Non capitalist firm is simply a different ownership structure. In simple terms: the capitalist mode of production is characterized by private ownership. Whereu

Non capitalist firm is simply a different ownership structure. In simple terms: the capitalist mode of production is characterized by private ownership. Whereupon one or a group of individuals that own the capital get to decide about what is done with the profits that are generated by the firm through the labour of the workers. So a non capitalist firm would be one where it is not the owners of capital that decide but the owners of labour (the workers). Applied to tech, it would as if the workers in Facebook were the ones that made all decisions, as opposed to just mark zuckerger and the board (who are decided on by shareholders). Now, there are also mixed models which are common in Scandinavian countries as well as Germany usually named 'co-determination' models; in these, workers get a presence in the board of directors and can influence decisions. These would be non capitalist modes of production, it doesnt really mean they dont make money or that they dont participate in markets and competition. Of course, markets are also an important part of capitalism but markets are impervious to the mode of production. You can have state enterprise participate in market dynamics together with privately or publicly owned firms alongside coops. Coops can survive very well under market competition dynamics. But there is an argument to be made about being undercut by privately owned firms that can easily make their products/services cheaper through off shoring and other anti-labour practices. In the end, the world is so large that competition is not as cut throat as in theoretical models... But still, the criticism of markets is there.