近年來，非營利部門在全球勞動市場中持續成長，而 Z 世代正以其獨特的工作價值觀進入職場。一方面，非營利組織（NPO）受限於資源結構，長期面臨薪資與升遷劣勢；另一方面，Z 世代呈現「職涯極簡主義」的傾向，不再以高薪與升遷為核心追求。當這兩股趨勢交匯，過去學界用以解釋 NPO 員工接受低薪的「勞動捐贈假說」，是否仍能解釋 Z 世代投入 NPO 的決策邏輯，便成為值得重新檢視的問題。
本研究採用半結構式深度訪談，訪談五位 Z 世代非營利組織員工（三位留任者、兩位離職者），以「職涯極簡主義」、「勞動捐贈假說與理性匹配假設」、「自我決定論（self-determination theory, SDT）」為三大理論框架，探究 Z 世代投入並留任 NPO 的真實動機與心理歷程。
研究發現可歸納為三項相互支撐的理論貢獻。第一，職涯極簡主義具有「生命階段敏感性」——當受訪者開始承擔家庭經濟責任或規劃成家時，其價值排序會由「彈性與意義感為首」重組為「薪資為首」。第二，Z 世代受訪者並未以「為理想犧牲」的框架詮釋自己接受 NPO 薪資的決策，而是透過「隱性薪資的換算機制」進行精算——他們將彈性、人際、意義感、議題契合度等非金錢報酬換算為具體的薪資價值，並納入與外部選項的整體比較。第三，本研究的質性資料初步呈現出SDT三需求在留任決策不同層次上的「功能分化」樣態，自主性較接近「進場條件」、勝任感較接近「持續條件」、關聯性則最接近「決定性條件」，本研究兩位離職者的離職主因均指向關聯性的破裂。此一觀察係對 SDT 場域化應用的初步補充。
綜合上述，本研究將 Z 世代 NPO 員工從「為理想犧牲的群體」重新定位為「會精算的消費者」，並建議 NPO 的留才工作從「強化使命傳遞」轉向「維護關聯性的健康」。本研究提出九項對 NPO 招募、留才、主管選任與組織文化的具體建議，期能為 NPO 在世代交替時代的人才策略提供學術與實務參考。

In recent years, the nonprofit sector has continued to grow within the global labor market, while Generation Z enters the workforce with distinctive work values. Constrained by resource structures, nonprofit organizations (NPO) have long faced disadvantages in salary and promotion; meanwhile, Generation Z exhibits a tendency toward "career minimalism," no longer treating high pay and advancement as core pursuits. As these trends converge, whether the "donative labor hypothesis"—long used to explain why NPO employees accept lower wages—can still account for Generation Z's decision to join NPOs becomes a question worth reexamining.
Drawing on three frameworks—career minimalism, the donative labor hypothesis versus the rational matching hypothesis, and self-determination theory (SDT)—this study employed semi-structured in-depth interviews with five Generation Z NPO employees (three stayers, two leavers) to explore their motivations for joining and remaining in NPOs.
The findings yield three mutually reinforcing contributions. First, career minimalism exhibits "life-stage sensitivity": as interviewees begin shouldering family responsibilities, their priorities shift from "flexibility and meaning first" to "salary first." Second, rather than framing wage acceptance as "sacrificing for ideals," interviewees engaged in deliberate calculation through an "implicit wage conversion mechanism," translating non-monetary rewards—flexibility, relationships, meaning, and issue alignment—into concrete wage equivalents weighed against external options. Third, the research reveals a "functional differentiation" among SDT's three needs: autonomy functions closest to an "entry condition," competence to a "continuation condition," and relatedness to a "decisive condition," with both leavers' departures attributed to ruptured relatedness—a preliminary supplement to the contextualized application of SDT.
This study thus repositions Generation Z NPO employees from "a group sacrificing for ideals" to "calculating consumers," and suggests NPO retention shift from "strengthening mission transmission" to "maintaining the health of relatedness." Nine recommendations concerning recruitment, retention, supervisor selection, and organizational culture are proposed to inform NPO talent strategies in an era of generational transition.

吳芝儀、廖梅花（譯）（2001）。質性研究入門：紮根理論研究方法（原作者：A. Strauss & J. Corbin）。嘉義：濤石。（原著出版於1998年）
社企流、聯合報系願景工程（2020）。青年世代×未來職涯大調查。台北：社企流。
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Nonprofit earnings and sectoral employment in the United States since 1994. Monthly Labor Review. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2024/article/nonprofit-earnings-and-sectoral-employment-in-the-united-states-since-1994.htm
Deloitte. (2024). 2024 Deloitte Gen Z and Millennial Survey. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.
Fairfax, B., Blau, G., & Hill, T. L. (2023). Exploring variables impacting on employee willingness to accept lower pay for a preferred employer attribute: Generation, gender, race and salary. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 23(2), 84–93.
George, A. S. (2026). Career minimalism: How Gen Z is redefining work-life balance and professional success. Partners Universal Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 3(1), 69–98.
Handy, F., & Katz, E. (1998). The wage differential between nonprofit institutions and corporations: Getting more by paying less? Journal of Comparative Economics, 26(2), 246–261.
Light, P. C. (2002). The content of their character: The state of the nonprofit workforce. The Nonprofit Quarterly, 9(3), 6–16.
May, T. (2011). Social research: Issues, methods and process (4th ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
McGinnis Johnson, J., & Ng, E. S. (2015). Money talks or millennials walk: The effect of compensation on nonprofit millennial workers' sector-switching intentions. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 36(3), 283–305.
Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Preston, A. E. (1989). The nonprofit worker in a for-profit world. Journal of Labor Economics, 7(4), 438–463.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
Wellhub. (2024). Career minimalism: How Gen Z is redefining work-life balance — Wellhub State of Work-Life Wellness Report. Wellhub Inc.