Management style in kibbutz industries

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to develop a managerial style typology relevant to kibbutz industry analysis and applicable to all cooperative organizations. Design/methodology/approach This study applied qualitative methods to evaluate the organizational biographies of Factories five factories, using open interviews and document analysis. Findings The findings show that before privatization took place, these industries were managed according to socialistic democratic principles. Once they became global and capitalistic, some kibbutz industries adopted a business cooperative style that combines features of capitalism and socialism, while others underwent a crisis and opted for a stricter and more bureaucratic managerial style. Research limitations/implications This research is based on five case studies; further research is recommended to establish the current typology. Practical implications This study shows very clearly that the cooperative business style can be offered for businesses previously operated according to socialistic principles. Originality/value This study augments current literature by elucidating the speed with which business activity is conducted according to cooperative principles. It presents a typology relevant to kibbutz industry and cooperative organizations alike, addressing the cooperative managerial, cooperative business and bureaucratic styles, enabling maintenance of normative management that adapts itself to global and capitalistic environments.

Loss of democracy in a cooperative kibbutz industry: ethical dilemmas – an Israeli case study

“…Alternative organizations could succeed in balancing internal and external environmental threats by creating new cultural practices. Managers, as leader of autonomous economic entities, could respond to internal and external changes (Moskovich, 2019). Cooperative managers could also respond to the social challenges of their communities, taking action to improve the social, economic and cultural conditions of their most vulnerable members.…”

“…Capitalism has developed as a neoliberal economic system, which theoretically encouraged free initiative and minimal governmental interference in economic spheres. Capitalism has attempted to achieve its goals by various means: the expansion free markets and the growth of individual companies in them, the freedom of the individual, efficiency, the profit motive and inequality (Parker et al , 2014; Gradin, 2015; Moskovich, 2019). These traits purported to reflected a society as an open ground for competition and the achievement of increasing wealth.…”

“…The traditional kibbutz principles and practices reflected socialist and democratic managerial style (Moskovich, 2019) in a number of ways:Organizational structures encouraged an egalitarian style, despite their operation within an external capitalist system. The leadership style often strongly influenced the extent to which these organizations, including civil/social associations and commercial enterprises, achieved their ideals (Cheney et al , 2014; Parker et al , 2014).…”

“…The current study explored several narratives that were central to defining socialist and democratic managerial style of a traditional kibbutz and its economic branches. They included the following features: team work, control over information, structure of the industry (hierarchical or flat), the rotation system in management, the decision-making process and the preference for hiring kibbutz members rather than outside workers (Michels, 1915; Moskovich, 2019; Moskovich and Palgi, 2015). Together, these narratives formed an ideal type could be a theoretical tool for considering whether an industry contained socialist and democratic features.…”

“…Previous literature has described the ethical and operational challenges that cooperatives faced, themselves (Flecha and Ngai, 2014; Paranque and Willmott, 2014), and the solutions their management offered to deal with capitalistic demands (Bari, 2017; Chambo, 2009; Emana, 2012; Muluneh, 2010). Nevertheless, the literature has scarcely mentioned the duality in the ethical management codes of cooperative owners of a capitalist factory (Atzeni, 2012; Moskovich, 2019; Palgi, 2006; Parker et al , 2014; Rogers, 2014).…”