翻译质量保证?比较德国和美国的非营利组织评估实践

Karl Urban
{"title":"翻译质量保证?比较德国和美国的非营利组织评估实践","authors":"Karl Urban","doi":"10.29173/cjnser546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents findings from a study of management practice in youth career assistance nonprofits in Germany and the United States, focusing on the area of evaluation. It was hypothesized that the institutional frameworks of the welfare regime, public administration, and the nonprofit sectors’ origins play an essential role in shaping evaluation practices at the level of operative management. Interviews with managers in both countries were conducted utilizing the World Management Survey in a mixed methods design. Data were evaluated using statistical methods and qualitative content analysis. The findings indicate significant quantitative and qualitative differences between nonprofit evaluation practices in both countries. These results are discussed within the institutional framework used for hypothesis formulation, concluding with suggestions of future research avenues for internationally comparative nonprofit scholarship.","PeriodicalId":502361,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research","volume":"180 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality Assurance Translated? Comparing Nonprofit Evaluation Practices in Germany and the United States\",\"authors\":\"Karl Urban\",\"doi\":\"10.29173/cjnser546\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article presents findings from a study of management practice in youth career assistance nonprofits in Germany and the United States, focusing on the area of evaluation. It was hypothesized that the institutional frameworks of the welfare regime, public administration, and the nonprofit sectors’ origins play an essential role in shaping evaluation practices at the level of operative management. Interviews with managers in both countries were conducted utilizing the World Management Survey in a mixed methods design. Data were evaluated using statistical methods and qualitative content analysis. The findings indicate significant quantitative and qualitative differences between nonprofit evaluation practices in both countries. These results are discussed within the institutional framework used for hypothesis formulation, concluding with suggestions of future research avenues for internationally comparative nonprofit scholarship.\",\"PeriodicalId\":502361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research\",\"volume\":\"180 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29173/cjnser546\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29173/cjnser546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了对德国和美国青年职业援助非营利组织管理实践的研究结果,重点关注评估领域。根据假设,福利制度、公共管理和非营利部门起源的制度框架在形成业务管理层面的评估实践中发挥着至关重要的作用。采用混合方法设计,利用世界管理调查对这两个国家的管理人员进行了访谈。采用统计方法和定性内容分析对数据进行了评估。研究结果表明,两国非营利组织的评估实践在数量和质量上都存在重大差异。这些结果在用于提出假设的制度框架内进行了讨论,最后就国际比较非营利学术的未来研究途径提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Quality Assurance Translated? Comparing Nonprofit Evaluation Practices in Germany and the United States
This article presents findings from a study of management practice in youth career assistance nonprofits in Germany and the United States, focusing on the area of evaluation. It was hypothesized that the institutional frameworks of the welfare regime, public administration, and the nonprofit sectors’ origins play an essential role in shaping evaluation practices at the level of operative management. Interviews with managers in both countries were conducted utilizing the World Management Survey in a mixed methods design. Data were evaluated using statistical methods and qualitative content analysis. The findings indicate significant quantitative and qualitative differences between nonprofit evaluation practices in both countries. These results are discussed within the institutional framework used for hypothesis formulation, concluding with suggestions of future research avenues for internationally comparative nonprofit scholarship.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
La gouvernance forestière: un regard pour mieux voir les acteurs de l’économie sociale La réalité multiscalaire dans la gouvernance des OBNL et EÉSS en alimentation scolaire : le rôle clé de l’expression d’un but commun pour rallier les parties prenantes Indigenous Economics: Sustaining Peoples and Their Lands La fabrique de l’émancipation. Repenser la critique du capitalisme à partir des expériences démocratiques, écologiques et solidaires, Bruno Frère et Jean-Louis Laville, Éditions Seuil, 2022, 443 pages Breaking the Cycle of Abuse and Closing the Housing Gap: A Mixed Methods Community-Based Study on Second-Stage Shelters
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1