Democratic Administration and Commitment of Members of Agricultural Cooperatives: A Case Study from a Prefecture in Greece
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Role of Democracy in Cooperatives
2.2. Cooperatives and Member Commitment
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Population and Sample
3.2. Data Collection Instruments
3.3. Procedures
4. Results
4.1. Members’ Attitude towards the Culture and Administration of Cooperatives
4.2. The Impact of Cooperative Governance on Members’ Cooperative Commitment
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kontogeorgos, A.; Chatzitheodoridis, F.; Loizou, E. Adaptation strategies for the Greek agricultural cooperatives during the economic crisis. Agric. J. 2016, 62, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nilsson, J. The nature of cooperative values and principles: Transaction cost theoretical explanations. Ann. Public Coop. Econ. 1996, 67, 633–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontogeorgos, A.; Sergaki, P. Principles of the management of agricultural cooperatives. Challenges and Prospects. Greek Academic Electronic Textbooks, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Gupta, C. The co-operative model as a “living experiment in democracy”. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2014, 2, 98–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaswan, M.J. Developing democracy: Cooperatives and democratic theory. Int. J. Urban Sustain. Dev. 2014, 6, 190–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bijman, J.; Verhees, F. Member or customer? Farmer commitment to supply cooperatives. In Proceedings of the International conference on the Economics and Management of Networks, Limassol, Cyprus, 1–3 December 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Munch, D.M.; Schmit, T.M.; Severson, R.M. Assessing the value of cooperative membership: A case of dairy marketing in the United States. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2021, 9, 100129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, J.; Han, H.; Jia, F.; Dong, H. Agricultural Co-operatives in the western world: A bibliometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 122945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morfi, C.; Ollila, P.; Nilsson, J.; Feng, L.; Karantininis, K. Motivation behind members’ loyalty to agricultural cooperatives. In Interfirm Networks: Franchising, Cooperatives and Strategic Alliances; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 173–190. [Google Scholar]
- Crick, J.M.; Crick, D. Coopetition and COVID-19: Collaborative business-to-business marketing strategies in a pandemic crisis. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 88, 206–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKillop, D.; French, D.; Quinn, B.; Sobiech, A.L.; Wilson, J.O.S. Cooperative financial institutions: A review of the literature. Int. Rev. Financ. Anal. 2020, 71, 101520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, D.W.; Johnson, R. Cooperative learning and teaching citizenship in democracies. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2016, 76, 162–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forrai Ørskov, F. The International Co-operative Alliance and the Consumer Co-operative Movement in Northern Europe, c. 1860–1939. Scand. J. Hist. 2019, 44, 531–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fulton, J.R.; Adamowicz, W. Factors That Influence the Commitment of Members to Their Cooperative Organization. J. Agric. Coop. 1993, 8, 39–53. [Google Scholar]
- Cechin, A.; Bijman, J.; Pascucci, S.; Omta, O. Decomposing the Member Relationship in Agricultural Cooperatives: Implications for Commitment. Agribusiness 2013, 29, 39–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontogeorgos, A. Brands, quality badges and agricultural cooperatives: How can they co-exist? TQM J. 2012, 24, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolz, A.; Möllers, J.; Micu, M.M. Options for agricultural service cooperatives in a postsocialist economy: Evidence from Romania. Outlook Agric. 2020, 49, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hakelius, K.; Hansson, H. Members’ attitudes towards cooperatives and their perception of agency problems. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2016, 19, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grashuis, J.; Cook, M.L. A structural equation model of cooperative member satisfaction and long-term commitment. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2019, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzarol, T.; Soutar, G.; Limnios, E.M. Member loyalty and WOM in co-operative and mutual enterprises. J. Serv. Mark. 2019, 33, 303–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cechin, A.; Bijman, J.; Pascucci, S.; Zylbersztajn, D.; Omta, O. Drivers of pro-active member participation in agricultural cooperatives: Evidence from Brazil. Ann. Public Coop. Econ. 2013, 84, 443–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manika, S.; Anastasiou, E. Regional economics in Greece: A spatial analysis of business and population dynamics. Int. J. Bus. Econ. Sci. Appl. Res. 2020, 13, 70–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalogiannidis, S. Economic Cooperative Models: Agricultural Cooperatives in Greece and the Need to Modernize their Operation for the Sustainable Development of Local Societies. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2020, 10, 452–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sergaki, P.; Semos, A. The Greek Unions of Agricultural Cooperatives as Efficient Enterprises, 2006. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Greek-Unions-of-Agricultural-Cooperatives-as-Sergaki-Semos/effc4b8d4ccf2fab72c132be71c90566b8cfe3c5 (accessed on 5 August 2021).
Variables | Scale | Frequency (f) | Relative Frequency (Rf) |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 75 | 0.75 |
Female | 25 | 0.25 | |
Age | ≤30 | 14 | 0.14 |
31–40 | 14 | 0.14 | |
41–50 | 29 | 0.29 | |
51–60 | 23 | 0.23 | |
61> | 20 | 0.20 | |
Years of cooperative activity | ≤10 | 41 | 0.41 |
11–25 | 43 | 0.43 | |
26> | 16 | 0.16 | |
Current Position in Cooperative | Member | 84 | 0.84 |
Board member | 15 | 0.15 | |
Education level | Basic education | 19 | 0.19 |
Secondary education | 60 | 0.60 | |
Higher education | 21 | 0.21 |
Cronbach’s Alpha | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Variance | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Item variances | 0.855 | 2.00 | 6.63 | 5.02 | 1.104 |
Questions | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neutral | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | |
Q1. Closely conected to the cooperative | 2 | 2% | 4 | 4% | 10 | 10% | 13 | 13% | 18 | 18% | 18 | 18% | 34 | 34% |
Q2. No thoughts of leaving the cooperative | 6 | 6% | 4 | 4% | 2 | 2% | 15 | 15% | 16 | 16% | 13 | 13% | 43 | 43% |
Q3. Continue belong in the current cooperative even better and alternative proposals | 4 | 4% | 4 | 4% | 6 | 6% | 18 | 18% | 21 | 21% | 14 | 14% | 32 | 32% |
Q4. Feel obliged to the cooperative | 6 | 6% | 2 | 2% | 2 | 2% | 14 | 14% | 16 | 16% | 19 | 19% | 39 | 39% |
Q5. Comply with the principles of the cooperatives | 3 | 3% | 3 | 3% | 6 | 6% | 12 | 12% | 26 | 26% | 18 | 18% | 31 | 31% |
Q6. Defend the cooperative in emergency situation | 5 | 5% | 1 | 1% | 1 | 1% | 9 | 9% | 24 | 24% | 22 | 22% | 37 | 37% |
Q7. Feel concerned about the future of the cooperative | 2 | 2% | 1 | 1% | 1 | 1% | 6 | 6% | 24 | 24% | 24 | 24% | 40 | 40% |
Q8. Feel the problems of the Cooperative as my own | 8 | 8% | 1 | 1% | 1 | 1% | 13 | 13% | 19 | 19% | 27 | 27% | 30 | 30% |
Q9. Willing to invest part of personal capital if this is required by the Cooperative. | 11 | 11% | 4 | 4% | 6 | 6% | 18 | 18% | 17 | 17% | 17 | 17% | 26 | 26% |
Q10. Willing to temporarily reduce my profit for the good of the Cooperative | 14 | 14% | 3 | 3% | 4 | 4% | 12 | 12% | 23 | 23% | 18 | 18% | 25 | 25% |
Q11. Interested in taking key positions in the Cooperative | 24 | 24% | 20 | 20% | 6 | 6% | 6 | 6% | 12 | 12% | 10 | 10% | 21 | 21% |
Q12. Interested in taking any position of responsibility. apart from the articles of association. in the Cooperative. | 24 | 24% | 19 | 19% | 8 | 8% | 8 | 8% | 7 | 7% | 9 | 9% | 23 | 23% |
Q13. My communication with the administration is flawless | 4 | 4% | 3 | 3% | 4 | 4% | 11 | 11% | 25 | 25% | 19 | 19% | 33 | 33% |
Q14. Always participate in all General Assemblies. | 7 | 7% | 7 | 7% | 9 | 9% | 8 | 8% | 15 | 15% | 14 | 14% | 39 | 39% |
Q15.I influence the course of the Cooperative | 8 | 8% | 4 | 4% | 11 | 11% | 14 | 14% | 24 | 24% | 16 | 16% | 22 | 22% |
Q16.The more I participate in the Cooperative processes. the more I benefit financially. | 6 | 6% | 5 | 5% | 2 | 2% | 12 | 12% | 20 | 20% | 25 | 25% | 29 | 29% |
Q17. Strategic decisions are taken exclusively by the members of the Cooperative | 2 | 2% | 5 | 5% | 5 | 5% | 13 | 13% | 21 | 21% | 27 | 27% | 26 | 26% |
Q18. The governing bodies (Chairman and Board of Directors) take into account for their decisions the interests of the members of the Cooperative | 5 | 5% | 3 | 3% | 2 | 2% | 16 | 16% | 19 | 19% | 27 | 27% | 27 | 27% |
Q19. I trust the information given to me by the management bodies (Chairman and Board) of the Cooperative | 6 | 6% | 3 | 3% | 1 | 1% | 13 | 13% | 20 | 20% | 27 | 27% | 29 | 29% |
Q20. There is a sense of corruption in the Cooperative | 67 | 67% | 19 | 19% | 5 | 5% | 2 | 2% | 2 | 2% | 1 | 1% | 3 | 3% |
Q21. My disengagement from the Cooperative will cost me a lot of time. money and effort | 9 | 9% | 11 | 11% | 6 | 6% | 9 | 9% | 7 | 7% | 19 | 19% | 38 | 38% |
Categories | χ2 | p-Value |
---|---|---|
Dedication—Self evaluation | ≥7635 | 0.000 |
Loyalty—Alternatives/Belief | ≥44,787 | 0.000 |
Identification—Personal Emotions/Participation | ≥3395 | 0.005 |
Identification—Efforts | ≥58,318 | 0.013 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 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
Ragazou, K.; Anastasiou, E.; Theodossiou, G.; Koutsogeorgos, K. Democratic Administration and Commitment of Members of Agricultural Cooperatives: A Case Study from a Prefecture in Greece. Businesses 2021, 1, 115-126. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses1020009
Ragazou K, Anastasiou E, Theodossiou G, Koutsogeorgos K. Democratic Administration and Commitment of Members of Agricultural Cooperatives: A Case Study from a Prefecture in Greece. Businesses. 2021; 1(2):115-126. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses1020009
Chicago/Turabian StyleRagazou, Konstantina, Evgenia Anastasiou, George Theodossiou, and Konstantinos Koutsogeorgos. 2021. "Democratic Administration and Commitment of Members of Agricultural Cooperatives: A Case Study from a Prefecture in Greece" Businesses 1, no. 2: 115-126. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses1020009
APA StyleRagazou, K., Anastasiou, E., Theodossiou, G., & Koutsogeorgos, K. (2021). Democratic Administration and Commitment of Members of Agricultural Cooperatives: A Case Study from a Prefecture in Greece. Businesses, 1(2), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses1020009