Contenu du sommaire : Recherche en gestion : retrouver du sens

This study investigates a new perspective of idea crowdsourcing which involves the simultaneous use of cooperation and competition ( “coopetition”) to stimulate the crowd. Based on the social interdependence theory, we present this new approach and explore how coopetition is set-up in this context. Through an empirical study, we show that the current platforms of idea crowdsourcing present different categories of coopetition. We discuss the managerial and theoretical implications of these results.

This paper seeks to shed light on the relationship between strategy and competence management in an SME characterized by a strong tacit culture and a centralized decision process. We study this question by means of a research-action within an industrial SME belonging to the automotive value chain. We pinpoint the fact that the codification of processes is a key element in the competence management. Process codification enables to identify core competences which were not explicitly known beforehand, and which contribute to shape the strategic view of the top manager. The relationship between strategy and competence management follows a sequential pattern where a top-down approach is followed by a bottom-up one.

Some communities of workers are faced with such changes in work practices that actors are questioned regarding their identity at work: this is the case for the profession of Industry Researcher, which has evolved considerably over the past years. As a unifying element of collective action, identity at work is nevertheless a means of organizing work in the workplace. In this context of professional change, this article investigates the role of Information Technologies (IT) in making researchers assert their identity at work. Through a case study carried out within a research center of a French telecommunications company, the article shows that the actors can mobilize the symbolic dimensions of IT to make them devices of identity affirmation. We explore the totem-object metaphor in order to better understand the social dynamics surrounding the appropriation of IT.

Rankings in higher education build several performance indicators often based on the number publications in international scientific journals. These criteria are integrated by institutions and influence their strategy and the evaluation process of academics. However, not all academics develop the same attitudes towards this system. Following an in-depth study conducted with more than 100 scholars from France and Québec, we developed a typology that reflects both the diversity of existing profiles and their coping strategies in the face of these new institutional injunctions.

This is an article about performativity. In the first degree, it is about the performativity of the ratings and rankings of academic journal articles and of the rankings of universities; and in the second degree, it asks “What social or political condition has produced the rankings and ratings?” We address this question by examining the “academic capitalism” argument and the sociology of Bernard Stiegler. Ultimately, in the third degree, we submit that the rankings and ratings are most crucially about researcher affectivity; they create a mindset, a sense of identity, even a lebenswelt.

This article addresses two questions: is management research relevant from the point of view of managers? What are the criteria that the latter consider important in their assessment of the utility of such research? Through a literature review, followed by a series of collective interviews with managers, the article reveals the point of view of practitioners regarding the benefits of management research as well as the characteristics of relevant research. Our study discusses the adoption of a relevant oriented research strategy and leads to theoretical contributions in the field of relevance literature.

Over the years, a single indicator has come to dominate the assessment of management science research: the number of articles published in journals ranked in the different lists promoted by various institutions (CNRS, Fnege, etc.). Taking the form of a pamphlet, this article shows the multiple harmful effects of such a system both institutionally (external control of academics), scientifically (standardisation of writing), individually (production of researchers in kit-form), and organisationally (creation of ego-academicus). Faced with meaningless system, the article concludes with a call for revolt.