Management Indicators for the Organisational Sustainability of Associative Productive Ventures
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Methodology
2.1. Definition of Management Indicators
2.2. Hierarchisation of Indicators Using the AHP Method
3. Results
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Correction Statement
References
- Duque, P.; Meza, O.E.; Giraldo, D.; Barreto, K. Social economy and solidarity economy: A bibliometric analysis and literature review. REVESCO Rev. Estud. Coop. 2021, 138, 1–25. [Google Scholar]
- Melián, N.A.; Campos i Climent, V.; Sanchis Palacio, J.R. La educación de postgrado en Economía Social en la universidad española ¿una asignatura pendiente? CIRIEC-España Rev. Econ. Pública Soc. Coop. 2017, 33, 32–54. [Google Scholar]
- Kontogeorgos, A.; Chatzitheodoridis, F. Workers or investors? Investigating the reciprocity aspects among Greek social enterprises members. REVESCO Rev. Estud. Coop. 2019, 132, 9–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bretos, I.; Díaz-Foncea, M.; Marcuello, C.; Marcuello, C. Cooperativas, capital social y emprendimiento: Una perspectiva teórica. REVESCO Rev. Estud. Coop. 2018, 128, 76–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Consejo Europeo de Ministros de Empleo y Política Social. Declaración de Madrid “La Economía Social, un Modelo Empresarial Para el Futuro de la Unión Europea”. 2017, pp. 2016–2019. Available online: http://www.socialeconomy.eu.org/sites/default/files/archives/DeclaracióndeMadrid.pdf (accessed on 12 October 2022).
- ONU. Transformar nuestro mundo: La Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible. Asam Gen 2015, 15900, 40. Available online: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ares70d1_es.pdf (accessed on 21 February 2023).
- Dudek, M.; Bashynska, I.; Filyppova, S.; Yermak, S.; Cichoń, D. Methodology for assessment of inclusive social responsibility of the energy industry enterprises. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 394, 136317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mair, J.; Martí, I. Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. J. World Bus. 2006, 41, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaves, R.; Monzón, J.L. The social economy facing emerging economic concepts: Social innovation, social responsibility, collaborative economy, social enterprises and solidary economy. CIRIEC-España Rev. Econ. Pública Soc. Coop. 2018, 93, 5–50. [Google Scholar]
- Calvache, V.J.; Jaramillo, O.; Benítez, E. El Sujeto/Objeto de estudio: Economía Popular y Solidaria en Ecuador; IAEN: Quito, Ecuador, 2021; pp. 29–58. [Google Scholar]
- Superintendencia De Economía Popular Y Solidaria. Rendición de cuentas SEPS 2021; SEPS: Quito, Ecuador, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Banco Central del Ecuador. Boletín de Cuentas Nacionales Trimestrales. Inf. Result Cuentas Nac. Trimest. IV Trimest. 2022, 1–17. Available online: https://contenido.bce.fin.ec/documentos/PublicacionesNotas/Catalogo/CuentasNacionales/Indices/c118032022.htm (accessed on 10 May 2023).
- Rodríguez, E.H.; Ramírez, G.C.J. Sustainability analysis of the strengthening processes of a rural association: Asomora a case study. Rev. Cienc. Agric. 2016, 33, 9. Available online: http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/rcia/v33n1/v33n1a02.pdf (accessed on 10 May 2023).
- Sosa González, J.L.S.; Gómez Abad, P.; Carmona Silva, J.L.; Medel Sánchez, J.M. Una aproximación empírica a la viabilidad de los emprendimientos sociales en México: El ciclo de vida de las cooperativas de la Región de la Costa de Oaxaca. REVESCO Rev. Estud. Coop. 2019, 151–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Álvarez Pérez, C.; Rodríguez Montequín, V.; Ortega Fernández, F.; Villanueva Balsera, J. Integrating analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and balanced scorecard (BSC) framework for sustainable business in a software factory in the financial sector. Sustainability 2017, 9, 486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dueñas-Ocampo, S.; Perdomo-Ortiz, J.; Villa Castaño, L.E. La separación entre sostenibilidad organizacional y desarrollo sostenible: Una reflexión sobre herramientas emergentes para disminuir la brecha. Innovar 2021, 31, 113–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leidecker, J.K.; Bruno, A.V. Identifying and using critical success factors. Long Range Plan. 1984, 17, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baumol, W.J. Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive, and Destructive. J. Bus. Ventur. 1993, 98, 893–921. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2937617?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents (accessed on 25 May 2023).
- Alonso, M.; Galve, C. El emprendedor y la empresa: Una revisión teórica de los determinantes a su constitución. Acciones Investig. Soc. 2008, 26, 5–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barba, V.; Atienza, C. Entrepreneurial behavior: Impact of motivation factors on decision to create a new venture. Investig. Eur. Dir. Econ. Empresa 2012, 18, 132–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davila, A.; Oyon, D. Introduction to the special section on accounting, innovation and entrepreneurship. Eur. Account. Rev. 2009, 18, 277–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dávila, R.L.d.G. Innovación y Éxito en la Gerencia Cooperativa. Primera; Instituto de Estudios Rurales, Ed.; Casos exitosos: Bogota, Colombia, 2004; 126p. [Google Scholar]
- Pacheco, J.; Castañeda, W.; Caicedo, C. Indicadores Integrales de Gestión; McGraw-Hill: Bogota, Colombia, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Barradas, M.; Rodríguez, J.; Espinoza, I. Desempeño organizacional. Una revisión teórica de sus dimensiones y forma de medición. RECAI Rev. Estud. Contaduría Adm. Infomática 2021, 10, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez, J.M.; Vélez Elorza, M.L.; Araújo Pinzón, P. Balanced scorecard para emprendedores: Desde el modelo canvas al cuadro de mando integral. Rev. Fac. Ciencias Económicas 2016, 24, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norton, D.; Kaplan, R. Cuadro de Mando Integral (The Balanced Scorecard), 2nd ed.; Gestión 2000: Barcelona, España, 2002; 326p. [Google Scholar]
- González, A.; Rito, G.; Naranjo, J. Proceso analítico jerárquico (AHP) para la determinación de los indicadores del turismo. Int. Tur. Rural Desarro. Sosten. 2016, pp. 475–485. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309412158_PROCESO_ANALITICO_JERARQUICO_AHP_PARA_LA_DETERMINACION_DE_LOS_INDICADORES_DEL_TURISMO_RURAL (accessed on 25 May 2023).
- Gong, Y.; Ying, W.; Yu, Y.; Zhou, X.Z.; Fan, X. Research on the Key Performance Evaluation Methods of Enterprises Using BSC and KPI Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process—Illustrated by the Case of Hangzhou Cigarette Factory. E3S Web Conf. 2021, 251, 01067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- González, A.L.; Melo, J.P. Savings and credit cooperatives in Ecuador: The challenge of being cooperatives. REVESCO Rev. Estud. Coop. 2021, 138, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, N.; Yang, X.; Shadbolt, N. The balanced scorecard as a tool evaluating the sustainable performance of Chinese emerging family farms-Evidence from Jilin Province in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forman, E.; Gass, S. The Analytic Hierarchy Process—An Exposition. Oper. Res. 2001, 49, 469–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, G.; Huang, S.H.; Dismukes, J.P. Product-driven supply chain selection using integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2004, 91, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lucianetti, L.; Battista, V.; Koufteros, X. Comprehensive performance measurement systems design and organizational effectiveness. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2019, 39, 326–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osorio Gómez, J.C.; Herrera Umaña, M.F.; Vinasco, M.A. Modelo para la evaluación del desempeño de los proveedores utilizando AHP. Ing. Desarro. 2008, 43–58. Available online: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=fua&AN=36126722&lang=es&site=ehost-live (accessed on 15 June 2023).
- Sanchís, J.R.; Campos Climent, V.; Mohendano Suanes, A. Factores clave en la creación y desarrollo de cooperativas. Estudio empírico aplicado a la comunidad valenciana. REVESCO Rev. Estud. Coop. 2015, 119, 183–207. [Google Scholar]
- Garrido, M.M.; Zambrano, W.E.O. Emprendimiento cooperativo de trabajo: Reultados, expectativas y desempeño empresarial. Un análisis en cooperativas valencianas de trabajo asociado. CIRIEC-Espana Rev. Econ. Publica Soc. Coop. 2019, 97, 5–47. [Google Scholar]
- Kasparian, D.; Rebón, J. The sustainability of social change. Positive factors in the consolidation of enterprises recuperated by their workers in Argentina. CIRIEC-Espana Rev. Econ. Publica Soc. Coop. 2020, 98, 213–246. [Google Scholar]
- Bettina, L.; El Khoury, C.; Issa, I.; Ghattas, P. Key success factors of social entrepreneurs in Lebanon. World Rev. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 16, 329–357. [Google Scholar]
- Coba, E.; Díaz, J.; Sánchez, A. Factores de éxito en la gestión de las asociaciones. un estudio del programa hilando el desarrollo. SIGMA Rev. Investig. Dep. Cienc. Económicas Adm. Comer. 2016, 3, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barragán, M.C.; Ayaviri, V.D. Innovación y emprendimiento, y su relación con el desarrollo local del pueblo de Salinas de Guaranda, Provincia Bolívar, Ecuador. Inf. Tecnol. 2017, 28, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saaty, T.L. Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic. RWS Public 2000, 6, 478. [Google Scholar]
- Amézaga, C.; Rodríguez, D.; Núñez, M.; Herrera, D. Orientaciones Estratégicas Para el Fortalecimiento de la Gestión Asociativa; Instituto: San Salvador, El Salvador, 2013; 96p. [Google Scholar]
- Dávila Ladron de, G.R.; Vargas, P.A.; Lina, B.; Roa, E.; Cáceres, L.S.; Vargas, L.A. Characteristics of the Colombian solidarity economy. Approaches to influential currents in Colombia. CIRIEC-Espana Rev. Econ. Publica Soc. Coop. 2018, 85–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Espinosa, H.R.; Gómez, C.J.R.; Betancur, L.F.R. Factores determinantes de la sostenibilidad de las agroempresas asociativas rurales. Rev. Econ. Soc. Rural. 2018, 56, 107–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ouyang, S.; Guo, Y.; Lin, X.; Tian, Y. Why Can Entrepreneurial Involvement Encourage the Entrepreneurship of People Experiencing Poverty?—A Study Using China’s Empirical Data. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- León-Serrano, L.A.; Loor-Reyes, J.A.; Araujo-Cobarrubio, R.A.; Ramírez-Asanza, A.D. Factores determinantes de la economía popular y solidaria en el sector asociativo. Entorno 2020, 70, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogozi’nska-Pawełczyk, A. Inclusive Leadership and Psychological Contract Fulfilment: A Source of Proactivity and Well-Being for Knowledge Workers. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aroca, M.; Manzano, M.; Quizhpe, V.; Domínguez, C.; Rivadeneira, E. La Sostenibilidad de los Emprendimientos en el cantón Guaranda. Rev. Enlace Univ. 2017, 53, 12–16. [Google Scholar]
No. | Key Success Factors | No. | Management Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Access to legal tenure of real estate and machinery. | 1 | Increasing associative resources. |
2 | Type and magnitude of resources. | ||
3 | Low investment requirements. | 2 | Capitalisation of investments. |
4 | Capitalisation policies: maintenance of machinery and investments. | ||
5 | Access to credit. | 3 | Access to financing. |
6 | Access to financing. | ||
7 | Differentiated remuneration criteria. | 4 | Representative income redistribution. |
8 | Accounting control. | 5 | Accounting control. |
No. | Key Success Factors | No. | Management Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
9 | Direct sales. | 1 | Sales growth. |
10 | Access to contracts with public institutions. | ||
11 | Access to contracts with private companies, networks and alliances. | ||
12 | Good previous positioning of the good or service in the market. | 6 | Brand positioning. |
13 | Own brand main product. | ||
14 | Positioning as a cooperative brand. | ||
15 | Competitive product in the market. | ||
16 | Attractiveness of the sector. | ||
17 | Customer satisfaction and loyalty. | 8 | Satisfied or frequent customers. |
No. | Key Success Factors | No. | Management Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
18 | Civic innovation. | 9 | Process innovation |
19 | No significant interruption of production. | ||
20 | Quality improvement. | 10 | Quality compliance |
21 | Status of the original production unit. | ||
22 | Product diversification. | 11 | Diversification of products and production sites |
23 | Location in an area favours productive or organisational advantage. |
No. | Key Success Factors | No. | Management Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
24 | Retention of skilled workers. | 12 | Professionalisation of technical areas |
25 | Incorporation or training of professionals. | ||
26 | Education and training. | 13 | Technical skills training. |
27 | Business skills training and previous experience. | ||
28 | Educational level. | ||
29 | Entrepreneurial culture. | ||
30 | Previous experience. | ||
31 | Relevance of work regulation rules and compliance devices. | 14 | Consolidation of labour regulations |
32 | Contractual form. | ||
33 | Leadership and cultural inclusion. | 15 | Participative leadership |
34 | Leadership. | ||
35 | Flexibility in working conditions. | ||
36 | Adequate working environment. |
No. | Key Success Factors | No. | Management Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
37 | Continuity of a group and/or project in the legitimate management of the cooperative. | 16 | Labour integration |
38 | Cooperative project that gives relevance to economic management. | ||
39 | Integration policies for the labour collective. | ||
40 | Organisations of recovered enterprises and/or cooperatives. | ||
41 | Trade unions. | ||
42 | Short or low conflict. | ||
43 | Participation of workers. | ||
44 | Motivation for social entrepreneurship. | 17 | Strengthening PSE principles. |
45 | Action with solidarity economy. | ||
46 | Community organisation. | ||
47 | Participation with the community. | ||
48 | Environmental protection. | 18 | Environmental protection. |
49 | Exchanges with other cooperatives. | 19 | Inter-cooperation with the solidarity economy sector |
50 | Sharing resources. | ||
51 | Knowledge sharing. | ||
52 | Service concession. | ||
53 | Production and marketing by associating. | ||
54 | Reciprocal relationships with neighbours and local institutions. | 20 | Institutional relations |
55 | External advice. | ||
56 | Social networks. | ||
57 | Relations with agents of the environment. | ||
58 | Programmes with educational establishments and science and technology organisations. | ||
59 | Redistribution processes from the State. | 21 | Access to state-run programmes. |
60 | Political support. | ||
61 | Positive economic context of the branch in the post-recovery stage. |
Criteria | Scale of Saaty | Criteria | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Extreme | Very strong | Strong | Moderate | Equal | Moderate | Strong | Very strong | Extreme | ||
C1. FINANCE | 9 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | X | 9 | C2. CLIENTS |
C1. FINANCE | 9 | 7 | 5 | 3 | x | 3 | 5 | 7 | 9 | C3. PROCESSES |
C1. FINANCE | 9 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | X | 9 | C4. LEARNING |
C1. FINANCE | 9 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 7 | X | C5. SOCIAL |
C1. FINANCE | C2. CLIENTS | C3. PROCESSES | C4. LEARNING | C5. SOCIAL | VALUE | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1. FINANCE | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.04 |
C2. CLIENTS | 0.28 | 0.09 | 0.22 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.15 |
C3. PROCESSES | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.04 |
C4. LEARNING | 0.28 | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.22 | 0.20 | 0.25 |
C5. SOCIAL | 0.36 | 0.62 | 0.39 | 0.65 | 0.59 | 0.52 |
1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Level 1: Perspectives | Local Value | Level 2: Indicators | Level 1 Value | Level 2 Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
SOCIAL | 33.9% | Labour Integration. | 31.1% | 10.5% |
Strengthening PSE principles. | 18.8% | 6.4% | ||
Inter-cooperation with the solidarity economy sector. | 16.7% | 5.7% | ||
Access to state-run programmes. | 16.3% | 5.5% | ||
Environmental protection. | 9.5% | 3.2% | ||
Institutional relations. | 7.6% | 2.6% | ||
LEARNING | 28.4% | Participatory leadership. | 43.6% | 12.4% |
Technical skills training. | 39.7% | 11.3% | ||
Consolidation of labour regulations. | 11.4% | 3.2% | ||
Professionalisation of technical areas. | 5.3% | 1.5% | ||
PROCESSES | 14.7% | Process innovation. | 52.7% | 7.8% |
Quality compliance. | 37.8% | 5.6% | ||
Diversification of products and production locations. | 9.4% | 1.4% | ||
CLIENTS | 15.4% | Satisfied or frequent customers. | 49.7% | 7.6% |
Sales growth. | 34.3% | 5.3% | ||
Brand positioning. | 16.0% | 2.5% | ||
FINANCE | 7.6% | Representative income redistribution. | 27.4% | 2.1% |
Access to funding. | 25.6% | 2.0% | ||
Capitalisation of investments. | 20.5% | 1.6% | ||
Increasing associative resources. | 15.5% | 1.2% | ||
Accounting control. | 10.9% | 0.8% | ||
TOTAL | 100% | 100% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Guananga, L.A.; Poveda-Bautista, R.; García-Melón, M. Management Indicators for the Organisational Sustainability of Associative Productive Ventures. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16166. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316166
Guananga LA, Poveda-Bautista R, García-Melón M. Management Indicators for the Organisational Sustainability of Associative Productive Ventures. Sustainability. 2023; 15(23):16166. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316166
Chicago/Turabian StyleGuananga, Luis Armando, Rocío Poveda-Bautista, and Mónica García-Melón. 2023. "Management Indicators for the Organisational Sustainability of Associative Productive Ventures" Sustainability 15, no. 23: 16166. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316166
APA StyleGuananga, L. A., Poveda-Bautista, R., & García-Melón, M. (2023). Management Indicators for the Organisational Sustainability of Associative Productive Ventures. Sustainability, 15(23), 16166. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316166