The Social Psychology of Organizations.

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Geography and Trade

Abstract This ethnography of three Australian hospitals seeks to understand how and why new accounting systems are “experimented” with in organizations. Latour's sociology of translation is adapted to argue that accounting change emerged not because there was certain knowledge of positive economic outcomes but because an uncertain faith, fostered by expert-generated inscriptions and rhetorical strategies, was able to tie together shifting interests in an actor network. The paper also highlights how accounting may ironically be both real and a simulation.

Experts, networks and inscriptions in the fabrication of accounting images: A story of the

Purpose – The objective of this paper is to collate and debate the main issues driving the stakeholder theory academic debate.Design/methodology/approach – First, a discussion of the stakeholder concept is set out before moving on to the history and nature of stakeholder theory. The work proceeds with an attempt to bring together systematically the points of divergence among researchers interested in stakeholder theory, and, finally, there is a brief discussion of these theoretical loopholes in conjunction with a proposed research agenda for the field.Findings – Based on the unification of the theoretically problematic issues, research agenda are put forward with the objective of clarifying doubts and resolving the controversies ongoing among academics. As regards the formulation of stakeholder theory, one question requiring resolution is that of the stakeholder concept itself. Additionally, further research should focus on the boundaries as to what constitutes a stakeholder group as well as defining the ...

Stakeholder theory: issues to resolve

In this article a critique of stakeholder theory is presented. The analysis highlights several concerns regarding the scientific rigor of this body of knowledge revealing the assumptions and inconsistencies that underpin its main propositions. The discussion shows in particular some of the internal contradictions between, on the one hand, the ideology of social good, and on the other hand, the ideology of control which we argue is not fully accounted for in the way stakeholder theory was popularized in recent years. Our critique opens up more possibilities for engaging with stakeholder theory acknowledging the underlying values that are at stake, thus, revealing the political and value‐laden nature of the concept of stake‐holder. What we seek to draw particular attention to is the way stake‐holder analysis reveals the challenges when not only subjectivities but identities are at stake. This latter point we hope will encourage greater reflexivity among theorists and researchers in this field, recognizing that their personal biases and partialities influence their scholarship, and the way they shape the ideologies stakeholder theory is presented by.

A critique of stake‐holder theory: management science or a sophisticated ideology of control?

Cet ouvrage presente les aspects organisationnels et les outils classiques du controle de gestion, et met l'accent sur les evolutions actuelles et les nouveaux enjeux de la discipline (les fondamentaux, les outils recents du pilotage, les aspects humains, le role et les fonctions du controle de gestion aujourd'hui.

Le contrôle de gestion

Cet ouvrage generaliste, accessible aux non specialistes et adapte aux techniques de management, presente le controle de gestion comme un outil strategique a travers une approche moderne qui tient compte de l'evolution du metier ces 10 dernieres annees.

Contrôle de gestion

Since it progressively became a major topic in Management Science from the late 1980s, the word ‘tradition’ can be used today to best describe stakeholder theory. Relations between the firm and stakeholders are ‘traditionally’ conceived on a single opposition axis introducing two main patterns of relations. On the one hand, stakeholders can intensify pressure over the firm thus, creating conflict. On the other hand, dialogue and partnership can be set through different methods, like the participation of NGOs in decision processes and strategic actions. In both cases, the patterns of relations are assumed to take place in the context of conflicting interests. This mode of conceptualizing stakeholder relations places power as a core dimension shaping stakeholder relationships. It could be argued that power relations seem to be the only imaginable relationships between the firm and those with whom it interacts — its ‘interactors’. In such a context, institutionalizing ‘fair contracts’ seems to be the only solution to overcome conflicting power relations. However, if such contracts are to be defined, it seems necessary to consider their possible content and the stakeholder relations they imply.

From Power to Knowledge Relationships: Stakeholder Interactions as Learning Partnerships

Le balanced scorecard est une technique dont le caractere innovant a ete peu discute, si ce n’est en France. Ce cas particulier suscite donc des interrogations quant a sa nature d’innovation manageriale. Pour y repondre, le recours a la terminologie, et plus generalement a des criteres ayant trait a la substance de cette technique, se revele aboutir a une impasse theorique et empirique. Cet article propose une alternative a ces demarches, en se fondant sur l’hypothese que la nature d’une innovation manageriale releve avant tout du discours. L’etude du contexte discursif qui fonde le caractere novateur du balanced scorecard aboutit a la formulation de ce que l’on appelle les « marqueurs » du discours de l’innovation manageriale, a savoir la rupture, l’avantage, et la systematicite.

/pdf/l-emergence-d-un-discours-de-l-innovation-manageriale-le-cas-4yhp9ww8a2.pdf

Jérôme Méric

Papers

A critique of stake‐holder theory: management science or a sophisticated ideology of control?

Le contrôle de gestion

Contrôle de gestion

From Power to Knowledge Relationships: Stakeholder Interactions as Learning Partnerships

L'émergence d'un discours de l'innovation managériale – le cas du Balanced Scorecard