EG-UK Conference Paper Style Guide


59 

 

 

 
 

 

 

Standards, Evaluation, Certification and implications 

for the study of Competitive Intelligence 
 

 

Christian Bourret * 

 

 

* University of Paris-East Marne-la-Vallée, France. 

bourret@univ-mlv.fr 
 

 

 

Received 10 December 2010; received in revised form 19 February 2011; accepted 27April 2012 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT:  The rise of standards, evaluations and certifications are expressions of what may be called the 

cult of performance and efficiency. Standards and assessment are frequently presented as inevitably, improving 

quality through a project approach.  As such they reflect a strong focus on efficiency in a world dominated by 

the quantitative approach. These standards and evaluations may hinder Competitive Intelligence goals. Building 

on the interdisciplinarity of Information and Communication Sciences (ICS), we propose another qualitative 

approach to standards and assessment. Finally, we considers the challenges represented by standards in the 

context of globalization of the economy and of trade. 

 

Keywords: Standards, evaluation, certification, competitive intelligence

1. Introduction 

Standards have become increasingly important in 

our society. In 1997, the French sociologist L. 

Thévenot had already spoken of "government by 

the standards." Since then the phenomenon has 

been largely amplified, with a close link between 

standards, outsourcing and its control, and 

evaluation. Standards have also become a main 

issue in the process of globalization. Standards are 

considered as part of modern management, for 

private companies and for public institutions alike. 

Standards are also as a main issue in globalization, 

with the role of ISO and of the  

 

 

“society of risk” (U. Beck) and a key point in Risk 

Management. Standards also have strong 

interconnections with Competitive Intelligence 

stakes as the analyst sets out to predict future 

scenarios. 

This article begins by demonstrating how the 

rise of standards, evaluation (assessment) and 

certification are a part of what we shall call the cult 

of performance and efficiency. Then we proceed by 

proving how standards and evaluation are important 

to improve service quality through a project 

approach. Standards can lead to an obsession with 

Available for free online at https://ojs.hh.se/ 

 

Journal of Intelligence Studies in Business 2 (2012) 59-67 

mailto:bourret@univ-mlv.fr
https://ojs.hh.se/


60 

 

efficiency in a too exclusively quantitative 

approach. This ambivalence of standards and 

evaluation processes can involve contradictions 

with Competitive Intelligence goals and methods. 

Based on the interdisciplinary of Information and 

Communication Sciences (ICS), this article 

proposes another qualitative approach to standards 

and assessment.  The perspective of this article is 

finally broadened by considering the challenges due 

to standards in the larger context of globalization. 

1.1 Standards, Assessment, Certification or the rise 

of the cult of Performance and Efficiency 

 

The concept of standards is ancient. In France, this 

term has a Latin origin (norme) and dates back to 

the year 1160. In the craft sector, guilds imposed a 

strict respect of the manufacturing processes. The 

French Revolution swept corporations away as 

vestiges of the “Old Regime”, with the 

revolutionaries willing to change both the things 

that were made and the people. The revolution 

imposed new standards such as the metric system, a 

new calendar (“revolutionary”), and a new division 

of national territory (the departments replacing the 

provinces). Even in metrology aspect (weights and 

measures), standards have deep social influences. 

Other standards (calendar, administrative districts) 

constitute the basic framework of daily life in a 

developed society. Today standards frame 

information exchanges (Pdf, Excel and so on). All 

the classifications are not neutral and they imply 

debatable statistical classifications (for example of 

social categories
1
). Classifications condition 

people’s representation and the vision of the future. 

As such it also affects the study of CI, as it decides 

how we look and try to analyze future events.   

 

The Industrial Revolution relied on the 

standardization of production, particularly from the 

early twentieth century with the scientific 

organization of work advocated by F. Taylor. The 

accounting techniques, which appeared in Venice 

(Italy) in 1494, are also based on standards, to 

assess the revenue and expenditure of companies, 

to assess profit (development of Capitalism).   

According to Colbert’s view in France in the 

seventeenth century (development of the 

administrative or absolute monarchy), the State 

point of view of standards are for tax purposes: 

French Accounting Plans of 1947 and 1982 met 

these two different goals. 

Standards and assessment (evaluation) are thus 

an integral part of the Management that has 

                                                 
1
 Classifications are never neutral: documentation and 

statistical bodies (INSEE in France) are linked to social 
categorizations and used to support any form of 
government, as with Apartheid in South Africa. 

gradually emerged, following the pioneering works 

of the French engineer H. Fayol in the early 

twentieth century. This was also part of the main 

characteristic of the United States (departments of 

Management for example at Harvard University). 

According to Le Moënne (2004), the big 

managerial disruption in the late eighties, 

corresponding to the spatial and temporal 

dislocation of companies, is probably the largest 

movement of managerial standards, most systematic 

and most radical since the origin of capitalism. It is 

accentuated by the Digital Revolution. We must not 

forget other “Revolutions” either: the Taylorization 

and Fordisme at the beginning of the 20
th 

century. 

Boussard (2008) defines "managerial ideology" as 

based on thee main points: monitoring and 

controlling an organization (the main justification 

of management), aiming at enabling organizations 

to be effective and efficient and finally relying on a 

rational and methodical approach to problems. The 

three keywords of management are: control, 

performance and rationality (Boussard 2008, pp. 

25-27). 

The dislocation of companies corresponds to the 

development of outsourcing, contributing to control 

and evaluation of results (regarding the goals 

contracted). The evaluation (assessment) began in 

the Anglo-Saxon countries and in private 

companies. In France, it gradually extended to the 

Public Sector (traditionally important in France) 

with the NMP (New Public Management / Nouveau 

Management Public), which gradually developed in 

the 1980s, succeeding to the PPBS (Planning 

Programming Budgeting System) and in France 

RCB (Rationalization of Budget Choices). The 

main idea of the NMP is to transpose management 

methods of the private sector to the public sector in 

order to improve efficiency, relying on the "3 Es": 

Economy, Effectiveness and Efficiency. Since 1996 

when the Social Budget of the Nation in France 

became higher than the State Budget, Parliament 

members voted for the annual LFSS (Law of 

Financing Social Security / Loi de Financement de 

la Sécurité Sociale). Later came the logic around 

goals or outcomes imposed by the LOLF (Organic 

Law of Public Finance / Loi Organique des 

Finances Publiques), which gradually after 2003 

transformed all management processes in the Public 

Sector, including universities (dashboards, 

indicators) and the focus on PPP (Partenariats 

Public Privé). 

As a result our society has progressively 

become a “society of mistrust”, as trust is a main 

stake. Standards are said to help "build confidence 

in an era of suspicion." In this perspective, 

D'Almeida (2001) emphasized the role of brands, 

labels and trade marks of companies and their 

products. These "work as safeguards to promote the 

security and sustainability of the exchange, 



61 

 

matching supply and demand in selective criteria 

clearly identified” (D'Almeida 2001, p. 242). 

D'Almeida (with men like Boutinet, Gramaccia) 

show how the project process, which is seen as 

increasingly natural in companies (Boutinet 2001), 

leads to a focus on innovations and has almost 

become an affair of State. The project process is at 

the heart of the modernization of the State as 

viewed by Rocard’s government in 1989.  

Developed in a competitive market space, the 

project has also been put at the service of 

improving the functioning of the State services, 

seeking to move the system from administration 

around procedures to administration with 

responsibility (D'Almeida 2006). 

The project, as a network for innovation, has 

become a symbol of our post-industrial society. 

This system has been implemented with notions of 

performance and efficiency and in relation with 

quality approaches. This article aims to outline the 

role of Quality approaches. Born in Japan after 

1945, the notion of quality was developed in the 

industrial field in a process of continuous 

improvement (kaizen).  This gradually became 

Total Quality Management (TQM), and expanded 

to the Western world in the 1980s. It then expanded 

to all sectors of organizations, whether private or 

public, and was backed by statements of procedures 

and certification corporations (ISO, AFNOR in 

France) and the development of references as 

standards of measure. 

Thevenot (1997) points to the evolution towards 

a "government by the standards" linked to market 

development, including the construction of the 

European market in the context of globalization. 

The rise of normalization corresponds to the 

competition in the market and is thus an integrated 

part of capitalism. Thevenot (1997) outlines the 

extension of the standardization area from that of 

goods, products and services to that of people 

(standardization of skills). It's a process to 

standardize objects or acts in order to bring 

consistency to an efficient industrial operation 

(Taylorization). The challenge is to ensure new 

surrounding formal contractual relations between 

individual subjects, with the risk of information 

dominated by a uniform standard of cognition. 

The evolution of the notion of standards has met 

two other major issues in the last sixty years: the 

development of the Welfare State and the 

development of services (tertiary sector) with the 

shift to the “taylorization of services”. The Welfare 

State, often interventionist, particularly in France, 

has gradually evolved to become more of a guide, a 

motivator and an arbitrator. This in a context of 

limited resources, deep deficits and higher charges, 

has implied a tighter cooperation with the private 

sector. With a Social or Welfare Budget which 

amount is larger than that of the State’s itself  

during the last twenty years, the State has been 

forced to delegate, develop partnerships with the 

private sector and learn to "manage risk", especially 

financially. At the same time, Western Societies 

have become Service Societies, since the service 

sector now counts for nearly 75 percent of the 

active working population, with a high proportion 

of "knowledge workers." 

1.2 Standards and Assessment for improving 

Quality 

 

According to AFNOR (French Standards 

Association or Association Française de 

Normalisation), the best way to introduce standards 

and norms is to recall the definitions of "standard" 

as proposed in ISO/CEI 
2
. Standardization is an 

"activity of establishing, in front of real or potential 

problem, provisions for common and repeated use, 

aimed at obtaining the optimum degree of order in a 

given context." The document states that "this 

activity involves, in particular, the formulation, 

dissemination and implementation of standards." It 

says that standardization offers significant 

advantages, including better adaptation of products, 

processes and services for which they are assigned, 

for the prevention of trade barriers and facilitating 

technology cooperation. The same guide outlines 

that "the standards are based on the consolidated 

results of science, technology and experience and 

seek the optimum benefit of the community." 

We shall retain the ideas of  "common and 

repeated use for obtaining optimum degree of order 

in a given context and facilitate cooperation". All 

organizations, private companies or public sector 

agencies, have developed customer approaches 

based on standards and benchmarks to ensure the 

quality of the services offered. The change has 

largely concerned management devices which have 

proliferated in all organizations. Boussard (2006) 

conclude that "the management devices between 

organizational and professional standards” Systems 

of standardization (of quality, security) about 

integration of information (ERP: Enterprise 

Resource Planning) and assessment (of skills, of 

financial results), are imperative in the name of the 

ideal organization, which is rational and efficient 

because regulated and controlled. According to 

Boussard (2008), these management devices 

constitute the privileged support of the the "makers 

of performance". This article comes to a key point: 

                                                 
2
 Normalisation et activités connexes – Vocabulaire général 

(2004), European Standard reference EN 45020, in France 
NF EN 45020.using ISO definitions (International 
Standards Organization), Website : 
http://www.bivi.metrologie.afnor.org/ofm/metrologie/i/i-
20/i-20-10/4 (visited on September 2010, 25

th
). 

javascript:bivi_preredirect('NF%20EN%2045020');
http://www.bivi.metrologie.afnor.org/ofm/metrologie/i/i-20/i-20-10/4
http://www.bivi.metrologie.afnor.org/ofm/metrologie/i/i-20/i-20-10/4


62 

 

the link between standards, productivity and the 

evaluation of the performance. 

The development of a "government by the 

standards" and by the quantitative techniques of 

management is inseparable from evaluation.  The 

use of increasingly important sub-contracting 

(outsourcing) or of a delegation and contracting 

approach can be defined as an objective or outcome 

approach and requires an assessment of the results 

obtained by the contracting party in comparison 

with the targets written in the original contract. 

States often try to master huge deficits, particularly 

in the Health sector in France. 

Lievre invites J. Plante who defines "assessment 

as the formation of value judgment on action in the 

perspective of decision making." Plante continues: 

"the quality of an assessment lies in the degree of 

integration of the results produced in the 

representations to come of the sponsors" (Lievre 

2002, pp. 22-23). In the public sector or quasi-

public social protection in France, these notions of 

standardization and evaluation correspond to the 

proliferation of different agencies. For example in 

the Healthcare sector, France developed ANDEM 

(National Agency for the Development of 

Evaluation in Medicine), established in 1990, then  

in 1997 it became ANAES (National Agency for 

Assessment and Accreditation in Health) and 

finally it became the High Authority for Health 

(HAS) in 2005. Then there is the AFSSAPS for 

sanitary security and health products. In the case of 

Healthcare Networks, devices of cooperation 

between public and private sectors wanting to 

articulate the activities of the hospital and primary 

care, it is outlined that: "The assessment of 

Healthcare Networks means to appreciate the 

achievement of qualitative and quantitative goals to 

measure their impact on the quality of care for 

patients, the quality of access to care, practices of 

Health professionals and on all the context of these 

Healthcare Networks." 
3
 The risks of drifts from a 

"government by the standards" are important in this 

case. The pointillist application of guidebooks and 

procedures (to take documents literally) can 

override the main spirit, forgetting the importance 

of context, as the cult of quantitative approaches 

overriding more qualitative approaches. 

Quality does not amount to the only application 

of standards. It constitutes above all a state of mind, 

a culture modulating behaviour, and a way of being 

and know how to face situations
4
. 

                                                 
3
 Circular CNAMTS (Health Insurance)/DHOS – Ministry 

of Health (March 2
th

, 2007) about orientations for 
evolution of Healthcare Networks in France, p. 2. 
4
 Ecole des Enseignants-Chercheurs en Qualité, CNQP 

(Comité National de la Qualité et de la Performance) – 
Université de Technologie de Compiègne (UTC), Paris, 
Negocia, 27 janvier 2011. 

Quality is not only standards; it is not only order or 

rule without meaning. It is rule and meaning. The 

problem is when we have rules without meaning or 

against meaning.   

 

1.3 The Cult of Standards or the Risk of Efficiency 

Obsession in a too exclusive quantitative 

approach 

 

Alémanno-Parrini and Le Moënne (2010) have 

outlined how the issue of evaluation of professional 

practices has become central in various sectors, 

including that of home services. Alémanno-Parrini 

and Moënne (2010) conclude that: "this concept is 

obviously ambivalent. Sometimes value judgment 

focused on practices, based on estimations of 

disparities with the specifications or expected 

results, in the case of projects (with extremely 

passionate reactions and mass movements of 

resistance). It can also be understood as a device 

for improvement or as an overall issue of resource 

management". This ambivalence is between the 

possibility of improvement and instrumental 

control. 

The rise of "performance devices" refers to the 

"injunction to professionalism" that "most often 

come into collision with the ideas that the 

professionals themselves have about their activity" 

(Boussard, Demazière & Milburn, 2010). In the 

Healthcare sector and especially in the hospital, 

Schweyer (2010) highlights the tension between 

costs (administrative and economic point of view 

about efficiency, corresponding to a will to control 

expenditure) and values (of the different 

professions). The central objective of cost 

containment in the Healthcare sector is also based 

on standards. 

Mintzberg (2001) is particularly vehement in his 

denunciation of the drifts of a too exclusively 

quantitative approach, notably in "Note on an ugly 

word: efficiency."
5
 For Mintzberg (2001) 

"management, as practiced now, may be causing 

the problem and do not propose the solution. It can 

work against our vital interests (...) a management 

obsessed with the idea of efficiency is a 

management obsessed with the idea of the 

quantifiable. The cult of efficiency became the cult 

of the quantifiable. And here lies the real problem 

(...) Because the economic benefits are more easily 

quantifiable than the social benefits, efficiency 

often leads the organization to adopt an economic 

ideology that can sometimes mean social 

immorality" (Mintzberg 2001, pp. 479-485). Critics 

of Mintzberg are met by De Gaulejac (2009) when 

                                                 
5
 MINTZBERG H (2001), « Remarque sur un bien vilain 

mot : "efficience"», in Le Management. Voyage au centre des 
organisations, Paris, Ed. d’Organisation, p. 479 – 485. 



63 

 

he denounces the “society sick of management”.  

De Gaulejac (2009) concudes in his preface that 

"disease of management becomes an epidemic." He 

stresses the point that "management by project 

became the model of governance." "The 

performance is not measured by the quality of 

service delivered, but only in terms of cost and 

financial results." De Gaulejac (2009), who has 

been associated with the creation of the University 

of Management in Paris Dauphine, emphasizes that 

"our purpose is not to condemn management.  

Management is necessary to optimize the 

functioning of organizations and administrations. It 

is not bad in itself. It becomes bad when, with the 

pretext of reform or rationalization, tools are 

applied blindly, without concern for human 

consequences, organizational and social (…) When 

management is at the service of instrumental 

rationality, it loses its legitimacy" (De Gaulejac 

2009, pp. 9 -13). 

There are examples of drifts, in France, as in the 

case of companies like France Telecom (Orange), 

known for scandals of moral harassment or in the 

Pôle Emploi (French Organization for 

Unemployment). Scepticism has also be directed 

towards the gap between the display of "quality 

certification" in RATP (Underground company in 

Paris) and at SNCF (French Railways) stations. The 

reality perceived by the users is of a sharp 

deterioration of the service during the last years.  

This is also the case in call centers (symbols of the 

“Taylorization” of services), where quality 

guidelines emphasize the speed of response and 

limitation of waiting times, which is praiseworthy, 

but these guidelines rarely mention the quality and 

the added value of the information given to users. 

In order to stick to quality procedures, these users 

have become “customers”, even in the Public 

Services. In parodying the title of the work of 

Ehrenberg (2000) on the "tiredness of being 

oneself" about an "individual uncertain, more and 

more exhausted by the "cult of performance". 

Jeannot (2010) speaks of the "tiredness of being a 

customer", also in the Public Sector. Jeannot (2010) 

stresses that these are not "users" who wish to 

become "customers". It is a "managerial standard", 

highly debatable, since the so-called customer has 

no real choice between different service providers. 

This "king customer" is more "confused", in 

"probation freedom" or suffering "pressures close 

to the forced sale" (Jeannot 2010, pp. 35-39). 

The emphasis is strongly on information and 

communication, but Wolton (2009) among others, 

states that "to inform is not to communicate." That 

is the question of meaning, especially in the public 

sector where the notions of "public service" and 

"public interest" no longer seem to have the same 

significance. 

2. Methodology 

Our approach relies on a literature review and 

mainly on a qualitative method (with emphasis on 

qualitative and not just in the speeches of leaders 

and in the titles of laws, but in the reality of daily 

activity), nevertheless without neglecting the 

quantitative aspects. A first step is to measure the 

gap existing between the official speeches of the 

leaders and the daily reality lived by employees.  

The question of meaning is critical, as in any 

approach linked with the "intelligence of 

complexity", by giving full value to autonomy and 

responsibility of "knowledge workers" (Dortier 

2005). The question is also essential in the answers 

proposed both by Mintzberg and by De Gaulejac. 

They outline the imperative to "give meaning to 

action", changing the point of view from the 

"employee as a resource" to the valorization of the 

"individual subject" and so a "more human 

management of resources" (De Gaulejac 2009, pp. 

302-310). With the equally critical issue of 

developing trust (Le Cardinal): in oneself, in others 

and in the future, in the people and in socio-

technical devices. 

Beyond standards, it is necessary to bet on the 

intelligence of the relationship. Thus we meet both 

N. D'Almeida (2001), who insists on a "relationship 

economy" with all the importance of Networks and 

Zacklad (2009) with his “economies of 

conviviality” and his “semiotics of cooperative 

transactions”. 

 

3. Standards and Competitive Intelligence not 

always an easy relationship 

These developments and shifts, which increase the 

gap between the noisy and incantatory speeches 

which are "customer focused" and the reality 

perceived by the so-called customer about the 

deterioration of delivered services, can contribute 

to the degradation of the image of companies. Thus, 

the excesses of a "government by the standards" 

and of performance only considered in quantitative 

terms ask the question about  the difficult 

relationship between Standards and Competitive 

Intelligence. 

According to Levet (2001), "Competitive 

Intelligence is the ability to understand our 

environment and to anticipate change (...) It is 

based on mastering information and on the 

production of new knowledge" (Levet 2001, VII). 

The Intelligence Economique Mémo, prepared by 

the French National Gendarmerie (2006) 

distinguishes three families of threats for a 

company: 1) the damage to image and reputation 2) 

exposure to economic and financial risks 3) risks of 

information and know-how. The document, 

Intelligence Economique Mémo, thus clearly 



64 

 

distinguishes between human threats and 

technological threats. 

For Le Bas and Picard (2003), if "information is 

at the heart of any Competitive Intelligence device 

(...) it is no longer considered as a scarce resource 

(...) But what became rare and may be considered 

as a source of competitive advantage for companies 

that control this resource, they are the skills needed 

to use, to interpret, or assimilate information" (Le 

Bas & Picard 2003, p. 17). In an organization that 

turns into a "learning organization", workers 

become "knowledge workers" (Dortier, 2005). 

Moral harassment and lack of motivation among 

employees may constitute a major risk for the 

company, resulting in Risk Management at different 

levels, a major concern for the function of 

Competitive Intelligence. 

Holmes (2002) refers to Bernstein, for whom, 

"the boundary between Modern Times and the Past 

is the mastery of risk" (Holmes 2002, p. 2). For 

Bernstein, "Risk Management is an active process" 

(Holmes 2002, p. 6) concerned with "the 

relationship between risk and change" (Holmes 

2002, p. 8). Introducing new management methods 

and methods for assessing performance, standards 

induce powerful changes in human relations and in 

the lives of individuals, and all of these 

consequences are normally not taken into account 

in CI analysis as analysts try to select the best 

scenarios. 

For their part, Metayer and Hirsch (2007) insist 

on ethical risks and human needs in the company, 

referring to Maslow's pyramid: need for belonging 

and of self respect and need for achievement. In 

this article emphasis has been on risks that the 

standards applied rigidly, expressed as 

instrumentalization. The standards used properly 

can contribute to a positive image of the company 

by improving the quality perceived by customers. 

These standards can also improve cooperation 

between organizations, especially in the context of 

globalization. It is only in their drifts, also for the 

project (Boutinet) - standards and project often 

being associated - that they constitute a risk for 

companies. 

3.1 A different approach to Standards and 

Competitive Intelligence Relationship 

 

The author believe that another approach of the 

relationship between Standards, Assessment and 

Competitive Intelligence is possible, especially 

based on the concept of “reliance”, important in the 

interdisciplinary of Information and 

Communication Sciences (ICS). 

Bernard (2006) positions the Information and 

Communication Sciences at the articulation of four 

issues: relationship, meaning, knowledge and 

action. Ollivier (2000) points out three issues: 

meaning, power and identity. The question of 

meaning is essential. It is  at the heart of the 

specificity of ICS, by providing the question of 

interactions with that of relationship (interactions or 

relationship) with knowledge and with action 

(issues of representations) , and with the joint issues 

of Competitive Intelligence as an aid to decision 

making in a strategic perspective. The human 

dimension is essential. Wolton (2009) emphasizes 

that to "think communication is to think the lack of 

communication, he speaks of “incommunication”. 

For Wolton "to communicate is less and less about 

how to transfer, rarely to share, but usually to 

negotiate and finally to cohabit" (Wolton 2009, p. 

94). 

This importance of meaning must be enhanced 

in relation to the notions of situation and 

contextualization as expressed by Mucchielli 

(2010) through his approach of "Situational 

Semiotic”. Mucchielli proposes to analyze 

situations for an actor from different frameworks or 

contexts: through identification of actors, 

positioning of actors, space and temporal contexts, 

standards, values, quality of relationships. These 

should be applied to standards in companies, for 

goods or services,  for a wider general use in 

society (social norms) but also as a method, as for 

technical requirements to supervise activities, 

standards established by ISO or French AFNOR.  

This is the subject of this communication. It is 

essential for "Situational Semiotic” to analyze the 

situation for any actor following these dimensions 

for reflection. 

The ICS approach tries to answer the central 

question of the meaning of the activity, recognizing 

issues that are central in management for a more 

complex approach.  Genelot (2001) stresses the 

importance of "making sense" and "build a 

culture", by "putting the human being at the heart of 

the company", "knowing how to recognize and 

articulate different logics to go back to the source 

of representations" (Genelot 2001, pp. 336 - 340). 

3.2 Standards: an example of the Globalization 

only for the benefit of its dominant countries 

and companies? 

 

Besides their weight of standards on the evolution 

of organizations, including those imposed through 

socio-technical devices such as information systems 

or management, standards are also a strategic issue 

for Economic Globalization. 

The competition between companies and 

countries is now global, both in the field of 

industrial products (cars, computers, machine tools 

and so on) but also in services (energy, insurance, 

banking, retail, transport, telecommunications and 

so on). Producers seek to generate margins in one 

battle at a time, all centered around cost, sales, and 



65 

 

the setting of prices as essential in the context of 

fierce competition. For their part, buyers and 

regulators seek qualitative benchmarks, for 

selecting the most competitive, rather than the less 

expensive suppliers or contractors. In this 

perspective, as already stressed by D'Almeida, the 

company's image and its reputation (around the 

concept of brand) can be valuable with all the 

challenges of e-reputation or reputation by 

examining information from Internet. Standards and 

certifications (as recognized signs of quality) may 

also help to develop the confidence of buyers and 

consumers and, therefore, constitute a strategic 

issue for companies, as part of a Competitive 

Intelligence analysis. 

The definition of standards is presented in basic 

documents published by the Standards’ 

Organizations as the result of a consensus. In this 

article the author questions the weight of the Anglo-

Saxon countries and companies, especially United 

States of America, particularly in the ISO 

(International Organization for Standards) which, 

by progressive or more coercive methods, 

contribute to impose standards on the rest of the 

world. These standards correspond to their 

particular approach and interests, helping to create 

a competitive advantage for their own businesses. 

Other standard organizations such as AFNOR in 

France, integrate and use the standards proposed by 

ISO, more or less willingly. As for patents and 

industrial property, the standards battle is a major 

issue for the credibility of the European Union and 

the economic weight of the countries of the Old 

Continent in the global marketplace.  

After the quasi abandonment of the national 

policy of Scientific and Technical Information in 

France in the 90’s, hope was placed on the 

European level. Worries have been expressed about 

the recent draft agreement (in December, 2010) 

between the European Patent Organization (EPO) 

and Google for the translation of the European 

patents 
6
. 

The stakes are particularly high in the field of 

standards, concerning the production of industrial 

goods or services, but there is also a key issue 

around accounting standards, as demonstrated by 

Capron (2007). Capron (2007) has stressed that in 

France, accounting is often perceived as a neutral 

technique (also often perceived as esoteric) that 

may be required objectively.  Furthermore, Capron 

(2007) states that it is above all a social convention, 

historically dated, evolutionary, developed 

according to the big economic movements, more or 

less buffeted by conflicting pressures and intended 

to produce economic and social effects, the most 

important thing is bringing confidence in trading. 

                                                 
6
 La Dépêche du GFII (Groupement Français des Industries 

de l’Information) 2010, December 1
st

.  

By focusing only on learning the ways of recording 

and bookkeeping system, France is in a vulnerable 

position, not reconsidering the foundations of the 

accounting systems. This includes the principles 

that guide accounting choices: any accounting 

system is a choice of representation of the 

economic and financial reality among many other 

possibilities. This instrumental and technical 

approach impedes being aware of the diversity of 

accounting systems in the world and across time, 

and more importantly, to underestimate the 

importance of valuation methods and valuation of 

companies. These are crucial to define the value of 

companies in case of purchase and also for 

taxation. Taxation is dependent on the criteria for 

evaluating benefits and benefits in term depend on 

provisions and depreciations. For example Anglo-

Saxon accounting systems grant more freedom to 

the accounting players as shown in the case of 

Enron (2001). As seen afterwards, this perspective 

of the accounting system must be questioned. It is 

for the Competitive Intelligence function to detect 

its weaknesses in advance. Thus questioning the 

whole system becomes its domain.  

 

4. Conclusion and future research 

Standards, Certification and Evaluation are key 

areas which influence the future of our world. The 

field of CI must be aware of the stakes. In this 

article the author has showed the risk of our 

existing standards in the form of certification and 

evaluation, which may lead to an obsession with 

instrumental and quantitative techniques. Examples 

of this is stressed by Mintzberg (2001) and De 

Gaulejac (2009), where the subtitle of the book is 

"managerial ideology, managerial power and social 

harassment." We must not deny the interest of 

management or the standards for the development 

of confidence, both for consumers and policy 

makers, to ensure the quality of goods and services, 

but must also foster comparisons. 

It is necessary to assess all the issues (not 

always seen) in the field of standards, both in the 

overall context of the globalization of trade and 

markets, but also the risks of abuses in daily 

activities in enterprises and organizations. The 

technique or even the idea of progress itself, 

standards, certification and evaluation, and more 

widely Quality approaches, are at the end 

ambivalent. They must be seen as tools and not as 

an end in themselves. 

In this perspective, the problems of the 

relationship, meaning, knowledge and action, as 

presented in an ICS (Information and 

Communication Sciences) approach are essential. 

This approach values the importance of the 

investment in the field of standards, certification 

and assessment by Competitive Intelligence actors, 



66 

 

to restore its relational and human dimensions (not 

leaving it only to engineers and technicians) both at 

the strategic, the policy (macro), and day-to-day 

working (micro) levels. The challenge is to create 

relationship and meaning to have better choices. In 

this spirit the author has also wanted to offer some 

areas for future research linked with challenges in 

the development of  trust, meaning and cooperation 

in a new qualitative approach around “Quality 2.0” 

or ”Sustainable Quality”. 

 

In what can be called the stereotypical speeches of 

main world organizations (such as WTO: World 

Trade Organization), some States and large 

companies insist on the benefits of free global 

competition for consumers. Many are questioning 

whether or not these are smokescreens, trying to 

hide a manipulation.  Strategic issues such as 

standards, are they not often ultimately a tool for 

domination of a few countries and for big 

multinational companies? 

More broadly, does not the unbridled pursuit of 

profit through the obsession of performance and 

efficiency (Stiglitz speaks about “cupidity”) risk to 

forget the quality, in the best sense of the word, 

sacrificing for example the healthcare and the 

environment because it is not profitable? The 

relationship between standards and the study of 

Competitive Intelligence here meets the challenges 

of sustainable development, outlining the limits of 

the current globalization process.  

 

References 

ALÉMANNO-PARRINI, S., LE MOËNNE, C. 

2010. Appel à contributions pour le n° 38 : 

« Evaluation, communication ? », Revue 

Communication & Organisation : 

http://www.fabula.org/actualites/communication

-et-organisation-n38-evaluation-

communication_39084.php (visited on 

December 2011 3
rd

 ). 

AVENIER, MJ. 1997. Le Management stratégique 

dans la complexité : un cadre de réflexion, 

consultable sur http://www.strategie-

aims.com/montreal/avenier.pdf 

BERNARD, F. 2006. « Les SIC une discipline de 

l’ouverture et du décloisonnement », in 

BOUZON (Arlette) sous la dir. de, La 

communication organisationnelle en débat. 

Champs, concepts, perspectives, Paris, 

L’Harmattan, pp. 33 – 46. 

BOUSSARD, V., DEMAZIERE, D., MILBURN, 

P. 2010. L’injonction au professionnalisme. 

Analyses d’une dynamique plurielle, Presses 

Universitaires de Rennes, 176 p. 

BOUSSARD, V. 2008. Sociologie de la gestion. 

Les faiseurs de performance, Paris, Belin, 263 

p.  

BOUSSARD, V. (Red.) 2005. Au nom de la 

norme : Les dispositifs de gestion entre normes 

organisationnelles et normes professionnelles, 

Paris, L’Harmattan, 224 p. 

BOUTINET, JP. 2001. Anthropologie du projet, 

Paris, PUF, 6
e
 éd., 350 p. 

CACALY, S., LE COADIC, YF., POMART, PD. 

and  SUTTER, E. 2008. Dictionnaire de 

l’information, Armand Colin, 3
e
 éd., 294 p. 

CAPRON, M. 2007. « Les enjeux de la 

mondialisation des normes comptables », 

L’Economie politique, 2007 / 4, n° 36.  

CARAYOL, V. 2004. Communication 

organisationnelle. Une perspective 

allagmatique, Paris, L’Harmattan, 235 p. 

D’ALMEIDA, N. 2006. « Les organisations entre 

projets et récits », in BOUZON (Arlette) dir., 

La communication organisationnelle en débats. 

Champs, concepts et perspectives, Paris, 

L’Harmattan, p. 145 – 158.   

D’ALMEIDA, N. 2007. Les promesses de la 

communication, Paris, PUF, 2001, rééd., 2007, 

264 p. 

DAVID, A. (red.) 2010. Intelligence Economique 

et problèmes décisionnels, Paris, Ed. Hermes - 

Lavoisier. 

DIAZ-BONE, R., THÉVENOT, L. 2010. « La 

sociologie des conventions. La théorie des 

conventions, élément central des nouvelles 

sciences sociales françaises », Trivium, 5–

2010 : http://trivium.revues.org/index3626.html. 

(visited on June 2010 27
th

). 

DORTIER, JF. 2005. « Les professionnels de 

l’intelligence : portrait de groupe », Les 

travailleurs du savoir, Sciences Humaines, n° 

157, pp. 28 - 33. 

EHRENBERG, A. 1991. Le culte de la 

performance, Paris, Calmann-Lévy. 

ELLUL, J. 2001. La technique ou l’enjeu du siècle, 

Paris, Economica, 1990, rééd. 2001, 423 p. 

GAULEJAC, V. 2009.  La société malade de la 

gestion. Idéologie gestionnaire, pouvoir 

managérial et harcèlement social, Paris, 2005, 

nouvelle éd.,  Points-Seuil, 353 p. 

Gendarmerie Nationale (2006) Mémo Intelligence 

Economique, 55 p. 

GENELOT, D. 2001. Manager dans la complexité, 

Paris, INSEP Consulting, 357 p. 

GUILHON, B., LEVET, JL. (reds.) 2003. De 

l’Intelligence Economique à l’Economie de la 

Connaissance, Paris, Economica, 199 p. 

HOLMES, A. 2002. Risk Management, Oxford, 

Capstone Publishing, 122 p.   

JEANNOT, G. 2010. « La fatigue d’être client », 

Informations sociales, Les services publics face 

à leurs usagers, n° 158, pp. 34 – 41. 

LEBAS, C., PICARD, F. 2003. « Intelligence 

économique, analyse stratégique évolutionniste 

et compétences de l’organisation », in 

http://www.fabula.org/actualites/communication-et-organisation-n38-evaluation-communication_39084.php%20(visited%20on%20December%202011%203rd
http://www.fabula.org/actualites/communication-et-organisation-n38-evaluation-communication_39084.php%20(visited%20on%20December%202011%203rd
http://www.fabula.org/actualites/communication-et-organisation-n38-evaluation-communication_39084.php%20(visited%20on%20December%202011%203rd
http://www.fabula.org/actualites/communication-et-organisation-n38-evaluation-communication_39084.php%20(visited%20on%20December%202011%203rd


67 

 

GUILHON, B., LEVET, JL. (reds.) De 

l’Intelligence Economique à l’Economie de la 

Connaissance, Paris, Economica, pp. 15 - 31. 

LE MOËNNE, C. 2004. «  La communication 

organisationnelle à l’heure de la dislocation  

spatio-temporelle des entreprises. La mutation 

des formes organisationnelles », Sciences de la 

Société, in CHESSEL, M.-E., COCHOY, F. 

dir., Marché et politique. Autour de la 

consommation engagée, Toulouse, LERASS, 

Presses Universitaires du Mirail, n° 62, 2004, 

pp. 209 – 224. 

LEVET, JL. 2001. L’Intelligence Economique. 

Mode de pensée, mode d’action, Paris, 

Economica, 154 p. 

LIEVRE, P. 2002, Evaluer une action sociale, 

Rennes, Ed. ENSP, 115 p.  

MAYÈRE, A. 1990. Pour une économie de 

l’information, Paris, Editions du CNRS.   

MÉTAYER, Y., HIRSCH, L. 2007. Premiers pas 

dans le management des risques, Paris, Afnor, 

2007, 135 p. 

MIÈGE, B. 2004. L’information-communication 

objet de connaissance, De Boeck, Bruxelles, 

248 p. 

MINTZBERG, H. 2002. « Nous vivons dans le 

culte du management », entretien, in Les 

organisations. Etat des savoirs, CABIN 

(Philippe) coord. par,  Editions Sciences 

Humaines, Auxerre, pp. 91 – 97.  

MINTZBERG, H. 2001.  Le Management. Voyage 

au centre des organisations, Paris, Ed. 

d’Organisation, 570 p. 

MORIN, E., LE MOIGNE, JL. 2003.  

L’intelligence de la complexité, Paris, 

L’Harmattan, 332 p. 

MUCCHIELLI, A. 2010. Communication & 

Influence. Approche situationnelle, Editions 

Ovadia, Nice – Genève – Paris – Bruxelles – 

Montréal, 124 p. 

MUCCHIELLI, A. 2001. Les sciences de 

l’information et de la communication, Hachette 

Supérieur, 3
e
 éd., 158 p. 

OLLIVIER, B. 2000. Observer la communication. 

Naissance d’une interdiscipline, CNRS 

Editions, Paris, 184 p. 

PLANTE, J.  1991. Principes d’une évaluation 

socialement utile. Leçons d’une expérience 

québécoise », in Outils, pratiques, institutions 

pour évaluer les politiques publiques, Paris, La 

Documentation française.   

SCHWEYER, FX. 2010. « Hôpital, une tension 

entre coûts et valeurs », in HALPERN 

(Catherine) coord. par, La Santé. Un enjeu de 

société, Auxerre, Ed. Sciences Humaines, pp. 

278 – 287. 

THÉVENOT, L. 1997. « Un gouvernement par les 

normes. Pratiques et politiques des formats 

d’information », in CONEIN, B., THEVENOT, 

L. dir., Cognition et information en société, 

Paris, Editions de l’EHESS, pp. 205 – 242.  

WOLTON, D. 2009. Informer n’est pas 

communiquer, Paris, CNRS Editions, 147 p.  

ZACKLAD, M. 2009. « Les économies de la 

convivialité dans les sociétés de l’information et 

des services », Leçon inaugurale, Paris, CNAM, 

17 juin 2009. 

Web sites  accessed 

 

AFNOR (Association Française de Normalisation) : 

www.afnor.org 

Association pour la Pensée Complexe. Programme 

européen « Modélisation de la CompleXité » : 

http://mcxapc.org 

ISO (International Standards Organisation): 

www.iso.org 

http://www.afnor.org/
http://mcxapc.org/
http://www.iso.org/