Yes, that's a big problem. The owners of capital want to have a say about what the company does, because their money are at stake.
Perhaps this is just a cultural thing though. Take money lending - although a bank gives capital to someone else in exchange for profit, it doesn't require strict controls over the actual use of the money; it relies on contract law to get the money back.
Similarly, the executives of the publicly traded companies have responsibility to shareholders. Perhaps a similar agreement could be institutionalized with the coops too (yet preserve their democratic nature).
For the lending, there will often be a collateral, for a company it will often be shares. That limits the leverage to 50% since a default will make the bank an investor and external investors can't have control.
The collateral will not always be shares, sometimes it could be the acquired physical good, then it's accessible to coops (too bad if you want to borrow for service or immaterial goods). Using real estate or company planes as a collateral suggests that you already got a credit to acquire them in the first place.
Perhaps this is just a cultural thing though. Take money lending - although a bank gives capital to someone else in exchange for profit, it doesn't require strict controls over the actual use of the money; it relies on contract law to get the money back.
Similarly, the executives of the publicly traded companies have responsibility to shareholders. Perhaps a similar agreement could be institutionalized with the coops too (yet preserve their democratic nature).