L’ubiquité en contexte mutualiste : le cas du chargé de clientèle
Contributor(s)
Laboratoire Information, Coordination, Incitations ( ICI ) ; Université européenne de Bretagne ( UEB ) -Université de Brest ( UBO ) -Télécom Bretagne-Institut Mines-Télécom [Paris]-Institut Brestois des Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société ( IBSHS ) ; Université de Brest ( UBO ) -Université de Brest ( UBO )Archives - Management & Sciences Sociales
Keywords
ubiquityaccount manager
cooperative bank
mutualism
local agency
ubiquité
chargé de clientèle
banque coopérative
mutualisme
caisse locale
JEL : M - Business Administration and Business Economics • Marketing • Accounting • Personnel Economics
JEL : M - Business Administration and Business Economics • Marketing • Accounting • Personnel Economics/M.M1 - Business Administration
JEL : M - Business Administration and Business Economics • Marketing • Accounting • Personnel Economics/M.M1 - Business Administration/M.M1.M14 - Corporate Culture • Diversity • Social Responsibility
[ SHS.GESTION ] Humanities and Social Sciences/Business administration
[ SHS.SOCIO ] Humanities and Social Sciences/Sociology
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01870858https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01870858/document
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01870858/file/L%E2%80%99ubiquit%C3%A9%20en%20contexte%20mutualiste.pdf
Abstract
International audienceThis article explores the role of the account manager practicing within local agencies of a cooperative banking group. As a collaborator of a bank claiming to be citizen, he is at the same time employee, actor of a territory and customer. We wonder how the stakeholder lives this ubiquity and which the consequences are in its daily work. The results, stemming from the study of interviews meaning and lexical analysis under ALCESTE, allow us to affirm that some collaborators appear as vectors of legitimization of the cooperative movement while others move away from “the ideal mutualist”.
L'ubiquité en contexte mutualiste : le cas du chargé de clientèle Cette contribution s'intéresse au rôle du chargé de clientèle exerçant au sein de caisses locales d'un groupe bancaire coopératif. En tant que collaborateur d'une banque se revendiquant citoyenne, il est tout à la fois salarié, acteur du territoire et client sociétaire. Nous nous demandons dès lors comment la partie prenante vit cette ubiquité et quelles en sont les conséquences sur son métier au quotidien. Les résultats, issus de l'étude de sens d'entretiens semi-directifs puis d'une analyse lexicale sous ALCESTE, nous permettent d'avancer que certains collaborateurs apparaissent comme des vecteurs de légitimation du mouvement coopératif alors que d'autres s'éloignent de « l'idéal mutualiste ».
Date
2015Type
info:eu-repo/semantics/articleIdentifier
oai:HAL:hal-01870858v1hal-01870858
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01870858
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01870858/document
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01870858/file/L%E2%80%99ubiquit%C3%A9%20en%20contexte%20mutualiste.pdf
Copyright/License
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/licences/copyright/Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Bulgaria - Ex-post impact assessment of the act on limiting administrative regulation and administration control on economic activityWorld Bank (World Bank, 2010-07-01)The ex-post impact assessment of the Limiting Administrative Regulation and Administrative Control on Economic Activity Act (LARACEAA) is part of the World Bank's support to the Government of Bulgaria through on-going analytical and advisory work in the area of regulatory reform. The purpose of the present ex-post impact assessment of the LARACEAA is to: (i) assess how the Act has been enforced, (ii) identify and estimate the impacts of the Act, and (iii) provide recommendations for amendments to the Act. Chapter one emphasizes the importance of the Act as part of the Bulgarian Government's role in advancing regulatory reform and improving the business environment; gives the scope of the assessment and presents the sources of information utilized; and delineates general limitations of the analysis. Chapter two outlines a policy framework by discussing coherence with the Governmental and European Union (EU) policies, as well as touching upon relevant documents on regulatory reform, followed by analysis of the goal and objectives of the Act, and identification of performance indicators for the measurement of the impact of the Act. Chapter three depicts the results of the ex-post impact assessment, while the final chapter four identifies the main problem; discusses underlying drivers and effects of the problem; and proposes recommendations for amendments to the Act.
-
Bulgaria - Ex-post impact assessment
 of the act on limiting administrative regulation and
 administration control on economic activityWorld Bank (World Bank, 2012-03-19)The ex-post impact assessment of the
 Limiting Administrative Regulation and Administrative
 Control on Economic Activity Act (LARACEAA) is part of the
 World Bank's support to the Government of Bulgaria
 through on-going analytical and advisory work in the area of
 regulatory reform. The purpose of the present ex-post impact
 assessment of the LARACEAA is to: (i) assess how the Act has
 been enforced, (ii) identify and estimate the impacts of the
 Act, and (iii) provide recommendations for amendments to the
 Act. Chapter one emphasizes the importance of the Act as
 part of the Bulgarian Government's role in advancing
 regulatory reform and improving the business environment;
 gives the scope of the assessment and presents the sources
 of information utilized; and delineates general limitations
 of the analysis. Chapter two outlines a policy framework by
 discussing coherence with the Governmental and European
 Union (EU) policies, as well as touching upon relevant
 documents on regulatory reform, followed by analysis of the
 goal and objectives of the Act, and identification of
 performance indicators for the measurement of the impact of
 the Act. Chapter three depicts the results of the ex-post
 impact assessment, while the final chapter four identifies
 the main problem; discusses underlying drivers and effects
 of the problem; and proposes recommendations for amendments
 to the Act.
-
Collective ChoiceSchwartz, Justin (SelectedWorks, 2011-01-01)This short nontechnical article reviews the Arrow Impossibility Theorem and its implications for rational democratic decisionmaking. In the 1950s, economist Kenneth J. Arrow proved that no method for producing a unique social choice involving at least three choices and three actors could satisfy four seemingly obvious constraints that are practically constitutive of democratic decisionmaking. Any such method must violate such a constraint and risks leading to disturbingly irrational results such and Condorcet cycling. I explain the theorem in plain, nonmathematical language, and discuss the history, range, and prospects of avoiding what seems like a fundamental theoretical challenge to the possibility of democratic decisionmaking at all. I focus on the two constraints most writers have thought most vulnerable to relaxation, one implying that interpersonal comparisons of utility are impossible or unattainable, and that the decisions must be collectively rational in giving single unique ranking of all alternatives. I show that the standard attempts to evade the Arrow problem by relaxing these requirements fail. I also discuss versions of the objection that the Arrow problem somehow misses the point of democratic decisionmaking, and show that the main such approaches, Jon Elster's appeal to deliberative democracy, Arrow's own idea that the conditions giving rise to the problem arise infrequently, Alfred McKay's attempt to impose an implausible mathematical condition on collective deliberation, and Elizabeth Anderson & Richard Pildes' theory that value incommensurability renders collective rationality irrelevant, all fail because they do not evade the problem, are ad hoc, or presuppose its premises. I conclude that the Arrow Impossibility Theorem still poses a major and surprisingly intransigent theoretical problem for democratic theory. This research was supported by funding from the John Marshall Law School