Purpose In light of South Korea's state-supported expansion of social cooperatives, this paper explores how members experience the balance between public value and cooperative principles. Design/methodology/approach Using Q methodology (which models shared viewpoints from rank-ordered statements), 70 worker-members from five cooperatives (Seoul, summer 2023) sorted 36 statements mapped to environmental, social–internal, social–external and governance (ESG) dimensions. Factor analysis yielded four perspectives. Findings We identify four perspectives–Principled but Inequitable, Instrumentalized Service Provider (Bipolar), Outward-Focused Strategic Enterprise, and Benevolent but Undemocratic. Across profiles, governance is the persistent fault line, the internal versus external social balance differentiates member experiences, and environmental commitment uniquely differentiates one profile. Outcomes span instrumentalization (narrow state-aligned service), selective agency (policy engagement and partnership), and benevolent paternalism (work-life gains with weak democracy). Implications span profile-specific policy and practice levers addressing governance gaps, autonomy-accountability tensions and the alignment of stated values with operational routines. Originality/value By centering member subjectivities under state pressure, the study demonstrates heterogeneous adaptations rather than a single path of co-optation and offers an actionable typology for policy and cooperative development.
Claassen et al. (Tue,) studied this question.