MASTER OF ARTS INORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP
This is to certify that I have approved this final copy of a Master’s Thesis by
Kristine G. Rose
Martha Hardesty, Ph.D.,Research Advisor
Date
COLLEGE OF ST. CATHERINEST. PAUL, MINNESOTA
Leadership Pathways: Women AgriculturalCooperative Directors
By
Kristine G. Rose
A Thesis submitted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Organization Leadership, atCollege of St. Catherine, St. Paul, Minnesota
December 2002
Thesis Advisor
Martha Hardesty, Ph.D.
Readers
Sharon Doherty, Ph.D. and Gary Weness, B.S.
Copyright 2002 Kristine G. Rose.All rights reserved. No part of this may be reproduced in any form or by any means,electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or any retrievalsystem, without the written permission of the author.
- i -
Acknowledgements
The MAOL journey for me has been a pursuit of authentic leadership as
described by Robert Terry and of ethical, effective and enduring leadership. Those are
the 3-E’s (White-Newman, 1993) I learned from you, Julie-Belle. They have provided a
solid foundation whenever I questioned leadership issues. Thus, you are the first person
I acknowledge and thank. Thank you for having had the vision for the MAOL program
and the tenacity to see it through to fruition. I am grateful for the MAOL program, my
journey through the program and your leadership.
Thank you, Martha, for agreeing to serve as my advisor. When I scanned the
MAOL faculty and decided to ask you, I didn’t have a clue what was in store for me. I
cherish your enthusiasm for this work and for life. Best wishes to you in all of your
interests and pursuits.
Thanks, Fred. Without the financial, physical and emotional support you
provided, this MAOL journey wouldn’t have been possible. Thank you for clocking in
at the P.O. to keep a roof over our heads, food on the table, and clothes on the kids.
Thanks too for your extra effort with the kids and around the house while I spent time
on this project. You’re the best partner.
David, Helen and William. I’m sure you’ve wondered what could possibly be so
great about school that I’d spend so much time, tuition and effort on it. I can only tell
you about the joy and excitement I’ve felt when I’ve learned new things – or had ‘aha’
moments. This is my journey. I set the bar high and now that I’ve hurdled it, the rush is
awesome. My first wish for you is that you love God, love others and love yourself. My
second wish is that you challenge yourself to set the bar high and go for it. That is the
stuff dreams are made of.
- ii -
Thanks, Mom and Dad, for your patience and understanding as I’ve pursued this
journey. First you loved me and from that, came roots and wings.
Thanks, Frank and Judy, for your patience and understanding. From your open
arms to gifts from your garden and heart, I am blessed by your presence in my life.
Thank you, Sharon and Gary, for agreeing to serve on this committee. Your
knowledge, experience and suggestions were valuable as I formed and wrapped up this
culminating work.
Last, but not least, this work wouldn’t have been possible without the
participation of the women directors. Thank you for agreeing to share your stories with
me. I was humbled by the opportunity to meet each of you and thrilled at the chance to
shed light on this seldom traveled path to ag co-op director. Again, my thanks to you
and best wishes to you in your leadership endeavors.
- iii -
Abstract
The research problem is two-fold. First, as an employee of a regional
cooperative, I saw little evidence of women directors. Second, several women, gathered
at a conference for women in agriculture at a roundtable discussion on leadership,
wondered how they might be considered for the role of agricultural cooperative
director. In response to the research problems, I first gathered data to quantify the
number of men and women who serve as directors in the Midwest. Next I reviewed the
literature concerning executive women and characteristics that propel or derail
advancement. As the literature concerning women and agricultural cooperative director
achievement was very limited, I looked to the six women agricultural cooperative
directors as a resource. Through interviews with them, the pathways they each traveled
to agricultural cooperative director were unveiled. This study found that participation
in certain organizations supports leadership development and propels achievement.
- iv -
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... i
Abstract .........................................................................................................................................iii
Table of Contents .........................................................................................................................iv
Chapter 1: Introduction................................................................................................................ 1
Research Questions and Purpose .................................................................................. 2
Research Goals and Methods ......................................................................................... 2
Chapter 2: Conceptual Context .................................................................................................. 6
Board Constituency ......................................................................................................... 6
Leadership Pathway Experiences.................................................................................. 8
Barriers to women’s advancement/achievement .......................................... 9
Advancement and achievement ..................................................................... 11
The Agricultural Cooperative ...................................................................................... 12
Industry Analysis.............................................................................................. 13
Values and Principles ....................................................................................... 15
Economic Features ............................................................................................ 17
Research Question in Light of Conceptual Context.................................................. 19
Chapter 3: Description of Research Design and Methods .................................................... 20
Research Genre and Typologies .................................................................................. 20
Sampling and Participant Demographics................................................................... 21
The Research Relationship............................................................................................ 22
Data Collection ............................................................................................................... 23
Data Management and Analysis.................................................................................. 24
Ethical Considerations .................................................................................................. 25
- v -
Chapter 4: Director Stories........................................................................................................ 27
Opal.................................................................................................................................. 27
Coral................................................................................................................................. 30
Violet................................................................................................................................ 36
Pearl ................................................................................................................................. 39
Ruby................................................................................................................................. 44
Crystal.............................................................................................................................. 51
Chapter 5: Leadership Pathway Unveiled .............................................................................. 59
Pre-nomination Pathway .............................................................................................. 62
Cooperative Affiliation .................................................................................... 62
Values ................................................................................................................. 63
Organizational Involvement and Leadership Development...................... 65
Nomination..................................................................................................................... 68
Self....................................................................................................................... 68
Nominating Committee ................................................................................... 69
Encouraged by others....................................................................................... 69
Concerns............................................................................................................. 74
Campaign and Election................................................................................................. 75
Post-election Pathway Director Reflections ............................................................... 80
Being a woman and a token ............................................................................ 80
Peer acceptance ................................................................................................. 81
Self acceptance................................................................................................... 84
Leadership as a component of the pathway experience........................................... 84
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 84
- vi -
Chapter 6: Summary, Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations........................ 85
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 85
Implications and Recommendations........................................................................... 88
Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 90
References .................................................................................................................................... 91
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Sample letter of invite........................................................................................ 97
Appendix B: Sample confirmation of interview letter.......................................................... 98
Appendix C: Sample consent document ................................................................................ 99
List of Tables
Table 1: Board constituency of Midwest cooperatives ............................................................ 7
Table 2: Board constituency: a comparison to the Fortune 500 and 1000 ............................. 8
Table 3: Number of cooperatives and net business volume ................................................. 14
Table 4: National Cooperative Bank Top 100: Midwest data .............................................. 15
Table 5: Economic features that differentiate a cooperative from an IOF........................... 18
Table 6: Leadership pathways unveiled .................................................................................. 60
- 1 -
Chapter 1: Introduction
I had the opportunity to lead a roundtable discussion on leadership at an April
1999 agricultural leadership conference where I introduced myself as an employee of a
regional cooperative and a graduate student in organizational leadership. When the
women at the table learned of my employment and leadership studies, they queried me
about how they might be considered for a farmer cooperative director leader role. After
nine years of employment in the regional cooperative system and graduate level
coursework in leadership studies, I didn’t have what I considered a very good response.
I told them about Thomas Kajer’s Ph.D. thesis research (1996) in which he describes an
election path that was initiated by an informal sponsorship of an individual and was
then followed by a formal election process. The fact that these women asked how they
might be considered for and included in the nomination/election process for the role of
agricultural cooperative director indicated their interest in serving as a director. It also
revealed the existence of a knowledge barrier or void.
That day, a small group of women identified knowledge and their lack of it as
one problem in their director leader quest. As a regional cooperative employee, I was
uncomfortable by what I perceived as another serious problem: far too few women
served as farmer cooperative directors. Furthermore, I began to see a real disconnect
between the diverse leadership experiences of my youth and the reality of a white male
organization and cooperative board of directors.
As I reflected upon the experiences of my youth, I assumed that my farm
background and leadership development experiences were similar to those of
prospective women directors. I grew up on a crop and dairy farm in which all family
members were involved in the day-to-day operations of our production agriculture
- 2 -
enterprise. I was very involved in leadership development activities such as 4-H and
never felt that I was more or less likely to be elected to a leadership position based on
my gender. I saw young men and women assume leadership roles at local, county and
state levels. I viewed both career choices and leadership opportunities as limitless and
not precluded by gender. Furthermore, I felt that my experiences as a 4-H member and
leader were excellent leadership development opportunities and preparation for adult
leadership roles within my community. I was confused. If women in agriculture
participated in youth leadership development programs, why did I see so few women
directors and why were women asking me how to become a director?
The Research Questions
Two problems were identified above. First, in my tenure with a regional
cooperative, I saw very few women directors and second, women wondered how they
might become directors. Each problem posed a unique question: 1) is my perception of
too few women directors accurate and 2) how do women become farmer cooperative
directors?
Purpose
This study will explore the research questions to discover how many women
serve as directors and the pathway they traverse to agricultural cooperative director.
Research Goals and Methods
The perceived under-representation of women on farmer cooperative boards of
directors created the need to either validate or invalidate the perception. The validation
process would be conducted through a data-gathering process of its own. The other
research question would focus on the knowledge void and suggested that interviews
with women directors were the most appropriate data-gathering method. In response to
- 3 -
the initial research questions, seven research goals emerged. They are identified and
described below.
Validate the Existence of a Gender Gap
Maybe my perception that too few women served as directors was wrong and
women served as directors of cooperatives at a level equal to or higher than the
corporate sector. Regardless, quantifying board constituency according to gender
would establish a benchmark for this study and future studies.
Gain an Understanding of the Leadership Pathway Experience
The women at the roundtable indicated an interest in being a director and a lack
of knowledge about how they might accomplish that goal. I didn’t have the requisite
knowledge that might have supported or enabled their journey. Therefore I looked to
the existing literature for information that might be helpful to them. Furthermore,
interviews with women agricultural cooperative directors could confirm and add to an
understanding of the leadership pathway to cooperative director.
Illuminate Their Leadership Pathway Stories
According to organizational sociologists, Joanne Martin and Melanie Powers,
stories are powerful. They compared the effectiveness of four different methods of
persuading people: 1) using only a story, 2) presenting statistical data, 3) presenting
statistics and a story, and 4) issuing a policy statement. “The students in the groups that
were given the story believed the claim about the policy more than any of the other
groups” (cited in Kouzes and Posner, 1995, p. 226). Thus the stories of the women
directors hold a prominent place in this work.
Reveal Common Themes or Patterns
Face-to-face interviews and the resulting transcripts would yield much data. An
- 4 -
analysis of the data would hopefully reveal themes or patterns common to the
participants. Emergent themes or patterns would hopefully shed light on the research
question and lead to a narrowing of the knowledge gap.
Empower Women in Agriculture with Knowledge
The women I listened to at the roundtable discussion were interested in
cooperative leadership, but didn’t know where to begin. With this work, the question of
how women achieve a directorship is unveiled and the knowledge gap narrowed.
Influence System Change
Cooperatives, cooperative employees, and member-owners are stakeholders in
the farmer cooperative system. Local cooperative directors are a primary source for a
regional cooperative’s board of directors. This work seeks to influence nominating
policy and procedure changes that promote the inclusion of women at all levels. As a
female regional cooperative employee it was important for me to see women directors. I
viewed a diverse board of directors as a reflection of the organization’s commitment to a
diverse employee population.
I once encountered a male regional cooperative employee who said: ‘If they
[women] don’t know how [to navigate the path to cooperative director leader], they
shouldn’t be a director.’ Similar attitudes and organizational policies and practices that
exclude fall short of being ethical, effective or enduring. Women are important figures
in the rural community and as such their contributions and leadership must not be
overlooked. Cooperative educators have an opportunity to increase awareness and
influence change surrounding attitudes, policies, and practices that marginalize or
oppress.
- 5 -
Make an Academic Contribution
Rickson (1997), in Current Sociology wrote:
…researching women in agriculture is central to many on-going social science
concerns, central to many feminist aims (Thompson, 1992), but more central still
to what Reinharz (1992) has called the ‘sociology of the lack of knowledge.’ That
sociology examines ‘how and why knowledge is not produced, is obliterated, or is
not incorporated into a canon’; it analyzes ‘how certain people are ignored, their
words discounted, and their place in history overlooked … how certain things are
not studied and other things are not even named’ (Reinharz, 1992: 248-9). (p. 91)
Rickson acknowledges that “researching women in agriculture is central to many
on-going social science concerns.” Since little research looks at women in
agriculture and even less looks at women in agricultural cooperatives, the
opportunity exists to make an academic contribution. More importantly, the
research is an opportunity to acknowledge, value and name the knowledge and
experience demonstrated by the women directors who shared their stories with
me.
The context in which women become agricultural cooperative directors is
developed in Chapter 2.
- 6 -
Chapter 2: Conceptual Context
Prior to this research project, suspicions and anecdotal evidence existed claiming
a paucity of women agricultural cooperative directors. An examination of the data was
required to quantify gender constituency within the agricultural cooperative setting and
compare the findings to the data from the investor-owned firm (IOF) setting. Next,
leadership pathway experiences are examined in the context of the IOF and then in the
context of the agricultural cooperative. Finally, the conceptual context is further
developed through an examination of the agricultural cooperative and its 1) significance
within the agricultural economy, 2) values and guiding principles, and 3) economic
features that differentiate it from an investor-owned firm.
Board Constituency
The first research question was, is my perception that few women serve as
directors accurate? The data gathering process began with a query of the National
Cooperative Bank Top 100 list of cooperatives in the Midwest. Eleven agricultural
cooperatives were identified as a result of the query. Then director names and photos
from each cooperative were gathered from 1) their cooperative’s website, 2) their annual
report as published on their website or 3) a written request for their most current annual
report. Table 1 shows the number of directors that serve each cooperative and their
constituency with regard to gender.
- 7 -
Table 1
Board seat constituency of top Midwest farmer cooperatives
Board seats heldby
Cooperative Women Men TotalSource
CHS Cooperatives 0 17 172001 annual report
Land O'Lakes Inc. 2 25 272001 annual report
Foremost Farms USA Cooperative 2 36 382001 annual report
Associated Milk Producers, Inc. 0 32 322001 annual report
American Crystal Sugar Co. 0 17 172001 annual report
Minnesota Corn Processors, Inc. 0 24 242001 annual report
United Suppliers, Inc. 0 9 92001 annual report
Equity Co-op Livestock Sales Association 0 15 152001 annual report
Swiss Valley Farms Co. 1 20 21www.swissvalley.com
Alto Dairy Cooperative 1 17 18www.altodairy.com
South Dakota Wheat Growers Association, Inc. 0 18 18www.sdwg.com
Total 6 230 236
According to Table 1 on board constituency of top Midwest farmer cooperatives,
women hold six of 236 board seats or 2.5% of total available board seats. Table 2 shows
how board constituency of Midwest farmer cooperatives compares to percentage of
board seats held by women in the Fortune 500 and 1000 where women held 12.4% and
10.9% of board seats respectively (Catalyst, Inc., 2002).
- 8 -
Table 2
Board constituency in Midwest cooperatives compared to the Fortune 500 and 1000
% of Board Seats Held by Women
Top 11 Midwest Agricultural Cooperatives 2.5%
Fortune 500 12.4%
Fortune 1000 10.9%
Note. Fortune 500 and 1000 data assembled from Catalyst, Inc. (2002)
The findings on board constituency confirm the perception that few women
serve as directors. The under-representation of women directors is an indication that
they have been largely excluded from agricultural cooperative leadership. The
difference between the percent of board seats held by women in midwestern agricultural
cooperatives and the Fortune 500 and 1000 of America indicated the existence of more
than just a gender gap; it suggested the existence of barriers to achievement faced by
women in the farmer cooperative system. The paucity of women directors and the
roundtable discussion where women wondered how they might become directors
suggested a closer look at the literature related to leaders and the pathway they traverse
to a leadership position.
Leadership Pathway Experiences
“Leaders go first. They set an example…” (Kouzes and Posner, 1995, p. 13).
The board constituency analysis identified the existence of a gender gap. Thus,
an examination of the literature surrounding barriers women and others face in their
leadership pathway pursuits is one focus of the conceptual context in which women
serve as directors. An examination of barriers helps uncover information about what
- 9 -
stands in the way of advancement or achievement. At the same time, six women
directors were identified and provide examples of achievement despite barriers. Thus,
the conceptual context will be further developed through an examination of the key
leadership pathway experiences of women who experience advancement to executive
and director positions. The literature contains examples of women who serve in
executive roles, who serve as corporate directors and who own their own companies.
From those examples, the achievement pathway to agricultural cooperative director
might begin to be illuminated.
Barriers to Women’s Achievement/Advancement
The noticeable lack of advancement by women and minorities became the
impetus for the 1991 formation of The Glass Ceiling Commission by the U.S. Labor
Department. “The Commission undertook an extensive research and information
gathering effort, including public hearings, surveys of chief executive officers, and
interviews with focus groups” (Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995a, p. 9). The
commission findings identified numerous barriers to achievement in its report Good for
Business: making full use of the nation’s human capital (Federal Glass Ceiling Commission,
1995b) including “difference” barriers such as culture, race and gender and “pipeline”
barriers.
Prior to the formation of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, Morrison (1987)
led the Executive Women Project and produced significant scholarly research in the area
of factors that “propel” or “derail” (p. 8) advancement. She described a “double barrier”
to advancement – the ceiling and the wall. The ‘glass ceiling – a transparent barrier -
applies to women as a group who are kept from advancing higher because they are
women’ (p. 13). “Once women break this first barrier, however, they unexpectedly
- 10 -
encounter another barrier—a wall of tradition and stereotype that separates them from
the top executive level. This wall keeps women out of the inner sanctum of senior
management, the core of business leaders who wield the great power” (p. 14).
The purpose of Morrison’s next work, The New Leaders: Guidelines on Leadership
Diversity in America, was “to help organizations and leaders design and implement
practices that will develop diversity within the management ranks” (1996, p. xii). As
part of the research, she and her team identified 21 barriers to advancement. Two
categories of barriers identified by Morrison are:
1) White men already in place, [sic] keep others out
2) Cannot find [emphasis added] qualified nontraditional candidates (p.
291)
For women in agriculture, that white men are already in place is evident by the
preceding data assembled on board constituency. Furthermore, if board constituents are
primarily men, then it seems logical that nominating committees are similarly
composed. If that is true, it is possible that few women candidates are found. In
category two, Morrison identifies five barriers, one being a lack of organizational savvy.
According to her a lack of organizational savvy limits access to political networks and
mentors, resulting in a knowledge gap.
Women’s absence from farmer cooperatives is also notable in the literature. Kau
(1976) in her research of Wisconsin agricultural cooperative managers discovered that “a
substantial number of managers were discouraging if not outright hostile to the idea of
more women in their cooperative.” More recently, O’Hara (1994) wrote “Women are
conspicuously absent from (or marginalized in) farming organizations, agro-support
services, agricultural cooperatives [emphasis added], the farming media and
- 11 -
organizational structures associated with initiatives to promote rural development
(1994:54)” (as cited in Liepins, 1998, p. 130). Barriers described in the agricultural
literature include patriarchy, gender, life cycle effects, and stereotyping which all hinder
women’s participation and achievement in agricultural cooperatives (Sachs 1983, 1986;
Rosenfeld, 1985; Kajer, 1996; Liepins, 1998; Ketilson, 1996; and Shortall, 1999).
Morrison and the Glass Ceiling Commission reported that their interviews were
conducted with executives. Unlike the executives who were the focus of their research,
women in agriculture who are interested in an agricultural cooperative director role
depend upon being successfully nominated and elected to a director role.
Advancement and Achievement
The preceding analysis of board constituency, and identification of barriers to
advancement, paint a dismal picture regarding women in agriculture and cooperative
director leader achievement. Yet, authors such as Swiss (1996), White (1992), Driscoll &
Goldberg (1993), and Helgesen (1990) through interviews with women leaders provide
hope and inspiration. They provide examples of women either advancing through the
ranks of corporate America or leading their own companies. Though these authors
provide numerous stories of advancement and achievement, none of the subjects are
women in agriculture.
The literature concerning women in agriculture and achievement falls into two
categories: 1) non-scholarly and 2) scholarly. The first category contains an article that
gives advice on overcoming barriers based on Randall’s own experience as a director
(1982). The second article showcases women cooperative leaders (Merlo, 1988).
The second category, scholarly literature on women and achievement in farming
organizations is limited. Shortall (1999) and Kajer (1996) provide the most
- 12 -
comprehensive look at the subject. Shortall’s work doesn’t examine the achievement
path. Instead her focus is on the achievement itself. Kajer provides the most valuable
insight on the journey to leader achievement in farming organizations. Participants in
Kajer’s project noted the significance of being asked. He devotes a portion of his
dissertation to “The Asking: Launching Leaders” (p. 297). He found that being asked
was “often remembered for a lifetime” and “affirms confidence of others in their
leadership abilities” and for those reasons I agree that being asked was significant for
those leaders. Yet is ‘being asked’ significant when one considers that most
organizations establish a nominating committee to source candidates? The questions his
research elicits are: did his subjects anticipate being asked, did they conscientiously
prepare themselves for leadership, did they signal their interest in some way, how was it
that they came to be asked, were they networked in such a way that they were
considered or noticed?
The Agricultural Cooperative
The agricultural cooperative setting is one factor that makes this research unique.
As described earlier, much of the pathway research has been conducted with women
executives in the invest-owned firm setting. While annual reports and company
information are widely available for IOFs, nearly the opposite is true in the cooperative
sector. Bernardi and Zeuli (1999) conducted a survey of new cooperative ventures since
1994 and identified the need for a comprehensive database for cooperative information.
Without a comprehensive database, I relied on two primary sources to develop a brief
industry analysis. One source of information was the United States Department of
Agriculture Rural Business Cooperative Service (USDA RBS). It conducts annual
surveys of farmer cooperatives and then publishes those results. The second source of
- 13 -
information was the National Cooperative Bank (NCB) which publishes: NCB Co-op
100, a list of the top one hundred revenue generating cooperatives. Beyond the industry
analysis, cooperative values and principles are reviewed, as are the economic features of
a cooperative.
Industry Analysis
The impact of the farmer cooperative industry in the five-state Midwest area can
be measured in terms of number of cooperatives and net business volume relative to the
U.S. presence overall. Table 3 shows that the Midwest is home to 1,046 cooperatives
with a total net business volume of $30.7 billion. As a percent of U.S. total cooperatives,
the Midwest is home to 31.3% of U.S. farmer cooperatives. The Midwest cooperative
business volume is 31.0% of the U.S. volume.
- 14 -
Table 3
Number of cooperatives and net business volume
State # ofcooperatives
Net business volume (mil.dol).
IA 179 7,932
MN 302 9,306
ND 251 3,041
SD 133 2,451
WI 181 8,018
Midwest total 1,046 $30,748
Nationally 3,346 $99,064
Midwest/National 31.3% 31.0%
Note. Data assembled from USDA-RBS Farmer Cooperative Statistics 2000
The National Cooperative Bank Top 100 list (2002) is the only known source for
data on individual cooperatives. A query by industry (agriculture) and state (MN, WI,
IA, ND and SD) of the Top 100 list resulted in a list of 11 cooperatives. A brief industry
analysis depicting national rank, revenues, and total assets (Table 4) showed total
revenues of $19.6 billion and total assets of $8.1 billion.
- 15 -
Table 4
National Cooperative Bank Top 100: Midwest data
National Revenue Total AssetsRank $ in Millions $ in Millions2000 Cooperative (state headquarters) 2000 1999 2000 1999
2 CHS Cooperatives (MN) 8,571 6,329 3,173 2,788
4 Land O'Lakes Inc. (MN) 5,756 5,613 2,473 2,684
31 Foremost Farms USA Cooperative (WI) 1,093 1,301 331 323
37 Associated Milk Producers, Inc. (MN) 989 1,062 227 209
45 American Crystal Sugar Co.(MN) 731 844 740 656
60 Minnesota Corn Processors, Inc. (MN) 584 599 606 619
79 United Suppliers, Inc. (IA) 440 403 190 164
85 Equity Co-op Livestock Sales Association (WI) 413 364 48 42
89 Swiss Valley Farms Co. (IA) 376 371 91 89
93 Alto Dairy Cooperative (WI) 367 422 67 66
98 South Dakota Wheat Growers Association, Inc. 331 272 181 152
TOTAL 19,651 17,580 8,127 7,792
Values and Principles
The International Cooperative Alliance’s (ICA) mission “has been accepted by
cooperators throughout the world as the final authority for defining cooperative and for
determining the underlying principles” (Hoyt, 1996, ¶2). The ICA has adopted as one of
its aims the ‘promotion and protection of cooperative values and principles’ (ICA, 2002,
- 16 -
¶Aims and Methods: Aims). The ICA Statement on Co-operative Identity provides the
following values statement:
Co-operatives are based on the values of self-help, self-responsibility, democracy,
equality, equity[emphasis added] and solidarity. In the tradition of their founders,
co-operative members believe in the ethical values of honesty, openness, social
responsibility and caring for others (ICA, 2002, ¶Values).
Equality and equity are included in the values statement. Ironically, this
research project is the result of women’s absence from the director’s table in the farmer
cooperative system. The Honorable Robert B. Reich, former Secretary of Labor and
Chair of the Glass Ceiling Commission, addressed equity in his “message from the
chair”:
The glass ceiling is not only an egregious denial of social justice that affects two-thirds of
the population, but a serious economic problem that takes a huge financial toll on
American business. Equity demands that we destroy the glass ceiling. Smart business
demands it as well. (Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995a, p. 4)
The ICA Statement on Cooperative Identity identifies seven guiding cooperative
principles. They include:
1) Voluntary and Open Membership
2) Democratic Member Control
3) Member Economic Participation
4) Autonomy and Independance [sic]
5) Education, Training and Information
6) Co-operation among Co-operatives
7) Concern for Community (ICA, 2002, ¶Principles)
- 17 -
Economic Features
The seven guiding principles provide a framework for the creation of future
cooperatives and a standard for current cooperatives. They also shed light on the
features that differentiate cooperatives from investor-oriented firms. From ownership,
to the subordination of capital, to the distribution of earnings, and voting privileges
numerous differences exist and are highlighted in Table 5: Economic Features that
Differentiate a Cooperative From an Investor-Owned Firm.
- 18 -
Table 5
Economic Features That Differentiate a Cooperative From an IOF
Feature Cooperative (user-oriented) Investor-Owned Firm
Ownership Open to those who use products and services(member-economic participation)
Stock-holders may or may notpurchase/use products or services
Subordination ofCapital
Equity Capital (a.k.a. member equity)1. Allocated
direct member investment retained patronage refund per-unit retains (based on physical
units handled by cooperative)2. Unallocated
Debt Capital1. Short-term debt
accounts and notes payable current portion, long term debt other short-term liabilities patronage refunds payable
2. Long-Term Debt long-term loans leasing
Ownership capital
Debt capital
Distribution ofearnings
Returned to owners in form of• Equity capital (ownership in cooperative)• Patronage refund (net income allocated to a
patron in proportion to the value or quantity ofpatronage conducted with the cooperative)
As a general rule, stock in a cooperative may earndividends at a rate not to exceed 8 percent and aretherefore not an attractive investment vehicle foroutside investors.
Shared with stockholders in form ofdividends and based on investment(number of shares held).
Voting privileges One vote regardless of amount of businessconducted with cooperative
According to quantity of stock owned
Information Source: Cooperative Financing and Taxation (USDA-RBCDS, 1981, rev 1995)
The member-owner is the central figure and beneficiary in the cooperative.
Those individuals who will use and benefit from the cooperative’s products or services
form the cooperative. Earnings are returned to those members who hold equity capital
and conduct business with the cooperative. Members have the opportunity to cast one
vote regardless of member equity in cooperative. In contrast the investor-owned firm
- 19 -
may or may not use the products or services offered by the firm. Earnings and voting
privileges are based on the quantity of stock held.
Research Question in Light of Conceptual Context
One of the initial research questions was, ‘how do women in agriculture achieve
a farmer cooperative director role?’ Based on the development of the conceptual
context, it was found that six women serve in the midst of 230 men as directors.
Furthermore it was shown that multiple barriers hinder women’s achievement. Thus
the primary research question became, ‘How in the context of a male constituency and
multiple barriers do women achieve an agricultural cooperative director role?’ A
secondary set of questions viewed director achievement as experience and knowledge
sets gained along the pathway to director leader. Interviews with the women directors
provided an opportunity to learn more about their achievement. The secondary
questions were:
• How did you prepare for the role of director leader?
• What were your nomination and election experiences?
• What challenges did you encounter and overcome?
• What role did others play in your director leader achievement?
• What key lessons or knowledge about director-leader achievement have
you come away with?
• What recommendations do you have for prospective directors, local
cooperatives, and cooperative educators about how to increase the
number of women directors?
With the conceptual context developed, the following chapter explores the
research design and methods employed.
- 21 -
Chapter 3: Description of Research Design and Methods Employed
“The research questions and methods chosen… are congruent and have an
organic relation to one another” (Marshall and Rossman, 1999, p. 10).
The research design and methods employed were selected based on:
1) the research problems: too few women serve as directors of agricultural
cooperatives and women indicated a lack of organizational savvy;
2) the conceptual context: women serve as directors in the midst multiple
barriers and a male constituency in the cooperative setting; and
3) the research goals identified in the introduction.
Research Genre and Typologies
A qualitative genre was chosen as it “is pragmatic, interpretive, and grounded in
the lived experiences of people” (Marshall and Rossman, 1999, p. 2). Six women
directors certainly could speak to their own experience of being elected to the
cooperative’s board of directors. Within the qualitative research genre, multiple
research typologies exist. Of those proposed in the literature, critical ethnography and
feminist theory were chosen.
First “critical ethnography is grounded in critical theories that assume that
society is structured by class and status, as well as by race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual
orientation, to maintain the oppression of marginalized groups” (Marshall and
Rossman, 1999, p. 6). The conceptual context revealed the existence of a gender gap
within the network of agricultural cooperative directors. That gap indicates the
existence of a system in which the exclusion of women is supported. Second, “Critical
ethnographers attempt to aid emancipatory goals, negate repressive influences, raise
- 22 -
consciousness, and invoke a call to action that potentially will lead to social change”
(Creswell, 1994, p. 12). The selection of a critical ethnography approach was driven by
the research question and in particular the research goal of influencing system change.
The research typology was also feminist theory. Feminist theories “…put
women at the center and identify patriarchy as central to understanding experience.
…They name and value women’s subjective experience” (Marshall and Rossman, 1999,
p. 6). Rather than look at the nomination and election experience of men, it was
appropriate to look at the experiences of these six women directors. It was their
experience that was central to understanding the research question and developing the
research design.
Sampling
The industry analysis revealed the existence of six women directors. Based on
the critical ethnography and feminist theory typologies, purposeful sampling (Miles and
Huberman, 1994) suited the research framework. Purposeful sampling “is a strategy in
which particular settings, persons or events are selected deliberately in order to provide
important information that can’t be gotten as well from other choices” (Maxwell, 1996, p.
___). Based on their achievement, these six directors “nested in their context” (Miles &
Huberman, 1994, p. 27) possessed the requisite knowledge and experience to provide a
detailed account of their nomination and election experiences.
Participant Demographics
Participant demographics were gathered through the interviews. The six
directors were homogeneous with regard to race, marital status and background. All
were white, married and possessed a farm background. With regard to age, I did not
request age information. Instead, I estimated their ages based on information they
- 23 -
provided during the course of the interview. One director was in her early 40s while the
rest were in their mid-to-late 50s or older. Neither did I specifically question tenure as a
director. Again, I relied on the context of the interview to estimate the number of years
of director service. Based on the interview data, I estimate five of the six women were
first elected to their cooperative’s board of directors in the following years: 1986, 1987,
19889, 1990, and 1996. Based on that estimation, five of the six have served as directors
for as few as six years and as many as sixteen years. The interviews also revealed a
limited amount of data on the amount of post high-school education held by the six
directors interviewed. One director spoke of her college years while another noted “I
had a professor.” Two directors wished they had more education, while two did not
note any post-high school education.
The Research Relationship
“…interviewees in qualitative interviews share in the work of the interview, sometimes
guiding it in channels of their own choosing. They are treated as partners rather than as
objects of research” (Rubin and Rubin, 1995, p. 10).
A letter of introduction (Appendix A) to each of the women directors initiated
the research relationship. In the letter, I described the research project, issues of
confidentiality and invited their participation. The letter was followed with a phone call
in which I described the project, issues of confidentiality and invited them to participate
in the interview. In fact, two of the women, eager to participate, called me before I
called them. While on the phone we also arranged a meeting date, time and place for
the interview. Once the interview was scheduled I sent a confirmation letter (Appendix
B) to each participant in which I listed the general interview questions, addressed the
issue of confidentiality once again and confirmed the meeting date, time and location.
- 24 -
Enclosed with the confirmation letter was a sample confidentiality agreement
(Appendix C) which gave each participant the opportunity to review the agreement
before being asked to sign it on the day of the interview.
Data Collection
All six women contacted agreed to an interview. Five of the six agreed to face-to-
face interviews while the other woman who lived outside the five-state area suggested a
phone interview. Whether face-to-face or over-the-phone, a general interview outline
was employed for all six interviews. A general interview outline, in comparison to a
structured interview, enabled me to pursue ideas or themes suggested by the director.
The challenge presented by a general interview outline is that the wording of the
questions changes from interview to interview. The associated flexibility of the
interview was a benefit so I could further probe ideas as information was uncovered
during the course of the interview or in ensuing interviews.
The interview outline arose from the idea that each director travels a unique
pathway to director. The pathway experience is chronological moving from early, pre-
nomination experiences to post-election experiences. The general interview outline
follows:
• Preparation for the director leader role
• The nomination of the director leader
• Marketing the director candidate (campaign practices)
• The election of the director leader
• The role of others in their nomination and election
• Challenges encountered and overcome
- 25 -
• Key lessons and knowledge gained regarding their director leader
achievement
• Reflections and recommendations for prospective women farmer cooperative
directors
A pilot interview was conducted with a female agricultural cooperative director
who serves a smaller cooperative in the state of Minnesota. The pilot interview met the
goals of testing the interview questions and practicing my interview skills.
Data Management
Upon completion of each interview, micro-cassette data was transferred to a
standard-size audio-cassette using equipment that I own. The next step was the
transcription of the audio recordings. I completed the transcription work using
equipment provided by the College of St. Catherine library audio-visual resource center.
Interview transcripts and related files were stored on a College of St. Catherine network
drive to which only I had access via a personal login and id. Upon acceptance of the
thesis research project, all micro-cassette and audio-cassette tapes were destroyed and
all documents stored on the network drive deleted.
Data Analysis
Once an interview was completed and transcribed, I read through the printed
transcript and recorded my reactions, questions, and observations to the data using
hand-written symbols and notes. Once all six interviews and associated transcription
work was complete, a side-by-side comparison table of election pathway experiences
emerged. The process I employed in developing the summary table was a combination
of read, record, edit, and confirm. First I read each transcript and recorded individual
responses in the summary table. For example, a participant might have noted that her
- 26 -
husband was very supportive. I then recorded “supportive husband” in the “pathway
experience” row x “director” column. I did this for each director. As the process
unfolded, pathway experiences were added until all transcripts were read. Lastly, each
transcript was cross-referenced with the table to confirm that the final table reflected the
actual content of the transcript.
Ethical Considerations
Confidentiality was a large issue as the women directors were easily identified
via a search of websites and annual reports. I took several measures to avoid any
breaches of confidentiality. First, all identifying information, including names of people,
cities/towns and states, was struck from the transcripts. Pseudonyms were used in the
thesis document and where possible I chose names of gems or flowers that suggest
strength, color, or beauty. The assignment of a pseudonym was not related in any way
to their real name. All tapes and transcripts will be destroyed upon the successful
defense and publication of the bound thesis.
Gaining a woman director’s consent was another ethical consideration. I
developed and employed a six-step process to assure each director understood and
agreed to her participation in the research project. The first step in the process was a
letter of introduction. The second step was a phone contact with the director. The third
step involved mailing of a copy of the consent form as an enclosure with the interview
confirmation letter. This provided another opportunity for the director to review and
consider the consent agreement. The fourth step was the review of the consent form
with her as we prepared for the interview. In the fifth step, the participant signed the
consent form indicating she understood and agreed. Step six was the receipt of a signed
consent form and commencement of the interview. All six participants signed the
- 27 -
consent form and agreed to participate in the research project with the understanding
that they could withdraw from the project at any time without consequence.
As noted earlier, stories are an effective means of conveying a message. In
addition, their voices must be heard. By including their stories herein, we cannot ignore
or discount their knowledge or experience. The following chapter allows the reader to
hear each director speak.
- 28 -
Chapter 4: Director Stories
The following stories are included here to illuminate their leadership pathway
knowledge and experience. My goal in sharing their stories was to allow their voices
and their stories to rise from the pages of this work. Each time I read these stories I am
transported back to our conversation and I hear their voices in my ear. I want my
readers to have that same experience. Therefore, I relied heavily on the transcripts,
lifting material directly from the transcript and allowing it to rise from the page with
little to no intervention. Where a transition to a new thought might have left the reader
stranded, I added a phrase or so to facilitate the story. Likewise, I did not change
grammatical errors, remove “you knows” or edit the work unless it distracted more than
helped tell this story. Where a director referred to a single situation in two separate
sections of the interview, I might have combined text from both sections and organized
it into a single thought. That way the story is told in an organized manner while still
upholding the story and allowing their voices to rise from the pages of this work.
Opal
I agreed to meet Opal at her home. Upon arriving at the farm, I went to the
nearest door where she welcomed me into her home and led me through the kitchen to
the dining table. I could see the barn from where I sat. She and her husband John own
and operate their dairy. Once we were seated at the table, I asked Opal to describe her
nomination and election to her cooperative’s board. In 450 words she breezed through
her story beginning with her involvement in the Young Cooperator (YC) program, being
asked to run, giving her election day speech, and ending with “It’s just something I
want[ed] to give a try and I got elected.”
- 29 -
Opal and John participated in the Young Cooperators organization and some of
its contests, winning “Outstanding YC Couple” one year. As a result of their YC
involvement Opal said, “I learned about our co-op and about the cooperative
system.…And in the YC arena, it’s a lot of couple stuff. It’s not just the guys. The
females are just as involved as the males.” Their involvement extended to their
cooperative as well. Her husband served as a district representative. The district
representatives and district director met “twice a year to discuss issues, maybe tour
plants, just stay involved in the co-op. So he had done that – been a district
representative. And you’re always invited to bring your spouse along – your wife,
whichever the case may be.” With a high involvement level and the “Outstanding YC
Couple” award, Opal and John were visible within their community and were being
prepared for future leadership opportunities. They just didn’t know that their
involvement and leadership would result in being approached to run for a cooperative
director role so early in their career.
We’d been with the co-op, but that would’ve been less than 10 years at that point, maybe
8 years when the retiring district director came to John and I both - He wondered if one of
us would be willing to run, just to get our names out front. Well at the time, John was
on the National Guernsey board as a director and so that was keeping him about as busy
as he needed besides the farm. And he was on Farm Bureau board and a couple other
things. John said [to me] ‘Why don’t you run? Just get your name out. We won’t get it
this time, but then they’re aware that we’re interested in the co-op and maybe it’s
something we can do down the road when we’re a little older.’ So I put my name up for
nomination.
- 30 -
In developing an understanding of the knowledge, experiences, and thought
processes surrounding the nomination and election of the directors, I asked Opal to talk
about why she accepted the nomination.
I guess I saw it as an opportunity for a new challenge and we felt we could work it out.
They [the board] meet once a month and it’s a one-day meeting. So we felt John could
handle some of my stuff here. I could still do stuff on both ends. I had two grandmas that
were willing to help out with the kids for that day and depending on the day, sometimes
they could just be here with their dad too. We just saw it as an opportunity to get more
involved, meet new people, be more aware of what’s going on in our co-op, be a part of the
process. I guess that’s why I accepted. It was a joint decision. John and I both felt we
were given the opportunity, let’s take it.
Opal also described the events of the election event.
There were two other gentlemen. One was probably late 40’s. I was friends of his
daughter, which was kind of interesting and the other guy was probably mid-50’s. Any
producers that show up are allowed to vote if they’re members - one vote per membership.
And it turned out the one gentlemen and I tied. And so they did a revote of course.
Now, just the two [of us] and we tied again. And so this time [the outgoing director]
said, ‘Well now each of you need to get up and give an impromptu speech why you want
to be a director of [this cooperative and] your reasons.’ And the other gentlemen, being
polite as he was, said, ‘Ladies first.’ I don’t remember quite what I said, but I just shared
our experiences with the YC group and how we enjoyed being part of [the cooperative],
and that I felt because I was active in the day-to-day operations of the dairy that I could
understand what other producers felt. That’s kind of the route I went. I didn’t go on
about being female or anything like that. I just said I felt I could do it because it was
- 31 -
something our family was involved in and we’d had some exposure to national issues
through the YC program. And it’s just something I want[ed] to give a try and I got
elected.
Coral
Coral suggested that we meet at a restaurant a few miles from her home. We
entered the restaurant together and asked to sit in the back where we could more easily
converse and record our conversation. We asked for coffee and immediately began
talking. Coral openly spoke of her nomination and election experiences, what she’s
gained from the experience, and more. I chose from the transcript entire paragraphs I
found central to her story. Here’s Coral’s story.
I forgot one very important point. My grandmother. My grandmother ran the farm. My
grandfather worked out. We lived with my grandmother and grandfather and so
everyday, I saw her going to the barn. She was the one who farrowed the pigs; she was
the one that had us kids down and pulling the mustard out of the field. I just grew up
with it. I never knew not being involved. My grandmother never said, ‘You kids go do
this or you kids go and unload hay.’ She said, 'Come and help me.' So I didn’t know life
without being involved. My grandmother had eight children, five boys and three girls.
All five of the boys worked out and I think it was because if someone was going to have an
off-the-farm job, they knew that the men could earn more money in the labor industry
than women. The women stayed home to run the farm and all the guys all got jobs.
When my grandfather went to work, he’d take the three oldest boys with him, so he took
her labor force. She broke the farm, the woods that was across the railroad tracks. She
- 32 -
broke it on a tractor. She knew more about the land, the wet spots and the difference
between which pigs and who was going to farrow more than the guys did.
So we also made a career change. We were 30-something when my husband had
a back injury and needed to leave the construction field and he wanted to do something
else. He was raised on a dairy farm and he always wanted to go back. So at 30-
something, we sold absolutely everything we had, bought a few cows, [and] found a farm
that we could rent. We decided we are doing business with a lot of cooperatives and these
[cooperatives] are our future. We needed to be involved and have a voice in what that
was going to be. We knew that we, whether it was church or anything, we knew that if
we were going to be members, we would be actively involved or we just wouldn’t be
members at all. We would either really be involved or we wouldn’t participate.
But the other thing that our local rep noticed was that neither my husband nor I
had an off-the-farm job. We were both… Because of his back injury… I did a lot of the
physical hands-on labor in the barn so I was always there when the dairy rep came. I was
always there when the milk inspector came; I was always there for the nutritionist; I was
there for barn cleaning, for milking, for everything and I was also in a major education
mode because I didn’t know anything about dairy. And it just happened that they came
to enroll us for members of the co-op and my husband wasn’t home and we filled out the
forms in the milk house and they asked for a social security number. Well I knew mine
but didn’t know Mark’s, so I gave mine. I was the one who had the actual share in the
cooperative simply because I put my social security number instead of my husband’s.
Actually our interest in the cooperative is through the Young Farmer program.
And that was our local co-op sponsoring my husband and I to go away for a day – Young
Farmer Leadership program. And then I think staff members chose from there who would
- 33 -
go on to the next level. The first time it was a single day conference; the next one we
went to was a three-day conference. After that it was, I think, the annual meeting which
was four days. And there’s an education process at each level. They work on first of all
understanding cooperatives; what’s involved; what makes a cooperative different from an
independently owned business. We had a really good history of our cooperative, how they
operate and function together as one parent company. And they also work on leadership
goals. How do you set goals? How do you become a leader? What kind of characteristics
or qualities do you need and they bring in speakers and hold seminars on developing
those skills. While we were at the annual meeting, they always choose [sic] one couple to
give the young farmer report to the general assembly and my husband and I were chosen
to do that. And because we were a dairy farm - but we also were farming crops, my
husband and I had split up and he had gone to some of the ag related speakers and I had
gone to some of the dairy ones. And independently, and we didn’t know it, but we were
both asking questions, quite a few questions in our group that we were in and it was
because we were actively involved that they had asked us to give a presentation. We
talked about why we were members of our cooperative and why it was important to us.
And we knew starting from scratch, we knew exactly the financial commitment it took
and dollar-wise what money exchanged between us. How much money exchanged from
the cooperative to us as far as milk sales and how much we had spent through the
[purchase of] feed, seed, fertilizer and that kind of thing back at our local and we just
realized that with that kind of an exchange, it was important for us to be involved and
committed to an organization that played that major role – to our fiduciary success and
also to the governance.
- 34 -
And after that our local co-op manager and some of the other managers [in our
area] stopped us and said, ‘If you guys ever want to get involved, we’d really like to see
you serve on some local boards or the region board.’ [When we considered running for
the regional board] I think we decided that it just wasn’t practical for him [my husband
Steve] to be able to leave the farm and so he really encouraged me to run. And he was
also involved. He was on the board of an organization that we belonged to for registered
Holsteins and he was a director on DHIA and he’s been a director at the Farm Service
Agency and so he really kind of encouraged me to try for the board.
I knew a couple of the managers that were on the nominating committee for the
fall board, for the region board that fall. And just thought it’s a good place to start. I felt
comfortable. There was a comfort level and I think I stopped to pick up cheese at one of
the co-ops and the manager said, ‘You know you should consider running for the board.’
He was on the nominating committee and looking for candidates and he was probably
asking about my husband, when I told him that I would be interested. And there was
kind of a pause and he said, ‘Well I’ll call one of the other managers.’ I think it was, ‘I’ll
call and see what he thinks.’ By the time I got home, the other manager must have said
something historic like ‘sure, put your name down.’ And he sent me the information and
I basically filled out the form that I needed to and contacted Member Services and got the
names and addresses and then it was to compile a letter. I saved a copy of that too, my
first letter and I remember handing it to some of the voting delegates and its legal size,
top-to-bottom, and they’re going, ‘Oh my gosh.’ They’ve never seen that much
information in their life, nor did they care. But I just talked about background. I was
raised on my grandparents farm. I had married a gentleman that had been raised on a
dairy farm, but their farm is now a housing development. He had been in construction
- 35 -
and back injuries put us into making a choice and we chose to be in agriculture. It
wasn’t like it was handed down to us or a forced decision; but it was something we openly
chose to do. [I] talked about involvement. Up until that time I’d been on church board
and school activities… That kind of thing in the community. And that was basically it.
I got up to introduce myself and to do my campaign speech, which was unheard
of at the time. The very first time I ran there was six of us and they brought us all up
front at the same time and they just asked if anybody had anything to say. I was on the
end and they started on the opposite. Every guy just said what his name was and where
he was from and you know if people wanted to support him that would be great. They got
to me and I actually had a prepared statement that I wanted to make. In fact I found it
this morning when I was going through… I told them what I felt about cooperatives and
principles and the amount of investment that we had in this cooperative and how many
dollars had exchanged hands between the cooperative and us and I wish more of it could
have stayed in our hands a little bit longer. And why I felt involvement in a cooperative
that was owned by farmer-members was important. I told a little bit about myself and it
took less than 2 minutes, but they’re all looking at me, like are you finished? I just
thought it was important; just giving my name I just didn’t think was enough. I just
needed to tell them basically what I felt about cooperatives. I thought it was important.
I remember my very first board meeting with my brand new briefcase in my
hand, walking up the sidewalk at the cooperative to go into the building to my very first
board meeting. I got up that morning, went down and did my calf chores, set up the
milkhouse for my husband and got things started. Then I went back in the house,
showered, got my clothes on and put my suitcase and briefcase in the car. I walked into
the boardroom. I was the first one there and found my place. I looked at that really big
- 36 -
room – microphones at every chair and my briefcase sitting on the table and I just
thought – what have I done? I just remember audibly thinking that I really had to do the
very best job I could do. I didn’t want to ask anything stupid and I didn’t want to do just
anything, not just for myself, but for any woman who would be the next one to sit. I
didn’t want to blow it, because I really wanted other women to have a chance.
I think there were other challenges. I can’t say they were across the board. I
think there were other personal challenges for me. That just makes me unique. I didn’t
have a lot of self-confidence or self-esteem. And so I always felt like I had to try harder,
read more, be more prepared, always go that extra mile just to be even. I always felt I had
to try hard just to be baseline. I wasn’t on the board very long, maybe three years and
[first name last name] sold his cows and had to retire off the board, because he was no
longer a dairy farmer. So the vice chair moved up to the chairman’s position on the dairy
committee and they needed to elect a new vice chair and my peers elected me into that
position. And I think at the meeting that that happened, I realized that I had always
thought of myself as not as good as or always trying harder. And the day that they did
that, I realized my peers had the confidence in me and trusted me. So I think my biggest
challenge was myself. And not only did they elect me then, that was in the fall to finish
that term, they re-elected me three more times. I think my biggest challenge was just me.
I wish I had realized it sooner. It was really late in coming. But I really have to
say that I think the gentlemen I served with recognized my value far ahead of me. Really,
they do tease me; they treat me like a sister. It was my low self-esteem. If I would’ve just
gotten it sooner...
- 37 -
Violet
I was unable to meet Violet for a face-to-face interview and so we conducted the
interview over the phone. I hope that I have an opportunity to meet Violet some day.
When asked about how she prepared for the role of agricultural cooperative director,
she described the importance of reading and attending director training. But I learned a
lot more about Violet just by listening to her talk. Throughout the course of the
interview she revealed much about herself. She grew up on a farm, earned a college
degree, worked for a man in college who became her mentor and worked in a bank
following college. She also described being active in the agricultural community.
Raised on her family’s farm she noted, “Of course my dad had a farm operation and
back then everything was done on the farm so to speak - an Old McDonald type thing. So he got
a lot of experience in different types of business approaches from grain to livestock.”
When asked to describe people who have played a role in her achievement she
spoke of her work in the college business office.
I go way back to my college days. I worked in the business office with a gentleman who
had retired but was working in the business. He had come from the business community
as a contractor – estimator. So he had a lot of experience in business and was tough.
And I got assigned to him and later found out that nobody else would work for him cause
he was tough. But he and I just hit it off great. And I didn’t have a bit of trouble with
him. If someone was willing to learn, he was very compassionate and helpful and
instructive on business things. He knew I was green, fresh into college without much
business savvy and he was very helpful and I would have to say that really grounded me
in business principles and I watched him deal with people and he was very good in
- 38 -
dealing with people and – and makes it clear to them what he wanted. So we just got
along fine and I think he laid the groundwork for my business academics.
Violet described her unsuccessful bid for a state Farm Bureau office and how that
resulted in her being noticed by the local cooperative’s nominating committee.
Although I had been active in the farm community and knew about the co-op and the
business and so forth, I was not seeking the position. I had been more active in the Farm
Bureau and was seeking an office there, but was unsuccessful at a state office that I ran
for there. When this position came up on the co-op board - why the nominating
committee I’m told after the fact said gee, ‘We’ve got somebody interested in ag here, let’s
ask her to run.’ It was my exposure from the Farm Bureau side that I guess caught the
attention of the nominating committee for the co-op. I said, ‘Well I don’t really know too
much about the governance.’ ‘Oh you’ll learn, you’ll do fine,’ [they said]. You know
how that is. I felt when I was asked it was quite an honor and so I was elected the first
time I ran.
Since the election was conducted via a mail-in ballot, Violet relied on a
cooperative mailing, her visibility in the agricultural community and personal contact
with members. I was interested in her campaign and whether she had a platform on
which she ran in her original campaign for cooperative director. In response she said,
Probably not a platform as much as just saying that I come from a farm background and
that I appreciate cooperative business principles and would definitely support them and
want to make the local co-op successful because if we’re successful, that farm is
successful. I tried to visit with people. I think the human side of it is very important and
I do that still. I visit local co-ops that I represent. I think the human side...so I tried to
contact some of the farm members that might be a bit skeptical of having this first woman
- 39 -
on the board and I had several positive comments. ‘Gee, after meeting her I have no
problem.’ I got that feedback from others. So like I say, that personal contact is very
important.
Without asking about her husband, I learned from Violet the following:
He is very supportive and has been from the beginning. He encouraged me to run each
time and then worked (inaudible) worked these re-elections. ‘Yes. Go on. Do it. You’re
doing a good job.’ He was very supportive of that. I am very active on the farm. Tractor
driving, truck driving, we run a saw-mill. I’m very much involved with that physically.
So when I’m away, some of those things can’t be done, but he says, ‘Oh that’s alright,
I’ve got plenty of shop work’ or whatever. So he works around my schedule. He’s never
said, ‘Well you really shouldn’t go this month’ or anything like that. I’ll say, ‘Well I’ve
got a training session’ [and he’ll say,] ‘Oh by all means go.’ So he’s very supportive.
Based on Violet’s story, I estimate that she was first elected to the local
cooperative board in 1986. Although the research question addresses the pathway to
leadership, it does not address the issue of enduring leadership. Violet wondered out
loud about her enduring leadership. She said,
You know it’s very hard to evaluate yourself. How do you know what really contributed
to your so-called success. I asked a region manager one time… I was up for election and I
had been re-elected and I wondered… You know after so long you think, how many
times can I be re-elected? Like I told you I had to be re-elected every year and I said,
‘What would you say would be attributed to my success’? He said, ‘Violet, I don’t know,
but whatever you’re doing, just keep doing it.’ Which didn’t help much but I just
maintained my same steadiness, I guess. I try not to be erratic and I think if you’re too
assertive, and I think I mentioned this before, it’s counterproductive.
- 40 -
I think you need to recognize others’ successes. Give them credit for their
success. And I’m saying this I think as a woman you need to do that because men
hesitate to complement sometimes. They’re very lax, maybe in that. So if you can
acknowledge some of their successes, maybe they made a comment during the board
meeting or they did some particular thing and complement them on that. I think its… I
mean if it’s sincere. Now I’m not saying be frivolous about it, but you know, say ‘That
was a really good comment that you made in the meeting. I agree with that. I hadn’t
thought of that’ or something of that sort. I think that’s important – it builds your level
of acceptance.
Pearl
I met Pearl on the farm she and her husband operate. She led me into the dining
room where a large and friendly dog greeted me. We sat and talked about her
nomination and election experience.
This particular board you do not have to be nominated. They send out.. there are district
meetings and they send out a notification to find out if you would be interested in serving
on the board and then you best be prepared to explain, at the meeting why you would be
interested. At the district meeting and in the bylaws of this particular cooperative [there
exists] a process whereby if someone really opposed you running, there is a vehicle to do
that. Maybe they would stand up and say this person has no character or… I don’t
know why they would do it, but there is a vehicle in the bylaws of this cooperative that
allows that. The candidates have to be approved by the voters before they are voted on.
They go through Roberts Rules of Orders… ‘Are there any other nominations’? But
basically you are nominated by indicating that you are interested.
- 41 -
The first year I ran I think I explained to you on the phone - this cooperative has
different districts and they had re-districted. So my particular district, the one that was
inclusive of our farm, did not have a director because they had switched and the man who
was our director was now running against someone else north of us. But my initial
reason for wanting to be on the board was that we were not happy with his
representation. He is a good man – has been a friend of our family for all of our many
years. But, did not do a good job representing us on this particular co-op, simply because
he didn’t pay attention. And he is sort of a… he has a very nice personality… a very
outgoing kind of person, but he doesn’t pay much attention to detail and I think it was a
glorification position. I think it was nice for him to be on the board, but he didn’t really
care to do anything with it. So he wasn’t very responsive to the people within his
district. So that was my initial reason for wanting to run. Would I have run against
him had we not been redistricted? Yes. Knowing full well that it would have caused
some problems. But that has never stopped me before so I guess it probably wouldn’t stop
me then.
At that election there were two other men running. I would say I won for a
variety of reasons. One because there were several – more than several wives at that
particular district meeting – and these are women I know. I had served on county board
at that time for a number of years. I was on some very visible committees so my name
was out there - it wasn’t as though I were an unknown person. Also because we had
milkroutes – we hauled milk from the farm to the factory – some of these people were our
patrons and I had known them for many years. The two men who were running had not
been with the cooperative as long as we had. I had that on my side. And most of those
people know, or knew at the time, I’m an active participant in this farm. I milk the cows;
- 42 -
I drive tractor; I don’t work away from the farm. So I think my argument that day was
‘Look, I do at least 50% of the work and I should at least have some of the say’ and my
main argument was because we had a milk route we were going into 53 farms every two
days. We were hitting 52 farms. Who knew better what was going on in the farm
economy than we would because we could see it every single day?
I asked Pearl how she prepared for being a director. She spoke of her ideals and
county board experience.
Yeah. It probably goes back to county board. What I discovered… What I’ve known
about myself is I like a challenge. And I am basically not so much one to back down from
an argument. Discussion is an exchange of ideas and an argument is a discussion of
ignorance. I had a professor that told me that one time and I firmly believe that. But I
also found out that I’ve liked researching things and I’ve liked finding out why things
work the way they work and this is our living. I mean at times I’m thinking of running
for the board and I’m thinking this is where we make our living. This is how… I should
have some say in how it works. And there were things going on that we weren’t
particularly happy with and so you don’t change things by sitting on your duff doing
nothing. You change things by getting involved and so that’s why I had initially run for
county board and that’s why I ran for this board. It was to find out why it was working
the way it was and what we could do to change it, if we could do anything at all.
She spoke further of experiences that prepared her for a directorship.
I think being in this business for 50 plus years. My husband and I both come from this
kind of background. My father was a milk hauler for 51 years. His father was a cheese
maker for 30-40 some years. We grew up in this thing. And we grew up particularly in
the milk-hauling business. I think we know more about what goes on with farmers and
- 43 -
in farmer’s minds than most people would imagine – than anybody could possibly know.
We’ve seen all the changes. I go back to the days of cans in cement tanks with water –
cold water. Helping my dad change cans and my husband does as well. I think our
lifetime prepared us for that. The patron has always been the most important part of our
business. Some of these patrons were 4th generation and that was a passionate part of
what I did on the board.
My husband taught ag and cooperatives was one of the things he taught. We’ve
always firmly believed in cooperatives. But the problem is that there is always somebody
at the top and that don’t always understand that the guy at the bottom is really the guy
that should get paid first because he’s the reason you exist. A cooperative exists – they
were started as an organization to make farmers, or in the case of electrical – the
stockholder – to make it better for them. But that’s why agricultural cooperatives started
as a bargaining unit – as sort of a safety net because we didn’t have unions per se. So
these cooperatives kind of served us well. [For example] there are 25 of us and we should
be able to get our seed at a little better cost if there are 25 of us versus 25 of us going
individually. That was the theory, the grass roots kind of thinking in cooperatives. My
husband and I grew up with that and we always… my father and mother and his parents
taught us that the patron comes first. That stockholder comes first. And when my
husband sat on the local cooperative board, that’s how they operated. Because he sat there
with a group of older farmers who believed in the same thing he did – that we do this, but
we do this with an eye on ‘Is it going to help the farmer’ or ‘Is it going to hurt the
farmer.’
There comes a point in most cooperatives in this day and age, particularly in this
cooperative, where there becomes a very fine line between cooperative and corporate. And
- 44 -
I’m sure you’ve seen that… larger units picking up smaller units. Okay – does it help or
does it hurt the guy who’s the individual stockholder? Is he going to get out of this what
he has invested? Is he going to get his equity? Is he going to get his capital retained? Is
he going to get everything that he deserves or is the guy who’s making $150,000 on top?
Once he [general manager or CEO] gets his, what’s left? That was my problem with this
co-op. There is just too much up here and not enough down here. I didn’t like the way it
looked and so I think my passion for our patrons probably was what really led me to think
about going on the board – because I firmly believe that’s the way cooperatives should
operate. They should always operate with an eye on the bottom line; but always with an
eye on what is our stockholder going to get. How is he going to get what he has coming
to him? What are we doing to have to do to make that happen? And not very many
cooperatives do that. I just firmly believe our patrons need some kind of representation
and ultimately that comes down to the farmers who aren’t on the board getting some
representation – somebody who knew what was going on on their farm.
Once elected Pearl described her feelings of serving on a board with a male
constituency.
I think to be a woman on a board that is predominantly male – whatever board it is, but
particularly going back to the rural cooperative kind of board you really have to do your
homework. You just have to read and talk and read and talk and read and talk. Always,
always, always do your homework so that when something is being discussed, whatever
question you ask has to sound smarter than the guys. It shouldn’t be that way. You’re
sitting as a board member and should be sitting equally. But it goes back to the old
philosophy of rural boards where women just didn’t exist on those boards and still
obviously don’t a lot. I think some women are probably afraid of that.
- 45 -
One question I posed was what role did others play in your nomination and
election?
I don’t know, other than my husband. I don’t know that anyone did in particular. When
I ran for county board, I also was the only woman on county board for a period of time.
Now I think there are seven. I don’t think that… I’m pretty independent. I don’t think
anybody influenced me, other than I just asked my husband, ‘Is this something you think
I could do? Do you think this is something I should do’? Because it was important in
terms of who is going to do the work when I’m gone kind of thing and do you think I have
the where-with-all to accomplish this? And he thinks obviously that I did. I don’t think
I’m easily influenced by other people, attitudes or opinions. I just am not. People who
have known me a long time would be able to tell you I pretty much walk my own path.
So I think I just decided for my reasons and ran at the time.
I wondered why Pearl’s husband didn’t enter the nomination and election
process.
He had served on another local cooperative board for 16 years, so he had had about all the
board meetings he really wanted. Also he was a milk hauler and he probably didn’t have
as much time and he just felt that it was okay if I wanted to do it. He really has never…
I guess he’s never said why he didn’t but he had served on that other board and I think he
was kind of boarded out. He kind of liked not having to go to meetings anymore and he
pretty much let me do what I wanted to do for 36 years.
Ruby
Ruby, Ruby, Ruby. I met Ruby on the family farm this past summer. A couple
grandchildren were around. She sent one to go help grandpa and the others
- 46 -
disappeared. She invited me to sit at the table in the middle of her kitchen. Here’s
Ruby.
Well each year the board of directors that are up for election, they get a copy of all the
patrons that ship milk to the co-op. And usually, there are usually two within, say my
district, there’s probably two directors and from those two directors get together and they
pick certain people that will run for the board and that’s how it all begins. Say they’ll
pick six to seven names and then the office at the co-op will call these people and will
verify if they’re willing to run or not and if you’re willing to run, then you have to send
them a little write-up, what do you call it? Bio, of you know your operation, anything
you want to put in it, a couple paragraphs – that’s about it. Then after that when the
election comes around, this comes out in a report and all the patrons get a copy of it. It’s
sent out in their annual report. They have their annual meeting in which - the
cooperative has several annual meetings in different parts of the area. And then you get
up there, whatever you want to say. You’ve got 3-5 minutes to say whatever you want to
say about yourself, your operation or why you want to be a director. And then they vote
right there at the meeting. And you’re either on the board or your off the board. You
either win or lose.
When asked about who noticed her, Ruby noted it was the fieldman.
The fieldman. They just tell the people that run this[cooperative] – well this one
would probably be a good candidate for a nominating committee. They give them names,
because they know the farmers.
I asked Ruby to describe her nomination and election experience. Here’s how
she described it.
- 47 -
I guess it all started when I was on the nominating committee. We met at the office and
at that time a couple of the field men were there and they asked if any of us would be
interested and I said, ‘Well I don’t know? Maybe.’ And they came back in two weeks
and they asked me if I’d be willing to run and I said, ‘Sure.’ So I ran for the board and I
ran against a gentleman that was on for oh… I believe eight years something like that
and I was elected. And he just lives south of here on a dairy farm. And from there I’ve
been re-elected every year. This is my… I’m going on my sixth year. We run for two
years at a time. We’re trying to get it three years because you’re just getting used to it
and if you don’t get re-elected then somebody’s got to run all over again. So that’s how I
got on the board.
Well we had the, after we were on the nominating committee we met as a group,
like I said and at that time we went to this list. And of course your name is in this list,
because you’re a member and when they get to your name they said, ‘Well what about
you’? And I said, ‘I suppose it wouldn’t be so bad.’ A couple weeks later then they called
and asked if I was serious and that’s when my name was put out. But otherwise my
name was not on the list. My husband’s name was because the check was in his name.
But I mean… You know if you and your husband ran a farm and shipped milk and it
was in your husband’s name, and somebody said to you, ‘Do you mind being on, do you
care to run for the board’? Sure. It’s no problem. You could run for the board and be
nominated. You’re part of the operation. You help. You work out there. You work side-
by-side. I’m up at 4:00 a.m. every morning, so...
I wondered what she spoke about during her candidate speech the day of the
election.
- 48 -
Oh just general you know. My personal life – married, you know, 11 children and so
many grandchildren. I farm with my husband and one son and what we have… for
crops. What type of farming we do. You know dairy, and at that time, we had hogs.
About how many acres, so many acres, you milk so many cows and if you’re – any of the
other associations if you’re involved with local co-ops, the breeders, or whatever you’re
involved in. At that time I was involved in Women for Agriculture, County Pork
Producers – give a short glimpse of what… You’re usually asked if there are any other
questions anybody else would like to know or ask you and if not… Really it’s in the
write-up you send to them, but you cover it in case – well some people don’t read’em all
the time. Well sometimes they’ll ask you – well sometimes they’ll ask you how long
you’ve been shipping to the cooperative other things like… could you specify more why
you want to be a director. If you think you could do a better job than some of the men?
I wondered how she responded to that question. Without missing a beat Ruby
responded.
I said, ‘Of course. I’m a woman.’ Well we look at things different than men do. You
know. I’m not saying I’m better than anybody else, but I mean, you look at a situation
different than men do. I don’t know about you, but I do. We all have our own ways and
thoughts of things and we just have a different look out or aspect of farming, agriculture
and nobody questioned me. And that was about the whole ball of wax. That’s when I got
elected and I’ve been there ever since.
As she was telling her story she kept referring to field men and I wasn’t sure who
they were and so I asked her about them.
Yes, they’re employees [of the cooperative], but they’re almost like an inspector. They go
around – if you’ve got troubles or they… or if you accidentally milk a cow that’s treated,
- 49 -
they come out and test your milk. Stuff like that and they know the patrons. And they’ll
say, ‘Well I think this person would be a good person to be on a nominating committee
because they know other producers.’ And that’s how that goes.
I wondered how Ruby prepared for being a director. “No. I just was myself. I
mean, I know agriculture. I know our farm. Sure it was different once you got on the board.”
At that point we were interrupted. When we resumed I tried to bring her back to
the idea of how she prepared. She resumed with:
Well yeah, I’ve been on the Farm Credit services – I’m going on my 13th year there. And
I chaired the Federal Land Bank side in our office at our board for seven years. In fact I
was the first woman ever elected to that. There still has never been a woman on that. I
was on the Women’s Pork Council of [state]– the women’s organization – because I was
treasurer there. I was there for six years. You can run for three and then be re-
nominated for another three, but then you have to be off one to get back on. From there I
went to the men’s board and I fulfilled a year term when one of the producer’s passed
away and then I was on there for six years straight and I was the first woman elected on
that board. I was on the [state] Women for Agriculture and our county pork producer
board and I still am a director for the county pork producer board and I haven’t had pigs
for three years.
Following on the theme of ‘I just was myself’ creates an opportunity to interject a
piece of advice Ruby offered during the interview. The advice was directed towards
other women interested in serving on a cooperative board. She said,
If they’re comfortable being on an all men’s board and they can carry their own weight,
handle themselves well, say what you think, stand up for yourself no matter. If
everybody agrees, then who needs a board? If you don’t think its right then say so.
- 50 -
Don’t ‘oh yeah, okay.’ Just don’t go along with’em because 14 of ‘em said it should be
this way and maybe you don’t want it that way. I mean you can disagree. Don’t be
afraid to disagree, because if you don’t disagree, if you’re just going to be a yes person,
stay off the board. They don’t need you.
Were there people who encouraged you?
I guess nobody really encouraged me. I just talked to my husband and I said, ‘Well, what
do you think’? And he says, ‘Go for it if you want to go on.’ I know when I got on the
Farm Credit board [I was told], boy you must have a good name because there has never
been a woman on the board. And the co-op there they just said, ‘Don’t worry. You’ll
make it.’ I don’t know, maybe you gotta be more outgoing, but you know I say what I
think. I don’t sit and think about fancy words I gotta use, because I probably don’t know
any. I just tell’em the way I feel. I don’t beat around the bush. I just say, well this is
what I think about it. I may be right and I may be wrong. Nobody is a 100% right. I
just tell people point blank and I guess maybe that’s why they wanted me on the board
’cause I told’em my opinions - if they liked it or not I guess.
I guess, if he [her husband] was against it I would not have run. But like I said, I
didn’t have any little kids at home. My kids were grown up. They were in sch…on their
own or in high school or something. Cause I have a big family – I’ve got 11.
Boy – I guess the biggest challenge, maybe I thought… Personally I probably
didn’t know if I knew enough about it. You know because I didn’t really know what they
did as a director on that board – on any of them as far as that goes. I didn’t know if I had
the education to do it. Because you get on these boards and this guy has got the Ph.D.
and whatever all these initials they got for education and I come through and I went
seven years of school and the last year was in vo-tech. Vocational school and I thought
- 51 -
well maybe I don’t have the smarts. I guess you learn as you go along and it probably
means more than a textbook and I’m not saying education ain’t good, ’cause there’s many
times I wish I had a better education because of things you just don’t understand or…
You know what I mean? You get into all these big numbers and I’m horrible at speaking
in front of people and believe me I had to do a lot of it. I applaud anybody that can do
this, believe me.
When I got on the board as a director, you learn many things you never knew
what went on at the cooperative or any other co-op. You don’t realize what the cost, or
the experience those people have to have, or even yourself. After you’re on that board –
you gotta study just a little bit harder because you’ve got to know – we get a pack a paper
about this thick and its numbers and I’m not a real numbers person. But its numbers.
The operation, the cost of milk, whey, cheese, whatever. You’ve got to study. You’ve got
to brush up on stuff. It’s very interesting and I guess… I wish everybody could be on
the board at sometime in their life to really understand what’s going on, because there is a
lot that people do not know or understand. You go to a meeting somebody will say, ‘Well
how come you’re not paying any dividend this year’? Well you go back and the manager
or CEO explains everything, or the financial person… They [member-owner] don’t
understand the cost and expense there is to running all this and bad debt – you get those
too, just as well as on a farm or anything else. I enjoy being on the board. Yeah, it would
be nice if more women were on the boards, really, truly.
I guess you’ve got to take a chance. Just go out there. I never even dreamed I’d
be elected. But you know if you never take a chance you’ll never know. Because there’s a
lot of demand out there for new ideas and different people and if you have the time and
the willingness to take a chance at running for a board, I’d say go for it. And I’m not
- 52 -
saying you’re going to go in there and think you’re going to take the whole world over,
the whole board over because you’re a woman. No. I mean – you’ve got to work with’em
just like you were another guy. I guess you should feel the same way as if you have an all
women board and a man wants to run for that board. Everybody should be treated equal,
no matter if you’re a woman or man, white or black, or whatever. Its… I don’t know. I
think it’s a challenge. I enjoy it, but don’t expect that they’ll put your napkin on your lap
and pull your chair. You’ve got to carry your own. And if they can’t do that and if they
expect to be pampered or anything, then don’t run for the board because you might be
accepted, but you won’t like it. It isn’t that they treat you bad. Well men talk. If you
can hold your own and be up front with everybody else, you go for it.
Crystal
Crystal shared a lifetime of involvement and leadership experiences with me.
She had so many things to share with me. I’ve organized her story into: pathway to
leadership, balancing act, and ensuing elections.
Pathway to leadership
We were members [of the milk marketing cooperative] and we were interested in knowing
more about it. We were asked to enter the Outstanding Young Dairy Couples contest.
And that was kind of the beginning where we were selected district winner and then we
were selected as one of two couples as winners in the state and we went on to win the
regional Outstanding Young Dairy Couples contest and from winning that we went on
to the National Milk Producers convention and represented our region along with two
other couples. And then, when we were involved in Young Cooperator (YC) activities at
National Milk representing our co-op, my husband and I were elected a regional vice
- 53 -
president for the national YC program. And it was just kind of a series of events that led
to more involvement, more interest and you find the more you’re involved the more you
learn. And the more you learn about issues and dairy issues that were affecting us on the
farm and it was just a real learning, educational process. And getting involved as well
on the national level and I guess, once you get a taste of it, it just seems like you’re kind
of hungry for more. When we were on national, as the regional vice presidents, we got to
[go to] Washington D.C. and participate in a national legislative-type forum where we
talked issues, visited our Congressmen and just worked with a select few young couples
from all over the United States for the one year we held that office.
And then after that, um, that was like in 1974, 75 and at that particular time in
our co-op, they were organizing a women’s organization. You know first, we were
known as the women’s auxiliary. Because I can remember we, well we weren’t an
auxiliary – we didn’t go and knit and embroider and have bake sales and this type of
thing. Our key areas where we worked… We worked in legislation; we worked in
promotions – promoting our product; educating the consumer. It seemed like there were
four things: education, promotion, legislation, communication. And so you know we
went to Washington. We lobbied on key issues. Uh, gosh – 12, 15 women from our
regional organization went to Washington several years and at that time when we went,
they had a forum in Washington that drew a couple, oh gosh, 2-3 hundred women from
all over the United States and we would do our legislative activity and then attend this
forum. And the co-op women were very active on the district level. We had an
organization on the state level and then we had a regional women’s board. And so my
involvement continued in that respect. I served as the state president of the women and
did serve as the regional president of our regional women’s organization. And as the
- 54 -
regional president of the co-op women, you weren’t a voting member of the board of
directors of the co-op. But you represented, I guess it was an advisory capacity that you
sat on the board of directors of our regional co-op.
And after I served in that capacity, which would have been four years… After I
was finished serving in that capacity, I had the opportunity to run for director on the
board of directors. They did some redistricting and it just happened in our particular
area, it was like a new district, and some of the directors said, ‘Well I think you or your
husband should think very seriously about seeking this position on the board.’ Um, and
you know, I told my husband about this and right away he said, ‘Well, you know, I think
you should do that.’ So..that’s kind of how it went I guess. He did not run for that
position because he didn’t feel, really didn’t feel he could be away from home two days
every month and at that time he was on a couple boards. So he really didn’t want to seek
another board position. So I decided to run for that position on the board and I was
elected to the regional board. And that would have been probably in, I’m thinking ’87,
’87 – ’88.
I probably wouldn’t have run for a director position if it meant bumping someone
off the board, that had been on the board for 12 years. I wouldn’t have done that. But
there was this extra district and it just worked out very well, for me.
Even though voting directors encouraged Crystal or her husband to seek the new
district directorship, I wondered about her nomination and election. Since she was
originally elected to the board in the late 1980’s she couldn’t quite remember what the
process was at that time.
See, if I remember right… You can if you’re… It seems like you submit… I’m trying to
think how it was with the cooperative. Um, it seems like you would get a card and you
- 55 -
could submit your name. It really wasn’t that someone nominated you. I’m trying to
think how that was with the cooperative. No I wasn’t nominated from the floor, it seems
like the nomination process was by submitting a letter [which] I probably did. But you
know, as I mentioned it was with other people’s urging and knowing that you had that
kind of support.
I also wondered if the election was conducted via a mail-in ballot or at a meeting.
Then you would have your district meeting and that district meeting was held in
November. Well, because the district was so large we had three annual meetings within
our district. And although I submitted my name to run for director, there could have
been five other people that submitted their name too. And there might have been another
name or two submitted. I can’t just remember.
The nominees usually have a chance to give a speech regarding their candidacy
and I wondered if Crystal had that opportunity and if so, wondered what she said that
day.
You kind of give your credentials. At that time, or prior to that time, I was nominated
and elected to the National Dairy Board from this particular area and I was on Dairy
Council, because when I was sitting on the co-op board, even in the advisory position, I
was elected to the Dairy Council. And um, you naturally give your farm’s… how many
cows you milk and how many acres and how long you’ve been a member of the co-op and
you know, how long we had been involved beginning with being elected the Young
Cooperators Outstanding Young Dairy Couple for district, state, and region. And just
giving that kind of information and then they’re the judge of who they think is the most
qualified. So then they voted at each of these three annual meetings and I was elected.
- 56 -
Balancing act
I guess when [my husband] was going [to board meetings] I would stay home and do the
chores. Our boys were younger and they would help me, but we would, you know, we
would do the chores.
The regional board of directors usually met monthly or maybe 10 months out of
the year and that was like a noon to noon meeting, so it was an overnight meeting and
our kids were in junior high and high school you know so that meant being away from
home overnight and usually our meetings were in [city, state] so that wasn’t that far.
But still it was organizing your family so you could be away. It doesn’t seem like that
much, but you know it involves a lot of organizing with your children and your husband
and food. You know where women – those are things they think about. Where for men,
of course you have your chores. I’ve always felt when I do these things and am involved
this way and am gone, I need to have all the preparation done myself - that I should not
be putting the burden on my mother or my mother-in-law or that I should really create
any kind of a hassle or burden for anybody. I feel everything should be organized and
taken care of before I go. Then everything just falls into place while I’m gone. It doesn’t
always work that way, but I just always have felt that someone else shouldn’t have to
bear that burden.
Crystal’s approach in ensuing elections
We did redistrict 3 years ago and in [my state] we redistricted from three districts down
to two and so another director and I ran against each other. And I won by one vote and
am still on the board. And I’m also on the executive committee. But um, I really, when
we redistricted three years ago, I really didn’t, I wasn’t really, and I don’t know if you
want me to go into this or not? I wasn’t going to run because the person that… He was
- 57 -
on the executive committee. He was like one of the vice-presidents, second vice president,
if I remember right. But he could run one more term and then he would have to retire
because once you’re 65 you have to retire from the board if you’re elected like, you know,
when you’re 64. You can fill out that term, but then you can’t run again. And I just
thought he was on the executive committee, he held an office. I probably… I didn’t want
to run and be defeated. And he kind of indicated… No he wasn’t going to run. And I
thought, well if he said he wanted to run, I would just refrain from running against him.
And I couldn’t really get a clear-cut answer from him and my husband said, ‘Well you
know, if you don’t run, it looks like you’re not interested. So if you run, it still shows
you’re interested in being on the board.’ So I did run and it was… Well I was elected by
one vote over this fella and am still on the board.
I did not want to run against this fella and I did not want to make enemies, you
know. I kind of wanted to sit down and talk about it and okay he would say, ‘Well, I’m
going to run [or] I’m not going to run.’ ‘If you’re not going to run then I’m interested.’
But I couldn’t get any conversation with him. So that’s why I decided to run and then
we ran against each other. And you know, it, it just was... And we were always real
good friends, but it was sort of a strained friendship after that. I kind of felt a coolness
from the president of the board and our general manager for a while ’cause I was not
supposed to beat him. I mean, I think they were so sure. They were so sure he was going
to be elected and then he wasn’t. I was.
I got a lot of telephone calls from members saying how glad they were. I don’t
know if this will go in writing or not… how happy they were that I bucked up against
him, that I ran against him and then I won. But I didn’t realize there were several
directors who weren’t real supportive of him evidently. I found out afterwards. And I
- 58 -
feel they were talking from the heart and that they weren’t just saying that or they
wouldn’t have called from other states to congratulate me and say ‘I’m glad you went
ahead and ran and didn’t let him stop you. I’m glad you ran and you won.’
Campaign approach
I had my thoughts together before and I guess kinda prepared for what I was going to say.
There were a few people that asked me about running and you know if someone asked me,
I said well, I’d appreciate your vote. I mean I didn’t call everybody. But if someone
indicated, you know, said anything I just did say that I’d appreciate their vote. [For
example] different dairy… Prior to that there were different events that I did mention it
to a few people.
I wouldn’t want to run the other person down. And I wouldn’t want anyone to
do that to me. But you know, if someone says something, just tell’em ‘Yeah. You’re
planning to run and would appreciate their vote.’ And then they can do what they want
to do.
Advice to others
I didn’t come on the board with… I mean some people really do have an agenda. You
might hear people say, and I’ve heard this said about some women too, ‘When I get on
that board, we’re going to do the financials this way.’ And you know, ‘Why are we doing
this that way? I’m going to make sure this gets changed.’ I take the attitude its better to
be silent and observe – and see how things are done instead of taking the attitude ‘Well
I’m going to do this and I’m going to do that.’ And um, I think a more ‘think before you
speak approach’ and offer constructive advice or … I don’t think you should go forward
with such an agenda.
- 59 -
You don’t gain popularity by trying to bump somebody off of a board, but maybe
someone is near retirement and let them know you’re interested. I guess you don’t make
friends by creating a stir.
Summary
With these stories, excerpts from the full transcript, clues about these directors
and their pathways to leadership are revealed. Chapter 5 draws from the full transcript
and unveils leadership pathway experiences they shared on their journey to agricultural
cooperative director.
- 60 -
Chapter 5: Leadership Pathway Unveiled
“People of color and white women often fail to advance because they don’t know ‘how to
play the game’ of getting along and getting ahead in business. They appear to lack the
preparation and knowledge that would allow them to put their experiences and their expectations
in the context of their organization’s culture” (Morrison, 1992, p. 45).
This chapter unveils the much of the mystery that shrouded the leadership path
to agricultural cooperative director. Through interviews, each of the women shared
with me their knowledge and experience gained as a consequence of their journey to
director. Their leadership pathway experiences span the pre-nomination to post-
election spectrum. The resulting transcripts were gleaned for themes or patterns in
response to the research question: How, in the context of a male constituency and
multiple barriers do women become agricultural cooperative directors? Patterns
emerged and are recorded in Table 6: Leadership Pathways Unveiled. A discussion of
the major findings follows Table 6.
- 61 -
Table 6
Leadership Pathways Unveiled
OpalYou don’t do it becauseyou’re female; you do itbecause you’re a personwho is capable, interestedand wants to make adifference
CoralIt was important to us to beinvolved and committed to anorganization that played amajor role in our fiduciarysuccess.
VioletBe really in touch – you’ve got toserve that electorate – don’t forgetwhere your roots are.
Pre-NominationA. Cooperative Affiliation
• Membership, husband, orfarm
B. Values a. The Cooperative Wayb. Organizational Involvement
C. Experiencesa. Visible rolesb. Farm backgroundc. On-farm involvementd. Leader husbande. Supportive husbandf. Educationg. Other experiences mentioned
A. Farm
B. Valuesa. yesb. yes
C. Experiencesa. Young Cooperators
and Farm Bureaub. yesc. yesd. yese. we work as a teamf. not notedg. full time farmer
A. Individual membership
B. Valuesa. Member 11 co-opsb. yes
C. Experiencesa. Young Farmer
Programb. yes and noc. yesd. yese. yesf. high schoolg. “chose agriculture”
A. Husband
B. Valuesa. yesb. like to involved
C. Experiencesa. county fair; Farm Bureaub. raised on farmc. tractor driving +d. not mentionede. yesf. collegeg. unsuccessful election
pursuit; worked in a bank;reading
NominationA. By selfB. By Nominating committeeC. Encouraged by
a. Co-op employeeb. Directorc. Husband
D. Concerns noted
A. NoB. NoC. Encouraged by
a. not notedb. yes c. yes
D. None noted
A. NoB. NoC. Encouraged by
a. general managerand membersservices personnel
b. not notedc. yes
D. Lack of education
A. NoB. YesC. Encouraged by
a. not notedb. not notedc. yes
D. “Don’t know too much aboutgovernance”
Campaign “low-key”A. Co-op newsletter or mailingB. Candidate mailingC. Personal contactD. Public forum/candidate speeches
A. noB. noC. not notedD. yes – impromptu
A. yes B. yes C. yes 1700 miles drivenD. yes – prepared
A. not notedB. yesC. yesD. no
ElectionA. Mail-in ballotB. MeetingC. Year first elected director
A. noB. yesC. ~1989
A. noB. yesC. ~1990
A. yesB. NoC. ~1986
Post-election pathway A. Accepted by peersB. Executive Committee service
A. yesB. yes
A. yesB. yes
A. “well received”B. yes
- 62 -
Table 6 continued
Leadership Pathways Unveiled
PearlI’ve never been a ‘yes sir, nosir kind of person’You change things by gettinginvolved.
RubyI say what I think. I don’t sitand think about fancy words Igotta use because I probablydon’t know any. I just tell ’emthe way I feel.
CrystalI probably wouldn’t have runfor a director position if itmeant bumping someone offthe board. I wouldn’t havedone that.
Pre-NominationA. Cooperative Affiliation
• Membership, husband, or farmB. Values
a. The Cooperative Wayb. Organizational Involvement
C. Experiencesa. Visible rolesb. Farm backgroundc. On-farm involvementd. Leader husbande. Supportive husbandf. Educationg. Other experiences mentioned
A. My husband and I hadour own memberships
B. Valuesa. “firm believer”b. not noted
C. Experiencesa. county
governmentb. yesc. “milk cows +d. “boarded out”e. yesf. “I had a professor”g. dissatisfaction w/
representation
A. Husband
B. Valuesa. Care about
patronsb. Yes
C. Experiencesa. Farm Credit, Pork
Councilb. yesc. I’m in the field.d. Not notede. yesf. “didn’t go very far
in school”g. Federal Lank
Bank
A. Husband
B. Valuesa. yesb. yes
C. Experiencesa. YC Programb. yesc. yesd. yese. yesf. not notedg. district opened
up; held non-voting directorposition
NominationA. By self B. By nominating committeeC. Encouraged by
a. Co-op employeeb. Directorc. Husband
D. Concerns noted
A. YesB. NoC. Encouraged by
a. not notedb. not notedc. yes
D. None noted
A. NoB. NoC. Encouraged by
a. yes (field man)b. not notedc. yes
D. “Didn’t know if I hadthe education to doit”?
A. NoB. NoC. Encouraged by
a. not notedb. yesc. yes
D. None noted
CampaignA. Co-op newsletter or mailingB. Candidate mailingC. Personal contactD. Public forum/candidate speeches
A. Not notedB. not notedC. network of women?D. Not noted
A. yesB. noC. not notedD. yes
A. yes B. yes C. meetingsD. yes
ElectionA. Mail-in ballotB. MeetingC. Year first elected director
A. NoB. yesC. not noted
A. noB. yesC. ~1996
A. noB. yesC. 1987
Post-election pathway A. Accepted by peersB. Executive Committee service
A. not notedB. not noted
A. “I was alwaysrespected.”
B. Yes
A. “very well accepted”B. yes
- 63 -
Pre-nomination Pathway
Cooperative Affiliation
I wondered whether membership was a prerequisite for being nominated or
enhanced a candidate’s chance for being nominated and elected. I found two directors
who were members of the cooperative when they were first elected, while the rest were
not initially members of record. It was interesting to listen to Ruby who described
membership as follows:
Nowadays a majority have husbands and wives names on the check. But you’re just
considered a member. I didn’t sign no papers I’m a member or anything. You’re just
automatic a member. We’re husband and wife, we farm together. Ruby
Whereas Coral mentioned that she held the membership.
And it just happened that they came to enroll us for members and my husband wasn’t
home and we filled out the forms in the milk house and they asked for social security
number. Well I knew mine but didn’t know my husband’s, so I gave mine. I was the one
who had the actual share in the company. Coral
Opal described yet another experience.
So then after I got elected, the field man came and he says – actually Joe came and says,
‘You know what? You technically are going to have to have your own membership –
separate from your farm name, because you have to be a member to be a director.’ Brief
oversight! And so then what we did was worked out a split check and so now we’re both
members. Opal
The findings show that a woman director’s non-member status, or membership
by association, did not preclude any of them from pursuing the nomination. However
the findings raise other issues. As Opal noted, she was active in the farming operation,
- 64 -
but did not hold the membership and once elected she became a member. Had she not
become a member, it is possible that the electorate could have challenged the election
outcome. I wonder if the election of Violet, Ruby, and Crystal could be challenged at
this point? Secondly, as Ruby noted in her interview, her husband held the membership
and as such, her name was not on the membership list. Had she not been on the
nominating committee, it is possible that her candidacy would have been overlooked in
the nomination process.
Values
The cooperative way. Although none of the research questions directly queried a
director’s value set with regard to cooperative membership, many spoke of how
important it was to them to conduct their business with a cooperative. Crystal said, “I
guess we just really support the cooperative way of marketing your product.” She also
told a story about her first wedding anniversary and the experience that has had a
lifelong affect on her value set.
The first year we were married, my.. we didn’t belong to a co-op. We shipped our milk,
our milk went to a small cheese plant and [my husband’s family] they always belonged to
a co-op, but this cheese plant paid so much more money for your milk… and so.. and
there were some farmers around, dairy farmers, that sent their milk to [name of plant],
just a small plant. On our first wedding anniversary, we got a notice that that plant
went bankrupt and we didn’t get a milk check for two months. I mean that plant was
down the drain, and that’s why you want to belong to a co-op. Crystal
Coral and her husband were new to farming and made a conscientious decision
to do business with as many cooperatives as possible.
- 65 -
And at the time we were probably members of 11 different cooperatives. … So at 30-
something, we sold absolutely everything we had, bought a few cows, found a farm that
we could rent and decided we are doing business with a lot of cooperatives and these
[cooperatives] are our future.
The discovery that these directors spoke about valuing the cooperative as a
means of conducting business seems logical. In fact, I would expect leaders of an
organization, such as these directors, to value the organization they serve. If they did
not value the organization, I wouldn’t expect them to contribute their time to the
organization much less its leadership.
The member-patron. Another value that surfaced in the research process was a
commitment to representing the member-patron. Violet, Pearl, and Ruby all described
their responsibility to the member-patron in varying ways. Several described talking to
members on the phone or driving to a cooperative to solicit member viewpoints. Violet
demonstrated through her actions of visiting members just how seriously she took her
responsibility as a director. Unlike her predecessors, she made it a point to meet the
members, listen to their issues, and represent them accordingly.
I went to a co-op in [state] and just dropped in on the local manager – went in and
introduced myself and sat down in the chair. He had this startled look on his face and he
said, ‘I’m just appalled – no board member has ever come to my co-op’ and I said, ‘Oh
really? Well I thought that’s what board members are supposed to do.’ I didn’t make a
big splash out of it, I just said, ‘I thought that’s what board members are supposed to do.
If I’m supposed to represent you, I need to know a little bit about your business, what it
looks like and some of your facilities.’ Well he agreed, but he was just totally shocked.
- 66 -
Violet’s leadership reminds me of Helegesen’s 1995 work, The Female Advantage.
Helgesen interviewed women executives and devoted an entire chapter (p. 43-60) to
describing one of her findings, “the web of inclusion.” While doing the diary studies, I
became aware that the women, when describing their roles in their organizations, usually referred
to themselves as being in the middle of things. Not at the top, but in the center; not reaching
down, but reaching out” (p. 45-46). Violet worked from her center by reaching out to the
cooperative membership she represented. Again, it seems natural the director would
reach out to the membership she represents.
Organizational involvement. None of the research questions directly queried
organizational involvement, much less level of organizational involvement or
organizational involvement as a value. The conversations about involvement were in
response to preparation for the role of director. Each director described numerous
organizations and leadership positions held. When Coral described her involvement
she said, “We knew that we, whether it was church or anything, we knew that if we were going
to be members, we would be actively involved or we just wouldn’t be members at all. We would
either really be involved or we wouldn’t participate.” I viewed her response as a statement
regarding her value set. She values being involved as a member in comparison to being
a name on a membership list.
Organizational Involvement and Leadership Development
Clearly, organizational involvement on its own does not lead to one’s
nomination and election as a director. A key success factor in their nomination and
election was involvement in organizations that provide leadership development
opportunities and visibility within their community. Coral, Opal, and Crystal provide
examples of how cooperative specific leadership development programs targeted
- 67 -
towards young members were key to their nomination and election while Ruby and
Violet spoke of their Farm Credit and Farm Bureau involvement as key factors in their
nomination and election.
Coral described how she gained her knowledge of cooperatives through her
participation in the Young Farmer program and how it was instrumental in her
leadership development.
Actually our interest in the cooperative is through the Young Farmer program. And that
was our local co-op sponsoring my husband and I to go away for a day – Young Farmer
leadership program. … The first time it was a single day conference; the next one we
went to was a three-day conference. After that it was, I think the annual meeting which
was four days. And there’s an education process at each level. They work on, first of all
understanding cooperatives, what’s involved, what makes a cooperative different from an
independently owned business. We had a really good history of [the cooperative], how
they operate and function together as one parent company. And they also work on
leadership goals. How do you set goals? How do you become a leader? What kind of
characteristics or qualities do you need and they bring in speakers and hold seminars on
developing those skills. Coral
Opal described a similar experience in which she learned about communication,
business issues at the local and national levels through the Young Cooperator program.
In our YC program we do a regional meeting and we’ve avoided breakout sessions that
were strictly for one [gender] group or the other. We like to do things on
communications, even first aid, on business issues that either the couples can go [to]
together or they can break out and go to different ones, but either male or female would
- 68 -
feel comfortable in the sessions. … [Plus], we’d had some exposure to national issues
through the YC program. Opal
Similar to Opal, Crystal’s leadership grew as a result of her involvement in the
YC program. She not only describes her experience at the local and national levels, but
how her desire to become more involved and learn more grew.
We were interested in knowing more about our milk-marketing co-op and we were asked
to enter the Outstanding Young Dairy Couples contest. And that was kind of the
beginning where we were selected district winner and then we were selected [as] one of
two couples as winners in the state and we went on to win the regional Outstanding
Young Dairy Couples contest and from winning that, we went onto the National Milk
Producers convention and represented our region. …at National Milk my husband and
I were elected a regional vice president for the national YC program. And it was just
kind of a series of events that led to more involvement, more interest and you find the
more you’re involved the more you learn. And the more you learn about issues affecting
us on the farm… And you know it was just a real learning, educational process. And
getting involved as well on the national level and I guess, once you get a taste of it, it just
seems like you’re kind of hungry for more and when we were on national, we got to
Washington D.C. and participated in a National Legislative-type forum where we talked
issues, visited our Congressmen and just worked with a select few young couples from all
over the United States. Crystal
Ruby was involved in numerous organizations, where she also held leadership
positions. She described her involvement as follows:
I’ve been on the Farm Credit services – I’m going on my 13th year there. And I chaired
the Federal Land Bank side of our board for seven years. In fact I was the first woman
- 69 -
ever elected to that – there still has never been a woman on that. I was on the Pork
Council Women of [state]– the women’s organization. … From there I went to the men’s
board and I fulfilled a year when one of the producer’s passed away and then I was on
there for six years straight and I was the first woman elected on that board. I was on the
[State] Women for Agriculture and our county pork producer board and I still am a
director for the county pork producer board and I haven’t had pigs for three years.
Although all six women described involvement and previous leadership, these
findings suggest that not all involvement is equal. The women who described their
involvement in the Young Farmer and Young Cooperator programs described
curriculum that was targeted to the couple; related to the business issues on local, state
and national levels; and addressed their development in the areas of communication,
leadership, goal setting and more. The implications of these findings are that the Young
Cooperator and Young Farmer programs provide training that 1) is gender neutral, 2) is
business focused, 3) is targeted to the couple and 4) supports leadership development
through curriculum on goal setting, communication, leadership, policy issues, etc.
Furthermore, women’s participation in the Young Farmer and Young Cooperator
programs created opportunities for women to be noticed for their leadership and for
their contributions to the organization.
Nomination
By Self
Unlike the five other directors, Pearl pursued the nomination without first being
encouraged by others. Instead, she spoke about being dissatisfied with her director
representative and when the notification arrived announcing a call for candidates, she
- 70 -
completed the forms and returned them to indicate her interest and candidacy. She
described her rationale for pursuing the candidacy.
This cooperative has different districts and they had re-districted. So my particular
district – the one that was inclusive of our farm did not have a director because they had
switched and the man who was our director was now running against someone else north
of us. But my initial reason for wanting to be on the board was that we were not happy
with his representation. He is a good man – has been a friend of our family for all of our
many years but did not do a good job representing us on this particular co-op.
By Nominating Committee
Violet noted that the cooperative’s nominating committee nominated her. (Data
regarding the committee’s gender constituency and the specific contact was not
gathered).
I had been more active in the Farm Bureau and was seeking an office there, but was
unsuccessful at a state office that I ran for there. When this position came up on the co-
op board why the nominating committee, I’m told, after the fact said ‘Gee, we’ve got
somebody interested in ag here, let’s ask her to run.’ It was my exposure from the Farm
Bureau side that I guess caught the attention of the nominating committee for the co-
op. Violet
Encouraged by others
Before we allow ourselves to pursue our dreams, we typically ask our “voters” –
our husbands, lovers, children, parents—if they approve of our ambition. More
significantly though, many women do not begin to allow themselves to dream big dreams
because they imagine that the “voters” would be too put out (Austin, 2000, p. xx).
- 71 -
For most of the women directors interviewed, their nomination was the result of
their participation in an organization that provided leadership development training
and opportunities. With training and opportunities to provide leadership, they were
noticed and encouraged by others. Four women described being encouraged, or as
Austin suggests, “voted in” by a cooperative employee or director. In each of these four
cases, it was a man who approached the prospective director and encouraged her.
Cooperative Employee. Carol and Ruby noticed by a cooperative employee and
consequently encouraged by that person to pursue the nomination.
…our local co-op manager and some of the other managers in our [area] had stopped
us and said ‘If you guys ever want to get involved, we’d really like to see you serve on
some local boards or the region board.’ Coral
Ruby described her nomination by telling me that she was on the nominating
committee and once on the nominating committee, the question was asked ‘Would you
be interested in being on the board’? Ruby responded that she might be interested.
When asked for additional detail, she talked about the fieldman and her selection to the
nominating committee. It is was the fieldman who recommended her for the
nominating committee. She told me that because she was actively involved in farm
activities, she knew the fieldman. She described his role as follows:
The fieldman… they just tell the people that run this [cooperative], ‘Well this one would
probably be a good candidate for a nominating committee.’ They give them [the
nominating committee] names because they know the farmers. The fieldman is an
employee of the co-op, but they’re almost like an inspector. They go around… If you’ve
got troubles or if you accidentally milk a cow that’s treated [with antibiotics], they come
out and test your milk, stuff like that and they know the patrons. And they’ll say, ‘Well I
- 72 -
think this person would be a good person to be on a nominating committee because they
know other producers’ and that’s how that goes. Ruby
Director. Opal and Crystal described the influence of other directors.
I had been active in what they call their YC, Young Cooperators program. Both of us
[my husband and I] had been in their contests. We won as outstanding YC couple and so
we’d been active and the director who was going to be retiring knew both of us and so
he came to John and I both. And so we’re like 30, 32 and he wondered if one of us would
be willing to run, just to get our names out front. He thought we were maybe too young
to actually get elected, but he said, ‘Let’s get your names out now.’ Opal
One board offered a unique ‘advisory role’ for the president of the cooperative
women’s organization – a position held by Crystal.
As the regional president of the co-op women, you weren’t a voting member of the board
of directors of the co-op. But you represented, I guess it was an advisory capacity that
you sat on the board of directors of our regional [cooperative]. Being in the advisory
position as the women’ s president on the board, a lot of the directors could see that there
would be an extra district down in this area. They were saying, ‘You know you really
ought to, you or [your husband] should consider running for that position.’ So it was
other directors and um…. I’m trying to think, when we first became involved, a fella by
the name of [first and last name] was our director on the board. He was the key player.
Crystal
The above stories demonstrate the influence that employees and other directors
wield in the nomination process. Furthermore, the employees and directors were all
males. Thus, in this study, it is “co-op men” who exercise power and influence in the
nomination of women director candidates. In fact, one director clearly understood the
- 73 -
power structure noting that, ‘a woman nominating another woman would not have the
same level of authority as a man nominating a woman.’
The findings are both encouraging and disconcerting. I am encouraged by the
fact that men are encouraging women to pursue a director position and at the same time
discouraged that only men were identified as encouraging women to seek a
directorship. I wonder if cooperative employees (managers and fieldmen) wield too
much influence in a process that serves the membership. I would like to see more
involvement on behalf of the membership in a process that serves the membership.
Another concern is that only one woman attributed her nomination to the nominating
committee. Consequently, questions regarding nominating committee effectiveness and
constituency with regard to gender and cooperative affiliation are raised. Lastly, I am
concerned by the attitude that surfaced concerning the idea that a woman who
nominates another woman presents a “weak or lesser” nomination.
Kajer (1996) found that leadership was launched when an individual was
“asked”. This study confirms that finding. Kajer’s interview was slightly different in
that his study included men and women, where women were the subject of this project.
The director’s husband. The “influence of others” was a general interview
question and elicited a consistent response. These women directors were married to men who
were actively involved in leadership roles within the agricultural community. As such, the
women described their husbands as being “boarded-out” and unwilling or unable to add another
responsibility to their already long list of leadership roles. Furthermore, when these women
raised doubts about their ability to serve as a director, it was their husbands who encouraged them
to pursue the director position. This is what they said about their husbands.
- 74 -
When we were approached, we were kind of approached, ‘Well would one of you two like
to run for the position as director of the board’? My husband didn’t feel that he could be
gone, you know, overnight like that once a month. And so then we talked about it. ‘Well
maybe I would like to do that.’ And I guess we gave it serious thought and really
thought… ‘Well yeah, we would like to be involved on that level.’ Crystal
Well at the time, my husband was on the national [breed] board as a director and
so that was keeping him about as busy as he needed besides the farm and he was on Farm
Bureau board and a couple other things. He said, ‘Why don’t you run’? Just get your
name out. And he definitely encouraged me. Opal
The interesting thing is, had he not had so many commitments at the time, I think
we would have had him run because he had been the district director, I mean the district
rep under the district director. Opal
I credit my husband for saying, ‘Either one of us could do this. You’re just as
qualified as I am.’ That might not always be the case. Depending on the marriage
relationship and how they view each other. Is the husband willing to say, ‘Why don’t
you try this instead of me’? That’s the main reason I tried it. It was him. He said, ‘Why
don’t you go ahead? There’s no reason you can’t do it.’ Opal
And he was also involved… he was on the board of an organization that we
belonged to for registered Holsteins and he was a director on DHIA and he’s been a
director at the Farm Service Agency and so he really kind of encouraged me to try for the
directorship. Coral
He had served on another local cooperative board for 16 years, so he had had
about all the board meetings he really wanted. He probably didn’t have as much time and
he just felt that it was okay if I wanted to do it. Pearl
- 75 -
He is very supportive and has been from the beginning. He encouraged me to
run each time and then worked these re-elections. ‘Yes. Go on. Do it. You’re doing a
good job.’ He was very supportive of that. Violet
I guess nobody really encouraged me. I just talked to my husband and I said,
‘Well what do you think’? and he says, ‘Go for it if you want to go on.’ Ruby
While all spoke to the supportive nature of their husbands, one director spoke of
the necessity of having a supportive spouse. She provided an example of a wife who
did not support her husband in his role as a director and consequently, he later resigned
his directorship.
Concerns
Despite leadership development, previous leadership roles, encouragement from
their husbands and others, Violet, Coral and Ruby still wondered if they knew enough,
were smart enough or had enough education to be a successful director. When
approached by the cooperative’s nominating committee, Violet said, ‘Well, I don’t really
know too much about the governance.’ Coral was concerned about her lack of college
education saying, “That has been the hardest thing for me.” Even Ruby, who brought a
wide variety of leadership experiences to the table said,
I guess the biggest challenge, maybe I thought, personally I probably didn’t know if I
knew enough about it. You know because I didn’t really know what they did as a director
on that board – on any of them as far as that goes. I didn’t know if I had the education to
do it. Because you get on these boards and this guy has got the PhD and whatever all
these initials – they got for education and I come through and I went seven years of
school and the last year was in vo-tech. Vocational school and I thought well maybe I
don’t have the smarts.
- 76 -
These women participated in leadership development opportunities,
demonstrated success, were recognized for their ability and were encouraged to pursue
a directorship. Yet, they wondered if they possessed ‘the right stuff’ to be a successful
director. Were their concerns evidence of the “psychological glass ceiling” that “women
unconsciously erect within our minds” influencing their decision (Austin, 2000, p. xii)?
Or were they acting in response to socially determined gender norms which decree that
“a women is good, not great” (Austin, 2000, p. xix)?
The Campaign and Election
Campaign practices varied for the six directors interviewed. Most did little or no
formal campaigning. Some relied on a cooperative-to-member mailing which included a
brief biographic sketch of their business and interest in the directorship. Others
described sending a letter to the membership. In contrast, Coral conducted a multi-
pronged campaign in which she sent letters, made phone calls, and visited members.
A “low-key” campaign
Violet said, “I sent a letter out that stated my position. I ran a fairly low-key
campaign.”
Ruby described a campaign in which she relied primarily on a two-paragraph
biographic sketch that was published in the annual meeting materials and mailed to all
cooperative patrons. She also spoke about her election-day speech. “And then you get
up there, whatever you want to say. You’ve got 3-5 minutes to say whatever you want
to say about yourself, your operation or why you want to be a director. And then they
vote right there at the meeting.” When asked about what she said that day she said,
Oh just general you know. My personal life – married, you know, eleven children and so
many grandchildren. I farm with my husband and one son and what we have for crops,
- 77 -
what type of farming we do. You know dairy and at that time we had hogs. About how
many acres, so many acres, you milk so many cows and if you’re – any of the other
associations if you’re involved with local co-ops, the breeders, or whatever you’re
involved in. At that time I was involved in Women for Agriculture, County Pork
Producers – give a short glimpse of what… and you’re usually asked if there are any
other questions anybody else would like to know or ask you.
Like Violet and Ruby, Crystal’s campaign was limited. She “didn’t call people
and ask for votes or anything,” but she did speak about ‘giving her credentials’ the day
of the election.
You naturally give your farm’s [statistics], how many cows you milk, and how many
acres, how long you’ve been a co-op member and you know, how long we had been
involved beginning with being elected or the Young Cooperators, outstanding young
dairy couple’s award for district, state, and region. And you know, just giving that kind
of information and then they’re the judge[s] of who they think is the most qualified.
Opal described a campaign that began after the first two ballots cast on election
day. The second ballot resulted in a tie that left Opal and her opponent in the running.
Up until that point, no mailings had gone out to the members and none of the
candidates had had an opportunity to speak that day. With two ballots cast, Opal
described what happened next.
The outgoing director then said, “Now each of you need to get up and give an impromptu
speech why you want to be a director and your reasons.” The other gentleman, being
polite as he was said, “Ladies first.” I don’t remember quite what I said, but I just shared
our experiences with the YC group and how we enjoyed being part of the co-op, and that I
felt because I was active in the day-to-day operations of the dairy that I could understand
- 78 -
what other producers felt. That’s kind of the route I went. I didn’t go on about being
female or anything like that. I talked about where I saw the co-op going. There were
things I wanted the co-op to do. I just said I felt I could do it because it was something
our family was involved in and we’d had some exposure to national issues through the
YC program. And it’s just something I want[ed] to give a try and I got elected.
Fortunately, Opal had a chance to speak that day. When asked what she felt
contributed to her election over her opponent that day, she responded, “The former
director’s wife felt that I had got the vote [on the third ballot] because I really talked
about the issues. Things that people wanted to hear. Family, future, that type of thing.”
A multi-pronged campaign
Coral, now a veteran director, has been through several election campaigns and
led the most comprehensive of all campaigns described from writing letters, fielding
phone calls and traveling to member cooperatives. She described the campaigns of her
first two elections.
Coral talked about her “education” in one election-day speech.
I had taken my barn boots that I had worn that morning along with me in a paper bag
and I got to the part about talking about education and why I felt that I was qualified to
serve as a director and I reached down and took my barn boots out of the paper bag and I
set them up on the podium. I said my education wasn’t based on what I knew in my
head, but the experiences and what I had learned in life when I wore those shoes – not the
shoes, the heels I was wearing that day, but the barn boots and the education that went
with those.
She was also willing to speak about what she felt was important.
- 79 -
I had been redistricted in June so I had three months to meet with new local co-ops and
their boards. And the day of the election was an ice storm, so very few members got
there. I got up to introduce myself and to do my campaign speech, which was unheard of
at the time. They brought all six of us up front at the same time and they just asked if
anybody had anything to say. I was on the end and they started on the opposite. Every
guy just said what his name was and where he was from and you know if people wanted
to support him that would be great. They got to me and I actually had a prepared
statement that I wanted to make. I told them what I felt about cooperatives and
principles and the amount of investment that we had in the cooperative and how many
dollars had exchanged hands [between] the co-op and us and how I wish more of it could
have stayed in our hands a little bit longer. And why I felt involvement in a cooperative
that was owned by farmer members was important. I told a little bit about myself and it
took less than 2 minutes, but they’re all looking at me, like are you finished? I just
thought it was important; just giving my name I just didn’t think was enough. I just
needed to tell them basically what I felt about cooperatives. I thought it was important.
Unlike the other directors, Coral’s campaign was large in scope. As such, she
faced challenges that none of the other directors described.
I had sent letters to everybody. I had called every single local co-op. I couldn’t get
anybody even talking to me. Managers wouldn’t even acknowledge me. They had
absolutely no questions, no concerns about the information that I had sent out, no
comments at all. Nothing. It was the coldest reception I had ever had in my life.
The next time, she directed her mailing to the chairmen of the various boards.
I think I put 1700 miles on our car after dark going to member co-ops. I’d leave at 5:00 in
the afternoon or whenever I had to and I wouldn’t get home until 1 or 2 o’clock in the
- 80 -
morning. I went and stood up at every meeting, told’em who I was and I was running
for corporate director and asked if they could support me at the annual meeting that
would be held in the fall. And then I wrote to every local co-op again. Instead of sending
it to the managers, I sent it to the chairman of the board. I couldn’t believe it. I think I
had 17 calls that first day that my letter got out. These local board members actually had
questions as far as how I was running and who I was, how long I’d been in dairy. I
remember hanging clothes and being on the cordless phone answering questions and I
was just overwhelmed.
The directors described varied campaign and election experiences demonstrating
achievement is not formulaic and that multiple factors contribute to one’s director
achievement.
Campaign Questions
To run or not run ‘as a woman’. Ruby fielded the question, “Do you think you
can do a better job than some of the men”? To which she responded, “Of course. I’m a
woman.” She continued, “Well we look at things different than men do. You know.
I’m not saying I’m better than anybody else, but I mean, you look at a situation different
than men do. I don’t know about you, but I do. We all have our own ways and
thoughts of things.”
Pearl addressed gender equity in a subtle way, noting in her campaign speech
that women who served as directors were “minimal in number.” Conversely, Opal
followed the advice of the outgoing director, “Don’t run as a female, run as a farmer
who wants to serve the co-op.”
- 81 -
Post- election Pathway Director Reflections
The reflections on their pathway experiences to director centered on being a
woman and a token, being accepted by their peers and for some, self-acceptance.
Being a Woman
Each of the women spoke about being a woman whether it was in the form of
being the first woman, wanting to blend in, or how they were treated. Opal and Violet
spoke about being first.
I didn’t know that there’d never been a woman on the board at my co-op, but that really
wasn’t the issue.’ Opal
I guess I never viewed myself as a woman breaking into that. As I got into it,
well I found out ‘Well, you’re the first woman we’ve ever had on the board – or that the
co-op has ever had.’ But I just kind of brushed those kind[s] of things aside, because I
think if you emphasize that then you’re kind of pointing to yourself and I just kind of
wanted to blend in. Violet
Being a Token
Violet “wanted to blend in.” Her reality of being a token (Kanter, 1977) conflicts
with her desire to blend in. “First, tokens get attention” (p. 212). “The upper-level
women became public creatures. It was difficult for them to do anything in training
programs, on their jobs, or even at informal social affairs that would not attract public
notice. … Many felt their freedom of action was restricted, and they would have
preferred to be less noticeable” (p. 213).
Crystal demonstrated a clear understanding of the concept, tokens get attention,
when she said, “As a woman, I think you have to be very careful that you are not
outspoken. I mean, you know, these men are reluctant to have a women on the board
- 82 -
and not that they want’em to shut up and not say anything, but I think you have to be
very tactful in your approach and very careful in what you offer and say. Crystal’s
strategy was to avoid attention. Her strategy is like that of pioneering females in male
organizations as described by Freeman (1990). “Pioneering women in this group report
similar strategies. They did not call attention to themselves primarily on the basis of
gender, nor did they actively demand acceptance from co-workers. Their energies were
concentrated on the work itself, and that may have precluded a focus on interpersonal
matters related to gender” (p. 195-196).
Peer Acceptance
Although some of the women described individual board members who seemed
uncomfortable having a woman in the boardroom, each of the directors noted how
overall she felt accepted by her fellow directors.
One thing I learned as far as the co-op board, they didn’t have a problem with me being a
female. They accepted me. Opal
Each director accepted me very well. I think I was accepted readily because, like I
say, I was known. Well you’re with your next-door neighbor so to speak, your county
people. You’re familiar with them from co-op annual meetings and the ag community –
you just know those people. So I was well received there. Violet
I can honestly say I was always respected as a woman. Ruby
I felt very well accepted. Of course I had been on the board before so I was kind of
acquainted with most of the directors. Crystal
I have had a wonderful experience, was well received and a lot better qualified
than I gave myself credit for. Violet
- 83 -
That these women describe being well accepted is not surprising as all were
veteran directors. “By the time she has proved herself, a woman’s acceptance has slowly
evolved” (Freeman, 1990, p. 196). That they had stayed on the leadership track versus
being derailed at some point is an indication that they were operating from within the
“narrow band of acceptable behavior” as defined by Morrison, White, Van Velsor, and
the Center for Creative Leadership.
The acceptable area, a narrow band of characteristics and actions, reflects the multiple
expectations of corporate women and the challenge they face of blending very disparate
qualities. It is clear that much behavioral territory is off-limits to executive women.
Women may exhibit only certain behaviors traditionally accepted as “masculine,” and
only certain behaviors traditionally thought of as “feminine” are permitted, as defined by
the narrow band (1992, p. 55).
Morrison et al. (1992) confirms that those women who advance on the corporate
ladder are able to successfully navigate within that narrow band of acceptable behavior.
It also explains, though does not excuse, Crystal’s behavior in a situation she described
to me. She described a situation in which a woman with whom she was familiar was
elected as a director to another cooperative’s board. She provided the following
account.
I guess when she was elected to their board, they really thought she would bring a lot of
knowledge and expertise and maybe the financial, but although she has that knowledge,
it’s kind of her attitude that she is going to change it and change it her way. That doesn’t
go over well. It really doesn’t go over well. Men or women. But a woman, on a
predominantly men’s board certainly isn’t a positive thing to do. Someone will challenge
her. Run against her probably. No one has said that’s going to happen. But you know, I
- 84 -
don’t think anyone will mentor her because she’s the only woman. Maybe a young fella,
they would. But I don’t think maybe as a woman they will. Crystal
I was disappointed by what Crystal shared with me. Here was a director who
brought an accounting background and was motivated to change procedures
presumably for the sake of improving the cooperative. Rather than mentoring the new
director and providing some advice about helping her develop allies in the political
process, Crystal did not indicate a willingness to step in and mentor this new director.
She justified her response by explaining that this person brought an agenda to the table.
Originally, I saw Crystal’s behavior as demonstrating a willingness to raise politics
above serving the cooperative. I now see her response in a different light. Crystal was
acting from her position as a token and also acting from within the narrow band of
acceptable behavior.
Peers’ Acceptance Confirmed
As noted earlier, these women directors were accepted by their peers. This
finding is confirmed by the fact that five of the six directors described being elected to
the executive committee. Coral’s description of her election to the executive committee
indicates that the biggest barrier to women’s participation might be an internal barrier.
The vice chair moved up to the chairman’s position on the dairy committee and they
needed to elect a new vice chair and my peers elected me into that position. And I think
at the meeting that that happened, I realized that I had always thought of myself as not as
good as or always trying harder. And the day that they did that, I realized my peers had
the confidence in me and trusted me. Coral
- 85 -
Self-acceptance
Coral raises an important issue described by Linda Austin (2000) in What’s
Holding You Back? 8 Critical Choices for Women’s Success. In it, she describes the
psychological glass ceiling as the “ceiling that we women unconsciously erect within our
minds. Despite its invisibility, it influences every decision we make in our careers and is
far more life-defining than any external barriers could be.”
Leadership as a Component of the Pathway Experience
One definition of leadership posited by Kouzes and Posner is that “leaders go
first” (1995, p. 13). These six women “went first.” They did not have other women
leading or modeling the way for them; they led the way. Their leadership is also notable
for the courage and authenticity they demonstrated. For example, Coral stood up in
front of the membership, barn boots and a few notes in hand, and spoke about her hopes
for the cooperative. Her actions embody Robert W. Terry’s idea that courage is central
to authentic leadership. Terry wrote, “Fear extinguishes leadership. Courage ignites
leadership” (p. 237). All six women overcame their fears and demonstrated courage in
pursuing the role despite the existence of barriers.
Summary
The knowledge and experience women directors possess as a consequence of
their participation in the nomination and election process within the agricultural
cooperative system has been revealed. I have learned much from them as they shared
their stories. I have a new understanding of how inauspiciously their journey began,
how for most women it was a co-op man who noticed their leadership and encouraged
them to pursue a directorship, how they approached their campaign, and how their
male peers accepted them.
- 87 -
Chapter 6: Summary, Implications, Recommendations, and Conclusion
The leadership roundtable discussion pointed to a knowledge void. Anecdotal
evidence pointed to a gap between the number of board seats and the number of seats
held by women. Data assembled from the top eleven Midwest cooperatives, confirmed
that gap. The data revealed the existence of 236 board seats, six of which were held by
women in 2001. The question of how they were nominated and elected to a director
position in the context of a male constituency and multiple barriers became the primary
research question. A summary of the findings, implications, recommendations, and
conclusions are presented here.
Summary of Findings
An industry analysis confirmed anecdotal evidence that few women serve as
directors of cooperatives in the Midwest. Of the 236 directors who serve the 11 top-
ranked Midwestern agriculture cooperatives (according to the National Cooperative
Bank Top 100 list), six directors are women. Six women equates to 2.5 percent of board
seats held by women in the agricultural cooperative sector. In comparison, research by
Catalyst shows that women hold 10.9 and 12.4 percent of director seats in the Fortune
500 and 1000 respectively. The gap between percent of board seats held by women in
the agricultural cooperative sector and the Fortune 1000 points to the existence of a
gender gap.
The review of literature identified numerous barriers that stand between women
and their career objectives. Barriers to achievement overshadow how women
experience advancement and achievement. In fact the problem was so pervasive the
United States President sanctioned the formation of The Glass Ceiling Commission by
- 88 -
the U.S. Labor Department in 1991. Consequently the existence of barriers to
advancement for women and others is well documented in the literature.
Barriers notwithstanding, numerous women experience executive-level and
director achievement. The literature provides examples of women who have
experienced advancement or achievement despite barriers. Specifically, the literature
contains examples of women who have achieved executive level positions via
advancement or ownership.
The majority of the literature concerning women in agriculture was limited to
barriers they experience. There were few examples of women in agriculture who had
experienced achievement in the context of a male cohort. The identification of a gender
gap and the absence of literature created an opportunity to investigate the primary
research question; how, in the context of a male constituency and multiple barriers,
did these six women experience agricultural cooperative director achievement?
Data was gathered through five face-to-face interviews and one phone interview
with the women directors identified in the industry analysis. The directors were first
asked to describe their nomination and election. The balance of the interview was spent
gathering detailed information regarding their experiences beginning with their
preparation for the role and concluding with a look back at their experience as a
director.
As part of the leadership pathway experience, the director’s relationship to the
cooperative was probed. Was she, her husband, or their farm the member of record?
Not all held their own membership. One woman described arranging a split check
which brought her into compliance with the cooperative’s membership requirement.
- 89 -
Preparation for the director role was queried as part of the interview framework
and revealed values they held in common from placing value on the cooperative as a
business priority to serving/representing the member and lastly organizational
involvement. The directors described a commitment to participate in organizations that
affected their livelihood. The organizations in which they were involved and described
as having launched their leadership were Young Cooperators, Young Farmers, and
Farm Bureau. Through these organizations they described opportunities to learn about
cooperatives, goal setting, leadership, farm safety, and much more.
Participation and leadership in these organizations did not go unnoticed.
Directors, managers, and fieldmen were identified as individuals who approached and
encouraged them to pursue a board seat. Kajer (1996) described similar findings. He
devoted a section of his dissertation to “Being Asked: Launching Leaders”. One might
consider the women in this study to have been asked, but encouragement seems a more
apt description. Often it was the couple who was noticed and then approached to seek
the nomination. The husband, already involved in leadership roles in other
organizations, often encouraged the wife to pursue the nomination. That combination of
influential co-op man and husband proved a consistent theme.
Once noticed and encouraged, the prospective director submitted her name and
pursued the election through a variety of campaign practices from doing nothing other
than speaking from the floor on election day to driving 1700 miles to discuss issues with
the membership.
The post-election portion of the interview provided an opportunity for the
directors to look back at their experience. As veteran directors, they reflected on their
experience noting that they felt well received by their male constituency which was
- 90 -
confirmed by the fact that most noted being elected to executive leadership roles during
their tenure.
Implications
Kanter (1977) in Men and Women of the Corporation devoted chapter 8 to
Numbers; Minorities and Majorities. With regard to tokenism she wrote, “Tokenism,
like low opportunity and low power, set in motion self-perpetuating cycles that served
to reinforce the low numbers of women and, in the absence of external intervention, to
keep women in the position of token” (p. 210). Tokenism conflicts with the cooperative
system’s values of equality and equity. Women are not the only minority group to be
excluded from the boardroom. As the United States becomes more and more diverse,
the rural farm population is experiencing change as well.
Recommendations
The research identified barriers that block and practices that enable achievement.
Consequently actions that remove barriers and propel achievement are required at the
organizational, individual and research levels.
Action at the Organizational Level
First and foremost, this research was done for women in agriculture who are
interested in serving their cooperatives. Cooperative associations or foundations have
an opportunity to inspire new leaders and improve their organizational savvy through
seminars and literature showcasing these six “ordinary” women who achieved the
extraordinary.
Second, the directors spoke of the positive impact the Young Cooperator and
Young Farmer programs had on their leadership development. Both programs offered
training that was targeted to the young farmer couple, gender neutral, and business or
- 91 -
skill oriented. Both provided opportunities to hold office and learn about leadership,
goal setting, cooperatives, agricultural issues and more. Young Cooperator and Young
Farmer programs prepare young men and women for leadership roles in service of the
cooperative and agricultural community in general.
Third, an audit of nominating practices, and membership articles and bylaws is
recommended to ensure practices and policies that are as inclusive as possible. Women
who are absent from the membership list can easily be overlooked in the nomination
process. While one director was invited to be a member of the nominating committee,
only one director in the group of six was identified as being directly approached by the
nominating committee.
Action at the Individual Level
With this new knowledge, I recommend that women become involved in
organizations that provide opportunities for their development and seek the guidance of
mentors. Collins (1983) describes mentors as “essential for women’s success” (p. 137)
while Morrison et al. note “help from above” (p. 24) as a success factor. Lastly, the
strongest advice is remove the internal barriers. Six directors said, ‘Go for it. You’re
probably more qualified than you give yourself credit for.’
Action at the research level
The scenario described by one director indicated her intent to steer clear of the
woman she described as bringing an agenda to the board. Yet, she and the other women
directors spoke of people who had been helpful to them in their nomination and
election. Research that identifies safe (versus career derailing) venues or opportunities
to mentor others is needed. The director is a source of knowledge and experience that
can and should be multiplied through mentoring others.
- 92 -
I received multiple messages concerning membership and what constitutes
membership. Another area of concern surrounds the nomination committee. Why does
it appear ineffective? How is nominating committee membership determined? Is its
constituency diverse? Does it hold as one of its goals a search for diverse candidates?
Research that looks at these questions is needed to improve the effectiveness of the
nominating committee.
Conclusion
The research met the project’s stated goal of understanding the leadership path
women travel to agricultural cooperative director based on existing literature and
confirmed by their lived experiences. The research also contributes knowledge to what
Rickson describes as
the ‘sociology of the lack of knowledge.’ That sociology examines ‘how and why
knowledge is not produced, is obliterated, or is not incorporated into a canon’; it
analyzes ‘how certain people are ignored, their words discounted, and their place
in history overlooked … how certain things are not studied and other things are
not even named’ (Reinharz, 1992: 248-9). (Rickson, 1997, p. 91).
The knowledge held by six individuals can no longer be ignored. They have a
place in history. The knowledge void, identified by those women who sat at the
leadership roundtable in 1999, is full of the wisdom and experience shared so
generously by six women agricultural cooperative directors. I close this thesis with the
salient responsibility of sharing their stories and being a champion for change.
- 93 -
References
Alto Dairy. (2002). About our company: board of directors. Waupon, WI: Author.
Retrieved May 2, 2002 from http://www.altodairy.com/about/boardofdirs.asp
American Crystal Sugar Company. (2001). United States Securities and Exchange
Commission Form 10-K. Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Retrieved May 30, 2002 from
http://www.freeedgar.com/EdgarConstruct/Data/1104659/01-
503547/j2470_10k405.htm
Associated Milk Producers Inc. (2001). 2001 Annual Report. Bloomington, MN: author.
Austin, L. (2000). What’s holding you back? 8 critical choices for women’s success. NY: Basic
Books.
Bernardi, A. & Zeuli, K. (1999, September). A survey of new cooperative ventures since 1994
(Contractor Paper 99-8). Lexington: University of Kentucky Rural Studies
Program. Retrieved May 2, 2002 from
http://www.rural.org/publications/bernardi99-8.pdf
Catalyst, Inc. (2002, December 4). Catalyst charts growth of women on America’s corporate
boards. (Press Release). Retrieve May 31, 2002 from
http://www.catalystwomen.org/press_room/press_releases/wbd2001.htm
CHS Cooperatives. (2001). Are we there yet? CHS 2001: CHS Cooperatives 2001 Annual
Report. St. Paul, MN: Author. Retrieved May 3, 2002 from
http://www.cenexharveststates.com/docs/financial/annual2001/report2001.pdf
Collin, N. W. (1983). Professional women and their mentors: A practical guide to
mentoring for the woman who wants to get ahead. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
- 94 -
Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research design: qualitative & quantitative approaches. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Driscoll, D. and Goldberg, C. R. (1993). Members of the club: The coming of age of executive
women. New York: Free Press.
Equity Co-op Livestock Sales Association. (2001). Annual report. Baraboo, WI: Author.
Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. (1995a). A solid investment: Making full use of the
nation’s human capital (ISBN 0-16-045547-2). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office. Retrieved May 31, 2002 from
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/e_archive/gov_reports/GlassCeiling/docu
ments/GlassCeilingRecommendations.pdf
---. (1995b). Good for business: making full use of the nation’s human capital. Washington,
CD: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved May 31, 2002 from
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/e_archive/gov_reports/GlassCeiling/docu
ments/GlassCeilingEnvironmentalScan.pdf
Foremost Farms. (2001). What’s next? 2001 Annual Report. Baraboo, WI: Author.
Retrieved on May 30, 2002 from
http://www.foremostfarms.com/about/index.htm
Freeman, S. J. M. (1990). Managing lives: Corporate women and social change. University of
Massachusetts.
Helgesen, Sally. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York:
Doubleday.
Hoyt, A. (1996, January/February). And then there were seven: cooperative principles
updated. Cooperative Grocer. Retrieved January 30, 2003 from
http://www.wisc.edu/uwcc/staff/hoyt/princart.html
- 95 -
International Co-operative Alliance. CA. (2002). What is the ICA? Retrieved on
January 30, 2003 from http://www.ica.coop/ica/ica/ica-intro.html
Kajer, T. (1996). Leadership in agricultural organizations: perceptions and experiences of
volunteer leaders. Dissertation. St. Paul: University of Minnesota.
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Kau, S. (1976). Women’s Involvement in WI Cooperatives. Master’s Thesis, University of
Wisconsin, Madison.
Ketilson, L. H. (1996). Women in co-operatives: a Canadian perspective. Retrieved May
31, 2002 from http://www.wisc.edu/uwcc/icic/orgs/ica/pubs/review/ICA-
Review-Vol--89-No--2--19961/Women-in-Co-operatives--A-Canadian-
Persp1.html
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge: how to keep getting
extraordinary things done in organizations. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Land O’Lakes, Inc. (2001). Growing Together Land O’Lakes, Inc. Annual Report 2001. St.
Paul, MN: Author. Retrieved May 2, 2002 from
http://www.landolakesinc.com/OurCompany/2001AnnualReport/board.html
Liepins, R. (1998). Fields of action: Australian women’s agricultural activism in the
1990s. Rural Sociology, 36, 192-221.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An interactive approach. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
- 96 -
Merlo, C. (1998, March/April). A few good women: though few in number, women in
leadership positions are playing an increasingly important role in U.S. co-ops.
Rural Cooperatives, 65, 4-10.
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Minnesota Corn Processors, LLC. (2001). Minnesota Corn Processors, LLC 2001 Annual
Report. Marshall, MN: Author.
Morrison, A. M. (1996). The new leaders: leadership diversity in America. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Morrison, A. M., Ruderman, M. N., & Hughes-James, M. (1993). Making Diversity
Happen: Controversies and Solutions. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative
Leadership.
Morrison, A. M., White, R. P., & Van Velsor, E. (1987). Breaking the glass ceiling can
women reach the top of America’s largest corporations? Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Morrison, A. M., White, R. P., Van Velsor, E., & The Center for Creative Leadership.
(1992). Breaking the glass ceiling can women reach the top of America’s largest
corporations? Updated edition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
National Cooperative Bank. (2002). NCB Co-op 100. Retrieved May 31, 2002 from
http://www.co-op100.com/
Randall, A. (1982). Overcoming roadblocks to women’s involvement farm cooperatives,
leadership. American Cooperation. ___, 153-157.
- 97 -
Rathbone, R. C. (1981/1995). Cooperative Financing and Taxation. (Cooperative
Information Report 1, Section 9). Washington, DC: United States Department of
Agriculture: Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service.
Rickson, S. T. (1997). Outstanding in their field: women in agriculture. Current
Sociology, 45(2), 91-133.
Rosenfeld, R. A. (1985). Farm women: work, farm and family in the United States. Chapel
Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
Rubin, H. J & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sachs, C. (1996). Gendered fields: rural women, agriculture and environment. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
---. (1983). The invisible farmers: women in agricultural production. Totowa, NJ: Rowman &
Allanheld.
Shortall, S. (1999). Women and farming: property and power. New York: St. Martins Press.
South Dakota Wheat Growers. (2002). About us: District Directors. Aberdeen, SD:
Author. Retrieved May 2, 2002 from
http://www.sdwg.com/index.cfm?show+10&mid=12&pid=2
Swiss, D. J. (1996). Women breaking through: overcoming the final 10 obstacles at work.
Princeton, NJ: Peterson’s/Pacesetter Books.
Swiss Valley Farms. (2001). Board of Directors. Retrieved May 20, 2002 from
http://www.swissvalley.com/about_us/bod.asp
Terry, R. S. (1993). Authentic leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
United Suppliers, Inc. (2001). United Suppliers, Inc 2001 Annual Report. Eldora, IA:
Author.
- 98 -
White, J. (1992). A few good women: breaking the barriers to top management. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
White-Newman, J. B. (1993). The Three E’s of Leadership: A Model and Metaphor for
Effective, Ethical, and Enduring Leadership. Annual conference of the
Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota.
- 99 -
Appendix A: Sample letter of invite
July 18, 2002
«First» «LastName», Director«Company»«Address1»«City», «State» «PostalCode»
Dear Ms. «LastName»:
I am nearing completion of the Master of Arts program in Organizational Leadership (MAOL) atthe College of St. Catherine in St. Paul, Minnesota. In partial fulfillment of the degree program, Ichose a thesis research project. My research project is an extension of my farm experience as ayouth, nine years with a regional cooperative, and interest in ethical, effective and enduringleadership. Consequently, I am very interested in your nomination and election to the«Company» Board of Directors.
I understand that very few women serve as directors of agricultural cooperatives and that some ofthe information you share may link you to an event or situation that others might link to you. Forthe sake of accuracy, I will record the interviews on audio-cassette and create a transcript fromthe recording. I will take the following steps to assure you and the other participants that theinformation you provide is confidential.• I will personally transcribe the tapes, removing all identifying information from the transcript• I will erase and destroy the tapes upon completion of the project• Only my advisors and I will have access to the transcripts• No identifying information will be contained in the thesis document.
Your nomination and election story is central to the research question. Please consider sharingyour story and two hours of your time with me. I believe the research findings will be of value tothe agricultural cooperative system including other directors, member development departments,and leadership development practitioners.
Should you have questions regarding the project or your participation, please contact me. Shouldyou wish to review my credentials, I have enclosed a list of references for you. I will call you todiscuss this project and invite you to participate.
Sincerely,
Kristine G. RoseMAOL studentCollege of St. Catherine
Enclosure (1) list of references
Contact information deleted
- 100 -
Appendix B: Sample letter confirming interview
September 24, 2002
{First Name} {Last Name}{Address 1}{City}, {ST} {Zip}
Dear Ms. {Last Name}:
Thank you so much for granting me the opportunity to interview you. Background researchrevealed that the top 10 cooperatives in the Midwest have 236 director seats, six of which are heldby women. Consequently, you are one of the few who have the knowledge and experience setneeded to help answer the primary research question: how, in the context of a primarily maleconstituency, do women become a director? With that question in mind, I’d like to know moreabout:
• Your nomination and election experience• What challenges you encountered and overcame?• What role others played in your achievement?• What key lessons and /or knowledge you’ve come away with?• What recommendations you have to increase women’s participation on agricultural
cooperative boards?
The interview is one aspect of my thesis research project and I value your participation. It isimportant though that you are aware that you can withdraw without consequence from the projectat anytime. Here is the information I have regarding our meeting:
Date:Time: Location: your farm
I look forward to meeting you and learning more about your nomination and election to the {co-op name} board of directors.
Sincerely,
Kristine RoseStudent, MAOL programCollege of St. Catherine
Contact information deleted
- 101 -
Appendix C: Sample consent document
«Date»
«First» «LastName»«Address1»«City», «State» «PostalCode»
Dear Ms. «LastName»:
Learning more about you and the experiences of your election in a face-to-face interview is animportant aspect of this research project. Before we commence the interview, I must address theissues of confidentiality and consent.
Confidentiality: The interviews will be recorded on audio-cassette for the sake of accuracy andlater transcribed using word processing software and equipment. I understand that very fewwomen serve in director roles and that some of the information you share may link you to anevent or situation that someone might be able to identify. I will take the following steps to assureyou and the other participants that the information you provide remains confidential.• Only my advisors and I will have access to the interview materials.• I will transcribe the tapes and remove identifying information from the transcripts. • The audio-cassette tapes will be destroyed upon acceptance and publication of the thesis
research document.• No identifying information will be published in the thesis document.
Consent: You are making a decision to participate or not participate. By signing below, youagree to participate and understand that your participation is voluntary and that at any time youmay choose to withdraw without consequence from the interview.
Sincerely,
Kristine RoseMAOL Student, College of St. Catherine
I have read the above and agree to participate. I would like a copy of the thesis presentation.
«First» «LastName», Director date
Contact information deleted
- 102 -
Appendix D: Characteristics of midwestern farmer operators
Characteristics of Farmer Operators
Characteristics MN WI IA ND SD Total As a %
All operators 73,367 65,602
90,792 30,504 31,286 291,551
99.6%
Black operators 196 184 123 199 513 1,215 0.4%Subtotal 292,766 100.0%
Male 69,750 61,201
86,174 29,168 29,810 276,103
94.3%
Male black 166 161 96 189 450 1,062 0.4%
Female 3,617 4,401 4,618 1,336 1,474 15,446
5.3%
Female black 30 23 27 10 63 153 0.1%Subtotal 292,764 100.0%
Spanish, Hispanic, orLatino origin 260 251 343 145 168 1,167 0.4%Not of Spanish,Hispanic, or Latinoorigin 62,095
57,784 80,060
25,373 26,994 252,306 86.5%
Spanish, Hispanic, orLatino origin notreported 11,012 7,567 10,389 4,986 4,122
38,07613.1%
Subtotal 291,549 100.0%
Note: Data assembled from Table 16: Tenure and Characteristics of Operator as found in the 1997 Censusof Agriculture-State Data: USDA, NASS