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.

- 20 -

- 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.

- 86 -

- 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