In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation
Identifieur interne : 000B47 ( Main/Corpus ); précédent : 000B46; suivant : 000B48In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation
Auteurs : Herv ColasSource :
- Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society [ 1472-0701 ] ; 2005-04-01.
Abstract
The general aim of this paper is to shift the interest in two particular stakeholders, the entrepreneur and the company itself, from a vision based on a company perceived as a stock package towards an aesthetic perception of its creation. It intends to link creative entrepreneurship and creativity in the arts. Emanating from the phenomenological thought of Maurice MerleauPonty on artistic vision, this research intends to read the motivations of a creator by a calling, that amounts to a countergift to the beauty of the world. This motivation to create can be articulated in two nonfinancial impulses to discover and to correct. A sketch portrait of a French entrepreneur is depicted to illustrate the urge to create a small business. A stakeholder understanding is suggested, taking into account schutzian multiple orders of reality.
Url:
DOI: 10.1108/14720700510562677
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Colas, Herv" sort="Colas, Herv" uniqKey="Colas H" first="Herv" last="Colas">Herv Colas</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Professor in entrepreneurship at the Reims Management School since 1997, after having been a management controller in Germany for the Thomson Multimedia group from 19881991, and both a consultant and CEO of CHD Consultants. His research concentrates on symbols and aesthetics in management and managerial representations, trying to find similar roots in his previous experience as an entrepreneur and his present hobby as a painter. Tel 00 33 3 26 77 47 47, Fax 00 33 3 26 04 69 63, Email herve.colasreimsms.fr</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853</idno><date when="2005" year="2005">2005</date><idno type="doi">10.1108/14720700510562677</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">000B47</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Colas, Herv" sort="Colas, Herv" uniqKey="Colas H" first="Herv" last="Colas">Herv Colas</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Professor in entrepreneurship at the Reims Management School since 1997, after having been a management controller in Germany for the Thomson Multimedia group from 19881991, and both a consultant and CEO of CHD Consultants. His research concentrates on symbols and aesthetics in management and managerial representations, trying to find similar roots in his previous experience as an entrepreneur and his present hobby as a painter. Tel 00 33 3 26 77 47 47, Fax 00 33 3 26 04 69 63, Email herve.colasreimsms.fr</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society</title><idno type="ISSN">1472-0701</idno><imprint><publisher>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><date type="published" when="2005-04-01">2005-04-01</date><biblScope unit="volume">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="78">78</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="88">88</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1472-0701</idno></series><idno type="istex">BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1108/14720700510562677</idno><idno type="filenameID">2680050206</idno><idno type="original-pdf">2680050206.pdf</idno><idno type="href">14720700510562677.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1472-0701</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The general aim of this paper is to shift the interest in two particular stakeholders, the entrepreneur and the company itself, from a vision based on a company perceived as a stock package towards an aesthetic perception of its creation. It intends to link creative entrepreneurship and creativity in the arts. Emanating from the phenomenological thought of Maurice MerleauPonty on artistic vision, this research intends to read the motivations of a creator by a calling, that amounts to a countergift to the beauty of the world. This motivation to create can be articulated in two nonfinancial impulses to discover and to correct. A sketch portrait of a French entrepreneur is depicted to illustrate the urge to create a small business. A stakeholder understanding is suggested, taking into account schutzian multiple orders of reality.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>emerald</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Herv Colas</name><affiliations><json:string>Professor in entrepreneurship at the Reims Management School since 1997, after having been a management controller in Germany for the Thomson Multimedia group from 19881991, and both a consultant and CEO of CHD Consultants. His research concentrates on symbols and aesthetics in management and managerial representations, trying to find similar roots in his previous experience as an entrepreneur and his present hobby as a painter. Tel 00 33 3 26 77 47 47, Fax 00 33 3 26 04 69 63, Email herve.colasreimsms.fr</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Entrepreneurs</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Creative thinking</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Values</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Small to mediumsized enterprises</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Motivation psychology</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>The general aim of this paper is to shift the interest in two particular stakeholders, the entrepreneur and the company itself, from a vision based on a company perceived as a stock package towards an aesthetic perception of its creation. It intends to link creative entrepreneurship and creativity in the arts. Emanating from the phenomenological thought of Maurice MerleauPonty on artistic vision, this research intends to read the motivations of a creator by a calling, that amounts to a countergift to the beauty of the world. This motivation to create can be articulated in two nonfinancial impulses to discover and to correct. A sketch portrait of a French entrepreneur is depicted to illustrate the urge to create a small business. A stakeholder understanding is suggested, taking into account schutzian multiple orders of reality.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.596</score><pdfVersion>1.5</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>598.307 x 796.307 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>5</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>838</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>6602</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>36166</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>11</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>133</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>88</last><first>78</first></pages><issn><json:string>1472-0701</json:string></issn><issue>2</issue><subject><json:item><value>Strategy</value></json:item><json:item><value>Corporate governance</value></json:item></subject><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society</title><doi><json:string>10.1108/cg</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>2005</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2005</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1108/14720700510562677</json:string></doi><id>BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><availability><p>EMERALD</p></availability><date>2005</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title><author><persName><forename type="first">Herv</forename><surname>Colas</surname></persName><affiliation>Professor in entrepreneurship at the Reims Management School since 1997, after having been a management controller in Germany for the Thomson Multimedia group from 19881991, and both a consultant and CEO of CHD Consultants. His research concentrates on symbols and aesthetics in management and managerial representations, trying to find similar roots in his previous experience as an entrepreneur and his present hobby as a painter. Tel 00 33 3 26 77 47 47, Fax 00 33 3 26 04 69 63, Email herve.colasreimsms.fr</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society</title><idno type="JournalID">cg</idno><idno type="pISSN">1472-0701</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1108/cg</idno><imprint><publisher>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><date type="published" when="2005-04-01"></date><biblScope unit="volume">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="78">78</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="88">88</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1108/14720700510562677</idno><idno type="filenameID">2680050206</idno><idno type="original-pdf">2680050206.pdf</idno><idno type="href">14720700510562677.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2005</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The general aim of this paper is to shift the interest in two particular stakeholders, the entrepreneur and the company itself, from a vision based on a company perceived as a stock package towards an aesthetic perception of its creation. It intends to link creative entrepreneurship and creativity in the arts. Emanating from the phenomenological thought of Maurice MerleauPonty on artistic vision, this research intends to read the motivations of a creator by a calling, that amounts to a countergift to the beauty of the world. This motivation to create can be articulated in two nonfinancial impulses to discover and to correct. A sketch portrait of a French entrepreneur is depicted to illustrate the urge to create a small business. A stakeholder understanding is suggested, taking into account schutzian multiple orders of reality.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>Entrepreneurs</term></item><item><term>Creative thinking</term></item><item><term>Values</term></item><item><term>Small to mediumsized enterprises</term></item><item><term>Motivation psychology</term></item></list></keywords></textClass><textClass><keywords scheme="Emerald Subject Group"><list><label>cat-STGY</label><item><term>Strategy</term></item><label>cat-CGVC</label><item><term>Corporate governance</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2005-04-01">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus emerald not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><!-- Auto generated NISO JATS XML created by Atypon out of MCB DTD source files. Do Not Edit! --><article dtd-version="1.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research-article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">cg</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="doi">10.1108/cg</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1472-0701</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1108/14720700510562677</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="original-pdf">2680050206.pdf</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="filename">2680050206</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="type-of-publication"><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">research-article</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Research paper</compound-subject-part></compound-subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="subject"><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-STGY</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Strategy</compound-subject-part></compound-subject><subj-group><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-CGVC</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Corporate governance</compound-subject-part></compound-subject></subj-group></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>In search of new organizational values: the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><string-name><given-names>Hervé</given-names> <surname>Colas</surname></string-name><aff>Professor in entrepreneurship at the Reims Management School since 1997, after having been a management controller in Germany for the Thomson Multimedia group from 1988‐1991, and both a consultant and CEO of CHD Consultants. His research concentrates on symbols and aesthetics in management and managerial representations, trying to find similar roots in his previous experience as an entrepreneur and his present hobby as a painter. Tel: 00 33 3 26 77 47 47, Fax: 00 33 3 26 04 69 63, E‐mail: herve.colas@reims‐ms.fr</aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><day>01</day><month>04</month><year>2005</year></pub-date><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>78</fpage><lpage>88</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>© Emerald Group Publishing Limited</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2005</copyright-year><license license-type="publisher"><license-p></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="14720700510562677.pdf"></self-uri><abstract><p>The general aim of this paper is to shift the interest in two particular stakeholders, the entrepreneur and the company itself, from a vision based on a company perceived as a stock package towards an aesthetic perception of its creation. It intends to link creative entrepreneurship and creativity in the arts. Emanating from the phenomenological thought of Maurice Merleau‐Ponty on artistic vision, this research intends to read the motivations of a creator by a calling, that amounts to a counter‐gift to the beauty of the world. This motivation to create can be articulated in two non‐financial impulses: to dis‐cover and to correct. A sketch portrait of a French entrepreneur is depicted to illustrate the urge to create a small business. A stakeholder understanding is suggested, taking into account schutzian multiple orders of reality.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Entrepreneurs</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Creative thinking</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Values</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Small to medium‐sized enterprises</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Motivation (psychology)</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>peer-reviewed</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>academic-content</meta-name><meta-value>yes</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>rightslink</meta-name><meta-value>included</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec><title>Introduction</title><p>Theorists of the stakeholder vision define several typologies of the stakeholder. In his typology, Freeman (1984) includes stockholders, suppliers, clients, employees, various members of the financial community, the public sector, consumer lobbies, and professional trade unions.</p><p>As a managerial strategy, this theory has the merit of stressing that in practice managers do not just consider shareholder dividends, but also pay attention to key individuals within the organization and to groups essential for the survival or the growth of the organization. In other words, in a utilitarian vision of these stakeholders, the manager has to take the social dimension of some stakeholders into account in order to favor long term good working practices within the firm. The stakeholder theory builds a model that considers the connections between a management giving preferential treatment to stockholders and the designation of various objectives within the same organization.</p><p>This stakeholder theory can also be interpreted as a normative and ethical vision requiring management to consider the individual or the group not just as a means, but as an end in itself. Connected with the famous Kantian behest, this ethical vision asserts that stakeholders deserve more consideration in management.</p><p>This concept can be viewed as an answer to the position of Friedman, according to which a management objective is unique and consists simply in creating value for stockholders. Socially oriented goals would be considered to be outside the sphere of management.</p><p>This debate between the stockholder‐stakeholder vision highlights the question of the essence of an organization perceived as a simple stock package, or as a coalition of stakeholders. Furthermore, it raises the question of what are the objectives of an organization and of the men that form it?</p><p>This paper aims to explore the managerial or rather the entrepreneurial motivations between the stake and stockholder vision, by trying to describe a hierarchy of values and finalities in a particular organization; in this case an SME in its creative phase. Basically, this paper will try to answer the question: do we create to earn money (stockholder perspective) or for other stakes (stakeholder vision)?</p></sec><sec><title>An approach to entrepreneurial motivation</title><sec><title>Value maximization versus a calling, a vocation</title><p>In a neoclassical approach, firms aim to maximize profit, i.e. to create a profitability surplus compared with other firms belonging to the same economic sector. This profit will be used as an operand in the calculation of the value of a stockholder portfolio, through the price earning’s ratio (PER). The equation is rather simple: with a constant PER, excess profit generates a valorization of the organization, perceived as a stock package.</p><p>When creating his organization, an entrepreneur is just seeking to become rich: it is his main objective. This concept is widely supported by entrepreneurial success stories, collected in “station” management literature, often revealing the accumulated wealth of the entrepreneur.</p><p>This conception of an organization as a stock package brings the financial dimension to the fore, while consigning the human dimension of the team, defined according to the same rules as “human capital”, to the background. This quantification (instead of a qualification) of the organization, however, cannot deal with understanding the concept of enthusiasm and team motivation that differ from one organization to another and that cannot be easily explained by the human capital theory. For this reason, and for the sake of this paper, a strictly quantitative vision does not seem to explain why entrepreneurs do what they do when they know very well that often they will earn less money than when they were salaried workers within a large company. Such a fact is well recognized, indeed, an entrepreneur who in his business plan, sets his salary at the same level as that in his previous company is considered a fool. The stockholder theory would maintain that the creator has to “tighten his belt” initially in order to obtain a capitalized profit surplus later in the selling out phase. Thus, entrepreneurship would be simply a matter of investment choice. Investment for an entrepreneur would be perceived only as the money for the constitution of capital and the actualized opportunity cost of his wages if he were to stay in a large company. The problem is that when entrepreneurs are questioned, the monetary factor appears strangely secondary to other notions put forward, such as freedom, the search for sensations, that gives rise to an aesthetic exploration of the motivation driving entrepreneurship, as the term “aisthanestai” means to “feel”.</p><p>This paper seeks to explore this quest for sensations in the creation of an organization and to go beyond the simple financial dimension, and furthermore to suggest that an organization need not be considered a simple stock package, but rather as an artistic artifact, in the same way as Marcel Duchamp gave birth to what is called “conceptual art”.</p><p>That is the reason why I will focus on two particular stakeholders: the organization in itself, whose objective is first to survive and to grow, and the entrepreneur himself, in his calling to create. The organization itself as a primary stakeholder whose survival and development can be considered as an end in itself has been suggested by Clarkson (1995). To consider a new business and its survival as an end in itself comes down to asking the question of a non financial motivation in SME creation. In other words why do we create? We would like to explore this SME creation as an “acte gratuit”, or rather as a call from the market, a call that amounts to a “counter gift” (a gift that comes back, in a Maussian sense (Mauss, 1923). This call of the market reflects a vocation, a Lutheran “beruf” (trade, occupation, skill). This beruf, this vocation, grounds the theory of labor division as a means of collective enrichment through an invisible hand. The monetary reward is just a sign sent by God that the entrepreneur has heard this call.</p></sec><sec><title>An illustration: a sketch portrait of Bernard</title><p>This is a portrait of a business creator. A portrait is a text aiming to represent a reality, or most often a person, that favors a representation of concrete examples in action, compared with a more traditional approach of the presentation of precepts. This portrait approach is situated between description and prescription, as Ricoeur (1985) has stressed in relation to narration. The portrait amounts to an artifact of the informal, aiming to recount in an intelligible way real situations for the scientific reader. This narrative approach of management actors is inspired by works of the so called Chicago School (Shaw, 1950; Coulon, 1994) (symbolic interactionism), and Garfinkel’s (1967) ethnomethodology, stating that actors as well as professional sociologists can give a meaning to their actions.</p><p>Bernard has been an entrepreneur for over ten years. He worked previously for a large professional training firm, after having been a commercial manager in a computer hardware construction company. He was tired of large company environments and was looking for independence. He decided to create his own company whose vocation would be to manage timeshare for sales teams working in SME. Its creation was typical of the majority of companies created in France, three out of four creations in France being one‐man businesses. His sales management activity for SME gave him a comfortable income and he had become specialized in the re‐launching of products offered by small pharmaceutical laboratories unable to afford to employ a competent full time sales manager.</p><p>Later, he took on another partner to cope with a regular growth in demand.</p><p>In order to satisfy one of his oldest client’s growing needs, his partner suggested dropping regular face to face sales in favor of direct sales promotions over the phone with a team of telephone salesmen. They consequently recruited three telephone assistants who were trained by the product laboratories themselves. Bernard designed the promotion leaflet, which was something in which he excelled. Within one term, the three of them had achieved as many sales as they would have done with a full team of 20 pharmaceutical salesmen. Bernard explained that a pharmaceutical salesman could not see more than six to seven clients a day in view of the time spent travelling.</p><p>He decided to pursue his ideas further by using his own money to buy specialized telesales software for 100 K€ and relocating his company to larger offices in the town center next to the railway station. “I couldn’t find a single bank to raise the 100 K€ without giving my house and even my children as security … No banks or financial institutions participated in the creation of the investment project”.</p><p>That strategy appeared successful: he collected substantial commissions. At the same time, he knew the exact growth of his client’s turnover. That was why he decided to take over a laboratory. This time, as soon as his intentions to expand externally were known, and taking into account the remarkable performances of his company (turnover doubling each year) the banks besieged him with offers to finance his laboratory and one of his clients took a share in his company.</p></sec><sec><title>Towards a stakeholder approach in this company creation</title><p>The primary stakeholders in an SME creation are:</p><list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p>The entrepreneur himself and his associates (especially Bernard, who took the risk of changing his job through his discovery), both stakeholder and stockholder.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p>The client (the first client, the laboratory who supported the commercial risk and financed it with its orders, and by taking a very active part in the telesales operator training).</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p>The software supplier (who played a very important role in the software programming).</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p>The employees, all women, Bernard judging them to be more “pushy”; more than half of them second generation immigrants.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p>The organization itself, whose survival and development is considered essential as a value in itself.</p></list-item></list><p>The stockholder and stakeholder entrepreneur manager merger does not allow for an agency type approach. Nevertheless, Bernard is not looking for surplus profit maximization, for the organization is not making enough profits to pay dividends. Above all, Bernard wants his business to grow.</p><list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p>An ethical and aesthetic vision of the organization.</p></list-item></list><p>Bernard does not earn as much money as before, but as he himself declares, “I don’t care, I’m having a whale of time”. He speaks of strong sensations, à la Nietzsche, even if he has not read him, especially when he sees his team of 15 people, who seem to be happy to have a job. One of his comments, however, intrigued me:</p><disp-quote><p>You should see how beautiful it is to see my team. And I’m even happier knowing they have north African roots and are from deprived backgrounds, it makes them even more pushy. And with the commission game, they can earn more than the telesales operators in other less quality‐based call centers.</p></disp-quote><disp-quote><p>I had to set up my company in the town center, even if I had been offered bigger offices in the suburbs. I wanted my employees to be able to have lunch easily at noon and to walk from the station without wasting too much time. It’s because I took these considerations into account that I have been able to create and keep a well trained, efficient team, contrary to the other call centers, known for their strict control management policy (big brother syndrome).</p></disp-quote><list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p>The vision of the organization has to be taken as a global perception that is not exclusively financial.</p></list-item></list><p>Bernard created his company with a multilateral vision of his activities, taking into account the different stakeholders’ points of view. Yet none of those stakeholders are financial institutions (banks or stockholders).</p><p>Indeed, Bernard and his partner’s objective is not so much to make money, but to “earn” the rewarding feeling that their project has given life to an active company, creating employment. The model is therefore more like the stakeholder rather than the stockholder version. This value frequently appears as a subject of pride for entrepreneurs in France. The absence of strong financial constraints or the stockholder reinforces the stakeholder approach.</p></sec></sec><sec><title>Beauty as a value in the stakeholder approach</title><p>Bernard chooses not to put all his efforts into maximizing his income. So what is his motivation? I would like to suggest a reading of this portrait through the philosophy of art, which tries to understand what pushes an artist to create (beyond the explanation – to sell his work – an unsatisfactory explanation because many artists create works without selling any of them – and putting aside the simple occupation of the “Sunday painter”).</p><p>First, in order to allow the intrusion of aesthetics and beauty into the field of managerial values, I will describe some of Merleau‐Ponty’s concepts (Huneman and Kulich, 1997), before assessing two quasi mystical radical motivations in the artistic approach: discovery and the correction of the world.</p><sec><title>Human behavior as a gestalt, and the creator’s vision within this general structure</title><sec><title>Human behavior works as a formal gestalt and cannot be reduced to a simple sum of basic reflexes.</title><p>In <italic>la structure du comportement</italic> (the structure of behavior), Merleau‐Ponty (1942), in opposition to Pavlov, criticized the idea that one can explain the behavior of an organism by breaking it up into a sum of reflexes responding to the stimuli of the world. An organism answers globally to a request, its response does not take into account an isolated stimulus, but responds to a total change in the state of its environment, a change which means something to it (risk, satisfaction …). So, it is appropriate to favor totality, because, as in a piece of music, “it is the precise distribution of the sounds in time, their melodic pattern, the relationship of the size of the objects in general: the specific situational structure which creates stimulus”. </p><p>Thus the perceived world is revealed to us only by form, which is not a material reality but an <italic>ideality</italic>, that the subject detects there. This form that we understand, only manifests itself by the way our desires and needs make sense of the world. The states of things we perceive are always polarized positively or negatively for us, and it is in that way they affect us.</p></sec><sec><title>The gestaltist vision of an object is given to us by the “I can turn around it” and our perception according to all its perspectives.</title><p>The creator’s vision is first the vision of a totality in an object‐horizon structure, in this case, in a stakeholder organization structure. The form targeted by behavior is therefore the ideal and the totality: its space is not only the real space but also includes a virtual space of possible moves, because our vision holds this ability to turn around the object. This object, that can be seen from different perspectives brings the cubist painter’s approach to mind, where an object in the same plane is shown with all its facets as though the observer had walked around it.</p><p>To see means to seize a Gestalt, it is to enter a universe of beings who show themselves and who are in relation with each other. “Gestalt is not the idea of significance but of structure, the indistinguishable junction of an idea and an existence, the contingent arrangement by which the materials in front of us acquire a sense, it is an intelligibility in a nascent state.”</p><p>Gestalt builds a form of communication and is “like a mixture of the objective and the subjective”.</p></sec><sec><title>Perspective: entering the object and “putting its environment in abeyance”: the object horizon structure (Merleau‐Ponty, 1945, 1965).</title><p>According to Merleau‐Ponty, to see an object means to have it on the border or the margin of the visual field and to be able to fix our attention on it; and/or to consider that this object solicits us to fix on it. By fixing on it, I focus my attention on it, and so, I shut off the landscape behind and I open the object. This is not related to specialist knowledge of the retina (for example a medical knowledge of cones and sticks). This particular knowledge is contingent. Seeing is putting the environment to sleep in order to see the object better and to enter the object. The objects build a system in which they cannot be seen without hiding the others. When I want to see an object in a structure of objects, the other objects of the system must become a “horizon”. In this object‐horizon structure, perspective is simultaneously the means by which the objects reveal themselves, and the way by which they dissimulate their presence. The entrepreneurial vision, while innovating (or dis‐covering) also works by privileging certain segments of the activity perceived within a background called the “market”.</p><disp-quote><p>To see is to enter into a universe of beings which show themselves, and they would not be shown if they could not be hidden behind one another or behind me. In other words: to look at an object is to enter into it and from there to seize all the things its facets reveal when turned towards it. (Merleau‐Ponty, 1945)</p></disp-quote><p>I can therefore consider that an organization, namely its stakeholders, forms a system or a world, and that everyone puts the others around it, like spectators of the hidden aspects of the organization. Thus, the stakeholder model is a model that aims at entering the black box of the organization, and refers to a higher level of transparency (translucidity).</p><disp-quote><p>I can see an object in the way objects form a system or a world, each one becomes a spectator of it and what is around it. A house that is ‘seen’ is not a house that is seen from nowhere or a particular position, it is a house seen from everywhere. It’s like a three‐dimensional exploration on the screen of a computer. The completed object as a gestalt is translucent, it is penetrated from all sides by a current infinity of looks which meet each other in its depth, while nothing remains hidden. (Merleau‐Ponty, 1945)</p></disp-quote><p>Husserl (1929) invites us to return to “things” in themselves. That is to say to a world of pre‐knowledge to which knowledge always refers and in which all scientific determination is abstract, signitive and dependent, exactly like geography with landscape where we first learned what a forest, a river or a field was. For us, in an entrepreneurial sense, the world of the creator is a direct relationship with a perceived totality; creation is looked at from all aspects since the creator uses the vision of his organization. Vision implies a mobility of both body and perspectives. Indeed vision and mobility are closely linked because vision enables us to know an object according to one of its facets, and mobility enables us “to turn around it”.</p></sec><sec><title>The entrepreneur like the artist answers a call, an invective, this call is a counter gift.</title><p>With Cézanne in mind, Merleau‐Ponty (1969) states that a painting is a vision before being a conception. The creator sees the market and the creation within the foreground of the market, before conceiving it, without prejudgments or application of theoretical knowledge.</p><p>The painter, whoever he is, while he is painting, uses a magical theory of vision (Merleau‐Ponty, 1969).</p><p>In the eyes of the painter, the “same thing is there at the heart of the world and here in the heart of the vision ”. His knowledge of reality is a real co‐naissance (from French “connaissance” “knowledge”, and “co‐naissance”, neologism that means simultaneous or common birth) since, once he is painting, the painter joins the world, plunges into a pre‐human silence in which it becomes impossible, even for him, to say “what comes from him and what comes from things”.</p><p>“The painter brings his body”, says the French writer Valéry. It is like an offering in which the pictorial gesture is a restitution to the substance of the world, giving back what passed from it to us, using perception, a counter gift (a gift that comes back), a gift to “nature”, which is a way for it to continue in the work of art itself. “Painting renders to the visible the advance (in the financial sense) that the visible gave us”: and it is by lending its body to the world that the painter changes the world into a painting.</p><disp-quote><p>It is the mountain itself which, from there, allows itself to be seen by the painter, it is the mountain which the painter questions by the look. What exactly does he ask the mountain? To reveal the means, only the visible means, by which the mountain gives itself to be seen as a mountain in our eyes. Light, lighting, shadows, reflections, color, all these objects of research are not completely real beings: they do not have, like phantoms, an existence that is visual. The look of the painter requests the things to reveal how they suddenly become visible. (Merleau‐Ponty, 1965)</p></disp-quote><p>Merleau‐Ponty was fascinated by Cézanne and said about him (Merleau‐Ponty, 1966):</p><disp-quote><p>He does not want to separate the fixed things which appear right in front of him and the way things show themselves, he wants to paint the matter giving form to itself, the nascent order … It is the primordial world which Cézanne wanted to paint, and for this reason his paintings give the impression of nature at its origin. (Merleau‐Ponty, 1966)</p></disp-quote><p>Following this metaphor of the visionary entrepreneur‐painter, the creator will try to see a primeval world, still inhabited by a human conscience (not yet seen by others), like Cézanne about whom Merleau‐Ponty says “He reveals the background of ‘inhuman nature’, on which the human will set itself up ”. Cézanne lets the things think themselves through his creative gesture. Cézanne said about this subject: “the landscape designs itself in me and I am its conscience”. Its generating force of nature penetrates into the artist who becomes the vector: as if the painting was an emanation of the world and as if the creative behavior of the painter was just answering its call:</p><disp-quote><p>The painter lives in fascination. It seems to him that his gestures, drawings, emanate from the things themselves … The roles between the visible and him, are inevitably reversed. This is why so many painters say that things look at each other.</p></disp-quote><p>Andre Marchand following Klee:</p><disp-quote><p>In a forest, I felt on several occasions that it was not me who was looking at the forest. I felt, some days, that the trees were looking at me, were speaking to me … Me, I was there, listening … I believe that the painter must be pierced through the universe and not to want to pierce it through … I wait to be internally submerged, sunk. What is called inspiration should be understood to the letter: there really is inspiration and expiration of the being, respiration in the being, action and passion … The distinction between who sees and who is seen disappears, so that one does not know who/what paints and whom/what is being painted. (Merleau‐Ponty, 1966)</p></disp-quote><p>We could also comment that the creator is called by a world that is not yet inhabited by other consciences, because he “is being looked at” by the world at the same time as he is looking at the world. </p></sec></sec><sec><title>The creative impulse articulated in two non‐financial urges: to dis‐cover and to correct</title><p>The roots of creativity is a delicate question for management science: Amabile (1997) stressed the importance of intrinsic motivations: it is necessary “to do what one likes, and to like what one does”. My contribution tries now to supplement this concept of motivation through the perspectives opened by the philosophy of art. I mean that I do not want to question the “love of doing”, but to pose two quasi mystical radical motivations in the artistic approach: dis‐covery and correction.</p><sec><title>Dis‐covery is a perception, a “saper vedere” in a perspective object‐horizon.</title><p>The first motivation of an artist, would be to reveal the beauty of the world, because this beauty reflects a divine presence. Why reveal the beauty of the world? Because this beauty is hidden (covered and not yet revealed) and asks, calls to be discovered. The construction of the term “discovered” is instructive, because it means that the discoverer, in particular a scientific discoverer, bearer of revolutions through whole sections of economics, like an artist, takes off the veil, a veil which represents a kind of chaos, hiding until now from human sight, the order that God had established when creating the world. We find here, what Luther proposed, quoted by Arendt (1958): “human work according to Luther is just a way to find the treasures that God put in the ground”. If we want to find them, it is necessary to know how to see: “Saper Vedere” is the greatest gift of an artist, said Leonardo de Vinci. With the same meaning, Albrecht Dürer said that the true gift of the artist is to extract (to pull out) the beauty within nature: “art is planted firmly in nature and only he who tears it out, will own it”.</p><p>In the world of ideas, Boileau (1660) criticized the naive vision according to which an extraordinary thought would be a thought that nobody had ever thought of before. On the contrary, it is a thought which has been had by everybody, but that <italic>somebody</italic> expresses before the others. Indeed, we are all full of an infinite number of confused ideas of truth and nothing is more pleasant for the human spirit “than when one offers us one of these ideas clearly and accessibly”.</p><p>This dis‐covery or revelation rests on the notion of mimesis, imitation, because basically, an artist imitates nature in order to un‐veil the beauty of the world, celebrating in this way the work of God. Mimesis is a concept that can be defined in the history of art, whether as an imitation of reality or as an imitation of an ideal, aiming to show, or for a closer interpretation of our aim, to manifest the beauty of the world or of this ideal.</p></sec><sec><title>Correction of nature: the baroque or a look at reality as a particular case of the possible.</title><p>To create, in theology, consists in drawing from nothing and in making something from nothing. In the human order, it is a question of producing something starting from pre‐existing data. This production takes the form of a new and original assembly. Such a concept is clearly expressed in modern art movements, in what we call the “installation”. Correcting nature was a theological revolution, because it implied that “God had failed his creation”.</p><p>Creation can relate to an exploration of the “probable” and the possible. The baroque style tried to make probable chimerical creatures. The term “baroque” was initially used in connection with the imperfect roundness of pearls. The word took on the meaning of irregular, odd or unequal. Baroque is therefore the strange, the irrational, an excess of inelegancy, even research on a monster.</p><p>Correcting nature, amounts to favoring “becoming” before “being”. It is stating a relativity of the visible. Furthermore it is stating reality as a simple example of the possible. The accident gets a status of essence. The modern world perceives contingency as essence, instead of seeking to get rid of the accident, by an increasing abstraction, “a la Aristotle”. An accident is what falls (an innuendo “from heaven”), it means what can or could occur. We talk in management about opportunity. The entrepreneur seizes this baroque, this accident. He is fully conscious of the contingency of the things that happen to him. His role is to seize opportunities because he perceives the world as a <italic>becoming</italic>.</p><p>Art is not just showing a form, a static perspective, it is also a process of formation, seeking to reveal the form as a process of genesis.</p><p>The work of art, like the creation of a company is a result of a critical judgment and a dissatisfaction regarding the world (one could say dissatisfaction regarding the market in management). The model of a painter like the painter is mortal, whereas the work of art wants to be imperishable or perennial.</p><p>Mintzberg (1989) talks about formulation and formation in strategy. Formulation means to declare the strategy, to represent it for its implementation. But Mintzberg stresses that this “traditional” vision of management is incomplete since the strategy can also emerge from opportunities. Strategy is also formed as a result of the modifications desired by customers, for example.</p><p>This correction of the world privileges thus an approach in the form of a becoming, integrating the accident and the transformation of the vision into a creation, transformations compared to the already pre‐established scheme. Reality is not perfect, the market does not function well, our product is unsuited to our customers, it must be corrected. Creation then becomes this transformation, not just of the world, but a transformation of our view on the world.</p><p>If mimetic tradition poses a link of similarity between the natural model (or ideal model) and the created product, the correction of the world poses a radical separation: on the one hand there is the natural world, and on the other, the artificial object or artifact. The correction of the world is not a representation of a primordial nature, but a denatured nature, which is shown in the form of an independent reality: the famous Cézanne blue shade then appears possible. Art has this formidable power to create a new world, a second nature, in such a way that we will see the original nature as a representation of art. This power has been described by Oscar Wilde who says “nature imitates art”. This correction, instituted in a representation, acquires an ontological independence and art becomes the model through which we perceive, we judge, we see nature.</p><p>The creator of a company (when it is successful) modifies the perception the market has of itself. A major innovation (in art one would say “of genius”) makes the actors unable to look at the market as they did before. It is a true rupture, in the full sense, i.e. a “rupture with the past, a crack up, à la Scott Fitzgerald (1936)”. We cannot relive the past, it is irremediable, because the past no longer exists.</p></sec></sec><sec><title>Bernard’s company revisited</title><sec><title>The integration of aesthetics within organizations.</title><list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p>This creation of a company reflects two particular urges in creation:</p></list-item></list><p>1. The dis‐covery of a particular commercial process and the revelation of a new area of margin.</p><p>2. A correction of the initial process in order to maximize the business: i.e. to integrate a laboratory in the company.</p><p>3. We can point out at this stage that the integration of this “correction” may ease in the stockholder approach since financing the acquisition will only be possible through investors or bankers, which implies a more financial foreground.</p><list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p>The hierarchy (or the play) of values.</p></list-item></list><p>This creation of a company may also be understood in a play of what is put forward, in particular the values carried by the various stakeholders of the organization, following this example of Gellner (1951) and Perelman:</p><disp-quote><p>The same process can be described, indeed, like the fact of tightening a bolt, of assembling a vehicle, of earning one’s living, of supporting the flow of exports … It (an act) can also be interpreted as a symbol, a means, a precedent, as a reference point in a direction.</p></disp-quote><p>These various perspectives are not always incompatible, but often the setting in the foreground of a way to consider the organization casts the others into the background, in a game of organization‐stakeholder perspective.</p><p>Of course, the creator could be accused of lying about his real intentions and of wanting to earn money. I do not believe this, it is more a quest for “joy” à la Bergson (1919), a desire to give his life meaning, which brings the thoughts of Ricoeur (1995) to the fore:</p><disp-quote><p>A life, it is the history of this life, in search of narration. To understand oneself, is to be able to tell both understandable and acceptable stories about oneself, especially acceptable.</p></disp-quote></sec><sec><title>Creation and to be project causa sui: the position of Sartre.</title><p>According to Sartre (1943), the fact of the creative act reveals a wrenching from reality, a way for consciousness to act out its freedom. It is thus the transformation of the world into nothingness (from French “néantisation”), the transformation of the market in this case. This nothingness makes it possible for a man to prove to himself that he is not an object or a being like the others. Creation is a human attitude which can be reduced neither to its productive intention nor to the object resulting from this intention as a material incorporation of the latter. The artistic phenomenon is a way of acting, making, a “poiesis” which implies inseparably conception and realization, for oneself and in itself:</p><disp-quote><p>Creation can only be conceived and sustained as a continuous passage from one object to another. The object suddenly emerging has to be completely me and completely independent of me (Sartre, 1943).</p></disp-quote><p>The artistic object, as with a newly created company, is a hybrid being because if it is material, almost similar to a natural thing, it holds a share of the creative act from which it stems. It is a “phantom object”, haunted by the freedom which slipped there and which more or less discreetly continues to animate it, like the mobiles of Calder, manufactured by the hand of a man, but “which have a life of their own”.</p><p>The autonomy of creation can be read in several ways; either from the more “Ricoeurian” point of view, where works are more autonomous in the way they will be read or looked at, there is an autonomy in the way they lend themselves to be viewed by the public. Or, from a Sartrian point of view, where the project of the creator is to exert his freedom, or even to get rid of his master.</p><p>If a work of art is to some extent the deposit of creative freedom, if the pour‐soi (the thing that is in or for my reflexive consciousness) exists in the element of the en‐soi (the <italic>per se</italic> or thing in itself), the desire which lies deep within artistic consciousness is better understood: let the world not be a constraint or an obstacle to my freedom but rather the result of this freedom. In the creative act, being is not given, it is no longer a precondition, it is on the contrary, me who forms its basis. Freedom is no longer in the world, it makes the world. Man is both the subject and object of his acts. He thinks he can produce a synthesis between the vacuum of his consciousness and the fullness of a being, by embodying his consciousness in an object made by himself and reflecting back his image like a negative. This outlandish project of a fusion of the “en‐soi” and the “pour‐soi” is nothing other than the one stigmatized at the end of being and nothingness, the to be project, the causa sui, i.e. God, taken to his extremes in the creative conduct.</p></sec></sec></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>To conclude, the stakeholder‐stockholder debate hangs on two concepts of the organization: either as a stock package, or as a coalition of interests. The stock package gives an opaque, limited vision of the organization. This vision appears to be anti‐managerial precisely because the management objective is simply to open the economic black box to see what is happening inside. The stakeholder theory seeks to transcend the opaqueness of an organization to look inside. It, therefore, not only tries to make the organization more transparent, but equally to place it within a perspective, entrepreneurship appearing like a privileged field of this, putting into perspective an organization. The entrepreneurial act of creation gives form but also by placing this form at the heart of a depth. This form is a way of becoming aware of the plurality of the world, while maintaining the cohesion essential to the life of the organization. In this sense, it favors unity by holding constituents and varying logics together. And what is an SME, if not a form that can be perceived at a glance by the entrepreneur, compared with a multinational company, in which the diversity of locations has to be reduced to monetary reporting. The stakeholder theory invites us to participate in the same mental revolution as impressionism did with the frame of a picture. Before impressionism, the canvas was set in a frame, whose function was to separate the painting from the wall. At the end of the 19th century, the edge of the stretcher had been painted, especially with painters like Seurat or Signac. The painting no longer needed to be separated from the wall but had to compose with it. The organization, like a painting, cannot be perceived simply as an object facing its market, but rather as a window opening on multiple realities.</p><p>Morgan (1988) says about it:</p><disp-quote><p>The point is that our understanding of organization is based on the use of metaphors which generate important insights that have always clearly defined limitations. Different metaphors grasp and highlight different aspects of organization but, in the process, tend to hide or distort others. A full understanding of organization thus requires that we find ways of integrating the many and often paradoxical insights that our theories and explanations create. My own solution to the problem is to argue that this can be achieved by explicitly recognizing that organizations are many things at once. (Morgan, 1988)</p></disp-quote><p>We can consider this position of Morgan as an invitation to highlight the schutzian multiple orders of reality. Management becomes, therefore, a game of articulating these multiple orders of reality and giving a sense of this articulation to the different stakeholders.</p><p>In a sense, this stakeholder vision seems to reflect the emergence of a post modernist deconstruction, or rather a suspicion of the ideology which states that the world could be mastered by the promethean concept, that tends to limit human situations. The idea of horizon, promoted by phenomenological philosophy allows this co‐existence of existing multiple realities. Therefore, this openness of the organization takes into account the indefinite aspect, the complexity of intertwined human significations, that cannot be reduced to a simple causal explanation, such as the concept of the organization as a simple stock package. In other words, I would like to unveil the emergence of a post modernist attitude in creative entrepreneurship, in which the entrepreneur acts beyond a unique conceptual attitude, that succeeds in “epiphanizing” or highlighting reality.</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="b1"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Amabile</surname>, <given-names>T.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1997</year>), “<article-title><italic>Motivating creativity in organizations – on doing what you love and loving what you do</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>California Management Review</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>40</volume> No. <issue>1</issue>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b2"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Arendt</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1958</year>), <source><italic>La condition de l’homme moderne</italic></source>, Calmann‐Levy, <year>1983</year>, <source><italic>The Human Condptlion</italic></source>, <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b3"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Bergson</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1919</year>), <source><italic>L’énergie spirituelle</italic></source>, PUF.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b4"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Boileau</surname>, <given-names>N.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1660</year>). Préface aux <source><italic>satires</italic></source>, 1st Edition, <publisher-loc>Gallimard</publisher-loc>, <year>1985</year>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b5"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Clarkson</surname>, <given-names>M.E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>), “<article-title><italic>A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Academy of Management Review</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>20</volume> No. <issue>1</issue>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b6"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Coulon</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>), <source><italic>L’école de Chicago</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Presses Universitaires de France</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b7"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Fitzgerald</surname>, <given-names>S.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1936</year>), “<article-title><italic>The crack up</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Esquire</italic></source>, French translation <source><italic>La fêlure</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Folio</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b8"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Freeman</surname>, <given-names>R.E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1984</year>), <source><italic>Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Pitman</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>Boston, MA</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b9"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Garfinkel</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1967</year>), <source><italic>Studies in Ethnomethodology</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Prentice Hall</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>Englewood Cliffs, NJ</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b10"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Gellner</surname>, <given-names>E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1951</year>), “<article-title><italic>Maxims</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Mind</italic></source>, <issue>July</issue>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b11"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Perelman</surname>, <given-names>O.‐T.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>), <source><italic>Traité d’argumentation</italic></source>, Editions de l’ Université libre de Bruxelles, 5th Edition, <year>2000</year>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b12"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Huneman</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name></person-group> and <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Kulich</surname>, <given-names>E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1997</year>), <source><italic>Introduction à la phénoménologie</italic></source>, Armand Colin.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b13"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Husserl</surname>, <given-names>E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1929</year>),<source><italic> Méditations cartésiennes</italic></source>, <publisher-name>trad. Pfeiffer et Lévinas</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>Vrin, Paris</publisher-loc>, <year>1969</year>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b14"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name>L’Atelier d’esthétique</string-name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>), <source><italic>Esthétique et philosophie de l’art</italic></source>, <publisher-name>De Boeck</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>Brussels</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b15"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Maffesoli</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1996</year>), <source><italic>Eloge de la raison sensible</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Grasset</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b16"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Mauss</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1923</year>), “<article-title><italic>Essai sur le don, forme et raison de l’échange dans les sociétés archaïques</italic></article-title>”, in l’année sociologique, seconde série, T.1, in <source><italic>Sociologie et anthropologie</italic></source>, <publisher-name>PUF</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>, <year>1950</year>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b17"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Merleau‐Ponty</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1942</year>), <source><italic>La structure du comportement</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Presses Universitaires de France</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b18"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Merleau‐Ponty</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1945</year>), <source><italic>Phénoménologie de la perception</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Gallimard</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b19"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Merleau‐Ponty</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1965</year>), <source><italic>L’oeil et l’esprit</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Gallimard</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b20"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Merleau‐Ponty</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1966</year>), <source><italic>Sens et non sens</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Nagel</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b21"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Merleau‐Ponty</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1969</year>), <source><italic>La prose du monde</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Gallimard</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b22"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Mintzberg</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1989</year>), <source><italic>Mintzberg on Management. Inside Our Strange World of Organizations</italic></source>, <publisher-name>The Free Press</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>New York, NY</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b23"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Mongin</surname>, <given-names>O.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <source><italic>Paul Ricoeur</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Seuil</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b24"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Morgan</surname>, <given-names>G.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>), “<article-title><italic>Accounting as a reality construction: towards a new epistemology for accounting practice</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Accounting, Organizations and Society</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>13</volume> No. <issue>5</issue>, pp. <fpage>477</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>85</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b25"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ricoeur</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>), Extrait d’un texte sur la souffrance, <source><italic>Actes du colloque de psychiatrie</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Lille</publisher-loc>,</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b26"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ricoeur</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1985</year>), <source><italic>Temps et récit</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Seuil</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b27"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Sartre</surname>, <given-names>J.P.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1943</year>), <source><italic>L’être et le néant</italic></source>, <publisher-loc>Gallimard</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b28"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Schütz</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1967</year>), <source><italic>Collected Papers</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Nijhoff, The Hague</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b29"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Shaw</surname>, <given-names>C.R.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1930</year>), <source><italic>The Jack Roller a Delinquant Boy’s Own Story</italic></source>, <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Herv</namePart><namePart type="family">Colas</namePart><affiliation>Professor in entrepreneurship at the Reims Management School since 1997, after having been a management controller in Germany for the Thomson Multimedia group from 19881991, and both a consultant and CEO of CHD Consultants. His research concentrates on symbols and aesthetics in management and managerial representations, trying to find similar roots in his previous experience as an entrepreneur and his present hobby as a painter. Tel 00 33 3 26 77 47 47, Fax 00 33 3 26 04 69 63, Email herve.colasreimsms.fr</affiliation></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2005-04-01</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2005</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">The general aim of this paper is to shift the interest in two particular stakeholders, the entrepreneur and the company itself, from a vision based on a company perceived as a stock package towards an aesthetic perception of its creation. It intends to link creative entrepreneurship and creativity in the arts. Emanating from the phenomenological thought of Maurice MerleauPonty on artistic vision, this research intends to read the motivations of a creator by a calling, that amounts to a countergift to the beauty of the world. This motivation to create can be articulated in two nonfinancial impulses to discover and to correct. A sketch portrait of a French entrepreneur is depicted to illustrate the urge to create a small business. A stakeholder understanding is suggested, taking into account schutzian multiple orders of reality.</abstract><subject><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>Entrepreneurs</topic><topic>Creative thinking</topic><topic>Values</topic><topic>Small to mediumsized enterprises</topic><topic>Motivation psychology</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><subject><genre>Emerald Subject Group</genre><topic authority="SubjectCodesPrimary" authorityURI="cat-STGY">Strategy</topic><topic authority="SubjectCodesSecondary" authorityURI="cat-CGVC">Corporate governance</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">1472-0701</identifier><identifier type="JournalID">cg</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1108/cg</identifier><part><date>2005</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>5</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>78</start><end>88</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1108/14720700510562677</identifier><identifier type="filenameID">2680050206</identifier><identifier type="original-pdf">2680050206.pdf</identifier><identifier type="href">14720700510562677.pdf</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="Copyright">© Emerald Group Publishing Limited</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>EMERALD</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Musique/explor/SchutzV1/Data/Main/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000B47 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000B47 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Musique
|area= SchutzV1
|flux= Main
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:BD8F638DF9DEF71F45A43EC67D037AE2C63B9853
|texte= In search of new organizational values the irruption of beauty in an entrepreneurial creation
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.38. |  |