Under Kennedy’s model, it is not so much the higher agency taking on certain menial tasks in order to show solidarity, but a more practical inversion of the typical hierarchical structure by promoting a supportive rather than a controlling role for managers. This idea is a long-established management strategy, but has strong theological resonance which could help its application to ecclesiastical institutions. In order to combat the risk that the powerful will misuse their authority, Kennedy states, the Catholic church insists on this idea of devolved executive function:
“Underlying this principle [subsidiarity] is the conviction that a good society demands the flourishing of this wide variety of associations. As a consequence, every superior authority has a twofold duty. First, it must provide assistance as needed to subordinate associations to enable them to perform their functions as effectively as possible. Second, it must always exercise restraint it its use of power so that the legitimate activities of these subordinate associations are never destroyed or absorbed.” (p.169)
As might be expected from an American author, Andrew McLeod (2007) puts considerable focus on Biblical precedent for good management techniques. His study questions whether co-operatives could help to bridge the gap that has developed in the US between the religious right and secular society. As an organisational principle for decision making, he cites Matthew 18:15-18, about disagreement between two believers, as the model for a business conflict resolution system in which the offender needs to recognise his/her offence. He then looks at the communal sharing in Acts and the divine punishment meted out to Ananias and Sapphira for withholding some money from the community. These latter two were struck dead by God: “this most extreme of punishments was reserved for being uncooperative – for failing to share. And it should be emphasized that Peter took the trouble to remind Ananias that the whole arrangement was voluntary.”
McLeod wonders if co-operative models would work in America, where he claims the culture fosters a ‘live and let live mentality’ that avoids imposing views on other people. He comments that Americans have difficulty seeing other points of view, and says positive role models need to be found in order to achieve this. He turns immediately to Mondragon (described below), which has ended up so large it has taken on some of the functions normally performed by a government. And in Italy there is the Confederazione Cooperativa Italiane Cooperative, which is more than 100 years old and has 3 million members.
After these two examples from Roman Catholic countries, McLeod concludes by hoping for an ecumenical future, which the co-operative idea of community helps to exemplify. He does end up with a similar conclusion to other writers, that co-operatives are a commercial model that removes competition and replaces it with community: “And perhaps more importantly, cooperatives provide a way to remove competition as the primary motivator for commerce without throwing out the existing economic order. This transition is highly important; sudden lurches toward sharing of wealth have consistently shown themselves to be less sustainable than gradual shifts.”