This is a Scoping Review Protocol following the JBI Scoping Review Template.
Scoping Review Protocol:
Review title
Examining the impact leadership behaviours have on older volunteers’ engagement, influencing their satisfaction and retention in their volunteering role: a scoping review protocol
Author Affiliations
•Tracy Walker, PhD Candidate, Torrens University, Australia.
•Corresponding author: tracy.walker@education.torrens.edu.au
Abstract
Introduction
The primary goal of this scoping review is to identify and analyse literature that examines older volunteers and how leadership behaviours may impact their satisfaction and retention. Identifying research studies that focus on leadership behaviours experienced by older volunteers will determine a future research agenda. Given the ongoing decline in volunteer retention rates, leadership behaviours that may be found to influence satisfaction levels are of primary interest. The objective of undertaking a scoping review is to map existing literature, identify key concepts, and highlight gaps and types of evidence available (Lely et al., 2023; Colquhuon et al., 2014). It is intended that this framework will inform future research design and evaluation.
Methods and Analysis
Following the JBI[1] Scoping Review (ScR) guidelines, this scoping review will identify, through electronic databases and journals, the existing literature that encompasses leadership behaviours that older volunteers experience in their activities. A literature summary table will be created to capture the essential relevant elements of papers raised by the research question. While scoping reviews extract data, they do not synthesise evidence (Pollock et al., 2023). Qualitative content analysis will provide a descriptive summary of the findings (Levac et al., 2010).
Key search strategies:
The search strategy is to locate both published and unpublished relevant documents. It will gather literature from the primary database sources: ProQuest, Scopus, APA PsychNet, Google Scholar (advanced search initial 100), PubMed, JSTOR, Informit, and Ebsco databases: CINAHL, Medline and Ageline. Date range will be 1999 – 2025.
Ethics and Dissemination
Approval from the Ethics Committee at Torrens University will not be necessary as this scoping review does not involve human subjects.
Key Words or Phrases
Introduction
Background and Rationale
This study aims to explore both peer-reviewed studies and grey literature relevant to older volunteers (aged 60 and above). Few studies can be found examining the leadership of older volunteers and their lived experiences. This scoping review will examine a broad range of literature to understand volunteer contexts and activities specifically involving older adults.
Scoping reviews provide a broad scope of examination of the topic, which can initiate research data from unexplored disciplines (Munn et al., 2018). A more comprehensive perspective of leadership of older volunteers may be gained by including a variety of research evidence, including qualitative studies, quantitative studies, and grey literature (Peters et al., 2021).
Existing systematic reviews explore volunteerism and volunteers’ successful engagement (Benevene et al., 2024; Filges et al., 2020; Forner et al., 2023). There is extensive research into older volunteers’ wellbeing and self-esteem (Russell et al., 2019; Seikkula, 2023; Windsor et al., 2023; Ruiz et al., 2016; Le & Aartsen, 2024). However, there appears little research focused on how leadership experiences impact the willingness of older adults to continue volunteering.
Objective Statement
The objective of this scoping review is to explore current literature that examines leadership styles and behaviours that impact or influence older volunteers’ satisfaction and engagement in their volunteering role. This scoping review aims to systematically identify and map the existing research on leadership behaviours affecting older volunteers.
Q1.) What studies have been undertaken to explore how leadership styles and behaviours influence older volunteers’ satisfaction in their roles?
Q2.) Are there studies that explore how volunteer leadership impacts older volunteers’ commitment to remain?
Q3.) What theoretical frameworks have been applied to studies regarding older volunteers and their satisfaction in their volunteering roles?
Methods
A comprehensive citation search strategy will be developed using key words in titles and abstracts of published articles and grey literature (Lely et al., 2023). The data extraction will align with the research questions.
Word Search
The following are the search words and Boolean operators in their groupings:
volunteer* AND (elderly OR older OR senior OR retire* OR aged) AND (leader* OR manag*) AND (retention OR retain OR satisf* OR turnover)
The JBI ScR guidelines will provide the reporting parameters for this scoping review. As suggested by Pollock et al., 2023 (p. 4), a literature summary table will be created in an Excel spreadsheet. A pilot test will be undertaken across selected databases and applicable journals to verify the validity of the search word applicability. A diary will be used to annotate all iterations of the search and any changes or additional words applied to the data selection process.
Eligibility Criteria
This scoping review aims to identify the gaps in the existing knowledge base regarding older volunteers and the impact leadership behaviours have on their satisfaction. Guided by the PCC mnemonic (population, concept and context), the inclusion criteria for this scoping review will focus on older volunteers as the population (Peters et al., 2021). “Older” is defined as over 60 years of age. The concept focuses on the strategies and impacts of leadership practices experienced older volunteers, considering how intrinsic and extrinsic motivators shape their level of engagement. The context will be community volunteer activity sites.
By including the essential words “old*” and “retire*”, many references will appear as volunteerism has attracted much research on the health and well-being benefits to older adults (Chen & Lu, 2024). The exclusion criteria will include “aged care” and references to “community” when it does not link to volunteering. All citations that use an employment environment or a paid employee theory will be excluded.
Voluntourism will be excluded from selected sources as this activity has an added dimension of travel and subsidised living costs associated with the overseas voluntary activity. Additionally, older volunteers in highly skilled emergency disciplines, such as the SES (State Emergency Services) and the RFS (Rural Fire Service) will be excluded as the proficiency demands required for this activity go beyond the scope of this community-based volunteering enquiry. Studies that focus on older volunteers as leaders will also be excluded.
The word “leadership” is vital to identifying applicable literature. Although “leadership” and “management” are interchangeable, these concepts have different implications. The interpretation of leadership and leadership styles implies the ability to inspire and motivate individuals or teams to achieve a common goal (Almas et al., 2020). Management implies the more transactional meaning of planning, organising, directing, and controlling resources (Kotter, 2021). As both words imply a leading role, both words will be used in the search strategy.
The lead researcher and second reviewer will discuss ambiguities arising during the review process. A challenge may arise because terms or topics entitled leadership can be ill-defined and have multiple definitions and synonyms. Texts will be reviewed to identify any ambiguities around these terms. Following an extraction guidance form, the search interpretation strategy will be shared with all reviewers.
Information Sources and Search Strategy
The lead researcher has developed this search strategy. A comprehensive literature overview through several electronic databases will be undertaken in consultation with a senior University Librarian.
This search strategy will gather literature from primary database sources: ProQuest, Scopus, APA PsycNet, Google Scholar (advanced search initial 100), PubMed, JSTOR, Informit, and Ebsco databases: CINAHL, Medline and Ageline.
Exact word searches of these electronic databases will be undertaken, with a date range of 1999 to 2025. (The start date has been chosen as it marks Clary and Snyder’s seminal paper, “The Motivations to Volunteer: Theoretical and Practical Considerations,” published in October 1999 in the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science[2]).
Journal articles, theses, grey literature, and conference papers will be reviewed for relevance. Specific journals: Voluntas, and Non-profit and Volunteering Quarterly, will be hand-searched systematically. These journals have been selected due to their focus on volunteerism. A hand search is used as these journals are not always systematically indexed. In addition to the selected journals, the Volunteering Australia Research portal will be included to ensure access to the most current research papers. Relevant references from previous studies undertaken by the lead researcher will be reviewed within the selection criteria and date range that support this protocol.
Importing the search results will be undertaken with Covidence to enable citations to be directly imported from the selected databases, ensuring that all search results are centralized in one platform. This will enable concurrent searches of titles and abstract by the two reviewers, assisting in consistency and thoroughness. Any duplicates will be identified through this reference tool and removed.
In keeping with the ScR guidelines, a diarised report will document each step of the review process to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and the ability to refine future searches (Peters et al., 2021).
Citations to be excluded will be studies involving older or aging adults that do not include the word volunteering or those that include “COVID”, “aged care”, and volunteer tourism”. Literature must have both volunteer AND old* AND leader* OR manager* in the title and/or abstract to remain valid for the scoping review.
Studies focusing on the Australian Mutual Obligations Program for Voluntary Work will be excluded, as participants in this program are influenced by distinct motivational frameworks (being paid a JobSeeker payment) that differ from the scope of this review.
The start date of the first search will be May 2025.
Study Selection/Screening
The screening eligibility criteria outline specific predefined words that will be used to choose the studies suitable for inclusion. Words are: volunteer* AND (elderly OR older OR senior OR retire* OR aged) AND (leader* OR manag*) AND (retention OR retain OR satisf* OR turnover). The study selection will be conducted to screen title and abstract.
Title and abstract screening will be performed by the lead researcher, with a second reviewer independently evaluating 10% of the citations to assess the consistency and reliability of the pre-established inclusion criteria. Any discrepancies or disagreements between the two reviewers will be resolved through discussion. If consensus cannot be achieved, a third reviewer will be consulted to make a final decision. Full-text articles of potentially relevant citations will be retrieved for evaluation by the lead researcher. A record of any excluded full-text articles that do not meet the inclusion criteria will be maintained for transparency and reporting purposes. The search and/or eligibility criteria may be modified during this review process (Ley et al., 2023).
Data Charting/Collection/Extraction
A standardised Excel spreadsheet will systematically chart data from the included studies. An extraction guidance form will be prepared to provide a thorough explanation of the data headings. The lead researcher will be conducting the initial charting process.
Collected data will align with the research question, “How do leadership behaviours influence older volunteers’ satisfaction and retention?”
Headings for the tabular literature summary will include (Younas & Ali, 2021):
Author(s)/ Year
Title
Country Origin
Purpose
Source
Research Design
Outcome Measures/ Instrument
Target Population
Volunteer Sector
Conceptual/Theoretical Framework
Major Themes
Critical Appraisal
All extracted citations will be managed in Covidence.
Synthesis and Presentation of Results
The ScR checklist will ensure that all essential reporting items are included. Mendeley Reference Manager will cleanse the data and identify any citation duplicates.
The search results will be demonstrated using a PRISMA flow diagram. The results will be presented in a mapping diagram to illustrate the findings.
Ethics
Given that this review does not involve human subjects, approval from the Ethics Committee at Torrens University is not required.
Dissemination
It is intended that this scoping review protocol will be registered in Prospero.
Conclusion
The scoping review aims to systematically investigate the research literature that examines the influence of leadership behaviours on older volunteers’ engagement, specifically investigating their satisfaction and intention to continue volunteering. By mapping existing literature, the review will identify key concepts and gaps in current research, providing a foundation for a future research study. Understanding how leadership impacts older volunteers is essential, especially given the declining volunteer retention rates.
Support/Funding
No funding will be provided for this scoping review. This research study is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.
Conflicts of Interest
No conflict of interest arises from this study.
Acknowledgements
Rachel Ambagtsheer as Doctoral Supervisor and secondary reviewer
Appendices
Appendix I: Search strategy
The full search strategy for one electronic database will be included, detailing the keywords words and how they were combined using Boolean operators with the number of records retrieved by the search.
References
Almas, S., Chacón-Fuertes, F., & Pérez-Muñoz, A. (2020). Direct and indirect effects of transformational leadership on volunteers’ intention to remain at non-profit
Clary, E., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current directions in psychological science, 8(5), 156-159.organizations. Psychosocial Intervention, 29(3), 125-132.
Kotter, J. (2021). Change: How Organizations Achieve Hard-to-Imagine Results in Uncertain and Volatile Times. Harvard Business Review Press.
Le, G., & Aartsen, M. (2024). Understanding volunteering intensity in older volunteers. Ageing & Society, 44(8), 1898-1916.
Lely, J., Morris, H., Sasson, N., Camarillo, N., Livinski, A., Butera, G., & Wickstrom, J. (2023). How to write a scoping review protocol: guidance and template. Charlottesville: Open Science Framework.
Mak, S., & Thomas, A. (2022). An Introduction to Scoping Reviews. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 14(5), 561–564.
Moher, D., Stewart, L., & Shekelle, P. (2015). All in the family: systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more. Systematic reviews, 4, 1-2.
Munn, Z., Peters, M., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC medical research methodology, 18, 1-7.
Peters, M., Marnie, C., Colquhoun, H., Garritty, C., Hempel, S., Horsley, T., Langois, E., O’Brien, K., Tuncalp, O., Lillie, E., Wilson, M., Zatin, W., & Tricco, A. (2021). Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application. Systematic reviews, 10, 1-6.
Peters, M., Casey, M., Tricco, A., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C., & Khalil, H. (2021). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI evidence implementation. 19. 3-10.
Pham, M., Rajić, A., Greig, J., Sargeant, J., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research synthesis methods, 5(4), 371-385.
Pollock, D., Peters, M., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Alexander, L., Tricco, A., Evans, C., Brando de Moraes, E., Godfrey, C., Pieper, D., Saran, A., Stern, C., & Munn, Z. (2023). Recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews. JBI evidence synthesis, 21(3), 520-532.
Ruiz, E., Marcos-Matás, G., & Tornero, M. (2016). Older volunteers’ intention to remain in service in nonprofit organisations. Psicothema, 28(3), 272-277.
Russell, A. (2019). Volunteering in Retirement and Retirement from Volunteering: Three Papers on Volunteering in Older Adulthood. [Doctor of Philosophy Thesis, University of Pennsylvania].
Seikkula, T. (2023). Urban Seniors in Finland in the year 2035. Horizon scanning of inclusion and volunteering in the future. [Master’s Thesis, Future Studies, Turku School of Economics].
Tricco, A.C., Cardoso, R., Thomas, S. , Sanober, M., Sullivan, S., Kealy, M., Hemmelgam, B., Ouimet, M., Hillmer, M., Perrier, L., Shepperd, S., & Straus, S. (2015). Barriers and facilitators to uptake of systematic reviews by policy makers and health care managers: a scoping review. Implementation Science, 11, 4.
Windsor, T., Mahlo, L., Gordon, S., Champion, S., & Rosso, E. (2023). Factors influencing older adults’ decisions to volunteer. Volunteering Australia, https:// volunteeringstrategy.org.au/VRP_Factors-influencing-older-adults-decisions-to-volunteer
Younas, A., & Ali, P. (2021). Five tips for developing useful literature summary tables for writing review articles. Evidence-Based Nursing, 24(2), 32-34. https://ebn.bmj.com/content/ebnurs/24/2/32.full.pdf
[1] Joanna Briggs Institute: a global leader in evidence-based healthcare organisation promoting and supporting evidence-based decisions to improve health and health service delivery.
[2]Clary & Snyder: Their work on the Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI) remains foundational in understanding motivations behind volunteering.
My Learning Journey 