" Management of intangibles : Foundation of a General Methodology for Evaluation and Control "
I. R. C. (Intangibles Research Collective)1
Abstract
The abundance of research on the question of intangibles is as large as is its diversity. Its heterogeneity and the absence of a common theoretical framework are a major characteristic. There seem to be few common points between the research carried out in the management of human ressources on getting the most out of human capital or on motivation, in marketing on the evaluation of brand names, in law on intellectual property, in accounting on registering intangible assets or in the management of data systems on the impact of the new technologies. Research on organizational learning and more generally on knowledge and intelligence in the company, studies on confidence, quality, environmental protection, the company as citizen, etc. must also be mentioned.
The non-existence of a common language, the lack of homogeneity among the studies conducted and their partial character are the result of the absence of epistemological thinking and of the refusal to take into consideration the human dimension inherent in any evaluation. The various statements of position on intangibles and more precisely on its evaluation are de facto underpinned by different espistemological positions which, not having been explained, cannot be discussed.
The goal in this paper is therefore twofold :
to propose an epistemological system capable of giving us a new grasp of intangibles and restore it in all its dimensions - subjective, objective and rational (part one),
to deduce from this the nature and hierarchy of criteria to be used in any approach of evaluation and running intangibles (pertinence, coherence and performance) and thus lay the foundations of a general methodology (part two).
The succinct presentation of a reform project within a company, during which the proposed approach was used, makes clear what theory brings to practice (part three).
Keywords
INTANGIBLE - EVALUATION - MANAGEMENT CONTROL - ANTHROPOLOGY - ESPISTOMOLOGY - PRAXEOLOGY - SENSE - SUBJECT - OBJECT - PROJECT - SUBJECTIVITY - OBJECTIVITY - RATIONALITY - - PERTINENCE - COHERENCE - PERFORMANCE
" Management of intangibles : Foundation of a General Methodology for Evaluation and Control "
I. R. C. (Intangibles Research Collective)
FOREWORD
The abundance of research on the question of intangibles is as large as is its diversity. Its heterogeneity and the absence of a common theoretical framework are a major characteristic. There seem to be few common points between the research carried out in the management of human ressources on getting the most out of human capital or on motivation, in marketing on the evaluation of brand names, in law on intellectual property, in accounting on registering intangible assets or in the management of data systems on the impact of the new technologies. Research on organizational learning and more generally on knowledge and intelligence in the company, studies on confidence, quality, environmental protection, the company as citizen, etc. must also be mentioned.
The non-existence of a common language, the lack of homogeneity among the studies conducted and their partial character2 are the result of the absence of epistemological thinking and of the refusal to take into consideration the human dimension inherent in any evaluation. The various statements of position on intangibles and more precisely on its evaluation are de facto underpinned by different espistemological positions which, not having been explained, cannot be discussed.
INTRODUCTION
Over the last few years there has been new interest in the management of intangibles, both on a theoretical as well as a practical level. Three examples, taken from the news over the past two years, illustrate this phenomenon. In June 1995, the International Accounting Standards Committee invited comments on a draft paper entitled Exposure Draft E50 on the subject of the accounting of intangible elements. Also in June 1995 the French General Commissariat for Planning3 appealed for bids to study the economy of the intangible and received 56 applications. In July 1996 the Third International Congress of the International Federation of Scholarship Association of Management selected the management of intangibles as leitmotiv of its meeting. These events only represent the most immediately visible aspect of the phenomenon : in fact, a large number of works fit into the framework of mangagement of intangibles, without their general title explicitly referring to it.
These studies are associated with an economic stake: companies devote more and more of their resources to creating intangible values. Thus, according to a study made by a group of auditing firms (CCAS et. al., 1994), in 1994 intangible assets represented 12% of the total assets of the 100 largest French industrial and commercial groups. Even this figure gives only an imperfect idea of the importance of the intangibles for companies - the accounting systems used lead to systematic underevaluation, as many studies show (Swales, 1985 or Megna and Müller, 1991). Moreover, certain research tends to show that the mastering of the intangible constitutes an essential element in the elaboration of strategies and one of the major sources of company profits (see, for example, Hall, 1991, 1992 and 1993).
Controllers should therefore orient all their efforts to mastering this resource. Clearly this is not the case and intangibles don't play the role in their work that they should (Harvey and Lusch, 1994). To us the solution of this paradox seems not to lie in the lack of tools, but rather in their over-abundance, which disorients evaluation specialists because they are unable to identify the underlying epistemological foundations.
The goal in this paper is therefore twofold : to propose an epistemological system capable of giving us a new grasp of intangibles and to restore it in all its dimensions (part one) ; to deduce from this the nature and hierarchy of criteria to be used in any approach of evaluation and running intangibles and thus lay the foundations of a general methodology (part two).
The succinct presentation of a reform project within a company, during which the proposed approach was used, makes clear what theory brings to practice (part three).
1. EPISTEMOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS
Because it explicitly incorporates the epistemological dimension, the theory of Human Coherences, developed by R. Nifle4, offers a pertinent theoretical framework for renewing our thinking on appreciating intangibles in business .
1.1 THE THEORY OF HUMAN COHERENCES, A THEORY OF SENSE AND THE SENSES
The theory of Human Coherences presents itself as an anthropological theory, i.e., a theory of man and his nature. It places him at the center of all reality and it is he who gives it a Sense5 and coherence. Sense can be defined as an interior disposition (an ´ oriented ª disposition) which is expressed by a particular outlook on the world, by a certain view of things. It is revealed through different ways of working, exchanging, conceiving or evaluating. To each Sense different attitudes, behaviors, representations and value systems are attached, whose coherence can be found precisely in the Sense underpinning them. The theory of Human Coherences is therefore also a theory of Sense6 and the Senses7.
It is present on three levels : teleological, epistemological and praxeological.
The theory, by raising the question of finalities, has teleological import. It is also an epistemological theory, that is, a theory of knowledge. The theory coherently integrates the subject, the object and the project of knowledge8, whereas modern science has based itself on the division between these three dimensions of knowledge. Modern science requires eliminating the subject and any subjectivity in order to achieve scientific objectivity.
Finally, the theory makes it possible to understand how phenomena are produced or transform themselves. In this way, it enables one to identify the means to be used in order to master them. The theory of Human Coherences therefore gives rise to a praxeology, all the more solid and fruitful that it is based on explicit epistemological foundations. In fact, without theory, any praxeology runs the risk of being reduced to a simple collection of recipes applied with more or less luck (Morel, 1992).
1.2. THE MEANS OF EXPRESSING SENSE
What is Sense originally expresses itself in reality by means of a model of a structure called a Coherence model. This is made up of a set of three orthogonal vectors associated with the three founding dimensions of human experience.
The vertical vector expresses the subjective dimension and interprets the intention, thus the Sense in which man sets himself up in, the orientation of his outlook on the world. All human reality is the reality of a subject and in that way intentional.
The horizontal vector oriented towards the left expresses the objective dimension. The object is that which is separated from a context and from which we are distinct. The objective dimension of reality expresses our experience of otherness.
There is no considered object without a considering intention, and therefore no objectivity without subjectivity. All reality is based on these two fundamental dimensions.
The last vector expresses the rational dimension which thus appears as the product of the two preceding dimensions9. Reason is therefore not premier, founding, but second, a consequence10.
These vectors define three areas formed by the sections taken two by two, which give consistence to reality :
the area of operations according to which things exist ´ in fact ª, have a physical form, and are, for example, presented in a physical context;
the area of the representations according to which things have a form, an image through which they are identified in a context of signs among which language and imagination play a role ;
the area of relations according to which things have a value, a quality through which they are judged in a community, a relational context, in a socio-cultural context.
2. DIMENSIONS , CRITERIA AND INSTRUMENTS
How can this analysis allow us to make progress in the elaboration of a methodology for the evaluation and control of intangibles ? The answer is threefold : the Coherence model makes it possible to identify the dimensions that are to be taken into account in any evaluation, gives the nature of and the ranking of the criteria to be used and indicates what instruments are required.
2.1 DIMENSIONS
The Coherence model makes it possible to appreciate all the aspects of reality. Thus, it shows that it is illusory to attempt to appreciate tangible and intangible independently from one another. In " vulgar " materialism " tangible " is associated on a factual level ; in the philosophy of Artistotle, it would correspond to the objective dimension. However that may be, the Coherence model shows that appreciating only the tangible component of reality leaves aside a large part of this same reality, that which we call " intangible ".
Some, in appreciating intangibles, emphasize the level of relations (for example, in the studies on confidence). Others emphasize the level of representations (for example, the studies of cognitivist inspiration). Finally, others are interested in the rational dimension (for example the research on strategy). Most of these conceptions agree, at best, on shutting out the subjective, human dimension from any evaluation, or, at worst, seeking to eliminate it.11
As for the coherence structure, it allows clarifying all the aspects of intangibles. Evaluating reality is therefore taking into account at the same time the subjective, objective and rational dimensions. Giving up a dimension means invalidating an evaluation.12
According to the theory of Human Coherences, not only does the Sense of man found and orient all reality, but all reality is based on this model structure, which is that of human experience. The Coherence model, by bringing to light the various dimensions of reality, indicates what has to be evaluated in order to be mastered ; theory is therefore also at the foundation of praxeology.
2.2. CRITERIA
The Coherence model supplies criteria, as well as their ranking of importance, according to which all things are evaluated. The criterion of pertinence is associated with the intentional, subjective dimension - in what direction are we going, is it the " right " direction? The criterion of coherency responds to the rational dimension : do all the dimensions join together correctly and are they coherent with the initial intention ? Finally, the criterion of performance corresponds to the objective dimension - have the goals been achieved ?
What use do management practicians and theoreticians make of these three criteria - performance, coherence and pertinence ?
The measurement of performance is one of the missions that has been traditionally assigned to management control. The evolution of this rôle, from control to running programs, reinforces the importance accorded to this criterion, as the titles of several recent works devoted to discipline indicate (Lorino, 1996 ; Jacot and Micaelli, 1996).
The notion of coherence is present in thinking on strategic management (Miles and Snow, 1978), but also more and more in research on management control (ECOSIP, 1996).
Finally, the notion of pertinence is familiar to accounting theoreticians. One of their major concerns is to work on the conditions of pertinent information.13 In management control, this preoccupation has become more important in the last ten years. The word seems to owe much of its popularity to the provocative title of the work published by T. Johnson and R. Kaplan in 1987; since then it has been picked up in the titles of numerous works and articles (for example Mévellec, 1991, or ECOSIP, 1996).
Management theoreticians and practicians are not unaware of these criteria, but they use them empirically and, consequently, in an uncontrolled manner. The " good " controllers use them intuitively. This is one aspect of their professionalism. However, until now, these implicit criteria have not been truly conceptualized and formalized. Transmitting them in order to facilitate training and professional expertise has suffered as a result. The contribution of the theory of Human Coherences lies in this work of conceptualization which both defines and ranks the three criteria.
Pertinence is the first criterion. The pertinence of an action is its appropriateness in relation to the intention of the decider. Let us recall that an intention is privileged expression of the Sense in which guides its orientation. Pertinence is expressed in relation to political choices. An action which would be efficient, but would not correspond to the initially expressed intention, would not be pertinent. For example, in order to evaluate the impact of a new technology it is necessary to go back to the intention which guided its being adopted. Accepting the subjective dimension of an evaluation is to refer to an intention and therefore to the responsability of those involved. Holding only to rationalism or only to objectivity, is, on the contrary, to refuse it.
Coherence, associated with rationalism (the two terms are often used interchangeably), is the second criterion. It is a question of knowing whether all the dimensions of an undertaking - in the most general sense of the word - are going in the same direction. The evaluator makes sure that the actions follow each other in a logical, organized way, that they keep up an adequate relation to each other.
Two examples can illustrate this. The temporal coherence of the operations of a project thus supposes establishing a schedule, which can be elaborated with the help of mathematical models which create orders, like P.E.R.T. or M.P.M. In the same way, the way a budget is drawn up follows a certain logic of priorities -- it is generally necessary to start by drawing up the sales budget and determining the stock required before elaborating the budget of the production centers.
Coherence should be not only " internal " in relation to the situation evaluated, but also " external ", that is, there should be a logical articulation between all the basic elements of this situation on the one hand and between the situation and its context on the other hand.
The criteria of performance is the third and last criteria. It goes back to taking into " account " the objective dimension in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.14 This is certainly the most used and best mastered criterion. Performance is located at the articulation between the factual level, the givens of production, for example (number of products per hour, loss rate) and the level of relations, that is, the usefulness of this production for a human community, a series of clients, for example. Performance expresses a service capacity.It measures the objective result, a result whose action can be quantified - effects obtained (in the short or long term), ressources consumed and the relation between these two terms. Objectifying is indispensable and quantifying is legitimate, whatever may be the difficulties that they might raise. Because measuring ressources is easier, up to now management control has prioritized this aspect rather than measuring the effects.
The three criteria are inextricably linked according to a defined ranking.
Coherence is subordinated to pertinence.15 The discussions related to the normalizing of accounting and especially those on intangible assets illustrate this approach. They bring to light the existence of multiple rational systems. Accounting rules may have a strong internal coherence, but not be pertinent for one of the categories of those involved - executives, financial analysts or others. For this group, therefore, they will not supply a correct evaluation.
The conditional character of a rational system has been brought to light by numerous works.16 Each person bears his own rational system and rational system conflicts are most often conflicts of intention, differences on the sense to be attributed to a given situation. Yet this conditonal character is usually left aside in approaches for evaluating intangibles.
Performance is relative to a precise intention. It cannot be conceived as absolute and isolated. It cannot be disassociated from the preceding criteria. For example, in a company the different departments taken one by one can apparently have a good performance, but if this performance is not relative to a total and therefore coherent performance, it may then be considered as negative. The strategy of those in the company often aims to isolate territorities which have been cut up in such a way as to make it possible to proclaim a good performance. In this way they arbitrarily ignore their responsability in relation to the global performance. There is no responsible performance without paying attention to pertinence and coherence.17
Although performance is subordonated to the two other criteria, it is nonetheless just as important, because without it, there is a great risk of falling into subjectivism.
KNOWLEDGE MODES AND INSTRUMENTS
A specific knowledge mode corresponds to each dimension. Objectivity implies a mode of conscience linked to discriminating, sharp and rigorous attention. It therefore necessitates capacities of observation. A rational system implies the capacity to reason. Subjectivity demands an effort of introspection. Even if it may seem a paradoxe, it is not possible to discover the intention which underpins an action if one does not first look within oneself for the answer. There is where intuition usually intervenes. Without it, it will be quite difficult to understand the intention that justifies the action and therefore to measure its pertinence.
Professionalism in evaluating requires that appropriate instruments be associated with each mode of knowledge. These instruments exist in the objective dimension, which has seen the development of a measuring science, and in the rational dimension, which is evaluated by using models. However, professionalism is still weak in the subjective dimension.
This deficiency is probably a sign of our Cartesian heritage. Our " modern " societies place much importance on objectivity and rational thinking - M. Crozier speaks of the ideology of rational thinking - but they tend to discard all subjective judgments, equated with arbitrary and irrational judgment. This dismissal goes together with a relative underestimation of intuition, even if some studies, especially on the behavior of senior executives, tend to rehabilitate it (Lebraty, 1996).
However, natural intutition cannot suffice to judge the pertinence of an action ; therefore it is necessary to develop new tools, or to encourage the utilisation by the controller of qualitative tools used in other fields like social sciences or marketing.
3. ILLUSTRATION : EVALUATION OF A REFORM PROJECT WITHIN A COMPANY
A succint presentation of a reform project was chosen to serve as an illustration for two reasons. The first is that a project obviously puts into play many elements labeled intangible (time, knowledge, confidence, participation ...). The second is that the different areas and dimensions of reality are perhaps more easily perceptible than in other contexts - managers know that in a project it is necessary to master the operations (factual level), the schedule (rational dimension) and the ressources (objective dimension). They also know that effective communication is important (level of representation) and that it is necessary to encourage the creation of a work community (level of relations). However, it is not possible to master the whole unless the intention is known and the Sense identified and respected (intentional dimension).
Without going into the detail of the project, which was spread out over one year, we will attempt to show how, through its different stages, the prioritized reference to the criteria of pertinence, coherence and performance made it possible to provide a basis for controlling the project, continue to control it and even to improve the control.
3.1. EVALUATION BEFORE AND DURING THE PROJECT
To take into account the criterion of pertinence requires identifying the person who is initiating, who is " carrying " the project. In the case under study it was the company president, who also played the role of project leader. Initially, the project was supposed to train his co-workers to become better at their business. Work done with the executive to determine the Sense of the project revealed the real stakes : " refocus the company on its real business, corresponding to its vocation ". The company president particularly appreciated this formulation, to which he referred throughout the project.
The vocation and the business of this company having been defined, it became obvious that one of the major challenges was to get not only all the co-workers to share this view, but also the other firms that worked with the company and especially its clients.
During this project the structure and the work methods were reviewed. A commercial policy, a recruitment and personnel evaluation procedure, a general policy and management methods were defined.
The coherence between these different elements and in relation to the initial intention was ensured by the creation of a workgroup on each of these subjects, charged with making proposals to general management. Each of these groups was led by a co-worker with an attitude that was especially close to that required by the very vocation of the company. This choice was essential, because it was through these group leaders that it was possible to maintain the Sense defined at the beginning and that it was possible to continually evaluate the pertinence of the project. The voluntary or involuntary deviations in relation to the initial intention were immediately spotted. The group leaders were thus able each time to refocus the work.
All the communications were organized to highlight not so much the progress accomplished in moving the project along but more the progress accomplished in the assimilation by everyone of what the business of the company was. Each meeting was an opportunity for the leader to systematically recall the vocation of the company and therefore the Sense of the project.
The basic brochure that was put out as part of the project was used as an aid for the commercial services in their encounters with clients and thus made it possbile for them to focus their approach. The principles that were expressed therein also guided the negotiation of new partnerships, which made it possible for the company to enlarge its market while still remaining true to its vocation.
The coherence of the decisions made as concerns organization, work methods, commercial relations, management principles and recruitment procedures was ensured by the project team gathered around the leader. He made sure that following specific goals in each of these fields did not lead to contradictions. The systematic reference to the whole company, its vocation and its business, made it possible to almost naturally reach this coherence without making a special effort to interrelate the different studies. That was one of the most surprising findings for those in the company who had undertaken projects in other conditions.
The original deadline for the project was met. The will to respect the time allotted for the project was coherent with the principle of " ensuring a happy ending ", which committed the company to its clients. It constituted one of the favorite expressions of the company's vocation and trade. It is this coherence that explains how it was possible for the project to be done on time and done without any unreasonable effort. In this respect the project constituted a genuine education for everyone.
The success of the project demanded from all the co-workers a change in attitude on the part of all the co-workers, and was very dependant on their ability to assimilate the company's business and vocation in their methods of work. Taking into account the effective changes in the professional practices therefore made up one of the major criteria for measuring the performance of the actions undertaken.
The reference to this criterion was systematic. At each stage the degree to which the goals had been attained was evaluated. The plans of action foreseen at the beginning were continually readjusted in function of the progress realized. Let it be underscored that this approach did not raise any special problems in spite of the scope of the changes required. On the contrary, it constituted an essential success factor.
3.2. A LATER EVALUATION
Once the new organizational scheme was set up and the foundation for new work, management and recruitment methods laid, as well as the basis for new client relations installed, the company continued its development with the same dynamic. One year later (thus two years after having launched the project), a new evaluation was made, referring to the three criteria utilized for the pre-project evaluation -
pertinence - was the company still centered on its vocation ?
coherence - did all the functions of the company effectively take into account its real job? Did they assume the consequences, each in its own special field ?
performance - had significant progress been made by everyone in mastering their job, given the company's needs ?
This evaluation was made by means of a poll of the company personnel. Using the results led to organizing a few corrective actions, especially a training action aimed at strengthening the professionalism of the managment of human ressources. This management was in fact playing a crucial rôle in the new organizational set-up, given the breadth of the changes that had been made and the necessity of making them last.
By giving it a better grasp of its work, the evolution of the services proposed to clients, now corresponding more to the company's vocation and trade, led to an increase of 30% in sales in less than three years. The number of employees increased proportionately.
CONCLUSION
Mastering evaluation is one of the perspectives for the evolution of the job of controller. In order to measure performance, a whole science of measuring has been developped. Controllers therefore have many tools at their disposal - for example, they know how to calculate all kinds of costs or evaluate the economic profitability of a project. In order to verify coherence, they can refer to numerous models - the budgetary system, " traditional " analytic accounting, or the ABC method (Activity Based Costing). In order to gauge pertinence, however, they are still relatively poor. General tools, capable of discerning Sense and of measuring the pertinence of actions undertaken in relation to this Sense, have been developped in complete accordance with the epistemological thinking that has been explained here. We are currently working on adapting these general tools to the specific problems that controllers must deal with.
1 This collective brings together theoreticians and practicians. It is led by D. Bessire (University of Paris I - Pantheon-Sorbonne) and R. Nifle (Coherences Institute). Those who have made a regular contribution to the study presented here are : F. Gautier (University of Paris X - Nanterre), J. Meunier (University of Paris I - Pantheon-Sorbonne), G. Nedonsel (Qualitral), G. Nifle (Coherences Institute) and B. Noir (quality control). Since its beginning, the collective has enjoyed the support of the French Movement for Quality, Paris area. The translation in English was made by D. and E. Jeffers.
2 Even within a given field partial approaches can coexist. Thus the solutions foreseen by the General French Accounting Plan of 1982 in terms of research and development or in terms of expenses for computer programs only constitute, as M. Lacroix (1996) emphasizes, partial solutions to the problem of intangible investments.
3 The General Commissariat for Planning is an organization under the aegis of the Ministry of the Economy and Finances. Its job is to carry out and encourage prospective studies in very diverse domains.
4 It is completely impossible to mention in the framework of this paper the sources the theory draws on. It is based on especially the philosophy of Kantian inspiration, of phenomenology and psychoanalysis. It criticizes the cognitivist current. Here only the elements of the theory necessary for understanding the paper are presented. For more detail, see texts available on www.institut-cohérences.fr.
5 Sense with a capital ´ S ª designates the concept as it was renewed by the Theory of Human Coherences; it transcends all the accepted meanings of the term ´ sense ª in French - ´ capacity to feel impressions that material objects make ; capacity to know in an immediate and intuitive way ; discerning, hearing, judging, reason, ; a way of understanding, of judging a person, a way of seeing a particuliar point of view ; an intelligible idea or set of ideas that represent a sign or a set of signs ; accepting, signifying value ; an intelligible idea to which an object of thought can be related (raison d'être) ; the order of elements of a process, of a direction (Robert Dictionnary).
6 The question of Sense is also at the heart of studies undertaken by ethnomethodologists in the wake of H. Garfinkel (1967) and notably by K. Weick (1995). But there where the theoreticians of enactment see the ´ production ª of Sense, the theory of Human Coherences sees it being " discerned ".
7 Theory, confirmed by practice, makes it possible to identify generic families of Senses ; to see this applied in management control, see Bessire and Nifle (1996).
8 J.-M. Besnier notes that ´ defined in a minimal way, knowledge is relating a subject to an object through a working structure ª ; the theory of Human Coherences radically differs from usual approaches by substituting the trialectic subject - object - project for the dialectic subject - object (Nifle, 1996).
9 The origin of the frequent confusion between objectivity and rationality is in Cartesian logic, which divides the subject from reality's other dimensions. The Coherence model translates this confusion geometrically : the objective and rational dimensions are actually situated on the same level.
10 The Latin word ratio from which the word reason comes notably signifies relation.
11 Subjectivity should nevertheless not be confused with the arbitrary, nor is it a synonym of subjectivism or relativism.
12 The image of a tripod can be used-take away a foot and it collapses, becoming unusable.
13 ´ To be useful, information has to be pertinent in relation to the decision-making needs of the users. Information possesses the quality of pertinence when it influences the usersí economic decisions by helping them to evaluate previous, current, or future events or by confirming or correcting previous evaluations. ª (The framework of preparation and presentation of the financial status of the I. A. S. C.)
14 Efficiency is defined by M. Gervais " as the sum total of output obtained by unity of input. An efficient machine is one which produces a given quantity of output with a minimal consumption of input or one which produces the most output possible from a given quantity of input " (Gervais, M., Contrôle de gestion et stratégie de l'entreprise, Economica, " Gestion " collection, Paris 1991, Volume 1, p. 12)
15 M. Ca pet et al.(1986, p. 333) expresses the same conception. According to them, by coherence ´ one understands that the decisions are logically related as well as being linked to a scale of preferences ". The scale of preferences is very closely associated with the intentional dimension of reality and a system of values.
16 M. Crozier and E. Friedberg (1981, p. 277) present the conceptual revolution introduced by H. Simon in the following way, ´ In order to understand how a decision is made it is not necessary to determine the optimal rational solution and then try to understand the obstacles that have prevented the deciders from discovering it or applying it. It is necessary to define the options that were before him one after the other in fonction of the structure of the field and then analyze what are the criteria that he used, consciously or unconsciously, to accept or reject these options. [...] This conceptual model offers the big advantage of acknowledging the considerable importance that rational thinking and even, in a more general way, what could be called the ideology of rational thinking have taken on and of making it possible to actually give them a role without at the same time accepting the reasoning on which this thinking and this ideology are based. "
The articulation between coherence and pertinence also goes back to the differenciation-integration approach (Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967) which can still be expressed in terms of the relation between diversity and oneness. In the Coherence model oneness is linked to the intentional dimension, which is expressed by one finality (several finalities may be expressed, but only one will be used in the evaluation). Diversity is realtive to the multiplicity of objects or groups of objects of preoccupation. Coherence is precisely ordered , and therefore rational integration of the multiplicity of objects through the oneness of the intention.
17 Such an approach puts into question the logic of dividing the organization into profit centers.
REFERENCES
AFRIAT C. and CASPAR P., Líinvestissement intellectuel, essai sur líÈconomie de líimmatÈriel, Economica-Centre de Propsective et d'Evaluation, Paris, 1988
BESNIER J.-M ., Les théories de la connaissance, Flammarion, collection " Dominos ", n° 105, Paris, 1996
BESSIRE D. and NIFLE R., " Le sens du contrôle de gestion, quelques repères épistémologiques ", Cahiers de recherche de l'Association Française de Comptabilité, n° 1, May 1996, pp. 19-25
CAPET M., CAUSSE G. and MEUNIER J., Diagnostic, organisation et planificatioin d'entreprise, Economica, collection " Gestion ", tome 1 : Diagnostic et politique générale, 2ème édition, Paris, 1986.
CROZIER M. and FRIEDBERG E., L'acteur et le système, Editions du Seuil, collection " Points politique ", Paris, 1981, (1ère édition, 1977).
GARFINKEL H., Studies in Ethnomethodology, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1967.
GERVAIS M., Contrôle de gestion et stratégie de l'entreprise, Economica, collection " Gestion ", Paris, 1994
HALL R., " The contribution of intangible ressources to business success ", Journal of General Management, Summer 1991, vol. 16-4, pp. 41-52.
HALL R., " A framework linking intangible ressources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage ", Strategic Management Journal, 1993, vol. 14, n° 8, pp. 607-618.
HARVEY P. and LUSCH R., " The case for an off-balance-sheet controller ", Sloan Management Review, Winter 1994, vol. 35, pp. 101-105.
JACOT J.-H. and MICAELLI J.-P. (coord.), La performance économique en entreprise, Hermès, Paris, 1996.
JOHNSON T. H. and KAPLAN R. S., Relevance lost : the rise and fall of managment accounting, Harvard Business School, Boston, 1987.
LACROIX M., " Les actifs incorporels : étude comparée de la doctrine comptable française et internationale ", Cahier de Recherches et d'Etudes en Gestion de l'Université Montesquieu - Bordeaux IV, 1996, n° I.9606, 21 p.
LAWRENCE P. L. and LORSCH J. W., Adapter les structures de l'entreprise : intégration ou différenciation, Les Editions d'Organisation, collection " Classiques EO ", Paris, 1989 (translated from English : Organization and Environment : Differenciation and Integration, Harvard University Press, Boston, 1967).
LEBRATY, J.-F., " L'intuition dans les décisions managériales ", Revue Française de Gestion, n° 109, juin-juillet-août 1996, p. 57-69.
LORINO P., Méthodes et pratiques de la performance, le guide du pilotage, Les Editions d'Organisation, Paris, 1996.
MARTORY B. and PIERRAT C., La gestion de l'immatériel, Nathan, collection " Les livres de l'entreprise ", Paris, 1996.
MEGNA P. and MULLER D. C., " Profit rates and intangible capital ", Review of Economics and Statistics, November 1991, vol. 73-4, pp. 632-642.
MEVELLEC P., Outils de gestion : la pertinence retrouvée, Editions comptables Malesherbes, Paris, 1991.
MILES R. E. and SNOW C. C., Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process, Mc Graw Hill, New York, 1978.
MOREL C., " Le mai chronique de la connaissance ordinaire sur l'entreprise ", Gérer et Comprendre, n° 28, septembre 1992, pp. 71-83.
NIFLE R., " La trialectique ", http ://www.institut-cohérences.fr., 1996
SWALES J. K., " Advertising as an intangible asset : profitability and entry barriers, a comment on Reekie and Bhoyrub ", Applied Economics, 1985, vol. 17, n° 4, pp. 603-607.
WEICK K., Sensemaking in Organizations, Sage Publications, London, 1995.
collective works
CCAS, DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU, ERNST & YOUNG, GCC, and GUERARD VIALA, L'information financière : 100 groupes industriels et commerciaux, CPC, Paris, 1994.
ECOSIP (COHENDET P., JACOT J.-H. and LORINO P., dir.) Coherence, pertinence et évaluation, Economica, collection " Gestion ", Paris, 1996.
La gestion de l'immatériel, actes du 3ème Congrès mondial de l'IFSAM (International Federation of Scholarly Association of Management), Paris, 8-11 juillet 1996.
Dossier " Investissement immatériel ", supplément à la revue Echanges, n° 119, janvier 1996, pp. 3-66.
1