Why do alternative organizations run differently from conventional shareholder let approach?

Alternative organizations run differently from conventional shareholder led approach because: b. they are run in non-hierarchical ways which aim to provide a positive impact on society rather than to make profit.

The main purpose of alternative organizations is not to make money but to provide goods and services that benefits the society as a whole. That’s is why these types of organizations aren’t run using the common shareholder-led approach.

if interdependence implies a two-way dependence, and if each partner is equally dependent on the other for success, then there is an equal commitment to the making the partnership successful. the advantage is sustainability of the relationship, the disadvantage is that decisions are "democratic" and therefore may take longer to reach and more likely to be a compromise (which is not always the best solution). as the interdependence moves away from equality, the decisions become more influenced by the more independent partner. in the extreme the relationship becomes more dictatorial and more like "master-slave". generally the relationship has less commitment in both directions and is more likely to be temporary.

if one generalizes (and one shouldn't), equity partnerships, which is probably what is implied by interdependence, can be slow to progress or change but durable. the extreme alternative, independent-dependent partnerships tend to be efficient but more fragile.

hope this but you will have to site your own evidence. : )

whats the question huh huh bruh