Dr. Geoff Nichols: University of SheffieldRita Ralston: Manchester Metropolitan

University

Talking ‘bout my generation: Generational differences in the

psychological contracts of volunteers at the 2012 Olympic Games: Are there differences in

attitudes to volunteering by generations?

Differences in volunteering rates by age

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Jan 2012 - Dec2012

%

16-2425-4445-6465-7475+

Percentage of adults volunteering at least once in last 12 months by age group, England

Source: Taking Part - in DCMS (2013) p.29

Differences in volunteering by age – why?

• General attitude – change by generation?

• Motivations reflecting personal circumstances and specific opportunities.

• Constraints. • Attitude and motivation depend on experience.

• Complex ‘cocktail’ in any one situation.

Using a ‘psychological contract’ to understand volunteering

• A subjective ‘deal’ – volunteer expectations.

• Transactional, relational and ideological components.

Volunteering for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games

• 70,000 ‘Games Makers’ - 240,000 applied - 100,000 interviewed.

• Regional interview centers - up to 16 months after applying.

• Notification - up to 18 months after interview.

• 3 training sessions – London, plus uniform pick up.

• Shift allocation from May.• Find own accommodation.

Methods • 53 qualitative interviews between February and June 2012 with individuals who had volunteered for the Games.

• Sample predominantly from Manchester and Sheffield areas – 200 miles north of London.

• Transcribed.• Analysed to identify including transactional, relational and ideological components of the psychological contract.

Results Older volunteer - Marge

• Retired, early 60’s. • “had such a good experience

(volunteering) in the World Student Games in 1991.”

• “worked in the voluntary sector all of my life”, offered a role it was “giving out dinner tickets … something I am not hugely motivated to do I can’t tell you.”

Results Marge – Contd...

• Was told that; “Electing the volunteers was a tough job but we were really impressed with your interview..” For Marge these were “just words and I don’t believe them.”

• She felt “… really undervalued.” But “somebody has to do the not so attractive glamorous jobs and OK I will do it .”

• Motivation “slowly turned down ‘like a ‘dimmer switch’”. Despite this “ I have to go, … it’s not in my make-up, to let people down.”

Results Older volunteer - Bernard

• Retired, late 70s. • Enjoyed volunteering at other large sporting events – wanted to support the UK - make sure the Olympics was a success.

• Thought his considerable experience as a volunteer manager might be useful.

• “I’ve been put on general stewarding, a general dogsbody really. I'm not pleased but I don't fret too much. If I commit to something, I commit, so you just have to get on with it.”

Results Younger volunteer - Lindy

• 17 when applied - now a first year student.

• Motivation - “the experience of being there to be honest and being involved in it.” She “wanted to be mainly in one of the stadiums rather than in the background doing things”.

• Second motivation was “because it will be good for my CV and stuff after University hopefully.”

Results Lindy – Contd...

• “Applied for the minimum time you could do – 11-14 days” because wanted “a bit of my summer … for a holiday and stuff.”

• Travel costs - “quite a lot of money for a student.”

• Volunteers were told “you are the most important part of the Olympics, but you know that they have to say it really to motivate us so it just goes in one ear and out the other.”

Results Younger volunteer - Laura

• Final year event management student.

• Wanted “to experience it and see what the infrastructure was like and to be part of it.”

• Hoped to “gain contacts with other event managers… .”

• Frustrated when interviewer responded “all I can say is what I've been told to say.”

• LOCOGs attitude - “this is what we want from you, take it or leave it” made her question whether “they could offer me as much as I could offer them” or if they “cared enough about the volunteers to look after us properly.”

Conclusions

• Difficulties of disentangling the volunteer cocktail.

• Identifying attitudes involves understanding each volunteer’s experience in their own terms – qualitative inductive methods.

• Evidence for altruism is weaker in the young but might just reflect a weaker set of values rather than different ones.

Conclusions

• Different reactions to LOCOG’s apparent insincerity.

• May be a difference in expectations of respecting the volunteer for what he or she had given up.

• Experienced volunteers’ expectations of being treated with respect and valued may be derived from their previous experience of volunteering, but may also be a difference over generations.

Conclusions

• Personal circumstances played a large part in the way attitudes could combine with motivations.

• Nearly all younger volunteers value experience in the job market -irrelevant to the older volunteers.

• Might social relationships become increasingly represented by monetary values - marketization replaces social values (Sandel, 2012).

And finally......

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of volunteers to this paper through the time given to providing interviews. Names and pictures of interviewees have been changed to protect

anonymity.

http://www.youtuberepeat.com/watch?v=zqfFrCUrEbY

Thank you for listening.Any questions?

Dr. Geoff Nichols: University of Sheffield

g.nichols@sheffield.ac.uk

Rita Ralston: Manchester Metropolitan University rita.ralston@ntlworld.com

References•Brodie, E., Hughes, T., Jochum, V., Miller, S., Ockenden, N., and Warburton, D. (2011) Pathways through Participation: What creates and sustains active citizenship? NCVO / IVR / Invovle. •http://pathwaysthroughparticipation.org.uk/resources/finalreport/

•Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (2013) . Meta-Evaluation of the Impacts and Legacy of the London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. Report 5 Post-Games Evaluation, summary report •https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/224181/1188-B_Meta_Evaluation.pdf (accessed 12-11-13)

•DCMS(2012) Department for Culture Media and Sport. (2012). Beyond 2012: the London 2012 legacy story. •https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/77993/DCMS_Beyond_2012_Legacy_Story.pdf

•Dickson, T. and Benson, A. (2013). London 2012 Games Makers: Towards Redefining Legacy https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/.../Games_Makers_Annex.pdf

•Hustinx, L. and Meijs, L.C.P.M. (2011). Re-embedding volunteering: In search of a new collective ground. Vountary Sector Review, 2 (1), 5 – 22.

•Nichols, G. (2012). The psychological contract of volunteers — a new research agenda. Voluntas. Published online before print http://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.1007/s11266-012-9294-9

•Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

•Sandel, M. (2012). What money can’t buy: the moral limits of markets. London: Allen Lane.

•Zimmers play My Generation http://www.youtuberepeat.com/watch?v=zqfFrCUrEbY•