degree of community involvement is likely subjective. The
megachurches that indicate the highest level of community involvement also rate themselves as
having the most volunteers.
Lower church member participation at large churches serves to uphold the reliance on
paid staff (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016). In 73% of megachurches, the senior leader was in the role
during the most significant growth period. These leaders are held in high regard by their
congregations, providing them with significant influence (Bird & Thumma, 2020). Further
concentrating influence, 90% of large church senior leaders serve as the figurehead to the entire
community (Rananaware, 2015). Given the high visibility and influence concentrated in large
church senior leaders, humility plays an important role. Large churches with senior leaders who
are perceived as humble see higher levels of affective commitment (Dunaetz et al., 2018).
Understanding of Volunteer Church Leaders
The leadership structure of small and large churches is different, however both are very
similar in the vagueness of volunteer church leadership. Their roles can vary significantly in
scope (Boender, 2015) and the word leader is used to refer to a multitude of understandings
(Bean & Martinez, 2015). Gulliver et al. (2023) wrote that it is problematic when a volunteer
organization is missing a clear understanding of volunteer leadership. Without a definition,

13
13
opportunities for volunteer leadership are subjective and it is challenging to offer a quality
volunteer leadership experience.
Two rare inquiries of volunteer leadership within the faith context mentioned the
importance the volunteer leader and professional leader dyad within the faith organization. One
study surveyed volunteer church leaders and their pastors to examine the alignment of task
mental models. When pastors and volunteer church leaders align in their understanding of goals
and how decisions are made, organizational performance was positively associated (Solansky et
al., 2008). Hameiri (2019) noted that religious volunteer leaders face challenges as a result of
unclear delineation of authority. Further, engaging volunteer leaders in senior roles is important
to religious organization success, but there is a significant lack of research addressing volunteer
leadership in the faith context (Hameiri, 2019). Given a scarcity of volunteer church leadership
literature (Erasmus & Morey, 2016), this literature review will draw from the limited research on
volunteer leadership in non-profits.
Volunteer Leadership
The volunteer leadership literature falls into two sparsely populated categories.
Leadership of volunteers and leadership by volunteers. The literature exploring leadership of
volunteers focuses on effective practices that lead to the acquisition and retention of volunteers
and is distinct from the practices of leadership in paid settings (Pearce, 1980; Posner, 2015).
Leadership by volunteers concerns volunteers that serve in leadership roles who are leading other
volunteers. There is scant empirical literature concerning leadership by volunteers (Akhter et al.,
2016; Gulliver et al., 2023; Posner, 2015; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009). Though the research is
minimal, leadership by volunteers is distinct from volunteering because like leadership in other
domains, volunteer leaders shoulder the responsibility of outcomes, create ways for others to

14
14
contribute, and serve in roles that are open ended (Baggetta et al., 2013). Both types of volunteer
leadership literature are pertinent to this study since the current problem involves the leading of
volunteers by volunteers.
Leadership By Volunteers
Volunteer leaders are critical to the performance of volunteer driven organizations
because they enlist and engage others to volunteer their time to advance the organizational
purpose (Baggetta et al., 2013; R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016; Hameiri, 2019; Markham et al., 2001;
Posner, 2015). Posner (2015) noted that leadership behaviors are observed in volunteer leaders
more frequently than in paid leaders. This may be due to lower amounts of fear. Paid leaders fear
their leadership behaviors may impact their livelihood (Pearce, 1982). Volunteer leaders are also
more committed and mentally engaged than their paid counterparts (Catano et al., 2001).
Voluntary choice to join fosters greater commitment (Salancik, 1977). Volunteer leaders
frequently lack formal leadership positions and are forced to operate outside of the standard
authoritative command structures found in organizations with paid employees (Gulliver et al.,
2023). Heavy responsibilities, a lack of training specific to volunteer settings, and absence of
recognition contribute to volunteer leader burn out (Akhter et al., 2016). The amount of time
required is a concern for volunteers considering a leadership role (Baggetta et al., 2013; Pearce,
1980).
The dominant theories used in volunteer research do not guide inquiry toward
examination of the volunteer role stratification or power allocation (Hustinx et al., 2022).
Perhaps this is why there is a dearth of literature on leadership by volunteers (Akhter et al., 2016;
Baggetta et al., 2013; Posner, 2015). Research on hierarchical volunteer role stratification is
limited due to scarcity of survey data about the volunteer experience (Hustinx et al., 2022). The

15
15
rare research into his area does state people with higher social status occupy senior volunteer
positions. Volunteers on boards receive social prestige for their service since there are a limited
number of board seats compared to general volunteering roles (M. Meyer & Rameder, 2022).
What motivates an individual to begin serving as a volunteer leader may be different than
what motivates their continued service. Chait et al. (2011) included nonprofit board governance
as a form of volunteer leadership. Nonprofit volunteer boards of directors are structurally
accountable for the management of the organization (Renz, 2016). The reasons individuals
initially serve on boards are different than what motivates them to continue to serve on boards.
At the outset, reasons people join volunteer boards of directors center around self-interest
including a desire to help others, benefit society, and apply their expertise or professional skills.
After board service, motivation to continue centers around the organization. Board members
continue out of commitment to the organizational mission, service to the organization’s
beneficiaries, and desire for the organization to succeed (Miller-Stevens & Ward, 2019). Bang
(2011) stated that volunteer leaders will remain in their role longer when they believe the
volunteers they are leading are competent. Expanding on that research, a study of volunteer
leaders in an environmental association measured the level of commitment of the leaders by the
number of hours they invested. Several factors lead to greater commitment. The greatest
predictor of commitment is the amount of training the volunteer leader received from the
organization. This may be due to the increase in skills to help perform the leadership role as well
as increasing the identification the volunteer leader has with the organization. Employment status
was the second greatest predictor. Volunteer leaders without another job gave more time to their
volunteer leadership role. The study also stated that interdependence between volunteer leaders

16
16
resulted in greater commitment. The interdependence may indicate trust between leaders, a sense
of unity, and increased obligation to fulfill one’s role (Baggetta et al., 2013).
Further study of volunteer leadership in board settings was done by De Clerck et al.
(2021). The premise was to research the impact of motivational style of the board on the
volunteers. In the analysis, board classifications of motivating and demotivating were analyzed
with possible outcomes in volunteers. The study stated that when volunteers perceive the board
to have a motivating style that supports the autonomy of the volunteer, beneficial outcomes were
associated. In other words when boards avoided controlling language, controlling behavior,
offered choices, and afforded opportunities for input, volunteers experienced enjoyment and
alignment with their personal goals. When boards were perceived to have a demotivating style,
volunteers felt pressure, failure, alienation, and even saw their work as a waste. The study
emphasized the importance of volunteer leaders leading in a way that supports the autonomous
needs of volunteers.
Research into volunteers serving as leaders has used servant leadership theory. Guided by
the literature that demonstrates servant leadership behaviors are conducive to volunteer settings,
Hameiri (2019) researched what motivations of volunteer leaders are linked to servant leadership
behaviors by volunteer leaders. This study is a rare line of inquiry of volunteer leaders within the
faith context as the participants were executive-level lay leaders within Jewish communal
organizations. Servant leadership was most likely to be practiced by volunteer leaders who are
motivated by a cause and a desire to serve others. Volunteer leaders with career motivations or
personal growth motivations are less likely to engage in servant leadership, including being less
likely to empower other volunteers. The research also stated the importance of trust in the lay
leader and professional leader dyad within the faith organization. The study included an

17
17
investigation of the type of trust within this dyad that results in servant leadership. When lay
leaders have affective trust (that is trust based on alignment of personal beliefs and values) they
are more likely to practice servant leadership (Hameiri, 2019). Similarly, Bushnell (2014) stated
that servant leadership is evident in volunteer leaders based on a qualitative study local club
presidents in a national organization. The organization’s focus on meeting local and global needs
may have naturally attracted altruistic leaders who aligned with the organization’s purpose and
instinctively displayed servant leadership practices. However, the needs meeting goals were not
the focus of the volunteer leaders. Instead, the volunteer leaders articulated a focus on creating a
quality experience for club members. The participants also voiced frustration with policies
provided by the overall organization and stated they navigated around them or disregarded them
entirely.
Leadership of Volunteers
Leadership of volunteers is distinct from leadership in paid settings. A key difference is
what motivates employees is different from what motivates volunteers (Akhter et al., 2016;
Posner, 2015). Leadership of volunteers is characterized by the absence of both formal authority
structures and reward and punishment processes (Catano et al., 2001; Posner, 2015; Q. E.
Usadolo & Usadolo, 2021). Leaders of volunteers must rely instead on other forms of influence
when working with their followers who have the choice to discontinue volunteering at any time
(Posner, 2015). Employees face the impact of a change in standard of living, whereas volunteers
can select other opportunities that may offer just as much benefit as their volunteer role. The
workforce in volunteer organizations comprises whatever people are available (Pearce, 1982).
Volunteers may not even see themselves as followers, further adding to the challenges faced by
volunteer leaders (Salacuse, 2006). A study comparing paid organizations and volunteer

18
18
organizations noted contrasts. Volunteer organizations had a greater degree of variance in
performance. When volunteers were given instructions, they selected which instructions to
follow and which to disregard. Employees on the other hand were more likely to follow
organizational protocol and directions from leadership. Volunteer organizations were more
dependent upon volunteers knowing the workforce could depart at any moment. Employers in
contrast had the ability to associate compensation with labor provision (Pearce, 1982). Choice is
a contributing factor to motivation and perhaps can be applied in volunteer environments. When
comparing the commitment level of volunteers to employees, Catano et al. (2001) stated
volunteers are more committed and claimed the freedom to choose rather than compulsion yields
greater commitment.
Good leadership of volunteers plays a role in volunteer satisfaction and retention.
Volunteers in a study of students at six volunteer projects at South African universities, indicated
quality volunteer leadership met volunteer expectations while poor leadership was demotivating.
Student volunteers citied quality volunteer leadership included effective communication,
organization, passion, dedication, efficiency, and support (Joseph & Carolissen, 2022). Similarly,
in a study of faith-based volunteers, volunteers with a positive perception of their management
experienced greater satisfaction (Erasmus & Morey, 2016). The use of people focused leadership
theories, like transformational leadership, leader-member exchange, and servant leadership, has
guided the research and warrants a review for the current problem of practice.

19
19
Transformational Leadership. Transformational leadership theory has been used to
research leadership of volunteers. Transformational leadership prioritizes transforming the
follower to accomplish more than what is expected. Elements include individualization and
inspiration through connection with others (Northouse, 2019). This theory is relevant to
volunteer leadership because of the absence of incentives used in paid environments (Catano et
al., 2001). Transactional leadership behaviors are more evident in for-profit settings given the
direct application of extrinsic incentives. Volunteers are more intrinsically motivated and
respond to higher-level motives (Rowold & Rohmann, 2009) which aligns with what
transformational leadership provides. Transformational leadership connects with followers’
values and beliefs (Anh et al., 2023) which are intrinsic motivation drivers (Mayer, 2011).
Transformational leadership has been shown to be an effective leadership approach when
leading volunteers. Rowold and Rohmann (2009) researched leadership from the perspective of
volunteers. Analysis of interviews with 288 volunteer choir members in Germany, concluded
volunteers positively responded to leaders who gave individualized consideration and exhibited
management-by-expectation, both of which are transformational leadership behaviors. These
leadership practices elicited positive emotions from volunteers. In the volunteer context, positive
emotions are important to volunteer retention since volunteers can easily choose to leave if they
are not satisfied. Anh et al. (2023) surveyed 249 volunteers in 30 non-profit organizations to
examine transformational leadership and volunteer commitment. The study affirmed the practice
of transformational leadership significantly predicted volunteer commitment. Further, the study
noted greater increases in commitment in volunteers with lower motivation initially. In other
words, transformational leadership has a positive effect on the commitment of all volunteers, but
especially those with low motivation. Another study researched mediators in the role of

20
20
transformational leadership and a volunteer’s intention to remain at the organization. The study
explored the mediators of role identity, organizational commitment, and satisfaction. In the
sample of 417 volunteers from 17 different non-profit organizations, the study stated
transformational leadership had a direct effect on volunteer intention to remain. The meditator of
role identity had a direct effect on volunteer intention to remain, while the mediators of
satisfaction and organizational commitment had indirect effects. Specifically, transformational
leadership was observed to increase volunteer satisfaction, which increased organizational
commitment, which in turn increased role identity. The study recommended concentrated focus
of transformational leadership by people leading volunteers (Almas et al., 2020).
Leader Member Exchange. Leader member exchange (LMX) theory has also been used
to examine leadership of volunteers. LMX theory examines leadership between the leader and
each individual follower rather than leader to a group of followers. LMX theory contends that
leader-member pairings are characterized by either an in-group or out-group nature with in-group
receiving greater degrees of empowerment and outgroup receiving greater parameters
(Northouse, 2019). LMX is measured with four dimensions: affect, loyalty, contribution, and
professional respect (Liden & Maslyn, 1998).
Studies have demonstrated the benefits of LMX in leading volunteers. Bang (2011)
researched the dimensions of LMX amidst both leaders and volunteers in sporting organizations.
Volunteer job satisfaction was significantly impacted by the leader and member perceiving each
other professionally. Another study examined LMX as a whole rather than each dimension.
Based on research that previously identified the benefits of quality communication between
leader and subordinate, Usadolo and Usadolo (2019) focused research on the communication
between leader and volunteers. Utilizing LMX theory, the study researched the role of supportive

21
21
communication and its relation to volunteers’ intention to stay in their role and volunteers’
satisfaction. The study sample included 196 volunteers and concluded high-quality leadermember exchanges influence volunteers’ intention to stay and satisfaction. Further, the study
described supportive communication partially influenced volunteers’ intention to stay and job
satisfaction. From this research leaders of volunteers can expect volunteers to remain in their role
when they offer supportive communication like care for the volunteer’s well-being and how the
volunteer helps accomplish organizational goals. Using LMX theory, Hoye (2006) examined the
performance of volunteer boards in relation to the quality of relationships. Through twelve semistructured interviews the study asserted that volunteer boards perform better when the exchanges
between board chair and organization executive are perceived by board members to be quality.
Servant Leadership. Servant leadership theory is another person-centered leadership
theory that has been used to research leadership of volunteers. Servant leadership theory holds
that the leader prioritizes the needs of the followers, providing a caring, respectful experience
that fosters growth (Greenleaf, 1977). It is especially relevant in volunteer organizations because
the satisfaction of the volunteers is important to their continued service (Ngah et al., 2022).
Empirical research has confirmed the benefits of servant leadership within voluntary
organizations. A study of 110 service club presidents and members stated that servant leadership
behaviors are especially aligned with volunteer organizations. Members expressed their interest
to remain in their volunteer role working with leaders who exhibit servant leadership behaviors.
Based on the data, the study posited servant leadership produced more beneficial results than
transformational leadership (Schneider & George, 2011). Another study surveyed 96 volunteer
general board members and volunteer executive board members surveyed in 12 non-profit
organizations to research the relationship of servant leadership and organizational trust and

22
22
exemplary followership and organizational trust. The study concluded servant leadership
fostered organizational trust while exemplary followership did not relate to organizational trust.
The study suggested that the general board members may have not had high levels of investment
in their work, resulting in no association between exemplary followership and organizational
trust (McAuley, 2019). In a study of the relationship between cultural environment and volunteer
affective commitment, servant leadership behaviors influenced volunteer affective commitment
greater than community culture. Affective commitment is an alignment of a volunteer’s values
and priorities with the organization’s values and priorities. Servant leadership prioritization on
meeting the needs of the volunteer provides an experience of that alignment for the volunteer
(Erdurmazlı, 2019).
Through a variety of theories, the research confirms the important role that peoplecentered leadership plays in volunteer leadership (Almas et al., 2020). In the absence of
monetary rewards, providing a quality volunteer experience becomes important for voluntary
organizations to retain volunteers (Rowold & Rohmann, 2009). Leadership of volunteers that
prioritizes good relationships and concern for the volunteers’ well being fosters positive
emotions in volunteers (Akhter et al., 2016; Schneider & George, 2011).
Volunteer Leadership Models
Four theories have been suggested to describe volunteer leadership and its relationship to
the organization. The models include democratic, oligarchic, leadership by default, and
leadership for self-development.

23
23
Democratic. Volunteer leaders in the democratic model are interested in serving as
leaders and are committed to the organization (Miller-Stevens & Ward, 2019). The leaders are
elected by organization members and willingly surrender their leadership role when new leaders
are elected. Interest in seeing the organization be successful motivates volunteer leaders to
actively increase knowledge about the organization and be involved in decision making.
Democratic volunteer leadership is the ideal model, but is rarely achieved (Markham et al.,
2001).
Oligarchic. The oligarchic model is derived from Michels’ iron law of oligarchy first
published in 1911 (Michels, 2016). More recent research applies the model to volunteer
leadership (Brulle, 2000; Hall, 1999). The theory holds that even in the idealized democratic
conditions, a select and homogeneous few will emerge as volunteer leaders. The work of
volunteer leadership requires sacrifice of time and the long curation of contacts. Organization
members may be disinterested in dedicating the significant time and effort required of leadership
roles and are content to surrender their democratic opportunity to the oligarchical leaders. The
prestige associated with leadership make the role attractive to oligarchical leaders who prefer to
maintain their role. They pursue mastery and set up urgency around decisions to foster the
organization’s reliance upon their skills and contacts (Markham et al., 2001). When succession
does occur, incumbents seek new leaders who are aligned with their views thereby limiting
accessibility of leadership to a homogeneous group (Brulle, 2000).

24
24
Leadership By Default. Contrary to the oligarchic model, the leadership by default
model holds that the high workload and low accompanying reward of volunteer leadership
makes volunteer leadership uninteresting to the membership. Volunteer leaders are individuals
with high levels of commitment to the organization and abundance of discretionary time to fulfill
leadership duties (Miller-Stevens & Ward, 2019). In the absence of others stepping forward
volunteer leaders fulfill the need (Gulliver et al., 2023). In a study of six voluntary organizations
Pearce (1980) stated the volunteer leaders are reluctant to fill leadership roles. What initially may
appear as maintaining leadership position by gaining influence are situational factors in which
the leader is attempting to advance the work of the organization. Volunteer leaders are quick to
divest their responsibilities to other organization members to relieve their workload. Due to the
high demand of time, volunteer leaders who perform poorly resign their positions citing they no
longer have the time available. High performing volunteer leaders are given more responsibility
which may lead to burnout (Pearce, 1980).

25
25
Leadership for Self-Development. The leadership for self-development model centers
around the desire of volunteer leaders to improve themselves. Volunteer leadership brings
enjoyment and is not driven by a desire to retain power or obtain rewards (Markham et al.,
2001). A study of a 200,000 member North American organization concluded that volunteer
leadership roles were highly desirable, with a large number of members eager to serve as
volunteer leaders. Volunteer leaders desired to create administrative structure to afford more
opportunities for volunteer leadership roles. The membership of the organization is limited to
women, so the membership may experience a lack of opportunity to serve as leaders outside the
organization, making leadership roles in the organization especially desirable. The provision of
volunteer leadership opportunity by the organization made it attractive to prospective members
(Markham et al., 2001).
Leadership Opportunity
To deploy a volunteer as a leader, churches must create an opportunity for a volunteer to
serve as a leader. Compared to politics, sports, and social services, religion has the lowest
percentage of volunteers in senior or management roles at 16.7%. (M. Meyer & Rameder, 2022).
The lack of a clear definition of volunteer leadership may pose a challenge to the creation of
volunteer leadership roles (Posner, 2015). The opportunity to serve in the church is a factor in a
congregant’s decision. Where there are no opportunities, church members will allocate their
volunteer time to other organizations (Becker & Dhingra, 2001). Von Behren (2021) shared an
example of a nonprofit board member who expressed interest in further applying his skills. The
response from the nonprofit executive was the offered skills were not the role of the volunteer,
thereby limiting the opportunity to volunteer. Another volunteer with extensive leadership
experience in the public sector offered to donate 10 to 15 hours a week of time to serve his

26
26
church as a volunteer leader. The church staff turned his offer down (anonymous, personal
communication, March 13, 2023). Von Behren (2021) suggested church staff would benefit from
self-examination about how they are contributing to the deterioration of volunteer leadership
prior to citing volunteer disinterest in serving as leaders. In a study that researched the barriers to
volunteering, respondents reported that they would volunteer if they were aware of the
opportunities to volunteer (Haski-Leventhal et al., 2018).
Volunteer leadership opportunity is characterized by empowerment. A study of volunteer
leaders within social enterprises asserted that when first level volunteers are empowered, their
loyalty to the organization increases. A primary way volunteer leaders were empowered was
public representation of the organization, serving as the visible face of the organization. They
were given access to the core structure of the organization and served as its extension. The
volunteer leaders were also tasked with managing and engaging other volunteers (Ávila &
Amorim, 2021). Empowerment has been associated with volunteer satisfaction. Volunteers
desire to accomplish goals to feel positive about their contribution (I. Li et al., 2007; Wisner et
al., 2005). Ainsworth (2020) stated psychological ownership predicts volunteering intention and
calls for future research particularly in the area of volunteers who have leadership
responsibilities. It is suspected these volunteers would have higher feelings of ownership. A
study of volunteers in local clubs of a national organization noted volunteer empowerment was
tied to multiple positive volunteer outcomes. When leaders empowered volunteers, it increased
volunteer commitment, satisfaction, and longevity (Schneider & George, 2011). Huang et al.
(2020) researched how inclusion is related to volunteer satisfaction. They stated when volunteers
have opportunity to participate in decision-making, they experienced greater satisfaction. This
type of inclusionary practice activated feelings of accomplishment and volunteers were more

27
27
likely to remain in the organization. In volunteer organizations with paid staff, Akhter et al.
(2016) stated the paid staff may be a barrier to volunteer opportunity. Staff can perceive their
role as more significant than volunteers and volunteer leaders and can even view volunteers as an
impediment to performance.
Volunteer Training and Development
Volunteer training has been researched as it relates to the volunteer experience. The
review of volunteer development literature is helpful to this problem of practice because it is
both a task volunteer leaders may engage in as they lead other volunteers, and it may be helpful
to volunteer leaders themselves. Some volunteers are motivated by the desire to learn new skills
(Clary et al., 1998). Volunteers may be attracted to organizations because of the availability of
volunteer leadership roles (Markham et al., 2001).
Research concludes that volunteer training raises volunteer satisfaction and commitment
to the organization. A study of 1,616 volunteer leaders stated training was the greatest predictor
of amount of time a volunteer leader invests. This may be due to the increase in skills to help
perform the leadership role as well as increasing the identification the volunteer leader has with
the organization (Baggetta et al., 2013). Volunteer training is a form of organizational support.
Usadolo et al. (2021)studied volunteer perception of organizational support. The results from a
survey of 213 volunteers from five non-profit organizations identified the emotional attachment
of volunteers increased when volunteers perceived the organization cared about their motives to
volunteer. The study specifically mentioned that systems that support volunteer knowledge
growth and skill development may be helpful to increase volunteer commitment. A different
study stated increased commitment specifically into leadership. A survey of 259 volunteers
included three open ended questions at the end of the survey. Training and mentoring were

28
28
mentioned by respondents as important to expanding their volunteer contribution to include
leadership (Gulliver et al., 2023). Another study specifically researched leadership skill
development in volunteers serving in rural areas. The lack of social programming in rural areas
placed emphasis on volunteers meeting community needs. The study stated that volunteers
successfully acquired leadership skill knowledge through a leadership development program.
Skills specific to personal time management were especially noted in the data analysis (Meier et
al., 2012). Volunteers who articulated perceived support from learning and development
opportunities intended to remain in their role and had higher organizational commitment.
Volunteers articulate the benefit of training and development. A study of Italian
volunteers states that when nonprofit leaders focus efforts on creating learning opportunities for
volunteers, volunteer satisfaction increases. Leader behaviors that promote knowledge
acquisition through process assessment and dialog to improve work bring opportunities for
volunteers to learn skills they may not otherwise have opportunity to acquire (Benevene et al.,
2020). Through semi-structured interviews of 30 past and present volunteer leaders in two
different organizations, Gordon and Gordon (2017) stated several beneficial themes. First,
participants noted their volunteer leadership roles afforded them training opportunities uniquely
offered to volunteer leaders. Training was both formal and informal and included mentoring. The
second theme that emerged is the opportunity to practice skills acquired in training. The
volunteer setting reduced competition with other leaders and they served as a support to one
another. Participants not in a vocational leadership position were able to acquire leadership
skills. The third theme identified was leadership learning transfer. Leadership skills acquired and
practiced in the volunteer organization could be applied in a different setting. Participants

29
29
specifically noted the benefit of trying new leadership competencies prior to their vocational
role.
Volunteer Motivation
The study of what motivates volunteers is the dominant line of inquiry within the
volunteer sector because of the absence of financial incentives that are typically used to motivate
a workforce (Pearce, 1982; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009). The success of organizations that rely
on volunteers is dependent upon recruiting and retaining volunteers. Understanding volunteer
motivation has a direct impact on the success of recruiting and retaining efforts (De Clerck et al.,
2022), including faith-based volunteers (Erasmus & Morey, 2016). When volunteers are
recruited in ways that address their motives, and matched with roles aligned with their motives,
they experience greater satisfaction and intend to remain in their role (Clary & Snyder, 1999).
Volunteer Functions Inventory
Seminal volunteer motivation research identified a framework of six volunteer
motivations. The motivations stem from functional theory that holds people believe and behave
in ways that serve to meet their psychological and social needs (Clary et al., 1996). The same
behavior observed in multiple individuals may be performed to meet different psychological
needs for each person. In this way the motives serve a functional purpose to satisfy specific
needs. Clary et al. (1992, 1998) created the Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI), a survey used
to assess the six motivations in volunteers. The six motives identified by Clary et al. (1998)
include:
1. Protective – a way of protecting the ego from the difficulties of life.
2. Values – a way to express ones altruistic and humanitarian values.
3. Career – a way to improve career prospects.

30
30
4. Social – a way to develop and strengthen social ties.
5. Understanding – a way to gain knowledge, skills, and abilities.
6. Enhancement – a way to help the ego grow and develop.
The VFI has been used in research of church volunteers.
Research has used the VFI in faith-based contexts to explore volunteer motivation. Erasmus
and Morey (2016) concurred with Clary et al. (1998) that faith-based volunteers experience
greater satisfaction when functional motivations are fulfilled, however they concurred within a
modified set of functional motivations that they concluded are valid within faith-based
volunteers. Specifically, Erasmus and Morey (2016) identified four of the six volunteer
functional motivations to be applicable in faith-based volunteers. Pilot participants in the study
stated the Protective items were self-serving and, therefore, not aligned with their others centered
motives to volunteer which stem from their faith. Factor analysis confirmed this feedback, and
the Protective items were eliminated from the data set. Similarly, some items within the
Understanding and Enhancement functions were eliminated by factor analysis. The remaining
items within Understanding and Enhancement were combined to form an Enrichment function,
creating four validated faith-based functional motivations and a suggested Faith Volunteer
Motivations (FVM) assessment to be used in future research. When the study analyzed the items
from the FVM data set supported the Clary et al. (1998) view that volunteers whose functional
motives are fulfilled experience greater satisfaction. The values motive emerged as the strongest
identified by participants in the study.
Petrovic et al. (2020) used portions of the Clary et al. (1998) VFI in a functional approach
to research an increase in volunteering due to religious beliefs and religious attendance. The
study deployed the Values and Social items of the VFI in the methodology. Petrovic et al. (2020)

31
31
stated religious beliefs strengthen the Values function which, like Erasmus and Morey (2016)
asserted, lead to increased volunteering. Bellamy and Leonard (2015) used selected single items
from the VFI to explore motivations of church volunteers to serve in the community. Volunteers
in the study selected the items associated with the Values function most frequently and the
Career and Protective functions were selected least. Another study used the entire 30 item VFI in
faith-based volunteer research and analyzed the relationship between religiosity and the entirety
of the VFI. The study stated there is a significant relationship between religiosity and the
functional motivations as a whole. Additionally, within the faith-based volunteer sample, the
study stated a significant relationship between VFI and volunteer attitude toward the
organization. When the six functional motives were analyzed individually to find a significant
relationship within the study’s proposed model, Protective and Career failed to be significant
(Zollo et al., 2022). The significant relationship of the whole set of six functional motivations
may have been established due to the strength of the other four functional motivations.
Taken as a whole, research using VFI in the Christian faith-based context has confirmed
the others-focused motivations. The self-serving aligned motivations were repeatedly rated the
lowest in the research. While moral viewpoints that help and not harm others are generally
universal to all individuals, religious people may derive greater satisfaction from fulfillment of
others-focused motivations because they are aligned with behaviors affirmed by their faith (Ab.
Wahab, 2017).
Self-Determination Theory
Self-determination theory (SDT) has been used to research volunteer motivation. The
theory proposes that people have three basic psychological needs that are autonomy, relatedness,
and competence which each have a net influence on an individual’s motivation. Autonomy is an

32
32
individual’s ownership to align their behavior with their own will. When internal and external
conditions align, there is integrity of actions. A sense of conflict is experienced when they do not
align. Relatedness is the giving and receiving of care and affection between an individual and
others. As relatedness increases, a sense of relational connection is experienced, as relatedness
decreases loneliness is felt. Competence is the need to accomplish objectives and acquire the
skills to address challenges. When the competence need is not met, individuals experience failure
and hopelessness. The combination of these three basic psychological needs is referred to as
autonomous motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Volunteer motivation research has confirmed the relationship between the three basic
psychological needs and a variety of volunteer outcomes, though at times there are some
research discrepancies. Early volunteer motivation research using SDT was conducted by Bidee
at al. (2013) with a sample of 206 healthcare volunteers in four organizations. The study
investigated the relationship between the autonomous motivation and volunteer work effort and
controlled motivation and work effort. Controlled motivation activates behavior to address
feelings of guilt or anxiety, or in response to a reward or punishment (Deci et al., 2017). The
Bidee at al. (2013) hypothesis that autonomous motivation led to increased volunteer work effort
was supported by the data. The study data did not support the hypothesis that controlled
motivation would lead to less volunteer work effort. Bidee at al. (2013) suspected the lack of
relationship between controlled motivation and less volunteer work effort was due to the
volunteers in the sample population volunteering out of interest rather than obligation. Haivas et
al. (2013) examined the three basic psychological needs separately to research the relationship
between each with two types of volunteer behavior: work engagement and intention to quit. Two
of the three basic needs, autonomy and competence, were directly related to volunteer work

33
33
engagement and intention to quit. Further, the need for autonomy was satisfied not only in the
initial choice to volunteer, but also was satisfied as the volunteering continued, which indicated
the importance of volunteers continued freedom of choice. The absence of a direct connection
between relatedness and continuing to volunteer differed from the research of Boezeman and
Ellemers (2014) who concluded autonomy and relatedness, not competence, were relevant to
volunteers’ continued service. Haivas et al. (2013) noted that when the three basic needs were
viewed as a single variant, there was a relationship with both volunteer work engagement and
intention to quit. In this way, the results of both studies show the three needs may intermingle to
drive volunteer motivation.
Huang et al. (2020) also stated volunteers are more likely to continue their service to the
organization when their needs for autonomy, competence, and relationship are met. The study
further examined the relationship between the level of inclusion volunteers feel and the
satisfaction of the basic psychological needs. The study used a model of three ways to examine
inclusion which were information sharing, decision making, and participation. Each of the three
needs were positively related to volunteers regularly receiving information. Competence and
autonomy were positively associated with volunteer involvement in decision making.
Relatedness and autonomy were positively associated with participation. The study supported
Haivas et al. (2013) that stated when volunteers feel included, it indirectly leads to continued
service since the basic psychological needs are met. Through a volunteer daily diary study Bidee
et al. (2017) concurred that volunteers’ intrinsic motivation increased when the three basic
psychological needs were met. The study also noted the role inclusion plays in volunteer
motivation. Volunteer sense of team inclusion is positively related to their intrinsic motivation
level.

34
34
Variable-centered SDT research has provided understanding of volunteer motivation.
Person-centered research of volunteer motivation has built on that understanding. Personcentered research is distinct in the way data are analyzed, bringing greater focus to less obvious
groups (see Figure 1). The results provide more practical suggestions (Kusurkar et al., 2021).
Anchored in self-determination theory, the De Clerck et al. (2022) person-centered study
identified motivation profiles in volunteers in the sample of 335 volunteers. Self-determination
theory states the importance of both the quantity and quality of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

35
35
Figure 1
Comparison of Variable-Centered and Person-Centered Analysis
(Kusurkar et al., 2021)
The profiles in De Clerck et al. (2022) include distinctions between motivation quality
and quantity, autonomous motivation, as well as controlled or amotivation. Controlled
motivation activates behavior to address feelings of guilt or anxiety, or in response to a reward or
punishment. Amotivation is the absence of self-determination that yields either no action, or
superficial actions. Autonomous motivation is the most self-determined form of motivation (Deci
et al., 2017). Volunteers with autonomous motivation experience their volunteering as enjoyable
and aligned with their personal goals. Given the absence of monetary compensation, the study
hypothesized most volunteers would have high autonomous motivation and accompanying low
levels of controlled and amotivation. In the sample, 24% of the volunteers fell into this category
which was lower than expected by the researchers. Unexpected was the amount (26%) of
volunteers with poor quality motivation which includes amotivation and feeling pressured. The
next phase of the analysis examined the outcomes of the volunteer motivation profiles related to
need satisfaction, job satisfaction, and work effort. The volunteers with high autonomous

36
36
motivation experienced satisfaction of the basic needs identified in self-determination theory
(autonomy, competence, and relatedness). These volunteers had higher levels of need
satisfaction, job satisfaction, and work effort. The results indicated that work effort was high
across the motivation profiles. Volunteers put effort into their work even when the motivation
they experience is poor quality. The difference is in sustaining the volunteer work. Higher
quality motivation is associated with longevity. Higher quality motivation includes volunteers
feeling enjoyment and personal importance combined with low controlled motivation. Whereas,
volunteers with high controlled motivation and amotivation encountered frustrated selfdetermination needs. These volunteers experience pressure, inadequacy, and disrespect and
indicated they considered discontinuing their service (De Clerck et al., 2022). Put another way,
in the absence of enjoyment and satisfaction, volunteers are simply going through the motions.
Organizations face the greatest risk of losing these volunteers.
Li et al. (2022) also used person-centered research methodology in a study of 916
volunteers. The study stated three distinct needs profiles with various associations of need
satisfaction and frustration: 1) high satisfaction, low frustration; 2) average satisfaction and
frustration; 3) low satisfaction, high frustration. In other words, need satisfaction and frustration
can occur simultaneously in volunteers. When volunteers encounter need frustration, it inhibits
high levels of need satisfaction. Each of the three profiles were then examined for associations
with volunteers’ intention to continue, emotional exhaustion, intrinsic motivation, and perception
of work environment. When volunteers have high satisfaction and low frustration, they indicate
the least emotional exhaustion and highest intention to continue and highest work environment
perception. The highest level of emotional exhaustion came when volunteers had low need
satisfaction and high frustration. No difference in intrinsic motivation was observed across the

37
37
profiles. The profiles and their accompanying associations point leaders of volunteers to identify
volunteers who are at greatest risk of discontinuing and create targeted strategies to address their
needs.
Self-efficacy
Research has confirmed self-efficacy plays a role in volunteers starting and continuing as
volunteers as well as transitioning to volunteer leadership. Self-efficacy concerns the extent an
individual believes in their ability to complete a task. Higher self-efficacy leads to sustained
effort when challenges are encountered (Bandura, 1997). A study compared people who were not
volunteers to people who are volunteers in search of barriers to initiating volunteer service. The
study’s conceptual framework suggested that willingness, capability, and availability combine to
result in volunteerability. Non-volunteers indicated more frequently than volunteers that specific
skills were necessary to volunteer and the non-volunteers believed they were not qualified. On
the other hand, volunteers indicated belief that volunteering skills can be developed and that
volunteering helps develop skills. In short, volunteers scored higher in self-efficacy scales than
non-volunteers (Haski-Leventhal et al., 2018). Similarly, Harp et al. (2017) studied volunteer
belief their community service contribution would make a difference, what the study called
community service self-efficacy (CSSE). The study concluded that in the face of organizational
constraints (for example: rules, other people, inadequate supplies), volunteers with higher CSSE
persisted in their service. CSSE did not however lead to volunteer engagement when their role
was ambiguous. The study demonstrated the importance both of volunteer self-efficacy as well
as role clarity. Wang et al. (2011) articulated that domain specific self-efficacy in relationship
with motivation contributed to volunteer intention to continue volunteering. The study stated
volunteer organizations would benefit from creating an environment that supports self-efficacy

38
38
and motivation. Gulliver et al. (2023) researched the different predictors of volunteers who
exhibit leadership behaviors distinct from participation behaviors. The study concluded selfefficacy was a key predictor. Volunteers exhibiting leadership behaviors had more self-efficacy.
An increase in self-efficacy was traced to participation experience accompanied by training
opportunities (Gulliver et al., 2023) There is a sequence evident in this study. Volunteer
participation increases efficacy to complete additional tasks. In the absence of others completing
the tasks and armed with increased self-efficacy, volunteers exhibited leadership behaviors.
Religiosity and Volunteering
Research has clearly and consistently identified that religious people volunteer more than
non-religious people (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2002; R. A. Cnaan & An, 2018; Petrovic et al., 2020;
Putnam & Campbell, 2010; Yeung, 2018). A variety of studies have researched the reasons for
the linkage. The literature holds two foundational theories between religiosity and volunteering
upon which additional connections have been explored. The first theory is that volunteering is a
personal expression of religious beliefs (von Essen et al., 2015). The second holds religious
people volunteer to identify with a social network that has specific values and norms and
accompanying social status (Tsang et al., 2015). Further research has explored these two
foundational connections.
Personal Belief Theory
Serving the less fortunate is a core tenant of most religions, including Christianity
(Hustinx, van Rossem, et al., 2015). Religious teachings emphasize compassion, self-sacrifice,
and meeting the needs of others (Mencken & Fitz, 2013). Christianity holds one of the two
Greatest Commandments is to “Love your neighbor as yourself” (New International Version,
1996, Mark 12:31). The personal belief theory of volunteering makes the connection that

39
39
religious people volunteer as an expression of the religious teachings they have been taught
(Yeung, 2018). Study respondents have articulated the importance of their religious beliefs as an
influence in their choice to volunteer (Bellamy & Leonard, 2015; Janus & Misiorek, 2019;
Petrovic et al., 2020). In studies using the VFI discussed above, religious respondents most
frequently identify the Values functional motive (Petrovic et al., 2020). The Values function is
described as a way to express ones altruistic and humanitarian values (Clary et al., 1998).
Personal Religious Practices
Personal belief theory research has explored personal religious practices and experience
to research personal beliefs influence on volunteering. Personal religious practices include
individual Bible reading and prayer. Haggard (2015) stated that personal practices lead to
volunteering within the church and through the church, but not external in the community. In this
way, individual practices increase the adherence to the church more so than general service.
Similarly, Johnson (2013) studied personal religiosity, specifically controlling for the social
network theory approach by factoring out worship attendance. None of the three religious groups
in the study were influenced to engage in secular volunteering. Lam (2002) researched personal
beliefs as expressed by frequency of Bible reading and prayer, both being individual spiritual
practices. The results indicated both had positive influence on the likelihood to volunteer. When
Yeung (2018) examined both the social and personal dimensions of religious activity, the study
established both as positive influences on volunteering. However, when modeled together, the
personal dimension did not maintain significance.
Personal Emotions
An interconnectivity between religious environment and individual emotions traces back
to Durkheim’s (1912) founding the sociology of religion. Churches that are emotionally

40
40
attractive, draw out commitment from church members and aid in the experience of meaningful
contribution (Dunaetz & Bocock, 2020). Corcoran (2019) stated there is an association between
high levels of emotional energy experienced by a person during a worship service and them
volunteering inside or outside the church. During a worship service, participants’ emotions are
touched positively. A reciprocal desire may lead the participants to give back to the group that
has engendered the favorable emotional experience. While emotions are personal, they are
evoked within the context of a gathering of people and thus are somewhat related to social
network theory.
Social Network Theory
The social network theory approach to establishing a connection between religiosity and
volunteering emphasizes the corporate gathering elements of religion, most frequently measured
in worship service attendance (Yeung, 2017). Religions convene believers together in social
spaces where relational exchanges take place that build social capital (Tsang et al., 2015). In
these settings, individuals may learn about volunteering opportunities or be invited to volunteer
(Becker & Dhingra, 2001; Musick & Wilson, 2008). Religious settings are formed around
commonly held beliefs (Lim & MacGregor, 2012). The social ties formed around the beliefs
establish trust between the religious people in the social setting. In the environment of trust,
people are more likely to volunteer (Wilson, 2000). Religious people may fear exclusion or
social disconnection when they do not adhere to the affirmation of service by the collective
group (Son & Wilson, 2012).
Worship Service Attendance
Research has emphasized worship service attendance to explore the social network
relationship with volunteering. Studies have consistently stated worship service attendance

41
41
predicts volunteering (Becker & Dhingra, 2001; Hughes, 2021; Johnston, 2013; Kim & Jang,
2017; Lim & MacGregor, 2012). Through a mixed methods approach in the context of four
churches Becker and Dhingra (2001) stated social networks are stronger than religious beliefs to
influence volunteering. Churches are fertile environments to form social networks. The
interviews indicated liberals and conservatives ascribe different meaning to their volunteering
that correspond to the religious rhetoric of their church. In this way, the norms of the social
network serve as a guide. Liberals articulated a sense of civic duty while conservatives sated
volunteering was a faith expression of religious beliefs. Johnston (2013) used longitudinal data
from the American Community Lives study to research the relationship between worship service
attendance and volunteering. Across the 16-year period the study stated personal predispositions
to volunteering were the source of influence to volunteer, worship service attendance increased
the likelihood of volunteering. Expanding on that research using the same data, another study
measured the amount of time spent volunteering. The study stated attendance at religious
services was a predictor of an increased number of hours spent volunteering (Kim & Jang, 2017).
Hughes (2021) concurred and stated evidence that the number of hours per month a person
volunteers increases with the number of times per month an individual attends a worship service.
Ruiter and De Graff (2006) used national level data in a study and stated the religious social
network theory is so strong that it influences non-religious people to volunteer. Using Gallup
World Poll data, Lim and MacGregor (2012) researched religious social network influence to
volunteer at a variety of levels including national, local, and personal. At the local level, using
U.S. county level data, the study concludes the opposite of the social network theory of
influence. Non-religious people and moderately religious people are less likely to volunteer in
counties with more religiosity. This could be because local volunteering opportunities may

42
42
already be occupied by religious people, thereby leaving non-religious people out. At the
personal social network level, non-religious people engage in volunteering if they have close
relationships with religious people (Lim & MacGregor, 2012). Merino (2013) concurred about
non-religious people in their research of the personal social network level specifically
investigating close ties and their influence on volunteering. Non-religious people with close ties
to churchgoers were more likely to receive invitations to volunteer. The study stated same-faith
close ties vary in their likelihood to see volunteer encouragement. The same-faith close ties that
discuss religion or spirituality are more likely influences toward volunteering. The study also
confirmed being asked to volunteer is a strong predictor of volunteering.
Personal beliefs in religious teaching that may lead to volunteering stem from the same
religious teaching that encourages gathering to worship. Research has pursued the constructs as
separate, but there may be interwoven complexities (Petrovic et al., 2021; Yeung, 2018).
Religiosity is multidimensional with beliefs stemming from cognitive thinking, an affective
element made up of feelings that lead to selection of specific churches and expressions of
worship, and behavioral choices (Zollo et al., 2022). Examining the relationship to volunteering
on any single comparative dimension misses the complexity (Petrovic et al., 2021). Research that
integrated the dimensions of personal belief and social network factored a continuum of low to
high belief and low to high worship service attendance. Additionally, the study allowed for
volunteering to have two stages: initial decision and continuation of service. The role of both
beliefs and social network were observed. Worship attendance increased the likelihood a person
would initially choose to volunteer. Personal beliefs related to the continuation of service
(Petrovic et al., 2021). This might be observed in a person starting to volunteer when invited by a
religious friend and continuing to volunteer as an expression of personal beliefs.

43
43
Another viewpoint holds that personal beliefs and social network influences are not tied together.
The social network attributes draw from connections between religious individuals while the
personal belief attributes are individualistic. Since these perspectives originate in disparate
sources, Yeung (2017) asserted the relationship between religiosity and volunteering is not yet
concrete. In an effort to explore the relationship further, Yeung (2017) researched the types of
volunteering religious people prefer and concluded religious people are most likely to volunteer
in humanitarian opportunities. This leaning may relate to the humanitarian related activities
being an expression of religious beliefs that prioritize caring for others.
Small Group
Another environment for the formation of religious social networks within churches in
addition to worship services is small groups. Churches create small group programs to provide a
structural way for church members to find social connection (Wuthnow, 1994). Churches over
1,000 in the corporate worship service are especially likely to implement a small group structure
(Thumma & Travis, 2007). Congruent to social network theory, the more a church member is
embedded into the social fabric of the church, the more likely they are to volunteer. Small group
participation serves to increase the social connections and levels of trust a participant
experiences, making them even more receptive to invitations to volunteer (Polson, 2016).
Participants in small groups are more likely to volunteer in their community than church
members who are not part of a small group (Whitehead & Stroope, 2015). It is worth noting that
in churches with high rates of small group participation, there is a decline in community
volunteering. In these cases, church members may experience a limit to their available time and
energy and make a choice for small group participation over volunteering (Whitehead & Stroope,
2015).

44
44
Conclusive evidence has clearly and consistently identified that religious people
volunteer more than non-religious people (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2002; R. A. Cnaan & An, 2018;
Petrovic et al., 2020; Putnam & Campbell, 2010; Yeung, 2018). Studies have investigated
different domains where religious people are likely to serve (Becker & Dhingra, 2001; Johnson
et al., 2013; Yeung, 2017), however none have included how religiosity impacts volunteering as
a church leader.
Church Environment
In addition to the religiosity of individual church members, some research has inquired
about the local church’s impact on volunteering. Research about the type of church has generally
used three church classifications: Catholic, Protestant, and Evangelical or Pentecostals. Becker
and Dhingra (2001) stated the identity of the church is an important driver of volunteering type.
Evangelical churches have two times the number of volunteers serving inside the church
compared to outside the church while Catholic and moderate Protestant churches have about the
same number serving inside and outside the church. Likewise, in a sample of 6,120 religious
attenders, Hughes (2021) noted differences between the volunteering patterns of Evangelicals
and Pentecostals compared to what the study labeled other mainstream groups. The Evangelicals
and Pentecostals spent double the amount of time serving within their church compared to other
mainstream groups. At the same time, Evangelicals and Pentecostals see their work as benefiting
the community, regardless of if they are serving inside or outside their church. The study also
included data about the personal beliefs of the people who attend church. Similar to other
research The level of individual belief in God was not significantly related to volunteering.
Given this conclusion, Hughes (2021) suggested that the culture and character of the church is
influential in church members volunteering behavior. Polson (2016) drew a similar conclusion

45
45
about the nature of the church and stated churches influence the worldview and actions of church
members. Churches that prioritize living distinctly and apart from the world see fewer
congregants volunteering in the community. Churches that prioritize caring for the community
see more church members serving in the community. Specifically, evangelical churches are less
likely to see church members serving as community volunteers. Additionally, Polson (2016)
stated large congregations are less likely to volunteer in the community. Individuals in smaller
churches are 50% more likely to indicate they have joined others to address a community need
than those in large churches. The study noted the trend that worshippers are increasingly
choosing large churches and connected this may pose a concern for community volunteer needs
in the future. The research of Bellamy and Leonard (2015) may be relevant to address this
potential future concern. The study agreed with other research reviewed above that church
involvement does predict community volunteering, however it is not due to the social networking
that happens within churches. The authors stated this is likely due to the high infrequency that
people attend church, thereby negating the formation of social capital. Instead, they concluded it
is collective efficacy that predicts volunteering. Collective efficacy is the feeling that together,
the group can accomplish its goals. The authors suggested the articulation of goals and a picture
of what the church can accomplish together are actions that can increase volunteering in the
community.
Critical Viewpoint of Volunteering
The critical theory perspective reveals that volunteering research neglects to recognize
the power differentials at work between the stakeholders involved in volunteering which include
volunteers, their beneficiaries, and professionals who organize the efforts (Hustinx et al., 2022).
Critical theory interrogates societal structures that operate in human contexts in ways that benefit

46
46
some people while marginalizing others (Cottrell, 2023). Operating from the assumption that
volunteering is an inherently productive activity, volunteering research has focused primarily on
the motivations people have to volunteer (Hustinx et al., 2022). With a comprehension of the
motivations, nonprofits are able to appeal more effectively to people to recruit volunteers (Clary
et al., 1998). Critical inquiry holds there are resources held by those with status that are needed
by those being served which perpetuates the dominant narrative of what has value (van der Veer,
2022).
Volunteering research using critical theory has concluded volunteering can be a tool to
reinforce hierarchical systems of power. For example, an ethnographic study of a national day of
service in Israel noted that volunteering was observed as a means to maintain power in the hands
of the volunteer organizers, thereby perpetuating the marginalization of the volunteers. The
organizers’ positionality that afforded privilege was eroding as it was divested to a wider
population. Through an expression of unity in the form of a national service day, the lines of
power were maintained, giving the threatened positionality an opportunity to continue to
experience power (Shachar, 2015). Van der Veer (2022) examined volunteers motivated to start
initiatives within an environment that encouraged such behavior. The study took place in the
Netherlands where state rhetoric affirmed an active citizenry and encouraged citizens to embrace
a responsibility for social service. The agenda included non-government entities collaborating to
meet needs in society. In the case of the ethnographic study, the focus was on volunteer
initiatives serving refugees. The study stated that those with refugee status who desired to launch
initiatives were marginalized and their initiatives were not realized. They were told they are
“only volunteers” or “just a volunteer” (p. 89) when they wanted to move to lead an initiative.
Study participants felt they were not perceived meaningfully by the agents who were tasked with

47
47
helping the formation of service initiatives. While the study did not make statements about
individuals with other positionality, this research can inform the inquiry of volunteer church
leadership. Churches teach church members to actively serve those around them (Hustinx, van
Rossem, et al., 2015; Mencken & Fitz, 2013) creating a similar environment that encourages the
formation of volunteer initiatives. Van der Veer (2022) concluded status is a factor in which
initiatives are advanced. A similar line of inquiry could research if church members motivated to
serve as volunteer leaders have equitable support.
Volunteer managers and coordinators play a deciding part in the inclusion or exclusion of
people as volunteers (Hustinx et al., 2022). These roles have been socialized to prioritize the
recruitment of volunteers with status to bring assets associated with the dominant narrative.
People with higher financial resources, higher education attainment, and greater social status are
both more likely to volunteer as well as more desirable by organizations in need of volunteers
(van Overbeeke et al., 2022). The organization then benefits from the assets of the volunteer.
Some leaders of volunteers do not identify as leaders. In a study of volunteer coordinators, all the
respondents choose the word manager rather than leader to identify themselves (Newstead et al.,
2021). Volunteer coordinators without a leadership identity, may not see their agency in working
toward inclusivity.
Non-volunteers experience demotivation to volunteer as they encounter an assertion they
are inferior in the volunteer domain. Individuals who possess the attributes nonprofits desire are
actively recruited and are met with supportive structure to engage their volunteer contribution.
Volunteers without the desirable attributes are expected to find volunteer opportunities on their
own, including volunteer opportunities that may replace a paying job (Hustinx, Waele, et al.,
2015). Another exclusionary practice is observed when volunteer roles are designed with specific

48
48
skill requirements. In doing so, non-volunteers perceive they are incapable of volunteering
(Haski-Leventhal et al., 2018).
Social interaction plays a prominent role in volunteering and the critical perspective
illuminates possible resulting exclusionary experiences. There is an implied positive exchange
within the interaction between volunteer and beneficiary that provides reward to the volunteer.
This can favor beneficiaries capable of socially expressing favorable status in receiving the
services of volunteers (Conran, 2011; Lichterman, 2015). While it is difficult to know the extent
of social anxiety, the National Institute for Mental Health (2017) indicates 12% of Americans
will encounter social anxiety disorder described as persistent fear of social situations. A study of
1,137 people concluded that all people prefer to volunteer with people they already know, but
those with higher social anxiety are less likely to volunteer. A moderating factor for people with
higher social anxiety is volunteering with a group, and church was the most frequent group
mentioned (Handy & Cnaan, 2007). The familiarity of church may aid in mobilizing socially
anxious people to volunteer. The process of sustaining a long term volunteer commitment is
more complex and socially anxious people may be discouraged from such commitments (Handy
& Cnaan, 2007). What remains to be explored is how people with less dense social connections
or higher social anxiety find their way into volunteer church leadership.
Religious Volunteering Absent of Choice
The two primary theories examined in the literature that connect religion and
volunteering are religious belief theory and social network theory. Religious beliefs motivate
volunteering as an expression of teachings to care for the world around us (von Essen et al.,
2015). Social network theory holds social connections provide invitations to participate in
volunteering efforts (Tsang et al., 2015). Volunteering has been researched as an activity that is

49
49
voluntary. However, the critical viewpoint has submitted this runs in contrast to the theology that
is the foundation for the examination of the relationship between religious beliefs and
volunteering (von Essen et al., 2015). The Christian calling to love the world through service
places the volunteer as one who obeys rather than has a voluntary choice to volunteer. Christian
theology that teaches expression of care to others may question the view that volunteering is an
expression of individual choice. Haers and von Essen (2015) hold that Christian theology ties a
life of service to others as central to a connection with God. Christianity holds God loves the
world and provides to the world an expression of that love in Jesus Christ (New International
Version, 1996, John 3:16). Being a Christian means responding to the example of Jesus Christ
who laid down his life as a sacrifice (New International Version., 1996, John 15:3). When a
person is a Christian, they are compelled by their faith to offer sacrificial acts of service to the
world around them. Meaning for a Christian comes in loving and serving others. In this way,
volunteering is a not a choice, as much as an outflow of a spiritually transformed life. Research
into religious volunteering within the Christian domain would benefit from including the tension
between autonomy and heteronomy (Haers & von Essen, 2015).
The critical theory perspective reveals that volunteering research neglects to recognize
the power differentials at work between the stakeholders involved in volunteering which include
volunteers, their beneficiaries, and professionals who organize the efforts. This absence may be
particularly salient when examining volunteer church leaders. The power differential between
pastors and church staff and volunteer church leaders is worthy of exploration to determine
dynamics that may be at play. Applied to this current inquiry, it is worth investigating the
possibility that church staff perpetuate being seen as religious elites, by limiting the amount of
empowerment given to volunteer roles.

50
50
Conceptual Framework
A theoretical framework is an existing theory in the literature that guides and provides
structural support for a study. Concepts from the theoretical framework serve to focus the
research, tying together the research questions, methodology, and analysis (Grant & Osanloo,
2014). The theoretical framework provides a lens by which to view a problem of practice,
offering points of entry to rigorous interrogation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Social cognitive theory (SCT) will be used as the foundational theoretical framework for
this study. Social cognitive theory examines the dynamic relationships between environment,
behavior, and the individual. An individual’s beliefs, goals, motivation, and self-efficacy can be
informed by the systems that exist in their surrounding environment, as well as observations
about the behavior of others. As social comparisons are made to similarly competent individuals,
individuals make a determination about their own performance expectations in a given task
which influences self-efficacy (Bandura, 2012). SCT is useful to gain an understanding about
how individuals form meaning. Given the nebulous conception of volunteer church leadership
(Bean & Martinez, 2015; Boender, 2015), an understanding of the forces at work within the
person, surrounding environment, and behavior of others will provide possible ways to address
the problem of a shortage of volunteer leaders in the church.
A conceptual framework draws from the theoretical framework and other relevant
concepts and theories in the literature to express how the research will proceed (Grant &
Osanloo, 2014). The conceptual framework for this research begins by determining which
stakeholder to center within SCT. Critical theory guides the research to center the church
member. Critical theory interrogates societal structures that operate in society in ways that
benefit some people while marginalizing others (Cottrell, 2023). Centering the church member

51
51
will guard the research against the dominant narratives that may currently be at work to cause a
shortage of volunteer church leaders. For example, current dominant narrative suggests that
church members do not have enough time, are missing necessary skills, or are not spiritually
mature enough for volunteer church leadership. A focus on the church member perspective will
illuminate unseen barriers that those in power, church staff, may not otherwise articulate.
The dimensions within SCT have dynamic relationships between one another (Bandura,
2012). The conceptual framework draws from the literature to identify the constructs at work in
the dynamic relationship relevant to this problem of practice. For example, research concluded
the behavior of people in a church is shaped by collective efficacy that is influenced by the goals,
rhetoric, and picture painted by the church (Bellamy & Leonard, 2015). Additionally, the
literature has stated values alignment between the person and organization is a factor in
volunteering satisfaction and performance (Akhter et al., 2016).
The literature has sourced concepts relevant to this research that align with each of the
components of SCT. These are expressed in Figure 2. The person in this case is the church
member. Church participation and spiritual beliefs both guide a church member to volunteer
(Petrovic et al., 2020). Individuals are motivated to volunteer as functional and autonomous
needs are met (Clary et al., 1998; De Clerck, Willem, et al., 2021). Research has shown that
volunteers transition to volunteer leadership as their self-efficacy increases (Gulliver et al.,
2023). In the behavior dimension, key actors include senior church leaders and those leading
volunteers. Senior church leaders have concentrated influence within the church setting, and the
relationship with volunteer leaders in the faith context is important to church mission
achievement (Hameiri, 2019). Most frequently in churches, those leading volunteers are pastors
and church staff. Leaders of volunteers are most effective when they use behaviors rooted in

52
52
people-oriented leadership theories (Almas et al., 2020). The church is the environment for this
research. A church creates opportunities for social networks to form and the literature has
demonstrated evidence that religious social networks influence volunteering (Becker & Dhingra,
2001; Hughes, 2021; Johnston, 2013; Kim & Jang, 2017; Lim & MacGregor, 2012). Volunteer
leaders are drawn to opportunities to be empowered to lead (Haski-Leventhal et al., 2018). These
opportunities also sustain their engagement as leaders (Ainsworth, 2020; Schneider & George,
2011). The rhetoric a church uses influences the type of volunteering done by the church
(Bellamy & Leonard, 2015). All these concepts may inform the understanding church members
form about volunteer church leadership.

53
53
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework
There are constructs within this current problem that highlight the dynamic exchange
between the SCT dimensions. Trust is dynamic between the person and environment dimensions.
Pastors trust church members who are willing to work without complicating other congregant
relationships (R. Cnaan & Scott, 2021) and volunteer leaders build trust in senior church leaders
who demonstrate humility and servant leadership (Hameiri, 2019). Collective efficacy expresses
the dynamic exchange between the environment and behaviors. As people in the church have a

54
54
feeling that together they can accomplish goals, they are drawn to engage as volunteers (Bellamy
& Leonard, 2015). Values alignment between individuals and the church is relevant to the
dynamic exchange between the environment and person in this research. When the values of the
individual align with the values of the church, they are more likely to be committed to their
church (Dunaetz et al., 2022).
Summary
Guided by SCT toward literature related to the formation of understanding of volunteer
church leadership, this literature review covered relevant concepts to the problem of practice.
The topics were drawn together within SCT to be expressed as a conceptual framework. The
conceptual framework provides a picture of the concepts within each SCT dimension and centers
the church member voice to account for potential marginalization that may be at work to create a
shortage of volunteer church leaders. The conceptual framework informs the research design and
methodology described in Chapter Three.

55
55
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study is to discover what church members know about volunteer
church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders. Church
members are the candidate population to serve as volunteer church leaders. While a complete
analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for the purposes of this study, the research centered on
church members, the volunteer leadership candidate population. The following research
questions serve to fulfill the purpose of the study.
1. What is a church member’s understanding of volunteer church leadership?
2. What contributes to a church member’s decision to serve as a volunteer church leader?
Overview of Design
The research followed a qualitative line of inquiry that focused on how people make
meaning of their experiences and the world around them (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Qualitative
research is an inductive process where the researcher is both the means for data collection as well
as the analyzer of the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A qualitative research approach aligns
with the research questions in this study that sought to discover how church members make
meaning of volunteer church leadership within the local church. Table 1 shows the research
questions and associated data source.
The study used semi-structured interviews which have some interview questions prepared
in advance and allowed for follow-up questions during the interview to reveal further details the
participant offered (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The semi-structured approach constructed
interview questions based on the relevant literature that informs the conceptual framework. The
interview questions and associated follow-up questions were guided by Patton’s (2015) six
interview question types and Clary et al. (1998) VFI.

56
56
Table 1
Data Sources
Research Questions Qualitative Interviews
RQ1: What is a church member’s understanding
of volunteer church leadership?
X
RQ2: What contributes to a church member’s
decision to serve as a volunteer church leader?
X
Research Setting
The research took place within Christian churches in the United States with over 1,000
people in worship service attendance. Qualitative cross-national research of volunteer church
leadership understanding would introduce significant cultural variables that may require a
different set of constructs outside the scope of the conceptual framework of this study. Further,
Christian churches in other countries may not have the degree of shortage of volunteer leaders
articulated by pastors in the United States (Earls, 2022). Churches with over 1,000 people in
worship service attendance rely heavily on staff and have limited opportunities for volunteer
church leadership (Polson, 2016). Large U.S. churches have inconsistent church participation
(Bird & Thumma, 2020) which upholds reliance on paid church staff (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016).
This setting acutely highlighted the problem of practice addressed by this research.
Participants in this study attend churches that fit the research setting. Given the
literature’s guidance to focus this research, purposeful sampling was used to identify study
participants. Purposeful sampling is the formation of a sample that meets specific criteria
centered around the study’s line of inquiry (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To speak to the
environmental and behavioral dimensions, participants needed familiarity with their church.

57
57
Therefore, participants in the study were part of their current church for at least two years as well
as attend their church’s worship service at least once per month.
The Researcher
As a White, college-educated, heterosexual, land-owning, upper middle class, cisgender,
English-speaking, Protestant Christian male, with ancestry dating back directly to the
Mayflower, I occupy the apex of privilege (Painter, 2010). On Morgan’s (1996) wheel of power,
every dimension places me at or near occupying maximum dominance. This dominance carries
to vocational experience, where I have held jobs at large churches and a widely known
international para-church ministry. Currently, my privilege has enabled me to occupy a
significant full-time church staff role, on a part-time basis which allows me to pursue my own
church consulting practice.
My privilege and opportunities afforded by my privilege provide a wide perspective to
see problems of practice across the field of church and church leadership. As a vocational
ministry leader, I have personal experience with the research topic from the perspective of the
stakeholder who holds power. This may distance me from the church member experience of
forming meaning of volunteer church leadership. Where I am comfortable and respected in
church leadership, it is possible that is not the shared experience of all church members. Without
leadership experience outside the field of church and ministry, I hold limited wisdom about how
people relate to leadership outside the church and how the epistemology of church leadership
may be informed by leadership experiences in secular settings.
The new volunteering research agenda forwarded by the critical perspective has
encouraged researchers to be acutely aware of their positionality and how it informs the
formation of meaning and acquisition of knowledge (Hustinx et al., 2022). Personal reflection

58
58
around my own experiences and assumptions will foster bracketing which limits my own biases
from impacting the research. Reflexive journaling that records why research design decisions
were made proved helpful to limit my positionality’s influence (K. Meyer & Willis, 2019).
Additionally, I selected participants from outside any ministry or church with which I was
engaged at the time of the research. This avoided role confusion for participants or an imbalance
of power they may have experienced that stemmed from my role as a church staff person or
church consultant (Glesne, 2011).
Data Sources
This research was a qualitative investigation of what contributes to church member
understanding of volunteer church leadership. The primary data source was insights,
perspectives, opinions, knowledge, and feelings of church members. These sources allowed for
analysis to observe how church members form their understanding of volunteer church
leadership. Church members are the candidate population to serve as volunteer church leaders.
Centering church member perspective in the research allowed discovery of barriers and
assumptions that may contribute to the shortage of volunteer church leaders.
Method: Semi-Structured Interviews
The study used semi-structured interviews of active church members who have been part
of their church for at least two years. The church members were part of U.S. churches with over
1,000 worship attenders to offer an environment that aligned clearly with the problem of practice
being researched. Semi-structured interviews leverage a combination of structure and
spontaneous pursuit of data. The structure is evidenced in the creation of an interview protocol
informed by the relevant literature. The interview protocol included probes that revealed the
source of the perspective and viewpoints of the participants which increased alignment with

59
59
social cognitive theory that guided the research. The semi-structured interview method included
the use of follow-up questions. Given the purpose of the study was to discover understanding,
follow-up questions were a useful tool to gather data to clarify and add detail to initial participant
responses.
Participants
This research is intended to benefit church members whose voices are not centered in the
discussion about volunteer church leadership. Informed by the critical perspective, the
participants were church members who are not serving as volunteer church leaders. This sample
provided data highly relevant to the research questions and purpose of the study. The process to
create the sample utilized two strategies. First was a convenience sample strategy. A
convenience sample is a specific type of purposeful sample where participants are selected
because they are relatively easy for the researcher to enlist (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Pastors
known to the researcher were approached to solicit participants from their Christian churches of
over 1,000 people in worship service attendance. Pastors were provided with an email to send to
prospective study participants (see Appendix B). The communication included the purpose of the
study, a description of the interview process, and assurance of confidentiality. Prior to scheduling
an interview, prospective participants were emailed a Study Information (see Appendix C). The
information stated the study was completely voluntary, described the sample criteria, disclosed
information about my role as a church consultant, and provided assurance of reasonable
measures to secure personal information. The study proposed a sample of 10 to 15 participants.
The sample was closed after 13 interviews because redundancy was achieved (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).

60
60
Instrumentation
The instrument design for this qualitative inquiry drew from the conceptual framework
and relevant instruments in the related literature. Volunteer research has primarily focused on
volunteer motivation. The seminal volunteer motivation work of Clary et al. (1998) created the
psychometrically validated and reliable Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI). The internal
consistency assessment revealed the Chronbach’s alpha coefficients for the six motivation scales
ranged from .81 to .89. Use of the VFI in religious settings has shown six others-focused
functional motives to be repeatedly identified by respondents as consistent with their motivation
to volunteer. While the VFI is a quantitative instrument, some items within the assessment were
adapted for the instrument in the present study. Patton’s (2015) qualitative interview question
typology also guided the design of the research instrument. The participants were asked about
their experience and knowledge of volunteer church leadership. Feelings questions elicited data
surrounding possible environmental barriers to serving as a volunteer church leader. Sensory
questions provided data about participants’ observations of comparative models as well as the
sources of their understanding of volunteer church leadership. Opinion and values questions
were used to discover what participants think about the highly individual subject of spiritual
beliefs and their intersection with volunteer church leadership.
Two previous empirical studies also informed the current instrumentation. Gulliver et al.
(2023) conducted quantitative research to assess the behaviors of volunteer leaders as
differentiated from volunteers. Three open ended survey questions were included in the research.
While the research took place within the environmental non-profit domain, this current study
adapted two of them for this similar line of inquiry in the church setting. Similarly, Akhter et al.

61
61
(2016) contrasted paid leaders with volunteer leaders. A comparative question for this interview
protocol design was influenced by the contrast research.
Previous research has suggested that church rhetoric about volunteering influences the
type of volunteering done by church members (Bellamy & Leonard, 2015; Yeung, 2017). Since
this has not been explored for volunteer church leadership, the instrument design included
questions to discover how church rhetoric informs volunteer church leadership. The complete
semi-structured interview protocol is in Appendix A.
Data Collection Procedures
Data was collected through 60-minute interviews that took place through a video
conference call using Zoom technology which allowed for a nationwide sample with low costs
and made participation accessible. The researcher’s University of Southern California Zoom
account was used to lend credibility to the research in the eyes of the participant. The account
also had recording and audio transcription features that aided data analysis. A time convenient to
the participants was scheduled and participants were emailed a secure Zoom link. The link was
accompanied by a written explanation of the research intent and a written confidentiality notice.
Early in the video call, before the interview started, the participants were reminded the
study purpose is academic research to discover what church members know about volunteer
church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders. They were then
asked for their permission to record the interview to the researcher’s secure Zoom account.
Participants were informed the purpose of the recording is to ensure accuracy of their
contribution to the research. They were also informed that only the researcher would see the
recording and the recording would be housed exclusively in a secure Zoom account.
Additionally, participants were informed the researcher may take notes during the interview for

62
62
the purpose of follow-up questions to the responses provided. The participants were informed
that only the researcher would have access to the notes which would be stored on a password
protected computer.
As the interviews commenced, the participants were reminded that their responses would
be held in confidence. Participants were assured that they could choose to opt out of the study at
any time, including at the conclusion of the interview. Following the interviews, a Video Text
Track (VTT) audio file was downloaded from the Zoom account. This VTT audio file was
imported to Atlas.ti file for analysis.
Data Analysis
Qualitative data analysis began during the interviews while data was actively collected.
Qualitative methodology requires the researcher to employ real time analysis to make decisions
about which questions merit follow-up, when to move to the next question on the interview
protocol, and how to keep the data organized. Analysis of early interviews yielded data to be
attentive to in subsequent interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data analysis continued after the sample was closed and interviews were complete. The
research design expected redundancy would be achieved, wherein later interviews resulted in the
same data collected from prior interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Redundancy was achieved
at 13 interviews. At this point data was transcribed for use with Atlas.ti, a software that aids in
qualitative analysis. The researcher, aided by the software, coded the data to look for pieces of
data that go together. As robust codes emerged, categories were constructed. Categories are
concepts that encompass many coded examples. The inductive process of category building was
informed by the research questions and study purpose. The categories were named in ways that
were specifically descriptive of the data in the category (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Throughout

63
63
analytical process, the researcher reviewed for personal bias that may be introduced through the
use of reflexive journal entries. This maintained credibility and trustworthiness through
adherence to rigorous methodology.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The intent of this research was to introduce insights and conclusions that are both useful
and practical to churches that face a shortage of volunteer leaders. Application of the
recommendations from this study will occur to the degree this study is deemed credible and
trustworthy by readers and practitioners in the field. Qualitative research derives credibility and
trustworthiness by following a rigorous inquiry process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study
was rooted in a thorough review of relevant literature. The conceptual framework for the
research was based on the review and served to maintain rigor throughout the research process.
The conceptual framework introduced concepts directly related to the research questions.
Instrumentation design was focused on these concepts to ensure the data that was collected
linked to the research questions at hand. Continuing the introduction of rigor to the design, the
interview protocol included structured questions guided by and adapted from the literature,
including seminal research (i.e. Clary et al., 1998) and related research (i.e. Akhter et al., 2016;
Gulliver et al., 2023). Drawing from previous empirical research in the literature served as an
investment in credibility of the current study.
Research rigor for this study was also evident in the selection of the research setting that
is based on the literature. A shortage of leaders exists across United States churches (Earls,
2022), however, the literature indicates this problem of practice is especially concentrated in
large churches (Bird & Thumma, 2020; R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016). Therefore, the current research
setting was U.S. Christian churches with over 1,000 people in worship attendance.

64
64
A strategy to augment the credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative research was to
make sure the study obtained data that the research questions required (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The absence of a clear definition of volunteer church leader leads to a common confusion
that exists in churches as to the difference between church volunteer and volunteer church leader
(Bean & Martinez, 2015; Boender, 2015). The research questions were specifically about
volunteer church leadership, distinct from church volunteer. To obtain data accurate to the
purpose of this study and therefore maintain rigor, it was important to ensure participants
remained aligned to the differentiation without the researcher leading participants to answers.
Question design, particularly of the structured questions prepared in advance aided in providing
guiderails to adhere to the current research questions so that trustworthy data was produced.
Additionally, asking the participant early in the interview to differentiate between church
volunteer and volunteer church leader focused the interview on producing relevant data.
Ethics
In qualitative research, the power dynamic generally favors the researcher. It is, therefore,
the responsibility of the researcher to ensure the rights and well-being of the participants are
preserved (Glesne, 2011). The intent of this academic research was not to bring harm to anyone.
It is recognized that in any human subject research, risk of harm is involved (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
The setting of the research took place within the church and therefore involved the highly
personal experience of spirituality. The researcher has a career in vocational church work and
recognized the added dynamic at work in this research that may be introduced. In addition to the
researcher-participant dynamic, the positionality of this researcher could have added pastorparishioner to the dyad. The rigor of the research and the well-being of the participant required

65
65
intentional mitigation strategies. In all communications before, during, and after, the researcher
maintained the posture of a scholar doing academic research. The role of the researcher and
purpose of the interaction with participants was clearly stated. Word choice and tone of voice
was researcher centric rather than pastoral. All email communication took place within the
researcher’s University of Southern California account to remain consistent with the researcher
identity. The sample did not include any individuals who were part of churches or ministries that
were related to the researcher’s current vocational ministry work, including consulting at the
time of the study.
In qualitative research, the researcher is both instrument and analyzer which makes
research ethics highly important to ensure credibility and trustworthiness of the study (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). According to Patton (2015), a researcher's credibility is dependent in part on
their honesty. The present study, therefore, clearly states the positionality of the researcher
including biases, church experience, and vocational experience. Stating researcher positionality
and research design logic was intentional to build trustworthiness by allowing the reader to draw
conclusions based on the information provided (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Christian churches actively teach the priority of service to others (Yeung, 2018). The
subject matter of the interviews could cause participants to experience guilt from thoughts that
their lifestyle or behavior is not congruent with the teachings of their church. Language of the
researcher that respects the unique life experience of every participant was helpful to mitigate
this potential respondent harm. Clear statements of gratefulness to the participant for their
participation in the research served to offer a mental connection that the participation itself is an
act of service. This mental connection was intended to aid in assuaging feelings of lifestyle
incongruence with Christian teaching.

66
66
The desirability of church members to appear in alignment with Christian teaching, moral
fortitude, or otherwise positive portrayal of themselves, may have influenced their responses
(Becker & Dhingra, 2001). Assurances of anonymity were given to mitigate this possibility.
Within the assurance of anonymity, a statement that the research benefits when responses are as
honest and accurate as possible further encouraged collecting reliable data.

67
67
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this study is to discover what church members know about volunteer
church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders. Christian
churches rely on volunteers as the workforce to accomplish a variety of tasks in the church
(Boender, 2015). Volunteer leaders inspire fellow church members and people outside the church
to serve as this workforce (R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016). Local churches in the United States are
facing a shortage of volunteer leaders resulting in low congregational engagement which inhibits
church capacity to accomplish its mission (Addai-Duah et al., 2020; Earls, 2022; Hussey &
Tkaczynski, 2014; Parkinson & Hawkins, 2011; Wilhoit, 2009).
Previous inquiry into volunteer leadership has highlighted the importance of role clarity
(Posner, 2015). Role clarity contributes to an increase in volunteer self-efficacy (Harp et al.,
2017). Prior volunteer leadership research has understood leadership to include practices and
behaviors associated with leadership of a specific constituency (Gulliver et al., 2023; Palumbo,
2016; Pearce, 1980; Posner, 2015). The investigation of volunteer leadership within the church
setting has yet to occur. This makes it challenging to accurately identify the reasons for a
shortage of volunteer leaders in the local church. The present study contributes to this gap in the
literature.
Volunteer church leaders emerge from church membership, so this study centered church
members as the research population. The following questions served to fulfill the purpose of the
study.
1. What is a church member’s understanding of volunteer church leadership?
2. What contributes to a church member’s decision to serve as a volunteer church leader?

68
68
Data collection to address the two research questions was through individual interviews
via pre-scheduled video calls. The interview protocol for this qualitative inquiry drew from the
conceptual framework and relevant instruments in the related literature. The interview protocol
can be seen in Appendix A. This chapter begins with a description of the participants. Then the
findings are presented for each research question.
Participants
This qualitative study consisted of 13 participants from seven different churches, in six
United States cities, across three states. Participants were gathered through a convenience sample
strategy from churches ranging in size from 1,000 to 7,000 worship service attenders per week.
Pastors known to the researcher were approached to solicit participants from their Christian
churches of over 1,000 people in worship service attendance. At the outset, a snowball sampling
strategy was planned, but did not prove effective. Initial participants were asked if they would be
comfortable providing an introduction to the researcher. These participants said yes but did not
follow through. The strategy was discontinued with subsequent participants.
At the time of the research, the 13 participants attended their church worship service at
least twice a month and were part of the church for at least two years. The research included one
semi-structured interview with each participant. The interview protocol is included in Appendix
A. Interviews took place via video conference call and lasted between 26 minutes and 65
minutes. Participants were asked for a time when they could be uninterrupted and have stable
internet access. Twelve of the 13 participants engaged via video call for the entire interview. One
participant turned off their camera halfway through the interview and continued the interview
while driving. The participant was asked if they would prefer to reschedule, and they responded
this was the best time. One participant engaged via video call while doing household chores.

69
69
Eleven participants were seated at a computer for the interview. Each participant was assigned a
pseudonym to protect anonymity. Table 2 describes pertinent participant information. The
research methodology did not include obtaining participant age, nor was participant age solicited
during the interviews. In 12 out of 13 interviews, participants voluntarily either stated their age
or shared information that revealed context to estimate their age within five years. This was
noted and considered in data analysis.

70
70
Table 2
Participant Characteristics
Pseudonym Age Estimate Church Church
Location
Church
Size
George 40s A WA 1500
Sam 20s A WA 1500
Tom 50s B TX 7000
Rachel 30s B TX 7000
Jose 30s C CA 2000
John 70s C CA 2000
Rhonda 40s C CA 2000
Alex ?? D CA 3000
Brandon 50s D CA 3000
Roger 40s D CA 3000
Ellen 40s E CA 2000
Annie 40s F TX 1000
Tyler 30s G WA 1000+
Research Question One: What is a church member’s understanding of volunteer church
leadership?
The first research question focused on a church member’s understanding of volunteer
church leadership. The interview started with a broad question that offered no context to the
words volunteer church leadership to elicit the unique understanding of each participant. Later
interview questions were designed to the remind the participants about the focus on volunteer
church leadership as distinct from volunteering in general. The data analysis produced four

71
71
themes evident in the data that answer the first research question. First, study participants have
an inconsistent understanding of volunteer church leadership. Second, church members face
barriers to volunteer in church leadership roles. Third, participant understanding of volunteer
church leadership included two pathways that church members take to become volunteer church
leaders. The final theme was values alignment between the church and volunteer leader is
important.
Inconsistent Understanding of Volunteer Church Leadership
Church members have an inconsistent understanding of volunteer church leadership.
Participants offered a wide range of what they understand volunteer leadership to be. The varied
understandings were evident among all participants and even between participants belonging to
the same church. Inconsistent understanding also existed within individual participant interviews.
Individual participants exhibited multiple ways they understand volunteer church leadership,
indicating participants individually are not clear about volunteer church leadership.
Participant understanding of volunteer church leadership fell into two broad categories,
spiritual beliefs and organizational. The spiritual beliefs category emphasizes the transfer of
spiritual beliefs from one person to another. The Christian faith places strong emphasis on
expressing the love of God from person to person. Seven participants in this study have an
understanding that volunteer church leaders are those who embody this belief of person to person
transfer of faith. Three different types of volunteer church leadership in the spiritual beliefs
category were observed in the data namely role model, influencer, and spiritual beliefs teacher.
The second category of volunteer church leadership understanding is characterized by the work
of the church as an organization. Local churches are formed around shared spiritual beliefs and
as the people who gather around those beliefs work together, they advance the expression of

72
72
those beliefs to the surrounding community. The data found that church members who facilitate
the work of the church are understood to be volunteer church leaders. Like the first category,
data analysis revealed different types of volunteer church leadership in the organizational
category. This category is comprised of five types of understanding including organizer, task
increase, church labor force, staff support, and unpaid staff. The categories and the typologies
within the categories are depicted in Table 3.
Table 3
Volunteer Leadership Typologies
Spiritual Beliefs Organizational
Role Model
Influencer
Spiritual Beliefs Teacher
Organizer
Task Increase
Church Labor Force
Staff Support
Unpaid Staff
All 13 participants demonstrated understanding that draws from both the spiritual and
organizational categories. Table 4 depicts each typology that surfaced during the interviews and
presents the findings for the participants. Six of the participants included at least one of the
spiritual belief typologies in their understanding. All 13 participants included at least one
organizational typology in their understanding. Every participant included more than one
typology. Participants ranged from at least two understandings of volunteer church leadership to
as many as five understandings. Each of the nine understandings will now be described.

73
73
Table 4
Identified Role Typologies
Pseudonym Role
Model
Influencer Spiritual
Beliefs
Teacher
Organizer Task
Increase
Church
Labor
Force
Staff
Support
Unpaid
Staff
Team
Leader
George X X X X
Sam X X
Tom X X X X X
Rachel X X X X
Jose X X X X
John X X
Rhonda X X
Alex X X
Brandon X X
Roger X X
Ellen X X X
Annie X X X
Tyler X X

74
74
Role Model
Two participants included role model in their understanding of volunteer church leader.
A role model in these data can be described as someone who demonstrates desired behaviors or
lifestyle. Jose described faith being transferred from person to person and even found it
humbling to play a role in that transference. He shared that role models played a role in his faith
formation and helped him apply “God’s teachings to real life.” Rhonda also included mentorship
in her understanding of volunteer church leadership when she stated, “And so when I think of
volunteer church leaders, I just think of like people who I just, I want to be like, you know, the
people that you look up to.” Christian churches emphasize teachings about spiritual beliefs and
accompanying behavioral change that is an expression of those beliefs. Church members who
model this type of behavioral change are then understood to be church leaders because other
people in the church want to follow their example.
Influencer
Two participants described volunteer church leaders as influencers. Rachel and Brandon
are at different churches in different states and still both used the same phrase in their interview.
It was the only occurrence of identical phraseology in the study. Rachel and Brandon both stated,
“leadership is influence.” Their statement described an understanding that every church member
is a volunteer church leader. Rachel voiced this by stating, “Everybody’s a leader.” This is
congruent with the Christian spiritual belief that every Christ follower has the universal role of
sacrificial service to others.
The two participants also described that people serving in designated roles in the church
are influencers. This understanding of influence narrowed volunteer church leaders from all
church members to those who volunteer at the church. Brandon described playing the piano

75
75
during the worship service is not only about the act of playing the piano, it is also, “influencing
someone to become more of a Christ follower.” In this understanding, the volunteer work is the
means for the spiritual beliefs transfer to occur.
Spiritual Beliefs Teacher
When participants described the tasks of a volunteer church leader or gave examples of
people serving as volunteer church leaders, six included some form of spiritual beliefs
instruction. The instruction described was in the form of groups based on age or subject matter
affinity. Types of groups mentioned by participants included high school, young adult, Bible
studies, small groups, and classes about two specific subjects. One participant mentioned
finances as a class topic. Another participant mentioned marriage enrichment as a class topic.
The groups described included participants who joined the group for the purpose of learning or
relationship building with other church members. The understanding of a volunteer church leader
as spiritual beliefs teacher was primarily as a discussion facilitator. Ellen said, “It might be
through facilitation of, like a course where it might be they’re a host of a Bible study.” Rachel
stated, “Whether it's mom connect or a community group or young adults or high school where
there's, you know, table discussions.”
A common social bond within church settings is shared beliefs. Those shared beliefs are
discovered through conversation with other church members. Churches provide environments
and frameworks in the form of courses and groups to promote the social bonds around shared
beliefs. The people who facilitate the gatherings either as designated by the church or who
emerge from within the group are understood as volunteer church leaders. When participants
spoke about church members with similar facilitation roles in the lives of children and middle
school students, those church members were referred to as volunteers, not volunteer leaders. For

76
76
the participants in this study, spiritual beliefs teachers are understood as volunteer church leaders
for people age high school and older. The delineation may be characterized by the amount of
spiritual beliefs knowledge required to serve the different ages. More thorough spiritual beliefs
knowledge is required to teach high school and older. Participants may see these individuals as
volunteer church leaders as a way to recognize their expertise.
Organizer
Churches rely on volunteers to do the work of the church. Large churches, like the ones
included in this study, require a large number of members willing to be involved to support the
needs of the congregation. Eight of the 13 participants described organizing volunteers in their
understanding of volunteer church leadership. The tasks of organizing volunteers were described
by participants with words that included: coordinating, managing, and organizing. Large
churches divide the work into task categories. Participants referred to a variety of volunteer
categories including parking, greeting, meals, and children. The people who organize the
volunteers within each category were understood by participants as volunteer church leaders.
Jose described this as, “managing the other volunteers. Kind of organizing them.”
When the participants related this type of understanding, they focused the descriptions on
administrative tasks. Participants described volunteer church leaders coordinate schedules, match
individuals with a task, and say, “here’s kind of how it works,” as Alex stated. Aspects of
leadership that include vision, inspiration, or motivation were notably absent from the participant
descriptions of organizers. A hesitancy was evident to express more than management and
coordination. This perspective did not include decision making authority nor creative problem
solving. The absence of these aspects of leadership within this understanding indicates these

77
77
individuals are perceived as middle management between church staff and volunteers and will be
discussed further below.
Task Increase
Volunteers have a varying degree of involvement in the church as indicated by their
frequency of service, duration of time in each occurrence, and tenure. Church members who
frequently say yes to additional church needs are understood to be volunteer church leaders by
five of the 13 participants. This understanding is based on the quantity of service, not the nature
of the serving itself. Prior volunteer leadership research has understood leadership to include
practices and behaviors associated with a leader-follower relationship (Gulliver et al., 2023;
Palumbo, 2016; Pearce, 1980; Posner, 2015). In the task increase typology of church leadership,
participant understanding did not include followers, nor leadership practices related to leading
followers. The understanding is instead rooted in the amount that a church member serves.
Volunteers who complete more tasks within a single service opportunity, or as indicated by
increased serving frequency define this understanding of volunteer church leadership. Jose
stated, “They’re just consistently there. They don’t shy away from responsibility.” Tyler gave an
example that compared a church member serving at a soup kitchen with a volunteer church
leader serving at the same location. In the description, the individual completed the same tasks as
the volunteer with the additional tasks of keeping the soup kitchen stocked and unlocking the
door. The increased task is what sets the individual apart as a leader. Absent of behaviors and
practices associated with a leader-follower relationship, a rise in the number of church members
who exhibit this typology may further contribute to the problem of a shortage of leaders. More
church members increasing tasks they complete would also increase the need for leadership of
those church members who complete the tasks.

78
78
Willingness to offer one’s service is a common characteristic within this understanding of
volunteer church leadership. Volunteers who proactively seek out additional tasks that meet
needs either identified by the church, or self-identified by the volunteer are understood as
leaders. The nature of the volunteering in this typology does not include leadership practices
associated with the leader-follower relationship, yet the participants still understood these
individuals to be volunteer leaders. Participants may hold this understanding similar to that of the
influencer typology. By proactively meeting needs, this task increase typology of volunteer
church leader sets an example of Christian teaching that invites sacrificial living on behalf of
others. The example of willing service may influence others toward fulfilling the teachings. In
this way, participants may understand the task increase typology as volunteer church leadership.
This is distinct from prior research on volunteer leadership that associates volunteer leadership
with leadership actions applied to a specific follower constituency (Gulliver et al., 2023;
Palumbo, 2016; Pearce, 1980; Posner, 2015).
Volunteer Church Labor Force
Large churches, like the ones attended by the study participants, have common tasks that
require labor. Church members volunteer to supply the required labor. Six of the 13 participants
indicated that church members who volunteer their time to fulfill the needed labor are volunteer
church leaders. They described the labor provided as clean up, set up, filling communion cups,
greeting, cleaning, playing instruments, and running the auditorium sound board, video cameras
and lights. This typology is distinct from other typologies in that there is no differentiation
between volunteers. Jose stated that volunteer church leadership is filing a need by “simply
giving your time.” In other words, everyone providing service in some capacity is understood to
be a volunteer church leader.

79
79
When participants described this typology, the context included comparison to church
members whose engagement in the church does not extend beyond worship service attendance.
Participants described people who have a greater commitment or respond to calls to volunteer
that are made by the church. John pointed out that church members, “have different ideas of what
commitment means.” He described some church members are committed when they attend the
worship service, while others “don’t really feel commitment unless they’re doing much more
than that.” George pointed out that “you used to be able to go to church and just be a
churchgoer.” George contrasted his past church experience with his present experience where he
observes his church continually stating, “where we need help.” In this typology, those who
respond to the church’s stated needs are understood to be volunteer church leaders. The tasks
stated in the participant descriptions do not include interaction with other volunteers. This
understanding of leadership is met when an individual church member fulfills the needs.
Staff Support
Large churches hire church staff people to “manage and run the church,” as John stated.
Two participants articulated an understanding that volunteer church leaders are staff supporters.
When the church staff workload exceeds what they are able to bare, volunteers are tapped to
support them, and these volunteers are understood to be volunteer leaders. The description of
volunteer leadership in this typology included that church staff hold decision making authority,
and the volunteer leaders’ role is to, “support one of the staff”, as described by Ellen. The details
of the support provided by the volunteer church leaders included scheduling and organization. In
this way, the actions are similar to the organizer typology. What makes the staff support
typology unique is the clear association with church staff. A volunteer church leader does not
lead or fulfill their responsibilities apart from the direction of church staff.

80
80
Unpaid staff
Another understanding of volunteer church leadership was church staff that do not receive
monetary compensation from the church. This understanding was formed by combining the two
known concepts of church staff and volunteering. All 13 participants had a consistent
understanding of the definition of volunteer as an individual who fulfills needs of the church but
does not receive monetary payment. The 13 participants also had a consistent viewpoint that
pastors and church staff are church leaders. Two participants combined these conceptual
understandings to form their understanding of volunteer church leadership to be a church staff
person that does not receive payment. Annie stated that, “I know of paid church leadership and I
know of volunteering.” This understanding is rooted in the perspective that it is staff who lead
the church. In order for a volunteer to be a church leader, they must be classified as staff and
seek monetary compensation from outside the church.
Team Leader
A final understanding of volunteer church leadership is team leader. Three of the
participants included this understanding in their interview. This type of volunteer church leader
is an individual responsible for a group of people who complete a scope of work at the church.
All participants who are listed for the Team Leader typology described the same scope of work
when they related this understanding of volunteer church leadership that of greeting people at the
doors of the church. The actions participants associated with this typology are distinctly different
from other typologies and go beyond coordination to include support for the people doing the
work. Participants described that team leaders provide instruction and equipping. They define
how the scope of work is accomplished and communicate that to the people doing the work.
George stated that volunteer church leaders have responsibility, “in defining roles,

81
81
communicating those roles, and following up on those roles to make sure it’s being done.” This
typology is the only one that included accountability within the understanding of volunteer
church leadership.
In addition to the provision of procedural knowledge about the work, the team leader
understanding included fostering volunteer motivation. These volunteer leaders link the work to
the church’s purpose, or even to a spiritual purpose. The team leader is responsible to help
volunteers believe they “have a value and they have a purpose” as Roger put it. They provide
direction and ensure each person knows what to do. When someone strays off task, the team
leader draws focus back to the scope of work.
Indistinguishable Language
Further evidence of the inconsistent understanding of volunteer church leadership was
observed in participants whose responses included language that indicated an indistinguishable
difference of volunteer church leadership and volunteer church service in general. Six of the 13
participants while talking about the role of a volunteer church leader transitioned to talking about
the role of a volunteer. When Jose was asked about the difference between volunteers and
volunteer leaders, he described “people who want to take a more active role” and then went on to
describe that role as participation in church programs by stating, “be part of a growth group,
come to the events.” When Ellen shared her perspective about how people become volunteer
church leaders, she described answering a call for volunteers. She stated, “It’s a request for
service. Please join and serve in our community” and then went on to describe serving in a
homeless shelter. In other words, Ellen answered a question about volunteer leadership with
information about serving in general. At times participants described leadership related concepts
and activities, and at times the same participants described volunteer service or church

82
82
participation. This happened even when the question was posed in a way that reminded the
participant about the distinction between volunteer leader and volunteer. As participants
vacillated between the two, their comments are further evidence of the lack of distinction
between volunteer church leadership and church volunteer.
Pastoral Confusion
Pastors who were approached during the convenience sampling process also revealed a
variety of viewpoints about volunteer church leadership. These pastors were not part of the
sample population, however their responses to the invitations for study participants, support the
finding there is an inconsistent understanding about volunteer church leadership. The email that
was sent to solicit participants (see Appendix B) stated the purpose of the study was to discover
what church members know about volunteer church leadership and what motivates them to serve
as volunteer church leaders. The selection criteria listed for pastors were participants needed to
be at the church for more than two years, attended at least monthly, and not currently serving as a
volunteer church leader. The words volunteer church leadership proved to be understood
differently by pastors. One pastor replied seeking clarification. The pastor asked, “First, define
what you mean by ‘volunteer church leader’. We sometimes make distinctions between leaders
and helpers or servers.” Another pastor interpreted volunteer church leader in a way that applied
to virtually everyone in the congregation. They indicated the scarcity of people who fit the
criteria. The pastor responded, “Honestly I can’t think of anyone who has been here two years, is
active in attendance and isn’t serving.” Their response could indicate a reality for pastors of large
congregations which is not being aware of every person in the church. It could also indicate their
understanding of what it means to serve at a church as they further went on to describe,
“Obviously, our first step is in a life group.” Life groups at this church are small groups of

83
83
people who gather about weekly to learn spiritual beliefs and support one another. Given the
context of this pastor’s email responses, the pastor may have understood volunteer church
leaders to mean anyone who is an active participant at the church. No participants in the study
came from that pastor’s church which has over 2,000 people who attend worship services each
week. This extremely brief analysis of the pastors’ email responses is outside the scope of the
purpose of this study, yet does point to a lack of clarity of volunteer leadership within another
stakeholder group in the church domain. Future research centering pastors would be relevant and
warranted to more completely address the shortage of leaders in the local church.
Barriers to Volunteer Church Leadership
Churches articulate a shortage of volunteer leaders. The data in this study revealed
barriers that may contribute to the shortage. Systems and norms were evident in the interviews
that establish and uphold the barriers. Participants described a deference to pastors and church
staff. The deference included absence of power sharing by pastors with volunteers. Systems and
vetting practices both formal and informal uphold the type of contribution volunteers make.
Finally, money is a tool used to uphold the barrier between church staff and volunteers.
Deference to pastors
Across the interviews, participants exhibited a deference to pastors and church staff.
Participants were reluctant to describe volunteers as leaders out of regard for the pastor as the
leader. The deference is observed in the words participants used to describe their understanding
of volunteer church leadership. Sam used the words, “head person” rather than leader during his
interview. Words like facilitate, coordinate, and support were used in a way that communicated a
limit to volunteer church leadership because the power resides in the hands of pastors and church
staff. The typologies identified in the data were absent of authority to make decisions. That

84
84
authority is reserved for the pastor and church staff. For example, George described a church
staff member as a “boss” and a pastor as “the ultimate decision maker.” Volunteer church leaders
“take direction” from the pastors as Ellen put it. Participants described volunteer church leader
typologies that included those who live in such a way as to embody Christian beliefs or those
who assist the pastors and church staff. These typologies do not include authority as it relates to
leading the church as an organization.
The team leader typology is a partial exception, though limits are still clearly evident.
The participants that described team leaders did include proactive actions on the part of team
leaders that were directed at the well-being and engagement of those doing the work. The
proactive action indicates some degree of authority to determine what members of the team need
and then meet those needs. The authority is limited to the team’s engagement and no participants
described volunteer church leaders who contribute to organizational direction, decision making,
or resource allocation. In fact, when Roger described his understanding, he specifically stated
that team leaders “have limited information” which presents a challenge when leading a team
because the team leader does not comprehend and understand the bigger picture.
Hierarchical System
Formal and informal practices shape and establish boundaries for the type of contribution
volunteers make. There is evidence in the data that a gap exists between staff and volunteer
leaders. The gap is one of hierarchy that places volunteer leaders as subservient to staff. George
stated, “There’s this hard hierarchy in churches.” The hierarchy is evident in the understanding
of who volunteer leaders lead. None of participants described a situation where volunteer leaders
lead staff people. Nine of the participants were asked directly who volunteer leaders lead. Of the
nine, five answered they lead other volunteers. The remaining four answered that volunteer

85
85
leaders lead everyone, referring to any church member or people outside the church. This answer
aligns with the understanding that volunteer leaders transfer spiritual beliefs from person to
person through influence, teaching and role modeling. From that perspective, there is no
designated group that volunteer leaders lead.
The hierarchy is also evident in the way participants describe the interaction between
church staff and volunteer leaders. Participants understand the authority and power to set the
boundaries of volunteer leadership resides with pastors and church staff. Participants described
volunteer leaders take direction from pastors and church staff and “serve alongside church staff”
as Ellen stated. It is pastors and church staff who determine what volunteer leaders will do. A
sample of actions participants included in their understanding of volunteer leadership were
scheduling, supporting staff, emailing other volunteers, and making coffee. These actions can be
characterized as administrative support and do not include leadership actions that may be
associated with empowerment like problem solving, vision casting, resource allocation, or
strategy.
The data revealed a system of norms that inhibit expanding volunteer leadership
contribution. Ellen described the perception that pastors and church staff “have it all figured out”
whereas church volunteers do not. Brandon related a personal desire to contribute more to
leadership of the church. He stated, “I tend to want to be a leader at the more large-scale level.”
Brandon has led worship for 35 years and started attending a new church. Brandon told the staff
person responsible for worship that he would like to help in any way, even if it is, “bring you
coffee on Sunday morning.” In the interview, Brandon stated that he knew he would need to earn
the trust of the staff person to expand his volunteer leadership contribution and that the staff
person was receptive to Brandon’s desire. After serving consistently for a year and a half

86
86
Brandon’s volunteer contribution has not changed. When he followed up about expanding his
contribution, the worship staff person responded that will happen in the future. Brandon stated
that “the system” is designed for someone who does not have experience or knowledge about
Christianity and there is not a system for people like him who desire to contribute greater
leadership.
Lack of communication was also identified as a barrier to volunteer leadership. Two
participants stated that church members and volunteers have limited information about what they
both described as the “bigger picture” of the church. Brandon said, “I think people want to serve.
I think what trips them up a lot of times is… lack of communication.” These participants
described that leadership contribution is difficult to make without the context of the overall
organizational environment. Volunteers are not able to see how their contribution connects to the
church mission. Their ability to extend leadership contribution to address challenges faced by the
church is inherently stunted without communication of the whole landscape.
Role of Money
The hierarchical gap between church staff and volunteers is reinforced with money.
Money is a currency used to define who the leaders of the church are and who holds the power.
Those who receive pay hold power and those who do not receive pay take direction and are
under the authority of those who do receive pay. Brandon stated, “the ones who get paid see
themselves on an elevated level than the ones who are volunteer.” All the participants held the
understanding that a volunteer is someone who does not receive financial compensation for a
service they render. There is evidence that when a volunteer’s contribution begins to exhibit
characteristics of power or skill that exceeds other volunteers, the idea of compensation for the
volunteer is introduced. For example, Brandon related a situation where the quality a volunteer

87
87
produced was superior to other volunteers. Rather than place the volunteer in a position that
would aid the other volunteers in raising their quality, the church staff discontinued all the
volunteers who contributed and offered payment to the volunteer who produced high quality.
When she declined and stated she would prefer to continue as a volunteer, they discontinued her
involvement and paid someone else. Brandon stated that payment becomes a way for church
staff to, “differentiate the people that don’t have skill.” A volunteer with power and high
competency is not the cultural norm. To uphold the norm, compensation is offered, which
maintains the hierarchy between church staff and volunteers.
The unpaid staff typology of volunteer church leadership is further evidence of the role of
money as a barrier. In circumstances where a volunteer has power, or contributes similarly to a
church staff person, they are understood not as volunteer leaders, but as staff that the church does
not compensate. The data in this study disassociate the word volunteer with authority or
empowerment further revealing the norm in churches that those who hold leadership power are
compensated. In this way, money is a tool that reinforces the hierarchical system.
Pathways To Volunteer Church Leadership
Participant understanding of volunteer church leadership identified two pathways that
church members take to become volunteer church leaders. First, church members may be
personally invited to serve as leaders. Second, prior to serving as leaders, church members are
first volunteers within the church. These two pathways were evident repeatedly in the interviews.
Personal Invitation
The most frequent pathway to volunteer church leadership that was mentioned is a
personal invitation. Ten out of the 13 participants described an invitation as part of the church
member journey to become a volunteer church leader. The invitation may be given by a pastor,

88
88
church staff, or another volunteer leader. When participants described the invitation, they
included affirmation of the prospective leader. Ellen demonstrated what an invitation may
include when she stated:
I get a sense from you that you have experience in this area from getting to know you.
You seem to have a lot of really good organizational skills. And you're able to talk to
people. And I think we could really use somebody who could lead that.
Attributes about the prospective leader that would be helpful were part of the leadership
invitation as well as a vote of confidence the person would perform well.
Volunteer First
The starting point for volunteer church leadership is serving as a church volunteer. Nine
of the 13 participants described this sequence in their understanding of volunteer church
leadership. Jose said, “You start out as a volunteer, and then, usually out of that group of
volunteers, leaders do emerge, ranks are recognized.” This pathway gives churches opportunity
to assess leadership candidates. Volunteers who demonstrate “a track record and reliability,” as
Rachel described, exhibit they can be relied upon for increased responsibility. Tom stated, “You
probably should have served in a volunteer role for an extended period of time, because that
shows commitment.” Churches learn which church members align with the mission, values, and
beliefs of the church. This pathway also provides the volunteer with an opportunity to build selfconfidence that they are capable of serving as a volunteer leader. People around them affirm their
contribution and skills are obtained.
Values Alignment
When asked about values alignment between the church and volunteer leader, all thirteen
participants stated it was important to have alignment. The values alignment assessment starts

89
89
when someone begins to attend the church. Participants in the study held that if people were to
consider being a volunteer church leader, they would likely have already determined they align
with the values of the church. People who do not align would discontinue church attendance.
John stated within about a six-month period people can assess alignment. A variety of factors
were included when participants described components of values alignment. Some factors
included: agreement with the church mission statement, doctrinal statement, theology, pastor,
vision, values, teaching, strategy, and structure.
Both categories of typologies of volunteer church leaders become comparative models
with increased visibility to other church members, which is the basis for participants articulating
the importance of values alignment. Churches have an interest in assuring volunteer leaders who
fulfill the spiritual beliefs category impart beliefs accurately. Sam stated that if a volunteer leader
is teaching something that is not aligned with the church’s beliefs it “will cause discord in the
church.” It is important for volunteer church leaders in the organizational typology to have
values alignment to avoid unnecessary turnover. Tom stated that without alignment around
vision and values volunteer leaders will quickly conclude, “I thought it was gonna be totally
different. This is not for me.”
Research Question Two: What contributes to a church member’s decision to serve as a
volunteer church leader?
The second research question focused on what contributes to a church member’s decision
to serve as a volunteer church leader. Interview questions included the participant placing
themselves in the situation of being invited to serve as a volunteer church leader. Six
considerations were evident in the data: role clarity, time, interest, family discussion, spiritual
calling, and resources. Each of the considerations are discussed below.

90
90
Role Clarity
A foundational consideration in the decision to serve as a volunteer church leader that
participants related was role clarity. Twelve of the 13 participants articulated the need for
information about the leadership role. A sample of statements made by participants about their
need for role clarity is in Table 5. The desired information included purpose, outcomes,
expectations, time requirements, responsibilities, and skills. Some participants presented their
need for role clarity with questions in quick succession which indicated a sense of urgency to
acquire knowledge about the prospective position.
Table 5
Participant Needs for Role Clarity
Pseudonym Sample Participant Quote Regarding Role Clarity
George Is it something that I feel like I can do and be effective?
Tom What am I going to need to to?
Sam What is the size of the group that I’d be leading?
Jose Going over the roles and responsibilies.
Rachel Clear expecations.
Alex Know the purpose of why, what’s looking to be done and why?
Ellen What is the outcome we are driving? What are we trying to accomplish?
Brandon Is it something I am passionate about?
Annie I would hope they have an idea of setting clear expectations.
Rhonda I would need to know exactly what’s expected of me.
Tyler Do my homework, figure out, get the context, ask clarifying questions.

91
91
A variety of motives were evident that drive participants to articulate a need for role
clarity. Participants desire to perform well in the prospective leadership role. By gathering as
much information about the role as possible, participants evaluate how they might perform in the
role. One participant described being nervous about responsibility for guiding other people. Role
clarity was a means to address her nervousness. Participants described higher confidence
entering a role when they believe they understand the role. Role clarity was also a factor in
assessing the value participants would receive from investing time. More excitement about the
work and responsibilities would bring greater willingness to accept the leadership role.
Information about the role was the means for participants to make other considerations of time,
interest and family discussion all related below.
Time
Participants described the amount of time required to serve as volunteer church leader is
an important consideration. Twelve of the 13 participants mentioned assessing the amount of
time required to serve as a volunteer church leader. Participants mentioned the competing
responsibilities in their lives that included job, parenting, marriage, and school. Participants were
interested in a host of questions that pertained to time including frequency, duration, length of
commitment, flexibility, and number of scheduled activities per week or month. Rachel stated
that knowledge of the schedule at least two to three months in advance would aid her decision.
Whereas participants paused to consider their answers to other questions, answers to the question
about information needed to make a serving decision were immediate and time was mentioned
first or very quickly. The time consideration is at the forefront of the decision-making process for
the participants in this study.

92
92
As participants described availability of time to volunteer they did so without a sense of
agency. In other words, participants spoke about time from the perspective that it controlled them
rather than they control it. For example, when Rhonda described her motivation to volunteer, she
said, “I have the desire to do it already. I wish that I could. It’s just not actually possible for me.”
Two participants expressed a relationship with time that did have agency. Tom and Sam
described time as a commodity that is allocated according to what is valued. Tom described that
everyone in North America has full schedules. He stated that it is incumbent upon churches to
have a vision “compelling enough for them to replace their time with that meaning.” Sam
associated allocation of time with spiritual commitment. He talked about controlling our time to
align with Christian beliefs stating, “sometimes you just need to go, help and serve, even if it’s
not what you want.”
Interest
Participants indicated that interest in specific types of work within the church is a factor
in the decision to serve as a volunteer church leader. A variety of components shape the concept
of interest including gifting, competence, and preference. Eight of the 13 participants cited
interest as a contributor to their decision.
Gifting
Gifting was a factor in determining interest referred to by five participants. Christian
belief includes God providing an individual with spiritual gifts that are found in the Bible. The
spiritual gifts are provided to serve others. Participants did not refer to specific gifts, nor make
references to the Bible, however they did mention gifting as a relevant factor. When Jose
described an invitation to serve as a volunteer church leader his words included an affirmation of
gifting when he said, “you show some type of gift or attribute that you’re good at.” Through the

93
93
lens of this study’s conceptual framework, the affirmation of gifting can influence an
individual’s belief they can fulfill a leadership role. Further, increased belief would lead to a
decision to serve as a volunteer leader. Tyler indicted he would be drawn to serve as a leader in
areas that “I feel most called to and most gifted at.” This shows one source of Tyler’s interest is
his confidence in what he is gifted at.
Competence
Interest is also guided by individual competence which is informed by skill and results in
belief that the service will make a difference. George and Ellen stated that areas of interest would
overlap with specific skills. George gave the example that volunteer leadership of the
soundboard is not a fit for him since he does not “know anything about that stuff.” Participants in
the study described that work scopes, tasks, and responsibilities that correspond to individual
skill increase belief that the volunteer work will make a difference in the lives of others.
Preference
Preference for specific types of church work that would bring enjoyment was another
component of interest. The preferences arose from vocation, past experience, and comfort. There
is evidence that participants had preference associated with past personal experience. One
participant was an addict in their past and became emotional when they expressed interest in
serving people who currently struggle with substance abuse. Jose described the role a middle
school football coach played in his life and his interest in serving middle school students. Rachel
expressed interest in leadership development of young adults which corresponded to her vocation
of the same scope of work. She said, “If they were to ever want to do any kind of professional
leadership development to help young adults, that would be my jam.”

94
94
Family Support
Discussing a volunteer church leadership opportunity with an immediate family member
was mentioned by eight of the 13 participants. Of the eight, seven were married and stated they
would discuss the decision with their spouse. They stated the support of their spouse was
essential if they were to accept the role. John shared, “I certainly have to consult with my wife
because I’ve learned that I can’t effectively do anything without her full support.” The eighth
was single and mentioned discussing the opportunity with their mother. Participants recognized
the decision may impact their spouse and children and therefore wanted the affirmation of
immediate family.
Spiritual Calling
Spiritual calling is a consideration for a church member as they decide to serve as a
volunteer church leader. Calling is a uniquely personal experience that has normative
understanding among Christian church members. Calling can be articulated as the personal belief
that God has provided instruction about a course of action to be taken by a church member.
When asked to describe a calling, Brandon stated, “you have this sense, you’re drawn to it like a
moth to a flame.” Ellen described calling as “something nagging in your heart saying you really
should head off in this direction.” Ten of the 13 participants described calling as a factor to
consider when deciding about a prospective church leadership opportunity.
Church members in this study describe calling as something that is heard. Participants
included prayer, talking to other people, and an increase in spiritual maturity as part of the
process of hearing a calling. Tyler shared that if he feels a calling from God, he does not
immediately “pull the trigger.” Instead, he prays about it further to see if the call gets louder or
fades away. If the call fades it is not something he believes is important. If the call continues

95
95
through questioning, discernment, and mentors, then he articulated it is, “probably God’s will.”
Annie related an experience where a friend showed her an Excel page with empty spaces where
volunteers were needed. She said that night she laid awake and “thought about that sheet, and the
Lord used that sheet to say, ‘it’s time, you need to volunteer.’” While calling was described in a
variety of ways, there was significant evidence that it is a consideration for church members in
this study as they decide to serve as a volunteer church leader.
Resources
Resources provided to volunteer church leaders was a consideration for participants.
Participants were interested to know how they would receive support as a volunteer church
leader. A total of 8 of the 13 participants included resources as a consideration. Resources at the
outset of a volunteering leadership role as well as ongoing resources were cited by participants.
Resources mentioned included training, feedback, access to other volunteer leaders, grace for
mistakes, shadowing, and support for challenging situations.
The need for resources was grounded in a desire to perform well and raise selfconfidence. Training at the start of volunteer leadership was described as important to “feel like I
can do this,” as Annie stated. John and Brandon both described the benefit of connecting with
other volunteer leaders. Brandon said shadowing someone currently in a volunteer leadership
role would be helpful training as well as give a clear picture of the role. John described support
from opportunities to share ideas with other volunteer leaders. Concern was expressed about
challenging situations that may involve difficult people or spiritual questions. Participants
wanted to know who they could go to for advice and counsel when they encountered challenges.
Ongoing support in the form of feedback and appreciation was evident. Feedback was rooted in
an interest to know that the time invested was delivering results. Tom stated, “I’d need feedback

96
96
to make sure that I’m on point.” Appreciation was also noted as a way for volunteer leaders to
continue to be motivated.
Summary
Two research questions were used to guide this study. The first research question was:
What is a church member’s understanding of volunteer church leadership? Four themes were
evident in the data that answer this research question. (1) Volunteer church leadership
understanding is inconsistent. A total of nine different typologies of understanding were evident
in the data analysis. Participants held a minimum of two understandings and as many as five. The
understandings fell into two categories. First, in the spiritual beliefs category volunteer church
leadership is understood as church members who share spiritual beliefs from one person to
another. Second, the organizational category is understood as church members who facilitate the
work of the church as an organization. The variety of understandings reveals a lack of role clarity
for volunteer church leaders. (2) Barriers exist that inhibit church members from serving as
volunteer church leaders. Systems and norms serve to quarantine the nature of the contribution
that church members make which creates a distinct hierarchy between volunteers and church
staff. Money plays a role in maintaining the hierarchy. (3) Church members take two pathways
to become volunteer church leaders: personal invitation and serving as volunteers first. (4)
Values alignment between the church and the volunteer leader is important to volunteer church
leadership.
The second research question was: What contributes to a church member’s decision to
serve as a volunteer church leader? Data analysis indicated five considerations church members
make when deciding to serve as volunteer church leader. The findings identified six
considerations: role clarity, time, interest, family discussion, spiritual calling, and resources.

97
97
Church members make-up the pool of people from which churches draw to address the
shortage of volunteer church leaders. This study centered church members in order to view the
problem from the perspective of those whose service will solve the problem. Prior research has
established the vital role motivation plays in the choice to serve. Guided by prior research of
volunteer motivation, this research has freshly illuminated factors at work that result in a
shortage of volunteer church leaders. The present findings point to promising recommendations
grounded in prior research that when applied will address the problem.

98
98
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMENDATIONS
The purpose of this study was to discover what church members know about volunteer
church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders. The qualitative
research methods, guided by the conceptual framework grounded in Social Cognitive Theory,
produced findings that answer the two research questions. This chapter will discuss the current
study’s findings as they relate to the literature and then present recommendations that arise from
findings. Each recommendation is grounded in prior research. The chapter will then move to the
limitations and delimitations of this study followed by recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
As stated earlier, there is a dearth of literature about volunteer leadership, and even less
about volunteer church leadership (Akhter et al., 2016; Gulliver et al., 2023; Posner, 2015;
Rowold & Rohmann, 2009). Still, connections between the current study and related literature
are evident. The current study offers groundbreaking research in the area of volunteer leadership
within U.S. churches with over 1,000 people in weekly worship attendance. The relevant
adjacent literature provides guidance for the recommendations to address the findings of this
study.
Lack of Clear Definition of Volunteer Church Leadership
This study demonstrated that understanding of volunteer church leadership is
inconsistent. Nine different typologies of volunteer church leadership were identified. The
typologies are inconsistent even by church members within the same church. This finding is
aligned with Posner (2015) that stated the lack of a clear definition of volunteer leadership may
pose a challenge to the creation of volunteer leadership roles. The shortage of volunteer leaders
in the local church may be due in part to the lack of definition at least within a local church, if

99
99
not across churches in the U.S. This study’s conceptual framework rooted in Social Cognitive
Theory holds that in the absence of consistent modeling of volunteer church leadership behavior,
an individual may be inconclusive about their own actions related to volunteer church leadership.
Without definition of volunteer leadership, churches are uncertain what leadership needs they
have which leaves church members who are willing to serve at a loss for how to contribute.
This study identified two categories of volunteer church leadership. One focused on the
transfer of spiritual beliefs, the other on organizational work. The spiritual beliefs category
includes two volunteer leadership typologies (influencer and role model) that are absent of
choice made by a church member to serve as a volunteer leader. Church members in these two
typologies are not invited to a role and may not be aware they are understood to be volunteer
church leaders. Instead, rather than conscious decision, the church members are validated as
leaders in the eyes of others. This is consistent with Haers and von Essen (2015) who questioned
volunteering within a Christian setting citing volunteering within the Christian setting is absent
of choice. They hold that the Christian teaching to love the world through service places the
volunteer as one who obeys rather than has an autonomous choice to volunteer. To be Christian
is to serve which removes the notion of individual choice. Individual choice is foundational to
the volunteering research using self-determination theory (SDT). The conceptual framework of
this study guided inquiry to include church member motivation to volunteer for church
leadership. In SDT, volunteer motivation is examined across three basic psychological needs:
autonomy, relatedness, and competence (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Haivas et al. (2013) found that
volunteer satisfaction is linked to satisfaction of the need for autonomy that is experienced by the
volunteer at the point of initial choice to serve as well as the ongoing choice to continue service.
Church volunteer leaders who are leaders by affirmation of others or by fulfilment of spiritual

100
100
beliefs are volunteer leaders not by their own choosing. This is the case in the role model and
influencer typologies of volunteer leadership. Self-determination theory research would hold
volunteer leaders within those typologies may be denied the opportunity to experience
motivation that stems from autonomous choice.
Volunteer Leadership Barriers
The conceptual framework for this study, informed by critical theory, places the church
member at the center to surface barriers to church leadership that church members may perceive.
This study demonstrated that church members encounter barriers which inhibit their service as
volunteer church leaders. This finding is consistent with the literature that emanates from the
critical viewpoint of volunteering. Volunteering research using critical theory has concluded
volunteering can be a tool to reinforce hierarchical systems of power (Hustinx et al., 2022;
Shachar, 2015; van der Veer, 2022). Shachar’s (2015) ethnographic study stated that organizers
of a national day of service in Israel used volunteering to maintain power in the hands of
volunteer organizers to perpetuate the marginalization of the volunteers. Similarly, participants
in this study described a hierarchical system that maintains volunteer leaders as subservient to
staff. Participants stated that volunteer church leaders take direction from pastors and church
staff and lead either other volunteers or no designated group at all. This is evidentiary of Meyer
and Rameder (2022) who stated religion has the lowest percentage of volunteers in senior or
management roles compared to other nonprofits. Participants exhibited a deference to pastors
and church staff and were reluctant to describe volunteers as leaders out of regard for the pastor
as the leader. This finding is consistent with Newstead et al. (2021) who stated volunteer
coordinators in the study used the word manager rather than leader to identify themselves.

101
101
The conceptual framework, grounded in Social Cognitive Theory, guided this research to
examine the interaction between church members (individual) and their environment. The
dynamic relationship between church members and pastors and church staff was a focus of
inquiry. This study demonstrated that pastors and church staff control the boundaries,
responsibilities and degree of empowerment afforded to volunteer church leaders. Participants
indicated that volunteer church leadership is limited to administrative support of pastors and
church staff and absent of empowerment to solve problems, cast vision, or allocate resources.
This is consistent with the literature that nonprofit executives and staff shape the degree to which
volunteers can contribute (Hustinx et al., 2022) and limit expansion of volunteer leadership (Von
Behren, 2021). The current study is also consistent with Akhter et al. (2016) that found paid staff
of volunteer organizations may be a barrier to volunteer opportunity. On one hand pastors
express a shortage of volunteer leaders (Earls, 2022), yet on the other hand pastors limit access to
volunteer leadership. Volunteer leaders are drawn to opportunities to be empowered to lead
(Haski-Leventhal et al., 2018). These opportunities also sustain their engagement as leaders
(Ainsworth, 2020; Schneider & George, 2011). The lack of empowerment identified in this study
may contribute to a shortage of volunteer church leaders.
Boosting Likelihood of Volunteer Leadership
This research demonstrated several factors that contribute to a church member’s decision
to serve as a volunteer leader that concur with the literature. First, the starting point for volunteer
church leadership is serving as a church volunteer. Through volunteering within the church,
church members build confidence to serve as volunteer church leaders. This concurs with HaskiLeventhal et al. (2018) who concluded that volunteers scored higher in self-efficacy scales
compared to non-volunteers. One of the few other studies of volunteer leadership observed the

102
102
same sequence as the present study. Volunteer participation increases efficacy to complete
additional tasks and ultimately transition to volunteer leadership (Gulliver et al., 2023).
Additionally, the current study showed the importance of resources for volunteer church leaders.
Participants noted a desire for training, feedback, access to other volunteer leaders, grace for
mistakes, shadowing, and support for challenging situations. This concurs with multiple prior
studies. Gulliver et al. (2023) stated that training and mentoring were important to expanding
volunteer contribution to include leadership. Usadolo and Usadolo (2021) noted systems of
volunteer skill development may increase volunteer commitment similar to another study that
stated training was the greatest predictor of amount of time a volunteer leader invests (Baggetta
et al., 2013). Also, Benevene et al. (2020) stated the benefit of dialog to improve volunteer work.
The current study adds to the previous research that shows the important role that support plays
in expanding volunteer engagement. Finally, like Baggetta et al. (2013) and Pearce (1980), this
study concurred that the amount of time required is a concern for volunteers considering a
leadership role. Participants in this study stated knowledge of time commitment is a
consideration in the decision to serve as a volunteer church leader.
Recommendation 1: Clear Definition of Volunteer Leadership
The consistency of church member understanding of volunteer church leadership is
inconsistency. Participants offered a wide range of what they understand volunteer leadership to
be. Nine distinct understandings of volunteer church leadership were evident in this study’s data.
Individual study participants held at least two understandings and as many as five. This leaves
abundant ambiguity about volunteer church leadership. This finding is aligned with Posner
(2015) that stated the lack of a clear definition of volunteer leadership may pose a challenge to
the creation of volunteer leadership roles. Without clarity about volunteer church leadership, it is

103
103
difficult to engage church members as volunteer leaders. It is recommended that local churches
form a mixed group of pastors, staff, and church members to create a clear definition of
volunteer church leadership that serves the local church context and is delineated from the
universal Christian teaching to spread the love of God from person to person.
Three of the understandings of volunteer church leadership identified by this study
pertain to the transfer of spiritual beliefs from one person to another. Christian teaching holds
this is a central tenant of the Christian faith that applies to all Christians. To be a Christian is to
share God’s love from person to person. As a defining spiritual belief, those who embody the
belief are more accurately characterized as followers of the Christian faith rather than volunteer
church leaders. It is vital for Christian churches to encourage all church members to share God’s
love in accordance with this central Christian belief. To not confuse the Christian teaching of
spiritual beliefs transfer that applies to all Christians, it is recommended that the spiritual beliefs
transfer understandings of volunteer church leadership are not included in the clear definition of
a volunteer church leader. Perhaps Psalm 78:72 will be helpful to churches as they move toward
a focused understanding of volunteer church leadership. The verse reads, “And David
shepherded them with integrity of heart; with skillful hands he led them,” (New International
Version, Psalm 78:72). David’s integrity of heart is reflective of the Christian teaching for all
Christians to have character that is modeled after Biblical instruction. The development of this
integrity of heart is appropriate to fall within spiritual growth efforts, commonly called
discipleship within Christian church settings. This leaves the skillful hands as the focus of
volunteer church leadership initiatives. Separating spiritual beliefs transfer and leadership as
distinct, reduces confusion and allows each important initiative to focus on clear objectives
consistent with the categories of understanding identified by this study.

104
104
Creating clear definition for volunteer church leadership around the second category
identified in this study, the work of the church as an organization, lays the foundation to provide
role clarity that 12 out of 13 participants in this study stated is desired. The work of the local
church is vast, especially considering the opportunities to serve the community surrounding the
local church. Churches want and need to enlist as many church members as possible to do the
work of the church. Relying on church staff alone to engage over 1,000 people in the church (the
minimum church size in this study) as volunteers is a limiting factor that does not fully leverage
the capacity of the church. Research has identified that social networking is an asset to church
volunteering (Becker & Dhingra, 2001; Musick & Wilson, 2008; Tsang et al., 2015). It is
recommended that volunteer church leadership include the responsibility to engage other church
members in the work of the church. Entrusting volunteer leaders with this responsibility
broadens social networking beyond only church staff which will result in more church members
doing the work of the church. Based on my research in this study and review of the relevant
literature, I recommend the following definition of volunteer church leadership: to invite, equip,
and release church members to do the work of the church. It is advised that local churches
choose language that contextualizes this definition to maximize common understanding within
the local church. Put another way, if churches already have words familiar to the church
members that capture the meaning of “invite, equip, and release” then those contextualized
words will be spread and understood more quickly. Other examples may include: recruit, train,
and deploy; engage, develop, and encourage; or enlist, guide, and position. The specific word
selection is important to create shared understanding relevant to a local church, however it is
critical that the understanding of the recommended definition is not lost.

105
105
A clear definition of volunteer church leadership capitalizes on prior volunteer research.
Volunteer motivation research has established volunteers experience positive, autonomous
motivation when they initially choose to volunteer as well as when they continue to grow in their
experience as a volunteer (Haivas et al., 2013). When churches create a clear definition of
volunteer church leadership, they establish an opportunity for church members to make a choice
which sets church members up to encounter autonomous motivation. Eight of the 13 participants
in this study stated that resources, including training, provided to volunteer church leaders was a
consideration in their decision to serve. Prior research has concluded that volunteer training
raises volunteer satisfaction and commitment to the organization (Baggetta et al., 2013; Gordon
& Gordon, 2017; Meier et al., 2012; Q. E. Usadolo & Usadolo, 2021). A clear definition of
volunteer church leadership can generate a relevant leadership development rubric to deliver
training and set up the benefits stated in the literature. Finally, volunteers may be attracted to
organizations because of the availability of volunteer leadership roles (Markham et al., 2001)
which directly addresses the problem of a shortage of volunteer leaders in local Christian
churches.
Recommendation 2: Volunteer Leader Empowerment
In this study, participants exhibited a deference to pastors and church staff that included
the absence of power sharing by pastors and church staff with volunteers. Participant
understanding of the work done by volunteer church leaders was limited to administrative
support tasks like scheduling, emailing, and making coffee. As prior research has concluded,
volunteers desire to accomplish goals to feel positive about their contribution (I. Li et al., 2007;
Wisner et al., 2005). Volunteers increase commitment, satisfaction, and longevity when they are

106
106
empowered (Schneider & George, 2011). It is recommended that pastors and church staff
empower volunteer church leaders.
Empowerment can take many shapes and recommending specifics may prove limiting to
volunteer church leaders which would be counterproductive. Still, since this study and the related
research, although minimal, has demonstrated an absence of empowerment by pastors and
church staff, suggesting some concepts may be warranted. A starting place to consider how to
empower volunteers can be drawn from prior research that has examined volunteer
empowerment. Concepts that may empower volunteer church leaders are:
• Public representation of the church as an organization (Ávila & Amorim, 2021)
• Leadership unincumbered by policies and procedures (Schneider & George, 2011)
• Leadership and engagement of church members to accomplish clear goals and objectives
(Ávila & Amorim, 2021; I. Li et al., 2007; Wisner et al., 2005)
• Access to the core structure of the church (Ávila & Amorim, 2021)
• Participation in organizational decision making (Huang et al., 2020)
Paid staff of volunteer organizations may be a barrier to volunteer leadership opportunity
(Akhter et al., 2016). Addressing existing barriers takes the courageous work of pastors and
church staff reflecting on how they might contribute to the barriers. Following Von Behren’s
(2021) recommendation, pastors and church staff would benefit from self-examination to identify
the underlying factors that prevent them from empowering volunteers. Self-examination
questions might include, but are not limited to the following:
• Where are volunteer leaders entrusted with financial resources and the authority to
determine how to allocate those resources to accomplish an objective?
• Where do volunteer leaders have decision making authority?

107
107
• In what ways are volunteer leaders included in determining the direction of the church?
• Where in the church are volunteer leaders responsible to determine methods and
solutions?
Answers to these self-reflection questions, may reveal areas to begin empowering volunteer
leaders. Where empowerment is lacking, pastors and church staff can take action to determine
ways to release authority and power into the hands of volunteer leaders.
Recommendation 3: Intentional Invitations
The next recommendation draws from three findings in this study. First, the starting point
for volunteer church leadership is serving as a church volunteer. Nine of the 13 participants
described this sequence in their understanding of volunteer church leadership. The most likely
candidates for this role are those already serving as church volunteers. Second, when asked about
values alignment between the church and volunteer leader, all thirteen participants stated it was
important to have alignment. Third, 10 out of the 13 participants identified personal invitation as
the most frequent pathway to become a volunteer church leader. It is recommended that churches
deliver clear invitations to existing volunteers who exhibit alignment with the church. Going
back to Psalm 78, verse 70 reads, “He chose David his servant and took him from the sheep
pens,” (New International Version, Psalm 78:70). This recommendation guides churches to
identify the sheep pens where prospective volunteer church leaders await.
Prior research grounds this recommendation. Haski-Leventhal et al. (2018) concluded
that volunteers scored higher in self-efficacy scales compared to non-volunteers. Gulliver et al.
(2023) concluded that volunteers build self-efficacy that fosters the transition to volunteer
leadership. Together with the present study, these studies help churches define the best pool for
volunteer church leadership candidates. Additionally, the literature has stated values alignment

108
108
between the person and organization is a factor in volunteering satisfaction and performance
(Akhter et al., 2016). When the values of the individual align with the values of the church, they
are more likely to be committed to their church (Dunaetz et al., 2022). Effective volunteer church
leaders will align with their church. Participants in this study highlighted several factors that
comprise values alignment that churches are recommended to consider: agreement with the
church mission statement, doctrinal statement, theology, pastor, vision, values, teaching,
strategy, and structure.
When churches offer personal invitations to existing volunteers that express evidence
they are aligned with the church, the composition of the invitation is important to carefully
design. This study and prior research offer guidance for how churches can deliver effective
invitations. Invitations should include the following elements:
1) Role description centered around expectations and objectives. Twelve of the 13
participants in this study articulated the need for information about the leadership role.
Likewise, Harp et al. (2017) concluded lower volunteer engagement when the role was
ambiguous. A clearly defined role will include elements identified by the participants in
this study such as:
• What is expected?
• What objectives are to be achieved?
• What is the outcome being driven?
• What are the responsibilities?
2) The amount of time it is expected the role will take and the length of time the prospective
leader will occupy the role. Twelve of the 13 participants in this study stated knowledge
of time commitment is a consideration in the decision to serve as a volunteer church

109
109
leader. Likewise, Baggetta et al. (2013) and Pearce (1980), stated the amount of time
required is a concern for volunteers considering a leadership role. Prospective leaders
will be best served with detailed information about time and length of service.
3) Written summary of the role description that includes the above information. Eight of the
13 participants in this study stated they would discuss a leadership opportunity with an
immediate family member. A written summary will serve as an aid for this discussion.
4) Written guidance for discernment of spiritual calling. Ten of the 13 participants in this
study described spiritual calling as a consideration. This provides churches with an
opportunity to provide spiritual guidance toward personal practices. Research has shown
that personal practices like Bible reading and prayer have a positive influence on the
likelihood to volunteer (Haggard et al., 2015; Lam, 2002). It is recommended that
churches provide prospective volunteer leaders with scriptures that may be helpful to hear
a spiritual calling as well as prayer and reflection prompts.
Recommendation 4: Enhance Volunteer Leader Motivation
Twelve of the 13 participants described the amount of time required to serve as volunteer
church leader is an important consideration. Two participants in this study expressed that
volunteers have agency in their relationship with time. Churches can strategically provide
volunteer leader support that is compelling enough for them to exchange their time for the value
they receive from serving. Guided by the functional motivations in the Faith Volunteer
Motivations (FVM) assessment (Erasmus & Morey, 2016), it is recommended that churches
deliver appreciation and support that connects volunteer leaders to their functional motivations.
Doing so will promote greater satisfaction among volunteer leaders and increase their longevity
of service (Clary et al., 1998; Erasmus & Morey, 2016). Churches that offer care for the motives

110
110
of volunteers can also expect greater emotional attachment to the church from the volunteers (Q.
E. Usadolo & Usadolo, 2021).
Churches can appeal to the career functional motive by empowering volunteer leaders to
experiment with leadership skills in their volunteer church leadership role. Posner (2015) noted
that leadership behaviors are observed in volunteer leaders more frequently than in paid leaders.
Volunteer church leaders can hone their skills in the playing field of church leadership as a
means to advance in their careers (Gordon & Gordon, 2017). The social functional motive can be
met by providing environments for volunteer church leaders to support and develop one another.
In peer coaching exercises, volunteer leaders can take turns sharing leadership challenges they
encounter and offer solutions to one another. This will foster leadership confidence and the
dialog will benefit their volunteer work (Benevene et al., 2020). The values functional motive
can be fulfilled by offering abundant, specific appreciation for the contribution the volunteer
makes. Stories of how their investment of time has benefited others will bring satisfaction. The
combination of these recommended strategies can generate higher volunteer satisfaction to
counter the concern about availability of time.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study was subject to a number of limitations and delimitations. The conceptual
framework informed by social cognitive theory and the related literature provides one approach
to the research questions. Selection of another theoretical framework may generate another
approach. Therefore, the conceptual framework utilized in this study is a delimitation in that it
ignores other concepts that may contribute to church member understanding of volunteer church
leadership. A sample size of 10 to 15 is a delimitation chosen given the time bounds of the
academic research. The availability of time to conduct the research within the academic calendar

111
111
results in the need to limit the sample size. It is possible the research could benefit from a larger
sample size that would include reinforcement of themes or surfacing of additional themes. An
interview time of 60 minutes is a delimitation selected out of respect for participants. An
interview of 60 minutes requires significant effort on the part of the participant. Out of a desire to
safeguard the well-being of the participants, the interviews will be limited to 60 minutes. It is
possible more relevant data could be collected from a longer interview time period. A second
interview with the same participant is not within the scope of the aforementioned available time
to conduct the research. These research design choices by the researcher collectively create
boundaries to the study that limit the complete discovery of church member understanding of
volunteer church leadership.
Beyond these delimitations resulting from choices of the researcher, the study faces
limitations that are out of control of the researcher. Delimitations include participants’ affective
commitment about their church, perception of the purpose of the study, and perception of the
researcher. All these delimitations may result in a variable degree of truthfulness in the
responses.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study focused on the problem of a shortage of volunteer leaders in the church and
centered the perspective of church members. Nine different typologies of volunteer church
leadership were evident in the interview data. More robust recommendations could be generated
by centering research on pastors and church staff of churches with over 1,000 people in worship
service attendance. Comparative analysis of the findings of this study with the findings of similar
inquiry of pastors and church staff would reveal areas of alignment and misalignment in how
volunteer church leadership is understood. Identification of gaps between understanding the role

112
112
of the two church stakeholder groups could more acutely explain the volunteer church leader
shortage.
This study identified barriers to church members serving as volunteer church leaders.
Future research that focused specifically on the barriers would further illuminate difficulty
church members encounter to serving as volunteer leaders. Specifically, church member
deference to pastors may stem from the normative experience that pastors serve as spiritual
authority figures in churches. The degree that leadership authority is generated from spiritual
authority and that impact on volunteer church leadership could be salient to the problem of a
shortage of leaders. Additionally, inquiry into norms, practices, and social constructs of the
hierarchy between pastors and volunteers would offer productive areas to address to deconstruct
the barriers that inhibit church members from serving as volunteer leaders.
Conclusion
Local churches in the United States face a shortage of volunteer leaders resulting in low
congregational engagement which limits church ability to contribute to society (Addai-Duah et
al., 2020; Earls, 2022; Hussey & Tkaczynski, 2014; Parkinson & Hawkins, 2011; Wilhoit, 2009).
Over three quarters of U.S. pastors cite one of their greatest challenges is a declining number of
volunteers and the need to address developing leaders and volunteers (Earls, 2022). Volunteer
church leaders convene other church members to accomplish the work of the church which
includes social services in the surrounding community (Boender, 2015; R. A. Cnaan et al., 2016;
R. A. Cnaan & Boddie, 2001). The community service work done by churches plays a vital role
in the social welfare of American culture (R. A. Cnaan & Boddie, 2002). The capacity to do that
work is diminished with a shortage of volunteer church leaders. When fewer people are

113
113
convened to serve, the spiritual vitality of the church declines and relational ties are weaker. The
net result is the church not effectively achieving its mission (Parkinson & Hawkins, 2011).
The purpose of this study was to discover what church members know about volunteer
church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders. Centering the
study on the perspective of church members was a design choice to search for perspectives and
barriers from the stakeholder group that populates volunteer church leadership roles. The
qualitative research of a sample of 13 church members from churches with over 1,000 in
attendance at weekly worship services provided rich insights that drove recommendations to
address the problem.
The findings of this study identified participants have an inconsistent understanding of
volunteer church leadership. A total of nine different typologies were identified which make it
challenging for church members to know how to engage as volunteer church leaders.
Additionally, this study illuminated barriers that exist which impede church members from
serving as volunteer church leaders. The findings also cite that role clarity, spiritual calling, and
volunteer leader support are factors in a church member’s decision to serve as a volunteer church
leader.
The study concluded with four recommendations for churches to move toward a surplus
of volunteer leaders. First, it is recommended that churches clearly define volunteer church
leadership centered around the work of the church as an organization. Churches should allow the
shaping of Christian beliefs to be driven by existing church spiritual formation initiatives.
Second, churches should empower volunteer leaders to lead rather than only provide
administrative support. Empowerment begins with pastors and church staffs doing the
courageous work of self-reflection to identify how they may contribute to the barriers the prevent

114
114
volunteer leader empowerment. Third, churches should deliver strategically crafted invitations to
church members who exhibit alignment with the church mission and values. The final
recommendation for churches is to offer volunteer leadership support that connects with
volunteer leaders’ functional motivations.
Thriving churches are a vital part of the American landscape. As volunteer driven
organizations, the health of the church rests in the hands of great leadership. That leadership
capital is already sitting in the pews of churches across the U.S. In the words of a participant in
this study, “If churches don’t have people that step into roles and help the church flourish, then
that’s how churches can die.” The recommendations made by this study arise from the findings
and prior research. By moving from recommendation to action, churches will move toward a
surplus of volunteer leaders.

115
115
References
Ab. Wahab, M. (2017). Relationships between religious work values, sustainable work
behaviours and sustainable energy consumptions: An empirical analysis using Muslim
employees. Management Decision, 55(9), 1854–1867. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-
2017-0039
Addai-Duah, C. R., Hoon, S. N., & Sinatra, S. J. (2020). Nonprofit church leaders’ perceptions
and lived experiences involving innovation competency and change management: A
phenomenological study. Journal of Social Change, 12(1).
https://doi.org/10.5590/JOSC.2020.12.1.07
Ainsworth, J. (2020). Feelings of ownership and volunteering: Examining psychological
ownership as a volunteering motivation for nonprofit service organisations. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 52, 101931.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101931
Akhter, S., Akingbola, K., Domaradzka-Widla, A., Kristmundsson, O. K., Malunga, C., &
Sasson, U. (2016). Leadership and management of associations. In D. H. Smith, D. H.
Smith, D. H. Smith, D. H. Smith, D. H. Smith, R. A. Stebbins, J. Grotz, & J. Grotz
(Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Volunteering, Civic Participation, and Nonprofit
Associations (pp. 915–949). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-
26317-9_36
Almas, S., Chacón-Fuertes, F., & Pérez-Muñoz, A. (2020). Direct and indirect effects of
transformational leadership on volunteers’ intention to remain at non-profit organizations.
Psychosocial Intervention, 29(3), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2020a17

116
116
Anh, H.-K., Xian, J., & Shin, H.-C. (2023). The effect of transformational leadership on the
volunteer members’ organizational commitment in non-profit organizations: The
moderating effects of motivation on volunteeing. In R. Lee (Ed.), Emotional Artificial
Intelligence and Metaverse (pp. 127–140). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16485-9_10
Ávila, L., & Amorim, M. (2021). Mechanisms adopted by social enterprises for effective
volunteer-based operations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol.
ahead-of-print(No. ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-08-2021-2892
Baggetta, M., Han, H., & Andrews, K. T. (2013). Leading Associations: How Individual
Characteristics and Team Dynamics Generate Committed Leaders. American
Sociological Review, 78(4), 544–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122413489877
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606
Bang, H. (2011). Leader–member exchange in nonprofit sport organizations. Nonprofit
Management and Leadership, 22(1), 85–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.20042
Bauer, S., & Lim, D. (2019). Effect of communication practices on volunteer organization
identification and retention. Sustainability, 11(9), Article 9.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092467
Bean, L., & Martinez, B. C. (2015). Sunday school teacher, culture warrior: The politics of lay
leaders in three religious traditions. Social Science Quarterly, 96(1), 133–147.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12080

117
117
Becker, P. E., & Dhingra, P. H. (2001). Religious involvement and volunteering: Implications
for civil society. Sociology of Religion, 62(3), 315–335. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712353
Bellamy, J., & Leonard, R. (2015). Volunteering among church attendees in Australia: Individual
and collective dimensions. In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen, J. Haers, & S. Mels (Eds.),
Religion and volunteering (pp. 121–143). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_7
Benevene, P., Buonomo, I., & West, M. (2020). The relationship between leadership behaviors
and volunteer commitment: The role of volunteer satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology,
11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.602466
Benz, J., Witt-Swanson, L., & Cox, D. A. (2023). Faith after the pandemic: How covid-19
changed american religion. Survey Center on American Life (American Enterprise
Institute). https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Faith-After-the-Pandemic.pdf
Berger, P., & Neuhaus, R. J. (1996). To empower people: From state to civil society. Aei Press.
Bidee, J., Vantilborgh, T., Pepermans, R., Huybrechts, G., Willems, J., Jegers, M., & Hofmans,
J. (2013). Autonomous motivation stimulates volunteers’ work effort: A selfdetermination theory approach to volunteerism. Voluntas: International Journal of
Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 24(1), 32–47.
Bidee, J., Vantilborgh, T., Pepermans, R., Willems, J., Jegers, M., & Hofmans, J. (2017). Daily
motivation of volunteers in healthcare organizations: Relating team inclusion and
intrinsic motivation using self-determination theory. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 26(3), 325–336.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1277206

118
118
Bird, W., & Thumma, S. (2020). Megachurch 2020: The changing reality in America’s largest
churches. Hartford Institute for Religion Research.
Boender, W. (2015). Volunteering in religious communities. In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen, J.
Haers, & S. Mels (Eds.), Religion and Volunteering: Complex, contested and ambiguous
relationships (pp. 329–343). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_16
Boezeman, E. J., & Ellemers, N. (2014). Volunteer leadership: The role of pride and respect in
organizational identification and leadership satisfaction. Leadership, 10(2), 160–173.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715012467487
Bowers, K. M. (2014). Servant leadership practices in a volunteer-led organization. In R.
Selladurai & S. Carraher (Eds.), Servant Leadership: Research and Practice (pp. 71–91).
IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5840-0.ch004
Bretherton, R., & Dunbar, R. (2020). Dunbar’s number goes to church: The social brain
hypothesis as a third strand in the study of church growth. Archive for the Psychology of
Religion, 42(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0084672420906215
Brulle, R. J. (2000). Agency, democracy, and nature: The U.S. environmental movement from a
critical theory perspective. MIT Press.
Catano, V. M., Pond, M., & Kevin Kelloway, E. (2001). Exploring commitment and leadership
in volunteer organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(6),
256–263. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730110403187
Chait, R. P., Ryan, W. P., & Taylor, B. E. (2011). Governance as Leadership: Reframing the
Work of Nonprofit Boards. John Wiley & Sons.

119
119
Chambré, S. M. (2020). Has volunteering changed in the united states? Trends, styles, and
motivations in historical perspective. Social Service Review, 94(2), 373–421.
https://doi.org/10.1086/708941
Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical
considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(5), 156–159.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00037
Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., & Ridge, R. (1992). Volunteers’ motivations: A functional strategy for
the recruitment, placement, and retention of volunteers. Nonprofit Management and
Leadership, 2(4), 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.4130020403
Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J., & Miene, P.
(1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional
approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1516–1530.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1516
Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., & Stukas, A. A. (1996). Volunteers’ motivations: Findings from a
national survey. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(4), 485–505.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764096254006
Cnaan, R. A., & An, S. (2018). Even priceless has to have a number: Congregational halo effect.
Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 15(1), 64–81.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14766086.2017.1394214
Cnaan, R. A., & Boddie, S. C. (2001). Philadelphia census of congregations and their
involvement in social service delivery. Social Service Review, 75(4), 559–580.
https://doi.org/10.1086/323163

120
120
Cnaan, R. A., & Boddie, S. C. (2002). Charitable choice and faith-based welfare: A call for
social work. Social Work, 47(3), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/47.3.224
Cnaan, R. A., Boddie, S. C., Handy, F., Yancey, G., & Schneider, R. (2002). The invisible caring
hand. New York University Press.
Cnaan, R. A., & Curtis, D. W. (2013). Religious congregations as voluntary associations: An
overview. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(1), 7–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012460730
Cnaan, R. A., Zrinšˇcak, S., Grönlund, H., Smith, D. H., HU, M., Kinoti, M. D., Knorre, B.,
Kumar, P., & Pessi, A. B. (2016). Volunteering in religious congregations and faithbased associations. In D. H. Smith, D. H. Smith, D. H. Smith, D. H. Smith, D. H. Smith,
R. A. Stebbins, J. Grotz, & J. Grotz (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Volunteering,
Civic Participation, and Nonprofit Associations (pp. 472–494). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-26317-9_23
Cnaan, R., & Scott, M. (2021). Personality, prosperity, priority, productivity, and piety: Selecting
congregational valued lay leaders. Journal of Health and Human Services
Administration, 43(4), 382–405. https://doi.org/10.37808/jhhsa.43.4.4
Conran, M. (2011). They really love me! Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1454–1473.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.03.014
Corcoran, K. E. (2019). Emotion, religion, and civic engagement: A multilevel analysis of U.S.
congregations. Sociology of Religion. https://doi.org/10.1093/socrel/srz012
Cosper, M. (n.d.). The rise and fall of Mars Hill (2022).
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/podcasts/rise-and-fall-of-mars-hill

121
121
Cottrell, M. (2023). Critical Theory. In J. M. Okoko, S. Tunison, & K. D. Walker (Eds.),
Varieties of Qualitative Research Methods: Selected Contextual Perspectives (pp. 103–
107). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04394-9_17
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
De Clerck, T., Aelterman, N., Haerens, L., & Willem, A. (2021). Enhancing volunteers capacity
in all-volunteer nonprofit organizations: The role of volunteer leaders’ reliance on
effective management processes and (de)motivating leadership. Nonprofit Management
and Leadership, 31(3), 481–503. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21444
De Clerck, T., Willem, A., Aelterman, N., & Haerens, L. (2021). Volunteers managing
volunteers: The role of volunteer board members’ motivating and demotivating style in
relation to volunteers’ motives to stay volunteer. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of
Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 32(6), 1271–1284.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00177-6
De Clerck, T., Willem, A., De Cocker, K., & Haerens, L. (2022). Toward a refined insight into
the importance of volunteers’ motivations for need-based experiences, job satisfaction,
work effort, and turnover intentions in nonprofit sports clubs: A person-centered
approach. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,
33(4), 807–819. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00444-5
Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work
organizations: The state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych032516-113108

122
122
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. Plenum.
Dunaetz, D. R., & Bocock, J. (2020). Ministry involvement of church staff and volunteers: The
role of organizational commitment and work engagement (SSRN Scholarly Paper
3683271). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3683271
Dunaetz, D. R., Cullum, M., & Barron, E. (2018). Church size, pastoral humility, and member
characteristics as predictors of church commitment. Theology of Leadership Journal, 1,
125–138.
Dunaetz, D. R., Smyly, C., Fairley, C. M., & Heykoop, C. (2022). Values congruence and
organizational commitment in churches: When do shared values matter? Psychology of
Religion and Spirituality, 14(4), 625–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000314
Eagle, D. E. (2015). Historicizing the megachurch. Journal of Social History, 48(3), 589–604.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jsh/shu109
Earls, A. (2022, January 11). U.S. pastors identify their greatest needs. Lifeway Newsroom.
https://news.lifeway.com/2022/01/11/u-s-pastors-identify-their-greatest-needs/
Erasmus, B., & Morey, P. J. (2016). Faith-based volunteer motivation: Exploring the
applicability of the volunteer functions inventory to the motivations and satisfaction
levels of volunteers in an australian faith-based organization. Voluntas: International
Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(3), 1343–1360.
Erdurmazlı, E. (2019). Satisfaction and Commitment in Voluntary Organizations: A Cultural
Analysis Along with Servant Leadership. Voluntas, 30(1), 129–146.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-018-9992-z

123
123
Froud, H. (2021). Returning from exile? Reconciliation within the church after COVID-19.
Practical Theology, 14(1–2), 123–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/1756073X.2020.1861402
Gallagher, S. K. (2004). The marginalization of evangelical feminism. Sociology of Religion,
65(3), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712250
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers (4th ed.). Pearson.
Gordon, P. A., & Gordon, B. A. (2017). The role of volunteer organizations in leadership skill
development. Journal of Management Development, 36(5), 712–723.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-06-2016-0099
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical
framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your “house.”
Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12–
26.
Greenleaf, R. (1977). Servant leadership. Paulist Press.
Grusendorf, S. (2017). Leading through growth: The role of the lead pastor in the large church.
Great Commission Research Journal, 9(1).
Gulliver, R. E., Fielding, K. S., & Louis, W. R. (2023). An Investigation of Factors Influencing
Environmental Volunteering Leadership and Participation Behaviors. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 52(2), 397–420.
https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640221093799
Haers, J., & von Essen, J. (2015). Christian calling and volunteering. In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen,
J. Haers, & S. Mels (Eds.), Religion and Volunteering: Complex, contested and
ambiguous relationships (pp. 23–40). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_2

124
124
Haggard, M. C., Kang, L. L., Rowatt, W. C., & Shen, M. J. (2015). Associations among
religiousness and community volunteerism in national random samples of American
adults. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 43(3), 175–185.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10852352.2014.973277
Haivas, S., Hofmans, J., & Pepermans, R. (2013). Volunteer engagement and intention to quit
from a self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
43(9), 1869–1880. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12149
Hall, R. (1999). Organizations: Structures, processes, and outcomes. Prentice-Hall.
Hameiri, L. (2019). Executive-level volunteers in jewish communal organizations: Their trust in
executive professionals as mediating the relationship between their motivation to
volunteer and their pursuit of servant leadership. Voluntas: International Journal of
Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30(1), 193–207.
Handy, F., & Cnaan, R. A. (2007). The role of social anxiety in volunteering. Nonprofit
Management and Leadership, 18(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.170
Harp, E. R., Scherer, L. L., & Allen, J. A. (2017). Volunteer engagement and retention: Their
relationship to community service self-efficacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 46(2), 442–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764016651335
Haski-Leventhal, D., Meijs, L. C. P. M., Lockstone-Binney, L., Holmes, K., & Oppenheimer, M.
(2018). Measuring volunteerability and the capacity to volunteer among non-volunteers:
Implications for social policy. Social Policy & Administration, 52(5), 1139–1167.
https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12342
Hoye, R. (2006). Leadership within Australian voluntary sport organization boards. Nonprofit
Management and Leadership, 16(3), 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.108

125
125
Huang, Y., Bortree, D. S., Yang, F., & Wang, R. (2020). Encouraging volunteering in nonprofit
organizations: The role of organizational inclusion and volunteer need satisfaction.
Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 32(2), 147–165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2019.1589624
Hughes, P. (2021). Do religion and spirituality make a contribution to the public good? The
association of religion and spirituality with volunteering. Journal for the Academic Study
of Religion, 34(1), 96–121. https://doi.org/10.1558/jasr.19466
Hussey, I., & Tkaczynski, A. (2014). Leadership development in Queensland Baptist churches.
Crucible Theology and Ministry, 6(1), 1–25.
Hustinx, L., Ane, G., Rameder, P., & Shachar, I. Y. (2022). Inequality in volunteering: Building
a new research front. Voluntas, 33(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-022-00455-w
Hustinx, L., van Rossem, R., Handy, F., & Cnaan, R. A. (2015). A cross-national examination of
the motivation to volunteer. In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen, J. Haers, & S. Mels (Eds.),
Religion and volunteering: Complex, contested and ambiguous relationships (pp. 97–
120). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_6
Hustinx, L., Waele, E. D., & Delcour, C. (2015). Hybridisation in a corporatist third sector
regime: Paradoxes of “responsibilised autonomy.” Voluntary Sector Review, 6(2), 115–
134. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080515X14357650822877
Hybels, B. (2004). Volunteer revolution. Zondervan.
Jackson-Jordan, E. A. (2013). Clergy burnout and resilience: A review of the literature. Journal
of Pastoral Care & Counseling, 67(1), 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.1177/154230501306700103

126
126
Janus, E., & Misiorek, A. (2019). Why do people help each other? Motivations of volunteers
who assisted persons with disabilities during world youth day. Journal of Religion and
Health, 58(3), 1003–1010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-018-0625-z
Johnson, K. A., Cohen, A. B., & Okun, M. A. (2013). Intrinsic religiosity and volunteering
during emerging adulthood: A comparison of mormons with catholics and non-catholic
Christians. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 52(4), 842–851.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12068
Johnston, J. B. (2013). Religion and volunteering over the adult life course. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 52(4), 733–752. https://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12065
Jones, J. (2021, March 29). U.S. Church Membership Falls Below Majority for First Time.
Gallup.Com. https://news.gallup.com/poll/341963/church-membership-falls-belowmajority-first-time.aspx
Jones, J. (2022, January 11). U.S. charitable donations rebound; volunteering still down. Gallup.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/388574/charitable-donations-rebound-volunteeringdown.aspx
Joseph, B. M., & Carolissen, R. (2022). Volunteer leadership: A silent factor in student volunteer
retention. Journal of Community Psychology, 50(7), 3006–3022.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22811
Kaiser, R. B., & Curphy, G. (2013). Leadership development: The failure of an industry and the
opportunity for consulting psychologists. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 65(4), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035460

127
127
Kim, Y.-I., & Jang, S. J. (2017). Religious service attendance and volunteering: A growth curve
analysis. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(2), 395–418.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764016655619
Kusurkar, R. A., Mak-van der Vossen, M., Kors, J., Grijpma, J.-W., van der Burgt, S. M. E.,
Koster, A. S., & de la Croix, A. (2021). ‘One size does not fit all’: The value of personcentred analysis in health professions education research. Perspectives on Medical
Education, 10(4), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00633-w
Lam, P. (2002). As the flocks gather: How religion affects voluntary association participation.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(3), 405–422.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5906.00127
Li, C., Heetae, C., & Yandan, W. (2022). Basic psychological need profiles and correlates in
volunteers for a national sports event. Voluntas, 33(2), 322–333.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00307-5
Li, I., Lin, M., & Chen, C. (2007). Relationship between personality traits, job satisfaction, and
job involvement among Taiwanese community health volunteers. Public Health Nursing
(Boston, Mass.), 24(3), 275–282.
Lichterman, P. (2015). Religion and social solidarity. In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen, J. Haers, & S.
Mels (Eds.), Religion and Volunteering: Complex, contested and ambiguous
relationships (pp. 241–261). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_12
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An
empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43–72.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)80053-1

128
128
Lim, C., & MacGregor, C. A. (2012). Religion and volunteering in context: Disentangling the
contextual effects of religion on voluntary behavior. American Sociological Review,
77(5), 747–779. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412457875
Markham, W. T., Walters, J., & Bonjean, C. M. (2001). Leadership in voluntary associations:
The case of the “international association of women.” Voluntas, 12(2), 103–130.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011234618485
Mayer, R. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson.
McAuley, C. (2019). Relationships matter—Ideas for transforming the nonprofit boardroom.
Performance Improvement, 58(4), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21848
McIntosh, G. (1999). One size doesn’t fit all: Bringing out the best in any size church. Grand
Rapids, Mich. : F.H. Revell. http://archive.org/details/onesizedoesntfit0000mcin
Meier, A., Singletary, L., & Hill, G. (2012). Measuring the impacts of a volunteer-based
community development program in developing volunteers’ leadership skills. The
Journal of Extension, 50(2).
Mencken, F. C., & Fitz, B. (2013). Image of God and community volunteering among religious
adherents in the United States. Review of Religious Research, 55(3), 491–508.
Merino, S. M. (2013). Religious social networks and volunteering: Examining recruitment via
close ties. Review of Religious Research, 55(3), 509–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-
013-0113-6
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

129
129
Meyer, K., & Willis, R. (2019). Looking back to move forward: The value of reflexive
journaling for novice researchers. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 62(5), 578–
585. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2018.1559906
Meyer, M., & Rameder, P. (2022). Who is in charge? Social inequality in different fields of
volunteering. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, 33(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00313-7
Michels, R. (2016). Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of
modern democracy. Martino Fine Books.
Miller, L. (2016). The spiritual child: The new science on parenting for health and lifelong
thriving. Macmillan.
Miller-Stevens, K., & Ward, K. D. (2019). Nonprofit board members’ reasons to join and
continue serving on a volunteer board of directors. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector
Marketing, 31(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2018.1526734
Morgan, K. P. (1996). Describing the emperor’s new clothes: Three mythos of educational (in-
)equity. In The gender question in education: Theory, pedagogy, and politics (1st ed., pp.
105–122). Routledge.
Musick, M., & Wilson, J. (2008). Volunteers: A social profile. Indiana University Press.
National Institute for Mental Health. (2017). National comorbidity survey. National Institute of
Health.
New International Version. (1996). Zondervan.
Newstead, T., Lewis, G., & Utas, and the V. L. R. G. at. (2021). Leading and managing in
Tasmania’s volunteer sector. Volunteering Tasmania. http://ecite.utas.edu.au/144220

130
130
Ngah, N. S., Abdullah, N. L., & Mohd Suki, N. (2022). Servant leadership, volunteer retention,
and organizational citizenship behavior in nonprofit organizations: Examining the
mediating role of job satisfaction. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(5),
1031–1053. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640211057409
Northouse, P. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
Painter, N. I. (2010). In the history of white people. WW Norton & Company.
Palumbo, R. (2016). Challenging Servant Leadership In The Nonprofit Sector: The Side Effects
Of Servant Leadership. The Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, 6(2), n/a.
Parkinson, C., & Hawkins, G. (2011). Move: What 1,000 churches reveal about spiritual growth.
Jossey-Bass.
Patton, M. (2015). Qualittative research and evaluation methods. Sage.
Pearce, J. L. (1980). Apathy or self interest? The volunteer’s avoidance of leadership roles.
Journal of Voluntary Action Research, 9(1–4), 85–94.
https://doi.org/10.1177/089976408000900109
Pearce, J. L. (1982). Leading and following volunteers: Implications for a changing society. The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18(3), 385–394.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002188638201800311
Petrovic, K., Chapman, C. M., & Schofield, T. P. (2021). Religiosity and volunteering over time:
Religious service attendance is associated with the likelihood of volunteering, and
religious importance with time spent volunteering. Psychology of Religion and
Spirituality, 13(2), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000236

131
131
Petrovic, K., Stukas, A. A., & Marques, M. D. (2020). Religiosity, motivations, and
volunteering: A test of two theories of religious prosociality. Journal of Theoretical
Social Psychology, 4(4), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.68
Polson, E. C. (2016). Putting civic participation in context: Examining the effects of
congregational structure and culture. Review of Religious Research, 58(1), 75–100.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-015-0223-4
Posner, B. Z. (2015). An investigation into the leadership practices of volunteer leaders.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(7), 885–898.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-03-2014-0061
Putnam, R., & Campbell, D. (2010). American grace: How religion divides and unites us. New
York : Simon & Schuster. http://archive.org/details/americangracehow0000putn
Rananaware, V. (2015). Leadership roles: Application of Mintzberg’s leadership roles to the
church leadership. Journal of Human Resources Research, 3(11), 23–27.
Renz, D. O. (2016). The Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management. John
Wiley & Sons.
Rowold, J., & Rohmann, A. (2009). Relationships between leadership styles and followers’
emotional experience and effectiveness in the voluntary sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, 38(2), 270–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764008317304
Ruiter, S., & De Graaf, N. D. (2006). National context, religiosity, and volunteering: Results
from 53 countries. American Sociological Review, 71(2), 191–210.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100202

132
132
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Salacuse, J. W. (2006). Leading leaders: How to manage smart, talented, rich, and powerful
people. American Management Association.
Salancik, G. R. (1977). Commitment and the control of organizational behavior and belief. New
Directions In Organizational Behavior, 1(1977), 54.
Schneider, S. K., & George, W. M. (2011). Servant leadership versus transformational leadership
in voluntary service organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
32(1), 60–77. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731111099283
Scott, M. L., & Cnaan, R. A. (2017). Religious congregations and poverty alleviation in the age
of new public governance. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 8(4), 391–410.
https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2017-0013
Shachar, I. Y. (2015). ‘Going back to our values’: Restoring symbolic hegemony through
promoting ‘volunteering.’ In L. Hustinx, J. von Essen, J. Haers, & S. Mels (Eds.),
Religion and Volunteering (pp. 305–327). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_15
Smith, G. A., Schiller, A., & Nolan, H. (2019). In U.S., decline of Christianity continues at rapid
pace: An update on America’s changing religious landscape. Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/10/Trends-inReligious-Identity-and-Attendance-FOR-WEB-1.pdf

133
133
Solansky, S. T., Duchon, D., Plowman, D. A., & Martínez, P. G. (2008). On the same page: The
value of paid and volunteer leaders sharing mental models in churches. Nonprofit
Management and Leadership, 19(2), 203–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.215
Son, J., & Wilson, J. (2012). Using Normative Theory to Explain the Effect of Religion and
Education on Volunteering. Sociological Perspectives, 55(3), 473–499.
https://doi.org/10.1525/sop.2012.55.3.473
Swarts, H. J. (2008). Organizing urban America: Secular and faith-based progressive
movements. U of Minnesota Press.
Thumma, S., & Travis, D. (2007). Beyond megachurch myths. Jossey-Bass.
Tsang, J.-A., Rowatt, W. C., & Shariff, A. F. (2015). Religion and prosociality. In D. A.
Schroeder & W. G. Graziano (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior (p. 0).
Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399813.013.013
Usadolo, Q. E., & Usadolo, S. E. (2021). The effect of motive fulfilment as a meditating variable
between perceived organisational support and volunteers’ affective commitment in nonprofit organisations. African Journal of Inter/Multidisciplinary Studies, 3(1), 75–90.
https://doi.org/10.51415/ajims.v3i1.896
Usadolo, S. E., & Usadolo, Q. E. (2019). The impact of lower level management on volunteers’
workplace outcomes in south african non-profit organisations: The mediating role of
supportive supervisor communication. Voluntas, 30(1), 244–258.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-018-9970-5
van der Veer, L. (2022). Treacherous Elasticity, Callous Boundaries: Aspiring Volunteer
Initiatives in the Field of Refugee Support in Rotterdam. VOLUNTAS: International

134
134
Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 33(1), 83–92.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00260-3
van Overbeeke, P. S. M., Koolen-Maas, S. A., Meijs, L. C. P. M., & Brudney, J. L. (2022). You
shall (not) pass: Strategies for third-party gatekeepers to enhance volunteer inclusion.
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 33(1), 33–
45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00384-0
Von Behren, M. T. (2021). Cultivating volunteer leaders in the fertile climate of servantleadership. The International Journal of Servant-Leadership, 15(1), 271–293.
von Essen, J., Hustinx, L., Haers, J., & Mels, S. (2015). Religion and volunteering. In L.
Hustinx, J. von Essen, J. Haers, & S. Mels (Eds.), Religion and volunteering: Complex,
contested and ambiguous relationships (pp. 1–20). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04585-6_1
Walz v. Tax Comm’n of City of New York, 397 (US Supreme Court May 4, 1970).
Wang, J.-W., Wei, C.-N., Harada, K., Minamoto, K., Ueda, K., Cui, H.-W., Zhang, C.-G., Cui,
Z.-T., & Ueda, A. (2011). Applying the social cognitive perspective to volunteer
intention in China: The mediating roles of self-efficacy and motivation. Health
Promotion International, 26(2), 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daq056
Whitehead, A. L., & Stroope, S. (2015). Small groups, contexts, and civic engagement: A
multilevel analysis of United States congregational life survey data. Social Science
Research, 52, 659–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.10.006
Wilhoit, J. (2009). Spiritual formation as if the church mattered: Growing in Christ through
community. Baker Academic.
Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 215–240.

135
135
Wisner, P. S., Stringfellow, A., Youngdahl, W. E., & Parker, L. (2005). The service volunteer –
loyalty chain: An exploratory study of charitable not-for-profit service organizations.
Journal of Operations Management, 23(2), 143–161.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.07.003
Wuthnow, R. (1994). Sharing the journey: Support groups and America’s quest for community.
Free Press.
Yeung, J. W. K. (2017). Religious involvement and participation in volunteering: Types,
domains and aggregate. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, 28(1), 110–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-016-9756-6
Yeung, J. W. K. (2018). Are religious people really more helpful? Public and private religiosity
and volunteering participation. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(6), 1178–
1200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764018783277
Zollo, L., Ciappei, C., Faldetta, G., & Pellegrini, M. M. (2022). Does religiosity influence
retention strategies in nonprofit organizations? VOLUNTAS: International Journal of
Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 33(2), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-
020-00293-8

136
136
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Name:
Gender:
Age:
Date/Time:
Introduction to the Interview:
Thank you for taking the time today for this interview. My name is Dave Bushnell. I am a
doctoral student at the University of California currently doing research on the subject of
volunteer leadership in the local church. You are the expert in this interview because you hold
valuable knowledge and insights and a unique vantage point on this subject. I know your time is
valuable and by investing your perspective, you are investing in the latest research of volunteer
church leadership. The purpose of this research is to find out what church members know about
volunteer church leadership and what motivates them to serve as a volunteer church leader.
Your consent to participate in this study is completely your decision throughout this
process. You may withdraw your consent to participate at any time. Did you get a chance to
review the participation document? Do you have any questions?
As I ask questions, you may notice me jot down a couple notes. Those are for my
reference, so I can ask follow-up questions about what you share. I would like to record our
conversation today with your permission. The purpose of the recording is to capture what you
share as accurately as possible. It is your insights and views that are most valuable to this
research and capturing them accurately is very important. The recording will be stored at all
times in a password protected account that only I have access to. I will be the only one who will
see the recording. May I record our conversation?

137
137
Do you have any questions as we begin?
Background and Demographics
• As we start, I have a few questions about your
• How long have you been part of your church?
• How many times per month do you attend worship service?
• Are you involved in a small group at your church?
• How frequently does your small group meet?
Conceptual Questions
Next, we will jump into the heart of this research. There are no right or wrong answers to
these questions because they are about your perceptions and understanding. Your complete
honesty is greatly appreciated. Your responses will be completely anonymous. At no time will
your name be associated with your responses.
Interview Questions Potential Probes RQ Key Concept
Addressed
1. What experience (if any) have
you had serving as a volunteer
church leader?
What was the experience like for
you? 1
Self-Efficacy,
Motivation
2. What do you know about
volunteer church leadership? How did you come to know that? 1
Volunteer
Rhetoric,
Opportunity
3. What is the difference between
a church volunteer and a
volunteer church leader?
How did you learn those
differences?
At your church, what types of
tasks do volunteer leaders do
that are distinct from volunteers?
1
Opportunity,
Environment
4. Who do volunteer church
leaders lead?
How do the people they lead get
connected to them? 1
Social
Network
5. Recalling the difference
between volunteers and
volunteer leaders, what are your
perceptions of volunteers
serving as church leaders?
What has informed those
perceptions? 1
Behavior
6. What observations have you
made of someone serving as a
How did those individuals
become volunteer leaders? 1
Behavior,
Trust

138
138
volunteer church leader? What do you think is the
pathway to become a volunteer
church leader?
7. Describe how volunteer church
leaders relate to the pastors or
church staff.
What can you share about how
trust is formed between
volunteer church leaders and
staff?
1
Trust, Social
Network
8. What differences do you
perceive between leading in the
church with leading elsewhere?
What are unique needs of a
volunteer church leader? 1
Environment,
Spiritual
Beliefs
9. Recalling the difference
between volunteers and
volunteer leaders, what
volunteer church leaders are
needed at your church?
How do you know those
volunteer church leaders are
needed? How did you find out
about that?
1
Opportunity,
Collective
Efficacy
10. What do you believe are the
reasons that a person serves as a
volunteer church leader? 2
Motivation
11. What characteristics have you
been told are necessary for
someone to serve as a volunteer
leader at your church?
Where did you hear that? In
what ways do you agree or
disagree with what you heard?
1
Volunteer
Rhetoric,
Values
Alignment
12. In what ways do your values
align with your church’s
values?
What role does values alignment
play in volunteer church
leadership?
1,2 Values
Alignment
13. At your church, in your
perception, what are the
requirements for people to serve
as volunteer church leaders?
Where did you hear that? In
what ways do you agree or
disagree with what you heard?
How do you feel about those
requirements?
1
Environment,
Opportunity,
Church
Participation
14. What does your church
communicate about
volunteering?
What type of things are
volunteers recruited to do? 1
Volunteer
Rhetoric,
People
Centered
Leadership
15. How does someone gain belief
they are able to serve as a
volunteer church leader?
What factors help a volunteer
take on leadership
responsibilities in the church? 1
Self-Efficacy
16. What volunteer church
leadership opportunities are
attractive to you?
What makes those opportunities
attractive to you? 1, 2
Motivation,
Opportunity
17. Suppose you were invited to
serve as a volunteer church
leader, what information would
you need to make your
decision?
Anything else? What would you
need from the pastor or church
staff?
2
Motivation,
Values
Alignment,
Trust, People
Centered

139
139
Leadership
18. What challenges or barriers
would you face in serving as a
volunteer church leader?
In what ways can your church
help you solve those barriers? 1, 2
Opportunity,
People
Centered
Leadership
19. What would you need from
your church to be a volunteer
church leader?
2
People
Centered
Leadership,
Self-Efficacy
20. What would make you feel
confident to serve as a volunteer
church leader?
2 Self-Efficacy
21. What would motivate you to
serve as a volunteer team
leader?
2 Motivation
22. How would you go about
making the decision to accept
an invitation to be a volunteer
church leader?
How do your spiritual beliefs
play a role in that decision? 2
Motivation,
Spiritual
beliefs
Conclusion to the Interview:
Thank you so much for your time today. You have invested in research that contributes to
solving the shortage of volunteer leadership in the local church. Your insights and perspectives
are so valuable. If I have further questions that emerge, would you be willing for me to contact
you?
The research includes interviews with other people. I will be analyzing all the information from
the interviews. At no time will I share your name or the name of your church. Would you be
open to reviewing some or parts of the analysis so you can check that it accurately reflects what
we discussed in your interview?
Do you know anyone who might be willing to participate this research and be interviewed? They
need to attend a Christian church of 1,000 or more at least once a month in order to participate. If
so, can you put me in touch with that person?
Thank you again. Have a wonderful day.

140
140
Appendix B: Participant Recruitment Email to Pastors
Hi (pastor first name),
Hope you are well. I have reached the point in my doctoral work where I am looking for
participants for my research study. The purpose of the study is to discover what church members
know about volunteer church leadership and what motivates them to serve as volunteer church
leaders.
Would you be willing to send the following email to 3 or more people you know who meet these
criteria?
• Attend a Christian church with over 1,000 total people at the weekend worship service(s).
• Have attended that church for at least 2 years.
• Attend worship service at least one time per month.
• Are not currently a volunteer church leader.
If you're game, this is the email to use. I really appreciate your help. Let me know if you have
any questions.
You are invited to participate in a study focused on volunteer church leadership. The purpose of
this study is to discover what church members know about volunteer church leadership and what
motivates them to serve as volunteer church leaders. Your participation in this research is
completely voluntary and I will not know if you choose to participate in the study or not. The
study is being conducted by Dave Bushnell as part of his doctoral dissertation at the University
of Southern California. Participation in the research includes one confidential 60-minute
interview via Zoom with the researcher. If you are interested in participating in this study, are at
least 18, and attend our church at least monthly, please click to indicate your interest.

141
141
Appendix C: Information Sheet
University of Southern California Information Sheet
My name is David Bushnell, and I am a student at the University of Southern California. I also
hold a role as the founder of Mobilize Leadership, an organizational consulting practice with a
primary focus on churches and non-profits.
I am conducting a research study on the shortage of volunteer church leaders. The name of this
research study is “Toward A Surplus of Leaders: How Church Members Understand Volunteer
Church Leadership.” I am seeking your participation in this study.
Your participation is completely voluntary, and I will address your questions or concerns at any
point before or during the study.
You may be eligible to participate in this study if you meet the following criteria:
1. You attend a Christian church with at least 1,000 total people at weekly worship services.
2. You have attended that same church for at least two years.
3. You attend worship at that same church at least one time per month.
4. You are over 18 years old.
If you decide to participate in this study, you will be asked to do the following activities:
1. Participate in a 1:1 online interview over Zoom for 60 minutes.
I will publish the results in my doctoral dissertation. Participants will not be identified in the
results. I will take reasonable measures to protect the security of all your personal information.
All data will be de-identified prior to any publication or presentations. I may share your data, deidentified with other researchers in the future.
If you have any questions about this study, please contact me: dbushnel@usc.edu. If you have
any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the University of
Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email irb@usc.edu.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Local Christian churches in the United States face a shortage of volunteer leaders resulting in low congregational engagement which limits church ability to contribute to society. The purpose of this study is to discover Christian church member understanding of volunteer church leadership and what contributes to their decision to serve as a volunteer church leader. This study used semi-structured interviews with 13 participants from seven churches each with over 1,000 congregants in total weekend worship attendance. The study concludes that church member understanding is inconsistent. Participants concurrently hold two to five of nine distinct understandings observed in the data. Barriers to volunteer church leadership were evident and participants described systems and norms that uphold the barriers. This study recommends a clear definition of volunteer church leadership. Based on the findings, components for volunteer leadership role clarity and invitations are offered to tackle barriers and move toward a surplus of volunteer church leaders.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Gender role beliefs of male senior leaders in retail and the impact on women’s advancement

PDF

Toxic leadership and U.S. Army special forces: a qualitative, phenomenological Study

PDF

Women in information technology senior leadership: incremental progress and continuing challenges

PDF

Women Chief Information Officers (CIOs): how did they make it?

PDF

Their voices: middle school girls of color and their perceptions of themselves as leaders

PDF

Stories of persistence: illuminating the experiences of California Latina K–12 leaders: a retention and career development model

PDF

An improvement study of leading a sustainable electric utility future through organizational change effectiveness

PDF

Adaptive leadership: a proactive approach to anticipating, identifying, and addressing external threats

PDF

Unpredicted but not unexpected: developing prepared health and human services crisis leaders

PDF

Understanding queer leadership in corporate America

PDF

Leadership matters: the role of urban school principals as transformational leaders in influencing parent engagement to disrupt educational inequities

PDF

Navigational leadership - a robust framework for leading in dynamic conditions

PDF

The art of leadership: investigating the decision-making process of how charter school leaders utilize the arts

PDF

The lack of Black women in higher education executive leadership in four-year colleges and universities

PDF

School district leadership and the motherhood penalty

PDF

Leadership development in a multigenerational workforce: a qualitative study

PDF

Understanding burnout in non-denominational clergy: a social cognitive approach

PDF

How a leader's behaviors mitigate barriers encountered during lean implementation in administrative areas: a phenomenological study

PDF

Understand how leaders use data to measure the effectiveness of leadership development programs

PDF

A research study of employee perceptions on identifying phishing attacks in financial organizations

Asset Metadata

Creator Bushnell, David (author)

Core Title Toward a surplus of leaders: how church members understand volunteer church leadership

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 02/28/2025

Defense Date 02/12/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Church,church member,church staff,non-profit,non-profit leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational leadership,Pastor,volunteer leadership,volunteer motivation,volunteerism

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Ott, Maria (committee chair), Muraszewski, Alison (committee member), Picus, Lawrence (committee member)

Creator Email bushnell.dave@gmail.com,dbushnel@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113842371

Unique identifier UC113842371

Identifier etd-BushnellDa-12677.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-BushnellDa-12677

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Bushnell, David

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240304-usctheses-batch-1127 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu