No description available.

Corporate support for the Arts, what views are held by the corporate sector about their support for the arts in Australia? Comparison of the literature of the not-for-profit arts sector in Australia with that of the USA and Britain highlights differences in the structure of philanthropic trusts in the USA and their contribution to the not-for-profit arts and the benefit of arts funding in Britain due to support form funding from lotteries. The Australian not-for-profit arts sector does not have support from lottery funding or a long history of support from philanthropic sources. An alternate funding source is corporations, and the role they play in support for the not-for-profit arts in Australia whilst acknowledged, remains unclear. With the use of an Interpretivist approach, this has been an exploratory study. Data was generated through focused interviews with representatives from companies, agencies of government and private philanthropy. The findings from the research have lead to the formation of the view that for the participant populations, support for the arts is considered to be sponsorship (perhaps mirroring structural changes in wider society); that is becoming focussed and strategic and in some instances comes at the expense of sports funding. Competition for corporate funding is not confined to the arts, but the wider not-for-profit sector and corporate decision making has become more astute. Policies and procedures support the decision process, aligning it with corporate goals reducing any impact of internal bias.

This research aimed to develop a deeper understanding of trust and non-profit agency website design, and specifically focussed on the ‘Donate Now’ button. Two experiments investigated the effects of varying levels of consumer certainty, manipulated by providing varying levels of donation relevant information on the web homepage donation buttons, on aid agency trust and donation compliance. Both experiments were based on Study 1, a preliminary survey of website donation button design. Experiment 1 investigated the effects of iconic manipulation of the ‘Donate Now’ button. Results suggested that varying levels of consumer certainty through iconic manipulation of the website donation button design did not effect aid agency trust and donation compliance. Experiment 2 extended the research of Burt and Dunham (2009) to investigate the effects of varying consumer certainty levels through the provision of crisis/need and response photographs on the donation buttons. Results suggested that whilst there was no effect of level of certainty on donation compliance, there was an effect on aid agency trust. Participants’ rated aid agency trust was increased to the greatest extent in the level of greatest certainty, when the donation button contained photographs of both the crisis/need and agency response. Collectively, these results suggest that aid agency trust can be enhanced through the considered manipulation of donation button design. Subsequently photographic images may be a more effective means with which to portray donation-relevant information and reduce uncertainty. Furthermore, in both experiments results showed that those individuals who reported higher aid agency trust also reported significantly higher donation intention. Thus, the current research has implications for the non-profit sector, suggesting that whilst the internet is a viable fundraising tool, the commercially driven process of online donation generation should not be isolated from the psychological concept of trust.

Report (M.S.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. M.S. 1991. / Vita. Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 56-59). Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1991. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [91]-99).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--West Virginia University, 2004. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains x, 77 p. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 57-59).

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität St. Gallen, 1996.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 1967. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 305-309). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1966. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wyoming, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on August 5, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 47).