Suchergebnisse

Résumé Grâce à la richesse des archives du premier PDG de la Régie Renault, et notamment des comptes rendus inédits des réunions qui ont rassemblé la direction de l'entreprise, la CGT et/ou le gouvernement, cet article rend compte du processus de négociation qui a conduit à résoudre le conflit Renault d'avril-mai 1947. Il montre comment la solution qui fut construite par les acteurs, tout en étant impensable au début du conflit, a finalement rendu compatibles l'ensemble des impératifs posés d'entrée par les différents protagonistes. Parce qu'il se propose d'entrer dans l'univers des principaux acteurs de cette négociation, ce texte éclaire d'une manière originale un processus de négociation particulièrement spectaculaire, ainsi que toute une page de l'histoire de la France de l'après-guerre, page décisive qui a conduit à l'exclusion des ministres communistes du gouvernement et à la rupture du tripartisme.

We adapt Erving Goffman's (1974) frame analysis to discover how frames shape individuals' decisions in a poker-based experiment. The frames that surfaced in our subjects' verbalizations suggest the ways in which they form very different impressions of "what is going on" in an identical situation. Our findings revealed that people's frames drive the information they attend to in a situation, the interpretation they put on that information, and the way they synthesize the information to make a decision. The thematic frames that emerged differed dramatically across groups of individuals; they also were cohesive, multifaceted, and relatively few in number. As a result they were predictive: one could foretell a person's behavior across multiple situations given the consistency in the frame adopted. In most cases, frames also revealed a significant mismatch with the requirements of the situation. Management scholars and practitioners would be wise to be more alert to frames which can do as much to derail effective decision-making as to facilitate it.

This paper employs a strong process approach to leadership – one that focuses on leadership moments in action – to explore how collaborative leadership emerges within a hierarchical context. Drawing on observation in three haute cuisine restaurant kitchen brigades – highly hierarchical teams that deal with intense time pressures – we document empirically in the ongoing flow of experience how leadership moments reorient collective action as a response to an unstable environment. Moreover, we show how collaborative leadership emerges from a hierarchical structure, counterintuitively, during the most critical period of the service. Our contribution is twofold. We offer a novel conceptualization of the emergence of plural leadership within a hierarchical context, one that highlights the capacity to reframe the way of working together during the most critical moments of an unfolding situation. In addition, our work contributes to the strong process approach to leadership through the methodology adopted: rather than exploring how turning points are discursively enacted, we focus on these as manifested in action and in the non-verbal aspects displayed at such moments.

AbstractResearch Question/IssueOn the basis of a dynamic interrelation between the assumptions of agency theory and stewardship theory, this study seeks to make sense of disobedience at the highest corporate level. Departing from a processual view in order to better understand how loyalty plays a critical role in the relationships between a CEO and his/her principal, we propose a conceptualization of the options open to a top executive in disagreement with the principal. We view the relationship from "below" by primarily taking the CEO's perspective, resulting in a more complex view on how "duty" is perceived and acted upon by the CEO.Research Findings/InsightsWe use the rich and abundant archives left behind by the CEO of a large French firm. We had access to over 50,000 pages of documents that allowed us to follow the CEO and his relationships with his principals, at times from day to day. We found two competing loyalties (loyalty to the principal—agency theory—and loyalty to the organization—stewardship theory) that gradually become independent of each other, triggering different responses in terms of "exits" from the relationship with the principal. This particular dynamic in which the CEO acted as a guardian of the overall purpose of the organization enabled the emergence, development, and consolidation of a disobedience process that over the years contributed to the well‐being of his firm as well as to the social changes occurring in France at that time.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsThis longitudinal study extends the corporate governance literature by offering a process‐oriented approach, quite rare in this stream of research, and a more dynamic view of how agency theory and stewardship theory interact. Then, by providing empirical support for the idea that the disobedience process can protect and allow an organization to first evolve positively over time and eventually contribute to social improvements, our study proposes a form of responsible stewardship.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsThis study offers important insights for executives, directors, and shareholders on how to make sense of, and in the long run potentially benefit from, disobedience at the highest corporate levels.

AbstractThis paper studies minority influence on individual tolerance to certain instances of fraud. Using an experimental approach, we divided 100 students from a business school into 25 groups and compared the individual trajectory of each group according to whether they were in a group composed of only fraud‐intolerant individuals (control), in a group with one fraud‐tolerant individual (minority), or in a group with two fraud‐tolerant individuals (equality). Our results indicate that individual fraud tolerance increases significantly after a group discussion in which only one more fraud‐tolerant individual participates, demonstrating the magnitude of the minority influence on the trajectory of individuals who were initially fraud intolerant.

AbstractThis paper studies minority influence on individual tolerance to certain instances of fraud. Using an experimental approach, we divided 100 students from a business school into 25 groups and compared the individual trajectory of each group according to whether they were in a group composed of only fraud‐intolerant individuals (control), in a group with one fraud‐tolerant individual (minority), or in a group with two fraud‐tolerant individuals (equality). Our results indicate that individual fraud tolerance increases significantly after a group discussion in which only one more fraud‐tolerant individual participates, demonstrating the magnitude of the minority influence on the trajectory of individuals who were initially fraud intolerant.