A typology of social cooperative member experiences
| Internal focus (concerned with members, culture, and internal processes) | External focus (concerned with social mandates, politics, and market position) | |
|---|---|---|
| Perspective 1: The Principled but Inequitable Cooperative | Perspective 3: The Outward-Focused Strategic Enterprise | |
| Proactive and Agentic (Shapes its own destiny; driven by internal will or external strategy) | Characterized by a proactive commitment to its internal democratic ideals and social mission. This principled stance is contrasted by a critical view of its inequitable practices, particularly regarding finances. Its agency is directed inward, corresponding with an insular external posture | Characterized by a proactive, external strategy of political engagement and networking for resilience. This outward focus on securing its market position is prioritized alongside member development, but coexists with significant internal governance flaws and financial precarity |
| Perspective 4: The Benevolent but Undemocratic Organization | Perspective 2: The Instrumentalized Service Provider (Bipolar) | |
| Reactive and Instrumentalized (Fulfills a role; dependent on external forces or internal problems) | Characterized by a reactive and insular posture stemming from undemocratic governance and financial instability. This contrasts sharply with its perceived success in providing specific, highly-valued personal benefits to its members, such as work-life balance | Characterized by a reactive fulfillment of a narrow, external social mandate (work integration). Its cooperative identity is perceived as instrumentalized and subsumed by this function, corresponding with a neglect of internal democracy and member well-being |
| Internal focus (concerned with members, culture, and internal processes) | External focus (concerned with social mandates, politics, and market position) | |
|---|---|---|
| Characterized by a proactive commitment to its internal democratic ideals and social mission. This principled stance is contrasted by a critical view of its inequitable practices, particularly regarding finances. Its agency is directed inward, corresponding with an insular external posture | Characterized by a proactive, external strategy of political engagement and networking for resilience. This outward focus on securing its market position is prioritized alongside member development, but coexists with significant internal governance flaws and financial precarity | |
| Characterized by a reactive and insular posture stemming from undemocratic governance and financial instability. This contrasts sharply with its perceived success in providing specific, highly-valued personal benefits to its members, such as work-life balance | Characterized by a reactive fulfillment of a narrow, external social mandate (work integration). Its cooperative identity is perceived as instrumentalized and subsumed by this function, corresponding with a neglect of internal democracy and member well-being |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.