JOINT REGULATION AND ITS MISFITS

To analyze collective work, it may be useful to consider organizationa l structures and cooperation modes as social rules, but with the provi so that regulations do not have one origine, but flour from several so urces. In most cases, regulations from two sources be distinguished : one tries to control from the outside the activity of a group (e.g. a working group), the other comes from the group itself who tries to reg ulate its activity autonomously. Control regulation and autonomous reg ulation confront each other; they accept, to certain degree, arbitrati on with reference to the results of the activity. This distinction is not equivalent to more classical ones like informal vs formal, spontan eity vs institution nor logic of sentiments vs logic of efficiency. Th is conceptual scheme if put to test thru two case studies (department store, supermarket), which allows to precise its significance and bear ing. The existence of an autonomous regulation has not to be postulate d as if it was a mechanical result of the location of a group in the o rganization. Any group is not able to achieve collective action. The c onfrontation between the two regulations, when it takes place, does no t necessarily take the form of a negotiation, properly said. Joint reg ulation is often accomplished thru open conflict. The confrontation of the two regulations does not lead always to a compromise; the result may be a compartimentation of their respective power areas or even a m utual obstruction. The total amount of regulation must be considered i n itself : a general deficit creates deficit << anomic >> situations o f low legitimacy with the possible outcomes of withdrawal, deviance or rigidity.