No abstract

Résumé S’attachant aux agriculteurs biologiques, l’article cherche à comprendre comment s’est opérée, chez les intéressés, la transition du conventionnel vers le bio. Deux approches théoriques sont mobilisées : celle de la dissonance cognitive et celle des émotions. On montre comment cognitions et émotions évoluent conjointement lors des trois étapes de la transition. La première étape, celle du désinvestissement par rapport à l’agriculture conventionnelle, est marquée par une forte dissonance cognitive et par la présence d’ « émotions d’éloignement ». La deuxième, celle de l’investissement dans le bio, voit l’agriculteur osciller entre plusieurs stratégies de réduction de la dissonance et ressentir des « émotions d’approche ». Lors de la troisième étape, la dissonance est désormais plus faible et des « affects » ont pris la place des émotions.

La littérature scientifique propose plusieurs manières d’analyser l’influence des différences culturelles sur le management des organisations : on peut distinguer à cet égard les positions universaliste, contingente et interprétativiste. À partir de l’analyse d’un cas d’entreprise béninoise qui exporte sa production en Europe, nous examinons dans quelle mesure cette troisième voie permet d’expliquer l’atteinte de performances durables pour les organisations africaines. Nous montrons que c’est moins la combinaison de composantes culturelles occidentales et locales qui garantit l’efficacité, mais plutôt la manière dont les dirigeants parviennent, au moyen d’un travail de traduction, à réduire les dépendances dans lesquelles l’organisation se trouve par rapport à ses différents environnements.

ABSTRACT:The ethical sensemaking approach stands as an essential alternative to the dominant rational and objectivist paradigm of ethical decision-making in organizations. From this perspective, this research explores the intrapersonal interplay of emotions and reflexivity in ethical sensemaking. We analyzed thirty-seven semi-structured interviews conducted with executive coaches sharing a critical incident about an issue they framed as ethical. Our findings show that their ethical decisions unfolded over a three-phase emotional reflexive sensemaking process, where reflexivity allowed for the management of emotions in the form of emotional awareness, emotional unpacking, and emotional (dis)engagement. Therefore, we portray ethics as a fabric, produced through the knitting of emotions and reflexivity. And, while ethics certainly appear to be produced by the subject, we suggest a reciprocal relationship, whereby the very fabric of ethics contributes to the production of the ethical subject.

Abstract. Several authors have argued that academic decision-making can be viewed as a political process. This implies that under certain conditions, academic decisions are most likely to be resolved through the use of influence strategies . One issue that can be raised from this theoretical perspective concerns the types of influence strategy that can be found in that kind of process. This article presents, discusses, and illustrates a typology that can be used as a descriptive instrument for dealing with this issue. The typology is based on the assumption that influence strategies can be described along two independent dimensions, namely, mode of influence and power resources. A critical review of the literature led us to distinguish two basic modes of influence (pressure vs legitimation), and seven types of organizational resources (expertise, monetary resources, information, time, rules, coalitions, language and symbolic actions). The assumption is that each of these organizational resources can be associated with either mode of influence, which gives 14 possible types of influence strategy. The typology was applied in the study of a case of decision-making process in a university. This case study provided illustrations Of some of the types of strategy identified by the typology.The view of academic decision-making as a political process is not new. Two decades ago showed in his famous case study of New York University that the view of academic decision-making either as a rational or a collegial process is more than ideal--though widely shared by academic communities--than an actual description of how people do act (also see Baldridge et al. 1977;Baldridge 1983). From his study, academic decision-making appears rather as an ongoing bargaining process among various interest groups with conflicting goals, values and preferences, and struggling throughout the decision process to obtain the decision outcomes that best suit their own interests. In such a political view of decision-making 1 academic policies result more from the interplay of the influence strategies 2 that are used by conflicting interest groups to affect the decision outcomes than from any collegial consensus of a community of scholars (Millett 1962) or bureaucratic procedures and rules (Stroup 1966). 3 From this theoretical perspective, at least two issues can be raised. One concerns the conditions under which politics 4 is likely to be involved in decision-making. A political approach to decision-making does not imply that all decisions in an organization will be resolved through politics all the time. As argued by and Baldridge et al. (1977), using politics to resolve a decision is costly and