The reform of the enterprise

Abstract

One of the first decisions taken by President Valery Giscard d’Estaing on his election was to launch a study directed to the reform of the enterprise in France (Rapport Du Comite d’Etude Pour La Reforme De L’Enterprise, 1975). The response to his initiative has been one of general hesitancy. Some feel unhappy at the prospect of reforming an institution which is demonstrably efficient and which has given proof of its adaptability. Others consider it inappropriate to undertake reforms which fail to alter the external influences bearing on the nature of the enterprise, that is, which exclude the possibility of changes in the social framework. These differing reactions which so typify the obstacles to progress which are found in French society will have to be overcome. They do not reflect an adequate appreciation of the role of the enterprise in industrial and urbah societies: they do not represent valid interpretations of the process of evolution which has made the enterprise the most vital medium and the most important organism of this age for uniting mankind. By virtue of its deterministic influence on the economic and social status of a very large proportion of the members of modern society, the enterprise evokes new expectations. These relate mainly to everyday aspects of life and stem from the contradictions which have become apparent between the enterprise and its environment. Consequently, there is manifestly a gap between the cultural level attained by contemporary society and the relatively impoverished content of the tasks which the enterprise makes available to society. Similarly, there is an evident contrast between a climate of general permissiveness which stems from extremely free interpersonal relationships, and the constraint, discipline and hierarchy which the organization of industrial life imposes on the enterprise. In a more general sense, one cannot avoid being impressed by the starkness of the difference between the image which firms tend to present to the consumer from the reality of the daily routine in which the worker is confined. These few examples of contradictions, which are by no means exhaustive, call for a fundamental renewal of the conditions of work, not only in the private but also in the public sector. In this perspective, there is effectively no dividing line between private enterprise and public enterprise or public administration. Nevertheless, the justification for the reform of the enterprise does not rest solely in the case for improving conditions of work. It also derives from the increasing divergence between legal rights associated with the enterprise and the functions pertaining to management. The process of concentration, which has been a characteristic feature of Western economies during recent decades, has given rise to industrial groupings which have become increasingly large, complex and anonymous. Neither worker, nor employee, nor even occasionally management, feel at ease when but rarely are they able to integrate their own interests with those of an organization to which they feel no longer any sense of belonging. Moreover, the traditional legal system which has supported this process of evolution now appears quite obsolete: the law relating to the enterprise remains in an embryonic state and its principal element, company law, now has only a remote bearing on reality. In numerous companies, shareholder sovereignty no longer corresponds to a true affectio-societatis. In those few instances