The Co-op Index was meant to be a handy diagnostic tool for the organizational development of worker co-ops. Although many papers and book chapters have described its functions and diagnostic model (Stocki, Prokopowicz, Novkovic, 2012; Novkovic, Prokopowicz, Stocki, 2012; Hough & Novkovic, 2012; Stocki, & Łapot, 2014), no empirical data collected from co-ops using the tool has yet been presented.

 It is the first presentation of empirical data gathered so far from eight Canadian and American co-operatives. First, we present psychometric features of the tool, particularly reliabilities of the scales. Second, we present Principal Components Analysis of the results which ended in formulating new twelve components we called Co-operative Universals. We present characteristics of the co-operatives diagnosed so far to show the applicability of the tool. We conclude the presentation with a list of future developments of the tool to make it an indispensable tool for all co-ops.

1. THE CO-OPINDEX
the tool’s reliability for co-operative
development: Analysis of data collected so far,
and plans for the future
Ryszard Stocki
Peter Hough
Research supported by the
European Union

2. WHYTO DIAGNOSE CO-OP?
All value-based organizations are subject to forces which lead to
abandoning their values and principles. If nothing is done they
decline and fall.
Time
Development (e.g. size)
Point of renewal
Area of possible !
change
Inevitable fall
Decline starts at the moment!
of the greatest prosperity
Initial!
adherence!
to values

3. WE DO NOT NOTICETHE CHANGES LIKE A
FROG IN A HOT POT UNTIL IT IS BOILED
Only monitoring the
organization, reflection and
habitual returning to the
initial values can save the
organization from inevitable
destruction.We may use
many different methods to
do this, starting from
ordinary group meeting and
reflection.The problem is
that in such discussions we
my be avoiding difficult
topics.We need to objectify.cc Purple Slog at flickr.com

4. WE STARTED WITH A DREAM
VISION OF AN IDEAL CO-OP
Following the values seems very difficult to diagnose. If you
want to do it you have to start with accepting human
experience as a reliable source of information, and you
have to do everything to objectify this experience to make it
reflect not subjective but objective reality.What if all people
are mistaken because of lack of knowledge or lack of access
to information. You have to confront their experience with
other data to change their experience.This is why diagnosis
is always a learning process, and you should never make the
mistake of making decisions on the basis of mere
questionnaire results.
CoopIndex results are just a starting point for better
understanding of your co-op not the end of it.

5. WEVERBALIZED “A DREAM COOP” IN 172
DESCRIPTIVE STATEMENTS AND CLASSIFIED THEM
WITHIN DIFFERENT SCALES

6. IN COOPINDEX WE
ASK 172 QUESTIONS
ABOUT DAILY CO-OP
PRACTICES
ONLY AFTER SUCH DISCUSSION CAN WE DRAW CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE
WEAKNESSES OF VALUES, PRINCIPLES, SYSTEMS, CLIMATE,ATTITUDES AND
OUTCOMES.
Practices
CO-OP INDEX
Co-opPrinciples
C
o-opValues
Systems
Clim
ate
Attitudes
Outcomes
Then we group the
answers according
to categories.The
results are meant to
evoke strategic
discussion.

7. TPIM
DIAGNOSTIC
PROCESS
Ideal
Coops
Real
Co-ops
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT ANALOGICAL TO MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS
Number of positive similarities x number of persons who experience them
The tool reflects the perception of
presence or absence of good
practices.The ideal is based on the
concept of participation being an
element of human dignity and Coop
Values and Principles
In medicine: Symptoms x Victims
Focus on positive aspects and not
pathologies is the main difference between
our and medical diagnosis.Though lack of any
positive experience is a sign of a pathology.
Such pathological organizations never
want to be diagnosed.

8. CHARACTERISTICS OF 10 CANADIAN
AND US CO-OPS WHO DECIDEDTO
USETHETOOL
Industry, (number of respondents and country)
1. Engineering Co-op (3 - US)
2. Services (102 - US)
3. Retail Stores (47 - US)
4. Restaurant (32 - Canada)
5. Food processing (69 - Canada)
6. Service and production (23 - US)
7. Service (45 - Canada)
8. Engineering service (14 - Canada)

9. IN STEP 1. WE FOUND OUT THAT OUR
QUESTIONS FALL INTOTWO DIFFERENT RESEARCH
PARADIGMS
To understand answers to such
questions we have to better
understand the coop.
43 statements 129 statements
Most of the questions were answered as
if they came from one population. We
can use them to make generalizations.
When we analyzed the distributions of the answers we found out that in 43
questions, we cannot draw general conclusions, as there is a hidden factor which
influences the results and destroys the normality of the distribution.

10. STEP 2. TESTINGTHE RELIABILITY OFTHE
SCALES BY MEANS OF CRONBACH’S α
Management !
Perspective
3 PerspectivesCo-op
Values
Co-op !Principles
Climate
Outcomes
Systems
Attitudes
The same set of 172 questions was used to view a cooperative from three
different perspectives: (1) Co-op values, (2) Co-op Principles and (3)
Management practices. We found out that it is worth to view the results in this
way as different people in a co-op are interested in different perspectives.

11. MANAGEMENT (1)
Organizational climate
1. Mutual Respect α=0.79
2. Leader Competence, α=0.57
3.Trust in leadership, α=0.76
4. Relations with co-workers, α=0.80
5.Trust among co-workers α=0.77
6. Participatory management α=0.84
7. Fun, α=0.67
!
!
!
!
Systems
8. Communication systems, α=0.77
9.Transparency, α=0.62
10. Feedback systems, α=0.72
11. Development of co-op members,
α=0.74
12. Innovations, α=0.72
13. Remuneration, α=0.85
14. Processes, α=0.80
15. Personnel policies and recruitment,
α=0.70
16. Strategy, α=0.87
Reliability of scales in the management perspective, the interpretation of
the highlighted scale should be performed with special caution.

12. MANAGEMENT (2)
Attitudes
17. Participatory knowledge, α=0.82
18. Ownership, α=0.80
19. Process improvement, α=0.69
20. Responsibility, α=0.61
!
!
!
!
!
!
Outcomes
21. Identification, α=0,67
22. Satisfaction, α=0.74
23. Self-realization, α=0.77
24. Independence, α=0.46
25.Viability, α=0.76
26. Products and services, α=0.75
27. Cooperation with coops, α=0.82
28. Community, α=0.84
29. Environment, α=0.85
30. External relations, α=0.56
Reliability of scales in the management perspective, the interpretation of
the highlighted scales should be performed with special caution.

13. CO-OPERATIVEVALUES
1. Self-help, α=0.70
2. Self-responsibility, α=0.49
3. Democracy, α=0.81
4. Equality, α=0.64
5. Equity, α=0.80
6. Solidarity, α=0.70
7. Honesty, α=0.74
8. Openness, α=0.72
9. Social responsibility, α=0.87
10. Caring for others, α=0.62
Reliability of scales in the Co-op Values perspective, the interpretation of
the highlighted scale should be performed with special caution.

14. CO-OPERATIVE PRINCIPLES
ICA AND MONDRAGON
1.Voluntary and open membership, α=0,68
2. Democratic member control, α=0.76
3. Member economic participation, α=0,77
4.Autonomy and independence, α=0.47
5. Education, training and information, α=0.80
6. Co-operation among Co-operatives, α=0.83
7. Concern for community, α=0.84
8. Concern for the environment. α=0.85
9. Participatory management, α=0.76
10. Labour control, α=0.66
11. Payment solidarity, α=0.79
12. Social transformation, α=0.79
Reliability of scales in the Co-op Principles perspective, the interpretation
of the highlighted scale should be performed with special caution.

15. STEP 3. PCA - AS IDTHERE WERE NO
MODEL
• We selected 60 co-operative specific questions with with
distributions close to normal distribution.
• We substituted the missing data with mean values.
• We tested the sampling adequacy and sphericity to find out if our
analysis was possible.
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of sampling adequacy = 0.89
Bartlett’s Test of sphericity Approx chi-square = 3577.41 (p< 0.000)
• We performedVarimax Rotation
In the last step of the analysis we looked at the data as if we had not had any
models. We wanted to see what components would be created if mere
mathematical correlations were allowed to construct a new model for us.

16. WE ARRIVED AT12 NEW COMPONENTS WHICH
TRANSCENDTHE MANAGEMENT AND CO-
OPERATIVE PERSPECTIVES ,WE CALLEDTHEM
CO-OPERATIVE UNIVERSALS
1. Human dignity, α=0.89
2.Transcooperation, α=0.82
(Co-operation among co-operatives)
3. Community, α=0.80
4. Development, α=0.79
5. Fairness, α=0.82
6.Transformation, α=0.75
7. Engagement, α=0.70
8. Security, α=0.59
9. Responsibility, α=0.73
10. Citizenship, α=0.64
11. CoopLiteracy, α=0.63
12. Co-operative
Lifestyle, α=0.68

17. THE MOST IMPORTANT, FIRST COMPONENT SEEMS
TO REFLECTTHE ESSENCE OF CO-OPERATIVES.
IT IS COMPOSED OFTHE QUESTIONS BELOW:
67. Experienced employees assist in the professional development of
their junior colleagues.
87. People in our co-op respect each other's opinions.
23. My supervisor consults me about the tasks entrusted to me.
165. My contribution to discussions is respected.
42. I have the opportunity to influence which tasks I will perform.
56. Members and employees are more important than capital to our
management.
13.When making decisions my co-workers and supervisors take my
welfare into account.
3. I am willing to participate in the evaluation of my coworkers' work.
16.The effort of individuals is honestly appraised.
37. I trust people in our co-op.
118. Different points of view are welcomed by my coworkers

18. THE 12 FIGURES BELOW SHOWTHE DIFFERENCE OFTHE
RESULTS OFTHE EIGHT CO-OPS ONTHETWELVE CO-OP
UNIVERSALS.AS WE CAN SEETHERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR
CO-OPERATION ASTHE CO-OPS DIFFER INTHEIR
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES.

19. • Offering the tool to other co-ops
(Consumer Co-ops, Credit Unions, Co-op
Banks)
• Training of Co-op Developers in using the
tool.
• Shortening the tool (introducing general
and more detailed diagnosis)
• Substituting the 30 Management scales
with 12 Co-op Universals.
• Defining co-operative literacy and its
development.
• Focussing on the importance of lifestyles.
POSSIBLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

20. www.coopindex.coop
www.stocki.org
Peter Hough!
peter.cwcf@xcountry.tv
Ryszard Stocki!
ryszard@stocki.org
Authors:
FOR MORE
INFORMATION