revue Recherche en Sciences de Gestion-Management Sciences-Ciencias de

Gestión, n°159 p. 99 à 125

Modern management and socio-economic

performance: A literature Review

Fatima Zahrae Boutachkourt

PhD Student
Management and Organizational Dynamics Research Team
Faculty of Legal, Economic and Social Sciences of Tangier
Abdelmalek Essaadi University
(Morocco)

El Ayachi Bencheikh
Research professor
Management and Organizational Dynamics Research Team
Faculty of Legal, Economic and Social Sciences of Tangier
Abdelmalek Essaadi University
(Morocco)

This paper aims to draw up the theoretical passage from the

notion of modernization to the integration of a global vision of both
economic and social performance. To do this, the literature was
reviewed. The literature review shows a trend toward integrating
social and economic performance within the managerial practices of
public organizations. Consequently, the socioeconomic model remains
the best among others in measuring and managing the internal
functioning of organizations, its ability to reconcile economic
performance and social performance, and its capacity to convert
hidden performance costs into added value.

Keywords: Managerial modernization - Socio-economic management

- Public management - Public organization.
100 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

Modernisation du management et performance socio-

économique : Une revue de littérature

Cet article a pour objectif de dresser le passage théorique de

la notion de modernisation vers l’intégration d’une vision globale de
la performance à la fois économique et sociale. Pour ce faire, la
littérature a été analysée. Elle montre une tendance vers l’intégration
des performances sociales et économiques dans les pratiques
managériales des organisations publiques. Par conséquent, le modèle
socio-économique demeure le meilleur parmi d’autres dans la mesure
et le pilotage du fonctionnement interne des organisations, dans sa
capacité à concilier la performance économique et la performance
sociale et dans son habileté à convertir les coûts cachés en valeur
ajoutée.

Mots-clés: Modernisation managériale - Management socio-

économique - Management public - Organisation publique.

Gestión moderna y rendimiento socioeconómico:

una revisión de la literatura

Este artículo pretende trazar el pasaje teórico de la noción

de modernización a la integración de una visión global del desempeño
tanto económico como social. Para ello, se ha revisado la
bibliografía, que muestra una tendencia hacia la integración del
desempeño social y económico en las prácticas de gestión de las
organizaciones públicas. En consecuencia, el modelo socioeconómico
sigue siendo el mejor entre los demás para medir y gestionar el
funcionamiento interno de las organizaciones, su capacidad para
conciliar el desempeño económico y el desempeño social, y su
habilidad para convertir los costes ocultos en valor añadido.

Palabras claves: Modernización de la gestión - Gestión

socioeconómica - Gestión pública - Organización pública.
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 101
A LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

In the public sector, we always talk about modernization,

modernity, and being modern. All these phenomena occupy an
important place in the reform charters of the public sector, despite this
concept of modernization lacking clear definitions. As a result, it
seems important to define a conceptual framework for this concept.
When we talk about modernization, we refer to other
concepts that are identical in substance; in fact, they are very different
in content: we talk about transformation, change, reform, innovation,
and adaptation. To give meaning to the various concepts cited, we
refer to the conclusions of (Damaj, 2013): Change denotes a minor
modification at the level of the culture, or structure of the
organization. However, the transformation is a major modification, a
major change. On the other hand, adaptation is defined as a response
to the observed or anticipated appearance of new internal or external
conditions for the organization, which tends to establish internal
coherence or make the organization fit by meeting the expectations
imposed on the environment and being consistent with its
characteristics. According to (Denys 2014, p19) : reforms do not seek
to create ruptures, but to pursue in all areas of public management the
modernization efforts largely expressed by the neo-managerial
movement. Innovation is the set of scientific, technological,
organizational, financial, and commercial approaches that lead to the
creation of technologically new or improved products or processes
(OCDE, 2005, p.11 cité par (Salmeron, 2016). On the other hand,
modernization presupposes a desire to break with the past, tradition,
and bureaucratic management (Machiavelli, 2012).
Modernization and the management that follows are not
recent or new issues in the organization’s public context. Although the
literature indicates a lack of works that study this concept of modern
organization. For this reason, it seems important to raise this
ambiguity in order to bring new alternative and relevant knowledge
for the proper conduct of our subsequent research.
Since the search for managerial modernization or the
modernization of management is an asset and a key element of
contemporary states, the choice of an adequate management method is
a criterion that guarantees the success of this project of modernizing
public organizations under a managerial vision.
102 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

From this perspective, modernization has largely been

associated with public-private partnerships, contracting, and
accountability. The present article focuses on the managerial side of
modernization. Therefore, the choice of a method of socio-economic
management as a political orientation tool linked to the modernization
of public organizations was not made without reason; there are
commonalities between managerial modernization and socio-
economic management.
Already, according to the work of ISEOR, socio-economic
management seeks to confront the perverse effects of bureaucracy.
Bureaucratic management has been considered by ISEOR as a virus;
the latter is called the TFW virus, in relation to the principles of the
classical model of Taylor’s, Fayol’s, and Weber’s. At the same time,
modernization aims to make a break with bureaucratic management.
Certainly, there are points of intersection between these two
issues: managerial modernization and socio-economic management.
Therefore, the central problem of this research paper concerns the
following question: To what extent does socio-economic
management reduce ambiguity compared to the concept of
managerial modernization within public organizations?
This article is guided by the following three questions:
 Why modernize, and towards what?
 What is the point of convergence between modernization and
performance?
 What is the contribution of the hidden cost-performance
method to improving economic and social performance?
Our present paper aims to clarify the connection between
managerial modernization and socio-economic management in the
context of public organizations and, finally, to propose a conceptual
model of research. This paper aims to achieve a better understanding
of the concept of modernization in management through an approach
to the socio-economic management of organizations.
In order to answer the problem, we will first present the
theoretical framework of our study; in the second part, we will present
the cross-views on the notion of modernization of management; then,
we will clarify the connection between managerial modernization and
socio-economic performance; and finally, we will present the
contribution of the hidden cost-performance method to improving
economic and social performance.
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 103
A LITERATURE REVIEW

1. – Theoretical framework: the New Public Management

movement and the socio-economic theory of organizations

In order to address our research problem, the foundations of

the new public management movement and the socio-economic theory
of organizations form the theoretical underpinnings of our research.

1.1. The New Public Management (NPM) movement

From the outset, to study the problem of modernizing public

organizations by transposing private management methods, it is
necessary to place the object of research within the New Public
Management movement. To this end, management modernization in
the context of public organizations consists in integrating, adopting,
and imitating "good" methods or practices that generally originate in
the private sector (Savall, 2008, p. 4). Indeed, managerial
modernization aims to regain the legitimacy of public organizations
through the practice of private-sector management methods
(Dondeyne, 2014).
To understand the principles of NPM, it makes sense to
review the literature on the genesis of New Public Management.
Indeed, neo-institutional theory is one of the foundations of NPM,
where market principles such as transparency and competition are
seen as regulators of the economy. Also, this NPM trend has its
origins in managerial theory, based on management expertise,
autonomy, and the development of appropriate management cultures
(Hood, 1991). However, behavioral biases, information asymmetries,
and conflicts take shape through the adoption of a market logic and a
managerial culture, two elements that regulate organizational
problems (Abord de Chatillon & Desmarais, 2012).
In other words, the principles of New Public Management are
in line with current issues and the major transformations that public
organizations have undergone. With this in mind, (Dibi, 2021), argues
that the mobilization of the NPM current is crucial, as the latter: is a
theoretical framework within which managerial issues relating to
public organizations are approached (Dibi, 2021).
This turn towards managerialism, the New Public
Management favors: the spread of results-based management,
financial planning, the separation of the political function from the
104 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

administrative function, the generalization of evaluation, and greater

transparency of accounting in the comparison of results with forecasts
(Amar & Berthier, 2007). Admittedly, with the obsolescence of
bureaucratic principles, the new public management movement is
developing principles to overcome bureaucratic rules in favor of
managerial logic (Boussard et al., 2015), and to challenge the public-
private boundary (Dreveton, 2017).
As a result, the bureaucracy model has suffered dysfunction
and performance degradation, as it has become irrelevant as an
organizational model. Henceforth, the primary function of
management is to avoid these drifts and resource degradations. This
means activating improvement processes and the dynamic search for
solutions to the increased organizational challenges caused by the
bureaucratic model (Bartoli & Blatrix, 2015, p183)..
In order to control the regulation of dysfunctions and
overcome degradations in performance, the New Public Management
trend legitimizes the possibility of developing a set of management
techniques, managerial practices, and performance criteria in public
organizations (Alcouffe et al., 2013). All this favors the
implementation of results-based management to regularize
uncontrolled power games (Sylvère, 2020), and to focus on the
development of an internal control culture with analyses in terms of
the cost-performance of activities (Damaj, 2013).

1.2. The socio-economic theory of organizations

The socio-economic theory of organizations has its

theoretical basis in macro-economic studies of the phenomena of
crisis and underemployment. Clearly, the socio-economic theory of
organizations emerged to complement the work of Germán Bernácer
(1922, 1955) on factors of production and François Perroux (1974,
1975) on the active unit and energy. According to (Dibi, 2022a),
economic activity arises from the interaction between structures and
behaviors. Thus, the improvement of an organization's economic
performance is made possible, without new external financial
resources, by a better interaction between organizational structures
and human behaviors (Savall & Zardet, 2015, p25).. This means that
the socio-economic theory of organizations aims to reconcile
economic and social performance (Mélissa, 2020).
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 105
A LITERATURE REVIEW

Otherwise, the socio-economic theory of organizations is

based on the following assumption: human potential is the sole factor
explaining the creation of value within an organization. Thus, labor,
capital, and technology are recognized as secondary factors of
production (Savall et al., 2017). In the same vein, (Boje & Sanchez,
2019), argue that the factors of capital and labor do not determine the
wealth created by an organization, meaning that there is a residual
gap, unknown and inexplicable by the traditional function of
production formalized by the theoreticians and practitioners of the
neoclassical school (production according to the neoclassicals is a
function of capital and labor).
Moreover, the socio-economic analysis of organizations has
emerged to study in depth this residual factor known as hidden cost-
performance. The latter is the cumulative cost of malfunctions that
cannot be identified by conventional accounting and financial
systems. The amount of dysfunctional costs borne by an organization
is explained on the basis of a gap analysis between expected and
actual operating costs. Concretely, hidden performance costs have
appeared, spread, and dispersed in the workspace with accelerated
frequency in time and space, and varied according to the nature of
interactions between structures and behaviors (Zidi, 2019). In line
with the above, it must be emphasized that the accumulation of
performance losses can only be tackled by operationalizing a socio-
economic strategy capable of identifying dysfunctions in production,
limiting the proliferation of dysfunctions again (Conbere & Heorhiadi,
2011; Zidi, 2019), and limiting the evaporation of resources by non-
value-creating activities ( Savall et Zardet, 2014).
For these reasons, and to conclude, the contributions of the
socio-economic theory of organizations are multiple in terms of social,
economic, organizational, and other performances. This theory
responds to current and future economic and social challenges largely
ignored in theories of organizations (Baker, 2003). Thus, the socio-
economic theory of organizations interweaves the structural
components of the organization and the human behavioral components
to achieve an integral vision of organizational performance. Socio-
economic theory is distinguished by its dysfunctional dimension of
performance, which is supported by socio-economic diagnosis. The
latter is seen as a simple ingredient of the action it takes to produce
results that help decision-making (Savall & Zardet, 2021, p. 34)
106 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

2. – Conceptual framework: Modern management and

socio-economic performance

2.1. Modernization: A necessity or an effect of luxury

2.1.1. Management Modernization: Definitions

A few years ago (Bartoli & Blatrix, 2015) , in a collective
work dedicated to the management of public organizations, these two
authors stated that the characteristics of change in public management
can be analyzed according to four models: renewal, reform, revision,
and modernization. According to the encyclopedic dictionary of
French public administration, as follows (Machiavelli, 2012), to be
modern, means to assume the desire to break with what precedes, with
tradition, with bureaucratic management. Similarly, in the dictionary
of the French language "Le Robert", to modernize, means to organize
in a way that meets, the needs of modern means. For (Lacabanne,
2014), modernity as improving the quality of services, liberalizing
access to data, democracy, transparency, and participation. In the same
way, according to (Dondeyne, 2014), the current state of new public
management encourages public organizations to modernize both
structurally and culturally in order to cope with successive budget
deficits and growing crises of legitimacy.
(Mecherfi, 2017, p90) confirms that the concept of
modernization has its objective: Following an evolutionary process,
effectiveness, efficiency, and performance, the main contemporary
references of public service modernization, are gradually asserting
themselves as fundamental elements of better public management,
thus leading to the placement of ongoing reforms in the course of
managerial approaches. However, the interest in the modernization of
management is explained by the following observation: The new
public management aims to modernize public action, often considered
counterproductive, by introducing into it aspects of managerial
rationality (Heurteux, 2019).
As a result, (Bartoli Annie, 2015, p100) considers that the
modernization of public institutions often has two main aspects: on the
one hand, the development of certain management approaches aimed
at the quality or performance of the service (strategic analysis,
management control, participatory management, etc.). On the other
hand, the establishment of information systems or computerized tools
to increase the efficiency of working methods. Subsequently, we note
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 107
A LITERATURE REVIEW

that most of the works dealing with the concept of modernization are
adapted to this definition: modernization aims to break with traditional
management and is based on the principles of NPM to improve
effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance.
However, for (Trosa, 2010) it is necessary to give meaning
to modernization methods, not only to place them explicitly at the
service of a broader political and social purpose than the mere search
for efficiency, but also to allow managers and staff to truly appropriate
their meaning. Similarly, (Alauzen, 2019) affirms that modernization,
which was no longer the business of a handful of senior civil servants,
politicians, and experts, was characterized by the participation of all
actors of the organization. On this point, (Guy, 2002) identifies four
main values that will characterize modern organization in the future:
participation, contract, social dialogue, and consultation.
From another point of view, modernization is not conceived
in a technocratic way, through a strong concentration on the
implementation of tools, but rather aims at a broader management
concept; it is therefore about giving sense to management tools and
instruments through the involvement of actors, consultation,
communication, updating dynamics, etc. In this sense, modern and
efficient public management requires a balance between the
implementation processes and the content of the management
methods.
The implementation of new modern management systems has
been characterized by the emergence of new conditions of
organizational efficiency: the distribution of work, the organization
chart, scheduling, etc. This modernization of public organizations
involves going beyond the classical modes of control based on
hierarchy, discipline, rules, and supervision to the emergence of other
modes of self-control based more on autonomy, communication,
interaction, participation, and responsibility.
As a result, this dynamic of empowerment of actors concerns
the means to be implemented and the results to be achieved; it is
particularly visible in the tools for the management of work and
human resources (Brakrim, 2022). The modernization of organizations
through the implementation of new management tools has made it
possible to transform the tool-individual relationship; it is a question
of moving from a constraining tool to a tool that would become a
behavioral support (Brakrim, 2022). However, the question that arises
108 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

is: Why is it necessary to modernize the management of public

organizations? This is the subject of the next section.

2.1.2. Modernization: An Urgent Priority

It is generally accepted that no country in the world is exempt
from the harmful effects of bureaucratic doctrine. In the face of this
situation, the public opinion has reached a consensus on the
impossibility of supporting the further excessive deterioration of
public resources. According to to (Denys, 2014), three main reasons
are now prompting states to undertake reforms: budgetary constraints,
concern for more efficient use of public funds and the need for
transparency in administrative action. Moreover, (Ben Said, 2000;
Machiavelli, 2012) argued that the urgent and major concern for
managers is to improve and adapt their organizations to changes in the
world and society in a context where the legitimacy of the state has
been questioned (Benyahlou, 2017; Dondeyne, 2014; Leroy, 2008).
In fact, the need to change the paradigm on which the
management of public action is based it’s becoming an absolute
reality, and there is no time left to catch up (Ben Said, 2000). At this
time, in the face of the broad criticism granted to the traditional
current theorized by Max Weber, the modernization of the state will
gradually impose itself and interfere with public reforms to become an
alternative issue that succeeds each other at the head of public leaders
(Sylvère, 2020). The definition of the concept of modernization varies
from one discipline to another; while the present work comes from the
field of public management, modernization is directly linked to
improvements and progress in the internal functioning of public
organizations (Boussard et al., 2015).
It is clear that, over the decades, resource-based management
was considered the ideal approach. However, resource-based
management has not produced the expected effects in terms of
improving internal functioning, which means that crises and budget
deficits are constantly on the increase. In this regard, the majority of
writings on the modernization of public management emphasize the
possibility of overcoming economic and social crises if the leaders of
public organizations have the will to change the bureaucratic logic
practiced in their organizations (Alauzen, 2019; Bartoli et al., 2011;
Boussard et al., 2015; Damaj, 2013; Guillemot & Jeannot, 2013;
Sylvère, 2020). The way out of the crisis is therefore to apply
measurement tools that have been widely developed in the private
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 109
A LITERATURE REVIEW

sector. As a result, the new tools of public management are considered

as institutional therapy (Mecherfi, 2017, p82). The bureaucratic logic
is overcome, giving way to the liberal perspective as the only support
of economic and social progress towards a new conception of public
organizations.
The criticism of bureaucratic management and the lack of
transparency in public services have led to dysfunctions in the
sincerity of reporting and public communication. The latter is no
longer able to reflect the reality of public organizations. Since it is
drawn up on the basis of opportunistic behavior and manipulation by
public managers in order to improve the image of their
organizations(Biondi et al., 2008; Burlaud & Chatelain-Ponroy, 2015;
Dreveton, 2008). According to (Sylvère, 2020), this situation can be
expressed as increased autonomy without increased responsibility; in
this case, in order to limit the opportunistic behavior of managers,
NPM aims to introduce results-based management. According to
(Mazouz & Tardif, 1998, p33), the institutionalization of management
by results is closely linked to performance management.
Moreover, with the emergence of the New Public
Management current, the notion of modernization has become
increasingly evident, where it is materialized through the possibility of
borrowing management tools from the private sector to the public
sector. It should be noted here that there is a strong commitment from
Anglo-Saxon and Francophone countries to embark on this progress
and social transformation (Alauzen, 2019).
Modernization has been accelerated by the intervention of the
principles of New Public Management; in fact, modernization is based
on the principles of NPM (Arnaud, 2004). This new doctrine (NMP)
aims firstly to go beyond the logic of regularity, compliance, and
verification, and secondly to integrate the logic of effectiveness,
efficiency, and relevance. According to (Dondeyne, 2014), NPM has
been able to require public organizations to modernize, both
structurally and culturally, in order to cope with successive budget
deficits and a growing crisis of legitimacy. (Mecherfi, 2017, p81),
argues that : States then embarked on a vast movement of reform and
modernization of their structures in order to acquire new legitimacy,
following the repeated attacks of liberal concepts that questioned the
effectiveness of the system of their public services.
110 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

It is also necessary to deal with the consequence of this

modernization, which is characterized by the integration of private
management tools into public organizations; in fact, following the
successive calls for transformation and organizational change, the
improvement of public management is the ultimate goal before any
reform of the public organization. According to (Mecherfi, 2017,
p81), in a context dominated by neoliberal ideology, the
modernization of the public service is seen by its ardent supporters as
the ultimate path and the optimal solution for the development of
societies. Therefore, the degree of modernity of management practices
is measured by achieving a level of performance as described by
managers in their strategies.
To use the definition of modernization given by the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
in an official report published in 2002: This modernization involves
the confrontation of logics and should place the quality of the service
provided and of the citizen at the center of the approach. This
definition is similar to that of (Chauvey, 2006; Georges, 2005; Guy,
2002; Leroy, 2008; Trosa, 2010) in that modernization ultimately aims
to satisfy citizens and improve the internal functioning of public
organizations.

2.2. Towards Modern Public Management: The contributions of

the Hidden Cost Performance Method

2.2.1. The socio-economic approach: General

The socio-economic approach of organizations aims to
compensate for the shortcomings of other management models, which
are based more on economic performance. However, the
implementation of this socio-economic vision does not happen
overnight. It is the result of a long process of diagnosis, evaluation,
consultation, etc.
According to (Savall & Zardet, 2015 ,p11-21): The
modernization of the management of public enterprises through the
practices of socio-economic management has become an obvious
reality. Contrary to the principles of Anglo-Saxon management based
on certain conditions for success, such as that social consensus and
peace, socio-economic management, through its multiple successes in
real companies, is now considered the real lever for improving the
overall performance of public enterprises. Indeed, according to
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 111
A LITERATURE REVIEW

(Mélissa, 2020), by levers we mean methods, tools, and management

systems that allow improving the functioning of organizations and
companies to be part of a global performance approach.
The socio-economic approach is based on co-production and
cooperation, according to (M. Ennajem, 2020) : To manage internal
group cooperation, it is a dysfunctional approach that has been
conveyed by socio-economic management, which uses the concept of
"hidden performance costs". Also, (Zidi, 2019) defines socio-
economic management as a global and sustainable management
approach. It is based on the development of the company's human
potential in order to improve its social and economic performance.
What makes socio-economic management a special mode of
management for (Gérard, 2014) what it has been materialized by a set
of management techniques, organization, and management of an
organization, a mode of management that closely integrates the social
dimension of the company and its economic performance.
Integrating human potential into managing organizations
considered according to (Martinez Vasquez, 2005) through the
synchronized decentralization of responsibilities, in particular by
relying on the implementation of decisive acts by the supervisory
staff, such as pilots in their area of responsibility.
According to (Damaj, 2013), socio-economic management
integrates all the functions of the organization, from the choice of
investments to the management of human potential, including quality
management, strategies, processes, and behaviors, in a horizontal,
vertical, and transversal process. Thus, socio-economic management
makes it possible to multiply the strategy into concrete actions for all
the agents of the organization and to guide the actions in a
synchronized and coordinated way.
In general, socio-economic management is based on the
reduction of dysfunctions through the adoption of a management
method called the hidden cost performance method. What is the
contribution of this method?

2.2.2. Hidden performance costs: An interdisciplinary perspective on

global performance:
As we have already seen, the basic idea behind the socio-
economic theory of organizations is to improve overall performance,
both social and economic, by acting on the various dysfunctions that
112 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

may arise as a result of interactions between an organization's

structural and behavioral components (Le Lédan et al., 2021).
As for (Zidi, 2019), hidden costs appear naturally within an
organization. It has to be said that every organization is subject to
hidden costs, i.e., the costs of regulating dysfunctions such as
absenteeism, staff turnover, quality defects, etc. The cost of regulating
these dysfunctions is what they have masked. The cost of regulating
these dysfunctions, masked by accounting and financial systems, is
indirectly reflected in the weakening of performance. Moreover,
regulatory activities consume resources intended for value-producing
activities, and an increase in hidden costs implies a loss in
performance. In other words, the reduction of a cost is a performance,
and the reduction of a performance is a cost (Dibi, 2022a). Note the
shortening of hidden cost to hidden cost performance.
Generally, hidden performance costs have appeared, spread,
and dispersed in the workspace with an accelerated frequency over
time and varied according to the nature of interactions between
behaviors and structures. In line with the above, it should be noted that
the accumulation of performance losses can only be tackled by
operationalizing a socio-economic strategy capable of limiting the
proliferation of dysfunctions again (Conbere & Heorhiadi, 2011; Zidi,
2019), and thus the evaporation of resources (Savall & Zardet, 2014).
Hence the perceived need to invent a socio-economic
analysis and diagnosis technique in order to remedy the shortcomings
of conventional methods. This process of metamorphosis (Dibi,
2022b) requires socio-economic intervention and structural and
behavioral change to ensure that the new management system is more
appropriate, relevant , efficient, and capable of recycling hidden costs
into added value in the short and long term (Salmeron, 2016). This
management method is also based on an extra-accounting model of
performance (Fernandez, 2015), with a descriptive, explanatory, and
prescriptive analysis of social and economic performance (Salmeron,
2016). In this perspective, (Savall & Zardet, 2015, p124) specifies
some of the benefits of calculating hidden costs, namely: examining
the organization's level of efficiency, engaging the organization in a
process of seeking solutions for greater efficiency, optimizing
resources and balancing budgets, developing and sustaining the
organization; supporting the quality of internal operations.
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 113
A LITERATURE REVIEW

For this reason and to conclude, the contributions of this

socio-economic method to organizations are multiple, diverse, and
varied in social, economic, and organizational performance terms.

2.3. New Public Management and socio economic theory of

organizations: Converging reflections

The aim of this section is to show how the socio-economic

approach helps to modernize the management of public organizations.
In fact, public management aims to improve the quality of
public services, enhance internal operations using management tools,
and encourage the involvement of stakeholders in operational and
strategic activities. All these elements contribute to improving
organizational performance.
When we talk about organizational performance, we mean
effectiveness in achieving objectives, efficiency in rationalizing
expenditures, and quality of life at work. Organizational performance
links economic efficiency with human dignity. The quest for
organizational performance in socio-economic management is a new
vision of the world, aimed at improving economic and social
performance through a dysfunctional approach.
Improved social performance can be seen in the reduction of
dysfunctions such as absenteeism, staff turnover, and demotivation.
Reducing dysfunction implies improving economic performance by
reducing resource consumption, improving productivity, and
motivating people to work for the organization. Improving socio-
economic performance requires the implementation of management
tools. Of course, the socio-economic method mobilizes tools and
techniques to reduce structural and behavioral dysfunctions. It should
be pointed out, however, that reducing costs implies improving
performance, but any reduction in performance comes at a cost. This
simultaneous reconciliation of economic and social performance
through a socio-economic approach is a lever that helps accelerate the
policy of modernizing public organizations by improving the quality
of internal operations.
Of course, the need to reconcile economic and social
performance indicators requires the development of managerial
practices. In this respect, the socio-economic approach offers
management techniques that are perfectly suited to steering overall
114 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

performance. It is worth mentioning that socio-economic approach

practices aim to make up for the shortcomings of traditional
accounting and financial methods and systems in terms of controlling
hidden cost performance. Otherwise, accounting and financial
practices do not reflect a global vision of internal operations, which
implies that part of the activity is hidden and consequently decision-
making, is now ineffective. In view of these observations and given
the strong presence of dysfunctions and hidden costs in public
organizations, the socio-economic method presents a highly
sophisticated approach, as it offers the possibility of providing
qualitative, quantitative, and financial information on performance.
This performance is the result of converting hidden costs into added
value.
In view of the above, the socio-economic approach presents
an opportunity for public organizations to become part of this
modernization process. This is why all the questions raised in the
introductory section can be analyzed according to the theoretical
corpus of socio-economic management with the current of New Public
Management.
For these reasons, the contributions of the socio-economic
theory of organizations are multiple and diverse in social, economic,
organizational, and other terms. This theory responds to current and
future economic and social challenges largely ignored in
organizational theories (Baker, 2003). Thus, the socio-economic
theory of organizations interweaves the structural components of the
organization and the human behavioral components, with a
reconciliation between visible and hidden performance, to achieve an
integral vision of performance.
This is why the social performance-economic performance
pairing is one of the paradigms of managerial modernization in
organizations. This observation is developed by (Bouckaert & Guy,
2002)in his article 'Performance measurement and management: The
Achilles ' Heel in Administrative'
The following table summarizes the ideas put forward in this
section:
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 115
A LITERATURE REVIEW

Table 1. Couple of managerial modernization and socio-

economic management

Managerial Socio-economic
modernization management
According to Socio-economic
Definition (Dibi, 2021) management aims to
"Management improve the internal
modernization refers to workings of
the use of private organizations in order to
management achieve better social and
techniques and economic performance.
methods to improve the This method is based on
economic and social the calculation of hidden
performance of a costs "which assesses the
public organization." economic consequences
of dysfunctions in
working conditions"
(Cappelletti & Olivier,
2018)
Theoretical The New The socio-
base Public Management economic theory of
movement organizations
Objectives Breaking with Overcoming the
bureaucratic impact of the TFW1 virus
management; on deteriorating
Major change. economic, and social
performance;
Changing
structures and behaviors.
Features According to The specificity
(Diallo, 2021), of the socio-economic
"managerialism is an management approach is
ideology that seeks to that "it is operational,
extend the principles of effective, and applicable

1
The TFW virus is a metaphoric concept developed by Henri Savall and the
ISEOR team to describe the deviations of the Taylorism, Fordism and Weberism
models in terms of the deterioration of working conditions.
116 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

management to all to many types of

spheres of social and organizations. It is
human life. original and owes
Managerialism nothing to the hasty and
advocates the rational ill-transplanted imitation
management of of foreign tools and
companies and the approaches." (Savall &
imitation of their Zardet, 2015, P355)
practices in all areas of
social and private life."
Convergenc In a book entitled "Maîtriser les coûts et
es les performances cachés, le contrat d'activité
périodiquement négociable". (Savall & Zardet,
2015, p11-21), a reference to the modernization of
public company management through a socio-
economic approach deserves to be taken up in
detail: "The modernization of public company
management through socio-economic management
practices has become an obvious reality. Contrary
to the principles of Anglo-Saxon management
based on certain conditions for success, such as
social consensus and peace, socio-economic
management, through its many successes within
real companies, today sees itself as the real lever
towards improving the overall performance of
public companies."
Source : Designed by authors
2.4. The contribution of socio economic management to
managerial modernization : Proposal of provisional conceptual
model

At first glance, socio-economic management is supported by

socio-economic management control practices. However, the literature
reveals a lack of studies dedicated to investigating the contribution of
socio-economic management control to the managerial modernization
of public organizations.
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 117
A LITERATURE REVIEW

2.4.1. Management by trust

Management by trust is an element that favors the
involvement of players in evaluation, steering and decision-making
processes, as well as the creation of a collaborative state of mind and
the development of a self-control function (Savall & Véronique,
2015) ; (Guibert & Dupuy, 1995) ; (Roche, 2021) ; (Martinez Vasquez,
2005) ; (Dehbi & Angade, 2018, 2019) ; (Dibi, 2020) ; (Rastrollo-
Horrillo et al., 2020) ; (Govart, 2021) ; (Voyant et al., 2017).

2.4.2. Social dialogue

Social dialogue helps to reduce the conflict-cooperation
balance, improve organizational efficiency and, create a social climate
that encourages the active participation of internal actors (Biscafé,
2020) ; (Péron & Péron, 2003) ; (Puthenveetil et al., 2017) ; (C.
Ennajem, 2019).

2.4.3. Enhancing human capital

Enhancing human potential refers to creating knowledge,
stimulating human behavior, reducing resistance to change, and
activating human potential (Martinez Vasquez, 2005) ; (Cappelletti &
Baker, 2010) ; (Dibi, 2020) ; (Dibi, 2022b) ; (Savall & Zardet, 2015,
p207) ; (Savall, 2008, p. 168) ; (Savall et al., 2017) ; (Savall & Zardet,
2011) ; (Roche, 2021)

2.4.4. Continuous improvement

Dynamic management encourages the adjustment of socio-
economic management control tools, the continual grooming of
dysfunctions, the reactivation of the change process, and the daily
monitoring of socio-economic indicators (Savall & Zardet, 2011) ;
(Savall & Véronique, 2015) ; (Dibi, 2022b) ; (Puthenveetil et al.,
2017) ; (Savall & Zardet, 2013)

2.4.5. Realistic strategic vision

Sharing the management of operational and strategic activity
is aimed at translating strategy into concrete objectives, reinvesting
time in strategic management and creating potential, organizational
alertness, and economic vigilance (Dibi, 2022a) ; (Martinez Vasquez,
2005) ; (Rastrollo-Horrillo et al., 2020) ; (Méan, 2008) ; (Savall &
118 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

Zardet, 2011) ; (C. Ennajem & Ennajem, 2021) ; (Salmeron & Roche,
2021)

2.4.6. Improved decision intake

Improved decision-making involves improving cash flow,
limiting resource wastage, mitigating decisions that destroy social and
economic values, and assisting decision-making (investment,
subcontracting, recruitment, etc.) (Savall & Zardet, 2011) ; (Rastrollo-
Horrillo et al., 2020) ; (Moreno, 2008, p. 69) ; (Boje & Sanchez,
2019) ; (Savall & Zardet, 2013) ; (Savall et al., 2017).
The figure below presents the provisional conceptual
framework of our research, or a rudimentary research conceptual
framework in the sense of (Miles and Huberman, 1991). In this sense,
"a conceptual framework describes, in graphic or narrative form, the
main dimensions to be studied, the key factors or variables, and the
presumed relationships between them" (Miles and Huberman, 1991,
p49). The conceptual framework used derives from the socio-
economic theory of organizations and the New Public Management
movement.
Figure 1: Provisional synthetic model of our research proposals

Source: Designed by authors

MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 119
A LITERATURE REVIEW

Conclusion

The notion of modernization has always had its origins in

official reports on the reform of public organizations, the renewal of
public services, and other organizational transformation projects. This
will to integrate new logics on the one hand and to break with
traditional management on the other hand was guided by the current
principles of New Public Management.
The definition of public performance, according to some
authors, is a difficult concept to surround. It is susceptible to different
perceptions and opinions. However, public performance as the
foundation of new public management had a prominent place in the
literature. In general, performance is a polysemic word that refers to
several meanings; it changes according to the perception of the actors,
and it is relative to several dimensions related to the strategy, vision,
and objectives of the organization.
Initially, performance was oriented towards the measurement
and management of economic indicators, with a strong focus on
improving public services (output) and citizen satisfaction (outcome).
At this point, this article starts with a global vision of performance and
has demonstrated a strong interest in organizational performance as
the spearhead for improving internal functioning, work climate,
effectiveness, and efficiency. Thus, the interaction between structures
and behaviors within an organization is a metric for judging the level
of performance. This relationship has its origins in a management
paradigm called the socio-economic model of organizations. The logic
of this model is based on the improvement of social performance as a
criterion for improving economic performance.
However, the issue of measuring and managing economic
performance through management control methods is not limited to
the economic dimension of performance; it would mean moving from
classical management control to modern management control. The
latter allows for the measurement and management of both visible and
invisible performance, providing a global vision of performance that is
both social and economic. The improvement of socio-economic
performance is the result of a longitudinal research approach carried
out within an organization through a method of socio-economic
intervention as well as the use of socio-economic management control
tools that make it possible to accompany the actors in the
120 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

implementation of organizational change projects and to propose

improvements throughout the intervention process.
Finally, the contributions of this article are those that help to
give better clarity to a topic considered young and recent in the
context of public organizations: managerial modernization through a
socio-economic management approach. We believe that future
exploratory results in the field will bring more knowledge to this
dialectical relationship of socio-economic management versus
managerial modernization, with a focus on the contributions of socio-
economic management control to the modernization of public
organizations.
The future results of our research could serve as a basis for
guiding the modernization policies of public organizations. Clarifying
the relationship between socio-economic management control and
managerial modernization is the subject of our future research.

REFERENCES

Abord de Chatillon, E., & Desmarais, C. (2012). Le Nouveau Management

Public est-il pathogène ?
Alauzen, M. (2019). Plis et replis de l ’État plateforme . Enquête sur la
modernisation des services publics en France. Université Paris
sciences et lettres.
Alcouffe, S., Rivière, A., & Fabienne, V.-D. (2013). Contrôle de gestion sur
mesure Industrie. Grande distribution. Banque. Secteur public.
Culture (Dunod (ed.)).
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3917/dunod.alcou.2013.01
Amar, A., & Berthier, L. (2007). Le nouveau management public: avantages
et limites. Gestion et Management Publics, 2007(January 2007), 1–
13.
http://www.unice.fr/recemap/contenurevue/Articles/Revue_Recema
p13_Amar_Berthier.pdf
Arnaud, S. (2004, March). La modernisation de la gestion publique. La Jaune
et La Rouge, 78, 31–33.
Baker, C. R. (2003). Theoretical Approaches To Management Control
Systems. Proceedings of the Administrative Sciences Association of
Canada 2003 Conference, June.
Bartoli, A., & Blatrix, C. (2015). Management dans les organisations
publiques : défis et logiques d’action (Dunod (ed.); 4ème éditi).
Bartoli, A., Olivier, K., Fabrice, L., & Bachir, M. (2011). Vers un
management public éthique et performant. Revue Francaise
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 121
A LITERATURE REVIEW

d’Administration Publique, 4(140), 629–639.

https://doi.org/10.3917/rfap.140.0629
Ben Said, H. (2000). Gesttion du changement dans l’administration publique
en vue de sa modernisation: Etude de cas canadiens et leçons pour
le Maroc. Université de montréal.
Benyahlou, Z. (2017). Réformes et modernisation des services publics,
Exemple: Programme Français de transformation de
l’administration- Action Publique 2022-. Revue Algérienne Des
Finances Publiques, 07, 35–51.
Biondi, Y., Chatelain-ponroy, S., & Sponem, S. (2008). De la quantification
comptable et financière dans le secteur public : promesses et usages
de la gestion par les résultats management by numbers. Politiques et
Management Public, 26(3), 113–125.
https://doi.org/10.4000/pmp.1532
Biscafé, B. (2020). Le dialogue social : une composante oubliée de la
performance durable des entreprises.
Boje, D. M., & Sanchez, M. (2019). The roots of the socioeconomic theory (
SEAM ). The Emerald Handbook of Management and Organization
Inquiry, 35–65. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78714-551-
120191004
Bouckaert, G., & Guy, P. (2002). Performance measurement and
management: The Achilles ’ Heel in Administrative. Performance &
Management Review, 25(4), 359–362.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2002.11643672
Boussard, V., Martin, E., Vezinat, N., & Martin, E. (2015). La permanence
dans le changement ? Les usages renouvelés de la « modernisation »
des entreprises publiques. Sociétés Contemporaines, 1(97), 5–23.
https://doi.org/10.3917/soco.097.0005
Brakrim, H. (2022). Les effets dysfonctionnels de la gestion de la
performance : une enquête auprès des intercommunalités françaises.
In AIRMAP (Ed.), 11ème édition du colloque de l’AIRMAP
« Visions et valeurs du management public dans un contexte de
crise(s) (pp. 1–25).
Burlaud, A., & Chatelain-Ponroy, S. (2015). Le contrôle de gestion dans les
organisations publiques : une gageure ? Economie et Management,
19–23.
Cappelletti, L., & Baker, C. R. (2010). Developing human capital through a
pragmatic oriented action research project: A French case study.
Action Research, 8(2), 211–232.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750309349976
Cappelletti, L., & Olivier, V. (2018). Quarante ans après son invention : la
méthode des coûts cachés. Association Francophone de
Comptabilité, 2(2), 71–91. https://doi.org/10.3917/accra.002.0071
122 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

Chauvey, J. (2006). Politiques et management public L ’ intérêt du Balanced

Scorecard dans l ’ évolution des modes de contrôle et d ’ évaluation
des Départements français. Politiques et Management Public, 24(2),
69–90. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3406/pomap.2006.2320
Conbere, J. P., & Heorhiadi, A. (2011). Socio-Economic Approach to
Management. OD Practionner, 43(1), 6–10.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315269290-3
Damaj, K. (2013). La transformation des organisations publiques au Liban et
son impact sur leurs performances , en lien avec la To cite this
version : Liban et son impact sur leurs performances , en lien avec
la satisfaction des usages. Conservatoire national des arts et metiers.
Dehbi, S., & Angade, K. (2018). Comprendre le rôle de la confiance dans la
relation managériale ( controleur de gestion – managers ) et son
impact sur la performance de l’entreprise Par Sara DEHBI
Chercheur en Entrepreneuriat , Audit et Finance à l ’ Ecole
Nationale de Commerce et de. Revue Économie, Gestion et Société,
15, 1–14.
Dehbi, S., & Angade, K. (2019). Relationship management controller
managers : what impact on performance ? Relation controleur de
gestion-managers : quel impact sur la performance ? Revue
Internationale Des Sciences de Gestion, 2, 306–318.
Denys, L. (2014). Management public et modernisation des services. Europa,
1–107.
Diallo, A. (2021). Management des compétences dans une perspective
d’amélioration continue de la performance de l’administration
publique. Congrès Academy of Management (AOM) - Management
Consulting - Iseor, Jun 2021, Lyon, France.
Dibi, A. (2020). La valorisation du potentiel humain par le management
socio-économique - cas d’une organisation publique administrative
marocaine -.
Dibi, A. (2021). La modernisation du management des établissements publics
de formation: Une approche socio-économique -Cas du CRMEF
CS-. Université Hassan 2 de Casablanca.
Dibi, A. (2022a). Diagnostic organisationnel d ’ un établissement éducatif :
identification des dysfonctionnements , évaluation des coûts cachés
et prescription d ’ actions correctives. Alternatives Managériales et
Economiques, 4(3), 81–101.
Dibi, A. (2022b). Le pilotage de la performance globale des établissements
éducatifs : des pistes pour faire mieux avec peu. Association
Francophone de Comptabilité, 3(15), 61–91.
Dondeyne, C. (2014). La légitimité du contrôleur de gestion dans le secteur
public: Le cas d’une organisation publique professionnelle, le CEA.
Université Montpellier 2.
Dreveton, B. (2008). Le rôle des représentations sociales au cours du
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 123
A LITERATURE REVIEW

processus de construction d ’ un outil de contrôle de gestion.

Comptabilité- Contrôle- Audit, 125–153.
Dreveton, B. (2017). Les outils du contrôle de gestion : des vecteurs de
valeurs pour l ’organisation publique ? Comptabilité, Contrôle et
Société, 3(27), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.3917/cca.233.0009
Ennajem, C. (2019). La construction de nouvelles relations entre contrôleur de
gestion et managers opérationnels dans le contexte d ’ un contrôle
de gestion décentralisé. Recherche En Sciences de Gestion, 1(130),
109–144. https://doi.org/10.3917/resg.130.0109
Ennajem, C., & Ennajem, M. (2021). Le pilotage du temps de travail humain
dans l'approche socio-économique. Congrès Academy of
Management (AOM) - Management Consulting - Iseor, Jun 2021,
Lyon, France.
Ennajem, M. (2020). Le pilotage de la valeur ajoutée dans les systèmes de
coopération inter- organisationnelle. Université HESAM.
Fernandez, G. (2015). Guillaume Fernandez Mesure et lisibilité de la
performance globale et durable : modélisation d ’ un tableau de
bord de pilotage intégrateur. Lyon 3.
Georges, M. (2005). Projets d’amélioration BPR Instrument de la
modernisation de l’administration fédérale.
Gérard, D. (2014). Durabilité des méthodes de management dans les
organisations : cas des projets de management socio-économique.
Université Jean Moulin (Lyon 3).
Govart, P. (2021). Comment retrouver la cohésion au sein d’une équipe en
crise ? Congrès Academy of Management (AOM) - Management
Consulting - Iseor, Jun 2021, Lyon, France.
Guibert, N., & Dupuy, Y. (1995). La Confiance , Variable-Clé d ’ un Contrôle
Rénové / ” Trust ”, a Key Variable in a New Approach of
Management Control. Modèles d’organisation et Modèles
Comptables, 355–370.
Guillemot, D., & Jeannot, G. (2013). Modernisation et bureaucratie,
l’administration d’Etat à l’aune du privé. Revue Française de
Sociologie, 54(1), 83–110. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfs.541.0083
Guy, B. (2002). Le passé et l’avenir de l’administration publique. Revue
Francaise d’Administration Publique, 2(102), 213–221.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rfap.102.0213
Heurteux, A. (2019). Le développement durable dans les métropoles
françaises : entre pilotage et hypocrisie organisationnelle Le
développement durable dans les métropoles françaises : entre
pilotage et hypocrisie organisationnelle. Université Côte d’Azur.
Hood, C. (1991). ALL SEASONS ? 69, 3–19.
Lacabanne, J. (2014). La Modernisation de l’Action Publique (MAP)
constitue-t-elle une rupture ou une continuité avec la Révision
124 FATIMA ZAHRAE BOUTACHKOURT, EL AYACHI BENCHEIKH

Générale des Politiques Publiques (RGPP) ? Faire-Son-Droit, 1–6.

Le Lédan, S., Bousquet, C., & Zardet, V. (2021). Comment accompagner
l’évolution du management du personnel administratif en milieu
hospitalier. Congrès Academy of Management (AOM) -
Management Consulting - Iseor, Jun 2021, Lyon, France.
Leroy, M. (2008). La modernisation de la bureaucratie fiscale. Gestion et
Manageement Publics, 6, 1–21.
Machiavelli, F. (2012). Modernisation de l’Etat. Le Dictionnaire
Encyclopédique de l’administartion Publique.
www.dictionnaire.enap.ca
Martinez Vasquez, G. (2005). La contribution du management socio-
économique dans l’amélioration des performances économiques et
sociales. Cas d’espérimentation dans trois petites entreprises
mexicaines. Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3.
Mazouz, B., & Tardif, M. (1998). A propos de la performance l’Arlésienne de
la sphère publique. In Management des organisations publiques :
théorie et applications. Presses de l’Université du Québec.
Méan, J. P. (2008). Politiques publiques, contractualisation des objectifs et
évaluation des performances. Modernisation Des Services Publics
Fécondité Des Partenariats Publics-Privés.
Mecherfi, A. (2017). Le service public dans tous ses états (A. des 11ème
journées M. de Droit (ed.)). Axis Desing.
Mélissa, S. (2020). L ’ intégration raisonnée des multiples normes exogènes et
endogènes pour maintenir la performance socio- économique de l
’entreprise. Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3.
Moreno, M. C. (2008). Politique innovante sur les populations à très faible
revenu. Modernisation Des Services Publics Fécondité Des
Partenariats Publics-Privés.
Péron, M., & Péron, M. (2003). "Postmodernism and thesocio-economic
approach to organizations. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 16(1), 49–55.
Puthenveetil, J. P., Yaeger, T. F., & Anderson, P. T. (2017). the Agile
Organization and the Role of Strategic Planning : Scenario
Planning in the Great Financial Crisis of 2007-2009.
Rastrollo-Horrillo, M.-A., Goter, F., & Salmeron, J. C. (2020). Planification
stratégique socio-économique, raconter l’imaginaire pour le rendre
réel.
Roche, A. (2021). La conduite du changement des compétences managériales.
cas d’une entreprise industrielle. Congrès Academy of Management
(AOM) - Management Consulting - Iseor, Jun 2021, Lyon, France.
Salmeron, J. (2016). Le processus d’innovation socio-économique: un
processus ambidextre? (Issue Lyon 3). Université Jean moulin Lyon
3.
Salmeron, J. C., & Roche, S. (2021). La gestion du temps du dirigeant au sein
MODERN MANAGEMENT & SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE : 125
A LITERATURE REVIEW

d ’ une PME en croissance : cas d ’ une agence d ’ architecture.

Congrès Academy of Management (AOM) - Management
Consulting - Iseor, Jun 2021, Lyon, France.
Savall, H. (2008). Modernisation des services publics Fécondité des
partenariats publics-privés (Economica).
Savall, H., & Véronique, Z. (2015). Gouvernance et management : quelle
coopération ? In Economica (Ed.), Actes du 27ème Colloque de
l’Institut de socio-économie des entreprises et des organisations (p.
179).
Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2011). Evolution des outils de contrôle et des critères
de performance, face aux défis de changement stratégique des
entreprises. 22ème Congrès de l’AFC.
Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2014). Reconstruire l’entreprise: Les fondements du
management socioé-conomique (Dunod (ed.)).
Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2015). Maîtriser les coûts et les performances
cachés, le contrat d’activité périodiquement négociable (Economica
(ed.); 6ème).
Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2021). Traité du management socio-économique
(EMS (ed.)).
Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2013). La conduite du changement dans les
entreprises et les organisations. In Economica (Ed.), Actes du 26ème
Colloque de l’Institut de socio-économie des entreprises et des
organisations (p. 203).
Savall, H., Zardet, V., Voyant, O., & Ennahem, C. (2017). Mesure et analyse
spectrale des réserves de productivité socio-économique : les coûts
cachés. 101 cas. Congrès Institut International Des Coûts (IIC) En
Partenariat Avec ISEOR, Jun 2017.
Sylvère, A. (2020). La modernisation de l ’Etat, indifférente à l’expertise des
services en territoires : la réforme de l’Administration Territoriale
de l’Etat dans les domaines de la Cohésion sociale et du
Développement durable (2009-2015). Université Paris-Est.
Trosa, S. (2010). Donner sens aux méthodes de modernisation de
l’administration. Revue Francaise d’Administration Publique,
135(3), 533–548. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfap.135.0533
Voyant, O., Bonnet, M., Tabchoury, P., & Datry, F. (2017). Contribution of
the socio-economic management control to steering balanced and
sustainable company overall performance. Society and Business
Review, 12(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBR-11-2016-0067
Zidi, T. (2019). Le management socio-économique de la RSE et la
performance globale de l’entreprise : cas d’une PME de service
marocaine. Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3.
Copyright of Recherches en Sciences de Gestion is the property of ISEOR and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.