arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Sensemaking in philanthropic foundations: developing a taxonomy and typology to understand identity and accountability

Alexandra Williamson & Belinda Luke

Voluntary Sector Review2025https://doi.org/10.1332/20408056y2025d000000044article
AJG 1
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

This article examines taxonomies and typologies as sensemaking processes to better understand identity and accountability in philanthropic foundations. While these organisations are established for public benefit purposes, public knowledge on them is limited, and concerns exist regarding their transparency, accountability and legitimacy. Challenges in the development of a taxonomy and typology as systematic processes of sensemaking are explored, providing nuanced insights into this organisational group’s identity and accountability. Publicly available data from two separate sources are examined as the basis for a taxonomy, and semi-structured interviews exploring accountability and identity provide the basis for a typology. This article highlights the importance of examining underlying commonalities as well as observable differences within a set of organisations, and exploring the interplay between the two. Collectively, findings from these sensemaking processes offer valuable insights into philanthropic foundations’ identity and accountability.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1332/20408056y2025d000000044

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{alexandra2025,
  title        = {{Sensemaking in philanthropic foundations: developing a taxonomy and typology to understand identity and accountability}},
  author       = {Alexandra Williamson & Belinda Luke},
  journal      = {Voluntary Sector Review},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1332/20408056y2025d000000044},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Sensemaking in philanthropic foundations: developing a taxonomy and typology to understand identity and accountability

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.