University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Centering underrepresented voices: the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector

(USC Thesis Other)

Centering underrepresented voices: the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Centering Underrepresented Voices: The Underrepresentation of BIPOC Professionals in
the Nonprofit Sector

Jolie Laurent Mason

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 2023

© Copyright by Jolie Laurent Mason 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Jolie Laurent Mason certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Esther C. Kim
Daniel Chatham
Alan G. Green, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This study applied Bandura’s model of reciprocal determinism through social cognitive theory to
examine the bidirectional triadic relationships between personal, behavioral, and environmental
factors that impact the underrepresentation of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of
color (BIPOC) professionals in the nonprofit sector. Additionally, a critical race theory lens
examined how White dominant culture holds the standard for the systems of power that influence
norms, attitudes, and practices within the nonprofit sector. The goals of the study aimed to
identify barriers to implementing BIPOC leadership development programs, provide insight into
the current leadership development practices on the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals,
and suggest possible solutions for eliminating barriers and improving the leadership trajectory
for nonprofit professionals. A qualitative research approach used semi-structured interviews to
address the problem of practice. An open and axial coding process guided a thematic analysis
using responses from open-ended. The interview participants’ experiences and opinions from
their leadership journeys helped construct the recommendations. The results show the barriers to
effective leadership development and the components that influence career trajectory for BIPOC
professionals in the nonprofit sector. The suggested recommendations include: utilize an
integrated leadership development system to design BIPOC-centered mentoring and coaching
opportunities; implement experience-based learning opportunities for emerging nonprofit
leaders; ensure equitable access to funding and opportunities and practices; and foster a
commitment to collective leadership for change. The integrated leadership development system
and collective leadership framework will address the underrepresentation of BIPOC
professionals and build strong collaborations among nonprofit leaders, organizations, and
funding institutions.

v
Dedication
To the 16 participants in my research, I dedicate this dissertation to you. Thank you for sharing
your experiences, insights, and opinions with me. Your voices are being heard! I am eternally
grateful for your contributions to this study and the impact you will continue to make in the
nonprofit sector.

To the researchers, scholars, and educators who inspired me with your research, knowledge, and
expertise, thank you for contributing to this study and the nonprofit sector. The nonprofit sector
is shifting to include more diverse leadership representation. Your research helped us understand
the barriers many leaders continue to face.

To future researchers, scholars, and educators, I hope this study and previous studies motivate
you to continue centering underrepresented voices while contributing to this field of study. Our
collective commitment to change must empower and support Black people, Indigenous people,
and people of color (BIPOC) nonprofit leaders who work within community-based organizations
addressing and dismantling harmful systems and structures affecting marginalized groups and
communities.

vi
Acknowledgments
I want to acknowledge my dissertation committee, Dr. Alan Green (chair), Dr. Esther
Kim, and Dr. Daniel Chatham. Thank you for providing feedback, guidance, and encouragement
throughout my doctoral journey. I am grateful for your commitment to getting me to the finish
line. To Dr. Erin O’Connor Marsano, thank you for your feedback, coaching, and support that
helped me become a better writer. To Dr. Marc Pritchard, thank you for the meetings that helped
me understand conceptual frameworks. To Dr. Leslie Tresun, thank you for your ongoing
support and thought partnership as an expert in the nonprofit sector.
Thank you to my entire family and dear friends for creating space so I could focus on my
dissertation. A special thank you to my amazing spouse, Daniel Mason, for your patience and
love.
Thank you to OCL cohort 18. I could not have gotten through this process without your
support. I am grateful for the life-long friendships we created during this transformational
journey together.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 2
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 3
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 4
Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 4
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 5
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 6
Historical Context of the Nonprofit Sector ......................................................................... 6
Current Trends in Nonprofit Leadership ............................................................................. 9
Leadership Development Programs .................................................................................. 15
Underrepresentation of BIPOC Leadership ...................................................................... 27
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 35
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 38
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 39
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 39
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 39
Research Setting ................................................................................................................ 40
The Researcher .................................................................................................................. 41

viii
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 42
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 46
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 47
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 49
Overview of Interview Participants .................................................................................. 49
Research Question 1: What Barriers Do Nonprofits Face in Implementing
Successful Leadership Development Programs? .............................................................. 52
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 63
Research Question 2: What Impact Do Leadership Development Programs Have
on the Career Opportunities for Nonprofit BIPOC Professionals? ................................... 64
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 78
Other Findings: Motivation Through Complex Work ...................................................... 79
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 80
Chapter Five: Recommendations .................................................................................................. 82
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 83
Shifting the Nonprofit Sector ............................................................................................ 89
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 90
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 102
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 103
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 105
References ................................................................................................................................... 106
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 132

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Demographics of Interview Participants ..........................................................................51
Table A1: Interview Questions .....................................................................................................133

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: The Reciprocal Determinism Related to Leadership .................................................... 37
Development in the Nonprofit Sector

Figure 2: Emerging Themes From Research Question 1 .............................................................. 64

Figure 3: Emerging Themes From Research Question 2 .............................................................. 79

Figure 4: Applying The New World Kirkpatrick Model to .......................................................... 96
Achieve Experience-Based Learning

Figure 5: Applying Collective Leadership to Enact Effective Change ....................................... 102
Within Community-Based Nonprofits

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Nonprofit organizations lack effective leadership development programs leading to the
underrepresentation of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of color (BIPOC)
professionals in leadership roles. There are currently 1.4 million nonprofits classified as
501(c)(3) tax-exempt entities in the United States (Cause IQ, 2020). The leadership of these
organizations is 87% White (Independent Sector, 2021; Boardsource, 2021) while BIPOC
individuals only make up 30% of the overall nonprofit workforce from entry-level to leadership
positions (Independent Sector, 2021), demonstrating the problem. Further, nonprofit funding
institutions like foundations are overrepresented in White leadership, with CEOs at 91%,
executive staff at 82%, and program officers at 67% (D5 Coalition, 2016).
While initiatives focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion are gaining momentum
within the sector, evidence shows a lag in progress for supporting and developing BIPOC
professionals into leadership positions (Adesaogun et al., 2015). Evidence shows that racial bias
and negative stereotypes have created barriers to BIPOC leadership advancement in the nonprofit
sector (Biu, 2019). According to Velasco and Sansone (2019), some racial barriers and negative
stereotypes result partly from fear that embracing BIPOC leadership and diverse perspectives,
ideas, and contributions leads to a loss of power for White professionals (Velasco & Sansone,
2019).
The literature shows little evidence of the experiences and outcomes of leadership
development for BIPOC professionals. According to Ospina (2018), this is due to scholars
overlooking the collective experiences of BIPOC leaders and resorting to White dominant
culture as the standard to measure leadership development. This complex problem is best suited
for exploration through Bandura’s bidirectional, triadic model of reciprocal determinism between

2

the personal, behavioral, and environmental factors (Bandura, 1989) that impact leadership
development. Additionally, the study will use a critical race theory lens to inform analysis of the
problem of how White dominant culture holds the standard for norms, attitudes, and ideologies
leading to privilege, power, and control over leadership development (Gillborn, 2015; Ospina &
Foldy, 2009). Critical race theory is an examination of existing racial disparities despite the
assertions that America is a colorblind race-neutral society and identifying what hinders or helps
to dismantle harmful systems that maintain the status quo (Martinez, 2014).
Background of the Problem
The nonprofit sector is underrepresented in BIPOC leadership. Homogeneous leadership
structures perpetuated by White dominant cultural norms contribute to barriers for BIPOC
professionals (Dorsey et al., 2020). Barriers to effective leadership development programs
include funding deficits, racial bias, and insufficient training. Overall funding for BIPOC-led
organizations is 24% less than for White-led organizations and 76% less in unrestricted funding
(Dorsey et al., 2020). Additionally, a study by Battalia Winston (2017) presented an example of
racial bias, revealing that 75% of White professionals do not have BIPOC professionals in their
networks, preventing diversity in recruitment strategies and referrals. Further, less than 50% of
nonprofits have access to training development, and training is limited to workshops and other
short-term options rather than longer-term programs such as mentoring and coaching and formal
leadership training programs, which causes barriers to effective leadership development
opportunities (Sargeant & Day, 2018).
Purpose of the Study
The study aimed to identify the barriers to effective leadership development programs
and how those barriers lead to the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit

3

sector. The study identified barriers to implementing leadership development programs, provided
insight into the impact of current leadership development practices on the underrepresentation of
BIPOC professionals, and suggested possible solutions for eliminating barriers and improving
the leadership trajectory for nonprofit BIPOC professionals. The following two research
questions guided the study:
1. What barriers do nonprofits face in implementing successful leadership development
programs?
2. What impact do leadership development programs have on the career opportunities
for nonprofit BIPOC professionals?
Significance of the Study
The nonprofit landscape is seeing a shift from homogeneous to heterogeneous leadership
structures. While underrepresentation of BIPOC leadership exists, the evidence shows increased
BIPOC-led organizations in the sector (Building Movement Project, 2021). Progress to
heterogeneity is slow, and BIPOC professionals are finding themselves in challenging positions
lacking support for their growth as leaders (Danley & Blessett, 2022). For example, BIPOC-led
nonprofit organizations struggle to compete for the same access that their White counterparts
have to professional networks and funding opportunities (Wallace, 2019b). This study was
important because the findings could lead to improved practices in implementing leadership
development programs and addressing the underrepresentation of BIPOC leaders in the nonprofit
sector. As a result, the study provided insight into White dominant culture practices and into
strategies for dismantling barriers to leadership development opportunities.

4

Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The study applied Bandura’s model of reciprocal determinism (1989). The bidirectional,
triadic model examined the relationship between social cognitive theory’s personal, behavioral,
and environmental factors through reciprocal determinism (Bandura, 1989). Reciprocal
determinism was appropriate for the study because it focused on an individual’s cognitive
process, choices and actions, and the learning environment contributing to their development
(Schunk & Usher, 2019). Critical race theory informed the study using a lens of society’s
relationship to race, racism, and power within institutions and structures (Martinez, 2014). The
study drew from the concept that White dominant culture holds the standard for norms, attitudes,
and ideologies leading to privilege, power, and control over leadership development (Gillborn,
2015; Ospina & Foldy, 2009).
The study involved a qualitative research method using semi-structured interviews. The
interview protocol contained 12 open-ended questions. The target population was leaders,
including executive directors, vice presidents, directors, and managers. Data analysis was
conducted by implementing coding, data review, and theme identification methods.
Definitions
The following list is relevant terms used throughout the study and definitions.
• BIPOC is an acronym that stands for marginalized groups, specifically Black people,
Indigenous people, and people of color (Garcia, 2020).
• Diversity is the differences among humans shaped through their intersecting identities
and perspectives (National Institute of Health, 2017).
• Equity is the value of dismantling unfair and unjust systems and structures (Fund the
People, 2017).

5

• Inclusion recognizes, invites, and embraces the experiences, backgrounds, beliefs, and
contributions each individual brings to a group (National Institute of Health, 2017).
• White dominant culture refers to societal norms perpetuated by White people of their
beliefs, values, and systems (National Museum of African American History &
Culture, 2022).
Organization of the Study
The dissertation contains five chapters. An overview of the problem of practice, the
purpose of the study, research questions, and methodology was provided in Chapter One.
Chapter Two outlines relevant research examining ineffective leadership development programs
in the nonprofit sector and the impact on the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals.
Chapter Three connects the methodology and data analysis to the problem of practice based on
the literature review. Chapter Four presents the findings and data analysis from the semi-
structured interviews. Chapter Five is the concluding chapter with a discussion of the findings
and suggested recommendations for the problem of practice and future research considerations to
support the leadership trajectory of BIPOC professionals working in the nonprofit sector.

6

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This literature review will examine the factors associated with leadership development in
the nonprofit sector. This section begins with the historical context of the evolution and current
landscape of the nonprofit sector. The literature review will then discuss relevant research and
studies related to nonprofit leadership development and the underrepresentation of Black people,
Indigenous people, and people of color (BIPOC) in the nonprofit sector. The review continues by
introducing the conceptual framework using Bandura’s social cognitive theory of reciprocal
determinism to examine the individual factors, critical behaviors, and environmental factors of
the learning environment, informed by a critical race theory lens. The literature review will
conclude with a summary of important points that inform the study.
Historical Context of the Nonprofit Sector
Nonprofit organizations are tax-exempt entities that exist to support and advocate for
social causes for public benefit without generating a profit (Foundation List, 2021). During the
late 1800s to early 1900s, the nonprofit sector was initially categorized as charitable and
voluntary organizations designed to bridge the gap between government services and societal
needs (Arnsbeger et al., 2008). The sector started as voluntary and has evolved in response to the
pressures of becoming business-like entities (Patton et al., 2007; Stewart & Kuenzi, 2018).
The laws of the 19th century established the distinction between nonprofit organizations
and private foundations (Arnsberger et al., 2008). The Tax Reform Act of 1969 divided public
charities and private foundations by establishing tax-exempt statuses through the 501(c)
designation (White, 2017). The 501(c) is an Internal Revenue Service Code delineation that
outlines descriptions and activities of tax-exempt organizations (Nonprofit Hub, n.d.). Heckler

7

(2019) argues that nonprofit leadership systems were historically rooted in Whiteness,
masculinity, control, and power.
Racism in Philanthropy
The 19th-century establishment of charitable organizations helped White and wealthy
men, like pioneers of philanthropy Andrew Carnegie, Russel Sage, and John D. Rockefeller,
bypass significant tax liabilities for themselves and future generations (INCITE! 2017).
Principles of racism and power influenced the development of specific nonprofit organizations
(INCITE! 2017). An example was Rockefeller’s philanthropic support, through his General
Education Board, for educating Black students in the South on a condition that segregation
remained active (Sawaya, 2011). Additionally, when enslaved Black communities were freed
following the adoption of the 13th amendment in 1865, White philanthropists funded segregated
education in the postbellum South, which in turn allowed White capitalist endeavors to control
the economy and conditions similar to the antebellum South by intentionally under-educating the
Black population (James-Galloway, 2019). Further, during the civil rights movement, the Ford
Foundation funded education reform through the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People (NAACP) to shift the focus away from racial issues that exposed various forms
of overt and systemic racism (Wimpee, 2022). Systemic racism in the nonprofit sector is
perceived to currently exist through the Nonprofit Industrial Complex, the collective control by
the government, wealthy elite, nonprofits, foundations, and other businesses that mask their
efforts to dismantle social justice initiatives (INCITE, 2017) through placing temporary band-
aids on societal problems such as homelessness, violence, and education (West, 2018).
Gladden and Levine (2021) describe systemic racism metaphorically as similar to the
plantation mentality in the south when enslaved people depended on plantation owners for their

8

basic needs. For example, nonprofits are highly dependent on and compete for funding from
White-dominated philanthropic organizations that control funds and determine the needs and
worth of nonprofits serving marginalized communities (Gladden & Levine, 2021). However,
evidence shows modern and progressive nonprofit organizations are moving away from formal,
standardized systems and embarking on operations like a sociocratic model with shared decision-
making, inclusive environments, and inviting community partners and allies to participate in
equitable processes (Haber, 2019).
Current Landscape of the Nonprofit Sector
Religious organizations, schools, and foundations account for 40% of nonprofit
organizations in the United States (Cause IQ, 2020). Nonprofit organizations registered with the
Internal Revenue Service increased by 21.42% from 2019 to 2020, from 1.5 million to 1.7
million nationally (National Center for Charitable Statistics, 2020; Koob, 2020). Faulk et al.
(2021) casted a wide net, examining nonprofit trends for 5 years from 2015 to 2020, including an
evaluation examining the impact of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Twenty-twenty impacted many nonprofit organizations because of the COVID-19
pandemic, and due to new laws, the IRS increased corporate charity contributions from 10% to
25%, encouraging corporations to support charitable giving in 2021 (Lough, 2021). During the
first 2 years of the pandemic, the nonprofit sector sustained a hard hit, with reduced revenues
from public and private sources resulting in workforce reductions and service delivery
modifications, coupled with the need to move programming to virtual platforms to accommodate
social distancing (Stewart et al., 2021). Faulk et al.’s (2021) findings from a 5-year study
indicated three critical change areas from 2015 to 2020 exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic
that impacted BIPOC leadership development. Nonprofits serve mainly in low-income BIPOC

9

communities, and these communities lack diversity and are grossly underrepresented with
BIPOC leadership at the board and staffing level. Additionally, nonprofits saw growth in
donations from 2015 to 2019. However, BIPOC-led organizations experienced smaller
incremental increases than White-led organizations, but the COVID-19 leveled the disparities by
reducing donations across the board. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic brought significant
setbacks to organizations by losing donation support, inability to provide services, and loss of
staff (Faulk et al., 2021). The pandemic put a strain on the sector, and there is an urgent need for
leadership development and commitment as looming leadership deficits will be impacted by the
last 3 years’ events (Kuenzi et al., 2021).
While leadership deficits include the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in
nonprofit organizations, the sector is experiencing a transition with increased BIPOC-led
organizations (Building Movement Project, 2021). White people are still overrepresented in the
sector; BIPOC professionals account for 10% of nonprofit leadership staff, and 37% of nonprofit
organizations do not have any BIPOC staff (Faulk et al., 2021). However, heterogenous
workplaces, changes in demographics and multiple generations in the workforce are trending in
the sector (Bauer et al., 2020).
Current Trends in Nonprofit Leadership
The nonprofit sector continues to evolve by prioritizing generational shifts in leadership,
supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and developing succession plans. Baby
boomers are retiring from the sector (Morris & Austin, 2014; Norris-Terrell et al., 2018; Stewart
& Kuenzi, 2018), and the focus is on millennials pivoting nonprofits to reimagine donor
relations, organizational outcomes and workplace cultures while preparing for succession
planning (Behrens et al., 2021). Foundations are paying more attention to racial justice by

10

collecting data, like demographic information of organizations, and allocating funding to DEI
initiatives (Behrens et al., 2021). This section will examine the literature on the emerging
generational shift in leadership, DEI in the sector, and the urgent need for succession planning.
Generational Shifts
Millennials occupy more space in the nonprofit sector as employees, donors, and
volunteers. In 2017, millennials made up 38% of the nonprofit sector workforce (Thomas-
Breitfeld & Kunreuther, 2017). An increase in millennial leadership is expected since this
generation is intrinsically motivated by meaningful work (McGinnis Johnson & Ng, 2016).
Retaining the millennial generation of emerging leaders will rely heavily on pay equity, access to
leadership development programs, and inclusive work environments (McGinnis Johnson & Ng,
2016). A study by Gorczyca and Hartman (2017) of 141 participants found a strong connection
between millennials’ altruistic attitude towards charitable organizations and wanting to serve in
various roles. According to Saratovsky and Feldman (2013), organizations have started
embracing millennials and their contributions to the sector. Millennials bring the skills, abilities,
and strategies to improve organizational performance by establishing meaningful relationships
with donors, utilizing technology and social media platforms for strengthening marketing
strategies, as well as strong interest in leadership development, and drive to foster workspaces of
diversity, equity, and inclusion (Saratovsky & Feldman, 2013).
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives play a significant role in leadership
development, especially for emerging BIPOC leaders (Nickels & Leach, 2021). Diversity only
focuses on statistical documentation for race, ethnicity, and gender, but including equitable and
inclusive environments requires further focus on values, norms, perspectives, and lived

11

experiences that nurture progressive cultures (Nickels & Leach, 2021; Whitaker Calloway,
2020). Fortunately, many organizations recognize the overall benefits of progressive cultures
through developing diverse leadership while cultivating meaningful relationships, and ensuring
employees feel valued and respected regardless of their role (Ely & Thomas, 2020).
Developing diverse leadership leads to increased opportunities to build resourceful
networks, enhanced problem-solving capabilities, and improved leadership trajectory for BIPOC
professionals. Evidence shows that diverse leadership in the nonprofit sector is beneficial to
bridging gaps in communities and forging stronger relationships when serving marginalized
groups (Gelles et al., 2009). Gelles et al. (2009) conducted a 6-year pilot study and follow-up
evaluation to examine diverse leadership development effectiveness and its link to increased
problem-solving techniques, community programs, and community collaboration. The study
consisted of 123 emerging BIPOC leaders who worked for nonprofits in communities of color.
After the 6 years, the Gelles et al. (2009) evaluation indicated that developing diverse leaders led
to increased opportunities for future BIPOC leaders, access to professional networks, community
collaboration among ethnic and racial groups, and social capital through collective leadership
activities. Additionally, research shows that diverse organizational leadership fosters better
experiences for emerging BIPOC leaders through equitable and inclusive practices and
environments (Beasley, 2017).
Equitable and inclusive environments support pipelines to leadership through mentoring
and coaching programs and leadership development opportunities, and help promote
organizational cultures that embrace lived experiences and differing perspectives (Whitaker
Calloway, 2020). A study by Brimhall (2019) surveyed and interviewed 21 workgroups about
their employment within inclusive organizations. Over 90% of respondents felt that

12

environments that fostered heterogeneous leadership increased employee engagement,
organizational commitment, and overall job satisfaction (Brimhall, 2019).
Effective DEI initiatives can strengthen organizational cultures by fostering a shared
understanding that leadership journeys are not a one-size-fits-all approach and drive decision-
makers to prioritize the well-being and belonging of emerging leaders (V ogel & Erickson, 2021).
DEI initiatives have become popular among many philanthropic foundations. Supporting DEI
initiatives fosters diverse representation at the organizational and foundational levels (Clohesy et
al., 2019). Numerous foundations embrace DEI initiatives for grant-making and support
organizations that add DEI messages to their branding and programming (Clohesy et al., 2019).
While support and representation from governing boards and foundations are vital to
DEI, evidence shows these two areas need more attention. The D5 Coalition (2016) examined
impediments to DEI, and their results indicated challenges with obtaining governing boards’
support for DEI, which is usually the starting point to leading initiatives of change. While
organizations have put into motion the effort to increase DEI, the effort remains stagnant with
staffing at foundations. The D5 Coalition (2016) report mirrored similar overrepresentation
statistics as nonprofit organizations showing that foundation CEOs are 91% White, executive
staff are 82% White, and program officers are 67% White. The Council on Foundations (2020)
report indicated that BIPOC executives remain concerned with staffing data demographics at the
foundation level and how the wealth and power of White dominant culture contributes to
systemic racism among leaders within the philanthropic community.
Collaboration between the philanthropic and nonprofit communities is imperative to
dismantling White dominant culture and forging a shared understanding of DEI initiatives.
Critical race theory reminds us of America’s roots in racism and the importance of closely

13

examining the practices impacting diversity deficits across all institutions and the barriers in the
nonprofit sector (Emerson Feit et al., 2017). According to Pérez Huber and Solorzano (2015),
critical race theory provides a lens for assessing institutional environments for oppressive
policies and practices such as racial microaggressions that become part of the culture and prevent
progressive actions such as the development of DEI programs. Velasco and Sansone’s (2019)
literature review showed comparisons between mandatory diversity programs and inclusive
environments of shared decision-making. Mandatory diversity programs have led to DEI
apprehension and feelings of loss of power and exclusion by White professionals (Velasco &
Sansone, 2019). A strategy for alleviating these feelings included encouraging collective efforts
for DEI initiatives among minority and majority groups to ensure internal and external buy-in
from all organizational voices (Velasco & Sansone, 2019). This process involves examining
practices connected to those who occupy spaces as volunteers, board members, community
partners and allies, and philanthropic leaders (Whitaker Calloway, 2020). Haile (2020) suggests
instilling collaboration among multiple perspectives to establish DEI attitudes and norms within
organizations when building relationships with board members, donors, and funders. Succession
planning is an ideal time to consider racial equity issues internally, implement innovative
strategies by bringing in more perspectives to increase internal candidate pools and foster
organizational commitment (Greer & Virick, 2008).
Succession Planning
Succession planning is a comprehensive plan for leadership transition that includes an
external and internal environmental scan by assessing trends, soliciting community partner input,
and thoroughly reviewing programs and service delivery models (Reid et al., 2014). The need for
active succession planning has not always been a priority in the sector. For example, a survey by

14

Sargeant and Day (2018) of 1,141 nonprofit professionals revealed that 67% of nonprofit leaders
are planning to transition out of their roles within 5 years. However, only 23% of nonprofits
surveyed had an active succession plan. Effective succession planning prioritizes leadership
development training and forethought (Moreno & Girard, 2019).
Organizations can avoid untimely disruptions to their operations by considering
leadership development programs before a leader transitions out of an organization (Bozer et al.,
2015; Gothard & Austin, 2013; Ritchie, 2020). McKee and Froelich (2016) surveyed 242
nonprofit professionals, and 90% of respondents indicated that succession planning was essential
and a priority for the continuity of organizational operations. Additionally, 48% of respondents
agreed that succession planning is necessary for financial stability, and 49% preferred an internal
candidate as there is a higher probability of a smoother transition when a change in leadership
occurs (McKee & Froelich, 2016). Developing internal candidates as part of the succession
planning can lead to increased executive talent pools and retention, and minimizes turnover
(Norris-Terrell et al., 2018).
Developing internal candidates as part of succession planning can be an effective strategy
for nonprofit organizations (Nonprofit HR, 2016). A survey study by Bozer et al. (2015) of 54
nonprofit executive directors concluded a strong desire to support internal leadership
development to help alleviate transition disruption, increase morale, and retain staff. Strategies
for developing staff internally for succession planning could result in eliminating external
recruiting costs (Ali & Mehreen, 2019; Landles-Cobb et al., 2015). However, nonprofit leaders
reported that opportunities for internal leadership development programs have been scarce due to
a lack of funding and human capital (Bozer et al., 2015).

15

Developing internal leadership development programs early on can strengthen the
candidate pool and organizational commitment (Ritchie, 2020). Creating a timeline of potential
position transitions, identifying potential internal candidates to fill those roles, and planning for
developing the internal candidates is a starting point (Ritchie, 2020). Establishing a solid
succession plan requires nonprofit leaders to start the process early by identifying and preparing
high organizational performers to avoid abrupt leadership transitions with little planning (Cooper
et al., 2020). Maximizing efforts toward a solid succession plan includes collaborative
relationships between nonprofit executives, their boards, organizational leadership teams, and
funders (Landles-Cobb et al., 2015).
Failure to adopt succession planning as an organizational norm may lead to insufficient
planning and disruption (Cooper et al., 2020). A study by Li (2019) of 39 interviews of nonprofit
leaders indicated that in many cases, organizations are not ready to approach the complexities of
long-term succession planning. According to Li (2019), view the transition as instantaneous and
unnecessary to start well before a leader decides to transition. Gothard & Austin (2013) suggest
applying data prior to succession plan decision-making, such as an organizational assessment,
turnover and retention rates, and examining the percentages of BIPOC professionals in
leadership roles and their growth potential. Leadership development programs focusing on
strategies to align policies and procedures, organizational goals, activities, and intended
outcomes will likely result in a successful succession plan (Gothard & Austin, 2013).
Leadership Development Programs
Access to leadership development in the nonprofit sector remains a challenge. Hailey and
James (2004) suggest the long-standing challenge is due to little research on the unique needs of
nonprofit leadership development. Leadership development has historically focused on the

16

individual traits and practices of the for-profit sector, and the nonprofit sector adopted this as a
one-size-fits-all framework (Hailey & James, 2004).
Nonprofit leadership development tended to focus on the traits of leaders rather than the
skills, abilities, and psychological components needed to navigate complex internal and external
environments (Hailey & James, 2004; Patton et al., 2007). Leadership development programs are
generally one-size-fits-all curriculums that assume everyone is at the same starting point
(Andersson & Tengblad, 2016). This section explores the one-size-fits-all approach by looking at
the development and evolution of leadership theory, factors associated with leadership
development, the struggle between White dominant cultures, BIPOC leadership in the nonprofit
sector, and the gaps in the research.
Evolution of Leadership Development
Defining leadership development is complex (Benmira & Agboola, 2021; Van Seters &
Field, 1990). The origin of leadership theory and development comes from the notion that
leadership is an innate skill set of males (Horner, 1997). The timeline of leadership development
paints a picture of how leadership evolved from primitive to progressive.
Leadership development began as a very gendered and autocratic concept. The Great
Man Theory in the 1800s posited that leadership traits were not a result of training but simply
what males were born with or not (Benmira & Agboola, 2021). Leadership theory started as one-
dimensional, based on White males and their traits, and has become multifaceted (Van Seters and
Field, 1990). Prior to the 1950s, leadership identity portrayed the prototype of a White male
fraternity brother who came from a wealthy family and resembled a Eurocentric appearance
(Leonard, 2003). The central leadership model was hierarchical and authoritarian (Leonard,
2003). Trait theories in the 1930s argued that leaders could develop in more than one way, either

17

innate or learned through training (Benmira & Agboola, 2021). Behavioral theory followed trait
theory, which expanded on the notion that learned behavior was part of leadership development
(Benmira & Agboola, 2021). The 1960s brought situational and contingency theories which
explored how environments played a role in leadership behavior and adaptation (Benmira &
Agboola, 2021). The 1990’s trends involved transactional leadership and transformational
leadership. Transactional leadership is an exchange relationship where a leader makes an offer
for something in return, like a manager and subordinate relationship based on promotion for
reaching goals (Northouse, 2019).
In comparison to transactional leadership, transformational leadership is associated with
leaders who unselfishly focus on their followers’ needs by motivating and encouraging them to
become leaders themselves (Northouse, 2019). The 2000s brought new concepts of leadership
theories into practice, including, servant and collective leadership theories. Servant leadership
theory focuses on leaders putting their followers first while connecting with them to grow and
develop (Northouse, 2019). Collective leadership is an approach using the unique contributions
of individuals of a leadership team to inform decisions instead of hierarchical processes (Ospina,
2017). Collective leadership fosters a growth pipeline through a learning model designed to
enhance knowledge, skill, and meaning (Raelin, 2018).
Although there were trends toward servant and transformational leadership in the 1990s,
these two leadership styles remain dominant in the nonprofit culture and were introduced much
earlier than the 1990s. Robert K. Greenleaf (1977) introduced the concept of servant leadership
in the 1970s. Greenleaf (1977) defined servant leadership as focusing on and prioritizing the
needs of others over your own needs. Servant leadership relies on the leader’s ability to expose
the potential of and empower those they lead (Van Winkle et al., 2014).

18

A study by Van Winkle et al. (2014) surveyed 116 employees of businesses and various
industries and showed a direct link between servant leadership and employees’ psychological and
structural empowerment. Structural empowerment provides the information, resources, support,
and opportunities for achieving goals, and psychological empowerment provides intrinsic
motivation, self-efficacy, and determination for performance (Allen et al., 2018). According to
Allen et al. (2018), the relationships between structural and psychological empowerment can
enhance an employee’s organizational commitment.
James Macgregor Burns introduced the concept of transformational leadership in 1978.
Burns (1978) defined transformational leadership as the relationship between leaders and
followers, ensuring reciprocity of motivation and shared values, beliefs, and expectations of the
other. Transformational leadership relies on social capital to build relationships and improve
individual and group performance (Ghasabeh, 2021). A study by Valero et al. (2015) of 112
nonprofit organizations indicated a link between transformational leaders and building
organizational resilience. The association of transformational leadership and resiliency creates a
greater organizational commitment by nonprofit sector employees (Valero et al., 2015). Leaders
are more likely to maintain organizational commitment when professional development
opportunities align mutually with their personal, behavioral, and environmental factors (Otaye-
Ebede et al., 2019).
Factors Associated With Leadership Development
There are several factors associated with strong leadership development. These include
personal, behavioral, and environmental factors which are foundational to leadership
development (McCormick, 2001). These intersecting factors influence an individual’s self-
efficacy, actions, and behaviors, and determine how they experience interactions and develop in

19

a particular environment (McCormick, 2004). Personal, behavioral, and environmental factors
affect how an individual develops skills and abilities through their perceived self-efficacy,
applies critical behaviors, and are influenced by their organizational environment (Machida &
Schaubroeck, 2011).
Personal Factors
Personal factors that emerged through research were self-efficacy, knowledge, and
motivation. A leader’s self-efficacy develops from their perceived abilities to achieve a goal
(Ozyilmaz et al., 2018). A study by Djourova et al. (2020) of 225 social workers revealed self-
efficacy as a leading predictor of a leader’s abilities and their influence on others’ belief in their
abilities. A leader’s drive to act on perceived abilities is motivation which produces behaviors
towards approaching a task (Ross, 2014). The knowledge gained from performing a task helps in
building self-confidence, identifying critical behaviors, and transferring learned skills to
influence effective leadership (Feser et al., 2017). Self-efficacy, knowledge, and motivation drive
personal beliefs and attitudes towards the strategies and choices related to behavioral factors
(Bracht et al., 2021).
Behavioral Factors
Behavioral factors that sustain competencies, such as implementing strategies and
choices, develop during experience-based learning (Caniglia et al., 2016). Experience-based
learning is ideal for emerging leaders as an opportunity to engage in the work while receiving
feedback, refining approaches to problem-solving, and learning from failures and victories
(McCall, 2010). Experience-based learning works well when feedback, mentorship, and
coaching opportunities are accessible (Andersson & Tengblad, 2016). Organizations can
optimize experience-based learning opportunities by fostering environments for learning critical

20

behaviors and implementing feedback and support to enhance leadership skill sets (McCall,
2010).
A versatile skill set and the psychological capacity to make decisions and implement
critical behaviors are ideal traits of emerging leaders in the nonprofit sector (Patton et al., 2007).
Leadership development relies heavily on cognitive and behavioral aspects combined with skills
and knowledge through gaining experience, receiving feedback, and personal reflection (Hinck,
2017). A survey of 76 racially diverse women in the human service field showed evidence that
attitudes towards effective leadership development worked well when longer-term strategies
were in place (Hopkins et al., 2021). The strategies included mentoring and coaching, which
resulted in learned skills and behaviors associated with problem-solving, supporting performance
teams, and guiding implementation to action (Hopkins et al., 2021). According to Feser et al.
(2017), a survey of 510 executives showed that organizations needed to redesign cultures around
behaviors for ongoing leadership development beyond short programs and unorganized
strategies. Environmental factors can significantly influence organizational culture development
(Ozyilmaz et al., 2018).
Environmental Factors
Nonprofit environments play a role in their workforce’s attraction, development,
retention, and commitment (LeRoux & Feeney, 2013). A case study by Smoyer et al. (2021) of
semi-structured interviews of senior-level nonprofit leaders revealed that environments fostering
participation in designing strategies, enabling workforce autonomy, and collaboration to meet
organizational needs are more likely to have higher organizational commitment. Enhancing
leadership development requires learning environments that support access to education,
networking, mentoring, and training to produce positive cultures (Day et al., 2014). Cultivating

21

inclusive leadership learning environments means replacing command and control leadership
styles with workspaces aligned to foster belonging, purpose, and lived experiences (Llopis &
Eber, 2019). The intersection of attitudes, norms, leadership styles, and behavioral characteristics
shapes organizational culture (Akingbola et al., 2019). A study by Bielak et al. (2021) of
nonprofit funders revealed that funders are coming to the table with more awareness when
examining ways to better partner with and provide financial resources to nonprofit organizations,
especially BIPOC-led organizations, in achieving more inclusive organizational cultures.
Foundation grantmaking has historically allocated minuscule amounts toward nonprofit
leadership development (Jagpal & Schlegel, 2015). According to Jagpal and Schlegel (2015),
from 2003 to 2012, foundations contributed less than 1% in grantmaking to leadership
development. Responses from a survey of 1,141 nonprofit professionals revealed that the top
three categories of needs were leadership training, coaching and mentoring, and education
(Sargeant & Day, 2018). However, less than 50% of nonprofit professionals reported funding
allocations toward training, mentoring, coaching, and education for leadership development
(Sargeant & Day, 2018). A survey by Santora et al. (2010) showed that 60% of nonprofit leaders
had access to leadership development, but in the form of workshops, and less than 10% had
access to long-term development, like training programs and mentorships. In 2017, 80% of
nonprofit leaders reported facing obstacles in one or more elements of nonprofit leadership
management, and funding concerns were 50% of the cause (Meehan & Starkey, 2017). Securing
funding from grantmakers has been arduous, especially for BIPOC nonprofit leaders forced to
compete among White-led nonprofit organizations to receive funding from White-led
philanthropic organizations that dominate the sector’s decision on grantmaking (Danley &
Blesset, 2022).

22

White Dominant Culture
White dominant culture in the nonprofit sector presents a set of inequitable rules, norms,
practices, and organizational cultures that prevent BIPOC professionals from accessing
leadership development opportunities, roles, networks, and resources (Heckler, 2019). A case
study by Danley and Blesset (2022) informed by ethnographic interviews of a nonprofit
community examined the cycles of dominance and power used to perpetuate White dominant
culture through closed networks of White leaders. The interviews indicated negative feelings
towards the relationships White leaders in the community had with direct access to White-led
foundations that in turn had direct access to White political figures while excluding and
minimizing efforts and contributions of grassroots, BIPOC-led organizations serving
marginalized communities (Danley & Blesset, 2022). This hegemonic mindset obstructs the
opportunities for BIPOC leaders to participate in leadership development strategies and gain a
seat at the table when leadership transitions are approaching and other critical decision-making
matters (Smith, 2019).
White dominant culture impacts BIPOC leadership development in grantmaking
institutions and nonprofit organizations. A survey study of 215 Black philanthropic professionals
revealed that the number one reason they leave grantmaking institutions is a lack of opportunities
for growth, training, and development (Association of Black Foundation Executives, 2014). On
the nonprofit side, this impacts BIPOC-led organizations losing their BIPOC connections at
grantmaking institutions and having to assimilate to White dominant cultural norms to receive
funding from foundations that lack alignment with their organizational needs and begrudgingly
accept impractical funding guidelines to get a foot in the door (Price & Bhattacharya, 2021).

23

White dominant culture perpetrators have found covert ways to oppress BIPOC
professionals and hinder their leadership trajectory. An example is racial microaggressions in the
workspace by slighting an individual’s race, ethnicity, culture, or appearance to belittle their
identity because they do not fit the standard of White dominant cultural norms (DeCuir-Gunby &
Gunby, 2016). Another example is oppressive workplace norms or policies that engender identity
threats and force BIPOC professionals to adapt to White dominant cultural norms, like
preventing natural hairstyles or using stereotypical inferences to justify not promoting certain
ethnic groups (McCluney et al., 2021). Instead of countering these systemic inequities, BIPOC
professionals may assimilate to White dominant cultural norms as a survival tactic to prevent
obstacles to their leadership development (Haynes et al., 2016).
Survival tactics in a White dominant culture environment can lead to suppressed feelings
about racism, sexism, and stereotypes in exchange for leadership development opportunities for
BIPOC professionals (Dickens & Chavez, 2017). A study by Dickens and Chavez (2017) of 10
Black professional women explored the benefits and psychological costs of maintaining two
identities in the workspace to fit into the culture while aspiring to obtain leadership positions.
BIPOC professionals often toggle between representing their authentic social and cultural
identities in the workplace or conforming to White dominant cultural norms when interacting or
sharing their perspectives, which leads to inadequate research on BIPOC leadership development
experiences (Gündemir et al., 2017).
BIPOC Leadership Development
The literature shows little evidence of the experiences and outcomes of leadership
development for BIPOC professionals. According to a multi-year study by Ospina (2018), the
author posited that research on BIPOC leadership development has been lean because scholars

24

overlook the collective experiences of people of color and revert to White dominant culture as a
standard for leadership theories. Viewing leadership development through diverse perspectives,
identities, and lived experiences helps reveal more inclusive methodologies for leadership
development among BIPOC professionals (Ospina, 2018). Al Ariss et al. (2014) suggests that
researchers can better understand and support the leadership trajectory of BIPOC professionals
by adopting diverse perspectives on learning styles and applying them to methods and practices
for developing BIPOC professionals.
Adding an evaluation component to leadership development programs could provide
insight into implementing best practices for emerging BIPOC leaders and what influences their
career trajectory. When the Rockefeller Foundation, at the time dominated by White
professionals, launched leadership programs for BIPOC professionals in the 1970s, formal
evaluation of these programs was overlooked (Willie, 1984). However, Willie’s (1984) research
into the data years later consisted of a comparative analysis between Rockefeller’s program and
similar programs with evaluations. The analysis resulted in findings that BIPOC professionals
were more likely to obtain career advancement through leadership development from a formal
curriculum and access to resources, financial support, and opportunities for implementing
experienced-based learning.
Leadership development deficits for BIPOC professionals can begin before they hit the
workforce because the impediments are evident in educational systems centered on Whiteness
(Dugan & Leonette, 2021). Many college graduates need to come out of their educational
experience with the tools to lead and the ability to make complex decisions while navigating
organizational structures and managing employees (Calvin & Swayze, 2012). Establishing
pipelines to leadership development by ensuring BIPOC professionals have access to training,

25

mentorship, coaching, sponsorship programs, and opportunities to apply learning in the
workplace is pivotal to organizational success (Stewart, 2016).
Programs like the John Hopkins University Carey Business School’s Leadership
Development Program specifically focus on advancing the leadership skills of BIPOC
professionals (John Hopkins, 2022). The design of the specialized program combines courses for
building business acumen and the psychological component for developing as leaders while
considering the experiences of BIPOC professionals on a global scale (Calvin & Swayze, 2012).
Since the program’s inaugural class in the 1990s, 550 graduates have completed the program.
According to John Hopkins University, the program is the first established BIPOC-centered,
graduate-level program for leadership development (John Hopkins, 2022). Investing in
leadership development for BIPOC professionals results in better organizational outcomes.
When organizations allocate funding toward BIPOC leadership development, it can lead
to multi-perspective teams engaging in equitable decision-making and building capacity.
According to the Fulton et al. (2019) review of data from the National Study of Community
Organizing Organizations, the benefits of embracing BIPOC leadership in the nonprofit sector
challenge traditional methods. This is achieved by gaining innovative, alternative perspectives
for addressing complex issues marginalized communities face and forging relationships with
BIPOC community leaders and other organizations and associations. Innovative perspectives
contribute to raising capacity building of organizations through building up human, financial,
physical, and social capital as part of successful leadership development (Brown et al., 2016).
According to a study by Brown et al. (2016), 67% of interviewed nonprofit executives agreed
that building capital through training, education, and leadership development opportunities was a
vital components of successful capacity building.

26

According to Friedrich et al. (2009), implementing a collective leadership framework can
increase organizational capacity building and improve performance, communication,
commitment, and problem-solving strategies. Prioritizing leadership development as a sector-
wide initiative can be achieved collectively through a collaboration of nonprofit organizations,
leaders, and funders rather than individual organizations attempting to take this on separately
(Walk et al., 2020). Collective leadership fosters continuous learning environments by creating
space for unique strengths and contributions to help address problems in communities by
reframing discourse, viewing differences as opportunities, and using the human potential to
foster motivation (Sánchez et al., 2020). These attributes can positively impact leadership
development opportunities, particularly for BIPOC leaders in nonprofit organizations.
Gaps in the Research
The literature does not address the experiences of leadership development for BIPOC
professionals (Ospina, 2018). Additionally, the nonprofit sector focuses on diversity in
leadership, but there is a gap in research about BIPOC leadership outcomes within BIPOC-led
and managed nonprofits (LeRoux & Medina, 2023). According to Ospina (2018), the intersecting
identities, experiences, and stories of BIPOC professionals are critical to informing leadership
development practices.
The emphasis on BIPOC leadership development practices in the nonprofit sector was
designed to challenge and change behavior rather than examining the inequitable systems built
by White dominant culture (LeRoux & Medina, 2023). Challenging the existing conditions
requires engagement with BIPOC leaders and understanding how their backgrounds,
experiences, development, and perspectives shaped their leadership journeys (Biu, 2019). The
lack of research on nonprofit BIPOC leadership development experiences support efforts to

27

maintain underrepresentation and the status quo of White dominant cultural norms within the
nonprofit sector.
Underrepresentation of BIPOC Leadership
BIPOC leadership is significantly underrepresented in the nonprofit sector with nonprofit
executives at 87% White (Independent Sector, 2021). Evidence suggests this, in part, is due to
structural racism that has been historically embedded in systems and institutions to discriminate
against people of color by hindering access to employment, education, housing, voting, and other
opportunities (Wiecek & Hamilton, 2014). Akpapuna et al. (2020) suggests that confronting
structural racism and addressing underrepresentation through a multicultural lens entails
embracing unique cultures, lived experiences, and world views as significant contributors to
overall organizational development and achievement. This section will examine barriers related
to underrepresentation due to homogeneous leadership, racial biases, and practices in hiring and
retaining BIPOC workforces.
Homogeneous Leadership
Navigating homogeneous leadership structures is challenging for BIPOC professionals.
Interviews of 25 BIPOC nonprofit and foundation leaders working within homogeneous
structures revealed barriers that included BIPOC leaders purposely left out of meaningful
conversations and decision-making, being burdened with dismantling stereotypes and addressing
racial and ethnic biases, and relying on restricted funds from White-dominated foundations to
solve marginalized communities’ problems without their buy-in of where resources were
critically needed (Wallace, 2019b). BIPOC leaders were candid about their struggles navigating
predominantly White-led spaces (Wallace, 2019a). They suggested to emerging BIPOC leaders
to develop strategies to take advantage of opportunities to learn and grow and engage in

28

professional networks and mentorships to increase their chances of success (Wallace, 2019a).
This section will explore nonprofit BIPOC professionals’ barriers when navigating homogeneous
leadership structures. Lack of board diversity, racial bias and leadership prototypes, glass cliffs,
stereotype threat, and funding limitations may contribute to these barriers.
Lack of Board Diversity
Addressing the underrepresentation of BIPOC leadership must start at the board level
(Walker, 2019). Starting at the board level is essential since nonprofit boards oversee decisions
on selecting executive leadership and can promote or hinder equity through access to financial
and social capital resources that drive diversity efforts (Walker, 2019). According to a report by
Boardsource (2021), heterogeneous boards show more commitment to supporting organizational
DEI initiatives than homogeneous boards. The current nonprofit board landscape shows White
members make up 83% of board chairs and 78% of board member roles (BoardSource, 2021).
However, evidence shows that diverse nonprofit boards lead to better decision-making,
progressive organizational cultures (Buse et al., 2016), increased funding opportunities (Harris,
2014), and improved governance effectiveness and community partner engagement (Fredette &
Sessler Bernstein, 2019).
Buse et al. (2016) surveyed 1,456 nonprofit CEOs and found a link between diverse
boards and better organizational outcomes and improved cultures by implementing inclusive
policies and procedures. Fredette and Sessler Bernstein (2019) surveyed 247 nonprofit boards,
finding that board members feel that diversity offers unique perspectives and lived experiences
for improving governance and community partner engagement. Diverse boards bring advantages,
like increased community engagement, knowledge sharing of how to meet the needs of
marginalized populations, and securing varying resources benefitting organizational performance

29

(Koppolu et al., 2021). However, White dominant culture can influence racial bias leading to
homogeneous boards that lack members of color and are not representative of the communities
they serve (Leach & Crichlow, 2020).
Racial Bias and Leadership Prototype
Racial bias is a threat to BIPOC leaders, their workspaces, and opportunities for growth
(Norris & Gibbons, 2019). A report from Battalia Winston (2017) shows how racial bias and
inequitable practices perpetuate underrepresentation. According to Battalia Winston (2017), 75%
of White professionals lack BIPOC colleagues in their professional network. Homogeneous
networks could lead to racial bias in recruitment and hiring practices and employment referrals
further contributing to BIPOC leadership underrepresentation (Battalia Winston, 2017).
Leadership prototypes contribute to the underrepresentation of BIPOC leadership
(Rosette et al., 2008). According to Rosette et al. (2008), a leadership prototype is the beliefs and
characteristics of a leadership standard. According to four separate experimental studies
conducted by Rosette et al. (2008), 943 participants perceived White leader prototypes as ideal
and preferred over BIPOC leader prototypes. Dupree and Torrez (2021) completed three separate
experiments with participants given written information on potential candidates and having to
choose the best person for the role. The results of the experiments indicated that White
Americans are conditioned to choose a White male as a better fit for a high-ranking executive-
level role over a Black or Latinx person. However, evidence suggests that marginalized groups
like BIPOC professionals are chosen as scapegoats for leadership roles when inevitable failure or
precarious situations exist, known as the glass cliff (Reinwald et al., 2022).

30

Glass Cliff
The glass cliff originated as a gendered term for women in leadership and has evolved to
include marginalized populations, like BIPOC professionals (Reinwald et al., 2022). The glass
cliff is a term directed toward women hired or promoted to risky leadership roles with a high
probability of adverse outcomes (Ryan & Haslam, 2005). The glass cliff currently encompasses
racial and ethnic minorities, in addition to women, placed in roles with a high risk of failure or
little growth potential (Morgenroth et al., 2020) and sustains barriers to advancement through
racial bias, stereotype discrimination, and exclusion from networks (Cook & Glass, 2013).
BIPOC professionals will sometimes purposely take on a high-stakes role, knowing that
an organization is struggling with scarce resources, and use it as a potential promotion strategy
(Cook & Glass, 2013). A study by Glass and Cook (2020) used semi-structured interviews of 33
women and BIPOC professionals. The results indicated that taking on high-risk roles was used as
a mobility strategy to combat scrutiny, change leadership perceptions of their capabilities, and
negate negative stereotypes.
Stereotype Threat
BIPOC individuals often bear the burden of disproving the perceived stereotypes about
them (Davis & Silver, 2003). A survey of 4,385 participants found commonalities among BIPOC
women of all races and ethnicities confronted with workplace covert and overt negative
stereotypes (Biu, 2019). The psychological load imposed by stereotype threat can adversely
affect an individual and organization leading to loss of engagement, lack of achievement
motivation, and fear of failure (Casad & Bryant, 2016). Additionally, some BIPOC-led
organizations feel that inequitable funding decisions and limitations are often based on
stereotype threat (Biu, 2019), and lack of sector-wide funding transparency impedes the ability

31

for leaders to gain knowledge on how to develop their staff and organizations further (Building
Movement Project, 2021).
Funding Limitations
BIPOC-led organizations face funding limitations and stipulations and are less likely to
receive funding than their White counterparts (Nickels & Leach, 2021). Dorsey et al. (2020)
identified the obstacles to BIPOC leaders accessing funding, including lack of access to social
networks and relationships with White-led grantmaking institutions, homogeneous decision-
making power, and lack of cultural competency. Additionally, Dorsey et al. (2020) found the
disparities in funding to be significant. BIPOC-led organizations receive 24% less overall
funding and 76% less unrestricted funding than White-led organizations. Further, organizations
may tailor fundraisers to their White audiences, which excludes potential BIPOC donors (Daniel
et al., 2019).
BIPOC fundraisers may feel like outsiders and forced to assimilate into a White dominant
culture when approaching White, wealthy donors (Daniel et al., 2019). Further, more fundraising
tailored to potential BIPOC donors and access to funding for BIPOC-led organizations is vital to
communities serving marginalized populations, according to three interviews of executive
directors experiencing inequitable funding practices (Flores & Matkin, 2014). Inequitable
practices around funding will lead to challenges in the recruitment, retention, and commitment of
BIPOC professionals across the sector (Boyarski et al., 2018).
Recruitment, Retention, and Turnover
Exclusive recruitment strategies remain evident in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit HR
(2021a) revealed that 63% of 423 nonprofits surveyed did not have formal plans and strategies
for recruitment, retention, and optimizing employee performance. According to a report by

32

Schwartz et al. (2011), 71% of respondents surveyed indicated subtle ways in which employment
interview questions carried a tone lacking racial equality, where interviewers used racial
microaggressions or stereotypes to ask questions and engage in dialogue. Walker (2019) suggests
that organizations prepare their recruitment strategies to diversify leadership by defining
vocabulary around shared DEI terminology, confronting White dominant culture norms, and
fostering an inclusive environment for staff and board members.
BIPOC leadership is increasing in the nonprofit sector, but it comes with a lack of
support for mentorship, coaching, and professional development opportunities (Adesaogun et al.,
2015). A research study that interviewed 30 Black women leaders in the nonprofit sector
revealed feelings that diversity and inclusion were entirely separate in the sector (Adesaogun et
al., 2015). The study participants felt that organizations’ intentions were misleading, and the
focus was on diverse hires and not inclusive environments (Adesaogun et al., 2015). Another
study highlighting the career stories of 25 nonprofit and foundation leaders also identified
common themes of the burdens on BIPOC professionals (Gasman et al., 2011). The burdens
included working twice as hard, putting in longer hours than their White counterparts, and
seeking ways to develop skills and abilities without access to professional development
opportunities and funding support while feeling forced to conform to the White dominant culture
(Gasman et al., 2011). These factors contribute to the turnover of BIPOC professionals in the
nonprofit sector.
Nonprofit HR (2019) reported that the national average for nonprofit sector turnover was
21%. A survey by Nonprofit HR (2021b) indicated that of the 500 respondents, 80% of
nonprofits did not have a retention plan when resignations started rapidly increasing during the
COVID-19 pandemic. A leading cause for turnover across all mission types of nonprofits is a

33

lack of training and development (Slatten et al., 2021). Turnover can present costly and
disruptive issues (Kim et al., 2018). A survey of over 500 nonprofit organizations indicated that
their challenges with retention are highest with women, 30%, and Black/African American
professionals, 23% (Nonprofit HR, 2021b). Threats to turnover, like the COVID-19 pandemic,
required many nonprofit organizations to reassess their workforce due to losing 30% of their
funding and needing to halt raises and other merit increases (Anderson, 2021).
According to Dorsey et al. (2020), funding inequities will continue to contribute to
BIPOC professionals leaving their organizations or the sector altogether. Compensation and
other extrinsic rewards are not the primary reason for nonprofit sector turnover but play a
significant role. Nonprofit sector wages have been historically low, staff often feel overworked,
and little attention is given to the leadership development needs of frontline staff (Anderson,
2021). The nonprofit sector struggles with providing extrinsic rewards due to a lack of financial
resources, sector competition for funding, and failing to prioritize where resources are needed
most (Stater & Stater, 2019). A survey of approximately 2,500 nonprofit professionals indicated
that in addition to extrinsic rewards, nonprofit sector employees consider the levels of social
interaction with supervisors, stress and burnout due to unrealistic workloads, and overall job
satisfaction as key indicators for turnover intention (Stater & Stater, 2019). Autonomy and
feeling valued were high indicators of job satisfaction for 196 full-time nonprofit employees
surveyed about turnover intention (Knapp et al., 2017). While flat hierarchical structures are
common in the nonprofit sector, survey data from 1,037 managers showed that they are less
likely to have high turnover intention when there is transparency, role clarity, a sense of
direction, and career opportunities (Lee, 2016).

34

Investment in Workforce
Nonprofit CEOs and executives sometimes withhold allocating funds to leadership
development programs for fear of turnover (Landles-Cobb et al., 2015). Conversely, the data
shows that when employees feel supported with access to growth and leadership opportunities,
their organizational commitment increases (Landles-Cobb et al., 2015). Investments in workforce
development work well when thoughtful and equitable programs are designed to enhance skills
and abilities, which improves organizational performance at all levels (Fund the People, 2017)
and not just at the executive level (D5 Coalition, 2016). Foundations, other funding institutions,
and nonprofits can work together to reimagine grantmaking to include these strategies in their
current and future initiatives (Fund the People, 2017).
Leadership development is critical for nonprofit organizations to enhance their
workforce’s skills for overseeing essential business functions such as financial practices, human
resources, service delivery, and performance accountability (Lee & Suh, 2018). A study by
Fulton et al. (2019) of 41 nonprofit organizations indicated that organizational commitment was
higher among BIPOC individuals when organizations acknowledged racial inequities exist in the
sector and obstruction of leadership development was partly due to White-dominated
professional networks, board of directors, and social circles. Flores and Matkin (2014) suggest
that investing in nonprofit BIPOC leadership development should include organizations
establishing a path of access to mentors and coaches, professional networks, and relationships in
the community while supporting individual cultural differences and embracing unique lived
experiences.

35

Conceptual Framework
This study will apply Bandura’s model of reciprocal determinism. The bidirectional,
triadic model examines how people are shaped by their environment and how an individual’s
contributions influence their relationship to the interrelated factors (Wood & Bandura, 1989).
Reciprocal determinism is rooted in social cognitive theory by the continuous interaction
between behavioral, environmental, and personal factors (Bandura, 1989). Critical race theory
will inform the study by examining society’s relationship to race, racism, and power within
institutions and structures (Martinez, 2014), and their impacts on leadership development for
BIPOC professionals. The study will draw from the concept that White dominant culture holds
the standard for norms, attitudes, and ideologies leading to privilege, power, and control over
leadership development (Gillborn, 2015; Ospina & Foldy, 2009).
Reciprocal determinism is the appropriate conceptual framework for this study to
examine leadership development. The following are two examples of how reciprocal
determinism influences leadership development in an organization. An individual builds self-
efficacy through motivation and gaining knowledge (self-confidence), which influences
strategies, actions, choices, and practices (experience-based learning), which then drives the
behaviors to build skill, mastery, and activities related to the social environment to foster
development through training, better career options, and cultures of success (leadership
development; Bandura, 1989). Another example is environmental conditions will vary
(organizational cultures), and self-regulation behaviors will determine how an individual
responds to a particular situation within an environment (choices and actions), which is
determined by their beliefs and effort (self-efficacy) in the environment (Bandura, 1978).

36

Personal Factors
Personal factors are influenced by values and beliefs, procedural and conceptual
knowledge, and abilities (Schunk and Usher, 2019). The cognitive process that determines self-
efficacy drives an individual to gain knowledge and motivation to perform tasks (Schunk &
Usher, 2019). Knowledge is knowing how to do something, and motivation is the desire to do it
(Elliot et al., 2017). Higher self-efficacy will result in taking on more complex tasks and
challenges, and lower self-efficacy will create stress and delay the progress of a task (Eun, 2019).
Behavioral Factors
Behavioral factors are influenced by choices, actions, practices, and skills (Schunk &
Usher, 2019). Opportunities for experience-based and observational learning lead to enhanced
skills, choices, and actions directed at achieving outcomes (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Perceived
self-efficacy influences behaviors, which indicate an individual’s skills, choices, and actions
(Eun, 2019).
Environmental Factors
Environmental factors are influenced by feedback, opportunities for development, and
organizational culture (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Depending on personal and behavioral factors,
environmental factors can affect an individual’s adaptability to an environment (Eun, 2019).
Adaptability and optimizing performance outcomes in an environment depend on the
accessibility to opportunities that drive success (Schunk & Usher, 2019).
This study will examine personal, environmental, and behavioral factors as they are
impacted by the White dominant culture. Figure 1 uses Bandura’s (1978) social cognitive
theory’s reciprocal determinism to explain the relationship between leadership development’s
personal, behavioral, and environmental factors. White dominant culture represents critical race

37

theory. The arrows indicate the influences to and from the three reciprocal determinants and how
race affects human interactions.

Figure 1
The Reciprocal Determinism Related to Leadership Development in the Nonprofit Sector

Note: Adapted from Business Presentation Template, by GraStudios,
https://creativemarket.com/GraStudios/373218-Business-Presentation-Template, Copyright @
2023 by GraStudios via Creative Market, Adapted with permission via Creative Market license
agreement.

38

Summary
The literature review provides evidence that the underrepresentation of BIPOC
professionals in the nonprofit sector exists. White professionals continue to dominate leadership
roles in the sector, and organizations are not prioritizing leadership development for BIPOC
professionals. While the sector is starting to shift to more BIPOC-led organizations, and
initiatives for diversity, equity, and inclusion, there needs to be more support for leadership
development and access to equitable funding opportunities for these organizations. The barriers
BIPOC professionals face to accessing leadership development are partly due to the racist roots
of the nonprofit sector, a homogeneous leadership mindset, and the power, privilege, and control
of White dominant culture. Chapter Three will present the methodology of the study.

39

Chapter Three: Methodology
Chapter Three presents the methodology of the research study. This study aimed to
identify the barriers in the nonprofit sector that impede leadership development and the impact
on BIPOC professionals’ career trajectories. This chapter explains the detailed process of
developing research questions, design, setting, researcher’s positionality, data sources, validity
and reliability, and ethics.
Research Questions
This study had three goals to further support and add to the research on leadership
development in the nonprofit sector. The study aimed to identify barriers to implementing
leadership development programs, provide insight into the impact of current leadership
development practices on the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals, and suggest possible
solutions for eliminating barriers and improving the leadership trajectory for nonprofit
professionals. The following two research questions guided the study:
1. What barriers do nonprofits face in implementing successful leadership development
programs?
2. What impact do leadership development programs have on the career opportunities
for nonprofit BIPOC professionals?
Overview of Design
The focus of this study was to examine the relationship between leadership development
in the nonprofit sector and its impact on the underrepresentation of executive-level BIPOC
professionals. The key concept of the study was the interaction between personal, behavioral,
and environmental factors that impact leadership development and the underrepresentation of
BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector. Examination of this relationship included a

40

conceptual framework derived from Bandura’s bidirectional triadic model of reciprocal
determinism (Wood & Bandura, 1989) and the connection to how institutions perpetuate systems
of White dominant culture and power into their organizational structures (Martinez, 2014).
The study comprised a qualitative approach of semi-structured interviews of leaders from
an extensive network of nonprofit organizations. All research questions were addressed by the
semi-structured interviews. Qualitative interviews were the chosen data collection method
because the goal was to learn more about the participants’ experiences through their thoughts,
feelings, and beliefs (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). Data analysis from the interviews helped
answer questions about how BIPOC leaders and their White counterparts experienced leadership
development in the nonprofit sector and if there was a correlation to BIPOC
underrepresentation.
The study engaged in a purposeful sampling method. The objective of the purposeful
sampling was to select a group of participants of varying perspectives to address the research
questions, speak to the conceptual framework model, provide information to create a thematic
analysis, and build rapport with participants to engage in rich conversations about experiences in
leadership development (Maxwell, 2013). The data source selected was semi-structured,
individual interviews to provide a confidential space for interviewees to share their experiences,
feelings, and perspectives about leadership development in the nonprofit sector.
Research Setting
According to the most recent data from 2020, there are 1.4 million 501(c)(3) nonprofits in
the United States (Cause IQ, 2020). Organizations represented under the 501(c)(3) code are non-
political, nonprofit organizations (Internal Revenue Service, 2022). Organizations that fall under
the 501(c)(3) designation were selected for this study because the literature review focused on

41

these organizations, specifically human service community-based nonprofits serving
marginalized communities. As of 2016, there were approximately 111,797 human service
nonprofit organizations in the United States (National Center for Charitable Statistics,
2020). Community-based nonprofit organizations provide services to targeted populations within
a community (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020). The target population was
current leaders holding a position as chief executive officer, president, executive director, vice
president, C-suite, director, or manager. Interviews were conducted via recorded video
conference format.
The Researcher
I hold a dual worldview that is a blend of transformative and pragmatic. A transformative
worldview addresses the marginalization and deprivation of individuals in a society due to power
and control systems through reformative approaches to address inequality and justice (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018). Pragmatists address problems by applying practical approaches and solutions
and are noncommittal to one generalized concept of problem-solving but rather utilize pluralistic
approaches obtained through thoughtful considerations of potential consequences (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). The convergence of these two worldviews for this study brought awareness to
critical issues within institutions while providing practical solutions for solving them.
I am a BIPOC professional and female working in the nonprofit sector. I have held entry
to executive-level positions. As a nonprofit management consultant, leadership coach, and
executive director, an essential part of my role is helping organizations identify problems and
bring practical solutions. My vantage point from employee (internal) to consultant (external)
allows me to examine organizational needs, systems, and cultures from different lenses. I have

42

worked within homogeneous and heterogeneous leadership structures. My experience in the
sector has been primarily with nonprofit organizations serving marginalized communities.
Ensuring reflexivity is critical in research because the researcher’s worldview,
relationship to the field of study and participants, and positionality could impact the overall study
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Identities such as race, gender, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic
status can influence how the researcher relates to the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), a researcher’s intersecting identities may present as an
insider in one regard and an outsider in another during research. My experiences as a female and
of racial/cultural minority groups automatically brought biases to the study. Therefore, mitigating
the potential for biases and assumptions was addressed by ensuring neutrality in conducting,
collecting, and analyzing data (Holmes, 2020).
Data Sources
This qualitative research included 16 semi-structured interviews with 12 open-ended
questions and corresponding probes. Appendix A articulates the proposed questions and shows
the alignment to the research questions and the conceptual framework. The target population was
current leaders holding a position as chief executive officer, president, executive director, vice
president, C-suite, director, or manager. Interviews generally took from 45 to 60 minutes to
complete. The interviews were conducted via Zoom’s recorded video conference format and
transcribed. Password-protected digital files were kept for all interviews and documents to
protect confidentiality. A designated secure location and locked file cabinet contained notes and
other paperwork created or obtained during the interviews. This section provides details about
the data sources and how they were applied to the study.

43

Interviews
This research used semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews were selected
to examine the perspectives and experiences of the respondents (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Each interview consisted of 12 open-ended questions for consistency (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). The use of corresponding probes was part of the interviews (Burkholder et al., 2020).
Additionally, an interview guide of related topics was used for prompts and follow-up questions
to help identify valuable information during the study that came up during the conversations
(Weiss, 1994).
The interview protocol recorded the date and time and recording time, and used
pseudonyms for all participants to maintain confidentiality (Burkholder et al., 2020). Questions
were focused on the leadership journey of the participant and their current role as a leader in the
nonprofit sector. Questions engaged participants to solicit responses related to their thoughts,
experiences, and feelings related to personal, behavioral, and environmental factors as leaders in
the nonprofit sector.
Participants
The recruitment method applied Eide and Allen’s (2005) three-pronged approach of
context, trust, and knowing when soliciting interest from potential participants. Diverse
populations have different perspectives, experiences, and stories that contribute to the interview
experience (Eide & Allen, 2005). This study recruited professionals in the nonprofit sector
holding leadership roles. According to Eide and Allen (2005), a researcher should possess an
appreciation for different cultures and the contributions participants bring to the interview
(context). Researchers should also build rapport with participants through confidentiality,
integrity, and reliability (trust) and instill self-awareness of our own culture, differences, and

44

perspectives, and how our unique experiences provide rich contributions to the interview process
(knowing). Implementing these measures ensured a purposeful recruitment process and
maximized the potential for rich conversations.
Targeting community-based nonprofits was a critical factor in recruitment. The sampling
criteria eligibility questions included: asking for participants’ pronouns, ethnic or racial identity,
if they were adults over 18 years of age, current title, confirmation that their organization was a
community-based nonprofit organization, and if they agreed to a recorded video interview.
Additionally, during the recruitment process, it was discovered that all nonprofits directly served
marginalized communities through their services.
Recruitment via snowball sampling ensured a purposeful approach to engaging potential
participants who met the interview criteria (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Snowball sampling was
selected as the recruitment method for this study because I have an extensive network in the
nonprofit sector and had access to colleagues and other leaders interested in sharing their
experiences about leadership development. However, understanding that power dynamics are
rooted in all research, I designed the process to ensure that it was collegial, mindful of each
participant’s position as a contributor to the research, and represented their stories deliberately
and intentionally (Merriam et al., 2001). The study plan was to engage 12 participants. The study
engaged 16 participants and each interview used the same interview protocol.
Instrumentation
An interview protocol was the chosen instrumentation (Appendix A). Semi-structured
interviews using open-ended questions are ideal for beginning researchers (Burkholder et al.,
2020). Additionally, due to the sensitive context of some of the questions, honest answers may
not be expressed in a group setting like focus groups. Open-ended interviewing was selected

45

because it offered the researcher and participant a subjective conversation experience. The
researcher explored emerging themes during the interview process (Morgan, 2014). Further, the
constructed narrative and historical context from the participant’s experiences and perspectives
led to more beliefs and meanings for the researcher to examine (Morgan, 2014).
The interview questions were constructed for clarity to avoid confusion for the
interviewee (Krueger & Casey, 2009). Interview questioning included the three factors from
Bandura’s triadic reciprocal model (Bandura, 1989). Strategic placement of the questions for a
conversation-style interview included personal, behavioral, and environmental factors.
According to Kruger and Casey (2009), question sequences generally start broad and narrow
down to the specific research questions the researcher is trying to answer. For this study, the
sequence of questions started broad about leadership experiences and access to development
opportunities and then narrowed to specific obstacles the interviewee may have faced.
Data Collection Procedures
Data collection consisted of recorded video conference responses from 16 individual,
semi-structured interviews. Video conferencing platforms increase accessibility for the
researcher and may eliminate geographic and time constraints for participants (Howlett, 2021).
Although numerous restrictions had been lifted, the COVID-19 pandemic has not ended, and
therefore, I preferred to maintain safe distances by practicing social distancing.
Interviews took approximately 45 to 60 minutes to complete. Interviews were completed
within 45 days from October through November 2022. Notes were taken during the interview to
record the insights, thoughts, feelings, and themes that came up and reminded me of important
information when conducting the analysis (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Secured and password-

46

protected digital files were organized and stored, and notes, hard-copy documents, and other
related paperwork were kept in a locked cabinet.
Data Analysis
Analysis of collected data followed a sequential systemic method by following Creswell
and Creswell’s (2018) data analysis process. The process consisted of five steps:
1. All data from recorded interviews was collected and stored in organized digital,
password-protected files.
2. A review of all data included assessing for mean-making, connections between
participants’ comments, and generalizability.
3. The coding of transcripts used open coding during the first stage for identifying
useful concepts, followed by the second stage of axial coding for groupings of themes
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) used to code and label transcripts via a codebook.
4. Once coding was complete, themes were generated from the transcripts to identify
shared perspectives and experiences, as well as opposing views from direct quotes.
5. Narrative findings from the coding analysis were presented. Findings included
narratives, direct quotes, and visuals (e.g., figures).
Validity and Reliability
Since qualitative methods are rooted in assumptions, I employed strategies congruent to
widely accepted standards for conducting narrative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I
ensured credibility and trustworthiness by implementing Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) Strategies
for Promoting Validity and Reliability. The strategies influence rigor in research studies that
accompany the conceptions around validity, reliability, and generalizability (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The four strategies were critical to the study’s validity and reliability:

47

1. Triangulation included comparing previous studies from the literature review to the
data collected.
2. I have a relationship to and experience working in the nonprofit sector. I engaged in a
reflexive process to bring awareness of potential biases and worldviews that could
impact the study. Additionally, I included notetaking during the study and documented
thoughts about observations due to my prior experiences (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
I enhanced validity and reliability in the study by ensuring interviewees were not
current nonprofit clients which would have resulted in a conflict of interest.
3. The peer review and the examination process entailed engagement with industry
colleagues to discuss the construction of the study, emerging themes from data
collected, and to identify biases I overlooked.
4. I ensured an audit trail throughout the data collection process. The audit trail was
documented should any questions arise about communication with interview
participants, the research process, and the use of decision-making strategies during the
study.
Ethics
Qualitative interviewing can feel like an intrusive process for the participant (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). I followed the ethical principles set forth by the University of Southern
California’s Office for the Protection of Research Subjects (OPRS) and the Internal Review
Board (IRB) to recruit and conduct research on human subjects. Recruitment of participants
included a detailed information sheet regarding consent for recording interviews, the voluntary
process of participation, that interviews can be stopped at any time, the confidentiality of the
interview and associated data, and the faculty advisor’s contact information. Additionally,

48

information and data related to the study was stored in password-protected digital files and
locked cabinets for hard copies. Ensuring the protection of confidentiality and integrity of the
subject and study was critical. Interviews were conducted in a solitary environment, behind a
closed-door office with a white-noise machine outside the door for added confidentiality.
When addressing participants, using appropriate language in a research setting is essential
to building rapport (Patton, 2002). An example was refraining from gendered language or
making assumptions about identity when asking questions. Providing space for the participants
to show up as their true identities without labels helped eliminate labeling (Patton, 2002).
Avoiding ethical dilemmas helps to enhance the validity of the research. Pre-established
relationships with participants can bring ethical dilemmas (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore,
participants were not contracted as my nonprofit clients. Additionally, the information provided
to participants addressed the intention of not holding power as the researcher and maintaining a
collegial alliance (Merriam et al., 2001). Results were shared with participants of all
perspectives, and assigning pseudonyms to participants ensured the protection of confidentiality
and anonymity (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

49

Chapter Four: Findings
This study aimed to identify the barriers to effective leadership development programs
and how they led to the underrepresentation of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of
Color (BIPOC) professionals in the nonprofit sector. This study specifically focused on
nonprofits working with marginalized communities that were categorized by the IRS as
501(c)(3), which were human service and community-based organizations. Community-based
nonprofit organizations provide services targeted to populations within a community (U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, 2020). A qualitative research approach was used to
address the research questions. Semi-structured interviews and data were collected from
nonprofit professionals in leadership roles. The chapter is organized into three sections. The
chapter begins with an overview of interview participants, followed by a presentation of findings
related to each research question and other findings, and concludes with a summary of the
findings.
Overview of Interview Participants
Data were collected from 16 interviews via the Zoom platform. All 16 participants
worked for community-based nonprofit organizations and held leadership roles. The types of
community-based nonprofits varied in addressing community needs and were primarily in the
areas of mental health, homelessness, health, addiction and recovery, foster care, arts, education,
financial literacy, and other comprehensive services essential to serving marginalized
communities. Some participants were newly hired into leadership roles or recently promoted,
while others had been in leadership roles for several years.
Information collected during the recruitment process included gender pronouns, racial or
ethnic identities, and current job title. Additionally, the recruitment process requested

50

confirmation that participants worked for a community-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit and confirmed
they were at least 18 years or older. Table 1 provides an overview of the interview participants’
demographics, including pseudonyms, job title category, type of organization, gender pronouns,
and racial or ethnic identity. The diverse group included 12 BIPOC leaders and four White
leaders.

51

Table 1
Demographics of Interview Participants
Pseudonym Position Type of organization Pronouns Racial and/or ethnic
identity
Grace

Director Mental health

She/her Black
Brooke

Director Social services

She/her White
Michele

Director Addiction and recovery She/her African American

Nicholas

Manager Social services

He/him Latino
Vivian

Manager Social services

She/her Latinx
Stephanie

Executive
Director

Mental health She/her White
Clara

Manager Education

She/her Latinx
Zayah

Vice president Mental health She/her North
African/Egyptian

Ryan

Executive
Director

Homeless services He/Him White
Natalie

Director

Social services She/her White
Andrea

Vice president

Financial literacy She/her Latina/Ecuadorian

Jordan

Executive
director

Health Declined
to state

Black
Maddie

Manager

Health She/her Hispanic/Latina
Faye

Executive
director

Education She/her Black
Jacquelyn

Executive
director

Foster youth and homeless
services
She/her Black
Victoria

Executive
director

Arts She/her Chinese

52

Identifying themes and patterns from the data was achieved by using thematic analysis.
Open coding was followed by axial coding to identify and group themes from the interview
transcripts. Each research question presents the findings. The findings suggest that the 16
participants experienced barriers with their organizations implementing leadership development
programs. However, the barriers did not prevent their leadership growth. The barriers became
part of their unique journeys and fostered motivation, which led to their leadership development
in the nonprofit sector. The findings also suggest that the nonprofit sector is shifting to a more
diverse representation of BIPOC leaders and more leadership opportunities.
Research Question 1: What Barriers Do Nonprofits Face in Implementing Successful
Leadership Development Programs?
The data revealed several barriers that nonprofit organizations faced in implementing
successful leadership development programs. Themes that emerged from analysis are categorized
by personal, behavioral, and environmental factors. These themes include racial
microaggressions, gender bias, ageism, stress and burnout, complexities of community-based
work, oppressive behavior, lack of resources and funding, funding restrictions, and a siloed
sector. Additionally, the data presents White dominant cultural norms and their reciprocal
relationship to these barriers.
Personal Factors
The emerging themes related to personal factors impacting self-efficacy, knowledge, and
motivation included experiences of racial microaggressions, gender bias, and ageism.
Participants identified these as perceived personal factors that impacted their nonprofit’s ability
to implement effective leadership development programs. The data revealed how the presence of

53

White dominant cultural norms played a role in participants’ self-efficacy, knowledge, and
motivation.
Racial Microaggressions
Eight participants experienced racial microaggressions. The data revealed the pressures
participants felt about their leadership roles in the sector, including knowing and being reminded
that their intersecting identities were not part of White dominant cultural norms. BIPOC
participants discussed the burden they often carried in White dominant culture environments and
internally debated when to exercise their power as leaders.
Faye described situations where she and other women of color in her organization were
confronted with this realization, “When our words and our sentiment was perceived as
unprofessional, rude, or aggressive, then we were told to be quiet. That did not go over well with
a number of women, so we had about five women of color that quit.” Similarly, Michele shared
how White dominant culture surfaces when BIPOC professionals transition from co-worker to
supervisor stating, “I felt like you like the black girl when she’s just a regular employee, but once
the black girl evolves to this place [leadership role], and she has certain power, then it changes
things.” Occurrences like these reminded BIPOC participants of the limitations to their
autonomy and who might be monitoring them.
BIPOC participants shared their awareness of these sentiments and were mindful of when
to speak up, their performance, and how others perceived them as leaders in the sector. Even
though they could successfully perform as leaders, six participants felt they were always being
watched more than others. According to Andrea, “We don’t want to mess up … this triggered
something else. … There’s so many biases and stereotypes for people of color by other people. I

54

have worked twice as hard because I felt I’m being scrutinized even more because I’m Latina.”
These feelings can easily become isolating for BIPOC professionals.
Participants shared how getting past those feelings of scrutiny as a BIPOC leader
required a level of self-efficacy that reminded them of their capabilities beyond White dominant
cultural norms. While the barriers still exist, overcoming them required building self-confidence
and knowing there was support from other BIPOC leaders and White allies. Grace recalls, “I
stopped second guessing myself, and just making decisions, and knowing that I belong in the
space [leadership]. And there’s a reason why I was promoted to this space.” Grace felt supported
and encouraged by her supervisor, leading to a higher level of self-confidence in the leadership
space.
The eight participants who experienced racial microaggressions perceived them as
influences of White dominant cultural norms. Those in power could dictate who was worthy of
leadership development based on their perceptions of BIPOC professionals. Racial
microaggressions were used to address the perceived rudeness or aggressiveness of BIPOC
leaders, which impeded their leadership development opportunities. If that did not work, gender
and ageism were contributing factors.
Gender Bias and Ageism
According to five participants, who self-identified as women, they experienced gender
bias, and two participants experienced ageism as well. Their experiences usually occurred during
leadership meetings, while directly serving marginalized populations, or when working with
colleagues or subordinates. Natalie said, “So much of this industry is women, but as you float
higher up, it’s mostly White men.” The racial and gender landscape was perceived as
homogeneous in nonprofit executive leadership.

55

Although these biases existed, the self-identified women, especially BIPOC women, felt
they carried most of the burden of the work. According to Vivian, “BIPOC women, we kind of
shoulder all of the work and hardly get recognition for a lot of our contributions within the
nonprofit sector.” Carrying the burden obstructed the focus on leadership programs, which led to
barriers for behavioral factors.
Behavioral Factors
The emerging themes related to behavioral factors impacting skills, choices, practices,
and actions included stress and burnout, oppressive behavior, and complexities of community-
based work. Participants identified these as perceived behavioral factors that impacted their
nonprofit’s ability to implement effective leadership development programs. The data revealed
how the presence of White dominant cultural norms played a role in participants’ skills, choices,
practices, and actions.
Stress and Burnout
Stress and burnout were the central overarching theme creating barriers related to
behavioral factors for interview participants. According to 14 participants, they had experienced
stress and burnout at one time or were currently experiencing it at the time of the interview.
Stress and burnout were due to wearing multiple hats by occupying more than one role at their
organizations and time constraints.
Grace described wearing multiple hats by stating, “We’re always moving at one hundred
miles per hour. There’s no time to slow down.” Some participants struggled with moving at such
a fast pace, which left little room to lend support and implement leadership development
programs within their organizations. Other behavioral factors were impacted by the fast-paced

56

nature of community-based nonprofits by delaying the focus on leadership development and
pivoting to impulsive responses and hasty actions to address organizational needs.
The data revealed that participants not having the time to focus on leadership
development was a significant component of wearing multiple hats leading to stress and burnout.
Victoria shared, “We actually spend so much time in terms of finding the funds and it takes away
from doing other stuff that is really meaningful.” The time constraints posed a barrier to what
could be done versus what needed to be done.
Participants felt the time constraints influenced their choices as leaders and subsequently
the actions they took. According to eight participants, the ability to learn and reflect on
leadership development and trainings became challenging when time constraints were present.
Natalie reflected on a recent training by stating, “That was great information, but I don’t have the
capacity mentally right now to figure out how I’m going to apply anything new or anything
different.” Additionally, Andrea felt her organization was missing an opportunity for developing
necessary leadership behaviors due to, “People are wearing multiple hats and it’s difficult to
focus on things, but I genuinely think we don’t have the right person that knows how to support
people in putting them on a professional development track.” It is not a current priority.
Vivian discussed how stress and burnout affected her as a BIPOC leader. She described
the additional pressures of being BIPOC, a woman, and the generational influence of
expectations at work. Vivian shared:
Usually it’s women of color, BIPOC women … we clean up the break rooms, we offer to
take on additional work, we stay late, we’re often just called to that role … sometimes we
feel obligated to do those things just because of how we grew up, our backgrounds, and
how we’re raised.

57

Community-based nonprofits are operating with a skeletal workforce. Four participants said their
organizations operate with limited staff and resources, so leadership development programs
cannot be prioritized. Programs are costly, usually not allocated in the budget, and perceived as
taking staff away from important day-to-day work. The day-to-day work becomes the priority
over leadership development programs. Additionally, minimizing the need for leadership
development programs for emerging leaders serving marginalized communities was perceived as
oppressive behavior through White dominant cultural norms.
Oppressive Behavior
According to eight participants, oppressive behavior within their organizations or former
organizations played a role in impacting their behavioral factors. Participants described how
White leaders in community-based nonprofits were sometimes oblivious to the issues that plague
marginalized communities. The choices made and the practices and actions implemented did not
always consider cultural relevance or sensitivity when it came to leadership development needs.
Clara felt she was always catering to people who did not represent the communities she was
serving, and those organizations followed a White dominant culture standard for leadership
development. She indicated that the experiences of BIPOC communities and staff are often
parallel:
It's a majority of most nonprofits where I worked. People did not look like me, mostly
White folks [leaders] who did not understand the experiences that I had … how can they
understand the experiences of the people they’re serving, which is very similar.
Similarly, Jacquelyn shared how it boils down to access when it comes to leadership
development and how practices, choices, and actions are decided by indicating, “White people
have access to wealth and power that we do not.” Further, Jordan discussed the misconception

58

of the scarcity of Black nonprofit leaders by stating, “Oftentimes we [Black leaders] hear [we
are] hard to reach, or I can’t find any [Black leaders], and that's not true. It’s simply not true.”
Jordan felt the truth was more related to BIPOC leaders being underutilized or perceived as
lacking in leadership experience.
According to three participants, the dismissive and oppressive exclusionary behavior
resulted in barriers for BIPOC leaders to accessing leadership development programs. For
example, leaders of BIPOC-led organizations felt they were perceived as lacking the ability or
capacity to lead. Therefore, their organizations were not prioritized for addressing leadership
development in marginalized communities. The complexities of community-based work often
cause leaders to prioritize the urgent needs of their communities over having the space to focus
on leadership development.
Complexities of Community-Based Work
Participants discussed how emotionally taxing community-based nonprofit work can be
for leaders and staff. For nine participants, the work can carry heavy emotional burdens. These
participants’ organizations were constantly faced with complex challenges causing harm to the
population they serve including people experiencing homelessness, incarceration, mental illness,
addiction, and domestic and child abuse. A sense of urgency was a constant feeling because of
the intersecting challenges the population faced. Nonprofit leaders were constantly making
choices and acting based on an unpredictable landscape of external factors. Grace shared an
example, “We support families during their most vulnerable moments, so everything regardless
of what it is … feels extremely urgent all the time.” Grace’s example shows how those moments
of constantly pivoting to a sense of urgency can be overwhelming for a leader.

59

Seven participants also addressed the stressors of working for community-based
nonprofits and agreed that the burdens project onto BIPOC leaders, especially BIPOC women
leaders. Vivian shared how these burdens force leaders to focus on the day-to-day work instead
of time developing as leaders:
BIPOC women … we’re here doing the work. We often work in organizations that like to
run lean, with limited resources, but we want to really do a good job and give as much of
ourselves as we can to the work.
Clara’s experience further validates what Vivian shared. Stress and burnout took a toll on her
overall health. She said, “I was working 10 to 12 hours per day, and because of the high turnover,
right? … I started losing my hair … my mental health just started deteriorating.” Clara’s situation
forced her to make a change. She was denied resources and lacked access to leadership
development programs to improve her work conditions, which led to significant health concerns.
She had to focus on the day to day because that was the priority. The strain within environmental
factors caused the pressure of carrying the burden of the workload as the primary focus even
though Clara lacked the funding and resources to do it successfully.
Environmental Factors
The emerging themes related to environmental factors impacting training and education,
leadership trajectory, and organizational culture included lack of resources and funding, funder
restrictions, and a siloed sector. Participants identified these as perceived environmental factors
that impacted their nonprofit’s ability to implement effective leadership development programs.
The data revealed how the presence of White dominant cultural norms played a role in
participants’ self-efficacy, knowledge, and motivation.

60

Lack of Resources and Funding
According to 14 participants, lack of accessibility to resources and funding were the
leading cause of not being able to access training and education. For these participants it meant
their organizations could not prioritize leadership development programs internally or externally.
For example, Victoria shared, “If I had enough funding, and then I had all the support I needed,
then yes, I’d love to go to trainings … but I’m struggling as of now to do what I need to do from
the daily operations.” Executive directors like Victoria found challenges in balancing funding
and resources and making tough choices about priorities.
Nicholas discussed how leadership development programs exist, but high costs prevent
access and create barriers to leadership development. Nicholas shared, “There’s a lot of barriers
to entry into these programs, right? A couple of organizations do leadership development
programs and a lot of them are really costly … I think employers should be able to sponsor these
particular programs.” Nicholas shared that formal programs can cost thousands of dollars, which
is not feasible to allocate in community-based organizations’ budgets operating on lean funding.
Five participants shared that employees generally needed help to cover the costs of
external programs due to lower wages. Additionally, community-based nonprofits often run lean
when it comes to staffing and funds for training, which hindered access to implementing
leadership development programs, including restrictions posed by funders. The five participants
shared that funders generally allocated most of the funds to direct services and not to leadership
or professional development of the staff and leaders overseeing programs and services.
Funder Restrictions
The data revealed that an employer’s inability to sponsor employee leadership
development programs might be due to funding restrictions. While only five mentioned funder

61

restrictions, the topic was mentioned quite often among the five leaders with significant
experience managing funding, especially government funding. Participants were frustrated about
how significant barriers are imposed before the application process. For example, BIPOC-led
organizations struggled with that because a track record of managing large grants was often
required to receive funding, especially government funding, which automatically made them
ineligible to apply. Additionally, once funding is received, the organization’s spending is dictated
by rigid protocols, which prevents them from making program decisions to produce the best
outcomes. Jacquelyn shared her frustrations about how doing the work and doing it successfully
was just not enough to be awarded funding:
The contracts state that you have to show that you’ve been doing this work for 5 years,
and able to maintain a two-million-dollar budget. I haven’t been able to maintain a two-
million-dollar budget, because I’ve been paying out my pocket [to cover operational
expenses].
Natalie further supports this claim by sharing how leadership positions were generally not
funded in grants, and organizations scrambled to pull funding from multiple sources to secure
leadership positions in the budget. Natalie shared, “There’s just not enough opportunity for
leadership positions because things are hierarchical, I think, part of there not being enough
resources or different structures. … It’s cultural to our society.” Funders’ rigid structures
contributed to a lack of leadership positions and the ability to offer leadership development
programs, which forces community-based nonprofits to seek out unrestricted funding.
Jacquelyn discussed the challenges she faced working diligently to secure government
funding for her organization, “Even if you want to develop your organization, even if you want
to expand your organization, there’s so much red tape that you have to go through.” Jacquelyn’s

62

frustration was mainly due to the impediments that prevent BIPOC-led organizations from being
viable candidates for competing for funding, especially government funding, and the barriers
community-based organizations face without having access to capital. Additionally, the silos that
exist within the nonprofit sector make it difficult to leverage funds by working with other
organizations on developing leadership development programs.
Siloed Sector
The data revealed that community-based nonprofits were often siloed from each other,
which created barriers to sharing resources about training for leadership development, funding
opportunities, and strategies for handling various operational challenges. The siloes in the
nonprofit sector were a barrier for nine participants. The data revealed how critical strategy and
resource sharing could be in leadership development. Learning from other leaders has been a
strategy the participants used to supplement when they could not participate in leadership
development programs.
Michele realized that community-based nonprofit leaders were dealing with many of the
same complex issues, no matter the mission. She recognized the importance of forging
relationships with other nonprofit leaders by asking fellow leaders: “Are you guys having those
same problems, too, and he [nonprofit leader] says absolutely. You don’t know that because
we’re so sectored off. We all have the same experiences, but we’re not together.” Michele felt
this was a gap in how leaders need more awareness and opportunities to share resources, which
are informal but effective ways to improve organizational cultures and their development as
leaders.
Jordan’s and Vivian’s perspectives supported Michele’s claim by sharing how resource
sharing has played a positive role in providing training and education, improving organizational

63

cultures, and supporting the career trajectory of emerging nonprofit leaders. Jordan makes
resource sharing a contingency for staff to attend trainings, “They have to come back and share
during staff meetings, so it further emphasizes what they’ve learned and now a plan of action. It
also helps their communication skills as well, so it’s a win-win all the way around.” Similarly,
Vivian shared her approach after attending a workshop or training by stating, “Share what you
learn and make it so that, if they pay for one person to go to a conference they’re getting more
bang for their buck, and you can justify the cost a little bit more.” Vivian found this strategy to be
helpful in boosting leadership development of others.
Summary
The data shows that participants experienced barriers to leadership development within
their organizations. While the perceived barriers created challenges for the participants accessing
leadership development programs, they have not impeded their individual leadership trajectories
with the presence of White dominant cultural norms. Figure 2 uses Bandura’s (1978) social
cognitive theory’s reciprocal determinism to explain the relationship between the emerging
themes and personal, behavioral, and environmental factors from the findings for Research
Question 1.

64

Figure 2
Emerging From Findings of Research Question 1

Note: Adapted from Business Presentation Template, by GraStudios,
https://creativemarket.com/GraStudios/373218-Business-Presentation-Template, Copyright @
2023 by GraStudios via Creative Market, Adapted with permission via Creative Market license
agreement.

Research Question 2: What Impact Do Leadership Development Programs Have on the
Career Opportunities for Nonprofit BIPOC Professionals?
The data revealed several themes related to components of leadership development
programs contributing to career opportunities for nonprofit BIPOC professionals. Themes that
emerged from analysis are categorized by personal, behavioral, and environmental factors. These
themes include self-confidence, trust from leadership, networks, connection to community-based
work, experience-based learning, mentoring and coaching, leadership development opportunities,

65

meaningful trainings, growth opportunities, and progressive work cultures. Additionally, the data
presents White dominant cultural norms and their reciprocal relationship to these factors.
Personal Factors
The emerging themes related to personal factors impacting self-efficacy, knowledge, and
motivation included self-confidence, participation in networks, trust from leadership, and
connection to community-based work. Participants identified these as perceived personal factors
contributing to the impact of leadership development programs and career opportunities despite
the presence of White dominant cultural norms.
Self-Confidence
Self-confidence was an emerging theme throughout the interviews. All 16 participants
were highly confident in meeting their job expectations, which contributed to higher self-
efficacy. All 16 participants’ answers about their ability to meet their job expectations were
almost identical in stating, “I feel confident” or “I feel very confident.” For example, Michele
quickly responded with, “Oh I feel pretty darn confident.” There was no pause to consider their
abilities or self-efficacy in their roles.
Participants shared moments where they doubted themselves, which sometimes
contributed to questioning or decreasing their self-efficacy. The complexities of working in
community-based nonprofits brought up these feelings when leaders approached challenging
situations. Six participants experienced self-doubt when struggling to make the right decision,
asking a question and fearing judgment, when meeting with a supervisor, or when the
organization’s basic needs could not be met.
Vivian shared that although she is highly confident in meeting her job expectations,
imposter syndrome lingers. Vivian said, “I have imposter syndrome, so I have self-doubt of

66

whether I’m doing sort of the right thing, or recommended the right course of action.” Like
Vivian, Clara shared similar feelings, “Sometimes I don’t believe in myself. I’m like, am I doing
this correctly? That imposter syndrome.” Although Clara was confident in her abilities, imposter
syndrome appeared a few times. Imposter syndrome refers to the self-doubt an individual harbors
and the fear of being considered a fraud, although evidence exists of their competence and
success (Mullangi & Jagsi, 2019).
Additionally, Ryan shared how self-doubt can surface when facing tough decisions or
actions that may be out of a leader’s control. He shared an example by stating, “I do have
moments like, especially when we’re not getting paid from our contract … so I’m up at three
worrying about payroll. So sometimes I feel inadequate because of things like that.” Ryan’s
account shows how a leader’s accountability to their employees, and the organization can
sometimes exacerbate self-doubt.
Ultimately, participants’ self-confidence outweighed feelings of imposter syndrome.
Knowing they reached their leadership roles based on merits redirected imposter syndrome.
Further, this helped them confidently navigate leadership development programs and
opportunities, like joining networks.
Networks
Participants felt participation in informal and formal networks provided opportunities to
gain knowledge, increase motivation, and build a sense of camaraderie with colleagues leading
within community-based nonprofits. Informal and formal networking enhanced personal factors
for eight participants. Stephanie found value in her network by stating, “Having a peer group is a
really great thing.” Additionally, Zayah expressed how demanding a nonprofit executive role can
be. Zayah shared, “You don’t really know how to do this thing on your own.” However, Ryan felt

67

networking was not always easy and posed challenges in the sector. For example, networking
and resource sharing could be helpful among nonprofit leaders for the enhancement of personal
factors, although it is not always evident among leaders in the sector. Ryan shared, “I don’t think
there’s enough camaraderie around leadership across the sector. I feel like It’s more competitive
… The tendency is to just buckle down and become very siloed, and then you’re scratching your
head sometimes.” Ryan felt there needs to be more building community among leaders across the
sector.
Jacquelyn discussed similar experiences to Ryan’s, which impacted personal factors for
her as a nonprofit leader. Jacquelyn shared:
I’ve learned in the nonprofit sector that you’ll meet a lot of people who want to protect
what they do because they want to have their own brand. You don’t meet a lot of people
who are like here, here’s this resource, or hey I know this person.
Networks were critical to the eight participants by reducing social isolation and increasing self-
efficacy, especially when their leadership roles required knowledge to make hard decisions.
Jacquelyn stated, “You know you have really high highs and really low lows, so you have to
find people who are going to hold you up through both.” Similarly, Victoria described why
networks were critical to the success of the organization and especially BIPOC emerging
leaders. Victoria shared, “Having networks to really nurture these younger leaders and to know
this is what you should be doing in 2 years of forming your organization. This is what you
should do in 5 years.” The value in knowing ahead of time through networks would take away
some of the guesswork.
Networks granted further leadership development for the eight participants. The value of
learning in peer groups created spaces to share resources. The spaces to share allowed for

68

learning from one another and strategizing ways to earn trust from leadership within their
organizations.
Trust From Leadership
Twelve participants discussed the importance of gaining trust from leadership and how
their relationships with leadership (e.g., executive leadership or board of directors) helped with
motivation and building knowledge for developing skills and making decisions. Grace had been
working in the nonprofit sector for over 3 years, and 2 of those years in a leadership role. She
recounted how meaningful her relationship with her supervisor was by stating, “He’s taught me
quite a bit and allowed me a lot of space. I think that’s been helpful to make my own decisions,
and there’s just a lot of trust there.” Gaining her supervisor’s trust was instrumental to Grace’s
knowledge-building and motivation.
Michele, who had been in community-based work for over 25 years, shared similar
feelings. Michele’s supervisor is the founder of the organization:
Knowing that someone trusts you with their organization. That is what gives me the
motivation. So, you’ve got to know that your boss trusts you, they respect you, and
respect your decisions, even if they don’t necessarily agree with them.
While trust from leadership was important to participants, the data revealed that external
influences could alter trust for BIPOC leaders in the nonprofit sector and how they are
perceived, which strengthened their motivation even more to do the work, like in Jacquelyn’s
case. Jacquelyn shared some experiences about the lack of trust for Black leaders in the
nonprofit sector but how her motivation to do the work was steadfast and unwavering:
There is a distrust of black nonprofit leaders and it’s gross. What bothers me is that the
leaders are people who experienced it [lived experience], and so we are in this dream to

69

dismantle the system that could have destroyed us. … There’s a different passion, a
different love, a different motivation for why we want this to be successful.
Eight participants felt that trust received from leadership was instrumental in opening doors to
opportunities to participate in leadership development opportunities and programs. Examples
included autonomy in their roles and freedom to choose programs or trainings they wanted to
participate in, which fostered more personal connections to community-based work.
Connection to Community-Based Work
Connection to community-based work also impacted participants’ knowledge and
motivation. According to the data, 16 participants had a personal connection to their community-
based work in the nonprofit sector. Personal and lived experiences were the most common
influence on participants’ connection to their work. Stephanie’s personal experiences led her to
the organization since she had experience with what the population was going through. Stephanie
shared, “The reason why I’ve stayed is because I found this calling, I guess, or calling and a
belief in the mission but also a community.” Victoria shared her perspective and said, “It was just
so eye opening and like mindset changing that people actually care about what they did and not
for money.” Victoria found it a life-altering experience when she decided to work in the
nonprofit sector.
Additionally, Jacquelyn shared another perspective about her connection to community-
based work on a deeply personal level and her growth as a leader was due to a strong
commitment to make it work:
For us [BIPOC] it’s all on the line. Like no, no, this is all the money I have. I have my
rent, my car payment, and then everything else comes to this [my organization] … I see

70

so many of us as Black people and Brown people sacrificing everything, and still not
having the tools… we’re learning on our own.
Nine participants discussed how they identified with the population they serve. The connection
through identity was a motivating factor in their development as leaders. Their perspectives
through identity were valued and embraced in leadership development spaces, which created
connections and opportunities to lead in community-based spaces where others may not relate to
the population.
Behavioral Factors
The emerging themes related to behavioral factors impacting skills, choices, practices,
and actions included experience-based learning, mentoring and coaching, and leadership
development opportunities. Participants identified these as perceived behavioral factors
contributing to the impact of leadership development programs and career opportunities, despite
the presence of White dominant cultural norms.
Experience-Based Learning
Opportunities for experience-based learning played a significant role in increasing career
opportunities for14 participants. Experience-based learning was most effective for implementing
change when participants could develop skills, turn choices into strategies, establish practices,
and move to action. The ability to demonstrate by doing helped participants further develop their
roles as leaders.
The data revealed that experience-based learning brought great value to the leadership
development experience of the 14 participants. Their organizations intentionally found ways to
implement experience-based learning by encouraging emerging leaders to contribute to internal
processes and procedures. Vivian said, “I think joining leadership has been especially

71

fulfilling…being able to really contribute and build processes and procedures.” Vivian’s
opportunity to implement experience-based learning techniques was motivating and provided her
with ways to develop skills and implement practices.
Grace credits her supervisor with providing opportunities for experience-based learning
before she was in a leadership role. Grace feels the support from her supervisor afforded her
opportunities to utilize experience-based learning and see its value as an emerging leader when
invited into leadership think tanks by being able to: “Think through and strategize in spaces with
other leaders, and just listening in to certain conversations that our executive director has let me
be a part of, even before I was in a director level role.” She shared how those spaces were
instrumental in her leadership development.
Zayah ensures her organization provides experience-based learning opportunities to the
emerging leaders on staff. She encourages her staff to lead discussions at board meetings because
she values their work and expertise they gained while providing direct services to the
community. Zayah shared, “I feel like they’re taking the lead on a lot of things, so they always
have that opportunity because they’re the ones in the trenches. Not me. I’m doing the back-end
work, so they are leaders in their own way.” Those opportunities cultivate cultures centered
around giving feedback after experience-based learning, which is critical to leadership
development.
Receiving feedback was vital in successfully implementing experience-based learning for
building skills and making choices for 12 participants. Receiving feedback after experience-
based learning activities led to participants developing better decision-making strategies. Grace
shared her experience receiving feedback and said, “Feedback keeps me motivated because it lets
me know I’m moving in the right direction.” The feedback received from her supervisor while

72

implementing experience-based learning strategies motivated Grace and led to higher self-
efficacy when making decisions.
Experience-based learning resulted in increased career advancement opportunities for 11
participants. The strategy helped the participants apply several learning objectives, which
increased effective behavioral factors leading to leadership roles and promotions. Further,
experience-based learning influenced participants to seek out mentors and coaches, so they could
enhance learning and build upon their skill sets.
Mentoring and Coaching
Mentorship opportunities contributed to 15 participants’ behavioral factors, and 14 had at
least one or more BIPOC mentors during their leadership journey. Participants shared that
representation mattered a great deal when working with a mentor. Grace shared, “My mentor
used to be one of our board members, and I just thought it was cool that it was a younger Black
woman that was on a board.” The data revealed that participants benefited greatly from having
BIPOC mentors during their leadership journey.
The learning experiences were meaningful for participants when having mentors who
could relate to what they were experiencing. Faye recalled, “Every school I went to I had a very
strong Black female principal that was a role model and a mentor for me.” Clara shared how
beneficial the experience was for her because previous roles lacked BIPOC mentors, and she felt
fortunate that she was able to forge a relationship so quickly in her new leadership role:
I do look up to this person as a mentor, and they have actually offered support in areas
that I feel I could improve in, or just [help me] feel more comfortable in spaces where I
need to speak to executive level folks as a Brown woman.

73

Additionally, the study showed that informal and formal coaching played a significant role in
behavioral factors for 11 participants. Stephanie and Faye took advantage of cost-effective
coaching opportunities and shared how beneficial the experience was for them as executive
leaders. Stephanie shared that, “The real value of this program was the connections with other
executive directors, and also this coaching we got like ten free hours of coaching from an
executive coach, and then I just stayed with her.” Like Stephanie, Faye had a similar experience
with coaching. Faye said, “
I would say everyone needs a coach, you know … a lot of the executive directors didn’t
utilize their coaches … They either didn’t have time. They didn’t see value to it. …
Getting them to understand the relevancy of having a coach.
Faye felt it was critical to advocate for other executive directors to experience the value of
having a coach, especially having someone to speak with outside the organization.
Access to someone outside the organization to connect with and develop new strategies
helped participants think introspectively about their leadership style and behavioral approach.
Eight participants shared how isolating leadership roles can be and how coaching helped them
align their leadership goals to the mission of their organizations, leading to leadership
development and career opportunities.
Leadership Development Opportunities
Leadership development opportunities enhanced behavioral factors for 13 participants
and were instrumental in impacting career trajectories for participants. These included activities
similar to experience-based learning, like utilizing autonomous decision-making on projects,
participating in team initiatives, and establishing organizational norms and practices, sometimes
leading to promotions and other leadership roles. Faye felt that leadership development

74

opportunities were critical in enhancing her behavioral factors. She asserted that more work is
needed to support leadership development opportunities for emerging BIPOC leaders:
We can do more and should do more to elevate our colleagues of color. We have a lot of
great, smart, talented, passionate individuals … we should offer that to our colleagues to
say we’ve got this project, or would you like to lead this?
According to six participants, leadership development opportunities worked best and led to
further opportunities when there was space to think, learn, and grow as a leader. Having that
space was vital for optimizing nonprofit leadership development skills, according to
participants, especially for BIPOC leaders. Space to think, learn, and grow also required,
“permission to fail,” according to Andrea. The spaces are contingent upon supportive
organizational cultures and environmental factors.
Environmental Factors
The emerging themes related to environmental factors impacting training and education,
career trajectory, and organizational culture included access to meaningful trainings, growth
opportunities, and progressive organizational cultures. Participants identified these as perceived
environmental factors contributing to the impact of leadership development programs and career
opportunities despite the presence of White dominant cultural norms.
Meaningful Trainings
Access to meaningful trainings was critical for 14 participants. Participants felt it was
necessary to have access to training that fostered an affinity group-type atmosphere for learning
and education, which made the learning environments psychologically safe spaces for sharing.
For example, Michele’s supervisor, also a BIPOC leader, encouraged these types of trainings and
sent Michelle information on trainings specifically for Black women in her field. Michele

75

recalled, “It was a great opportunity for me to discuss some of the things I’ve experienced with
other people who look like me, sound like me, and work in the same industry.” Attending the
training was instrumental for Michele and afforded her the opportunity to learn and share with
other people who had similar experiences.
Some additional examples of how community-based organizations ensured access to
training and education included Ryan’s organization, which provided each staff with a one-
thousand-dollar training budget each year. Natalie’s organization had a training department and a
digital library that staff could access trainings when convenient for their schedules. Brooke
participated in a few cohort trainings funded by her organization. Jordan’s organization centers
staff training as a core focus of how they better serve their community. Jordan shared the
importance of how experience-based learning was contingent upon creating an environment
where there is access to meaningful trainings and ensuring space to utilize what was learned by
stating, “Oh, without a doubt! That is where we thrive because we purposely are going in and
using the training, the education of really being mindful of how do we really improve the
communities that we serve.” Access to meaningful trainings implemented as part of leadership
development programs helped participants identify areas of interest for individual growth
opportunities.
Growth Opportunities
Some participants perceived their nonprofit leadership journey as a winding path instead
of a straight one. Natalie shared that, “I don’t feel like I’ve gone into an organization that put me
on some sort of formal track for leadership, or that there were regular check-ins about leadership.
I feel like it’s a bit haphazard.” According to eight participants, the path to nonprofit leadership
and growth opportunities needed to be more straightforward. There was a lack of accessible

76

leadership development programs in the sector, so participants experimented with carving out
their paths using the knowledge, skills, and self-confidence they had developed.
Finding ways to overcome the ambiguity of the nonprofit leadership trajectory and
finding opportunities was the goal of participants who wanted to grow as leaders. Participants
realized that leadership development in the sector was a standard, one-size-fits-all model, which
left little room for innovation around collective leadership frameworks. Ryan shared how
nonprofit leadership development always seemed standardized:
My observation had always been that if you wanted to move into leadership in an
organization, it meant that you were on one track, and you were to be a program
manager, a director, executive director … that just doesn’t work for everyone.
Ryan added, “It also isn’t very equitable because we learned that there were people who were
complete leaders in their field. But were not ever going to be great administrators. Nor was that
their passion.” Ryan’s statement raised a question about how nonprofits look at equity and
access to leadership development for their staff. For example, Vivian shared how lack of pay
equity can impede leadership development, especially for BIPOC leaders, “A lot of times we’re
underpaid and can’t afford to pay for a really expensive leadership program.” Lack of access to
capital and resources forced participants to be creative and find alternative paths to leadership
within their organizations, like taking advantage of experience-based learning opportunities and
other internal training options.
Progressive Organizational Cultures
Access to leadership development opportunities was more likely to be obtainable within
collaborative and supportive organizational cultures. Fourteen participants experienced
progressive organizational cultures where they worked. Progressive cultures offered training,

77

experience-based learning opportunities, mentoring and coaching, and embraced diversity,
equity, and inclusion. For participants at all leadership levels, fostering progressive cultures of
collaboration and support also meant ensuring diverse representation.
Nine participants shared their experiences with a steady increase of BIPOC leaders in the
nonprofit sector. Diverse representation in leadership was essential to fostering progressive
organizational cultures. Participants agreed that diverse representation and perspectives mattered
and were critical to leadership development and building effective teams. Additionally, diverse
representation was equally important to participants regarding experts chosen to facilitate
trainings in the sector. Equity in the selection process of facilitators was a question regarding
who and how someone was selected and perceived as an expert on a particular topic, primarily
when the topics focused on services within marginalized communities. Participants shared how,
historically, White facilitators dominated those roles. Clara shared her feelings about a recent
training facilitated by a BIPOC professional:
The people that we hear speak and train us, don’t look like us often either, but when
there is, it’s very powerful, you know? I was a participant in a recent training … and the
person was a beautiful Black woman, who was just so empowering.
Grace shared similar feelings and had a recent experience like Clara, where a relatable BIPOC
professional facilitated a training. Grace shared, “Those that look like you and have similar
experiences to you are helpful because you just relate a little bit better.” This sparked a
realization of how vital and impactful diverse representation can benefit the nonprofit sector and
the experiences of emerging BIPOC leaders.
Further, Nicholas shared that his organization lacked BIPOC representation. The
leadership in his organization was predominantly White. Nicholas felt that, “You should be able

78

to see people who identify with you as individuals. Folks who are leading those programs to
reflect who you are, right?” Nicholas questioned how the lack of diversity within the
organization impeded fostering progressive cultures for emerging leaders.
Progressive organizational cultures have contributed to community-based organizations
developing better leadership development opportunities and programs that apply to diverse
groups of emerging leaders. According to nine participants, their organizations have intentionally
considered the unique lived experiences and needs of BIPOC professionals. More thought has
been put into meeting the needs of a diverse workforce of emerging leaders.
Summary
The data shows that participants’ career growth was impacted when they had access to
leadership development opportunities and programs. An unexpected finding was that access to
growth opportunities was relatively similar among all participants. The data collected from
participants showed that although the presence of White dominant cultural norms existed, it was
not a deterrent to the leadership growth of the participants. Figure 3 uses Bandura’s (1978) social
cognitive theory’s reciprocal determinism to explain the relationship between the emerging
themes and personal, behavioral, and environmental factors from the findings for Research
Question 2.

79

Figure 3
Emerging Themes From Findings of Research Question 2

Note: Adapted from Business Presentation Template, by GraStudios,
https://creativemarket.com/GraStudios/373218-Business-Presentation-Template, Copyright @
2023 by GraStudios via Creative Market, Adapted with permission via Creative Market license
agreement.

Other Findings: Motivation Through Complex Work
All 16 participants expressed their motivation to remain doing community-based work.
While the findings showed the barriers and challenges to leadership development, the motivating
factors contributing to participants’ commitment to continue with community-based nonprofit
work included trusting their supervisor had their best interest and knowing they could make a
difference as a nonprofit leader.
While trust from leadership was an important factor to participants, eight participants felt
that being able to trust their leadership was equally important. Brooke shared, “that feeling of

80

like my boss has my back.” Michelle had similar feelings, “That’s what motivates me to know
that someone trusts me, and they value my skills, and they trust it.” Additionally, four executive
directors felt they had supportive boards that they trusted had their best interest as well. For
Zayah, her motivation came from her board’s work in their professional lives. She shared, “They
inspire me, and what they do in their own individual work.” The perception of mutual trust was
important for participants to feel they had the autonomy to get the work done, knowing support
was there if they needed it.
Additionally, for 16 participants, knowing they could make a difference by addressing
community problems or fostering hope in marginalized groups was a motivating factor. For
Maddie, it was her work in healthcare, bringing kids together with family members with a cancer
diagnosis to share in fun activities. For Zayah, she knew that she needed to help kids who were
involved in the justice system. She shared, “I was seeing a lot of really good kids just getting in
trouble with the law. … I was really just hearing a lot of these kids, you know, just good kids.”
Like Maddie and Zayah, all participants wanted to make a difference. Reframing the problems
towards solutions-focused strategies and glimpses of hope were seen as a common theme of
motivation throughout the interviews.
Summary
This study aimed to identify the barriers to effective leadership development programs
and how it leads to the underrepresentation of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of
color (BIPOC) professionals in the nonprofit sector. The evidence showed barriers to
implementing leadership development programs in community-based nonprofits. However, the
barriers were not deterrents in pursuing leadership development for nonprofit professionals. The
evidence also shows that the impact of leadership development programs, when accessible, can

81

profoundly impact the leadership trajectory of BIPOC professionals. For example, when
participants had access to training, mentoring and coaching, and worked in progressive
organizational cultures, they saw career growth as leaders in the nonprofit sector. The data
showed that White dominant cultural norms continue to exist, but community-based nonprofit
organizations actively try to dismantle these structures. The study shows that a shift in nonprofit
community-based organizations is creating more opportunities for BIPOC leaders and embracing
diverse representation in the sector.
Chapter Five will further continue the discussion by addressing recommendations. The
recommendations will be based on the study findings and literature. They will cover the
personal, behavioral, and environmental factors that will inform ways to increase BIPOC
representation and leadership opportunities in community-based organizations in the nonprofit
sector despite the presence of White dominant cultural norms.

82

Chapter Five: Recommendations
This study aimed to identify the barriers to effective leadership development programs
and how they lead to the underrepresentation of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of
color (BIPOC) professionals in the nonprofit sector. This study specifically focused on
nonprofits categorized by the IRS as 501(c)(3), which were human service, community-based
organizations, and working with marginalized communities. Community-based nonprofit
organizations provide services to targeted populations within a community (U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, 2020). The study’s conceptual framework applied social cognitive
theory through Bandura’s model of reciprocal determinism, which examines the bidirectional
triadic relationships of how people are shaped through their environment and their contributions
to the dynamics of the interrelated factors (Wood & Bandura, 1989). The study applied a critical
race theory lens and the connection to how institutions perpetuate systems of White dominant
culture and power into their organizational structures (Martinez, 2014). The research questions
that guided this study were the following:
1. What barriers do nonprofits face in implementing successful leadership development
programs?
2. What impact do leadership development programs have on the career opportunities
for nonprofit BIPOC professionals?
This chapter begins with a discussion of the findings, followed by a section on a sector
shift where I will connect the findings to the direction and trends and how a broad nonprofit
sector change is critical. Next is the recommendations for practice, which identifies possible
recommendations for addressing leadership development barriers and increasing the

83

representation of BIPOC leadership in the nonprofit sector. The chapter concludes with
limitations and delimitations of the study and recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
Reciprocal determinism and existing White dominant cultural norms have been used to
examine and discuss the findings. This study used Bandura’s social cognitive theory of reciprocal
determinism to focus on the interrelated relationship between personal, behavioral, and
environmental factors (Bandura, 1989). Additionally, the study used a critical race theory lens to
examine how White dominant cultural norms are standard practices that lead to privilege, power,
and control over leadership development (Gillborn, 2015; Ospina & Foldy, 2009).
The literature shows that the historical context of the standard of leadership centered
around White males and their traits (Benmira & Agboola, 2021; Van Seters & Field, 1990).
Additionally, organizations adopted one-size-fits-all, hegemonic leadership development styles
automatically leading to the underrepresentation of any group that did not fit the model
(Andersson & Tengblad, 2016; Hailey & James, 2004; Smith, 2019). Further, the literature points
to ways White dominant cultural norms were used as justification for organizations to bypass the
promotion of BIPOC individuals and invoke prejudices based on appearance, cultural norms, and
identity that did not align to White dominant cultural norms (DeCuir-Gunby & Gunby, 2016;
McCluney et al., 2021).
The study findings focused on examining emerging themes related to existing barriers
and opportunities related to leadership development and identified the changes leading to
increased representation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector. The findings show us
how the shift to increased representation could be related to evidence of collective leadership
across the sector.

84

Emerging Themes
The emerging themes from the study included barriers to implementing leadership
development programs such as racial microaggressions, gender bias, ageism, stress and burnout,
complexities of community-based work, oppressive behavior, lack of resources and funding,
funding restrictions, and a siloed sector. Additionally, several themes emerged of the contributing
factors that influenced the career trajectory of nonprofit BIPOC professionals, including self-
confidence, trust from leadership, networks, connection to community-based work, experience-
based learning, mentoring and coaching, leadership development opportunities, meaningful
training, growth opportunities, and progressive work cultures. While participants experienced
barriers to leadership development, the barriers were not a deterrent to their career trajectory as
nonprofit professionals. Further, participants shared how the presence of White dominant cultural
norms impacted the reciprocal relationship between the factors.
Personal Factors
Personal factors were defined through the literature as an individual’s self-efficacy,
knowledge, and motivation (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Racial microaggressions were personal
factors most discussed as barriers to leadership development. According to eight participants,
racial microaggressions were present through White dominant cultural norms. Participants felt
their leadership and work were scrutinized, leading to inequities in growth opportunities because
they did not fit the standard leadership model. Nonprofits have historically adopted a one-size-
fits-all and hegemonic leadership model, which impeded BIPOC individuals from access to
leadership development and a seat at the table (Andersson & Tengblad, 2016; Smith, 2019).
However, this barrier was not a factor impacting self-efficacy in the participants. Racial

85

microaggressions contributed to participants’ motivation as leaders due to their high self-efficacy
and increased commitment and determination to their work and the nonprofit sector.
A leader’s development of self-efficacy determines how an individual navigates
situations based on their perceived abilities. The literature asserts that perceived abilities can
predict how a leader approaches strategies to achieve a goal (Djourova et al., 2020; Ozyilmaz et
al., 2018). Higher self-efficacy is evident when a leader’s perceived abilities result in obtaining
knowledge and building self-confidence when addressing complex decision-making situations
(Bracht et al., 2021; Eun, 2019; Feser et al., 2017; Ross, 2014).
The findings indicated that all 16 participants exhibited high self-efficacy. Study
participants were confident in their abilities to meet and exceed the requirements and
expectations of their roles. While temporary imposter syndrome was present, it was not a factor
preventing participants from growth opportunities. The data revealed that all 16 participants had
a personal connection to their mission-based work, which influenced higher levels of self-
efficacy. In some cases, the connection to the work and the communities they were serving was
tied to shared lived experience with the population. The literature suggests that when
organizations invest in diverse leadership and embrace their leaders’ lived experiences and
perspectives, they will be better suited to serve their communities (Flores & Matkin, 2014;
Fulton et al., 2019). Lived experiences and perspectives can contribute to an individual’s
approach to behavioral factors.
Behavioral Factors
Behavioral factors were defined through the literature as an individual’s choices, actions,
practices, and skills (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Stress and burnout were the behavioral factors
most reported as a barrier. According to 14 participants, stress and burnout prevented a focus on

86

leadership development. Priorities focused on day-to-day work in community-based
organizations, usually requiring participants to constantly pivot towards urgent matters. The
literature showed that stress and burnout was an expectation of working in the sector due to
greater workloads and attempts to meet unrealistic demands (Anderson, 2021; Deng et al., 2021;
Stater & Stater, 2021).
Additionally, the literature asserts that BIPOC professionals felt they must work harder
than their White counterparts and conform to White dominant cultural norms adding to stress and
burnout (Dickens & Chavez, 2017; Gasman et al., 2011). The literature aligns with the findings
of the study as well. Unrealistic work demands leading to stress and burnout represented barriers
to accessibility for growth like mentoring, coaching, experience-based learning, and other
leadership development opportunities.
Experience-based learning was a common behavioral factor related to participants’ career
trajectories. According to 14 participants, experience-based learning was an effective strategy for
developing decision-making skills based on choices, actions, and practices. Participants
implemented experience-based learning strategies by taking on projects, facilitating meetings,
and contributing to their organization’s operations and cultural environment. Executive leader
participants saw the value in providing experience-based learning opportunities to their staff.
Embracing experience-based learning can foster learning environments that cultivate strategy
development, problem-solving, and feedback (Anderson & Tengblad, 2016; Caniglia et al., 2016;
McCall, 2010). According to Andersson and Tengblad (2016), experience-based learning works
well when mentorship and coaching opportunities exist.
Mentorship and coaching are critical in the sector to support the increase of BIPOC
professionals entering or promoting into leadership roles (Adesaogun, 2015). The evidence from

87

the findings supports this claim. Fifteen participants were mentored, and 14 had at least one
BIPOC mentor during their careers. Additionally, 11 participants participated in coaching.
Participants who experienced mentoring and coaching found great value in the process. The
literature asserts that mentoring and coaching are priorities requested by nonprofits but one of the
most underfunded activities (Meehan & Starkey, 2017; Sargeant & Day, 2018). Additionally,
BIPOC emerging leaders need better access to mentoring and coaching opportunities, which
enhance leadership development and build social capital (Hopkins et al., 2021; Whitaker
Calloway, 2020).
When included in the leadership development process, mentoring and coaching can
support increased social capital. Building social capital is critical to mentoring and coaching
because it stimulates the drive for leaders to build meaningful relationships and networks,
leading to more leadership development opportunities and better organizational outcomes (Day
et al., 2014). When part of the overall organizational process, mentoring and coaching paired
with increased social capital leads to better performance among individuals and groups (Gelles et
al., 2009; Ghasabeh, 2021). The experiences and application of experience-based learning and
mentoring and coaching can lead to more inclusive organizational cultures and positively impact
environmental factors.
Environmental Factors
Environmental factors were defined through the literature as performance feedback,
opportunities for development, and organizational culture (Schunk & Usher, 2019). The most
discussed barrier impacting environmental factors was the lack of funding and resources.
According to 14 participants, this was the main reason emerging leaders needed support in
accessing training and development while working for community-based nonprofits. Costly

88

leadership development programs, lack of time, and inadequate staffing were contributing
factors. A small group of five participants also mentioned how funder restrictions played a
significant role. Three participants shared experiences of inequitable funding practices in the
sector. There were parallels between the literature and the participants’ statements. BIPOC-led
organizations receive less funding than White-led organizations (Dorsey et al., 2020). BIPOC
participants’ feelings mirrored a study by Biu (2019), which found that BIPOC-led organizations
felt that inequitable funding practices were due, in part, to stereotype threat.
Additionally, funding limitations and restrictions are more likely to be imposed on
BIPOC-led organizations over White-led organizations (Nickels & Leach, 2021). These
impediments were perceived to drive participants’ motivation and commitment to their work in
the sector and foster the desire to work collaboratively to dismantle inequitable funding
practices. Dismantling inequitable practices requires more collaboration among funders, leaders,
and organizations to increase accessibility to unrestricted funds for programs, services, and
training.
Meaningful training and growth opportunities were commonly discussed among
participants as environmental factors impacting leadership development. According to 14
participants, growth opportunities were expanding within the nonprofit sector. For example,
more experiences of training facilitated by BIPOC professionals were vital to creating more
inclusive learning environments. Additionally, more diverse leadership representation within
organizations led to progressive cultures. The findings show that more representation in the
sector is evidenced in areas of leadership and training facilitators supporting the literature
regarding a shift to more BIPOC leadership and representation (Building Movement Project,
2021). Nonprofit organizations are embracing more heterogeneous leadership structures, which

89

promotes progressive cultures and fosters commitment from BIPOC professionals to stay in the
field longer (Bauer et al., 2020; Brimhall, 2019). Heterogenous leadership and progressive
cultures could lead to more opportunities for organizations to evolve into implementing
collective leadership frameworks.
Shifting the Nonprofit Sector
The research suggests that significant barriers related to White dominant cultural norms
impede leadership development for BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector (Heckler, 2019).
However, the nonprofit sector is shifting towards diversity in leadership, leading to progressive
cultures (Ely & Thomas, 2020). The increasing trajectory of BIPOC leaders across the nonprofit
sector addresses representation, but support needs to reach beyond diversifying leadership
(Building Movement Project, 2021). A broader sector-wide shift requires a collective leadership
lens and framework centering collaboration on nonprofit leadership development, organizational
cultures, and combatting inequitable funding practices.
A sector-wide shift fostering collective leadership requires an integrated leadership
development system that addresses the needs of current and emerging leaders, organizations, and
funding institutions. Achieving an integrated leadership development system would mean
aggregating information, experiences, and resources of established effective nonprofit leaders
and consultants with specific disciplines who fit the criteria to spearhead a sector-wide shift.
Secondly, designing an evolving model for leadership development platforms, which enable
change agents to transform their expertise into content and other resources that are easily
accessible to current and emerging leaders, organizations, and funders seeking to address
underrepresentation of BIPOC leadership. Examples of this evolving model should include both
online and offline methods such as mastermind courses, virtual trainings, summits, and

90

nonprofit-centered events, which would attract and center the voices of leaders who have
historically been marginalized due to White dominant cultural norms. Finally, the model for the
system would allow current and emerging leaders, organizations, and funders to access and
contribute collaboratively. The system would provide easier access to resources and events that
are informed by collective leadership frameworks. By utilizing these frameworks innovative
strategies for change would be developed through multiple perspectives, lived experiences,
norms, values, and beliefs.
I acknowledge that my positionality influences this view as a BIPOC leader in the
nonprofit sector with over 20 years’ experience and currently as a consultant, leadership coach,
and executive director. I have collaborated in the development of and benefitted from similar
systems, which have led to higher self-efficacy, leadership development opportunities, and
collaborative relationships with funders. However, these systems have historically lacked a
BIPOC lens and a collective leadership framework. This new system model would address
coaching and mentoring opportunities, opportunities for experience-based learning, equitable
funding opportunities and practices, and communities committed to change. The
recommendations for practice will highlight how each integrated action contributes to fostering
collective leadership.
Recommendations for Practice
Several recommendations for practice were identified during data analysis. This section
will focus on four core recommendations of the integrated leadership tool. The recommendations
target three community partner and ally groups: community-based nonprofit organizations,
BIPOC leaders, and funders. The recommendations in this section will help community partner
and ally groups increase BIPOC representation while collectively working towards dismantling

91

White dominant cultural norms across the sector. The recommendations that emerged from
participant responses include designing BIPOC-centered coaching and training opportunities,
implementing experience-based learning opportunities for emerging BIPOC leaders, ensuring
access to equitable funding opportunities and practices, and a commitment to collective
leadership for change. Utilizing the integrated leadership system for each recommendation will
lead to the development of actionable tools and resources.
Recommendation 1: Design BIPOC-Centered Mentoring and Coaching Opportunities
Using the integrated leadership development system to design BIPOC-centered
mentoring and coaching opportunities will increase the representation of BIPOC professionals in
nonprofit leadership roles. Data from the study indicated that when BIPOC leaders saw
themselves represented in learning environments, they related better to the environment, were
motivated to learn, and built skills within affinity-type group atmospheres. Nonprofit
organizations should consider how the unique lived experiences, perspectives, and abilities of
BIPOC leaders add to learning environments and provide access to mentoring and coaching.
Individuals will likely be motivated to participate in mentoring and coaching opportunities when
they are represented. The literature shows that access to mentoring and coaching is essential for
individual and organizational success (Hopkins, 2021; Stewart, 2016).
The study findings indicated that mentoring and coaching were critical to 15 participants’
leadership development. When leaders were offered mentoring and coaching by BIPOC leaders,
all leaders found great value in the relationship. For BIPOC leaders, relating to someone who
may have had the same experiences was encouraging. White leaders valued the perspective of
BIPOC coaches and mentors and felt it was a vital learning opportunity to build relationships.
Mentoring and coaching support experience-based learning opportunities by guiding individuals

92

to make choices, develop skills, and move to action. The literature showed that nonprofit BIPOC
leaders have shared how their access to mentoring and coaching helped them navigate spaces,
especially where White dominant cultural norms created barriers to their leadership development
(Wallace, 2019a). Effective mentorship programs boost self-efficacy for BIPOC emerging
leaders (Ijoma et al., 2022; Silverstein et al., 2022; Tibbetts & Parks Smith, 2023).
Organizations should consider factors that promote self-efficacy for BIPOC leaders to aid
them in their leadership development, leading to more organizational success and growth
(Gothard & Austin, 2013; Stewart, 2016). By providing opportunities geared explicitly towards
BIPOC professionals, organizations can foster more inclusive, diverse, and equitable
environments for leadership development. Additionally, space for offering these opportunities
needs to be overt and accessible. Wallace (2019a) suggests BIPOC emerging leaders should be
encouraged to take advantage of opportunities for mentoring and coaching because hegemonic
leadership structures still exist and can be harmful. Dismantling hegemonic structures can be
achieved through ensuring mentoring and coaching leads to experience-based learning
opportunities that expand diverse perspectives and approaches to leadership.
Recommendation 2: Implement Experience-Based Learning Opportunities for Emerging
Nonprofit Leaders
Experience-based learning provides opportunities for leaders to learn by practice, which
increases their capacity for developing skills and decision-making (Schunck & Usher, 2019). The
study showed that experience-based learning led to enhanced behavioral factors for participants.
Inviting leaders to participate in budget meetings while learning negotiation skills to help make
decisions when interacting with funders was an example from the study.

93

Using the integrated leadership system to develop experience-based learning
opportunities would allow emerging BIPOC leaders to apply what they learned to practical
activities on the job and amplify their leadership development. Opportunities for experience-
based learning could be focused on projects and initiatives that build skill sets required for future
leadership roles in the nonprofit sector. Examples of projects and initiatives could include
leading team meetings or discussions on essential topics, attending community meetings to build
networks and relationships, designing the scope of work for new community-based programs,
and developing internal training models based on previous learning experiences aligned with the
organization’s mission.
Leading meetings or discussions on important topics will help emerging leaders develop
skills for public speaking and facilitating in large groups. Developing skills through practice can
lead to higher self-efficacy, impacting personal factors (Schunk & Usher, 2019). These skills will
prepare someone who wants to be an executive leader for a community-based nonprofit.
Additionally, these skills are utilized through practice when leaders attend community meetings
and possess the confidence to network and build relationships.
Decisions at the leadership level can be more challenging with higher stakes, especially
for BIPOC leaders. Forming networks early on can support building experience-based learning
skills for emerging BIPOC leaders. Networks are critical in the nonprofit sector since training
programs can be costly. Networks increase learning opportunities for BIPOC leaders as safe
spaces to fill in gaps and offer opportunities to gain knowledge about important topics. Networks
can improve learning and knowledge gathering while increasing motivation, which impacts
personal factors such as self-efficacy.

94

Designing the scope of work for a new community-based program engages multiple skill
sets, which supports experience-based learning. Designing programs requires strategies for
understanding a population and the problem an organization is trying to solve, the costs
associated with solving the problem, the actions and practices for implementation to solve the
problem, and the desired results and intended outcomes. This type of experience-based learning
mirrors many of the issues and decisions a nonprofit leader will face on a larger scale as an
executive at an organization while navigating external influences such as political landscapes and
requirements from funding institutions.
Developing internal training models based on previous learning experiences, like
attending conferences or training, provides an experience-based learning opportunity. This can be
achieved by adopting the new world Kirkpatrick model as a guide (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The new world Kirkpatrick model relies on four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and
results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The framework works backward to ensure the focus is
on the end goal, the results. Level 4 should be viewed on a macro level. Results impact the whole
organization, not just one area. Experience-based learning can impact multiple organizational
areas, including the individual and those with whom the knowledge is transferred. Level 3 is
where learning turns behaviors into action. Level 2 is where learning and obtaining knowledge
takes place. Level 1 is the entry point for the training where participant engagement occurs.
Organizations can use the 4-step framework to create experience-based learning opportunities
that support an individual’s growth while promoting knowledge sharing with others:
1. Level 1 is reaction. An individual shows interest in attending a conference or training
to boost their professional development.

95

2. Level 2 is learning. An individual attends a conference or training. This environment
cultivates learning new ideas and obtaining useful knowledge.
3. Level 3 is behaviors. An individual begins developing and guiding behaviors based
on what was learned during a conference or training.
4. Level 4 is results. This step optimizes experience-based learning of practice by doing,
affording an individual the autonomy to develop and facilitate internal training and
sharing the knowledge with staff. The individual could utilize the integrated
leadership development system to learn and build applications for experience-based
learning techniques and lead the efforts for the organization to develop an internal
training model for emerging leaders.
Recommendation 2 supports using innovative methods to increase leadership
development opportunities as an alternative to costly leadership development programs. Costly
leadership development programs and limited access to funds were the primary reasons study
participants’ organizations could not support growth opportunities. This recommendation uses
elements existing within organizational structures to generate new opportunities for supporting
the growth of emerging BIPOC leaders. Figure 4 adapts the new world Kirkpatrick model to
show how leadership development can be achieved through experience-based learning.

96

Figure 4
Applying The New World Kirkpatrick Model to Achieve Experience-Based Learning

Note. Adapted from Grey Simple Modern 4 Layers Funnel Diagram Chart Graph, by RRgraph,
https://www.canva.com/p/templates/EAE90qolxKA-grey-simple-modern-4-layers-funnel-
diagram-chart-graph/, Copyright @ 2023 by RRgraph via Canva, Adapted with permission via
Canva license agreement.

Recommendation 3: Ensuring Access to Equitable Funding Opportunities and Practices
Access to equitable funding practices will boost opportunities for BIPOC-led community-
based organizations to receive funding. Equitable funding opportunities and practices include
ensuring funding is awarded to organizations with a reputable community-based track record
while still building capital, providing post-award proposal evaluations for rejected organizations,
and reducing restrictions on funding allocations and spending. An example of executing this
recommendation is implementing an equity scorecard. An equity scorecard is similar to academic

97

and community scorecards, which is centered on accountability, planning, implementation, and
evaluation.
The Center for Community and Health Development at the University of Kansas
developed an online tool, The Community Toolbox, which contains numerous resources for
communities wanting to enact social change (University of Kansas, 2023). Similar to an
integrated leadership development system, The Community Toolbox is ideal for aggregating
information, resources, and data on how funding institutions could be more equitable in their
approach. Their community scorecard model could help funders, organizations, leaders, and the
communities they serve by building stronger connections while ensuring equitable access to
opportunities and practices. Foundations and government grantmaking institutions could fund a
community-based task force to examine and address all aspects of progress, change, and
accountability related to funding inequities. Based on The Community Toolbox Model, a
scorecard model can be adapted to ensure funders are held accountable for diversifying
eligibility for funding proposals and decisions on award recipients.
Diversifying eligibility for funding proposals could increase opportunities for BIPOC-led
organizations to receive more funding awards. The literature showed that BIPOC-led
organizations receive 24% less funding than their White counterparts and 76% less unrestricted
funding (Dorsey et al., 2020). Evidence from the study showed how BIPOC-led organizations
doing the work in the community felt they still needed more financial and social capital to be
perceived as credible when competing with White-led organizations with access to more capital.
Reframing eligibility requirements to align with meeting community needs allows organizations
to explain their ability to perform the scope of work and propose how they would use funds.
Implementing a refined process by strongly encouraging all funders to go through a checklist

98

measured by the task force through a community scorecard model would increase accountability
and ensure more equity across the sector. A refined process would increase opportunities and
allow community-based organizations to compete fairly for funding regardless of financial or
social capital.
Post-award evaluations are critical to the learning process for organizations that received
proposal rejections. Organizations find value in funders providing relevant evaluation
information based on a grant submission to help strengthen future proposals (Gallo et al., 2021;
Hren et al., 2022). Encouraging and collaborating with community-based organizations to
strengthen their proposals can lead to better community services, build relationships between
organizations and funders, and promote more inclusivity and alignment of goals between
community-based nonprofits and funding institutions.
Minimizing funder allocation and spending restrictions will afford community-based
organizations the option to include their internal and external needs for leadership development
in funding proposals. The literature points to leadership development as a core need in the sector,
but less than 50% of nonprofits have access to capital to participate in leadership development
programs (Meehan & Starkey, 2017; Sargeant & Day, 2018). Additionally, the literature shows
evidence that BIPOC nonprofit leaders compete for restrictive funding from White-led
philanthropic organizations. The homogeneous staffing at these grantmaking institutions
determines how funds can be spent (Danley & Blesset, 2022). Further, the study shows evidence
that BIPOC-led organizations struggle with the restrictions because of automatic disqualification
if they do not check boxes that White dominant cultural norms have implemented. For example,
funders require evidence of organizations successfully managing large amounts of money before
receiving awards. Grantmaking institutions could implement unrestricted starter grants that

99

would work to the organization’s and the grantmaker’s advantage while building a collaborative
relationship, leading to better proposals and future funding.
Recommendation 3 supports progressive organizational cultures and environmental
factors. Equitable funding opportunities and practices can lead to more support for training and
education for nonprofit leaders, leading to better outcomes for community-based organizations.
Training and education stimulate opportunities for increasing leadership trajectory.
Recommendation 4: Commitment to Collective Leadership for Change
To increase the likelihood of Recommendations 1, 2, and 3’s effectiveness, community-
based nonprofit organizations, current and emerging nonprofit leaders, and funders should
activate a shared goal for a broad sector-wide change by implementing a collective leadership
framework through Kotter’s eight-step change model (Kotter, 2012). According to Kotter’s
original change model published in Harvard Business Review in 1995, organizations were failing
to lead effective change because they lacked the following: a sense of urgency, guided coalitions,
a vision, communication of the vision, removal of obstacles for the vision, creating short-term
wins, patience and celebrating short-term wins too soon, and making necessary changes for
sustained success.
Kotter’s eight-step change model is ideal for Recommendation 4 because it encompasses
the goal of the integrated leadership development system by identifying actionable tools and
resources through a collective leadership framework. Nonprofit organizations, current and
emerging leaders, and funders can use a collective leadership approach to build on the
contributions from individuals’ unique experiences and perspectives, promoting inclusive
learning environments, skill building, and action (Ospina, 2017; Raelin, 2018;). Additionally,
collective leadership aims to eliminate White dominant cultural norms by reframing the

100

discourse that has historically held the leadership standard and creating space for differing
perspectives and experiences as opportunities to strengthen relationships within communities
(Sánchez et al., 2020).
Kotter and his colleagues enhanced the eight-step model over the years. The following
eight enhanced steps create a strategic action, which includes integration of leadership
development and collaboration among community partners and allies:
1. Create a sense of urgency. The nonprofit sector and its community partners and allies
must agree that ineffective leadership development and the underrepresentation of
BIPOC leadership are priorities to address.
2. Build a guiding coalition. A collective group of nonprofit organizations, leaders, and
funders should come together to guide the change process. The coalition must be
diverse, with varying perspectives, experiences, and skills. This group can use
mentoring and coaching as opportunities to increase skill sets, build confidence, and
keep community partner and ally groups motivated.
3. Form a strategic vision and initiatives. Identify the direction of change through
desired actions and outcomes. Most importantly, a commitment to realistic, attainable,
and flexible strategies for change is critical.
4. Enlist a volunteer army. Ensure a process that embraces participation. Step 4 is ideal
for experience-based learning because it increases motivation while providing
opportunities for individuals to learn by doing and creating change.
5. Enable action by removing barriers. A commitment to fostering inclusive
organizational and funder cultures that embrace collective leadership by removing
barriers to leadership development and underrepresentation. Examination of White

101

dominant cultural norms, funding restrictions, burnout, and silos present areas where
significant barriers exist in the nonprofit sector and impede the career trajectories of
BIPOC professionals.
6. Generate short-term wins. Create cultural norms of recognizing and communicating
short-term wins. Ensure that wins are communicated early, clearly, and often.
7. Sustain acceleration throughout the process. Adopt continuous improvement practices
to ensure motivation and keep the momentum up. Perform check-ins regularly with
the volunteer army to ensure support exists, and the team can continuously progress
forward with goals, actions, and desired outcomes.
8. Institute change mechanisms. Actively dismantle old leadership norms by adopting
new approaches, behaviors, and attitudes. Ensure success by regularly revisiting new
norms and their impact on leadership development and the increased representation of
BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector.
Figure 5 adapts Kotter’s enhanced eight-step change model (Kotter International, 2023)
to illustrate how the process can lead to effective change that encompasses collective leadership
by supporting nonprofit organizations, emerging leaders, and funders across the sector.
Additionally, Figure 5 also incorporates where Recommendations 1, 2 and 3 can be implemented
within the eight steps.

102

Figure 5
Applying Collective Leadership to Enact Effective Change Within Community-Based Nonprofits

Note. Adapted from Marketing and Sales Graph, by Lenora,
https://www.canva.com/p/templates/EAFQ-DRry5I-marketing-and-sales-graph/, Copyright @
2023 by Lenora via Canva, Adapted with permission via Canva license agreement.

Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations in research are the factors not controlled by the researcher that could impact
the study and outcome (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). Two limitations were identified in this
research study. There was not a full representation of BIPOC professionals in the study. Unique

103

experiences of BIPOC professionals may have varied based on their racial or ethnic identity and
how they experienced White dominant culture. Additionally, snowball sampling instead of
convenience sampling may have impacted access to potential participants. However, to increase
the validity and reliability of the study, a snowball sampling explored opinions and perspectives
outside of the researcher’s professional network. Further, the study’s design could be considered
a limitation because every nonprofit in the U.S. or every type of nonprofit was not represented.
Delimitations are the boundaries the researcher sets when conducting the study
(Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). Three limitations were identified in this study. The research
sample size was a delimitation. There are 1.4 million nonprofits in the United States (Cause IQ,
2020). The sample size of 16 nonprofit leadership professionals indicates that the participants’
views, experiences, and opinions may not represent the entire nonprofit sector population.
Secondly, participants were representatives of human service community-based nonprofit
organizations. Finally, the researcher is a person of color identifying as Black. The researcher
also works in the nonprofit sector. This relationship may be perceived as the researcher being an
insider.
Recommendations for Future Research
The findings suggest opportunities for further research into ineffective leadership
development programs and the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit
sector. The questions that arose during the study for further research were centered around the
existence of BIPOC-specific leadership development programs and how boards of directors and
funders contribute to the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector.
Studies focusing on BIPOC-centered leadership development programs, funders and boards, and
community-based change models would add value to the research.

104

Reviewing current BIPOC-centered leadership development programs would provide
better insight into the journey of BIPOC leaders and could be compared to the findings of this
study. For example, a study that follows participants for multi-years who have completed a
BIPOC-centered leadership development program like the John Hopkins University Carey
Business School’s Leadership Development Program for BIPOC professionals mentioned
previously would be an important contribution to the literature. Since this study’s BIPOC
population was predominantly racially and ethnically identifying as Black or African American
and Hispanic or Latin/a/e/o/x, engaging different BIPOC-represented groups’ perspectives would
add significantly to this research.
Additionally, research on community-based nonprofit boards and funders would be
critical in examining how they contribute to the underrepresentation of BIPOC leaders in the
nonprofit sector. A study focusing on nonprofit funders’ and boards’ perspectives about the
underrepresentation of BIPOC leaders in the nonprofit sector would give a broader vantage point
of the problem. Understanding the existing barriers among other types of nonprofits and
foundations could also achieve a broader understanding of the underrepresentation of BIPOC
professionals across the sector. A mixed method approach using surveys and interviews would
help gain a farther reach of participants in other geographic regions, people who work for
varying nonprofit missions, and those who want to remain anonymous.
Finally, a study following a nonprofit community-based task force initiative working
towards collective change would address multiple barriers found in this study. For example,
obtaining demographics for leadership development program enrollment and funding for
BIPOC-led organizations would show if there was progress in addressing underrepresentation.

105

Identifying internal leadership development opportunities would show if there was progress in
community-based nonprofits implementing experience-based learning opportunities.
Conclusion
The lack of effective leadership development programs and the underrepresentation of
BIPOC professionals in leadership roles is a critical problem to address in the nonprofit sector.
The challenges faced by community-based nonprofit leaders are complex. Additionally, many
organizational cultures’ acceptance of White dominant cultural norms as the standard has led to
preventing BIPOC professionals from accessing leadership development opportunities (Heckler,
2019). The study’s evidence shows that factors such as racial microaggressions, oppressive
behavior, and restrictions imposed by funding institutions reflect White dominant cultural norms,
which have significantly contributed to this problem of practice.
The results and findings indicate that the nonprofit sector’s community-based
organizations will thrive with diversifying leadership if they implement more leadership
development opportunities for BIPOC professionals. The recommendations detail utilizing an
integrated leadership development program with actionable tools and resources to achieve
success. The recommendations focus on BIPOC professionals and broaden the scope of
examining how organizations in the sector approach leadership development when serving
marginalized communities and working with funders. Dismantling White dominant cultural
norms requires collectively and intentionally embracing diverse, equitable, and inclusive
perspectives and practices so community-based organizations, current and emerging leaders, and
funders feel supported and thrive when applying strategies that more effectively support
marginalized communities.

106

References
Adesaogun, R., Flottemesch, K., Ibrahim-DeVries, B (2015). Stratification, communication
tactics, and black women: navigating the social domain of nonprofit organizations.
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 19(1), 42–57.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-
journals/stratification-communication-tactics-black-women/docview/1693690524/se-2
Akingbola, K., Edmund Rogers, S., & Baluch, A. (2019). Employees and change management in
nonprofits. Springer Nature Switzerland AG (Ed.), Change Management in Nonprofit
Organizations. Theory and Practice. (pp. 104–126). Palgrave Macmillan
Akpapuna, M., Choi, E., Johnson, D. A., & Lopez, J. A. (2020). Encouraging multiculturalism
and diversity within organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational
Behavior Management, 40(3–4), 186–209.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01608061.2020.1832014
Al Ariss, A., Özbilgin, M., Tatli, A., & April, K. (2014). Tackling whiteness in organizations and
management. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(4), 362–369.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2013-0331
Ali, Z., & Mehreen, A. (2019). Understanding succession planning as a combating strategy for
turnover intentions. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 16(2), 216–233.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-09-2018-0076
Allen, S., Winston, B.E., Tatone, G.R., & Crowson, H.M. (2018). Exploring a model of servant
leadership, empowerment, and commitment in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit
management & leadership. 29(1),123–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21311

107

Anderson, M. (2021). Supervisory support, job satisfaction, and leadership development in non-
Profit organizations. International Social Science Review, 97(2), 4.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-
journals/supervisory-support-job-satisfaction-leadership/docview/2577533546/se-2
Andersson, T., & Tengblad, S. (2016). An experience based view on leader development:
leadership as an emergent and complex accomplishment. Development and Learning in
Organizations, 30(6), 30–32. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-06-2016-0054
Arnsberger, P., Ludlum, M., Riley, M., & Stanton, M. (2008). A history of the tax-exempt sector:
an SOI perspective. Statistics of Income. SOI Bulletin, 27(3), 105–135.
Association of Black Foundation Executives. (2014). The exit interview: Perceptions on why
black professionals leave grantmaking institutions. https://abfe.issuelab.org/resource/the-
exit-interview-perceptions-on-why-black-professionals-leave-grantmaking-
institutions.html
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9),
1175. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. The American Psychologist,
33(4), 344–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344
Battalia Winston. (2017). The state of diversity in nonprofit and foundation leadership. Battalia
Winston http://www.battaliawinston.com/wp-
content/uploads/2017/05/nonprofit_white_paper.pdf

108

Bauer, K., Behrens, T., Borashko, R., DeLeeuw, J., Janes, P., Martin, T., Moody, M., Olivarez, J.,
Paz, A., Pratt, M., Rau, O. (2020). 11 Trends in philanthropy. Anticipate and embrace
what’ s next. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy.
https://johnsoncenter.org/blog/11-trends-in-philanthropy-for-2020/
Beasley, M.A. (2017). Beyond diversity. A roadmap to building an inclusive organization. Green
2.0. https://diversegreen.org/research/beyond-diversity/
Behrens, T., Gomes P., Layton, M., Martin, T., Moody, M., Olivarez, J., Peterson, K., Sharp
Eizenger, M., Starsoneck, L., Williams, J., Yore-VanOosterhout, A. (2021). Anticipate &
embrace what’ s next. 11 trends in philanthropy for 2021. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for
Philanthropy. https://johnsoncenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/11-Trends-for-2021-
WEB.pdf
Benmira, S., & Agboola, M. (2021). Evolution of leadership theory. BMJ Leader, 5(1), 3–5.
https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2020-000296
Bielak, D., Isom, D., Michieka, M., & Breen., B. (2021). To advance racial equity and justice,
funders begin looking inward. The Bridgespan Group.
https://www.bridgespan.org/bridgespan/Images/articles/race-place-based-
philanthropy/race-and-place-based-philanthropy-to-advance-racial-equity-funders-look-
inward-2.pdf
Biu, O. (2019). Race to lead: Women of color in the nonprofit sector. Building Movement
Project. https://racetolead.org/race-to-lead-women-of-color-in-the-nonprofit-sector/
BoardSource. (2021). Leading with intent. Reviewing the State of diversity, equity, and inclusion
on nonprofit boards. https://leadingwithintent.org/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-
findings/

109

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Chapter 4: Qualitative data. In Qualitative research for
education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.) (pp. 117–129). Allyn and
Bacon.
Boyarski, L., Kretman, K., Mason, A. (2018). Advancing racial equity within nonprofit
organizations 2018 research results. Georgetown University.
https://cpnl.georgetown.edu/news-story/racial_equity_nonprofits/
Bozer, G., Kuna, S., & Santora, J. C. (2015). The role of leadership development in enhancing
succession planning in the Israeli nonprofit sector. Human Service Organizations:
Management, Leadership & Governance, 39(5), 492–508.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2015.1077180
Bracht, E.M., Keng-Highberger, F. T., Avolio, B. J., & Huang, Y . (2021). Take a “selfie”:
examining how leaders emerge from leader self-awareness, self-leadership, and self-
efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 635085–635085.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.635085
Brimhall, K.C. (2019). Inclusion is important . . . but how do I include? Examining the effects of
leader engagement on inclusion, innovation, job satisfaction, and perceived quality of
care in a diverse nonprofit health care organization. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 48(4), 716–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764019829834
Brown, W.A., Andersson, F.O., & Jo, S. (2016). Dimensions of capacity in nonprofit human
service organizations. Voluntas (Manchester, England). 27(6), 2889–2912.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9633-8

110

Building Movement Project (2021). Making (or taking) space. Initial themes on nonprofit
transitions from white to BIPOC leaders. Robert Sterling Clark Foundation.
https://buildingmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/MakingOrTakingSpace.pdf
Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (Eds.). (2019). Chapter 10:
Interviewing essentials for new researchers. In Research Design and Methods: An
Applied Guide for the Scholar-Practitioner (pp. 147–159). Sage.
Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership. New York. Harper & Row
Buse, K., Bernstein, R. S., & Bilimoria, D. (2016). The influence of board diversity, board
diversity policies and practices, and board inclusion behaviors on nonprofit governance
practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(1), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-
014-2352-z
Calvin, J. R., & Swayze, S. (2012). Global leadership development of minority managers: A
study of two cohorts. In NAAAS Conference Proceedings (p. 44). National Association of
African American Studies.
Caniglia, G., John, B., Kohler, M., Bellina, L., Wiek, A., Rojas, C., Laubichler, M. D., & Lang,
D. (2016). An experience-based learning framework: Activities for the initial
development of sustainability competencies. International Journal of Sustainability in
Higher Education, 17(6), 827–852. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-04-2015-0065
Casad, B., & Bryant, W. J. (2016). Addressing stereotype threat is critical to diversity and
inclusion in organizational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(8).
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00008
Cause IQ. (2020, March 4). How many nonprofits are in the U.S.?
https://www.causeiq.com/insights/how-many-nonprofits-in-the-us/

111

Clohesy, S., Dean-Coffey, J., & McGill, L. (2019). Leveraging effective consulting to advance
diversity, equity, and inclusion in philanthropy. The Foundation Review, 11(3), 81–95.
https://doi.org/10.9707/1944-5660.1483
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2013). Glass cliffs and organizational saviors: barriers to minority
leadership in work organizations? Social Problems, 60(2), 168–187.
https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2013.60.2.168
Cooper, E. A., Phelps, A. D., & Rogers, S. E. (2020). Research in nonprofit human resource
management from 2015 to 2018: Trends, insights, and opportunities. Employee Relations:
The International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-04-2019-0166
Council on Foundations (2020). 2020 Grantmaker salary and benefits report: Key findings.
Council on Foundations. https://www.cof.org/content/2020-grantmaker-salary-and-
benefits-report-key-findings
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
D5 Coalition (2016). State of the work. Stories from the movement to advance diversity, equity.
D5 Coalition. https://www.d5coalition.org/tools/state-of-the-work-final/
Daniel, J., Levine, J., McGoy, D. Reddrick, C., & Syed, H. (2019). Money, Power and Race: The
Lived Experience of Fundraisers of Color. Cause Effective.
https://www.causeeffective.org/preparing-the-next-generation/money-power-and-
race.html
Danley, S., & Blessett, B. (2022). Nonprofit Segregation: The Exclusion and Impact of White
Nonprofit Networks. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(3), 507–526.
https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640221081507

112

Davis, D.W., & Silver, B. D. (2003). Stereotype threat and race of interviewer effects in a survey
on political knowledge. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 33–45.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00003
Day, D. V ., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in
leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The
Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004
DeCuir-Gunby, J.T., & Gunby, N. W. (2016). Racial Microaggressions in the Workplace: A
Critical Race Analysis of the Experiences of African American Educators. Urban
Education, 51(4), 390–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916628610
Dickens, D., & Chavez, E. L. (2017). Navigating the workplace: The costs and benefits of
shifting identities at work among early career U.S. black women. Sex Roles, 78(11–12),
760–774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0844-x
Djourova, N.P., Rodríguez Molina, I., Tordera Santamatilde, N., & Abate, G. (2020). Self-
Efficacy and Resilience: Mediating Mechanisms in the Relationship Between the
Transformational Leadership Dimensions and Well-Being. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 27(3), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051819849002
Dorsey, C., Bradach, J., Kim, P. (2020). Racial equity and philanthropy: Disparities in funding
for leaders of color leave impact on the table. Echoing Green and Bridgespan Group.
https://www.bridgespan.org/bridgespan/Images/articles/racial-equity-and-
philanthropy/racial-equity-and-philanthropy.pdf
Dugan, J.P., & Leonette, H. (2021). The complicit omission: Leadership development’s radical
silence on equity. Journal of College Student Development, 62(3), 379–382.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2021.0030

113

Dupree, C. H., & Torrez, B. (2021). Hierarchy profiling: How and why a job’s perceived impact
on inequality affects racial hiring evaluations. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 96, 104185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104185
Eide, P., & Allen, C. B. (2005). Recruiting Transcultural Qualitative Research Participants: A
Conceptual Model. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 44–56.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690500400204
Elliot, A.J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2017). Handbook of competence and motivation:
theory and application (Second edition.). The Guilford Press.
Emerson Feit, M., Blalock, E., & Nguyen, K. (2017). Making diversity matter in a nonprofit
accreditation process: Critical race theory as a lens on the present and future of nonprofit
education. Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, Special Issue 1, 59–68.
https://doi.org/10.18666/JNEL-2017-V7-SI1-8240
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2020). Getting serious about diversity. Harvard Business Review,
98(6), 114–122.
Eun, B. (2019). Adopting a stance: Bandura and Vygotsky on professional development.
Research in Education (Manchester), 105(1), 74–88.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523718793431
Faulk, L., Kim, M., Derrick-Mills, T., Boris, E., Tomasko, L., Hakizimana, N., Chen, T., Kim,
M., & Nath, L. (2021). Nonprofit Trends and Impacts 2021 National Findings on
Donation Trends from 2015 through 2020, Diversity and Representation, and First-Year
Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Urban Institute.
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/104889/nonprofit-trends-and-
impacts-2021_3.pdf

114

Feser, Nielsen, N., & Rennie, M. (2017). What’s missing in leadership development? The
McKinsey Quarterly, (3), 20–24. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-
insights/leadership/whats-missing-in-leadership-development
Flores, K.L, & Matkin, G. S. (2014). “Take your own path”: minority leaders encountering and
overcoming barriers in cultural community centers. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 21(1),
5–14. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-
journals/take-your-own-path-minority-leaders-encountering/docview/1518918432/se-2
Foundation List. (2021, April 13). What is a nonprofit? Explanation of the types of nonprofits,
definition, and the difference between “public charities” and “foundations.”
https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.foundationlist.org/news/what-is-a-nonprofit-
the-types-of-nonprofits-
definitions/&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1649201913349193&usg=AOvVaw3xUU7l4O4D
uO1hyGHjitkV
Fredette, C., & Sessler Bernstein, R. (2019). Ethno-racial diversity on nonprofit boards: A critical
mass perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(5), 931–952.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764019839778
Friedrich, T. L., Vessey, W. B., Schuelke, M. J., Ruark, G. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). A
framework for understanding collective leadership: The selective utilization of leader and
team expertise within networks. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 933-958.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.008
Fulton, B.R., Oyakawa, M., & Wood, R. L. (2019). Critical standpoint: Leaders of color
advancing racial equality in predominantly white organizations. Nonprofit Management
& Leadership, 30(2), 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21387

115

Fund the People. (2017). Fund the people toolkit: Equity & inclusion literature review.
http://fundthepeople.org/toolkit/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Literature-Review.pdf
Garcia, S., E., (2020). Where did BIPOC come from? The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-bipoc.html
Gasman, M., Drezner, N., Epstein E., Freeman, T., Avery, V . (2011). Race, gender, and
leadership in nonprofit organizations. Palgrave Macmillan US.
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/socal/reader.action?docID=832222
Gelles, E., Merrick, M., Derrickson, S., Otis, F., Sweeten-Lopez, O., & Folsom, J. T. (2009).
Building stronger weak ties among a diverse pool of emergent nonprofit leaders of color:
Building Stronger Weak Ties. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 19(4), 523–548.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.235
Ghasabeh, M.S. (2021). Transformational Leadership: Implementing a Cultural Approach in
Organizations. The Journal of Values Based Leadership, 14(1), 101–118.
Gillborn, D. (2015). Intersectionality, critical race theory, and the primacy of racism: Race, class,
gender, and disability in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(3), 277–287.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414557827
Gladden, S.N., & Levine Daniel, J. (2021). The plantation’s fall and the nonprofit sector’s rise:
Addressing the influence of the antebellum plantation on today’s nonprofit sector.
Administrative Theory & Praxis, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2021.1959167
Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2020). Pathways to the glass cliff: A risk tax for women and minority
leaders? Social Problems, 67(4), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spz045

116

Gorczyca, M., & Hartman, R. L. (2017). The new face of philanthropy: The role of intrinsic
motivation in millennials’ attitudes and intent to donate to charitable organizations.
Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 29(4), 415–433.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2017.1326349
Gothard, S., & Austin, M. J. (2013). Leadership succession planning: Implications for nonprofit
human service organizations. Administration in Social Work, 37(3), 272–285.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03643107.2012.684741
GraStudios, (2023). Business Presentation Template [Figure], Creative Marketplace.
https://creativemarket.com/GraStudios/373218-Business-Presentation-Template
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness. Paulist Press.
Greer, C., & Virick, M. (2008). Diverse succession planning: Lessons from the industry leaders.
Human Resource Management, 47(2), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20216
Gündemir, S., Dovidio, J.F., Homan, A.C., & De Dreu, C. K.W. (2017). The impact of
organizational diversity policies on minority employees’ leadership self-perceptions and
goals. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(2), 172–188.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816662615
Haber, M. (2019). The new activist non-Profits: Four models breaking from the non-profit
industrial complex. University of Miami Law Review, 73(3), 863–954.
Haile, A. (2020). Guide to succession planning for nonprofit organizations. A quick start
framework to start and sustain succession planning. Nonprofit Leadership Center.
https://nlctb.org/wp-content/uploads/decent/Guide-to-Nonprofit-Succession-Plan-with-
Sample-Plan_Amy-Haile_Dec2020.pdf

117

Hailey, J., & James, R. (2004) “Trees die from the top”: International perspectives on NGO
leadership development. Voluntas (Manchester, England), 15(4), 343–353.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-004-1236-8
Harris, E.E. (2014). The impact of board diversity and expertise on nonprofit performance.
Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 25(2), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21115
Haynes, C., Stewart, S., & Allen, E. (2016). Three paths, one struggle: Black women and girls
battling invisibility in U.S. classrooms. Journal of Negro Education, 85(3), 380–391.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7709/jnegroeducation.85.issue-3.
Heckler, N. (2019). Whiteness and masculinity in nonprofit organizations: Law, money, and
institutional race and gender. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 41(3), 266–285.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2019.1621659
Hinck, J. (2017). Designing an organizational leadership development program: A case study
approach. Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, 7(4), 268–286.
https://doi.org/10.18666/JNEL-2017-V7-I4-8081
Holmes, A. G. D. (2020). Researcher positionality--A consideration of its influence and place in
qualitative research--A new researcher guide. Shanlax International Journal of
Education, 8(4), 1–10.
Hopkins, K., Meyer, M., Afkinich, J., Bialobrzeski, E., & Perry, V . (2021). Impact of leadership
development and facilitated peer coaching on women’s individual, collective, and
organizational behaviors in human services. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 32(3),
387–408. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21487
Horner, M. (1997). Leadership theory: past, present, and future. Team Performance
Management, 3(4), 270–287. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527599710195402

118

Howlett, M. (2021). Looking at the ‘field’ through a Zoom lens: Methodological reflections on
conducting online research during a global pandemic. Qualitative Research,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120985691
INCITE! Women of color against violence (2017). The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond
the Nonprofit Industrial Complex. Duke University Press.
Independent Sector. (2021). Health of the U.S. nonprofit sector. Independent Sector.
https://independentsector.org/resource/health-of-the-u-s-nonprofit-sector-2020/
Internal Revenue Service (2022). Exemption requirements - 501(c)(3) organizations. Internal
Revenue Service. https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-
organizations/exemption-requirements-501c3-organizations
Jagpal, N., & Schlegel, R (2015). Cultivating nonprofit leadership. A missed philanthropic
opportunity. National Committee for Responsible Philanthropy.
https://bjn9t2lhlni2dhd5hvym7llj-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/03/CultivatingNonprofitLeadership.pdf
James-Gallaway, A. D. (2019). All Money Ain’t Good Money: The Interest Convergence
Principle, White Philanthropy, and Black Education of the Past and Present. Mid-Western
Educational Researcher, 31(3).
John Hopkins University. (2022). John Hopkins Carey Business School Leadership Development
Program. https://carey.jhu.edu/articles/carey-business-school-opens-enrollment-diversity-
leadership-initiative
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2014). Chapter 9: Methods of data collection. In
Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th ed.) (pp.
223–246). Sage.

119

Kim, J. J., Brookman-Frazee, L., Gellatly, R., Stadnick, N., Barnett, M. L., & Lau, A. S. (2018).
Predictors of burnout among community therapists in the sustainment phase of a system-
driven implementation of multiple evidence-based practices in children’s mental health.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 49(2), 132.
https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000182
Knapp, J.R., Smith, B. R., & Sprinkle, T. A. (2017). Is it the job or the support? Examining
structural and relational predictors of job satisfaction and turnover intention for nonprofit
employees. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(3), 652–671.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764016685859
Koob, A. (2020, April). Key Facts on U.S. Nonprofits and Foundations. Candid.
https://www.issuelab.org/resources/36381/36381.pdf
Koppolu, R., Cairns, C., Crawford, D., Dudley, E., Finn, L., & Horner, G. (2021). Leadership
succession planning and executive board service. Journal of Pediatric Health Care.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2021.08.009
Kotter International (2023). 8 steps to accelerate change in your organization.
https://www.kotterinc.com/
Kotter, J.P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Chapter 3: Developing a questioning route. In Focus
groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.) (pp. 35–61). Sage.
Kuenzi, K., Stewart, A. J., & Walk, M. (2021). COVID‐19 as a nonprofit workplace crisis:
Seeking insights from the nonprofit workers’ perspective. Nonprofit Management &
Leadership, 31(4), 821–832. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21465

120

Landles-Cobb, L., Kramer, K., & Milway, K. S. (2015). The nonprofit leadership development
deficit. Sanford Social Innovation Review.
https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_nonprofit_leadership_development_deficit
Leach, K.A., & Crichlow, W. (2020). CRT intersectionality and nonprofit collaboration: a critical
reflection. Community Development Journal, 55(1), 121–138.
https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsz028
Lee, Y . (2016). Comparison of job satisfaction between nonprofit and public employees.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45(2), 295–313.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764015584061
Lee, Y ., & Suh, J. (2018). Managerial development programs for executive directors and
accountability practices in nonprofit organizations. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 38(4), 431–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16674783
Lenora, (2023). Marketing and Sales Graph [Figure], Canva.
https://www.canva.com/p/templates/EAFQ-DRry5I-marketing-and-sales-graph/
Leonard, H.S. (2003). Leadership Development for the Postindustrial, Postmodern Information
Age. Consulting Psychology Journal, 55(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/1061-
4087.55.1.3
LeRoux, K., & Feeney, M. K. (2013). Factors attracting individuals to nonprofit management
over public and private sector management. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 24(1),
43–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21079
LeRoux, K., & Medina, A. (2023). Bending the arc of nonprofit leadership toward justice:
Impacts of racial representation and organizational publicness on diversifying executive

121

leadership. Public Administration Review, 83(1), 103–116.
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13534
Li, H. (2019). Leadership succession and the performance of nonprofit organizations: A fuzzy-set
qualitative comparative analysis. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 29(3), 341–361.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21339
Llopis, G., & Eber, J. (2019). Leadership in the age of personalization. Why standardization fails
in the age of “me”. GLLG Press
Lough, S. (2021, December 13). Get a closer look at why the IRS is encouraging taxpayers to
make charitable contributions by December 31, 2021. Internal Revenue Service.
https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.irs.gov/about-irs/the-irs-encourages-
taxpayers-to-consider-charitable-
contributions%23:~:text%3DThe%2520law%2520now%2520permits%2520C,to%2520e
ligible%2520charities%2520in%25202021&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1649377457633
Machida, M., & Schaubroeck, J. (2011). The Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Leader
Development. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(4), 459–468.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051811404419
Martinez, A. (2014). Critical race theory: Its origins, history, and importance to the discourses
and rhetorics of race. Frame-Journal of Literacy Studies, 27(2), 9–27.
http://www.tijdschriftframe.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Frame-27_2-Critical-Race-
Theory.pdf
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Chapter 5: Methods. In Qualitative research design (pp. 96–104). Sage.
McCall, M. W. (2010). Recasting leadership development. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 3(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01189.x

122

McCluney, C. L., Durkee, M. I., Smith II, R. E., Robotham, K. J., & Lee, S. S. L. (2021). To be,
or not to be … Black: The effects of racial codeswitching on perceived professionalism in
the workplace. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97, 104199.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104199
McCormick, M. J. (2001). Self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness: applying social cognitive
theory to leadership. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 8(1), 22–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190100800102
McGinnis Johnson, J., & Ng, E. S. (2016). Money talks or millennials walk: The effect of
compensation on nonprofit millennial workers sector-switching intentions. Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 36(3), 283–305.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X15587980
McKee, G., & Froelich, K. (2016). Executive succession planning: barriers and substitutes in
nonprofit organizations. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 87(4), 587–601.
https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12129
Meehan, B., & Starkey, K. (2017). Stanford survey on leadership and management in the
nonprofit sector. Stanford University. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-
research/publications/survey-leadership-management-nonprofit-sector
Merriam, S. B., Johnson-Bailey, J., Lee, M. Y ., Kee, Y ., Ntseane, G., & Muhamad, M. (2001).
Power and positionality: Negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures.
International journal of lifelong education, 20(5), 405–416.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370120490
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

123

Morgan, D. L. (2014). Chapter 3: Research design and research methods. In Integrating
qualitative and quantitative methods (pp. 45–62). Sage.
Moreno, J. V ., & Girard, A. S. (2019). Capitalizing on an existing shared governance structure in
developing leadership succession planning. JONA: The Journal of Nursing
Administration, 49(4), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000737
Morgenroth, T., Kirby, T. A., Ryan, M. K., & Sudkämper, A. (2020). The who, when, and why of
the glass cliff phenomenon: A meta-Analysis of appointments to precarious leadership
positions. Psychological Bulletin, 146(9), 797–829. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000234
Morris, Z.A., & Austin, M.J. (2014). Leadership development in the Jewish nonprofit sector: a
case study of the New York Muehlstein Institute for Jewish Professional Leadership.
Journal of Jewish Communal Service, 89(1),125–140.
Mullangi, S., & Jagsi, R. (2019). Imposter Syndrome: Treat the Cause, Not the
Symptom. JAMA : the Journal of the American Medical Association, 322(5), 403–404.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9788
National Center for Charitable Statistics. (2020). The nonprofit sector in brief 2019.
https://nccs.urban.org/publication/nonprofit-sector-brief-2019#the-nonprofit-sector-in-
brief-2019
National Institute of Health. (2017). Glossary. National Institute of Health.
https://diversity.nih.gov/find-read-learn/glossary
National Museum of African American History & Culture. (2022). Whiteness. National Museum
of African American History & Culture. https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-
race/topics/whiteness

124

Nickels, A.E., & Leach, K. A. (2021). Toward a more just nonprofit sector: Leveraging a critical
approach to disrupt and dismantle white masculine space. Public Integrity, 23(5), 515–
530. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2020.1870833
Nonprofit Hub. (n.d.). A brief history of nonprofit organizations (and what we can learn).
https://nonprofithub.org/a-brief-history-of-nonprofit-organizations/
Nonprofit HR (2016). 2016 Nonprofit employment practices survey results. Nonprofit HR.
https://www.nonprofithr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/2016NEPSurvey-final.pdf
Nonprofit HR (2021a). 2021 Nonprofit talent management priorities survey. Nonprofit HR.
https://www.nonprofithr.com/2021tmps/
Nonprofit HR (2021b). 2021 Nonprofit talent retention practices survey. Nonprofit HR.
https://www.nonprofithr.com/2021talentretentionsurvey/
Nonprofit HR. (2019). 2019 Talent retention practices survey results. Nonprofit HR
https://www.nonprofithr.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Nonprofit-HR-Talent-
Retention-Survey-Findings-2019-.pdf
Norris, M., & Gibbons, S. (2019). Nonprofits unintentionally perpetuate racism. Here’s how to
stop. Chronicle of Philanthropy, 31(5), 34–35.
Norris-Terrell, D., Rinella, J., & Pham, X. (2018). Examining the career trajectories of nonprofit
executive leaders. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(1), 146–164.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764017722023
Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: theory and practice (Eighth Edition.). SAGE Publications,
Inc.
Ospina, S. M. (2018). Toward Inclusive Leadership Scholarship: Inviting the Excluded to
Theorize Collective Leadership. In After Leadership (pp. 147–156). Routledge.

125

Ospina, S. M. (2017). Collective leadership and context in public administration: Bridging public
leadership research and leadership studies. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 275–
287. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12706
Ospina, S., & Foldy, E. (2009). A critical review of race and ethnicity in the leadership literature:
Surfacing context, power, and the collective dimensions of leadership. The leadership
quarterly, 20(6), 876-896.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.005
Otaye-Ebede, L., Shaffakat, S., & Foster, S. (2019). A Multilevel Model Examining the
Relationships Between Workplace Spirituality, Ethical Climate and Outcomes: A Social
Cognitive Theory Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(3), 611–626.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04133-8
Ozyilmaz, A., Erdogan, B., & Karaeminogullari, A. (2018). Trust in organization as a moderator
of the relationship between self-efficacy and workplace outcomes: A social cognitive
theory-based examination. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
91(1), 181–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12189
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative interviewing. In Qualitative research and
evaluation methods (3rd ed.) (pp. 339–396). Sage.
Patton, R., Mordaunt, J., & Cornforth, C. (2007). Beyond nonprofit management education:
Leadership development in a time of blurred boundaries and distributed learning.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(4_suppl), 148S–162S.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764007305053
Pérez Huber, L., & Solorzano, D. G. (2015). Racial microaggressions as a tool for critical race
research. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 18(3), 297–320.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2014.994173

126

Price, A., & Bhattacharya, J. (2021). BIPOC nonprofit leaders deserve better from philanthropy.
Nonprofit Quarterly. https://nonprofitquarterly.org/bipoc-nonprofit-leaders-deserve-
better-from-philanthropy/
Raelin, J.A. (2018). What are you afraid of: Collective leadership and its learning implications.
Management Learning, 49(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507617729974
Reid, M.F., Brown, L., McNerney, D., & Perri, D.J. (2014). Time to raise the bar on nonprofit
strategic planning and implementation. Strategy & Leadership, 42(3), 31–39.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-03-2014-0019
Reinwald, M., Zaia, J., & Kunze, F. (2022). Shine bright like a diamond: When signaling creates
glass cliffs for female executives. Journal of Management, 49(3), 105–136
https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063211067518
Ritchie, M. (2020). Succession planning for successful leadership: Why we need to talk about
succession planning. Management in Education, 34(1), 33–37.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020619881044
Rosette, A.S., Leonardelli, G. J., & Phillips, K. W. (2008). The white standard: racial bias in
leader categorization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 758–777.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.758
Ross, S. (2014). A conceptual model for understanding the process of self-leadership
development and action-steps to promote personal leadership development. The Journal
of Management Development, 33(4), 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-11-2012-
0147

127

RRgraph, (2023). Grey Simple Modern 4 Layers Funnel Diagram Chart Graph [Figure], Canva.
https://www.canva.com/p/templates/EAE90qolxKA-grey-simple-modern-4-layers-
funnel-diagram-chart-graph/
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-represented
in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management, 16(2), 81–90.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00433.x
Sánchez, I.D., Ospina, S.M., & Salgado, E. (2020). Advancing constructionist leadership
research through paradigm interplay: An application in the leadership–trust domain.
Leadership, 16(6), 683–711. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715020919226
Santora, J.C., Sarros, J.C., & Esposito, M. (2010). Small to mid-sized nonprofit leadership
development initiatives: organizational lessons learned. Development and Learning in
Organizations, 24(6),17–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777281011084711
Saratovsky, K.D., & Feldman, D. (2013). Cause for change the why and how of nonprofit
millennial engagement (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass, a Wiley imprint.
Sargeant, A., & Day, H. (2018). A study of nonprofit leadership in the US and its impending
crisis. Concord Leadership Group
https://concordleadershipgroup.com/!WakeUpCall_Report.pdf
Sawaya, F. (2011). “That friendship of the whites”: patronage, philanthropy, and Charles
Chesnutt’s the colonel’s dream. American Literature, 83(4), 775–801.
https://doi.org/10.1215/00029831-1437216
Schunk, D.H., & Usher, E.L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R.M. Ryan
(Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (2nd ed., Chapter 2). Oxford
University Press.

128

Schwartz, R., Weiberg, J., Hagenbuch, D., Scott, A. (2011). The voice of nonprofit talent:
Perspectives of diversity in the workplace. Commongood Careers & Level Playing Field
Institute. https://mk0kaporcenter5ld71a.kinstacdn.com/wp-
content/uploads/2017/05/voice_of_nonprofit_talent.pdf
Slatten, L.A., Bendickson, J.S., Diamond, M., & McDowell, W.C. (2021). Staffing of small non-
profit organizations: A model for retaining employees. Journal of Innovation and
Knowledge, 6(1), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2020.10.003
Smith, M. (2019). Nonprofit leadership at a crossroads. Nonprofit Quarterly.
https://nonprofitquarterly.org/nonprofit-leadership-at-a-crossroads/
Smoyer, C.B, Dwyer, R. J., Garfield, J. K., & Simmons, B. D. (2021). Developing workforce
capability in nonprofits through effective leadership. International Journal of Applied
Management and Technology, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.5590/IJAMT.2021.20.1.09
Stater, K.J, & Stater, M. (2019). Is it “just work”? The impact of work rewards on job
satisfaction and turnover intent in the nonprofit, for-profit, and public sectors. American
Review of Public Administration, 49(4), 495–511.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018815261
Stewart, A. J., & Kuenzi, K. (2018). The nonprofit career ladder: exploring career paths as
leadership development for future nonprofit executives. Public Personnel Management,
47(4), 359–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026018783022
Stewart, C. (2016). How diverse is your pipeline? Developing the talent pipeline for women and
black and ethnic minority employees. Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(2), 61–66.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-09-2015-0059

129

Stewart, M.J., Kuenzi, K., Walk, M., & Kippel, A. (2021). States of COVID-19: Synthesis of
state-level nonprofit reports on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
https://nonprofiteducationsurvey.com/future-research/
Theofanidis, D., & Fountouki, A. (2018). Limitations and delimitations in the research process.
Perioperative Nursing-Quarterly Scientific, Online Official Journal of GORNA, 7(3
September-December 2018), 155–163. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2552022
Thomas-Breitfeld, S., & Kunreuther, F. (2017). Race to lead: confronting the nonprofit racial
leadership gap. Building Movement Project. https://racetolead.org/race-to-lead/
University of Kansas. (2023). Center for community health and development, community
toolbox. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/assessment/assessing-community-needs-
and-resources/community-report-cards/powerpoint
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2020). Community-based organizations during
COVID-19. https://www.phe.gov/emergency/events/COVID19/atrisk/returning-to-
work/Pages/default.aspx
Valero, J.N., Jung, K., & Andrew, S. A. (2015). Does transformational leadership build resilient
public and nonprofit organizations? Disaster Prevention and Management, 24(1), 4–20.
https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-04-2014-0060
Van Seters, D. A., & Field, R. H. (1990). The evolution of leadership theory. Journal of
organizational change management. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534819010142139
Van Winkle, B., Allen, S., DeV ore, D., & Winston, B. (2014). The Relationship between the
servant leadership behaviors of immediate supervisors and followers’ perceptions of
being empowered in the context of small business. Journal of Leadership Education,
13(3), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.12806/V13/I3/R5

130

Velasco, M., & Sansone, C. (2019). Resistance to diversity and inclusion change initiatives:
Strategies for transformational leaders. Organization Development Journal, 37(3), 9–20.
V ogel, K., & Erickson, S. (2021). Well-being, EDIB, and the promise of leadership development.
Journal of Library Administration, 61(8), 1008–1016.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2021.1984145
Walk, M., Stewart, A. J., & Kuenzi, K. (2020). Should I stay or should I go?: Investigating
nonprofit sector commitment among nonprofit education alumni. Journal of Nonprofit
Education and Leadership, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.18666/JNEL-2020-10116
Walker, V . (2019). The road to nonprofit diversity and inclusion. The Journal of Infectious
Diseases, 220(Supplement_2), S86–S90. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiz175
Wallace, N. (2019, July 9a). Advice for young nonprofit professionals of color — from people
who have been there. The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
https://www.philanthropy.com/article/advice-for-young-nonprofit-professionals-of-color-
from-people-who-have-been-there/
Wallace, N. (2019, July 9b). Nonprofit leaders of color speak about struggles and triumphs. The
Chronicle of Philanthropy. https://www.philanthropy.com/article/nonprofit-leaders-of-
color-speak-out-about-struggles-and-triumphs/
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Chapter 3: Preparation for interviewing. In Learning from strangers: The art
and method of qualitative interview studies (pp. 51-59). New York, NY: The Free Press.
West, E. (2018, October 18). Beyond the non-profit industrial complex. Truthout.
https://truthout.org/articles/beyond-the-non-profit-industrial-complex/
White, A. (2017). Tax Reform Act of 1969. Learning to give.
https://www.learningtogive.org/resources/tax-reform-act-1969

131

Whitaker Calloway, T. (2020). How to truly foster diversity, inclusion, and equity in your
nonprofit workplace. NonProfit Pro, 18(4), 10–10.
Wiecek, W.M., & Hamilton, J.L. (2014). Beyond the civil rights act of 1964: Confronting
structural racism in the workplace. LSU Law Digital
Commons. https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol74/iss4/5/
Willie, C. V . (1984). Leadership development programs for minorities: an evaluation. The Urban
Review, 16(4), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01142979
Wimpee, R. (2022, April 4). Funding a social movement: The Ford Foundation and civil rights,
1965–1970. Rockefeller Archive Center. https://resource.rockarch.org/story/philanthropy-
social-movements-ford-foundation-civil-rights-1965-1970/
Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. The
Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361–384. https://doi.org/10.2307/258173

132

Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Introduction to the interview: Thank you for meeting with me today. Your experiences
and perspective as a nonprofit leader will help determine the effectiveness of leadership
development programs. The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of leadership
development programs in the non-profit sector for BIPOC and non-BIPOC leaders. I am seeking
to answer two questions:
1. What barriers do non-profits face in implementing successful leadership development
programs?
2. What impact do leadership development programs have on the career opportunities
for non-profit BIPOC professionals?
I will be asking 12 interview questions with possible follow-up questions. The interview
should take approximately 45 to 60 minutes. This interview and your information are
confidential and will be kept in a secure location. I will be using a pseudonym for you and if I
quote you in the study. Before we begin, please re-read the informed consent. Do I have your
permission to record this interview? Please self-identify if you are a Black, Indigenous, or person
of color (BIPOC) or a non-BIPOC.
Conclusion to the interview: Thank you for participating. I appreciate your time and all
you shared about your experiences and journey as a non-profit leader. This information will be
kept confidential and stored in a secure place. If I quote you, a pseudonym will be used. After
today, if anything comes to mind that you would like to share, please feel free to reach out to me
via phone or email.

133

Table A1
Interview Questions
Interview question Potential probes RQ Key concept
addressed
What is your role at the
organization?

What experiences lead you
to be a leader?
Did you have a mentor? 1 and 2 Personal;
behavioral
factors
What are the essential
elements of an effective
leadership development
program?

What makes you say this? 1 and 2 Personal,
behavioral,
and
environmental
factors
Please describe the
leadership opportunities
you have access to at your
organization.
Please provide examples of
types of trainings
1 and 2 Behavioral and
environmental
factors
Please describe your
relationship with your
supervisor.
How does the relationship
with your supervisor
impact your motivation?
1 Personal factors
How confident do you feel in
your ability to meet the
expectations of your job?
How did you determine that? 1 Personal factors
What are the barriers to
accessing leadership
development
opportunities?
What strategies do you use to
address these barriers?
1 Environmental
factors
How would you describe the
organizational culture at
your organization?
Can you share some of the
organization’s norms,
policies, and procedures?
1 Environmental
factors
Have you experienced any
discrimination and/or
biases in your role as a
leader?
If yes, can you give an
example? How did this
experience make you feel?

1 Personal factors

What type of feedback
have you received about
your leadership style?
Describe the support you
have or have not received
to enhance your leadership
development.
2 Behavioral
factors
What recommendations do
you have for improving
leadership development
programs?
What strategies would
enhance the learning
process
2 Environmental
factors

134

Interview question Potential probes RQ Key concept
addressed
Is there anything you would
like to add regarding
leadership development
that I have not asked you?
What advice would you give
emerging leaders?
1 and 2 Personal,
behavioral,
and,
environmental
factors

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study applied Bandura’s model of reciprocal determinism through social cognitive theory to examine the bidirectional triadic relationships between personal, behavioral, and environmental factors that impact the underrepresentation of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of color (BIPOC) professionals in the nonprofit sector. Additionally, a critical race theory lens examined how White dominant culture holds the standard for the systems of power that influence norms, attitudes, and practices within the nonprofit sector. The goals of the study aimed to identify barriers to implementing BIPOC leadership development programs, provide insight into the current leadership development practices on the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals, and suggest possible solutions for eliminating barriers and improving the leadership trajectory for nonprofit professionals. A qualitative research approach used semi-structured interviews to address the problem of practice. An open and axial coding process guided a thematic analysis using responses from open-ended. The interview participants’ experiences and opinions from their leadership journeys helped construct the recommendations. The results show the barriers to effective leadership development and the components that influence career trajectory for BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector. The suggested recommendations include: utilize an integrated leadership development system to design BIPOC-centered mentoring and coaching opportunities; implement experience-based learning opportunities for emerging nonprofit leaders; ensure equitable access to funding and opportunities and practices; and foster a commitment to collective leadership for change. The integrated leadership development system and collective leadership framework will address the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals and build strong collaborations among nonprofit leaders, organizations, and funding institutions.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Understanding workplace burnout in the nonprofit sector

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black, indigenous, and people of color in executive-level information technology positions

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black women in the senior executive service of the United States government

PDF

Looking through the staff lens: membership retention strategies in 501c6 nonprofit organizations

PDF

Managers’ roles in supporting employee engagement in Jewish nonprofit organizations

PDF

Facilitators for the advancement of Hispanic/Latinx employees in corporate security

PDF

An examination of the impact of diversity initiatives and their supporting roles on organizational culture: an experiential study from the perspective of diversity personnel

PDF

A nonprofit study evaluating board chair onboarding practices for effective governance

PDF

Retaining and supporting BIPOC professionals in PWIs: addressing PWIs equity gap

PDF

Partnerships and nonprofit leadership: the influence of nonprofit managers on community partnerships

PDF

Leadership in turbulent times: a social cognitive study of responsible leaders

PDF

Silencing to belonging: the institutionalization of Black girls in public schools

PDF

The lack of National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) hiring of male and female BIPOC athletics coaches

PDF

Amplifying the counter-narratives of first-generation college graduates of color as they navigate the journey toward decent work

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Performance measurement in nonprofits: an evaluation study

PDF

The underrepresentation of African American women in corporate leadership roles

PDF

The importance of Black and Latino teachers in BIPOC student achievement and the importance of continuous teacher professional development for BIPOC student achievement

PDF

Underrepresentation of women of color in railroad engineering

PDF

The underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in the United States Army

Asset Metadata

Creator Mason, Jolie (author)

Core Title Centering underrepresented voices: the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 05/09/2023

Defense Date 04/05/2023

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

Tag BIPOC,nonprofit,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Green, Alan G. (committee chair), Chatham, Daniel (committee member), Kim, Esther C. (committee member)

Creator Email drjoliemason@gmail.com,jlmason@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113103746

Unique identifier UC113103746

Identifier etd-MasonJolie-11802.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MasonJolie-11802

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Mason, Jolie

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230509-usctheses-batch-1040 (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