Running head: ARTICLE ABSTRACT 1

Article Abstract

Name of Student

Institution Affiliation
ARTICLE ABSTRACT 2

Article Abstract

Citation

Cress, D. M., & Snow, D. A. (1996). Mobilization at the margins: Resources,

benefactors, and the viability of Homeless Social Movement Organizations. American

Sociological Review, 61(6), 1089. doi:10.2307/2096310.

Problem

In this study, Cress and Snow seek to address the dearth of knowledge regarding four

resource-related issues that are fundamental in comprehending the dynamics of Social

Movement Organizations (SMOs). The issues concern: 1) conceptualization and identification of

resources; 2) the question of level of importance of varied resources for mobilization as well as

collective action; 3) relative importance of internal and external resources; and 4) implications of

external aid for viability and strategic actions of the organizations.

Design and Sampling

Limiting the study setting to the United States, Cress and Snow gathered and utilized data

from 15 homeless SMOs in addition to their organizational supporters and antagonists in eight

cities. The researchers conducted an ethnographic fieldwork over a span of three years ending in

1992. The cities were selected based on the extent to which they varied in level of mobilization

and whether the researchers had established contacts therein already. Data was collected using

interviews and direct observation – by attending meetings and participating in collective actions.

The project extensively employed an onion-snowball strategy.

Measuring Devices and their Precision

ARTICLE ABSTRACT 3

Aided by the onion-snowball strategy, the researchers collected information from SMOs

and used the insights gleaned to target relevant facilitative organizations and other participants.

This method was effective in enabling them to map the relevant organizational field and offered

validity checks on the sources of information upon which the study was that predicated. To

refine the voluminous data the observations and interviews yielded, researchers first coded the

information into two master categories: empirical and conceptual groups. This data was further

coded to reveal the variations in each major grouping. Also, the researchers employed qualitative

comparative analysis. This approach was essential in identifying, from the numerous resource

permutations, the simplest combination of resources that will make a given SMO viable.

Results

The study highlighted four categories within which resources for SMOs survival are

subsumed: moral, material, informational, and human. The authors also determined that certain

resources and resource combinations are indeed essential and sufficient for viability of SMO; a

combination of at least nine resources is necessary to make the organization viable. Additionally,

the authors found three resource pathways among viable organizations. Withal, it was

determined that external support, though vital for homeless activism, costs the SMOs their

autonomy.

Interpretation

Based on the results of the study, Cress and Snow contended that organizational viability

is subject to successful resource mobilization. They also suggested that viable SMOs are highly

likely to be prosperous. Impliedly, establishing relationships with patrons allows the movement

to focus on homeless activism rather than resource mobilization thus increasing chances of
ARTICLE ABSTRACT 4

successes. Therefore, SMOs should focus on instilling camaraderie in the relationship with

benefactors.

Criticisms and Notes

Cress and Snow’s empirical study is highly informative. By reading the article, it became

apparent that resources alone do not guarantee viability of SMOs. Moral, material, informational,

and human resources are unquestionably a must-have; however, ultimate success remains

essentially a matter of how the individual resources are combined. Still, it seems pretty

contradictory that the success of homeless SMOs depends on external support yet the same

attracts loss of autonomy. Future research should explore how losing autonomy as a result of

patronage affects the homeless SMOs. Also, it is crucial to understand what factors, internal or

otherwise, moderate the loss of autonomy following external support, to render some SMOs

successful nonetheless. Achieving SMO goals hardly reflects whether the goals are beneficial to

the poor. As such, a definitive understanding of *success* of SMOs is vital as a step to

establishing a consensus over how to define a thriving association.