LHBRARY Mlci‘tlgan Static University i PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE l fl ——r+—; F It ~ e 17 l _ _ TWTW J usu I: An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution ‘ cMnanma-pd . COMPETENCIES FOR PRESIDENTS OF AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES IN THE STATE OF SAo PAULO, BRAZIL : ADMINISTRATORS' PERCEIVED PRIORITY RANKING BY Marilia Henriette Guillaumon Gerges A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Agricultural and Extension Education 1991 "‘é- A57. 6“ \./ ABSTRACT COMPETENCIES FOR PRESIDENTS OF AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES IN THE STATE OF SAO PAULO, BRAZIL: ADMINISTRATORS' PERCEIVED PRIORITY RANKING BY Marilia Henriette Guillaumon Gerges Educational and training programs for members of agricultural cooperatives in Brazil are essential if they are to thrive in today's highly competitive world. In order to design the most effective training programs, administrators of 152 agricultural cooperatives in Sao Paulo, Brazil were surveyed as to their perceptions of the highest priority competencies needed by presidents of these organizations. Seventy-four cooperative presidents and administrators completed the questionnaire (49 percent return rate) which included ranking their perceptions of the highest priority competency in each of nine clusters: Foundation of Cooperatives, Overall Knowledge, Cooperative Administration, Decision Making, Human Resource Management, Membership Relations, Vision, Communication, and Leadership. This study was also designed to determine if organizational characteristics (type of commodity of the cooperatives, number of employees and membership), and administrators' personal characteristics (level of schooling, years of experience, training programs attended and level of performance -- outstanding or average) were factors which influence perception of priority ranking competencies. The results of this study revealed that cooperative administrators agreed on thei importance of cooperative presidents possessing competencies having the knowledge and skill components, as well as the behavioral, affective, and motivational components. This study also revealed that the organizational and administrators' personal characteristics included in this study are not the sole factors that influence perceptions of competencies. There are other factors which may be relevant when designing a training program. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express her sincere appreciation to Dr. 0. Donald Meaders as chairman of the Doctoral Committee gave his advice and.assistance throughout this study; Special acknowledgment is due to the members of the Advisory Committee, Dr. Carroll Wamhoff, Dr. Joe Levine and Dr. Larry Hamm. Sincere thanks are due to Dr. John Schweitzer who gave invaluable assistance during the statistical analysis phase. Special thanks are given to the Brazilian Government for their financial support, and to Cooperativa dos Cafeicultores da Regiao de Marilia for their cooperation and support during the data collection phase of this study. A special word of gratitude is due to the authors' family in Brazil: to my mother, and all my brothers and sisters, Tera, Lisette, Francois, Carlinhos, Zito, Rose, Ignez, Yvonne, and Zizi. ‘Your influence will always occupy the most profound and meaningful dimensions of my life. Most of all, my heartiest thanks to my husband, Naji, for his unending love, inspiration, and support throughout this study. I dedicate this work to my children. May they acquire a love for knowledge, that leads to God truth. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Viii LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 X Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l Cooperative Education and Training . . . . . . 2 Cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo . . . . 5 Level of Education of Cooperative Members. . 7 The Management System of Cooperatives in the State of 830 Paulo, Brazil . . . . . . . 8 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Importance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 16 Definitions of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Assumptions . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Overview of the Research Design . . . . . . . 18 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Cooperative Management . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Business Management- Katz's Three Skill Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Managerial Competencies . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Defining Competencies . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Approaches to Identifying Competencies . . . 26 Identification of Competencies for This Study 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 3 6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4O Approach to Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Research Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 The Process for Instrument Development . . . . 42 Rationale of Questionnaire Part I . . . . . 44 Rationale of Questionnaire Part II . . . . . 52 V Rationale of Questionnaire Part III. Validity Test . Reliability Test . Distribution and Collection of the Questionnaire Response Rate . Data Analysis . Data Analysis of 0 IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS V. utstand ing Presiden Description of Respondents . Cooperatives' Locations Organizational Characteristics . Administrators' Personal Characteristics . ts. Cooperative Administrators' Perception on Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters Perceptions on Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Cooperatives' Organizational Characteristics Cooperatives' Commodity. Cooperatives' Number of Employees. Cooperatives Membership Perceptions on Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Cooperative Administrators' Personal Characteristics Administrator's Level of Schooling . Administrator's Years of Experience. Administrator's Training Programs Attended . . . Description of Outstanding Presidents Perceptions of Outstanding Presidents on Priority Ranking Competencies within Each of the Nine Clusters Summary of Written Comments Additional Competencies . Duties and responsibilities of a Cooperative Presidents . The Criteria of Nominating Outstanding Presidents . . General Comments about the Questionnaire SUMMARY, RESEARCH FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Research Findings vi Page 54 55 56 57 59 61 62 65 66 66 68 72 77 87 87 93 99 105 105 112 112 123 125 131 131 131 133 134 136 137 Page Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Study Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Recommendation From this Study . . . 149 Recommendation For Further Research . . . . . 149 APPENDICES A. QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 B. COVER LETTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 C. WRITTEN COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T 169 LIST OF REFERENCES 0 O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O 175 vii LIST OF TABLES 1. Number of Agricultural Cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil . . . . . . . 2. Level of Education of Cooperative Members in the State of 850 Paulo, Brazil . . . . . 3. Nominated Outstanding Presidents and Number of Points Computed . . . . . . . . . 4. Cooperative Respondents by Geographic Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Response Rate by Cooperatives' Commodities . . 6. Cooperatives' Commodities by Number of Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. Cooperatives' Commodities by Membership Size 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 8. Cooperatives' Commodities by Administrator's Educational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. Cooperatives' Commodities by Administrator's Years of Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. Cooperatives' Commodities by Administrators' Training Programs Attended . . . . . . . . . 11. Friedman's Analysis of Variance for Each Cluster of Competencies . . . . . . . . . . 12. Frequency of Responses for Each Competency Statement by Response Category . . . . . . . 13. ANOVA Test Analysis of Respondents' Perception of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Cooperatives' Commodities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'viii Page 64 68 69 7O 71 73 75 76 78 80 88 Table 14. t-Test Analysis of Respondents' Perception of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Cooperatives' Number of Employees . . . . . . . . . . 15. t-Test Analysis of Respondents' Perceptions of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Cooperatives' Membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16. t-Test Analysis of Respondents' Perceptions of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Administrators' Level of Schooling . . . . . . . . . . . . 17. t-Test Analysis of Respondents' Perceptions of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Administrators' Years of Experience . . . . . . . . . . . 18. t-Test Analysis of Respondents' Perceptions of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters by Administrators' Number of Training Programs Attended . . . 19. Characteristics of Nominated Outstanding Presidents Responding to the Survey . . 20. t-Test Analysis of Outstanding and Average Presidents' Perceptions of Priority Ranking Competencies Within Each of the Nine Clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21. Summary of the Results From ANOVA and t-Test Regarding Differences Between Respondents' Perceptions in Priority Ranking Competencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Page 94 100 106 113 118 124 126 145 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. The Relationship between the theoretical Basis for Identifying Competencies and Competency Clusters Used in this Study . . . . . . . . . 39 2. Map of the State of $50 Paulo - Brazil and Location of Cooperatives Surveyed . . . . . . 67 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Cooperatives are democratic organizations whose members are both owners and users. As owners of the cooperative the farmers/members elect from among themselves the leaders who will administer the organization. The administration of cooperative organizations involves the application of the principles of business management and principles of cooperatives. The promotion of the well being of the members through meeting the -‘ economic needs of farmers in marketing products, processing and transporting those products, obtaining production supplies and providing the many services needed in modern farming operations are major, but not the sole, goals of the cooperative organization. The goals of cooperatives are far more than just increasing the economic welfare of members. They include attempting to have a positive effect on the social, cultural, and educational life of the community. Fauquet said: The primary aim of the cooperative institution is to improve the economic position of its members, but because of the method it employs and the qualities which it requires of its members and which it develops in them, it aims at and achieves a higher goal: to make men with a sense of both individual and joint responsibility, so that they may rise individually to a full personal life and collectively to a full social life (Fauquet 1965, 6). 1 2 Cooperatives which follow the Rochdale principles adopt education as one of their main principles which is listed fifth in the order of priorities. Dubbashi mentioned that: Cooperative action takes its birth not in the legal process of registration of the cooperative society but in education (Dubbashi 1970, 109). Cooperative education has a broad scope. The very coming and working together of people according to the principles of cooperatives constitute education. The fulfillment of other cooperative principles such as democratic control, limited interest on invested capital, dividends paid according to patronage, etc. ultimately depends on successful cooperative education. COOPERATIVE EDUCATION AND TRAINING It is an established principle that education and training are essential to the success of a business; agricultural cooperatives are no exception. In fact, because of the inherent nature of cooperatives as institutions of people, cooperatives require additional investments in human development (Hutchinson 1969). Experience all over the world has shown that if cooperatives are to thrive in a highly competitive world and at the same time follow their philosophy, they must place increasing emphasis on education and training (Youngjohns 1977). The starting point of cooperative education is membership. Beyond member education, there is a special 3 need for education and training of the members who will administer the cooperative because of their special responsibilities. Dubbashi affirmed that: Cooperators, particularly those who have to bear responsibility as office-bearers of cooperative societies, have to acquire some concrete body of knowledge, skill and technique based on sound theory and past experience (Dubbashi 1970, 118). The members/administrators should be well prepared to respond to new situations which the job demands as competition sharpens, new technology is introduced, and as business expands and becomes more diversified. The dynamic changes of today's society require new dimensions of cooperative leadership. More than ever before competent administration is essential to the continued growth and development of cooperative business. In order to keep pace with these economic forces, cooperative organizations must make every effort to assure that their leaders are capable of discharging their responsibilities efficiently. As Vilstrup said: Complex economic forces will generate the need for skilled leaders with new levels of training and courage. Growth and economic survival will clearly depend on ability to recognize trends, articulate issues, motivate membership and formulate sound decisions (Vilstrup 1983, 257). The success of cooperatives is closely linked to the quality and competence of the administrators elected by the membership. Farmers who become administrators of the cooperatives are in a critical position to guide the 4 cooperatives' growth and direction and to be sure that the cooperatives' activities remain in all the members' interests, assuring the fulfillment of the economic and social responsibilities of the organization. Management of cooperatives requires a coordinating force of leadership and vision; people with broad social, economic, and political knowledge are needed who can contribute to the planning and administration of the organizations' goals, represent agricultural interests, and apply good business practices as well as exert major efforts in promoting the human and educational development of its members. The objective of management training programs is to strengthen operating methods and procedures by improving the abilities and visions of the persons charged with management responsibilities (Volkin and Griffin 1959). Some areas which usually require on-going training and continuing education are cooperative principles, leadership and decision making, human relations and communications, and capital structure and market development (Freppert 1985; Allen 1987; Volkin and Griffin 1959; Vilstrup 1982). To maximize the probability of designing an effective training program is to determine the competencies that the persons participating in the training should possess to deliver the work effectively. Then, the objectives of the program must be pinpointed and its content developed. 5 This study was built on the expertise and experience of cooperative administrators in the State of $50 Paulo, Brazil in an attempt to determine the perceived priorities among the many different competencies needed by cooperative presidents. Those perceived priority competencies could serve as useful information when designing in-service training programs for cooperative presidents. Following is an overview of the scope of cooperatives in the State of $30 Paulo, Brazil and a description of their management systems. COOPERATIVES IN THE STATE OF SAO PAULO The State of $50 Paulo is the major economic center in Brazil. Cooperatives in the State of 850 Paulo comprise more than 12 percent of the total number of agricultural cooperatives in the country K. They experienced their major growth during the 1960's and declined in number during the 1970's and 1980's (Table 1). Nonetheless, Schneider 1978 reported that cooperative membership seems to have grown steadily in recent years. During the year of 1988, cooperatives reported an increase of approximately 4 percent in their membership?. Cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo have become an ' Panorama do Cooperativismo Brasileiro. Série Cadernos Economicos # 48, Organizacao das Cooperativas Brasileiras, 1987. 2 Ibid Table 1.--Nurber of agricultural cooperatives In the state of Sao Paulo CATEGORIES G 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 WITIES 110 I 110. X lo. I lo. x 110. X VEGETABLE PRODUCTION 93 74.4 76 70.4 150 68.8 124 68.9 118 67.8 HIXTA 40 32 60 55.6 101 46.3 79 43.9 74 42.5 COFFEE 15 12 4 3.7 27 12.4 21 11.7 19 10.9 SUGAR CANE 1 0.8 4 3.7 16 7.3 17 9.4 17 9.8 CITRUS 4 3.2 3 2.8 3 1.4 3 1.7 4 2.3 BANANA 0 0 0 0 2 0.9 2 1.1 2 1.1 COCOA 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 HHEAT 1 0.8 1 0.9 1 0.5 1 0.6 1 0.6 CASSAVA 28 22.4 3 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 COTTON 1 0.8 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOBACCO 1 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GRAPES 2 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CROPS/LIVESTOCK 2 1.6 8 7.4 34 15.6 21 11.7 24 13.8 ANIMAL PRODUCTION 30 24 24 22.2 34 15.6 35 19.4 32 18.4 DAIRY 30 24 22 20.4 25 11.5 24 13.3 24 13.8 POULTRY 0 0 0 0 6 2.8 6 3.3 4 2.3 CATTLE 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 1.1 0 0 SHINE 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 FISHERIE 0 0 2 1.9 3 1.4 2 1.1 3 1.7 TOTAL 125 100 108 100 218 100 180 100 174 100 llotc : Adapted from " Os Cinqacnta m do Departarnento dc Cooperativismo" Governo do Estado de Sao Paulo, Secretarla da Agriculture 0 Abastcclmento, 1983. 7 important economic force. As reported by the Brazilian Cooperatives Organization (OCBffi approximately 23 percent of the production and marketing of cotton, 48 percent of garlic, 53 percent of potatoes, 28 percent of coffee, 32 percent of milk, and 80 percent of soybeans in this state is done by cooperative organizations. As processing and manufacturing methods become more technical, as capital requirements increase, and as more farmers join cooperatives, the administrators of cooperatives need to be better trained and educated so they can respond to the new challenges and complex operations of their organizations. In recent years increased attention has been given to the importance of training programs for cooperative administrators in Brazil (Junqueira 1986; Nascimento 1982; Doray 1982; Nogueira & Coda 1982). However, as Nascimento 1982 mentions much more is needed in order to enable administrators to respond to the challenges the future will present to agricultural cooperatives. Level of Education of Cooperative Members When studying competencies for cooperative presidents, an investigation of the cooperatives' members' educational levels cannot be neglected since the cooperative president 3 Ibid. 8 will emerge in general. A certain minimum level of formal education is, indeed, required to deal with the relative complexity of the cooperative enterprises, as well as to participate in training programs. As presented in Table 2, the majority (67 percent) of cooperative members in the State of Séo Paulo in 1970 had at least completed elementary school, and the great majority (96 percent) were formally literate. Considering that since that time the availability of schooling has not had any significant change, this data may still be indicative of the present situation. Table 2.--Level of education of cooperative members in the State of $50 Paulo, Brazil Elementary Elementary Beyond Illiterate‘ Incomplete Complete Elementary ‘ (%) (Ii) (15) (’6) 4 29 44 23 Source: Adapted from J. Schneider (1978, 199). Ministry of Agriculture Survey; and FIBGE, Censo Demografico, 1970. ‘ Member's educational level for 1975. (Quoted from -original). me t S s e Co 'v s 'n the State of $50 Paulo, Brazil The management system of cooperatives in the State of $50 Paulo is usually comprised of the Administrative Board of Directors, the Fiscal Board of Directors, and the General Assembly which includes every member. 9 The Administrative Board of Directors The Administrative Board of Directors consists of five to nine cooperative members elected by the General Assembly for a three year period. A rotation of at least one third of its members each term is required. The members of the Administrative Board elects among themselves the cooperative president, vice-president and secretary. These three officers usually comprise the executive board. Some executive boards of cooperatives are composed of the president, administrative-director and financial-director, or president-director, administrative-director and superintendent-director. Briefly, responsibilities of the Administrative Board of Directors are summed up in the bylaws by the statement that the Administrative Board of Directors plan and coordinate the operations and services of the cooperative and evaluate results. The following list consists of some typical bylaws' provisions regarding duties and responsibilities of the Administrative Board}: . Establish quality control and deadlines; . Use and evaluate financial resources for the accomplishment of operations and services; . Estimate the profitability of operations and services and check viability; . Establish policies for hiring and dismissing ‘ Egtatuto de Cooperativa Agricola. Secretaria da Agricultura, Departamento do Cooperativismo. Sao Paulo, 1986. 10 employees; . Establish policies for the efficient functioning of the organization; . Establish policies for the admission, dismissal, elimination and exclusion of members; . Call meetings; . Hire, if necessary, a professional executive to direct the work of management; . Assure that bylaws and regulations are observed by all members and employees; . Create education committees. The Cooperative President The cooperative president is the head of the organization who will implement the policies of the Administrative Board. The overall responsibilities of the president involve the thinking, judging and deciding of cooperative issues, and motivating members and employees to do their best to make the organization successful. The following list consists of some typical bylaw provisions delineating the duties and responsibilities of the cooperative president’. . Develop the cooperative's annual plan; . Supervise cooperative activities; . Verify the budget; . Sign bank checks with another executive director; . Call and direct meetings 5 Ibid 11 . Evaluate and present reports of the administration, cooperative's activities, inventory, and finances. The Fiscal Board of Directors The Fiscal Board of Directors is composed of three senior officers and three substitute officers, all cooperative members elected every year by the General Assembly. The rotation of at least two thirds of its members is required in every election. During the first meeting, the Fiscal Board of Directors will elect among the three senior officers a coordinator of the Fiscal Board who will have the responsibility to call and direct meetings, and a secretary who will keep the records of all meetings of the Board. Briefly, responsibilities of the Fiscal Board of Directors are summed up in the bylaws by the statement that the Fiscal Board of Directors should regularly supervise the cooperative's operations, activities and services. The following list consists of some typical bylaw provisions used to spell out the duties and responsibilities of the Fiscal Board“: . Check the monthly accounting balance to verify if it is under the limits established by the Administrative Board; . Verify if debts incurred agree with the cooperative's plans; . Verify if operations and services correspond with the cooperative forecast in volume, quality and value and 5 Ibid 12 with the economic situation of the organization; Certify if the Administrative Board of Directors are meeting regularly; Check into members' complaints; Determine if duties and responsibilities with fiscal and administrative authorities and other cooperative organizations are being carried out properly; Check if inventory turnover is being made according to the cooperative's regulations; Report their evaluation about the cooperative and identify any irregularity to the Administrative Board of Directors. General Assembly The General Assembly, composed of every member, is the most powerful part of the cooperative's management system. The General Assembly has the power to make any decision of interest within the bylaws and regulations. The following list consists of some typical bylaw provisions dealing with the duties and responsibilities of the General Assembly7: Elect the officers of the Administrative Board and the Fiscal Board of Directors; Determine compensation of Administrative and Fiscal Board of Directors; - Determine the manner, form, and amount of patronage refunds, or share of losses; Prepare the financial plan for the next administration. 7 Ibid 13 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The expansion, diversification and growing sophistication of cooperative enterprises are causing changes in the way cooperatives are run; these changes affect the management greatly. In the midst of rapid change, cooperative administrators have to be flexible so they can make adjustments to change. They have to keep learning new methods and techniques of business management while demonstrating a commitment to the principles of cooperatives. The basic knowledge of the philosophy of cooperatives, and the vital difference between cooperatives and other type of businesses should never be neglected (Patera 1985). No longer can cooperatives afford to be managed by presidents who do not possess the special skills required for the management of cooperatives. Because presidents of cooperatives are farmers themselves, in many cases they are not prepared to respond to the individual or social needs of their members or organizations. They have not had the experience nor the training to deal with problems of the big organization that their cooperative has become (Schneider 1982). The responsibilities and legal obligations of cooperative presidents are far too great to have people serving who do not understand the full scope of their responsibilities. The cooperative president should possess 14 a management style, possess motives and ambitions compatible with the constraints of a member-user-owned, democratically controlled organization. The abilities of good management are not personal characteristics, but broad performance competencies which can be developed through specific training and education programs (Mentkowski 1982, Boyatzis, 1982, Hutchinson, 1969). Educating for the development of such competencies is needed. Therefore, training programs are in constant need of development, refinement and evaluation. Training programs should be designed with appropriate objectives based on a global view of what presidents of cooperatives should know to meet the demands of their administrative work. The highest priority competencies which will enable the cooperative president to administer effectively must be determined in order to establish criteria for the training of cooperative presidents. Therefore, a study concerning priority ranking competencies which cooperative presidents must have is essential. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study was to delineate essential competencies that could serve as valuable information when designing training programs for Cooperative presidents. The objective of the study was to determine the highest 15 priority competencies for agricultural cooperatives' presidents as perceived by people currently in administrative positions in cooperatives. RESEARCH QUESTIONS The questions that guided the research process and the related approach to measurement selected for this study were: 1- What are the organizational and personal characteristics of the survey population? 2- What are the opinions of members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for agricultural cooperative presidents? 3- Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents? 4- Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents that can be attributed to organizational characteristics (commodity of the cooperative, number of employees, and membership size)? 5- Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents that can be attributed to administrators' personal characteristics (level of schooling, years of experience, number of training programs attended)? 6- What are the organizational and personal characteristics of the nominated outstanding presidents? 7- Are there significant differences between the average and outstanding presidents regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents? 8- What are the most important duties and 16 responsibilities of a cooperative president as perceived by the respondents? IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY This study provides useful information for determining the highest priority competencies aS'perceived by key people in the administration of cooperatives. The priority competencies identified should serve as a basis for the establishment of training programs directed toward improving the overall abilities of a cooperative president. This study stimulates: - the enforcement of the value of certain competencies in aiding cooperative presidents to fulfill successfully the administrative functions; - the improvement in administrative training for cooperative presidents by applying the competencies that should be the focus of an administrative educational program. ' DEFINITION OF TERMS Administration[Management - refers to the activities of planning, organizing, controlling, motivating and coordinating the cooperative in its day-to—day operations. Agricultural Cooperatives - embraces only cooperatives associated with agriculture, livestock, and dairy, and excludes cooperatives that fall under the category of fisheries and forestry. Competencies - defined as those professional and personal characteristics which will enable the cooperative president to perform a quality job. Cooperative Administrators - refers to the executive members of the Administrative Board of Directors. Coffee, Sugar Cane and Dairy Cooperatives - production 17 and marketing cooperatives whose main product is that from which they take their name. gropsLLivestock Qpppepatives - production and marketing cooperatives that deal with plant and animal production. Mixed Coopepatives - cooperatives dealing with more than one product on the same basis. " e " o ' s - refers to cooperatives federation, central and cooperatives dealing with a single product but with no significant number of organizations to agglomerate them in a separate group. ngapigational Chapapteristics - refer to the type of commodity with which the cooperative deals, number of employees, and membership size. Personal Characteristigg - include the administrator's level of schooling, years of experience, and number of administrative training sessions attended. Training Program - a practical training experience designed to develop a particular skill or group of skills. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY This study has the following limitations: This study was concerned only with cooperatives in the State of Sio Paulo, Brazil, taking into account that the structure of Brazilian rural production is very diversified in various regions of the country. An authentic generalization of the results of this study to the rest of the country would be difficult. Furthermore, the cooperative movement in the State of 850 Paulo has always been more expressive than in other regions of Brazil. The outstanding presidents identified in this study were limited to the opinions of the administrators surveyed and to the presidents responding to the questionnaire survey. 18 ASSUMPTION A basic assumption of this study is that the responses from members of the sample population reflect their true opinions and that respondents completed the survey with relative honesty and accuracy. OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH DESIGN The design chosen for this study was a mailed questionnaire survey. The data obtained from the questionnaire were used to: Determine the organizational and personal characteristics of the survey population. Determine what the highest priority competencies are for a cooperative president as viewed by people in administrative positions in an agricultural cooperative. Determine if cooperative organizational or administrators' personal characteristics influence their perceptions of priority ranking competencies for agricultural cooperative presidents. Determine the organizational and personal characteristics of the outstanding presidents who were nominated. Determine if the selected outstanding presidents perceived the same as the average presidents on priority ranking competencies for an agricultural cooperative president. Determine what the most important duties and responsibilities are of a cooperative president as described by the respondents in an open-ended research question. A three-part self-administered mailed questionnaire was developed for the collection of data. The questionnaire 19 items were reviewed by a panel of judges and tested for validity prior to mailing to the research population. Reliability testing was done in the form of test-retest procedures. Chapter III presents additional detailed information on the methodology design. The data collected, both numeric response and written comments, were transformed for microcomputer entry and analysis using the SPSS-PC, Version 2.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). Various statistical tests were performed on the quantitative data to provide information related to answering the research questions. Chapter IV provides a detailed reporting of the research results. A summary of the study, conclusions, limitations, and recommendations for further research are presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE In order to have a set of competencies be priority ranked by cooperative administrators, this study first identified some important competencies of a cooperative president. The identification of competencies for this this study emerged primarily from a review of literature in the fields of Cooperative Management, Business Management, Managerial Competencies, as well as from a validation of a jury of experts which is described in Chapter IV. The intent of this procedure was to understand better the management functions of agricultural cooperatives, to get acquainted with existing business management knowledge and practices, and to identify certain competencies for cooperative presidents in order to respond to the research problem. COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT A cooperative is an organization formed by a group of people with common interests who have joined together for the purpose of providing service as a means of economic, social, and cultural improvement for themselves and the community in which they live. 20 21 Cooperative principles are fundamental to the business activities of cooperatives. Democratic control, one member - one vote, limited interest on invested capital, dividends paid according to. patronage, and service at cost for members are some of the important principles that are unique to cooperatives. Another characteristic feature of cooperatives is that their members are at the same time the owners and direct beneficiaries of the organization. As owners of the cooperatives, the farmers-members are jointly responsible for their control and management. All the factors mentioned above contribute to the internal organizational environment. That environment transmits the expectations of the members toward the direction of the business, and consequently, determines the outcomes the cooperative president is expected to produce. The president's job overall is to create within the organization an environment that facilitates the accomplishment of its objectives. A useful method of classifying managerial functions is to group them_around the activities of planning, organizing, controlling, motivating, and coordinating. Following is a brief discussion of each of these functions considering the importance of understanding each function as a necessary part of the total management process. 22 Elappipg involves the thinking, judging, and decision- making function of management. The planning process will involve determining the goals and plans for the organization and communicating them to others, suggesting and thinking through, organization' policies, stipulating rules for management succession; and adopting procedures required to handle products. Organizing involves the establishment of an institutional structure of roles through a delineation and enumeration of the activities required to achieve the goals of the enterprise by each part of it. Organizing involves the grouping of activities and the structural arrangement of persons, facilities, and equipment. Controlling evaluates the results being achieved to ensure that plans of action are being carried out as intended. Controlling involves monitoring the performance of employees and the business as a whole providing feedback on employees' performances, predicting trends and forecasting results. Motivatipg is the responsibility of management to encourage the members to participate in cooperative issues, build commitment, identity and pride. Employees and members must have confidence in those who guide them, feel that they are members of the team, and know their responsibilities, obligations, and benefits so they can 23 feel a sense of accomplishment when the cooperative succeeds. Coordinating means integrating activities, people, facilities, and equipment to achieve a satisfactory, unified operation. It is the work of reconciling differences in approach, timing, effort, or interest and harmonizing cooperative and individual goals. BUSINESS MANAGEMENT KATZ'S THREE SKILL APPROACH Katz 1974 suggests that effective administration rests on three basic personal skills, technical, conceptual and human. This approach is the outgrowth of first-hand observations of executives at work, coupled with studies of current research in the field administration. According to Katz, this approach is based not on what good executives are (innate traits and characteristics) but rather on what they do (skills which they exhibit in carrying out their job effectively). A description of each skill follows: Ieghpigal Skill implies an understanding of, and proficiency in, a specific kind of activity, particularly one involving methods, processes, procedures, or techniques. Conceptual Skill is the ability to see the enterprise as a whole, including recognizing how the various functions 24 of the organization depend on one another, and how changes in any part will affect all the others. Conceptual skill refers to ways in which the administrator perceives and responds to the direction in which the business should advance, and coordinates and integrates all the activities and interests of the organization toward a common objective. Conceptual skill is the ability to translate knowledge into action. Human Skill is the executive's ability to work effectively as a group member and to build cooperative effort within the team he/she leads. To achieve the goals of the organization a coordination of people is essential. This coordination may involve motivating cooperative members and employees, organizing the cooperative human resources, managing conflicts, and stimulating a degree of pride in the organization. _ MANAGERIAL COMPETENCIES Definipg Cgmpetepgigs 1 Certain characteristics or abilities enable a person to demonstrate appropriate specific actions in a job. These characteristics or abilities can be called competencies. Klemp noted: Competence has been taken to mean knowing how to perform or possessing the aptitude for performance, rather than demonstrating that knowledge or aptitude: Knowing has been 25 distinguished from doing. (Klemp 1979, 42) Klemp 1980 defines job competency as an underlying characteristic of a person which results in effective and/or superior performance in a job. An underlying characteristic, in a sense, may be a knowledge, skill, trait, self-scheme, or motive which a person may possess. Klemp wrote: . A competency, or component or overall competence, is a characteristic of an individual that underlies effective work performance. A competency can be any human quality: It can be knowled e, a category of usable information organized around a specific content area (for example, knowledge of mathematics); it can be a skill, the ability to demonstrate a set of behaviors or processes related to a performance goal (for example, logical thinking); it can be a trait, a consistent way of responding to an equivalent set of stimuli (for example, initiative); it can be a self-scheme, a person's image of self and his or her evaluation of that image (for example, self-image as a professional); or it can be a mot've, a recurrent concern for a goal state or condition which drives, selects, and directs behavior of the individual (for example, the need for efficacy). A person may possess many of these characteristics, but by our definition, if the knowledge, skill, trait, self-scheme, or motive is not explicit related to _effective performance, it is not a competency. (Klemp 1980, 4) Other authors define competence as developmental, holistic and generic. Mentkowski et. al. noted: A competence to be developmental means that it is teachable. Thus, competencies are broken open into sequential descriptions or pedagogical levels that describe increasingly complex elements which students acquire over time as the result of instruction. A competency to be_hpli§pip means that it involves the whole person including a behavioral component, a knowledge component, an affective or self-perception component, as well as a motivation component. And a competency to be 26 ggpgpip means that the developing holistic ability will transfer across situations and settings in work, but also the personal and professional situations. (Mentkowski et. al. 1982, 8) Apppoaches to identifying Competencies The domain of behaviors important to competent performance in the job can be viewed from several different angles. Some approaches focus on the theoretical aspects of the job, whereas others focus on the more practical aspects. Boyatziz has three different views about competence: If you are part of the scientific management tradition, you may view competencies as the specifications for the human machinery desired to provide maximum organizational efficiency and effectiveness. If you are part of the humanistic management tradition, you may view competencies as the key that unlocks the door to individuals in realizing their maximum potential, developing ethical organizational systems, and providing maximum growth opportunities for personnel. If you are one of the people who studies, thinks about, and tries to help organizations utilize their human- resources effectively, the findings and model should provide a needed relief from the eclectic cynicism or parochial optimism concerning management that many of us have developed. (Boyatziz 1982, 258) The most common approaches to determine competencies are described below: The Panel Method One of the methods utilized for the identification of competencies is the Panel Method, comprised of a group of people, usually experts, who generate a model through discussion of what is needed to perform a job competently. 27 Primoff 1973, in using a panel of experts for identifying the elements of a job, found this a fair method since it is developed by people who have a thorough knowledge of the job. However, this technique can be severely limited by biased individual values and beliefs about the important dimensions of the job. These bias can invalidate the study. The Systematic Observation Method Another approach for determining competencies may come from Systematic Observation. Such studies represent an attempt to systematically determine those competencies which effective people possess. Campbell et al. in a review of research on managerial behavior stated: By sampling broadly and by gathering many behavioral incidents about managerial jobs, an investigator can be assured of discovering important time, person, or situation-determined changes that may be crucial to a full understanding of the job being studied. (Campbell et a1. 1970, 80) The Task and Function Analysis Method Another approach for determining competencies comes from The Task and Function Analysis (Albracht 1966; Gardner 1964; Davies 1973). This is one of the more explicitly detailed methods of determining competencies. The basic method is to identify a job; the functions and activities of the job then become the focal point for identifying the competencies needed by the individuals who are expected to 28 perform them (Clark and Meaders 1968). This method has been criticized as yielding lists of only minimum knowledge and skills requirements. Pottinger stated that: These lists neglect many significant areas of job competence because they address only external, observable behaviors without consideration of intrapersonal and environmental variables that influence behavior. (Pottinger 1979, 27) Such a judgement based approach may yield reliably observable outcomes, but it provides no insight into the skills and abilities that cause these outcomes (Huff 1980). Boyatziz stated that: Models based on task or function analysis focus on the job and do not address the person in the job. In doing so, the models include many specific and detailed descriptions of activities, but no mention is made of the characteristics that enable or increase the likelihood of a person performing those activities. (Boyatziz 1982, 8) The Behavioral Events Analysis Method Another approach for determining competencies is The Behavioral Events Analysis (McClelland 1975). This method uses a structured interview technique in which the respondents are asked to describe three incidents in which they felt effective in the job and three incidents in which they felt ineffective in the job. The responses then are recorded and analyzed by professionals experienced in this technique to determine how more effective and less effective workers perform their work differently. A 29 distinguishing characteristic of this procedure is that the interviewees are initially chosen by nomination based upon job performance -- those who had demonstrated superior performance and those who had demonstrated average performance. This approach has been used with success, but it is costly, time-consuming and requires trained professionals to analyze the responses. The Job Competence Assessment Method Other methods of determining competencies use an integration of various approaches. The Job Competence Assessment developed by McBer and Company, a behavioral research firm, is one of these. According to Boyatziz 1982, the Job Competence Assessment uses five steps to generate a validated model for a job. The first step involves determining the appropriate measure of job performance and how it is to be assessed. The second step involves job element analysis and the third step involves the Behavioral Event Interviewing, mentioned above, where distinguishing characteristics are identified, coded, and categorized. In the fourth step these characteristics are compared with the job elements to determine the distinguishing characteristics of the superior performers. And the last step involves integration of the results of steps two through four. This method has developed a list of managerial 30 behaviors which are characteristic of superior performance. McBer's study of 2000 managers in a variety of jobs and organizations delineated twenty-one generic competencies -- the Management Competency Model. The Management Competency Model The Job Competence Assessment which generated the Management Competency Model was designed to identify competencies that are not only related to effective performance but that cause effective performance. This method generated a list of competencies that have been shown to relate to effectiveness regardless of the specific job and the organization. According to Boyatziz the list was integrated with two criteria in mind: (1) the competencies had distinguished effective performance in a job with statistical significance; and (2) the competencies were not unique to the specific product or service that the organization provided (Boyatzis 1982, 26). The uniqueness of this model is that the competencies are generic and, thus, apply to managers in very diverse settings. They are holistic and, thus, the competencies are applied to the individual manager in his or her real world situation. They are developmental and, thUs, are behavioral oriented in which the critical issue is not the possession of the competency but its use. The resulting list included twenty-one types of competencies arranged in six clusters: 1) Goal and Action 31 Management cluster (Diagnostic Use of Concepts, Efficiency Orientation, Expressed Concern with Impact, and Proactivity); 2) Leadership cluster (Conceptualization, Logical Thought, Self-Confidence, and Use of Oral Presentations); 3) Human Resource Management cluster (Accurate Self-Assessment, Managing Group Process, Positive Regard, and Use of Socialized Power); 4) Directing Subordinates cluster (Developing Others, Spontaneity, and Use of Unilateral Power); 5) Focus on the Others cluster (Concern with Close Relationships, Perceptual Objectivity, Self-Control, and Stamina and Adaptability); and 6) Specialized Knowledge cluster. An explanation of the competencies of each cluster based on Boyatziz 1982, follows: Goal and Agtiop Mapagemgpp glpspgp (Boyatzis 1982, 60-98) piagnostig pge of cppcepp is a way of thinking to bring a concept to the situation in an attempt to interpret events through that concept. People with this characteristic usually have a model, theory or framework with which to interpret or explain events. Skills: pattern identification through concept application; deductive reasoning. Efficiency orientation represents a concern of doing something better. People who possess efficiency orientation set goals that are challenging but realistic; goals that are 32 within the range of feasible accomplishment but require special efforts. Skills: Goal-setting skills; planning skills; skills in organizing resources efficiently. c r w't ° represents concern with symbols of power in order to have impact on others. Those people see themselves as important, collect objects of prestige, become officers in organizations to which they belong, and act assertively. They often express concern about the prestige or reputation of the organization. Such people have a need to persuade or influence others. Skills: symbolic influence behavior. Prgagtivity represents a disposition toward taking action to accomplish something. Proactive people initiate action, communication, proposals, and meetings. They accept and admit responsibilities for success or failure. Skills: problem solving skills; information seeking skills. Leadership Cluster (Boyatzis 1982, 99-120) Conceptualigaton is a thought process in which a person develops a concept that describes a pattern or structure perceived in a set of facts. People with this skill are innovative and creative. They can communicate the meaning of the concept clearly. Skills: pattern identification through concept formation. 33 Logical Thought represents a thought process in which the person places events in a causal sequence, based on a perception of a series of causes which effect events. That is, the person views certain events as preceding or causing other events, which in turn precede or cause other events. People with this characteristic are orderly and systematic. Skills: excellent organization of thought and activities. Self-anfidence is the ability to display consistently decisiveness or presence. People with such a characteristic are usually charismatic and have a belief in the likelihood of their own success. Skills: self-presentation skills. Use of oral presentation is a competency by which people make effective verbal presentations, whether these presentations be in one-on-one meetings or an address to an audience of many. Skills: verbal presentation skills. W (Boyatzis 1982. 121-41) Accurate self-assessment is a competency by which people have a realistic view of themselves. These people see their strengths and weaknesses and know their limitations. Skills: self-assessment skills. 34 Mapagipg gppup prpcess is an ability to stimulate others to work together effectively in group settings. People with this competency communicate to a group the need for collaboration and cooperation. They create symbols of group identity, pride, and trust which represent the team effort. Skill: instrumental affiliative behavior; group process skills. Positive regard is believing in others. These people have a basic belief that people are good, and they see themselves as good. Skills: verbal and non-verbal skills which result in people feeling valued. Use of socialized power is a competency by which the person uses forms of influence to build alliances, networks, coalitions, or teams. Skills: alliance producing skills. Directing Subordinapas Clastar (Boyatzis 1982, 142-58) Development of others is a competency with which people demonstrate feedback skills in facilitating self-development of others with the intent of stimulating improved performance. Skills: feedback skills to facilitate self-development. Spontapeity is a competency with which people can easily express any thoughts, feelings, or opinions. Skills: self- 35 expression skills. Q§e_2f_unilateralinorsr is an ability to stimulate subordinates or others to go along with directions, wishes, commands, policies, or procedures. People with this competency give orders, commands, or directions based on personal authority, positional authority, or the policies of the organization without necessarily soliciting the input of others, even in situations in which input has been solicited previously. Skills: compliance producing skills. Focus on Others Cluster (Boyatzis 1982, 159-82) ancerp wiph close relapionship is a competency by which people care about and build close relationships with individuals. These people demonstrate nonverbal skills that cause people to feel cared for. They spend time talking with subordinates and co-workers when there is no particular task requirement. Skills: nonverbal skills that result in people feeling cared for; friendship building skills. Perceptual objecpivity is a competency which allows people to be relatively objective and not limited in view by excessive subjectivity or personal biases, prejudices, or perspectives. These people have the ability to remove themselves from emotional involvement and view the situation with relative objectivity. Skills: effective distancing 36 skills Self - contrgl is a competency exhibited by people who inhibit personal needs for the sake of organizational goals. People with self-control, when verbally attacked by someone, do not necessarily react with corresponding anger or defensiveness. Skills: self control skills. Stamina and adaptability is an ability people have to sustain long hours of work and be flexible to adapt to changes in life and the organizational environment. Skills: adaptation skills; coping skills. Specialized Knowledge Cluster (Boyatzis 1982, 183-90) A model of performance in any job must include specialized knowledge such as facts, principles, theories, frameworks, or models. In assessing competence, the possession of information related to the work should be practical and usable, otherwise it will not be related to performance. IDENTIFICATION OF COMPETENCIES FOR THIS STUDY In identifying the competencies necessary to perform effectively as president of a cooperative, multiple sources of the literature review were used. .The first step was to study the managerial functions of planning, organizing, controlling, motivating, and coordinating and through the 37 Task and Function Analysis Method to identify the basic competencies related to these functions. Taking into account that the literature indicated that this latter method may identify abilities critical for effective performance, but may not necessarily identify the personal abilities which are related to effective performance, further work was done. The second step was to find the elements thought to be most important for management that stem from ideas about management behaviors which screen judgments of effective performance through values and attitudes. To serve this purpose, the Management Competency Model (Boyatziz 1982) was used. Furthermore, the Katz Three Skill Approach was used to assure the inclusion of technical, human and conceptual competencies. Competencies were also generated from lists of characteristics cited in a study conducted by Mentkowski et al. 1982 rating managers' characteristics. A study done by Volkin et al. 1960 on directors of farmer cooperatives was also used as a source of competencies. Competencies were also generated from the pre-test distributed to six experts in agricultural cooperatives in Brazil. After the final list of competencies was generated, the competency statements were classified into nine clusters: Foundation of Cooperatives, Overall Knowledge, Cooperative Administration, Decision Making, Human Resource Management, Membership Relations, Vision, Communication, and Leadership. 38 Each of these clusters were composed of five competency- statements, with a total of forty-five competency-statements composing the first part of the survey questionnaire. Figure 1 explains the relationship between the theoretical basis for identifying competencies and competency clusters. SUMMARY This chapter has attempted to provide some empirical substantiation to the identification of important competencies of persons who are currently presidents of cooperatives. Cooperative management was studied by grouping the managerial functions around the activities of planning, organizing, controlling, motivating, and coordinating. The Katz Three Skill Approach was examined which suggests that effective administration rests on three basic skills described as technical, conceptual, and human. The next section was devoted to defining competencies and discussing approaches to identifying those competencies. Understanding the concept of competencies was a prerequisite to understanding the remainder of the study and the outcome of the research. Finally, the approach chosen to be used in this study to identify the competencies necessary to perform effective work as a cooperative president was discussed. 39 .Aomm .mmma ufiuumsom Eouu omummodv .xooum was“ CH com: mumumdao xocwummfioo can mmflocmummfioo mcfl>maucmofl you wanna Hwowumnomcu may cmmzumn QflcmCOMDMHmH one .H Tuscan curmuuoooa mu>_bntoaoou Co conunocoou 4II a_;mtoooo4 4lll| .nouauucouoll co_uau.camco ecu oc_uconotau¢ uc_aa: comm_uoo 0‘ ‘ casoztlt neonate...» uc___ucouo¢ “co an mg a rmLoBEo: accrue co aouo ou.c uo cl: 0 nova .no u > no. no nocuouc. _ . . . a . . c p _ _ _ _ . .coEoomco: outsoaoc cuss: A . scuEumnco: outaoaox case: coaoztl. co_uotoaoou uc.ua.oc.um 4 gasozrl. upou_uua u>_nnocuota uc.>a_an.o co_m_> 4|. «turbo co mauou Allllt casoxelt co.uouopo 5—0» oc_uoeotm :nsozrltxcoz Eon. ecu oucot.ucou oc.t._:n ou.~o v:- . cosaztlt >u_ucop. .ucoeu.eeou uc_v_.ao mcc_.c_u¢ a_zntonEut r c.5ntuoa04 II. nouns—otcaam acmouot.o . noooLu vca co_uau_c:EEOu .coEomnco: co_uu< be. —aOu caEazflln_aaon>_vc. Ou aucnuoo» u:_v~>oLa .cusuomco: ouL30nux case: .cuEuooca: outcome: can: coEoztll uaootu Lo o_aot_>_vc_ _ Co cue-Ecoctoa ac_uo:.a>w I Q~£uLUVQU.L 0.9-$50900.— co~uoumco580u Tl “refinance: ouLSOuox caE:: . co632¢|| «Luzuo om oc_uou.::EEOU a co.uua uo ca_a era :05: :u..dEOuua o» ousauuocun on 9.:oga .ou_c;uo ouL90uoL to. u.aooa 3o; oc.c.ELouao seasouoca: outoonox caE::LI.ucoEuuocor ccwuu< vcn .aoa 4I|ll .ou_czuo»+l\ no_u_>.uuo uc_a:otu aarntovooa a_;ntoo004 t co_~ou_c:£eou “evacuate: outaonoz casoz Allll. caeozrll accrue ou oc.uau_c:eeou mc_xaz comm_uuclll Luzon .atu~n_.c: Co on: QIIII- .aauooucourll >u.tozu:a ou oc_uo.oc uo_u._on n_aoa oaozu uc.>o.goa comumtu¢.c_fiu< o>mu050060utlruco60occmz co_uu( poo .mOu 4llll. _ou_csuoholl to» co_uua Go ace—a oc.£n__acuuu co_ua~.cooto _a:uaoucourl| or“ C0 «.009 ecu oc_c_ttouoo auto—30c: ._oto>o mo>_uacoc009 ho comaooc30u «Hit uc_uac_pL009 uc_.o>.uoz ocu__otuc0u uc_~_cauco oc.ccc_m Leena—u >ucouuaEOu .uvo: >ucuuoo50u “cusuuocor suaocaa< Mung nan-p :O-«uczu CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURES The objective of this study was to determine the highest priority competencies for agricultural cooperatives' presidents as perceived by people currently in administrative positions in cooperative. This section describes and explains the procedures used to obtain information for this study. It identifies the approach to measurement, research population, process for instrument development, validity and reliability tests, distribution and collection of the questionnaire, response rate, and data analysis. APPROACH TO MEASUREMENT The questions that guided the research process and the related approach to measurement selected for this study were 3 1- What are the organizational and personal characteristics of the survey population? 2- What are the opinions of members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for agricultural cooperative presidents? ’ 3- Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperativ presidents? ' 40 41 4- Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents that can be attributed to organizational characteristics (commodity of the cooperative, number of employees, and membership size)? 5- Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents that can be attributed to administrators' personal characteristics (level of schooling, years of experience, number of training programs attended)? 6- What are the organizational and personal characteristics of the nominated outstanding presidents? 7- Are there significant differences between the average and outstanding presidents regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents? 8- What are the most important duties and responsibilities of a cooperative president as perceived by the respondents? RESEARCH POPULATION The survey population of this study consisted of presidents and members of the Board of Directors of agricultural cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil. A total of 152 cooperatives of the 156 active agricultural cooperatives in the State of $30 Paulo were surveyed (97.4 percent). The persons contacted represent a systematic sample with a random start. For each name drawn first from the list of cooperatives, the president was contacted; for each name drawn second one member of the Board of Directors was contacted. In this manner the study would determine the 42 .competencies that presidents themselves perceive as important to fulfill the responsibilities of their positions, as well as the competencies that other members of the Board of Directors perceived as important. However, due to the fact that the great majority of the respondents were presidents (89.7 percent), for the purpose of analysis the presidents' and directors' opinions were combined into responses of administrators as a whole. THE PROCESS FOR INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT The method which was used to gain insight into the management of a cooperative was to survey those who were knowledgeable about the occupation. To accomplish this, a survey instrument was used to priority rank the competencies of an agricultural cooperative president. The design chosen for this study was a mailed questionnaire survey. Several factors were considered in reaching the decision to conduct a mailed questionnaire survey rather than any other form of data collection such as personal interview or telephone. The first factor was the great distance between locations of cooperatives since limited financial resources were available. A second consideration was that a precedent study had been conducted by Mentkowski et al. (1982) on a Similar topic. A set of questionnaire items was available from Mentkowski's 1982 study that 43 provided a beginning for developing an instrument. A third consideration was that a written questionnaire could provide the most data in a set amount of time (estimated between fifteen to twenty minutes). Considering that this was a cross-cultural research, special attention was given to the translation process in order to assure the retention of the original meaning of the questions. The following steps were taken in the translation process to assure the conceptual equivalence of the questionnaire: 1. The questionnaire was first designed in English 2. It was then translated into Portuguese for pre-testing 3. The Portuguese version was adapted according to validators' suggestions for completion by the sample population 4. The Portuguese version was translated back into English. Careful attention was given during the translation process from Portuguese to English to the following: a. Words that had a dual meaning. For example, in Portuguese there is a parallel distinction in the verbs "conhecer" and "saber", while in English the single verb "to know" is used for both of the senses. For translation purposes the terms "know" (conhecer) and "know how" (saber) were used. b. Verbs in which the meaning of "know how" was implicit in the verb itself were translated literally. c. Words dealing with "knowledge". As Schutz 1962 44 defined: "Knowledge has manifold degrees of clarity, distinctness, precision, and familiarity". This study used the term "knowledge about" based on James 1950 where it goes to great lengths to spell out the difference between "knowledge of acquaintance" and "knowledge about". James wrote: We can ascend to knowledge about it by rallying our wits and proceeding to notice and analyze and think. What we are only acquainted with is only present to our minds; we have it, or the idea of it. But when we - know about it, we do more than merely have it; we see, as we think over its relations to subject it to a sort of treatment and to operate upon it with our thought (James 1950, 222). Following is the rationale of the three parts of the questionnaire. Rationale of Questiopnaire Part I Part I of the questionnaire consists of forty-five. competency statements arranged in nine clusters, categorized under the headings of Foundation of Cooperatives, Overall Knowledge, Cooperative Administration, Decision Making, Human Resource Management, Membership Relations, Vision, Communication, and Leadership. The procedure to classify competencies into clusters is explained as follows: 1. Each competency was analyzed individually; 2. Related competencies were identified; 3. Competencies not directly related to each other were analyzed based on the inferable aspects of the 45 competency, or based on the context of the situation in which the competency would occur; 4. Competencies were classified into clusters. The instructions on the research survey asked the respondents to consider each competence in the context of their own job, and then to priority rank them utilizing a scale of zero through five. If the competency statement was perceived not to be important, an option was given to use zero. A value of one was used to describe a competency statement that had the highest priority of the cluster, and a value of five was assigned to a competency statement that had the lowest priority of the cluster. At the end of the inventory there was space for the respondents to write additional statements they felt were omitted. An explanation of each cluster is presented below: Cluster #1 - Foundation 0: Cooperatives This cluster corresponded to the concept of cooperatives. Knowledge of cooperatives and belief in their principles are a solid qualification for a cooperative president. Cooperative philosophy and principles are fundamental in the operation of the cooperative association; they determine the framework of cooperative activities. The cooperative president may be faced with situations that require him or her to stand up and fight for the principles 46 he/she believes in in order to strengthen the collective voice of agricultural interests in state and national affairs. To perform these aspects of the job, five competencies were identified: . Know and apply the cooperative philosophy . Have cooperative spirit . Have knowledge about current cooperative legislation . Have knowledge about the cooperative way of doing business ' . Know how to defend cooperative interests before governmental institutions Clpsterii 2 - Overall Knowladga This cluster dealt with the overall knowledge the president must have in deciding the course of the business. The president's job often involves situations that require a general knowledge of agriculture, marketing, social matters, and business methods and problems. Five competencies that corresponded to this cluster were: . Have knowledge about agriculture . Have experience in other management positions . Have knowledge about marketing channels . Have knowledge about cooperative administrative, financial, and operational structure . Have knowledge about the social, economic, and political environment in which the cooperative operates 47 Cluster # 3 - Cooperative Administration The responsibility and accountability of the cooperative ultimately rests in the hands of its president who is responsible for establishing goals and plans of actions according to cooperative principles and philosophy. This cluster of competencies referred to ways in which the president perceives and responds to the direction in which the business should advance; it involved the thinking, judging, and decision-making functions toward a common objective. Five competencies that corresponded to this cluster were: . Know how to administer the cooperative as a business and social operation . Know how to manage the cooperative in a participative and democratic structure . Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative . Know how to identify alternatives in solving problems . Know how to assure that the bylaws and regulations of the association are observed by members and employees Cluster # 4 - Decision Makipg A cooperative president is the decision maker of the cooperative organization. The person in such a position 48 should have the ability to consistently display decisiveness and presence. Some circumstances will require that a president not become emotionally involved and be able to view a situation with relative objectivity. Five competencies that enable the president to respond to these responsibilities of the job were: . Have initiative and decision making abilities. . Be aware of his authority and responsibilities in legal and social matters . Know how to make decisions under conditions of risk . Know how to withstand pressure and remain calm in crisis situations . Know how to deal with conflict directly and tactfully Cluster i 5 - Human Besourga Management Cooperative management must work closely with employees and members. To achieve the goals of the cooperative, a coordination of these two groups of people is essential. The coordination may involve appropriate delegation of authority, knowledge of people's needs, grouping of activities and the structural arrangement of persons, facilities and equipment as well as the evaluation of performance to ensure that plans of action are being carried out as intended. Five competencies that corresponded to this cluster were: 49 . Know how to delegate authority appropriately . Know how to understand and respond to members and employees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations . Know how to coordinate people, activities, and facilities . Know how to ensure employees' good performance . Know how to evaluate performance of employees and the cooperative as a whole Cluste; £6 - Membership Relatigas Cooperative members are the users and the owners of the organization and, as such, have responsibilities and obligations. Protecting the interests of the members, instilling a feeling of group responsibility, communicating to the members the need for collaboration and cooperation, and creating symbols of group identity, pride, and trust will facilitate the accomplishment of cooperative objectives and stimulate members' interest, involvement, and commitment. To perform these aspects of the job, five competencies were identified: 1 . Assure that the members are the main goal of the organization . Keep members informed about policies and operating practices . Instill in members their responsibility for making 50 the cooperative successful . Motivate members to participate in cooperative issues . Keep channels of communication open among directors, members, and employees CustarJ'Y-Vigion The performance of the president is enhanced by his/her vision of the possibilities for the cooperative. Therefore, the better the president understands his/her job, the better opportunities for development he/she will offer to employees and members. The cooperative president should take advantage of every opportunity to instill enthusiasm, aspiration, and understanding in the members, employees, and the community in which the cooperative serves. Five competencies that would help the president perform these aspects of the job were: . Promote the educational development of employees and members . Display a progressive attitude for the development and expansion of the cooperative . Keep up-to-date with the economic and social cooperative system . Act as a model influencing positive behaviors of employees and members . Know how to guide directors, employees and members in a clear and complete way 51 gluspar # 8 - Communipation A cooperative president in order to represent well the interests and needs of the farmers, should have the ability to work and get along with people, transmit a sense of trust, and reflect the ability to cooperate and work well as a team. -He/she should have the ability to make effective verbal presentations, whether these presentations be in one- on-one meetings, or an address to an audience of many people. Competencies that represented this cluster were: . Know how to deal with people . Know how to communicate clearly . Know how to direct meetings Know how to listen critically . Know how to instill trust Clust 9 - Leade 5 ° The cooperative's performance depends largely on the leadership of the president to motivate members and employees and to organize the human resources of the cooperative in order to achieve its desired goals. The president should have a good reputation and the highest integrity. To perform these aspects of the job, five competencies were identified: .' Have common sense . Have leadership abilities . Know how to influence 52 . Have a high capacity to work . Be honest, of good character and good reputation. a 'o e o uestio a're t I: Part II was designed to get information about the respondents' backgrounds and the cooperatives they were representing. This part of the questionnaire survey consisted of seven questions which attempted to measure several variables. They were: Position: The question asked what position the respondent holds in the cooperative. As mentioned earlier in this study, cooperatives in the State of $30 Paulo usually have one president and two directors (financial and administrative). This question was designed to determine if the title and responsibilities of the position a person holds influence the perception of effective performance. However, this question was not used in the statistical analysis because the great majority of the respondents (89.2 percent) were cooperative presidents. Therefore, for statistical analysis purposes the research population was treated as just one group called cooperative administrators. 53 Cooperatives' Commodities This variable was intended to be used to ascertain if the type of product with which the cooperative deals influences the perception of priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents. Cooperatives' Number of Employees This questionnaire was also designed to collect information about the size of the organization based on the number of employees working for it. Size and complexity of the business may influence the degree and amount of managerial responsibilities. This study took into account that an administrator holding a highly positioned management role in a small organization may not have the same responsibilities as the same position in a larger organization. Therefore, his or her perceptions of a quality managerial role may differ. Cooperatives' Membership Size of membership is generally a measure of strength of the organization as far as bargaining for prices and credit is concerned. This question was intended to determine if membership size affects the administrators' perception of important competencies. 54 Administrator's Level of Schooling The questionnaire asked administrators to indicate the highest level of schooling attained. When a technical school or university was attended, the field in which the degree was earned was requested. This question was designed to determine if years of formal education influence the perception of prioritizing competencies for a cooperative president. Administrator's Years of Experience Another variable included in the questionnaire survey was how many years of experience the respondent had in order to find out to what extent experience affects the perception of priority ranking competencies. Administrator's Training Programs Attended‘ The respondents were asked if they had ever attended a management training program and, if so, how many. These questions were expected to serve as an indicator of the administrators' and the organizations they were representing, commitment for educational advancement. Rationale of Questionnaire Part IlI: This part of the questionnaire was designed to ascertain the opinions of the respondents concerning the most important responsibilities and duties of the 55 president's job. Also, it was important to determine if level of performance (outstanding or average) of the cooperative president affects his/her perception of priority ranked competencies. Through a peer nomination procedure (Kane and Lawler 1978; Mentkowski et al. 1980), the administrators were asked to nominate those cooperative presidents whom they considered "outstanding". In this sense, "outstanding" was defined by the persons who were in the best position to observe the behavioral performance of their colleagues and who could identify those presidents who stood out as particularly effective. Kane and Lawler have reported that the peer nomination method appears to have the highest validity and reliability among other peer assessment methods, such as peer rating and peer ranking. Space was allotted on the questionnaire for participants to list the names of five cooperative presidents they felt were doing an outstanding job. The answers of the presidents who were nominated most frequently could then be studied to determine which competencies they cited. VALIDITY TEST Once a set of competencies had been identified, those competencies were validated to determine if they were, indeed, essential to effective performance. Prior to 56 mailing to the sample population, the research questionnaire was pre-tested by a panel of six judges directly involved with cooperative administration in Brazil to test the content validity of the instrument. Those contacted in the pre-test were not included in the final questionnaire survey. Judges were asked to add competencies which they felt were omitted and to make comments and suggestions. Results of such pre-tests were then used to rank order the original competency listing, add competencies, and sort out those competencies not deemed essential. To guide the evaluation process, each judge was presented with the following questions; they were then asked their general comments about the questionnaire. 1. Which words are not easily understood? 2. Does the questionnaire create a positive impression -- one that motivates people to answer it? 3. Which questions elicit uninterpretable answers? Why? 4. Which aspects of the questionnaire suggest bias on the part of the researcher? 5. General comments about the questionnaire. RELIABILITY TEST The reliability of a measure is simply its consistency. Babbie identifies reliability as: The quality of a measurement method that suggests that the same data would have been collected each time in 57 repeated observations of the same phenomenon. (Babbie 1986, 558) In order to determine its reliability, the questionnaire was given a pilot test on six administrators of cooperatives and after two weeks was retested on the same group. Those contacted in the reliability test were not the same contacted for the validation of the research instrument, nor included in the final questionnaire survey. A Spearman Non-parametric Correlation was used in Order to determine the internal consistency of the study. A value of 0.57 was obtained indicating a moderate correlation between the test and retest procedures and thus all the competency statements were included in the final analysis. DISTRIBUTION AND COLLECTION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE A mailed questionnaire survey was sent during January to March 1990 to 152 agricultural cooperatives of the 156 cooperatives (97.4 percent) listed with the Organization of Cooperatives for the State of Séo Paulo (OCESP). The difference of four associations was accounted for by changes of address or difficulties in obtaining the correct address. The questionnaire was printed in a booklet format that consisted of two high quality 8%" x 14" sheets of paper folded in the middle and stapled. On the front cover a map of the State of $50 Paulo with all the locations of the cooperatives was printed to create a positive first impression. Above the map in capital letters was written 58 "COMPETENCIES FOR COOPERATIVE PRESIDENTS" so the respondents would have an idea of the subject of the questionnaire. Under the map was a brief statement about the objectives of the study (See Appendix A for copy of the questionnaire). An identification number was stamped individually on the last page of each questionnaire. In the cover letter respondents were assured of the confidentiality of their responses. The questionnaire was accompanied by a personalized cover letter with the logo of the Agricultural and Extension Education Department, Michigan State University (See Appendix B). The respondents' name, job title, organization name, and address was individually typed and each letter was individually signed by a faculty member of the Agricultural and Extension Education Department and this researcher. This procedure was the same for each follow-up and reminder letter. A letter of endorsement by the National Secretary of Cooperatives, Mr. Adair Mazzotti, under the recommendation of the Ministry of Agriculture, Dr. Iris Rezende, was enclosed with the research questionnaire in order to communicate the relevancy of the study. In addition, in order to motivate the members of the sample population to respond to the questionnaire, a stick of a chewing gum was placed in each envelope. All the questionnaires were mailed with a postage-paid return envelope. 59 A follow-up letter was mailed to each member of the sample population two weeks after the initial mailing. One week later a Telex message was sent to all non-respondents. The following week a reminder packet which included a cover letter, a new questionnaire stamped in the right corner "SECOND REQUEST" in red letters, and another postage-paid return envelope was mailed to those who still had not responded. The deadline for the return of the questionnaire was clearly stated on each cover letter as well as the questionnaire itself. (Some of the sample population called the telephone number printed at the bottom of the cover letter to justify their delay in responding.) RESPONSE RATE There were seventy-four questionnaires returned out of the 152 questionnaires mailed to cooperative administrators for approximatelly 49 percent response rate. Those who responded to the questionnaire survey were representative of the cooperative geographic location and the cooperative commodity group, as explained in Chapter IV. Sixty-six out of seventy-four respondents (89.2 percent) were cooperative presidents, five (6.7 percent) were administrative directors, and three (4 percent) were financial directors. Because of this disparity, for purposes of analysis the opinions of administrators as a whole were considered; presidents' and directors' opinions 60 were not considered separately. The low response rate from cooperative directors may be attributed to the terminology used to designate respondents. As mentioned earlier in this study, some cooperative organizations designate the members of the Administrative Board of Directors as president-director, superintendent- director, and administrative-director; or president, vice- president, and secretary; or president, administrative director, and financial director. Consequently, when the president-director received the survey addressed to the director, he responded to the questionnaire rather than passing it on to a director. 1 From the total of seventy-four questionnaires returned, sixty-seven were statistically usable for the purpose of Part I (44 percent response rate). When analyzing the data of Part I and Part II, the same sixty-seven eligible questionnaires were used, since the responses to both parts are related. Because data from Part III was independent from other parts of the survey, responses from all seventy- four questionnaires were used. The relatively low return rate overall may be attributed in part to the economic changes made by the newly elected Brazilian government at the time of the mailing of the questionnaire. The new economic plan was introduced in the very beginning of the newly elected Brazilian president's administration, and nobody had expected drastic 61 changes that soon. At the same time those economic changes occurred, the third mailing was already out and consequently was abruptly interrupted. Although telephone calls were made, only a few questionnaires were returned; the respondents were too occupied in adapting themselves to the new economic plan. DATA ANALYSIS The data collected, both numeric responses and written comments from the returned seventy-four questionnaires, were prepared for analysis on a microcomputer using the' statistical analysis package SPSS - PC, Version 2.0. Variables were defined and the form was created for SPSS use in order to guide the transformation of questionnaire responses into numerical data. The written comments were entered for future organization and manipulation of data. The first part of the analysis consisted of determining the basic distributional characteristics of the data. Response frequencies, percent, mean, and standard deviation were generated on each competency-statement in Part I and for the respondents' organizational and personal backgrounds in Part II of the questionnaire. All items from the questionnaire which provided responses on a rank type scale (Part I) were interpreted and analyzed as if they were measured at the ordinal level. 62 Friedman's Chi-Square statistic test for the analysis of variance was utilized in Part I of the questionnaire where the data were in the form of ranks. Cross-tabulation was performed on pairs of questionnaire items in Part II that were measured on the nominal and ordinal level. Statistical t-Tests were utilized to compute probability level for testing whether or not the difference between two sample means was significant. One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests were utilized to compute F ratios in order to determine whether significant differences existed between the main groups. The 0.05 level of significance with an accompanying 95 percent confidence level was used in assessing results of this study. Data Analysis at Qutstapdipg Ppasidepts The questionnaire survey asked the respondents to nominate five cooperative presidents whom they considered outstanding and to place the names in rank order, the most outstanding first. Of the seventy-four respondents, forty- two (57 percent) nominated outstanding presidents; twenty- one (50 percent) nominated five names; five (12 percent) nominated four names; six (14 percent) nominated three names; five (12 percent) nominated two names; and five (12 percent) nominated only one outstanding president. Sixty cooperative presidents were nominated as outstanding presidents at least once. Of the sixty, twenty- 63 four (40 percent) had responded to the questionnaire survey. Since the nominations were in rank order the number of points each president received was calculated in order to determine the first names of the list. The basis used to calculate the number of points was: If nominated as the first or the second outstanding president three points were added to his score; if nominated as the third or fourth name, two points were added to his score; and if nominated as the fifth name, one point was added to his score. Fourteen presidents got at least nine points (Table 3) and were nominated at least three times. Of the fourteen, eight (57.1 percent) had responded to the questionnaire; one was an unusable response. Therefore, seven names were selected to comprise the list of outstanding presidents for further statistical analysis of their perceptions regarding priority ranking competencies for presidents of cooperatives. 64 Table 3.--lloainated outstanding presidents and MI“ of points counted mtstandim Presidents Under of| mtstanding Presidents litter of Presidents Responding points | Presidents Respondim points (Part Order) to the survey ccQuted | (Rank Order) to the survey comuted l . 1 no 23 | 31 no 3 2 yes 23 | 32 yes 3 3 no 21 | 33 yes 3 4 no 20 | 34 no 3 5 yes 20 | 35 no 3 6 yes 18 | 36 no 3 7 yes 16 | 37 no 3 8 no 15 | 38 no 3 9 no 15 | 39 no 3 10 yes 14 | 40 no 3 11 no 9 | 41 yes 3 12 yes 9 | 42 no 3 13 yes 9 | 43 no 3 14 yes 9 | 44 yes 3 15 yes 6 | 45 yes 2 16 no 6 | 46 no 2 17 yes 6 | 47 no 2 18 no 6 | 48 yes 2 19 no 6 | 49 no 2 20 yes 5 | 50 no 2 21 yes 5 | 51 no 2 22 no 5 | 52 no 2 23 yes 4 | 53 no 2 24 yes 4 | 54 no 2 25 yes 4 | 55 no 2 26 no 4 | 56 no 2 27 yes 4 | 57 no 2 28 yes 3 | 58 no 2 29 no 3 | 59 yes 1 30 no 3 | 60 no 1 I llote: If noeinated as the first or the second outstanding president three points were added to his score; if nominated as third or fourth nae, two points were added to his score; and if noninated as the fifth name, one point was added to his score. CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS The objectives of this study were to examine how people in administrative positions in agricultural cooperatives priority rank competencies of presidents of these organizations, and to determine what the differences are between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies that can be attributed to organizational differences (cooperatives' commodities, number of employees, and membership) or personal differences (administrators' level of schooling, years of experience, and participation in training programs). Also this study was designed to ascertain the differences between the ~perceptions of the average and the nominated outstanding presidents on priority ranking of the competencies of the cooperative president. ‘ The findings in this chapter are presented and discussed in the following sections: . Description of cooperative respondents. . Perceptions of cooperative administrators on priority ranking competencies within each of the nine clusters. . Perceptions of administrators on priority ranking competencies within each of the nine clusters by cooperative organizational characteristics (commodities, number of employees and membership). 65 66 . Perceptions of administrators on priority ranking competencies within each of the nine clusters by administrator' personal characteristics (educational level, years of experience, training). . Description of outstanding presidents. . Perceptions of outstanding presidents on priority ranking competencies within the nine clusters . Summary of written comments DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENTS The questionnaires which were returned provided information about the following characteristics: cooperatives' geographic locations, cooperatives' organizational characteristics (cooperatives' commodities, number of employees, and membership) and administrators' personal characteristics (administrator's level of schooling, years of experience, and participation in training programs). Important aspects of these characteristics are discussed in this Chapter. Coppetativea' ngatiops The locations of the cooperatives surveyed and the locations of the cooperatives responding to the questionnaire are displayed in Figure 2. The State of sao Paulo was divided into forty-three micro regions. The geographic micro regions were adopted from Ataa ga Copcenttagao ga 67 Agricultuta Brasileipa, Ministério da Agricultura, 1970. In order to analyze the response rate by the locations of cooperatives, the map was divided into three main regions: North-Northwest-Central corresponding to micro regions 225, 226, 227, 231, 232, 233, 234, 239, 240, 241, 245, 250 251, 252; North-Northeast-Central corresponding to micro regions 228, 229, 230, 235, 236, 237, 238, 242, 243, 244, 246, 247, 254; and South-Southeast-Central corresponding to micro regions 248, 249, 253, 255, 256, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267. Despite the fact that some micro regions had a greater percentage of respondents than others, the overall picture of the map shows that respondents were not unevenly distributed. Table 4 indicates that twenty-eight out of fifty-eight (48.3 percent) questionnaires mailed to cooperatives located in the North-Northwest-Central part of the state were returned, twenty-two out of forty questionnaires (55 percent) mailed to cooperatives located in the North-Northeast-Central part of the state were returned, and twenty-four out of fifty- four questionnaires (44.4 percent) mailed to cooperatives located in the South-Southeast-Central part of the state were returned. Among the cooperatives answering the .research survey 37.8 percent were located in the North- Northwest-Central part of the state 29.7 percent were located in the North-Northeast-Central region and 32.4 percent were located in the South-Southeast-Central sector. 67a .wuoDHSUflum< mo >uumflcflz on» >9 omumcmflmmo mcofiamuouofls o» Ucommmuuoo how ou mmm “Dcmccommmn mm>flumummooo H nvupwxw>u=m O>MDMMTQOOO H . "mcoflumooq w>flumuwmoou can oasmm 0mm no mumum may no mm: .m Tuscan 68 'Table 4.--Cooperatives respondents by geographic location Survey Mailed Response Total by Region Response REGION No. % No. % % North-Northwest-Central 58 38.2 28 48.3 37.8 North-Northeast-Central 40 26.3 22 55.0 29.7 South- Southeast-Central 54 35.5 24 44.4 32.4 Total 152 100 74 48.7 100 Organizational Chatacteristics Cooperatives' Commodities The cooperatives having a higher response rate were the Mixed cooperatives. They had a response rate of approximately 23.9 percent of the total number of cooperatives responding to the questionnaire, roughly 31.7 percent of Mixed cooperatives participated in the study. Coffee cooperatives' and Dairy cooperatives' response rates were 19.4 percent; 75 percent of all Coffee cooperatives and 59.1 percent of all Dairy cooperatives were participants in this research. Crops/Livestock cooperatives represented approximately 17.9 percent of the total responses and approximately 61.1 percent of all the cooperatives in this category. Sugar Cane cooperatives had a response rate of approximately 14.9 percent of the total number of cooperatives responding and approximately 61.1 percent of all cooperatives in this category. Table 5 illustrates the 69 number and percentage of response for each commodity group. Table 5.--Response rate by cooperatives' commodities % Within Total % Commodity Cooperatives Cooperative Commodity No. Group Surveyed Mixed 16 31.7 23.88 Coffee 13 75.0 19.40 Dairy 13 59.1 19.40 Crops/Livestock 12 61.1 17.91 Sugar Cane 10 61.1 14.93 "Other" 3 36.4 4.48 Total 67 100 Cooperatives' Number of Employees Respondents were asked to classify the cooperatives' number of employees in one of four categories: less than twenty employees, 20-50, 51-100, and more than 100 employees. Of the cooperatives' respondents, 43.9 percent had more than 100 full-time employees, 21.2 percent had 51-100 employees, 15.2 percent had 20-50 employees, and 19.7 percent had less than 20 employees. Data from cross- tabulation, displayed in Table 6, indicated that Coffee and Dairy cooperatives with eight out of the thirteen respondents (61.5 percent) having more than 100 full-time 70 employees, ranked highest. Mixed cooperatives ranked lowest with two out sixteen respondents (12.5 percent) having more than 100 employees and eight out of the sixteen respondents (50 percent) reporting with less than 20 employees. Table 6.--Cooperatives' commodities by number of employees Number of Employees Row Commodity <20 20-50 51-100 >100 Total Sugar Cane 4 1 2 3 10 Coffee 1 4 8 13 Dairy 1 2 2 8 13 Crops/Livestock 2 4 5 11 Mixed 8 4 2 2 16 "Other" 3 3 Column Total 13 10 14 29 66 % 19.7 15.2 21.2 43.9 100 Note: Number of missing observation = 1 Cooperatives' Membership Respondents were asked to classify the cooperatives' membership in one of six categories: less than 150 members, 150-299, 300-444, 450-599, 600-750, and more than 750 members. A total of thirty-six out of the sixty-six cooperatives (54.5 percent) which responded to this question reported having more than 750 members. At the other extreme, twenty- 71 one out of sixty-six (31.8 percent) reported less than 300 members. Data from a cross-tabulation analysis of cooperatives' commodities by membership size displayed in Table 7, indicated that eleven out of thirteen Coffee cooperatives' respondents (84.6) had a membership of more than 750 members, followed by the Crops/Livestock cooperatives with eight out of eleven (72.7). Mixed cooperatives presented the smallest membership with nine out of sixteen (56.2 percent) with less than 300 membersh Table 7.--Cooperatives' commodities by membership size I Mewership | Row Comedity < 150 150-299 300-449 450-599 600-750 >750| Total I SUGAR CARE 3 1 1 2 3 | 10 I corres 1 1 11 | 13 I DAIRY 1 2 3 7 | 13 l CROPS/LIVEST 1 2 8 | 11 l MIXED 2 7 1 1 5 | 16 I ”OTHER" 1 2 | 3 l leliiI TOTAL 8 13 2 5 2 36 I 66 l x 12.1 19.7 3.0 7.6 3.0 54.5 | 100.0 Note : Inter of missing observation 8 1 72 i a “'5 on a ' “cs Administrator's Level of Schooling Respondents were asked to classify their educational levels in one of five categories: primary school, middle school, high school, technical school, or university. Over half (57.8 percent) of the cooperative administrators, i.e. thirty-seven out of the sixty-four responding had university degrees. Just five of the sixty- four (7.8 percent) had a primary level of schooling. The data from the cross-tabulation analysis shown in Table 8 revealed that seven out of the ten Sugar Cane cooperatives (70 percent), nine out of twelve Coffee cooperatives (75 percent), seven out of thirteen Dairy cooperatives (53.8 percent), eight out of eleven Crops/Livestock cooperatives (72.7 percent) had administrators with university degrees. Mixed cooperatives had the lowest number of administrators with university degrees, four out of fifteen (26.6 percent) and the most administrators with middle school education, six out of fifteen (40 percent). This part of the questionnaire also provided a space for respondents who attended technical school or universities to specify their area of study. The following is a summary of their responses. From the sixty-four respondents, eight had technical school degrees. Threetof them (37.5 percent) had a degree in Accounting; two of them (25 percent) had a technical degree 73 in Agriculture. Each of the following areas had one person (12.5 percent) with a degree in Motors and Machines, Industrial Mechanics, and primary school Teaching. Of the respondents, thirty-seven had a university Table 8.-- Cooperatives'Commodities by administrators level of scholling | Level of Schooling | Row Conodity Primary Middle High Technical University| Total suntan: 1 1 1 7 : 1o corree 1 1 1 9 : 12 DAIRY 2 1 3 7 i 13 CROPS/LIVESTOCK 1 2 8 : 11 atxso 1 6 1 3 4 : 15 ~orusa~ 1 2 : 3 I COLUMN TOTAL 5 8 6 8 37 | 64 x 7.8 12.5 9.4 12.5 57.8 :100.0 Note : umber of missing observations 8 3 degree. Among them, four (10.8 percent) had earned two degrees -- all had a degree in Management, one's second degree was in English; the second degree of one was in Law, and two had Engineering degrees as their second. From the thirty-seven respondents, fifteen (40 percent) had a degree in Law; eight (21.6 percent) had a degree in " ‘9'" fi'fiex‘wgma- n... . 74 Agronomy; six (16.2 percent) had a degree in Management; two (5.4 percent) had a degree in Engineering; two (5.4 percent) had a degree in Medicine; one (2.7 percent) had a degree in Animal Science; one (2.7 percent) had a degree in Economics; one (2.7 percent) had a degree in Veterinary Science, and one (2.7 percent) had a degree in Odontology. Administrator's Years of Experience Respondents were asked to classify their years of experience as an administrator of a cooperative in one of four categories: 0-2 years, 3-4 years, 5-10 years, and more than 10 years of experience. A total of twenty-six of the sixty-six respondents (39.4 percent) who responded to this question had more than 10 years of experience, and eighteen of the sixty-six (27.3 percent) had 5-10 years of experience. Only ten of the sixty-six cooperative administrator respondents (15.2 percent) were identified as new administrators with 0-2 years of experience. Data from cross tabulation shown in Table 9 revealed that the experience of cooperative administrators concentrated in the group of at least 5 years of experience (66.7). Of the ten administrators of Sugar Cane cooperatives, eight (80 percent) had more than 5 years of experience as did nine of the thirteen (69.2 percent) administrators of Coffee and Dairy cooperatives, and seven of the eleven Crops/Livestock (63.6 percent) administrators. 75 On the other hand, Coffee (23.1 percent), Dairy (7.7 percent), Crops/Livestock (18.2 percent), and Mixed (25 percent) cooperatives were the only ones with administrators with 2 years of experience or less. Table 9.--Cooperatives' commodities by administrators' years of experience Years of Experience Row Commodity 0-2 3-4 5-10 >10 Total Sugar Cane 2 4 4 10 Coffee 3 1 3 6 13 Dairy 1 3 3 6 13 Crops/Livestock 2 2 3 4 11 Mixed 4 3 5 4 16 "Other" 1 2 3 Column Total 10 12 18 26 66 % 15.2 18.2 27.3 39.4 100 Note: Number of missing observation = 1 Administrator's Training Programs Attended Respondents were asked to classify the number of training programs attended in one of four categories: no training received, one, two, and more than two training programs. More than half (52.3 percent) of the administrators had never attended any training programs, thirteen out of the sixty-five (20 percent) who responded to this question had attended at least one training program, and thirteen out of 76 sixty-five (20 percent) had attended more than two training programs. Data from the cross-tabulation, displayed in Table 10, provided the information that Dairy cooperatives' administrators had the most training. More specifically, it was shown that eight out of thirteen Dairy cooperative administrators (61.5 percent) had participated in 2 or more training programs, followed by three out of eleven Crops/Livestock cooperative administrators (27.3 percent). The great majority of Sugar Cane cooperatives, nine out of ten (90 percent) had not participated in any training programs. More than one-half of the Coffee cooperatives, seven out of thirteen (53.8 percent), also had received no training, and nine out of fifteen Mixed cooperatives (60 percent) had never participated in a training program. Table 10.--Cooperatives' commodities by administrators' training programs attended Training Programs Row Commodity 0 One Two >Two Total Sugar Cane 9 1 10 Coffee 7 3 1 2 13 Dairy 4 1 3 5 13 Crops/Livestock 4 4 i 3 11 Mixed 9 3 1 2 15 "Other" 1 1 I 3 Column Total 34 13 5 13 65 % 52.3 20.0 7.7 20.0 100 Note: Number of missing observation = 2 77 COOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATORS' PERCEPTION ON PRIORITY RANKING COMPETENCIES WITHIN EACH OF THE NINE CLUSTERS Upon conducting the Friedman's Analysis of Variance for ranked data (Table 11), the results showed that there were significant differences at the 0.05 level and 95 percent confidence interval in the way respondents priority ranked the competencies in eight of the nine clusters. The Vision cluster was the only cluster with no significant difference in priority ranking competencies. Table 12 displays the frequency and percentage for each rank category (0,1,2,3,4,5) and the total mean score and standard deviation for the forty-five competency statements within each of the nine clusters. The scale for ranking competencies goes from 0 to 5. For analysis purpose the computer translated the value of 0 (not important) to the value of 6; 1 (highest priority) and 5 (lowest priority). Therefore, when reading Table 12, a lower score indicates a measure of first priority rather than a higher mean score. Individual competency statements are arranged in Table 12 with the statement of each cluster having the lowest total sample mean score first (highest priority competency of the cluster), followed by the remaining statements listed in descending order of priority according to the total sample mean score of each statement. The competency displaying the highest total sample mean score (lowest priority competency of the cluster) appears at the end of ‘each particular cluster. Table 11.--Friehn's Analysis of Variance for each cluster of 78 cometencies SORCE SIP! OF DE EAR F F VARIATIul SQUARES D.F. SQUARE PRmABILITY Fomdation of Cooperatives Cluster BETUEER PEG’LE 44.3111 62 0.7147 UITHIN PEWLE 586.8000 252 2.3286 SEMEN IEASURES 148.9841 4 37.2460 21.098 0.000 * TOTAL 631.1111 314 2.0099 Overall Knowledge Cluster BEMEN PEwLE 40.2277 64 0.6286 UITilIil PEWLE 611.6000 260 2.3523 BETWEEN MEASLRES 143.1815 4 35.7954 19.563 0.000 * TOTAL 651.8277 324 2.0118 Cooperative Adainistration Cluster RETUEER PEWLE 45.1200 64 0.7050 HITIIIN PEwLE 603.2000 260 2.3200 REMER MEASURES 68.7200 4 17.1800 8.229 0.000 * TOTAL 648.3200 324 2.0010 Decision Making Cluster IETlEEll PEle 73.0031 64 1.1407 HITHIN PEG-“LE 605.2000 260 2.3277 BETHEEN MEASURES 203.4954 4 50.8738 32.421 0.000 * TOTAL 678.2031 324 2.0932 "man Resources Management Cluster BEMEII PEa’LE 63.0892 64 0.9858 HITIml PEU’LE 598.4000 260 2.3015 8ETl£E1l IEASURES 234.6892 4 58.6723 41.297 0.000 * TOTAL 661 .4892 324 2.0416 Hetership Relations Cluster BETIEEN PEle 72.5108 64 1.1330 UlTlml PEOPLE 596.4000 260 2.2938 BETIEEN MEASURES 136.2338 4 34.0585 18.947 0.000 * TOTAL 668.9108 324 2.0645 Table 11.--Continuad 79 SORCE Slll OF OF NEAR F F VARIATlul SOUARES 0.F. SlllARE PROBABILITY Vision Cluster BETEEI PElPLE 62.1108 64 0.9705 UITIIII PEG'LE 600.8000 260 2.3108 BETIEEN REASLRES 14.9108 4 3.7277 1.629 0.167 TOTAL 662.9108 324 2.0460 Coaunication Cluster BETHEEI PEOPLE 86.2061 65 1.3262 UITIiIll PEWLE 605.6000 264 2.2939 BETUEEN EASURES 71.8667 4 17.9667 8.752 0.000 * TOTAL 691 .8061 329 2 .1028 Leadership Cluster 8ET1£EI PEGLE 107.6000 66 1.6303 HlTlml PEOPLE 602.0000 268 2.2463 BETWEEN REASIRES 206.8836 4 51.7209 34.558 0.000 * TOTAL 709.6000 334 2.1246 * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95% confidence interval 80 Table 12.-~Fremency of responses for each copetency stateeent by response category 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total Cowetsncies 11 I I I I ll Ilean X K K x X K 8.0. Fotndation of Cooperatives Cluster llave cooperative 41 12 6 5 3 1.76 spirit 61.2 17.9 9.0 7.5 4.5 1.17 know and apply the 13 28 15 6 4 2.39 cooperative philosophy 19.7 42.4 22.7 9.1 6.1 1.09 have knowledge about cooperative 9 6 21 16 11 3.22 way of doing business 14.3 9.5 33.3 25.4 17.5 1.26 Ilave knowledge about current 5 13 14 18 13 3.33 cooperative legislation 7.9 20.6 22.2 28.6 20.6 1.24 Know how to defend cooperative 6 12 6 14 26 3.66 interests before goverruental 9.4 18.8 9.4 21.9 40.6 1.42 institutions Overall Knowledge Cluster have knowledge about the coop. 24 27 7 7 1 2.00 atinistrative, financial and 36.4 40.9 10.6 10.6 1.5 1.02 operational structure Have knowledge about the social 23 24 11 6 3 2.13 mic, and political 34.3 35.8 16.4 9.0 4.5 1.13 enviroment in mich the cooperative operates llave knowlme about 1 14 5 17 14 15 3.12 agriculture 1.5 21.2 7.6 25.8 21.2 22.7 1.48 Ilave experience in other 1 7 7 16 16 19 3.45 wt positions 1.5 10.6 10.6 24.2 24.2 28.8 1.37 llave Knowledge about 5 6 18 17 19 3.60 aarketing chemels 7.7 9.2 27.7 26.2 29.2 1.22 Table 12.--Contimd 81 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total Coquetencies 11 R 11 N 11 11 Mean x 1 K x K K 8.0. Cooperative Achinistration Cluster know how to unege the 27 18 8 5 9 2.27 cooperative in a participative 40.3 26.9 11.9 7.5 13.4 1.41 and duocratic structure Know how to minister the 24 15 11 11 5 2.36 cooperative as a business and 36.4 22.7 16.7 16.7 7.6 1.33 social operation Know how to identify 7 15 23 10 11 3.05 alternatives in solving problems 10.6 22.7 34.8 15.2 16.7 1.22 Know how to assure that the 13 10 8 15 20 3.29 bylaws and regulations of the 19.7 15.2 12.1 32.7 30.3 1.53 association are observed by esters and emloyees Know how to formlate policies 4 13 16 19 13 3.37 consistent with the objectives 6.2 20.0 24.6 29.2 20.0 1.19 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster Ilave initiative and decision 44 12 2 2 1.58 asking abilities 66.7 18.2 9.1 3.0 3.0 0.99 Be aware of his authority and 19 24 7 9 8 2.45 responsibilities in legal and 28.4 35.8 10.4 13.4 11.9 1.35 social setters Know how to wake decisions 9 14 20 12 11 3.03 under conditions of risk 13.6 21.2 30.3 18.2 16.7 1.28 Know how to withstand pressure 8 10 18 18 11 3.22 and rain sale in crisis 12.3 15.4 27.7 27.7 16.9 1.26 situations Know how to deal with conflict 2 8 11 18 28 3.93 directly and tactfully 3.0 11.9 16.4 26.9 41.8 1.16 Tflle 12.--Cmt1mnd 82 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total Certencies I N I R I ll Mean 2 K 2 X K K 8.0. lit-an Resource Manage-mt Cluster Know how to delegate authority 39 16 7 2 2 1.67 appropriately 59.1 24.2 10.6 3.0 3.0 1.00 Know how to tnderstand and 25 25 11 3 3 2.01 respond to sewers' and 37.3 37.3 16.4 4.5 4.5 1.07 emloyeee' needs within the lieits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 8 13 17 12 16 3.23 perfornnce of mloyees and 12.1 19.7 25.8 18.2 24.2 1.35 the cooperative as a mole Know how to coordinate people, 1 2 9 21 14 19 3.55 activities and facilities 1.5 3.0 13.6 31.8 21.2 28.8 1.22 Know how to ensure eaployees' 1 2 5 12 29 17 3.77 good perfornnce 1.5 3 7.6 18.2 43.9 25.8 1.11 Mrship Relations Cluster Assure that the wars are the 41 10 10 4 2 .75 main goal of the organization 61.2 14.9 14.9 6.0 3.0 1.11 Keep open chamel of 16 17 11 12 11 2.78 cmicetion along directors, 23.9 25.4 16.4 17.9 16.4 1.42 sewers and amloyees Instill in mars their 13 17 16 11 10 2.82 responsibility for asking the 19.4 25.4 23.9 16.4 14.9 1.34 cooperative successful Motivate were to participate 8 17 11 16 14 3.17 in cooperatve issues 12.1 25.8 16.7 24.2 21.2 1.35 Keep “era infer-ed about 10 14 17 22 3.72 policies and operating practices 3.1 15.4 21.5 26.2 33.8 1.18 Table 12.--Contimed 8_3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total Certencies 11 I I I I ll Keen Vision Cluster Know how to guide 01rectors, 16 20 12 12- 2.58 esters and ewloyees 24.2 30.3 18.2 18.2 9.1 1.29 in a clear and cowlete way Keep tab-to-date with the 1 13 19 13 12 8 2.70 ecortoflc and social cooperative 1.5 19.7 28.8 19.7 18.2 12.1 1.35 systu Display a progressive attitude 17 15 14 10 11 2.75 for the developent and 25.4 22.4 20.9 14.9 16.4 1.42 experision of the cooperative Promote the edacationel 12 11 15 15 13 3.09 developent of teoyees and 18.2 16.7 22.7 22.7 19.7 1.39 asters Act as a nodal influenciru 19 7 9 11 20 3.09 positive behaviors of swloyees 28.8 10.6 13.6 16.7 30.3 1.63 and esters Cmication Cluster Know how to instill 22 16 13 7 8 2.44 trust 33.3 24.2 19.7 10.6 12.1 1.37 Know how to deal with people 21 13 14 14 5 2.54 31.3 19.4 20.9 20.9 7.5 1.33 Know how to listen critically 18 18 8 16 7 2.64 26.9 26.9 11.9 23.9 10.4 1.38 Know how to micate clearly 14 12 18 16 2.82 21.2 18.2 27.3 24.2 9.1 1.28 Know how to direct meetings 10 6 10 7 34 3.73 14.9 9.0 14.9 10.4 50.7 1.52 Table 12.--Continued 84 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total Coepetencies N N R I R N Keen K K K K 2 K 8.0. Leadership Cluster Be honest, of good character 40 13 6 4 4 1.79 and good reputation 59.7 19.4 9.0 6.0 6.0 1.20 have leadership abilities 25 18 12 12 2.16 37.3 26.9 17.9 17.9 1.12 Have cos-on sense 14 14 16 13 10 2.87 20.9 20.9 23.9 19.4 14.9 1.36 Have a high capacity to work 6 15 20 16 10 3.13 9.0 22.4 29.9 23.9 14.9 1.19 Know how to influence 6 3 8 15 35 4.04 9.0 4.5 11.9 22.4 52.2 1.28 ..: 07.14! .-n era‘s-4....-- 85 According to Table 12, in the Foundation of Cooperatives cluster, the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Know and apply the cooperative philosophy" (priority # 2, S.D.= 1.09), and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement, was "Know how to defend cooperative interests before governmental institutions" (priority # 5, S.D.= 1.42). In the Overall Knowledge cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Have knowledge about the cooperative administrative, financial and operational structure" (priority # 1, S.D.= 1.02), and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement was "Have knowledge about agriculture" (priority # 3 , S.D.= 1.48). In the Cooperative Administration cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative" (priority # 5, S.D.= 1.19), and the competency with the most variation/least agreement was "Know how to assure that the bylaws and regulations of the association are observed by members and employees" (priority # 4, S.D.= 1.53). In the Decision Making cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Have initiative and decision making abilities" (priority # 1, S.D. 0.99), and the competency with the most variation/least agreement 86 was "Be aware of his authority and responsibilities in legal and social matters" (priority # 2, S.D. 1.35). In the Human Resources cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Know how to delegate authority appropriately" (priority # 1, S.D. 1.00) and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement was "Know how to evaluate performance of employees and the cooperative as a whole" (priority # 3, S.D. 1.35). In the Membership Relations cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Assure that the members are the main goal of the organization" (priority # 1, S.D.1.11), and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement was "Keep channels of communication open among directors, members, and employees" (priority # 2, S.D. 1.42). In the Vision cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Know how to guide directors, employees, and members in a clear and complete way" (priority # 1, S.D. 1.29), and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement was "Act as a model influencing positive behavior of employees and members" (priority # 5, S.D. 1.63). In the Communication cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Know how to communicate clearly" (priority # 4, 8.0. 1.28) and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement 87 was "Know how to direct meetings" (priority # 5, S.D. 1.52). In the Leadership cluster the competency ranked with the least variation/most agreement was "Have leadership abilities" (priority # 2, S.D. 1.12), and the competency ranked with the most variation/least agreement was " Have common sense" (priority # 3, S.D. 1.36). These data indicate that in 78 percent of the cases (seven of nine) the competencies that had the most agreement were the competencies ranked as first or second priority, and in 78 percent of the cases (seven of nine) the competencies having the least agreement were the competencies ranked as third, fourth, or fifth priority. PERCEPTIONS ON PRIORITY RANKING COMPETENCIES WITHIN EACH OF THE NINE CLUSTERS BY COOPERATIVES' ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Cooperatives' Commodity Table 13 displays the results of the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test on individual competencies for the nine clusters based on six cooperatives of different commodities. This table indicates the mean and standard deviation for each competency by cluster in each commodity group, the number of respondents, the F probability, and significant difference at the 0.05 level. I All competency statements, except for one competency in the Membership Relations cluster ("Instill in members their responsibility for making the cooperative successful"), 88 Table 13.--AMOVA test analysis of respondents' perception of priority ranking cometsncies within each of the nine clusters by cooperatives' co-aodities Why 61 02 G3 04 85 86 F Cometencies Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean II Proba- S.0. 8.0. 8.0. S.D. S.D. S.D. bility Fomdation of Cooperatives Cluster Mave cooperative 1.6000 1.6667 1.9231 2.0769 1.2500 1.8750 67 0.5845 spirit 0.6992 1.1547 1.4979 1.3205 0.4523 1.3601 know and apply the 2.1000 2.0000 2.6154 2.4615 2.0833 2.6667 66 0.6238 cooperative utilosophy 1.1005 1.0000 1.1929 1.0500 0.9003 1.2344 Ilave knowledge about cooperative 3.5000 3.0000 3.2308 3.0769 3.2000 3.2143 63 0.9822 way of doing business 1.1785 1.0000 1.3009 1.4979 1.4757 1.1217 Ilave knowledge about current 3.7000 4.3333 3.5385 3.0000 2.7000 3.4286 63 0.2395 cooperative legislation 1.0593 0.5774 0.9674 1.1547 1.4181 1.5046 Know how to defend cooperative 4.1000 4.0000 3.6923 4.1538 3.4545 2.9286 64 0.2461 interests before govermental 1.2867 1.7321 1.4936 1.1435 1.3685 1.5424 institutions Overall Knowledge Cluster Ilave knowledge about the coop. 1.8000 1.3333 2.0769 1.9231 2.1818 2.1250 66 0.8057 achinistrative, financial and 0.6325 0.5774 1.0377 1.3205 1.0787 1.0247 operational structure Ilave knowledge about the social 2.1000 2.3333 2.0000 2.1538 1.6667 2.5625 67 0.4687 mic, and political 1.2867 1.5275 1.1547 1.0682 0.7785 1.2093 envirorlent in which the cooperative operates Have knowledge about 3.2000 3.3333 3.1538 3.4615 3.0909 2.7500 66 0.8872 agriculture 1.3984 0.5774 1.5730 1.4500 1.3751 1.7701 have experience in other 4.0000 3.0000 3.3077 3.3846 3.0000 3.6875 66 0.5987 mags-lent positions 1.0541 1.0000 1.3775 1.3868 4.4142 1.5798 Ileve knowledge about 3.9000 4.0000 4.0769 3.2308 3.2000 3.5000 65 0.3926 aarketing channels 1.1972 1.7321 1.0377 1.3009 1.5492 0.9661 Table 13.--Contirued 3.9 Conodity 01 02 03 G4 65 06 F Copetencies Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean ll PRm. $00. 80°. $00. $00. 8.0. $00. Cooperative ministration Cluster know how to mge the 2.5000 2.6667 2.2308 2.3846 1.8333 2.3125 67 0.8896 cooperative in a participative 1.4337 2.0817 1.4806 1.5021 1.3371 1.3525 and deeocratic structure Know how to achinister the 2.5000 3.3333 3.0769 2.2308 1.6364 2.1250 66 0.0892 cooperative as a business and 1.6499 1.1547 1.4412 1.1658 0.8090 1.2583 social operation Know how to identify 3.0000 2.3333 2.7692 3.6154 2.6364 3.2500 66 0.2889 alternatives in solving problem 1.3333 0.5774 1.0919 1.3253 1.4334 1.0000 Know how to assure that the 3.6000 3.0000 3.6923 3.0000 3.1818 3.1250 66 0.8419 bylaws and regulations of the 1.3499 2.0000 1.4936 1.4720 1.6624 1.6683 association are observed by esters and emloyees Know how to fomlate policies 3.4000 2.3333 3.2308 3.4615 3.4000 3.5625 65 0.7230 consistent with the objectives 1.2649 1.1547 1.3634 1.1266 0.9661 1.2633 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster Rave initiative and decision 1.7000 1.0000 1.7692 1.5385 1.4545 1.5625 66 0.8802 nking abilities 1.0593 0.0000 1.1658 1.1266 1.0357 0.8139 Be aware of his authority and 2.5000 3.0000 2.6154 2.3846 2.0000 2.5625 67 0.8358 responsibilities in legal and 1.3540 1.7321 1.4456 1.2609 1.1282 1.5478 social utters Know how to nke decisions 3.3000 4.0000 2.8462 3.1538 2.6364 3.0000 66 0.6191 under conditions of risk 1.4944 1.0000 1.4051 0.8987 1.3618 1.3166 Know how to withstand pressure 3.2000 3.3333 3.8462 3.2308 2.8000 2.9375 65 0.4028 and min caln in crisis 0.9189 1.5275 0.8987 1.4806 1.7512 1.0626 situations Know how to deal with conflict 4.3000 3.6667 3.9231 4.0769 3.0833 4.2500 67 0.1026 directly and tactfully 0.9487 0.5774 1.0377 1.1875 1.4434 1.0000 Table 13.-~Continued 99 Co-odity 81 02 G3 64 85 06 F Cometencies Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean 11 PROS. 8.0. 8.0. 8.0. 8.0. 8.0. 8.0. 111.1 Resource Management Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.7000 1.0000 2.0769 1.4615 1.3636 1.8125 66 0.3700 appropriately 1.2517 0.0000 1.3205 0.6602 0.6742 0.9811 Know how to understand and 2.1000 3.0000 2.0000 1.9231 2.0000 1.8750 67 0.7139 respond to meters' and 0.9944 1.7321 1.2910 0.9541 0.7385 1.1475 emloyees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.6000 3.0000 3.3077 3.6154 2.8182 2.9375 66 0.6014 performance of eaployees and 1.5055 0.0000 0.9473 1.7097 1.7215 0.9979 the cooperative as a mole Know how to coordinate people, 3.5000 3.0000 3.3077 3.4615 3.2727 4.1250 66 0.3826 activities and facilities 0.9718 1.0000 1.7505 0.8771 1.1909 1.0878 Know how to ensure Qloyees' 4.1000 4.0000 3.6154 3.9231 3.5455 3.6875 66 0.8515 good performance 0.7379 1.0000 1.3868 0.8623 1.2136 1.2500 Mefiership Relations Cluster Assure that the masters are the 1.4000 2.3333 2.0000 1.7692 1.7500 1.6250 67 0.7585 min goal of the organization 0.6992 1.5275 1.2910 1.1658 0.8660 1.2583 Keep open channel of 3.3000 1.3333 2.6154 3.0000 2.7500 2.6875 67 0.4263 cmiatim among directors, 1.3375 0.5774 1.5566 1.5811 1.4848 1.2500 medaers and eaployees Instill in mowers their 3.0000 3.0000 3.2308 3.0000 1.5833 3.1250 67 0.0193 responsibility for making the 1.3333 0.0000 1.3009 1.3540 0.7930 1.4083 cooperative successful Motivate meters to participate 3.3000 3.3333 3.0769 3.0769 3.2727 3.1250 66 0.9972 in cooperatve issues 1.3375 1.1547 1.1875 1.2558 1.6181 1.5864 Keep mesbers informed about 4.0000 5.0000 4.0769 3.6923 3.2000 3.3750 65 0.1201 policies and operating practices 1.0541 0.0000 1.0377 1.1094 1.3984 1.2042 Table 13.--Continued Commodity 01 82 G3 G4 05 06 F Competencies Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean M PROS. S.D. S.D. 8.0. 8.0. S.D. S.D. Vision Cluster Know how to guide directors, 2.7000 2.3333 2.6923 2.7692 2.1818 2.5625 66 0.9064 employees and members 1.4944 1.5275 1.4367 1.4806 0.9816 1.1529 in a clear and complete way Keep up-to-date with the 2.2000 3.0000 2.6923 3.0000 2.4545 2.8750 66 0.7440 economic and social cooperative 1.2293 1.0000 1.4936 1.5275 1.4397 1.2042 system Display a progressive attitude 3.2000 4.3333 2.8462 2.3846 2.6667 2.4375 67 0.2635 for the development and 0.6325 1.1547 1.4051 1.4456 1.6697 1.5042 expansion of the cooperative Promote the educational 3.1000 3.0000 3.4615 3.0000 2.6364 3.1875 66 0.8259 development of employees and 1.6633 1.0000 1.4500 1.4142 1.2863 1.3769 members Act as a model influencing 3.8000 2.3333 2.9231 3.1538 2.7273 3.1250 66 0.6782 positive behaviors of employees 1.6193 2.3094 1.5525 1.5191 1.6181 1.7842 and members Communication Cluster Know how to instill 2.9000 2.3333 2.6154 2.4615 2.0000 2.3125 66 0.7706 trust 1.5239 2.3094 1.6602 1.1983 1.1832 1.1955 Know how to deal with people 2.8000 2.0000 2.3077 2.4615 2.1667 3.0000 67 0.5367 1.3166 1.0000 1.1094 1.5064 1.4668 1.3166 Know how to listen critically 2.7000 3.6667 3.0000 2.6923 2.2500 2.3750 67 0.5425 1.6364 1.5275 1.4142 1.4936 0.9653 1.3601 Know how to communicate clearly 2.6000 3.3333 3.0769 2.8462 2.2727 3.0000 66 0.6143 1.2649 1.1547 1.0377 1.2810 1.3484 1.4606 Know how to direct meetings 4.0000 3.6667 4.0000 3.7692 3.7500 3.3125 67 0.8676 1.1547 1.1547 1.4142 1.6408 1.6026 1.8154 Table 13.--Continued 92 Commodity G1 02 G3 G4 05 86 F Competencies Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean A PROB. S.D. S.D. S.D. 8.0. 8.0. 8.0. Leadership Cluster Be honest, of good character 1.7000 1.3333 1.6154 1.6923 2.0000 2.0000 67 0.8965 and good reputation 0.8233 0.5774 1.1929 1.1094 1.2792 1.5492 1.2843 have leadership abilities 2.2000 2.0000 2.8462 2.0769 1.6667 2.0625 67 0.1881 0.9189 1.0000 1.2810 1.1875 0.9847 1.0626 Have common sense 2.9000 4.0000 3.0769 3.1538 2.0000 2.8750 67 0.1599 1.5239 1.0000 1.2558 1.3445 1.2060 1.3601 Have a high capacity to work 3.5000 3.0000 3.0000 3.3077 2.6667 3.2500 67 0.6506 0.8498 1.0000 0.8165 1.3156 1.4355 1.3904 Know how to influence 4.7000 4.6667 4.4615 4.0000 3.5833 3.5625 67 0.1257 0.6749 0.5774 1.0500 1.2247 1.5050 1.5042 Note: 018 Sugar Cane; 82- "Other"; 83: Coffee; 04- 0airy; 858 Crops/Livestock; 66: Mixed * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95% confidence interval 93 showed a high degree of agreement among the respondents from all six cooperative commodity groups with respect to priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents. Respondents from Crops/Livestock cooperatives placed higher priority on the above competency with a computed mean score of 1.5833. Each of the other five commodity groups had mean scores within the range of 3.000 to 3.2308. Cooperatives' Number of Employees For tabulation purposes, it was decided to combine the four categories of cooperatives"number of employees into two: cooperatives with 100 employees or less, and those with more than 100 employees. Table 14 displays the results of a t-Test analysis comparing responses of administrators from cooperatives with 100 or less employees and cooperatives with more than 100 employees. The table presents information about the mean, standard deviation, number of respondents, 2 tail probability, and significant differences at the 0.05 level for each competency according to the perceptions of the respondents in each of the two groups. The only competency that indicated a statistically significant difference between cooperatives with 100 or less employees and those with more than 100 employees was the statement, "Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative" in the Cooperative 94 Table 14.--t-Test analysis of respondents' perception of priority ranking cometencies within each of the nine clusters by cooperatives' "dyer of emloyees Employees 100 or less More than 100 Cowetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M 8.0. M Probability Fomdetion of Cooperatives Cluster Mave cooperative 1.7838 37 1.7586 0.932 spirit 1.2280 1.1230 know and apply the 2.2500 36 2.5862 0.224 cooperative philosophy 1.1050 1.0860 Have knowledge about cooperative 3.3333 33 3.0690 0.418 way of doing business 1.0800 1.4620 Have knowledge about current 3.2121 33 3.4828 0.401 cooperative legislation 1.2190 1.2990 Know how to defend cooperative 3.7353 34 3.5172 0.547 interests before governental 1.5240 1.2990 intitution Overall Knowledge Cluster Rave knowledge about the coop. 2.0278 36 1.9655 0.811 aninistrative, financial and 1.0280 1.0520 ' operational structure have knowledge about the social 2.2973 37 1.9655 0.238 economic, and political 1.2660 0.9060 environent in which the cooperative operates have knowledge about 2.9167 36 3.3448 0.253 egri culture 1.5560 1.3960 Mave experience in other 3.5833 36 3.2414 0.321 nnegement positions 1.3170 1.4310 have knowledge about 3.6000 35 3.6207 0.947 nrketing chamals 1.1930 1.2930 95 Table 14.--Continued Esployees 100 or less More than 100 Conetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. ii 8.0. I Probability Cooperative Adainistration Cluster know how to manage the 2.1892 37 2.4138 0.525 cooperative in e participative 1.4310 1.4020 and dnocratic structure Know how to achinister the 2.5000 36 2.2069 0.385 cooperative as a business and 1.2980 1.3980 social operation Know how to identify 3.2222 36 2.8276 0.201 alterntives in solving problems 1.2220 1.2270 Know how to assure that the 2.9444 36 3.6552 0.061 bylaws and regulations of the 1.4720 1.5180 association are observed by median and eaployees Know how to formilate policies 3.6286 35 3.0345 0.048 * consistent with the objectives 1.1900 1.1490 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster llave initiative and decision 1.6111 36 1.5517 0.814 making abilities 1.0220 0.9850 Be aware of his authority and 2.4865 37 2.4138 0.831 responsibilities in legal and 1.3460 1.4020 social matters Know how to make decision 3.1389 36 2.8276 0.327 wider condition of risk 1.3550 1.1360 Know how to withstand pressure 3.0571 35 3.3793 0.313 and remain calm in crisis 1.2350 1.2930 situations Know how to deal with conflict 3.9730 37 3.8966 0.793 directly and tactfully 1.0400 1.3190 96 Tfile 14.--Continuad Ewloyees 100 or less More than 100 Conetanciss Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M S.D. M Probability lit-n Resource Management Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.7778 36 1.5517 0.370 amropriataly 1.0170 0.9850 Know how to mderstand and 1.8919 37 2.1724 0.296 respond to mrs' and 1.0480 1.1040 wloyees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.1944 36 3.2414 0.891 performance of emloyees and 1.2830 1.4550 the cooperative as a ahole Know how to coordinte people, 3.5556 36 3.5517 0.990 activities and facilities 1.2520 1.2130 Know how to enurs amloyees' 3.8056 36 3.6897 0.677 good perfornnce 1.1910 1.0040 MMip Relations Cluster Assure that the medasrs are the 1.6216 37 1.8621 0.384 main goal of the organization 1.0370 1.1870 Keep open chamsl of 2.9730 37 2.5517 0.238 mication nong directors, 1.3640 1.5020 mowers, and teoyees Intill in mensrs their 2.9730 37 2.6897 0.394 responsibility for making the 1.3640 1.2850 cooperative successful Motivate meters to participate 3.0278 36 3.3103 0.409 in coopsretve issues 1.4640 1.2280 Keep meters informed about 3.6000 35 3.8276 0.446 policies and operating practices 1.1930 1.1670 Table 14.--Continuad 9.7 Emloyees 100 or less More than 100 Wtencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. 11 8.0. 11 Probability Vision Cluster Know how to guide Directors, 2.7222 36 2.4138 29 0.345 emloyees, and medaers 1.3860 1.1810 in a clear and couplets way Keep m-to-date with the 2.6389 36 2.7586 29 0.727 economic and social cooperative 1.4170 1.3000 system Display a progressive attitude 2.5405 37 2.9310 29 0.264 for the developsnt and 1.3660 1.4380 expansion of the cooperative Promote the athcational 3.1111 36 3.1379 29 0.938 developsnt of employees and 1.2600 1.5290 mowers Act as a model influencing 3.2222 36 2.8966 29 0.431 positive behaviors of smloyses 1.5880 1.7180 and esters Cmiatim Cluster Know how to intill 2.4167 36 2.3793 29 0.912 trust 1.3170 1.3990 Know how to deal with people 2.5946 37 2.5172 29 0.816 1.4040 1.2430 Know how to listen critically 2.5676 37 2.7586 29 0.582 1.3650 1.4310 Know how to micate clearly 2.8056 36 2.8276 29 0.946 1.2830 1.3110 Know how to direct meetings 3.8108 37 3.6207 29 0.621 1.4880 1.6130 98 Table 14.--Continued Employees 100 or less More than 100 Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. R 8.0. M Probability Leadership Cluster Be honest, of good character 1.8649 37 1.7241 0.641 and good reputation 1.1100 1.3340 Mave leadership abilities 2.1622 37 2.1379 0.932 1.2360 0.9900 have conon sense 2.9189 37 2.7586 0.639 1.4020 1.3270 Have a high capacity to work 3.1081 37 3.2069 0.741 1.1000 1.3200 Know how to influence 4.0270' 37 4.0345 0.982 1.3840 1.1800 * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95% confidence interval 99 Administration cluster. The mean score of cooperatives with 100 or less employees for this competency was 3.6286, and for cooperatives with more than 100 employees the mean was 3.0345. All other competencies indicated no significant differences at the 0.05 level on the way cooperative administrators of different organizations' personnel size prioritize each competency. Coppepatives' Memberahip For the purpose of statistical analysis, it was decided to combine membership into two groups: 750 members or less and those with more than 750 members. Table 15 displays the results of a T-test analysis comparing responses of administrators of those two groups. There was a significant difference at the 0.05 level between the two groups regarding their perception of priority ranking the competency, "Know how to administer the cooperative as a business and social operation" in the Cooperative Administration cluster. Cooperatives with 750 members or more placed higher priority (2.0556) on this competency than cooperatives with less than 750 members (2.7586). Data from the t-Test analysis for the competency "Know how to make decisions under condition of risk" in the Decision Making cluster, indicated that the mean score of respondents of cooperatives with 750 members or more 100 Table 15.--t-Test analysis of respondents' perception of priority ranking cometsncies within each of the nine clusters by cooperatives' medasrship Mesbsrs 750 or less more than 750 Cometencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M 8.0. 11 Probability Fouxiation of Cooperatives Cluster Mave cooperative 1.8667 30 1.6944 36 0.5570 spirit 1.3830 0.9800 know and apply the 2.5172 29 2.3056 36 0.4450 cooperative philoswhy 1.0560 1.1420 have knowledge about cooperative 3.2593 27 3.1714 35 0.7900 way of doing business 1.1630 1.3610 Mevs knowledge about current 3.2222 27 3.4286 35 0.5250 cooperative legislation 1.2190 1.2900 Know how to defend cooperative 3.6071 28 3.6571 35 0.8910 interests before governsntal 1.5710 1.3050 intitutions Overall Knowledge Cluster .1 Have knowledge about the coop. 2.1014 29 1.9167 36 0.4720 aninistrative, financial and 1.1130 0.9670 operational structure have knowledge about the social 2.1000 30 2.1944 36 0.7370 economic, and political 1.1250 1.1420 erwirmt in tatich the cooperative operates Mave knowledge about 2.9667 30 3.2286 35 0.4840 agriculture 1.4020 1.5730 have experience in other 3.5333 30 3.3429 35 0.5800 nnagnent positions 1.3830 1.3710 Mave knowledge about 3.9310 29 3.3429 35 0.0560 marketing chamsls 1.0330 1.3270 1.01 Table 15.--Continued Members 750 or less more than 750 Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M 8.0. M Probability Cooperative Administration Cluster know how to manage the 2.1333 30 2.4167 36 0.4210 cooperative in a participative 1.4080 1.4220 and democratic structure Know how to aninister the 2.7586 29 2.0556 36 0.0350 * cooperative as a business and 1.3000 1.3080 social operation Know how to identify 3.2333 30 2.8857 35 0.2590 alternatives in solving problems 1.1940 1.2550 Know how to assure that the 2.9333 30 3.5429 35 0.1080 bylaws and regulations of the 1.5070 1.5020 association are observed by members and employees Know how to formulate policies 3.5172 29 3.2286 35 0.3420 consistent with the objectives 1.2990 1.1140 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster Have initiative and decision 1.5333 30 1.6286 35 0.7050 making abilities 1.0420 0.9730 Be aware of his authority and 2.6000 30 2.3333 36 0.4320 responsibilities in legal and 1.3290 1.3940 social matters Know how to make decisions 3.3793 29 2.6944 36 0.0290 * under conditions of risk 1.1780 1.2610 Know how to withstand pressure 3.1379 29 3.2571 35 0.7100 and remain calm in crisis 1.2740 1.2680 situations Know how to deal with conflict 3.9000 30 3.9722 36 0.8040 directly and tactfully 1.0940 1.2300 1 0.2 Ttle 15.--Continued Meters 750 or less more than 750 Castanies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M 8.0. M Probability Ill-en Resource Management Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.7931 29 1.5833 36 0.4060 amroprietely 1.0480 0.9670 Know how to uiderstand and 2.0000 30 2.0278 36 0.9180 respond to meters' and 1.1140 1.0550 “loyees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.0000 30 3.4000 35 0.2370 perfornnce of mployees and 1.3650 1.3330 the cooperative as a tole Know how to coordinte people, 3.8621 29 3.3056 36 0.0680 activities and facilities 1.0930 1.2830 Know how to enurs esployees' 3.9333 30 3.6000 35 0.2280 good perfornnce 0.8680 1.2650 Metership Relations Cluster Assure that the meters are the , 1.6000 30 1.8333 36 0.3960 main goal of the organization 0.9320 1.2310 Keep open chamel of 2.7333 30 2.- 36 0.7800 cmiutim maong directors, 1.1413 1.4640 meters and etloyees Intill in meters their 3.1333 30 2.6111 36 0.1120 responsibility for making the 1.320 1.2930 cooperative successful Motivate meters to participate 3.1667 30 3.1429 35 0.9450 in cooperatve issues 1.4400 1.3090 Keep tters informed about 3.7586 29 3.6571 35 0.7340 policies and operating practices 1.0910 1.2590 103 Table 15.--Continued Mtrs 750 or less more than 750 Cotetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M S.D. M Probability Vision Cluster Know how to guide Directors, 2.“ 30 2.8857 35 0.0420 * meters and wloyees 1.2230 1.3010 in a clear and cutlete way Keep tp-to-dete with the 2.9655 29 2.4722 36 0.1470 economic and social cooperative 1.4760 1.2300 system Display a progressive attitude 2.6667 30 2.7500 36 0.8120 for the developent and 1.2950 1.5000 expansion of the cooperative Promote the educational 3.3333 30 2.9429 35 0.2570 developaent of euployees and 1.1840 1.5140 meters Act as a model influencing 3.3000 30 2.8857 35 0.3140 positive behaviors of qloyees 1.6220 1.6590 and nters Connication Cluster Know how to instill 2.7000 30 2.1429 35 0.0960 trust 1.2360 1.3960 Know how to deal with people 2.4000 30 2.6944 36 0.3730 1.3800 1.2830 Know how to listen critically 2.5333 30 2.7500 36 0.5320 1.3830 1.4020 Know how to catnicate clearly 2.8667 30 2.7714 35 0.7690 1.2520 1.3300 Know how to direct meetings 3.9667 30 3.5278 36 0.2500 1.4740 1.5760 Table 15.--Continued you Menbers 750 or less more than 750 Coapatencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M 8.0. Probability Leadership Cluster Be honest, of good character 1.6667 30 1.9167 0.4060 and good reputation 0.9220 1.4020 Have leadership abilities 2.1333 30 2.1667 0.9060 1.1060 1.1590 Have con-on sense 2.8000 30 2.8889 0.7940 ' 1.3490 1.3890 Have a high capacity to work 3.4333 30 2.9167 0.0800 1.1040 1.2280 Know how to influence 4.3000 30 3.8056 0.1210 1.1490 1.3690 * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95% confidence interval 105 (2.6944) was significantly lower than that of cooperatives with less than 750 members (3.3793). Respondents from organizations with larger membership placed higher priority. on this competency than respondents from smaller organizations. Data from the t-Test analysis for the competency, "Know how to guide directors, employees, and members in a clear and complete way" in the Vision cluster, showed that respondents from cooperatives with less than 750 members priority ranked this competency higher (2.2333) than cooperatives with 750 or more members (2.8857). There were no significant differences at the 0.05 level on the way administrators from different sized cooperatives priority ranked other competencies. PERCEPTIONS ON PRIORITY RANKING COMPETENCIES WITHIN EACH OF THE NINE CLUSTERS BY COOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATOR' PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS Administrator's Level of gonggling For analysis purposes, educational level was combined into just two groups of respondents: those with less than a university degree and respondents with a university degree. Upon conducting the t-Test analysis for the competencies within each of the nine clusters, the results showed there were significant differences in the perceptions of priority ranking some of the competencies; these are presented in Table 16 1'06 Table 16.--t-Test analysis of respondents' perception of priority ranking cotetencies by tinistrators' level of schooling Less than 0.0. 0.0. 2 Tail Cotetencies Mean Mean Probability 8.0. M 8.0. II Fomdation of Cooperatives Cluster Have cooperative 1.7407 27 1.6757 37 0.819 spirit 1.1960 1.0560 know and apply the 2.6154 26 2.2432 37 0.183 cooperative philosoth 1.3290 0.8630 Have knowledge about the cooperative 3.0833 24 3.2778 36 0.571 way of doing busineu 1.2830 1.3010 Have knowledge about current 3.3750 24 3.3889 36 0.967 cooperative legislation 1.3130 1.2250 Know how to defend cooperative 3.3600 25 3.8611 36 0.168 interests before govermental 1.4690 1.3130 institutions Overall Knowledge Cluster have knowledge about the coop. 2.1538 26 1.8919 37 0.332 tinistrative, financial and 1.0840 1.0220 operational structure Have knowledge about the social 2.3333 27 2.0811 37 0.380 economic, and political 1.1770 1.0900 envirotmnt in which the cooperative operates Have knowledge about 2.6667 27 3.4167 36 0.050 * agriculture 1.5190 1.4420 Have experience in other 3.8148 27 3.0833 36 0.035 * merlagement positions 1.2410 1.4020 Mave knowledge about 3.5385 26 3.6389 36 0.755 trketing chamels 1.1400 1.3130 107 Table 16.--Continuod Less than 0.0. 0.0. 2 Tail Cotetenci es Mean Mean Probabi l i ty 5.0. M 5.0. M Cooperative Adinistration Cluster know how to nnage the 2.5185 27 2.1351 37 cooperative in a participative 1.5030 1.3570 0.290 and dtocratic structure Know how to athinister the 2.1538 26 2.4865 37 cooperative as a business and 1.1560 1.4650 0.338 social operation Know how to identify 3.0741 27 3.0000 36 alternatives in solving problems 1.2690 1.1950 0.813 Know how to assure that the 3.0370 27 3.4722 36 bylaws and regulations of the 1.4270 1.5760 0.263 association are observed by “era and etloyees Know how to fortlate policies 3.7308 26 3.0556 36 consistent with the objectives 1.2510 1.0940 0.028 * of the cooperative Decision Making Clmter Have initiative and decision 1.4074 27 1.6667 36 tking abilities 0.7970 1.1210 0.311 Be aware of his authority and 2.7037 27 2.3514 37 responsibilities in legal and 1.3820 1.3380 0.309 social matters Know how to make decisions 3.0385 26 2.9459 37 ll'dfl' conditions of risk 1.2160 1.2900 0.775 Know how to withstand pressure 2.8846 26 3.4167 36 and min calm in crisis 1.0710 1.3810 0.106 situtions Know how to deal with conflict 4.2222 27 3.7027 37 directly and tactfully 1.1210 0.080 1.1750 108 Ttle 16.-~Continuad Less than 0.0. 0.0. Cotetancies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M 8.0. 11 Probability littn Resource Managtent Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.6154 26 1.7027 37 appropriately 0.8040 1.1510 0.740 Know how to mderstand and 2.0000 27 2.0811 37 respond to meters' and 1.2090 0.9830 0.768 etloyees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.3333 27 3.1389 36 performance of atloyees and 1.3300 1.4170 0.582 the cooperative as a mole Know how to coordinate people, 3.5769 26 3.4595 37 activities and facilities 1.1370 1.2820 0.709 Know how to ensure etloyees' 3.8519 27 3.6667 36 good perfortnce 1.0270 1.1950 0.521 Mtrship Relations Cluster Assure that the stars are the 1.4815 27 1.9459 37 min goal of the organization 0.9350 1.2010 0.099 Keep open chamel of 2.9630 27 2.6486 37 cmiutim among directors, 1.4540 1.4570 0.397 meters and etloyees instill in meters their 3.2963 27 2.5135 37 responsibility for nking the 1.2950 1.2830 0.019 * cooperative successful Motivate meters to participate 3.1852 27 3.1111 36 in cooperatve issues 1.5200 1.2370 0.832 Keep “are informed about 3.3462 26 3.9167 36 policies and operating practices 1.0930 1.2040 0.061 Table 16.--Continued 109 Less than 0.0. 0.0. Cotetancies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. I 8.0. II Probability Vision Cluster Know how to guide Directors 2.8519 27 2.2778 36 qloyeas, and meters in 1.1990 1.2790 0.075 a clear and cotlete way Keep tp-to-date with the 2.3846 26 2.8919 37 economic and social cooperative 1.3880 1.3290 0.148 system Display a progressive attitude 2.5556 27 2.8649 37 for the developent and 1.3960 1.4170 0.389 expansion of the cooperative Promote the ethicational 3.1111 27 3.0833 36 developent of atloyees and 1.4760 1.3170 0.938 meters Act as a model influencing 3.3704 27 2.9444 36 positive behaviors of etloyees 1.5230 1.7230 0.312 and meters Cotnication Cluster Know how to instill 2.6667 27 2.2500 36 trust 1.5930 1.1310 0.229 Know how to deal with people 2.8519 27 2.3243 37 1.4060 1.2480 0.119 Know how to listen critically 2.3333 27 2.8649 37 1.3300 1.4370 0.137 Know how to «unions clearly 2.7037 27 2.8056 36 1.1710 1.3480 0.755 Know how to direct meetings 3.7037 27 3.7838 37 1.5140 1.5300 0.836 Table 16.-~Continued HO Less than 0.0. 0.0. Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M S.D. M Probability Leadership Cluster Be honest, of good character 1.8519 27 1.8108 37 and good reputation 1.1670 1.2660 0.895 Have leadership abilities 2.1852 27 2.0811 37 1.2410 1.0380 0.717 Have common sense 2.9259 27 2.7568 37 1.2690 1.4220 0.625 Have a high capacity to work 3.1852 27 3.1351 37 1.2410 1.2060 0.872 Know how to influence 4.1111 27 3.9455 37 1.3110 1.3110 0.620 Mote: 0.0. a University Degree * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95% confidence interval in Statistical data showed that administrators without a university degree placed significantly higher priority (2.6667) on the competency, "Knowledge about Agriculture" in the Overall Knowledge cluster than administrators with more education (3.4167). Cooperative administrators with a university degree placed significantly higher priority (3.0833) on the competency, "Have experience in other management positions" in the Overall Knowledge cluster than cooperative administrators without a university degree (3.8148). 0n the competency, "Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative" in the Cooperative Administration cluster, the results showed that there was a significant difference between the groups. Administrators with a university degree priority ranked this competency higher (3.0556) than administrators with less than a university degree (3.7308). Administrators with a university degree placed a significantly higher priority (2.5135) on the competency, "Instill in members their responsibility for making the cooperative successful" than did administrators with less than a university degree (3.2963). There were no significant differences on the way cooperative administrators with different level of schooling perceived the importance of other competencies within the nine clusters. 112 WWW For statistical purposes the respondents' answers were combined into two groups of administrators, those with ten years of experience or less and those with more than ten years of experience. Results from the t-Test analysis comparing the perceptions of these two groups of cooperative administrators are presented in Table 17. The only competency that had significant difference at the 0.05 level between the groups was "Keep up-to-date with the economic and social cooperative system" in the Vision cluster. Administrators with more than ten years of experience placed significantly higher priority (2.3182) on this competency than administrators with less years of experience (3.4762). Administrator's Training Ezggzams Attended For statistical purposes, the responses were combined into two groups of administrators, those who had attended no training and those administrators who attended at least one training program. Table 18 shows that there was no significant difference at the 0.05 level between the perceptions of cooperative administrators who attended at least one training program and those who had not attended any. 113 Table 17.-~t-Tast analysis of respondents' perceptions of priority ranking cotetencies within each of the nine clusters by achinistrators'years of experience Experience 10 Years or less More than 10 Years Cotetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M 8.0. M Probability fotndation of Cooperatives Cluster Mave cooperative 1.7273 22 1.7955 44 0.8260 spirit 1.2410 1.1530 know and apply the 2.3636 22 2.4186 43 0.8510 cooperative philosophy 0.9530 1.1800 Have knowledge about cooperative 3.1500 20 3.2381 42 0.8010 way of doing business 1.2680 1.2840 Mave knowledge about current 3.4000 20 3.3095 42 0.7930 cooperative legislation 1.2730 1.2590 Know how to defend cooperative 3.8095 21 3.5476 42 0.4940 interests before govermental 1.4010 1.4350 institutions Overall Knowledge Clmter have knowledge about the coop. 1.9524 21 2.0227 44 0.7990 tinistrative, financial and 0.9730 1.0670 operational structure have knowledge about the social 2.0909 22 2.1818 44 0.7600 ecoriomic, and political 1.1090 1.1470 enviroment in finish the cooperative operates Mave knowledge about 3.0909 22 3.1163 43 0.9490 agriculture 1.5710 1.4670 Mave experience in other 3.5455 22 3.3721 43 0.6330 tnagement positions 1.2990 1.4150 have knowledge about 3.6667 21 3.5814 43 0.7970 nrketing channels 1.0650 1.3140 1111 Title 17.--Continuad Experience 10 Years or less More than 10 Years Cotetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M 8.0. M Probability Cooperative Achinistratim Cluster know how to nnege the 2.1818 22 2.3409 44 0.6690 cooperative in a participative 1.4020 1.4300 and democratic structure Know how to tinister the 2.333 21 2.3864 44 0.8830 cooperative as a business and 1.3170 1.3680 social operation Know how to identify 3.2273 22 2.9535 43 0.4000 alternatives in solving problems 1.2320 1.2340 Know how to assure that the 3.3636 22 3.2093 43 0.7020 bylaws and regulations of the 1.4970 1.5520 association are observed by meters and atloyees Know how to fortlate policies 3.4762 21 3.3023 43 0.5900 cormistent with the objectives 1.1670 1.2250 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster Mave initiative and decision 1.6818 22 1.5349 43 0.5790 .king abilities 1.1290 0.9350 Be aware of his authority and 2.8636 22 2.2500 44 0.0840 responsibilities in legal and 1.4900 1.2600 social utters Know how to tke decisions 3.4286 21 2.7955 44 0.0580 under conditions of risk 1.2480 1.2310 Know how to withstand pressure 2.9524 21 3.3256 43 0.2700 and retin calm in crisis 1.3960 1.1900 situations Know how to deal with conflict 3.5909 22 4.1136 44 0.0850 directly and tactfully 1.0980 1.1660 1,15 Ttls 17.--Continued Experience 10 Years or less More than 10 Years Cotstencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M 8.0. M Probability Minn Resource Management Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.6667 21 1.6818 44 0.9550 appropriately 0.8560 1.0730 Know how to mderstand and 2.1364 22 1.9545 44 0.5210 respond to mubers' and 1.2830 0.9630 toloyees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.0455 22 3.3023 43 0.4730 perfortnce of etloyees and 1.3970 1.3370 the cooperative as a whole Know how to coordinate people, 3.5714 21 3.5455 44 0.9370 activities and facilities 1.3630 1.1700 Know how to ensure atloyses' 3.6364 22 3.8140 43 0.5440 good perfortncs 1.2930 1.0060 Metership Relations Cluster Assure that the meters are the 1.9091 22 1.6364 44 0.3480 tin goal of the organization 1.1920 1.0590 Keep open chamel of 2.5909 22 2.8864 44 0.4330 mication tong directors, 1.4030 1.4500 mtsrs and etloyees instill in meters their 3.0000 22 2.7727 44 0.5160 responsibility for tking the 1.3090 1.3440 cooperative successful Motivate mtsrs to participate 3.1818 22 3.1395 43 0.9070 in cooperatve issua 1.4350 1.3380 Maintain meters informed about 3.8571 21 3.6279 43 0.4690 policies and operating practices 1.1530 1.1960 Table 17.--Continued 116 Experience 10 Years or less More than 10 Years Cotetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. M S.D. M Probtility Vision Cluster Know how to guide Directors, 2.3182 22 2.7209 43 0.2390 etloyses and meters 1.2870 1.2970 in a clear and couplets way Keep qrto-date with the 3.4762 21 2.3182 44 0.0010 * economic and social cooperative 1.2500 1.2520 system Display a progressive attitude 2.6364 22 2.7500 44 0.7590 for the development and 1.4650 1.3830 expansion of the cooperative Promote the sensational 3.0909 22 3.1395 43 0.8940 developent of atloyess and 1.3060 1.4240 meters Act as a model influencing 3.0909 22 3.0698 43 0.9610 positive behaviors of etloyees 1.6010 1.6820 and meters Connication Cluster Know how to instill 2.6364 22 2.2791 43 0.3140 trust 1.2930 1.3680 Know how to deal with people 2.6364 22 2.5227 44 0.7460 1.1770 1.4060 Know how to listen critically 2.5909 22 2.6818 44 0.8040 1.5630 1.3080 Know how to cotnicate clearly 2.5455 22 2.9535 43 0.2290 1.2620 1.2900 Know how to direct meetings 4.1364 22 3.5227 44 0.1270 1.3560 1.5920 117 Table 17.--Continued Experience 10 Years or less More than 10 Years Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M S.D. M Probability Leadership Cluster 8e honest, of good character and good reputation Have leadership abilities Have common sense Have a high capacity to work Know how to influence 1.9091 1.3060 2.3182 1.1710 2.9545 1.3970 3.2273 1.1520 4.1364 1.2070 22 22 22 22 22 2.7955 1.3570 3.1136 1.2240 3.9773 1.3380 0.6170 0.4000 0.6580 0.7180 0.6400 * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95% confidence interval 118 Table 18.-~t-Test analysis of respondents' perceptions of priority ranking competencies within each of the nine clusters by administrators' number oi training pregame attended Training Attended None One or More Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail 8.0. N S.D. N Probability Foundation of Cooperatives Cluster Have cooperative 1.7353 34 1.8387 31 0.727 spirit 1.2860 1.0680 know and apply the 2.5000 34 2.2903 31 0.448 cooperative philosophy 1.1350 1.0710 Have knowledge about cooperative 3.4242 33 2.9655 29 0.157 way of doing business 1.2750 1.2390 Have knowledge about current 3.1818 33 3.5172 29 0.297 cooperative legislation 1.1310 1.3790 Know how to defend cooperative 3.4545 33 3.8333 30 0.293 interests before governmental 1.5430 1.2620 Institutions Overall Knowledge Cluster Have knowledge about the coop. 1.9706 34 2.0333 30 0.812 administrative. financial and 1.0000 1.0980 operational structure Have knowledge about the social 2.2647 34 2.0000 31 0.350 economic, and political 1.1630 1.0950 environment In which the cooperative operates Have knowledge about 3.2353 34 3.0333 30 0.590 agriculture 1.4370 1.5420 Have experience In other 3.5294 34 3.2667 30 0.447 management positions 1.3310 1.4130 Have knowledge about 3.5294 34 3.7241 29 0.538 marketing channels 1.3080 1.1620 Table 18.-~Continued 119 Training Attended None One or More Competencies Mam Mean 2 Tall 8.0. N 8.0. N Probability Cooperative Administration Cluster know how to manage the 2.4118 34 2.1290 31 0.427 cooperative in a participative 1.5400 1.2840 and democratic structure Know how to administer the 2.4118 34 2.3667 30 0.894 cooperative as a business and 1.3050 1.4020 social operation Know how to identify 2.8824 34 3.2000 30 0.308 alternatives in solving problems 1.1220 1.3490 Know how to assure that the 3.2353 34 3.3333 30 0.800 bylaws and regulations of the 1.5770 1.4930 association are observed by members and employees Know how to formulate policies 3.5588 34 3.0690 29 0.104 consistent with the objectives 1.2110 1.1320 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster Have initiative and decision 1.6765 34 1.5000 30 0.487 making abilities 1.0930 0.9000 Be aware of his authority and 2.4118 34 2.5161 31 0.762 responsibilities in legal and 1.2340 1.5250 social matters Know how to make decisions 3.1765 34 2.7333 30 0.158 under conditions of risk 1.3590 1.0810 Know how to withstand pressure 2.9412 34 3.5172 29 0.073 and remain calm in crisis 1.2780 1.2140 snuaflons Know how to deal with conflict 4.0294 34 3.8387 31 0.516 directly and tactfully 1.0167 1.1860 120 Table 18.-~Continued Training Attended None One or More Competencies Meat Mean 2 Tall S.D. N S.D. N Probability Human Resource Management Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.5882 34 1.8000 30 0.405 appropriately 0.8920 1 .1260 Know how to understand and 1.9412 34 2.0968 31 0.567 respond to members' and 1.0130 1.1650 employees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.3235 34 3.0667 30 0.455 performance of employees and 1.3190 1.4130 the cooperative as a whole Know how to coordinate people, 3.7941 34 3.2333 30 0.066 activities and facilities 1.0670 1.3310 Know how to ensure employees' 3.9118 34 3.6000 30 0.265 good performance 0.8660 1.3290 Membership Relations Cluster Assure that the members are the 1.6471 34 1.8387 31 0.490 main goal of the organization 1.1250 1.0980 Keep open channel of 2.7353 34 2.8065 31 0.843 communication among directors. 1.3770 1.5150 members and employees Instill in members their 3.1471 34 2.5161 31 0.057 responsibility for making the 1.3950 1.2080 cooperative successful Motivate members to participate 3.0000 34 3.2667 30 0.435 in cooperatve issues 1.3030 1.4130 Keep members informed about 3.7647 34 3.6897 29 0.801 policies and operating practices 1.1560 1.1980 Table 18.--Continued 121 Training Attended None One or More Competencies Mean ' Mean 2 Tail S.D. N S.D. N Probability Vision Cluster Know how to guide Directors 2.5000 34 2.6667 30 0.615 members and employees 1.3540 1.2690 in a clear and complete way Keep up-toodate with the 2.8529 34 2.5333 30 0.354 economic and social cooperative 1.3510 1.3830 system Display a progressive attitude 2.8529 34 2.6129 31 0.493 for the development and 1.2820 1.5200 expansion of the cooperative Promote the educational 3.2059 34 3.0000 30 0.556 development of employees and 1.4930 1.2590 members Act as a model influencing 3.0294 34 3.0667 30 0.928 positive behaviors of employees 1.5860 1.7210 and members Communication Cluster Know how to instill 2.6471 34 2.1667 30 0.155 trust 1.4330 1.2060 Know how to deal with people 2.4706 34 2.5806 31 0.736 1.2850 1.3360 Know how to listen critically 2.8235 34 2.4839 31 0.331 1.4450 1.3380 Know how to communicate clearly 2.7059 34 2.9333 30 0.488 1.2680 1.3370 Know how to direct meetings 3.5882 34 3.8710 31 0.466 1.5980 1.5000 Table 18.--Continued r22 Training Attended None One or More Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. N 8.0. N Probability Leadership Cluster Be honest. of good character 1.6765 34 1.9355 31 0.395 and good reputation 1.1210 1.3150 Have leadership abilities 2.2941 34 2.0323 31 0.353 1.1690 1.0800 Have a common sense 2.9412 34 2.7419 31 0.563 1.4550 1.2900 Have high capacity to work 3.0588 34 3.1935 31 0.649 1.0990 1.2760 Know how to influence 4.1471 34 3.9032 31 0.454 1.2580 1.3500 123 DESCRIPTION OF OUTSTANDING PRESIDENTS The nominated presidents who responded to this questionnaire survey provided information about the following organizational and personal characteristics of their organizations and themselves: (1) commodity, (2) number of employees, (3) membership, (4) president's level of schooling, (5) president's years of experience, and (6) president's participation in training programs. The summary of the outstanding presidents' characteristics are displayed in Table 19. Following is a brief discussion of the important aspects of these characteristics. 1t appears that the cooperatives' commodity was not a factor in determining best presidents, since every cooperative commodity group was represented by at least one outstanding president, except the Sugar Cane cooperatives. The majority of outstanding presidents, six of the seven (85.7 percent) belonged to a cooperative with more than 100 employees; one of the seven (14.3 percent) belonged to a cooperative with 51 - 100 employees. Of the seven outstanding presidents, six (85.7 percent) belonged to cooperatives with 750 members or more, one of the seven (14.3 percent) belonged to a cooperative with less than 150 members. 0f the seven outstanding presidents, four (57.1 percent) had university degrees, one (14.3 percent) had a primary school degree, one (14.3 percent) had a high school 1211 .33. N A 0.. A 3.29.95 85 A 8.. A 03.5. m m 2 - m SEE 8A A 62 A 5.8 m .23. F 2 A 3.32.5 8.. A 8. - 5 3.033585 a 33.220. 6:0: or - m $862.5 own A cow A 66:00 3 Aocsgaotu$ P v - m 36.5.8... on. v cow A .650. or 39.5 m A 9 A no... own A cop A use). cm 362355 N A 2 A 2.235 9K A 8. A 8:8 mm 9.....8... 85.596 9.39.8 can $0.6.an eoEmc .o 88> .o .96.. 6.5.3.5.: .o .382... 3.3858 «5.8 62.82.80 9.5.2.600 3.5380 .o 39:22 .623 a... 2 9.6582 25.6.8... 9.9.223 mes—=80: .o mo..m...o.o£a..0:.9 6.62. 125 degree, and one (14.3 percent) had a technical school degree. Of the seven outstanding presidents, four (57 percent) had more than ten years of experience, and none with less than three years of experience. Of the seven, four (57 percent) had attended at least two training programs; two of the seven (28 percent) had attended one, and only one (14 percent) had never attended any training program. PERCEPTIONS OF OUTSTANDING PRESIDENTS ON PRIORITY RANKING COMPETENCIES WITHIN THE NINE CLUSTERS Table 20 displays the results of a t-Test analysis comparing responses from the average presidents and the seven cooperatives' presidents nominated as outstanding. There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding their perceptions on priority ranking the competency, "Have knowledge about current cooperative legislation" in the Foundation of Cooperative cluster. The average presidents placed higher priority on this competency (3.1400) than the outstanding presidents (4.2857). There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding their perceptions on priority ranking the competency, "Know how to communicate clearly" in the Communication cluster. The average presidents placed higher priority on this competency (2.7500) than the outstanding presidents (4.0000). 126 Table 20.--t-Test analysis of outstanding and average presidents' perceptions of priority ranking cotetencies within each of the nine clusters mtstanding Average Cotstencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. S.D. M Probability Foundation of Cooperatives Cluster lievs cooperative 1.2857 1.8679 53 0.232 spirit 0.4880 1.2560 know and apply the 2.2857 2.4340 53 0.739 cooperative philosophy 0.7560 1.1350 iieve knowledge of cooperative 3.5714 3.1000 50 0.360 way of doing business 1.1340 1.2820 iiave knowlewe of current 4.2857 3.1400 50 0.022 * cooperative legislation 0.7560 1.2460 Know how to defend cooperative 3.5714 3.1000 50 0.360 interests before governmental 1.5120 1.2820 institutions Overall Knowledge Cluster ilave knowledge of the coop. 2.2857 1.9615 52 0.441 ethinistrative, finmcial and 1.3800 0.9890 operational structure iiave knowledge of the social 2.0000 2.0943 53 0.835 eccrioufic, and political 0.5770 1.1650 envirorment in tich the cooperative operates llave knowledge of 2.8571 3.2115 52 0.552 agriculture 1.6760 1.4460 iiave experience in other 3.5714 3.7059 51 0.819 management positions 1.3970 1.4460 ilave knowletbe of 4.2857 3.4706 51 0.101 marketing chainsls 0.7560 1.2550 127 Table 20.--Continued Outstanding Average Cctstencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M S.D. ll Probability Cooperative ministration Cluster know how to tnags the 2.4286 7 2.2830 53 0.807 cooperative in a participative 1.3970 1.4860 and democratic structure Know how to aministsr the 2.5714 7 2.3269 52 0.650 cooperative as a btminess and 1.6180 1.2940 social operation Know how to identify 3.0000 7 3.0385 52 0.940 alternatives in solving problems 1.4140 1.2360 Know how to assure that the 3.5714 7 3.2885 52 0.641 bylaws and regulations of the 1.2720 1.5250 association are observed by meters and atloyees Know how to fortlate policies 3.4286 7 3.3725 51 0.910 conistent with the objectives 1.5120 1.1830 of the cooperative Decision Making Cluster llave initiative and decision 1.4286 7 1.6154 52 0.642 tking abilities 0.5350 1.0320 Be aware of his authority and 3.0000 7 2.3774 53 0.275 responsibilities in legal and 1.9150 1.3330 social utters Know how to tke decisions 3.1429 7 3.0000 52 0.784 under conditions of risk 1.0690 1.3140 Know how to withstand pressure 3.8571 7 3.1176 51 0.140 and retin calm in crisis 1.0690 1.2430 situations Know how to deal with conflict 3.5714 3.9245 53 0.467 directly and tactfully 1.1340 1.2070 128 Table Zoe-Continued Outstanding Average Cotstencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M S.D. M Probability littn Resource Menagmnt Cluster Know how to delegate authority 1.5714 7 1.6923 52 0.765 appropriately 1.1340 0.9810 Know how to mderstand and 2.7143 7 1.8868 53 0.056 respond to meters' and 1.7040 0.9540 atloyess' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to evaluate 3.0000 7 3.2692 52 0.632 performance of etloyees and 0.8160 1.4430 the cooperative as a tole Know how to coordinate people, 3.5714 7 3.5577 52 0.978 activities and facilities 1.2720 1.2110 Know how to ensure aliplcyess' 4.1429 7 3.6923 52 0.330 good performance 0.9000 1.1640 Metership Relations Cluster Assure that the meters are the 2.1429 7 1.7170 53 0.345 main goal of the organization 1.4640 1.0630 Keep open chamel of 2.0000 7 2.8868 53 0.120 cmication among directors, 1.1550 1.4320 meters and etloyees instill in meters their 2.8571 7 2.8491 53 0.988 responsibility for tking the 1.3450 1.3780 cooperative successful Motivate tubers to participate 4.0000 7 3.0385 52 0.079 in cooperatve issues 1.1550 1.3570 Keep meters informed about 4.0000 7 3.6863 51 0.510 policies and operating practices 0.8160 1.2080 129 Table 20.--Ccntinued Outstanding Average Cotetencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M S.D. M Probability Vision Cluster Know how to guide Directors, 2.5714 7 2.5577 52 0.979 meters and etloyees 1.1340 1.3050 in a clear and cotlete way Keep tp-to-date with the 3.1429 7 2.6923 52 0.432 economic and social cooperative 0.6900 1.4760 system Display a progressive attitude 2.8571 7 2.6604 53 0.727 for the developeent and 1.5740 1.3720 expansion of the cooperative Promote the educational 2.4286 7 3.2308 52 0.155 development of euployees and 1.6180 1.3520 meters Act as a model influencing 4.0000 7 2.9615 52 0.115 positive behaviors of etloyees 1.7320 1.5960 and meebers Cmication Cluster Know how to instill 1.8571 7 2.5769 52 0.190 trust 1.4640 1.3340 Know how to deal with people 3.0000 7 2.4340 53 0.295 1.0000 1.3660 Know how to listen critically 2.0000 7 2.6038 53 0.282 0.5770 1.4460 Know how to cos-nicate clearly 4.0000 7 2.7500 52 0.013 0.5770 1.2660 Know how to direct meetings 4.1429 7 3.6981 53 0.473 1.5740 1.5260 Table 20.--Ccntinuad 1'30 Outstanding Average Competencies Mean Mean 2 Tail S.D. M S.D. M Probability Leadership Cluster Be honest, of good character 2.4286 1.6226 53 0.070 and good reputation 1.6180 1.0040 Mave leadership abilities 1.8571 2.2830 53 0.358 1.0690 1.1500 Have good sense 2.4286 7 2.9434 53 0.349 0.7870 1.4060 Have a high capacity to work 4.0000 7 3.0000 53 0.032 * 1.0000 1.1440 Know how to influence 4.2857 7 4.0755 53 0.688 0.9510 1.3280 * : Significant difference at 0.05 and 95! confidence interval 131 The competency that also indicated a significantly difference between the two groups was "Have a high capacity to work" in the Leadership cluster. The average presidents placed higher priority on this competency (3.0000) than did the outstanding presidents (4.0000). SUMMARY OF WRITTEN COMMENTS Additional Competencies At the end of Part I of the questionnaire respondents were encouraged to mention additional competencies that were not included in the study. Following are some of the additional competencies cited: . Know how to adopt an organizational view of the business, be impartial and without paternalism; . Be optimistic and believe in God; . Be a business man; . Prioritize cooperative education; . Have no ambitions for himself. Duties and Responsibiiities of a Cooperative President The third part of the questionnaire asked opinions of the respondents concerning the responsibilities and duties of a cooperative president. 0f the sixty-seven respondents, fifty-three (79 percent) provided a written response to the statement: "What do you consider the most important duties and responsibilities of a president of an agricultural 132 cooperative?" Respondents' comments are presented in Appendix C. Following are a few of the most important' duties and responsibilities mentioned most often.’ - Administering the cooperative with honesty and hard work. - Fulfilling the cooperatives' bylaws and regulations, and applying them for good understanding between, Board of Directors, members, and employees. - Having a cooperative spirit and following the cooperative philosophy. - Knowing how to organize, coordinate, and recruit a hard working team. Other comments were that the president should have initiative, inspire trust, be able to make decisions, promote the economic and social development of the cooperative, and be able to respond to the needs of all members; treating them equally and fairly regardless of economic or social status. Of the respondents, two commented that the president administer the cooperative as a social organization above personal interests. A representative comment was: "Be aware that you are a president for a certain period of time and the cooperative is not your property, it belongs to all the members to whom you are administering for a determined period of time." One respondent believed that the cooperative president 133 should have knowledge about agriculture, he wrote: "... It is essential to have knowledge about agriculture in order to understand the cooperatives' members and their needs. There are cases where the president has a university degree but does not know anything about agriculture." The Criteria of Nominating Outstanding Presidents In Part III of the questionnaire, the respondents were asked to nominate five outstanding presidents. Although the format of the questionnaire did not include a space for comments, some respondents chose to give additional information about their criteria for nominating an outstanding president or an explanation as to why they had chosen not to nominate any one. One respondent said: "The criteria chosen to select the outstanding presidents was based on the size of the cooperative and the number of times the president has been reelected". Others indicated a totally negative attitude toward the idea of nominating outstanding presidents by crossing out the space. Another respondent mentioned that the reason he was not going to answer to this question was that he had been involved with cooperative administration for only a short time and was unprepared to make a fair nomination. Another respondent wrote: " Since I personally have more contact with presidents of dairy cooperatives, and I do not know 134 presidents of other cooperatives, I will not nominate any name in order to not commit an injustice." There were indications that some respondents had taken a considerable amount of time completing this question. One respondent, who did not nominate an outstanding president, wrote: "Every person who believes and dedicates himself to the cooperative doctrine in its fullest sense of the word stands out in the community. It does not matter if his organization is small or large, powerful or not; it does not matter if his cultural level is high or not, if his acts are great or simple; what really matters is that he is defending the interests of the whole group, without advocating his own causes -- and this ennobles the person. For this reason, in my opinion, from the humblest to the wittiest, all of them are outstanding." General Connents Angut ghe Questionnaire Some respondents chose to give their comments about the questionnaire in the blank space left on the last page. One respondent congratulated the work being done on this subject. Another respondent chose to give feedback on his responses. He wrote: "In many situations we are not able to be the mirror of our response to this questionnaire, in a country such as Brazil, where there is no security in the agricultural sector. Despite the fact that we are aware of the main goal of cooperatives -- the members -- we cannot 135 think of cooperatives without giving a special consideration to the business organizations that they are also. At the end of the year, when it is time to present the financial report, we have to show evidence of economic good standing or provide patronage refunds. After all, it is hard or even impossible to share losses". CHAPTER V SUMMARY, RESEARCH FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo are becoming larger and business operations, consequently, are becoming more technical and complex. This mandates a change in management techniques and procedures. Presidents, who are the farmers themselves, need to continually develop their administrative skills oriented to business and social organizations. Effective training programs can respond to such needs through the inclusion of high priority competencies in the program content. Through an extensive review of the literature, this study determined essential competencies needed to administer the cooperative organizations. Those competencies were organized into nine clusters, which key people in the administration of cooperatives were asked to priority rank those competencies in order of importance. Cooperatives of six commodity groups were represented in the survey population: Coffee, Dairy, Crops/Livestock, Sugar Cane, Mixed, and "Other" cooperatives. Also, cooperatives with different personnel, and membership sizes 136 137 were represented in the survey population, along with administrators with different levels of schooling, years of experience, and number of training programs attended. Of the questionnaires mailed to cooperative administrators, seventy-four were returned (49 percent response rate); however, some of the respondents misunderstood the correct way to answer Part I of the survey. Therefore, for analysis purposes of Part I and Part II, only the sixty-seven correctly answered questionnaires (44 percent response rate) were used. The data were analyzed using: (1) frequencies, percent, mean, and standard deviation, (2) cross-tabulation, and (3) One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), t-Test, and Friedman's Analysis of Variance for ranked data. In order to utilize the valuable information provided, all seventy—four questionnaires returned were used in Part III. In this part of the questionnaire, the respondents were asked their opinions on the most important duties and responsibilities of a cooperative president and to also name five outstanding presidents in the State of Sao Paulo. RESEARCH FINDINGS A summary of the research findings is presented within each frame of the research question. 138 Bgsggrcn Questign t 1: What are the organizational and personal characteristics of the survey population? Most of the cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil have more than fifty employees (65.1 percent) and more than 750 members (54.5 percent). Coffee cooperatives are the largest organizations in terms of the number of employees and membership. More than half the Coffee cooperatives (61.5 percent) reported having more than 100 employees, and 84.6 percent reported having more than 750 members. On the other hand, Mixed cooperatives are the smallest organizations in terms of number of employees and membership. Fifty percent of the Mixed cooperatives reported having less than twenty employees and 56.2 percent reported having less than 300 members. Dairy cooperatives have the highest employee-member ratio. Most administrators of cooperatives in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil have university degrees (57.8 percent), at least five years of experience as cooperative administrators (66.7 percent) and have never attended a training program (52.3 percent). Almost half (40 percent) of the administrators with university degrees have graduated from law school. The great majority (70 percent or more) of the administrators of Coffee, Crops/Livestock, and Sugar Cane cooperatives have university degrees. On the other hand, Mixed cooperatives have the least number of administrators with University degrees (26.6 percent) and the most with in middle school education (40 percent). No wide variations were found among administrators based on years of experience. Dairy cooperatives' administrators have received the most training; 61.5 percent of them have attended two or more training programs, while more than one- half of the administrators of other cooperatives have never participated in any training program. Bgseazpn Question i 2: What are the opinions of members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for an agricultural cooperative president? Cooperative administrators ranked the following competencies as the highest priority competency of each cluster: Foundation of Cooperatives: Have cooperative spirit Overail Knowledge: Have knowledge about the cooperative administrative, financial and operational structure Cooperative Administgatipn: Know how to manage the cooperative in a participative and democratic structure Decision Making: Have initiative and decision making abilities Human Resource ana e ent: Know how to delegate authority appropriately Membership Relations: Assure that the members are the main goal of the organization Visign: Know how to guide other directors, employees and members in a clear and complete way 140 Connunication: Know how to instill trust Leadership: Be honest, of good character and reputation Research Question t 3: Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents? Friedman's Analysis of Variance revealed that there were statistical differences at the 0.05 level and 95 percent confidence interval in the way respondents priority ranked competencies in eight of the nine clusters. The Vision cluster was the only cluster with no significant difference in priority ranking competencies. However, further analysis (T-test analysis by cooperative' membership in Table 15, and T-test analysis by administrators' years of experience in Table 17) revealed significant differences in the way respondents priority ranked some competencies. This may be attributed to the fact that Friedman's Analysis of Variance test did not detect differences that were scattered, while more specific analyses detected concentrated differences. Reseanch ngstion t 4: Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents that can be attributed to organizational characteristics (commodity of the cooperative, number of employees, and membership size)? ANOVA and t-Test analyses were conducted to determine whether there were significant differences in priority 141 ranking competencies between groups of key organizational characteristics. The analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences at the 0.05 level regarding priority ranking in the following groups: 1. Respondents from the Crops/Livestock cooperatives placed higher priority on the following competency than respondents of other cooperative commodities: "Instill in members their responsibility for making the cooperative successful" in the Membership Relations cluster. 2. Respondents from cooperatives with more than 100 employees placed higher priority on the following competency than respondents from cooperatives with 100 or less employees: "Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative" in the Cooperative Administration cluster. 3. Respondents from cooperatives with 750 members or more placed higher priority than respondents from cooperatives with less than 750 members on the following competencies: "Know how to administer the cooperative as a business and social operations" in the Cooperative Administration cluster; and "Know how to make decisions under conditions of risk" in the Decision Making cluster. On the other hand, respondents from cooperatives with less than 750 members 142 placed higher priority on the following competency than respondents from cooperatives with 750 members or more: "Know how to guide other directors, employees, and members in a clear and complete way" in the Vision cluster. Research Question t 5: Are there significant differences between members of the survey population regarding priority ranking competencies that can be attributed to administrators' personal characteristics (level of schooling, years of experience, number of training programs attended)? t-Tests were conducted to determine whether there were significant differences in priority ranking competencies between groups of key administrators' personal characteristics. The analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences at the 0.05 level in the following groups: 1. Respondents without university degrees placed higher priority than respondents with university degree on the following competency: "Knowledge about agriculture" in the Overall Knowledge cluster. On the other hand, respondents with university degrees placed higher priority than respondents without university degrees on the following competencies: "Have experience in other management positions" in the Overall Knowledge cluster; "Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative" in the Cooperative Administration cluster; and "Instill in members their responsibility for making the 143 cooperative successful" in the Membership Relations cluster. 2. Respondents with more than ten years of experience placed higher priority than respondents with less years of experience on only one competency: "Keep up-to-date with the economic and social cooperative system" in the Vision cluster. 3. No significant differences were found between administrators who attended a training program and those who had never attended one on the perceptions of priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents within the nine clusters. Research Question t 6: What are the organizational and personal characteristics of the nominated outstanding presidents? The great majority (85.7 percent) of outstanding presidents belonged to cooperatives with more than 100 employees and more than 750 members. Most of them (57 percent) had university degrees and more than ten years of experience. The great majority (85.7 percent) had attended at least one training program. Research Question t 7: Are there significant differences between the average and the nominated outstanding presidents regarding priority ranking competencies for an agricultural cooperative president? The average presidents placed higher priority than the 144 outstanding presidents on the following competencies: "Have knowledge about current coOperative legislation" in the Foundation of Cooperatives cluster; "Know how to communicate clearly" in the Communication cluster, and "Have high capacity to work" in the Leadership cluster. Table 21 summarizes the results from Anova and T-test regarding differences between members of the survey population on priority ranking competencies for cooperative presidents. Research Question i : What are the most important duties and responsibilities of a cooperative president as perceived by the respondents? _Respondents, when given the opportunity to make additional comments about important duties and responsibilities of cooperative presidents, indicated an overwhelming importance be placed on administering the cooperative with honesty and hard work. Also, respondents felt that cooperative presidents should possess a cooperative spirit and follow the cooperative philosophy. The next most important duty and responsibility of cooperative presidents was to fulfill the cooperatives' bylaws and regulations and apply them for good understanding between the Board of Directors, members, and employees. CONCLUSIONS Conclusion i 1: Most of the cooperative administrators had a much higher level of schooling than their members. Almost 145 etc! 9 £868 8... a s6: >..ae.u 83.5888 8 to: .85. 88-»- 8838393 excesses a5 5.! 38.91... 93. .3382... deco as 9.25.. 3. 5.3.2.8.: so... .85.... s .52.. a. deco as .c slicers a5 5.... 88388 3.3.2. .325... S! 83988 use .38 a 5 8.56.9.3 9.- 288888625 also 9285.... x... .o 23.28 .9531! 8923933. econ-Sac ico- uca 3213 a as .38 2.. 3.3.5.. .88 2. 2.2!. .2. 8.3.2.2.... .5... 3852. c. .32... dose 9: .c .25qu a... £0 8832.8 .32.2. 83:83. 8228-3 coaaflcieEoo :0...) steam—ac 322880! 29518: Raccoon. 58:... 2...... .3308 5.3.3.553 a. )9. :65. 8. 8 )9. .65. a. 8 so: :55. 2522.30 8338.68 .a£o c. successes sea: E 22325- £865. 58- 8336. E .335 co..a.e.oa. 252830 82.3 53a 252330 8352.. .5. .6 c823“. d... 6.3 a. 8x. A a. 285.0 8222 28.. o. A .658 E .8. .o 8» 3 62A 858.50 soc-8.2.2. 05.698 an? cesium 3.3.... .o .26.. 8.3.880 .6 83> c.5393: .6 .8832 .93.... uses... 85.5835 .28.... 3.33.2.8... 2. 3.83.590 8.8398538668538830 9....5. .53.... c. 8888.... .3528... :82... 882...... 85282 so: as. <>Oz< 62. as... as .o 81:55....“ on: 146 80 percent of cooperative administrators led an organization made up of 23 percent (Table 2) of its members having education beyond elementary school. This leads to the conclusion that participation in the administration of a cooperative is largely a function of one's level of schooling. Conclusion t 2: Only five of forty-five competencies were selected one time as unimportant. The conclusion, then, is that the respondents agreed that all the competencies stated are important in carrying out the responsibilities of the cooperative president. Conclusion f g: Although Friedman's Analysis of Variance showed significant differences in the way respondents priority ranked eight of the nine-study clusters, only in nine of the forty-five competency statements (20 percent) could those differences be attributed to the organizational and administrators' personal characteristics included in the study. It may be concluded, that there may be other factors influencing the perception of priority ranked competencies for cooperative presidents which were not included in this study that are relevant when designing a training program. Conclusion t : The respondents tended to agree on the competencies perceived as the highest priorities, but they 147 were not in agreement with the competencies perceived as the lowest priorities. Therefore, when establishing a training program for cooperative presidents, its content shall not be in conflict with the highest priority competencies determined in this study. Conglugign_£_§ The results from this study found no support for the hypothesis that organizational or personal characteristics are factors which can prevent the effectiveness of developing training programs directed to all cooperative presidents regardless of organizational or personal characteristics. Conclusion £ 6: The resulting list of the highest priority competencies indicated that a cooperative president should possess competencies related to The Management Competency Model. This model characterizes competencies as holistic; that is, it included a knowledge component, a behavioral component, an affective component, and a motivational component. So when this study identified competencies for cooperative presidents, it included those components. Competencies with the behavioral, the affective, and the motivational component could rarely be identified if the Task and Function Analysis was the sole approach used to determine competencies for a cooperative president, since this approach has been criticized as addressing only 148 external observable behaviors. Therefore, The Management ‘ Competency Model is the best approach to delineate the highest priority competencies for a cooperative president. Conclusion t 7: The highest priority competencies determined in this study suggested that the responsibilities and duties of a cooperative president involve much more than the skills and abilities necessary to carry on a business operation; it involves the whole person. Thus, training programs for cooperative presidents must not be limited to developing skills and abilities on how to perform tasks but should go far beyond; programs should develop the inner values of a person. STUDY LIMITATIONS First, as has been mentioned previously, the relatively low response rate to the questionnaire survey (49 percent) limited the generalization of the conclusions of this study. Second, since the great majority of the respondents were cooperative presidents, this study did not register the opinions of administrators in the administrative or financial director positions who might have different perceptions of competencies for cooperative presidents. Third, the list of competencies used in this study are important but there may be some additional competencies necessary for a cooperative president to deliver a quality 149 job. And, finally, the priority competencies determined in this study should be viewed as preliminary and not conclusive. This study is offered as a vehicle to provoke careful thought about aspects of the job of a cooperative president which may not have been previously examined. Nonetheless, it should serve as a basis and guide to the content of training programs for cooperative presidents. RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS STUDY The review of literature indicated that training programs for cooperative administrators are essential for the success of the organizations. The result of this survey research indicated that most cooperative administrators (52.3 percent) have never attended a training program. This demonstrates that training programs for cooperative administrators in the State of Sao Paulo still is in a early formative phase. Governmental institutions related to the cooperative movement and cooperatives themselves should make every possible effort to involve as many administrators as possible in training programs. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Listed below are some recommendations arising directly or indirectly out of this study. They are: 150 To adapt the questionnaire and replicate the study for completion by other members of the Board of Directors. To adapt the questionnaire and replicate the study for completion by cooperatives' members. Investigate their perceptions of important competencies for cooperative presidents. To adapt the questionnaire and replicate the study aiming higher response rate specially from administrators with less schooling and less years of experience. ' To conduct a study to assess the planned training programs to maximize the probability that training will result in the development of those high priority competencies. To conduct a study assessing the impact of training programs on the performance of cooperatives' administrators. ' To conduct further intensive research, possibly by means of personal interviews with nominated outstanding presidents to determine the factors that make them outstanding. APPENDICES APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY (Portuguese and English Version) 151 REQUISITOS PRINCIPAIS DE PRESIDENTES DE COOPERATIVAS AGRICOLAS O objetivo déste questionério é identificar quais os requisitos que um presidents de cooperativa agricola deve possuir, para desempenhar com sucesso as funooes de administrador. As informacoes obtidas nesta pesquisa serviréo para desenvolver um estudo. na Michigan State University - Estados Unidos, sobre cooperativas agricolas no estado de Sao Paulo. Responda cada questao atentamente, usando suas experiéncias e seu desempenho atual. ‘ Abaixo 152 PART I estéo relacionados alguns requisitos necessarios presidente de cooperativa. Comece lendo cs 5 itens de cada bloco e entao, enumere-os em ordem de importfincia. l (nais importante) a 5 (menos importante). Se considerar o requisito n50 importante use 0. pm $21: on non PRESIDENTS m: coopm-rrva é pmxso...... Enumere de l a 5 do Conhecer e aplicar a doutrina cooperativista: Ter espirito cooperativista: Ter conhecimento da legislacéo cooperativista vigente; Ter conhecimento da economia cooperativista: Saber defender os interésses da cooperativa perante os orgios governamentais. Enumere de 1 a 5 Ter conhecimento sobre agricultura: Ter experiéncia em outras atividades administrativas; Ter conhecimento dos meios que compde o sistema de comercializacio: Ter conhecimento da estrutura administrativa, financeira e operacional da cooperative; Ter conhecimento do meio social, economico, e politico na qual a cooperativa opera. Bnumere de l a 5 Saber administrar a cooperativa como uma emprésa economica e social; Saber administrar a cooperativa numa estrutura participativa e democratica; Saber formular regras condizentes com os objetivos da cooperative; Saber identificar alternativas para solucionar os problemas da cooperativa: Saber zelar para que as leis, regulamentos e estatuto da entidade sejam observados por todos associados e funcionérios. 153 pm SER on non PRESIDENTE DE coopm'rrva 1': PRECISO..... Enumere de 1 a 5 Ter iniciativa e capacidade de decisao; Ter consciéncia de sua autoridade e responsabilidade, tanto do ponto de vista social como legal; Saber tomar decisoes em situacées que envolvam risco; Saber trabalhar sob pressao e permanecer calmo em situacdes criticas; Saber lidar com situacoes de conflito diretamente e com tato. Enumere de l a 5 Saber delegar podéres sem perder autoridade; Compreender e oorresponder as necessidades dos cooperados e funcionérios, dentro dos limites da lei e do estatuto; Coordenar pessoas, atividades e instalaooes; Assegurar o desempenho adequado de funcionarios; Avaliar o desempenho de funcionarios e a cooperativa como um todo. Enumere de l a 5 Assegurar que a cooperativa é uma empresa que tem como objetivo principal - o cooperado; Manter os cooperados informados sobre regras e praticas de operacao; Incentivar o cooperado a participar da vida societaria e empresarial da cooperativa; Incutir nos cooperados a responsabilidade de cada um, para atingir o sucesso da cooperativa; Manter na cooperativa um ambiente de bom relacionamento entre diretoria, cooperados e funcionarios a fim de manter um clima de cooperacfio. 15“ pm SER on son passmms DE coopm'rrva i: pnzcrso... . . Enumre de 1 a 5 Promover o desenvolvimento educativo dos c00perados e funcionérios: Tomar uma atitude progressista no desenvolvimento e expansio da cooperativa, respeitando a lei e o estatuto Manter-se sempre atualizado quanto ao sistema cooperativista, economico e social; Servir como modélo, influenciando positivamente o comportamento dos associados e funcionérios. Saber orientar de uma maneira clara e completa outros diretores, cooperados e funcionarios. Enumere de l a 5 Saber lidar com as pessoas; Saber comunicar-se claramente; Saber dirigir.os trabalhos nas assembléias e reumioes; Saber ouvir; Saber infundir confianca Enumere l a 5 Ter bom—senso; Ter lideranca; Saber influenciar; Ser trabalhador. Ser honesto, ter bom caréter e boa reputacio. Se houver outros itens que n50 foram incluidos, mas que considere importante qualidade num bom administrador, mencione no espago abaixo: 155 Part II Nesta parte, gostariamos de obter algumas informacdes profissionais suas e sobre sua cooperativa. Preencha o espago de cada item indicando sua resposta. l- Posicio que ocupa na cooperativa Presidente Diretor Financeiro Diretor Administrativo Outta, por favor especifique 2- Qual é o produto principal comercializado por sua cooperativa? Cana de Acucar Pecuéria Avicola Suinos Horticultura Outros, por favor especifique 3- Quantos funcionarios esta cooperativa menos de 20 funcionérios 21 a 50 funcionérios 51 a 100 funcionérios mais que 100 funcionérios Café Citrus Arroz Leite emprega? 4- Quantos cooperados esta cooperativa possui? menos de 150 cooperados 150 a 299 cooperados 300 a 449 cooperados 5- Qual é o seu nivel de escolaridade? primério ginasial Escola técnica, em que area? superior, em que area? 450 a 599 cooperados 600 a 749 cooperados mais de 750 cooperados colegial 6- Quanto tempo de experiéncia possui como administrador de cooperativa? 0 a 2 anos 5 a 10 anos 3 a 4 anos mais de 11 anos 156 7- Quantos programas de treinamento para administradores de cooperativas participou nos ultimos 3 anos? nenhum ' um dois mais que dois Part III Quais os deveres e responsabilidades que considera mais importante para um presidente de cooperativa? Gostariamos de saber na sua opiniao quais os melhores presidentes de cooperativas agricolas do estado de Sao Paulo. Sua resposta é extremamente confidencial. Por favor, relacione 5 nomes em ordem decrescente (os melhores primeiro). Por favor, retorne este questionario até 0 dia para o o seguinte endereco: Marilia Henriette Guillaumon Gerges Rua Alvares Cabral, 290 Marilia - SP - 17500 Agradecemos sua colaboracéo. 157 U 8T ONNAIR This research concerns the functions of a president of an agricultural cooperative. The information from this study will serve to develop a study at Michigan State University - Michigan, USA. Answer each question thoughtfully using your own experiences and current work. PART I The following are some competencies to successfully perform the job of a president of a cooperative. Please, read the 5 items, and then, order them in order of importance. 1 (most important) to 5 (least important). If you feel that the competence is not important at all use 0. TO BE A GOOD COOPERATIVE PRESIDENT IT IS NECESSARY TO ..... Know and apply the cooperative philosophy Have cooperative spirit Have knowledge about current cooperative legislation Have knowledge about the cooperative way of doing business Know how to defend cooperative interests before Governmental institutions Have knowledge about agriculture Have experience in others management positions Have knowledge about marketing channels Have knowledge about cooperative administrative, financial and operational structure Knowledge about the social, economic, and political environment in which the cooperative operates Know how to administer the cooperative as a business and social operation Know how to manage the cooperative in a participative and democratic structure Know how to formulate policies consistent with the objectives of the cooperative Know how to identify alternatives in solving problems Know how to assure that the bylaws and regulations of the association are observed by members and employees. 158 TO BE A GOOD COOPERATIVE PRESIDENT IT IS NECESSARY TO ..... Have initiative and decision making abilities Be aware of his authority and responsibilities in legal and social matters Know how to make decisions under conditions of risk Know how to withstand pressure and remain calm in crisis situations Know how to deal with conflict directly and tactfully Know how to delegate authority appropriately Know how to understand and respond to members and employees' needs within the limits of bylaws and regulations Know how to coordinate people, activities, and facilities Know how to ensure employees' good performance Know how to evaluate performance of employees and the cooperative as a whole Assure that the members are the main goal of the organization Keep members informed about policies and operating practices Instill in members their responsibility for making the cooperative successful Motivate members to participate in the cooperative issues Keep channels of communication open among directors, members, and employees Promote the educational development of employees and members Display a progressive attitude for development and expansion of the cooperative Keep up-to-date with the economic and social cooperative system Act as a model influencing positive behaviors of employees and members Know how to guide directors, employees, and members in a clear and complete way 159 TO BE A GOOD COOPERATIVE PRESIDENT IT IS NECESSARY TO .... Know how to deal with people Know how to communicate clearly Know how to direct meetings Know how to listen critically Know how to instill trust Have common sense Have leadership abilities Know how to influence Have a high capacity for work Be honest, of good character and good reputation If there are any items which we have not included that you believe are important to the cooperative president performance, please note in the space below. Part II Now we would like to have some information about yourself and your organization. Please fill in the space in each unit indicating your answer. 1- Position you hold in the cooperative organization President Financial Director Administrative Director Other, please specify 2- Type of commodity your cooperative deals with? Sugar Cane Coffee Livestock Citrus Poultry Rice Swine Dairy Horticulture Others, please specify 3- Number of full-time employees working for the cooperative? less than 20 employees 20 to 50 employees 51 to 100 employees more than 100 employees 160 4- How many members the cooperative has now? less than 150 members 450 - 599 members 150 - 299 members 600 - 750 members 300 - 449 members -More than 750 members 5- What is your level of schooling? Primary Middle School High School Technical School. Which area? University. Which area? 6- How many years of experience as a cooperative administrator do you have? 0 - 2 years 3'- 4 years 5 - 10 years more than 10 years 7- How many cooperative administration training programs have you attended in the last 3 years? none once two more than two Part III What do you consider the most important duties and responsibilities of a president of an agricultural cooperative? Now would like your opinion as to who are the most outstanding cooperative president in this state. You may be assured of complete confidentiality. Please list the names you consider the five top cooperative presidents in rank order (the most outstanding first). Please, return completed questionnaire within two weeks to the following address: Thank you very much. APPENDIX B COVER LETTERS (Portuguese and English Version) o...- 9‘. 161 Agricultural & Extension Education E Michigan State University 410 Agriculture Hall East Lansing, Michigan 48824 - 1039 (517)355-6580 Marilia, de Janeiro de 1990 Prezado Sr.: Como administrador desta Cooperativa, V.S. esta a par da importancia dos rogramas educacionais para o desenvolvimento das cooperativas agricolas. Este é um estudo que esta sendo realizado na Michigan State University - Estados Unidos, com a finalidade de determinar os principais requisitos de um presidente de cooperativa. V. 8. £01 selecionado para participar deste estudo devido sua experiencia e conhecimento na administracao de cooperativas -agricolas. Quando completa, esta pesquisa seré uma nova fonte literaria para o desenvolvimento de programas de treinamento para administradores de cooperativas. Faz-se necessario ressaltar que suas respostas serEo tratadas confidencialmente. O questionério tem um numero de identificach apenas para propositos estatisticos. Seu nome nunca sera mencionado no questionario. Sua participacao neste estudo é voluntaria, no entanto nos agradeciariamos sua colaboracao. Foi estimado que o preenchimento deste questionério levaré de 15 a 20 minutos. Em.caso de duvida sobre alguma questEol comunique- se com o seguinte telefone a fim de obter maiores informacoes (0144) 33-24-87. Devido ao tempo limitado que temos no Brasil para a coleta de dados, pedimos a gentileza de retornar este questionario em duas semanas, no mais tardar dia . Junta segue um chiclete Wrigley's para auxiliar sua concentrach! Agradecemos sua colaborach, e aguardamos sua breve resposta. Er. Donégg éeaéers MariliW’TIEumon-Gerges MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution ** T62 Junto segue xerocépia da carta enviada pelo Ilmo Sr. Secretério Nacional de Cooperativismo Sr. Adair Mazzotti, com recomendacao do meo Sr. Ministro da Agricultura Dr. Iris Rezende Machado enfa tizando a importancia desse estudo. Em anexo segue envelope selado para remessa do questionério - resposta. 163 LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT senwco Pasuco FEDERAL onao :GAB/SENACOOP/BSB 8m: 20/12/39 0. :sscas'riaro NACIONAL DE coopsnmrvrsuo Endorses :sss ED. ADRIANA Q. 02 31.2 "D" LOTS 16 A. 3 Auan: 3 Senhor Presidents A bolsista Brasileira Marilia Guillaumon-Gerges,ora our sando 0 programa de Doutorado na Michigan State University - Esta- dos Unidos, solicita nosso apoio. para qué as Cooperativas Agrico- las do Bstado de 550 Paulo, venham a colaborar no preenchimento de um questionério, e o faqam retornar a Doutoranda, afim de que os dados obtidos. possam ser trabalhados no desenvolvimento de progrg mas de interesse das Cooperativas Brasileiras, principalmente nas Sreas de treinamento e capacitacio. O Senhor Ministro da Agricultura, Doutor Iris. Rezende Machado, recomendou-nos que fizessemos a/apresentacio da bolsista, pela grande contribuicio que essa iniciativa pode proporcionar ao Cooperativismo Brasileiro. Sr. Presidente, por acharmos de fundamental importin- cia', para o Cooperativismo esta pesquisa, solicitamos mais uma vez, sua gentileza, no sentido de dar toda atencio ao trabalho. que me- rece todo o nosso apoio. ATENCIOS E Q ‘ I SECRETAR NA 2 oormnvxsno ' 164 Agricultural & Extension Education E Michigan State University 410 Agriculture Hall East Lansing, Michigan 48824 - 1039 (517) 355 - 6580 Marilia, Janeiro de 1990 Prezado Sr.: Ba duas semanas atrés, um.questionério foi enviado a V.S. com a finalidade de obter suas opiniées sobre os principais requisitos de um presidente de cooperativa. V.S. foi selecionado para participar desta pesquisa devido seus conhecimentos e experiéncia na administragio de cooperativas. Se V.S. jé completou e retornou o questionério, agradecemos, do contrario, por favor, preencha-o tEo logo possivel. Sua contribuigEo é muito importante e estamos contando com sua colaboragEo. Se por alguma raon V.S. nEo recebeu o questionério, ou este perdeu-se, comunique-se conosco no enderego abaixo que tao logo enviaremos um outro. Cordialmente, agradecemos. Dr. Do a Mea ers Mar1 1 B. GuilléumofiLG ges Rua Alvares Cabral 290 Marilia - SP 17500 Fone: (0144) 33-24-87 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 165 Agricultural 8. Extension Education 5 Michigan State University 410 Agriculture Hall East Lansing, Michigan 48824 - 1039 (517) 355 - 6580 Marilia, Fevereiro de 1990 Prezado Sr.: Acérca de 4 semanas atrés foi enviado um questionario a fim de obter suas opiniées sobre quais sao os principais requisitos para ser um.bom.presidente de cooperativa. No entanto, sua resposta ainda nEo foi recebida. 0 Departamento de Educagao e Extensao Rural da Michigan State University, através deste .projeto, encarregou-se deste estudo por ter conviccao que sua opiniao como administrador desta cooperativa deve ser levada em conta. O motivo desta correspondencia é por causa de que cada questionério tem importancia .significativa para este estudo. Para que os resultados desta pesquisa seja realmente representativo das opinioes dos administradores de cooperativas é essencial que todas as pessoas retornem o questionario. E importante esclarecer a complete confidencialidade deste estudo. O questionario tem um numero de identificacao somente para propésitos estatisticos, e seu nome nao sera colocado no questionario. Em caso que seu questionario foi extraviado, segue em anexo um substituto. Foi estimado que levaré de 15 a 20 nunutos para complete-lo. Devido ao tempo limitado que temos no Brasil para a coleta de dados, pedimos a gentileza de retornar este questionario respondido o mais breve possivel. Ficando no aguardo de breve resposta, agradecemos. Cordialmente, Dr. Donal eaders Marilia'fienrietfie—EfiillaumonSerges Prof. Michigan State Rua Alvares Cabral 290 University . Marilia , SP 17500 MS U is an Affith Action/ Equal Opportunity Institution 166 [date] [first 8 last name] [name 5 address of cooperative] Dear Mr.[last name]: As the administrator of [name of the cooperative] you are undoubtedly aware of the importance of educational programs for agricultural cooperatives. This study is being done at Michigan State University - USA, with the objective of determining what are the competencies that enable cooperative presidents to successfully perform their work. You have been selected to participate in this study, because of your experience and understanding of cooperative administration. When completed, this study will contribute to the field of literature for the development of training programs for cooperative administrators. You may be assured of complete confidentiality. The questionnaire has an identification number for statistical purposes only. Your name will never be placed on the questionnaire. Your completion of the survey is completely voluntary with no penalty for non-participation. The return of the survey constitutes your consent. We estimate that it will take 15-20 minutes to complete the questionnaire. If you have any questions about the study, please use the following telephone number to request additional information ....... Considering that we have limit time in Brazil to collect the data for this research project, please return the completed questionnaire within 2 weeks, no later than January, 1990. Thank you for the contribution. Enclosed is a chewing gum to help your concentration. Sincerely, Major Professor Researcher P.S. Please note the enclosed letter of endorsement by the National Secretary of Cooperatives, Mr. Adair Mazzotti, under the recommendation of the Ministry of Agriculture, Dr. Iris Rezende. 167 FIRST FOLLOW-UP [date] [first & last name] [position] [name & address of cooperative] Dear Sir: Two weeks ago, a questionnaire seeking your opinion about the highest priority competencies for presidents of cooperatives was mailed to you. You were selected to participate in the study because of your knowledge and experience in administration of cooperatives. If you have already completed and returned the questionnaire to us please accept our sincere thanks. If not, please do so as soon as possible. Your contribution is essential and we are counting on your support. I by some chance you did not received the questionnaire, or it got misplaced, please contact us in the address below and we will get another one in the mail today. Thank you. [Faculty Name & Signature] [Researcher Name $ Signature] [Address] 168 REMINDER LETTER [date] [first & last name] [position] [cooperative name & address] Dear Sir: About four weeks ago we wrote to you seeking your opinion about the highest priority competencies for. presidents of cooperatives. As of today we have not yet received your completed questionnaire. The Department of Agricultural and Extension Education at Michigan State University has undertaken this study because of the belief that your opinion as cooperative administrator is important. We are writing to you, because of the significance each questionnaire has to this study. In order for the results of the study to be truly representative of the opinions of cooperative administrators it is essential that each person return the questionnaire. You may be assured of complete confidentiality. The questionnaire has an identification number for statistical purposes only. Your name will never be placed in the questionnaire. In the event that your questionnaire has been misplaced, a replacement is enclosed. .We estimate that will take 15 to 20 minutes for completion of the questionnaire. Due to the limited time we have in Brazil to collect the research data, we ask.you to return the completed survey as soon as possible. Hope to hear from you soon. Thank you very much. Cordially, [Faculty' name & Signature] [Researcher' name & Signature] [Address] APPENDIX C WRITTEN COMMENTS 169 If there are any items we have not included, please note. To define a philosophy of work, define mission, and have clear objectives. Well Known, leadership, and hard work. This cooperative was founded by japanese immigrants in 1934. Today 50% of the members are brazilian-japanese, and 50% brazilian of various origins. Our president has to know the social, economic, and political environment of this community. Do not use the cooperative as a means to promote himself, do not mix politics with cooperative administration. Be optimist, and believe in God. The president should be honest, hard work, business-man, have cooperative spirit, and have no ambition for himself. Training for the directors. I am answering just the first part of the questionnaire because this cooperative will close in February due to lack of knowledge by te members about the philosophy and principles of cooperatives. Also, the agriculture crisis, and lack of government support contributed to force this organization out of business. . Creation of educative committees. Be a financially successful in his private life. Do not depend economically from the cooperative salary, be honest and hard work, give the same treatment to large and small farmer. Every cooperative have a tendency to grow, the administrator should hold back this development. Adopt an organizational view of the business, impartial, and without paternalism. Prioritize cooperative education, dedication, motivate the member to participate on cooperative issues. Administrators should manage the organization according to the needs and wants of the members. 170 what do you consider the most important duties and responsibilities of a cooperative president? Assiduity and good understanding of members and employees in order to make them feel supported. Fulfill the social regulations. Fulfill cooperative bylaws and regulations, and maintain a cooperative spirit. Manage well, and enforce cooperative education. To organize a responsible and hard working team. To represent the organization, make sure that the board of directors are acquainted with the goals and objectives of the organization, as well as the organization rules. Have a plan on how to coordinate and execute the plans of the organization. Political and administrative representativity. Leadership, appearance, good management skills. Knowledge in recruiting good executives; give opportunities for them to develop themselves and their work. Be punctual, honest, and work in order to make the cooperative successful, defend the interest of the cooperative. Be loyal to the cooperative members, and serve the cooperative. Be yourself. Be honest, take the initiative, possess decision making abilities, promote the economic and social development of the cooperative, have cooperative spirit. To always apply the real cooperative spirit and philosophy, keep the members well informed about the cooperative activities and development, try to respond to every basic needs of the members. Honesty, initiative and decision making abilities. Hard work, perseverance, honesty. 171 Hard work, understanding, inspire trust of members and employees. Honesty. Dedicate time on cooperative issues, work together with other directors on all the problems of the cooperative, finding ways to solve them. Assure that the bylaws and regulations of the organization are followed, and apply them for the good understanding between Directors, members, and employees. Honest, hard work and have initiative. Think logically, honesty, and have cooperative spirit. Know and respect the cooperative bylaws. Coordinate employees and members in order to make them as efficient as possible. To promote the development of the cooperative responding to the expectations of its members through continuous leadership, logic and good relationship with everybody. In addition to the ones specified in the bylaws,the president must administer the cooperative with democracy, honesty, and leadership, listening to his assistants and not with the political goals of re-election. Assiduity, leadership, and honesty. Work seriously, being honest, responsible, and professional, aware of his duties and obligations with the cooperative members. Assure that the interests of the cooperative are being fulfilled, and supervise the cooperative activities. Be responsible, honest, patient. It is essential to know how to guide members and have knowledge about agriculture in order to understand the cooperative's members and their needs. There are cases where the president has a university degree but does not know anything about agriculture. Honesty and integrity. Honesty, punctuality, and firmness when dealing with cooperative issues and development. Financial security. Duties: Keep the cooperative on a solid base in three major 172 areas: politically well balanced, economically stable, administratively well structured. Responsibilities: assure the social and economic responsibilities of the cooperative. To listen and respond to the needs of members. Duty: Try to motivate farmers to join the cooperative movement. Responsibility: To represent well the cooperative members. Fulfill the cooperative bylaws and philosophy. Respect the cooperative assets', treat all members the same no matter their economic or social class. To be in charge of his executive administration. Serve as a model with dedication and hard work in order to show the team that they will grow with the cooperative. Achieve all the objectives of the cooperative. Preside the coop with equity (everybody the same). Be aware that you are a president for a certain period of time and the cooperative is not your property, but it belongs to all the members to whom you are administering for a determined period of time. Fulfill the bylaws, regulations, objectives, and have knowledge of what you are doing. Ability to represent the cooperative and its members before governmental institutions and the community. Maintain a certain social-economic position in order to assure the financial-economic stability of the cooperative without forgetting the members. Motivate members to have a cooperative spirit. Direct the members' efforts to achieve their objectives. Hard work and honesty. The president should serve as a model to members, and there should be no question about his honesty. Dedicated worker, planning for the development of the cooperative and fulfilling the obligation of the bylaws. Keep track of the financial situation. 173 Value the opinions and work of other directors, and motivate their participation on the day-to-day-cooperative life. Ability to prioritize, and be aware that he is a temporary administrator of collective property. He is not the owner of the organization. Honesty, dedication, impartiality. The most important responsibility of the president is to effectively integrate the three vertices of the association: Administrators, Employees, and Members. Be responsible for all decisions, be honest, communicate well, and be leader. 174 what is your level of schooling? Management and English Dentist Law Agronomy Law Law Law, and Management Management Agriculture Law Law - Engineering, Management Civil Engineering, Management 1/2 course of Engineering Law Agriculture Chemistry Law Agronomy Animal Science Law Economics Accounting Agronomy Law Law Management Agriculture Veterinary Agronomy Accounting Law Law Business (incomplete) Agronomy Motors and Machines Agronomy Accounting, and Law Agronomy and Education Medical Teacher Accounting Agronomy LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Akin, G. 1987. Varieties of managerial learning. Qgganizational Dynamics 16 (2): 36-48. Albracht, J. J. 1966. A process for Determining Vocational Competencies for the Performance of Essential Activities for the Sales Functions by Sales Personnel in the Feed Industry, and the Loci at Which the Competencies Could Be Taught. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University. Allen, W. R. 1987. The management team for the cooperative of the future: The Union Equity Story. Aeezieee Cooperation. Washington, D.C.: 181-187. e o e a c ' ° . 1970. Ministerio da Agricultura. Vol IV. Brasilia. Area Handbook Series. 1983. Brazil a Country Study. The American University, ed. R.F. Nyrop. Baarda, J. R. 1983. Laws provide guidelines on legal responsibilities of co-operative directors. Farmer Cooperatives, (July) : 8-9. Babbie, E. R. 1986. The Practice oi Social Research. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc. Baer, K. P. 1987. The management team for the cooperative of the future: The Growmark Story. Aeegican gexpegeei_n. Washington, D.C.: 175-80. Boyatzis, R. 1982. The gempetene Menegez. A Model fie; c 've . New York: John Wiley & Sons. Brena, J. S. 1978. Director-manager relationship in cooperatives. Extension Bulletin no. 100. Aeiep and Pacific Council. Food and Fertilizer Technology Center. (January), Taipei, Taiwan. 175 176 Campbell, J. P.; M. D. Dunnette; E. E. Lawler III; and K. E. Weick, Jr. 1970. Managerial Behavior, Performapce, egg Effectivepees. New York: McGraw-Hill. Clark, R. M. and 0. D. Meaders. 1968. £ppepiep_epppeeep__ pg identifying cprricular content appropriate to vocapional - technical education ppograms. College of Education. Michigan State University. (March). Cracknell, M. P. 1978. Government - Cooperative Relationship. Agziepitupel Cooperative internationai (Summary of cooperative workshops held in Ghana), March 24-30, 1974; quoted in J. E. Schneider. 1978, Agzieulpupel Coopepatives apd erendept Aecgmplepion in Brazil: Chapge op Reproduction? Ph.D. dissertation. University of Wisconsin. Daloisio, T. and M. R. Firestone. 1983. Speaking from experience... A case study in applying adult learning theory in developing managers. Training end Deveiopmepp Journal. 37 (February): 73-78. Darlage, A. 1983. Cooperative education and the bottom line: Our program and results. American Cooperation. Washington, D.C.: 287-92. Davies, I. K. 1973. Competency Based Learning: a a eme nd es' New York: McGraw-Hill. Deutscher, I. 1973. Asking questions cross-culturally: Some problems of linguistic comparability. In Qemparapive Reseapeh Methogs, ed. d.P. Warwick and S. Osherson: 163-86. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewwod Cliffs, N.J. Doray, M. 1982. A Formacao dos Administradores Eleitos. In Administracao de Cooperativas (Vol. III) of Menual de Cooperativismo. D.B. Pinho et al. Brascoop, Sao Paulo: 219-20. Drucker, P. F. 1974. Management - Tasks, Besponsibiiities, Epeepices. New York: Harper & Row. Dubhashi, P. R. 1970. Epineipies and Ehiioseppy of Qe;epepepi_p. Vaikunth Mehta National Institute of Co-operative Management. Poona. Estetppo de goopepepive Agpicoie. 1986. Secretaria da Agricultura. Departamento de Cooperativismo. sao Paulo. 177 Earmer.§222eretiye_fierxiee. 1971- U-S- Department of Agriculture. Recruiting, training, and developing workers for farmers cooperatives. Information 77. Fauquet, G. 1965. Oeuvres: Le secteur cooperatif. Regards sur le mouvement cooperatif, etc. Editions de i'Institute ges Etudes Cooperatives, Paris. In Mobilization of human resources for rural development through agricultural cooperatives. Paper presented at the Open flezlg Conference on "The role of agricultural cooperatives in economic and social development" organized by ICA/FAO/ILO/IFAP/COPAC, Rome 22-28 May. Forrest, D. G. 1983. What makes a good manager? The genedien_nenegep. Toronto, (December) 8 (4): 21-22. Freppert, J. 1985. Training and educating management, directors, employees, and members: The Harvest States Program. Anepican Qoepepepie . Washington, D.C.: 178- 82. Gardner, H. 1964. Qetermining competencies for initiel em 0 en ' the d ° f e i t busin s . Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University. Goldsmith, J. 1979. Competence assessment within a professional training program. In: Defining and measuring competence. (issue no.3) of new Qizeetion to; Expepientiai Learning ed. P. Pottinger and J. oldsmith: 53-63. San Francisco, California. Jossey-Bass. Grauerholz, J. L. 1982. The role of a cooperative manager. American Cooperation, Amepican inspipute ef geopepepio . Washington, D.C.: 269-74. Griffiths, J. F. and D. W. King. 1986. Hey dipecpions in librerx___end_inf2rmatien_§gienee_edusetien- Connecticut: Greenwood Press, Inc.. American Society for Information Science. Gwin, F. 1976-77. Local Managers must grow as cooperatives grow. American Cooperation, Ame c st'tu of geepepepien. Washington D.C.: 135-40. Huff, 5.; G. Klemp; L. Spencer; S. Williamson. 1980. Tne assessment_2f_eesueetienal_22meetenee- McBer and Company, Boston, Massachusetts. Prepared for the National Institute of Education. (July). Hutchinson, C. R. 1969. Cooperative educetion and training in deveioping countpies. Edited by M. J. McGrath 178 guidelines for cooperatives in developing economies. The International Cooperative Training Center. The University of Wisconsin, Madison: 157-207. James, W. 1950. ' ' es 0 s c . Dover Publications, Inc. Junqueira, J. B. 1986. O Cooperativismo em sao Paulo. Speech delivered in the ii Encontro Betadual doe Comites Educativos de Cooperativas do Estado de 560 22212: organized by COONAI/SENACOOP/ICA/OCESP. Brodosqui, Sao Paulo. November 26-27. Kai, T. 1981. Agricultural Cooperatives Management: Japan's Experience. Tokio: Ppegncepe' Aesocietion fier Marketing Bapn Ppoduets. Asian Productivity Organization: 92-108. Kane, J., and E. Lawler. 1978. Methods of peer assessment. Psychologicei Buiiepin. 85 (3): 555-86. Katz, R. L. 1974. Skills of an effective administrator. Harwapd Business Review. 52: 90-102. Klemp, G.O. 1979. Identifying, measuring, and integrating competence. In: Defining and measuring competence. (issue no.3) of New directiens fer Enperiential ieepning. ed. P. Pottinger and J. Goldsmith: 41-52. San Francisco, California. Jossey-Bass. Klemp, 6.0. 1980. s t 'o competenee. Final report. Prepared for the National Institute of Education. (February). Laidlaw, A.F. 1972. Mobilization of human resources for rural development through agricultural cooperatives. Paper presented at the Open Wopig Qonfepence on "The Role of Agricultural Cooperatives in Economic and Social Development" organized by ICA/FAO/ILO/IFAP/COPAC, Rome, 22-28 May. Lannhagen, P.E. 1981. Managerial problems of producers' marketing associations. Tokio: Bpogueeps' Aseoeiatien for Magneting Fepn Prodncts. Asian Productivity Organization: 84-91. Leith, G. 1983. Cooperative directors in the 80's: Old issues plus new challenges. Anerican Qoeperapion. Washington, D.C. : 385-90. 179 Mather, J.W.; G. Ingalsbe; D. Volkin. 1980. Cooperative Management. 00 e a 've o a 'on e o n 1, Section 8. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.. (April). Manuel, M.L. 1973. Improving Management of Farmer Cooperatives. Bannep Cooperapive Sepviee. General Report 120. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. (September). McClelland, D. C. 1973. Testing for competence rather than for "intelligence"- Amerieen_2exshelegi§_- 28 (1): 1-40. McClelland, D. C. 1975. Pow . e e e e 'e ce. New York: Irvington Publishers, Inc. Mentkowski, M.; V. DeBack; J. M. Bishop; 2. Allen; B. Blanton. 1980. ve o 'n of s 'o a c m et c modei for nnrsing educapion. Final Report to the National Institute of Education. Research Report Number 9. Mentkowski, M; K. O'Brien; W. McEachern; D. Fowler. 1982. Beveloping a professional eompetence modei gor nenagemenp education. Final Report to the National Institute of Education. Research Report number 10. Alverno College, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Nascimento, O. V. 1982. Evolucao da educacao cooperativa no Brasil. In Administracao de Cooperativas (vol III), of M_nual_de_9222_retixi§me D. B. Pinho et a1- Brascoop, Sao Paulo: 227- 238. Nogueira, N. and R. Coda. 1982. A funcao de administracao de recursos humanos em organizacOes cooperativas. In Administracao de Cooperativas (vol III), of Manual de geepepepiyiene. D. B. Pinho et al. Brascoop, sao Paulo: 193-205. Nyrop, R.F., ed 1983. Bpanii e Country Study. Area Handbook Series: The American University. Os Cingnenta Anos go Bepaptanenpo ge eooperetivisno. 1983. Governo do Estado de Sao Paulo, Secretaria da Agricultura e Abastecimento. Sao Paulo :7 Panorama do Cooperativismo Brasileiro - 1987. 1989. Serie Cadernos Beonomicos No. 48, Organizacao das Cooperativas Brasileiras. Brasilia. Patera, M. 1985. U.S. cooperative education effort pales 180 in comparison to Austria. Farmer Cooperapives. (November): 10-11. Pottinger, P. S. & G. O. Klemp. 1976. Qoncepts ang issues IEIQEQQ pg the identificapion, meesupemenp, end xelidatien_ef_eemnetene_. Boston: McBer and Company- Pottinger, P. 1979. Competence assessment: comments on current practices: In: Defining and measuring competence (issue no. 3) of New D'rectio s or Expepienpiei_Leepning. ed. P. Pottinger and J. Goldsmith: 25-39. San Francisco, California. AJossey-Bass. Pottinger, P.; N. E. Wiesfeld; D. K. Tochen; P. D. Cohen; M. L. Schaalman. 1980. Ine assessment ef geenpapionai etence: C c ssessment for con i eertification. McBer and Company. Boston, . Massachusetts. Prepared for the National Institute of Education. Powers, E.A. 1987. Enhancing managerial competence: The American Management Association competency programme. Journal of Mana emen eve o m . United Kingdom. 6 (4): 7-18. . Primoff, E. 1973. Bow te prepepe ang conduet jop elemenp enaminapiens. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Civil Service Commission. Rodrigues, R. 1986. Speech delivered in the II ‘ Encontro Estadual dos Comites Educativos de Cooperativas do Estado de Sao Paulo, organized by COONAI/SENACOOP/ICA/OCESP. Brodosqui, Sao Paulo. November 26-27. Roy. 3.9. 1981. _Q92eeratiyee1_Deyelsement1_£rineinlesi_and_ Menagemenp. Danville, Illinois: Interstate. Schneider, J. E. 1978. Agricultural Cooperatives and Dependent Accumulation in Brazil: Change or Reproduction? Ph.D. dissertation. University of Wisconsin. Schneider. 3.0. 1982. 2rin2ipaie_2reblema§_da_gemunieeeée_ Ceopepativa= In Administracao de Cooperativas (vol III), of Manual de Cooperativismo. D.B. Pinho et al. :141-5. Brascoop, sao Paulo. Schutz, A. Phaenomenologica. Collected Papers I. The Problem of Social Reality. ed. Maurice Natanson. 1962. Martinus Nijhoff/The Hague. Netherlands. 181 Seabra, M. G. 1977. As Qeepepativas Mistas ge Bspede Be 830 Panle. Sao Paulo: Universidade de 550 Paulo. Steele, R. E. 1986. Factors Affecting Practical Agricultural Training Experiences for Graduate Students from Developing Countries. Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University. Tne Wopld Bang Ailee. 1987. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.. Togerson, R. E. and G. Ingalsbe. 1984. Ine_£npn:e_ef_ Banner Coepepepivee. Cooperative Extension Service. Michigan State University. Vilstrup, D. 1982. New dimensions in cooperative leadership. American Cooperation. Washington, D.C.: 257-63. Volkin, D. and N. Griffin. 1959. Management training among farmer cooperatives. General Report 65. Fennep Qeoperetiye Bepviee. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C. (June). Volkin, D; N. Griffin; H. H. Hulbert. 1960. Directors of regional farmer cooperatives. General Report 83. Eepner Coopepepiye Bepyi e. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.. Warren, R.D.; G.M. Beal; J.M. Bohlen. 1973. Managers and firm characteristics of farm supply cooperatives in Iowa. W: 107- Wilkie, J.W.; D. E. Lorey; E. Ochoa, ed. 1988. Statistical Abstpect of Lapin Anepi e. vol. 26. "lilllllllllllllllll'llllll“