What concept of finality to justify managerial behavior?

Quelle conception de la fin pour justifier les comportements managériaux ?

Bernard Guéry ()
Additional contact information
Bernard Guéry: ER IPC - ER IPC - Facultés libres de philosophie et de psychologie

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Management is often presented as an end in itself. The current emphasis on MBO adds weight to this idea, which can lead to circularity and an inversion of goals and means. In this context, this paper aims to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of two conceptions of finality. The first, instrumental finality, focuses on objectives as the only goal that needs to be considered in an organisation. The second, transcendent finality, makes it possible to consider the coherence between individual and organisational goals. This second finality schema can create a basis for virtue-based ethics, which can be used to justify certain behaviours in terms of a manager's end. This concept of finality is considered alongside deontology, which precludes finality as an acceptable justification, and utilitarianism, which considers finality to be the only relevant consideration.

Date: 2017
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02493541v2
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Revue internationale de psychosociologie et de gestion des comportements organisationnels, 2017, Le règne de la fin, XXIII (55), pp.113. ⟨10.3917/rips1.055.0113⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.science/hal-02493541v2/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02493541

DOI: 10.3917/rips1.055.0113

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().