Cooperatives are special because the members not only own the cooperative, but also patronize it. CEO’s decision has an impact on the overall members’ interests. Understanding how CEOs differ from members regarding their evaluations on cooperative performance and what causes the differences, is valuable for CEOs to best serve the members. This paper evaluates the difference between CEO and member evaluation regarding their cooperatives, and further examines the role of governance in predicting the evaluations and differences in evaluations, based on a set of first-hand data containing Chinese agricultural cooperatives (240 CEOs and 543 members). Cooperative performance is measured by three indicators: member profitability, social influence in the local community, and overall performance. The results show that members have higher scores than CEOs regarding member profitability and overall performance, while CEOs have a higher evaluation regarding social influence. “This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in 'The Social Science Journal' on 27 Jan. 2020 available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1016/j.soscij.2019.01.006. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/xiao-peng-20466772/
MULTIFILE
The methodology of biomimicry design thinking is based on and builds upon the overarching patterns that all life abides by. “Cultivating cooperative relationships” within an ecosystem is one such pattern we as humans can learn from to nurture our own mutualistic and symbiotic relationships. While form and process translations from biology to design have proven accessible by students learning biomimicry, the realm of translating biological functions in a systematic approach has proven to be more difficult. This study examines how higher education students can approach the gap that many companies in transition are struggling with today; that of thinking within the closed loops of their own ecosystem, to do good without damaging the system itself. Design students should be able to assess and advise on product design choices within such systems after graduation. We know when tackling a design challenge, teams have difficulties sifting through the mass of information they encounter, and many obstacles are encountered by students and their professional clients when trying to implement systems thinking into their design process. While biomimicry offers guidelines and methodology, there is insufficient research on complex, systems-level problem solving that systems thinking biomimicry requires. This study looks at factors found in course exercises, through student surveys and interviews that helped (novice) professionals initiate systems thinking methods as part of their strategy. The steps found in this research show characteristics from student responses and matching educational steps which enabled them to develop their own approach to challenges in a systems thinking manner. Experiences from the 2022 cohort of the semester “Design with Nature” within the Industrial Design Engineering program at The Hague University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands have shown that the mixing and matching of connected biological design strategies to understand integrating functions and relationships within a human system is a promising first step. Stevens LL, Whitehead C, Singhal A. Cultivating Cooperative Relationships: Identifying Learning Gaps When Teaching Students Systems Thinking Biomimicry. Biomimetics. 2022; 7(4):184. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics7040184
DOCUMENT
Incentives are frequently used by governments and employers to encourage cooperation. Here, we investigated the effect of centralized incentives on cooperation, firstly in a behavioral study and then replicated in a subsequent neuroimaging (fMRI) study. In both studies, participants completed a novel version of the Public Goods Game, including experimental conditions in which the administration of centralized incentives was probabilistic and incentives were either of a financial or social nature. Behavioral results showed that the prospect of potentially receiving financial and social incentives significantly increased cooperation, with financial incentives yielding the strongest effect. Neuroimaging results showed that activation in the bilateral lateral orbitofrontal cortex and precuneus increased when participants were informed that incentives would be absent versus when they were present. Furthermore, activation in the medial orbitofrontal cortex increased when participants would potentially receive a social versus a financial incentive. These results speak to the efficacy of different types of centralized incentives in increasing cooperative behavior, and they show that incentives directly impact the neural mechanisms underlying cooperation.
DOCUMENT
