Bonache, Adrien and Bessour, M. (2009): Séparabilité des audits et du contrôle de gestion en vue de contrôler l'identité organisationnelle.
Preview |
PDF
MPRA_paper_12959.pdf Download (100kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Objective. The aim of this article is to show that the audits aren't perfect substitute but additional of management control. Study design. We make out from a literature review and well-known cases some propositions and we search to give credit to our principal proposition with one exploratory case study: the internal audit insufficiency to control alone the organization. The case studied (Total) and the three respondents were chosen relatively to their relevance for our research questions. Results. It could be possible to infer internal audit insufficiency to put alone the organization under control.
Item Type: | MPRA Paper |
---|---|
Original Title: | Séparabilité des audits et du contrôle de gestion en vue de contrôler l'identité organisationnelle |
English Title: | Audits and management control separability to control organization identity. |
Language: | French |
Keywords: | management control, internal audit, external audit, internal control, environmental economics |
Subjects: | M - Business Administration and Business Economics ; Marketing ; Accounting ; Personnel Economics > M4 - Accounting and Auditing |
Item ID: | 12959 |
Depositing User: | Adrien B. BONACHE |
Date Deposited: | 23 Jan 2009 18:50 |
Last Modified: | 27 Sep 2019 20:06 |
References: | Amintas A., in Yves Dupuy (1999), Faire de la recherché en contrôle de gestion, Chapitre 1 : La crise du contrôle de gestion comme crise des savoirs gestionnaires. Ashby R.(1956), An introduction to cybernetics. Brunsson N.(1989), The organization of hypocrisy, Chichester, John Wiley and Sons. Clarkson M.B.E.(1995), « a stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance », Academy of Management review, 20(1), pp.92-117. Dupuy Y. in Yves Dupuy et Pierre-Louis Dubois(2007), Connaissances et management, chapitre 3 Contrôlabilité des organisations et principe de la variété requise, ouvrage collectif en hommage à Robert REIX. Kaplan A.(1964), The logic of Inquiry, San Francisco: Chandler. KYDLAND F.E. et PRESCOTT E.C.(1977), Rules rather than discretion: the inconsistency of optimal plans. Martory B.(2000), “La valeur ajoutée sociale, principes d’évaluation”, colloque de pesor, juin 2000. Mintzberg H.(1982), Structure et dynamique des organisations, Les éditions d’organisation. Power M. (2005), La société de l’audit, éd. La découverte. Ramachandra V.S. (1998), Phantom in the brain, Harper Collins, New York. Renard J. (2006), Audit interne: théorie et pratique Rowan B.et Meyer J. W.(1977), “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol.83, n°2, pp. 340-363. Rowan B.et Meyer J. W.(1978), The structure of educational organizations, pp.78-109; in MEYER M. W. et al, ed. environments and organizations, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Inc., 1980. Sigglekow N. (2007), « Persuasion with Case Studies », Academy of management journal, 50(1), pp.20-24. Tinbergen J. (1952), On the Theory of Economic Policy. Weick K.E. (1993), “The collapse of sensemaking in organizations; The Mann Gulch Disaster”, Administrative Science Quaterly; dec 1993; 38, 4; Research Library Core. Weick K.E.(1996), “Drop your tools : An allegory for organizational studies”, Administrative science Quaterly, June 1996; 41, 2; Research Library Core pp.301-313. Yin R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publication. |
URI: | https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/12959 |