The second authority defined comes from the legitimacy inherited from ones’
function, in Weber sense [10]. So, experienced workers, specialists, inspectorate
and auditors can also make injunctions. We chose here not to use the word “expert”
as Blau showed that training purpose in organizations was mainly to make people
experts in their respective domains; as we wanted to insist on the role idea which
goes beyond knowledge.
The third authority observed results from a commitment. In this configuration,
issuer and addressee are parts of the same community of interest and share an aim.
That is why the issuer is legitimate to make an injunction and the addressee has to
fulfill his duty as a group member. As one can guess, this is why safety culture
development is encouraged in nuclear firms.
Finally, observing nuclear industry fieldwork shows that safety injunction use
often implies an interesting labor division. Indeed, the issuer; or transmitter
regarding its human or non-human status [11]; fixes goals that the addressee has to
reach by defining himself means such as structures, equipment, workforce, and so
on. So, safety injunction strength and weakness is its capability to rely on its
addressee’s experience by giving him some latitude to obtain a better individual
contribution to safety. However, as nuclear industry also needs precision in several
quality aspects, order as a management device can also be very helpful.
2.2 What Is Order?
Order is a time and space framed, oral or written binding communication, coming
from an authority detaining a recognized power of direction over the addressee, to
which the addressee must obey. In most of the cases, this authority is responsible of
the given order result. Obedience and disobedience are not related to the
autonomy-heteronomy tension derived from conformism but is a matter of dependence and independence balance. As a matter of fact, obedience in the kind of
relationship previously described does not impact the addressee identity in the same
way as injunction.
Indeed, as there are objective things showing the addressee’s dependence and as
the action expected is, apparently, not related to his own willingness, the subject is
generally not easily questionable for his acts. As The Grapes of Wrath novel shows
[12], when an expropriated farmer asked for who he should shoot to avenge his
loss, the answer done by the mended man is that he is just following the owner
orders who is just following the bank orders; and so on until the causal chain
vanishes in the unknown, making the farmer’s quest for a convener absurd.
Furthermore, orders are often combined with injunctions. Even in organizations
when orders through short communications were openly favored such as in jail or in
Christian schools during XVIIIth and XIXth centuries, Michel Foucault demonstrated the existence of another purpose than getting obeyed quickly.
What was at stake was to place bodies in a little world of signals to which an
only and mandatory answer is attached. So, a daily-life order can also be combined
On Safety Management Devices: Injunction …
245
Précédent

- 247/350

Suivant