University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Social factors involved in the success or failure of consumer cooperatives in the United States

(USC Thesis Other)

Social factors involved in the success or failure of consumer cooperatives in the United States

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content SOCIAL FACTORS INVOLVED IN THE SUCCESS OR FAILURE OF CONSUMER COOPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES A D i s s e r t a t i o n P r e s e n te d t o t h e F a c u lty o f t h e D ep artm en t o f S o c io lo g y The U n i v e r s i ty o f S o u th e rn C a l i f o r n i a I n P a r t i a l F u l f i l l m e n t o f th e R e q u ire m e n ts f o r th e D egree D o c to r o f P h ilo s o p h y by A lf r e d W illia m S h e e ts May 1951 UMI Number: DP31713 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. D lssertatieri: P ü M Ig h & ig UMI DP31713 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 P h. 0, s.. 'SI s This dissertation, written by under the guidance of h.%^... Faculty Committee on Studies, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Council on Graduate Study and Fesearch, in partial ful fillment of requirements for the degree of D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y Date........ Committee on Studies Chmrman ACKNOWLEDGMENTS S in c e t h i s s tu d y i s a s o c i a l r a t h e r th a n an i n d i v i d u a l p r o d u c t i t i s b o th t h e o b l i g a t i o n and th e p l e a s u r e o f th e a u th o r t o s t a t e h i s in d e b te d n e s s t o th e h u n d red s o f co- o p e r a t o r s th ro u g h o u t th e U n ite d S t a t e s who answ ered th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , t o th e o f f i c i a l s o f c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le s a le s who gave s o f r e e l y o f t h e i r t im e , and s p e c i a l l y t o C. Ja c k M cLanahan, a t t h a t tim e E d u c a tio n D i r e c t o r o f t h e C oopera t i v e League of th e U n ite d S t a t e s , w ith o u t whose a s s i s t a n c e t h e w hole p r o j e c t would n e v e r have p a sse d beyond t h e p l a n n i n g s t a g e . TABLE OF CONTENTS ! CHAPTER PAGE I . THE OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY . . . 1, C l a r i f i c a t i o n o f b a s ic te rm in o lo g y ......................... 1 O b je c tiv e s and p r e s u p p o s i t io n s o f th e stu d y . . 5 A r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e s tu d y o f t h e pro b lem • • • 10 O v e r - a l l m ethodology u sed i n th e s tu d y . . . . 13 S u m m a ry ............................. 16 ; I I . THE SELECTION OF SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR STUDY, THE CIRCULATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE, AND RETURNS RECEIVED FROM RETAIL SOCIETIES . . 18, The s e l e c t i o n o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t o be s t u d i e d ............................. 18 The c i r c u l a t i o n o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . . . . . 29, R e tu rn s from t h e m a ilin g s o f q u e s t io n n a ir e s t o r e t a i l c o o p e r a tiv e s ................................... 32 Summary and e v a l u a t i o n ...................................................... 38 I I I . CRITERIA FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF SUCCESS IN CONSUMER COOPERATIVE FOOD S T O R E S ..................... 40 The m eaning o f s u c c e s s a s fo u n d i n l i t e r a t u r e d e a l i n g w i t h consum er c o o p e r a tiv e s • • . . . 40 M ethodology u sed f o r d e te r m in in g th e n a tu r e o f s u c c e s s i n r e t a i l c o o p e r a tiv e fo o d s t o r e s ...................................................... 55 B a sic a s s u m p t i o n s ........................................................ 55 V CHAPTER PAGE The q u e s t i o n n a i r e and what i t was d e s ig n e d t o do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f th e q u e s t io n n a ir e . . . 58 The r e t u r n s from t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . . .. . . 61 The d e f i n i t i o n o f s u c c e s s in c o o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e s ............................................. .. .... 64 The e v a l u a t i o n o f s u g g e s te d c r i t e r i a o f s u c c e s s ........................................ . . . . . . . . . 69 The n a t u r e o f th e raw d a ta ...................................... 69 The t a b u l a t i o n o f v a lu e s a s s ig n e d t o c r i t e r i a . . . . . . . . 70 The p o s s i b i l i t y o f c o n c o m ita n t v a r i a t i o n of th e c r i t e r i a .. . .. . .. . . 75 Comments on th e n a tu r e o f s u c c e s s i n c o o p e r a tiv e fo o d s t o r e s . . . . . .......................... 77 The m easurem ent o f s u c c e s s i n consum er c o o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e s . . . . . 8 l| Summary and e v a l u a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . 89 IV . THE OBSERVANCE OF ROCHDALE PRINCIPLES AS A FACTOR IN THE SUCCESS OR FAILURE OF COOPERATIVES................................................................................ 94 S t a t i s t i c a l te c h n iq u e s em ployed . . 95 v i CHAPTER PAGE A n a ly s is o f th e o b s e rv a n c e o f R o ch d ale P r i n c i p l e s . ..................... . . . . . . . . 98 Summary and s i g n i f i c a n c e o f th e f i n d in g s • . 105 V. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEM SUCCESS AND SELECTED FACTORS PRESENT W H E N COOPERATIVES ARE ORGANIZED................................................................................ 110 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e f i r s t b u s in e s s v e n tu r e and s u c c e s s . . . . . . 110 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een s u c c e s s and th e s t a g e s th ro u g h w hich c o o p e r a tiv e s p a s s . . 115 The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e econom ic c y c le t o s u c c e s s ........................ 121 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e amount of h e lp r e c e iv e d from c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le s a le and s u c c e s s . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e k in d o f h e lp r e c e iv e d from c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le s a le s and f s u c c e s s . ..................................................................... 132 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een o r g a n i z a t i o n s w hich have a id e d b e g in n in g s o c i e t i e s and s u c c e s s .................................. 134 Summary and s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e f i n d in g s . . 141 v i l CHAPTER PAGE, I V I. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TECHNIQUES USED , ( BY COOPERATIVES TO CONTACT MEMBERS AND PROSPECTIVE MEMBERS AND SUCCESS........................ . 148 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e m ethods used | by c o o p e r a tiv e s to e s t a b l i s h c o n ta c t s | w ith members and s u c c e s s ........................ 149| The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e m ethods used by c o o p e r a tiv e s t o e s t a b l i s h c o n ta c t s | w ith non-m em bers and s u c c e s s .. . .. . 168 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e m ethods used , I t o r a i s e e d u c a tio n fu n d s and s u c c e s s . . • 182; The r e l a t i o n s h i p b etw een th e t r e n d i n e d u c a ti o n a l work and s u c c e s s . . . . . . . 188| The r e l a t i o n s h i p b etw een e x p e n d itu r e s f o r ' e d u c a tio n and s u c c e s s . . .. . . 192 The r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e u se o f i c o o p e r a tiv e p a p e rs and s u c c e s s . . . . . . 200| Summary and c o n c lu s io n s .............................. BOs! V I I . COMMUNlTY-CaOPERATIVE RELATIONSHIPS AND SUCCESS .................... .... . . . . . . . 206 R e l a t i o n s h i p s betw een c o o p e r a t i v e s and n o n - c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le s a le s ......................... . * 206 v i i i CaAPTER PAGE I The r e l a t i o n s h i p s betw een i n d i v i d u a l | e o o p e r a to r s and th e community ... .. . 209 C o o p e ra tiv e a t t i t u d e s tow ard l o c a l b u s in e s s m e n 's a s s o c i a t i o n s « ......................... 212 The a t t i t u d e o f l o c a l b u sin e ssm e n to w ard , c o o p e r a tiv e s ............................................. 21 C o o p e ra tiv e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c i v i c a f f a i r s i ^ and d u t i e s ....................... 2l7j ' Summary and c o n c lu s io n s . . . . . ......................... 222 ! I jV III. SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN COOPERATIVES . . . 225, I A n ta g o n is tic g ro u p s w ith in c o o p e r a tiv e s . . • 225 ' C o n tro l o f p o l i c y fo rm a tio n i n c o o p e r a tiv e s I by s m a ll g r o u p s ................................... . 2271 I S o c i a l i t y o f members b e fo r e and a f t e r | I b u s in e s s m e e tin g s . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231< W illin g n e s s o f members t o u n d e rta k e s p e c i a l jo b s ............................. 234} V a r i a t i o n among c o o p e r a to r s who v o l u n te e r ■ f o r j o b s ....................................................................... 257 The p r o p o r t io n o f members a t t e n d i n g i ) b u s in e s s m e e tin g s ......................« « 2401 Summary and c o n c l u s i o n s ............................................« . 244' 1 % CHAPTER PAGE IX . THE RELATIONSHIP OF SOME ECOLOGICAL ASPECTS ! OF COOPERATIVE FOOD STORE OPERATION TO SUCCESS......................................................................................... 248 C o o p e ra tiv e b u s in e s s l e a d e r s h i p i n t h e food ! s t o r e f i e l d ........................ 248^ The p e rc e n ta g e o f non-member b u s in e s s e n jo y e d by c o o p e r a tiv e s in t h e food s t o r e f i e l d ........................................................................... 25l| The c o m p e titiv e s i t u a t i o n f a c i n g c o o p e ra t i v e s w hich o p e ra te fo o d s t o r e s .................... 254' The s i z e o f th e community i n w hich t h e c o o p e r a tiv e o p e r a t e s . . . . . . . . . 257 Summary and c o n c l u s i o n s .................................................. 261 X. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE OCCUPATIONAL i I COMPOSITION OP THE MEMBERSHIP OF COOPERATIVES AND S U C C E S S ............................................. 264' I The p r o p o r t io n o f u n s k i l l e d l a b o r in I c o o p e r a tiv e s ...................................................................... 265 The p r o p o r t i o n o f s k i l l e d l a b o r i n j c o o p e r a tiv e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 The p r o p o r t io n o f c l e r i c a l w o rk e rs i n ^ c o o p e r a tiv e s . . . . . . . . ...................... . 272 ! il I CHAPTER PAGE' The p r o p o r t io n o f p r o f e s s i o n a l p e o p le in : c o o p e r a tiv e s..................................... 27 6j j The p r o p o r t io n o f e x e c u tiv e s i n ' I c o o p e r a tiv e s 279' 1 The p r o p o r t io n o f fa rm e rs in c o o p e r a tiv e s • 28l| I Summary and c o n c lu s io n s . . . . . . . 285| X I. SUM M ARY AND INTERPRETATION OF THE FINDINGS . . 2871 The f i n d i n g s o f th e s t u d y ........................ 28?! S i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e f i n d in g s f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n and d ev elo p m en t o f consum er c o o p e r a tiv e s . . . . . . . . . 296' The w id e r s i g n i f i c a n c e o f th e f i n d i n g s . . . 311' ! BlBEIOcaiAPHT............................................................................................... 51?' APPENDIXES I A. The F i f t h R e v is io n o f th e Q u e s tio n n a ir e i " S i g n i f i c a n t S o c i a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f i i Consumer C o o p e r a tiv e s in th e U n ite d I j S t a t e s " .......................... 323I j B. C r i t i c i s m s and S u g g e s tio n s by C o o p e ra tiv e ' i L ea d ers R e l a t i n g t o M a t e r i a l t o Be I n c lu d e d I j i n th e Q u e s tio n n a ir e " S i g n i f i c a n t C h a r a c te r - j I i s t i c s o f C o o p e r a tiv e s in th e U n ite d I I I I S t a t e s . . . . . . . . . . ......................................... 331 il — . — ......................................... ■ . - — - ■ I. —-------------------- - ' — ' — I I I I . — I. ■ ..I . —........ I . — .................. —1 . . 1 I I. —I I . -■ — - — — i i 3: 1 'CHAPTER PAGE I 'a pp e n d ix e s j C. D e f i n i t i o n s o f S u c c e s s i n th e F i e ld o f I I Consumer C o o p e ra tiv e Food D i s t r i b u t i o n • • • 333 D. S u g g e ste d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f S u c c e s s f u l C o o p e ra tiv e Food S t o r e s and R e la te d Comments by T w enty-S ix R esp o n d en ts . . . . . 338 E . C o n cu rren ce o f S u g g e ste d C r i t e r i a f o r E s t a b l i s h i n g C o o p e ra tiv e S u c c e ss • . « • • • 340 F . Comments on th e N a tu re o f S u c c e ss in th e F i e l d o f C o o p e ra tiv e Food D i s t r i b u t i o n • . • 343i G. N ote on th e R e l i a b i l i t y and V a l i d i t y o f th e I Q u e s tio n n a ire " S i g n i f i c a n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f C o o p e ra tiv e s in th e U n ite d S t a t e s ? . • • 350; The v a l i d i t y o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 350 The r e l i a b i l i t y o f th e q u e s t io n n a ir e • • « • 357; I J r LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I . The P e r c e n ta g e o f Q u e s tio n n a ir e s R e tu rn e d by C o o p e ra tiv e Food S t o r e s i n t h e U n ite d • i S t a t e s by W holesale A reas . . . . . . . 36’ I I . G e o g ra p h ic a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f R e sp o n d e n ts t o | t h e Q u e s tio n n a ir e on S u c c e ss and o f Coop e r a t i v e Food S to r e s i n t h e U n ite d S t a t e s . 6 5-66 I I I . T a b u la tio n of V alu es A ssig n ed by T w enty- ! S ix P ro m in en t C o o p e ra to rs t o C r i t e r i a { I o f S u c c e ss i n C o o p e ra tiv e Food S t o r e s . . . 71! IV . Summation o f V alues A ssig n ed t o t h e S c o re | F re q u e n c ie s T a b u la te d i n T a b le I I I . . . . 73 V. A nnual P e r c e n ta g e Gain i n M em bership o f a j Random Sam ple o f E ig h ty - S ix C o o p e ra tiv e s • 86j V I. A verage M em bership G ain i n a Sam ple o f E ig h ty - S ix C o o p e ra tiv e s H aving u n d e r F iv e , H undred and o v e r One T housand Members • • • 88 I V I I . A dherance t o R o ch d ale P r i n c i p l e s by 287 Co- | o p e r a t i v e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e I n c r e a s e j i n M embership D u rin g th e P a s t Y ear . . . . 99, V I I I . P e r c e n ta g e s o f 287 C o o p e ra tiv e s (Computed from "A lw ays" and "N ever" Answers) F o llo w - ! I in g R o ch d ale P r i n c i p l e s in t h e C a te g o r ie s j ! 0 - 1 .9 and 1 7 -6 4 .9 P e r Cent A nnual j I x i i i I ; TABLE PAGE I M em bership I n c r e a s e ......................... .. .... 101 I ■ i IX . P e r c e n ta g e s o f 287 C o o p e ra tiv e s (Computed ! ! I from "Always" and "Som etim es" Answers) F o l - I lo w in g R ochdale P r i n c i p l e s i n th e C a te g o - , j r i e s 0 - 1 .9 and 1 7 -6 4 .9 P e r Cent A nnual j I M embership I n c r e a s e ......................................................... 104 I X. The F i r s t B u s in e s s V e n tu re o f 263 C o opera- 1 j t i v e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e I n c r e a s e i n i ' M em bership D u rin g th e P a s t Y ear . . .. .. 112 i X I. S ta g e s o f D evelopm ent P a ss e d Through by 287 i ; C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e I n - ^ c r e a s e i n M em bership D u rin g th e P a s t Y ear • 118 ! X I I . Economic C o n d itio n s Under Which 267 C oopéra- I I t i v e s Were S t a r t e d T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e ! j I n c r e a s e in M em bership D u rin g th e P a s t , ! Y e a r ........................................................................................... 123 I ' 'X I I I . Amount o f H elp R e c e iv e d by 261 C o o p e ra tiv e s i From C o o p e ra tiv e W h o le sa le s B e fo re They j ' Had a S t o r e T a b u la te d by P e rc e n ta g e I n - | I I c r e a s e i n M em bership D u rin g th e P a s t Y ear . 126 XIV. K ind o f H elp R e ce iv e d by 174 C o o p e ra tiv e s | I From C o o p e ra tiv e W h o lesales B e fo re They ‘ I Had a S t o r e T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e I n - ; x iv TABLE PAGE c r e a s e t a M embership D u rin g t h e P a s t Y e ar • 135 XV. Types o f O r g a n iz a tio n s H e lp in g i n t h e O rgan i z a t i o n o f 178 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e I n c r e a s e i n M em bership D uring th e P a s t Y ear 135 XVI. The Breakdown o f th e Column " O th e r" i n j T ab le XV ............................... 157 X V II. The Number o f O r g a n iz a tio n s H e lp in g i n th e O r g a n iz a tio n o f 270 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d ; by P e r c e n ta g e I n c r e a s e o f M em bership ; I D u rin g t h e P a s t Y ear . . . . . . . . . 140 X V III. M ethods Used by 266 C o o p e ra tiv e s t o C o n ta c t I ^ Members T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual j M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 i XIX. P r o p o r t i o n a t e Usage o f M ethods o f C o n ta c tin g Members by N in e ty -T h re e C o o p e ra tiv e s i n | I th e C a te g o r ie s o f "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " P e r C ent A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . 158 XX. F re q u e n c ie s W ith Which V a rio u s M ethods Were i I Used by 141 C o o p e ra tiv e s t o C o n ta c t Mem b e rs T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual * M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 XXI. The A verage Use o f M ethods o f C o n ta c tin g ' i ‘ XV| I i iTABLE PAGE î Members o f 141 C o o p e ra tiv e s and t h e R a tio j I I Which th e L a rg e r A verage I s to th e j S m a lle r in th e C a te g o r ie s o f P e rc e n ta g e i 1 o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e "Under 2" j I I and ’•1 7 -6 4 .9 " ..................... 165 j X X II. M ethods Used by 237 C o o p e ra tiv e s to C o n ta c t I < I I P r o s p e c t iv e Members T a b u la te d by P e r c e n t - ! I i I a g e I n c r e a s e i n M em bership D u rin g t h e ! : P re v io u s Y ear .................................... 170| IX X III. The P e rc e n ta g e o f U sage o f N ine M ethods f o r I i j C o n ta c tin g Members i n t h e H igh and Low i C a te g o r ie s o f Member I n c r e a s e .............................. 172 XXIV. F re q u en c y W ith Which V a rio u s M ethods Were ! I Used by 111 C o o p e ra tiv e s t o C o n ta c t Non members T a b u la te d by P e rc e n ta g e I n c r e a s e | 1 i n M em bership D u rin g th e P a s t Y ear . . . 177! XXV. A verage F re q u e n c ie s W ith Which V a rio u s M eth ods Were Used by 111 C o o p e ra tiv e s t o Con t a c t Non-members T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e | I n c r e a s e i n M em bership D u rin g th e P r e v io u s ' Y ear ............................................ 179 j XXVI. The M ethodsUsed by 243 C o o p e ra tiv e s t o R a is e E d u c a tio n Funds T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f x v i TABLE PAGE A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . 183 XXVII. The P r o p o r t i o n s o f N in e ty F re q u e n c ie s I Grouped by C a te g o r ie s of A nnual Member s h ip I n c r e a s e a n d M ethods o f R a is in g E d u c a tio n Funds t o t h e T o t a l F re q u en c y i n t h e C a te g o ry 186 X X V III. The T rend i n E d u c a tio n a l Work i n 258 Coop e r a t i v e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e of A nnual M embership I n c r e a s e . « . . . • « • 189 XXIX. A verage E x p e n d itu re P e r Member f o r Educa t i o n by Two H undred C o o p e ra tiv e s Tabu l a t e d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M embership I n c r e a s e . . . . 194 XXX. The P r o p o r tio n s o f th e C o o p e ra tiv e s i n th e V a rio u s C la s s e s o f E d u c a tio n a l E x p en d i t u r e o f C a te g o r ie s "U nder 3" and "1 5 - 6 4 .9 " t o t h e T o ta l F re q u en c y i n Each C a t e g o r y .......................................................................... . 199 XXXI. The Number o f C o o p e ra tiv e s S u b s c r ib in g to t h e R e g io n a l C o o p e ra tiv e Paperr* f o r T h e ir Members T a b u la te d by P e rc e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . • * . . . 201 XXXII. B u s in e s s R e l a t i o n s h i p s o f 261 C o o p e ra tiv e s TABLE W ith N o n -c o o p e ra tiv e W h o le sa le s Tabu l a t e d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual Member s h ip I n c r e a s e * • • • ............................. « • X X X III. 262 C o o p e ra tiv e s Whose Members D id o r Did N ot Have D i f f i c u l t i e s B ecause o f T h e ir I n t e r e s t in th e C o o p e ra tiv e T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e .......................... XXXIV. M anagers o f 247 C o o p e ra tiv e s Who Were I n t e r e s t e d in J o i n i n g L o c a l B u s in e s s m en’ s A s s o c ia tio n s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . XXXV. A c ce p tan c e o f 253 C o o p e ra tiv e s by a L o c a l B u sin e ssm e n ’ s A s s o c ia tio n T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership I n c r e a s e « . . . ....................................................... XXXVI. C iv ic A f f a i r s and D u tie s P a r t i c i p a t e d in by 245 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership I n c r e a s e . * XXXVII. The F re q u e n c y W ith Which 162 C o o p e ra tiv e s P a r t i c i p a t e d i n C iv ic A f f a i r s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . # x v i i PAGE 207 211 214 216 219 221 x v i i i TABLE PAGE 'XXXYIII. I n o id e n c e o f A n t a g o n is ti c Groups in 263 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e rc e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . , . , . 226 ipX IX . I n c id e n c e of a L e a d e r s h ip C liq u e in 264 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership I n c r e a s e .. ... . 229; XL. P r o p o r t i o n o f Members o f 264 C o o p e ra tiv e s E ngaging i n S o c i a l i t y B e fo re and A f te r B u s in e s s M e etin g s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n t age o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . 232 X L I. The P r o p o r t i o n s o f t h e C o o p e ra tiv e s in th e V a rio u s P e r c e n ta g e s o f Member S o c i a l i t y o f C a te g o r ie s "U nder 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " t o t h e T o ta l F re q u en c y in Each C a te g o ry . 233 X L II. W illin g n e s s o f Members o f 270 C o o p e ra tiv e s t o V o lu n te e r f o r S p e c i a l Jo b s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e of A nnual M embership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 X L II I. V a r ia t io n i n P e o p le Who V o lu n te e r f o r S p e c ia l Jo b s i n 268 C o o p e ra tiv e s Tabu l a t e d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual Member s h ip I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 XLIV. P r o p o r t i o n o f Members of 272 C o o p e ra tiv e s TABLE Coming to B u sin e ss M e e tin g s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e of A nnual M embership I n c r e a s e « ..................................... . XLV. The P r o p o r tio n s o f C o o p e ra tiv e s i n th e V a rio u s C la s s e s o f Member A tte n d a n c e a t B u sin e ss M e etin g s o f C a te g o r ie s "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " t o t h e T o ta l F req u en cy i n Each C a te g o ry ............................. . . XLVI. B u s in e s s L e a d e rs h ip P ro v id e d by 257 C ooper a t i v e s in t h e Food S t o r e F i e l d T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership in I n c r e a s e ... .... . . . . . . . . . . XLVII. P e r c e n ta g e o f Non-Member B u s in e s s i n 256 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e of A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . X L V III. Amount o f C o m p e titio n E x p e rie n c e d by 261 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . XLIX. The S iz e o f Community i n Which 273 Cooper a t i v e s Are L o c a te d T a b u la te d by P e r c e n t age o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . « . . L . The A verage F re q u e n c ie s in th e "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " C a te g o rie s o f T a b le XLIX x ix PAGE 242 243 249 252 256 259 XX TABÎE PAGE T a b u la te d by P o p u la tio n C la s s e s , . . . , 260 L I . The P e r c e n ta g e o f U n s k ille d L a b o re rs on t h e M em bership R o s te r o f 242 C oopera t i v e s T a b u la te d b y P e r c e n ta g e of A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e ............................. 266 L I I . The P r o p o r t i o n o f U n s k ille d L abor i n j E ighty-T w o C o o p e ra tiv e s i n th e "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " C a te g o r ie s of M em bership I n c r e a s e t o t h e T o t a l F re q u en c y in Each C a te g o ry . . . . . . 268 L I I I . The P e r c e n ta g e o f S k i l l e d L a b o re rs on th e M em bership R o s te r o f 239 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d b y P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e ............................................ . 270 LIV. The P r o p o r t i o n o f S k i l l e d L abor in E ig h ty - One C o o p e r a tiv e s in th e "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " C a te g o r ie s o f Member I n c r e a s e t o t h e T o ta l F req u en cy i n Each C ateg o ry • 271 LV. The P e r c e n ta g e of C l e r i c a l W orkers on th e M em bership R o s te r o f 237 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership I n c r e a s e • . . . • • • . • • * 273 L 7 I. The P r o p o r t i o n o f C l e r i c a l W orkers i n TABLE S e v e n ty -N in e C o o p e ra tiv e s i n t h e "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " C a te g o r ie s o f M em bership I n c r e a s e t o t h e T o t a l F req u en cy in Each C ateg o ry . . . . . . L V II. The P e r c e n ta g e o f P r o f e s s i o n a l P e o p le on th e M em bership R o s te r o f 238 C oopera t i v e s T a b u la te d b y P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M em bership I n c r e a s e .......................... L V III. The P r o p o r t i o n of P r o f e s s i o n a l W orkers i n E ig h ty C o o p e ra tiv e s in th e "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " C a te g o r ie s o f M embership I n c r e a s e t o t h e T o ta l F requency in Each C a te g o ry . . . . . .............................. LIX . The P e r c e n ta g e o f E x e c u tiv e s on th e M embership R o s te r o f 236 C o o p e ra tiv e s T a b u la te d by P e r c e n ta g e o f A nnual M em bership I n c r e a s e . . . . . . . . . IX . The P e r c e n ta g e o f F a rm ers on th e Member s h ip R o s te r o f 255 C o o p e ra tiv e s Tabu l a t e d by P e r c e n ta g e o f Annual M embership I n c r e a s e ........................ LXI. The P r o p o r tio n o f F a rm ers in E ig h ty -N in e C o o p e ra tiv e s in th e "Under 2" and XX i PAGE' 275 277 278 280 282 x x i i TABLE PAGE " 1 7 -6 4 .9 " C a te g o r ie s o f M em bership I n c r e a s e t o t h e T o ta l F re q u en c y in E ach C a te g o ry ............................. . 284 L X II. The Number o f R e sp o n d e n ts Who A s s is te d i n C om pleting Each Q u e s tio n n a ir e by P e r c e n ta g e o f Member I n c r e a s e D u rin g I th e P a s t Y ear . . . . . . . . . 354 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 . S i g n i f i c a n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f C o o p e ra tiv e s i n th e U n ite d S t a t e s . . . . . . . . . . . 25-28 2 . What I s th e M easure o f Consumer C o o p e ra tiv e S u c c e ss i n t h e F i e l d o f Food D i s t r i b u t i o n • 59 CHAPTER I THE OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY I . CLARIFICATION OF BASIC TERMINOLOGY The f o llo w in g i s a s tu d y o f th e s o c i a l f a c t o r s i n v o lv ed in th e s u c c e s s f u l and u n s u c c e s s f u l f u n c t i o n in g o f ! consum er c o o p e r a tiv e s in th e U n ited S t a t e s . S in c e a number o f th e term s in v o lv e d have been used w ith v a r io u s m eanings | t h i s s e c t i o n i s in te n d e d t o i n d i c a t e a s p r e c i s e l y a s p o s s i b l e th e se n se i n w hich th e y w i l l be used in th e pages w hich f o llo w . The word " s o c i a l " i s h e r e i n a p p lie d t o any s i t u a t i o n , p ro c e s s o r phenomenon w hich i s , in a d i r e c t s e n s e , c h a r a c - ; t e r i z e d by human i n t e r a c t i o n now a n d /o r has been caused by su c h i n t e r a c t i o n in th e p a s t . I n th e i n d i r e c t se n se an e - , I normous number o f phenomena, s i t u a t i o n s and p r o c e s s e s c h a r - , a c t e r i s t i e o f l i f e w ith in s o c i e t y a r e s o c i a l ; f o r exam ple, a medium of exchange c a n n o t be c o n s id e re d to be a n y th in g e x c e p t s o c i a l s in c e i t d o e s n o t e x i s t e x c e p t in s o c i e t y and i s m an-made. S i m i l a r l y , a r t i f a c t s (su c h as lawnmowers, : f o r k s , and to o th b r u s h e s ) and p r o c e s s e s (su ch as ro ad b u i l d in g ) may be c o n s id e re d s o c i a l . I t i s n o t w ith in th e scope o f t h i s s tu d y t o exam ine any su c h " s o c i a l " s i t u a t i o n s , p r o c e s s e s , o r phenomena w hich a r e , t o be s u r e , im p o s s ib le w i t h o u t i n t e r a c t i o n b u t in w hich th e s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e 2 m e re ly a means t o an end; th e s tu d y i s , t h e r e f o r e , n o t d i r e c t l y co n cern ed w ith b a la n c e s h e e t s , o p e r a t in g s t a te m e n t s , o r any o t h e r t o o l s o f b u s in e s s o p e r a t io n . I t i s r e a d i l y r e c o g n iz a b le t h a t i n t e r a c t i o n a t m em bership m e e tin g s and a d v i s o ry c o u n c i ls , o r betw een a few i n d i v i d u a l s in a home where th e c o n c e p t of c o o p e r a tio n i s b e in g e x p la in e d c o n s t i t u t e a d i f f e r e n t o rd e r o f s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s th a n th o s e in c lu d e d , in th e exam ples o f th e i n d i r e c t l y s o c i a l c i t e d a b o v e . More s p e c i f i c a l l y , su c h t o p i c s a s r e l a t i o n s h i p s betw een c o o p e r a t i v e and comm unity, l e a d e r - f o l l o w e r r e l a t i o n s w i t h in th e c o o p e r a tiv e and th e ty p e o f c o n ta c t s betw een members and non^ m em bers, a re th e fo c u s o f i n t e r e s t o f th e s tu d y . I t i s a c knowledged, how ever, t h a t i t i s n o t p o s s ib le t o e s t a b l i s h an , e n t i r e l y c l e a r c u t and d e f i n i t i v e l i n e of d e m a rk a tio n w hich : can be a p p lie d in th e c a se o f th e word " s o c i a l . % A " f a c t o r " i s , f o r p u rp o s e s o f t h i s s tu d y , any s o c i a l phenomenon or r e l a t i o n s h i p w hich i s assumed t o in f lu e n c e co o p e r a t i v e s e i t h e r in th e d i r e c t i o n o f s u c c e s s o r o f f a i l u r e . | A ll th e phenomena s e l e c t e d f o r e x a m in a tio n w i l l n o t , in a l l ’ l i k e l i h o o d , b e a r a d e m o n s tra b le r e l a t i o n s h i p to th e s u c c e s s , I o r f a i l u r e of c o o p e r a t i v e s , b u t th o se c o n s id e re d i n th e s tu d y were assumed p o t e n t i a l l y to p o s s e s s su ch a r e l a t i o n s h i p u n t i l d is p ro v e d by th e f a c t s u n e a rth e d in th e s tu d y . " F a c t o r ," as u sed in t h i s s tu d y , i s to be u n d e rs to o d i n a se n se v e ry sim - : jL lar to th e econom ic c o n cep t o f ’’f a c t o r s . o f .p ro d u c tio n , 3 w here th e t h r e e f a c t o r s o f la n d , l a b o r , and c a p i t a l a re con s i d e r e d e s s e n t i a l to th e e x p la n a tio n o f th e p r o d u c tio n o f g o o d s. I t i s o b v io u s ly im p o s s ib le in a s tu d y o f th e scope o f t h i s one to c o n s id e r a l l th e " s o c i a l f a c t o r s " r e l a t e d to consum er c o o p e ra tiv e s u c c e s s or f a i l u r e ; th o s e in c lu d e d a r e a r e s i d u e from a much l a r g e r (a lth o u g h n o t a l l i n c l u s i v e ) g r o u p .1 I S in c e one o f th e f o llo w in g c h a p te r s w i l l be d e v o te d to th e e x p lo r a ti o n o f th e n a tu r e of c o o p e ra tiv e s u c c e s s no a tte m p t w i l l be made to d e f in e th e c o n c e p t a t t h i s p o i n t . S u f f i c e i t to say t h a t , s in c e th e c o o p e r a tiv e movement has n o t , a s f a r a s th e a u th o r has been a b le to d i s c o v e r , e v e r o f f i c i a l l y o r u n o f f i c i a l l y d e fin e d th e n a tu r e of c o o p e r a tiv e s u c c e s s , any d e f i n i t i o n m ust rem a in in c o n c lu s iv e and s u b j e c t ' to e v e n tu a l change sh o u ld th e p a ssa g e of tim e r e s u l t i n a c o n sen su s d e v e lo p in g on t h i s s u b j e c t w ith in th e c o o p e r a tiv e m ovement. The n a tu r e o f c o o p e r a tiv e f a i l u r e w i l l be i m p l i c i t in th e d e f i n i t i o n o f s u c c e s s d e v elo p ed in C h ap ter I I I . The term "consum er c o o p e r a tiv e " i s one w hich c a r r i e s ' a t l e a s t two m ea n in g s. To many c o o p e ra to r s in r u r a l a r e a s , a s w e ll a s t o th e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s o f th e c o o p e ra tiv e ^ G f. C h ap ter I I f o r a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h i s p r o c e d u r e . 4 , w h o le s a le s w hich th e y own. and c o n t r o l , th e p h ra s e i s more o r l e s s synonymous w ith "u rb an c o o p e r a t i v e ," and c a r r i e s an o v e rto n e o f " c o o p e r a tiv e s f o r p e o p le who consume b u t p ro d u ce n o t h i n g ." C la s s c le a v a g e i s a p p a r e n t in su ch an a t t i t u d e , som etim es even to th e p o i n t w here a c e r t a i n f e e l i n g of i n s u l t i s n o t i c e a b l e i f th e words a re a p p lie d to a r u r a l co - o p e r a t o r 's s o c i e t y . "Consumer c o o p e r a tiv e " i s n o t used in i t h i s s tu d y i n t h i s s e n s e . In th e p a g es w hich f o llo w th e p h ra s e r e f e r s t o c o o p e r a tiv e s whose ow ners a r e p r i m a r il y i n t e r e s t e d in s u p p ly in g t h e i r own n e ed s a s consum ers r a t h e r th a n in m a r k e tin g , p r o c e s s in g or w h o le s a lin g th e p r o d u c ts o f, i n d u s t r y o r a g r i c u l t u r e t o r e a l i z e a f i n a n c i a l r e t u r n . T h e r e f o r e , a fe e d m i l l s e l l i n g mash t o c h ic k e n r a i s e r s or th e A s s o c ia te d P r e s s d i s t r i b u t i n g in f o r m a tio n to i t s member ow ners would be consum er c o o p e r a t i v e s and would f a l l i n th e same c a te g o ry as a food s t o r e s e l l i n g g r o c e r i e s t o i t s m em ber-ow ners o r a h o s p i t a l p a tr o n iz e d w h o lly o r l a r g e l y by i t s o w n e rs. A consum er c o o p e r a tiv e may o r may n o t d e a l in econom ic goods and s e r v i c e s or in n o n - m a t e r i a l v a lu e s (su ch a s r e c r e a t i o n ) . S in c e o th e r ty p e s o f c o o p e r a tiv e s a re o u t s i d e o f th e sco p e of th e s tu d y th e word " c o o p e r a tiv e " sh o u ld alw ays be ta k e n t o mean "consum er c o o p e r a tiv e " u n le s s o t h e r - ; w ise s t a t e d . For p r a c t i c a l re a s o n s i t was n e c e s s a r y to l i m i t th e 5; .S tu dy to th o s e c o o p e r a tiv e s a f f i l i a t e d w ith t h e n a t i o n a l co o p e r a t iv e m ovem ent• T h ere a r e o t h e r s , stu m b le d upon from tim e to tim e , w hich c o n c lu s iv e ly d e m o n s tra te th e e x is te n c e o f n o n - a f f i l i a t e d c o o p e r a t i v e s , b u t t h e r e i s no a d e q u a te so u rc e w hich l i s t s t h e i r a d d r e s s e s and nam es. In 1947 th e I B ureau o f L abor S t a t i s t i c s o f th e U n ite d S t a t e s D epartm ent o f L abor is s u e d a d i r e c t o r y of a l l th e consum er c o o p e r a tiv e s ! o f w hich i t had k n o w l e d g e U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h i s p roved to be a p o o r s o u rc e o f in f o r m a tio n s in c e many of th e a d d re s s e s and' some o f th e names had b e en changed s i n c e th e d a ta were c o l l e c t e d , a f a c t r e a d i l y e s t a b l i s h e d by com paring th e s o c i e t i e s l i s t e d i n th e b u l l e t i n w ith th e m em bership l i s t s s u p p lie d by th e v a r io u s c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le s a le s . F u rth e rm o re , m ost of th e s o c i e t i e s l i s t e d in th e B u l l e t i n were members o f one or a n o th e r o f th e c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le s a le s a f f i l i a t e d w ith th e n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a tiv e movem ent. Many o t h e r s o c i e t i e s l i s t e d were no lo n g e r in e x i s t e n c e . I I . OBJECTIVES A N D PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE STUDY B a s i c a l l y t h i s s tu d y i s an a tte m p t to t e s t two ^ D i r e c t o r y o f Consumers* C o o p e ra tiv e s i n th e U n ite d S t a t e s , B u l l e t i n N o. 7 50 ( R e v is e d J u n e 1947) o f B ureau o f L abor S t a t i s t i c s , U .S . D ep artm en t of L abor (W ashington, B .C .: U .S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1 9 4 7 ), 119 p p . 6 c lo s e l y r e l a t e d h y p o th e se s, v i z . , t h a t s o c i a l f a c t o r s p la y an im p o rta n t r o l e i n th e s u c c e s s f u l o r u n s u c c e s s f u l d e v e lo p ment and f u n c t i o n in g o f consumer c o o p e r a tiv e s , and f u r t h e r , t h a t some o f th e s e f a c t o r s a re of g r e a t e r r e l a t i v e impor ta n c e th a n o t h e r s in t h i s r e g a r d . I m p l i c i t in th e c o n s i d e r a tio n o f th e s e two p r o p o s i t i o n s is th e q u e s tio n of th e r e l a t i v e im portance o f f i n a n c - I in g , m erch an d izin g and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s to th e s u c c e s s f u l f u n c t i o n in g of consumer c o o p e r a t i v e s . In the c o o p e ra tiv e movement t h e r e has been w id e -sp re a d a c c e p ta n c e of th e th e o ry t h a t s o c i a l f a c t o r s a r e im p o r ta n t, but th e r e has been no d e te r m in a tio n of how im p o rta n t any giv en f a c t o r or s e t of f a c - , t o r s m ight be or what p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r s p o ss e s s a g r e a t e r or a l e s s e r im p o rta n c e . M oreover, w hile c o o p e ra to rs as a whole a r e a l s o convinced o f th e need f o r e x c e l l e n t f i n a n c in g and m erc h an d izin g p r a c t i c e s th e r e has been b a sic d isa g ree m e n t from g r a s s r o o t s l e v e l s on up to N a tio n a l C o o p erativ es and th e C o o p e rativ e League of th e U.S.A. on th e r e l a t i v e impor ta n c e of th e r o l e p lay ed by th e s e t h r e e m ajor groups of fa c -I t o r s i n d e te rm in in g c o o p e ra tiv e s u c c e s s . The C oop erativ e League has t r a d i t i o n a l l y ta k e n th e p o s i t i o n t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e " e d u c a tio n " ( b a s i c a l l y th e t e c h n i c a l e d u c a tio n of c o o p e ra to rs in t h e i r b u s in e s s and th e e s ta b lis h m e n t of consensus on p r i n c i p l e s and g e n e ra l o b j e c ti v e s th ro u g h i n t e r a c t i o n ) i s t h e b a s ic i n g r e d i e n t of c o o p e r a tiv e su c c e ss^ w h ile N a tio n a l Co o p e r a t iv e s has tended t o c o n s id e r good m e rc h an d izin g and f in a n c in g p r a c t i c e s t h e im p o rta n t a s p e c t .^ A f u r t h e r h y p o th e s is which t h i s stu d y is desig n ed to t e s t is t h a t where th e r e have been ad eq uate s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h ip s th e r e w i l l a l s o , in most c a s e s , be a h ig h degree of m e rc h an d izin g and f i n a n c i a l s u c c e s s . In o th e r words, i f the^ h y p o th e s is i s c o r r e c t , t h e r e should be a high c o r r e l a t i o n between b u sin e ss su c c e ss and e x c e lle n c e in s o c i a l r e l a t i o n - i s h i p s . Such a r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l n o t, of c o u rs e , d em o n strate c a u s a l i t y per s e . In more s p e c i f i c term s th e o b j e c ti v e s of the stu d y may be s t a t e d as fo llo w s ; 1. To t e s t th e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t some s o c i a l f a c t o r s : a re s i g n i f i c a n t l y im p o rta n t f o r th e s u c c e s s f u l f u n c tio n in g o f consumer c o o p e r a t i v e s . Should t h i s prove to be t r u e i t i s h ig h ly p ro b a b le t h a t o t h e r forms o f s e m i- s o c i a l ^ T his theme ru n s l i k e a r e t r a i n th ro u g h th e w r itin g s and p u b lic u t t e r a n c e s of James P . W arbasse, foun der and long, tim e p r e s i d e n t and d i r e c t o r of th e C o o p erativ e L eague. As s t a t e d to th e a u th o r by D r. W arbasse, "There a re two th in g s t h a t must n o t be le a rn e d by d o in g . One i s m edicine (he was a surgeon) and one i s c o o p e r a tio n ." ^ The C e n te n n ia l Congress o f the C o o p e rativ e League in 1944 was th e o c c a sio n of open d e b a te on t h i s p o i n t . The d i s c u s s i o n , which was w itn e s se d by the a u th o r , was a c l e a r , o v e r t e x p re s s io n of t h i s p h i lo s o p h ic a l schism w ith in the movement. 8 'o rg a n iz a tio n s w i l l a ls o be dependent f o r t h e i r su c ce ss upon c e r t a i n s o c i a l f a c t o r s . 2. To i s o l a t e and e v a lu a te th e r e l a t i v e degree of in f lu e n c e e x e r te d by th e d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l f a c t o r s which i t w i l l be p o s s i b l e t o examine in t h i s s tu d y . The f a c t s d i s covered may w a rran t some t e n t a t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of im por- ^ ta n c e to th e stu d y of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . For exam ple, the I f a c t s may s u s t a i n or d i s c r e d i t such a p r o p o s i t io n a s , "The s m a lle r th e number o f peop le in a c o o p e ra tiv e th e g r e a t e r th e l i k e l i h o o d of s u c c e s s ." 3 . To e s t a b l i s h some t e n t a t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s r e g a r d l in g th e r e l a t i v e im portance of f in a n c e and m erch an d izin g and o f c o o p e ra tiv e " e d u c a tio n " in prom oting c o o p e ra tiv e s u c c e s s . Any such g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s w i l l b e, i t i s hoped, of v a lu e f o r th e s tu d y of o t h e r ty p e s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s which a re n o t s o l e l y s o c i a l in n a t u r e . Should i t be e s t a b l is h e d t h a t c o o p e r a tiv e su c c e ss i s alw ays or n e a r l y always a r e s u l t of th e o p e r a tio n o f th e th r e e f a c t o r s o f e d u c a tio n , f i n a n c e , and m erc h an d izin g a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of im portance w i l l have been re a c h e d . Should i t be e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t e d u c a tio n can be d is r e g a r d e d when th e r e i s adeq u ate m erch an d izin g and f i n a n cin g a la r g e p a r t o f th e r a is o n d ' ê t r e of the C o o p erativ e, League and many o th e r o r g a n iz a tio n s may have been underm ined. 4 . To f i n d th o se s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s i g n i f i c a n c e 9 which c h a r a c t e r i z e a l l or n e a r ly a l l consumer c o o p e r a tiv e s . T his should give a c l e a r e r im p re ssio n of th e e s s e n t i a l n a t u r e of c o o p e ra tiv e s and presum ably a l s o of th e n a tu r e of o t h e r , b a s i c a l l y s i m i l a r , s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 5. To i n d i c a t e why th e f a c t o r s which may or may n o t p la y an im p o rta n t r o l e i n the p ro d u c tio n o f su c c e ss or f a i l u re p la y th e r o l e th ey d o . Here a g a in , any v a l i d re a so n s I which may be uncovered w i l l p ro b ab ly be o f v a lu e in the stu d y of o t h e r , b a s i c a l l y s i m i l a r , s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 6 . To d is c o v e r j u s t what c o n s t i t u t e s su c c e ss or f a i l u r e in consumer c o o p e ra tiv e r e t a i l o u t l e t s . This sh o u ld , of c o u rs e , su g g e st s ta n d a rd s o f su c c e ss which may be a p p lie d to o th e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s o f a s i m i l a r n a t u r e . > Sin ce i t was n o t p o s s ib l e a t t h i s tim e to stu d y a l l ty p e s of consumer c o o p e ra tiv e e n t e r p r i s e s , th e a r e a of stu d y was lim ite d t o th o se c o o p e ra tiv e s which s e l l g r o c e r ie s on th e r e t a i l l e v e l and the u n v e r i f i e d assum ption has been made t h a t any s o c i o l o g i c a l f i n d in g s which ap p ly to consumer co o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e s w i l l a ls o apply to o th e r forms of con-' sumer c o o p e ra tiv e e n t e r p r i s e , and t h a t c o n seq u e n tly th o se s o c i a l f a c t o r s which lea d to e i t h e r s u c c e s s or f a i l u r e of c o o p e ra tiv e food s t o r e s w i l l produce su c c e ss or f a i l u r e in o th e r forms o f c o o p e r a tiv e e n t e r p r i s e . ' I t i s f u r t h e r assumed t h a t the answ ers r e c e iv e d r e p r e s e n t a s u f f i c i e n t l y a c c u r a t e re p o r t i n g _pn _ th e _pa r t_p f _________: 10 re s p o n d e n ts to make a c c u r a te d e d u c tio n s p o s s i b l e . Every e f f o r t was made to in s u re th e maximum a c c u ra c y of th e r e t u r n s , but w ith th e b e s t p ro ce d u res an elem ent o f u n c e r t a i n t y must rem ain . I I I . A RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY OF THE PROBLEM Much has a lr e a d y been s a id i n d i c a t i v e of th e v a lu e s t o be d e riv e d from th e stu d y of th e problem . The fo llo w in g , i s a s y s te m a t i z a ti o n and au gm en tation of p re v io u s p e r t i n e n t ' rem ark s, and c o n s t i t u t e s a fo rm al j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r th e tre a tm e n t o f th e problem . I t should be noted a t th e o u t s e t t h a t n o t only was the p r o j e c t d e sig n ed f o r the purpose o f f u r t h e r i n g the fund : o f s o c i o l o g i c a l knowledge but a l s o of s u p p ly in g in fo rm a tio n ' of i n t e r e s t and v a lu e to people i n t e r e s t e d in consumers co- ' o p e r a t io n . The t o p i c was chosen a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n w ith .some o f the o f f i c e r s of th e C oop erative League o f th e U.S.A.: and, i f th e s tu d y i s judged s u c c e s s f u l , w i l l answer q u e s- i t i o n s which weigh h e a v ily on th e minds o f many c o o p e ra tiv e l e a d e r s . In t h i s c o n n e c tio n i t m ight be p r o p e r ly r e c a l l e d t h a t th e p r o j e c t sh o u ld : 1. I n d i c a te th e r e l a t i v e im portance o f c o o p e ra tiv e e d u c a tio n , m erch an d izin g and fin a n c e in th e developm ent of s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e r a tiv e s . 11 2. I n d i c a te th e r o l e played not o n ly by s o c i a l f a c t o r s as a whole ( in c lu d in g b u t n o t lim i te d to c o o p e ra tiv e e d u c a tio n ) but a l s o th e com parative im portance o f th e r o l e s ; played by the i n d i v i d u a l s o c i a l f a c t o r s in s u c c e s s f u l coop e r a t i v e developm ent. 3. Help t o u n if y th e p h ilo so p h y o f th e c o o p e ra tiv e movement i n s o f a r as t h i s p h ilo so p h y i s concerned w ith th e , n a tu r e of c o o p e ra tiv e su c c e ss and th e f a c t o r s le a d in g to i t . 4 . I n d i c a te th e p o s s i b i l i t y of b u sin e ss su c c e ss in th e a b sen ce o f s u c c e s s f u l l y o p e r a tin g s o c i a l f a c t o r s pro d u c in g consensus and c o n sc io u s n e ss of kind in a s o c i a l group. 5. I n d i c a te th o se s o c i a l phenomena which a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of c o o p e ra tiv e food s t o r e s in th e c o o p e ra tiv e move ment of th e U nited S t a t e s . These d a ta should give a c le a r e r , p i c t u r e of j u s t what i s meant by th e c o n ce p t, "consumer c o o p e r a t i v e ." 6 . P ro v id e r e a s o n s , where p o s s i b l e , f o r th e b e h av io r of th e phenomena o b se rv e d . T his should throw some l i g h t on the l o g i c a l approach f o r c o o p e r a tiv e s to make to th e p ro b lems which fa c e them. 7. I n d i c a te s o c i a l s t r a t a and e c o l o g ic a l backgrounds from which c o o p e ra tiv e members a re drawn. A side from any v a lu e which th e stu d y may have f o r the c o o p e ra tiv e movement i t should a ls o have c e r t a i n s o c i o lo g i c a l v a lu e s to o f f e r which w i l l swells the. e x i s t i n g a c c u m u la tio n of 12 S o c i o l o g i c a l knowledge. O bviously such a c c r e t i o n s w i l l be l a r g e l y in the f i e l d of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . A s u c c e s s f u l com pletion o f the p r o j e c t sh ould: 1. P ro v id e f u r t h e r in fo rm a tio n about th e r e l a t i v e s t r e n g t h o f "economic man" and " s o c i a l man." I s man c h i e f l y in flu e n c e d by s o c i a l or by economic m o tiv e s, and to what ; e x te n t? I 2. I n d i c a t e th e d egree to which th e r e is a need f o r d e m o c ratic p ro ce d u res in s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s s i m i l a r to c o o p e r a t i v e s . 3 . Show som ething o f th e r o l e of le a d e r s h ip in such o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 4 . I n d i c a te som ething o f th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s an o rg an - | i z a t i o n s i m i l a r to th e c o o p e ra tiv e s must have w ith th e com m unity in o rd e r to r e a l i z e i t s p o t e n t i a l i t i e s . 5. D e p ic t some of th e problem s in v o lv e d in th e o rg an i z a t i o n of d em o c ratic o r g a n i z a t i o n s , the need f o r o u ts id e h e lp and th e s t r e n g t h of i n t e r n a l f o r c e s . 6 . Throw l i g h t on the r o l e of membership in s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 7 . D isc o v e r s u c c e s s f u l and u n s u c c e s s f u l methods of d e v e lo p in g consensus and f u r t h e r i n g th e s o c i a l i z a t i o n o f ; ! group members. 8 . D e sc rib e some of the te c h n iq u e s whereby a demo c r a t i c group may a c q u ir e new m e m ^ r p ._____________ J 13 9. In g e n e r a l , p ro v id e a d d i t i o n a l d a ta c l a r i f y i n g the r o l e o f i n t e r a c t i o n i n group o r g a n i z a t i o n , and throw l i g h t on the n a tu r e of s o c i a l p ro c e s s and on th e b a s ic s o c i a l p ro c e s s e s of accommodation, a s s i m i l a t i o n and s o c i a l i z a t i o n . The stu d y may a ls o throw a d d i t i o n a l l i g h t on th e p ro c e s s e s o f c o m p e titio n and c o n f l i c t . I IV. OVER-ALL METHODOLOGY USED IN THE STUDY S in c e C hap ters I I and I I I a re l a r g e l y concerned w ith ■ a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of v a r io u s p o r tio n s of the m ethodolo gy used in t h i s stu d y i t i s n o t n e c e ssa ry a t t h i s p o in t to give a f u l l d e s c r i p t i o n of t h i s m a t t e r . N o n e th e le s s , the r e a d e r should be a c q u a in te d a t t h i s p o in t w ith th e g e n e ra l p ro c e d u re s which were fo llo w ed in t h i s stu d y so t h a t th e o v e r - a l l schem at w i l l be known and i t s u n f o ld in g can be f o l lowed in the su c c e e d in g p a g e s . This stu d y l o g i c a l l y f a l l s i n to t h r e e main p a r t s ; ,th e d e te r m in a tio n of th e n a tu re of su c c e ss in consumer coop e r a t i v e food s t o r e o p e r a tio n and c r i t e r i a f o r i t s m easure m ent, th e co m pilin g of a body of in fo rm a tio n co n ce rn in g th o se s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of consumer c o o p e ra tiv e s s e - , l e c t e d f o r s tu d y , and th e d e m o n s tra tio n ( i f su c h i s p o s s ib le ) o f th e r e l a t i o n s h i p between th e d e g re e of su c c e ss and f a i l u r e of th e v a rio u s c o o p e r a tiv e s and t h e i r s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 14 The n a tu r e of su c c e ss in c o o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e s was • d ete rm in e d ^ by d e v e lo p in g c r i t e r i a o f su c ce ss on the b a s is , of th e a u t h o r 's e x p e rie n c e w ith consumer c o o p e ra tiv e s and on, th e a d v ic e of o th e r s who had enjoyed s i m i l a r e x p e rie n c e s . A f t e r c u l l i n g out th o se c r i t e r i a which seemed l e a s t u s e f u l and d r a s t i c a l l y re d u c in g th e number o f c r i t e r i a , a s e l e c t e d l i s t o f c r i t e r i a was m ailed to a number o f c o o p e ra tiv e lea d -, e rs f o r c r i t i c i s m and e v a l u a t i o n . Each le a d e r was a ls o asked t o d e f i n e w hat, in h i s o p in io n , c o n s t i t u t e d c o o p era t i v e s u c c e s s . On th e b a s i s of th e s e d e f i n i t i o n s and th e e v a l u a t i o n s o f th e c r i t e r i a which were su b m itte d , i t was p o s s i b l e to e s t a b l i s h an i d e a l d e f i n i t i o n of c o o p e ra tiv e su c c e ss and to develop a l o g i c a l l y r e l a t e d c r i t e r i o n f o r ju d g in g such s u c c e s s . The c o m p ila tio n of a body o f in fo rm a tio n co n ce rn in g the s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of consumer c o o p e r a tiv e s inv o lv ed th e c r e a t i o n and c i r c u l a t i o n o f a q u e s t io n n a ir e , a p ro c e s s which i s d is c u s s e d l a t e r in d e t a i l . ^ The a c t u a l s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s chosen were a r e s i d u e from a la r g e number o f p o t e n t i a l l y i n t e r e s t i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which were r e duced t o a number p r a c t i c a b l e f o r use in a q u e s t io n n a ir e . ^ See C hapter I I I f o r a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of th e p ro c e s s o f d e te r m in a tio n . ^ See C hapter I I f o r a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the c o m p ila tio n and c i r c u l a t i o n o f th e q u e s t io n n a ir e . 15 A number of s i g n i f i c a n t and i n t e r e s t i n g s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s - i t i c s were o m itte d , u n f o r t u n a t e l y bu t u n a v o id a b ly . The ques t i o n n a i r e was e x te n s i v e l y r e v is e d t o i n c o r p o r a te th e c r i t i cisms and s u g g e s tio n s of s e v e r a l competant s c h o l a r s and of o f f i c i a l s o f c o o p e ra tiv e w h o le s a le s . I t was th e n c ir c u la te d , th ro u g h o u t th e c o u n try to th e boards of d i r e c t o r s of th e ; v a rio u s c o o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e s in th e U nited S t a t e s w ith ! I th e c o o p e ra tio n of th e r e s p o n s i b l e o f f i c i a l s o f the v a rio u s ; c o o p e ra tiv e w h o le s a le s . As a r e s u l t o f t h i s f i n e coop era- I t i o n on th e p a r t o f e x e c u tiv e s in th e c o o p e ra tiv e w h o le s a le s , th e p r e s t i g e o f th e w h o le sale o f which th e i n d iv i d u a l r e t a i l : c o o p e ra tiv e was a member worked t o i n f lu e n c e th e r e t a i l in th e d i r e c t i o n o f a f u l l e r and more a c c u ra te answ er a s w ell as i n f lu e n c i n g i t to answer th e q u e s tio n n a ir e in t h e f i r s t p la c e . S in c e th e e a r l y r e t u r n s in d ic a te d t h a t ad eq uate r e p l i e s were to be expected no r e v i s i o n of th e q u e s tio n n a ir e ; was made on th e b a s is o f f i e l d e x p e r i e n c e . A r e m a ilin g was s e n t to a l l c o o p e ra tiv e s o c i e t i e s which d id n o t r e p l y t o th e I f i r s t m a ilin g . The r e t u r n e d q u e s tio n n a ir e s were se g re g a te d a c c o rd in g t o th e d e g re e o f su c c e ss th e p a r t i c u l a r c o o p e ra tiv e enjoyed and freq u e n cy d i s t r i b u t i o n s were compiled on t h i s b a s i s . The t h i r d main s e c t i o n of the s tu d y , th e p o t e n t i a l d e m o n s tra tio n of r e l a t i o n s h i p between th e d e g re e of su c c e ss , and f a i l u r e o f th e v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s and t h e i r s o c i a l 16 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , i s p r i m a r i l y a problem in l o g i c a l d e d u c tio n and i n the a p p l i c a t i o n of s t a t i s t i c a l m easures of r e l a t i o n - ; s h i p . The stu d y o b v io u sly does n o t le a n toward th e case h i s t o r y app ro ach a lth o u g h t h i s i s not i n d i c a t i v e o f any dep r e c a t i o n of t h i s method; c o n s id e r a tio n s of tim e , th e immen s i t y of th e a re a of in q u ir y , and the need f o r a c c u r a t e , ^ I q u a n t i t a t i v e measurement of th e ex pected r e l a t i o n s h i p s were i the re a so n s f o r em ploying th e q u e s tio n n a ir e app roach and s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s as m e th o d o lo g ic a l t o o l s . A ll th e chap t e r s f o llo w in g C hapter I I I a re devoted t o d is c o v e r in g and a n a ly z in g th e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . V. SUMMARY The purpose of t h i s i n tr o d u c to r y c h a p te r has been to o r i e n t th e r e a d e r to a t l e a s t a p o r t io n of th e s p e c i a l i z e d term in o lo g y used in th e stu d y and to a c q u a in t him w ith th e p u rp o se s f o r which th e s tu d y was made and th e m ethodological^ ap p roach es u se d . T his r e s e a r c h i s fo cu sed on a s p e c i a l type o f human ^ group, th e consumer c o o p e r a tiv e , and th e in f lu e n c e s e x e rte d ' upon i t by s o c i a l f a c t o r s . C o o p e rativ e s c o n s t i t u t e e i t h e r one p rim ary group o r a p l u r a l i t y of prim ary groups w ith a common f o c u s . Such groups a r e im p o rta n t f a c t o r s in th e de velopm ent of p e r s o n a l i t y and th e a c c ep tan c e of folkw ays and 17 mores (and c o n seq u e n tly in th e m ainten an ce of s o c i e t a l s t a b i l i t y ) ; th e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s em phasize th e w ider s i g n i f i - . cance o f the stu d y . The q u e s tio n n a ir e method was u sed . A c a r e f u l l y d e veloped s e r i e s of q u e s tio n s d esig n ed to c l a r i f y the s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c o o p e r a tiv e s was d i s t r i b u t e d to coo pera t i v e s o c i e t i e s th ro u g h o u t th e U nited S t a t e s . The r e t u r n ’ s ! were t a b u l a t e d and t r e a t e d s t a t i s t i c a l l y so t h a t d i f f e r e n c e s between more and l e s s s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s could be d e te rm in e d . In t h i s manner i t was p o s s ib le to d is c o v e r which s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were a s s o c i a t e d w ith th e more and which w ith th e l e s s s u c c e s s f u l of th e s e s o c i e t i e s . CHAPTER I I THE SELECTION OF SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR STUDY, THE CIRCULATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE, AND RETURNS RECEIVED FROM RETAIL SOCIETIES I . THE SELECTION OF CHARACTERISTICS TO BE STUDIED I t was d ecided v ery e a r l y in th e stu d y t h a t , due to th e g e o g ra p h ic a l a re a and th e l a r g e number o f i n d i v i d u a l u n i t s in v o lv e d , th e In fo rm a tio n upon which th e stu d y must be based would have to be g a th e re d by c i r c u l a t i n g a ques t i o n n a i r e . Because, as f a r as th e a u th o r has been a b le to d i s c o v e r , n o th in g has been p u b lis h e d on t h i s s u b j e c t in e i t h e r t h i s co u n try or abroad which would a d e q u a te ly cover th e contem plated f i e l d o f stu d y or any m ajor s e c t i o n o f i t , th e stu d y could n o t be made w ith o u t u n co v erin g new inform a t i o n ; a l i b r a r y ty pe s tu d y was t h e r e f o r e im p o s s ib le . To con* d u c t th e stu d y b a s i c a l l y by the case h i s t o r y te c h n iq u e was f i n a n c i a l l y im p o ssib le and q u e s tio n a b ly e f f e c t i v e due to the need f o r q u a n t i t a t i v e m easurem ent. The obvious c o n c lu sio n was t h a t th e q u e s t io n n a ir e approach o f f e r e d th e g r e a t e s t p ro m is e . A ll q u e s t io n n a ir e s a r e lim ite d in s i z e and so the s e l e c t i o n of item s f o r i n c l u s i o n became th e f i r s t m ajor problem . S o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e u s u a lly le g io n , and t h i s case was no e x c e p tio n . A c o n s id e ra b le l i s t of over te n 19 t y p e w r i t te n pages was r a p i d l y accu m u lated , a l i s t based on s u g g e s tio n s of i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s and the a u t h o r 's p e rs o n a l i n t e r e s t s and f i l e s . These o r i g i n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s i g n i f i c a n c e to th e stu d y were c l a s s i f i e d i n t o th e fo llo w in g g ro u p in g s: 1. E c o lo g ic a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f th e a r e a in which th e c o o p e ra tiv e i s f u n c t i o n in g . Such q u e s tio n s as l i m i t a - . t i o n s on th e sta n d a rd o f l i v i n g , l o c a t i o n of th e c o o p e ra tiv e r e l a t i v e to c o m p e titio n , and th e d eg ree of i s o l a t i o n from s o u rc e s o f su p p ly a re o f i n t e r e s t in t h i s c o n n e c tio n . 2 . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f th e members o f th e c o o p e r a tiv e s , i n c lu d in g such item s as a g e , e d u c a tio n , o c c u p a tio n , r a c i a l co m p o sitio n , language o r lan guag es spoken, p o l i t i c a l back- * grounds and c u r r e n t p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s , church membership, and hom ogeneity and h e te r o g e n e it y in c u l t u r a l background and s o c i a l p h ilo s o p h y . 3. S o c i a l f a c t o r s i n th e o r g a n iz a tio n of th e c oo per a t i v e . T his r a i s e d such q u e s tio n s as th e type of s o c i a l and: economic c o n d itio n s o b ta in in g when th e c o o p e ra tiv e was o rg an iz e d , th e so u rc e and r o l e of le a d e r s h ip in the o r g a n i z a t i o n ; p r o c e s s , th e a t t i t u d e of th e community, the h e lp r e c e iv e d from th e o rg a n iz e d c o o p e ra tiv e movement, and w hether the co o p e r a tiv e was an e x te n s io n of an e x i s t i n g group or an e n t i r e l y new s o c i a l e n t i t y . 4.._The time., .o c c a sio n , a n d ^reaso n for_ s t a r t i n g t h e 20 c o o p e r a t i v e . 5. The method o f s t a r t i n g th e c o o p e r a tiv e . Was i t s t a r t e d by l o c a l d i r e c t i o n or an o u ts id e group? Did i t begin as a f u l l - f l e d g e d s t o r e o r a buying club? Did an "an g e l" f in a n c e i t ? Were i t s le a d e r s d em o cratic or a u t o c r a t i c ? 6 . S o c i a l m alad ju stm en ts which th e c o o p e ra tiv e could e x p l o i t . Were l i v i n g s ta n d a r d s d e p re s s e d , p r i c e s to o h ig h , i q u a l i t y p o o r, c r e d i t d i f f i c u l t to o b ta in o r to o c o s t ly to u se ? 7. The n a tu r e of th e i n t e r n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s in th e c o o p e r a tiv e . T his r a i s e d such q u e s tio n s a s th e deg ree of harmony, c o n sen su s, and c o h esiv e n ess of th e group and th e q u a n ti t y and q u a li t y o f member p a r t i c i p a t i o n and d em o cratic , c o n t r o l . Are th e members m erely accommodating to th e coop- . e r a t i v e or a re th e y a c q u i r in g s o c i a l i z e d a t t i t u d e s toward i t . 8 . The a t t i t u d e s of th e community toward th e c oo per a t i v e and v ic e v e r s a . Are the m eetings of th e c o o p e ra tiv e open to a l l c i t i z e n s ? Do th e c o o p e ra to rs p a r t i c i p a t e i n the community l i f e , c o n tr i b u te to i t s p h i l a n t h r o p i e s and f u r t h e r i t s a c t i v i t i e s ? Does th e community c o n s id e r th e c o o p e ra tiv e s u b v e r s iv e , a t h r e a t , a mere p h ilo s o p h y , o r a d e s i r a b l e i n n o v a tio n ? 9. The methods o f communication used w ith in the c o o p e ra tiv e and between th e c o o p e ra tiv e and t h e community. T h is r a i s e s q u e s tio n s as _to_the n a tu re of^.the e d u c a tio n .a n d J 21 r e c r e a t i o n program of th e c o o p e r a tiv e , th e v a rio u s sub groups in th e c o o p e r a tiv e , and th e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n t e r a c t i o n which i t f o s t e r s . 10. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of th e le a d e r s h ip of the s o c i e t y . I s l e a d e r s h ip p a id or v o lu n ta r y , c r e a t i v e o r r o u t i n i z e d , a ru b b e r stamp of the membership or a u t o c r a t i c o r som ething betw een, e n t h u s i a s t i c o r m erely a c t i n g from a ; se n se o f duty? 11. S ta g es o f developm ent th ro u g h which the s o c i e t y , has gone. 12. C loseness of adherence to Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s . When th e s e v a rio u s g rou pin gs of s i g n i f i c a n t s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were tra n sfo rm e d i n t o q u e s tio n s th e r e s u l t was f o u r te e n ty p e w r i t te n pages of q u e s t io n n a ir e . I t was obvious t h a t n o t only was th e q u e s tio n n a ir e im p o s sib ly long • b u t a l s o a la r g e number of the q u e s tio n s were o f such a na tu r e t h a t th ey were p r a c t i c a l l y im p o ssib le to answer a c c u r a t e l y w ith o u t some r e s e a r c h on th e p a r t o f re s p o n d e n ts . : With th e s e two p o in ts in mind th e q u e s tio n n a ir e was r e v is e d i f i v e t i m e s , 1 a p ro c e s s which reduced i t to f o u r t y p e w r itte n ' p a g e s. The q u e s tio n s r e t a i n e d were th o se w hich, in the o p in io n of the a u th o r had th e g r e a t e s t im portance in term s of b re a d th of s o c i a l a re a in which they were s i g n i f i c a n t . r e v i s io n ^ See Appendix "A" on page 523 f o r a copy o f the 5th 2 2 ’ th e p o s s i b i l i t y of o b ta in in g v a l i d a n sw e rs, the avoidance of em barrassm ent to r e s p o n d e n ts , th e e a se o f an sw erin g , the l ik e l i h o o d of f i n d i n g d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e r e p l i e s from s u c c e s s f u l and u n s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s , a n d th e b e a rin g of th e q u e s tio n upon th e aim of th e s tu d y . I t was s t i l l feared ^ however, t h a t th e q u e s tio n n a ir e would appear to o fo rm id a b le to th e p r o s p e c tiv e re s p o n d e n t. M oreover, so many q u e s tio n s i of i n t e r e s t and im portance had been e lim in a te d t h a t i t was th o u g h t t h a t v i t a l p o i n t s m ight have been o m itte d . For th e above re a s o n s and because o f th e p o s s i b i l i t y of some im p o rta n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c h avin g been o v erlo o k ed , t h i s fo u r-p a g e q u e s tio n n a ir e was mimeogrpphed and m ailed f o r comment and c r i t i c i s m to the e d u c a tio n d i r e c t o r s and manag- i e rs of a l l but one o f th e consumer c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le sa le s and r e g i o n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s in th e U nited S t a t e s ^ a s w e ll as ^ The o r g a n i z a t i o n s in q u e s tio n , as l i s t e d by Mr. J a c k McLanahan, a t t h a t tim e E d u ca tio n D i r e c t o r o f th e Coop e r a t i v e League o f th e U nited S t a t e s , in a l e t t e r t o the a u th o r , were: A s so c ia te d C o o p erativ es C e n tra l C o o p erativ e W holesale C e n tr a l S t a t e s C o o p e rativ e s Consumers C o o p e rativ e A s s o c ia tio n Consumer C o o p e rativ e s A s so c ia te d E a s te r n C o o p e ra tiv e s, I n c . Ohio Farm Bureau C oo p erativ e A s s o c ia tio n Ohio Farm Bureau S e r v ic e s ' Farm ers C o o p erativ e Exchange Farm ers Union C e n tr a l Exchange Farm ers Union S t a t e Exchange (Nebraska) I p d ia n a Farm Burçau C oo perative A s s o c ia tio n M idland C o o p erativ e W holesale 23 a s e l e c t e d l i s t o f o th e r c o o p e ra tiv e l e a d e r s . The o r g a n iz a t i o n o m itted was th e Ohio Farm Bureau S e r v ic e s ; th e re a so n f o r th e o m issio n was t h a t t h i s i s a c t u a l l y a s u b s id i a r y of th e Ohio Farm Bureau C o o p e rativ e A s s o c ia tio n and does not r e t a i l com m odities. A c tu a lly t h i r t y managers and e d u c a tio n . . . , d i r e c t o r s re c e iv e d th e q u e s tio n n a ir e in s te a d o f th e expected t h i r t y - t w o . T his d is c r e p a n c y i s accounted f o r by th e f a c t . ' I t h a t in two c ase s th e g e n e ra l manager a l s o f i l l e d th e p o s i - ' I t i o n of e d u c a tio n d i r e c t o r . The c o o p e ra tiv e le a d e r s not ' d i r e c t l y connected w ith t h e w h o le sa le s were chosen from an i n i t i a l l i s t o f s i x t y - f o u r p eo ple who have been m entioned p ro m in e n tly and c o n s i s t e n t l y in c o o p e ra tiv e p a p e rs and maga z i n e s , and who have w r i t t e n books and a r t i c l e s on v a rio u s i p h a ses o f c o o p e ra tio n , made im p o rtan t sp e e c h e s, and in gen e r a l have been prom inent in c o o p e ra tiv e c i r c l e s . T his l i s t was shrunk to tw e n ty -n in e and th e a tte m p t was made to o b ta in a f a i r l y adeq u ate d i v i s i o n between peo ple p r i m a r il y i n t e r e s te d in th e b u sin e ss a s p e c ts and th o se i n t e r e s t e d in th e e d u c a tio n a l a s p e c ts o f consumers c o o p e r a tio n . The a tte m p t was made to in c lu d e a l l of th e o u ts ta n d in g le a d e r s o f th e (F o otn ote 2 co n tin u ed ) '.P a c ific Supply C oop erativ e P e n n sy lv a n ia Farm Bureau C oop erative A s s o c ia tio n T ennessee Farm C o o p e ra tiv e s Utah C oo perativ e A s s o c ia tio n . 24 c o o p e ra tiv e movement in t h i s c o u n try . F ollo w in g an i n i t i a l m a ilin g a second m a ilin g was made to th o se who had not r e p l i e d w ith in a re a s o n a b le p e r i od. From a t o t a l of f i f t y - n i n e q u e s tio n n a ir e s which were m ailed th e r e were s i x t e e n r e p l i e s , a r e t u r n s l i g h t l y over 27 p e r c e n t. S in ce th e managers o f th e w h o le sa le s in many , c ases tu rn e d t h i s chore o v er to th e e d u c a tio n d i r e c t o r s , and^ in some c ase s d is c u s s e d th e m a tte r w ith them, th e s e r e p l i e s a c t u a l l y r e p r e s e n t a somewhat l a r g e r r e t u r n th an th e number would i n d i c a t e . A lthough a la r g e number o f s u g g e s tio n s and c r i t i cisms^ were c o n ta in e d in the r e p l i e s , no o b se rv a b le appro ach to consensus was o b se rv a b le ; th e h ig h e s t freq u e n cy o b ta in e d f o r any s u g g e s tio n o r c r i t i c i s m was t h r e e , which i s s l i g h t l y under 20 p e r c e n t . N o n e th e le s s , some of th e p o in ts had con s i d e r a b l e i n t r i n s i c m e r i t, and th e f i n a l e d i t i o n o f the q u e s tio n n a ir e in c o rp o ra te d s e v e r a l o f th e s e s u g g e s tio n s . The q u e s t io n n a ir e in i t s f i n a l form appears below . By th e te c h n iq u e s o f rea rran g e m en t and o f s u b s t i t u t i n g p r i n t i n g f o r mimeographing i t s s i z e was made t o appear con- , s i d e r a b l y s m a lle r than th e memeographed form from which i t was c o p ie d . ^ See Appendix "B" on page 331» SIGNinCANT CHARCTERISTICS OF COOPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES The inform ation co n tain ed in this questio n n aire will not be available to anyone in a form w hich will identify your cooperative. A lthough you p ro b ab ly will not b e ab le to a n sw er all of the follow ing questions w ith perfect a c curacy, p lease an sw er all the questions as accu rately a s you can. If a sm all gro u p of people could cooperate in filling out this q u estionnaire, g re a te r a ccu racy w ould result a n d less time w ould b e n eed ed for answ ering the questions. Name of Your C o o p erativ e........................................................................................................................................................... I. Adherence to Rochdale Principles Behind e a c h of the R ochdale Principles listed below , p lease put an "X" in the colum n w hich best expresses the w ay your coo p erativ e follows it. a. O pen m em bership w ithout respect to race, religion, or politics ............................................. b. O ne m em ber, one v o t e ...................................... c. Limited a n d m odest interest on c a p ita l........ d. Savings returns (dividends) on the b asis of p u r c h a s e s .......................................................... e. Sells only for c a s h ....................................... f. N eutrality in race, religion an d politics. g. Sells a t going m arket p rices.................... Never O bserves A lw ays O bserves Som etim es O bserves ....................... ........................ II. How Your Cooperative Was Started 1. In w h at h fld w as your first busin ess v enture? (Please circle the correct answ er) a. Food b. G asoline c. O ther (w hich one) .......................................... 2. P lease circle all of the follow ing stag es th ro u g h w hich your coo p erativ e h as gone a n d in d icate a b o u t how long it rem ain ed in each: a. S tudy g ro u p w ithout business operations . . .................years, ................. m onths b. B uying club ............................................................................................................. years, ................. m onths c. Limited service store (either w ithout groceries, or m eats, or v eg etab les, or o p en only p art of the time) ............................................years, ................. m onths d. Full service s t o r e ............................................................ . .................years, ................. m onths e. E xpansion into other th an your original line................................ ................ years, ................. m onths 3. Please circle the statem ent b est d escribing the econom ic conditions under w hich your cooper ative w as started: a. M ore th an a v e ra g e local prosperity d. D epression b. A v erag e local prosperity e. R ecovery from depression c. Less th an a v e ra g e local prosperity 4. Before you h a d a store, how m uch help did you get from your cooperative w holesale? (Please circle the best answ er) a. A g reat d eal b. V ery little c. Not much an d not little 5. W hat w as the n atu re of this help, if any? (Please circle all the correct answ ers) a. F inancial c. F ieldm an b. E ducation m aterials d. A dvice (other th a n from the fieldm an) e. O ther help ................................................................................................................................................................. 6. P lease circle all of the following w hich p la y e d a n im portant p art in the organization of your cooperative (before you h a d a store): a. A church—W hat denom ination ........................................................................................................................ b. A fraternal o rganization— W hich o n e ............................................................................................................ c. A lab o r union—W hich o n e ................................................................................................................................... d. A farm o rg anization— W hich o n e ...................................................................................................................... e. O ther o rganizations— W hich o n es................................................................................................................... Ill M ethods Your Cooperative U ses To Establish Contacts With Members and Non-Members 1. P lease circle all of the following m ethods your cooperative h as u sed during the p ast y e a r to contact m em bers a n d in the b rack ets indicate how often the m ethod w as u sed during the year. ) a. N ew s bulletin ) b. T elephone com m ittee ) c. Notices (on bulletin b oards, etc.) ) d. Posters ) a. M ailing cards, distributing "th ro w -aw ay s," etc., for the p u rp o se of advertising com m odities ) f. M em bership m eetings (for tran sactin g business) ) g. R ecreational m eetings (business held to a m inimum) ) h. S q u are or folk d an cin g ) i. Social d an cin g ) j. M ovies ) k. S tudy action or discussion groups ) 1 . R egional co-op m eetings (camps, institutes, etc.) ) m. R efreshm ents served at the store or at m eetings (exclude dinner ineetings) ) n. C alls b y m em bers of a com m ittee on other m em bers. ) o. Books, pam phlets, etc., distributed or m ailed to m em bers ) p. O ther m ethods ...................................... ...................................................................................................... 2. P lease circle all of the following m ean s w hich your cooperative has used to contact non-m em b ers d u ring the p ast y ear a n d indicate in the b rack ets how often the m ethod w as u sed d u ring the year. ( ) a. M em bers sp eak in g to non-m em bers ab o u t the cooperative as p art of a p lan n ed new m em ber cam p aig n b. A dvertisem ents (new spaper, radio, billboards, etc.) c. M ailing cooperative literature d. Inviting non-m em bers to recreatio n al m eetings e. Inviting non-m em bers to business m eetings f. H aving m em bers act as sp eak ers for non-cooperative groups g. P lanned contacts in the store (by a com m ittee, etc.) h. News notices in local p ap ers i. O thers .............................................................................................................................................................. 25 5, W tiat w as the n a tu re of this help, if any? (Please circle all the correct answ ers) a. F inancial c. F ieldm an b. E ducation m aterials d. A dvice (other th an from the fieldm an) e. O ther help ................................................................................................................................................................ 6. P lease circle all of the following w hich p la y e d a n im portant p art in the o rganization of your cooperative (before you h a d a store): a. A church— W hat denom ination ........................................................................................................................ b. A fraternal o rg anization— W hich o n e............................................................................................................. c. A lab o r union— W hich o n e................................................................................................................................... d. A farm organization— W hich o n e ................................ ...............................................,........;........................... e. O ther organizations— W hich o n e s................................................................................................................... III! M ethods Your Cooperative U ses To Establish Contacts With M embers and Non-M embers 1, P lease circle all of the follow ing m ethods your cooperative has u sed d u rin g the p ast y e a r to contact m em bers a n d in the b rack ets indicate how often the m ethod w as u sed d uring the year. a. N ew s bulletin b . T elephone com m ittee (Notices (on bulletin b o ard s, etc.) d. Posters e. M ailing cards, d istributing "throw -avrayc," etc., for the purp o se of ad v ertisin g com m odities f. M em bership m eetings (for tran sactin g business) g. R ecreational m eetings (business held to a m inimum) h. S q u a re or folk d an cin g i. Social d an cin g j. M ovies k. S tudy actio n or discussion groups 1 . R egional co-op m eetings (cam ps, institutes, etc.) m. R efreshm ents served at the store or at m eetings (exclude dinner m eetings) n. C alls b y m em bers of a com m ittee on other m em bers, o. Books, pam phlets, etc., d istributed or m ailed to m em bers p. O ther m ethods .............................................................................................................................................. Please circle all of the follow ing m eans w hich your cooperative h as u sed to contact non-m em b ers d u rin g the p ast y ear a n d indicate in the b rack ets how often the m ethod w as u sed d u rin g the year. ( ) a. M em bers sp eak in g to non-m em bers a b o u t the cooperative as p a rt of a p la n n e d new m em ber cam p aig n b. A dvertisem ents (new spaper, radio, billboards, etc.) c. M ailing cooperative literature d. Inviting non-m em bers to recreatio n al m eetings e. Inviting non-m em bers to busin ess m eetings f. H aving m em bers act as sp eak ers for non-cooperative groups g. P lan n ed contacts in the store (by a com m ittee, etc.) h. N ew s nohces in local p ap ers i. O thers ............................................................................................................ SIGNIFICANT CHARCTERISTICS OF COOPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES The inform ation contain ed in this q u estio n n aire will not be available to anyone in a form w hich identify your cooperative. A lthough you p ro b ab ly v/ill not b e a b le to an sw e r all of the follov/ing questions w ith perfect curacy, p lease answer all the questions as ac c u ra tely a s you can. If a sm all gro u p of peo p le coui& cooperate in filling out this questionnaire, g reater a c c u ra cy w ould result and less tim e w ould b e n e e d e d for answ ering the questions. N am e of Your C o o p erativ e................................................................................................................................................... ....... I. Adherence to Rochdale Principles Behind e ach of the R ochdale Principles listed below , p le a se put an "X" in the column w hich best expresses the w ay your cooperative follows it. a. O pen m em bership v/ithout respect to race, religion, or politics ............................................. b. O ne m em ber, one v o t e ...................................... c. Limited a n d m odest interest on c a p ita l........ d. Savings returns (dividends) on the basis of p u r c h a s e s .......................................................... e. Sells only for c a s h ............................................... f. N eutrality in race, religion a n d politics....... g . S e l l s a t g o i n g m a r k e t p rices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Never O bserves A lw ays | Som etim es O bserves j O bserves I II. How Your Cooperative Was Started I. In w h at field w as your first busin ess venture? (Please circle the correct ansv/ei) a. Food b. G asoline c. O ther (w hich one) ........................................... 2 . P l e a s e c i r c l e a l l o f t h e following stages t h r o u g h which y o u r c o o p e r a t i v e has gone a n d indicate a b o u t h o w l o n g i t r e m a i n e d i n e a c h : a. Study group without b u s i n e s s operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y e a r s , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . months b. Buying c l u b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y e a r s , gaonths c. Limited s e r v i c e store (either w i t h o u t groceries, o r m e a t s , o r * vegetables, o r o p e n o n l y p a r t o f t h e t i m e ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y e a r s , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . months d. Full service s t o r e ................................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y e a r s , ................ months e. E x p a n s i o n i n t o o t h e r t h a n y o u r o r i g i n a l l i n e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y e a r s , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . months 3. Please circle the s t a t e m e n t b e s t d e s c r i b i n g t h e econom ic conditions under v / h i c h y o u r cooper ative w as started: a. More than a v e r a g e l o c a l p r o s p e r i t y d. D e p r e s s i o n b. A v e r a g e l o c a l p r o s p e r i t y e . R e c o v e r y from d e p r e s s i o n c. Less t h a n average l o c a l p r o s p e r i t y 4. Before you had a s t o r e , h o w much h e l p did y o u get f r o m y o u r c o o p e r a t i v e w h o l e s a l e ? (Please circle the best answer) a. A great deal b. Very little c. Not m u c h a n d n o t l i t t l e 26 3. How are your ed u catio n funds jrQi^dXPleaSe circle the correct answ er) a. A p ercen tag e, pi the total volum e of b u sin ess—W hat p e rc e n ta g e ......................... b. A p e rc e n ta g e of n e t in O o m e^W h at p e rc e n ta g e ......................... c. A fixed sum p er y e a r— W hat sum $......................... d. A percèn)f&ge .of sav in g s—W hat p e rc e n ta g e ......................... e. V arying %utns voted from time to tim e b y the board, of directors— A bout how m uch $..... f. O ther ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4. P lease circle the statem ent w hich b est expresses the trend in ed u catio n al work in your cooper ative d u rin g the p ast five years; a. G reatly e x p a n d e d d. D ecreased som ew hat b. Som ew hat e x p a n d e d e. D ecreased con sid erab ly c. S tay ed ab o u t the sam e f. H as b e e n discontinued C om m ents (if any) ....................................................................................................................................................... 5. How m uch did your cooperative sp en d for ed u catio n al w ork last year? P lease do not include busin ess advertising. $......................... 6. Does your co o p erativ e subscrib e for the reg io n al cooperative new spaper for all of your m em bers? (P lease circle the correct answ er) Yes No C om m ents ........................................................................................................................................................................ IV. Relationships Between Your Cooperative and the Community 1. H as your coo p erativ e h a d difficulty in estab lish in g busin ess relations with local n o n -co o p er ative w holesales? (Please circle the correct answ ers) a. W ithin the p ast y e a r Yes No b. Earlier th an the p a st y ear Yes No 2. H ave you h e a rd th at a n y of your m em bers or prospective m em bers h av e run into trouble b e c a u se of their interest in the cooperative? (P lease circle the correct answ ers) a. W ithin the p ast y e a r Yes No b. Earlier th a n the p a st y e a r Yes No 3. H as your m a n a g e r tried to becom e a m em b er of a local b u sin essm en 's association? (Please circle the correct answ er) Yes No 4. H as your m a n a g e r b e e n invited to becom e a m em ber of a lo cal b u sin essm en 's association? (Please circle the correct answer) Yes No 5. W ithin the p a st two years, what civic affairs a n d duties (such ds) the C om m unity Chest, Red. C ross drive, etc.) h as your cooperative p articip ated in a s a n organization? .............................. V . Leadership and Internal Relationships in Your Cooperative 1 . D u r i n g t h e p a s t two years, h a s y o u r c o o p e r a t i v e b e e n d i v i d e d i n t o - g r o u p s v/hich w e r e an tag onistic to e a c h other o v e r a p e r i o d o f time? ( P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e c o r r e c t answer) Y e s No 2 . I s t h e r e a s m a l l group i n y o u r c o o p e r a t i v e w h i c h m a k e s t h e d e c i s i o n s - a n d s u g g e s t s t h e c h a n g é s / y e a r a f t e r y e a r ? ( P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e correct a n s w e r ) Y e s N o U n d e c i d e d 3 . A b o u t what p r o p o r t i o n of y o u r m e m b e r s f o r m g r o u p s a n d c a r r y o n l i v e l y c o n v e r s a t i o n s beiure a n d a f t e r b u s i n e s s m e e t i n g s ? ( P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e b e s t a n s w e r ) 5% 10% 20% 30% 40%' 50% 60% 70% 100% 4. W hen there a re sp ecial jobs to b e done, is it'e a s y t a find people to do them ? (Please circle the correct answ er) Alwcg^s N ever Seldom . U sually .S ou ietim es 5. Do ab o u t the sam e p eo p le volunteer every time? (Please circle the best answ er) Yes No U ndecided 6. A bout w hat p ercent of the members turn out for m ost b usiness m eetings? (Please circle the b est answ er) 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% VI. Miscellaneous Items 1. How m an y m em ber fam ilies do you h av e?......................... 2. How m any of these fam ilies joined w ithin the p ast y e a r? ......................... 3. W hat w ere your sales per m em ber d u rin g the last fiscal year? $......................... 4. W hat w ere your sales p er m em ber the y ear before that? $......................... 5. How m uch m oney h a v e your m em bers invested in their cooperative up to the present? $.............. 6. How m uch m oney h a d they invested a t this tim e last y ear? $................ 7. Do you feel th at your cooperative h as ach iev ed busin ess lead ersh ip in the food store field in your com m unity? (Please circle the bets answ er) Yes No U ndecided 8. A bout w h at p ercent of your b u sin ess is non-m em ber business? (Please circle the b est answ er) 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 9 . H o v / m u c h c o m p e t i t i o n d o e s y o u r c o o p e r a t i v e m e e t ? ( P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e b e s t a n s w e r ) M uch None Little Q uite a bit A verage 10. W hat p ercent of the h e a d s of the m em ber fam ilies of your cooperative w ould you estimate fall into the following occu p atio n al classifications? (Please circle your choices) a. Unskilled labor ................0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% b. Skilled labor .................... 0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% c. Clerical w ork ers...............0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% d. Professional people .......0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% e. Executives ........................ 0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% f. Farmers ...............................0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1 1 . How m a n y people h elp ed f i l l o u t t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If th ere is an y ad d itio n al inform ation a b o u t your cooperative or the conditions u n d er w hich it functions w hich you w ould l ^ e to ad d , or a n y com m ents you w ish to m ake, p lease do so below , or on a n ad d itio n al sh eet of, p ap er. Thank you very much for your cooperation. 2 7 M 3. How a re your ed u catio n funds ra ise d (Plddse circle the correct an sw er) a. A p e rc e n ta g e of the total volum e of b u sin ess—W hat p e rc e n ta g e ......................... b. A p e rc e n ta g e of net incom e—W hat p e rc e n ta g e ......................... c. A fixed sum p er y e a r— W hat sum $......................... d. A p erc e n ta g e of sav in g s—W hat p e rc e n ta g e ......................... e. V arying sum s v o ted from tim e to tim e b y the b o a rd of directors—A bout how m uch $...... . f. O ther ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4. P lease circle the statem en t v/hich best expresses the trend in ed u catio n al w ork in your c o o p er ativ e d u rin g the p a st five years: a. G reatly e x p a n d e d d. D ecreased som ew hat b. S om ew hat e x p a n d e d e. D ecreased co n sid erab ly c. S tay ed a b o u t the sam e f. H as b een discontinued C om m ents (if any) ....................................................................................................................................................... 5. How m uch did your coo p erativ e sp en d for ed u catio n al w ork last year? P lease do not include b usin ess a d v e r t i s i n g . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Does your co o p erativ e su b scrib e for the regional cooperative n e w sp a p e r for all of your m em bers? (Please circle the correct answ er) Yes No C om m ents ........................................................................................................................................................................ IV. Relationships Betw een Your Cooperative and the Community 1. H as your coo p erativ e h a d difficulty in estab lish in g busin ess relations w ith local n o n -co o p er ative w holesales? (Please circle the correct answ ers) a. W ithin the p ast y e a r Yes No b. Earlier th an the p ast y e a r Yes No 2. H ave you h e a rd th at an y of your m em bers or prospective m em bers h av e run into trouble b e c au se of their interest in the cooperative? (Please circle the correct answ ers) a. W ithin the p a st y e a r Yes No b. E arlier th an the p ast y e a r Yes No 3. H as your m a n a g e r tried to becom e a m em b er of a local bu sin essm en 's association? (Please circle the correct ansv/er) Yes No 4. H as your m a n a g e r b e e n invited to becom e a m em ber of a local b u sin essm en 's association? (Please circle the correct answ er) Yes No 5. W ithin the p ast two years, w h at civic affairs a n d duties (such as the C om m unity C hest, Red Cross drive, etc.) h a s your cooperative p a rticip ated in as a n organization? .............................. V . Leadership and Internal Relationships in Your Cooperative 1 . D u r i n g t h e p a s t t w o y e a r s , h a s y o u r c o o p e r a t i v e b e e n d i v i d e d i n t o g r o u p s w h i c h w e r e a n t a g onistic t o e a c h o t h e r o v e r a p e r i o d o f t i m e ? ( P l e a s e circle t h e c o r r e c t a n s w e r ) Y e s N o 2 . I s t h e r e a s m a l l group i n y o u r cooperative w h i c h m a k e s the d e c i s i o n s a n d s u g g e s t s t h e c h a n g e s y e a r a f t e r y e a r ? ( P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e c o r r e c t a n s w e r ) Y e s N o U n d e c i d e d 3 . A b o u t w h a t proportion o f y o u r m e m b e r s f o r m g r o u p s a n d c a r r y o n lively c o n v e r s a t i o n s b e f o r e a n d a f t e r b u s i n e s s m e e t i n g s ? ( P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e b e s t a n s w e r ) 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 4. W hen th ere a re special jobs to b e done, is jt^eqsy to find p eo p le to do them ? (Please circle the correct answ er) Alwçrys N ever S eldom U sually Som etim es ■ ■I, ■ 5. Do a b o u t the sam e people volunteer ev ery time? (Please circle the b est answ er) > Yes No U ndecided 6. A bout v/hcrt p ercen t of the m em bers turn out for m ost busin ess m eetings? (Please circle the best answ er) 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% VI. Miscellaneous Items 1. How m an y m em ber fam ilies do you h av e?......................... 2. How m an y of these fam ilies joined w ithin the p a st y e a r? ......................... 3. W hat w ere y o u r sales p e r m em ber d u rin g the last fiscal year? $......................... 4 . What were your sales per member the year before that? $ ......................... 5. How m uch m oney h a v e your m em bers in vested in their cooperative u p to the present? $.............. 6. H ow m uch m oney h a d they in vested a t this tim e last year? $................ 7. Do you feel th at your cooperative h as ach iev ed busin ess lead ersh ip in the food store field in your com m unity? (P lease circle the bets answ er) Yes No U ndecided 8. A bout w h at percen t of your b u sin ess is non-m em ber business? (Please circle the b est answ er) 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 9. How much competition does your cooperative meet? (Please circle the best answer) M uch N one Little Q uite a bit A v erag e 10. W hat percen t of the h e a d s of the m em ber fam ilies of your coo p erativ e w ould you estimate fall into the following o ccupational classifications? (Please circle your choices) a. U nskilled lab o r .......... .... 0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% b. Skilled lab o r .............. .... 0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% c. C lerical w o rk e rs .......... .... 0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% d. Professional peo p le .. n% 5% IG UL 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 . Executives ................... .... 0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1 . Farm ers .............................. 0 % 5% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Î 1. How m any people h elp ed fill out this questionnaire? If there is a n y ad d itio n al inform ation a b o u t your cooperative or the conditions u n d er w hich it functions w hich you w ould like to add, or an y com m ents you w ish to m ake, p lease do so below , or on cm ad d itio n al sheet of paper. Thank you very m uch for your cooperation. 2g 89 I I . THE CIRCULATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE The most im p ortant s in g le problem involved in the c i r c u l a t i o n of t h i s q u e s tio n n a ire was to secure the c o n f i dence of the boards of d i r e c t o r s of the v a rio u s r e t a i l coop e r a t i v e s to whom the q u e stio n n a ire was s e n t , and to impress , them w ith th e importance of the stu d y . In order to achieve , t h i s the fo llo w in g procedure was fo llo w e d • The ed u ca tio n d i r e c t o r of the C ooperative League of ^ the United S t a te s was approached and asked to w rite l e t t e r s ; in tro d u c in g the a u th o r to each of the c o o p erativ e w holesales in the U nited S t a t e s . These l e t t e r s , which he k in d ly con sented to f u r n i s h , b r i e f l y in tro d u ced th e p r o j e c t and vouch ed f o r the s i n c e r i t y of the r e s e a rc h e r . At the same time and in the same envelope t h a t the s e m i- f in a l form of the q u e s tio n n a ir e , " S ig n if ic a n t S o c ia l C h a r a c te r is ti c s of Coop- : e r a t i v e s " ( r e f e r r e d to a b o v e ), was m ailed to the ed ucation d i r e c t o r s and managers o f th e w h o le sale s, the l e t t e r of in tro d u c tio n from th e e d u ca tio n d i r e c t o r o f the C ooperative League along w ith a l e t t e r from the a u th o r were included This l e t t e r of the a u th o r , in a d d itio n to f u r t h e r d e s c rib in g the p r o j e c t ; asked th a t the w holesale f u r n i s h a l i s t of the ; Also in cluded was a q u e s tio n n a ire r e l a t i n g to the n a tu re of success (see Chapter I I I ) . Thus the t o t a l m a il ing c o n siste d of four item s, two q u e s tio n n a ire s and two l e t t e r s . 30 names and a d d resses of a l l the r e t a i l co o p erativ e food s to r e s ,on t h e i r membership r o s t e r . A m a jo rity of the w holesale o rg a n iz a tio n s cooperated r e a d i l y w ith t h i s r e q u e s t. In s e v e ra l c a se s, however, the re q u e s t was e i t h e r considered im possible to comply w ith a t t h a t time or got l o s t in th e s h u ff le o f a busy e x e c u tiv e ’ s desk, o r, in the case o f some w holesale o rg a n iz a tio n s which j were but s l i g h t l y or n ot a t a l l involved in food s to r e opera tion.^ the re q u e s t was ignored because the re s p o n s ib le o f f i - ; c i a l s considered th a t t h e i r o rg a n iz a tio n was o u ts id e the scope of the stu d y . C onsiderable correspondence ensued, and f i n a l l y a t r i p through the middle west e s ta b lis h e d r a p p o rt and won th e co o p eratio n of most of the w holesales which had not y e t agreed to p a r t i c i p a t e in th e p r o j e c t . Five whole s a le s had no c o n ta c ts w ith food s t o r e s and were elim in a te d from the stu d y .^ Correspondence w ith th e Farmers Union S ta te Exchange of N ebraska was f i n a l l y dropped a f t e r a con- ' s id e r a b le exchange of correspondence because r e p l i e s were a lre a d y in hand from a number of co o p erativ e food s t o r e s in N ebraska as a r e s u l t o f in tro d u c tio n s rec eiv e d from an o th e r ■ so u rc e , and th e re fo re i t did n o t seem d e s ir a b le to push a These f iv e w h olesales were: Ohio Farm Bureau Cooper a t i v e A s so c ia tio n , In d ia n a Farm Bureau C ooperative A ssocia t i o n , Farmers C ooperative Exchange, Pennsylvania Farm Bureau C ooperative A s so c ia tio n , and Tennessee Farm C o o p erativ es. 3 1 f r u i t l e s s issu e any f u r t h e r . The Farmers Union C e n tra l Ex change r e p l i e d to l e t t e r s a f f i r m a t i v e l y but a f t e r n e a rly two y e a rs o f n e g o tia tio n f a i l e d , due to in a c tio n , to supply the re q u e ste d in fo rm a tio n . As in the case of the Farmers Union S t a te Exchange of Nebraska many s o c i e t i e s a f f i l i a t e d w ith the Farmers Union C e n tra l Exchange re c e iv e d m a ilin g s w ith in tr o d u c tio n s from o th e r co o p erativ e w holesales due to over-. I la p p in g j u r i s d i c t i o n s and hence th e lo s s of co o p eratio n a t t h i s p o in t was no t as s e rio u s as i t might otherw ise have been. The num ber,of c o o p e ra tiv e s involved was, in any case , s m a ll. In summary, th en , nine w holesale o rg a n iz a tio n s out of a p o s s ib le t o t a l of eleven which had food s to r e connections fu rn is h e d l e t t e r s of in tr o d u c tio n and l i s t s of t h e i r member , food s t o r e s to g e th e r w ith t h e i r a d d re s s e s . These nine i n cluded a l l the major groups of c o o p erativ e food s t o r e s . In a s in g le envelope th ese r e t a i l co o p erativ e food s t o r e s were se n t the fo llo w in g : a s e l f addressed stamped i envelope, a l e t t e r of in tr o d u c tio n from t h e i r w ho lesale, a l e t t e r o f e x p la n a tio n from the a u th o r e x p la in in g the purpose of th e q u e stio n n a ire and t o a l e s s e r degree the o b je c tiv e s of th e stu d y , and a blank q u e s tio n n a ir e . Those who did not r e p ly re c e iv e d a r e - m a ilin g . In th e o r i g i n a l blue p r i n t of the study i t was d e cided t h a t a sampj.e of two o r_ th re e d q zen _ q u e stio .n n a ire s. 3 2 should be se n t out before the main m a ilin g in o rd er to iro n out any d i f f i c u l t i e s which a sm all m a ilin g might uncover w ith reg a rd to the wording or form at of the q u e stio n n a ire or the p h rasin g of th e accompanying l e t t e r . This was done q u ite a u to m a tic a lly due to the f a c t th a t one w holesale r e p lie d and cooperated much sooner than any o th e r and the r e tu rn s were in from t h i s one a re a before f u r t h e r m ailin gs were made. No changes or r e v is io n s were found n e c e ssa ry . I I I . RETURNS FROM THE MAILINGS OF QUESTIONNAIRES. TO RETAIL COOPERATIVES The u n iv erse to which q u e s tio n n a ire s could t h e o r e t i - ; c a lly be m ailed was r a t h e r se v e re ly l im i te d . Moreover, i t was known to l i e w ith in c e r t a i n l im i ts but i t s ex ac t s iz e w ith in th ese l i m i t s was and i s a m a tte r fo r c o n je c tu r e . Wallace J . Campbell, A s s is ta n t S e c re ta ry of the Cooperative League of the U.S.A. has claimed th a t th e re are 2,400 "stores" r e t a i l i n g commodities^ (ex c lu siv e of farm su p p lie s and s e r v ic e s t a t i o n item s, and such s p e c i a l item s as shoes, books, e t c . ) ; the a u th o r ’ s experience w ith the movement led him to ; expect t h a t a very la rg e m a jo rity of th e se s o c i e t i e s would I be hand ling g r o c e r ie s . Mr. Campbell’s f ig u r e s were compiled; ^ Wallace J . Campbell, Consumer C ooperatives in . ^ e r i c a (Chicago; C ooperative League of the U .S.A ., 1944), in s id e -fro n t cover . . - - - ------------ — - — — ---- 5 5 from in fo rm a tio n issued by the U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , the Farm C re d it A d m in istra tio n , and the C ooperative League of the U .S .A ., and may w e ll re p re s e n t a la rg e amount of o v e rla p p in g . In the 1949 "Date Book" issu ed by the Coop e r a t iv e League the number of such s to r e s i s claimed to be 3 , 0 0 0 . In 1947 the Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s of the U.S. Department of Labor issu e d a d i r e c t o r y of consumer coopera- , I t i v e s of a l l t y p e s . An a c tu a l count of the a s s o c ia tio n s l i s t e d d is c lo s e d a t o t a l of 1,119 c o o p erativ es which handled food item s e i t h e r as a major p a r t of t h e i r b u sin e ss or as a very minor p o r tio n or to whom food d i s t r i b u t i o n was of an in te rm e d ia te im portance. This d i r e c t o r y included a l l the s t a t e s and the T e r r i t o r y of Hawaii.® While t h i s d i r e c to r y i s w ithou t doubt a worthwhile endeavor i t i s a moot q u estio n ! how much credence can be placed in the in fo rm atio n i t con t a i n s . This s c e p tic is m has two b a se s . In the summer of 1949 the au th o r d iscu ssed the forthcom ing new e d it i o n of t h i s d i r e c t o r y w ith the ed u ca tio n d i r e c t o r of one o f the coopera t i v e w h o le sa le s. I t was obvious t h a t the s t a t i s t i c a l i n f o r - m ation which he intended to supply the Department of Labor ^ Co-op Date Book (Chicago; Cooperative League of U .S .A ., 1949), no paging. ® D ire c to ry of Consumers * C ooperatives in th e U nited S t a t e s , B u l le tin No. 750, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s (Washington, D.C.; U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O ffic e , 1947) , pp . 1-119.-------— —----- ------------- 54 would no t be h ig h ly a c c u ra te . F u r th e r, a quick sp o t check in 1949 of the s e c tio n of the d i r e c to r y d e a lin g w ith S outh- • ern C a lif o r n ia d is c lo s e d t h a t out of the t h i r t y - s i x s o c ie t i e s l i s t e d f iv e were c o r r e c t l y e n tered w ith regard to name, a d d re ss , e t c . , and nine o th e rs may have been c o r r e c t . In fiv e c a se s, however, th e ad d re sses were d e f i n i t e l y in e r r o r , in a n o th er case th e name had been changed and in s ix te e n cases the s o c i e t y no lo nger e x is te d , due presumably to t u r n over in c o o p e ra tiv e s o c i e t i e s in the a r e a . F u rtherm ore, th e re were seven o th e r s o c i e t i e s in e x is te n c e which were not l i s t e d (some of them having evolved from the d e fu n c t s o c ie t i e s and r e p r e s e n tin g a change in name and lo c a le r a t h e r than type of b u sin e ss or members) in th e d i r e c to r y but were known p e rs o n a lly to the a u th o r . In th e l i g h t of the f o r e going the accuracy of the d i r e c to r y should be su b je c t to some q u e stio n . The most a c c u ra te source of in fo rm a tio n on t h i s sub j e c t unearthed in th e study was th e membership l i s t s of the co o p erativ e w ho lesales them selves. Due to the in a c c u ra c ie s ’ of th e d i r e c to r y ( r e f e r r e d to above) i t was im possible to compute a c c u r a te ly how many r e t a i l c o o p e ra tiv e food s to r e s are not a f f i l i a t e d w ith one of the w holesales which a re con nected w ith th e co o p erativ e movement. However, while t h i s f ig u r e would be of i n t e r e s t i t would not have any g r e a t i n flu e n c e on th e stu d y b e c a u se -th e .-q u e stio n n a ire s re tu rn e d . . 35 from r e t a i l s o c i e t i e s , most of whom would of n e c e s s ity be f a r removed from the person making the stu d y , involved in t h e i r own immediate problem s, and uninfluen ced by an i n t r o - I d u c tio n from o r g a n iz a tio n s o r persons whom they t r u s t e d , would be very u n lik e ly to c o n ta in e i t h e r a cc u ra te inform a t i o n o r, fo r t h a t m a tte r , to be re tu rn e d a t a l l . In o th er words, c o o p e ra tiv e s n o t a f f i l i a t e d w ith c o o p erativ e whole- ; i ,s a l e s would be u n lik e ly to r e t u r n s a t i s f a c t o r y d a ta . As noted e a r l i e r , the c i r c u l a t i o n of the q u e s tio n n a ire s was based on th e idea t h a t the confidence of the r e t a i l coopera t i v e s must be won in advance. Nine w h olesales out of the seventeen w holesales con ta c te d re p o rte d t h a t they had food s t o r e s on t h e i r member sh ip r o s t e r s and cooperated in the stu d y . The fo llo w in g ta b u l a t i o n shows not only th e number of s o c i e t i e s a f f i l i a t e d w ith each w holesale but a ls o in d ic a te s th e per cen t of r e tu rn ed q u e s tio n n a ire s rec eiv e d in the s e v e r a l c a s e s . A r e p ly was considered unusable when i t f a i l e d to supply the d a ta which made p o s s ib le th e computation of the in c re a s e in ^ membership. This r a t i o was used fo r judging the r e l a t i v e su ccess of the s o c i e t i e s (see Chapter I I I ) and consequently ^ was an a b s o lu te ly e s s e n t i a l one. | I The t o t a l membership of C e n tra l C ooperative Wholesale did n o t re c e iv e q u e s tio n n a ire s because a t t h a t time i t was uthought-.that the .u n iv erse-w as-larg er-an d- on ly -a given- — - ■ TABLE I THE PERCENTAGE OF QUESTIONNAIRES RETURNED BY COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES IN THE UNITED STATES BY WHOLESALE AREAS 36 A B G D E W holesale Universe Q uestion n a ir e s Mailed R e p lie s Received Usable R ep lies Received Per Cent Usable R e p lies* A ssociated C ooperatives 21 21 16 15 , 62 C e n tra l Cooperative W holesale 161 106 58 52 49 C e n tra l S t a te s C ooperatives 28 28 17 14 50 ' Consumers Cooperative A sso c ia tio n 200 200 85 73 37 Consumers C ooperatives A ssociated 10 10 0 0 0 E a s te rn C ooperatives 145 145 80 75 52 Midland Cooperative W holesale 80 80 47 39 49 P a c i f i c Supply C ooperative 23 23 17 17 74 Utah Cooperative A sso c ia tio n 4 4 2 1 25 TOTAL 672 617 322 284 46** * Column ”E” i s obtained by d iv id in g column "D" by column "B." ** Average per c e n t. 37 f r a c t i o n of the r e t a i l s t o r e s re c e iv e d a m a ilin g . F u r th e r more, many of the s t o r e s l i s t e d were branches; only p a re n t ! s t o r e s rec eiv e d q u e s tio n n a ir e s . In only one case , t h a t of Consumers C ooperatives Asso c ia te d , was the r e tu r n very u n s a t i s f a c t o r y . No e x p la n a tio n i s a v a ila b le to account fo r th e t o t a l l y n e g ativ e r e s u l t s o b -| ta in e d o th e r than the f a c t t h a t a l l the s o c i e t i e s involved j were p rim a rily in the o i l b usiness w ith g ro c e rie s as a sid e i s s u e . The f a i l u r e a t t h i s p o in t is of l i t t l e p r a c t i c a l s i g n i f ic a n c e , however, sin c e the numbers involved a re sm all. The r e tu r n s a re d i s t r i b u t e d in p o in t of geog rap h ical l o c a l i t y in roughly the same r a t i o as c o o p erativ e food s to r e s a re lo c a te d in the v a rio u s p a r t s o f the U nited S t a t e s . The r e s u l t s of th e stu d y should n o t, th e r e f o r e , be b iased in r e s p e c t to any s p e c i f i c geographic a re a . I t i s o f i n t e r e s t to note the d i f f e r i n g percen tag e of r e t u r n s from the s e v e r a l q u e stio n n a ire m a ilin g s . The reason f o r t h i s is obscure but th e h ypo th esis may be o ffe re d t h a t the phenomenon r e f l e c t s th e d i f f e r i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the w holesales and t h e i r r e t a i l s o c i e t i e s . AS may be observed r e a d ily the u n iv erse i s a sm all one. I t i n i t i a l l y appeared somewhat l a r g e r . When a ques t io n n a ir e was re tu rn e d w ith the n o ta tio n t h a t th e p o st o f f ic e could not f in d th e address or t h a t the s o c ie ty had closed i t s doors t h a t name was s u b tra c te d from the t o t a l r o s t e r of names. 3 8 and the q u e stio n n a ire was n o t included in the number m ailed out* In o th e r words, the u n iv erse was considered to be a "working" o n e . IV. SUM M ARY AND EVALUATION The development of the q u e stio n n a ire and i t s c i r c u l a t i o n w ith in the s e le c te d p o p u la tio n has been considered in t h i s c h a p te r. I t is notew orthy t h a t the technique of d i s t r i b u t i o n < was based upon a common v a lu e , c o o p e ra tio n , held by p r o f e s s i o n a l c o o p erato rs in the v a rio u s w h o lesales, by the boards ’ of d i r e c t o r s of the r e t a i l c o o p e ra tiv e s , and by the a u th o r. The su ccess of the v enture must be c re d ite d to a la rg e e x te n t to th e consciousness of kind b u i l t around t h i s common value and to e x is ti n g behavior p a tt e r n s fa v o ra b le to group p r o j e c t s . The r e tu r n s from the m a ilin g of the q u e stio n n a ire were considered ad eq u ate. The m ajor a re a s in which th e s e le c te d type of c o o p e ra tiv e , the food s t o r e , c u rr e n tly o p e ra te s in the U nited S t a te s were a l l re p re se n te d in the r e t u r n s . The percentag e o f r e tu r n s from th ese a re a s was, , on th e whole, high; the ex ce p tio n s were unim portant f o r the , purpose of th e stu d y . F i n a l l y , the m a jo rity of the q u e stio n n a ir e s were s a t i s f a c t o r i l y answered. The technique of m a ilin g th e re v is e d q u e s tio n n a ire to 39 , the c o o p erativ e le a d e r s f o r c r i t i c i s m proved to be e f f e c t i v e . I t enhanced the importance of th e stu d y in t h e i r eyes and consequently th e re was a g r e a te r w illin g n e s s to a s s i s t in c i r c u l a t i n g the q u e stio n n a ire among r e t a i l s o c i e t i e s . I t a ls o in su red t h a t im portant a re a s of in q u iry would not be ' ■ . I a c c id e n t a l l y o m itted . The l e t t e r of in tro d u c tio n from the w h olesales to the food s t o r e s placed the whole c i r c u l a t i o n | p ro cess on a d i f f e r e n t le v e l than could have been otherw ise achieved since th e r e t a i l s tended to i d e n t i f y the stu d y w ith the w e lfa re both of t h e i r group and of the co o p erativ e move-' ment. CHAPTER I I I CRITERIA FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF SUCCESS IN CONSUMER COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES I . THE MEANING OF SUCCESS AS FOUND IN LITERATURE DEALING WITH CONSUMER COOPERATIVES I t was s t a t e d e a r l i e r in t h i s study t h a t th e re i s i l i t t l e , i f any, consensus among co o p erato rs about the p r e c is e n a tu re of c o o p erativ e s u c c e s s , This does no t mean, however, t h a t the s u b je c t has no t been given any d i r e c t con s i d e r a t i o n in w ritin g s d e a lin g w ith consumers co o p eratio n , or t h a t the n a tu re of success has not been suggested in th e d is c u s s io n of o th e r to p ic s r e l a t e d to consumers c o o p e ra tio n . I t is th e purpose of t h i s s e c tio n to review and sy n th e siz e some of the sta te m e n ts and su g g e stio n s about the n a tu re of c o o p erativ e su ccess which have been e i t h e r i n f e r r e d or d i r e c t l y s t a t e d , and to a ttem p t to d isc o v e r whatever l i k e - mindedness may e x i s t . I t is n o ta b le t h a t th e word success i s fre q u e n tly used by tho se who w rite about c o o p e ra tiv e s in t h e i r s t r u g g lin g s ta g e s , when th e fo rc e s of an u n frie n d ly or i n d i f f e r - , ent s o c ie ty th r e a te n to overwhelm them, in the sense of the isu rv iv al of the s o c i e t y . I t i s in t h i s se n se , f o r example, t h a t the word i s used (w ithout d e f i n i t i o n , how ever,) in a survey made by the Bureau of A g r ic u ltu r a l Economics of the 41 ; Department of A g ric u ltu re of th e United S t a te s in 1925, a 'study which d e a l t w ith c o o p e ra tiv e s o p e ra tin g between 1913 and 1923. This was a p e rio d when co o p erativ es were l i t e r - a l l y s tr u g g lin g fo r s u r v i v a l . In such p e rio d s as t h i s th e re is a ls o a tendency to d e fin e success in the sense of keeping b u sin ess o p e ra tio n s in the b lack or of rem aining in ' b u sin e ss; i t i s in t h i s sense t h a t the concept is used in i Cooperation in 1 9 2 7 It i s h a rd ly s u r p r i s i n g t h a t such should be the case when c o o p e ra tiv e s a re in p e r i l , but t h i s ^ same g e n e ra l a t t i t u d e toward success is a ls o expressed a t l a t e r and h a p p ie r p e rio d s of co o p erativ e h i s t o r y . In the work by Seba E ld rid g e and a s s o c ia te s success i s no t d e fin e d , but success is by im p lic a tio n s ta y in g a li v e and f a i l u r e is | going out of b u s i n e s s H o w e v e r , a few pages f u r t h e r on the' a u th o rs use success in the meaning of growth and expansion and d e sc rib e the f a c t o r s which w i l l make t h i s p o s s ib le R an d all and Clay, by im p lic a tio n , d e fin e su ccess as sta y in g 1 " ’What K ille d the C o o p erativ e’ ?" C o o p e ratio n , XI (March, 1925), 56. 2 C ooperative S o c ie tie s F a i l , " C o o p eratio n , X III (September, 1927), 172-3. 5 Seba E ld rid g e and a s s o c i a t e s , Development of Col l e c t i v e E n te r p r is e (Lawrence, Kansas: U n iv e rs ity of Kansas P r e s s , 1943), p p . 405-7. ^ I b i d . , pp. 410-11. 4 2 ; In b u s in e s s .^ Even James P . Warbasse, who i s i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y known as an advocate of th e wider view of the v alues of c o o p e ra tio n , assumes in h is a u to p s ie s of d efu n ct s o c i e t i e s t h a t the d e ath of a s o c ie ty i s the c r i t e r i o n of f a ilu r e .® There a re a number of o th e r w r itin g s on v a rio u s a sp e c ts of ^ consumer c o o p eratio n which assume t h a t su ccess f a l l s in one of th e th r e e c a te g o rie s d e sc rib e d above. Somewhat r e l a t e d to t h i s p o in t of view i s the d e f i n i t i o n of su c ce ss im plied in a book w r i t te n by Howard Turner; in which he su g g e sts t h a t c o o p erativ e su ccess c o n s is ts of e f f e c t i n g economies to th e consumer and keeping a liv e as an economic u n i t R a l p h C alkins shows a s im ila r o r i e n t a t i o n when he says t h a t "a m a jo rity of a u t h o r i t i e s appear to r e - ' gard f i n a n c i a l su ccess as a n e ce ssa ry c r i t e r i o n of success 8 of c o o p erativ e e n t e r p r i s e é" Orin E. Burley s t a t e s c a te g o r i c a l l y t h a t the b a sic im p erativ e f o r a c o o p erativ e is ® H arlan J . R andall and Clay J . D a g g ett, Consumers C ooperative Adventures (W hitewater, W isconsin: The White w ater P r e s s , 1936), p . 151. ® James P. W arbasse, Problems of C ooperation (Chicago; C ooperative League of the U .S .A ., 1942T, P« x i i . 7 Howard H. T u rn e r, Case S tu d ie s of Consumer Coopera t i v e s (New York: Columbia U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1941), pp. 298- ■ 5 0 1 . ® Ralph N. C a lk in s, "A Theory of the Consumer Cooper a ti v e U nit in the F ree Exchange Economy," (unpublished M a ste r’s t h e s i s . U n iv e rs ity of New Mexico, Albuquerke, N-.M*, 1949 ) , - p . 83 . ----------- - - -- 43 Q to o p erate s u c c e s s f u lly the chosen b u sin e ss. He f u r t h e r e lu c id a te s h is p o in t of view by s t a t i n g t h a t " the term ’f a i l u r e ’ has a m u ltitu d e of p r a c t i c a l m eanings. . . a more d e s c r i p t iv e term of what is u s u a lly c a lle d ’f a i l u r e s ’ i s ’d isc o n tin u a n c e reco rd. A w ell known b u l l e t i n of the U.S. Department of Labor a ffirm s t h a t the average man jo in s a c o o p erativ e to save h im self the r e t a i l e r ’s sm all n e t prof-i i t , and t h a t , as would be im plied in the above sta te m e n t, c o o p e ra tiv e s grow b e s t in "hard tim es" such as d e p re s s io n . J.K . S te rn and H.F. Doran discov ered in t h e i r stu dy t h a t "most farm ers sa id th ey supported c o o p e ra tiv e s in o rd er to gain f i n a n c i a l advantage. T. Wendell Boyles has l i s t e d the fo llo w in g "a lle g e d purposes" of c o o p e ra tiv e s which i n flu en ced a f f i l i a t i o n w ith the movement in the fo llo w in g I 'x ranked o rd er: Orin E. B urley, The Consumers C ooperative As A D i s t r i b u t i v e Agency (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I n c . , 1939), p . v i i i . ‘ 10 I b i d . , p . 237 . ' 11 O rg a n iz atio n and Management of Consumers’ Cooper- : a t i v e A sso c ia tio n s and Clubs (Washington, D.C.; U.S. Gov- ernment P r i n t i n g O ffic e , 1934), p . 1. 1^ J.K . S te rn and H .P. Doran, F arm ers’ Support of C o o p e ra tiv e s, B u l le t in 50 5 (No a d d ress: School o f A g ric u l- -t u r e , Pennsylvania S t a te C olleg e, 1948), back of f r o n t cover* 1^ T. Wendell B o y le s, "A Study of the P r i n c i p l e s and j P r a c t i c e s of Los A ngeles’ County R e t a i l C o o p e ra tiv e s," j 44 I 1. Improvement of the sta n d a rd of l iv i n g . : - I ; B. More j u s t d i s t r i b u t i o n of goods and s e r v i c e s . ! j 3. Improvement of q u a l i t y . | I 4 . R eduction of p r i c e s . ' I . I j 5. U ltim ate in c re a s e in th e volume of p ro d u c tio n . | { ' lit i s n o ta b le t h a t a l l of th e s e item s a re economic in na- { t u r e . I f co o p erativ e su ccess i s r e l a t e d to b rin g in g the p ro s p e c tiv e co operator in to the f o ld and s a t i s f y i n g him, the above c l a s s i f i c a t i o n would imply a s tro n g ly economic base fo r co o p erativ e s u c c e s s . I i Looking a t th e problem from a p sy c h o lo g ic a l p o in t of ■ view Leonard W. Doob m ain tain s t h a t an in d iv id u a l, to be a ! c o o p e ra to r, must be convinced t h a t "h is le v e ls of a s p i r a t i o n can be most s a t i s f a c t o r i l y achieved by becoming and then re-| m aining a member of a c o o p erativ e o r g a n iz a tio n ." ^ ^ I t would! be l o g i c a l to assume on t h i s b a s is t h a t success would con s i s t of convincing members and p ro s p e c ts of the v alue of I c o o p eratio n by showing them th a t they uould implement some I l i f e need, whether r e a l or f e l t , by c o o p e ra tin g . The same ; a u th o r, in c o lla b o r a tio n w ith Mark May, makes th e fo llo w in g (Footnote 13 continued) (unpublished M a ste r’s t h e s i s . U n iv e rs ity of Southern C a li f o r n ia , Los Angeles, 1938), p . 84 Leonard W. Dobb, "P sy ch o lo g ical Aspects o f Con sumers C o o p eratio n ," The Annals of the American Academy of P o l i t i c a l and S o c ia l S cien c e, 191 (May, 1937), pp. 4 8 -9 . j 45 I s ta te m e n ts which b u t t r e s s t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n : i (An in d iv id u a l competes o r cooperates) to close the gap between h is le v e l of achievement and t h a t of ' h is a s p i r a t i o n s by a c h ie v in g g o a ls . He w i l l n e it h e r * compete nor cooperate u n le ss the s i t u a t i o n seems to a f f e c t the d isc rep a n cy between h is two l e v e l s . 15 The goals fo r which an in d iv id u a l w i l l compete or cooperate are a fu n c tio n of h is knowledge concerning the o b je c ts or p r e s t i g e , the a tta in m e n t of which ap p ears to him to r a i s e one or more of h is le v e ls of achievement toward correspon din g l e v e ls of a s p i r a t i o n . Other a u th o rs th in k of c o o p erativ e success in terms * of th e re n d e rin g of s e rv ic e and the c o n tr o l li n g of e x p lo ita -; t i o n . J.A . Hough, f o r example, m ain tain s t h a t " s e rv ic e to ■ 1 ;the a s s o c ia te d consumers t y p if i e d in the i n d iv id u a l members of th e r e t a i l d i s t r i b u t i v e s o c ie ty " i s th e goal of coopera- j t iv e t r a d i n g . 17 H arland R andall and Clay D aggett claim t h a t th e co o p erativ e a t Waukegan, I l l i n o i s , was s t a r t e d in o rd er j to combat a r i s e in th e p r ic e of m ilk which was considered I u n j u s t . 18 L o g ic a lly th e n , in t h i s case, su ccess would con- | 1 s i s t in red u cin g th e p ric e of m ilk and p re v e n tin g f u r t h e r p r i c e r i s e s in t h a t commodity. Ralph C alkins m ain tain s th a t 1^ Mark A. May and Leonard W. Dobb, Com petition and C ooperation, S o c ia l Science R esearch Council B u lle tin No. 25 P e w York: 1937), p . 9. 1^ I b i d ., p. 16. ! 1^ J.A . Hough, Dividend on C ooperative Purchases j(M anchester: C ooperative Union L im ited, 1936), p . 165. I 18 H arlan R andall and Clay D aggett, 0£. c i t ., p . 109 .| L __________________________________________________________________________________ —-----------------1 j 46 I Rochdale c o o p e ra tiv e s should s t r i v e fo r s a t i s f a c t i o n of the ; I "immediate economic compulsions of s o c ie ty and th e long run i jgeneral s o c i a l w e l f a r e ."19 T his statem en t complements the j jquotation from the same a u th o r which was c ite d above. J .P . jWarbasse s t a t e s t h a t many s o c i e t i e s f a i l e d because th ey did |not f i l l a need; a c o o p erativ e must be u s e f u l to i t s mem- jbers.^^ Orne Anders a ls o i s th in k in g in t h i s same lin e when he s t a t e s t h a t co o p eratio n i s a defense a g a in s t economic ex- P l p l o i t a t i o n and s p e c i a l l y a g a in s t monopoly.^ V arious a u th o rs a re s tr o n g ly opposed to th in k in g of c o o p e ra tiv e success in terms of b u sin e ss success e x c lu s iv e ly or even, sometimes, of in f lu e n c in g the economic system in a I id e s ira b le d i r e c t i o n . George R u s s e ll, fo r example, says: I d i s l i k e the l i t t l e groups who meet a couple of { tim es a year and c a l l them selves coo p erato rs because i th ey got t h e i r f e r t i l i z e r s more cheaply and have I done n o th in g e l s e . 22 j T. Wendell Boyles m ain tain s on the b a sis of a survey which ; 1 he m entions but f a i l s to c i t e t h a t 99 per cent of th e peoplej who jo in c o o p e ra tiv e s do so because "coo p eratio n ex presses ^9 Ralph C alk in s, 0£ . c i t ., p . 82. 2^ J . P . Warbasse, 0£ . c i t . , p. 79. p 1 Orne Anders, C ooperative I d e a ls and Problems (M anchester: C ooperative Union L im ited, 1937), p. 37. George W. R u s s e ll, C ooperation and N a t io n a li t y (Chicago: C ooperative League of the U .S .A ., 1940), p . 59 47 j an i d e a l in which they b e l i e v e . T h i s a s s e r t i o n should be I compared w ith the sta te m e n t by the same a u th o r quoted above which im p lies t h a t a f f i l i a t i o n w ith the movement ta k e s p lac e !for economic re a s o n s . I f the u n c ited survey i s c o rr e c t i t 1 I I I vvould be rea so n ab le to deduce t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s w ithou t i I I s tr o n g ly expressed i d e a ls would be u n s u c c e s s fu l. Benson j ! I L an d is' sta te m e n t t h a t th e p r o f i t in c o o p erativ e m arketing | I P A i s the l e a s t im p ortant rea so n f o r c o o p eratin g and Leonard K e rc h e r's statem en t t h a t ^»a Rochdale c o o p e ra tiv e . . . i s f i r s t I ' |of a l l a dem ocratic o r g a n iz a tio n ôf persons and only second-; I p ' I a r i l y a b u sin e ss e n t e r p r i s e , " add weight to th e p o in t of j ! ; jView. I I : ; Landis su g g ests an even l e s s b u s in e s s -c e n te re d success id e a l in sta te m e n ts about F inland and Denmark. C ooperation : j ! I n F in la n d , he say s, was the v i t a l f a c t o r which held people I ' to g e t h e r under th e h e e l o f Czarism and i t was ed u ca tio n by i Hannes Gebhard and h is a s s o c ia te s which made t h i s phenomenal' 23 T:* .Wendell B oyles, op_. c i t ., p. 84 I 24 Benson Y. L and is, S o c ia l Aspects of Farmers Cooper a ti v e M arketing (Chicago: U n iv e rs ity of Chicago P r e s s , 1925); P" 4. I • I 25 Leonard C. K ercher, Vant W. Kebker, and W ilfred C.l L e la n d , J r . , Consumers' C ooperatives in the N orth C e n tra l ' S t a t e s (M inneapolis: U n iv e rs ity of M innesota P r e s s , 19417, I ,p. 41. j \ 4 8 ' 'S tre n g th p o s s i b l e *25 ue quotes C hris L. C h risten sen w ith I a p p ro v al as fo llo w s: ; I j ' C ooperation has l i f t e d th e Danish farm er from the j I l e v e l of p e a sa n try to the h ig h plane of an e n lig h te n - ; ! ed and wholesome country l i f e . . . . I t has made th e i ' Danish farm er a c o n te n te d , w e ll-e d u c a te d , s e l f - r e s p e c t - j I ing c i t i z e n . 27 , Jacob Baker, e t a ^ . , s t a t e t h a t th e o b je c tiv e s of the coop e r a t iv e movement (and su ccess i s n e c e s s a r il y th e a tta in m e n t of o b je c tiv e s ) in England and S cotlan d a re the a b o l i t i o n of p r o f i t , th e e lim in a tio n of p r i v a t e b u sin e ss and the e s t a b lish m en t of a c o o p erativ e commonwealth; in Sweden and S w itz erlan d they are the e lim in a tio n of monopoly and the e sta b lis h m e n t of consumer c o n tr o l over p r i c e s . 28 O ther a u th o rs m ain tain t h a t th e o b je c tiv e s o f cooper a t i v e a c t i v i t y are :2 9 1. S a t i s f a c t i o n of m a te r ia l and im m aterial needs, in c lu d in g s t a t u s , s e c u r i t y , p r e s t i g e , advancement, psy chic | s a t i s f a c t i o n from a sense of belonging and p rid e in owner sh ip and management. ' 26 Benson Y. L andis, 0£. c i t ., pp. 57-8. 27 I b i d .. p . 61. I j 28 Jacob Baker, e^ aL ., R eport of the In q u iry on Co- I o p e ra tiv e E n te rp ris e in Europe (Washington D. C.: U.S. Gov- !ernment P r i n t i n g O ffic e , 1932), pp. 2-3. j 29 Leonard C. K ercher, Vant W. Kebker and W ilfred C. Iceland, J r . , 0£ . c i t ., pp. 15-17. [ " ' ' — - - - I I I 2. To u sher in a more e q u ita b le s o c i a l o rd e r; t h i s j [will o fte n in clu d e th e e ra d ic a tio n of f r e e e n t e r p r i s e . ; F u rth e r on in t h i s work i t is s t a te d t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s i should;50 1. Be th e consum er's advocate.. 2. P r o t e c t him a g a in s t high p r i c e s . 3. R egulate p r i v a t e b u sin e ss. 4 . C ontrol monopoly. "C ooperators must a t a l l tim es remember t h a t co o p eratio n i s not m erely a b u s in e s s . I t i s something more than t h a t . I t j i s an experiment in a d i f f e r e n t kind of c i v i l i s a t i o n . " ^ ^ j D r. M.M. Coady r e f e r s to c o o p e ra tiv e s a s the means by which i"th e people w i l l have an o p p o rtu n ity to r i s e to th e f u l l 's t a t u r e of c it i z e n s h i p " by fu n c tio n in g in the f i e l d s of b u sin e ss and f i n a n c e . ^2 J .P . Warbasse s t a t e s : A s o c ie ty is a poor co o p erativ e i f i t s purpose is only to run a cheap s t o r e . . .in o rd er to save the members money. . .They [members] must th in k always of expansion. . . . 30 I b i d ., p . 175. O rg a n iz atio n and Management of Consumers Coopera- ! t i v e A s so c ia tio n s and C lu b s, pp. 36-7. j 32 No a u th o r. How S t . F ra n c is X avier U n iv e rs ity Edu c a te s f o r A ction (Chicago: C ooperative League of th e U .S.A ., no d a t e ), p. 46. ' soi I ; The purpose of th e c o o p e ra tiv e movement i s t h a t the | people s h a l l e n te r more and more th e f i e l d s occupied ; ; by p ro fit-m a k in g b u sin e ss u n t i l the consumers a re sup- ; ' p ly in g and producing f o r them selves the th in g s t h a t | 1 a re n e e d fu l f o r t h e i r l iv e s and h a p p in e s s .33 | The same a u th o r, whose n a ti o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n tr ib u - ^ tio n s to th e c o o p e ra tiv e movement add weight to h is o p in io n s, ! says f u r t h e r : j What i s th e end toward which co operation is moving, I . . . [ i t ] i s to s e t everybody to work, to g l o r i f y ! s e rv ic e in s te a d of p ro p e r ty , to e lim in a te th e p a ra - I s i t i c p r o f i t e e r and the e x p lo ite d p r o l e t a r i a t , and by so doing e s t a b l i s h not the d i c t a t o r s h i p of the p ro l e t a r i a t but th e d i c t a t o r s h i p of humanity. C ooperation, he c o n tin u e s, i s a method of o rg a n iz in g s o c ie ty dpon a v o lu n ta ry , n o n - p o l i t i c a l b a s i s . I t i s a means by which a v o lu n ta ry a s s o c i a t io n of neighbors can save th e i n d iv id u a l from being enveloped and dominated by c e n t r a l i z e d power, and by which an in d iv id u a l may p reserv e h is freedom w ithout r e l i n q u is h in g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . ^5 J e r r y V oorhis, when asked what he considered the r o l e of the c o o p e ra tiv e s to be, r e p l i e d t h a t they should e f f e c t sa v in g s, t r a i n the people f o r democracy, and provide an 53 James P . Warbasse, C ooperative Education (Chicago: C ooperative League of the U .S .A ., 1938), p. 3. I 34 James P . Warbasse, C ooperative Democracy (New jYork: H arper and B ro th e rs, P u b lis h e r s , 1947), pp. 21-2. ^ 35 Ib id ., p . ix . ! 51! I answer to th e t h r e a t posed by both big busin ess and big ’ ' ' I n c A I governm ent. I In h is r e p o r t to th e 1944 Cooperative Congress, E.R. Bowen, then g e n e ra l s e c r e t a r y of the C ooperative League of the U .S .A ., quoted w ith ap p rov al the slo g an , "In our hands [ i . e . , the c o o p erativ e movement] l i e s th e f u t u r e , " and went on to say t h a t co o p eratio n is the way to avoid fa sc ism and communism and monopoly and to o b ta in f u l l and equal economic freedom . The fo u r corner stones o f c o o p eratio n a re i t s c u l t u r a l , e d u c a tio n a l, commercial, and f i n a n c i a l a s p e c ts , he c o n tin u ed , and "the c u l t u r a l sid e of a c o o p erativ e i s more im p ortant than th e commercial s i d e . "3® " C u ltu ra l" is unde fin e d but i t can be i n f e r r e d from the con tex t t h a t he meant a t t i t u d e s and b a sic o r i e n t a t i o n . In the same speech he quoted John M itc h e ll, manager o f the C ooperative W holesale S o c ie ty of England as saying; I f co o p eratio n is lo y a lly !s u p p o rte d and i n d e f i n i t e l y extended i t w i l l so lv e a l l s o c i a l problems, d e stro y p o v e rty , e ra d ic a te crim e, and secure the g r e a t e s t hap p in e s s to th e g r e a t e s t number.39 36 Wallace J . Campbell, Consumer C ooperatives in | America (Chicago: C ooperative League of th e U .S .A ., 1944), | p. 30. I 37 No a u th o r. The C ooperative C enten nial Congress ' ' Book (Chicago: C ooperative League o f the U .S .A ., 1944), p . 10' 1 I b i d .. pp. 21-2. I ________ gg_Ibld...._p,._26..____________________________________________ 1 52 Be f u r t h e r r e c a l l e d the words of A lb e rt Thomas, who has been' c a lle d th e " c o o p e rativ e prophet of F ra n c e ," when he sa id t h a t "C ooperation i s a plow guided by a s t a r , " ^ ^ There a re many o th e r sta te m e n ts concerning th e o b je c t i v e s of co o p eratio n which e i t h e r am plify or add weight to the view point t h a t co o p eratio n i s the means to achieve a new and b e t t e r s o c i a l world r a t h e r than a mere savin g or b u s i- i * ness c o n tin u an c e. Enough has been sa id to i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p o in t of view. V .8. Allane does, however, throw some a d d i- | t i o n a l l i g h t on the s i t u a t i o n in h i s a n a ly s is of what coop e r a t io n means to d i f f e r e n t c o o p e ra to rs . He says t h a t coop e r a tio n is consid ered by one group of c o o p erato rs as a means of a m e lio ra tin g th e p re s e n t s o c i a l i l l s , of in s u rin g s o c i a l p ro g re s s w ith in the con fin es of c a p ita lis m . Another group th in k s of c o operation as a t r a i n i n g school f o r the working c la s s to use f o r the purpose of read y in g them selves to take over economic le a d e r s h ip fo llo w in g a p o l i t i c a l r e v o lu tio n . The t h i r d group (and he claim s t h a t most co o p erativ e le a d e rs : f a l l in t h i s group) v i s u a li z e co o p eratio n as a new economic system c h a ra c te riz e d by: ' I 1. S a t i s f a c t i o n of need s u b s ti t u t e d f o r the quest f o r p r o f i t s . 40 Loc. c i t . I r 55: I 2 . S u b s t i t u t i o n of c o ll e c t iv e e n te r p r is e fo r i n d i- ^ i v id u a l e n te r p r is e and c o m p e titio n . ! I ! i 3. R ecog nitio n t h a t moral laws cannot be se p a ra te d | I I Ifrom economic law. ^ Ifhe f i r s t two groups th u s th in k of co o p eratio n as a means to jan end, w hile th e t h i r d th in k s of c o o p eratio n as an end in { its e lf .41 j What th en can be concluded from the fo reg o in g ? The fo llo w in g g e n e r a liz a tio n s would appear to be j u s t i f i e d , a t l e a s t a t the p re s e n t time : I I 1. There i s an enormous d i v e r s i t y , e i t h e r s t a te d or I {implied, in th e conceptions of the o b je c tiv e s of coop eratio n and of co o p erativ e su c ce ss held by th e v a rio u s a u th o rs c ited . I I 2. Many a u th o rs appear to hold d i f f e r e n t conceptions j {at d i f f e r e n t p e rio d s or in d i f f e r e n t p o rtio n s of t h e i r w rit-! ling s, th u s su g g e stin g a f l u i d r a t h e r than a fix e d concept of j [su c c e ss. ! ' 3. A g r e a t d e a l of what has been suggested above con- ! i s t i t u t e s th e type of c r i t e r i a of success which could not be I ■ ■ ■ japplied in the case of i n d iv id u a l r e t a i l s t o r e s , e . g . , de- 'f e a t i n g monopoly. A g re a t deal of the m a t e r i a l is of a I {nature which i s extrem ely d i f f i c u l t i f not im possible to 41 V.S. Alanne, Fundamentals of Consumers Cooperation { S uperior, W isconsin: C ooperative P u b lish in g A s so c ia tio n , 4L'94'6* )p“'P P ~ 9 7-8“ ;--------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 54 I measure a c c u r a t e l y , and consequently i s not u s e f u l fo r such I a study as t h i s . I 4. C ooperation h a s, a p p a re n tly , th e p e c u lia r charac- I I j t e r i s t i c of being ab le to be " a l l th in g s to a l l men," so to take th e c o lo r of the i n d i v i d u a l 's thought and a s p i r a t i o n t h a t he can see in i t a means to th e d e s ire d end. 5. Any s p e c i f i c d e f i n i t i o n of the end or ends of coop e r a tio n or of the n a tu re of co o p erativ e su ccess is bound not to fin d favo r w ith a la rg e p ro p o rtio n of the coop erativ e [Universe. I 6. I t i s l i k e l y t h a t any d e f i n i t i o n of success in r e - |t a i l co o p erativ e food s to r e s or any c r i t e r i o n fo r judging jsuch su ccess is n o t going to meet w ith g e n e ra l ap p ro v a l. I This lik e lih o o d i s co rro b o ra te d by in te rv ie w s the author h as had w ith co o p erativ e le a d e r s in which he asked what the in te rv ie w e e thought c o n s titu te d c o o p erativ e su c c e ss . No one was su re enough to give a s t r a i g h t forward r e p l y . 7. The more prom inent c o o p erato rs quoted (and the q u o ta tio n s were chosen a t random from those a v a ila b le ) ap peared to take a w ider, more id e a l- c e n te r e d view of coopera- r - I |tio n ( c f . th e c i t a t i o n s from Warbasse, Bowen and McLanahan) i I • , [than l e s s e r c o o p e ra tiv e l i g h t s or s c h o la rs who were only i I ! istudying c o o p e ra tio n . 55 I I . METHODOLOGY USED FOR DETERMINING THE NATURE OF SUCCESS IN RETAIL COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES Basic assu m p tio n s. The fo llo w in g in q u iry in to the n a tu re of success in the f i e l d o f consumer c o o p erativ e food s to r e o p e ra tio n and th e c r i t e r i a which can be used to e s ta b l i s h i t s in cid en ce i s based on fo u r assum ptions. The f i r s t of these i s t h a t th e re is no o b je c tiv e and v a lid d e f i n i t i o n of th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s u c c e s s fu l coop e r a t iv e food s t o r e s , or indeed, of any o th e r type of con sumer c o o p erativ e e n t e r p r i s e . Such a d e f i n i t i o n must be based on consensus or on some o th e r form of a u t h o r i t y , a d e f i n i t i o n by consensus i s h ig h ly u n lik e ly due to th e f a c t th a t each r e t a i l c o o p erativ e i s e n t i r e l y autonomous, s e t s i t s own goals and re - e v a lu a te s and r e - s e t s them c o n tin u o u sly , and alth o u g h somewhat in flu e n ce d by advice from the regional- and n a tio n a l le v e l i t does n o t c o n sid er such advice to be of a compulsory n a tu r e . At b e s t th e r e i s feut lim ite d i n t e r a c tio n between c o o p e ra tiv e s , and t h i s se v ere ly l i m i t s the p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r consensus. F urtherm ore, r e t a i l coopera t iv e s a re no t g e n e ra lly i n t e r e s t e d in success in i t s wider a s p e c t; boards o f d i r e c t o r s , th e governors and p o lic y makers of th e c o o p e ra tiv e , u s u a lly t r y to meet immediate problems r a t h e r th an co n sid er lon g -term g o a ls . In any case, th e re is no evidence of the e x is te n c e of an a u t h o r i t a t i v e d e f i n i t i o n ' i 56' I I I iOf c o o p erativ e success based e i t h e r upon consensus or on the' i pronouncements of any a u t h o r i t a t i v e c o o p erativ e body. j ■ I t would not be s u r p r i s i n g i f re s p o n s ib le co o p erativ e o f f i c i a l s on th e n a tio n a l or r e g io n a l le v e l had developed a j I I (formula d e fin in g su c c e ss , bu t th e re is no evidence t h a t such| !is the c a se . Many of them have, from time to tim e, l i s t e d I [in d iv id u a l item s which they considered im portant f o r the | I I good h e a lth of r e t a i l c o o p e ra tiv e s . These item s a re both { I v a rie d and numerous, and r e f l e c t a d e s ir e to meet immediate i problems r a t h e r th an to implement a long-range program which: would lead to s u c c e s s . Presumably t h i s lack of long-range philosophy is due to the enormous p re s su re of burning is s u e s ! on an overworked le a d e r s h ip . Perhaps the b e st evidence of th e n o n -e x iste n c e of a v a lid d e f i n i t i o n of c o o p erativ e success is contained in the fin d in g s from th e q u e s tio n n a ire t i t l e d , "What is th e Measure I I I of Consumer C ooperative Success in th e F ie ld of Food D is tri-j jb u tio n ?" These f in d in g s , which w i l l be d isc u sse d a t le n g th | I I j l a t e r , s h o w th e lac k of unanim ity among c o o p erativ e le a d - i I 1 Iers on t h i s s u b j e c t , a la c k which would be very u n lik e ly i f i I • 1 I they were aware o f any a u t h o r i t a t i v e d e f i n i t i o n . None of ' ! th ese le a d e r s made any re fe re n c e to any e x is ti n g d e f i n i t i o n ! ^2 See pp. 64 f f . ' 57 of c o o p erativ e s u c c e s s . ! ! The second b a sic assum ption i s t h a t any d e f i n i t i o n of {success must be o p e ra tio n a l in n a tu re r a t h e r than a b s o lu te . 1 ! I t must be more in the n a tu re of an o r i g i n a l c r e a tio n th an , jof a d e s c r i p t io n of an e x i s t i n g concept. This is a lo g ic a l in fe re n c e from th e f i r s t assum ption and th e d e f i n i t i o n and c r i t e r i a developed in t h i s stu d y .sh o u ld be ev alu ated in t h i s [ l i g h t . 1 '' I j The t h i r d b a s ic assum ption is th a t the n a tu re of sue-: I I icess must be d e fin e d by c r i t e r i a which are amenable to s t a - | ! I t i s t i c a l m a n ip u la tio n . T his makes th e d e f i n i t i o n of success, I even more o p e ra tio n a l and a r b i t r a r y than i t would have been ! ioth erw ise, but the a l t e r n a t i v e la r g e ly p reclu d es the p o s s i- ! b i l i t y of a s c i e n t i f i c in q u ir y . The immediate problem thu s reduces i t s e l f to (1) d e fin in g su ccess and (2) red u c in g the d e f i n i t i o n to a form usab le in t h i s stu d y . I The f o u r th assum ption i s t h a t the c r i t e r i a must apply *to a l l s i t u a t i o n s . C ooperatives a re la rg e and sm a ll, young i and o ld , r u r a l and urban; they a re s i t u a t e d in la rg e and sm all towns, and t h e i r membership i s a cross s e c tio n of the j n a ti o n . The c r i t e r i a of success must be usable in a l l thesej I c a s e s . I The q u e s tio n n a ire and what i t was designed to d o . IThe q u e s tio n n a ire b e arin g the t i t l e , "What is the Measure o f I 58 {Consumer C ooperative Success in the F ie ld of Food D is tr ib u - 'tio n ? " , was la r g e ly an o r i g i n a l c r e a t i o n . ^3 No r e s e a rc h on ! t - the problem was uncovered which could be used as a base fo r | the q u e s tio n n a ir e . Study of the w ritin g s of coop erativ e le a d e r s p lu s p e rs o n a l experience provided th e b a sic raw ma t e r i a l out of which i t was fa sh io n e d . S e v e ra l s o c i o lo g i s t s helped to improve i t t e c h n i c a l l y . The q u e stio n n a ire c o n siste d of th re e p a r t s : the f o r mal d e f i n i t i o n , the suggested c r i t e r i a , and th e s e c tio n in which the respondent could express h is r e a c tio n s to the : q u e stio n of the n a tu re of success and i t s measurement. These th re e p a r t s a re of such a n a tu re t h a t , in a rough se n se , ' they c o n s t it u t e a check on each o t h e r . In t h i s way i t was p o s s ib le to ev alu ate th e c o n siste n c y of th e respondent and check h is u n d e rstan d in g of what he was a tte m p tin g to do. I t was considered im portant to g et re a c tio n s to th e suggested c r i t e r i a l e s t the r e p ly be m erely a choice of e v i l s , and thej i n d i v i d u a l 's opinions and valu es be l o s t . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of the q u e s t io n n a ir e . The q u e stio n n a ir e was m ailed , to g e th e r w ith the t e s t copy of the ques t io n n a i r e (then t i t l e d ) " S ig n if ic a n t S o c ia l C h a r a c te r is ti c s of Consumer C ooperatives in th e United S t a t e s , " to a l l the See p. 59. W H A .T IS THS imSURB OP OŒSOim COOPmTIVB SUCCESS IN TH E FIELD OF FO O D DISTRIBUTION? Before you roed whp.t follows will you please write in a sentence your de finition of a successful consumer cooperative food store. A successful consumer cooperative food store is one in which The following aro suggested criteria for judging the success of consumer cooperative food stores. Ploase mako any additions which you consider desir able and then put appropriate numb or in the parentheses, Number (1) will moan that you consider that particular criterion more im portant than a ll tho others. Number (2} will moan that you oonsidor that criterion more iiqoortant than any critoria except those followed by (1). Similarly (3) will moan that tho criterion is moro important than any criteria except those followed by (1) or (2), (4) moro important than any critoria but (1), (2), and (3), and so on. Tw o or more critoria may have tho same number i f you attach equal import ance to them. If you think a criterion is worthless, please put (0) in the parenthesis. 1. .. Now members per 100 old members taken in per year ( } 2# , Percent of membership usually attending membership meetings ( 1 3# IPrond in sales per member per given period ( ) 4. Patronage refunds per #100 of purchase ( ) 5. Trend in invested member capital per given period ( J 6. Business leadership in tho community in the food store field ( ) 7» Othors_______________________________________________________________ 59 I G O j Imanagers and edu catio n d i r e c t o r s of the v a rio u s co op erativ e I {wholesales in th e U nited S t a t e s . I t was a ls o se n t to a s e l e c t e d l i s t of co o p erativ e le a d e rs n o t d i r e c t l y connected [with the w h olesales I j I t i s apparent t h a t an e f f o r t was made to o b ta in the p o in t of view of both s p e c i a l i s t s in c o o p erativ e education and management and in a d d itio n t h a t of prom inent co op erato rs n o t in th e employ of w h o le s a le s . A f u r t h e r e f f o r t was made to o b ta in a g eog rap h ical d i s t r i b u t i o n corresponding w ith t h a t of the co o p erativ e movement in t h i s co u n try . The a t tempt was a ls o made to uncover a group of coop erato rs who {had n ev er been in the employ of the co o p erativ e movement, Ibut t h i s was u n su c c e ssfu l because of the s c a r c i t y of promi nent c o o p erato rs who have not been thus employed. I t was n e ce ssa ry in s e v e r a l cases to send a second and, in one c ase , a t h i r d m a ilin g to w holesale managers and [education d i r e c t o r s in order to d isc o v e r t h e i r ideas about i c o o p e ra tiv e s u c c e s s . No follo w -up was used as f a r as the o th e r group was concerned because (1) s u f f i c i e n t d a ta were r e c e iv e d , (2) alm ost a l l of the most prom inent co o p erators r e p l i e d , and (3) in two or th r e e cases the addresses were I For a d e ta il e d d e s c r i p t io n of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of j j the q u e s tio n n a ire see pp. 29 f f . The m a ilin g th e re describ-j jed included both t h i s q u e s tio n n a ire and th e one d e a lin g w ith I s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . ! ■ too old and more r e c e n t ad d re sses could not be p ro cu red . ! ! i I I I . THE RETURNS FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRE I I I From a t o t a l of f i f t y - n i n e q u e s tio n n a ire s which were , m ailed tw e n ty -six r e p l i e s were re c e iv e d . Of th e s e r e tu r n s two, in s te a d of c o n s is tin g of completed q u e s tio n n a ire s , were sm all essay s on th e g e n e r a l to p ic of cooperative' s u c c e s s . The r e tu r n s were poorer fo r th e group of ed u ca tio n d ire c to rs ; and managers o f the w h olesales than they were f o r th e group i no t employed by the v a rio u s coop erativ e w h o le sa le s. The {managers made th e few est r e t u r n s ; of th e s ix te e n managers only fo u r r e p l i e d , w hile seven of the fo u rte e n e d u catio n d i r e c t o r s answered. The combined percentage of r e p l i e s was | ■ ' I t h e r e f o r e 37 per c e n t. The f ig u r e is somewhat m isle a d in g i . . j because in two cases th e edu catio n d i r e c t o r was asked by the! {manager to re p ly f o r both p a r t i e s , and th e r e p ly of the edu-| ! c a tio n d i r e c t o r t h e r e f o r e r e p r e s e n ts th e o f f i c i a l view point I j of two of the s i x t e e n w holesales c o n ta c te d . In a d d itio n a t i I le a s t fo u r of the w holesales were not engaged in th e grocery b u sin e ss and t h e i r managers and e d u catio n d i r e c t o r s did not f e e l q u a lif ie d to give an o p in io n . Two re tu rn e d q u e stio n n a ir e s were unsigned but were stamped w ith the name of a w h o le s a le . Of th e tw enty-nine q u e s tio n n a ire s se n t to people not 62 I {employed by th e w h olesales as managers o f edu catio n d i r e c - itors e t c . , f i f t e e n r e p l i e s (a 52 p e r c en t re tu rn ) were r e c e i v e d . An in d eterm in ate number of those not r e p ly in g may n ever have re c e iv e d th e q u e s tio n n a ire due to f a u l t y a d d r e s s e s ; in two cases the l e t t e r was re tu r n e d . The r e p l i e s a c t u a l l y rec eiv e d were broken down in to th re e c o n tr a s t in g groups: 1. People known f o r t h e i r i n t e r e s t in b u sin ess and ■finance v ersus people p rim a rily i n t e r e s t e d in e d u c a tio n . 2. P r o f e s s io n a ls versus n o n - p r o fe s s io n a ls . I 3. W esterners, m id d le -w e ste rn e rs, and e a s t e r n e r s . i When th e r e p l i e s were broken down in to the c a te g o r ie s of b u sin e ss and ed u ca tio n i t became e v id e n t t h a t some i n d i- jViduals had been so c lo s e ly a sso cia ted with both business j ! J and ed u ca tio n t h a t they could not be j u s t i f i a b l y p ut in ' I e i t h e r group. N e ith e r could e d i t o r s of co op erative p apers | be e a s i l y lumped in e i t h e r c a te g o ry . The f i n a l breakdown : r e s u l t e d in th e fo llo w in g f i g u r e s : ! I People p r im a r ily i n t e r e s t e d in ed ucation . . . 11 j People p rim a rily i n t e r e s t e d in busin ess . . . 6 ; People i n te r e s te d in busin ess and education '. 5 E d ito rs of c o o p erativ e papers . . . . . . . . 2 I U n k n o w n ................................................ 2 ; TOTAL 26 Making allowance f o r th e f a c t t h a t some of the edu c a tio n d i r e c t o r s answered f o r the managers, th e balance 63 between the e d u c a tio n a l and b usiness emphases in th e move- | I jment i s f a i r l y even. ; I ■ [ ; I t proved im possible to e s t a b l i s h a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f fe re n c e between p r o f e s s io n a ls and n o n -p r o fe s s io n a ls . Only ! th r e e of th e resp o n d en ts had never been in the employ of th e c o o p erativ e movement, and alm ost e q u ally few had spent I t h e i r e n t i r e working l i f e w ith th e movement. At l e a s t one who had rec eiv e d no rem uneration had spent decades working f u l l time fo r the movement. No c r i t e r i a were e s ta b lis h e d I upon which a v a lid c l a s s i f i c a t i o n in to p r o f e s s io n a l and non p r o f e s s io n a l could be made. When th e resp o n d en ts were d ivided accordin g to geo- I g ra p h ic a l groupings and compared w ith th e d i s t r i b u t i o n of th e co o p erativ e food s to r e s on the membership r o s t e r s of the c o o p erativ e w holesales which cooperated in t h i s stud y, th e fo llo w in g r e l a t i o n s h i p s were d is c lo s e d ; C ooperatives R egional D iv isio n Respondents in th e Area West c o ast (in c . Utah) 5 48 M iddle-w est ( in c . s t a t e s as f a r sou th as Kansas) 15 531 E ast c o ast ( in c . s t a t e s as f a r sou th as D.O.) 6 146 Southern s t a t e s (in c . New Mexico) 0 19 I t i s e v id e n t from t h i s t a b u l a t i o n t h a t the r e p l i e s were 64! I weighted in fav o r of the f a r west where th ere a re more j [wholesales per hundred c o o p e ra tiv e s . No p a r t i c u l a r s i g n i f i - icance I s a tta c h e d by the au th o r to t h i s phenomenon due to the f a c t t h a t many of the respon dents have fre q u e n t c o n ta c ts w ith each o th e r and w ith o th e r a re a s th an the one in which they r e s i d e , and in many cases have liv e d in o th e r a re a s . Some of them t r a v e l c o n tin u o u sly , but were counted as r e s i d ing a t t h e i r l e g a l r e s id e n c e . In o th e r words, th ey probably e x p ress lo c a l a t t i t u d e s to a very lim ite d d egree. Table I I p i c t u r e s th e se same d a ta when they are r e duced to a s t a t e by s t a t e d i s t r i b u t i o n . While no claim can be made t h a t the te n o r of the r e p l i e s c o n s t i t u t e s an a c c u ra te r e f l e c t i o n of the v alu es held by th e co o p erativ e p o p u la tio n of th e country or of the member-owners of the c o o p erativ e food s t o r e s , th e se r e p l i e s do c o n s t i t u t e a r e f l e c t i o n of th e v a lu e s held by an impor t a n t cro ss s e c tio n of the le a d e rs h ip of the movement, a cross s e c tio n which i s somewhat r e p r e s e n ta t iv e w ith r e f e r ence to g e o g ra p h ica l d i s t r i b u t i o n and the type of work upon which the in d iv id u a l respondent i s c o n c e n tra tin g . IV. THE DEFINITION OF SUCCESS IN COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES I The im pression conveyed by an exam ination of the TABLE I I 65 GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE O N SUCCESS AND OF COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES IN THE UNITED STATES S ta te Number of Respondents Number of Food S to re s Alabama 0 0 Arizona 0 0 Arkansas 0 0 C a lif o r n ia 3 20 Colorado • 0 10 C onnecticut 0 15 Delaware 0 2 D i s t r i c t of Columbia 0 0 F lo r id a 0 0 G eorgia 0 0 Idaho 0 2 I l l i n o i s 4 7 In d ian a 1 3 Iowa 0 12 Kansas 4 60 Kentucky 0 0 L o uisiana 0 0 Maine 0 2 Maryland 1 2 M assachusetts 1 27 Michigan 0 54 M innesota 1 149 M is s is s ip p i 0 0 M issouri 0 45 Montana 0 0 Nebraska 0 23 Nevada 0 1 New Hampshire 0 a New Je rse y 0 15 New Mexico 0 1 New York 4 31 N orth C arolin a 0 0 N orth Dakota 0 23 Ohio 3 8 66 TABLE I I (Continued) GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE O N SUCCESS AND OF COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES IN THE UNITED STATES Number of i Number of S ta te Respondents Food S to re s Oklahoma 0 10 Oregon 0 5 Pennsylvania 0 36 Rhode Is la n d 0 2 South C arolin a 0 0 South Dakota 0 17 Tennessee 0 0 Texas 0 8 Utah 1 4 Vermont 0 7 V ir g in ia 0 5 Washington 1 16 West V ir g in ia 0 0 W isconsin Z 114 Wyoming 0 6 TOTAL 26 744 I 67 d e f i n i t i o n s of su ccess re c e iv e d from le a d e rs in th e eoopera- I jtive movement was one o f d i s s im ila r it y . The follow in g exam-1 iples i l l u s t r a t e the p o in t .^5 j i A s u c c e s s f u l consumer c o o p erativ e food s to r e i s one i in which (a) a workable percen tag e of the members a re j informed on p o l i c i e s , program and r e s u l t s , (b) the | o p e ra tio n i s comm ercially s u c c e s s fu l and expanding, j ( c) the p o l i c i e s adhere to Rochdale p r i n c i p l e s , and i (d) th e group i s accepted by th e community. I A s u c c e s s f u l consumer co o p erativ e food s to r e is one in which s e r v i c e s , q u a li t y , and p r ic e s a re such t h a t p a tro n s b e n e f it by u sin g th e s t o r e , and in a d d itio n co o p erativ e e d u catio n is promoted through the use of p o s t e r s , some l i t e r a t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n , informed em p lo y e e s, e t c . A s u c c e s s f u l consumer c o o p erativ e food s to r e i s one in which co-op id e a s a re accepted as of paramount im p o rtan c e and in which th e se id eas have been made to fu n c tio n e f f i c i e n t l y through a com bination of the f a c t o r s o f lo y a l members, wise d i r e c t o r s , e f f i c i e n t man agement, and adequate c a p i t a l fo u n d a tio n s . Such a co op becomes a s o c i a l and economic i n s t i t u t i o n p ro v id in g f o r the economic, s o c i a l ,- a n d c u l t u r a l needs of i t s members and c o n s ta n tly expands to s e r v ic e those needs. A s u c c e s s fu l consumer co o p erativ e food s to r e is one in which every a c t i s an e x p ressio n of complete i n te g r i t y , complete m u tu a lity , of good w i l l , and where th ese ex p re ssio n s are developed on a sound economic base of s e rv ic e a t sound s o c i a l and economic c o s t, or w ith s e r v ice to th e common good r a t h e r than impairment of i t . A s u c c e s s fu l consumer c o o p erativ e food s to r e i s one in which the m a jo rity of the membership understand w ell th e Rochdale p r i n c i p le s of c o o p eratio n and something of th e h i s t o r y of the c o o p erativ e movement, a re b e lie v e rs in co o p eratio n to th e e x te n t of being w i l li n g to give some time each week or month to th e a c t i v i t i e s of the ^3 For o th e r d e f i n i t i o n s of su ccess see Appendix "C," 535. I " ' 6 8 ^ I s o c ie ty and who i n s i s t on u p -to -d a te and a c c u ra te b u sin e ss methods and on a n e a t, w e ll-o rg a n iz e d s t o r e . i ! I t These d e f i n i t i o n s o f success are obviously the prod- j I I iucts of in d iv id u a l thought and r e p r e s e n t the a c c r e tio n s from, I [ y e a rs of e x p e rie n c e . A number of the d e f i n i t i o n s con tained I p o in ts which were not made in a l l or n e a rly a l l of the o th er j d e f i n i t i o n s , and nine of them seemed to be v a r i a t i o n s of a them e. A frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of the v a rio u s p o in ts made in th e s e d e f i n i t i o n s emphasizes both lik e n e s s e s and d issim i l a r i t i e s . 46 For obvious rea so n s co nsid erab le judgment had to be ex ercised w ith reg a rd to the r e a l i n t e n t of the r e spondents and whether the i n t e n t of one corresponded w ith t h a t of o th e rs who had used d i f f e r e n t p h raseolo gy. I t i s ev id e n t from th e fin d in g s summarized in Appen d ix t h a t th e re i s no s in g le d e f i n i t i o n which could pos s i b l y c o n ta in a l l the v a rio u s elem ents suggested as being im p o rta n t f o r co operativ e s u c c e s s . However, fo llo w in g the d i r e c t i o n suggested by the fo reg o in g a n a ly s is the fo llo w in g composite d e f i n i t i o n i s perhaps reaso n a b ly r e p r e s e n ta t iv e : A s u c c e s s fu l consumer co o p erativ e i s one in which (a) th e needs of a group of people are met by e f f i c ie n t d i s t r i b u t i o n of q u a li t y goods and s e r v i c e s , and (b) th ese same people are f u l l y informed concerning t h e i r b u sin e ss and a c t i v e l y c o n tro l i t and promote See Appendix "D” , pp. 538-339. f " 6 9 l I ! I i t s w elfare by t h e i r v o lu n ta ry and c o n tin u in g a c t i v i t y in such a way as to expand t h e i r b u sin e ss c o n tin uou sly i ! and serve th e e n t i r e community. The fo llo w in g s e c tio n i s an attem p t to a r r i v e a t an u n d e rstan d in g of the n a tu re of c o o p erativ e success through an exam ination of the ran k in g given to suggested c r i t e r i a of su ccess by the v a rio u s re sp o n d e n ts. I f th e respondents were c o n sta n t in t h e i r a t t i t u d e s t h i s s e c tio n should t e l l a s to r y s i m il a r to the one above. V. THE EVALUATION OF SUGGESTED CRITERIA OF SUCCESS The n a tu re of the raw d a t a . Twenty-four of the ques t io n n a i r e s e n t i t l e d "What i s the Measure of Consumer Cooper a tiv e Success in the F ie ld of Food D i s t r i b u ti o n ^ " , were r e tu rn e d . In twenty cases a l l s ix of the suggested c r i t e r i a i had been e v a lu a te d , in th r e e cases they had been p a r t i a l l y , I sco red ; in th e rem aining case none of th e c r i t e r i a were sc o red , but a l e t t e r was s u b s ti t u t e d which explained the re s p o n d e n t's a t t i t u d e s on th e s u b j e c t . The r a t i n g of the c r i t e r i a was made by each respond ent by a s s ig n in g the number one (1) to a l l those c r i t e r i a ! which he considered to be of g r e a t e s t value f o r th e d e t e r - * . I m ination of s u c c e ss , number two (S) to a l l those having the I next g r e a t e s t value f o r the d e te rm in a tio n of su c c e ss, and so| 70 ' I i ,on. I f th e c r i t e r i o n was considered to be of no value a | i sco re of zero (0) was a ssig ned to i t by the r e s p o n d e n t . ' i I I The t a b u la tio n of valu es assigned to c r i t e r i a . The I t a b u l a t i o n of v a lu e s on th e fo llo w in g page shows the f r e - I ... jquencies w ith which co o p erativ e le a d e rs assign ed the v a rio u s j v alu es to the s e v e r a l c r i t e r i a . The c r i t e r i a in q u estio n were th e fo llo w in g ; 1. New members per 100 old members taken in per y e a r . 2. Per cent of membership u s u a lly a tte n d in g mem b e rsh ip m eetin g s. 3. Trend in purch ases p er member p e r given p e rio d . 4. Patronage refu n d s p er $100 of p u rc h a se s. 5. Trend in in v e s te d member c a p i t a l per given p e r i o d . 6. B usiness le a d e rs h ip in th e community in the | food s to r e f i e l d . : In order to t r a n s l a t e the value judgment of th e co- ! I o p e ra tiv e le a d e rs in to m athem atical r a t i o s an a r b i t r a r y I . . I sco re o f e ig h t was assig n ed in each case where a score of i one was given by a resp o n d en t, seven f o r each sco re of two, | I and so on u n t i l a score of one was assigned to the item s I ' ' I iwhich the respo ndents had r a te d as e i g h t . (The re sp o n d e n ts; See page 59 f o r the a c t u a l d i r e c ti o n s su p p lied the respondent on th e q u e s tio n n a ir e . 71 TABLE I I I TABULATION CE VALUES ASSIGNED BY TWENTY-SIX PROMINENT COOPERATORS TO CRITERIA OF SUCCESS IN COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES C r i te r io n Number Score of F requencies of Assigned Scores it) T o ta l R e p lies (n) 1 £ 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 3 4 3 8 0 £ 1 1 0* £2 ! £ 5 6 5 3 2 0 1 1 0 £3 3 7 6 3 3 1 0 0 0 1 £1 4 4 1 £ 3 3 3 1 1 £ £0 5 £ 4 8 1 4 1 1 0 0 £1 6 5 3 5 £ 4 £ 0 0 1 ££ 72 did not confine t h e i r sc o rin g to s ix p o in ts alth oug h th e re were only s ix c r i t e r i a . ) Any score of zero or over e ig h t re c e iv e d from a respondent was given a zero r a t i n g . I t was 4-R thus p o s s ib le to give each c r i t e r i o n a t o t a l score which , was th e summation of th e sc o res receiv ed in th e s e v e r a l | s c o rin g c a te g o rie s by each c r i t e r i o n . T his score was d i - i vided by the number of r e p l i e s (n) re c e iv e d which ra te d the j p a r t i c u l a r c r i t e r i o n , and the r e s u l t a n t f ig u r e gave a mathe m a tic a l p ic t u r e of th e r e l a t i v e v alu es assign ed to the c r i - , t e r i a by the co o p erativ e l e a d e r s . T h e s e f ig u r e s a re as follo w s ; C r i te r io n Score 1 5.41 2 6.00 3 6.43 4 4.50 5 5.62 6 5.59 I t is evid en t t h a t the fo u r th c r i t e r i o n rec eiv e d not only th e low est r a t i n g but a c o n sid era b ly lower r a t i n g than t h a t of any of the o t h e r s . In terms of p ercen tag e t h i s c r i - ; t e r i o n has a score about 17 p er cent lower than the next I low est c r i t e r i o n and 30 p e r cent le s s than the score received 48 See Table IV (" T o ta l V a lu e "), p . 73. As can be r e a d i ly seen, the r e s u l t of t h i s mathe m a tic a l ju g g lin g was to give to the most popular c r i t e r i o n th e l a r g e s t r a t h e r th an th e s m a lle s t s c o re . TABLE IV SUMMATION CE VALUES ASSICfflED TO THE SCORE FREQUENCIES TABULATED IN TABLE I I I 73 Summations of F requencies Times Assigned Values Score of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 C r i te r io n : is'V alu ed T o ta l Number a t (v) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Value 1 24 28 18 40 0 6 2 1 0 119 2 40 42 30 15 8 0 2 1 0 138 3 56 42 18 15 4 0 0 0 0 135! 4 32 7 12 15 12 9 2 1 0 90, 5 16 28 48 5 16 3 2 0 0 118 6 40 21 30 10 16 6 0 0 0 123 74; by the h ig h e s t c r i t e r i o n . j I t i s notew orthy t h a t a l l of th e c r i t e r i a were con- I sid e re d v a lu a b le ( i f by value we mean placement in one of ; i the top fo u r c a te g o r ie s : see Table I I I ) by a co n sid era b le | number of th e re sp o n d en ts, a number which amounted to 50 per I cent in the case of the low est ra te d c r i t e r i o n (number f o u r )} , I t i s not l i k e l y t h a t the c r i t e r i a were judged s o le ly w ith re f e re n c e to each o th e r and w ithout some a b s o lu te stan d ard in mind because i f t h i s were so th e re would tend to be as many q u e stio n s re c e iv in g a r a t i n g of s ix as rec eiv e d a value I of one or two, and t h i s was obviously not so . I t i s hence j lo g i c a l to assume t h a t a l l the c r i t e r i a have i n t r i n s i c | m e rit in th e thought of the respo ndents and t h a t the number I I of high sco res a ssig n ed is not the r e s u l t of a comparative ! I r a t i n g system . There i s a notew orthy c l u s t e r i n g of sco res I i between 5.41 and 6 .43. j 1 There a re a t l e a s t two p o s s ib le i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s which can be o ffe re d to e x p la in the r e l a t i v e l y good sco res a ssig n ed a l l the c r i t e r i a . In the f i r s t p lace the respond e n ts were extrem ely busy people and in some cases they may have given the c r i t e r i a a cu rsory exam ination, a procedure I which would decrease th e p ro p o rtio n of poor sc o res sin c e some people p r e f e r to agree r a t h e r than d is a g r e e when th e re ; is no s tro n g m o tiv a tio n to c r i t i c i z e . In th e second p la c e . 75; ! th e c r i t e r i a may a c t u a l l y be good t e s t s of su ccess in the | ; ■ I ibest judgment of the re s p o n d e n ts. The above d a ta do n o t I I I ‘ w a rran t d e s ig n a tin g any c r i t e r i o n or combination of c r i t e r i a jto be e x c lu siv e in d ic a tio n s of success in c o o p erativ e food j s t o r e s . Unless they vary concom itantly no s in g le one can ibe chosen le g i t im a t e ly to the ex clu sio n of th e o t h e r s . A com bination might w ell in clu d e a l l th e c r i t e r i a w ith the e x ce p tio n of number fo ur which re c e iv e d by f a r the low est s c o r e . F u r th e r, i t i s p o s s ib le th a t th e re may be a more b a s ic c r i t e r i o n , one not suggested in the q u e s tio n n a ir e . The p o s s i b i l i t y of concom itant v a r i a ti o n of the c r i t e r i a . As suggested by one of th e resp o n d en ts, th e re i s . a p o s s i b i l i t y of s e v e r a l c r i t e r i a v ary in g to g e th e r , so t h a t | the presence of one in any given degree would alm ost s u re ly in d ic a te a comparable tre n d (in t h i s case th e v a r i a t i o n would have to be d i r e c t) in the o t h e r s . In ord er to t e s t t h i s h y p o th e sis f o r t y completed q u e stio n n a ire s b e a rin g th e t i t l e , " S ig n if ic a n t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of C ooperatives in the U nited S t a t e s , " were a n a ly z e d . These q u e s tio n n a ire s were e n t i r e l y u n s e le c te d . That the f iv e c r i t e r i a (number fou r being e lim in a te d due to i t s d e f i n i t e l y p o orer r e l a t i v e v a l- j n a tio n ) did not vary to g e th e r i s evidenced by th e f a c t t h a t j out of a p o s s ib le t o t a l of f o r t y - f o u r cases th e re were only | two cases in which a l l f i v e of th e c r i t e r i a showed a con- j 76 cu rre n t' tren d e i t h e r toward success or f a i l u r e , nine cases j in which f o u r of the c r i t e r i a showed t h i s tr e n d , and seven I cases in which th re e of th e c r i t e r i a showed t h i s tr e n d . ! I These f i g u r e s a re s l i g h t l y d ece p tiv e s in c e th e re were n in e - j I iteen cases in which a t l e a s t one q u e stio n was not answered; i in twelve of th ese n in e te e n cases i t is p o s s ib le t h a t , were th e answers a v a i l a b l e , a concomitance in c lu d in g th re e or more c r i t e r i a might be e s t a b l is h e d . There was, however, no evidence of t h i s concurrence apply ing to th e same c r i t e r i a .^ ^ A f u r t h e r p e r t i n e n t q u e stio n was whether any c r i t e - | r i o n v a rie d w ith any o th e r . The d a ta e s ta b lis h e d a n e g ativ e answer and a re as fo llo w s: ___________Gases of_______ . D iffere n ce 'Matched C r i t e r i a Concurrence Raw Refined 1 and 2 16 28 25 1 and 3 11 33 15 1 and 5 24 20 15 1 and 6 15 29 25 2 and 3 7 37 16 2 and 5 15 29 21 2 and 6 23 21 14 3 and 5 11 33 10 3 and 6 13 31 9 5 and 6 16 28 19 The column t i t l e d "Refined" r e p re s e n ts th e cases of I d if f e r e n c e which would be apparent i f a l l the q uestion naires: 50 See Appendix "E ." pp . '540-342. 77 having one or more om itted r e p l i e s were e lim in a te d . I t is obvious t h a t th e r e is s t i l l no co ncurrent tren d between any of th e c r i t e r i a . One f u r t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t should be noted which | jstems from th e exam ination of th e f o r t y - f o u r completed ques t i o n n a i r e s . In fo rty -o n e cases out of th e f o r t y - f o u r , c r i t e r i o n number one could be c o n stru cted out of the d a ta r e c eiv ed , in f o r t y - f o u r cases c r i t e r i o n number two, in t h i r t y - nine cases c r i t e r i o n number f i v e ,a n d in f o r t y cases c r i t e r io n number s i x . I t would seem, however, t h a t s in c e c r i t e r io n number th re e could only by obtained in tw e n ty -s ix cases out of th e f o r t y - f o u r , i t would be of l i t t l e value; respond e n ts sim ply did not answer in a s u f f i c i e n t number o f c a se s. V I. COM M ENTS ON THE NATURE OF SUCCESS IN COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES E ighteen of the respondents to the q u e s tio n n a ir e , "What is the Measure of Consumer Cooperative Success in the F ie ld of Food D i s t r i b u t i o n ? ," made a d d itio n a l comments e i t h e r on the q u e s tio n n a ire i t s e l f or in supplem entary l e t t e r s . T h e s e comments o fte n proved to be very th o u g h t f u l and in d ic a tiv e of the p h ilo s o p h ie s held by th ese ! ^^See Appendix "F ," pp. 343 f f., f o r the raw d a ta Lthus_se cured..______________________ : _____________________________ 78: * ( I r e s p o n d e n ts . I t was p o s s ib le to c l a s s i f y the comments (mostj I I of which were in th e form of suggested c r i t e r i a f o r judging ! Isuccess) under s ix te e n headings which a r e , to g e th e r w ith the j ^frequency of m ention, l i s t e d below in o rd er of d e c re a sin g ifrequ ency. 1. E f f i c i e n t o p e ra tio n ("good management," " in c r e a s ing volume of b u s in e s s ," "co m petitive p r ic e s and s e r v i c e ," "com m ercially s u c c e s s fu l" were some of the phrases used) was twice given a r a t i n g of one (fo llo w in g the system used in the q u e stio n n a ire ) and tw ice a r a t i n g of two. I t was o th e r wise n o t ra te d a lth o u g h nine of the e ig h te e n respo ndents mentioned t h i s p o i n t. S. P a r t i c i p a t i o n by members (" d is c u s s io n g ro u p s," "community a c t i v i t i e s , " were some of th e p h rases used) was accorded a r a t i n g of one once, of two once, and of s ix once; i t was o th erw ise not r a t e d . S ix of th e e ig h te e n respondents m entioned t h i s p o in t a lth o u g h only th re e r a te d i t . I 3. Membership u n d e rstan d in g of the meaning of cooper-1 a tio n (the re fe re n c e was p rim a rily to th e e x te n t and successj of the e d u c a tio n a l e f f o r t ) was r a te d once as th r e e but j o therw ise u n ra te d . Five respon dents mentioned t h i s p o i n t. ! ■ ■ . I I 4. A need must be answered by c o o p e ra tio n . This p o in t was r a t e d twice as one and was o th erw ise u n ra te d . 1 I Four resp ond en ts mentioned i t . i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 79 I s I i 5. P a r t i c i p a t i o n by th e coo perative ( " re g io n a l organ-i I , l iz a tio n " was mentioned th r e e tim es in t h i s regard and "com- , .munity s e rv ic e " once) re c e iv e d r a t i n g s of th re e tw ic e , f iv e j I I once and seven once. Four respo ndents mentioned i t and a l l i I fo u r ra te d i t . | 6. The importance of th e c r i t e r i a l i s t e d in th e ques-; tio n n a i r e vary w ith the circum stances (success i s r e l a t i v e to age, needs, community, help rec eiv e d from o th e r coopera t i v e s , etc.). This issu e was r a is e d by fo u r respo ndents but! I was u n r a t e d . 7. Member w illin g n e s s to in v e s t (or a c t u a l in v e s t- j m e n t). This was mentioned th r e e tim es, but was u n ra te d . | I I 8. Q uality of th e board o f d i r e c t o r s ( " e f f i c i e n t , " | 1 "has the movement in m ind," " is p ro g re ssiv e ") was mentioned | I t h r e e tim e s. The respondent who brought up the issu e of ; - i ; e f f i c ie n c y ra te d the p o in t as of value two. ; 1 • ' ■ * I 9. Expansion i n to new f i e l d s rec eiv e d one r a t i n g of | 1 th re e and was mentioned by two resp o n d en ts. 10. Good a d v e r t is in g and p u b l ic i ty was mentioned by one person and rec eiv e d a r a t i n g of two. 11. Community acceptance was mentioned once and r e - ; ceived a r a t i n g of f o u r . I 12. Adherance to Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s was mentioned i I once and receiv ed a r a t i n g of one. 80 1 i 13. Member c o n tr o l was mentioned once but was un- I r a t e d . i 14. C ooperative minded, devoted employees was men- I tio n e d once but was not r a te d . 15. There a re two types of su ccess: economic and s o c i a l . This was mentioned once and s t r e s s e d a t le n g th . 16. A ll c r i t e r i a l i s t e d in the q u e stio n n a ire w ill tënd to r i s e and f a l l to g e th e r and a re based on some under ly in g f a c t o r . This comment was made once. In the fo re g o in g a d i s t i n c t s t r e s s on the importance i ■ I of b u sin e ss e f f i c ie n c y and member un d erstan d in g and p a r t i c i - i p a tio n is e v id e n t. There were f o r ty -s e v e n o v erlappin g p o in ts made in th e comments o f th e re sp o n d e n ts. T h ir ty - f o u r of th ese had e i t h e r a d i r e c t or i n d i r e c t b e a rin g on th ese ; I two m ajor p o i n ts . At l e a s t twenty of th ese (numbers 1, 4, ! I ■ ! |8, 9, 10, and 14) a re d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to b u sin ess e f f ic ie n - l jcy w hile a t l e a s t twenty-two (numbers 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 13 ) i Ihave a r e l a t i o n s h i p to member u n d e rstan d in g and p a r t i c i p a - j t i o n . ' Of the rem aining p o in ts , two (numbers 15 and 16) are | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I n o t so much concerned w ith the n a tu re of th e c r i t e r i a of I i su ccess as w ith th e g e n eral q u e stio n of whether th e re can I be v a lid c r i t e r i a or whether the suggested c r i t e r i a were ! v a l i d . Two (numbers 6 and 11) are concerned w ith 81 cooperative-com m unity r e l a t i o n s to some e x te n t, b u t a re c e r t a i n l y n o t s tro n g e x p re ssio n s of o p in io n . I t is notew orthy t h a t , although the s t r e s s i s so c l e a r l y on b u sin ess e f f i c i e n c y and member u n d e rstan d in g , th e re i s no tendency to a s s ig n to e i t h e r a c a u sa tiv e r o le I in th e c re a tio n of the o th e r . V II. THE MEASUREMENT OF SUCCESS IN CONSUMER COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES I : On the b a sis of the fo reg o in g comments on and d e f i n i t io n s o f the n a tu re of success i n the f i e l d of consumer co o p e ra tiv e food d i s t r i b u t i o n th e fo llo w in g must be considered b a s ic in g re d ie n ts of s u c c e s s f u l co o p erativ e o p e ra tio n : 1. B usiness e f f i c i e n c y . 2. A member need which i s being met by th e c o o p e r a tiv e . 3. Informed and a c t iv e members. 4. P o s i t i v e , a c t iv e member c o n tr o l of th e c o o p e ra tiv e . 5. S e rv ice by th e c o o p e ra tiv e to the community. 6. Continuous expansion. The fin d in g s i n d ic a te t h a t b u sin e ss e f f i c ie n c y , informed and a c tiv e members, and p o s i t i v e , a c t iv e member c o n tr o l a re the key item s. Any c r i t e r i o n or c r i t e r i a which can measure co o p e ra tiv e su ccess a d e q u a te ly must bear a r e l a t i o n to th ese 82 th r e e p o i n ts . I t was obvious t h a t none of th e s ix c r i t e r i a su g g e st ed in the q u e s tio n n a ire were predom inantly fav o red by th e ' resp o n d en ts or s tr o n g ly r e j e c t e d . Consequently none of them can be accepted as ad equate s o le ly on th e b a s is o f the r a t ings of th e c r i t e r i a . However, in the l i g h t of the key item s l i s t e d above, th e c r i t e r i o n , "New members per 100 old i I members taken in p e r y e a r ," i s worthy of f u r t h e r c o n sid e ra t i o n . I t p r e s e n ts both advantages and d isa d v a n ta g e s. Anyone w ith an in tim a te knowledge o f co o p erativ es knows t h a t i t i s very hard to win new members when the b u s i n e ss o p e ra tio n is i n e f f i c i e n t . I t is a ls o obvious t h a t most new members become members because old members have p e r suaded them to j o in , and th e only old members who a re lik e ly , to succeed in such a ta s k are th ose who are informed and a c t i v e . F u r th e r, when a member i s informed and a c tiv e he w ill tend to e x e rc is e c o n tr o l over th e c o o p e ra tiv e . I t should be added t h a t u n le ss th e c o o p e ra tiv e i s f u l f i l l i n g a ‘need new members are hard to win, and i f i t i s answ ering a need i t is doing a s e r v ic e to th e community. There is a ls o j a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between new members and continuous ,expansion; b u sin e ss expansion i s based on c a p i t a l and th e i amount of c a p i t a l u s u a lly v a rie s with th e t o t a l number of members. I t would seem th e n , in summary, th a t t h i s 8 3 c r i t e r i o n is f u n c t i o n a l l y r e l a t e d t o th e b asic in g r e d ie n ts of s u c c e s s f u l coo perativ e o p e ra tio n l i s t e d above. N o tw ith stan d in g th e se p o in ts fa v o rin g t h i s c r i t e r i o n th e r e are d isa d v a n ta g e s as w e ll. In th e f i r s t p lace i t i s conceivable t h a t a l l or n e a rly a l l of th e c it i z e n s of a com munity m ight be members of th e c o o p e ra tiv e or c o o p e ra tiv e s . There a re a few cases o f t h i s , but they a re very r a r e and such a phenomenon can be e a s i l y d e te c te d by checking popula t i o n f i g u r e s fo r the a r e a . Such a check was a c t u a l l y made I b e fo re th e d a ta were t a b u l a t e d . I t was found t h a t only one s o c ie ty did not have a c le a r o p p o rtu n ity to expand w ith o u t going o u tsid e of the a re a in which i t was c u rr e n tly o p e ra t- ' i n g .^2 52 The p rocess follow ed i s d e ta il e d below: 1. The p o p u la tio n of each town from which a r e p ly was re c e iv e d was found. In only one case was i t im possible to fin d t h i s f i g u r e . I f fo u r tim es the membership of th e coop e r a t iv e was a p p re c ia b ly l e s s than th e p o p u la tio n of the town, the co o p erativ e was considered to have p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r membership expansion. Most c o o p erativ es passed t h i s t e s t . I 2. The p ro p o rtio n of farm er members in th e rem aining ‘ s o c i e t i e s was noted and a co rrespo ndin g number was s u b tra c t-i ed from th e t o t a l membership. I f fo u r tim es th e rem aining members provided a t o t a l le s s than th e p o p u latio n of the , fow n the q u e stio n n a ire was considered u s a b le . , 3. Of th e rem ainder, th e few s o c i e t i e s which were branch s t o r e s or had branches were i d e n t i f i e d and a d j u s t ments were made in accord w ith the f in d in g s . 84 A second o b je c tio n i s t h a t membership growth i s not n e c e s s a r il y ste a d y . When a co o p erativ e i s g e t t i n g s t a r t e d i t u s u a lly has a ra p id membership growth because a minimum number of members a re e s s e n t i a l fo r in s u rin g b u sin e ss oper a tio n s in th e black And t h i s r e s u l t s in an in te n s iv e s t r u g g le fo r c o n v e rts . There a re p robably o th e r s i t u a t i o n s which tend e i t h e r to a c c e le r a te o r d e c e le r a te member in c r e a s e . | This is not only undoubtedly c o rr e c t but a ls o i r r e l e v a n t . Any bu sin ess i s n o t s u c c e s s f u l every y e a r, and i f th e re i s ^ no member growth in a p a r t i c u l a r year i t sim ply means t h a t the c o o p e ra tiv e was not s u c c e s s f u l d u rin g t h a t y e ar; the conception of a co operativ e which is always e i t h e r su c c e ss f u l or u n su c c e ss fu l is r i d i c u l o u s . I f a lo n g e r perio d of time than a year is used the r e s u l t w i l l be e i t h e r inaccura-, c ie s in r e p o r tin g o r no r e p o r tin g a t a l l ; one reaso n fo r ^ such an end prod uct is t h a t the re s p o n s ib le o f f i c e r s o f co- o p e ra tiv e s f r e q u e n tly change and know r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e of the s t a t i s t i c s o f p rev io u s regim es. I t should be added th a t (Footnote 52 continued) 4 . For th o se s t i l l rem aining which were 70 or more per cen t farm er in com position, the p o p u la tio n of th e county was checked a g a in s t th e membership of th e c o o p e ra tiv e . I 5. A ll but one of the rem aining s o c i e t i e s was f i n a l l y c le a re d when the p ro p o rtio n of non-member b u sin e ss was noted. I t was f e l t th a t as long as th e re was non-member b usin ess the co o p erativ e had o p p o rtu n ity f o r expanding i t s membership. 85 such s t a t i s t i c s a re fr e q u e n tly not kept in w r itin g , but are f ig u re d out by th e membership chairman on the sp o t or e ls e a re kept only f o r a s h o rt p erio d of tim e. Another o b je c tio n to t h i s c r i t e r i o n is th a t i t is p o s s ib l e t h a t in s m a lle r, younger s o c i e t i e s new members a re ; won by the p e rs o n a l e f f o r t s o f e n th u s ia s ts w hile in th e ' l a r g e r , o ld e r s o c i e t i e s b u sin ess e ff i c ie n c y and th e lu r e of sav ings r e t u r n s play a g r e a te r r o l e ; c a u sa tiv e f a c t o r s a re .thus obscured. Assuming th e t r u t h of t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y the f a c t rem ains t h a t t h i s need n o t be considered r e le v a n t to the q u e stio n in hand alth oug h i t is of c o n sid era b le impor tance f o r o th e r p u rp o ses. One of the respondents to th e q u e stio n n a ire m a in ta in - led t h a t t h i s c r i t e r i o n would have l i t t l e i f any value be cause l a r g e r c o o p e ra tiv e s had a slow er r a t e of member growth' than s m a lle r ones, and consequently th e la r g e r th e coopera t i v e the le s s s u c c e s s fu l i t would appear to be. In order to I t e s t t h i s hy p o th esis e ig h t y - s i x completed q u e s tio n n a ire s , " S ig n if ic a n t C h a r a c te r is ti c s of C ooperatives in th e U nited S t a t e s , " were analyzed w ith th e r e s u l t s ta b u la te d on the fo llo w in g page. Even making allow ance f o r p o s s ib le in accu - : ,ra c ie s in r e p o r tin g in the 700-799 member b ra c k e t, where e x c e ssiv e p erc en ta g es were r e p o rte d , and f o r the sm a lle r i ;number of e x h ib its in th e l a r g e r member b ra c k e ts , no 86 TABLE V ANNUAL PERCENTAGE GAIN IN MEMBERSHIP OF A RANDOM SAMPLE OF EIGHTY-SIX COOPERATIVES P er Cent Gain 0 » 1 —1 Gi C O o > IQ a » IS o > o: o > rH o > o > 1 — 1 Gi ■ i Gi Gi 02 Gi to Gi Gi to Gi Gi Gi G i' C O Gi Gi «0 o - p o - p o ■P o - p o + 3 o - P o O - p O - P O - p O - p O + 3 O - P O P " à ' cd ' P re s e n t Membership o (O CO o r-4, lO H o 0 2 02 s lO to § o lO O to g | 0 to 99 1 1 2 1 1 1 100 to 199 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 200 to 299 5 1 1 4 300 to 399 2 4 2 1 1 400 to 499 4 1 3 1 1 1 500 to 599 1 2 1 1 1 1 600 to 699 1 1 700 to 799 1 1 2* 800 to 899 1 2 1 900 to 999 1 '10001 and up 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 ' * The a c tu a l f i g u r e s were 114 and 250 per c e n t. s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e i s a p p a re n t. I t i s p o s s ib le to show t h i s by a s s ig n in g a value of one to the p ercen tag e gain of 0 -1 .9 , two to the percentag e gain 2 -3 .9 , and so on, and then d iv id in g th e t o t a l s by the number of c a s e s . ^3 when t h i s is done th e average gain shown by s o c i e t i e s w ith le s s th an fiv e hundred members i s 3.7 while t h a t of s o c i e t i e s w ith over one, thousand members i s 5 . 0 . w hile t h i s r e s u l t is not s t a t i s - ; t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t due to the sm allness of the sample of l a r g e r s o c i e t i e s i t does in d ic a te t h a t th e assum ption t h a t l a r g e r s o c i e t i e s do not grow as f a s t as sm a ller ones is of q u e stio n a b le v a l i d i t y . I t can a ls o be claimed t h a t a c o o p erativ e which is ,not growing in membership, but which has a high degree of p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t membership m eetings and which i s run e f f i c i e n tl y as f a r as th e m erchandizing a s p e c ts a re concerned, should be considered s u c c e s s f u l. A p r i v a t e p r o f i t e n t e r p r is e in an analogous c o n d itio n (custom ers who keep buying th e produce and a high r e t u r n on b u siness o p e ra tio n s) would h a rd ly s a t i s f y th e am bitions of most American corpo rate boards of d i r e c t o r s ; the American b u sin e ss t r a d i t i o n i s d e f i n i t e l y one of stead y expansion and t h e r e is l i t t l e reason See Table VI, p. 88 54 Loc. c i t . 88 TABLE VI AVERAGE MEMBERSHIP GAIN IN A SAMPLE OF EIGHTY-SIX COOPERATIVES HAVING UNDER FIVE HUNDRED AND OVER ONE THOUSAND MEMBERS i Membership , Gain in ; P er Cent Assigned Value Under 500 members Over 1000 members Frequency T o tal Value Frequency T otal Value 0 - 1.9 1 16 16 1 1 2- 5.9 2 8 16 1 2 4- 5.9 3 9 27 1 3 6- 7 .9 4 2 8 3 12 ' 8 - 9 . 9 5 4 20 2 10 10-14.9 6 7 42 2 12 ■ 1 5 -1 9.9 7 3 21 0 0 20-24.9 8 1 8 2 16 25-29.9 9 4 36 1 9 30-54.9 10 1 10 0 0 ; TOTAL 55 204 13 65 AVERAGE GAIN 3.7 5.0 i 89; why a co o p erativ e should a c c e p t a lower sta n d a rd of su c c e ss.; I t is a p p a re n t, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t the o b je c tio n s which have been examined have lim ite d s i g n i f i c a n c e . The obvious advantages of t h i s c r i t e r i o n , which were noted e a r l i e r in the c h a p te r, as w e ll as th e f a c t th a t t h i s r e l a t i v e l y accu r a t e f ig u r e i s r e a d i ly obtained from most co o p erativ es and can be used s t a t i s t i c a l l y makes i t the b e st a v a ila b le c r i t e - | r i o n . Consequently, f o r purposes of t h i s stu d y , success in ! c o o p erativ e food s to r e s w i l l be judged on the b a s is of the , p ercen tag e of members who joined the s o c ie ty w ith in th e p a st twelve months to th o se who were members o f the s o c ie ty f o r a, g r e a t e r p e rio d . Whether these members a re a c tiv e or in a c tiv e is an im portant q u e stio n , but to develop an o b je c tiv e c r i t e r i o n to d i f f e r e n t i a t e the two types and to expect the ; v a rio u s c o o p erativ es to apply i t i s h a rd ly p r a c t i c a l a t t h i s p o i n t . Furtherm ore, were t h is done, i t is q u e stio n a b le whether much would be gained; c o o p e ra tiv e s do not u s u a lly d iv id e t h e i r membership in to th ese two c a te g o r ie s , and i f they did th e r e is no in d ic a t i o n t h a t d if f e r e n c e s would be found between s u c c e s s f u l and u n su c c e ss fu l c o o p erativ es in t h i s r e s p e c t . ' V I I I . SUM M ARY AND EVALUATION I An exam ination of a v a ila b le co o p erativ e l i t e r a t u r e 90 has f a i l e d to d is c lo s e any consensus e i t h e r on the c h arac t e r i s t i c s of s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s or on the n a tu re of s u c c e s s . This c o n d itio n was p a r t l y due to v a r i a ti o n s in the a u th o r s ' frames of r e f e r e n c e ; th ese d i f f e r e d w ith regard to the p a r t i c u l a r phase and sta g e of co o p erativ e s tu d ie d , the a u t h o r 's c o n fig u ra tio n of a t t i t u d e s , and the s o c i a l s i t u a t io n in which the c o o p erativ e fu n c tio n e d . Perhaps i t would : be J u s t i f i a b l e to s t a t e t h a t success meant to th ese th in k e r s an overcoming of those d i f f i c u l t i e s which were (to them) the most im portant an d /o r imminent. Since i t was im possible to f in d the needed consensus in p u b l ic a t i o n s , i t was n e c e ssa ry to undertake re s e a r c h to r e a l i z e t h a t end. Aside from th e t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t in volved, i t was im perativ e to f in d an a cc ep tab le c r i t e r i o n or s e t of c r i t e r i a which would enable th e a u th o r to arrange the resp ond en t c o o p e ra tiv e s a c c o rd in g to th e degree of su ccess they had a tt a i n e d ; o therw ise the stu d y could not have been com pleted. F u r th e r , the c r i t e r i o n or c r i t e r i a should be r e a d i l y a p p lic a b le and capable of m athem atical h a n d lin g . I t (or they) should a ls o be capable of being ap p lied to the , e n t i r e p o p u la tio n s tu d ie d . A q u e s tio n n a ire was developed as a b a sic t o o l f o r . t h i s r e s e a r c h . I t had th re e p a r t s . The f i r s t c o n s is te d of a space in which the resp o n d en ts were asked to d e sc rib e a 91 ! s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e . The second p a r t l i s t e d s ix su g g est- ■ed c r i t e r i a of success which th e resp o n d en ts were asked to r a t e in ord er of im portance. In th e t h i r d s e c tio n the r e spondents were in v ite d to add any c r i t e r i a of t h e i r own. The th re e p a r t s provided a check on the re s p o n d e n ts' con- ; s i s t e n c y . The q u e stio n n a ire was th en m ailed to the manag- | e rs and edu catio n d i r e c t o r s of a l l c o o p erativ e w holesales j in the U nited S ta te s as w ell as to co o p erativ e le a d e rs no t , d i r e c t l y a f f i l i a t e d w ith the w holesales but se rv in g th e co- ; < ' ■ ■■ ■ I o p e ra tiv e movement in v ary in g c a p a c itie s and d i s t r i b u t e d throughout the a re a se rv ic e d by c o o p erativ es in t h i s country. Oh the b a s is of th e r e t u r n s , success was in f e rr e d to be the e f f i c i e n t m eeting of member-need by d e m o c ra tic a lly minded, informed c o o p erato rs who th in k not only of them se lv e s but of the community, and who expand t h e i r operations, c o n tin u o u sly . No one c r i t e r i o n or group of c r i t e r i a was c l e a r l y fav o red . No s i g n i f i c a n t concurrence between c r i t e - ■ r i a could be found. The c r i t e r i a and th e accompanying r e - | marks added by resp o n d en ts proved to be g e n e ra lly h e te r o - I geneous r a t h e r th an te n d in g toward consensus. However, i th e re was a d is c e r n ib le focus on b u sin e ss e f f i c i e n c y , and .on member u n d e rstan d in g and p a r t i c i p a t i o n . ; Obviously no c r i t e r i o n or group of c r i t e r i a fo r e v a lu a tin g success would be l i k e l y to s a t i s f y a l l coopera 92. t o r s . N e v e r th e le s s , the c r i t e r i o n , "New members p e r 100 old members taken in per y ear" was chosen fo r use in t h i s study because of th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s i t p a te n tly held to the q u a lity of b usin ess o p e ra tio n , member i n t e r e s t and a c t i v i t y , the f i l l i n g of a need (which is dem onstrably to th e community's ad v a n ta g e ), and co o p erativ e growth. I t was, fu rth e rm o re , a c r i t e r i o n which was r e l a t i v e l y easy to develop from a c c e s s i b l e f i g u r e s and which could be used s t a t i s t i c a l l y . The converse c r i t e r i o n , the number o f members le a v in g a s o c ie ty each y e a r, would be le s s v a lu a b le because, alth o u g h coopera t o r s may leave a s o c ie ty not only v o l u n ta r il y but a ls o i n v o l u n t a r i l y due to d e ath , changed re s id e n c e , e t c . , they w ill, very seldom jo in a coop erativ e i n v o lu n t a r i l y . The se a rc h fo r a c r i t e r i o n emphasizes n e g a tiv e ly the s o c i o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e t h a t norms a re developed in groups through i n t e r a c t i o n and u n d erscores a b a sic value o f con v e n tio n s , m eeting s, and o th e r s i m i l a r a sse m b lie s . An i n t e g ra te d program w ith common i d e a ls and goals can, a p p a re n tly , h a rd ly be achieved w ithout a high degree of i n t e r a c t i o n . The respon dents in d ic a te d the most agreement w ith re-! gard to th e need f o r e f f i c i e n t b u sin e ss p r a c t ic e s and an a c t i v e , informed membership. For many y e a rs ,D r. James P . ' Warbasse was th e g uiding s p i r i t in th e C ooperative League of the U.S.A. and s e t the p a t t e r n of p h ilo s o p h ic a l thought 9 3 which was follow ed throughout the American p o rtio n of the movement. His s t r e s s was on a c t i v e , informed membership and b u sin e ss e f f i c i e n c y . Thus, sin c e c o o p erato rs had lim ite d o p p o rtu n ity f o r d ev elo ping consensus through d i r e c t i n t e r a c t io n , Dr. Warbasse, through the medium of h is published works, su p p lied norms f o r the o p e ra tio n of c o o p erativ es which were w idely a c c e p te d . CHAPTER IV THE OBSERVANCE OF ROCHDALE PRINCIPLES AS A FACTOR IN THE SUCCESS OR FAILURE OF COOPERATIVES There has been some d if f e r e n c e of o pinion among the h i s t o r i a n s and t h e o r e t i c i a n s of the coo perativ e movement about what should and what should not be included under th e r u b r ic of Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s . For purposes of t h i s study the l i s t i n g which is g e n e ra lly used by the c o o p erativ es throughout the co u n try , namely, th a t which is s tr e s s e d by th e Cooperative League of the U .S .A ., is used . The l i s t i n g which fo llo w s i s in the same o rd e r as t h a t found in the q u e s tio n n a ir e , " S ig n if ic a n t C h a r a c te r is ti c s of C ooperatives in the U nited S t a t e s , " and i s in the sequence in which th e p r i n c i p l e s a re l i s t e d and d isc u sse d in t h i s c h a p te r. The wording i s th a t which is c u sto m arily used throughout the co o p erativ e movement.^ These p r i n c i p l e s a re : 1. Open membership w ithout re s p e c t to ra c e , r e l i g i o n , or p o l i t i c s . 2. One member, one v o te . 3. Limited and modest i n t e r e s t on c a p i t a l . 4. Savings r e tu r n s (dividends) on the b a sis of p u r c h a s e s . 1 Also commonly l i s t e d among th e s e p r i n c i p le s a re "educate c o n s ta n tly " and "expand c o n tin u o u s ly ." P a r t of t h i s l a t t e r has been chosen to be the c r i t e r i o n of s u c c e s s . The form er i s d e a l t w ith in a succeeding c h a p te r. 95 5. S a les only f o r cash. 6. N e u t r a l i t y in r a c e , r e l i g i o n and p o l i t i c s . 7. S a le s a t going m arket p r i c e s . I t has been w idely assumed by both p r o f e s s io n a l and la y c o o p erato rs th a t non-observance of th ese p r i n c i p l e s i s an alm ost c e r t a i n cause of f a i l u r e . The purpose of t h i s i c h a p te r i s to d eterm ine, w ith in the lim i ts of the in h e re n t ; p o s s i b i l i t i e s of the d a ta , whether a s t r i c t adherence to th ese p r i n c i p l e s is re a lly , the sin e qua non of c o o p erativ e ! s u c c e s s . I . STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES EMPLOYED ; I ' Before proceedin g with the a n a ly s is of th e d a ta a vv'ord should be sa id about the s t a t i s t i c a l tech n iq u es em ployed both in t h i s c h a p te r and th o se which fo llo w . The b a sic problem involved in i n t e r p r e t i n g the d a ta assembled from th e q u e s tio n n a ire was to e s t a b l i s h w hether ; ,the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of u n su c c e ss fu l and s u c c e s s f u l coopera- | t iv e s d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y . I f they do i t w i l l be necessary! to d e sc rib e th e amount of d if f e r e n c e which is p r e s e n t in ' m athem atical term inology. The b a sic technique used in the fo llo w in g pages to uncover t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p in cases no t obvious by in s p e c tio n was th e com putation of the sta n d ard 96 e r r o r o f two p r o p o rtio n s (or p e r c e n t a g e s ) O n c e th e s ta n d ard e r r o r has been computed i t i s p o s s ib le to e s t a b l i s h the p resen ce or absence of a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the p e rc en ta g es and t o pro v id e a m athem atical p ic t u r e o f the degree of presence or absence of d if f e r e n c e . The q u e stio n of th e n e c e s s ity f o r u sin g th e two ex trem es r a t h e r than th e e n t i r e frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n has been d isc u sse d in Appendix This technique w i l l be f o l lowed c o n s i s t e n t l y throughout th e fo llo w in g c h a p te rs . I t should be n o te d , however, t h a t th e h ig h e s t frequ en cy of mem b e rsh ip in c r e a s e , t h a t of 65 per cent in c re a s e and up, was n o t used because i t was f e l t t h a t in th ese few cases some ab n o rm a lity e x is te d which, while i t m ight be w e ll worth a d d i t i o n a l stu d y , would only d i s t o r t any f in d in g s which m ight re s u l t from t h e a n a ly s is under c o n s i d e r a ti o n . For t h i s reaso n. 2 T his form ula may be w r itte n as fo llo w s; (Yi) % s l/pq ( ^ 4- - — ) when "p" i s t h e t o t a l p ercen tag e of y NI Ng occu rren c e, "q" i s 1-p, th e number in th e f i r s t sample and Ng the number in th e second sam ple. For f u r t h e r e la b o r a tio n o f th e form ula s e e H erbert Arkin and Raymond R. Colton, ^ O u tlin e of S t a t i s t i c a l Methods (New York: Barnes & N o b le , I n c . , 1938), p. 125. ^ For a ta b le showing the p r o b a b i l i t i e s of occurrence ,of d i f f e r e n c e r e l a t i v e to th e sta n d ard e r r o r see l o c . c i t ., p. 121. ^ See Appendix "G," p . 350. 97 extrem es used were th e c a te g o r ie s of "Under 2" and " 1 7 -6 4 .9 ” p er c e n t. The s iz e of th e sample i s always an im portan t co n sid e r a t i o n . I f , as has been claim ed, a la rg e sample is one in which over t h i r t y item s a re a v a ila b le ^ a glance a t Table VIIlG w i l l show t h a t the use of a formula f o r a la r g e sample was j u s t i f i e d . Such a formula was used . : The q u e stio n of l e v e l of s ig n if ic a n c e i s a ls o impor t a n t . I t i s obvious t h a t p e rc en ta g es which a re s i g n i f i c a n t ly d i f f e r e n t under s p e c if ie d c o n d itio n s are n o t n e c e s s a r il y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t under o th e r c o n d itio n s . F u r th e r , th e r e i s no m ath em atically p r e c is e agreement among s t a t i s t i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s in t h i s r e g a r d . Some p ercen tag e l e v e l of s ig n if ic a n c e must be chosen, however, and f o r purposes of t h i s study the fo llo w in g dictum w i l l th e r e f o r e be made the r u l e ;^ I f a d if f e r e n c e as la rg e as th e one observed might occur by chance no o f te n e r than f i v e tim es in one hundred, i t i s regarded as a r e a l d i f f e r e n c e . In t h a t case th e d if f e r e n c e i s sa id to be s i g n i f i c a n t . 126. 6 c ; H e rb ert Arkin and Raymond R. C olton, op_. c i t ., See p . 101. ^ Thomas C. McCormick, Elem entary S o c ia l S t a t i s t i c s (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I n c . , 1941), p . 256. 98 I I . ANALYSIS OF THE OBSERVANCE OF ROCHDALE PRINCIPLES Table VII summarizes the e x te n t of observance of the v a rio u s Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s by the respondent c o o p e ra tiv e s . ' I t is obvious t h a t th e re i s very l i t t l e f l a t r e j e c t i o n of ' any one of th e p r i n c i p le s (note columns t i t l e d "N” ) . The h ig h e s t number of r e j e c t i o n s was found in th e case of p r i n c ip le number f iv e ( s e l l s only f o r c a s h ) , but even here th e re were only t h i r t e e n r e j e c t i o n s in a t o t a l of 153 answ ers. I The c lo s e s t com petitor in t h i s re g a rd was p r i n c i p l e number one (open membership) w ith ten r e j e c t i o n s . Since both of th e s e p r i n c i p l e s a re c o n tra ry to the folkways or mores of a ' la rg e p ro p o rtio n of the p o p u la tio n of the U nited S t a te s t h i s low p e rc en tag e of r e j e c t i o n i s r a t h e r s u r p r i s i n g than o th e r wise . As might w ell be exp ected, the p ro p o rtio n of tim es t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s answered "Sometimes” (see columns t i t l e d ”8 ", Table VII) was c o n sid e ra b ly in excess of th e tim es they: r e p lie d ”N e v er." To some degree t h i s is probably a s t a t i s t i c a l e x p ressio n o f a s tru g g le between the i d e a ls of the co-i 'o p e ra tiv e movement and th e o v e r - a l l folkways and mores of ' t s o c i e t y . Here ag ain the h ig h e s t frequency was found in con-; I - 1 n e c tio n w ith p r i n c i p le number fiv e ( s e l l s only f o r cash); th e t o t a l number of c o o p erativ es answ ering "Sometimes” was T A B L E VII A D H B E M C E T O E O C H D A L E PR INC IPLES BY 2S7 C O O P E R A T IV E S T A B U L A T E D B Y P E R C E N T A G E IN C R E A S E IN M E M B E R S H IP D U R IN G T H E PA ST Y E A R 99 Observance Of Rochdale P rinciplesl Percentage I II III IV V VI VII Increase A^ s3 N? A S N A s N A s N A s N A S N A s N Under 2 57 0 3 59 0 0 ks 7 2 i+ 8 7 1 37 15 k 56 1 2 55 0 2- 2.9 16 0 1 17 0 0 16 1 0 17 0 0 7 7 2 16 0 0 17 0 0 3- 3*9 22 0 1 2k 0 0 22 2 0 23 1 1 10 15 0 23 0 0 21 3 0 25 0 0 25 0 0 23 2 0 25 0 0 Ik 10 1 25 0 0 23 1 0 5- 6.9 29 1 2 31 0 1 31 0 1 30 1 1 15 16 1 30 1 1 30 1 1 7- 8.9 33 0 0 33 0 0 32 1 0 32 0 1 15 15 2 32 1 0 29 0 9-10.9 15 0 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 Ik 1 1 10 5 1 15 0 0 1^ 0 1 11-12.9 15 0 1 16 0 0 15 0 0 15 1 0 9 7 1 16 0 0 16 0 0 13-1^.9 7 0 0 7 0 0 6 0 1 7 0 0 k 2 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 15-16*9 k 1 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 1 3 1 5 0 0 1 0 l7-6^*9 kz 0 2 # 0 0 36 k 3 k l 2 0 27 15 0 ^3 0 2 ^3 2 0 65 & up 5 0 0 ' 5 0 0 k 1 0 5 0 0 3 2 0 5 0 0 k 1 0 T O T A L S 270 2 (282) 10 282 0 (283) 1 2 5 l& 18 (279) 7 262 13 (280) 5 152 97 (262) 13 273 3 (281) 5 263 17 (282) 2 1. See pp* 95-96 for a lis tin g of the Rochdale Principles in the order used in th is table. 2. " A " means that the cooperative always follows th is principle. 3. "8" means that the cooperative sometimes follows this principle. 5-. " N " means that the cooperative never follow s th is principle. •These principles are referred to above hy R om an humerais. 100 : n in e ty -s e v e n w hile only t h i r t e e n answered "N ever.” R e la ti v e ly few answered "Sometimes” to th e q u e stio n s about the o th e r p r i n c i p l e s . P r i n c ip l e number th r e e (lim ite d i n t e r e s t on c a p i ta l ) re c e iv e d e ig h te e n such t a l l i e s , p r i n c i p le number seven ( s e l l s a t going market p ric e s ) seventeen, and p r in c ip le number fo u r (savings re tu r n s on th e b a s is of purchases) t h i r te e n . The o th e r p r i n c i p le s rec eiv e d a n e g lig ib le number of | "Sometimes” answ ers. ; The g e n e ra l im pression conveyed by the d a ta is t h a t !the c o o p e ra tiv e s in q u e stio n , whether hig h ly s u c c e s s fu l or u n s u c c e s s fu l, show a s tro n g tendency to follow Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s w ith the p o s s ib le ex ce p tio n of p r i n c i p le number f i v e , " s e l l s only f o r c a s h .” When the number of resp o n d en ts in c a te g o rie s "Under 2” and ”17-64.9" which always observed the s e v e r a l Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s was d iv id e d by th e t o t a l number of resp ond en ts answ ering e i t h e r "Always” and "Never" or "Always” and "Some t i m e s , ” a percen tag e of observance was obtained.® This pro- : ] vided a b a s is upon which th e s ig n if ic a n c e of the d if f e r e n c e between the observance of Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s by s u c c e s s fu l ■ and r e l a t i v e l y u n su c c e ss fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s could be computed. From Table V III i t i s obvious th a t the r a t i o of ob- ' servance to non-observance of Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s in th e two ® See T a b le _ y iII, p . 101, and Table IX, p. 1 0 4 _ 101 TABLE V I I I PERCENTAGES OF 287 COOPERATIVES (COMPUTED FROM "ALWAYS" AND "NEVER" ANSWERS) FOLLOWING ROCHDALE PRINCIPLES IN THE CATEGORIES 0 -1 .9 AND 17-64.9 PER CENT ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE Rochdale P r in c ip le s ^ P ercentag e of Member In cre ase Under 2 17 -64 .9 Always Observes (A) T o tal R e p lie s (T)3 Jd T Always Observes T otal R e p lies (T) A T I 57 60 .95 42 44 .95; I I 59 59 1.00 44 44 1.00' I I I 48 50 .96 36 39 .92 IV 48 49 .98 41 41 1.00 V 37 41 .90 27 27 1.00, VI 56 58 .97 43 45 .96 VII 55 55 1.00 43 43 1.00 ^ See pp. 94-95 f o r a l i s t i n g of the Rochdale P r i n c i p le s in the o rd e r used in t h i s t a b l e . These p r i n c i p le s are r e f e r r e d to above by Roman num erals. ^ This p ercentag e i n d ic a te s th e e x te n t to which the c o o p e ra tiv e s in q u e stio n m aintained th a t they always adhered to Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s . When s u b tr a c te d from one hundred the p ercen tag e of ^Tfever" answers i s o b ta in e d . Those which answered "Sometimes" were om itted from c o n s id e ra tio n in this! t a b l e . ® T h e .fig u re "T" is obtained by adding the "Always" and the "Never" answ ers. ; 10% , c a te g o rie s i s i d e n t i c a l in th e case of p r i n c i p l e s number one (open membership), two (dem ocratic c o n tr o l ) , and seven (s a le s a t going market p r i c e s ) . Reference to Table VII shows th a t in th e f i r s t two cases (numbers one and two) th e re were only two answers which f e l l in th e "S" (some tim es) column. In th e case of p r i n c i p le s number seven (s a le s a t going market p r i c e s ) , however, th e re were seven- i tee n c o o p e ra tiv e s which answered "Sometimes." U n fo rtu n ate ly th e re is no way of t e l l i n g whether th e se c o o p e ra tiv e s were ■ s e l l i n g f o r more or le s s than p r e v a i li n g market p r i c e s , or perhaps were s e l l i n g some item s h ig h er and some lower than t h i s l e v e l . These seventeen r e p l i e s e x h ib ite d c o n sid era b le spread w ith in th e s e v e r a l c a te g o rie s of membership increase,; and gave no in d ic a t i o n of su p p o rtin g any h y p o th e sis of d i f f e r e n c e . I t would seem, th en , t h a t th e re i s l i t t l e p o s s i- | b i l i t y of d is c o v e rin g any s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s between c a te g o r ie s of c o o p e ra tiv e s by f u r t h e r a n a ly s is of th e an- i ' 1 swers to p r i n c i p le s one, two and seven. As f a r as the rem aining p r i n c i p l e s a re concerned, the- I high and low membership c a te g o r ie s of p r i n c i p l e number fiv e ; ( s e l l s only f o r cash) o ffe re d th e g r e a t e s t prom ise of d i f f e r i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y . On th e b a s is of th e d a ta in Table VIII the sta n d ard e r r o r of the two p ercen tag es was computed and was found to be 5.8 p e r c e n t. The observed d if f e r e n c e was 103 10 p er c e n t, or 1.71 sta n d ard e r r o r s . Such a d if f e r e n c e could occur by chance in about 8 .91 p er cent of the cases and i s d e f i n i t e l y not s i g n i f i c a n t . When th e same measure was computed f o r the same p r i n c i p l e on the b a sis of th e d a ta in Table IX, a stan d ard e r r o r of 9.7 per cent was o b ta in e d . The observed d if f e r e n c e was 7 p e r cent and could have occur- ed by chance in alm ost 50 per cent of the c a se s. There i s ; c l e a r l y , th e r e f o r e , no s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e between the answers of the more s u c c e s s f u l and the le s s s u c c e s s fu l coop e r a t i v e s in s o f a r as the f i f t h Rochdale p r i n c ip le is con cerned . The high and low member in c re a s e c a te g o rie s of p r i n - ,c ip le number four showed a s l i g h t l y g r e a te r d if f e r e n c e in , Table IX than th ey did in th e case of p r i n c i p le number f i v e . When, however, th e sta n d ard e rr o r was c a lc u la te d i t was found t h a t the observed d if f e r e n c e was only 1.38 sta n d ard e r r o r s , and consequently could w ell occur by chance in about 16 to 19 p e r cent of the c a se s, a c le a r example of non s i g n i f i c a n c e . One f u r t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y o f fin d in g s i g n i f i c a n t d i f fe re n c e s between the high and low member in c re a s e c a te g o rie s rem ained. This was to combine the c la s s e s t i t l e d "Sometimes" and "N ever," and compute th e d i f f e r e n c e s by d iv id in g the t o t a l number in each categ ory ( i . e . , the fre q u e n c ie s under 104 TABLE IX PERCENTAGES OF 287 COOPERATIVES (COMPUTED FROM "ALWAYS" AND "SOMETIMES" ANSWERS) FOLLOWING ROCHDALE PRINCIPLES IN THE CATEGORIES 0 -1 .9 AND 17-64.9 PER CENT ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE Rochdale P r in c ip le s ^ P ercentage of Member In cre ase ; Under 2 17 -6 4 .9 Always Observes (A) T o ta l R e p lies (T)3 A % T Always Observes (A) T o ta l R e p lies (T) A I 57 57 1.00 42 42 1.00 I I 59 59 1.00 44 44 1.00 I I I 48 55 .87 36 40 .90 IV 48 55 .87 41 43 .95: V 37 52 .71 27 42 . .64 VI 56 57 .99 43 43 1.00 VII 55 59 .93 43 45 .96 ^ See pp. 94-95 f o r a l i s t i n g of the Rochdale P r i n c i p le s in th e o rd er used in t h i s t a b l e . These p r i n c i p le s a re r e f e r r e d to above by Roman num erals. 2 T his p ercen tag e in d ic a t e s th e e x te n t to which the c o o p e ra tiv e s in q u estio n m aintained t h a t they always adhered to Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s . When s u b tra c te d from one hundred the percen tag e of "Sometimes" answers i s o b ta in e d . Those which answered "Never" were om itted from c o n s id e ra tio n in t h i s t a b l e . ^ The f ig u r e "T" is o b tain ed by adding the "Always" and th e "Sometimes" answ ers. ; 105 the t i t l e s "Always," "Sometimes," and "Never") in to the t o t a l number under "Always." This procedure produced the fo llo w in g d if f e r e n c e s : P r i n c ip l e I I I I I I IV V VI VII D iffe re n c e (in p e rcen tag es) 0 0 0 9 2 1 3 The d if f e r e n c e found under p r i n c i p le fo u r (savings r e tu r n s I on th e b a sis of purchases) is by f a r the most s t r i k i n g ; i t was, however, only 1.47 sta n d ard e r r o r s and consequently 'could have occurred by chance in about fo u rte e n and a h a l f cases in a hundred. I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , c le a r l y not s i g n i f i c a n t. The o th er d if f e r e n c e s were much sm a lle r than the one t e s t e d , and consequently were no t considered to be p o ten t i a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . ' Since th e d if f e r e n c e s t e s te d in t h i s c h ap ter were by f a r the most p ro m ising , i t i s re a so n a b le to assume th a t th e re i s no r e a l p o s s i b i l i t y of fin d in g s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r ences between the observed adherence to Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s , by c o o p erativ es in th e high and low c a te g o rie s o f membership; i n c r e a s e . I I I . SUM M ARY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FINDINGS Among the c o o p e ra tiv e s stu d ie d th e r e was a high de- i gree of observance of a l l the Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s except the ^f i f t h one (_s a le s pn ly_ f o r cash) ; in t h i s case the perc e n ta ge j 106 of f l a t r e j e c t i o n in the t o t a l p o p u la tio n answering was low (only 5 p e r cent) , but the p ro p o rtio n of c o o p erativ es which d e v ia te d p e r i o d i c a l l y was n o ta b ly la r g e (57 p er c e n t ) . This i s th e o u tsta n d in g example of a trend observed throughout t h i s a n a l y s i s , v i z ., t h a t many more c o o p e ra tiv e s sometimes dev ia te d from a s t r i c t adherence to the Rochdale P r in c ip l e s than f l a t l y r e j e c t e d them; th e p ro p o rtio n is 150 d e v ia tio n s | to f o r t y - t h r e e o u t r ig h t r e j e c t i o n s . This fin d in g su ggests t h a t r e t a i l co o p erativ es a re s u b je c t to th e p u l l of c o n f l i c t i n g s o c i a l f o r c e s . As f a r as p r i n c i p l e number f iv e is concerned, one of th ese fo rc e s is the Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s as a whole w ith t h e i r weight of t r a d i t i o n and world-wide a c c e p ta n c e . This in h e re n t s t r e n g th is augmented by th e p r a c tic e of c o o p erativ e w holesales of mak ing compliance w ith th e Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s a requirem ent f o r membership in the w h o le sale . The c o n tra ry s o c i a l fo rc e i s su p p lied by c u rre n t American folkways and mores and i n cludes th e behavior p a tt e r n s and a t t i t u d e s involved in c re d i t buying and p re s su re s from com p etitiv e busin ess which tend to fo rc e compliance w ith th ese consumer p a t t e r n s . P r i n c i p l e s th r e e and f o u r , which r e f e r to i n t e r e s t on .c a p i t a l and to savings r e t u r n s , probably have many "Some tim es" answers because th e c o o p e ra tiv e s a re f r e q u e n tly fo rced by lac k of business su c ce ss to d e fe r the a p p lic a tio n ' 107 of e i t h e r or both of th e se p r i n c i p l e s . I t i s s e r io u s ly to be doubted i f th e re i s any s i g n i f i c a n t r e j e c t i o n of the p r i n c i p le s as p r i n c i p l e s i f by the term we mean stan d ard s 9 f o r r e g u l a ti n g b e h a v io r. As d isc u sse d above no d e f i n i t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of th e r e tu r n s on p r i n c i p l e number seven ( s e l l s a t going market p ric e s ) i s p o s s ib l e . I t might w ell be observed; however, t h a t one im portant segment of the co- j o p e ra tiv e movement (the B r i ti s h ) adheres s t r i c t l y to t h i s .p rin c ip le while a n o th e r la rg e segment (th e Swedish) has t r a d i t i o n a l l y abandoned i t when i t considered p r ic e s un j u s t i f i a b l y h ig h . Since both th e B r i t i s h and the Swedish movements have been g e n e r a lly considered s u c c e s s f u l, a p reced en t f o r independent a c tio n has been e s t a b l is h e d . i The most im portant f a c t e s ta b lis h e d by t h i s a n a l y s i s ,' a lth o u g h perhaps not p e r t i n e n t to the main o b je c tiv e s of the stu d y , is t h a t the Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s e x e r t an enormous i n flu e n c e on c o o p e ra tiv e s in the U nited S t a t e s , and are ad hered to w ith rem arkable t e n a c i t y . The p a s t is thus v i t a l in the p re s e n t as groupways are s a n c t i f i e d by age and usage. I t i s notew orthy t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s in d i f f e r e n t s e c tio n s of , 1 th e country did not d i f f e r a p p re c ia b ly w ith reg ard to the ; p r i n c i p l e , "Open membership w ithout reg ard to ra c e , r e l i g io n . ^ See page 102. 108 ior p o l i t i c s . " This su g g e sts t h a t groupways ( i f by th e term we r e f e r to p a tt e r n s of behavior unique to a given group) e x e rt g r e a te r c o n tro l over prim ary groups than folkways in some c a s e s . No s i g n i f i c a n t evidence has been uncovered which de m o n stra te s e i t h e r t h a t adherence to Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s w i l l b rin g success to a co o p erativ e v en ture or th a t d is re g a rd o f . th ese p r i n c i p le s w ill not lead to f a i l u r e . The d a ta ten d .. .to show t h a t s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s m ain tain a cash trad in g , p o lic y more c o n s i s t e n t l y than the u n su c c e ssfu l and, as would be expected, a re more c o n s i s t e n t in t h e i r payment of savings r e t u r n s . In no case do the more s u c c e s s fu l c o o p erativ es disr- regard th e Rochdale P r i n c i p l e s to a g r e a te r degree than the : le s s s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s . ; The fin d in g s help to j u s t i f y the fo llo w in g sta te m e n ts: 1. While an o rg a n iz a tio n may be unable to fu n c tio n a d e q u a te ly w ith o u t a p p ro p r ia te r u le s of procedure (in t h i s case th e Rochdale P r i n c ip l e s ) such r u le s a re in no sense a 'g u aran tee of su c c e ss. E x c e lle n t norms do not always a t t r a c t : members; i f they did th e re would be a tendency, o th e r th in g s i being e q u a l, f o r a l l the c o o p e ra tiv e s stu d ie d to have ap- I p ro x im ately equal in c r e a s e s in membership and th e r e is no ; I su g g e stio n of such a r e l a t i o n s h i p in the d a ta . I t i s , of c o u rse , conceivable t h a t the e s s e n t i a l democracy o f a 109 Rochdale c o o p e ra tiv e might a t t r a c t people under circum stances where democracy was le s s taken f o r g ran ted than in t h i s coun t r y . A pparently Americans a re c r i t i c a l o f undem ocratic o r g a n iz a tio n s , b u t are not p a r t i c u l a r l y a t t r a c t e d to o rg a n iz a t i o n s m erely because they a re d em o cratic. 2. Savings r e tu r n s a re n o t always a m ajor f a c t o r in the a t t r a c t i o n of members. I f they were, those c o o p e ra tiv e s' which c o n s i s t e n t l y or fre q u e n tly saved money fo r t h e i r mem bers would, o th e r th in g s being e q u a l, show s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r in c r e a s e s in membership than th o se which did n o t; the d a ta do not su gg est such a r e l a t i o n s h i p . CHAPTER V THE RELATIONSHIP BETWM SUCCESS AND SELECTED FACTORS PRESENT W HEN COOPERATIVES ARE ORGANIZED This chap ter i s based on S e c tio n I I of the q u e s tio n n a ir e which i s t i t l e d "How your co o p erativ e was s t a r t e d . " The reason fo r in c lu d in g t h i s s e c tio n in the q u e stio n n a ire was to f i n d out i f f a c t o r s p re s e n t a t the founding of coop- ; e r a t iv e s bore any dem onstrable r e l a t i o n s h i p to the l a t e r su ccess or f a i l u r e of th e s e s o c i e t i e s . U n fo rtu n a te ly but in e v i t a b l y a c o n sid e ra b le number of q u e stio n s which would be p e r t i n e n t to t h i s in q u iry could n ot be asked due to the n e c e s s i t y f o r s h o rte n in g the q u e s tio n n a ire , and consequently t h i s c h ap ter r e a l l y i s an exam ination of the r e l a ti o n s h i p between c e r t a i n s e le c te d s o c i a l f a c t o r s prom inent in the founding of most c o o p e ra tiv e s and the l a t e r su ccess or f a i l ure of the s o c i e t i e s . I . THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FIRST BUSINESS VENTURE AND SUCCESS I t should be r e c a l l e d t h a t t h i s stud y i s p rim a rily concerned w ith food s t o r e s , or more s p e c i f i c a l l y , coopera t i v e s which s e l l f o o d s t u f f s e i t h e r as a sid e lin e or as the main p a r t o f t h e i r b usin ess v e n tu re . There has been a body ■ of opinion w ith in th e American coop erativ e movement which I l l has m aintained t h a t food i s th e l o g i c a l commodity upon which co o p erato rs should base t h e i r f i r s t b u sin e ss v e n tu re (p a r t i c u l a r l y in urban and suburban a r e a s ) , and th a t o th e r com m o d itie s should be handled l a t e r . I t i s affirm ed t h a t more fre q u e n t member c o n ta c ts r e s u l t because food i s bought more f re q u e n tly than any o th e r commodity, and th a t these c o n ta c ts lead to g r e a t e r member a s s i m il a ti o n and s o c i a l i z a t i o n due tOj more fre q u e n t i n t e r a c t i o n . The opposing philosophy main t a i n s t h a t such c o n ta c ts are no t r e a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t except perhaps in the beginning s ta g e s and t h a t food s to r e o p e ratio n is d i f f i c u l t because of the r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r co m p etition and lower margins in t h i s f i e l d . Furtherm ore, the a c t u a l o p e ra tio n of th e b usiness in terms of book-keeping, turnover* e t c . , i s much more d i f f i c u l t , and savings r e tu r n s a re alm ost' c e r t a i n to be sm all or n o n - e x is te n t. I I t was th e above d if f e r e n c e of opinion which le d to the in c lu s io n of t h i s q u e s tio n . Table X shows t h a t most of the c o o p erativ es which are c u r r e n t ly s e l l i n g f o o d - s tu f f s began t h e i r business c a re e rs in t h i s same f i e l d . Out of a t o t a l of 263 c o o p e ra tiv e s which answered t h i s q u e stio n , 169 had f i r s t so ld food as compared to t h i r t y - s i x which s t a r t e d w ith petroleum p rod ucts and f i f t y - e i g h t which s t a r t e d in o th e r l i n e s . In the case of younger c o o p e ra tiv e s the l in e s o f m erchandise handled by t h e , 1 1 2 TABLE X THE FIRST BUSINESS TENTURE OF 263 COOPERATITES TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP DURING THE PAST YEAR P ercentage In c re a s e F i r s t B usiness V enture Food G asoline Other Under 2 37 4 9 2- 2.9 10 1 5 3- 3 .9 18 2 3 4- 4.9 14 3 7 5 - 6 . 9 20 7 4 7- 8.9 20 2 6 9-10.9 6 6 5 11-12.9 9 3 3 13-14.9 4 0 3 15-16.9 2 1 2 17-64.9 24 6 11 65 & up 5 1 0 TOTALS 169 TOTAL C ooperatives Answering 36 263 58 113 n e a r e s t co o p erativ e w holesale play s a c o n sid era b le p a r t in the d e te rm in a tio n of which p ro d u cts th e beginning s o c ie ty chooses to h a n d le , and sin c e th e w holesales involved in t h i s study alm ost a l l handled g ro c e rie s ^ one would expect a g re a t number of th e resp o n d en ts to s t a t e t h a t they too handled f o o d - s t u f f s . A number of the o ld e r s o c i e t i e s were founded before th e w h o lesales; need d i c t a t e d to a larg e e x te n t t h e i r choice of a lin e of b u sin e ss. A number of these l a t t e r s o c i e t i e s were so o ld t h a t they had f o r g o tte n e i t h e r p a r t l y or com pletely th e circum stances surrou nding t h e i r founding. When, in the membership in c re a s e c a te g o rie s of "Under 2" and "17-64.9" per cent the p ro p o rtio n s o f the fre q u e n c ie s under "Food," "G a so lin e," and "O ther" to th e t o t a l of the fre q u e n c ie s in th e se two c a te g o rie s were computed, the f o l lowing r e l a t i o n s h i p s were found: Food G asoline Other Under 2 .74 .08 .18 17-64.9 .585 .146 .268 D iffere n ce .155 .066 .088 Since the d if f e r e n c e under "Food" was alm ost twice as g r e a t as e i t h e r of the o th e rs th e sta n d ard e rr o r of these The e x cep tio n s are Utah C ooperative A sso c ia tio n and P a c if i c Supply C ooperative, each w ith a minor number of food s t o r e s . 114 two p e rc e n ta g e s was computed. This d if f e r e n c e was found to be 1.56 stan d ard e r r o r s , which could not p o s s ib ly be s i g n i f ic a n t sin c e i t could occur by chance in about tw elve cases in one hundred. Food cannot, t h e r e f o r e , be con sidered to be a f i e l d of b u sin e ss o f f e r in g e i t h e r more or l e s s chances f o r u ltim a te su ccess th an petroleum p ro d u c ts , e tc . I t was assumed, on th e b a sis of th e fo re g o in g , t h a t ; th e o th e r d i f f e r e n c e s were not s i g n i f i c a n t . The d a ta support the co n clu sio n t h a t i t does not make much d iffe re n c e whether a c o o p erativ e s t a r t s b u sin e ss opera tio n s in f o o d - s t u f f s , g a s o lin e , or o th e r commodities as f a r as th e f u tu r e success of the s o c ie ty i s concerned. The problem of being s u c c e s s fu l would seem to be p r im a r ily one of techn iques to in su re e f f i c i e n t o p e ra tio n and member s a t i s f a c t i o n , and perhaps o th e r f a c t o r s l e s s o bvious. I t should a ls o be added t h a t th e d a ta c e r t a i n l y do n ot s u s ta i n any theory which claim s t h a t f o o d - s t u f f s are a b e t t e r f i e l d in which to s t a r t a co o p erativ e v entu re than o th e r l i n e s ; while in c o n c lu s iv e , they tend to show ( i f anything) t h a t food s t u f f s a re not as good a l i n e in which to s t a r t a cooperative b u sin e ss v en tu re as e i t h e r petroleum p rod ucts or a v a r ie ty of o th e r l i n e s . 115 I I . THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUCCESS AND THE STAGES THROUGH WHICH COOPERATIVES PASS There has been disagreem ent in the c o o p erativ e move ment as to whether c o o p erativ es should t r y to s t a r t in b u s i ness as complete economic u n i t s , c a rry in g a f u l l lin e and r e l y i n g on paid p e rso n n e l r a t h e r than on v o lu n te e rs or whether th ey should go through a grad u al growth p r o c e s s . One group of th in k e r s has m aintained th a t paid p e rso n n e l and a complete s to r e r e s u l t in a high q u a lity of s e rv ic e to the customer which a t t r a c t s new and holds old members. Another group argues t h a t v o lu n te e r a c t i v i t y and f i r s t hand member experien ce w ith the running of a b u sin e ss i s not only educa t i o n a l f o r the consumer b u t a ls o b u ild s a f e e l in g of owner sh ip and belonging, and an e s p r i t de corps which is e s s e n tia l f o r th e s u c c e s s f u l f u n c tio n in g of a c o o p e ra tiv e . In some c o u n trie s (such as G reat B r ita in ) th e form er philosophy is dom inant. In t h i s country th e t r a d i t i o n a l sta g e s of cooper a ti v e development have been: 1. A study group, in which the idea of co o p eratio n is d isc u sse d and e v a lu a te d , a d e c is io n is made concerning the type of b u sin ess a c t i v i t y the group wishes to engage in , and a p re lim in a ry study of what such a b u sin ess v en tu re would involve is conducted. 2. C lo sely fo llo w in g t h i s s ta g e , which i s c u sto m arily 116 no t very drawn ou t due to member im patience to "g et g o in g ," i s th e buying club s t a g e . The co op erato rs do n o t have f u l l y developed tech niqu es fo r g e tt i n g alon g w ith each o th e r or f o r running t h e i r b u s in e s s , but they do have m ak e sh ift tech n iq u es in o p e ra tio n . 3. Often th e buying club merges im p e rce p tib ly in to a lim ite d s e r v ic e s t o r e . Some member may be h ire d on a p e r centage or p a r t time b a s is to keep the s to r e open a c e r t a i n number of hours a day or days per week. L a te r the coopera tiv e may be open throughout the work week but may o f f e r only a f r a c t i o n of the goods and s e r v ic e s u s u a lly expected from such a s t o r e . I t may, f o r example, have only canned and dry goods, w ithout any meats or f r e s h fo o d s. This sta g e p r e s e n ts i n f i n i t e v a r i a t i o n s in d e t a i l . 4 . Sometimes c o o p e ra tiv e s never get beyond th e sta g e j u s t d is c u s s e d . I f th ey do th ey e n te r the f u l l s e r v ic e s to r e s ta g e , in which th ey o f f e r a l l the goods and s e r v ic e s which are g e n e r a lly o ffe re d by competing b u sin e sse s in t h e i r l o c a l i t y . 5. The l a s t sta g e in to which a r e t a i l co o p erativ e may e n te r is expansion in to o th e r l i n e s . Sometimes t h i s occurs b efore th e f u l l s e rv ic e s t o r e sta g e i s reached, bu t t r a d i t i o n a l l y n o t. A g re a t many c o o p e ra tiv e s have not gone through t h i s 117' sequence in e i t h e r t h i s coun try or abroad; the above is th e r e f o re an id e a l fo rm u la tio n r a t h e r than a statem en t of what n e c e s s a r il y o c c u r s . Not only were th e c o o p e ra tiv e s in the q u e s tio n n a ire asked to note the v a rio u s s ta g e s through which they pro g resse d b u t they were a ls o asked to t e l l how many y e ars and months they remained in each s ta g e . An exam ination of the j r e t u r n s on th e second p a r t of t h i s q u e stio n showed a g re a t amount of inaccu racy; so much so, in f a c t , t h a t any general-! i z a t i o n s based on th e se time p e rio d s would be com pletely un r e l i a b l e . For t h i s reaso n no com putations were made on t h i s d a ta . Some of the o ld er c o o p e ra tiv e s sim ply did not know how long, f o r example, they had been buying clubs or whether th ey had been because o f the c o n sid e ra b le p e rio d of y e ars which had in te rv e n e d . (Some s o c i e t i e s a re t h i r t y or more y e a rs o ld .) Few c o o p e ra tiv e s had kept an a c c u ra te h is t o r y of t h e i r s o c ie ty ; t h i s is u nd erstan d ab le sin c e most coopera t i v e s fac e forward r a t h e r than d w e llin g on th e p a s t . Table XI shows the frequency with which the v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s had e n te re d the v a rio u s s ta g e s of development o u tlin e d above. Out of the 287 c o o p e ra tiv e s answering the q u e s tio n n a ire only n i n e t y - s i x claimed t h a t they had ever been a study group, n in e ty -s e v e n t h a t they had been a buying c lu b , and 118 t h a t th ey had been a lim ite d s e rv ic e s t o r e . 118 TABLE XI STASES OF DEVELOPMENT PASSED TÏÏROÜGH BY 287 COOPERATIVES TABULATED BY PEROMTAGE INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP DDRING THE PAST YEAR P e rcen tag e In c re a s e Stages Of Development Study Group Buying Club Lim ited S e rv ice f u l l S e rv ic e New Lines Under 2 22 26 26 46 20 2- 2.9 6 7 5 13 6 5- 5.9 8 8 12 23 6 4- 4 .9 6 7 9 23 13, 5- 6.9 9 8 7 29 18 7- 8 .9 10 15 17 25 14 9-10.9 4 5 4 13 9 ' 11-12.9 8 6 10 14 9 13-14.9 2 1 4 6 3 15-16.9 2 1 2 1 3 17-64.9 16 9 17 31 15 65 & up 3 4 5 5 2 TOTAÎB 96 97 118 227 118 119 In c o n tr a s t 227 claimed the s t a t u s of a f u l l s e r v ic e s to r e and 118 sa id t h a t they had taken on a d d itio n a l l i n e s of m erchandise. I t c e r t a i n l y is s u r p r i s i n g t h a t so few claimed to have been in e i t h e r a stu dy group or buying club stag e s in c e , in most c a se s, the only lo g ic a l a l t e r n a t i v e would seem to be a f u l l se rv ic e s to r e s e t up by some o u tsid e o rg a n iz a tio n (such as a co o p erativ e w holesale) and operated i u n t i l th e customers were changed in to c o o p e ra to rs . This has been extrem ely r a r e in t h i s country; indeed, no such case in v o lv in g food s to r e o p e ra tio n has come to th e a u th o r ’s a t t e n t i o n in te n y e a rs o f in tim a te a s s o c i a t io n w ith th e coop e r a t i v e movement. I t i s p o s s ib le t h a t those claim ing to have gone through buying club and study group sta g e s went through e i t h e r one or th e o th e r . I f we assume, as i s un l i k e l y , t h a t th e s o c i e t i e s went through e i t h e r one or the o th e r s ta g e , we have 193 s o c i e t i e s which once were or are in one o f the two s ta g e s as compared w ith 227 f u l l s e rv ic e s t o r e s . A minimum of t h i r t y - f o u r s o c i e t i e s a re thus s t i l l unaccounted f o r and must have sprung in to being in an un s p e c if ie d manner. A more l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would be e i t h e r t h a t in a c c u ra te answers were receiv ed from resp o n d en ts or th a t the resp o n d en ts had assumed t h a t a l l s ta g e s p rev io u s to the one they sa id they were in would a u to m a tic a lly be considered 1 2 0 p a r t of t h e i r p a st h i s t o r y ; in o th e r words, i f they sa id they were in th e f u l l s e r v ic e s to r e stag e t h a t i t would be a u to m a tic a lly im plied t h a t they had been through one o r more of the th re e proceeding s t a g e s . Any fin d in g s based on the answers to t h i s q u e stio n should be ev alu ated a c c o rd in g ly . When the p ro p o rtio n s of c o o p e ra tiv e s in th e c ateg o r i e s "Under 2" and "17-64.9" were compared w ith r e s p e c t to : the s ta g e s of development through which they had gone^ the d if f e r e n c e s between th e se high and low c a te g o rie s were as fo llo w s : Study Group Buying Club Limited S ervice F u ll S e rv ice New Lines Under 2 .16 .19 .19 .33 .14 17-64.9 .18 .10 .19 .35 .17 D iffe re n c e s .02 .09 .00 .02 .03 When the d if f e r e n c e obtained under "Buying Club" was t e s te d f o r s ig n if ic a n c e i t was found to be 1.87 sta n d ard e r r o r s , and consequently could have occurred by chance in 6 p er cent of the c a s e s . Here again the 50 p e r cent le v e l of s ig n if ic a n c e was not ach iev ed , but i t i s close enough to in d ic a te th a t some o th e r stu d y might uncover a d if f e r e n c e which would be s i g n i f i c a n t i f the 5 per cent c r i t e r i o n were 2 T his p ro p o rtio n was computed by d iv id in g th e t o t a l number in category "Under 2" and in category "17-64.9" in to the v a rio u s fre q u e n c ie s found in the v a rio u s sta g e s of de velopment . 1 2 1 u s e d . No a ttem p t was made to t e s t the o th e r d i f f e r e n c e s fo r s ig n if ic a n c e sin c e th ey were very sm all both a b s o lu te ly and in comparison to th e p ro p o rtio n t e s te d above. In summary, th e d a ta do not i n d ic a te t h a t success is r e l a t e d in a dem onstrably s i g n i f i c a n t manner to any of the t r a d i t i o n a l sta g e s through which c o o p e ra tiv e s may p a ss. ; This con clu sion must be considered t e n t a t i v e sin c e the d a ta were not n e c e s s a r il y r e l i a b l e . A study group does n o t i n sure success but the d a ta do not support the h y p o th esis t h a t i t can be s a f e l y dispensed w ith . Buying clubs do not s i g n i f i c a n t l y m i l i t a t e a g a in s t su c c e ss. None of the o th er sta g e s of development show more than a f a i n t r e l a ti o n s h i p to th e f u tu r e su ccess of a co op erativ e v e n tu re , except to in d ic a te t h a t in c r e a s in g the scope of b u sin e ss o p e ra tio n s does not weaken a c o o p e r a tiv e ’s chances of su c c e ss. I I I . THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE ECONOMIC CYCLE TO SUCCESS I t has been g e n e ra lly supposed t h a t c o o p erativ es can ' be b e st s t a r t e d in p e rio d s of d e p re ssio n because money has g r e a t e r v alu e d u rin g such p e rio d s and consequently many people w i l l have more i n t e r e s t in sav in g sm all amounts. F u r th e r , people a re so busy in prosperous p e rio d s t h a t they 1 2 2 cannot tak e time to b u ild c o o p erativ e o rg a n iz a tio n s . The c o o p e ra tiv e s were consequently asked in the q u e s tio n n a ire to in d ic a te a t what p erio d in th e economic cycle they were s t a r t e d and were given th e fo llo w in g f i v e a l t e r n a t i v e s , one of which th ey were supposed to check: 1. More than average l o c a l p r o s p e r it y . 2. Average lo c a l p r o s p e r it y . , i 3. Less than average l o c a l p r o s p e r it y . 4 . D epressio n. 5. Recovery from d e p re ss io n . The r e tu r n s are ta b u la te d in Table X II. Of the 267 c o o p e ra tiv e s which answered t h i s q u e stio n 110 claimed t h a t they had been founded in a perio d of more than average p r o s p e r i t y . I f one assumes t h a t many resp ond en ts d id not d i s tin g u is h w ith any high degree of accuracy between " le s s than average l o c a l p r o s p e r ity " and " d e p re s s io n ," th e combined t o t a l would be n i n e t y - s i x c o o p e ra tiv e s s t a r t e d under adverse economic c o n d itio n s . I f the fre q u e n c ie s under "recovery " a re added to t h i s t o t a l i t becomes 127, or sev en teen more than the number founded in p e rio d s of more than average p r o s p e r i t y . I t is c le a r from th e above t h a t th e re is l i t t l e f a c t u a l b a s i s , a t l e a s t as f a r a s th e c u rre n t d a ta d is c lo s e s , f o r assuming t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s a re s t a r t e d c h ie f ly in tim es of d e p re s s io n . The q u e stio n s t i l l rem ains, however, whether 123 TABLE XII ECONOMIC CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH 267 COOPERATIVES W ERE STARTED TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP DURING THE PAST YEAR Economic Conditions O btaining P ercentage In c re a s e Average More than Average Less than Average Depres sio n Recovery Under 2 6 27 7 7 4 2- 2.9 1 6 4 2 4 3- 3.9 2 8 5 6 1 4- 4.9 2 5 6 6 5 5- 6.9 4 10 6 6 4 7- 8 .9 3 13 3 7 5 9-10.9 3 7 2 4 0 11-12.9 1 6 3 5 2 13-14.9 0 4 0 1 2 15-16.9 0 3 1 0 1 17-64.9 6 18 11 3 3 65 & up 2 3 0 1 0 TOTALS TOTAL 30 Cooperatives Answering 110 1 48 267 48 31 124 ‘ more of the s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s were organized d u rin g "bad t im e s ." When, in the percentage of membership in c re a se c a t e g o rie s "Under 2" and "17-64.9" p e r c e n t, i t was computed what the p ro p o rtio n of each frequen cy to th e t o t a l of th e f re q u e n c ie s in the category was, th e fo llo w in g r e l a t i o n s h i p s were found: i Average More than Average Less than Average Depres sio n Recovery! Under 2 .118 .529 .137 .137 .078 , 17-64.9 .146 .439 .268 .073 .075 D iffe re n c e .028 .090 .131 .064 .050 When th e g r e a t e s t d if f e r e n c e (13.1 per cent) was t e s te d f o r s ig n if ic a n c e i t was found to be 1.58 sta n d ard e r r o r s and th e r e fo re could have occurred by chance about 11 p e r cent of the tim e. The 9 per cent d if f e r e n c e found under "more than average" was l e s s than one sta n d ard e r r o r , and co nsequen tly even le s s s i g n i f i c a n t than th e p rev iou s d if fe r e n c e . There i s , t h e r e f o r e , n o th in g in the d a ta to sup p o r t s tr o n g ly e i t h e r the t h e s i s t h a t most c o o p erativ es a re s t a r t e d in "hard tim es" or t h a t those which are s t a r t e d in e i t h e r "good" or "bad" tim es a re more l i k e l y to succeed than ithose which a re n o t. This c o n clu sio n must be tem pered, how-' ! e v e r, with c a u tio n . Many c o o p e ra tiv e s , and s p e c i a l l y th o se ; which have been in o p e ra tio n f o r two decades or more might 125 w ell be u n c le ar as to th e economic c o n d itio n s o b ta in in g in t h e i r lo c a l a re a a t th e time of t h e i r founding. There i s , t h e r e f o r e , a t h e o r e t i c a l chance t h a t t h i s f a c t o r a ff e c te d th e r e s u l t s o b ta in e d . Since the l a r g e s t d if f e r e n c e between th e hig h and low c a te g o rie s was so very c l e a r l y not s i g n i f i c a n t, t h i s cannot be considered o th e r than a t h e o r e t i c a l p o s s i b i l i t y . IV. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AM OUNT OF HELP RECEIVED FROM COOPERATIVE WHOLESALE AND SUCCESS The respon dents to the q u e stio n , "Before you had a s t o r e , how much help did you get from your co operativ e whole s a l e , " had t h e i r choice o f th re e r e p l i e s : 1. A g r e a t d e a l. 2. Very l i t t l e . 3. Not much and n o t l i t t l e . There was, however, one u n fo rseen re p ly which was rec eiv e d w ith enough frequency to be notew orthy, v i z . , "We were founded before th e re was a c o o p erativ e w h o le sa le ." I t i s p o s s ib le t h a t some respondents may have answered "Very l i t t l e " r a t h e r than give th e above e x p la n a tio n . Table X III g ives a s t a t i s t i c a l p r e s e n ta tio n of the frequency w ith which the th re e p o s s ib le answers were g iv en . Of th e 261 r e p l i e s re c e iv e d , 124 sa id t h a t they had receiv e d 126 TABLE X III AM OUNT OF HELP RECEIVED BY 261 COOPERATIVES FROM COOPERATIVE WHOLESALES BEFORE THEY HAD A STORE TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP DURING THE PAST YEAR Amount of Help Percen tag e In c re a s e G reat Deal Very- L i t t l e Not Much or L i t t l e Under 2 11 24 16 2- 2.9 2 9 6 3- 3 .9 3 12 8 4- 4.9 4 13 8 5 - 6 . 9 8 15 8 7- 8 .9 10 12 8 9-10.9 4 7 5 11-12.9 5 9 2 13-14.9 3 3 0 15-16.9 1 2 0 17-64.9 16 16 5 65 & up 4 2 0 TOTALS 71 124 66 TOTAL C ooperatives Answering 261 127 but l i t t l e help from t h e i r co o p erativ e w h o le sale , as com pared w ith seventy-one which claimed to have re c e iv e d a g re a t d e a l . S i x t y - s i x c o o p erativ es sa id th a t they had r e ceiv ed , "Not much and not l i t t l e " h e lp . When th e p ro p o rtio n s of frequency in each c la s s of each c ateg o ry to the t o t a l fre-^ quency in t h a t categ o ry in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" per cent c a te g o rie s were computed, the fo llo w in g r e l a ti o n s h i p s were d isc o v ere d ; G reat Deal Very L i t t l e Not Much or L i t t l e Under 2 .216 .471 .314 17-64.9 .432 .432 .135 D iffe re n c e .216 .039 .179 W e have here c o n tr a d ic to ry d a ta . The d if f e r e n c e of 21.6 p e r cen t found in the "Great Deal" column would i n d i cate t h a t tw ice as g re a t a p ro p o rtio n of the s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s got c o n sid e ra b le help from c o o p e ra tiv e w holesales as did the u n s u c c e s s fu l. This d if f e r e n c e proved to be 2.17 sta n d ard e r r o r s , and sin c e t h i s would occur by chance in about th re e cases in a hundred i t i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r ence. T h e o r e tic a lly , however, th e d if f e r e n c e between the high and low c a te g o r ie s in the column t i t l e d "Very L i t t l e " should show about the same amount of d if f e r e n c e but w ith a rev e rse d meaning. The 3 .9 per cent d if f e r e n c e a c t u a l l y d i s covered is h a rd ly such a f in d in g sin c e i t i s over f iv e tim es 128 l e s s than th e 21.6 per cent d i f f e r e n c e in th e "Great Deal" ■column. I t is undoubtedly not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . S e v e ra l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s can be a tta c h e d to t h i s f in d in g : 1. The d a ta a re com pletely or l a r g e ly u n r e l i a b l e . This i s u n lik e ly ^ a lth o u g h , of course, p o s s ib l e . 2. Enough of th e old c o o p e ra tiv e s , which were s t a r t e d b e fo re th e founding of the w h o le sale s, answered "Very L i t t l e " to p r e ju d ic e the answer. The f a c t t h a t a h ig h er p ercentag e of the u n su c c e ssfu l is found in the "Very L i t t l e ” column (47.1 per cent) than of the s u c c e s s f u l (43.2 per cent) lends some credence to t h i s th eo ry ; th e tr e n d , a t l e a s t , i s in the expected d i r e c t i o n . 3. Beginning c o o p e ra tiv e s need o u tsid e h e lp . This may be o b tain ed from th e c o o p erativ e w holesale, from o th e r o r g a n iz a tio n s , or from experienced i n d iv id u a ls . Where the w h olesale has helped s i g n i f i c a n t l y the co o p erativ es have f r e q u e n tly been very s u c c e s s f u l. Where the w holesale has n o t given t h i s help i t has been rec eiv e d in some cases from o th e r s o u rc e s . (One s o c ie ty mentioned the F ile n e Foundation, and an o th e r c re d ite d C ooperative D i s t r i b u t o r s , a t th a t time a n a ti o n a l m a il-o rd e r c o o p e ra tiv e .) ^ See Appendix "G," pp. 350 f f . 1 2 9 In o rd er to throw f u r t h e r l i g h t on t h i s problem a second ta b u l a t i o n of the d a ta was made f o r the r e p l i e s in th e "Under. 2" and "17-64.9" p er cent c a t e g o r i e s . In t h i s case a l l the c o o p erativ es which r e p lie d t h a t they had r e ceived no help from any c o o p erativ e w h o le sale , whether be cause th e re was no w holesale or f o r o th e r re a so n s , were lumped in a c la s s t i t l e d "None" in ste a d of under "Very L i t t l e . " The d i s t r i b u t i o n was as fo llo w s: Very Not Much Much L i t t l e or L i t t l e None Under 2 11 16 16 8 17-64.9 16 11 5 5 When th e above raw d a ta were, fo llo w in g the pro ce dures used above, changed in to p e rc e n ta g e s , th e fo llo w in g r e l a t i o n s h i p s were found: Very Not Much Much L i t t l e or L i t t l e None Under 2 .22 .31 .31 .16 17-64.9 .43 .30 .14 .14 D iffe re n c e s .21 .01 .17 .02 I t i s obvious t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s a re about the same, and in the same d i r e c t i o n s as those ta b u la te d on page 127, and the alm ost eq u al percentag e under "None" ex p la in s why. The second h y p o th esis advanced to e x p la in th e la rg e p e rc e n t age of s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s in the "Very L i t t l e " column ap p a r e n tly is not v a l i d . The t h ir d su p p o s itio n cannot be 130 te s te d w ith the d a ta in hand. The reaso n fo r the high p e r centage of s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s which rec eiv e d very l i t t l e help from co o p erativ e w holesales d u rin g t h e i r o rg a n iz a tio n p e rio d must th en , f o r the moment, remain obscure. When th e d if f e r e n c e between the p ro p o rtio n in the high and low c a te g o r ie s of membership in c re a s e of th e "Not , Much or L i t t l e ” column (17 per cent) was te s te d fo r s i g n i f i cance i t was found to be 1.94 sta n d ard e r r o r s ; sin ce t h i s would occur by chance in about f i v e cases in one hundred i t is s i g n i f i c a n t , but b a re ly so . Such a d if f e r e n c e , which seems to show t h a t a co o p erativ e has l e s s chance o f success when th e help rec eiv e d from th e w holesale i s n e i t h e r "much or l i t t l e , " can be in te r p r e t e d to mean t h a t j u s t h e lp fu ln e s s , u n le s s of such a degree t h a t i t r e a l l y i s very f a r - r e a c h in g , does more harm than good. Half-way measures a p p a re n tly are i n e f f e c t i v e . A h y p o th esis could be form ulated a t t h i s p o in t t h a t some help lead s to r e l i a n c e on th e h e lp in g agency; i f help i s i n s u f f i c i e n t , d i f f i c u l t i e s r e s u l t i n g from normal co o p e ra tiv e o p e ra tio n s a re not met ad eq u ately and th e coopera t i v e ’ s s u c c e s s fu ln e s s is le s s e n e d . When th ere is no r e l i ance or very l i t t l e r e l i a n c e on help from the w h o le sale , s u f f i c i e n t s e l f - r e l i a n c e i s g e n e ra te d . In summary, the d a ta sup p o rt th e fo llo w in g a s s e r tio n s ; 1. Help from a coo perativ e w holesale i s not im perative 131 f o r the su ccess o f a co o p erativ e food s t o r e . 2. When a w holesale f u r n is h e s th e r e t a i l c o n sid era b le h e lp , i t is more l i k e l y to be s u c c e s s f u l than u n s u c c e s s fu l. 3. There are o th e r f a c t o r s than help from th e whole s a le o p e ra tin g in the s i t u a t i o n , and th ese f a c t o r s play a s tr o n g r o l e in d eterm in in g th e degree of su ccess a coopera t i v e e n jo y s. 4 . When the help o ffe re d by th e w holesale i s "not much and not l i t t l e " the r e s u l t is more l i k e l y t o be un s u c c e s s f u l than s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s . I t i s p o s s ib le t h a t a p sy c h o lo g ic a l f a c t o r i s o p e ra t ing in t h i s s i t u a t i o n . When a c o o p erativ e answers t h a t i t re c e iv e d a g r e a t d e a l of help from a w holesale w hile i t was i o rg a n iz in g the sta te m e n t may r e f l e c t th e c u rre n t r e l a t i o n sh ip s between the w holesale and th e r e t a i l . I t i s p o s s ib le , but cannot be checked a t t h i s tim e, t h a t the manner in which th e i n i t i a l o rg a n iz a tio n of th e coo perativ e took p lac e i s of. r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e im portance. The dominant (or one o f the dominant) f a c t o r s may r a t h e r be a co n tin u in g h e a lth y r e l a tio n s h ip between r e t a i l and w h o le sale . 132 V. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE KIND OF HELP RECEIVED FROM COOPERATIVE WHOLESALES AND SUCCESS Table XIV giv es a p ic tu r e of the kind of help which c o o p e ra tiv e s , s u c c e s s f u l and u n s u c c e s s fu l, claim they r e ceived from t h e i r co o p erativ e w h o le sa le . One hundred and th ir ty - tw o of th e co o p erativ es re c e iv e d e d u c a tio n a l m a te ria ls and 118 were helped by th e w h o le s a le s ’ fieldm an; only s i x t y - s ix rec eiv e d advice from th e w holesale in a d d itio n to th a t o ffe re d by th e field m an , f i f t e e n re c e iv e d f i n a n c i a l a id , and twenty-two re c e iv e d o th e r kinds of h e lp . When th e v a rio u s p ro p o rtio n s of th e fre q u e n c ie s in the f iv e columns ( F in a n c ia l, E ducation M a te r ia ls , e tc .) to the t o t a l of the fre q u e n c ie s in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" per cent c a te g o rie s were computed, the fo llo w in g r e l a ti o n s h i p s were e s t a b l is h e d : Education F in a n c ia l M a te ria ls Fieldman Advice Other Under 2 .027 .411 .342 .164 .054 17-64.9 .047 .312 .344 .250 .062 D iffe re n c e .020 .099 .002 .086 .080 None of th ese d if f e r e n c e s a re s i g n i f i c a n t ; the l a r g e s t (9.9 per cent) i s b a re ly g r e a t e r th an one stan d ard e r r o r . I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , obvious t h a t th e r e l a t i v e su c c e ss fu ln e ss or u n su c c e ssfu ln e ss of th e v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s cannot be at-r t r i b u t ed to the kind of help th ey re c e iv e d from co o p erativ e ' TABLE XIV KIND OF HELP RECEIVED BY 174 COOPERATIVES FROM COOPERATIVE WHOLESALES BEFORE THEY HAD A STORE TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP DURING THE PAST YEAR 133 P ercen tag e In c re a s e Kind of Help F in a n c ia l E ducation M a te ria ls Fieldman Advice^ Other Under E 2 30 25 12 4 2- 2.9 0 9 5 5 2 5- 5.9 0 8 9 3 3 4 - 4 . 9 0 8 9 4 2. 5- 6.9 1 16 12 7 3 7- 8.9 2 19 14 5 0 9-10.9 2 7 7 4 2 11-12.9 2 7 7 3 2 15-14.9 3 4 3 2 0 15-16.9 0 1 2 1 0 17-64.9 3 20 22 16 4 65 & up 0 3 4 4 0 TOTALS 15 132 118 66 22 ^ Other than from the fieldm an. 154 w holesales when they were o rg a n iz in g . This i s what one would expect s in c e th e re i s no ap paren t motive f o r a whole- : s a le g iv in g d i f f e r e n t kinds or amounts of a s s is ta n c e to i t s v a rio u s members and p ro sp e c tiv e members u n le ss geographic d i f f i c u l t i e s f ig u r e im p o rta n tly . There i s no tren d o b se rv ab le in th e d a ta . I t should be added t h a t the above con clusio n does not; sug g est t h a t the help o ffe re d beginning s o c i e t i e s by coopera t i v e w holesales i s not v alu ab le or th a t i t does not c o n tr ib u te to th e f u t u r e success of the s o c ie ty . VI. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONS WHICH HAVE AIDED BEGINNING SOCIETIES AND SUCCESS Table XV shows to what degree the v a rio u s types of o rg a n iz a tio n s played a r o le in th e o rg a n iz a tio n of coopera t i v e s . As would be expected by any co o p erativ e h i s t o r i a n , th e farm o rg a n iz a tio n s helped to found a n o tic e a b ly g r e a t e r number of c o o p e ra tiv e s than any of th e o t h e r s . These organ i z a ti o n s a s s i s t e d in th e form ation of seventy-one s o c i e t i e s w hile la b o r unions p a r t i c i p a t e d in the o rg a n iz a tio n of e ig h te e n , f r a t e r n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s of f i v e , and churches of t h i r t y . The m iscellan eo u s c ateg o ry , " O th e r," w i l l be examined l a t e r . When th e p ercen tag e d i f f e r e n c e s between the high and 135 TABLE XV TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS HELPING IN THE ORGANIZATION OF 178 COOPERATIVES TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP DURING THE PAST YEAR P ercen tage In c re a s e Types of O rgan izatio n s Church F r a t e r n a l Labor Farm Other Under Z 6 0 5 9 12 2- 2.9 3 1 0 4 2 5- 3.9 2 1 0 8 5 4 - 4 . 9 2 0 0 10 7 5- 6.9 4 1 1 10 8 7- 8 .9 2 0 1 7 10 9-10.9 1 0 1 6 0 11-12.9 1 0 4 2 5 13-14.9 1 0 1 2 0 15-16.9 0 0 0 3 0 17-64.9 8 2 3 8 14 65 & up 0 0 2 2 3 TOTALS 50 5 18 71 66 136 low c a te g o r ie s were computed in the manner follow ed above, the fo llo w in g r e l a ti o n s h i p s were d isco v ered ; Church F r a t e r n a l Labor Farm Other Under 2 .187 .00 .156 .281 .375 17-64.9 .228 .57 .086 .228 .400 D iffe re n c e .041 .57 .070 .053 .025 The 7 p e r cent d if f e r e n c e l i s t e d under "Labor" was, upon exam ination, a d if f e r e n c e of s l i g h t l y under one s ta n d ard e r r o r and hence c l e a r l y not s i g n i f i c a n t . The 5.7 per cent d if f e r e n c e under " F r a te rn a l" a ls o proved not to be s i g n i f i c a n t (1.4 sta n d ard e r r o r s ) . Hence, i t was assumed th a t th e o th e r d if f e r e n c e s a ls o were not s i g n i f i c a n t . I t i s ob vious t h a t no one o rg a n iz a tio n has had a b e t t e r rec o rd than the o th e rs as f a r as f a t h e r i n g s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es i s con cern ed . When the column "Other" in Table XV was broken down in to i t s component u n its some i n t e r e s t i n g d a ta were uncov e re d . Table XVI summarizes th e f i n d in g s . Only one coopera tiv e was s t a r t e d by a neighborhood group. These a re the groups which would o fte n be expected to have a high degree of h e te r o g e n e ity with reg ard to r a c e , r e l i g i o n , occup ation, e t c . , a lth o u g h some lik e n e s s in terms of c u l t u r a l le v e l; a farm a re a i s not here considered to be a neighborhood. Eight c o o p e ra tiv e s out of the s i x t y - s i x were s t a r t e d by a 137 TABLE XVI THE BREAKDOW OF THE COLUM N "OTHER" IN TABLE XV Type of S o c ia l Groups Race & Percen tage N a tio n - In c re a s e a l i t y Occupa t i o n a l N eigh borhood College & School F a c u lty Members Cooper a ti v e s M iscel laneous Under 2 2 2 0 4 2 2 2- 2.9 0 0 0 0 1 1 3- 3.9 1 1 0 0 1 2 4- 4.9 1 1 0 4 1 1 5- 6.9 2 0 0 1 1 3 7- 8 .9 0 2 1 3 3 1 9-10.9 1 1 0 0 0 0 11-12.9 0 0 0 3 3 0 13-14.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 15-16.9 0 0 0 0 0 1 17-64.9 1 0 0 4 4 4 65 & up 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 8 7 1 19 16 15 158 group which was based on race or n a t i o n a l i t y , and seven on o c c u p a tio n a lly o rie n te d groups; in both cases a con sciou s ness of kind was p r e s e n t . Most of th e c o o p e ra tiv e s s t a r t e d by th e s e two groups were, however, n o t among the h ig h ly suc c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s . A s u r p r i s i n g number of c o o p erativ es (nin eteen ) were s t a r t e d w ith th e help of p o rtio n s o f u n iv e r-; s i t y or school f a c u l t i e s (mostly the fo rm e r). Four of these; were in the most h ig h ly s u c c e s s f u l group while fo u r were in the l e a s t s u c c e s s f u l. The r e s t were s c a t t e r e d in the middle q u a r t i l e s o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n . The d a ta c e r t a i n l y do not su ggest t h a t sch o o l te a c h e rs and u n i v e r s it y p ro fe s s o rs are c o n s i s t e n t l y s u c c e s s f u l sponsors of co o p erativ e developments. S ix te e n c o o p e ra tiv e s were aided in t h e i r o rg a n iz a tio n p e rio d by o th e r c o o p e ra tiv e s . Of th e s e , fo u r were in the h ig h ly s u c c e s s f u l group and th re e in the reaso n ab ly su c c e ss f u l c a t e g o r i e s . I t would, t h e r e f o r e , seem t h a t in s o f a r as the sc a n ty d a ta i n d ic a t e , co o p erativ es a re more h e lp f u l in g e t t i n g o th e r c o o p e ra tiv e s organized and on th e road to su c cess than any o f the o th e r groups analyzed in Table XVI. Of th e f i f t e e n rem aining cases ta b u la te d in the "Other" column o f Table XV th r e e were s t a r t e d or helped by S o c i a l i s t s , two by a housing a u th o r i ty , and one each by the fo llo w in g o rg a n iz a tio n s ; Epic movement, a newspaper, an o r g a n iz a tio n in a housing a u th o r i ty , p o p u la tio n of a t r a i l e r 139 camp, a v e t e r a n s ’ o rg a n iz a tio n , an a t h l e t i c a s s o c i a t io n , a temperance s o c ie ty , a Democratic clu b, th e Commonwealth F e d e ra tio n , the F ile n e Foundation. These groups seem to re p re s e n t two types which might be c h a r a c te r iz e d as th o se who w ish to h elp the underdog ( e . g . . S o c i a l i s t s , E pic, and F ile n e Foundation) and those who a re underdogs and are t r y i n g to help them selves ( e . g . , the p o p u la tio n of the t r a i l e r camp, th e v e t e r a n s ’ o rg a n iz a t i o n a l While i n t e r e s t i n g , th e se d a ta c o n trib u te n o th in g to the u n d e rstan d in g of c o o p erativ e success and f a i l u r e . No a ttem p t was made to t e s t the d a ta in Table XVI f o r s ig n if ic a n c e of d if f e r e n c e because the fre q u e n c ie s were very s m a ll . Table XVII shows how many o rg a n iz a tio n s p a r t i c i p a te d in the o rg a n iz a tio n of th e c o o p e ra tiv e s s tu d ie d . I t is notew orthy th a t 109 out of £70 c o o p erativ es claimed th a t they had been unaided by any o th e r o rg a n iz a tio n in t h e i r i n i t i a l p e rio d . One hundred and t h i r t y of the o th e rs had been aided by only one o r g a n i z a t i o n . ■ I t i s c le a r t h a t th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of more than one o rg a n iz a tio n in the founding of a co o p erativ e i s r e l a t i v e l y r a r e . When the p ro p o rtio n s of each frequency to the t o t a l of th e fre q u e n c ie s in th e c atego ry in which i t is found were computed, the fo llo w in g p e rc e n ta g e s were d isc o v ered : 140 TABLE XVII THE NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS HELPING IN THE ORGANIZATION OF 270 COOPERATIVES TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE INCREASE OF MEMBERSHIP DURING THE PAST YEAR P ercentag e In c re a s e Number of O rg an izatio n s None One Two Three Four "Several Under 2 24 26 3 0 0 0 2- 2 .9 8 8 0 0 0 1 3- 3.9 9 13 1 0 0 0 4- 4.9 11 11 3 0 1 0 5 - 6 . 9 13 13 3 2 0 0 7- 8 .9 12 17 1 0 0 0 9-10.9 9 5 2 1 0 0 11-12.9 7 6 3 0 0 0 13-14.9 3 2 1 0 0 0 15-16.9 0 2 1 0 0 0 17-64.9 12 22 4 1 1 1 65 & up 1 5 0 1 0 0 TOTALS 109 130 22 5 2 2 TOTAL Cooperatives Answering 270 ^ Two c o o p e ra tiv e s answered t h a t s e v e r a l o rg a n iz a tio n s helped in the o rg a n iz a tio n of t h e i r c o o p e ra tiv e , but s p e c if ie d noth ing e l s e . 141 None One Two Three Four "S everal" Under 2 .453 .491 .057 0 0 0 17-64.9 .293 .537 .097 .024 .024 .024 D iffere n ce .160 .046 .040 .024 .024 .024 When the l a r g e s t of th e se d i f f e r e n c e s , the 16 p er cent ta b u la te d under ’TSIone," was te s te d f o r s ig n if ic a n c e i t was found to be 1.56 sta n d ard e r r o r s , and hence n ot s i g n i f i c a n t The o th e r d if f e r e n c e s were not te s te d sin c e they showed so l i t t l e promise of d i f f e r i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y . N e v e rth e le s s , an, i n s p e c tio n of the p ro p o rtio n s under columns "None" and "One" show t h a t a sm a lle r p ro p o rtio n of the s u c c e s s fu l than of the u n s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s had rec eiv e d no help from any o rg a n i z a tio n s w hile a s l i g h t l y h ig h er p ro p o rtio n of the s u c c e s s fu l, than of the u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s had receiv ed help from one or more o th e r o r g a n iz a tio n s . This trend in d ic a te s th a t a beginning s o c ie ty has a b e t t e r chance fo r success when sponsored by some o rg a n iz a tio n than i t has i f i t i s u n a id e d ., V II. SUM M ARY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FINDINGS Only two of th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s examined in t h i s chap- ' t e r proved to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . The d a ta i n d ic a te t h a t a c o o p erativ e has a g r e a te r chance of being s u e - ■ c e s s f u l i f i t re c e iv e s c o n sid e ra b le a s s is ta n c e du rin g i t s o r g a n iz a tio n a l p e rio d from a co operativ e w holesale. This 142 fin d in g is a cc o rd in g to e x p e c ta tio n , s in c e an o rg a n iz a tio n needs both t e c h n ic a l and p sy c h o lo g ic a l a s s is ta n c e in the be-| g in n in g of i t s l i f e c y c le . A dem ocratic o rg a n iz a tio n must, of n e c e s s ity , e x h ib i t some lac k of o rg a n iz a tio n w hile i t s members a re dev elo p in g consensus in the period p receding the esta b lish m e n t of norms; w ell-tim ed a s s i s t a n c e often g r e a tly a c c e l e r a te s t h i s p ro cess of o r g a n iz a tio n . Help from an out-; s id e source a ls o reduces the sense of uniqueness which i s so d i s t u r b in g to l e s s bohemian in d iv id u a ls and s u b s t i t u t e s both a knowledge of lik e n e s s and a f e e l i n g of belonging to an e s ta b lis h e d order of phenomena. To the e x te n t t h a t a s s i s t ance a c c e le r a te s p ro g re s s , members and p ro s p e c tiv e members develop m orale. The second fin d in g was on the border lin e of s i g n i f i cance, and must be regarded as in c o n c lu s iv e . When a moder a te amount of a s s i s t a n c e was receiv ed from th e w holesales, r a t h e r th an a c o n sid e ra b le or a n e g lig ib le amount, the co o p e ra tiv e was le s s l i k e l y to succeed. The reason f o r t h i s I tendency can only be c o n je c tu re d . While i t is not s u r p r i s in g t h a t a moderate amount of a s s is ta n c e would produce le s s b e n e f i c i a l r e s u l t s than a c o n sid era b le amount, i t i s obvi ously not l o g ic a l t h a t a n e g lig ib le amount of help should produce b e t t e r r e s u l t s than a moderate amount. P o s sib ly m o tiv a tio n is th e key to th e enigma. C ooperatives are 143 d i f f i c u l t to s t a r t in the food s to r e f i e l d w ithout a s s i s t ance and th e founders would be very determ ined to ’»go i t a l o n e ; ” such people might be expected to put c o n sid e ra b le energy in to t h e i r v e n tu re . F u r th e r , such m o tiv a tio n might w ell be coupled w ith an e a r l i e r p erio d a n te d a tin g the found in g of the a re a wholesale and c h a ra c te riz e d by le s s com peti t i v e food r e t a i l i n g th an is now common. The a n a ly s is of t h i s s e c tio n has a ls o supported the fo llo w in g sta te m e n ts by f a i l i n g to in d ic a te s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a ti o n s h i p s : 1. No evidence has been found su g g estin g t h a t success has a s i g n i f i c a n t l y dem onstrable r e l a t i o n s h i p w ith the study group, lim ite d s e r v i c e , f u l l s e r v ic e , or expanded se rv ic e s ta g e s of co o p erativ e developm ent. Approximately equal p e r centages of s u c c e s s fu l and u n s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s went through th ese sta g e s or a re now in them. (This does not prove, however, t h a t such a p o t e n t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p does not , e x i s t . ) Since success has been defin ed in t h i s study in terms of winning new members, i t is l o g i c a l to assume t h a t such valu es as th e comparative q u a lity and p r ic e of goods and the human r e l a t i o n s h i p s e s ta b lis h e d in the c o n ta c ts be tween the c o o p erativ e and th e members a re of b a sic s i g n i f i cance fo r ach iev in g s u c c e s s . I t i s p o s s ib le to e s t a b l i s h th e s e p o s i t iv e v a lu e s, and e s p e c ia lly those cen tered on 144 human r e l a t i o n s h i p s , a t any stag e of co o p erativ e development. I f member enthusiasm coupled w ith a firm b e l i e f in the f e a s i b i l i t y of r e a l i z i n g valu es by co o p eratio n tend s to win members, i t i s i l l o g i c a l to suppose t h a t th e re would be a stro n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between any stage of development and s u c c e s s . E. As f a r as t h i s study goes i t seems to make no d i f - | fere n ce in what p e rio d of the economic cycle a co operative i s o rganized; th e d a ta do not in d ic a te any r e a l v a r ia tio n in, the chances of being s u c c e s s f u l. There is a tendency, which could occur by chance, f o r p e rio d s of average and l e s s than average p r o s p e r it y to be a s s o c ia te d w ith the o rg a n iz a tio n of more s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s and f o r p e rio d s of more th an average p r o s p e r ity and of d e p re ssio n to be a s s o c ia te d w ith l e s s s u c c e s s fu l; th e s e te n d e n c ie s show i n t e r n a l in c o n s is te n cy. 3. The f in d in g s in d ic a te t h a t when a s o c ie ty re c e iv e s l i t t l e help from a co o p erativ e w holesale i t has about as good a chance of succeeding as of being u n s u c c e s s fu l. In o th e r words, l i t t l e help does not r e a l l y in c re a s e a coopera t i v e ' s chances of succeedin g. Much s p e c u la tio n i s p o s s ib le on t h i s p o in t, but th e re is l i t t l e to be gained therefro m except to n o te t h a t help from a w holesale is but one of m u ltip le f a c t o r s which o p erate to produce c o o p erativ e 145 su c c e ss . I f t h i s were not so , the r e l a t i o n s h i p noted above would be the o ppo site of what the d a ta show i t to be. 4. No r e l a t i o n s h i p was found between the kind of help given by c o o p e ra tiv e w h o le sa le s to r e t a i l s o c i e t i e s and su c c e s s . This suggests t h a t i t i s no t so much the tra n sm issio n of t e c h n i c a l "know-how” which is r e l a te d to success as the e x is te n c e of and q u a lity of i n t e r a c t i o n between the whole- | s a le and th e beginning s o c i e t y . I t may be claimed th a t sin c e c o o p e ra tiv e s o r i g in a te under d i f f e r e n t c o n d itio n s and th e r e fo re have d i f f e r e n t needs, a f in d in g of t h i s n a tu re is m ea n in g less. This i s tru e w ith in d e f i n i t e l i m i t s , but i t is a ls o tr u e t h a t alm ost a l l beginning co o p erativ es have common needs which must be met in order to in su re s u r v iv a l, and i t i s th ese common needs which are the b a sis of a w h o le s a le 's a c t i v i t y . I t can be f u r t h e r suggested w ith c o n sid e ra b le j u s t i f i c a t i o n t h a t the kind of h elp may be im portant and a f a c t o r in s u c c e s s , but being a c o n sta n t does not get ade quate r e c o g n itio n in t h i s type of stu d y . 5. The d a ta do not show t h a t any type of o rg a n iz a tio n has been h ig h ly s u c c e s s f u l in s t a r t i n g s u c c e s s fu l coopera t i v e s . A p a r t i a l e x p la n atio n i s provided by the tendency of e s ta b lis h e d o rg a n iz a tio n s to c a rry out a c t i v i t i e s (such as i n i t i a t i n g c o o p erativ es) as a m a tte r of p o lic y r a t h e r than as a resp o n se to lo c a l need. F u r th e r , c o o p e ra tiv e s o r i g i 146 nated in t h i s manner tend to be b u i l t "from th e top down" w ith o u t a sound fo u n d a tio n in norms, v a lu e s, and a t t i t u d e s based on consensus. 6. The fin d in g s in d ic a te t h a t s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es can be s t a r t e d w ithout help from any o u tsid e o r g a n iz a tio n , a lth o u g h th e re is a tendency fo r g r e a te r su ccess to be a s s o c ia te d w ith sp o nso rship by some o r g a n iz a tio n . Such su c cess may be explained by e s p e c ia lly happy circum stances in th e environment or by the b a sic n a tu re of the need answered by c o o p eratio n or by an e x p erien ced , indigenous le a d e r s h ip , or any com bination of the t h r e e . 7. The a n a ly s is does n o t su pp o rt the h y p o th e sis t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s w i l l be more s u c c e s s f u l i f they make t h e i r i n i t i a l v en tu re in th e f i e l d of f o o d s t u f f s . This i s l o g ic a l i f one assumes t h a t su ccess means winning new members and th a t members a re won l a r g e ly by th e e f f o r t s of e n t h u s i a s t i c p a t r o n s . The fin d in g s as a whole sug gest t h a t s o c i a l and psy c h o lo g ic a l f a c t o r s o p e ra tin g on the primary group le v e l r a t h e r th an f a c t o r s such a s th e busin ess c y c le , sta g e of development of the c o o p e ra tiv e , o r g a n iz a tio n a l backing, or type of i n i t i a l b u sin e ss v e n tu re p lay the d e c is iv e r o l e in prom oting c o o p erativ e s u c c e ss . A c o r d ia l r e l a t i o n s h i p w ith the co o p erativ e w h o lesale, and t h i s i s probably the r e a l 147 s i g n if ic a n c e of what is meant by " c o n sid e ra b le a s s is ta n c e " sin c e the w h o le sa le s' fieldm en help a l l s o c i e t i e s w ithout fa v o r or p r e ju d ic e , d e f i n i t e l y in c re a s e s th e lik e lih o o d of s u c c e ss . I t seems probable th a t t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p lead s to a g r e a te r acceptance of th e te c h n ic a l advice o ffe re d both in the f i e l d s of b u sin e ss and e d u c a tio n , and a ls o develops | g r e a te r enthusiasm and m orale. i CHAPTER VI THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TECHNIQUES USED BY COOPERATIVES TO CONTACT MEMBERS AND PROSPECTIVE MEMBERS AND SUCCESS I t is a b a s ic p r i n c i p le of so ciolo gy th a t the degree to which people are a s s im ila te d in to any given s o c i a l group or th e speed w ith which a new s o c i a l group is formed v a r ie s ; w ith the q u a n tity , i n t e n s i t y and n a tu re of th e i n t e r a c t i o n between th e v a rio u s persons in v o lv e d . Since co o p erativ e success is im possible w ith out the accommodation and a s s im i l a t i o n of people in th e community to and in to the coopera t iv e group, the i n t e r a c t i o n between th e people in th e coop e r a t iv e and between th e s e c o o p e ra to rs and the r e s t of the p o p u la tio n of the a re a i s a q u e stio n of g re a t s i g n i f i c a n c e . This c h ap ter i s an attem p t to examine p a r t of the i n t e r a c tio n p ro ce ss by gauging th e .g c o p e, i n t e n s i t y , and n a tu re of the s t i m u l i i to which c o o p e ra tiv e s s u b je c t t h e i r members and p r o s p e c ts . I t i s not a t t h i s tim e p o ssib le to make a measurement of the r e a c tio n of th e p o p u latio n to th e s e s t i m u l i i , but an in q u iry such as th e fo llo w in g may be ex pected to give some i n d ic a t i o n of the kind and degree of r e a c t i o n which th e e f f o r t s of th e more and of th e le s s sue- 1 c e s s f u l co o p erativ es w i l l e l i c i t . A h y p o th esis might w ell be advanced t h a t th e re i s a ; 149 ^ s ig n ific a n t d if f e r e n c e between s u c c e s s f u l and u n su c ce ssfu l c o o p erativ es w ith re s p e c t to e i t h e r the methods they use to c o n ta ct members and non-members or the frequen cy w ith which they use th ese methods or th e q u a lity of th ese methods. I t i s beyond the scope of t h i s study to assay the q u a lity of the methods used, but an a tte m p t w i l l be made to e v alu ate the types of methods and th e frequency w ith which th ey are j used by the s u c c e s s fu l and the u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p e ra tiv e s . I . THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE METHODS USED BY COOPERATIVES TO ESTABLISH CONTACTS WITH MEMBERS AND SUCCESS In the q u e s tio n n a ir e , " S ig n if ic a n t C h a r a c te r is ti c s of C ooperatives in the U nited S t a t e s , " th e fo llo w in g q u estio n was asked: P le a se c i r c l e a l l of the fo llo w in g methods your co o p erativ e has used d u rin g the p a st y ear to c o n ta ct members and in th e b ra c k e ts in d ic a te how o fte n th e method was used d u rin g the y e a r. I ( ) a . News b u l l e t i n ( ) b. Telephone committee i ( ) c . N o tices (on b u l l e t i n boards, e t c . ) : ( ) d. P o s te r s ( ) e. M ailing c ard s, d i s t r i b u t i n g , "throw -aw ays," e t c . , f o r th e purpose of a d v e r t is in g com m o d ities ( ) f . Membership m eetings (fo r t r a n s a c t i n g business) ( ) g. R e c re a tio n a l m eetings (b u sin e ss held to a minimum) ( ) h. Square or f o lk dancing ( ) i . S o c ia l dancing 150 ( ) j . Movies { ) k . Study a c tio n or d is c u s s io n groups ( ) 1. R egional co-op m eetings (camps, i n s t i t u t e s , e tc .) ( ) m. Refreshm ents served a t the s to r e or a t m eetings (exclude d in n er m eetings) ( ) n. C alls by members of a committee on o th e r members ( ) o. Books, pam phlets, e t c . , d i s t r i b u t e d or m ailed to members ( ) p . Other methods Two hundred and s i x t y - s i x co o p erativ es answered t h i s ; q u e s tio n . I t i s u n lik e ly t h a t most of the resp o n d en ts r e membered a l l th e v a rio u s a c t i v i t i e s in which t h e i r coopera- I t i v e s p a r t i c i p a t e d ; the rec o rd of freq u e n cie s in Table XVIII should th e r e f o r e be considered a minimum r a t h e r th an a maxi mum l i s t i n g . The q u e stio n may be r a is e d whether i t i s not more l i k e l y t h a t th e respo ndents from th e le s s s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s would answer l e s s com pletely than those from th e ' more s u c c e s s f u l. This is h ig h ly u n lik e ly . In th e f i r s t p la c e , th e resp ond en ts from more s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s p ro b a b ly had more to r e p o r t and consequently could more e a s i l y f o r g e t a p o r tio n of i t . In th e second p la c e , c o o p e ra tiv e s ; u s u a lly p rid e them selves on the "education program" and wish' to record the g r e a t e s t p o s s ib le a c t i v i t y ; th e l e s s s u c c e ss - ' f u l , having a r e l a t i v e l y sm all ag greg ate to reco rd would be , ,s p e c i a l l y anxious to record e v e ry th in g p o s s ib le . The expec- i .t a t i o n i s , th e r e f o r e , t h a t the r e p l i e s r e f l e c t a more com p l e t e p ic tu r e of the a c t i v i t i e s of th e u n su c c e ssfu l than of TABLE X V III M E T H O D S U SE D BY 266 C O O P E R A T IV E S T O C O E T A O T M E M B E R S T A B U L A T E D BY P E R C E N T A G E O P A N Î T O A L M E M B E R S H IP IN C R E A S E 151 Percentage Increase Methods Used T o Contact M em ber s i Total Replies A B c D E F G H I J E L M N 0 P Under 2 22 11 22 17 33 kS' 6 2 1 16 9 11 22 16 11 10 50 2- 2.9 8 2 6 k 7 13 ) + 2 1 k 5 7 8 2 2 16 3- 3.9 12 k 7 6 10 20 5 1 1 3 3 8 10 5 6 3 22 4- ^.9 15 k Ik 13 16 2k 10 2 2 7 7 7 12 5 1^ 25 5- 6.9 17 h 16 15 21 31 16 6 3 10 13 22 6 16 7 31 7- 8.9 20 k 10 16 21 27 9 3 2 12 15 20 8 10 6 30 9- 10.9 9 5 7 5 10 15 9 3 2 10 2 7 15 6 3 3 16 11-12.9 11 5 7 10 12 13 10 9 3 10 7 9 15 8 12 2 16 13- 1%.9 k 1 1 1 5 3 2 1 0 k 1 1 2 2 1 + 7 15-16.9 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 3 l 7- 6kv9 19 9 16 21 2k 36 12 5 k 16 5 19 22 10 19 15 ^3 65 & up 3 3 3 3 5 7 3 0 0 2 2 1 2 0 1 5 7 T O T A L S 1^1 52 109 111 165 2I+3 86 3^ 19 96 31 99 151 70 101 Gk 266 ^ For a lis tin g of these methods in the order corresponding to the capital le tte r s on th is page, see p. 150* Small lettera are used there because the question was exactly quoted. 1 5 2 the s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s . A f u r t h e r q u e stio n may be r a is e d concerning th e a c curacy of the fig u r e s placed in the b ra c k e ts to in d ic a te how o fte n the method was used d u rin g the p a s t y e a r. There i s no q u e stio n t h a t , in many c a se s, th e se f ig u r e s were not e x a c t; indeed, th ey could not be exact except in the case of socie-, t i e s which conducted t h e i r edu catio n programs with consider-i a b le system and p r e c i s i o n . This i s ra r e in th e a u th o r 's | exp erien ce (being u s u a lly lim ite d to s o c i e t i e s w ith a paid | ed u ca tio n d i r e c to r ) as w e ll as c o n tra ry to th e behavior p a tt e r n s u s u a lly found in sm all o r g a n iz a tio n s . F ig u re s sho uld, t h e r e f o r e , be tak e n as in d ic a t i v e r a t h e r than as m ath em atically a c c u ra te sta te m e n ts of what a c t u a l l y occurred; A y e t more se rio u s q u e stio n invo lv es the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of th e d a ta . I t i s no t p o s s ib le f o r a s o c i e t y w ith a poor e d u c a tio n a l program to be s u c c e s s f u l because i t i s reap^ in g th e reward o f p rev io u s y ears of e x c e lle n t e d u c a tio n a l work? Both t h i s and th e o p p o site p o s s i b i l i t y i s very r e a l , and some o f the unexpected answers which were re c e iv e d may ' be exp lain ed in t h i s manner. The assum ption i s made in both t h i s and the fo llo w in g s e c tio n o f t h i s c h ap ter t h a t , i n th e case of a c o n sid e ra b le m a jo r ity of c o o p e ra tiv e s , th e q u a li t y and q u a n tity o f the e d u c a tio n a l e f f o r t has remained r e l a t i v e ^ ly the same over th e one or two year period o f tim e preced 1 5 3 ing the c u rre n t in q u ir y . The v a l i d i t y of t h i s s u p p o s itio n cannot be dem onstrated w ith th e d a ta in hand, and the only j u s t i f i c a t i o n which can be o ffe re d i s th e well-known g e n e ra l tendency of organized s o c i a l groups to change slow ly. With the above q u a l i f i c a t i o n s in mind the fre q u e n c ie s in Table XVIII were an alyzed . I t is obvious th a t the most commonly used method of c o n ta c tin g members was membership ! m eetings f o r the purpose of t r a n s a c t i n g b u sin e ss (F) w ith a t o t a l frequency o f 243. I t i s s u r p r i s i n g th a t every one of the respo ndents did not check t h i s item sin c e a dem ocratic o rg a n iz a tio n cannot be run w ithout such m eetings or t h e i r e q u iv a le n t, but tw e n ty -th re e o f th e respondents f a i l e d to do so . In view of the p r a c t i c a l l y unanimous agreement in t h i s regard shown in the a n a ly s is of adherance to Rochdale P r i n - i c ip le s ^ the most l i k e l y e x p la n a tio n f o r t h i s phenomenon i s o v e r s i g h t . Over h a l f of the re sp o n d en ts, a t o t a l of 165, s p e d - ' f i e d t h a t they m ailed cards or d i s t r i b u t e d throw-aways, e t c . , f o r the purpose of a d v e r t is in g commodities (E ). O ften such cards and throw-aways a re not lim ite d to commodity a d v e r t i s in g (as an exam ination of any number of them quickly shows); u s u a lly they ap p ea l to both the economic and th e i d e a l i s t i c ^ See page 99. 154 s id e of the membership, a p r a c t i c e which is in lin e w ith c u rre n t b u sin e ss folkw ays. One hundred and f i f t y - o n e c o o p erativ es sa id t h a t they served refreshm ents a t the s to r e or a t m eetings (M), a pro cedure which would encourage f r a t e r n i z a t i o n and emphasize the s o c i a l values i m p l i c i t in c o o p erativ e a c t i v i t i e s . One hundred and fo rty -o n e issu e d a news b u l l e t i n (A). Here ! a g a in , as in the case of the m a ilin g of cards and throw- iaways, the p u b lic a tio n o fte n c a r r i e s both a d v e r t i s i n g and I I p h ilo s o p h ic a l m a t e r i a l and appeals to both the economic and i d e a l i s t i c sid e of th e c o o p e ra to r. I t i s p ro b a b le , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t something of t h i s s o r t i s re c e iv e d by the o v e r whelming m a jo r ity of c o o p erato rs du rin g any given y e a r. ' As might be expected, a g re a t number o f c o o p erativ es made use of p o s te r s and b u l l e t i n boards (D and C ) . The f r e - ' quencies were 111 and 109 r e s p e c t i v e l y . This i s in contrast^ w ith the f i f t y - t w o s o c i e t i e s u sin g telephone committees (B), a device which re q u ir e s c o n sid e ra b ly more e f f o r t and tim e, but which a ls o p ro v id es an in tim a te r e l a t i o n s h i p in which Î prim ary group a t t i t u d e s can be developed. One hundred and | I one c o o p e ra tiv e s , or n e a rly 40 p er c en t, d i s t r i b u t e d books a n d /o r pamphlets to members (0 ). This i s a ls o a r e l a t i v e l y I e f f o r t l e s s p ro cedu re. When, out of th e t o t a l of 266 r e p l i e s to the q u estio n. 1 5 5 the frequency w ith which the v a rio u s methods were re p o rte d to have been used were arranged in order of d e c re a sin g f r e - ' 1 ,quency (the numbers in b ra c k e ts a re the fre q u e n c ie s) the fo llo w in g r e l a t i o n s h i p s were e s ta b lis h e d : 1. Membership m eetings (243) 2. Cards and throw-aways (165) i 3. Refreshm ents (151). These a re fre q u e n tly o ffe re d | in connection w ith membership m eetin g s. I 4. News b u l l e t i n (141) 5. P o s te r s (111) 6. N o tice s on b u l l e t i n boards (109) 7. Books, pam phlets, e t c . (101) 8 . R egional co o p erativ e m eetings (99). These a re u s u a lly a tten d e d by r e l a t i v e l y few members. 9. Movies (96). Often th e f i e l d man p rovides and o p e ra te s th e machine. 10. R e c re a tio n a l m eetings (86) 11. C a lls on o th e r members (70) 12. Other methods (64) 13. Telephone committee (52) 14. Study a c tio n or d is c u s s io n groups (51) t 15. Square or fo lk dancing (34) ' 16. S o c ia l dancing (19) The above a rra y su g g ests the fo llo w in g o b se rv a tio n s: 156 . 1. The frequency w ith which th e v a rio u s methods were ■ ,used i s p a r t l y e x p lic a b le by re fe re n c e to American mores and; folkways and to the co m p etitio n of commercial i n t e r e s t s . I f s o c i a l dancing, f o r example, were not as commonly a v a ila b le as i t i s in most communities t h i s frequency would probably be much l a r g e r . S im ila r ly , r e c r e a t i o n a l m eetings a re con t r a r y to c u rre n t American folkw ays; many Americans alm ost p rid e them selves on being too busy to "waste" an evening; when they go out they o fte n go in couples or as fam ily groups and i n t e r a c t alm ost e x c lu s iv e ly w ith each o th e r . Many c o o p erativ es provide a combination r e c r e a tio n - b u s in e s s membership m eeting, and some of the r e p l i e s under t h i s head ing probably r e f e r to g a th e rin g s of t h i s s o r t . 2. There is a rough in v e rs e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the fre q u e n c ie s w ith which v a rio u s methods were used and the e f f o r t n e ce ssa ry to use the method. For example, refreshm ents served a f t e r a m eeting a re r e l a t i v e l y p a in le s s to prepare and clean up a f t e r , whereas a d is c u s s io n group fre q u e n tly I inv o lv es refresh m ents as w ell as c o n sid era b le p re p a ra tio n ! on the p a r t of the le a d e r and th e h o s te s s . ! 3. There is a rough d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between th e , ,c lo sen e ss w ith which th e method is r e l a t e d to the economic a s p e c ts of co o p eratio n and the frequency w ith which i t is used . For example, a d v e r t i s i n g was used a t l e a s t fo ur or 157 f iv e tim es and p o s s ib ly s ix tim es (combining th e fre q u e n c ie s under numbers 2 and 4 on page 155) as f re q u e n tly as a t e l e - ■ phone committee. This l a t t e r i s not used f o r a d v e r t is in g commodities; i t s fu n c tio n is u s u a lly to get the member to m eeting s. Table XIX shows th e p ro p o rtio n s which r e s u l te d when ' the fre q u e n c ie s ta b u la te d under the v a rio u s ty pes of methods! (in Table XVIII) in the c a te g o r ie s of "Under 2" and "17-64.9" p e r cent membership in c re a s e were d iv id ed by th e t o t a l num ber of c o o p erativ es re p ly in g to the p a r t i c u l a r q u e stio n in th e given c a te g o ry . When the d if f e r e n c e s o b tain ed by sub t r a c t i n g the sm a ller percentag e of usage from th e la r g e r were examined f o r s i g n if ic a n c e i t was found t h a t both d i f fe re n c e s of twenty-two (methods "L" and "0") were com fort- : a b ly w ith in the 5 per cent l e v e l of s i g n i f ic a n c e . Both were 2.26 sta n d ard e r r o r s , and would, t h e r e f o r e , occur by chance not o f te n e r than 2.5 tim es in a hundred c a se s. The h ig h e r p ro p o rtio n f o r th e more s u c c e s s f u l co o p erativ es found under | method "L" (which r e f e r s to p a r t i c i p a t i o n in re g io n a l coop- ( e r a t i v e m eetings) i n d ic a te s a g r e a te r i n t e r e s t by members | of the more s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s in th e wider a s p e c ts of the, c o o p e ra tiv e movement. Camps and i n s t i t u t e s put on by re g io n a l c o o p erativ e o rg a n iz a tio n s g e n e r a lly provide fo r c o n s id e r a b le s o c i a l i t y o f a type designed to develop a sense of : 158 TABLE XIX PROPORTIONATE USAGE OF METHODS OF CONTACTING MEMBERS BY NINETY-THREE COOPERATIVES IN THE CATEGORIES OF "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" PER GENT ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE P ercentage o f T o ta l R e p lies Methods^ Under 2 17-64.9 D iffere n ce A 44 44 0 B 22 21 1 C 44 37 7 D 34 49 15 E 66 56 10 F 92 84 8 G 12 28 16 H 4 12 8 I 2 9 7 J 32 57 5 K 18 12 6 L 22 44 22 M 44 51 7 N 52 23 9 0 22 44 22 P 20 35 : . 15 ^ For a l i s t i n g of th ese methods in the o rd er c o rr e sponding to th e c a p i t a l l e t t e r s on t h i s page, see p. 149. Small l e t t e r s were used th e re because th e q u e stio n was e x a c t ly' qüb'fèd. - - ' 159 u n ity and consciousness of kind as w ell as to evoke p l e a s u r a b le r e a c t i o n s . F u r th e r , th e re is not only an i n t e l l e c t u a l qu ickening but an a c t u a l exchange of id e a s . I t is seldom t h a t such g a th e rin g s a re d evo ted , in.iany la rg e d eg ree, to te c h n ic a l a sp e c ts of b u sin e ss o p e ra tio n a lth o u g h i t is q u ite : commonly p o in te d out t h a t adequate fin a n c in g and good b u s i- ; \ n e ss procedures are e s s e n t i a l f o r co o p erativ e s u c c e ss . ' The second s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e was found w ith r e - ^spect to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of books and pam phlets, e t c . , ■ (method " 0 " ). Here a g ain tw ice as g re a t a percentage of the s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s d i s t r i b u t e d l i t e r a t u r e to t h e i r members; as did th e u n s u c c e s s fu l. Such books and pamphlets a re s e l - jdom, i f e v e r, even p a r t i a l l y focused on t e c h n ic a l a sp e c ts 'o f fin a n c e or b u s in e s s ; c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y they d e a l w ith ! the reaso n f o r co o p eratio n and what people have been ab le to ’ accom plish through the i n s t r u m e n t a l it y of c o o p e ra tio n . They, a re what one would g e n e ra lly c a l l "back-ground m a t e r i a l . ” One o th er d if f e r e n c e , th e d if f e r e n c e of s ix te e n found under "G" ( r e c r e a t i o n a l m eetings) was a ls o s i g n i f i c a n t , but : by so clo se a margin th a t i t could w ith equal j u s t i f i c a t i o n ! be counted as n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t . I t was 1.94 sta n d ard e r r o r s and could, th e r e f o r e , have occurred by chance in alm ost e x a c tly f i v e cases in a hundred. As has been noted e a r l i e r in t h i s c h a p te r, any e r r o r would be expected to exaggerate 1 160 the a c t i v i t i e s o f the le s s s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s ; i t is re a s o n a b le , t h e r e f o r e , to assume t e n t a t i v e l y t h a t t h i s d i f - , fe re n c e i s s i g n i f i c a n t . I t may be in f e r r e d t h a t when coop e r a t o r s p lay more t o g e th e r they are a ls o more e f f e c t i v e : i n t h e i r o th e r c o o p erativ e a c t i v i t i e s , t h a t p lay b u ild s an e s p r i t de c o rp s . R e c re a tio n c e r t a i n l y i s one means by which a f e e l i n g of group lik e n e s s and u n ity can be developed. | The th re e s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s seem to p o in t to jthe conclu sion th a t success i s r e la te d to inform ed, a c t iv e , i n t e r e s t e d , s o c i a l l y i n te g r a te d members and a group ch arac t e r i z e d by c o n sid e ra b le consciousness o f kind and a sense of u niqueness. None of the o th e r d if f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t . The , two g r e a t e s t (the f i f t e e n p o in ts d if f e r e n c e under methods and "P") were 1 .5 and 1 .6 sta n d ard e r r o r s r e s p e c t iv e ly , and would hence occur by chance in about t h i r t e e n and eleven cases out o f a hundred r e s p e c t i v e l y . When the d i f f e r e n c e s which were s i g n i f i c a n t are l e f t ' ! out of c o n s id e ra tio n and th o se in which the more unsu ccess- , f u l c o o p erativ es have the l a r g e r sc o re s a re l i s t e d to g e th e r,j ,we get the fo llo w in g grouping: : 1. N o tices (C) - a seven p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . 2. Cards and throw-aways (E) - a ten p o in t d if f e r e n c e 3. Membership m eetings f o r the conduct of b u sin e ss 161 '(F) - an e ig h t p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . 4. Study a c tio n and d is c u s s io n groups (K) - a s i x p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . 5. C a lls by a committee on o th e r members (N) - a nine p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . When we l i s t the d if f e r e n c e s in which the more su c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s have the la r g e r sc o re we g e t the follow ingj group ing: 1. P o s te r s (D) - a f i f t e e n p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . | 2. Square or f o lk dancing (H) - an e ig h t p o in t d i f - I f e r e n c e . 3. S o c ia l dancing (I) - a seven p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . 4. Movies (J) - a f iv e p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . I 5. Refreshm ents (M) - a seven p o in t d if f e r e n c e . | I 6. Other methods (P) - a f i f t e e n p o in t d i f f e r e n c e . - This l a s t c la s s (P) i s very s c a t t e r e d as f a r as typ es o f a c t i v i t i e s a re concerned. The fo llo w in g t i t l e s show both the v a r i e ty and something of the n a tu re o f th e s e methods : ' I open house, lunch and p r i z e s , d i r e c t c o n ta c ts in th e s t o r e , | d a i l y s o l i c i t i n g , newspaper a d v e rtis e m e n ts , c o n ta c ts by th e I ' I c o o p e r a tiv e 's employees, b ro a d c a s ts , p r i z e s , neighborhood ; I I ,group m eetings, co-op cap e rs, p e rs o n a l c o n ta c ts , a d v e r t i s e - | Iments in F in n is h p a p e rs, community p r o j e c t s , l e t t e r s to mem b e rs , e t c . The notew orthy th in g is t h a t a co n sid era b le p ro - 162 'p o rtio n of th e se procedures have to do w ith d i r e c t s o c i a l c o n ta c ts and p le a s a n t a c t i v i t i e s . They a r e , m oreover, in f u l l accord w ith American folkw ays. Looking now a t th e two groups of methods l i s t e d above i t i s n o tic e a b le t h a t those d if f e r e n c e s in which th e more s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s have a h ig h er sco re a re la r g e ly charac-i t e r i z e d by p le a s a n t s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s which a re in f u l l a c- I cord w ith American folkways and which involve c o n sid e ra b le f a c e - t o - f a c e i n t e r a c t i o n between the members. Those d if f e r - : ences in which the le s s s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s have a h ig h e r score a r e , in th r e e c a se s, im personal and have more to do w ith the economic than th e s o c i a l s id e of l i f e ; m oreover, ,they involve "work" on th e p a r t of the members of th e coop e r a t i v e . Two of them, d is c u s s io n groups and c a l l s by a committee on o th e r members, a re not in accord w ith American fo lk w ay s. None of th e se d if f e r e n c e s a re s i g n i f i c a n t , but the . c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s in d ic a te d above are i n t e r e s t i n g and impor- ‘ta n t because they tend to re in f o r c e th e co nclusions based on : 1 ■the d if f e r e n c e s which a re s i g n i f i c a n t . ; The a n a ly s is up to t h i s p o in t has d e a l t w ith the methods used. Let us now examine the fre q u e n c ie s w ith which’ th e v a rio u s methods were used. This should give some i n d i c a tio n of the i n t e n s i t y w ith which these methods were 165 p resen te d to the members of th e v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s . Table XX shows th e s e f r e q u e n c ie s . I t should be r e membered t h a t th ese f ig u r e s a re not h ig h ly a c c u ra te ; r a t h e r th ey a re g e n e ra l i n d i c a t i o n s . I t should f u r t h e r be noted t h a t th ere were in d iv id u a l cases in which very la rg e usages were re c o rd e d , and consequently the averages computed a re | not r e p r e s e n ta tiv e because of the r e s u l t i n g d i s t o r t i o n . For, I the above reaso n no a ttem p t was made to c a lc u la te whether or not the d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t ; th ey were examined s o l e ly to e s t a b l i s h any tre n d s which might be p r e s e n t, and to note whether they co rro b o ra te d th e f in d in g s of the a n a ly s i s to t h i s p o i n t. Since the raw sco res in Table XX show l i t t l e about th e d if f e r e n c e s between u n su c c e ssfu l and s u c c e s s fu l cooper- , a t i v e s , each frequency in the c a te g o r ie s of "Under 2" and "17-64.9" annual membership in c re a s e was d iv id ed by the number of c o o p e ra tiv e s answering in the given c ateg o ry . The r e s u l t a n t r a t i o s showing the average use of each method | a re shown in Table XXI to g e th e r w ith the p ro p o rtio n of the sm a lle r r a t i o to the l a r g e r and th e d if f e r e n c e between the ,r a t i o s . I t can be i n f e r r e d from Table XXI t h a t th e re is l i t t l e d if f e r e n c e between s u c c e s s fu l and u n su c c e ssfu l coopera t i v e s w ith reg a rd to th e e f f o r t which th ey expended to TABLE XX FRiqüSNCIBS W ITH W HICH VARIOUS M ETH O D S W B EE USED BY 1%1 COOPERATIVES TO C O N TA C T M EM B ER S TA BU LA TED BY PERCEN TA G E O F A N N U A L M EM BERSH IP INCREASE percentage Increase Frequency With Which The Various Methods Were Usedl Total ^pliesî A B 0 D E F G H I J K L M m 0 p Under 2 126 34 4l 20 279 100 23 1 3 36 10 22 56 22 57 0 31 2- 2.9 6 0 3 0 55 24 2 8 0 4 0 l4 7 0 0 3 5 3- 3.9 47 4 IS 9 18 13 4 4 0 2 15 12 9 50 4 0 7 k- 4 .9 42 10 49 45 164 31 22 37 0 2 11 6 20 13 11 1 11 5- 6.9 135 4 54 62 182 43 17 8 15 34 65 34 45 26 16 3 15 7- 8.9 131 14 33 22 149 50 29 4 0 23 17 35 352 28 51 0 19 9-10.9 115 15 22 37 124 31 26 l4 13 18 7 12 4o 9 18 26 11 11-12.9 160 14 18 42 87 37 16 9 5 12 IS 30 21 6 19 0 11 13- 14.9 2 1 4 4 52 4 2 1 0 2 3 2 6 0 1 52 1 15- 1 6 .9 2 0 0 0 12 3 0 0 0 0 " 0 1 2 14 4 0 3 17-64.9 128 42 68 83 121 57 56 67 2 14 27 35 29 12 12 606 24 65 & up 14 0 0 0 32 9 1 0 0 1 8 0 11 0 0 2 3 ^ For a listin g of these methods in the order corresponding to the capital letters on this page, see p$ 150* TABLE XXI 165 THE AVERAGE USE OF METHODS OF CONTACTING MEMBERS OF 141 COOP ERATIVES AND THE RATIO WHICH THE LARGER AVERAGE IS TO THE SMALLER IN THE CATEGORIES OF PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" Methods^ Average Use D iffe re n c e ^ "S" "U" R atio "Under 2" " P er Cent 17-64.9" Per Cent Sm aller Average, L arger Average A 4.06 5.35 1.27 .76 j B 1.10 1.75 .65 .63 G 1.32 2.83 1.51 .47 ' D .64 3.46 2.82 .18 E 9.00 5.04 3.96 .56 F 3.23 2.37 .86 .73 G .74 2.33 1.59 .75 H .03 2.79 2.76 .01 I .10 .08 .02 .80 J 1.16 .58 .58 .50 K .32 1.12 .80 .29 L .71 1.46 .75 .49 1 M 1.81 1.21 .60 .67 ! N .71 .50 .21 .70 ■ 1 0 1.84 .50 1.34 .27 P 0.0 25.25 25.25 .00 i 1 For a l i s t i n g of th e se methods see p. 149. 2 "S" in d ic a te s t h a t the average of th e s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s was the l a r g e r ; "U" in d ic a te s t h a t the unsuc- -c e s s fu l-c o o p e ra tiv e s had— the- l a r g e r - a v e r a g e .--------------------- 166 c o n ta c t t h e i r members. In nine cases the s u c c e s s f u l cooper a t i v e s had made more use of the p a r t i c u l a r method than had the u n su c c e ssfu l (see column "S "), but in seven cases the u n su c c e ss fu l had a h ig h er average use of th e p a r t i c u l a r method than the s u c c e s s f u l (see column "U") . I t might be asked i f t h i s r e l a t i v e e q u a lity was not compensated f o r by a sm a ller d if f e r e n c e in the average usage of a p a r t i c u l a r method in cases where the u n su c c e ssfu l soci-! e t i e s had the g r e a t e r usage and a l a r g e r d if f e r e n c e in cases where the s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s had the g r e a t e r average usage. This proved to be t r u e . When, in th e column t i t l e d "R atio" a l l th e c la s s e s in which th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s had the l a r g e r usage were averaged and compared w ith the correspond-; in g average f o r the u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s , the average r a - , t i o f o r the s u c c e s s f u l co o p erativ es (ex cludin g the fig u re under method "P" which was the r e s u l t of the very e x te n siv e use of ra d io programs by two la rg e s o c i e t i e s and could not be f a i r l y included) was .45 while t h a t f o r the u n su c c e ssfu l ■ was .60. In o th e r words, the u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p erativ es used the method 4 .5 tim es to each ten tim es i t was used by the s u c c e s s fu l in cases where the s u c c e s s f u l had a h ig her usage w hile th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s used the method s ix tim es fo r each ten tim es i t was used by th e u n su c c e ssfu l in cases where they had th e h ig h er average usage. Again exclu ding 167 the fig u re under "P", the average d if f e r e n c e under "S" (in th e " D iffere n ce " column of Table XXI) was 1.52 w hile t h a t under "U" was 1.0 8 . T his in d ic a te s th a t the s u c c e s s fu l d i f fe re d more from the u n su c c e ss fu l in c a te g o rie s where they had a h ig h er usage th an in th e o p p o site case . I t may be, th e r e f o r e , concluded t h a t th e frequ en cy w ith which a method was used was r e la te d in some degree to s u c c e ss , but th a t t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p was not one of dem onstrated r e l i a b i l i t y . I f we d is r e g a r d f o r the moment d if f e r e n c e s of l e s s than .50, the u n su c c e ss fu l s o c i e t i e s show h ig h er average usage of methods which inv olve fa c e p to -fa c e c o n ta c ts and i n t e r a c t i o n between members in two cases (membership m eet ings f o r t r a n s a c ti n g b u sin e ss and refresh m en ts served a t :m eeting, e t c . ) while the s u c c e s s f u l show h ig h er usage in f i v e such cases (teleph one comm ittee, r e c r e a t i o n a l m eetings, square or f o lk dan cin g , study a c tio n or d is c u s s io n groups, and r e g io n a l co-op m e e tin g s ) . F u rth e r , th e average d i f f e r ence between th e s u c c e s s f u l and u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p e ra tiv e s ' w ith reg a rd to the above methods is .73 fo r methods used more f r e q u e n tly by th e u n su c c e ss fu l and 1.31 fo r methods used more f r e q u e n tly by s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s . I t may then be concluded w ith re s p e c t to th e freq u e n c ie s w ith which the v a rio u s methods of c o n ta c tin g members are used t h a t those methods which involve f a c e - t o - f a c e 168 r e l a t i o n s h i p s and i n t e r a c t i o n between c o o p erato rs are used more o fte n by th e more s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s than by the un s u c c e s s f u l. Since a h igher p ro p o rtio n of the s u c c e s s f u l than of the u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s a re u sin g such methods as w ell as u sin g them more fr e q u e n tly when they do use them a t ' a l l ; i t can be affirm ed t h a t , a t l e a s t to some e x te n t, su c cess is r e l a t e d to f a c e - t o - f a c e c o n ta c ts and member i n t e r a c tio n . In summary, success is r e l a te d t o inform ed, i n te r e s t- ; ed a c tiv e members who have a cquired a consciousness of kind through p l e a s a n t, in tim a te , s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s w ith o th er c o o p e ra to rs . A c t i v i t i e s which a re focused on the economic a sp e c t of c o o p eratio n a n d /o r a re of a type which the p a r t i c i p a n ts con sider to be "work" a re r e l a te d to u n su c ce ssfu ln e ss More fre q u e n t usage of any method tends to be r e la te d to g r e a t e r su c c e ss . ' I I . THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE METHODS USED BY ■ * ! COOPERATIVES TO ESTABLISH CONTACTS ^ WITH NON-MEMBERS AND SUCCESS | 1 The respondent c o o p e ra tiv e s were asked t o answer the ' fo llo w in g q u e stio n : P le a se c i r c l e a l l of th e fo llo w in g means which your co o p erativ e has used to c o n ta ct non-members d u rin g th e p a st year and i n d ic a te in b ra c k e ts how 169 o fte n th e method was used d u rin g the y e a r. ( ) a . Members speaking to non-members about the c o o p erativ e as p a rt of a planned new member campaign ( ) b. A dvertisem ents (newspaper, r a d i o , b i l l b o a r d s , e t c . ) ( ) c. M ailin g c o o p erativ e l i t e r a t u r e { ) d. I n v i t i n g non-members to r e c r e a t i o n a l m eetings { ) e. I n v i t i n g non-members to b u sin e ss m eetings ( ) f . Having members a c t as speak ers f o r non- c o o p erativ e groups ( ) g. Planned c o n ta c ts in th e s to re (by a committee, | e t c . ) ( ) h. News n o tic e s in l o c a l papers ( ) i . Others Since t h i s q u e stio n i s very s im ila r to th e q u e stio n analyzed in the p reced in g s e c tio n , the remarks made t h e r e ^ apply w ith equal fo rc e to th e a n a ly s is which fo llo w s . Table XXII summarizes the r e t u r n s . An answer which was re c e iv e d w ith n o tic e a b le but unexpected frequency was ”None.*^ Such r e p l i e s were ta b u la te d s e p a r a te ly and c o n s t i tu te a s i g n i f i c a n t f r a c t i o n of the t o t a l r e p l i e s in c a t e gory " 0 - 1 . 9 , M where they a re 50 p er cent as fre q u e n t as the r e p l i e s from c o o p erativ es which were co n scio u sly t r y in g to | a t t r a c t members. The fre q u e n c ie s under "None" a re not i n cluded in the column "T o ta l R e p lie s ." In o rd e r to o b ta in comparable r a t i o s th e fre q u e n c ie s o b tain ed fo r the v a rio u s methods in the "0 -1 .9 " and "17-64.9 c a te g o r ie s were d iv id e d by the t o t a l r e p l i e s re c e iv e d in th e 2 See pp. 150-152. H H i C Q r4 (D c d * H -P I — I O Ph E h 0 C V 3 0 P O î s ; I — I 0 P ü 0 Ph 0 O u Pk p ü 0 "ë 8 o p 0 p 0 P 0 H f ü C î> N « o m 0 t l O 0 0 0 p 0 r i 0 0 u o ü ÎH ri 0 H P h _ to C Q C O rH (H o r4 r4 O 02 rH D» rH O C O oa to o rH rH 0 L Q 1 I C V J 03 03 02 tO 02 O) 02 «O tO D- rH rH « 1 ^ tO I — I I — I 02 O) C i LQ I — I O tP rH rH tO C O I — I G ) I P GO O) O 02 O rH rH CO Oi ^ 03 I —I r H I — I O ' rH rH 0> rH rH CO O - rH 02 tO rH rH O O D C O O ' ^ 02 O rH O O O C O O 02 02 O rH rH O rH CO O rH Oi tP rH rH O r H r H t O C O H ^ C O t O O 2 r H C 0 r H 02 O O O C O I — I C O e n ^ C O o 02 IP 02 O O rH O en CO rH tO 02 rH rH Oi O rH en 02 rH 02 rH CO CO (D y] H 02 en O) en en • • • • rH 02 CO ^ J 1 I 1 o 02 CO O ) e n y ] GO 1 t I P o O" lO 02 rH tO LP CO 02 yD en yD I — I I — I CO (O I — I I — I I — I IP IP I — I o 02 rH a en en en en en P , <tî • • • • • r i o 02 ^ y3 o I — I rH rH 1 — 1 (D cy E-4 I 1 I 1 I en rH CQ CP o IP I—i l —i l —i l —I tO 170 ri 0 p 0 0 > o p 0 0 rH 0 u 0 ri i « 0 p p p o •H p ri o « r i 0 ri o ♦H p 0 ri o« © p p « r i o îjD ri •H P 0 •iH rH 0 ri O • p c 4 e n yD rH rH P 0 0 0 02 171 p a r t i c u l a r c a te g o ry . The r e s u l t s o b tain ed a re shown in Table XXIII. The d if f e r e n c e between the p ro p o rtio n of "None" r e p l i e s to "None" plu s "T otal" r e p l i e s in the ”0 -1 .9 " and "17-64.9" c a te g o r ie s was a ls o computed; i t was found to be 26 per c e n t. When t h i s f ig u r e was t e s te d f o r s ig n if ic a n c e i t was found to be 3 .1 sta n d ard e r r o r s and could hence occur' ! by chance in .194 cases in a hundred. I t is c le a r , th e r e - ^ f o r e , t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s often cannot win members u n less they, use some method to c o n ta c t them which is s y s te m a tic a lly planned in advance. This i s h a rd ly s u r p r i s i n g . In th e case of method "B" (A dvertisem ents) th e re was a d i f f e r e n c e of 29 per cent between th e two c o n tra s te d cate-l 'g o r i e s . This a ls o proved t o be s i g n i f i c a n t , sin c e th e d i f fe re n c e was 2.48 sta n d a rd e r r o r s and could th e re fo re have occurred by chance in about 1.3 cases or le s s in a hundred. I t i s c le a r , s in c e th e "17-64.9" categ o ry had th e la r g e r per cen tag e, t h a t more s u c c e s s f u l than u n su c c e ss fu l s o c i e t i e s j : ' I ;make use of a d v e rtise m e n ts of v a rio u s s o r t s . Method "I" ( O th e r s ) , which i s a c a t c h - a l l c la s s if i e s - ! I Itio n , showed a d if f e r e n c e o f 2.19 sta n d ard e r r o r s between I the sc o res in the high and low c a te g o rie s of member increase! This could occur by chance in about 2.7 cases in one hundred, and was c l e a r l y a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e . A pparently more , : I 172 TABLE XXIII THE PERCENTAGE OF USAGE OF NINE METHODS FOR CONTACTING MEMBERS IN THE HIGH AND LOW CATEGORIES OF M EMBER INCREASE Methods P er Member Under 2 Cent In c re a s e 17-64.9 D iffere n ce A .47 .65 .18 B .44 .73 .29 G .56 .40 .16 D .25 .25 .00 E .39 .50 .11 E .28 .25 .03 G .28 .20 .08 H .31 .48 .17 I .08 .28 .20 173 of th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s than of th e u n su c c e ss fu l use "o th e r" methods than those l i s t e d in th e q u e s tio n n a ir e . i When th ese "o th e r" methods were c l a s s i f i e d on the b a sis of p e rso n al and im personal c o n ta c ts , the fo llo w in g r e s u l t s were o b tain ed : ^ A. P e rso n a l c o n ta c ts : 1. D isc u ssio n groups 2. An "at home" fo r the neighborhood 3. "Kitchen p a r t i e s " 4. C o n tactin g newcomers to town 5. D em onstrating products so ld by th e co o p erativ e 6. S erv ing co ffe e in the s to r e 7. C ontacts by a f i e l d man 8. C h a ttin g w ith neighbors about co operatio n 9. "Co-op businessman d in n e r" 10. Members i n v i t i n g p ro sp e cts to m ee tin g s, e tc . 11. E ducation d i r e c t o r m eeting p ro s p e c ts , 12. Committee c a l l i n g on p ro sp e c ts The t o t a l frequency w ith which th e above were used was se v en te en . B. Im personal c o n ta c ts : 1. C ir c u la rs m ailed to a "phone l i s t " 2. A s e r i e s of s to r e windows on th e co-op idea i 3. M ailing news b u l l e t i n s to p ro sp e c ts : 174 4. M ailing l e t t e r s to p ro sp e c ts 5. Sending out a p ro sp e ctu s of the co o p erativ e 6. M ailing a co op erativ e paper to p ro sp e c ts 7. News items in union papers The t o t a l frequency w ith which the above were used was te n , w ith about h a lf o f the t o t a l coming from th e r e tu r n s of le s s s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s . C. P a r t l y p e rs o n a l and p a r t l y im personal c o n ta c ts : 1. Radio program. This would norm ally be e n tire ly : im personal, but in one case th e b ro ad c ast was a t a l e n t show; t h i s would e m o tio n ally involve ■ everyone who knew any of th e lo c a l t a l e n t used. 2. Sponsorship of an evening m eeting w ith th e l o c a l P.T.A . This included the showing of Co-op m ovies. 3. P r e s e n tin g the idea of co o p eratio n a t union m eetings 4. The sp onsorship of a s o f t b a l l team 5. P la c in g a f l o a t in a parade 6. The assum ption of c iv ic r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1 'The t o t a l frequency of mention of th e above item s was e i g h t . I t i s notew orthy t h a t th e c o n sid era b le m a jo rity of I the methods l i s t e d above in vo lv e f a c e - t o - f a c e c o n ta c t s . I t must be concluded, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t more o f th e s u c c e s s f u l 17 5 than of the u n su c c e ss fu l s o c i e t i e s use f a c e - t o - f a c e c o n ta c ts as a tech n iq u e fo r winning new members in s o f a r as th ese con-; t a c t s involve o th er a c t i v i t i e s th an th o se l i s t e d in the q u e stio n which is th e b a s is f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s . R eturning to methods not d isc u sse d thus f a r , the o th e r d i f f e r e n c e s proved so sm all t h a t they could have oc curred by chance in eleven or more cases in a hundred. I t > ! i s i n t e r e s t i n g to n o te , however, t h a t the more s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s made more e x te n siv e use o f the technique of mem b e rs speaking to non-members while the l e s s s u c c e s s fu l put more s t r e s s on m a ilin g co o p erativ e l i t e r a t u r e . A lso, more : of th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s , on the whole, used more o f the methods suggested in the q u e stio n th an did the le s s s u c c e s s f u l . The con clu sio n from the fo re g o in g is t h a t , on the whole, the more s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s use a g r e a te r v a r i e t y of both p e rs o n a l and im personal methods to c o n ta ct p rospects. This d i f f e r e n c e i s not very s t r i k i n g in some cases but was ^ s i g n i f i c a n t in the case of th e methods "O thers" and "Adver tis e m e n ts ." S o c ie tie s having no planned c o n ta c ts w ith non members f re q u e n tly have neg lig a b le membership growth. There a re i n d ic a tio n s t h a t d i r e c t , p e rs o n a l methods of c o n ta ct are: ! more e f f e c t i v e th an th e i n d i r e c t , b u t t h i s i s not conclusive- ;ly dem o n strated . F u r th e r, th e re i s no evidence to su ggest : 176 t h a t im personal methods of c o n ta c tin g members a re not v a lu a b le . Let us now tu r n from methods used to c o n ta c t non members to the frequency w ith which th e s e methods were used. Table XXIV shows th e fre q u e n c ie s w ith which th e v a r i ous methods were used by th e respondent c o o p e ra tiv e s . I t should be noted t h a t h e re , as in th e case of the f r e q u e n c i e s , d isc u sse d in th e p receed in g s e c tio n of t h i s c h a p te r, the t o t a l s and any f i g u r e s based upon them a re d e ce p tiv e because, th e r e were la rg e i n d iv id u a l fre q u e n c ie s which tended to d i s t o r t th e p i c t u r e . I t should a ls o be noted t h a t r e l a t i v e l y few of the s o c i e t i e s which cooperated in the study answered t h i s q u e stio n (111 out of 287). This poor p ro p o rtio n of r e p l i e s might w ell be a r e s u l t of lac k of knowledge in a number of c ase s; i t su g g e sts th a t those f i g u r e s which were o b tain ed a re probably proxim ate r a t h e r than a c c u ra te . T h irty -o n e , of co u rse, had answered "None." For the above reaso n s no attem p t was made to t e s t th e d if f e r e n c e s between th e more and th e le s s s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s f o r s i g n i f i cance. When the fre q u e n c ie s found in each c ateg o ry of member sh ip in c re a s e under each method were d iv id e d by th e number o f co o p erativ es which answered in each c a te g o ry , a r a t i o w a s, o b tain ed which was comparable to the co rrespon din g r a t i o s in O E-t m -p ri rH 0 0 T J p > ri o o E-t O i m 0 H !x l O M o pq 0 tiO 0 0 0 + 3 0 d 0 0 ri o o u d 0 H A n o o - G O G O Oi o - o O 03 00 rH rH rH rH rH rH 03 o O O 03 Ht 03 rH o O 03 O L O rH rH ID O C O lO o to Oi 03 rH to rH 'tj't to C O o 03 C O rH o Oi 'tH 'tj't L O t o O i rH C O O lO O) O rH C O t o o - o rH rH rH 03 C O rH o 'tjt O 03 sM t o G O o O 03 O rH rH rH rH rH rH Oi ID 03 O- Oi rH G O rH 'ttt C O G O G O 1 — 1 I — 1 rH rH 03 rH t o 'tft o tO O rH 'tj't t o 03 o O rH 1 — 1 rH 03 rH rH t o 03 C O O 03 C O O G O lO 'tj't 03 O rH rH G O Oi O- rH t o rH G O rH O o> C O G O Oi to to o - O 03 1 — 1 03 Oi O o - t o C O rH rH 1 — 1 03 rH t o rH rH rH G O rH 03 O C O 'tj't 03 C O C O rH 03 Oi 03 rH rH rH 03 rH 03 O i Oi o* Oi C T > Oi Oi Oi Oi Oi Ot ri ri 03 C O t o G O O 03 to 0 rH rH rH rH to o8 nO I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 d 03 C O lO O Oi rH C O L O o - t o rH rH rH 1 — 1 to C O C O C O C O Oi C O G i lO C O r4 o> lO C O O i C O $ IQ 03 03 C O rH I O ' E4 177 xt d 0 -P 0 0 > O 0 0 rH 0 ri 0 d I p 4 -p Ü •H ri O < r i 0 d o •iH -p 0 0 & 0 < r i O W d •H + 3 0 •H 0 ri p • . P h O i ' o : rH rH ' 0 I 0 0 178 o th e r c a te g o r ie s . These average annual usages o f the v a r i ous methods a re shown in Table XXV. I t is n o tic e a b le t h a t the c o o p erativ es in the "17-64.9" percentage in c re a s e c a te gory had h ig h er s c o r e s , on the whole, th an those in the low c a te g o r ie s of membership in c r e a s e . In the "Under 2" c a te - ' gory the only score which was h igher than th o se in the "17- , 64.9" category was the 1.12 found under "E," in the "2-2 .9" ' categ o ry only th e 2.14 under "E" and the 4.29 under "H," in the "3 -3 .9 " category only th e 1.75 found under " E ," and in ! the "4 -4 .9 " category only th e .88 found under "P ." As t h i s comparison is c a r rie d down through the c a te g o r ie s th e re are an in c r e a s in g number of methods where o th e r c a te g o r ie s show h ig h e r sco res than th o se in th e "17-64.9" c a te g o ry . I t is c l e a r , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t a g r e a t e r p ro p o rtio n of th e more suc c e s s f u l than of the l e s s s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s use th e meth ods they s e l e c t w ith g r e a t e r freq u en cy . C ooperatives in the "17-64.9" category used methods "A," "B," "E," "H" and "I" more fre q u e n tly than tho se in the "Under 2" c a te g o ry . Method "D" was used e q u a lly o fte n by both groups. Methods "C," "E" and "G" were used w ith great-^ e r frequency by the c o o p e ra tiv e s in the "Under 2" c a te g o r y .5 The average usage o f th o se methods used by more cooperatives: ^ See p. 172 f o r docum entation of th e s e s ta te m e n ts . a M I I W g S O H O m H H q g ■ 3 Î M E -4 M H O 8 g g g ^ H C O rH C t : P PQ fH l e i s I — I X t ( D § C Q nd O x i -p 0 H p q P Q Q pq 0 W 0 0 C Q - P 0 c! 0 0 r i Ü O r i r i 0 H to o O o 03 03 O O o O 00 o to o O O o 02 00 03 H O o IS o 1 —1 tQ o O o 1 —1 LQ O o to H o A 0 0 [S o> O to O LQ o O o o o c n 02 O 1 —1 O to to H LQ o Gi o rq 1 —1 02 H 00 LQ to 1 —1 to 03 o 0 -p C Q to CD O LQ to O O LQ o O o c n LQ H to O Uj IS o 1 —1 03 LQ LQ o u O 00 H o 1 —1 « 03 H o 0 -p -p 0 1 —1 LQ O LQ CD 03 03 o o O O to o H to O IS GO 03 00 to GO o O to o 0 O 1 —1 1 —1 1 —1 o O o -p •H A 0 Ü CV3 LQ 00 1 —1 LQ o o o o O o 0 f-H H 02 GO 1 —1 to 00 1 —1 o LQ O o x5 H 02 03 03 H H H GO -p « •H x i LQ O CO O H o O O O O o to O 00 o 1 —1 03 LQ LQ O O o 02 H 1 —1 1 —1 1 —1 O to o u o A C Q x { IS to LQ LQ sM 1 —1 o O O O o o ' t } « sM 03 03 sM o GO LTi U1 O 00 o X N H H o> IS to 03 03 o -p 0 Q 0 X 02 to Lf: Oi Oi o O o O Gi o -p 1 —1 1 —1 to 03 GO LQ 00 Gi o O CO o <ri O r-i to 03 H 1 —1 Oi H o> to to H to H Gi 0 3 . to LQ 'th o o tû ri •H LQ H LQ 00 Gi O O LQ O 03 o -p to IS 02 to 03 to to 03 O IS o 0 H H H H 1 —1 03 03 ♦H r —1 0 g 02 Oi Gi o> G> Gi Gi Gi Gi Gi Gi p r i 0 to to 00 O H 03 1 —1 H to H sM to ri 1 —1 1 1 03 1 to 1 LQ IS Gi rH H to H LQ H IS 1 —1 LQ to 179 180 ,in the "Under 2" c ateg o ry was 1.22 in th e "Under 2" category and 1.68 in the "17-64.9" c ateg o ry , a d if f e r e n c e in average , usage o f .46 in fa v o r of th e h ig h e r c ateg o ry . C onversely, in th e case of th ose methods used more e x te n s iv e ly by coop e r a t i v e s in th e "17-64.9" categ ory the average usage fo r the c o o p e ra tiv e s in the "Under 2" category was 2.68 and f o r th e ^ c o o p e ra tiv e s in th e "17-64.9" categ ory was 13.77; th e d iffe r^ ence in t h i s case was 11.03. I t i s again obvious th a t more s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s use methods f o r c o n ta c tin g p ro sp e c ts w ith n o tab ly g r e a t e r frequency than th e l e s s s u c c e s s f u l. The d a ta on frequency of use i n d ic a te t h a t the g r e a t e r th e frequency w ith which methods of c o n ta c tin g p ro sp e cts a re used th e g r e a t e r the membership in c re a s e which may be expected (o th e r th in g s being e q u a l ) . In c o n clu sio n , th e a n a ly s is of th e d a ta in t h i s s e c t i o n has shown t h a t: 1. There i s a s tro n g lik e lih o o d t h a t few i f any new members w i l l be won w ith o u t the use of d e f i n i t e methods fo r c o n ta c tin g such p ro s p e c ts ; eig h tee n out of the th ir t y - o n e c o o p e ra tiv e s s ig n if y in g t h a t th ey used no methods f o r con t a c t i n g p ro sp e c ts had no new members.^ 2. Of the v a rio u s methods examined which might be 4 See p . 170. 181 used f o r c o n ta c tin g p ro sp e c tiv e members, more of th e more s u c c e s s f u l than of the le s s s u c c e s s f u l co o p erativ es used "B" (A dvertisem ents) and "I" (O thers)*^ The d if f e r e n c e s in th e s e two cases were c l e a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t . I t is d o u b tfu l, however, whether e i t h e r of th e s e two methods should be con s id e re d to be r e l a t e d to s u c c e s s . One is dom inantly p e rso n a l in n a tu re w hile the o th e r i s im personal, and consequently . th ey a re not complementary and p o in t to o p posite co n clu sion s. I t is more probable t h a t the im portant f a c to r involved is the freq uency w ith which th e se methods a re used. 3. While th e d if f e r e n c e s found could have occurred by chance, more of th e le s s s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s m ailed l i t e r a - : tu r e to p ro sp e c ts (Method "C") w hile more of the s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s used th e method o f speaking to non-members ' ( "A") . 4. The more s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s con tacted non-mem b ers by both p e rso n a l and im personal methods; th e form er appeared to be more e f f e c t i v e (alth o u g h t h i s is not c l e a r l y dem onstrated by th e d a ta ) but th e r e is no i n d ic a tio n in the d a ta t h a t t h e . im personal methods were not v a lu a b le . 5. The more s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s had an immensely g r e a t e r average usage of both p e rs o n a l and im personal * 5 See pp. 173 f f . f o r a breakdown of t h i s c a te g o ry . 182 methods of c o n ta c tin g p ro sp e c ts than the le s s s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s . As f a r as th e d a ta examined a re concerned, the frequency of c o n ta c ts w ith p ro sp e c ts appears to be the c r u c i a l f a c t o r in d eterm in in g s u c c e ss . I I I . THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEM THE METHODS USED TO RAISE EDUCATION FUNDS AND SUCCESS The v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s which p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h i s study were asked the fo llo w in g q u e stio n : How a re your edu catio n funds ra is e d ? a . A p ercen tag e o f t o t a l volume of b u sin e ss b. A p ercentag e of net income c. A fix e d sum p er y ear d . A p ercen tag e of savings e. Varying sums voted from tim e to tim e by th e board o f d i r e c t o r s f . Other The assum ption behind t h i s q u e stio n was th a t those c o o p e ra tiv e s which were most sy ste m atic about r a i s i n g th e n e ce ssa ry funds would be th e most l i k e l y to have adequate funds when they needed them. Such c o o p e ra tiv e s should be more s u c c e s s f u l, o th er th in g s being e q u a l. Table XXVI summarizes the r e t u r n s . S ince i t was not ! a n ti c i p a te d t h a t any co o p erativ e would n o t use some method f o r o b ta in in g e d u c a tio n funds no p ro v is io n was made f o r th is, ; p o s s i b i l i t y . The column "None" i s consequently a l i s t i n g of such answers which were found in c la s s "F" (O th er); the ' 183, TABLE XXVI THE M ETHODS USED BY 243 COOPERATIVES TO RAISE EDUCATION FUNDS TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE P ercen tag e Methods Used to Raise Funds^ In c re a s e A B C D E F (None) 2 Tota] Under 2 7 2 1 4 16 19 (10) 49 2— 2*9 3 4 1 1 5 3 (1) 17 3- 3 .9 2 2 3 2 5 7 (2) 21 4— 4*9 6 4 2 2 7 5 (1) 26 5 - 6 . 9 4 5 2 1 10 4 (1) 26 7- 8 .9 9 2 4 2 7 5 (2) 29 9-10.9 3 2 1 0 4 6 (0) 16 11-12.9 3 0 1 0 7 4 (0) 15 13-14.9 1 0 0 1 4 1 (0) 7 15-16.9 0 1 0 2 0 1 (1) 4 17-64.9 7 10 3 3 8 10 (4) 41 65 & up 3 2 0 0 0 4 (1) 9 TOTALS 48 34 18 18 73 69 (23) 260 ^ See P* 182 f o r the v a rio u s a l t e r n a t i v e s . The smal] ' l e t t e r s correspond w ith the c a p i t a l s used in t h i s ta b le ^ The column "None” r e p r e s e n ts one p a r t of the f r e quencies found in column "F" ( O th e r ) . 184 ; t o t a l ’TSÎone" answers are a p a r t of the t o t a l answers l i s t e d ! under "F ." In th e category "Under 2" th e re were alm ost as many "None" answers (ten) as in a l l the o th er c a te g o rie s put to g e th e r ( th ir t e e n ) . On the s u rfa c e i t would seem t h a t i t takes money to get new members. However, i t should be noted t h a t fo u r c o o p e ra tiv e s in th e "17-64.9" categ o ry a ls o an- ,swered "None." N othing d e f i n i t i v e can be s t a te d w ith fo u r s o c i e t i e s as a b a se , b ut i t is i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t a l l fo u r of : the c o o p e ra tiv e s were very sm all (under 150 members), two of them were over elev en y e ars old and in v e ry sm all com m u n ities (under 3,500 p o p u latio n ) while two were l e s s than two y ears old and in s iz e a b le c i t i e s . I t should be noted ; t h a t in sm all s o c i e t i e s th e re i s a t r a d i t i o n of member p a r t i c i p a t i o n which is o f te n l o s t l a t e r as the s o c ie ty becomes l a r g e r ; f u r t h e r , a sm all s o c ie ty u s u a lly in clu d es in i t s membership the more a g g re ssiv e and convinced c o o p erato rs in the lo c a l p o p u la tio n . These f a c t s help to e x p la in th e phe nomenon. The o b se rv a tio n made a t the b egin nin g of t h i s p ar-' agraph should be m odified to read t h a t i t ta k e s money to geti new members u n le s s o th e r f a c t o r s a re o p e ra tin g which a t t r a c t ' p ro sp e c ts and do th e job money u s u a lly do es. : When the fre q u e n c ie s under the v a rio u s methods in the c a te g o r ie s of member in c re a s e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" were 185 d iv id e d by the t o t a l number of c o o p e ra tiv e s in each catego ry , th e average frequency fo r each method in th e two c a te g o r ie s was e s t a b l is h e d . These r a t i o s a re shown in Table XXVII. I t is c le a r t h a t th e l a r g e s t d if f e r e n c e between th e more and th e l e s s s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s occurred w ith r e s p e c t to method "B" (p ercen tage o f n et incom e), where th e r a t i o in th e "17-64.9" categ o ry was twenty p o in ts h igh er ; th an in th e "Under 2" c a te g o ry . This d if f e r e n c e proved to , be 2.7 9 sta n d ard e r r o r s , and hence c l e a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t ( i t ; would occur by chance in about one case in two h u n d red )• I t i s d i f f i c u l t to suggest any reaso n f o r t h i s . I t i s c le a r ly n o t in agreement w ith th e assum ption t h a t g r e a t e r su c c e ss i s a r e s u l t of sy ste m a tic fund r a i s i n g , s in c e i t i s not more sy s te m a tic to r a i s e funds by a l l o t t i n g a fix e d p ercen tag e of : net income than to a l l o t a p e rc en ta g e o f the t o t a l volume of b u sin e ss or a p ercentage of sa v in g s, and none of the o th er d i f f e r e n c e s , in c lu d in g t h a t under "None," were even c lo s e to being s i g n i f i c a n t . : I A p a r t i a l e x p la n a tio n l i e s in the f a c t th a t many s o c i e t i e s used more than one method f o r r a i s i n g funds i n c lu d in g a c o n sid e ra b le number of techn iques lumped under : mettiod "F ." These included i n i t i a t i o n f e e s , food s a l e s , f e s t i v a l s , s o c i a l a f f a i r s , c o n tr ib u tio n s , use of non-member sa v in g s, charging e d u c a tio n a l e x p e n d itu re s to expenses. 186 TABLE XXVII THE PROPORTIONS OF NINETY FREQUENCIES GROUPED BY CATEGORIES OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE AND METHODS OF RAISING EDUCATION FUNDS TO THE TOTAL FREQUENCY IN THE CATEGORY : P er Cent Membership In c re a s e Methods^ Under 2 17-64.9 D iffe re n c e A .14 .17 .03 B .04 .24 .20 ,G .02 .07 .05 D .08 .07 .01 E .32 .20 .12 , F .39 .24 .15 ! (None) .20 .10 .10 ^ For a l i s t i n g of th e methods fo r which the c a p i t a l ; l e t t e r s stand see p. 182. 187 p ercen tag es o f the r e b a te s rec eiv e d by members from mer c h a n ts, e tc . There was a v a r i e t y of com binations of th ese w ith the methods l i s t e d in the q u e stio n ; t h i s made f u r t h e r a n a ly s is im p o ssib le . N e v e rth e le s s , i t i s of i n t e r e s t th a t the f i r s t th re e methods of r a i s i n g e d u ca tio n funds (a p e r centage o f t o t a l volume of b u sin e ss, a percentag e o f n et income, and a fix e d sum per year) were used to a g r e a te r e x te n t by the more s u c c e s s fu l while th e l a s t two (varying sums voted from tim e to time by the board of d i r e c t o r s and " O th e r," /a g r e a t p ro p o rtio n of which w as made up of "None" answers) were used to a g r e a t e r degree by th e le s s su c c e ss f u l . This i s in agreement w ith the assum ption made a t th e beginning o f t h i s s e c tio n but i s , of co u rse, p u re ly su g g e st- tiv e sin c e a l l but one of th e d if f e r e n c e s a re n o t s i g n i f i cant . At t h i s p o in t the q u e stio n of the amount spent i n tru d e s i t s e l f . The purpose of adop ting one of the above methods (or some o th er) is to r a i s e money, and in each case the amount of money ra is e d by the method i s the c r u c i a l q u e s tio n . This r e l a t i o n s h i p between th e amount of funds and success w i l l be examined in S e c tio n V of t h i s c h a p te r. A ll t h a t can be concluded a t t h i s p o in t is meagre. The d a ta c le a r l y dem onstrate th a t more of the s u c c e s s f u l than of th e u n su c c e ss fu l s o c i e t i e s r a i s e a t l e a s t p a r t of 188 t h e i r funds by a l l o c a t i n g a percentag e of net income, a f a c t which has no a p p aren t s ig n if ic a n c e fo r t h i s stu d y . I t is in d ic a te d but not proved th a t i t u s u a lly takes some money to win new members and t h a t sy ste m a tic fund r a i s i n g i s more l i k e l y to lead to su ccess than the o pp osite co u rse. I t i s c l e a r , however, t h a t no m a tte r how a c o o p erativ e r a i s e s i t s , funds i t can be s u c c e s s f u l. The c r u c i a l p o in t seems to be ! to r a i s e s u f f i c i e n t funds by whatever method i s chosen or prov ide a f r e e s u b s t i t u t e f o r what th e fund would p u rch ase. IV. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TREND IN EDUCATIONAL W ORK AND SUCCESS The respondents were asked the fo llo w in g q uestio n : P le a s e c i r c l e the statem ent which b e st ex presses th e tre n d in e d u c a tio n a l work in your c o o p erativ e d u rin g the p a s t f i v e y e a rs : a . G re a tly expanded b. Somewhat expanded c . Stayed about the same ; d. Decreased somewhat ’ e . Decreased c o n sid e ra b ly f . Has been d isc o n tin u e d Table XXVIII summarizes the r e t u r n s . Two hundred and i f i f t y - e i g h t c o o p erativ es answered the q u e s tio n . I t i s no t i c e a b l e t h a t very few of the s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es have e i t h e r d isc o n tin u ed or c o n sid e ra b ly decreased (tren d s "E" and ”F") t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l work w hile a c o n sid e ra b le number . 189 TABLE X X V III THE TREND IN EDUCATIONAL W ORK IN 258 COOPERATIVES TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE P ercen tag e In c re a se Trend in E d u ca tio n a l Work^ A B C D E F Under 2 1 7 14 6 11 11 1 2- 2.9 1 3 4 1 5 1 5- 5.9 0 6 13 1 2 1 4- 4.9 3 5 5 4 5 1 5- 6,9 6 4 10 5 3 0 7- 8.9 6 6 15 2 1 1 9-10.9 3 7 5 1 1 0 ' 11-12.9 3 6 4 1 2 0 15-14.9 1 3 2 0 1 0 ' 15-16.9 0 2 1 1 0 1 17-64.9 11 8 12 3 1 2 65 & up 3 1 1 0 0 1 , TOTALS . 58 58 86 25 52 19 ! ^ For a l i s t i n g of these tre n d s see p . 188. The sm all l e t t e r s correspond w ith the c a p i t a l l e t t e r s on t h i s page. 190 of th e u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s have done so . The g r e a t e s t s in g le number (e ig h ty - s ix ) have m aintained t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l a c t i v i t i e s a t about the same l e v e l , but more ( n in e ty - s ix ) have in c re a se d such a c t i v i t i e s (tre n d s "A" and "BT) than have d ecreased or d isc o n tin u e d i t (tren d s "D," "E" and "F,". w ith a t o t a l frequency o f s e v e n t y - s i x ) . As in the case of some of the o th e r q u e s tio n s , th e r e s u l t s are bound to be somewhat m isle a d in g because some of the s o c i e t i e s which give evidence of being s u c c e s s fu l to a g r e a t e r o r le s s degree and y et have poor e d u c a tio n a l p ro grams may be re a p in g the r e s u l t s of a previous p e rio d when they were e d u c a tio n a lly more r o b u s t. Such cases a re prob a bly r e l a t i v e l y few.® There may a ls o be cases where the co- . o p e ra tiv e i s growing due to the e x c e lle n c e of i t s b u sin e ss le a d e r s h ip . There is no doubt t h a t su p e r-m a rk ets, as a whole, have dem onstrated tremendous p u l li n g power, and a n o n - p r o f it b usiness could have eq ual p u l l . Here a g a in , how e v e r, th e re is c o n sid e ra b le q u e stio n i f more than a handful of c o o p erativ es a re growing fo r t h i s reason a lo n e . An exam in a t i o n of the r e tu r n s shows r e l a t i v e l y few co o p erativ es o p e ra tin g a s to r e w ith volume comparable to t h a t of a super-i m a rk e t. When the raw f ig u r e s in the c a te g o rie s of "Under 2" ^ See p. 152 fo r a__discussion_jp.f_ t h i s .p o in t 191 and "17-64.9" of Table XXVIII were t r a n s l a t e d in to r a t i o s by d iv id in g each of the fre q u e n c ie s in columns "A," "B," e t c . , by th e t o t a l number in the categ o ry , the fo llo w in g r e s u l t s were o b tain ed ; A B 0 D E E Under 2 .02 .14 .28 .12 .22 .22 17-64.9 .30 .22 .33 .08 .03 .05 D iffere n ce .28 .08 .05 .04 .19 .17 , When these d if f e r e n c e s were t e s t e d the 25 per cent , found under tre n d "A" ( g r e a tly expanded) proved to be s i g n i f i c a n t . This spread was 3.74 sta n d a rd e r r o r s , and could t h e r e f o re have occurred by chance in le s s than one case in f iv e thou sand. There i s consequently no doubt t h a t success-' I ;f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s , on the whole, a re g r e a t ly expanding t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l work in s i g n i f i c a n t l y more cases th an are th e u n su c c e s s fu l; th e re i s a c le a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between marked expansion of the e d u c a tio n a l program and su c c e ss. The n in e te e n p o in t d if f e r e n c e under "E" (decreased c o n sid era b ly ) was found to be 2.55 sta n d ard e r r o r s . This :was a ls o c l e a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t sin c e i t could have occurred by chance in le s s th an one case in a hundred. This tren d ,i s th e converse of tre n d "A" ( g r e a t ly expanded), and as would be expected a d ecrease in e d u c a tio n a l work is c le a r l y a s s o c ia te d w ith lac k of s u c c e ss . 192 When th e sev en teen p o in t d if f e r e n c e under "F" (has been d isc o n tin u e d ) was t e s t e d fo r s ig n if ic a n c e i t was found to be 2 .2 sta n d a rd e r r o r s and could have occurred by chance in not over 2.78 cases in one hundred. I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , w e ll w ith in the 5 per cent le v e l of s i g n if ic a n c e used in t h i s stu d y . S ince i t shows t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more of the u n su c c e ss fu l th an o f the s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es have d i s - | continued t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l work, i t r e in f o r c e s th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s made above. None of th e o th e r d if f e r e n c e s proved to be s i g n i f i cant . In summary, success i s very c le a r ly t i e d to educa t i o n a l work. More o f the s u c c e s s f u l than of th e un su ccess- : f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s show a tre n d toward s tro n g e r e d u c a tio n a l program s. F a ilu r e i s s tr o n g ly a s s o c ia te d w ith an ed ucation program which is d e c re a sin g c o n sid e ra b ly or has been d isc o n tin u e d . N e v e rth e le s s , th e r e a re some c o o p erativ es which claim to do l i t t l e or no e d u c a tio n a l work and which have prosp ered n o tw ith s ta n d in g . V. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EXPENDITURES FOR EDUCATION AND SUCCESS When the respondent c o o p erativ es were asked how much , they had spent d u rin g the previous year f o r e d u c a tio n a l work 193 ■exclusive of bu sin ess a d v e r t i s i n g , the raw d a ta were of l i t t l e d i r e c t value because the s o c i e t i e s vary co n sid era b ly ; in s i z e . For t h i s reaso n the f ig u r e s were div id ed by the number of members the co o p erativ e s a id i t had a y ear before i t answered the q u e s tio n n a ir e . These annual expen d itu res per member are ta b u la te d in Table XXIZ. This q u e stio n was not answered by as many coopera tiv e s as most of the o th e r s . When the two hundred re tu r n s 'received were ta b u la te d under the s e v e r a l p ercentage i n cre ase c a te g o r ie s , the "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o rie s had e x a c tly tw enty-nine answers each. This was one u n it below the minimum f ig u r e of t h i r t y s t i p u l a t e d e a r l i e r in the s tu d y .? For purposes of s t a t i s t i c a l m an ip u latio n , th e r e f o r e , the category "2 -2 .9 " was combined w ith the "Under 2" categ ory and the "15-16.9" w ith the "1 7 -6 4 .9 ." I n s p e c tio n d is c lo s e d th a t the c o o p e ra tiv e s in the "Under 2" category had h ig h er fre q u e n c ie s in every c la s s of e x p en d itu re up to and in c lu d in g f i f t y c e n ts , while th o se in ' the "17-64.9" category had h ig h er fre q u e n c ie s in every c la s s ' from f i f t y cen ts up. I f the t o t a l of th e fre q u e n c ie s in : I each catego ry which a re in c la s s e s of average annual expendi t u r e of le s s than f i f t y cents i s d iv id e d by the t o t a l s of ' ) the fre q u e n c ie s in the c la s s e s of over f i f t y cents average I ? See p ._ 97 . ___ _____________________________ _____________ _ I O M o cn Ü g @8 % P C O P Q a X B P H <î S « i ! § § H B 1 X 4 0 pq P a o S M B < H H I B P 4 ^ I C Q U c d H iH O a d •H 0 ^ 4 -P •H d 0 : §) 0 u 0 r - j 0 -P O B dn 3 g TO'2 OO'2-TO'T 00'T-T6" 06" -T9' 09' -T6' 06' -19 ' 09' - I S ' OS' - I t ' O f -1 2 ' 0 2 ' - 1 2 ' 02' -TT' OT' -TO' 0 tîD 0 0 w -P 0 a 0 0 A Ü Ü u d 0 H P 4 0>tOO>OC\3cOCO'^ C D COOitn C M r H B C M C M W r H r H CM D - r 4 ' d i [ > . ( 0 ; 0 i 0 C M C M H C D O OC M OO rHr HOi H O O B O OCMrHCMO OBO H O O O O B B r H c O B B B O OCO O OO BC M CM OO t O O B O O O O t O O B B C M B O O ' ^ C M C M C M B O C M B B CM O B O O O CM B B CM B O B O B B O C M B C M O C M ' ^ B O ' O O B O LO. I—I O I—I I—I I—I I—I O I I O CM O ID B O B B O O O O O B O 194 O Î CM B O i CM I— I B (O B to I— I CO B 0 » B C M O O O O O G i O 0> OiOi A <q high="" low="" for="" border="" method="" rev=""> E 4 H i H C O S H S 8 a ^ < 4 ^ C O P S S g - M O C O w M K g H M P § g § P4 P & O o o p H H o o O o O O O O 03 2 3 2 O P o p H o p H O p H C O p H o O O 03 03 p H ' o> p H o cv o p H 03 O o O o O O to p H 03 00 p H H +5 •H o C O o 03 H o p H o O O O O p H p H pH c d ♦ p H O O 1 C O o 03 o O O p H o O o pH p H O O to 1 « Û j a • p H 1 00 1 a o to p H 03 C O O 03 03 C O 03 O to 03 C O 1 • p H to C O 1 00 1 0 3 00 1 M o P 03 03 p H 03 o pH o O O O O O Ï C O A 0 1 g o C O 03 O 03 O- C O C O 03 p H O to O O Ï 0 C O 03 ' a o 03 O to 03 03 03 O O ■ O to 1 C \ 3 03 o 03 03 03 C O p H 03 C O p H 03 03 00 i p p H C O 1 1 to 03 I to 03 o> O o to ID C O C O p H C O p H o> j 03 p H H 00 C O i P4 M 1 I I 0 2 00 0 03 o> Oi O Ï o> o> o> o> O Ï OÏ A <4 0 0 * • • • • • • « • • d E -i E 4 i -P 0 P 4 03 C O to C O o 03 to O O d 0 0 p H p H p H p H to «y E 4 E 4 0 U •d 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I o o d 03 C O 4^ to £ > ■ O Ï p H C O to o- to u d P p H rH p H p H to 0 H P 233; I ; TABLE XLI THE PROPORTIONS OF THE COOPERATIVES IN THE VARIOUS PERCENTAGES OF M EMBER SOCIALITY OF CATEGORIES : "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" TO THE TOTAL ! FREQUENCY IN EACH CATEGORY ! P ercen tag e ' Engaging {in S o c i a l i t y C a te g o rie s Under 2 17 -6 4.9 D i f f e r e n c e ' 1 I 5 .41 .32 .09 10. 1 .23 .10 .13 1 20 1 .04 .10 .06 ' 1 30 .06 .15 .09 1 40 .02 .00 .02 ; 50 .10 .13 .03 1 i 60 .04 .00 .04 ! 70 .06 .00 .06 ! 80 .04 .15 .11 90 .02 .05 .03 100 1 .....- .............................................................................................................................. .00 .00 .00 - ! 1 ! 1 ! ! 1 : ! ; 1 1 — — 1 234 [su ccessfu l had the h ig h er p e rc en ta g e. Moreover, the d i f f e r - I I jences fav o r the two c a te g o rie s more or le s s a l t e r n a t e l y , so [that i t cannot be sa id t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s fav o rin g the jmore s u c c e s s f u l a re grouped a t the end of the percen tage of I s o c i a l i t y continuum and th e le s s s u c c e s s f u l a t th e o th e r . 'When th e d i f f e r e n c e s were t e s t e d , none proved even to be ap p ro ach in g th e l e v e l of s i g n i f ic a n c e . , I t must be concluded, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t th e re is ab s o l u t e l y no evidence in the d a ta to su p p o rt th e th eo ry th a t [members of s u c c e s s fu l c o o p erativ es e x h ib i t a hig h er degree i ! |of s o c i a l i t y b efore and a f t e r b u sin e ss m eetings than members' I jof u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s . i I I IV. WILLINGNESS OF MEMBERS TO | I UNDERTAKE SPECIAL JOBS j I S ince people o fte n p r e f e r to be connected w ith and , working f o r an "up and coming" o rg a n iz a tio n r a t h e r than one I i - I [which is dead or moribund, i t might be expected t h a t the [ I I jmore s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s would have le s s d i f f i c u l t y in I ; O btaining v o lu n te e rs f o r s p e c i a l jo b s, while s o c i e t i e s which' jwere no t showing sig ns of p ro g ress would have a p p re cia b ly more d i f f i c u l t y . The respo ndents were a c c o rd in g ly asked, I "When th e re a re s p e c i a l jobs to be done, i s i t easy to fin d | people to do them?" The choice of r e p l i e s was "Always," I 235 j"Never," "Seldom," "U su ally ," "Sometimes," I ! The r e tu r n s a re summarized in Table XLII. Over h a lf I I ! I |(144) of the 270 respondents in d ic a te d t h a t they could ; I e i t h e r u s u a lly or always f in d people to do s p e c ia l jobs I w ith o u t undue d i f f i c u l t y ; of t h i s 144, tw enty-seven were in j the "17-64.9" category and tw enty were in the "Under 2 " I 1 j c a te g o ry . I f the "Never" and "Seldom" columns a re combined j j j jit i s c le a r t h a t nine s o c i e t i e s in the more s u c c e s s f u l group never or seldom can f in d v o lu n te e rs w h ile n in etee n such ! ; s o c i e t i e s a re l i s t e d in th e "Under 2" c ateg o ry . Among th e [ d o u b tfu l s o c i e t i e s ("Sometimes") th e r e were fo u rte e n in the i "Under 2" and seven in the "17-64.9" c a te g o r ie s . There i s , I t h e r e f o r e , a c le a r trend which shows th a t u n su c ce ssfu l i s o c i e t i e s have more d i f f i c u l t y in o b ta in in g v o lu n te e rs th an > s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s . When the raw data in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" {categories were transform ed in to p ercen tag es by d iv id in g i I i each in d iv id u a l frequency by the t o t a l in th e c ateg o ry , th e I fo llo w in g r e s u l t s were o b tain ed : i ! "Is i t Easy to Find P e o p le " f o r Jobs j Always Never Seldom U sually Sometimes ' I Under 2 .15 .13 .23 .23 .26 ;i7-64.9 .21 .05 .16 .42 .16 D iffe re n c e .06 .08 .07 .19 .10 256 1 TABLE XLII WILLINGNESS OF MEMBERS OF 270 COOPERATIVES TO VOLUNTEER FOR SPECIAL JOBS TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE P ercentage "Is i t Easy to Find People " f o r Jobs 1 In c re a s e Always Never Seldom U sually Sometimes 1 Under 2 8 7 12 12 14 2- 2.9 3 0 5 3 6 3- 3.9 5 0 4 8 6 4 - 4 . 9 4 1 6 10 4 5 - 6 . 9 4 1 5 14 6 7- 8.9 4 3 8 14 2 9-10.9 3 0 3 8 2 11-12.9 1 1 1 8 5 13-14.9 1 0 1 3 1 15-16.9 0 0 0 2 1 17-64.9 9 2 7 18 7 65 & up 2 0 3 0 2 TOTALS 44 15 55 100 56 TOTAL RESPONDENTS 270 237 1 ! I When th e n in e te e n p o in t d if f e r e n c e was t e s t e d i t | [proved to be j u s t two sta n d ard e r r o r s , and consequently was ' 1 ' jsa fe ly though not h ig h ly s i g n i f i c a n t ; i t could occur by j chance in 4.55 or l e s s cases in one hundred. None of the i I I jother d if f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t . ! I I I I t may be concluded t h a t the d a ta c l e a r l y sug gests | t h a t more u n su c c e ssfu l th an s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s have | j d i f f i c u l t y in o b ta in in g v o lu n te e r s . I t can be s t a t i s t i c a l l y ; Ishown t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more of the s u c c e s s f u l th an of th e i 'u n su cc essfu l s o c i e t i e s have e s ta b lis h e d such r e l a t i o n s h i p s ] w ith t h e i r members t h a t th e se members a re a s u a lly w illin g j ;to give some of t h e i r tim e to the co o p erativ e when occasion | ' I demands. j I I V. VARIATION AM ONG COOPERATORS j W H O VOLUNTEER FOR JOBS ] I I In some c o o p e ra tiv e s , as w ell as in o th e r s o c i a l | j o r g a n iz a tio n s , the same people fre q u e n tly v o lu n te e r w hile I jthe g r e a t m a jo rity a re a p a t h e t i c . I t was f e l t t h a t th e ; I 'wider the d i f f u s i o n of th e p a tt e r n of v o lu n te e r a c t i v i t y | I 1 I I [throughout the s o c i e t y , th e more a c t i v e , inform ed, and | i n t e r e s t e d members t h a t s o c ie ty would be l i k e l y to have. j I t would norm ally, t h e r e f o r e , be more r a t h e r th a n le s s I I s u c c e s s f u l. I j 2 3 8 , I I With t h i s in mind the respondent c o o p erativ es were asked, "Do about the same people v o lu n te e r every tim e?" The 1 r e t u r n s a re shown in Table X L III. I t is c le a r t h a t in the g re a t m a jo r ity of s o c i e t i e s th e re is a lim ite d Band p ro bably ' : I sm all) group which c a r r i e s a d is p r o p o r tio n a te amount of th e [ lo a d . In 202 out of a t o t a l of 268 r e tu r n s the s o c ie ty in - I d ic a te d t h a t "about the same people v o lu n teered every t im e ," | w hile only fo rty -tw o in d ic a te d t h a t t h i s was not tru e of ; i i t h e i r o rg a n iz a tio n and tw e n ty -fo u r were d o u b tf u l. A n o t ic e - ; ably g r e a t e r number of c o o p e ra tiv e s in th e "Under 2" than in ' th e "17-64.9" c ateg ory experienced l i t t l e r o t a t i o n in volun t e e r i n g . j Vifhen the raw d a ta in th e above two c a te g o rie s were I changed in to p e rc en tag es by d iv id in g each frequency by th e t o t a l in the categ o ry , the fo llo w in g d if f e r e n c e s were d i s - | j 1 covered: "Do th e Same People V olunteer Every Time" , Yes No Undecided Under 2 .87 .06 .08 17-64.9 .56 .28 .16 I i D iffe re n c e .31 .22 .08 j ' I When th e t h i r t y - o n e and twenty-two p o in t d iff e r e n c e s | were t e s t e d they proved to be 3.41 and 2.93 sta n d ard e r r o r s i i i r e s p e c t iv e ly ; sin c e such a spread would occur by chance in ' I 239 TABLE XLIII VARIATION IN PEOPLE W H O VOLUNTEER FOR SPECIAL JOBS IN 268 COOPERATIVES TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE P ercen tag e In cre ase "Do the Same People V olunteer Every Time" Yes No Undecided Under 2 46 3 4 S- 2.9 11 3 3 3- 3.9 19 3 0 4 - 4 . 9 19 4 2 5- 6.9 19 8 2 7- 8 .9 23 2 5 9-10.9 14 2 0 11-12.9 12 3 1 13-14.9 5 1 0 1 15-16.9 3 1 0 17-64.9 24 12 7 65 & up 7 0 ■O ' TOTALS 202 42 24 TOTAL RETURNS 268 ^. J I 240 ile s s than .067 cases in a hundred in the former and about 1.35 cases in a hundred in the l a t t e r , both a re s tro n g ly s i g n i f i c a n t . I t should be concluded, th e r e f o r e , th a t th e re i s no q u e stio n t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more of the s u c c e s s fu l th an of th e u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s have a c o n sid era b le group of people who a re w illin g to v o lu n te e r r a th e r than a l im i te d , unchanging group who always or n e a rly always c arry the lo a d . VI. THE PROPORTION OF MEMBERS ATTENDING BUSINESS MEETINGS ! B usiness m eetings a re u s u a lly not an i n t e r e s t i n g 1 s o c i a l e x p e rie n c e . Only members who a re thoroughly sold on ; an o rg a n iz a tio n and f e e l a r e a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s [fu tu re a re l i k e l y to fo rc e them selves to a tte n d u n le ss some unusual a t t r a c t i o n is o ffe re d or t h r e a t e n u n ciated . I t i s I to be supposed, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t à s o c ie ty which has a high I [turno ut a t a b u sin ess m eeting has a high p ro p o rtio n of t i members who a re a s s im ila te d in to th e s o c ie ty and wish th e j lvalues held by the o rg a n iz a tio n to be expressed in th e j 1 I j s o c ia l m i l i e u . Such members provide one of the bases upon i I jwhich a s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ e can be e re c te d . I t i s to be ! I I I ex p ected , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t i t would be th e more s u c c e s s f u l I I I s o c i e t i e s which would have th e g r e a t e r percentage of membersi I 241: jin a tten d a n ce a t b usin ess m eetin g s. : ; I t was w ith t h i s in mind t h a t the respondents were I jasked, "About what per cent of the members tu rn out fo r [most b u sin ess m eetings?" Table XLIV summarizes the data* ; ' An exam ination of th e groupings shows no c le a r tre n d 1 I i jsince th e re is no a p parent d if f e r e n c e between the v ario u s ' I ! [c a te g o rie s o th e r than the v a r i a t i o n always shown by raw i 'd a ta . The fre q u e n c ie s in the "Under E" and "17-64.9" c a te - ! i I g o rie s were then changed in to p erc en ta g es of the t o t a l in * the c ateg o ry w ith the hope of d is c o v e rin g some in fo rm ation of v a lu e . The r e s u l t s a re shown in Table XLY. [ The d if f e r e n c e s p o in t to a s l i g h t but n o tic e a b le , trend--m ore s u c c e s s fu l than u n su c c e ss fu l s o c i e t ie s excel in ! the h igher p erc en ta g e of atten d e n ce c la s s e s . When th ese 'd if f e r e n c e s were t e s te d the tw e n ty -fo u r p o in t d if f e r e n c e jproved to be E.76 stan d ard e r r o r s and the eleven p o in t d i f fe re n c e 1.96 sta n d ard e r r o r s r e s p e c t i v e l y . Both d ifferen c e s! I were, t h e r e f o r e , s i g n i f i c a n t ; the form er could have occurred; I by chance in not over .60 cases and the l a t t e r in not over I Ifive cases in a hundred. (The l a t t e r i s , of co urse, b a re ly [within the lim i t of s i g n i f ic a n c e .) [ I t is c le a r t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more of the unsuccess-i i jfu l than of the s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s have 10 per cent of j ; I I their'm em bers coming to b u sin ess m eetings w hile s ig n if ic a n t] ^ f> 5 w a C O O o o O o O p H -P O o o O o d o> 0 ü A 0 o 1 — 1 p O o C M 00 d • pH o 1 — 1 1 — 1 pH o 0 t> îîD d •p H p 0 o r H o rH 1 — 1 0 to S 0 0 0 o 03 pH 03 pH d lO • p H 0 d pq o ' t H - 03 03 £ N o " V p 00 d •H o tO C O C O a to o o d o o pH o> C O •H 03 1 — 1 p El O C M O o 00 " V o El rH 1 — 1 1 — 1 P H lO o> pH O o 0 Î 5 0 0 03 o> o> o> 0 0 P 0 E l 03 C O d 0 0 0 El nd î i I ü ü d 03 C O E l d îo 0 H P H OrHrHrHC arHC VîO O rH Oi < J i < J i Oi Oi Gi • • • • • • Ç Û 00 O c\2 ^ O I —I I —I I C ~ - 1 o > r H I I— I r H I t CO L O rH I — I 0 > C M • 0 to 1 o- to rH tO 242 o C \ 2 L O rH to C \ 2 03 IN 03 in 03 iH in rH to to in to 03 a m g g o o E H E h 1 1 1 ! TABIE XLV 243 THE PROPORTIONS OF COOPERATIVES IN THE VARIOUS CLASSES OF 1 M EM BER ATTENDmCE AT BUSINESS MEETINGS OF CATEGORIES 1 "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" TO THE TOTAL ! FREQUENCY IN EACH CATEGORY i 1 P ercentage Coming 1 to Business i Meetings P ercen tag e Under 2 I n c re a s e 17-64.9 D iffe re n c e 5 .17 .21 .04 i 10 .34 .10 .24 20 .21 .17 .04 30 .11 .21 .10 ; 1 40 .08 .05 .03 50 .04 .15 .11 j 1 60 .02 .10 .08 ! 70 .02 .02 .00 80 .02 .00 .02 ‘ 90 .00 .00 .00 i 100 .00 .00 .00 1 P 244 I I imore s u c c e s s f u l than u n su c c e ss fu l s o c i e t i e s have 50 per cent; I I 'of t h e i r members coming out to such g a th e r in g s . These d a ta ;add weight to th e tre n d observed above bu t p ro v id es only a « I , * j p a r t i a l v in d ic a tio n of th e h y p o th esis t h a t more members | ^attend th e membership m eetings of most s u c c e s s f u l coopéra- I !tiv e s . However, the d a ta o f f e r no convincing evidence to | I ! |the c o n tra ry sin c e none of the o th er d i f f e r e n c e s a r e s i g n i f - j jicant and the l a r g e s t ones tend to su p p o rt r a t h e r th an r e - < jbut th e h y p o th e s is . i I I I I ; I V II. SUM MARY AND CONCLUSIONS ' I The a n aly se s c a r r ie d out in t h i s c h ap ter p o in t to th e I [follow ing c o n clu sio n s: I I 1. A h ig h er p ro p o rtio n of the u n su c c e ssfu l than of I ;the s u c c e s s f u l co o p erativ es have a n ta g o n is tic groups w ith in I : t h e i r membership. This tre n d was not dem onstrably s i g n i f i - ! c a n t. I 2. More s u c c e s s f u l than u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p erativ es ! have w ider member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in p o lic y making f u n c tio n s , i I . ; This proved to be a s tr o n g , s t a t i s t i c a l l y dem onstrable trend.' ' 3. No d if f e r e n c e of any kind w ith r e s p e c t to th e so- ^ j c i a l i t y of members b e fo re and a f t e r busin ess m eetings was I I I found between s u c c e s s f u l and u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p e ra tiv e s . i iThis does not mean th a t th e f r i e n d l y a t t i t u d e s and m utual 245: I I jre s p e c t which u n d e rlie such a c t i v i t y a re not im po rtant f o r ' !member growth. I t may mean t h a t a modicum of s o c i a l i t y is ' ! [ e s s e n ti a l f o r even bare s u r v i v a l and w ill th e r e f o re be | p re s e n t in a l l c o o p e ra tiv e s . j 4. A g r e a t e r p ro p o rtio n of the u n su ccessfu l than of j I the s u c c e s s f u l co o p erativ es have d i f f i c u l t y in f in d in g v o l- ; u n t e e r s . This was dem onstrated s t a t i s t i c a l l y , but th e d i f - i 1 ' jference was b a re ly la rg e enough to be s i g n i f i c a n t . ! j 5. More u n su c ce ssfu l c o o p e ra tiv e s have a r e l a t i v e l y I jfixed group of v o lu n te e rs w ith a g re a t p ro p o rtio n of the [membership rem aining a p a t h e t i c . This may be exp lain ed by I [reference to th e su p e rio r e d u c a tio n a l e f f o r t of s u c c e s s f u l I c o o p e ra tiv e s ; where th e member i s b e t t e r inform ed, both in .terms of immediate need and u ltim a te o b je c tiv e s , he w i l l be more l i k e l y to v o lu n te e r when need a r i s e s . F u r th e r, a supe r i o r e d u c a tio n a l e f f o r t should produce a b e t t e r l i a i s o n be tween th e management, board of d i r e c t o r s and members of the s o c i e t y , and consequently th e members would be more l i k e l y i Ito be n o t i f i e d when a need a ro se and to be asked to volun- I jteer t h e i r s e r v i c e s . The d if f e r e n c e in t h i s case was h ig h ly ! i s i g n i f i c a n t . I t should be added, however, t h a t most cooper a t i v e s in every categ ory of member in c re a s e do not have much r o t a t i o n in t h e i r v o lu n te e r group* 6. A s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a te r p ro p o rtio n of the P " ...... ‘ ' '246 ^ u n su c c e ss fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s have 10 per cent o f t h e i r member sh ip p re s e n t a t b u sin e ss m eetings w hile a s i g n i f i c a n t l y I [greater p ro p o rtio n of th e s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s have 50 ; ' ' i per cent o f t h e i r members in atten d e n ce a t such m eetin g s. | I I ‘ The f i r s t d if f e r e n c e was s tr o n g ly s i g n i f i c a n t but th e l a t t e r ■ was b a re ly under the 5 per cent l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e . Since ithese fin d in g s do n o t run co unter to th e tre n d of the oth er I [data, i t can be sa id t h a t more of the s u c c e s s fu l than of the! ! I u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s have la rg e membership atten d en ce a t i b u sin ess m eetin g s. . i : : The f in d in g s as a whole in d ic a te t h a t the s u c c e s s f u l [ s o c ie ty is c h a r a c te riz e d by a g r e a te r p ro p o rtio n of a c tiv e i members who a re w i l l i n g to assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and do- ' I i h a te tim e . Success appears to be r e l a t e d to a s o c i a l l y con-: g e n ia l membership which e x h ib its behavior p a tt e r n s based on ' a philosophy of m utual a id r a t h e r than a d e s i r e to "see w h a t, I can g et out of i t . " The d a ta su ggest t h a t consensus w ith ! ; . I re g a rd to group values p lay s a b a sic r o l e , and u n d e rlin e th e I im portance of a f e l t need toward which the members of the | ! I s o c ie ty can o r ie n t both t h e i r a t t i t u d e s and behavior p a tte rn s , I t is f u r t h e r suggested by the fin d in g s t h a t i d e n t i f i é Cation of a member w ith th e values and o b je c tiv e s of an o r- ' g a n iz a tio n is r e l a t e d to th e amount of member p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the o r g a n iz a tio n . This would not be s u r p r i s i n g sin ce , I 247 {Values and norms are created and m odified in group in t e r a c t i o n . ! I I 1 CHAPTER IX : I I I THE RELATIONSHIP OF SOME ECOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF ' COOPERATIVE FOOD STORE OPERATION TO SUCCESS I I I I The environm ental c o n d itio n s , both s o c i a l and n a tu r a l, under which an o rg a n iz a tio n o p e ra te s play an im portant and ! sometimes c r u c i a l r o le in the d e te rm in a tio n of the e v en tu al : i I I jsu ccess or f a i l u r e of the o r g a n iz a tio n . C ooperatives a re noj {exception. This ch ap ter is an attem pt to r e l a t e some of the I e c o lo g ic a l f o rc e s p la y in g on c o o p erativ es to t h e i r success [ i I : or f a i l u r e . I I I I I . COOPERATIVE BUSINESS LEADERSHIP IN ; THE FOOD STORE FIELD ' i I t i s rea so n a b le to assume t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s which I have been h ig h ly s u c c e s s f u l in terms of th e c r i t e r i o n used in t h i s study (annual in c re a s e in membership p e r one hundred' I 'members) would r a t e co rresp o n d in g ly high in term s of b u s i n e ss l e a d e r s h ip . To t e s t t h i s hyp o th esis the respondents [were asked, "Do you f e e l t h a t your co o p erativ e has achieved . [business le a d e rs h ip in the food s to r e f i e l d in your com- ,munity?" I I The r e tu r n s a re c l a s s i f i e d in Table XLVI. Most of i : I the c o o p e ra tiv e s (117) s a id t h a t th ey had achieved b usin ess I ( le a d e r s h ip , while s l i g h t l y fewer (109) were c e r t a i n t h a t ; 249 : TABLE XLVI BUSINESS LEADERSHIP PROVIDED BY 257 COOPERATIVES IN THE FOOD STORE FIELD TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE P erce n tag e B usiness L eadership Achieved 1 In c re a se Yes No Undecided j Under 2 j 12 37 2 ! 2 - 2 . 9 3 7 3 ; 3- 3.9 14 9 0 1 1 4 - 4.9 9 10 4 1 5 - 6 . 9 20 5 3 7- 8^9 15 9 5 ' 9-10.9 9 5 2 ! 11-12.9 7 5 4 13-14.9 i 3 2 2 15-16.9 1 1 1 17-64.9 21 15 5 : 65 & up 3 4 0 ; TOTALS TOTAL REPLIES 117 109 257 31 ....... ........... 250| I I I they had n o t. T h irty -o n e were undecided. Many more of th e i i : [su ccessfu l than of th e u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s sa id they had , achieved such le a d e r s h ip , w hile many more of th e u n su c ce ssfu l than o f th e s u c c e s s f u l s a id t h a t th ey had n o t. | When th e fre q u e n c ie s in the "Under 2" and "17-64.9" i c a te g o rie s were changed in to percen tag es by d iv id in g them ; by the t o t a l frequency in th e categ o ry , the follo w in g d i f - j fe re n c e s were found; | i B usiness L eadership Achieved i Yes No Undecided I Under 2 .24 .72 .04 I 17-64.9 .51 .36 .12 ! D iffe re n c e .27 *36 .08 | When t e s t e d , th e 36 per cen t d if f e r e n c e proved to be | I 3.46 and th e 27 per cent d if f e r e n c e 2.72 sta n d ard e r r o r s . | [The former could have occurred by chance in le s s than s i x ! : [and th e l a t t e r in about s i x t y - f i v e cases in ten thousand. I jBoth a r e , t h e r e f o r e , h ig h ly s i g n i f i c a n t . | I ' j There i s , c o n seq u en tly , no doubt th a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y ! jmore s u c c e s s fu l than u n su c c e ss fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s (u sin g th e j word success in terms of membership in c re a se ) have achieved | I b u sin e ss le a d e rs h ip in the food s to r e f i e l d , and s i g n i f i - I I c a n tly more u n su c c e ss fu l th an s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es have ' I f a i l e d to achieve t h i s le a d e r s h ip . Business le a d e rs h ip and | I 251! I member in c re a se undoubtedly vary d i r e c t l y w ith each o th e r, iWhether or not one i s a cause of the o th e r cannot be t o ld Iat t h i s tim e from an exam ination of a v a ila b le d a ta . i I I I . THE PERCENTAGE OF NON-MEMBER BUSINESS ENJOYED I BY COOPERATIVES IN THE FOOD STORE FIELD ! I t would be re a so n a b le to e x p e c t, fo llo w in g th e logic! I in h e re n t in th e h y p o th esis suggested a t the b eg inning of I I t h i s c h a p te r, t h a t the more s u c c e s s fu l co o p erativ es would, j by th e very rea so n of being s u c c e s s f u l, enjoy co n sid era b ly jmore non-member b u sin ess th an u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s . F ur- , t h e r , in most communities th e supply of non-members is f o r p r a c t i c a l purposes u n lim ite d , so i t is probably s a f e to ex- I ; Ipect c o n sid era b le non-member b u sin e ss in even the most su e- ' I i jc e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s . Such a conclusion m ust, however, be tern— ', Ipered by the f a c t t h a t when a co o p erativ e i s s u c c e s s fu l i t I h a s, by d e f i n i t i o n , been a b le to reduce the number of non- ! members by changing them in to members. j I The respondents were ask ed , "About what per cent of | I I I your b u sin e ss i s non-member b u sin e ss? " Table XLVII p ic tu re s ' I I 'th e r e t u r n s . I t is i n t e r e s t i n g th a t when the "Under 2" and j I I"17-64.9" c a te g o rie s a re compared, th e re i s a g r e a te r (or I I I equal) number of c o o p e ra tiv e s in th e higher th an in the low-, ; . I e r c atego ry in every p erc en ta g e c la s s up to and in c lu d in g j H § a g C Q C Q 0 d •H C Q g U 0 Æ * d I Ü o s < 5 -1 O 0 Î3D 0 4J d 0 o ÎH 0 PM O O rH o o > S o C Q S o r-4 ID 0 b O 0 0 ra -A 0 d 0 0 P 4 o o A d 0 H Ç U 252 o o o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o o o o l O O O O O O O O O O r H O iQ O O O r H H O r H O O O O £ > 0 H o a W H O O O 0 0 3 0 C Q C \ 3 t Q ^ O « 0 CQ 4^ O O O] M H s| iO] C\ ]r-40]r-4r4CQOr-4lOO IDrHrHC QcQ '^O HOa OlO oa COO^^CDCQt QcQOÎ ' ^Ot H H CQ UQ Tji 00 (D C Q O r H H « O r H • • • • • • « • • • d fMCQCQ'Q<«ÛCX)003'Q^«û%*< 0 «Û CD U Q rH rH CQ CQ O CQ M 3 U Q O EH o EH rd I I I 1 * I » » I % _ d C Q C Q^ lQ C NC Ïî rH CQ L OD - LO I —I I—Il —I I —I tû oB 1 1 1 1 rH CQ LO 0 LO rH rH rH rH tO [ 253 {forty. This is the more rem arkable because o f th e g r e a te r t o t a l frequency in the "Under 2" categ o ry . C onversely, i jthere were more c o o p erativ es in the ’’Under 2" c ateg o ry in I ithe percentage c la s s e s between 50 and 80. (There were no t [frequencies in th e 90 and 100 per cent c l a s s e s .) There ap- I p e ars to be a tendency f o r fewer u n su c c e ssfu l than su c c e ss f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s to have sm all numbers of non-member p atro ns and f o r fewer s u c c e s s f u l th an u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p erativ es t o i have a la rg e p ro p o rtio n of non-member t r a d e . ' When the fre q u e n c ie s in the two c a te g o rie s were changed in to p e rc en ta g es of th e t o t a l frequency in each c a te g o ry , th e fo llo w in g d if f e r e n c e s were found: P ercen tag e of Non-Member Business | 5 10 20 30 40 "so 60 70 801 ( Under 2 .08 .08 .06 .10 .08 .26 .14 .10 .10? 17-64.9 .18 .16 .26 .13 .13 .05 .05 .00 .03 {Difference .10 .08 .20 .03 .05 .21 .09 .10 .071 I j I The d if f e r e n c e s of 20 and 21 per cent were found to j be 2.60 and 2.59 sta n d a rd e r r o r s r e s p e c t iv e ly . S ince t h i s ; would Occur by chance in about nine cases in a thousand, ; both a re s tr o n g ly s i g n i f i c a n t . I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , c le a r th a t; ! imore of the s u c c e s s fu l th an of th e u n su c ce ssfu l s o c i e t i e s ; I ! {had 20 per cent non-member b u siness w hile s i g n i f i c a n t l y morej lof th e u n su c c e ssfu l th an of the s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es had I i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i I z s T i I 50 per cent non-member b u sin e ss. I These fin d in g s b u t tr e s s the tren d observed e a r l i e r in , t h i s s e c tio n , and i t may be s a id w ith a ssu ran ce t h a t more ! f u n su c c e ss fu l th an s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es have a c o n sid er- j a b le amount of non-member business and v i c e - v e r s a . The | ! I c au sa l r e l a t i o n s h i p s involved can only be co njectu red a t i ■this p o in t. | I I I . THE COMPETITIVE SITUATION FACING COOPERATIVES WHICH OPERATE FOOD STORES j I I I The co m p etitio n faced by a c o o p erativ e i s , to some d e g re e , a m a tte r of d e f i n i t i o n of s i t u a t i o n r a t h e r than of n o n -p sy c h o lo g ic al f a c t . The t h e o r e t i c a l , id e a l co op erative ‘ I ' meets no co m p etitio n; member needs a re met by th e s o c ie ty ! I and so p a tro n s have no d e s ir e to go e lsew h ere. This would i c o n s t it u t e a c lo se d , n on-com petitive economy. To the e x te n t| t h a t a co o p erativ e can approach t h i s i d e a l , com petitive busi4 I ness becomes an e v er l e s s i n f l u e n t i a l f a c t o r in th e a t t i t u d e s I I |0f th e members. I t is l o g i c a l to assume, th e r e f o r e , t h a t the more s u c c e s s fu l c o o p e ra tiv e s would f e e l t h a t they were m e e t - ' in g le s s c o m p e titio n . F u r th e r , i f we assume t h a t th e re i s a, r e l a t i o n between a b i l i t y to win members and b u sin e ss e f f i ^ jcienoy, the s u c c e s s fu l co o p erativ es should f e e l le s s competi t i v e s t r a i n on t h i s count as w e ll. 255' I In o rd er to t e s t th e t r u t h o f th e above assum ption ' I th e resp o n d en ts were asked, "How much com petition does your i jco o p e ra tiv e m eet?" The r e t u r n s a re summarized in Table j iXLVIII. Out of a t o t a l of 261 c o o p e ra tiv e s , 106 met much I I , c o m p e titio n , f i f t e e n l i t t l e or no c o m p etitio n , e ig h ty -o n e ; ' "average" co m petition , and f i f t y - n i n e " q u ite a b i t " o f comp | p e t i t i o n . The g re a t m a jo rity (165) met e i t h e r much or " q u ite a b i t " of c o m p e titio n , so i t must be conceded t h a t th e i d e a l c o o p erativ e d isc u sse d in th e beginning of t h i s s e c tio n i s seldom i f ever a r e a l i t y . When th e raw d a ta were changed in to percen tag es in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o rie s by d iv id in g each frequency by th e t o t a l frequency in th e categ o ry , th e f o l lowing d if f e r e n c e s were found: Amount of Com petition Met Much None L i t t l e Quite a B it Average Under 2 .56 .00 .08 .13 .23 17-64.9 .38 .03 .03 .18 .40 D iffe re n c e .18 .03 .05 .05 .17 ' Both th e 18 and 17 per cent d iff e r e n c e s proved to be I il.7 6 sta n d a rd e r r o r s , and could, t h e r e f o r e , occur by chance I in a t l e a s t 7.5 cases in a hundred. Both were c l e a r l y not s i g n i f i c a n t . Moreover, th e r e is no ob serv ab le c o n sisten c y in th e d i r e c t i o n of the d i f f e r e n c e s ; fewer s u c c e s s fu l 256 TABLE XLVIII AM OUNT OF COMPETITION EXPERIENCED BY 261 COOPERATIVES TABULATED BY PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE Percen tag e Amount of Com petition Met In c re a s e Much None L i t t l e Quite a B it Average Under 2 29 0 4 7 12 2- 2.9 7 0 0 6 3 3- 3.9 8 0 2 6 7 4— 4.9 13 0 0 2 8 5- 6.9 8 0 2 7 12 7- 8.9 10 0 1 10 7 9-10.9 5 0 1 4 6 11-12.9 4 0 1 8 3 13-14.9 3 0 1 1 2 15-16.9 1 0 0 1 2 17-64.9 15 1 1 7 16 65 & up 3 0 1 0 3 TOTALS TOTAL 106 REPLIES 1 14 261 59 81 257 c o o p e ra tiv e s have much com petitio n or l i t t l e c o m p e titio n , but more s u c c e s s fu l c o o p erativ es have "q u ite a b i t " of com p e t i t i o n or average c o m p e titio n . I t can only be concluded, t h e r e f o r e , th a t th e d a ta a re t o t a l l y unrewarding except t h a t they in d ic a te t h a t th e re i s no r e a l d i f f e r e n c e between s u c c e s s fu l and u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p e ra tiv e s as f a r as th e amount of com petition they meet is concerned. IV. THE SIZE OF THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH THE COOPERATIVE OPERATES Where th e choice of the consumer i s lim ite d , the a v a i la b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s may be very poor and very w ell p a t ro n iz e d . F u r th e r , the a t t i t u d e of the shopper may be based ;on r e s i g n a t io n t o th e i n e v i t a b l e or on ignorance of th e pos s i b i l i t i e s . In e i t h e r c a se , a co o p erativ e may achieve su c cess more r e a d i ly than in more com p etitiv e a r e a s . Moreover, the s t a t u s of c o o p erativ es may be in flu en ced tp a c o n sid e r ab le degree by th e s i z e of the community in which they o p e ra te (o th e r th in g s being e q u a l ) . To throw l i g h t on th e se su p p o s itio n s th e p o p u la tio n s of th e communities in which th e respondent co o p erativ es were [located were found. These f ig u r e s were g e n e ra lly low s in c e ,they were n o t, o f n e c e s s i t y , th o se ta b u la te d by the census 258 of 1950; in some cases they may be in excess of the p re s e n t p o p u la tio n . Table XLIX shows these fin d in g s organized in to e ig h t p o p u la tio n g ro u p s. The breakdown was more d e ta ile d in the lower p o p u la tio n b ra c k e ts because i t was f e l t th a t th e re was g r e a te r lik e lih o o d of v a r i a ti o n in t h a t area than in the area of la rg e p o p u la tio n g rou pin gs. The fre q u e n c ie s in the "Under 2" c ateg o ry were g r e a t e r th an those in the "17-64.9" c ategory in a l l popula t i o n c la s s e s except th e 1,000-2,000 c l a s s . The d if f e r e n c e s 'in the raw d a ta were so sm a ll, however, t h a t one could h a rd ly claim to have found a tr e n d . In o rd er to c l a r i f y the d a ta , th e fre q u e n c ie s in th e se two c a te g o rie s were r e duced to p e rc en tag es of the t o t a l in the frequen cy ; the r e s u l t s are shown in Table L. None of th e d if f e r e n c e s proved to be s i g n i f i c a n t except the 29 and th e 9 per cent f i g u r e s , which were 3.45 and 2.01 stan d ard e r r o r s re s p e c t i v e l y . Such d i f f e r e n c e s could occur by chance in about .05 and 4 .5 cases in a hundred; the former is h ig h ly s i g n i f i c a n t , while th e l a t t e r is b a re ly w ith in th e l im i t of t o l e r ance . I t thué may be concluded t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more suc c e s s f u l than u n su c c e ssfu l co o p erativ es operate in communi t i e s having p o p u latio n s of between one and two thousand i n h a b i t a n t s , and t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u n su c c e ssfu l than i C Q M O p H - I — I O A O O nd 0 d I — I 0 1 1 — 4 O o o o o lO o C Q O I — I I rH O o o O O O lO rH C Q >> -p I •H rH O 0 o o 0 o o § ID O O rH P 4-1 I O 1 —1 o o o 0 o o c c •H C Q ID C O I rH O o o O O I — I C Q t O rH O o o lO m I — I A 0 O ^0 O 0 ID P) 259 O rH rH C Q ID C Q rH C Q O O to O O C Q C O t D H t O O O O O ID CQ H O CQ CQ to CO I 1 CQ CQ O t O C Q C Q l D t O ' ^ ' ^ CO rH ’sti C O C Q C Q C O C O ^ ID ID C O ID ID C Q I — I C O C O O ^ t O O p t O C O 'vHO 0 bO 0 CQ OÏ CJi 0 m -P 0 E, CQ CO 0 0 0 0 U ^0 1 1 o o 0 CQ CO El c! 0 0 H Ph O t O H O ^ O C O C Q C Q C Q O C O O ID CQ I — I I — I I — I tO I — I I — I o o rH I — I CO IN CQ to CO CO CQ I — I I — I H I CQ CO ID H I a O) O) O i G i OÎ O) O) < • • • • • • • • 0 Eh HI to 00 O CQ HI to HI Q 1 --1 1 —1 1 —1 1 —1 to Eh f I I Î 1 1 1 1 ID IN O i rH to ID IN ID 1 —1 rH rH 1 —1 to 260 TABLE L THE AVERAGE FREQUENCIES IN THE "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" CATEGORIES OF TABLE XLIX TABULATED BY POPULATION CLASSES P o p u la tio n C lasses P ercentage Under 2 In c re a s e 17-64.9 D iffe re n c e Under 500 .06 .02 .04 501- 1,000 .09 .00 .09 1,001- 2,000 .08 .37 .29 2,001- 5,000 .11 .12 .01 5,001- 10,000 .11 .07 .04 10,001- 25,000 .21 .16 .05 25,001-100,000 .15 .12 .03 100,001 and up .19 .14 .05 261 s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es o p e ra te in communities of fiv e hundred to one thousand i n h a b i t a n t s . C i ti e s of f iv e tho u sand p o p u la tio n and over and ham lets w ith under f iv e hundred p o p u la tio n have a h ig h er p ro p o rtio n of u n su c c e ssfu l th an of s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es b u t th e se d if f e r e n c e s a re not s i g n i f i c a n t . The d a ta in d ic a te t h a t a p o p u la tio n of between one and two thousand i s an optimum s i z e from th e p o in t of view 'of c o o p erativ e success sin c e every o th e r p o p u latio n group shows an a s s o c i a t io n w ith u n su c c e ssfu ln e ss (w ith th e excep t i o n of th e two to f iv e thousand group were the d if f e r e n c e between th e r a t i o s is m ic ro s c o p ic a lly s m a l l ) . V. SUM M ARY AND CONCLUSIONS The fo llo w in g may be concluded from th e fo reg o in g a n a ly se s : 1. A s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig her p ro p o rtio n of s u c c e s s fu l (when success i s measured in terms of annual member increase) th an of u n su c c e ss fu l c o o p erativ es have achieved b u sin e ss dominance w hile a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig h er p ro p o rtio n of the .unsu ccessfu l than of the s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s have f a i l e d to achieve such s t a t u s in th e f o o d - s to re f i e l d . This i s not a s e l f - e v i d e n t p r o p o s itio n because a c o o p e ra tiv e m ight conceivably have gained a b u sin e ss dominance based on a high 2 6 2 p ro p o rtio n of non-member b u s in e s s , and y et have won few new members * 2. A h ig her p ro p o rtio n of u n su c c e ssfu l th an of suc c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es have a la rg e volume of non-member b u s i ness w hile a h igh er p ro p o rtio n o f s u c c e s s fu l th an of unsuc c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es have a sm all volume of non-member b u s i n e s s . This fin d in g was h ig h ly s i g n i f i c a n t and su g g e sts th a t people jo in c o o p erativ es la r g e ly fo r s o c i a l re a s o n s ; in co o p e ra tiv e s w ith a la rg e p ro p o rtio n of non-member b u sin ess the economic a s p e c ts of the c o o p erativ e are o b v io u sly a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y s a t i s f a c t o r y and yet many of th e p a tro n s do not become members. S avin gs, convenience, and s e rv ic e a re d o u b tle s s im p o rta n t, but th ese must be r e le g a te d to a se c ondary p o s i t i o n . 5. S u c c e ss fu l and u n su c c e ssfu l c o o p erativ es meet about th e same amount of co m p e titio n . N e ith e r type has in vaded th e f i e l d of food s t o r e o p e ra tio n w ith s u f f i c i e n t suc cess to th r e a te n th e p r o f i t margins of p re v io u s ly e x ta n t ^business; su c ce ssio n has n o t taken p la c e . A pparently t h i s type of p r i v a t e p r o f i t b u sin e ss c u r r e n tly o f f e r s values to i t s p a tro n s which th ey wish to p re s e rv e . 4. A h ig h ly s i g n i f i c a n t p ro p o rtio n of s u c c e s s f u l co o p e ra tiv e s a re s i t u a t e d in communities having one to two thousand i n h a b i t a n t s . P o s s ib ly prim ary group r e l a ti o n s h i p s 263 f l o u r i s h most w idely in t h i s s iz e of community. C e rta in ly th e r e would tend to be a la rg e degree of homogeneity and f r i e n d l i n e s s . More u n su c c e ss fu l th an s u c c e s s f u l coopera t i v e s a re found in communities which a re e i t h e r sm a lle r o r l a r g e r th an t h i s s iz e but with one e x c e p tio n , th e d i f f e r ences a re not s i g n i f i c a n t . I t may l o g i c a l l y be asked why th e sm a ller communities a re l e s s fa v o ra b le to c o o p erativ e su c c e ss . Any e x p la n a tio n of t h i s s i t u a t i o n w ith the d a ta in hand would be pure s p e c u la tio n , but i t i s notew orthy t h a t many very sm all communities (under one thousand i n h a b i t a n t s ) . a re no t b a s i c a l l y as homogeneous as they appear on th e s u r fa c e s in c e they are o fte n e i t h e r r e s o r t towns or shopping c e n te rs f o r farm communities in which th e r e is a very con s id e r a b l e p ro p o rtio n of the p o p u la tio n l i v i n g on f a i r l y i s o l a t e d fam ily farm s. ! The ch ap ter as a whole i n d i c a t e s , perhaps somewhat c o v e r tly , the importance of a c t i v e , a s s im ila te d members who I win new members through prim ary r e l a t i o n s h i p s . C ooperatives are a t t r a c t i v e , a p p a re n tly , l a r g e ly because the s o c i a l r e l a t io n s h ip s involved a re a t t r a c t i v e r a t h e r than because of t h e i r b u sin e ss e f f i c ie n c y . CHAPTER X THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE OCCUPATIONAL COMPOSITION OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF COOPERATIVES AND SUCCESS I t has been a s s e r te d t h a t c e r t a i n c la s s e s of people a re b e t t e r s u ite d to o rganize and o p e ra te c o o p erativ es th an o th e r s . One o f th e mos t p e r s i s t e n t of th e s e hypotheses i s t h a t farm ers e x c e l a l l o th e r o c c u p a tio n a l groups in b u ild in g c o o p e ra tiv e s . Another a s s e r t i o n i s t h a t u n s k ille d la b o r is in capable of dev elo ping s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e ra tiv e s because of i t s ignorance of the f i n e p o in ts of b u sin e ss o p e ra tio n , and y e t a n o th er i s t h a t most p r o f e s s io n a l people and e x ecu tiv es cannot be i n t e r e s t e d in co o p eratio n because t h e i r income is s u f f i c i e n t to o b v ia te th e need f o r "pinching p e n n ie s ." In o rd e r to t e s t a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y th e above suppo s i t i o n s th e respo ndents were asked the fo llo w in g composite ,q u e stio n : What per cen t of th e heads of th e member fa m ilie s of your c o o p e ra tiv e f a l l in to th e fo llo w in g occupa t i o n a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s ? a . U n sk illed la b o r b. S k ille d la b o r c. C le r ic a l workers d . P r o f e s s io n a l people e . E xecutives f • Farmers I t is c le a r t h a t th e r e tu r n s could n o t be expected to be m ath em atically exact p e rc e n ta g e s . An exam ination of th e q u e s tio n n a ire s shows, however, th a t a c o n sid e ra b le 265 number of the respon dents gave thorough c o n s id e ra tio n to th e q u e stio n s ; a la rg e number o f r e p l i e s contained such i n s e r t s as "2 1/2 p e r c e n t," " p r a c t i c a l l y none," "our members a re about 90 p er cent s t u d e n t s , " e t c . , and very few of th e r e p l i e s did not add up to a t o t a l of 100 per cent* I . THE PROPORTION OF UNSKILLED LABOR IN COOPERATIVES Table LI shows th e p erc en ta g e of u n s k ille d workers which were re p o rte d in th e v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s . I t i s c le a r t h a t alth oug h u n s k ille d la b o r c o n s t it u t e s a very con s id e r a b l e percentage o f the t o t a l p o p u latio n of the country t h i s p ro p o rtio n i s not r e f l e c t e d in the membership composi t i o n of c o o p e ra tiv e s . Out of 242 respondents only twelve s a id t h a t 60 per cent or more of t h e i r membership w as un- I s k i l l e d la b o r, only t h ir t y - t w o t h a t 40 p e r cent or more and only e ig h ty - th r e e th a t 20 per cent or more was in t h i s group. This i s a l l th e more rem arkable because no s o c i a l c l a s s , w ith th e e x cep tio n of c asu a l farm la b o r, would be expected to have g r e a te r need f o r the economic b e n e f its of coopera t i o n . As f a r as comparisons of and c o n tr a s ts between th e un s u c c e s s f u l and s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s a re concerned, an exami n a tio n of the raw d a ta shows no d if f e r e n c e s which can be i ë o ü C Q H I M w g p :, H O w S A et; 5 :: a I td ffl [ Q g k g # ^ P h S O ° ^ C Q O S B K a S o g 8 8 C Q El P D Ph PQ O < H ^ "' E H O P 4 E 4 O o 1 —1 o o> o co 0 o E l IN 0 E l O c d O 1 - 4 tO 0 I —1 1 —iO •H ID 0 0. t = > O <H HI O 0 bO 0 O + : > C O 0 0 ü E l 0 o pH CQ O rH L O O 0 bO 0 0 0 -P 0 0 0 0 O ü 0 0 0 H o o o o o o o o o o o o CQ o o o o o o o o rH o O O O i H O O O r4 O O i H O r H O O i H O O O O O O O O i H O O O O C Q O O O O O O C O i H i H O i H C Q O O O O CQH C O O O O C Q O O r4 O O C Q r H C O O C Q HI HI HI r4 C Q O O C Q i H C O i H C Q c O C O C Q C O i H i H rH C Q r H O t O C O H i O H i COCOiH i Hl N O [s. HI CO O) CO C O t O CD CQ CQ H r4 C Q l D c O i H i H O l O H C Q O O ï iH O H I C O CQ C Q I — I I — I C i C Q CQ S o H I O IN C O H I a 0 C 7 > Gi Gi G > G > O O) C J> C J> Gi < ! • * • • • • • • • 0 EH CQ CO O GO O CQ HI tÛ HI O rH 1 —1 I —1 I —1 t û EH I l l 1 J 1 1 f 1 1 CQ co HI lO IN G > H CO LO IN LO rH I —1 I —1 I —1 tÛ 266 267 considered a tr e n d . When th e in d iv id u a l fre q u e n c ie s in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o rie s a re changed in to p e rc e n t ages by d iv id in g each frequency by th e t o t a l in th e category comparable f ig u r e s were o b ta in e d . These r a t i o s are shown in Table L II. There i s l i t t l e t h a t can be suggested from a study of th ese p ro p o r tio n s . With th e e x cep tio n of p e rc e n t ages in the "0 ," "5," and "80" c la s s e s the "Under 2" c a te gory has c o n s i s t e n t l y h igher p ro p o rtio n s than the "17-64.9" c a te g o ry . The d if f e r e n c e s are so sm a ll, however, t h a t no [inference would be j u s t i f i e d . When the l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e , th e seventeen p o in t found under "5 ," was te s te d i t proved to be 1.84 sta n d a rd e r r o r s and sin c e t h i s could occur by chance in about 6.5 cases in a hundred, i t was c le a r l y no t s i g n i f i c a n t. I t was assumed t h a t th e o th e r d if f e r e n c e s were a ls o not s i g n i f i c a n t . I t must be concluded, on th e b a sis of the above a n a l - < y s i s , t h a t i t cannot be dem onstrated s t a t i s t i c a l l y w ith the a v a i la b l e d a ta t h a t c o o p e ra tiv e s w i l l be e i t h e r more o r l e s s s u c c e s s f u l because th ey have a high or a low p ro p o rtio n of u n s k ille d la b o r in t h e i r memberships. I f th e re i s any d i f - I fe re n c e between the high and low c a te g o rie s of member i n c re ase the d a ta sug gest t h a t th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s have a lower and the u n su c c e ss fu l a h ig h er percentage of un s k i l l e d lab o r members, but th e re is only the f a i n t e s t 268. TABLE L U THE PROPORTION OF UNSKILLED LABOR IN EIGHTY-TWO COOPERATIVES IN THE "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" CATEGORIES OF MEMBERSHIP INCREASE TO THE TOTAL FREQUENCY IN EACH CATEGORY P ercen tag e o f L aborers C a teg o ries of Membership In c re a s e 1 D iffere n ce Under 2 17-64.9 0 .17 .24 .07 5 .15 .32 .17 10 .22 .18 .04 20 .17 .05 .12 30 .06 .05 .01 40 .06 .05 .01 50 .06 .05 .01 60 .02 .00 .02 70 .02 .00 .02 80 .00 .02 .02 I 1 90 .06 .02 .04 ! 100 .00 .00 .00 269 i n d ic a t i o n t h a t t h i s s i t u a t i o n may o b ta in . I I . THE PROPORTION OF SKILLED LABOR IN COOPERATIVES Table L III shows the percen tage of s k i l l e d la b o r which was re p o rte d to e x i s t in th e respondent c o o p e ra tiv e s . As in the case of u n s k ille d la b o r , th ere were few coopera t i v e s in which th e re was a high p ro p o rtio n of s k i l l e d l a b o r e r s . Out of 239 re sp o n d e n ts, only t h i r t y - f o u r had 40 or more per cent of t h e i r membership in the s k i l l e d lab o r b r a c k e t, while f i f t y - f o u r had 30 or more p e rc ce n t and e ig h ty had 20 or more per cent in t h i s group. Once again the raw d a ta showed no observable tre n d w ith r e s p e c t to d if f e r e n c e s between the f ig u r e s in the "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o r ie s . These d a ta were, t h e r e f o r e , changed in to p e rc en ta g es o f the t o t a l in t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e c a te g o r ie s ; the r e s u l t s a re shown in Table LIV. An exam ination of the d if f e r e n c e s d is c lo s e d n o th in g of im p ort. In f iv e of the "p ercentage of la b o r e rs " groups th e more s u c c e s s fu l s o c i e t i e s had th e h igher r a t i o w hile in s i x (one, th e 100 p e r c e n t, had no freq u e n cie s) the le s s s u c c e s s f u l had the h ig h er r a t i o . Moreover, th ese cases in which the s u c c e s s fu l and th e u n su c ce ssfu l had the h ig h er p ro p o rtio n s were i n t e r l a c e d . When the two l a r g e s t d i f f e r - 3 g E - > C Q U ® u o rO 0 d •H 00 < U o 0 00 c s d 0 o u 0 Ç U a C O o c \ } to o 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 3 0 d 0 0 u o o u d 0 H hi o o o o o o o o o o o o H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r H O O O 0 H o o W O O H r H O H O H O O O a a a a a a a O H O H ^ O H O O sJ <0 Cv 3 0 CQ 0 rH 0 0 0H 0 Cv3 W C Q O O < M H C O O O L O W C O O < H L O H C O C V 3 C V 3 C V 3 0 C V 3 0 OCOWt OL O' ^ t - l COWr H^ O aOCQO OOïOî' ^ÇOOi HCQCX} CVJrHOrH I— Î Oi o> OÏ Oi Oi Oi o> Oi G F > O) 04 d 03 CO to 00 o 03 4^ to 1 —1 rH 1 —1 to o8 1 I I Ï Î t 1 1 1 t 03 CO LO o Oi r-j CO LO o- LO r~i rH rH rH to o r-j 03 iO O r4 270 (D 03 % O i to 03 LO o 271 TABLE LIV THE PROPORTION OF SKILLED LABOR IN EIGHTY-ONE COOPERATIVES IN THE "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" CATEGORIES OF MEMBER INCREASE TO THE TOTAL FREQUENCY IN EACH CATEGORY C a teg o ries of P e rcen tag e Membership In cre ase of Laborers Under 2 17-64.9 D iffe re n c e 0 .16 .27 .11 5 .18 .35 .17 10 .23 .11 .12 20 .18 .05 .13 30 .04 .13 .09 40 .09 .03 .06 50 .02 .03 .01 60 .02 .00 .02 70 .04 .00 .04 80 .00 .03 .03 90 .02 .00 .02 100 • 00 ■ .00 .00 272 ences (seventeen and t h i r t e e n ) were t e s te d they were found to be 1.53 and 1.79 sta n d ard e r r o r s r e s p e c t iv e ly , and hence could have occurred in about 12.5 and 7.0 cases in a hundred by chance; th ey were f a r from s i g n i f i c a n c e . I t must be concluded, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t i t makes abso l u t e l y no d if f e r e n c e as f a r as th e su ccess or f a i l u r e of a coo p erativ e is concerned whether or not th e re i s a consider-; ab le p ro p o rtio n of s k i l l e d la b o r in the membership sin ce such in cid en c e is n e it h e r a n e g a tiv e nor a p o s itiv e i n f l u ence. I I I . THE PROPORTION OF CLERICAL W ORKERS IN COOPERATIVES Table LV shows th e fre q u e n c ie s w ith which c l e r i c a l ; workers were found in th e v a rio u s c o o p e ra tiv e s . As in th e two p rev io u s c a se s, r e l a t i v e l y few c o o p erativ es had a high p ro p o rtio n of c l e r i c a l workers on t h e i r membership r o s t e r s ; out of 237 respon dents only twenty-two had 30 or more per I cent of t h e i r members in t h i s o c c u p a tio n a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and only f o r t y - t h r e e had 20 or more per cent of such members. ,N early h a lf of th e c o o p e ra tiv e s had no c l e r i c a l workers in t h e i r membership. Since no c le a r tre n d was apparent from an examination' of the raw d a ta in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o r ie s , > ( - 1 s P Q H g I O O D ' H 8 ^ g g E H 1 % , o S K co pL, H B S C O M P Q A g g E h P h O S w g 8 ^ K o g g P 4 < > H Q P P 2 0 o < N îz> 0 pg < q H E H 1 U H H O O H O Oî O 00 O 0 o A 0 M U O o tO H 0 ü •H o A LO 0 H O <HO O 0 w 0 •P O Ü CQ 0 o A 0 PhO C V 3 O H LO O 0 tiO 0 0 0 P 0 Ü 0 0 U ü O U d 0 H FM O O O O O O O O O O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o - H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O H O O O O O O O O O H O O O 0 CV 2 0. o o o o o o o o o H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C \ 2 0 to o o M O H O H ^ O O O O l OOt QCOCVJ c OHr HHOHr H (O H H tOH<tOHCOHOCOCV3 C7 >CV2 H<CX) CX) ( DE>- CV2 C\ 2 r H^ t Q LO(DCV3lOtQH<«0«OC\2CN3H<0 -H rH iH -H -H CV3 O i o> O O o> o> o o> o> O A CV3 CO O 00 o C\2 cO 0 H H H H O tG 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 to 1 d CV2 CQ lO o- o> H CQ o 0 H H H H O O 273 H C\2 C O H H C\2 % G) O O O • 0 Eh O 274 th e se d a ta were changed in to p ercen tag es of th e t o t a l in th e c a teg o ry so t h a t a c le a r e r conceptio n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s involved would be r e a l i z e d . Table LVI shows the r e s u l t a n t r a t i o s . In fo u r of the "Percentage of C l e r i c a l Workers" groups th e s u c c e s s f u l c o o p erativ es had h ig h er r a t i o s than th e l e s s s u c c e s s f u l, w hile in fo u r th e opposite s i t u a t i o n o b ta in e d . In fo u r cases th e re were no recorded f r e q u e n c ie s . F u r th e r , th e re was no a pparen t o rd er in the sequence w ith which th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s had h ig h er r a t i o s and v ice v e r s a . When the d i f f e r e n c e s were t e s te d i t was found t h a t th e 21, 14, and 9 per cent d if f e r e n c e s were 2.96 , 2.34 , and 2.13 sta n d a rd e rr o r s r e s p e c t i v e l y . Such spreads could occur by chance in about .32, 1 .9 0 | and 3.30 cases in one hundred; a l l of them were, t h e r e f o r e , s i g n i f i c a n t . This in d ic a te s ,th a t a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p ro p o rtio n of c o o p erativ es which have about 5 per cent of t h e i r members working in the ^ c le ric a l occupations are s u c c e s s f u l, w hile a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a te r number of c o o p erativ es which have about 20 or 30 per cent of t h e i r members in th e c l e r i c a l occupations a re unsuc c e s s f u l . In co nclu sion , th e d a ta in d ic a t e t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer of th e s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s have a c o n sid e ra b le body of members who a re in the c l e r i c a l o c c u p a tio n a l group while 275 TABLE LVI THE PROPORTION OF CLERICAL W ORKERS IN SEVENTY-NINE COOPERATIVES IN THE "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" CATEGORIES OF MEMBERSHIP INCREASE TO THE TOTAL FREQUENCY IN EACH CATEGORY P e rcen tag e of C le r i c a l Workers C atego ries of Membership In c re a se Under 2 17-64.9 D iffere n ce 0 .35 .39 ■ .04 5 .21 .42 .21 10 .14 .08 .06 20 .12 .03 .09 30 .14 .00 .14 40 .02 .05 .03 50 .00 .00 .00 60 .00 .00 .00 70 .00 .03 .03 80 .02 .00 .02 90 .00 .00 .00 100 .00 .00 .00 276 s i g n i f i c a n t l y more of the u n s u c c e s s fu l have such a group of members. The reasons f o r t h i s rem ain obscure sin c e th e a v a ila b le d a ta throw no l i g h t on th e causes behind t h i s phenomenon. IV. THE PROPORTION OF PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE IN COOPERATIVES Table LVI I shows th e frequency w ith which p r o f e s s io n a l people were found on the membership r o s t e r s of coopera t i v e s . As would be ex pected, they c o n s t it u t e a d e f i n i t e m in o rity in most s o c i e t i e s ; th e r e were only f o r t y - f i v e out of 238 c o o p erativ es in which p r o f e s s i o n a l people were 20 or more per cent o f th e t o t a l membership. When the raw d a ta in the "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o r ie s were compared n o th in g of s ig n if ic a n c e was d i s c lo s e d . The in d iv id u a l fre q u e n c ie s were then changed in to p e rc e n ta g e s o f th e t o t a l in each freq u en cy . The r e s u l t s a re shown in Table LV III. None of th e d i f f e r e n c e s were p ro m ising ly la r g e , and none o f them proved to be even c lo se to the le v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e . There was a s l i g h t tendency f o r s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s to have h ig h e r p ro p o rtio n s in th e |5 and 10 p e r cent groups, and f o r u n su c c e ssfu l s o c i e t i e s to have hig h er r a t i o s in the groups ran g in g between 20 and 80 per c e n t, but t h i s can be e a s i l y exp lain ed by re fe re n c e to H I -- - - o o o o o o O o O O O O O O O H O o o o o o o o O o o o O O os O rH o o O O rH o O o o o o C M (D 0 H O O o O C \2 O rH O 1 — 1 o o rH o L O C M o O 0 F M 1 — 1 o rH o O rH O O O O o o O o C M 0 (D 0 O •H 0 O oa rH O o O 1 — 1 O o rH o rH o tû 0 L O q-, o u A* O C O rH rH rH rH O O rH O o rH O O S 44 O 0 bO 0 o to o rH rH O rH rH (M O o rH O O -P C O rH d 0 o A 0 o C M rH C O o O O rH rH C M o rH O rH P4 C M rH o O C M C M (M to tO C M O rH o O C M H C O L O O C O o to C O os 00 tû o (M to to os rH rH rH t> O to to os O o to L O C O r— 1 (M 1 — 1 O rH rH rH rH 00 G O 0 P bO 0 C M os os os O S os O S O S os O S O S 0 0 d p 0 J M C M to tO 00 O C M tû O d 0 0 1 — 1 rH rH r— 1 tO o8 E -c 0 f M ï I * I 1 I 1 1 1 1 ü O d C M to L O o O S rH C O L O o L O u d != > rH rH rH rH tû 0 H H 4 277 TABLE LVIII THE PROPORTION OF PROFESSIONAL W ORKERS IN EIGHTY COOPERATIVES IN THE "UNDER 2" AND "17-64.9" CATEGORIES OF MEMBERSHIP INCREASE TO THE TOTAL FREQUENCY IN EACH CATEGORY 278 P ercentage of P r o f e s s io n a ls C a teg o ries of Membership In c re a s e Under 2 17-64.9 D iffe re n c e 0 .32 .32 .00 5 .23 .35 .12 10 .16 .19 .03 20 .05 .03 .02 30 .07 .03 .04 40 .07 .03 .04 50 .05 .03 .02 60 .02 .00 .02 70 .00 .03 .03 80 .02 .00 .02 90 .00 .00 .00 100 .00 .00 .00 279 the th eo ry of sample v a r i a t i o n . I t must be concluded t h a t i t makes no d if f e r e n c e as f a r as coo perativ e success or f a i l u r e i s concerned whether a la rg e o r a sm all p o r tio n of the members of a s o c ie ty a re p r o f e s s io n a l p eo ple. V. THE PROPORTION OF EXECUTIVES IN COOPERATIVES Table LIX shows the p ro p o rtio n of e x e c u tiv e s which a re members of c o o p e r a tiv e s . As would be ex p ected , the fre q u e n c ie s a re low in p r a c t i c a l l y every p e rc en tag e group. One hundred and six ty -tw o out o f th e 236 resp ond en ts sa id t h a t th e r e were no e x e c u tiv e s in t h e i r s o c ie ty , w hile only s ix claimed t h a t 20 per cent or more of t h e i r members were ,in t h i s c la s s . , When the raw d a ta in the "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o rie s were changed i n to p e rc en tag es by d iv id in g the in d iv id u a l fre q u e n c ie s by the t o t a l in the categ o ry , the fo llo w in g d if f e r e n c e s were found: s i I § o 8 ^ to H to p :1 <M O S O FM fri H 0 ^ 8 2 F d g il !: g * o g g H O H 2 gP. O >4 I g k Ej O < M F D O P Q g g 0 1 M O O p o o> o 00 o o 0 0 f> o •H tO P d o 0 o H LO 4h O © o bO 0 P d 0 o o F4to 0 FM o CM o 1—1 LO o 0 bO 0 0 0 P 0 d 0 0 A ü O u d 0 H FM o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o OO o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o OM o o o o o o o o o o OO r H O O O O OO o o o t O O O O O O O O O O r H O tO rH ( M r H r H C M H H O o to o LO O r H t O î O O C O r H O L O to ^ CM CQ I—I I—I I—I CM I—I rH CM CM C3î a Oi Oi C J5 a Oi Oi Oi C3î d u 0 CM to (O 00 O P CM P P tO 1 —1 S -d I I 1 I I 1 I 1 î 1 g CM to LO o Oi 1—t rH to p LO 1 —1 p LO (O O O o o o o 280 C O CM < o CO E h O E h 281 P ercentag e of E xecutiv es^ 0 5 10 20 Under 2 .67 .12 .14 .07 17-64.9 .73 .16 .08 .03 D iffe re n c e .06 .04 .06 .04 Since none of th e se d if f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t and s in c e th e re i s no sig n of a tre n d in the d a ta , i t must be concluded t h a t i t makes a b s o lu te ly no d if f e r e n c e as f a r as success or f a i l u r e of c o o p e ra tiv e s i s concerned whether or not c o o p erativ es have or do no t have e x ec u tiv es in t h e i r m embership. VI. THE PROPORTION OF FARMERS IN.:COOPERATIVES Table IX shows th e degree to which the membership of c o o p e ra tiv e s is made up of farm e rs. Out of the 255 coopera t i v e s which r e p l i e d to th e q u e stio n only f o r t y - n i n e had no farm ers in t h e i r membership and only e ig h ty - th r e e had as few as 10 per c e n t. By comparison, 10 5 of the c o o p e ra tiv e s had a membership of which 80 per cent or more was drawn from the' farm er group. An exam ination of the raw data in th e "Under 2" and "17-64.9" c a te g o rie s showed a s l i g h t tendency f o r th e ^ The o th er p e rc e n ta g e s in th e se c a te g o rie s were om itted, be,canse^they had.no f r e q u e n c ie s , ....... M g E H H % I w s i 10 ü to % CM H P h F M O H E h M 8 i « g % 1 1 l ë M N B | g | il Ph p O E -4 8 0 g # ü 2 FM pq g o o H O 05 o 00 o es 0 u o 0 to a u 0 Ph o 4h LO o 0 bO 0 o P d 0 o u 0 o Ph CO o CM o H LO O 0 bO © 0 0 P 0 d 0 © d ü O d d 0 M ,._fm_ C M r H H H H C M C M O C M O CMO CQtOO^GOtO^COrHrHtOCM C M t O D O l O « O t O C O C M O C M y 3 0 C M O O H C Q C M C M H r - J O CQr-J r H O H H H O O C M O H ^ î H O s } 4 0 0 r HH 0 ' H 0 0 0 ^ 0 rH rH C O O O C M O O O O O O r*4OOCMc0CMO Or HOr HO C O O O r H O r H C M r H O O r H O CMO C M C O r H C Q r H r H r H O r H O ' st 4CMr H t O r H C M O C M H O C M r H O C M r H C M s } 4 l O C M C O r H O O C O rH H rH tO L O L O C O tû rH rH rH rH rH 282 C O I— I O) L O H O i I — I o> 3 CMa>0>a>0>0>0>0>(3^Gr>0> cm <q high="" rev="" method="" low="" type="" for="" accept="" value="" media="" checked="" name="" open=""> Between th e C oop erative and Members, and Seiw een th e C oop erative and Non-members 1 . P le a s e c i r c l e a l l o f th e f o llo w in g m ethods o f in - fo rm a tio n and e d u c a tio n w hich your c o o p e r a tiv e has used in th e p a s t y e a r , and in th e p a r e n th e s is in d ic a t e about how o fte n the method was used d u rin g th e y e a r . a . News b u l le t in ( ) b . T elephone com m ittee ( ) c . N o tic e s (on b u l le t in b o a rd s, e t c . ) ( ) d . P o s te r s ( ) e . M a ilin g c # r d s , d is t r ib u t in g "throw -aw ays," e t c . fo r purpose o f a d v e r tis in g com m odities ( ) f . Membership m eetin g s (fo r tr a n s a c tin g b u sin e ss g . R e c r e a tio n a l m eetin g s (b u s in e s s h e ld to a minimum) ( ) h . Square or f o lk d an cin g ( ) i . S o c ia l d a n cin g ( ) j . M ovies ( ) k . Study a c tio n or d is c u s s io n groups ( ) 1 . R eg io n a l co-op m eetin g s (cam ps, i n s t i t u t e s , e t c . ) ( ) m. R efresh m en ts se rv e d a t th e s t o r e or a t m eetin g s ( ) n . C a lls by members o f a com m ittee on o th er members ( ) o . B ooks, p am p h lets, e t c . , d is t r ib u t e d or m ailed to members ( ) p . O ther m ethods _________________________________________ 2 . Does your c o o p e r a tiv e su b s c r ib e t o th e r e g io n a l c o o p e r a tiv e newspaper fo r a l l o f your members? (P le a se c i r c l e th e c o r r e c t answer) Yes No Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3 . How are th e fu n d s fo r e d u c a tio n r a is e d ? (P le a se c i r c l e th e c o r r e c t answer) a . A p e r ce n ta g e o f t o t a l volume o f b u s in e s s b . A p e r c e n ta g e o f n e t income c . A f ix e d sum per year d . A p e r c e n ta g e o f sa v in g s e . V arying sums v o ted from tim e to tim e by th e 329 bpard of d i r e c t o r s f . Other 4 . How much did your c o o p e r a tiv e spend f o r e d u c a tio n l a s t year? $ ____________ 5* P le a s e c i r c l e th e sta te m en t which b e s t e x p r e s s e s th e tren d in e d u c a tio n a l work in your c o o p e r a tiv e d u rin g th e p a s t f i v e y e a r s: a . G rea tly expanded b. Somewhat expanded c . S tayed about th e same d . D ecreased somewhat e . D ecreased c o n sid e r a b ly f . Has been d is c o n tin u e d Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6 . P le a s e c i r c l e a l l o f th e fo llo w in g means w hich your c o o p e r a tiv e has used to c o n ta c t non-members d u rin g th e p a s t two y e a r s: a . Members sp ea k in g to non-members about th e coop e r a t iv e b . A d vertisem en ts ( in new spap ers, r a d io program s, b illb o a r d s , e t c . ) c . M a ilin g c o o p e r a tiv e lit e r a t u r e d . I n v it in g non-members to r e c r e a t io n a l m eetin g s e* I n v it in g non-members to b u s in e s s m eetin g s f . Having members a c t a s sp ea k ers f o r n on -coop era t i v e groups g . Planned c o n ta c ts in th e s to r e h . O thers _________ __ IX . Adherence to R ochdale P r in c ip le s p le a s e in d ic a te by p la c in g an "X" in th e a p p ro p ria te column how your c o o p e r a tiv e o b serv es th e f o llo w in g p r in c ip le s : Always Som etim es Never O bserves -O bserves O bserves a . Open membership w ith o u t r e s p e c t to r a c e , r e l ig i o n or p o l i t i c s b . One member, one v o te G. L im ited and m odest i n t e r e s t on c a p i t a l d . S a v in g s r e tu r n s ( i . e . d iv id e n d s) on th e b a s is o f p u rch ases e . S e l l s f o r cash Always Som etimes N ever O bserves O bserves O bserves f . N e u tr a lity in r a c e , r e l i g i o n and p o l i t i c s g* S e l l s a t g o in g m arket p r ic e s I f th e r e i s any a d d itio n a l in fo rm a tio n about your coop e r a t iv e o r the c o n d itio n s under which i t fu n c tio n s w hich you would l ik e t o add, o r any comments you w ish to make, p le a s e do so below and on th e back o f t h i s s h e e t . Thank you v ery much fo r your c o o p e r a tio n . APPENDIX "B" CRITICISMS AND SUGGESTIONS BY COOPERATIVE LEADERS RELATING T O MATmiAL T O BE INCLUDED IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE "SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS OF COOPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES" J The f o llo w in g s u g g e s tio n s and c r it ic is m s a r e g iv en in as much th e same form as the au th or r e c e iv e d them a s p o s s i b l e . SUGGESTION O R CRITICISM FREQUENCY (in q u e s tio n form) 1 . What kind o f neighborhood i s th e c o o p e r a tiv e in ? 2 . What i s th e income l e v e l o f th e members and p a tro n s? 3 . How fa r i s th e c o o p e r a tiv e from a c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le sa le ? 4 . What a re th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f your em ployees? 5 . What i s th e c o o p e r a tiv e ’ s c a p it a l s it u a t io n ? 6 . In g e n e r a l, what problem s do you fa c e ? 7 . How much s t a b i l i t y does your membership e x h ib it? 8 . Should n ot th e word "consumer" be om itted s in c e i t con n otes urban and w i l l be o b je c te d to by r u r a l co o p era to rs? 9 . W hy was your c o o p e r a tiv e organ ized ? 1 0 . Has th e c o o p e r a tiv e paid r efu n d s? 1 1 . Why d id n ’ t th e w h o le sa le g iv e more h elp ? 1 2 . Are c o o p e ra to rs a c t iv e in sc h o o l a f f a i r s , u n io n s , e t c .? 332 SUGGESTION O R CRITICISM FREQUENCY (in q u e s tio n form) 1 3 . What em otion s are in v o lv ed in c o o p e r a tiv e e d u c a tio n a l work? 1 1 4 . What ty p e s o f p e o p le are among th e a c t iv e members? 1 1 5 . What c h a r a c t e r is t ic s do boards o f management d is p la y ? 1 1 6 . How i s adequ ate r e sp o n se to be o b ta in ed ? 1 1 7 . What s i z e o f town i s th e co-op lo c a te d in ? 2 1 8 . What c o n d itio n s are r e s p o n s ib le f o r b r in g in g in new members a t t h i s tim e? 2 1 9 . Should n o t econom ic a s p e c ts be s t r e s s e d more h e a v ily ? 2 2 0 . Are n o t some (th e q u e stio n s were s p e c if ie d ) q u e s tio n s hard t o answer a c c u r a te ly ? 2 2 1 . I s n ot th e form o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e b e tte r s u ite d t o urban than to r u r a l a rea s? (C f. q u e s tio n n in e above) 3 2 2 . I s n o t th e q u e stio n n a ir e to o lon g? 3 In a d d itio n th e r e were v a r io u s s u g g e s tio n s fo r b e tt e r term in o lo g y in e x is t in g q u e s tio n s . APPENDIX "C" DEFINITIONS O F SUCCESS IN THE FIELD OF C O N SU M ER COOPERATIVE FOOD DISTRIBUTION The fo llo w in g d e f i n i t io n s o f th e m eaning o f s u c c e s s in th e f i e l d o f consumer c o o p e r a tiv e food d is t r ib u t io n are tak en from th e r e p l i e s o f c o o p e r a tiv e le a d e r s to th e q u es t io n n a ir e e n t i t l e d , "What i s th e M easure o f Consumer Coop e r a t iv e S u c c e ss in th e F ie ld o f Food D is t r ib u tio n ? ." They c o n s t it u t e th e raw d a ta o u t o f w hich th e freq u en cy d is t r ib u t io n e n t i t l e d , "Suggested C h a r a c te r is tic s o f S u c c e s s fu l Co o p e r a tiv e Food S to r e s and R e la te d Comments," and th e compos i t e d e f i n i t i o n o f c o o p e r a tiv e s u c c e s s in th e f i e l d o f food d is t r ib u t io n are b a sed . (S ee pages 64 f f . ) In each o f the fo llo w in g d e f i n i t io n s from th e q u es tio n n a ir e s th e le a d l i n e , "A s u c c e s s f u l consumer c o o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e i s one in w h ich ," i s o m itte d . 1 . . . .an econ om ical s e r v ic e i s ren dered to i t s members and p atron s w ith in a fram e o f d e m o c r a tic a lly owned and c o n tr o lle d p o l i c i e s o f h ig h e s t e t h i c a l and consumer s e r v ic e stan d ard s 2 . . . .( a ) a w orkable p e r ce n ta g e o f th e members a r e in formed on p o l i c i e s , program and r e s u l t s , (b) th e op era t i o n i s com m ercially s u c c e s s f u l and exp an d in g, (c) th e p o l i c i e s u s u a lly adhere t o th e R ochdale P r i n c ip l e s , (d) th e group i s a c ce p ted in th e community 3 . . . .o p e r a te s a s to r e b e t t e r than o th e r s in th e communi t y and s e r v e s a need by p r ic e - s e r v ic e 4 . . . .s e r v i c e s , q u a lit y and p r ic e s are such t h a t p a tro n s b e n e f it by u s in g th e s t o r e , and in a d d itio n c o o p e r a tiv e e d u c a tio n i s prom oted through u se o f p o s t e r s , some 5 3 4 lit e r a t u r e d is t r i b u t io n , inform ed em p loyees, e t o . 5 . , . «p rovid es a d e q u a tely th e food needs o f i t s members a t a s a v in g s u f f i c i e n t to j u s t i f y the e f f o r t o f th e members expended in a d m in is te r in g th e a f f a i r s o f th e s t o r e « 6 . . . .th e management i s as good o r b e t t e r than th e com p e t i t i o n and th e members ta k e p r id e in t h e ir ow nership 7 . . • .c o -o p id e a s are a c c e p te d as o f paramount im portance and in w hich t h e s e id e a s have been made to fu n c tio n e f f i c i e n t l y through a com b in ation o f th e f a c t o r s o f lo y a l members, w ise d ir e c t o r s , e f f i c i e n t management and ad e quate c a p it a l fo u n d a tio n s . Such a co-op becomes a s o c i a l and econom ic i n s t i t u t i o n p r o v id in g f o r the e c o nom ic, s o c i a l and c u lt u r a l needs o f th e members and con s t a n t ly expands to s e r v ic e th o s e needs 8 . . . . i s n e ith e r to o b ig nor to o sm a ll - a c t iv e and con tin u ed membership p a r t ic ip a t io n in p o lic y , management, e d u c a tio n . E f f i c i e n t , c o n s c ie n tio u s em ployees - good p u b lic r e la t io n s « • se n se o f community r e s p o n s ib i li t y 9 . . . .p r ic e s and s e r v ic e are c o m p e titiv e w ith th o se o f o th e r e s ta b lis h m e n ts in th e a r e a , in which some p a tro n age refu n d s are p a id to p a tr o n s , and w hich i s a c t iv e in d e v e lo p in g a c ce p ta n c e fo r co-op la b e l good s. I would add t h a t members o f any s u c c e s s f u l c o o p e r a tiv e sh ou ld be a c t iv e c i t i z e n s in t h e ir community 1 0 . . . .th e s o c i a l and econom ic s ig n if ic a n c e o f th e e n t e r p r is e i s un d erstood by a c o n sid e r a b le p ro p o rtio n o f th e member p a tr o n s; in w hich v a lu e s a s judged by q u a lity and p r ic e are su p e r io r to th o se in th e average o f p r o f it b u sin e ss food s t o r e s ; in w hich th e members are lo y a l p a tr o n s; in w hich th e r e i s a ste a d y in c r e a s e in member s h ip and b u sin e ss tu r n o v e r; in w hich th e b u sin e ss i s a su c c e s s from th e f i s c a l sta n d p o in t; in which i t i s a member o f a fe d e r a tio n o f c o o p e r a tiv e s o c i e t i e s le a d in g to w orld fe d e r a tio n ; in w hich th e r e i s an a c t iv e i n t e r e s t in th e s o c i e t y ’ s b u sin e ss shown by th e m em bership; and in w h ich , as th e b u sin e ss grows and th e members g a in e x p e r ie n c e in i t s a d m in is tr a tio n and c o n t r o l, th ey move on to t r a n s la t e t h e ir e x p e r ie n c e in to o th er e n t e r p r is e s fo r su p p ly in g t h e ir n e e d s. 335 X I. . . .( 1 ) There i s a c t iv e membership p a r t ic ip a t io n and u n d e rsta n d in g . (2) Proved econom ic advan tage and fin a n c i a l s t a b i l i t y . (3) Adherence to c o o p e r a tiv e p r in c i p l e s . (4) Id e a lism as t o th e econ om ic, s o c i a l and c i t i z en sh ip v a lu e s th e c o o p e r a tiv e can c o n tr ib u te t o th e community. 1 2 . . . .e v e r y a c t i s an e x p r e ss io n o f com plete i n t e g r i t y , com p lete m u tu a lity , o f good w i l l , and where th e s e ex p r e s s io n s a re d ev elo p ed on a sound econom ic base o f s e r v ic e a t sound s o c i a l and econom ic c o s t , or w ith s e r v ic e to th e common good r a th e r th an im pairm ent o f i t . 1 3 . . . . e f f i c i e n t s e r v ic e and q u a lity m erchandise t o se r v e th e need s o f p a tr o n s, to g e th e r w ith c o o p e r a tiv e and con sumer e d u c a tio n a r e su p p lie d as th e r e s u l t o f adequate c a p i t a li z a t i o n by 400 or more consumer f a m ilie s and th e employment o f q u a lif ie d s t a f f p eo p le fo r management and su b o rd in a te o p e r a tio n s 1 4 . . . .th e m a jo r ity o f th e membership understand w e ll the R ochdale P r in c ip le s o f c o o p e r a tio n and som eth in g o f th e h is t o r y o f th e c o o p e r a tiv e movement, are b e lie v e r s in co o p e r a tio n to th e e x te n t o f b e in g w i l l i n g to g iv e some tim e each week or month t o th e a c t i v i t i e s o f th e s o c ie t y and s t o r e and who i n s i s t on u p -to -d a te and a c c u r a te b u sin e ss m ethods and a n e a t , w e ll-o r g a n iz e d s to r e 1 5 . . . .a p p lie s th e p r in c ip le o f consumer ow nership and p r o v id e s i t s exp and ing membership goods and s e r v ic e s a t low p r i c e s , q u a lit y c o n sid ered 1 6 . . . .th e membership i s a c t i v e ly in t e r e s t e d (2), whose board i s made up o f cap ab le and r e sp e c te d members o f th e community (7), whose o p e r a tio n s are run co m p eten tly (6), th e s e a s s u r in g n e c e s s a r y p atronage volume (3) and th e lik e lih o o d o f adequ ate fin a n c in g (5) and a l l in combina t io n b u ild in g a b a s is fo r sound growth (1) and a b i l i t y to p rovid e patron age sa v in g s over and above day t o day v a lu e s in q u a lit y , p r ic e and s e r v ic e (4). 1 7 . . ♦ .th e members u n derstand and p r a c tic e c o o p e r a tio n by p a tr o n iz in g t h e ir own s t o r e and con d u ctin g e f f e c t i v e membership a c t i v i t i e s 1 8 . . . .th e membership i s open to a l l , v o lu n ta r y w ith a l l , and c o n tin u a lly grow ing; th e g o o d s, p r ic e s and f a c i l i t i e s are a s fa v o r a b le t o th e consumer as any in th e 336 m arket a r ea ; th e em ployees are happy and co-op m inded; th e c r e d it r a tin g and r e p u ta tio n in th e b u s in e s s commu n i t y i s e x c e lle n t ; and the i n s t i t u t i o n i s look ed up to by a m a jo r ity o f th e p u b lic as an a s s e t t o th e community SO. . . .a d e q u a te ly and e f f i c i e n t l y s e r v e s th e needs o f i t s m em ber-owners. T h is in c lu d e s a t l e a s t th e fo llo w in g f a c t o r s ; a "one sto p & shop" s e r v ic e * f r e s h m eats* goed p rod u ce, and dry g r o c e r ie s ; housed in a modern w e ll eq u ip p ed , c le a n , w e ll lig h t e d f a c i l i t y ; a good s e l e c t io n o f s to c k tu r n in g tw ic e a month or more; s u f f i c i e n t c a p i t a l to own f i x t u r e s , equipm ent and in v e n to r y c le a r and to o p e r a te on a cash b a s is ; w e ll tr a in e d and e f f i c i e n t management and s t a f f ; a r e s p o n s ib le and inform ed Board o f D ir e c to r s ; an a c t iv e member and community r e la t io n s program; th e e n t ir e c o o p e r a tiv e e f f o r t su pp orted by a t l e a s t 80 per c en t m em ber-patronage 2 1 . . . .th e patron-ow ners are d e m o c r a tic a lly p rovid ed w ith q u a lit y goods and e f f i c i e n t s e r v ic e s a t an u ltim a te sa v in g s over p r o f it e n te r p r is e 2 2 . . . .a f t e r th e i n i t i a l p e r io d o f prom otion and th e s t a r t o f b u s in e s s , a c h ie v e s th e fo llo w in g o b j e c t iv e s : (1) A volume o f b u sin e ss s u f f i c i e n t to make i t one o f th e pace-m akers in p r ic in g and s e r v ic e in i t s tra d e a r e a . (T h is w i l l r e q u ir e a la r g e s e l f - s e r v i c e su per-m arket in a b ig c i t y , a sm a lle r one in a m id- w estern c o u n ty -s e a t tow n, but n ot n e a r ly a s la r g e a s t o r e in a sm a ll r u r a l town str u g g in g fo r e x is t e n c e a g a in s t th e tren d t o tr a d e in la r g e r c e n te r s . In th e l a t t e r c a s e , s u c c e s s would in c lu d e draw ing new tr a d e in t o th e community c e n te r in w hich th e co-op s t o r e i s lo c a t e d .) (2) A sound f in a n c ia l s tr u c tu r e w ith f i r s t , th e f ix t u r e s , equipm ent and in v e n to r y owned 100 per cen t by th e members; se co n d , p le n ty o f f r e e w orking c a p ita l* a ls o owned by th e members; and t h ir d , an adequate s t o r e b u ild in g under s a t i s f a c t o r y lo n g -term l e a s e . (I th in k i t g e n e r a lly dangerous fo r urban c o -o p s to in v e s t any o f t h e ir c a p it a l in r e a l e s t a t e .) (3) A membership* a board o f d ir e c t o r s , and a group o f em ployees each th o ro u g h ly inform ed on c o o p e r a tiv e p r in c ip le s and CO-OP p ro d u cts and lo y a l to th e co o p e r a tiv e way o f b u sin e ss and th e lo c a l and r e g io n a l c o o p e r a tiv e o r g a n iz a tio n o f w hich th e y are a p a r t. 337 (In m ost urban co -o p s t h i s w i l l im ply a s e r i e s o f a c t iv e com m ittees on m em bership, prom otion , women’ s a c t i v i t i e s and th e l i k e . ) 2 3 . That i t charge p r ic e s in l i n e w ith com peting food s t o r e s in th e community and a t th e same tim e r e tu r n a patronage refu n d - 5 per c e n t i f p o s s ib le . That i t m ain tain h o n est w eig h t and measure s e r v i c e , c le a n f r ie n d ly f a c i l i t i e s and atm osp h ere. That i t m a in ta in h ig h h on est sta n d a rd s o f q u a lit y in i t s m erchandise a s s o c ia te d w ith a consumer e d u c a tio n program d esig n ed to h e lp members understand th e m eanings o f q u a lity sta n d a rd s and how su ch sta n d a rd s can be used e f f e c t i v e l y by th e h ou sew ife to prepare food a s a t t r a c t i v e l y and n u t r it io u s ly as p os s i b l e a t th e lo w e st p o s s ib le c o s t (exam ple, soup proba b ly d o e sn ’ t r e q u ir e grade "A” canned or fr o z e n peas). 2 4 . "I have had no e x p e r ie n c e w ith th e a b ove." APPENDIX "D" SUGGESTED CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL COOPERATIVE FO O D STORES A ND RELATED C O M M E N T S BY TWENTY^SIX RESPONDENTS CHARACTERISTICS A N D C O M M E N T S D is t r ib u t e s q u a lit y goods and s e r v ic e s e f f i c i e n t l y " B etter d is t r ib u t io n than th a t o f co m p etito rs" "So th a t th e p a tro n s b e n e fit" N atu re u n s p e c ifie d but c a te g o r i c a l l y s t a te d C le a r ly im p lied Answers a need o f or p r o v id e s a s e r v ic e fo r th e members C a te g o r ic a lly m entioned C le a r ly im p lied A f u l l y inform ed membership C a te g o r ic a lly s ta te d C le a r ly im p lied A h igh d e g r ee o f member p a r t ic ip a t io n In c i v i c a f f a i r s In p a tr o n iz in g th e s to r e In v o lu n ta ry member a c t i v i t y In p atron age and v o lu n ta r y member a c t i v i t y C le a r ly im p lied D em ocratic membership and c o n tr o l C a te g o r ic a lly s t a t e d . C le a r ly im p lied S e r v ic e t o th e community C ontinuous ex p a n sio n C a te g o r ic a lly s ta t e d C le a r ly im p lied A good board o f d ir e c t o r s L o y a lty and p r id e in ow nership FREQUENCY PER CENT (in 26 r e p lie s ) 21 5 4 10 2 12 8 1 1 7 1 1 1 7 5 7 2 20 18 15 9 6 6 4 3 81 77 69 58 35 23 23 15 12 3 3 9 CHARACTERISTICS A M D OOM M M TS « F o llo w R ochdale P r in c ip le s C a te g o r ic a lly s t a t e d C le a r ly im p lie d E f f i c i e n t and d o n s e ie n tio u s em ployees Community a c ce p ta n c e o f th e c o o p e r a tiv e Membership in th e c o o p e r a tiv e r e g io n a l E x h ib its i n t e g r i t y , m u tu a lity and good w i l l ( c le a n , h o n e s t, fr ie n d ly ) C oop erative s u c c e s s i s n o t a b s o lu te but r a th e r r e l a t i v e t o th e s it u a t io n Community le a d e r sh ip by th e c o o p e r a tiv e Member a ccep ta n ce o f co -o p la b e l goods Happy em ployees Optimum s i z e (u n s p e c ifie d ) FREQUMCY PER CMT ( in 26 r e p lie s ) 5 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 12 12 8 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 APPENDIX "E" CO NCURRENCE OF SUGGESTED CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING COOPERATIVE SUCCESS In th e fo llo w in g ta b u la tio n o f th e d egree o f con cu r r en ce betw een th e c r i t e r i a l i s t e d in th e q u e stio n n a ir e en t i t l e d "What i s th e Measure o f Consumer C oop erative S u c c e ss in th e F ie ld o f Food D is tr ib u tio n ? " th e m eaning o f th e sym b o ls i s a s f o llo w s : "P" means in d ic a t io n o f s u c c e s s fu ln e s s "N" means in d ic a t io n o f u n s u c c e s s fu ln e s s "Z" means in d é c is io n or a b sen ce o f tren d "?" means th a t no answer was g iv e n by th e resp on d en t The purpose o f th e ta b u la tio n was to fin d w hether or n o t th e v a r io u s c r i t e r i a would vary to g e th e r ; in o th er w ord s, w hether o r n o t e v id e n c e o f s u c c e s s or la c k th e r e o f w ith regard to a g iv e n c r it e r io n would make a corresp on d in g s u c c e s s or la c k th e r e o f p rob ab le in any or a l l o f th e o th e r c r i t e r i a . For a l i s t i n g o f th e s e v e r a l c r i t e r i a s e e th e t e x t , p ages 70 and 7 2 . The raw d ata were f o r t y - f o u r com pleted q u e s tio n n a ir e s ( " S ig n if ic a n t C h a r a c te r is tic s o f C o o p era tiv es in th e U n ited S t a t e s " ) . C r ite r io n number fo u r was o m itte d . In th e c a se o f c r i t e r io n two a membership tu r n -o u t o f over 10 p er cen t was a r b i t r a r il y ra ted a s a s u c c e s s f u l tu r n -o u t. 3 4 1 CONCURRENCE IN NEGATIVE O R POSITIVE TREND BETW EEN FIVE SELECTED CRITERIA FO R SUCCESS IN COOPERATIVE FOOD STORES AS FOUND IN A R A N D O M SAMPLE O F FORTÏ-FOUR EXHIBITS CRITERIA N r. 1 N r. 2 N r. 3 N r. 5 N r. 6 P P Z P p P P N P p P N P P p P N Z P p P N T Z N Z N N Z N P N P Z Z P N P P P P N N Z N P P Ÿ P N ? P t ? ? P N f P P Z N P P ? P N P ? P N Z z N z N P p N p N P z N p N 7 9 N p P N P Z p N Ÿ P N p N P N N p N P P P p P N P N p N ? Z P ? N ? N N p P T P P z N P P N p N P P P p P ? ? N p N P N 342 CRITERIA N r. 1 N r. 2 N r. 3 N r. 5 N r. 6 P P 7 ? ? P P P P P P N N N P P P N P P P N N P N ? N 7 ? N P P P P P P P N P N P N N Z , N P P 7 P N P P 7 z N P P 7 N Z P P 7 P P P N Z P N APPMDIX «F” C O M M E N T S O N THE NATÜRE OF SUCCESS IN THE FIELD OF COOPERATIVE FO OD DISTRIBUTION The f o llo w in g commente, a l l o f them sp on tan eou s r e a c t io n s on th e p a rt o f resp o n d en ts t o th e q u e s tio n n a ir e en t i t l e d "What i s th e M easure o f Consumer C o o p era tiv e S u c c e ss in th e F ie ld o f Food D is t r ib u tio n ? ," a re p r a c t i c a ll y uned i t e d , In a few c a se s comments o f a p e r so n a l n a tu re have been om itted and in o th e r s a word or two has been added t o c l a r i f y th e th ou gh t o f th e r esp o n d en t. These comments are a r e a c tio n to e it h e r th e r e q u e st fo r a d e f i n i t io n o f a su c c e s s f u l consumer c o o p e r a tiv e food s t o r e or to s i x c r i t e r i a w hich were su g g e ste d in th e q u e s tio n n a ir e a s p o s s ib ly u s e f u l fo r ju d g in g c o o p e r a tiv e s u c c e s s , or t o b o th . 1 . ( C r ite r ia 1 , 2 and 3) a l l d o v e t a il in t o each o th e r ; each i s based on l o y a lt y t o an id e a l and p a s s in g i t on to o th e r s . A ll su ch f a c t o r s (a s c r it e r io n 5) p la y d i f f e r e n t r o le s a t d if f e r e n t t im e s . T h eir im portance v a r ie s (w ith ) t h e ir c ir c u m sta n c e s. Number 6 , f o r exam p le, ca n ’t come u n t i l you have shown by e x p e r ie n c e your c a p a c ity to le a d . P atron age refu n d s may be m ost im portant t o som e, o f l i t t l e im portance to o t h e r s . S e r v ic e may come f i r s t . I don’t l ik e to s e t one ( c r it e r io n ) over a g a in s t an oth er f a c t o r - a l l im portant - and fo r d i f f e r e n t reason s and a t d if f e r e n t tim e s . My r a tin g would be; (1) U n derstand in g Co-op Id ea (2) A b ilit y t o m atch Co-op Id ea to needs o f p eo p le 344 (3) A b il i t y to make id e a work in term s o f e f f i c i e n t w ages, s e r v ic e and g e n e r a l r e s u l t s . A ll o th e r s flo w from t h e s e . 2 . The c o -o p ’ s c r e d it r a tin g w ith i t s members i s im p o rta n t. In s h o r t , i f i t needs c a p it a l and is s u e s a c a l l to th e members, how prompt and l i b e r a l i s th e resp on se? 3 . Management i s th e most im p ortant c r it e r io n and th e Board o f D ir e c to r s q u a lif ic a t io n s are th e n e x t m ost im p o rta n t. 4 . Trend in p u rch ases from th e r e g io n a l co-op w h o le sa le a s a p o r tio n o f t o t a l p u rch ases (sh o u ld be a ss ig n e d a v a lu e o f 3) . 5 . In th e lo n g run ( c r it e r io n ) number 6 i s probab ly th e m ost im portant a s th e co-op i s la r g e enough to a f f e c t p r ic e l e v e l s fo r a l l consum ers. 6 . E x te n t and s u c c e s s o f e d u c a tio n a l e f f o r t s (r a t in g o f) 5* Trend toward p r a c tic e o f c o o p e ra tio n in o th er f i e l d s o f endeavor ( e . g . c r e d it and h e a lth ) ( r a t in g o f) 4 . 7 . Capable le a d e r s h ip (Board) (r a t in g o f ) 2 . In ( c r it e r io n ) 2> , ab ove, I am in c lu d in g membership and p atron e d u c a tio n a s in t e g r a l c o n d itio n s o f membership i n t e r e s t . 8 . P er c e n t o f members in d is c u s s io n and s tu d y -a c tio n or m em bership-developm ent groups ( r a t in g o f) 1 . A ll s i x it e m s , ( c r i t e r i a ) are im portant - n ot ea sy to choose betw een them . A ll s i x item s th a t a re g iv e n are l i k e l y t o go up t o g e th e r or down to g e th e r a c co r d in g to th e d eg ree o f an u n d e r ly in g f a c t o r , su ch as s p i r i t o f c o o p e r a tio n , based on d eg ree o f c o o p e r a tiv e e d u c a tio n . 9 . In fo rm a tio n program - a d v e r t is in g , p u b l i c i t y , p u b lic r e la t io n s ( r a tin g o f) 2 . C oo p erative e d u ca tio n and a c t i v i t i e s (r a tin g o f) 3 . C ap acity and im p r essio n s o f s t a f f ( r a t in g o f) 2 . 1 0 . I th in k " p a r tic ip a tio n " i s th e a l l im portant d eterm in an t o f s u c c e s s f u l e f f o r t in c o o p e r a tiv e s - i f th e 345 p a r t ic ip a t io n in m eetin g s i s c o n s is t e n t ly good , i t w i l l e it h e r r e f l e c t or r e s u l t in new members, in c r e a se o f p u rc h a ses, e t c . 1 1 . Membership p a r t ic ip a t io n in community a c t i v i t i e s (r a tin g o f) 6. P a r t ic ip a t io n in r e g io n a l c o o p e r a tiv e a c t i v i t y (r a tin g o f) 7 . 1 2 . D egree o f b e n e fit and s a t i s f a c t i o n en joyed in membership (r a tin g o f) 1 . P a r t ic ip a t io n in a f f a i r s o f fe d e r a tio n o f which s o c i e t y i s a member ( r a tin g o f) 5 . Urge to expand in t o o th e r f i e l d s o f s e r v ic e (r a tin g o f) 3 . 13# Member a c t i v i t y in and s e r v ic e to th e community where th e c o o p e r a tiv e i s lo c a te d (r a tin g o f) 2 . P r ic e s and s e r v ic e s c o m p e titiv e (r a tin g o f) 1 . M eets gen u in e need o f p atron s (r a tin g o f ) l . I t seem s to me th a t sta n d a rd s I have put down fo r a su c c e s s f u l c o o p e r a tiv e im ply adequ ate f in a n c in g , good man agem ent, and member a c t i v i t y . I t i s hard to se p a r a te one fa c to r from a n o th e r . Nor am I a t a l l p o s i t i v e th a t my ran k in g o f th e f a c t o r s i s f o e l- p r o o f , s in c e m ost o f them are so in te r d e p e n d e n t. 1 4 . A cceptan ce in community ( r a t in g o f) 4 . Use o f R ochdale P r in c ip le s (r a tin g o f) 1 . Commercial s u c c e s s o f food s to r e (r a tin g o f) 2 . A b ilit y to perform w orth w h ile community s e r v ic e (r a tin g o f) 3 . (C r ite r io n 3) w i l l vary so much a s n o t to be very in d ic a t iv e - one l o c a l i t y a g a in s t a n o th e r , e t c . 1 5 . G en era lly sp ea k in g our farm er c o o p e r a tiv e s have been f a i r l y s u c c e s s f u l becau se: 346 (1) They sim p ly attem p t to s a t i s f y a r e a l econom ic need* (s) F o r tu n a te ly , we have been m ost s u c c e s s f u l in h a v in g broadminded and lo n g -p o in t -o f- v ie w lea d er sh ip * (3) A c tu a l l o c a l farm er c o n tr o l even though a t tim es i t l e s s e n s e f f i c i e n c y of o p e r a tio n . 1 6 . own f e e l i n g i s t h a t su c c e s s i s r e l a t i v e . I t depends on th e (1) p o t e n t i a l i t i e s o f th e community, (2) th e age o f th e c o -o p , (3) th e need s o f th e p eo p le and (4) th e h e lp o f o th e r c o -o p s . I mean; (1) a v i l l a g e may be so sm a ll th a t i t can ’ t p o s s ib ly su p p ort a co-op food s t o r e , or i t may be b ig enough fo r a sm a ll gro cery s to r e b u t not fo r a su p er m ark et. And a g a in , a food s to r e may be th e l a s t th in g in th e world th a t a community n e e d s, so th a t th e s t r u g g le to su pp ort a co-op food s t o r e may d e fe a t c o o p e r a tio n in g e n e r a l - a l l tHe en ergy o f th e a c t iv e members may go down a r a t h o le . I have heard i t s a id a g a in and a g a in th a t i f food i s a poor b u sin e ss fo r co-op t o be i n , th e y sh ou ld go in t o a l i n e where th e p r o f it p o s s i b i l i t i e s are g r e a t e r , but I have n ev er heard a s p e c i f i c a lt e r n a t iv e s u g g e s te d . So th a t b e fo re you a sk y o u r s e lf w hether a co^pp fo o d s t o r e i s a s u c c e s s , you have to ask y o u r s e lf , I s food th e r ig h t b u s in e s s fo r t h is co-op to be in ? In what f i e l d i s th e community l i k e l y to g e t maximum v a lu e fo r i t s co-op e f f o r t s ? (2 ) A young co-op may be a s u c c e s s on c e r ta in term s w hich would d is g r a c e an o ld c o -o p . I t depends on c i r cum stances w hether th e number o f new members p e r month sh ou ld go up or down a s th e co-op grows m ature. Even th e p e r ce n ta g e o f membership a tte n d in g th e annual m eet in g may or may n o t mean much. I wonder i f you w ouldn’t g e t to th e p o in t more q u ic k ly i f you sim p ly found ou t what i s a c tu a lly g o in g on and a r b i t r a r il y ru led th a t th e to p 10 per cen t are s u c c e s s f u l. (3) The th in g th a t has im pressed me m ost about Nova S c o t ia i s th a t th e y s t a r t in th e r ig h t p la c e th e stu d y clu b m eets t o d is c u s s th e n eed s o f th e p e o p le . Here in th e S t a t e s p eo p le in th e c i t i e s a u to m a tic a lly open food s t o r e s a s i f no o th e r ty p e o f co-op were c o n c e iv a b le . I don’t p reten d t o know w hether food s t o r e s a r e th e r ig h t g o a l or n o t , but I am p e r f e c t ly con vin ced th a t th e m ethods a r e wrong. 347 (4) The e f f i c i e n c y o f a co-op i s o f co u rse lim ite d by th e s u c c e s s o f o th e r c o -o p s . With o th er c o -o p s , w h ole s a lin g and p r o c e s s in g can be c a r r ie d on r e g io n a lly and n a t io n a lly ; w ith o u t them , th e co-op has to su r v iv e through i t s l o c a l e f f o r t s . A g r e a t many groups here in th e E ast have s ta r te d food s t o r e s , I th in k , sim p ly be cau se th e r e a lr e a d y was a w h o le sa le in e x is t a n c e . T his would have been a good r ea so n i f th e w h o le sa le had been e f f i c i e n t . There are two ty p e s o f s u c c e s s , and I am n o t su re th a t your q u e s tio n n a ir e s r e c o g n iz e t h i s - the econom ic and th e s o c i a l . They te n d , o r sh ou ld te n d , to fe e d each oth er* But a s everybody knows, a co-op may become a l m ost a s s o u l le s s as a ch ain s t o r e . Economic s u c c e s s i s n o t to o hard t o r e c o g n iz e , but what you a re lo o k in g fo r i s to u g h e r . There a re l o t s o f s t o r i e s about (a) co-op c r e a tin g harmony in th e community, r e l ie v i n g r a c i a l te n s i o n s , a l l e v i a t i n g r e l ig i o u s in t o le r a n c e , op en in g oppor t u n i t i e s o f N eg ro es; none o f t h e s e , how ever, seem s t o sp r in g out o f a food s t o r e . C red it u n io n s, h o u sin g co o p e r a tiv e s and th e ty p e o f community c o o p e r a tiv e which has been d ev elo p ed in th e M aritim es seem t o have much more o f t h i s s o r t o f s u c c e s s to t h e i r c r e d i t . I t i s q u ite c o n c e iv a b le t h a t a co-op th a t n ev er has much o f a g r o s s , compared w ith G re en b e lt, may e x e r t a much more v i t a l in flu e n c e on th e w e lfa r e o f th e comm unity. I wonder i f you have co n sid er ed su ch q u e stio n s a s ; (a) What changes h as your co-op made in community l i f e ? Do p eo p le g e t a lo n g any b e t t e r w ith ea ch o th er? I s l i f e in town p le a sa n te r ? Are th e r e more o p p o rtu n i t i e s f o r members o f m in o r ity groups - Jew s, N eg ro es, C a t h o lic s , O r ie n ta ls - to hold o f f i c e or t o g e t job s? I s th e r e any s ig n o f a more s e r io u s and f a r s ig h te d community s p i r i t ? (b) What have p e o p le lea r n e d from th e co-op? Have th e y lea rn ed more abou t b u s in e s s than th e y u sed to know? About econ om ics? P o l i t i c s ? (c) How many o f them are in a d i f f e r e n t econom ic p o s i t io n as a r e s u l t o f th e co-op ? Own t h e ir own homes? Out o f d eb t? You s e e , o f c o u r se , th a t I am th in k in g p r im a r ily o f th e sm a ll tow n. . . . 348 1 7 . M y comment on your si|E c r i t e r i a f o r ju d g in g s u c c e s s i s a s f o llo w s : C r ite r io n 1 . T his cannot be made a f ix e d f a c t o r . I t w i l l be c o n d itio n e d by th e age o f th e c o o p e r a tiv e and th e ty p e o f community in w hich i t i s lo c a te d . For e x am ple, th e o ld e r and b e tte r e s ta b lis h e d a c o o p e r a tiv e i s , i n a sm a ll community th e l e s s i t s p o s s i b i l i t i e s fo r grow th. C r ite r io n S . T his i s a f a c t o r w hich i s i t s e l f c o n d i tio n e d by th e s i z e o f th e m em bership. The la r g e r th e membership th e sm a lle r th e p ercen ta g e a tte n d in g m eetin g s w i l l b e , as a g e n e r a l r u l e . So i f you measure a coop er a t i v e on t h i s b a s is th e sm a lle r i t i s th e more l i k e l y i t i s to be s u c c e s s f u l in " g e ttin g out th e v o te ." C r ite r io n 3 . T h is a g a in i s a f a c t o r over which th e co op i t s e l f has no e x a c t c o n t r o l. The tren d in s a le s per member would have to be judged a g a in s t th e tre n d s in th e income o f th e members. I would th in k i t much more im portant to know th e p ercen ta g e o f t o t a l p u rch a ses o f th e membership w hich a r e made through th e c o o p e r a tiv e . C r ite r io n 4 . I b e lie v e in p atron age refu n d s bu t th e y a re n ot a good g u id e to c o o p e r a tiv e s u c c e s s . They a r e d eterm in ed in p a r t by th e c o m p e titiv e f a c t o r s and in p a r t by th e p h ilo so p h y o f th e members and management. For example th e Swedes d e lib e r a t e ly keep p atron age r e fu n d s low in o rd er to keep p r ic e s down. The E n g lish fo llo w th e c o m p e titio n r e l i g i o u s l y in o rd er to pay h igh p atron age r e fu n d s . C r ite r io n 5 . O.K. C r ite r io n 6 . O.K. 1 8 . Â s u c c e s s f u l consumer c o o p e r a tiv e s t o r e i s one in which T a n g ib le s . (1) High sta n d a rd s o f q u a lit y , s e r v ic e and upkeep a re m a in ta in e d . P r ic e s a r e c o m p e titiv e . The s t o r e o p e r a te s w ith sta n d a rd g r o ss and n e t m argins and exp en se p er c e n t s . And th e r e i s ta n g ib le e v id e n c e o f th e h ig h c h a r a cter o f i t s aim s and s e r v ic e b ecau se o f th e s t e a d i l y in c r e a s in g volume and amount o f membership in v e s te d c a p i t a l. I n t a n g ib le s . (2) The c o o p e r a tiv e has an inform ed s t a f f 349 who have both cause and d e s ir e t o p la y a p a rt in a " great d em ocratic movement in th e making" and who g iv e a p r a c t ic a l d em on stration o f t h e ir aims by t h e ir a t t i tude toward th e p u b lic th e y s e r v e . (3) The c o o p e r a tiv e has a board who s e e s th e s t o r e as an in t e g r a l p a r t o f a la r g e r movement and who sh apes p o lic y w ith t h i s in m ind, both in th e c o o p e r a tiv e d e velopm ent o f t h e ir own a rea ând in t h e ir r e la t io n s h ip t o t h e ir d i s t r i c t , r e g io n a l and n a tio n a l c o o p e r a tiv e o r g a n iz a tio n s . (4 ) The c o o p e r a tiv e has a grow ing m em bership, a t l e a s t one fo u r th o f whom are inform ed as t o what th e coop era t i v e movement sta n d s f o r and who are w i l l i n g to tak e some p a rt in i t s more e s s e n t i a l a c t i v i t i e s . APPENDIX "G" NOTE O N THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY O F THE QUESTIONNAIRE "SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS O F COOPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES" C arefu l c o n s id e r a tio n o f th e m a te r ia l in Chapter I I g iv e s some im p r essio n o f th e v a lu e o f d ata o b ta in ed by u se o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e " S ig n ific a n t C h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f Coop e r a t iv e s in th e U n ited S t a t e s ." T h is n o te i s a more s p e c i f i c in q u ir y in t o the q u e s tio n o f th e r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y o f th e d ata found in th e com pleted q u e s tio n n a ir e s . I . THE VALIDITY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE A q u e s tio n n a ir e i s v a lid when i t t e s t s or d i s c l o s e s what i t was in ten d ed t o d i s c l o s e . T h is i s a c h ie v e d when:^ 1 . A ll known p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f e rr o r have been guarded a g a in s t . E. R espondents have no m o tiv e fo r m is le a d in g . 3 . R e s u lts are n o t in c o n s is t e n t w ith o th e r known f a c t s . A lthough i t could h a r d ly be guaranteed t h a t , i f th e s e t e s t s were met c o m p le te ly , th e q u e s tio n n a ir e would be e n t ir e ly v a l i d , th ey do p r o v id e u s e f u l checks on v a l i d i t y and ^ George A. Lundberg, S o c ia l R esearch (New York; Long m ans, Green and Company, 1 9 4 6 ), pp. 2 0 1 -2 . 3 5 1 c o n se q u e n tly a re th e b a s is o f a good sh are o f th e fo llo w in g e v a lu a tio n . The p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f e rr o r a r e , o f c o u r se , le g io n . Some o f t h e s e , to g e th e r w ith a p p ro p ria te comments, a re l i s t e d below : 1 . Language, a s has been amply dem onstrated by sem an- t i c i s t s , i s an e v e r p r e se n t stu m b lin g b lo c k . The academ ic p erson ten d s t o u se t e c h n ic a l term s, but t h i s does n ot keep d ou ble m eanings from c r e e p in g i n . Even th e more t e c h n ic a l term s tend t o ta k e on s p e c ia l m eanings in d i f f e r e n t a r e a s , w h ile commonly used words a re p r a c t i c a ll y guaranteed to have d i f f e r e n t c o n n o ta tio n s n o t o n ly in d i f f e r e n t a rea s but a ls o in d i f f e r e n t c la s s e s o f s o c i e t y . An im portant exam ple o f t h i s i s th e term "consumer" w hich r u r a l c o o p e ra to rs in some a r e a s , c o n sid e r co n n o tes "urban." To sa feg u a rd a g a in s t such d e f i c i e n c i e s and so u r c e s o f e r r o r as th e above th e q u e s tio n n a ir e was c r i t i c i s e d by s e v e r a l acad em ician s and a c o n sid e r a b le number o f c o o p e r a tiv e le a d e r s . I t was a ls o curry-com bed by th e a u th o r . 2 . C e rta in p s y c h o lo g ic a l d e f i c i e n c i e s may s e r io u s ly p r e ju d ic e th e v a l i d i t y o f any q u e s tio n n a ir e . I f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e i s to o lo n g (or appears to be s o ) , or th e d ir e c t io n s are to o in v o lv e d , or a g r e a t d e a l o f w r itin g (som etim es even a sm a ll amount in th e c a se o f c e r t a in ty p e s o f p eo p le) i s 5 5 2 r e q u ir e d , th e resp on d en t may have a n e g a tiv e r e a c tio n toward f i l l i n g o u t th e q u e s tio n n a ir e , a r e a c tio n which may cause him n o t to r etu r n i t or to g e t so d is g u s te d th a t he w i l l n o t s e r io u s ly attem p t to answer i t a c c u r a t e ly . As n oted in C hapter I I th e q u e s tio n n a ir e was e x te n s iv e ly r e v is e d , and each r e v is io n e x c e p t th e l a s t r e s u lte d in th e e lim in a tio n o f a number o f q u e s t io n s . The f i n a l copy o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e was p r in te d , a p roced ure w hich appeared t o make i t sm a lle r a lth o u g h th e q u e s tio n s were alm ost e n t i r e ly th o s e found in th e l a s t mimeographed e d i t io n . That th e q u e s tio n n a ir e was n ot to o lo n g i s in d ic a te d by a r ea so n a b ly adequate r e tu r n from th e m a ilin g s ,^ and by th e f a c t th a t m ost o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e s were f u l l y or to a v ery la r g e e x te n t answ ered. The d ir e c t io n s to th e resp o n d en t were e d ite d in th e manner su g g e ste d in th e p ro ceed in g paragraph and would seem t o be c le a r ju d g in g by th e r e t u r n s . W ritin g was p r a c t i c a ll y e lim in a te d , and was th e r e fo r e n o t an im portant stu m b lin g b lo c k . 5 . M ost p e o p le , when ask ed to do som eth in g, w ish to know th e s i g n if ic a n c e b oth o f th e th in g th e y are to do and o f th e t o t a l e f f o r t to which th e in d iv id u a l procedure con t r i b u t e s . Where t h i s i s m is s in g , in t e r e s t la g s and accu racy s u f f e r s . An attem pt was made t o o r g a n ize th e q u e s tio n s in 2 For d ocum entation o f t h i s p o in t se e p . 3 6 . 3 5 3 such a way th a t th e resp on d en t could s e e th e r e la t io n s h ip s betw een them and t h e i r s ig n if ic a n c e fo r c o o p e r a tio n . In ad d i t i o n an e f f o r t was made to g iv e each resp o n d en t a t l e a s t a glim p se o f th e o b j e c t iv e o f th e stu d y a s a w hole and o f i t s p o s s ib le u t i l i t y to both th e in d iv id u a l s o c i e t y and th e c o o p e r a tiv e movement. 4 . P e r so n a l b ia s i s perhaps th e m ost s e r io u s d i f f i c u lt y any q u e s tio n n a ir e has to contend w ith . I t has been s a id t h a t a n y th in g l e s s than 100 per cen t r e tu r n s are l i k e l y t o be b ia sed by some ty p e o f in d iv id u a l n ot h avin g answ er e d . & I t sh ould a ls o be added th a t even sh o u ld such 100 per c en t r etu r n be made th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f p e r so n a l b ia s i s s t i l l p r e se n t b ecau se some in d iv id u a ls may answer e it h e r w ith tongue in cheek or w ith d e lib e r a t e m a lic e . In o rd er to m eet th e th r e a t o f b ia s i t was su g g e ste d in th e a u th o r ’ s c o v e r in g l e t t e r th a t th e q u e stio n n a ir e be answered by sm a ll groups o f p e o p le r a th e r than by any one in d iv id u a l. T his s u g g e s tio n was n o t , o f c o u r se , com plied w ith in a l l c a s e s , but t o th e e x te n t th a t i t was th e v a l i d i t y o f th e r e tu r n s was augm ented.^ I t i s n otew orth y th a t in a l l th e c a te g o r ie s o f c o o p e r a tiv e , r a n g in g from v ery u n s u c c e s s fu l to h ig h ly ^ George A. Lundberg, 0£ . c i t . , p . 2 0 6 . ^ See T able LXII, p . 3 5 4 , fo r th e ta b u la tio n o f th e d eg ree o f com pliance w ith t h i s r e q u e s t. 354 TABLE LXII THE N U M BER OF RESPONDENTS W H O ASSISTED IN COM PLETING EACH QUESTIONNAIRE BY PERCENTAGE OF MMBIR INCREASE DURING THE PAST YEAR P ercen ta g e In c r e a se D uring P a st Year Number o f P eo p le 1 1 T otals; i 1 2 3 4 5 6 & up Under 2 22 18 19 0 4 2 65 2 - 2 .9 9 6 1 0 0 1 17 3 - 3 .9 10 6 2 1 1 3 23 4 - 4 .9 14 5 4 0 0 3 26 5 - 6 .9 15 10 3 1 0 2 31 7 - 8 .9 14 7 3 3 2 1 32 9 -1 0 .9 7 7 1 2 0 2 19 1 1 -1 2 .9 7 2 2 3 0 2 16 1 3 -1 4 .9 6 0 1 0 0 0 7 1 5 -1 6 .9 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 7 -6 4 .9 16 12 6 2 1 4 41 65 & up 1 3 1 0 0 0 5 TOTALS 127 77 43 12 8 20 287 355 s u c c e s s f u l, a v ery c o n sid e r a b le number o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e s were f i l l e d o u t by groups r a th e r than in d iv id u a ls ; out o f th e t o t a l o f 287 r e p li e s 160 had been f i l l e d o u t by two or more p e o p le . 5. Q u estion s may be asked in q u e s tio n n a ir e s w hich cannot be answ ered a c c u r a te ly by th e resp on d en t a lth o u g h he th o ro u g h ly u n d erstan d s th e q u e stio n s and would lik e to r e p ly a s e x a c t ly a s p o s s i b l e . S e v e r a l q u e s tio n s o f t h i s ty p e were e lim in a te d from th e q u e s tio n n a ir e w ith th e h elp o f th e v a r i ous p eo p le who coop erated in d e v e lo p in g i t . Other q u e s tio n s were r e ta in e d which d id n o t a llo w fo r a m a th em a tica lly p r e c is e r e p ly , but w hich would n e v e r th e le s s d i s c l o s e m a te r ia l which would be o f v a lu e even i f n o t p r e c is e . An example o f t h i s ty p e o f q u e s tio n i s , fo r exam ple, "Has your c o o p e r a tiv e had d i f f i c u l t y in e s t a b lis h in g b u sin e ss r e la t io n s w ith lo c a l n o n -c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le sa le s? " In many c a se s r e la t io n s h ip s have n ot been c o r d ia l or o v e r t ly b e l l i c o s e ; in o th er words th e r e were b o r d e r -lin e c a se s where a "yes" or "no" answer was d i f f i c u l t to make. I t i s r e a so n a b le to su p p o se, how ever, th a t m ost c a se s would f a l l on e it h e r one s id e o f th e fe n c e or th e o t h e r , and th e s i g n if ic a n c e o f e it h e r r e la t io n s h ip i s c o n s id e r a b le . The l o g ic a l assum ption would be th a t border l in e c a se s would be a s l i k e l y to r e p ly n e g a tiv e ly as p o s i t i v e l y and would ten d to b a la n ce each o th e r . S in c e i t was 3 5 6 im p o ssib le t o g e t such in fo r m a tio n more p r e c is e ly w ith in th e sco p e o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e , q u e stio n s o f t h i s ty p e were r e t a in e d , and th e r e tu r n s were an alyzed w ith t h i s d e f ic ie n c y in m ind. I t i s d o u b tfu l i f th e resp o n d en ts d e lib e r a t e ly f a l s i f ie d t h e ir r e p l i e s . In th e f i r s t p la c e , none o f them had any id e a o f what would be c o n sid ered th e c r it e r io n or c r i t e r ia o f c o o p e r a tiv e s u c c e s s . Q uite p o s s ib ly many o f them may have had t h e ir own p r iv a te id e a s as t o w hether or n ot t h e ir s o c i e t i e s were s u c c e s s f u l, and a few o f them in d ic a te d a s much. N e v e r th e le s s , th e f a c t th a t th e y d id n o t know the b a s is upon which th e y would be judged was a f a c t o r in p r e v e n tin g s o c i e t i e s from n o t r e p ly in g or from f a l s i f y i n g due to fe a r o f b ein g l i s t e d among th e f a i l u r e s . In th e secon d p la c e , a g r e a t number o f th e r e p li e s were th e prod u ct o f group in t e r a c t io n (s e e a b o v e ); th e la r g e r th e group th e sm a lle r th e lik e lih o o d o f f a l s i f i c a t i o n . In th e th ir d p la c e , th e l e t t e r s o f in tr o d u c tio n from th e w h o le sa le s s t r e s s e d th e im portance o f the stu d y to th e movement and t o t h e ir w h ole s a l e s and th e m s e lv e s , and th u s p rovided an in c e n t iv e fo r r e p ly in g as a c c u r a te ly a s p o s s i b l e . ^ ® The fo llo w in g e x tr a c ts from two l e t t e r s o f in t r o d u c tio n from prom inent c o o p e r a tiv e w h o le sa le s i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p o in t . 5 5 7 From th e fo r e g o in g i t i s e v id e n t th a t s te p s were tak en to in su r e a maximum o f v a l i d i t y . I I . THE RELIABILITY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE W hile th e im portance o f th e r e l i a b i l i t y o f a q u es tio n n a ir e v a r ie s w ith th e s u b je c t m atter under c o n s id e r a tio n i t i s e s s e n t i a l to a c h ie v e as h ig h r e l i a b i l i t y a s th e c i r cum stances w i l l a llo w . A q u e stio n n a ir e i s r e l i a b l e i f th e p er c e n t an sw erin g a c e r ta in way or th e mean o f th e d is t r ib u t io n and i t s stan d ard d e v ia tio n rem ain f a i r l y s t a b le when th e q u e s tio n n a ir e i s resu b m itted to th e same p o p u la tio n or a n o th er p o p u la tio n . . .h ig h ly s im ila r (F o o tn o te 5 co n tin u ed ) T h is l e t t e r w i l l in tr o d u ce Mr. ______ and ca rry w ith i t an endorsem ent o f th e stu d y p r o je c t he i s c a r r y in g on. . The p r o j e c t . . . i s a stu d y o f co-op s t o r e s — why some su cceed and o th e r s f a i l . W e a re in t e r e s t e d in fin d in g th e answer to t h i s q u e s tio n o u r s e lv e s and y o u , t o o , sh ou ld be c u r io u s about th e p o s s ib le answ er to t h i s problem . T h erefo re we recommend th a t you h e lp Mr. ______ o b ta in th e n e c e s s a r y background in fo rm a tio n t o make h is stu d y su c c e s s f u l by f i l l i n g out th e su rv e y form e n c lo s e d . I recommend th a t you h e lp Mr. o b ta in th e in f o r m ation about your c o o p e r a tiv e t h a t h e i s s e e k in g . . . . The p r o j e c t on w hich he i s w orking prom ises to be o f c o n sid e r a b le v a lu e to th e c o o p e r a tiv e movement and i s w e ll w orth any e f f o r t and tim e you may need t o in v e s t to fu r n is h him th e in fo rm a tio n he n e e d s. 6 George A. Lundberg, op . c i t . , p. 199. 358 The same a u th o r ity sa y s fu r th e r th a t: The in d iv id u a l s t a b i l i t y o f q u e s tio n n a ir e r e p li e s i s p rob ab ly one w hich has t o be e stim a te d in each ca se r a th er than a cco r d in g t o any g e n e r a l r u le , on accou n t o f th e la r g e number o f v a r ia b le s l i k e l y to be o p e r a t iv e .” Q u e stio n n a ir es vary n o t o n ly by chance b u t a ls o a cco r d in g to s u b je c t m a tte r , th e p u b lic q u e stio n e d and th e tim e w hich has e la p se d betw een th e f i r s t and second m a ilin g s . A lthou gh no one w i l l q u a rrel w ith th e t h e o r e t ic a l d e s i r a b i l i t y o f r e su b m ittin g a q u e stio n n a ir e tw ic e to th e same group or t o two h ig h ly s im ila r groups and th e n compar in g th e two r e s u l t s in ord er to e s t a b lis h t h e ir r e l i a b i l i t y , i t i s fr e q u e n tly n o t f e a s i b l e in p r a c t ic e . The cu rren t stu d y p r o v id e s an exam ple o f t h i s . To subm it i t tw ic e to th e i d e n t i c a l group was unw ise because o f th e h ig h ly un fa v o r a b le r e a c tio n w hich m ost boards o f d ir e c t o r s would have toward u sin g t h e ir a l l to o skimpy tim e to do th e same job t w ic e . A c tu a lly th e re were a few d ou b le r e tu r n s from coop e r a t iv e s due t o th e f a c t th a t t h e ir r e p l i e s w h ile in th e m a il c ro ssed th e a u th o r ’s secon d m a ilin g and le d them to send a secon d r e p ly . The remarks w hich accom panied some o f th e s e second r e p l i e s showed some i r r i t a t i o n . F urtherm ore, in a t l e a s t two c a se s th e c o o p e r a tiv e had k ep t a carbon copy h o c , c i t . , p. 2 0 0 . 3 5 9 o f th e f i r s t r e p ly and s a id so* I f t h i s were to o ccu r in any la r g e number o f c a se s secon d m a ilin g s to e s t a b l i s h r e l i a b i l i t y would produce rem arkable r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s ! F in a ll y , th e q u e stio n s r e f e r , on th e w h ole, t o a f l u i d s i t u a t io n ; t h i s s it u a t io n cou ld be v e r y d i f f e r e n t w ith in a p e r i od o f a s l i t t l e as two or th r e e m onths. I t was a ls o n o t f e a s i b l e t o m a il th e q u e s tio n n a ir e to a h ig h ly s im ila r group. In th e f i r s t p la c e , p r a c t i c a ll y th e w hole u n iv e r se o f resp o n d en ts r e c e iv e d th e f i r s t m a ilin g , and th a t sm a ll p o r tio n w hich d id n o t c o n s is te d la r g e ly o f c o o p e r a tiv e s t o r e s w hich were branches o f o th e r s t o r e s . S e c o n d ly , th e r e was no way in which e s s e n t i a l s im ila r it y could be fe r r e te d out s h o r t o f making a supplem entary stu d y o f th e c o o p e r a tiv e s n ot in c lu d e d in th e m a ilin g s ; t h i s would have been p r o h ib it iv e b o th in term s o f tim e and money. Such b e in g th e ca se th e f o llo w in g attem p t was made to e v a lu a te th e r e l i a b i l i t y a c h ie v e d . I t sh ou ld be c o n sid er ed in d ic a t iv e r a th e r than h ig h ly a c c u r a te . In th e f i r s t p la c e s e v e r a l assu m p tion s were made and what f o llo w s them i s v a lid o n ly t o th e d eg ree th a t th e s e assu m p tion s are v a l id . 1 . D if f e r e n t p eo p le w i l l o f te n g iv e d if f e r e n t answ ers when asked th e same q u e stio n ( in a q u e stio n n a ir e ) s e p a r a te ly , but when th e a n sw ers, a lth o u g h g iv e n s e p a r a t e ly , a re a p ro du ct o f group in t e r a c t io n th e y ten d to be th e same or v e ry 3 6 0 n e a r ly th e sam e. In su ch c a se s e r r o r s in judgem ent ten d t o be m o d ified an d /or o b lit e r a t e d in th e p r o c e s s o f in t e r a c t io n when th e in t e r a c t io n i s fo cu se d on th e s u b je c t on which th e judgement i s t o be made. 2 . Some q u e s tio n s a re more l i k e l y to e l i c i t u n r e li a b le answ ers than o t h e r s . 3 . When a q u e s tio n i s such th a t a resp o n d en t i s in h o n est doubt a s t o what he sh ou ld r e p ly , and p a r t ic u la r ly i f th e q u e s tio n i s o f th e ty p e w hich i s t o be answered by "yes" or "no," th e u n c e r ta in t ie s w i l l tend to even each o th e r out in th e lo n g ru n . For exam ple, one q u e s tio n asked w as, "What p r o p o r tio n o f your members form groups and ca rry on l i v e l y c o n v e r sa tio n s b e fo re and a f t e r b u sin e ss m eetin gs?" and th e resp on d en t could tak e h is c h o ic e o f e le v e n su g g e ste d p e r c e n ta g e s . Should tw en ty resp on d en ts be in doubt w hether to check 20 or 30 per c e n t, p rob ab ly about h a lf would check th e h ig h e r and h a lf th e low er p e r c e n ta g e . 4 . When q u e s tio n s a re o f a ty p e th a t e l i c i t answ ers w hich f a l l n a tu r a lly in t o a continuum , th e r e may be c o n sid e r a b le u n r e l i a b i l i t y in th e r e p li e s in th e c e n tr a l s e c t io n o f t h i s continuum , b u t th e two extrem es w i l l ten d to show a tr u e p ic tu r e w h ic h , a lth o u g h perhaps n o t e n t i r e l y c o r r e c t q u a n t it a t iv e ly , w i l l n e v e r t h e le s s a c c u r a te ly d e p ic t th e tr e n d • 361 With th e s e assu m p tion s in mind th e f o llo w in g o b serv a t io n s are in ord er: 1 . G reater r e l i a b i l i t y was in su red by r e q u e s tin g th a ti more than one in d iv id u a l p a r t ic ip a t e in answ ering th e q u es t io n n a ir e . 2 . The q u e stio n s can be d iv id e d in t o th r e e d i s t i n c t g r o u p in g s. The f i r s t i s th e q u e s tio n o f in c r e a s e in member-' s h ip , w h ich , s in c e i t i s t o be used as th e c r it e r io n fo r s u c c e s s , m ust be co n sid ered th e key q u e s tio n . B ecause most o f th e f ig u r e s from th e v a r io u s r e tu r n s on t h i s q u e stio n ended in e it h e r f i v e or z e r o , th e d e d u c tio n can be made th a t th e f ig u r e s o ffe r e d by th e r esp o n d en ts were rounded and th e r e fo r e n o t e x a c t. W hile i t i s n o t e x p e cted th a t th e se f ig u r e s were f a r wide o f th e mark in m ost c a se s b ecau se o f th e g e n e r a l in t e r e s t and s e l f - g r a t i f i c a t i o n arou sed in m ost c o o p e r a tiv e s by th e a d d itio n o f members, two f a c t o r s h elp to jmake t h i s k ey f ig u r e more a c c u r a te in term s o f th e stu d y as , a w h o le. In th e f i r s t p la c e , in a c c u r a c ie s sh ou ld ten d to c a n c e l each o th e r o u t. S e c o n d ly , fo r p u rp oses o f s t a t i s t i c a l com putation th e two extrem es were c o n tr a ste d to in su r e th e ad van tages n oted ab ove. In th e second group o f q u e s tio n s f a l l th o se which are im portant r a th e r as a g e n e r a l in d ic a t io n o f tren d or c o n d i t io n than as a p r e c is e f i g u r e . A q u e stio n such as "About 562 what per cen t o f your b u sin e ss i s non-member b u sin ess? " f a l l s in t h i s c a te g o r y . I t r e a l l y i s o f l i t t l e im portance fo r t h i s stu d y w hether th e resp on d en t sa y s 5 per cen t or 10 per c e n t, but i t i s o f c o n sid e r a b le i n t e r e s t w hether m ost s u c c e s s f u l s o c i e t i e s have a la r g e or a sm a ll amount o f non member b u s in e s s . In th e t h ir d group a re th o s e q u e s tio n s w hich a re n ot 1 r e a d ily s u b je c t to in t e r p r e t a tio n or u n r e lia b le r esp o n se s by a resp on d en t* A la r g e p r o p o r tio n o f th e q u e s tio n s a re o f ' A t h i s v a r ie t y . Examples o f t h i s ty p e a re th e fo llo w in g ; "How a re your e d u c a tio n fu n d s r a ised ? " (w ith five p o s s i b i l i t i e s t o choose from ) and "Has your manager t r ie d t o become a member o f a l o c a l b u sin essm en ’ s a s s o c ia tio n ? " Answers t o such q u e stio n s sh o u ld be r e l i a b l e i f answered h o n e s tly , a l though th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f normal human e rr o r and b ia s must n o t be d isc o u n te d e n t i r e l y . 5 . U n r e lia b ilit y som etim es r e s u l t s from d e s ir e to f a l s i f y . E rror o f t h i s l a t t e r ty p e sh o u ld be a t a minimum in t h i s stu d y due t o th e i n t e r e s t o f th e resp on d en ts in the o b j e c t iv e s o f th e stu d y and th e la c k o f in c e n t iv e t o be o th e r than h o n e s t• i In summary th en i t i s probab le th a t some answ ers ® See th e copy o f th e q u e s tio n n a ir e , p p . 2 5 -2 8 . 3 6 3 would have v a r ie d s l i g h t l y had th e r esp o n d en ts answered the q u e s tio n n a ir e on each o f two c o n se c u tiv e d a y s; t h i s would be th e r e s u lt o f human e r r o r and o f th e v a r ia t io n in human a t t it u d e s and e m o tio n s. The e x p e c ta tio n i s , how ever, th a t m ost q u e s tio n s and many e n t ir e q u e s tio n n a ir e s would n o t be s u b je c t to t h i s in a c cu ra c y due to t h e ir n a tu re a n d /o r to th e ic o n sid e r a b le number o f c a se s where more th an one p erson an - : sw ered th e q u e s tio n n a ir e . F u rth er, d o u b tfu l o a se s sh ou ld tend to average o u t , and a s t a t i s t i c a l u se o f th e two e x trem es sh o u ld show a tr u e tren d a lth o u g h q u a n t it a t iv e ly th e r e s u l t may be somewhat in a c c u r a te . UMWwWiy o t S o u th e r n O altfornla</q></q>

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Clothing as a factor in the social status rating of men

PDF

Adjustment of large downtown and boulevard churches in Los Angeles to socio-cultural factors in the community

PDF

Stereotypes of selected white college students concerning Negroes

PDF

Characteristics of Filipino social organizations in Los Angeles

PDF

Changing socio-cultural patterns of the Chinese community in Los Angeles

PDF

Religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles

PDF

An experimental study of the effect of "human interest" factors on listenability

PDF

Reference Group Theory, Selection, And The Images Of Professions

PDF

Consensus Of Role Perceptions In A Welfare Planning Council

PDF

A study of juvenile gangs in the Hollenbeck area of East Los Angeles

PDF

A study of the attitudes of high school teachers of vocational subjects toward vocational education and its social values

PDF

Interpersonal Relations In Ethnically Mixed Small Work Groups

PDF

Some Social Factors Affecting The Power Structure And Status Of A Professional Association In Reference To Social Work

PDF

A study of realism in the writings of Joel Chandler Harris

PDF

Social phases of the group health association movement in the United States

PDF

The theories, practices and objectives in national social planning

PDF

Realism in the fiction of Frances Burney

PDF

Roles student nurses desire or expect to perform and roles achieved by graduate nurses from the same selected school of nursing

PDF

Social Class Membership And Ethnic Prejudice In Cedar City

PDF

Psychological well-being and location in the social structure

Asset Metadata

Creator Sheets, Alfred William (author)

Core Title Social factors involved in the success or failure of consumer cooperatives in the United States

School Department of Sociology

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Sociology

Degree Conferral Date 1951-05

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest

Advisor McDonagh, Edward Charles (committee chair), Bogardus, Emery S. (committee member), Neumeyer, Martin H. (committee member), Nordskog, John E. (committee member), Vincent, Melvin James (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC11255961

Unique identifier UC11255961

Legacy Identifier DP31713

Document Type Dissertation