IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dij/revfcs/v21y2018i7p79-102..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Les paradoxes organisationnels et le déploiement des outils de gestion : leçons issues de deux études de cas

Author

Listed:
  • Amaury Grimand

    (IAE - Université de Nantes)

  • Ewan Oiry

    (Département d’organisation et ressources humaines - ESG UQAM)

  • Aurélien Ragaigne

    (IAE - Université de Poitiers)

Abstract

(VF)Les paradoxes sont aujourd’hui considérés comme des processus centraux dans le fonctionnement des organisations. Lors de leur déploiement, les outils de gestion révèlent ces paradoxes et en créent de nouveaux. Les outils de gestion sont le plus souvent analysés sous l’angle d’un couplage fort. Ils sont considérés comme efficaces si leurs usages correspondent à ce qui était prévu par les concepteurs de l’outil. Nous présentons une première étude de cas qui montre que ce couplage fort peut dans certains cas déstabiliser une organisation et ses salariés parce qu’il n’offre pas la possibilité de gérer les paradoxes organisationnels. La seconde étude de cas souligne alors qu’un couplage faible entre la manière dont l’outil a été construit et la façon dont il est utilisé, construit un espace de gestion des paradoxes organisationnels et, à ce titre, apparaît comme un mode renouvelé de lecture du statut des outils de gestion et de leur rôle dans l’action collective. Ces résultats sont mobilisés pour développer plusieurs éléments de discussion avec la littérature existante et proposer des pistes d’action managériales. (VA) Paradoxes are at the heart of organizational dynamics. During their implementation, management tools make these paradoxes visible and create new ones. Management tools are mainly analyzed as requiring a strong coupling. They are deemed to be more efficient if their use remain coherent with its promoters’ expectations. By using a first case study, we demonstrate that a strong coupling can be disruptive for an organization and unsettle employees, since it doesn’t help manage organizational paradoxes. The second case study advocates for the use of a loose coupling system for implementing management tools. We suggest that it enables the regulation of organizational paradoxes and the expression of their creative potential. The results are discussed in view of academic litterature about management tools and their use and some managerial implications are put into relief

Suggested Citation

  • Amaury Grimand & Ewan Oiry & Aurélien Ragaigne, 2018. "Les paradoxes organisationnels et le déploiement des outils de gestion : leçons issues de deux études de cas," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 21(3), pages 79-102, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:dij:revfcs:v:21:y:2018:i:7:p:79-102.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://fcs.revues.org/2890
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guillaume Denos & Christophe Maurel & François Pantin, 2020. "Raising awareness about paradoxes: the case of a participatory device facing social innovation tensions," Post-Print hal-03274464, HAL.
    2. Olivier Billaud & Etienne Maclouf, 2021. "Entre le ministère et la terre : la recherche de proximité des sciences participatives révélatrice de paradoxes," Post-Print hal-03338599, HAL.
    3. Guillaume Denos & Christophe Maurel & François Pantin, 2020. "Raising awareness about paradoxes: the case of a participatory device facing social innovation tensions," Post-Print hal-03274408, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    paradoxes organisationnels; outils de gestion; couplage; usages; études de cas; organizational paradoxes; management tools; coupling; use; case study research;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M19 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dij:revfcs:v:21:y:2018:i:7:p:79-102.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Informatique Technique MSH Dijon (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.revues.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.