Search results

The purpose of our article is to contribute to the further understanding of individual responses to pluralism, by studying in particular the role played by critiques and compromises in the formulation of such responses. Drawing on theoretical insights from the sociology of conventions, we look at the various modes of justification publicly advanced by French co-operators when engaging with co-operative principles. Our analysis allows us to identify three main instantiations, that is situated and flexible enactments, of these principles: pragmatic, reformist, and political. Our contribution to the understanding of pluralism and its instantiations by organizational members is threefold. First, in contrast with studies drawing on an institutional-logics perspective, our study shows that individual instantiations of pluralism rely not only on positive affirmations of logics but also on critical mobilizations of competing logics. Second, our study shows that pluralism can be understood not only as co-existing multiple logics, but also as different possible instantiations of the same logic, the ambiguity of which allows compromises to be settled with other logics. Third, we suggest that organizational members’ responses to pluralism often involve more than two logics, which are combined into a complex set of interdependent judgments. In addition, in relation to co-operative studies, our proposed typology provides a mapping that usefully extends the range of possibilities found in co-operators’ instantiations of co-operative principles, thus furthering our understanding of the diversity of the co-operative movement.

The financial crisis of 2008 resulted in calls for change. Commentators suggested that co-operatives, in particular credit unions, could provide accountability and sustainability through their open governance and mutual status. However, such suggestions assumed that co-operative principles and practice continued to underpin the efficacy of co-operative banking, and that credit unions, one of the most prevalent forms of co-operative banking, could offer a viable financial alternative. Instead, in the case of Cyprus, the financial crisis and the associated aftershocks triggered the nationalisation and demutualisation of credit unions. This prompted the researchers to question both the viability of a co-operative banking future and the extent to which co-operative principles were shaping decision making, governance, accountability and sustainability. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

A case study approach was adopted to explore the degree to which co-operative principles still shaped credit union thinking and stakeholder relationships.

As is the case elsewhere within the co-operative movement, the findings point the fact that governance is weaken by the low membership participation and that the principles are no longer universally applied. Credit unions, if not co-operative banking, may not offer the financial assurances that commentators have called for. Moreover, the guiding principles may no longer be embedded within the fabric of the movement.

Findings are important for practitioners/supervisory body as they highlight possible impacts on co-operative’ future and especially on their governance model and level of autonomy and independence in case of state intervention.

The research undertaken is original as it is the first time credit unions in Cyprus were examined for adherence to co-operative principles.

This paper is concerned with the historical record of one business in the UK, which has long laid claim to the moral high ground in the conduct of its affairs – the amalgam of consumer co-operative business organisations, which eventually merged to become the Co-operative Group at the beginning of the 21st century. This paper aims to offer an assessment of the record of the British consumer co-operative movement’s efforts to abide by and promote its values and principles during the first 137 years of its existence (1863 to 1990).

The paper is developed using largely qualitative research methods and a variety of sources. These include archival resources and business-historical materials such as committee minutes and correspondence. These materials have been complemented by several semi-structured recorded interviews with senior members of the Co-operative Group.

The authors develop several conclusions. First, where ethical choices were possible and no serious commercial interests were impaired, the co-operative movement could and usually did do its best to adhere to its principles. Second, in several instances, commercial interests did frequently trump ideals. Finally, the organisational structure of the movement made it very difficult to ensure that co-operative principles and values were adhered to.

This paper presents a unique case-study that examines the inherent tension between commerce and ethics in the co-operative movement.

The main objective of this chapter is to evaluate whether social auditing is applicable to Maltese co-operatives and, if so, to lay out the possible characteristics of such an exercise. The chapter adopts a mixed research methodology with semi-structured interviews being conducted with 14 local experts, and a questionnaire being addressed to 11 Maltese co-operative managers. The findings indicate that the Maltese co-operative identity is as yet emergent and that, consequently, if a social audit is introduced now, controversies would easily arise on the audit’s frequency, publication, scope and composition of the audit team. Nonetheless, a social audit may ultimately be modelled on the Beechwood process and on the reporting indicators of the Euro Co-op Social Reporting Working Party. It would involve the examination of both the qualitative and quantitative aspects of a co-operative, concluding with recommendations for improvement. Furthermore, the exercise would need to be monitored by the Maltese regulator, the Co-operatives Board, and best be conducted regularly, say, every 3 years, by an inter-disciplinary audit team. Therefore, the chapter concludes that the introduction of such a regulatory exercise as part of the Maltese co-operative framework would ultimately be beneficial, ameliorating the co-operative movement. Yet, it is strongly recommended that, prior to its introduction, Maltese co-operatives work further on developing their fundamentals.

This policy brief calls for co-operative industry associations to implement policies that encourage co-operatives to embrace the SDGs in a way that reflects the co-operative difference. In particular, this brief explores why it is important for co-operatives to measure and report on the SDGs and to link the SDGs to the seven principles of co-operatives. We argue that reporting on the SDGs in the context of the seven principles enables co-operatives to illustrate their co-operative difference from investor-owned businesses (IOB) who are increasingly reporting on SDG performance. We identify key recommendations that are critical in facilitating co-operatives’ adoption of the SDGs and in reporting their performance relative to the SDGs and the seven principles.

To examine metrics used for performance measurement, analysis, and decision-making by insurance cooperatives.

A documentary review and semi-structured interviews of three large insurance cooperatives form the basis of the study.

The analysis suggests insurance co-operatives metrics are consistent with investor-owned companies. These measures do not recognize the cooperative principles and values which consistent the formative basis of these insurance co-operatives.

The insurance co-operatives under examination do not engage in a comparison to other insurance co-operatives; rather comparisons are made against investor-owned companies. As this analysis is used in decision-making and strategy formulation, guiding the direction of the co-operatives the questions must be raised: does the co-operative difference exist in the insurance sector and how (and what) performance analysis tools are used to assess their performance?

There is a paucity of research in the area of metrics and analytics of co-operatives. As such this article expands the academic scope of examination of co-operatives in the context of financial and accounting operations. Additionally, it adds to the ongoing discussion in the academy focused on the nature of co-operatives and the nature of the co-operative difference.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to literature on corporate social responsibility by comparing CSR reporting between co‐operative organizations and listed companies. The authors aim to illustrate whether the different values and principles of co‐operatives and public limited companies result in differences in CSR reporting between these organization types.

First, the authors introduce the concept of CSR reporting. Second, they extend their framework with some previous literature on co‐operation. Using qualitative methodology, they compare values and objectives as well as communication and reporting of the co‐operative to those of the listed companies. The analyses and the synthesis of CSR reporting and co‐operation literatures provides academics and practitioners with ideas on how to move towards a model of co‐operative CSR reporting.

Values and principles of co‐operation do not significantly guide the CSR reporting of our case co‐operative. Instead, the issues emphasized in CSR reporting of our case co‐operative and the two investor‐owned companies are mostly related to common concern and the latest course of events throughout the world and the current issues in general. The study also indicates that the case co‐operative (Metsäliitto) falls behind in its CSR reporting to those of the listed companies (Stora Enso and UPM‐Kymmene).

While the study helps to understand the role of organization type in CSR reporting, as such the findings are limited to the context of the study.

The paper provides a good point of departure for students and practitioners interested in CSR reporting and co‐operatives.

To the authors' knowledge, so far the role of organization type (and the related differences in business objectives, values etc.) in CSR reporting has not received much of scholarly attention.

This chapter contributes to the discourse on the impact of employee participation in organisations. Using worker co-operatives as special cases of participatory firms, we discuss the role of values in organisations and their importance in a business context. We devise and apply the CoopIndex diagnostic tool as a method of assessment of the ‘health’ of an organisation whose members aspire to align co-operative management with the application of the co-operative principles and values.

Argues for a reorientation of economic theory around the concept of co‐operative production. Suggests that by definition, co‐operative production exists when different people take different, complementary roles in production. Argues that, while the proposed reorientation has clear roots in the ideas of Adam Smith, it also synthesizes several other key insights of the classical economists, and at the same time leads, by implication, both to the major topics of neoclassical economics and to some important topics of modern applied economics that are often treated in an ad hoc fashion, such as economies of agglomeration, dualism in development and X‐inefficiency.

For many, co‐operatives represent a challenge to existing systems of industrial relations and organisation structure. However, many of the co‐operatives which have been formed in recent years do not approximate to this vision, since they have not been set up from an ideological standpoint. Co‐operatives can be divided into three types: small business; participative; ideological. It is also important to evaluate their development against the reasons for their evolution. Indeed, the new co‐operatives are ideologically diverse, organisationally different, and a considerable way off being the job generators of the future.