IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00519036.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Complexité et décision participative : le cas du système de la propriété intellectuelle des innovations biotechnologiques

Author

Listed:
  • Céline Bérard

    (COACTIS - COnception de l'ACTIon en Situation - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne, DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Les décisions prises dans un système complexe s'imbriquent dans un réseau d'enjeux et d'acteurs en interaction, et nécessitent la participation des parties prenantes du système pour éviter les conséquences indésirables des actions qui y sont menées. D'une manière générale, l'intérêt de faire participer les parties prenantes aux processus décisionnels, est aujourd'hui largement accepté par les organisations. Toutefois, les mécanismes par lesquels les parties prenantes sont impliquées lors de la prise de décision, ne sont que peu explicités dans les travaux antérieurs. L'objectif de cet article est ainsi d'analyser les mécanismes de participation des parties prenantes sur lesquels s'appuient les décideurs qui agissent dans un système complexe. Plus précisément, cette recherche propose un examen des démarches participatives mises en œuvre par les décideurs qui agissent dans le système de la propriété intellectuelle des innovations biotechnologiques. Pour ce faire, quarante entretiens ont été menés auprès de décideurs politiques affiliés à des organisations gouvernementales (au Canada, en France, en Belgique, en Suisse et au Royaume-Uni) et intergouvernementales (européennes et mondiales), actives en matière de développement de nouvelles politiques reliées à la propriété intellectuelle. D'une part, les résultats révèlent que des parties prenantes dominantes, dépendantes et définitives sont systématiquement impliquées. D'autre part, les résultats montrent que l'implication des parties prenantes peut s'inscrire dans trois démarches participatives distinctes mais non-exclusives, à savoir : 1) les consultations, 2) les interactions, 3) les processus de travail en commun. De plus, cette recherche permet de mettre en évidence les effets du contexte organisationnel et des caractéristiques personnelles des décideurs sur l'étendue et la profondeur de la participation.

Suggested Citation

  • Céline Bérard, 2010. "Complexité et décision participative : le cas du système de la propriété intellectuelle des innovations biotechnologiques," Post-Print halshs-00519036, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00519036
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00519036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00519036/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary L. Lilien & Arvind Rangaswamy & Gerrit H. Van Bruggen & Katrin Starke, 2004. "DSS Effectiveness in Marketing Resource Allocation Decisions: Reality vs. Perception," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 216-235, September.
    2. Marcie J. Tyre & Eric von Hippel, 1997. "The Situated Nature of Adaptive Learning in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 71-83, February.
    3. John C. Henderson & Paul C. Nutt, 1980. "The Influence of Decision Style on Decision Making Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 371-386, April.
    4. Michael A. Hitt & Beverly B. Tyler, 1991. "Strategic decision models: Integrating different perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(5), pages 327-351, July.
    5. Dima Jamali, 2008. "A Stakeholder Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Fresh Perspective into Theory and Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(1), pages 213-231, September.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/795 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Pieter J. Beers & Henny P. A. Boshuizen & Paul A. Kirschner & Wim H. Gijselaers, 2006. "Common Ground, Complex Problems and Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 529-556, November.
    8. Pierre Romelaer, 2005. "L'entretien de recherche," Post-Print hal-00160028, HAL.
    9. Said Elbanna & John Child, 2007. "Influences on strategic decision effectiveness: Development and test of an integrative model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 431-453, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Céline Bérard, 2013. "Les démarches participatives en matière de politiques publiques : le cas de la propriété intellectuelle des innovations biotechnologiques," Post-Print halshs-00987945, HAL.
    2. Céline Bérard & Martin Cloutier L. & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print halshs-01666605, HAL.
    3. Céline Bérard & L.M., Cloutier & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print hal-02128255, HAL.
    4. Imbulana Arachchi, Janaki & Managi, Shunsuke, 2021. "Preferences for energy sustainability: Different effects of gender on knowledge and importance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    5. Elbanna, Said & Abdelzaher, Dina M. & Ramadan, Nora, 2020. "Management research in the Arab World: What is now and what is next?," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2).
    6. Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2014. "Antecendents and effects of decision comprehensiveness: The role of decision quality and perceived uncertainty," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 625-635.
    7. van den Oever, Koen, 2017. "Uncharted waters : A behavioral approach to when, why and which organizational changes are adopted," Other publications TiSEM 0136c8c2-ecdd-4f82-8ca7-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Dimitratos, Pavlos & Petrou, Andreas & Plakoyiannaki, Emmanuella & Johnson, Jeffrey E., 2011. "Strategic decision-making processes in internationalization: Does national culture of the focal firm matter?," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 194-204, April.
    9. Gulikers, Judith T.M. & Baartman, Liesbeth K.J. & Biemans, Harm J.A., 2010. "Facilitating evaluations of innovative, competence-based assessments: Creating understanding and involving multiple stakeholders," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 120-127, May.
    10. Schweizer, Lars & Patzelt, Holger, 2012. "Employee commitment in the post-acquisition integration process: The effect of integration speed and leadership," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 298-310.
    11. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2018. "Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 937-952, July.
    12. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    13. Zhiang (John) Lin & James A. Kitts & Haibin Yang & J. Richard Harrison, 2008. "Elucidating strategic network dynamics through computational modeling," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 175-208, September.
    14. Mahabubur Rahman & M. Ángeles Rodríguez-Serrano & Mary Lambkin, 2019. "Brand equity and firm performance: the complementary role of corporate social responsibility," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(6), pages 691-704, November.
    15. Isabel-María García-Sánchez & Cristina Aibar-Guzmán & Carmen Serrano-Valdecillos & Beatriz Aibar-Guzmán, 2022. "Analysis of the Dialogue with Stakeholders by the IBEX 35 Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-26, February.
    16. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    17. Castaldo, Sandro & Ciacci, Andrea & Penco, Lara, 2023. "Perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction in grocery retail: A comparison between low- and high-productivity stores," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    18. Shathees Baskaran & Saravin Kumar Binu Kumar & Thanabalan Tangaraja & Nomahaza Mahadi, 2019. "Conceptualizing Strategic Ethical Decision Making: Cultural Traits as Moderator," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 9(3), pages 118-127, July.
    19. Wenbin Sun & Shanji Yao & Rahul Govind, 2019. "Reexamining Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder Value: The Inverted-U-Shaped Relationship and the Moderation of Marketing Capability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 1001-1017, December.
    20. Muhamad Azrin Nazri & Nor Asiah Omar & Aini Aman & Abu Hanifah Ayob & Nur Ainna Ramli, 2020. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Performance in Takaful Agencies: The Moderating Role of Objective Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-18, October.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00519036. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.