I have volunteered more than once in my life, and each experience taught me something. Not always something good. One particular role stands out, not because of the mission, which was noble, or the people, who were mostly decent, but because of how spectacularly badly it was managed. It was a masterclass in how to drain goodwill, confuse capable people, and slowly suffocate enthusiasm without even realising it was happening.
Volunteers are different from employees. That is obvious, but it is astonishing how many managers ignore that fact. Volunteers do not receive a salary. They are paid in meaning, in connection, in purpose, and occasionally in biscuits and lukewarm tea. When you manage them as if they are replaceable staff members or disposable interns, you will quickly learn what disengagement really looks like.
This is not theory. This is lived experience. I am not writing this as a consultant or academic observer. I am writing this as someone who once showed up early, stayed late, believed in the mission, and slowly began thinking, why am I even here? If you lead volunteers, pay attention, because everything I describe here is avoidable.
Treat Volunteers Like Free Labour
The first mistake, and perhaps the most common, is treating volunteers as unpaid employees who should simply be grateful to be involved. This mindset poisons everything.
In the organisation I joined, there was an unspoken assumption that because we were volunteers, we should tolerate chaos, poor communication, and last-minute changes. When plans fell apart, it was brushed off with, “Well, we’re all volunteers here.” That line was meant to excuse incompetence, but it only signalled that standards did not matter.
There is a difference between understanding resource constraints and accepting disorder. Volunteers will forgive limitations. They will not forgive laziness or disrespect. If you want someone to donate their time, the least you can do is show that you value it.
Volunteering, by definition, is an activity where people freely give their time for the benefit of others, as outlined in the concept of volunteering described on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteering. That word “freely” matters. It means they can also freely leave.
When volunteers are treated like free labour, they quietly start calculating opportunity cost. They begin thinking about what else they could be doing with that evening or weekend. That is the beginning of the end.
Provide No Clear Role Definition
Nothing destroys motivation faster than ambiguity about responsibilities. I remember turning up to sessions where nobody seemed to know who was doing what. Tasks overlapped. Some things were done twice. Others were not done at all.
When I asked for clarity, I was told, “Just pitch in where needed.” That sounds collaborative, but in practice it created confusion. Without defined roles, accountability disappears. When accountability disappears, frustration creeps in.
Here is how the dysfunction played out:
| Management Failure | What It Felt Like as a Volunteer | Consequence |
|---|---|---|
| No defined responsibilities | Uncertainty about expectations | Anxiety and second-guessing |
| Overlapping tasks | Wasted effort | Resentment |
| No accountability | No feedback loop | Stagnation |
| Constant reshuffling | Instability | Emotional detachment |
Volunteers are often capable professionals in their day jobs. Many bring serious skills. When those skills are ignored or misapplied, it feels insulting. It is not that we wanted rigid corporate hierarchies. We wanted clarity.
Clear role definitions are a form of respect.
Change Plans Constantly Without Explanation
One of the most demoralising experiences was showing up prepared, only to discover that the entire plan had changed. Again. And no one thought it necessary to tell us in advance.
There were times when I had rearranged family commitments, driven across town, and mentally prepared myself for a specific task, only to be told, “Actually, we’re doing something different today.” No context. No apology. Just chaos.
Change is inevitable in volunteer settings. But unmanaged change feels careless. People can adapt if you explain why. They cannot adapt if they feel blindsided.
When leadership shrugs and says, “It’s fine, we’ll figure it out,” what volunteers hear is, “Your time is not important enough for planning.”
Ignore Feedback Completely
This one still irritates me.
We were periodically asked for feedback. Surveys were sent. Group discussions were held. Concerns were raised politely and constructively. And then absolutely nothing happened. No follow-up. No visible change. No acknowledgement.
There is something uniquely demoralising about being invited to speak and then being ignored. It would almost have been better not to ask.
Over time, people stopped offering suggestions. They disengaged. When leaders later complained that volunteers were “less committed,” they failed to connect the dots. Feedback without action becomes theatre. It creates cynicism. If you ask for input, you must close the loop. Even if you cannot implement a suggestion, explain why. Silence breeds distrust.
Play Favourites Openly
In every volunteer group, informal hierarchies emerge. That is natural. What is not healthy is when leaders openly favour certain individuals and dismiss others.
In my experience, a small inner circle formed around the coordinator. These individuals received better information, more visible roles, and public praise. The rest of us were peripheral. There was no transparent selection process for leadership tasks. No clear criteria. It felt arbitrary.
Favouritism sends a brutal message: contribution does not determine opportunity; proximity does. That erodes morale faster than almost anything else. Volunteers are often motivated by belonging. When belonging is conditional, they pull back.
Provide No Training or Onboarding
On my first day, I was handed a lanyard and pointed toward a group of people. No introduction to procedures. No explanation of values. No overview of expectations.
It was sink or swim from the start. Effective volunteer management includes onboarding. That does not require a corporate induction pack, but it does require intention. Without it, new volunteers feel exposed and incompetent.
Here is what proper onboarding might include compared to what we received:
| Effective Onboarding | What We Experienced |
|---|---|
| Clear mission briefing | Vague statements |
| Defined responsibilities | “Help out where you can” |
| Introduction to team | Awkward self-navigation |
| Safety guidance | Assumptions |
| Mentor or buddy | None |
When people feel lost at the beginning, many never return for a second session. Leaders often interpret that as a lack of commitment, when in reality it is a failure of welcome.
Confuse Busyness With Impact
One of the strangest dynamics was the obsession with looking busy. We were constantly pushed to “do more,” create more activity, fill more time. Yet rarely did anyone ask whether what we were doing actually made a difference.
There were endless micro-tasks. Rearranging materials. Rewriting documents that did not need rewriting. Creating subcommittees that produced nothing tangible. Busyness became a proxy for value. As a volunteer, this felt hollow. Most of us joined because we believed in the cause. When effort did not translate into measurable impact, motivation faded. Volunteers crave meaning. Without it, the experience becomes transactional and ultimately disposable.
Fail to Recognise Contribution
Recognition does not have to be grand. A thank-you. A specific acknowledgement of effort. A short message after a long event. Instead, praise was generic and rare. The only time volunteers were mentioned publicly was when something went wrong. Over time, that shifts internal dialogue from I’m making a difference to I’m invisible unless I mess up.
Recognition is not about ego. It is about reinforcing purpose. When contribution is unacknowledged, volunteers question whether they are needed at all.
Avoid Difficult Conversations
Conflict happened, as it always does in groups. Miscommunications. Missed deadlines. Personality clashes.
Leadership consistently avoided addressing issues directly. Instead of clear conversations, there were vague emails about “team spirit.” Instead of resolving tensions, they hoped problems would disappear. They did not. Unaddressed conflict creates undercurrents. Volunteers begin to form factions. Whisper networks develop. Energy shifts from mission to drama. The irony is that volunteers, who are there by choice, often respond well to honest dialogue. What they resent is passive-aggressive management.
Overload the Reliable People
There is a predictable pattern in poorly managed volunteer teams. A small group of dependable individuals carries most of the workload. Instead of protecting them, leadership piles more responsibility onto them because it is easier than confronting underperformance elsewhere. I was one of those people for a while. At first, it felt flattering. Then it felt exhausting. Eventually, it felt exploitative.
Reliable volunteers burn out quietly. They do not complain loudly. They simply withdraw. The organisation I worked with lost several of its strongest contributors within a year. Leadership described it as “natural turnover.” It was not natural. It was preventable.
Create a Culture of Guilt
Perhaps the most subtle but corrosive mistake was the use of guilt as a motivational tool. Phrases like “We really need people to step up” or “The community is counting on us” were deployed whenever participation dipped.
There is nothing wrong with reminding volunteers of the mission. The problem arises when emotional pressure replaces genuine engagement. Volunteers give their time freely. If they begin to feel coerced, even indirectly, resentment grows. Guilt may produce short-term compliance. It destroys long-term commitment.
Treat the Mission as Untouchable
Ironically, the cause itself became sacred in a way that prevented improvement. Any suggestion that something was not working was interpreted as disloyalty to the mission.
This created a dangerous blind spot. When leaders conflate criticism of process with criticism of purpose, growth stalls. Volunteers who care deeply about the mission often see operational flaws clearly. Silencing them weakens the organisation.
Assume Passion Equals Resilience
There was a belief that because volunteers cared deeply, they would tolerate anything. Long hours. Poor communication. Disorganisation. Passion was treated as an infinite resource. It is not.
Even the most committed individuals have limits. Burnout is not confined to paid roles. It is a psychological response to chronic stress and lack of control. When I eventually stepped back, it was not because I stopped believing in the cause. It was because I felt depleted and unvalued.
What Good Management Would Have Looked Like
To be fair, it is easier to criticise than to lead. Volunteer management is challenging. Resources are limited. People have competing priorities. But the fundamentals are not complicated.
Here is a simplified comparison:
| Poor Volunteer Management | Effective Volunteer Management |
|---|---|
| Assumes availability | Respects time constraints |
| Vague roles | Clear responsibilities |
| No onboarding | Structured welcome process |
| Reactive planning | Proactive communication |
| Guilt-based motivation | Purpose-driven engagement |
| Favouritism | Transparent opportunity |
| Ignored feedback | Closed feedback loops |
| Overloads reliable members | Distributes responsibility fairly |
None of this requires massive budgets. It requires intention.
The Emotional Journey of a Badly Managed Volunteer
If I map my own journey, it followed a predictable arc:
- Initial enthusiasm and optimism
- Confusion and mild frustration
- Increased effort to compensate
- Growing resentment
- Emotional detachment
- Withdrawal
At each stage, intervention was possible. A conversation. A clarification. A simple acknowledgement. Instead, silence filled the gaps. By the time I left, I felt oddly relieved. That relief should have been a warning sign for leadership.
The Cost of Getting It Wrong
Poor volunteer management does not just lose individuals. It damages reputation. Word spreads quietly through communities. Future recruitment becomes harder. More importantly, the mission suffers. Volunteers are often the public face of an organisation. Their energy and commitment are visible. When that energy dims, impact declines. The tragedy is that most of these failures are not malicious. They stem from inexperience, ego, or simple neglect. But the outcome is the same.
Final Reflections
If you lead volunteers, understand this: they are not there for a pay cheque. They are there for meaning. That makes your responsibility heavier, not lighter.
You cannot compensate for poor leadership with passion alone. If I could speak directly to the coordinator who managed us, I would say this kindly but firmly: you did not lose volunteers because they lacked commitment. You lost them because they felt invisible. Volunteers give you something priceless. Do not treat it casually.
And if you are currently volunteering in a poorly managed environment, know that your frustration is valid. Wanting structure, clarity, and respect does not make you difficult. It makes you human.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Why is managing volunteers different from managing paid staff?
Volunteers are not financially dependent on the role, which means their primary motivation is intrinsic rather than extrinsic. They seek meaning, connection, and contribution rather than salary or promotion. Because they can leave without economic consequence, engagement must be nurtured intentionally.
2. What is the biggest mistake volunteer managers make?
The most damaging mistake is treating volunteers like free labour instead of valued contributors. When leaders assume availability, ignore boundaries, or dismiss input, volunteers disengage quickly.
3. How important is onboarding for volunteers?
Onboarding is critical. Even a simple orientation session that clarifies mission, expectations, and processes dramatically improves retention and confidence.
4. Can volunteers experience burnout?
Yes, absolutely. Burnout is linked to chronic stress, lack of control, and insufficient recognition, not just salary-based employment. Volunteers can and do burn out when poorly managed.
5. How should feedback from volunteers be handled?
Feedback should always be acknowledged and followed up. Even if suggestions cannot be implemented, explaining why maintains trust and respect.
6. Is favouritism always harmful in volunteer teams?
While informal bonds are natural, visible favouritism without transparent criteria erodes morale and creates division. Clear processes for allocating roles and opportunities prevent resentment.
7. How can leaders motivate volunteers without using guilt?
Motivation should be rooted in purpose and appreciation. Share impact stories, celebrate contributions, and clearly connect tasks to meaningful outcomes rather than applying emotional pressure.
8. What signs indicate that volunteers are disengaging?
Common signs include reduced attendance, minimal participation in discussions, reluctance to take on tasks, and a general shift from enthusiasm to indifference.
9. What should a volunteer do if they feel badly managed?
Start with a respectful conversation seeking clarity. If patterns persist and leadership is unresponsive, it may be healthier to step back or find another organisation aligned with your values.
10. Can poorly managed volunteer organisations recover?
Yes, but only if leadership acknowledges the issues and commits to structural changes. Transparency, humility, and consistent communication are essential to rebuilding trust.
If this article resonates with you, either as a leader or a volunteer, take it as a prompt for reflection rather than accusation. Most volunteer failures are not intentional. But intention does not negate impact. And impact is what ultimately determines whether people stay or quietly walk away.
