Designing the Governance Model of the Endowment System in Iran with Emphasison the Role of Trustees

IntroductionGovernance refers to focusing on processes through which collective groups can be managed. In this regard, non-public institutional mechanisms such as civil society have been increasingly expanded in governance processes (Bozzini and Enjolras 2011; Rhodes, 1997). In other words, the administration of affairs in a framework of non-hierarchical, systematic, and collaborative relationships and interactions that includes the real cooperation and interaction of all actors and stakeholders in a field, including government, private and civil society institutions, is referred to as governance.Due to the excessive expansion of the public sector in Iran, the third sector has not been able to have a proper position in responding to the needs of citizens as it deserves (Research Center Parliament, 2008); on the other hand, the public sector itself has not had sufficient efficiency and effectiveness due to its numerous administrative and economic problems, large size and high costs (Danai Fard and Abbasi, 2007). The endowment system is no exception to this rule. Endowment is an institution through which a significant part of the problems and bottlenecks of society can be recognized and the property and assets of good people can be used voluntarily to solve them. But so far, the impact of endowments on the growth and development of the country's economy, reducing economic inequalities and using the endowment capacity in difficult economic conditions has not been tangible (Khaksar Astana et al., 2014). Therefore, the main goal of this research is to formulate the governance model of the Endowment system in Iran, and the research question is, what is the governance model of the Endowment system in Iran? Research MethodologyThis research has been conducted with a qualitative approach, qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data, and structural-interpretive modeling was used to validate the components of the model. Philosophically, this research has an interpretive approach and is developmental in terms of orientation.In this research, we use qualitative content analysis with a thematic analysis unit (Sandelowski, 1995). In this regard, we have used the method of Braun and Clark (2006):Stage 1: Familiarizing yourself with your data "repeatedly reading the data" and actively reading the data (looking for meanings and patterns).Stage 2: Creating initial conceptual identifiers from the dataStage 3: Categorizing different identifiers in the form of selective identifiers and sorting the identified data summary.Stage 4: Reviewing the primary themes createdStage 6: Defining and naming sub-themesStage 6: Review, comparison, and participation of experts, and final analysis and report writing (Hajipour et al., 2015).The structural-interpretive modeling strategy is a suitable method for identifying and designing the model of complex relationships between the components of a phenomenon (Attri et al, 2013). This method was first proposed and introduced by Warfield (1974).The data collection tool in the qualitative section was semi-structured documents and interviews, and in this stage, 22 experts were selected using non-probability sampling and snowball methods. In the stage of structural-interpretive modeling, the number of samples was 14 experts. Also, to measure the reliability and validity of the research findings, it was indicated that the coefficient of Cohen's kappa is 0.7544, and since it is more than 0.7, it indicates the appropriate reliability of the findings. Research FindingsThe governance model of the endowment system with 3 main themes of strategic factors, infrastructural factors, and consequences and effects, as well as 11 sub-themes of data and information management, spatial oriented strategic plan, structure and model of the endowment administration, coherence and integration, rule of law, accountability, transparency, participation, independence, outcomes, and effects and 46 components were compiled, and the dimensions of the model were organized in four levels Discussion and ConclusionThe three key axes and bottlenecks of endowment governance are explained below:Management of data and information instead of the management of endowments:To implement the trustee-based governance of endowments, information on endowments and real and legal trustees (charities), including the intentions, geography, qualifications of trustees, and the like, should be collected in the territorial arena (Charities Regulator, 2018).The structure and model of endowment administration:In the trustee-centered governance model, each endowment is considered a self-sufficient unit with a legal personality, and a board of trustees, a trustee, and a supervisor can be considered for its management. Therefore, in contrast to state-oriented governance, which has a simple approach, in trustee-oriented governance, a complex, non-hierarchical approach based on the endowment is dominant.The spatial-oriented strategic plan:Having a program based on local requirements, needs and capacities can provide further development and progress. It is obvious that endowments also have specific and special intentions in the field of land in different regions, and the spatial-oriented strategic plan should be formulated and implemented in accordance with this issue, and each region and sometimes each endowment (large endowment) has its own special plan (Chew, 2009). References:Attri, R., Devi, N. & Sharma, V. (2013). Interpretive structural modeling (ISM) approach: An overview. Research Journal of Management Sciences, 2(2), 3-8.Bozzini, E. & Enjolras, B. (Eds.). (2011). Governing ambiguities. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-10.Charities Regulator. (2018(. Charities Governance Code, Dublin.Chew, C. (2009). Strategic Positioning in Voluntary and Charitable Organizations. Publishing RoutledgeDanai Fard, H. & Abbasi, T. (2007). Administrative reforms in Iran: An analysis of government downsizing. Daneshvar Raftar, 15(29), 102-121.Hajipour, B., Moutamani, A. & Tayyebi Abolhasani, A.H. (2015). The combination of success factors for the commercialization of advanced technology products. Innovation Management, 5(4), 54-19.Khaksar Astane, H., Rahnama, Ali. & Ibrahim, H. (2014). Pathology of the position of the endowment institution in strengthening the country's economy. The first knowledge-based conference on resistance economy.Research Center Parliament. (2008). Pathology of non-governmental organizations in Iran. Rhodes, R. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity, and accountability. Buckingham, PA: Open University Press.Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health, 18(2), 179- 83.Warfield, J.N. (1974). Developing interconnection matrices in structural modeling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetic, 4(1), 81-87.