(Photo Emmanuelle Avril)jeudi 9 décembre 2010
Photo Saturday session 1
Divina Frau-Meigs, Régine Hollander, Géraldine Castel, Nathalie Duclos(photo Emmanuelle Avril)
vendredi 12 novembre 2010
jeudi 11 novembre 2010
Programme
Vendredi 3 décembre/Friday 3 December
9h00 Ouverture du Colloque/Welcome Address - M. Pierre CIVIL, Vice-Président du Conseil Scientifique et de la Recherche de l’Université Sorbonne Nouvelle- Paris 3.
9h15 Introduction.
Présidente/Chair : Martine Azuelos (directrice CERVEPAS, Sorbonne-Nouvelle)
9h30 Cécile DOUSTALY (Université de Cergy-Pontoise) : « Reforming the governance of public arts organisations: the case of England».
10h00 Roseline THERON (Université de Nancy 2) : « London Transport/Transport for London: politics, management and public service values... an unstable mix? ».
10h30-10h45 Questions & debate.
10h45-11h Pause café/Coffee Break
11h00 Christine ZUMELLO (CREW, Sorbonne-Nouvelle) : « Financial Institutions and Political Parties in the USA: new forms of representation and new forms of intermediation ».
11h30 Vincent MICHELOT (Institut d’Etudes Politiques, Lyon) : « Citizens United to the Test : Corporate Affluence and Influence in the 2010 mid-term Elections».
12h00 James MORONE (Chair Department of Politicial Science, Brown University): « American Democracy Today : Race, Morality, and the Rebellion Against the State ».
12h30-12h45 – Questions & Debate.
Déjeuner/Lunch
Présidente/Chair : Pauline Schnapper (directrice CREC, Sorbonne-Nouvelle)
14h30 Catherine CORON (CREW, Université Panthéon-Assas): « British Business Schools’ Governance : Promoting Free Enterprise or Entrepreneurship Values ?».
15h00 Will DAVIES (Institute for Science Innovation & Society, University of Oxford): « The Rebirth of Mutualism in Britain? ».
15h30 Alice LAM (Royal Holloway, University of London): « The learning organisation and societal institutions».
16h00-16h15 Questions & Debate.
16h15-16h30 Pause café/Coffee Break
16h30 Jean-Baptiste VELUT (Université Paris Est Marne la Vallée) : « Inside and Outside the Beltway : Centralizing and Decentralizing Mobilization within the Citizen Trade Campaign Network ».
17h00 Emmanuelle AVRIL (CREW, Université Sorbonne-Nouvelle) : « From Grassroots to Netroots. The evolution of decision-making in the British Labour Party ».
17h30 Steve WARD (University of Salford): « Party organisational change and the Internet in the UK: The growth of a virtual grassroots?».
17h30-17h45 Questions & Debate.
Samedi 4 décembre/Saturday 4 December
Présidente/Chair : Divina Frau-Meigs (directrice CREW, Sorbonne-Nouvelle)
9h30 Régine HOLLANDER (CREW, Université Panthéon-Assas): « Technology and Best Practices in Financial Markets : does High-Frequency trading Threaten the Basic Principles of Good Governance? ».
10h00 Géraldine CASTEL (Université Stendhal, Grenoble): « Web 2.0 communication in the post-spin era : party saviour or gravedigger?».
10h30 Nathalie DUCLOS (Université Toulouse-le-Mirail) : « The Scottish National Party: party organisation and internal reform ».
11h00-11h15 Questions & Debate.
11h15-11h30 Pause café/Coffee Break
11h30 Mathieu O’NEIL (Université Paris-Sorbonne Paris IV & Australian National University) : « Modeling Online Peer Projects ».
12h00 Bill DUTTON (Director Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford): « Networking Distributed Public Expertise: Strategies for Citizen Sourcing Advice to Government ».
12h30-12h45 Questions & Debate.
12h45 TABLE RONDE/ROUNDTABLE.
13h00 Déjeuner/Lunch
How to get there
Métro ligne 10 Cardinal Lemoine/Ligne 4 Odéon/Ligne 7 Place Monge, RER B Luxembourg ou Cluny La Sorbonne
mercredi 10 novembre 2010
Abstract Cécile DOUSTALY
Cécile DOUSTALY (Université de Cergy-Pontoise) : « Reforming the governance of public arts organisations: the case of England ».
The consequences of the new governance frameworks and managerial practices introduced since the 1990s on state arts policies are by no means clear-cut (Gray 2009, Belfiore 2004, Pierre, J., Peters, B., 2000). The Department of Culture, Media and Sport, Non Departmental Public Bodies such as Arts Council England, local authorities and arts institutions have been asked to adopt structural reforms, joined-up decision making, users’ consultation and participation and new audit mechanisms which have proven complex to apply to the arts sector. Quantitative assessment criteria of cost-efficiency, users’ satisfaction and more recently “engagement” with the arts (measuring audience numbers) have been criticized by administrators and artists alike for being inadequate and simplistic. They have had unintended and detrimental consequences (Doustaly & Gray 2009). This paper will discuss the rhetorics and the impact of the latest organisational changes within public bodies supporting the arts which aim is to improve internal democracy as a way to increase ownership and implementation of governmental policy objectives.
A new local framework has been devised to allow more central resources devolution and greater local decision making. Local Areas Agreements, should now result from negotiations between Central Government and local authorities and respect the principle of « co-design », seen as a way to increase ownership of the policy and strike the right balance between locally and nationally driven priorities : neither top-down nor bottom-up, and not only joined-up — termed here reciprocal. They at last accept the idea of differing objectives between actors while supposedly allowing the centre to control the arts sector more effectively.
As an arm’s length body, Arts Council England (ACE) is composed of a variety of actors (administrators, arts practitioners and art lovers) who split over managerial practices and socio-economic targets introduced by the government as opposed artistic ones (NCA, 2009). Although this is not clearly stated in official statements, the 2009 ACE organisational reform has been expected to balance out such quantitative approach by reintroducing qualitative assessment based on peer review (artists and practitioners) judgement of “excellence”. Ongoing artistic assessment, sectoral reviews, and one-off appraisals of recipients are officially going to be used to improve transparency in grant giving towards recipients, “to create an Arts Council that best serves both audiences and artists” (ACE, 2010). This paper will try to provide a first assessment of the reorganisation and analyse whether it has succeeded in alleviating internal tensions and increasing the feeling of internal democracy (interviews planned in London in June 2010).
Abstract Roseline THERON
Roseline THERON (Université de Nancy 2) : « London Transport/Transport for London: politics, management and public service values... an unstable mix? ».
The transport organising authority for London has been a political football for decades, and a consultant's playfield for the last ten years – to the least. As the governance of the capital went astray throughout the Thatcher years, London Transport, its management and harshly-streamlined staff valiantly tried to hold on to their values, and weather through the changes forced upon them by the new people in charge. With New Labour came the Greater London Authority, and a new body named Transport for London which started as an empty nutshell to end up swallowing London Transport, a dozen satellite agencies and replacing a seventy-year-long love/hate relationship between LT and the capital's inhabitants by PR jargon and glossy paper publications. This paper intends to show how the successive management patterns experienced by LT/ TfL have utterly changed its structures, people and processes. However, the top-down corporate culture change attempts have met unexpected resistance and resilience from the traditional engineer culture.
Abstract Christine ZUMELLO
Christine ZUMELLO (CREW, Sorbonne-Nouvelle) : « Financial Institutions and Political Parties in the USA: new forms of representation and new forms of intermediation ».
In the United States, there has been a fundamental revision of the channels of communication and governance within political parties and financial institutions over the last twenty years. These transformations are the manifestations of longer trends, but also of more recent developments. In both cases, the unifying tendency has been a shift toward the reinforcement of « direct access ». Direct access meant that participation, and hence representation within political parties could be improved and that « inefficient » intermediaries within financial institutions could be eliminated. Within political parties « direct access » was both an off-shoot of the institutionalisation of primary elections but also of the internet revolution and the growing reliance on viral communication through astroturf organizations. Meanwhile, the intellectual theorizing of government failure and the efficiency of markets has led to an increasing financiarisation of the American economy and what appears to be a « democratisation of financial markets » and a weakening of intermediaries. The overall effect was a change in the status of the activist/citizen in political parties and of the client/investor in financial institutions.
Abstract Vincent MICHELOT
Vincent MICHELOT (Institut d’Etudes Politiques, Lyon) : « Citizens United to the Test : Corporate Affluence and Influence in the 2010 mid-term Elections».
In the immediate aftermath of the costliest mid-term elections in American history, many observers have established a direct causal link between a surge of unregulated money from donors who may now remain anonymous and the Citizens United v. FEC decision the US Supreme Court handed down in January 2010. The consequences would be potentially devastating for the Democratic Party as early as the 2012 cycle and would probably usher a radically different electoral landscape if that hasty judgement were taken at face value. Yet, many questions need to be asked and answered before proclaiming the advent of the age of corporate buying of elections and its many rancid whiffs of the Gilded Age. Should new patterns of campaign financing be ascribed to Citizens United exclusively? How influential was the legislative context in the wake of the health care battle and Wall Street reform? Are we not simply witnessing yet another episode of corporate cash going to the presumptive winner?
Abstract James MORONE
James MORONE (Chair Department of Political Science, Brown University): « American Democracy Today : Race, Morality, and the Rebellion Against the State ».
“No novelty in the United States struck me more vividly then the equality of conditions.” wrote Alexis de Tocqueville in 1835. That equality held both promise and peril for the young republic.
The dangers are as familiar today as when Tocqueville described them: Fierce racial animosity; economic greed (“a breathless cupidity” threatened to subvert equality and create a “manufacturing aristocracy”); and a distrust of the state that simultaneously promoted civil society and subverted great national projects.
All three of Tocqueville’s warnings –racial tension, the rise of economic inequality, and state bashing-- have been aggravated by the election of President Barack Obama. At first, President Obama’s election seemed to signal a post racial America. But just the opposite has happened. Race now inflects every issue. The great health care debate, for example, became intertwined with feelings about race and about “foreignness.” At the same time, the effort to address economic problems aroused a fierce conservative populism that blamed the economic trouble on elites, on foreigners, on the left, and on the state itself. Racial animosity, nativism, and fear of the state have all surged.
At bottom, the United States is locked in a battle between two factions. On the one side, cosmopolitans celebrate diversity, stand ready to deploy the state to combat inequality, and search for international alliances organized under the banner of economic liberalism. The other side fears racial and ethnic diversity, celebrates empire, reads politics in morally unambiguous (often religious) terms, and despise the federal government as an anti capitalist engine of equality. The two sides are evenly matched: 7 of the last 14 elections saw a change in at least one house of Congress and in 3 of the past 5 presidential elections no candidate got a majority of the vote (which is very unusual in a two party system).
My talk analyzes the state of American democracy and places it in historical context. The key dimensions all have a long legacy in the United States: Racial tension, moral fervor, a rebellion against the state, fierce partisanship, and an assault on democratic representation in the name of the people. Underlying these old tensions lie new institutional forces. I pay special attention to what is simply the reappearance of old American themes; and what is genuinely new on the American political scene.
Abstract Catherine CORON
Catherine CORON (CREW, Université Panthéon-Assas): « British Business Schools’ Governance : Promoting Free Enterprise or Entrepreneurship Values ?».
During the last decades British business schools’ governance has gone through a process of deep evolution so as to adapt to various factors which were active both in the short and the long run. Among these, let’s mention for instance the recent economic crisis, economic and knowledge supply globalization, and finally the increasing use of new information technologies in higher education which compelled these institutions to adapt to the demand and to reorganize in order to remain competitive and to absorb innovation.
These changes have been justified by the concern to move towards more democracy as well as transparency from decision-making authorities. However, the context of liberalism they were framed in also left its trademarks and we may wonder whether British business schools did not become even more elitist and more focused towards promoting free enterprise values than any type of entrepreneurial dynamism. The study of the new deal in terms of power distribution, and more particularly decision-taking process within these institutions as well as the new organisation of their governance structures will enable us to find some elements of answer to this question.
The necessity to release annual and financial reports illustrates the influence of the financial and economic sphere as well as that of the model of liberal capitalism. The aim of this article will be first to identify the innovative characteristics of the main changes. Then, these evolutions will be examined in the light of governance functionalist theory as Gérard Charreaux showed in his February 2002 article « Quelle théorie pour la gouvernance ? De la gouvernance actionnariale à la gouvernance cognitive », http://www.u-bourgogne.fr/LEG/wp/010401.PDF, that it could be applied to academic institutions. So, the central question will be to try to find out if the notions of entrepreneurship education and innovation which are part and parcel of the entrepreneurial process were able to overcome those of profitability and efficiency promoted by the financial markets and whether it corresponds to an Anglo-Saxon cultural specificity.
Abstract Will DAVIES
Will DAVIES (Institute for Science Innovation & Society, University of Oxford): « The Rebirth of Mutualism in Britain? ».
Since the collapse of much of Britain's banking system in the autumn of 2008, there have been widespread calls to rethink core assumptions about governance and regulation in the financial sector. However, these have also extended further, to challenge the shareholder value ideology in the private sector, but also centralisation of governance in the public sector. Mutualism - the ownership and control of organisations by their designated users, employees or 'members' - has risen to prominence in mainstream policy debates, as a potential alternative to both orthodox public and private governance systems. This paper addresses how and why this has happened, what the potential benefits of mutualism could be (both social and economic) but also what the remaining obstacles are to altering the dominant models of ownership in the British context.
Abstract Alice LAM
Alice LAM (Royal Holloway, University of London): « The learning organisation and societal institutions ».
There is a growing understanding that knowledge is at the core of economic development. The last decades have been characterised by an acceleration of both knowledge creation and knowledge destruction. In this context, the learning capability of firms becomes a major concern for national governments and, vice versa, the national infrastructure supporting knowledge creation and diffusion becomes a concern for management and employees. To get the two to match and support each other becomes a prerequisite for economic success for firms as well as for the national economy. This paper seeks to explain how societal institutions, which may exist at the national or regional levels, shape the types of organisational learning predominating at the level of the firm. It focuses on education and training systems, and labour markets as key societal institutions shaping the micro-level processes of learning and knowledge creation within and between firms. The analysis illustrates the logic of institutionalised variation in patterns of learning and innovation. It argues that tacit knowledge, which is difficult to create and transfer in the absence of social interaction and labour mobility, constitutes a most important source of learning and sustainable competitive advantage in the knowledge economy. Learning builds on trust and social capital. Institutions that are able to imbue these elements into firms and markets encourage interactive learning and are more likely to produce strong innovative capabilities.
Abstract Jean-Baptiste VELUT
Jean-Baptiste VELUT (Université Paris Est Marne la Vallée) : « Inside and Outside the Beltway: Centralizing and Decentralizing Mobilization within the Citizen Trade Campaign Network ».
New information technologies have revolutionized the modus operandi of advocacy networks, allowing them to build new alliances at both national and international levels, while facilitating the participation of grassroots activists in a decision-making process that tends to be more decentralized. These organizational transformations are crucial for the sustainability of any political organization to the extent that the emergence of new participatory structures can not only expand the base of advocacy networks (recruitment, alliance-building) but also change its political orientation. In many regards, these internal and external changes can have a significant impact on a movement’s ability to reach its political objectives.
This paper seeks to analyze the costs and benefits of these organizational changes through the experience of the Citizens Trade Campaign. The development of this central actor in the US-based global justice movement from the beginning of the 1990s largely owes to the diffusion of new information technologies. How did this political alliance between unions, environmental and consumer advocates manage to deal with these internal and external mutations? What obstacles did it face to respond to the demands of grassroots activists for more decentralization while meeting its own needs to remain politically united? Did these organizational transformations increase the political clout of the fair trade coalition? This analysis will tackle these questions by relying on a series of interviews with political actors inside and outside Washington, and more specifically with representatives from member organizations of the Citizens Trade Campaign.
Abstract Emmanuelle AVRIL
Emmanuelle AVRIL (CREW, Université Sorbonne-Nouvelle) : « From Grassroots to Netroots. The evolution of decision-making in the British Labour Party ».
This paper will present an overview of the overall transformation of the Labour Party from a social democratic party into a marketing organisation, with the adoption of supposedly more efficient and rational policy-making processes. The combined effects of the party’s structural changes and the development of internet tools, which were meant to boost participation and mobilisation in a context of long-term decline of party membership, have deeply transformed the role of members in the Labour Party. Yet the move from a formal model of membership (grassroots) to the much looser model of the “Supporters Network” (netroots) in a bid to get activists back on the campaign trail, seems to have failed to deliver the kind of “vibrant” organisation which the leadership had promised to deliver. This is in part because the reforms rested on a misconception of the human dimension of both organisational change and of politics, as well as on a misunderstanding and misuse of the technical means available, in particular the potential of the new technologies to establish collaborative environments and foster lateral communication in place of the top-down, hierarchical model.
Abstract Steve WARD
Steve WARD (University of Salford): « Party organisational change and the Internet in the UK: The growth of a virtual grassroots? ».
The rise of newer user-driven ‘web 2.0’ technologies such as blogs, social networking sites and video sharing tools has raised new possibilities and challenges for party activism and organization. As well as offering new means for parties to organize their supporters and activists, these applications also stimulate the growth of unofficial groups and networks which are loosely aligned with party politics but are not under their control. The paper looks at one particular aspect of these developments – the emergence of unofficial party blogs sites and networks in the UK. In particular, we examine three of the largest such blogs: Conservative Home (CH), Labour List (LL) and Liberal Democrat Voice (LDV), all of which have been developed since 2005 and all of which to a greater, or lesser, degree claim to seek to represent grassroots voices within the parties. We examine them in regard to five basic questions: (1) what are the origins and main purposes of the sites? (2) what type of content do they contain and who provides this content? (is dissent and criticism of the party promoted?); (3) how wide is the reach of these sites in the WWW and who forms the audience? (4) what is the nature of online networks that these sites occupy and how integrated are they with those surrounding their respective official party sites; and finally (5) to what extent do elections and party incumbency affect these sites content, visibility and online networks. How far did the 2010 campaign and subsequent government change in the UK make a difference to the way these blogs operate? In addressing these questions the research also seeks to assess the wider impact of these sites on intra-party organisational coherence and wider questions of possible future decline or renewal of parties. To what extent do these new party spaces challenge or support parties’ current model of operation in the UK and their message/leadership? Do they enjoy a higher profile than their official counterparts and siphon supporters away from party politics ‘as usual’, setting up the possibility for a more fluid, open and non-membership based version?
Abstract Régine HOLLANDER
Régine HOLLANDER (CREW, Université Panthéon-Assas): « Technology and Best Practices in Financial Markets : does High-Frequency trading Threaten the Basic Principles of Good Governance? ».
Information technology first appeared in financial markets as a tool to facilitate the matching and clearing of buy and sell orders. More recently, as computers gained in power and speed, they have been programmed for high-frequency trading. The latter accounts for more than half of trading volume in the United States (55% on Nasdaq). According to proponents and users (about 400 financial institutions, including specialized funds), by providing liquidity and taking advantage of market inefficiencies, it reduces transaction costs for investors and acts as a stabilizer. For critics that see it as dehumanizing securities’ trading, it only benefits those firms that can afford to invest in ultra-fast equipment and hire quants capable to design the algorhythms that trigger buy and sell orders.
On 6 May, 2010, at around 2:30 pm, the DJIA lost 1000 points (9.2%), then bounced back almost all the way in a few minutes. The specialists of the Securities and Exchange Commission were not able to pinpoint the reason for the dramatic downfall. High-frequency trading was named as one of the possible causes for the huge loss and the fast rebound. Whether this was or was not the case, that episode is an indicator of the opacity that such type of trading makes possible. In moments of crisis, human traders can switch strategies and suspend activities that threaten the stability of a system, while computers have no scruples executing the programs they have been wired for.
Hence, one can wonder to what extent high-frequency trading is in compliance with the basic principles of social responsibility and transparency inherent in good governance.Abstract Géraldine CASTEL
Géraldine CASTEL (Université Stendhal, Grenoble): « Web 2.0 communication in the post-spin era : party saviour or gravedigger ? ».
The shift of political communication in the last decades towards increasingly professional, centralized and tightly-controlled practices epitomised by the ubiquity of the now derogatory term of ‘spin’ has been the object of thorough analysis and heated debate, and repeatedly blamed for fuelling cynicism towards the political class in a more general context of democratic disengagement and declining party membership.
The growing array of web 2.0 tools available to parties since the first experiments in the use of ICTs for electoral purposes in the United States in the 1990s, ranging from sites and blogs to social networks and increasingly sophisticated data-managing software among others, could provide political organisations with the means to invert this trend, and therefore possibly alter the way they construct their identity, shape their image and seek legitimacy for the enactment of their project.
Indeed, in the post-spin age, instant messaging as well as various fact-checking devices or online vigilante groups have made transparency even more of a challenge. More significantly, the internet has contributed to creating new possibilities in terms of devolving creative and strategic authority from the centre to a variety of actors, be they local branches, activists or outside laymen. Crowdsourcing initiatives, for instance, have become far less complex from a technical point of view and could be instrumental to opening-up channels favouring a wider involvement into communication drives.
The potential for tools such as these and others to remodel not only the manner parties are communicating with the public, but also the elaboration of campaigns themselves within these organisations cannot be ignored. Yet how far have the parties truly gone in that respect during the 2010 general election ? To what extent have the internal relationships between the different layers of activism been affected regarding decision-making, agenda-setting and fieldwork implementation in this sector ? And from a broader perspective, are web 2.0 contraptions to be seen as the key to party regeneration, or rather, in an era when Facebook groups like Rage Against the Machine gather more members than the party they support, as yet another threat to their survival ?
Abstract Nathalie DUCLOS
Nathalie DUCLOS (Université Toulouse-le-Mirail) : « The Scottish National Party: party organisation and internal reform ».
The organisation of the Scottish National Party (SNP), which is a Scottish centre left, pro-independence party, was radically reformed in 2004 after remaining largely unchanged since the 1960s, when the SNP had moved on from being a very marginal party to being a serious challenger in Scotland to the two major British parties, Labour and the Conservatives. It could be argued that until 2004, despite the fact that with the introduction of devolution in 1999, the SNP became a potential government party for the first time in its history, the party's constitution was more akin to that of a protest party than to that of the second biggest parliamentary party in Scotland. The main aim of this paper is to present the reforms imposed on the party in 2004 by its leader John Swinney (such as the introduction of the One-Member-One-Vote system or the new way of choosing the party's National Convenor), reforms that go a long way to explaining the party's first election victory in 2007. The paper also endeavours to explain John Swinney's motivations, as well as the Scottish political context in which this internal reform took place. This paper also considers the efforts recently made by the party to become more representative (by increasing the number of female elected representatives, for instance).
Abstract Mathieu O'NEIL
Mathieu O’NEIL (Université Paris-Sorbonne Paris IV & Australian National University) : « Modeling Online Peer Projects ».
Groups of people collaborating online to produce public goods such as free software or free encyclopedias were initially conceptualised as “communities”, and later as “networks”. It has now become clear that they constitute a new type of organisational arrangement, characterised by autonomous and distributed work practices, known as “peer production” (participants self-select their tasks and the amount of time they can contribute) as well as by overlapping forms of justifications for legitimate expert or administrative actions. Online tribal bureaucracies thus comprise collectivist, bureaucratic and charismatic features. Despite the premium placed on deliberation and consensus they are frequently the site of conflicts. They also have benefits, such as being immune from the productivity-limiting norms popular amongst corporate employees, or replacing the interminable meetings of communes by asynchronous communications. Does this development signify, following a well-worn alternative, an increase in soft control or the dawning of a more politically participatory age? In fact, both scenarios must contend with resistance to scalability, uncertainty over identity and competence, and online peer projects' foundational critique of the separated authority of experts and leaders, which all complicate connections with corporate structures.
Abstract Bill DUTTON
Bill DUTTON (Director Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford): « Networking Distributed Public Expertise: Strategies for Citizen Sourcing Advice to Government ».
The potential of crowd sourcing has captured the imagination of many managers and professionals across all sectors of society, but left many others quite skeptical. This is not only because conceptions of the wisdom of crowds appear counter-intuitive, but also, if taken literally, these concepts can be misleading and therefore dysfunctional for governments seeking to adopt innovations in distributed collaboration. This presentation challenges conventional notions of the wisdom of crowds, arguing that distributed intelligence must be well structured by technical platforms and management strategies. After clarifying these conceptual issues, I explain how collaborative networking can be used to harness the distributed expertise of citizens, as distinguished from citizen consultation, which seeks to engage citizens – each on an equal footing. Networking the public as advisors aims to involve experts on particular public issues and problems distributed anywhere in the world. The presentation then describes the lessons learned from previous efforts to citizen source advice, and why governments should again pursue this strategy as a means to inform policy and decision-making. This is followed by a set of eight strategies for fostering the bottom-up development of governmental initiatives aimed at harnessing distributed public expertise.
vendredi 8 janvier 2010
COLLOQUE - Appel à communications
UNIVERSITE SORBONNE-NOUVELLE PARIS 3INSTITUT DU MONDE ANGLOPHONE
COLLOQUE ORGANISE DANS LE CADRE DE L'AXE "DEMOCRATIE, POLITIQUES ET SOCIETES" DU CREW (avec le soutien du CERVEPAS et du CREC) EA 4399
Les organisations en changement :
Vers de nouvelles pratiques de gouvernance économique et politique au sein des organisations du monde anglophone.
Vendredi 3 et samedi 4 décembre 2010, Maison de la Recherche, 4 rue des irlandais 75005 Paris, salle 1
La gouvernance, qui a trait à l’ensemble des processus permettant de définir le champ du pouvoir et le contrôle des ressources, a toujours constitué un sujet important pour la vie des organisations, que celles-ci relèvent de la sphère politique, économique ou sociale. Certaines mutations récentes, telles que la mondialisation ou la révolution des nouvelles technologies de l’information, ont obligé les organisations à repenser leurs structures décisionnelles et ont favorisé, à la fois, la convergence et une forte innovation des pratiques.
Les dirigeants des organisations économiques et politiques tentent ainsi de s’adapter à un contexte global de « démocratisation » des modes d’organisation. L’apparition du web 2.0 et son modèle d’intelligence participative offre de nouvelles perspectives aux organisations en permettant la mise en place de réseaux et l’émergence de communautés susceptibles de s’approprier collectivement les objectifs de l’organisation mais aussi de proposer des systèmes de réglementation plus interactifs et donc potentiellement plus efficaces.
Les propositions de communications (300-500 mots) devront parvenir avant le 5 mai 2010 (accompagnées d’un CV de 5 à 10 lignes) à emmanuelle.avril@univ-paris3.fr et christine.zumello@univ-paris3.fr
Emmanuelle Avril est Professeur en civilisation britannique contemporaine et membre du CREC/CREW;Christine Zumello est Maître de Conférences en civilisation Nord-américaine et membre du CERVEPAS/CREW.
jeudi 7 janvier 2010
CONFERENCE - Call for Papers
Changing Organisations:Towards a new economic and political governance within organisations of the English-speaking world.
Friday 3 and Saturday 4 December 2010, Maison de la Recherche, 4 rue des irlandais 75005 Paris, salle 1
Governance, which relates to the processes determining authority and the control of resources, has always been a crucial dimension of the life of organisations, whether they belong to the economic, political or social sphere. A number of recent changes, such as globalisation and the revolution of new information technology have forced organisations to rethink their decision-making structures and have simultaneously favoured convergence as well as the adoption of highly innovative practices.
The advent of the post-industrial society has meant that the economic and financial activities have been redesigned according to the law of the market. The Efficient Markets Theory has had a direct influence on the morphology of organisations and their decision-making processes. From then on, the corporation was no longer considered as a clearly delineated institution but evolved into a constantly moving network of contracts between a number of stakeholders. This evolution on the ground was in part given a formal definition through the functionalist theory of corporate governance which lay the foundations of shareholder capitalism. In addition, the State has worked in some cases to foster the conditions for the optimization of business shareholder value, notably in the field of financial innovation. However, the current economic and financial crisis is challenging this development model and has forced a revision of forms of governance as well as a redefinition of the role of the State.
Business and political leaders alike are thereby trying to adapt to a global and renewed context of organisational « democratisation ». The emergence of web 2.0 and its network-based model of participative intelligence has opened new prospects to organisations by relying more on net-root forms of governance. This evolution has opened the door to more interactive – and possibly - more efficient regulation systems.
The objective of this conference is to confront the rhetoric of democratisation born out of the new governance apparatus with the empirical effects of the new practices. Is organisation 2.0 more democratic and transparent? Can the new governance models allow businesses to reconcile shareholder profit with a positive societal impact? Are the new consensus-building participative structures the panacea to the decline in partisan engagement? What are the practical manifestations of the replacement of the old insular hierarchical organisation model with participative horizontal structures? Has the new paradigm really displaced the old? What have been the organisational and state-related conditions of the emergence of this new form of governance? This conference therefore sets out to analyse the evolution of the governance of economic, political and social organisations in the English-speaking world and to reflect upon the theoretical and institutional logic of such transformations.
emmanuelle.avril@univ-paris3.fr and christine.zumello@univ-paris3.fr
Emmanuelle Avril is Professor of Contemporary British Civilisation and a member of the CREC/CREW;
Christine Zumello is Associate Professor in North American Civilisation and a member of the CERVEPAS/CREW.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)
