This article reports the findings of a project entitled 'The participation of members in mutual businesses'. A previous project developed a theoretical model of what makes people participate, focusing on the participation of public service users in council housing and social care services. The current project builds on this work, applying the 'mutual incentives model' to a population sample of area committee members and a random sample of non-participant members of a very large UK consumer co-operative, the Co-operative Group. Two arguments are presented as to why such research is needed. First, member participation in co-operative and mutual businesses is becoming an important issue both for this sector and more generally for public policy. Second, a comparison between a public services setting and a co-operative setting enables us to extend and further test the theoretical model. Two main features of the model are outlined: a 'mutual incentives theory' that goes beyond other models to combine individualistic and collectivistic motivations, and the 'participation chain', a synthesis of existing knowledge that joins motivations to * This article is based on the final report to the Economic and Social Research Council of a project entitled 'The participation of members in the governance of mutual businesses: application of a motivational model', project no: R000223846. We are grateful to the ESRC for financial support.
JEL Classification: D23; L21; M21; P13 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10. 5947/jeod.2013.001 This paper asks how effective are co-operatives at surviving economic recession, and whether they can grow at the expense of investor-owned businesses and provide an alternative business model that is fairer, more stable and less risky. The paper begins by providing historical evidence concerning the resilience of co-operatives during economic crises. Then, taking a 'member-owned business' approach, it analyses the comparative advantages and disadvantages of co-ops along three dimensions: ownership, control and benefit. It broadens this out to consider advantages to the wider society, and theorises comparative advantages of other business types. It concludes by asking what it would take for the co-operative potential to be realized. The potential of co-operatives during the current recession; theorizing comparative advantage Birchall, J.
This article focuses on the key question for co-operatives and mutuals of whether they can continue to be genuine member-owned and controlled businesses once they become very large. After providing a commentary on current attempts to revitalise member democracy in the UK consumer co-operative sector, it outlines the "mutual incentives model" developed by the authors to explain what motivates people to participate. The main part of the article then provides a formative evaluation of one very large co-operative society, the Co-operative Group. Drawing on a recent project carried out with funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, and in partnership with the UK Co-operative College, it discusses findings from datasets of 450 area committee members and a random sample of non-active members. The findings are structured according to the mutual incentives framework, including individualistic and collectivistic incentives, resources and mobilization factors. The conclusion is that the Group is having some success with its member participation strategy despite problems of scale. Steady, incremental improvements are identified that should enable the strategy to succeed, showing that there is no simple correlation between size and democracy.co-operatives, mutual incentives theory, size and democracy, stakeholder involvement,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.