IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dij/revfcs/v18y2015i4p49-81..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quand des justifications similaires sont utilisées pour promouvoir le budget… et sa remise en cause

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Berland

    (Université Paris-Dauphine DRM)

  • Vassili Joannides

    (Grenoble Ecole de Management)

  • Yves Levant

    (Université Lille 2 et Skema)

Abstract

(VF)Cet article étudie les justifications développées pour promouvoir l’adoption du budget et sa remise en cause, le Beyond Budgeting. Nous nous intéressons à la manière dont deux justifications distinctes, l’une relative aux turbulences de l’environnement et l’autre au besoin d’émancipation des managers, ont été utilisées sur deux périodes, 1930-1950 pour la naissance du budget et les années 1990 à aujourd’hui pour sa remise en cause. Ce faisant, nous cherchons à comprendre l’homogénéité des discours managériaux sur les deux périodes. Notre réponse à ce paradoxe s’appuiera sur les travaux de Boltanski et Thevenot (1991) et Boltanski et Chiapello (1999), traitant des systèmes de justification et les Cités de valeur sur lesquels ils reposent pour les premiers ainsi que l’esprit du capitalisme pour les seconds. Nous montrons que les justifications prennent une signification différente selon les acteurs auxquels ils s’adressent et selon les mots-clés qui les constituent.(VA)This paper examines the arguments used to promote the adoption of traditional budgetary controls and the challenge found in Beyond Budgeting. In particular, we have studied two distinct lines of argumentation : One focused on the instability of the environment and was used between 1930 and 1950 in support of traditional budgetary controls, while the other has been used in support of managerial freedom since the 1990s. Both are now used in support of abandoning the traditional budgetary process. In our study, we have tried to understand the homogeneity of the conflicting management rhetoric of the two periods. Our conclusions are based on the work of Boltanski and Thevenot (1991) and Boltanski and Chiapello (1999). The former examine lines of argumentation and the orders of worth on which they rest, while the latter look at the idea of capitalism. We show that lines of argumentation will take on different connotations, depending on the audience and the key concepts used.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Berland & Vassili Joannides & Yves Levant, 2015. "Quand des justifications similaires sont utilisées pour promouvoir le budget… et sa remise en cause," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 18(4), pages 49-81, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:dij:revfcs:v:18:y:2015:i:4:p:49-81.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://fcs.revues.org/1718
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simon Alcouffe & Jonathan Maurice & Nadine Galy & Loïc Gate, 2019. "Is the limited diffusion of management accounting innovations really a paradox? A meta-analysis of the relationship between product diversity and the adoption of Activity-Based Costing [La faible d," Post-Print hal-02124677, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    esprit du capitalisme; cités de valeur; justifications; budget; gestion sans budget; BBRT; spirit of capitalism; orders of worth; argumentation; beyond budgeting; BBRT.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:dij:revfcs:v:18:y:2015:i:4:p:49-81.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Informatique Technique MSH Dijon (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.revues.org/ .

    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.