Board members make important decisions that usually have large impacts on their organization. They have an extremely high values of time because board members usually have extensive experience and expertise within their given fields. These
characteristics are also associated with high values of time. I created a dummy variable named BoardAid. I created this variable by using the following question in the 2014 CPS. PES810 indicates whether or not individuals volunteered for a board in the past year:
PES810- Did you provide professional or management assistance including serving on a board or committee. (Yes/No response).
If the respondents answered, “yes” to PES810, then BoardAid = 1. If the respondents answered “no” to the question, BoardAid = 0. Respondents had to be a volunteer in order to be a board volunteer so all board volunteers were categorized as Volunteer = 1 in Table 2. 23,430 of the 88,925 respondents who volunteered in the past year answered the board volunteer question. Of the 23,430 that answered the board volunteer question, 3,841 actually provided professional assistance on a board. 1,801 of the 9,767 males that answered the question served on a board, while 2,040 of the 13,663 females that
answered the question served on a board. Both the 9,650 males and 13,482 in Table 4 females had an observation for all 11 variables in Table 4 which explains why there are fewer males and females compared to those that answered the board question.
The dependent variable in Table 4 is BoardAid. I will use the regression results to determine the effect of my independent variables on board volunteering versus regular volunteering. Freeman does not include any information specific to board volunteering.
His analysis only focuses on regular volunteering, while my analysis furthers the research on board volunteers. Like Table 2, Table 4 is a linear probability model so if a coefficient is positive, volunteers are more likely to be a board volunteer than a regular volunteer. If a coefficient is negative, volunteers are more likely to be board volunteers than regular volunteers. I display the estimates separately for males and females in Table 4. I also include coefficients and standard errors in the table. I discuss the results for males first and then those for females.
Table 4.
Linear Probability Regression in the Relation of Board Volunteering to Demographic Factors and Family Income in September 2014 CPS
Dependent Variable: BoardAid (=1)
Male Female
Independent Variables (1) (2)
Ln (family income) .014 .027*
(.009) (.006)
Employed (=1) .036* .020*
(.011) (.007)
Grade Completed .022* .021*
(.002) (.001)
Age .001 .000
(.001) (.001)
Age^2*100 1.17E-07 1.16E-07
(1.47E-07) (1.12 E-07)
White (=1) .040* .010
(.012) (.009)
Married (=1) .033* .014*
(.010) (.007)
No. of Children -.012* -.004
(.004) (.003)
INCMSA (=1) -.045* -.033*
(.009) (.007)
N 9,650 13,482
R2 .061 .041
Note: Standard errors shown in parentheses. * = 5% significance.
Male volunteers have positive and statistically significant coefficients for Employed, Grade Completed, White, and Married. Thus they are more likely to volunteer as a board member than as a regular volunteer if they have a higher income, are employed, have completed a higher grade level, are white, or are married. For males, the only change compared to Table 2 is the statistical significance of Number of
Children. According to Table 4, the larger the family size, the less likely males are to volunteer as a board member versus a regular volunteer. It is interesting that the Number of Children has a negative impact on board volunteering compared to other volunteering.
The variable INCSMA is negative and statistically significant, as it is for males in Table 2. Age appears to have no effect on a male’s choice of board versus regular
volunteering.
For females, the variables Ln (family income), Employed, Grade Completed, and Married all have positive and statistically significant coefficients. If females have a higher income, are employed, have completed a higher grade level, or are married, then they are more likely to volunteer on a board versus regular volunteering. Number of Children has a negative coefficient, but it is not statistically significant. Likewise, Age is not statistically significant. The variable INCSMA is negative and statistically
significant, as it is for females in Table 2.
I summarize the comparison between males and females as follows. For both, being employed, completing a higher grade, being married is associated with a higher likelihood that a volunteer is a board volunteer rather than a regular volunteer. For both, living in a metropolitan area is associated with a relatively lower likelihood. For male volunteers, being white makes it more likely that volunteers are board volunteers, while
having more children makes it less likely. Neither of these variables seems to affect whether or not female volunteers are board volunteers. Higher income raises the chance that a female volunteer is a board volunteer, but income seems to have no effect for males. Neither gender shows an age-related effect. This may be because both male and female board members tend to be older.
While there are some differences between males and females, the variables that affect the likelihood that individuals who volunteer serve as board volunteers versus just regular volunteering tend to be characteristics associated with a high value of time.
These include being employed, a higher level of education, and being married. The extent that board volunteering is more time consuming than regular volunteering, these results are contrary to the simple substitution effect based on opportunity cost. It appears that volunteers’ higher value of time characteristics are more likely to be board
volunteer. This once again confirms that something else is needed to explain how and why people volunteer.