One governance theory to rule them all? The case for a paradoxical approach to co-operative governance

Michaud, Myriam; Audebrand, Luc K.

doi:10.1016/j.jcom.2021.100151

Cited by 26 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 113 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Related to the idea above, it seems that, while social and economic issues are widely accepted in practice by the SE itself, the issue of participatory governance is not equally well established among SEs in a comparable manner. Therefore, a universe is found where some organisations carry out this strategic governance, whereas, at the same time, there are many of these organisations that appear unaware of the impact that a democratic and collective strategy can have on their actions (Michaud and Audebrand, 2022). Therefore, in accordance with the wish of these enterprises to increase their social value creation, the incorporation of this participatory governance would remain a pending task for these organisations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SE governance therefore plays a critical role in managing the hybrid nature of SEs, for it is the organisational mechanism by which to ensure the fulfilment of the social mission of a SE in a sustainable way (Defourny et al , 2021; Pestoff and Hulgård, 2016), and in so doing, to integrate the dual economic and social nature of the SE. Governance thereby acts as a device to address the isomorphic pressures that the environment puts on SEs to change their raison d'être towards one of the aforementioned extremes of the continuum (Dees, 1998), and to dismiss either the economic or the social focus (Doherty et al , 2014; Michaud and Audebrand, 2022).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Responding to the imprecisions of social enterprise identity: considering the role of participatory governance

Morera

García

Alfonso

2023

EBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to understand the importance of participatory governance in the identity of social enterprises (SEs). To this end, this paper provides a framework by means of the value co-creation process and by drawing from the service-dominant logic perspective and the stakeholder theory. An explanation is also provided regarding the opportunity to include fundamental issues in defining SE collective identity, such as those related to an organisation’s participatory nature of involving the stakeholders affected by its activities, the exercise of democratic decision-making and its autonomy from the state and market. Design/methodology/approach On the statistical exploitation of a large international data set, the authors approach the conceptualisation of SEs by providing an index to measure their social, economic and governance characteristics, thereby enabling these enterprises to be categorised into different groups. Findings This study found that the inclusion of the governance dimension in the research incorporates the greatest variability between the various models of SE, thereby justifying participatory governance as the raison d’être of the two fundamental schools in SE, namely, Anglo-Saxon and European. Practical implications This research offers a tool to policymakers to be used as a criterion of classification and hierarchical organisation for public procurement. It enables the various organisations to be ordered and takes social and cultural influence into consideration. This tool would be highly useful as a support of social entrepreneurship from the public environment, especially at the local level. Originality/value This study justifies the value of incorporating participatory governance as a distinctive dimension for the definition of categories of SEs. Furthermore, an index to craft taxonomies of SEs is developed based on social, economic and governance indicators, which provides a framework that facilitates the empirical research of the SE.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to the imprecisions of social enterprise identity: considering the role of participatory governance

Morera

García

Alfonso

2023

EBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Co-operative Commission of Malaysia (SKM) defines CG as “… the relationship between members as business owners, management who operate the business and the board leading the management on behalf of the members with the aim of achieving the goals of the cooperatives” (GP27, n.d.: Cooperative Governance Guidelines). Although cooperatives are different from investor-owned firms in terms of social mission, property rights (interests not related to capital invested), and decision-making structure (based on people rather than capital), both entities are similar in terms of commercial activity, market competition, distribution of surplus to members/shareholders, organizational structure and processes (Michaud & Audebrand, 2022, p. 3).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cooperative Governance and Cooperative Performance: A Systematic Literature Review

Jamaluddin,

Saleh,

Abdullah

et al. 2023

SAGE Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the proliferation of systematic literature review studies on cooperative organization, a similar review of cooperative governance and performance literature has yet to be conducted. To close this gap, this paper presents a systematic literature review on the relationship between cooperative governance (CG) and cooperative performance using the PRISMA approach. Major search engines were used in the compilation of studies published between 2009 and 2021. A review of the 30 selected papers indicate there are four categories of CG used in relation to cooperative performance: board characteristics, policy compliance, management, leadership and strategies, and the board’s social or human capital. The results also suggest mixed and inconclusive findings on the CG–cooperative performance relationship. The current study seeks to contribute to the existing literature by highlighting patterns and gaps of past studies on the CG–cooperative performance relationship, thereby providing insights for future research.

show abstract

“…One of those alternative management styles suggested and investigated during the last few decades was bringing democracy at workplaces, describing the systems of exercising workers' or representatives' power (Frega et al, 2019). Scholars (Geckil & Tikici, 2018; King & Land, 2018) and industrial practitioners (Fenton, 2012) have advocated the incorporation of democratization at workplaces will result in the success of the organization (Michaud & Audebrand, 2022). Slater and Bennis's (1964) article published in Harvard Business Review foresaw that democracy would be a trend in both workplace and society, as it is the most efficient social system in times of unrelenting change.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rationale and development of organizational democracy scale

Ahmed

2022

Bus. Polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea of bringing democratization at the workplace has been present in management literature for decades. Literature has witnessed an increased interest of researchers on this topic, especially after the 2003 Academy of Management Annual Meeting conference having the theme “Democracy in a Knowledge Economy,” and August 2004 special issue of the Academy of Management Executive: “Democracy in and around Organizations.” To further explore this underpinned concept, the present study aims to refine and develop the organizational democracy construct. Using in-depth literature analysis published in last three decades on organizational democracy, ten dimensions (freedom, fairness, integrity, tolerance, shared responsibility, structure, transparency, knowledge sharing, accountability, and learning environment) were identified, leading to the development of its conceptual framework. By deploying established scale development procedures, the organizational democracy scale was developed, refined, and validated. The new organizational democracy scale consists of forty-five items consistent with theory and practice. The scale will assist future researchers and industrial practitioners in a deeper exploration of this construct and organizational managers for establishing, assessing, and improving democratic practices at their workplaces.

show abstract

One governance theory to rule them all? The case for a paradoxical approach to co-operative governance

Cited by 26 publications

References 113 publications

Responding to the imprecisions of social enterprise identity: considering the role of participatory governance

Responding to the imprecisions of social enterprise identity: considering the role of participatory governance

Cooperative Governance and Cooperative Performance: A Systematic Literature Review

The rationale and development of organizational democracy scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About