IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01654768.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Utiliser des images pour améliorer les manières d'observer les organisations

Author

Listed:
  • Jérémy Eydieux

    (LEMNA - Laboratoire d'économie et de management de Nantes Atlantique - IEMN-IAE Nantes - Institut d'Économie et de Management de Nantes - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises - Nantes - UN - Université de Nantes)

Abstract

Les écrits méthodologiques des sciences de gestion n'évoquent jamais l'utilisation d'images comme un atout. Pourtant, les chercheurs ont spontanément tendance à fabriquer des images (par exemple des modèles). Cette absence formelle des images est en dissonance avec notre pratique de recherche. Nous- mêmes nous en servons abondamment et de diverses manières pour mieux comprendre les organisations que nous étudions. Cet article présente l'utilisation d'images comme un moyen d'améliorer les manières dont les chercheurs et la communauté académique observent les organisations. Nous nous appuyons sur notre travail de thèse, et sur l'approche pragmatiste que nous y avons développée. Nous déroulons neuf récits de notre expérience de recherche, dont l'objectif est de susciter la créativité, l'opportunisme et l'intelligence située des chercheurs. À la collecte des données, utiliser des images permet de prendre des notes plus expressives et de gagner du temps de collecte des données. L'utilisation d'images rend le travail d'analyse plus efficace en gardant en mémoire la lecture des données et en faisant gagner du temps d'analyse. Les images améliorent la communication de la recherche, en rendant visible la matérialité de l'objet de recherche et en aidant à clarifier les idées développées. Plutôt que de proposer d'utiliser des techniques de dessin ou des images spécifiques, nous invitons les chercheurs à s'appuyer sur les images qu'ils connaissent déjà ou qu'ils pourraient apprendre pendant leur travail de recherche. Nous invitons enfin à une utilisation plus répétée et plus diversifiée des images dans les travaux de recherche en sciences de gestion.

Suggested Citation

  • Jérémy Eydieux, 2017. "Utiliser des images pour améliorer les manières d'observer les organisations," Post-Print hal-01654768, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01654768
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01654768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01654768/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    2. Romain Laufer & Armand Hatchuel & Albert David, 2012. "Les nouvelles fondations des sciences de gestion : éléments d'épistémologie de la recherche en management," Post-Print hal-01635115, HAL.
    3. John Van Maanen, 1995. "Crossroads Style as Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 133-143, February.
    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. Jean-Luc Moriceau, 2017. "Death Lines," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01503426, HAL.
    2. Amin Vahidi & Alireza Aliahmad & Ebrahim Teimouri, 2019. "Evolution of Management Cybernetics and Viable System Model," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 297-314, June.
    3. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    4. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    5. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    6. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Rocco Curto, 2023. "DIKEDOC: a multicriteria methodology to organise and communicate knowledge," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1049-1082, June.
    7. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Linking stakeholder visions with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 762-772.
    8. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    9. Miguel Pina e Cunha & Joao Vieira da Cunha & Carlos Cabral Cardoso, 2000. "Looking for complication: The case of management education," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp394, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    10. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    11. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    12. Rajneesh Chowdhury, 2023. "Methodological Flexibility in Systems Thinking: Musings from the Standpoint of a Systems Consultant," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 59-86, February.
    13. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    14. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    15. G A Hindle & L A Franco, 2009. "Combining problem structuring methods to conduct applied research: a mixed methods approach to studying fitness-to-drive in the UK," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1637-1648, December.
    16. Richard Ormerod, 2006. "The OR approach to forecasting: comments on Mingers' paper," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(11), pages 1371-1373, November.
    17. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    18. Keys, Paul, 2000. "Creativity, design and style in MS/OR," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 303-312, June.
    19. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    20. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.

    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:hal-01654768. 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.