In our society, we can consider three driving political economic sectors, the government, business, and nonprofit (Herman). When revisiting these three sectors, it is important to consider each sector’s mission, clientele, services, leadership, societal and economical responsibilities, and desired outcomes.
As we generalize, we often perceive the overall role of the nonprofit sector in society today to provide supplementary public needs without monetary compensation when there are gaps in the services provided by the government. While “for-profit” or business sectors are generalized to solely focus on providing commodities to the public driven by monetary profit. Government, one of the strongly rooted political economic sectors is perceived to have the role of providing the public with the limited required services considered to be the responsibility of the government.
All sectors strive to fulfil a mission and a sense of client satisfaction that differ depending on their desired revenue and framework. Each sector can provide a certain societal role but may differ depending on their organizational value towards fulfilling their social and or corporate responsibility(Herman). There is a differing accountability towards their mission, stakeholders, and society.
Some underlining contrasts between the three sectors can be determined through their framework on their mission, measurements of commodities, evaluation, quality and profit. In the ‘for-profit’ sector, the mission is often geared towards obtaining continuous quality measurements of their commodities to increase revenue to expand the target group. The non-profit sector gear their mission towards quality measurement of their commodities with the purpose to fulfil their commitment to provide public commodities to their target group. Government sector tries to ensure their ability to provide large scope access unlike the other two sectors that seek to target a group determined by the scope of the services or commodities for either a profit as in the business sector or for ‘no profit’ in the nonprofit sector.
As mentioned in the Herman article, there is importance and difference in the foundation and framework of each sector’s board. The boards try to target certain stakeholders and consumers. Each sector focuses on their scope of access, structure, and the kind of services they will provide. The boards often focus on the funding and financing. All sectors vary in terms of their agency’s individual framework, mission, and revenue. Each sector differs in terms of their targeted group such as citizens, producers, and consumers. Another component of the sectors is the tax exemptions. For example, the government collects taxes to provide goods and nonprofit obtain tax exemption.
Often these three sectors are considered separate entities and not interconnected. Most commonly these entities are perceived with the notion of “good” versus “bad.” The private ‘for profit’ sector and the public sector are commonly perceived as the corrupt while nonprofit are the “good,” yet it is often misleading. All three of these entities are very interconnected and are a fundamental part of our economy all sectors varying from good and bad yet can all provide a contribution to social and ethical responsibility (Herman).
The historical role of nonprofit societal responsibility has been long lived in American life. They trace back into the 1950s when many of the nonprofit organizations were founded, yet they all vary in scope and in terms of revenue(Hall). Therefore, nonprofits have long been a fundamental foundation to the services obtained in the United States. Nonprofit organizations can provide any goods or services in a not ‘for profit’ basis in the United States (Hall). Today, the nonprofit sector continues to be very fundamental. The sector has evolved in terms of scope and services. In addition, it has been influenced by historical events that have taken the sector to grow or change. We can see the impact of things like the conservative revolution on the nonprofit sector and its role.
