The Influence of Board Diversity and Board Conflict on Performance in Consumer Cooperatives in South Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Board of directors are important elements in the structure and management of cooperatives. This study examines the relationships between cooperative board diversity (i.e., value and functional) and three performance variables (social performance, operational performance, and democratic performance). Additionally, we hypothesize that conflict (task or relational) mediates these relationships. We argue that decision making, policy, and performance depend on the composition of a board. The empirical analysis, using a sample of 423 female board members in 66 local consumer cooperatives in South Korea, finds that board value diversity can have a negative effect on performance, even though their functional background diversity may be positive, while conflicts over performing tasks may mediate functional background diversity and performance. More specifically, the results indicate that board value diversity is positive and significantly related to relational conflicts, while functional background diversity is negative and significantly related to task conflicts. The findings suggest that performance of cooperatives can be improved with more diverse board with functional backgrounds. We hope that this paper could offer a significant contribution to both the board and corporate governance literature and the diversity literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".