Search

International audience; This paper develops the bases for a decisional organization theory. Important approaches, like sociological systems theory, partial and meta-organization, or organizationality, share the assumption that decisions are a central component of organizations. However, organization studies still fail to account fully for the role of decisions in the emergence and continuation of organization. Yet, while pre-modern societies could rely on institutionalized orders in the form of traditions and authorities, the contemporary world rests on a myriad of decisions to cope with societal complexities. We develop an integrated, decisional organization theory (decisional OT) in which we articulate several concepts of organization theory, thus presenting organization as both a system of decisions and a decided social order. Looking further at organization as continua, we distinguish between ‘entitative organizationality’, i.e., degrees of organizationality at the entity level, and ‘structural organizationality’, i.e., a combination of organizational elements. This approach constitutes an important development for OT because it helps us to analyze the complex layering and intertwining of social orders inside, outside, among, and as organization(s), and identifying future research on the nesting of organization and the maintenance of organizational boundaries.; Neste texto são desenvolvidas as bases para uma Teoria Decisória nas Organizações (TDO). Abordagens importantes, como a teoria dos sistemas sociológicos, a da organização parcial e meta-organizacional, ou a organizacionalidade, compartilham a suposição de que as decisões são um componente central das organizações. Entretanto, os estudos de organização ainda falham em explicar plenamente o papel das decisões no surgimento e na continuação da organização. No entanto, enquanto as sociedades pré-modernas poderiam contar com ordens institucionalizadas na forma de tradições e autoridades, o mundo contemporâneo repousa sobre uma miríade de decisões para lidar com as complexidades sociais. Assim, desenvolvemos, de forma integrada, uma Teoria Decisória nas Organizações (TDO) na qual articulamos vários conceitos da teoria da organização, apresentando a organização tanto como um sistema de decisões quanto como uma ordem social decidida. Assumindo, adiante, a organização como um continua, distinguimos entre ‘organizacionalidade entitativa’, ou seja, os graus de organizacionalidade no nível da entidade, e ‘organizacionalidade estrutural’, ou seja, uma combinação de elementos organizacionais. Esta abordagem constitui um desenvolvimento importante para a Teoria Organizacional (TO) porque nos ajuda a analisar a complexa estratificação e o entrelaçamento das ordens sociais dentro, fora, entre e como organização(ões), e a identificar pesquisas futuras sobre o ‘aninhamento’ da organização e a manutenção dos limites organizacionais

Quel role l’expert-comptable (EC) peut-il jouer dans l’exploitation de l’intelligence collective (IC) par le crowdlending, et a quelles conditions ? Cet article s’appuie sur une etude de cas approfondie d’une tentative inaboutie d’exploiter l’IC grâce a l’expertise-comptable dans le cadre d’un partenariat entre une plateforme de crowdlending et l’Ordre des Experts-Comptables. Nos resultats decrivent certaines actions de l’EC permettant d’activer diverses fonctions de l’intelligence collective sur les forums, en amont et en aval de la collecte. Mais l’article revele aussi deux facteurs organisationnels d’echec de l’exploitation de cette ressource : le non-respect d’un principe de co-dependance et l’hypocrisie organisationnelle. Cette analyse nous conduit a proposer un modele elargi de co-dependance entre plateforme, porteurs de projet, foule et experts-comptables dans le crowdlending, permettant une « ingenierie » de l’intelligence collective, c’est-a-dire son expression, sa transformation et son exploitation.

Can platforms close the governance gap in the sharing economy, and if so, how? Through an in-depth qualitative case study, we analyze the process by which new regulation and self-regulation emerge in one sector of the sharing economy, crowdfunding, through the actions of a meta-organization. We focus on the principal French sectoral meta-organization, Financement Participatif France (FPF—Crowdfunding France). We show that this multi-stakeholder meta-organization not only closed the governance gap through collective legal, ethical, and utilitarian work but also preceded and shaped the new market. We present a hybrid governance approach combining (a) soft multi-agency regulation, (b) self-regulation through a process of “partial meta-organizing”, and (c) direct civil society participation. We expand the literature by highlighting features of platforms’ partial meta-organizing and by identifying conditions for successful joint regulation and self-regulation of the sector. This study was funded by laboratory of excellence ReFi, of heSam University (Grant No. ANR-10-LABX-0095) and by Agence nationale de la Recherche (Grant No. ANR-11-IDEX-0006-02).

Le mot fintech resonne comme le nom d’un monstre hybride. C’est un Minotaure, un assemblage entre deux elements proteiformes qui, chacun pris isolement, suscitent deja en eux-memes autant d’espoir que de peur. La regulation des fintechs necessite une capacite a poser des definitions sur des phenomenes instables, une capacite a creer des policy networks et des formes d’organisations innovantes entre acteurs emergents et, enfin, une capacite a prendre en compte et a traiter une forme d’anxiete des regulateurs sur leur propre utilite. Le mouvement des fintechs pousse le regulateur a s’interroger sur lui-meme et sur la necessite de « fintechiser » la regulation financiere.

De la Revolution a l’Empire, les armees francaises dominent la scene militaire europeenne. Elles le doivent essentiellement a la standardisation de l’artillerie qu’a mise au point l’officier et ingenieur Jean-Baptiste Vaquette de Gribeauval (1715-1789) a la fin du XVIIIe siecle. Ce processus de standardisation a porte sur les calibres des canons et la conception des affuts (roues et essieux). Il a suppose au prealable la mise au point de techniques de production et de mesure et implique la formation des officiers d’artillerie aux sciences fondamentales et appliquees. Tout a du bouger en meme temps : la doctrine militaire, l’industrie, les techniques. Ce mouvement fortement controverse a entraine, a l’instar de la querelle des Bouffons en matiere d’opera, l’un des grands debats publics de la fin de l’Ancien Regime, la querelle dite des Rouges et des Bleus (en reference a la couleur des uniformes des artilleurs avant et apres la reorganisation de cette arme). Gribeauval a d’abord ete soutenu par le pouvoir royal, puis a ete eclipse, avant de revenir aux commandes pour mener a bien sa reforme. Nous presentons ici cette premiere grande bataille de la standardisation industrielle, dans son contexte historique.

In a seminal paper, Ahrne and Brunsson coined the word ‘meta-organization’. More than a label, this word describes a challenging and stimulating concept that can be valuable for management studies when approached with different units of analysis and research methodologies. ‘Meta-organization’ refers to a central phenomenon in the contemporary world, namely the increasing importance of collective action at the level of organizations, ensuing from major issues related to sustainable development, human rights and corporate responsibility. The concept calls for new forms of theorizing of global collective action. The diversity and heterogeneity of meta-organizations raise methodological issues that require original approaches. In this paper, we show the novelty of the concept of meta-organization; we then address the methodological difficulties and propose a research agenda on meta-organizations for management studies.

Meta-organizations (MO, i.e. organizations of organizations) are increasingly set up and used to tackle contemporary environmental or social problems. The primary focus of this novel concept has been traditional industries and cases of MO made of one single type of members, e.g. firms, often in the same industry. Little research has examined cross-sectoral or multi-stakeholder MO and their roles in the governance of economic activities, especially in the oceans, which face severe and complex grand challenges. Here we investigate the forms and conditions under which MO can effectively facilitate the joint governance of ocean problems. Our paper develops a conceptualization of ‘governing MO’ as a category of MO dedicated to sustainability and organizations' practices self-governance. We then conduct a comparative study of ocean governance devices through the MO lens and highlight broad variations in the use of MO characteristics. Lastly, we define ideal-typical dimensions and boundary conditions for a MO model of ocean governance.

International audience; Par son immensité, sans doute aussi par son éloignement de nos considérations quotidiennes, l'océan nous semble capable d'encaisser tous les coups que nous lui faisons subir : plastique, réchauffement, acidification, surconsommation des ressources, introductions d'entités chimiques nouvelles, perte de biodiversité et d'habitat. Il est urgent d'adresser ces menaces qui font courir le risque d'un effondrement irrémédiable des écosystèmes naturels et humains. Pour ce faire, nous appelons de nos voeux le développement de Sustainable Ocean Studies dont le management pourrait constituer la clé de voute. Car hélas, alors que l'océan fait l'objet de nombreuses recherches en sciences de la Terre, il semble à l'inverse oublié du management. Dans ce dossier, nous abordons l'océan comme enjeu pour la recherche en management à travers trois éclairages : celui de la plongée sous-marine, celui de la consommation de faune menacée et enfin celui de la recherche en mer, nécessairement interdisciplinaire

Le developpement durable est une idee abstraite. Par quel enchainement de mecanismes une telle idee peut-elle avoir un effet sur la gestion de firmes, et ce, au niveau le plus operationnel ? Cet article decrira tout d’abord cet ensemble de dispositifs en mettant notamment l’accent sur le role des meta-organisations. Il s’interrogera ensuite sur la complexite organisationnelle qui en decoule.

Organizing practices at the collective level of firms and entrepreneurs, i.e. ‘meta-organizing’, is a necessity for the development and diffusion of sustainable innovations. This paper seeks to build a meta-organization approach of sustainable innovation’s governance. To do so, we conducted a three-stage literature review and analysis to 1) identify organizational capabilities that businesses need to acquire to develop sustainable innovations, 2) uncover attributes of meta-organizations as devices for governance, 3) relate these attributes to the capabilities for sustainable innovations. Our contributions are twofold: first we build a more comprehensive understanding of organizational capabilities, insisting on the overlooked importance of accountability, in addition to existing literature on anticipation, resilience, reflexivity, responsiveness and inclusion. Second, we highlight the key role of meta-organizations in facilitating the meta-governance of these capabilities. We propose a research agenda to further investigate these issues in several families of meta-organizations. Meta-Organizing Firms’ Capabilities for... (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321491104_Meta-Organizing_Firms'_Capabilities_for_Sustainable_Innovation_a_Conceptual_Framework [accessed Apr 05 2018].

International audience; Développer en France une plateforme de financement participatif sous la forme de prêts rémunérés, ou crowdlending, n’était, jusqu’il y a encore quelques années, qu’une utopie. La concrétisation de cette idée semblait irréaliste, car elle remettait en cause non seulement le secteur financier traditionnel, mais aussi les cadres réglementaires qui le protégeaient contre l’émergence de toute innovation de rupture. Dans cet environnement hostile et incertain, quelles stratégies un entrepreneur peut-il mettre en œuvre pour développer un business model innovant vis-à-vis non seulement des acteurs installés, mais aussi de ses futurs concurrents ? Cet article explore la configuration des stratégies concurrentielles et coopératives auxquelles recourt un stratège du crowdlending français pour créer, faire grandir et conserver la maîtrise d’un nouvel espace de marché

In a recent issue in this journal, Lawton et al. and Spillman argue for the importance of studying trade associations, also referred to with the broader term meta-organization. They discuss why meta-organizations matter and why more research is needed on the topic. We fully concur with the authors that meta-organizations constitute an inflating, diverse, and undeniable phenomenon of collective action among organizations and that collective scholarly efforts are necessary to improve our understanding of meta-organizations in their multiplicity. In this article, we shed some light on a body of work already investigating the matter. They constitute what we call the “European School” of meta-organization. We show the relevance of this recent European work for the US–UK-oriented trade association research and aim to bridge the gap between these research traditions by proposing a common research agenda on key topics of resources, forms’ differentiation, coopetition, and their role in sustainability governance.

International audience; Few industries have been pressured to develop corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards and policies like oil and gas. This has translated into the creation of non-governmental organizations and branches of the oil and gas firms focused on CSR. However, given the intrinsic complex characteristics of this industry, its global reach, and the fact that its operations affect and involve a wide variety of stakeholders, CSR issues cannot be defined and implemented exclusively at the industry or firm levels, but require the participation of other actors affected directly or indirectly by oil and gas activities. In this paper we argue, first, that oil and gas CSR issues are collectively constructed through meta-organizations (organizations composed by other organizations), and, second, that the complexity and variety of CSR issues require companies to build industry-specific and non-industry-specific collective actions. Based on how oil and gas firms participate in this multi-level co-construction of CSR issues, we created a typology of meta-organizations as infra-sectoral, sectoral, cross-sectoral, and supra-sectoral meta-organizations.

Comment assurer la réussite d’une fabrique plurielle d’une politique publique dans un secteur émergent comme le financement participatif ou crowdfunding ? À travers une étude de cas approfondie, cet article revient sur la place des plateformes de crowdfunding dans le réseau d’acteurs cherchant à influencer la régulation, c’est-à-dire le policy network du crowdfunding. La méthodologie s’appuie sur des documents juridiques et trente‑et‑un entretiens pour reconstituer les séquences stratégiques de cette co-construction et les dialogues implicites entre acteurs hétérogènes. Nous montrons le passage d’un mouvement collectif informel de plateformes à une méta-organisation sectorielle forte, légitime et crédible qui contribue à la gouvernance sectorielle en gérant la pluralité des acteurs et en servant d’intermédiaire de négociation. En entrepreneur institutionnel, la méta-organisation vient compléter le policy network émergent, et conditionne la réussite de la co-construction des politiques publiques dans un secteur nouveau. Cet article contribue à développer la notion de « vide organisationnel » dans un policy network émergent, i.e. l’absence d’un intermédiaire organisé, et à montrer comment peut se structurer en réponse une méta‑organisation. How to ensure successful multi-stakeholder public policy making in an emerging sector such as crowdfunding? Through an in-depth case study, this article analyses the role crowdfunding platforms played in the network of actors seeking to shape their regulation, i.e. the crowdfunding policy network. Thanks to legal documents and thirty-one interviews, we reconstituted both the strategic sequences of this co-construction of the regulation and implicit dialogues among heterogeneous public and private actors. We show that collective action among platforms moved from an informal network to a strong, legitimate and credible sectoral meta-organization. This meta-organization contributed to the sectoral governance of crowdfunding by managing the plurality of actors involved and acting as an intermediary for negotiation. As an institutional entrepreneur, the meta-organization complemented the emerging policy network and conditioned the successful co-construction of the regulation of a new sector. This article contributes to the definition of an "organizational gap" in a policy network, i.e. lack of structured intermediary. It also shows how a meta-organization can be structured to fill this gap.

International audience; In this essay, we criticize how the performativity thesis, as described and exemplified in Do Economists Make Markets, has focused primarily on the field of economics generally and business school–based financial economics consequently. By doing so the performativity literature has ignored whether, when, and how financial economics outperforms, or might be outperformed by, other business school sciences, such as management. In other words, just as a firm’s economic performance depends on its capacity to outperform its competitors, we suggest that the performativity of a science, like financial economics, also results from its capacity to outperform other sciences, like management.; Cet essai critique la thèse de la performativité, c’est-à-dire la capacité d’une théorie à créer la réalité qu’elle décrit, telle qu’elle est abordée dans Do Economists Make Markets, un ouvrage qui s’est concentré principalement sur le champ de l’économie en général et de l’économie financière enseignée dans les business schools plus précisément. De ce fait, la littérature sur la performativité a ignoré si, quand et comment l’économie financière surperforme ou peut être surperformée par, les autres disciplines de gestion, telle que le management. Tout comme la performance financière d’une firme dépend de sa capacité à surperformer ses concurrents, nous suggérons dans cet essai que la performativité d’une science résulte aussi de sa capacité à surperformer les autres sciences, comme le management

International audience; Our paper studies collective action between firms from the perspective of devices. To do so, we use the concepts of meta-organizations and partial organizations that were developed by Ahrne and Brunsson (2008, 2010). We conduct a case study of the oil and gas sector and show that while literature has expected these devices to retreat due to globalization and weakening of States and collective negotiations, they actually remain a powerful mean of collective action between firms. Notably, firms widely use these devices to deal with CSR and sustainable development issues, in relation with all the different stakeholders. From a strategic standpoint, these collective action devices allow firms to manage reputational effects and weak signals coming from the environment, as well as to neutralize conflicts with stakeholders. From the institutional standpoint, the invention of new organizational forms since the 1960s – business thematic and multi-stakeholder metaorganizations – occurred in a dynamics of institutional complementarity. Indeed, these devices rely on one another and complete each other, therefore allowing firms to develop a broad range of collective strategies.; L’article étudie l’action collective des entreprises sous l’angle des dispositifs. Pour analyser ces derniers, il utilise les concepts de méta-organisation et d’organisation partielle mis en avant par Ahrne et Brunsson (2008 ; 2010). S’appuyant sur le cas d’un secteur, celui du pétrole, il montre que contrairement à ce qui avait été anticipé en raison de la globalisation et de l’affaiblissement des États et de la négociation collective, ces dispositifs continuent à être utilisés à grande échelle par les entreprises, notamment pour traiter les questions de responsabilité sociale et de développement durable en relation avec les différentes parties-prenantes. En effet, sur le plan stratégique, ces dispositifs d’action collective permettent de gérer les effets de réputation des entreprises, les signaux faibles venant de l’environnement et le désamorçage des conflits avec les parties prenantes. Sur le plan institutionnel, l’invention de nouvelles formes de dispositifs depuis les années 1960 – les méta-organisations corporatives thématiques et multi-parties-prenantes – s’est faite dans une dynamique de complémentarité, les dispositifs s’appuyant les uns sur les autres et se complétant pour permettre aux entreprises une large gamme de stratégies collectives.