Social Capital: A Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage for Consumer Co-operatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Competitive advantages of consumer co-operatives have received increasing scholarly attention during the recent years. In the extant literature, co-operative social capital (derived from the co-operative values, purpose, and principles) has been identified as a source of competitive advantage for co-operatives. However, the literature lacks empirical evidence concerning how the sources of social capital are developed and utilized in consumer co-operation and what strategic benefits consumer co-operatives achieve by utilizing and developing different sources of social capital. Our paper is directed toward this end. In our study, we thematically analyze 20 qualitative interviews with executives, managers, and supervisory board chairs of Finnish retail and service organization S Group and its co-operatives.Our findings indicate that there are several sources of social capital for consumer co-operatives (e.g. interacting and sharing a common identity). Further, we consider how these sources of social capital are interrelated to different dimensions of social capital (communal, relational, and cognitive). We also describe the strategic benefits that the different dimensions of social capital create, the most important finding being that social capital may help consumer co-operatives to achieve a sustained competitive advantage by providing resources for managing institutional dependencies and customer-relations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".