RAIFFEISEN AS SOCIAL INNOVATOR

In recent years the term social innovation has become widely used by policy makers, yet important ambiguities remain. One of these concerns what has been called the paradox of embedded agency – how social innovators conceive of something new when working with existing social institutions. So far few writers have considered whether historical examples can, with benefit of hindsight, shed light on the relationships between social innovators and social institutions. This paper considers the example of Friedrich Wilhelm Raiffeisen, creator of rural credit unions and agricultural co‐operatives in 19th‐century Germany. Raiffeisen was a social conservative who worked in many ways within existing social institutions. At the same time, his desire to meet social needs drove him to create new forms of action and organization that resulted in social innovation. Raiffeisen's process of invention shows that social innovation, particularly in transitional eras like his, need not be a matter of using logical‐deductive processes to address a social need, but may depend critically on values, will, a readiness to experiment, and an ability to find allies. These qualities enabled Raiffeisen to break through existing institutions to do something fundamentally new, and they may be qualities that provide new focus for social‐innovation research and policy.     

Reconciling different truths about isomorphic pressure and distinctive behavior at European cooperative banks: Back to the future with Raiffeisen's principles

This article employs a new approach to address a key question in an expanding literature on European cooperative banks: are they still distinctive and sources of social innovation or did they suffer from organizational isomorphism throughout their history? First, we go back to the time when Friedrich Wilhelm Raiffeisen (1818–1888) formulated his principles for the forerunners of many contemporary cooperative banks. Subsequently, we identify areas where major adaptations to the archetypical model of cooperative banks have taken place or are still taking place today. We integrate a detailed explanation of the backgrounds and motivations of these steps with an analysis of isomorphic consequences and loss of distinctiveness that have allegedly emanated from these adjustments. Against the latter common opinion, we place an equally well‐founded dissenting view and formulate recommendations to stay on or return to the cooperative track. Thus, we reconcile conflicting assessments in scientific publications and present a balanced view on the current peculiarity of cooperative banks, substantiated by up‐to‐date figures. With the economic disruption caused by the coronavirus outbreak, we argue that, now more than ever, cooperative banks could demonstrate their solidarity, long‐term orientation and local anchoring—namely bringing Raiffeisen's principles back to the future.