Member Cooperative Learning Model for Strengthening Cooperative Principles at Artha Kencana Cooperative, Cangkir Village, Driyorejo District, Gresik Regency
Keywords:
Cooperative governance, Digitalization, Member education, Member participation, Women's empowermentAbstract
Village cooperatives frequently face limited member literacy, weak participation, incomplete governance documentation, and low digital readiness. This study evaluates a Member Cooperative Learning (MCL) model designed to strengthen cooperative principles and institutional performance at Artha Kencana Cooperative in Cangkir Village, Gresik Regency. A descriptive qualitative design with a participatory research approach involved 90 members selected purposively from approximately 200 members across four business units. Data were collected through educational workshops, focus group discussions, simulations, participatory observation, interviews, document review, and a pre-test/post-test questionnaire covering cooperative identity, member rights and responsibilities, democratic governance, financial administration, and collective marketing. Quantitative evaluation data were summarized descriptively, while interview, observation, and document data were analyzed thematically and triangulated. Before the program, only about 30% of participants demonstrated adequate understanding of cooperative principles. After the intervention, 50.0% achieved a high knowledge category and 38.9% a moderate category. Participation in the Annual Members' Meeting exceeded 75%, three core governance documents were established, marketing channels expanded from one to at least three, average monthly sales increased from IDR 5.0 million to IDR 7.5 million, and the proportion of members operating independent or joint businesses rose from about 20% to more than 50%. The study contributes an integrated learning model that connects cooperative education with governance practice, digital financial recording, product marketing, and women's economic empowerment. Because the study involved one cooperative without a control group, the outcomes should be interpreted as program-associated improvements rather than definitive causal effects.
Downloads
References
S. Novkovic, “Defining the co-operative difference,” The Journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 2168-2177, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2008.02.009.
R. Spear, “Governance in democratic member-based organisations,” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 33-60, 2004, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8292.2004.00242.x.
J. Birchall and R. Simmons, “What motivates members to participate in co-operative and mutual businesses?” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 465-495, 2004, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8292.2004.00259.x.
P. Österberg and J. Nilsson, “Members’ perception of their participation in the governance of cooperatives: The key to trust and commitment in agricultural cooperatives,” Agribusiness, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 181-197, 2009, doi: 10.1002/agr.20200.
A. Cechin, J. Bijman, S. Pascucci, D. Zylbersztajn, and O. Omta, “Drivers of pro-active member participation in agricultural cooperatives: Evidence from Brazil,” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 443-468, 2013, doi: 10.1111/apce.12023.
J. Nilsson, G. L. H. Svendsen, and G. T. Svendsen, “Are large and complex agricultural cooperatives losing their social capital?” Agribusiness, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 187-204, 2012, doi: 10.1002/agr.21285.
R. Ruben and J. Heras, “Social capital, governance and performance of Ethiopian coffee cooperatives,” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 463-484, 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8292.2012.00473.x.
E. Kusmiati, D. Masyita, E. Febrian, and M. F. Cahyandito, “A study on the determinants of successful performance of Indonesian cooperatives,” International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 50, no. 9, pp. 1285-1301, 2023, doi: 10.1108/IJSE-02-2022-0078.
A. Aziz, A. Iradianty, and V. Rifdy, “Preparing digital advancements in Pasteur Subdistrict cooperatives,” Journal of Community Service and Empowerment, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 469-479, 2024, doi: 10.22219/jcse.v5i3.32968.
I. Shobirin and A. H. Muhammad, “IT governance model based on COBIT 2019 to support digital transformation of cooperatives: Case study of KSPPS TAMZIS Bina Utama,” G-Tech: Jurnal Teknologi Terapan, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 2474-2484, 2024, doi: 10.70609/g-tech.v8i4.5169.
P. C. Verhoef, T. Broekhuizen, Y. Bart, A. Bhattacharya, J. Q. Dong, N. Fabian, and M. Haenlein, “Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 122, pp. 889-901, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022.
R. Eller, P. Alford, A. Kallmünzer, and M. Peters, “Antecedents, consequences, and challenges of small and medium-sized enterprise digitalization,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 112, pp. 119-127, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.004.
H. Bouwman, S. Nikou, and M. de Reuver, “Digitalization, business models, and SMEs: How do business model innovation practices improve performance of digitalizing SMEs?” Telecommunications Policy, vol. 43, no. 9, Art. no. 101828, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101828.
P. B. Datta and R. Gailey, “Empowering women through social entrepreneurship: Case study of a women’s cooperative in India,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 569-587, 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00505.x.
F. Baum, C. MacDougall, and D. Smith, “Participatory action research,” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, vol. 60, no. 10, pp. 854-857, 2006, doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.028662.
V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77-101, 2006, doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
T. O. Nyumba, K. Wilson, C. J. Derrick, and N. Mukherjee, “The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation,” Methods in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 20-32, 2018, doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12860.
