cooperative-organizational-structure

Cooperative Organizational Structure

A cooperative organizational structure, often simply referred to as a cooperative or co-op, is a unique form of business organization that places a strong emphasis on collaboration, shared ownership, and democratic decision-making. Cooperatives exist in various industries and sectors, including agriculture, retail, housing, and finance, and serve a diverse range of purposes.

Understanding the Cooperative Structure

The Essence of a Cooperative

A cooperative is a business or organization owned and operated by a group of individuals or entities who come together to pursue common goals or meet shared needs. The core principle underlying cooperatives is that they are democratically controlled by their members, with each member having an equal say in the decision-making process, regardless of their level of investment or ownership.

Cooperatives are often formed to address specific needs, such as access to essential goods or services, fair pricing, or support for producers and workers. They can take various legal forms, including consumer cooperatives, worker cooperatives, producer cooperatives, and housing cooperatives.

Characteristics of a Cooperative

Several key characteristics distinguish a cooperative organizational structure:

  1. Member Ownership: Members collectively own and control the cooperative, typically by purchasing shares or memberships.
  2. Democratic Governance: Decision-making authority is distributed among members, who participate in the cooperative’s governance through voting and participation in meetings.
  3. Shared Benefits: Profits and benefits generated by the cooperative are distributed among members based on their level of participation or use of the cooperative’s services.
  4. Voluntary Membership: Membership in a cooperative is typically open to those who are willing to use its services and abide by its principles.
  5. Education and Training: Cooperatives often prioritize education and training to ensure that members are informed and engaged in the organization’s activities.

Advantages of a Cooperative Structure

A cooperative organizational structure offers several advantages that can benefit both its members and the broader community:

1. Economic Empowerment:

  • Cooperatives empower members by providing access to goods, services, and economic opportunities that might otherwise be out of reach.

2. Shared Risk and Reward:

  • Members collectively share the risks and rewards of the cooperative’s activities, fostering a sense of shared responsibility.

3. Democratic Participation:

  • Cooperatives promote democratic decision-making, giving each member a voice in the organization’s direction and policies.

4. Fair and Equitable:

  • Cooperatives often prioritize fairness and equity in pricing, wages, and benefits, benefiting members and consumers alike.

5. Social and Environmental Impact:

  • Many cooperatives prioritize social and environmental goals, contributing to positive community and sustainability outcomes.

Challenges of a Cooperative Structure

However, the cooperative structure also presents challenges:

1. Decision-Making Complexity:

  • Democratic decision-making can be time-consuming and challenging, particularly in larger cooperatives with numerous members.

2. Capitalization:

  • Raising capital and accessing financing can be more challenging for cooperatives compared to traditional corporations.

3. Member Engagement:

  • Ensuring active member participation and engagement can be a persistent challenge for cooperatives.

4. Governance and Conflict:

  • Managing conflicts and maintaining effective governance in a democratic structure can be complex.

5. Competitive Markets:

  • In competitive markets, cooperatives may face challenges in price competitiveness and scaling operations.

Real-World Implications

Cooperative organizational structures have real-world implications in various industries and sectors:

1. Agriculture:

  • Agricultural cooperatives, formed by farmers to collectively market and sell their products, are prevalent worldwide.

2. Credit Unions:

  • Credit unions are financial cooperatives that provide banking services and loans to members while emphasizing fair and ethical practices.

3. Consumer Cooperatives:

  • Consumer cooperatives, like grocery store co-ops, offer goods and services to members with a focus on community and sustainability.

4. Worker Cooperatives:

  • Worker cooperatives are owned and managed by their employees, promoting workplace democracy and shared ownership.

5. Housing Cooperatives:

  • Housing cooperatives enable residents to collectively own and manage their housing, fostering a sense of community and affordability.

Navigating the Cooperative Structure

Successfully navigating a cooperative organizational structure requires careful planning and attention to various factors:

  1. Member Engagement: Foster active member participation through education, communication, and opportunities for involvement.
  2. Governance Structure: Develop a clear governance structure that balances democratic decision-making with efficient operations.
  3. Financial Management: Establish sound financial practices and explore financing options tailored to cooperative needs.
  4. Market Positioning: Compete effectively in the market by emphasizing the unique advantages and values of the cooperative model.
  5. Collaborative Networks: Explore collaborations and partnerships with other cooperatives to leverage resources and expand impact.

Conclusion

A cooperative organizational structure is a testament to the power of collaboration, shared ownership, and democratic decision-making. While it poses challenges related to governance, capitalization, and member engagement, cooperatives have a profound impact on their members and communities by addressing economic, social, and environmental needs. As individuals and organizations continue to seek alternatives that prioritize fairness, equity, and sustainability, the cooperative model remains a compelling and enduring choice in the landscape of modern business and community development.

Key Highlights

  • Understanding the Cooperative Structure:
    • Cooperatives are businesses owned and operated by a group of individuals or entities who come together to pursue common goals or meet shared needs.
    • Core principles include democratic control, member ownership, and shared benefits.
    • Various legal forms include consumer cooperatives, worker cooperatives, producer cooperatives, and housing cooperatives.
  • Characteristics of a Cooperative:
    • Member ownership: Members collectively own and control the cooperative.
    • Democratic governance: Decision-making authority is distributed among members.
    • Shared benefits: Profits and benefits are distributed among members.
    • Voluntary membership and education/training are also key characteristics.
  • Advantages of a Cooperative Structure:
    • Economic empowerment, shared risk and reward, democratic participation, fairness and equity, and social/environmental impact are the key advantages.
  • Challenges of a Cooperative Structure:
    • Decision-making complexity, capitalization, member engagement, governance/conflict, and competitiveness in the market are the main challenges.
  • Real-World Implications:
    • Examples include agricultural cooperatives, credit unions, consumer cooperatives (e.g., grocery store co-ops), worker cooperatives, and housing cooperatives.
  • Navigating the Cooperative Structure:
    • Strategies include fostering member engagement, developing clear governance structures, establishing sound financial practices, positioning effectively in the market, and exploring collaborative networks.
  • Conclusion:
    • Cooperatives are powerful models based on collaboration, shared ownership, and democratic decision-making.
    • While posing challenges, they have a profound impact on members and communities by addressing economic, social, and environmental needs.
    • Cooperatives remain compelling choices for those seeking fairness, equity, and sustainability in business and community development.
Case StudyContextStrategyOutcome
Mondragon CorporationWorker-owned cooperative conglomerate in Spain.Cooperative Organization: Structured as a federation of worker cooperatives across various sectors.Achieved strong economic performance, job stability, and social benefits, becoming a model for worker-owned enterprises.
REI (Recreational Equipment Inc.)American consumer cooperative retailing outdoor gear.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure where profits are returned to members through dividends and discounts.Enhanced customer loyalty, increased sales, and strong community engagement, driving growth and market leadership in outdoor retail.
The Co-operative GroupBritish consumer cooperative with diverse businesses including food retail, insurance, and legal services.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits shared among members and reinvested in the community.Improved customer loyalty, community impact, and business growth, maintaining a strong presence in multiple sectors.
Land O’LakesAmerican agricultural cooperative specializing in dairy products.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure where profits are distributed among member-owners.Enhanced member engagement, innovation in product development, and market competitiveness, driving growth in the agricultural sector.
Ocean SprayAmerican agricultural cooperative specializing in cranberries and grapefruit.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure with profits shared among grower-owners.Achieved strong market presence, product innovation, and financial returns for members, driving growth in the beverage industry.
Ace HardwareAmerican hardware retail cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Retailer-owned structure with profits returned to member stores.Increased operational efficiency, competitive pricing, and member satisfaction, driving growth and market leadership in hardware retail.
Sunkist GrowersAmerican citrus-grower cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Grower-owned structure where profits are shared among members.Enhanced product quality, market reach, and financial returns for growers, driving growth in the citrus industry.
Blue Diamond GrowersAmerican almond-grower cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure with profits distributed to members.Achieved strong market presence, product innovation, and financial returns for members, driving growth in the almond industry.
Arla FoodsEuropean dairy cooperative based in Denmark.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure where profits are reinvested in the business and distributed to members.Enhanced product quality, market reach, and financial stability, driving growth and competitiveness in the dairy industry.
Organic ValleyAmerican organic food cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure with profits returned to members and reinvested in sustainable practices.Increased member engagement, product quality, and market presence, driving growth and leadership in organic foods.
RabobankDutch multinational banking and financial services company.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits reinvested in member services and community projects.Achieved strong financial performance, customer loyalty, and community impact, maintaining a leading position in cooperative banking.
CoBankAmerican cooperative bank serving rural America.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits returned to member-owners.Enhanced financial stability, member services, and community impact, driving growth and leadership in rural banking.
Group Health CooperativeAmerican healthcare provider and insurance company.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure where profits are reinvested in healthcare services and member benefits.Improved healthcare quality, member satisfaction, and operational efficiency, driving growth and leadership in cooperative healthcare.
Agricultural Cooperative Federation (Zen-Noh)Japanese agricultural cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure with profits reinvested in member services and agricultural innovation.Enhanced agricultural productivity, member engagement, and market competitiveness, driving growth and sustainability in Japanese agriculture.
FonterraNew Zealand-based dairy cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure where profits are distributed to members and reinvested in the business.Achieved strong market presence, product innovation, and financial returns for members, driving growth and competitiveness in the global dairy industry.
Rochdale PioneersBritish consumer cooperative and the world’s first successful cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits shared among members and reinvested in the community.Established a sustainable business model, improved member benefits, and inspired the global cooperative movement.
Desjardins GroupCanadian financial cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits reinvested in member services and community development.Achieved strong financial performance, customer loyalty, and community impact, maintaining a leading position in cooperative banking.
Credit AgricoleFrench cooperative banking group.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits reinvested in member services and local economies.Enhanced financial stability, customer loyalty, and community impact, driving growth and leadership in cooperative banking.
WelkoopDutch agricultural and pet supply cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Member-owned structure with profits returned to members.Increased member engagement, operational efficiency, and market presence, driving growth and competitiveness in agricultural and pet supplies.
PlunkettsIrish agricultural cooperative.Cooperative Organization: Farmer-owned structure with profits reinvested in member services and agricultural innovation.Enhanced agricultural productivity, member engagement, and market competitiveness, driving growth and sustainability in Irish agriculture.

Related Organizational StructuresDescriptionImplications
Cooperative Organizational StructureA Cooperative Organizational Structure is characterized by a democratic and participative approach to decision-making and governance. It emphasizes collaboration, shared ownership, and equal participation among members or stakeholders. Cooperative structures prioritize employee empowerment, transparency, and accountability, fostering a culture of trust, collaboration, and mutual respect.Cooperative Organizational Structures offer several benefits, including increased employee engagement, motivation, and commitment. By involving employees in decision-making and sharing ownership, cooperative structures can enhance organizational performance, innovation, and resilience. However, cooperative structures may also pose challenges related to consensus-building, coordination, and conflict resolution, as decision-making processes may require more time and effort to ensure alignment and inclusivity.
Flat Organizational StructureA Flat Organizational Structure is characterized by few or no levels of middle management between frontline employees and top leadership. It fosters a decentralized decision-making process, promotes employee empowerment and autonomy, and encourages open communication and collaboration. Flat structures prioritize flexibility, agility, and quick decision-making, enabling organizations to adapt rapidly to change and foster innovation.Flat Organizational Structures share similarities with Cooperative Structures in their emphasis on employee empowerment and autonomy. By reducing hierarchical layers and promoting open communication, flat structures enable employees to take ownership of their work and contribute directly to organizational goals. Both models prioritize flexibility and agility, enabling organizations to adapt quickly to market changes and capitalize on emerging opportunities. However, flat structures may have less formalized mechanisms for governance and decision-making compared to cooperative structures, which may require explicit processes for consensus-building and conflict resolution.
Participatory ManagementParticipatory Management is an approach to organizational leadership that involves employees in decision-making, goal-setting, and problem-solving processes. It emphasizes collaboration, transparency, and shared responsibility, enabling employees to contribute their ideas, insights, and expertise to organizational decision-making. Participatory management fosters a culture of empowerment, ownership, and accountability, enhancing employee motivation, engagement, and satisfaction.Participatory Management aligns closely with the principles of Cooperative Organizational Structures in its emphasis on employee involvement and empowerment. By involving employees in decision-making and goal-setting processes, participatory management can enhance organizational performance, innovation, and resilience. Both approaches prioritize transparency, collaboration, and shared responsibility, enabling organizations to leverage the collective intelligence and creativity of employees to achieve common goals. However, participatory management may require leadership commitment, cultural change, and investment in training and development to ensure effective implementation and sustainability.
Democratic LeadershipDemocratic Leadership is a leadership style that involves sharing decision-making authority and soliciting input from team members or stakeholders. It emphasizes collaboration, inclusivity, and transparency, enabling employees to participate in organizational decision-making and contribute their perspectives and ideas. Democratic leaders facilitate open communication, consensus-building, and shared ownership, fostering a culture of trust, accountability, and innovation.Democratic Leadership shares similarities with Cooperative Organizational Structures in its emphasis on shared decision-making and transparency. By involving employees in decision-making processes and soliciting their input, democratic leaders can enhance employee engagement, motivation, and commitment. Both approaches prioritize collaboration, inclusivity, and accountability, enabling organizations to leverage the diverse perspectives and expertise of employees to achieve common goals. However, democratic leadership may require leadership skills, cultural change, and organizational support to ensure effective implementation and alignment with organizational objectives.

Read Next: Organizational Structure.

Types of Organizational Structures

organizational-structure-types
Organizational Structures

Siloed Organizational Structures

Functional

functional-organizational-structure
In a functional organizational structure, groups and teams are organized based on function. Therefore, this organization follows a top-down structure, where most decision flows from top management to bottom. Thus, the bottom of the organization mostly follows the strategy detailed by the top of the organization.

Divisional

divisional-organizational-structure

Open Organizational Structures

Matrix

matrix-organizational-structure

Flat

flat-organizational-structure
In a flat organizational structure, there is little to no middle management between employees and executives. Therefore it reduces the space between employees and executives to enable an effective communication flow within the organization, thus being faster and leaner.

Connected Business Frameworks

Portfolio Management

project-portfolio-matrix
Project portfolio management (PPM) is a systematic approach to selecting and managing a collection of projects aligned with organizational objectives. That is a business process of managing multiple projects which can be identified, prioritized, and managed within the organization. PPM helps organizations optimize their investments by allocating resources efficiently across all initiatives.

Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model

kotters-8-step-change-model
Harvard Business School professor Dr. John Kotter has been a thought-leader on organizational change, and he developed Kotter’s 8-step change model, which helps business managers deal with organizational change. Kotter created the 8-step model to drive organizational transformation.

Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model

nadler-tushman-congruence-model
The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model was created by David Nadler and Michael Tushman at Columbia University. The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model is a diagnostic tool that identifies problem areas within a company. In the context of business, congruence occurs when the goals of different people or interest groups coincide.

McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom

mckinseys-seven-degrees
McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom for Growth is a strategy tool. Developed by partners at McKinsey and Company, the tool helps businesses understand which opportunities will contribute to expansion, and therefore it helps to prioritize those initiatives.

Mintzberg’s 5Ps

5ps-of-strategy
Mintzberg’s 5Ps of Strategy is a strategy development model that examines five different perspectives (plan, ploy, pattern, position, perspective) to develop a successful business strategy. A sixth perspective has been developed over the years, called Practice, which was created to help businesses execute their strategies.

COSO Framework

coso-framework
The COSO framework is a means of designing, implementing, and evaluating control within an organization. The COSO framework’s five components are control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring activities. As a fraud risk management tool, businesses can design, implement, and evaluate internal control procedures.

TOWS Matrix

tows-matrix
The TOWS Matrix is an acronym for Threats, Opportunities, Weaknesses, and Strengths. The matrix is a variation on the SWOT Analysis, and it seeks to address criticisms of the SWOT Analysis regarding its inability to show relationships between the various categories.

Lewin’s Change Management

lewins-change-management-model
Lewin’s change management model helps businesses manage the uncertainty and resistance associated with change. Kurt Lewin, one of the first academics to focus his research on group dynamics, developed a three-stage model. He proposed that the behavior of individuals happened as a function of group behavior.

Organizational Structure Case Studies

OpenAI Organizational Structure

openai-organizational-structure
OpenAI is an artificial intelligence research laboratory that transitioned into a for-profit organization in 2019. The corporate structure is organized around two entities: OpenAI, Inc., which is a single-member Delaware LLC controlled by OpenAI non-profit, And OpenAI LP, which is a capped, for-profit organization. The OpenAI LP is governed by the board of OpenAI, Inc (the foundation), which acts as a General Partner. At the same time, Limited Partners comprise employees of the LP, some of the board members, and other investors like Reid Hoffman’s charitable foundation, Khosla Ventures, and Microsoft, the leading investor in the LP.

Airbnb Organizational Structure

airbnb-organizational-structure
Airbnb follows a holacracy model, or a sort of flat organizational structure, where teams are organized for projects, to move quickly and iterate fast, thus keeping a lean and flexible approach. Airbnb also moved to a hybrid model where employees can work from anywhere and meet on a quarterly basis to plan ahead, and connect to each other.

Amazon Organizational Structure

amazon-organizational-structure
The Amazon organizational structure is predominantly hierarchical with elements of function-based structure and geographic divisions. While Amazon started as a lean, flat organization in its early years, it transitioned into a hierarchical organization with its jobs and functions clearly defined as it scaled.

Apple Organizational Structure

apple-organizational-structure
Apple has a traditional hierarchical structure with product-based grouping and some collaboration between divisions.

Coca-Cola Organizational Structure

coca-cola-organizational-structure
The Coca-Cola Company has a somewhat complex matrix organizational structure with geographic divisions, product divisions, business-type units, and functional groups.

Costco Organizational Structure

costco-organizational-structure
Costco has a matrix organizational structure, which can simply be defined as any structure that combines two or more different types. In this case, a predominant functional structure exists with a more secondary divisional structure. Costco’s geographic divisions reflect its strong presence in the United States combined with its expanding global presence. There are six divisions in the country alone to reflect its standing as the source of most company revenue. Compared to competitor Walmart, for example, Costco takes more a decentralized approach to management, decision-making, and autonomy. This allows the company’s stores and divisions to more flexibly respond to local market conditions.

Dell Organizational Structure

dell-organizational-structure
Dell has a functional organizational structure with some degree of decentralization. This means functional departments share information, contribute ideas to the success of the organization and have some degree of decision-making power.

eBay Organizational Structure

ebay-organizational-structure
eBay was until recently a multi-divisional (M-form) organization with semi-autonomous units grouped according to the services they provided. Today, eBay has a single division called Marketplace, which includes eBay and its international iterations.

Facebook Organizational Structure

facebook-organizational-structure
Facebook is characterized by a multi-faceted matrix organizational structure. The company utilizes a flat organizational structure in combination with corporate function-based teams and product-based or geographic divisions. The flat organization structure is organized around the leadership of Mark Zuckerberg, and the key executives around him. On the other hand, the function-based teams are based on the main corporate functions (like HR, product management, investor relations, and so on).

Goldman Sachs’ Organizational Structure

goldman-sacks-organizational-structures
Goldman Sachs has a hierarchical structure with a clear chain of command and defined career advancement process. The structure is also underpinned by business-type divisions and function-based groups.

Google Organizational Structure

google-organizational-structure
Google (Alphabet) has a cross-functional (team-based) organizational structure known as a matrix structure with some degree of flatness. Over the years, as the company scaled and it became a tech giant, its organizational structure is morphing more into a centralized organization.

IBM Organizational Structure

ibm-organizational-structure
IBM has an organizational structure characterized by product-based divisions, enabling its strategy to develop innovative and competitive products in multiple markets. IBM is also characterized by function-based segments that support product development and innovation for each product-based division, which include Global Markets, Integrated Supply Chain, Research, Development, and Intellectual Property.

McDonald’s Organizational Structure

mcdonald-organizational-structure
McDonald’s has a divisional organizational structure where each division – based on geographical location – is assigned operational responsibilities and strategic objectives. The main geographical divisions are the US, internationally operated markets, and international developmental licensed markets. And on the other hand, the hierarchical leadership structure is organized around regional and functional divisions.

McKinsey Organizational Structure

mckinsey-organizational-structure
McKinsey & Company has a decentralized organizational structure with mostly self-managing offices, committees, and employees. There are also functional groups and geographic divisions with proprietary names.

Microsoft Organizational Structure

microsoft-organizational-structure
Microsoft has a product-type divisional organizational structure based on functions and engineering groups. As the company scaled over time it also became more hierarchical, however still keeping its hybrid approach between functions, engineering groups, and management.

Nestlé Organizational Structure

nestle-organizational-structure
Nestlé has a geographical divisional structure with operations segmented into five key regions. For many years, Swiss multinational food and drink company Nestlé had a complex and decentralized matrix organizational structure where its numerous brands and subsidiaries were free to operate autonomously.

Nike Organizational Structure

nike-organizational-structure
Nike has a matrix organizational structure incorporating geographic divisions. Nike’s matrix structure is also present at the regional and sub-regional levels. Managerial responsibility is segmented according to business unit (apparel, footwear, and equipment) and function (human resources, finance, marketing, sales, and operations).

Patagonia Organizational Structure

patagonia-organizational-structure
Patagonia has a particular organizational structure, where its founder, Chouinard, disposed of the company’s ownership in the hands of two non-profits. The Patagonia Purpose Trust, holding 100% of the voting stocks, is in charge of defining the company’s strategic direction. And the Holdfast Collective, a non-profit, holds 100% of non-voting stocks, aiming to re-invest the brand’s dividends into environmental causes.

Samsung Organizational Structure

samsung-organizational-structure (1)
Samsung has a product-type divisional organizational structure where products determine how resources and business operations are categorized. The main resources around which Samsung’s corporate structure is organized are consumer electronics, IT, and device solutions. In addition, Samsung leadership functions are organized around a few career levels grades, based on experience (assistant, professional, senior professional, and principal professional).

Sony Organizational Structure

sony-organizational-structure
Sony has a matrix organizational structure primarily based on function-based groups and product/business divisions. The structure also incorporates geographical divisions. In 2021, Sony announced the overhauling of its organizational structure, changing its name from Sony Corporation to Sony Group Corporation to better identify itself as the headquarters of the Sony group of companies skewing the company toward product divisions.

Starbucks Organizational Structure

starbucks-organizational-structure
Starbucks follows a matrix organizational structure with a combination of vertical and horizontal structures. It is characterized by multiple, overlapping chains of command and divisions.

Tesla Organizational Structure

tesla-organizational-structure
Tesla is characterized by a functional organizational structure with aspects of a hierarchical structure. Tesla does employ functional centers that cover all business activities, including finance, sales, marketing, technology, engineering, design, and the offices of the CEO and chairperson. Tesla’s headquarters in Austin, Texas, decide the strategic direction of the company, with international operations given little autonomy.

Toyota Organizational Structure

toyota-organizational-structure
Toyota has a divisional organizational structure where business operations are centered around the market, product, and geographic groups. Therefore, Toyota organizes its corporate structure around global hierarchies (most strategic decisions come from Japan’s headquarter), product-based divisions (where the organization is broken down, based on each product line), and geographical divisions (according to the geographical areas under management).

Walmart Organizational Structure

walmart-organizational-structure
Walmart has a hybrid hierarchical-functional organizational structure, otherwise referred to as a matrix structure that combines multiple approaches. On the one hand, Walmart follows a hierarchical structure, where the current CEO Doug McMillon is the only employee without a direct superior, and directives are sent from top-level management. On the other hand, the function-based structure of Walmart is used to categorize employees according to their particular skills and experience.

Main Free Guides:

Discover more from FourWeekMBA

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top
FourWeekMBA