Those two organizational models are fundamentally different. The PPT is a top-down approach which sets firm company values with little room for deviation, ensuring consistency but limiting individual input (admittedly mostly executive/company officer input).
In contrast, the co-op is a bottoms-up model which empowers every employee to have a say, making the company dynamic and responsive to collective decisions.
While both might aim beyond just profits and share goals like amplifying employee voices, their execution is markedly different. For example, in an employee cooperative, major changes can happen quickly through collective decision-making. Conversely, in the PPT model, even unanimous agreement on change could be denied.
As a thought experiment, imagine what would happen in both scenarios (co-op vs PPT) if every single employee (including executives/company officers) decided they didn’t want the business to buy local fish anymore.
To extend the thought experiment further, imagine if, in the co-op scenario, a survey was run to collect information about whether employees still wanted the company to buy local fish...and then the employees who didn't were slowly whittled down to a minority through selective firings.
The tendency for the most ruthless in leadership to "take the wheel" by excising any from the organization who aren't on board with increased ruthlessness is a common one (see the current GOP in the US, various stories of Soviet leadership, and common trends in executive-turnover-immediately-preceding-layoffs).
