# Between crisis, opportunity, and transformation: renewing the professional identities of the art-house film organizational field. The case of the Festival de Cannes.

Grégoire Lacoste

► To cite this version:

Grégoire Lacoste. Between crisis, opportunity, and transformation: renewing the professional identities of the art-house film organizational field. The case of the Festival de Cannes. AIMAC Lisbonne 2024, Université de Lisbonne; AIMAC, Jun 2024, Lisbonne, Portugal. hal-05107199

HAL Id: hal-05107199

https://hal.science/hal-05107199v1

Submitted on 11 Jun 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
Cinema plays a role in cultural industries (Caves, 2000) and constitutes a singular form of creative work (Menger, 2009). The creative professions of filmmaking rely on specific dynamic capacities (Teece, 1997), that are difficult to characterize, since the sources of inspiration and action can be diverse; at the same time, cinematographers operate systematically through project management (Brechet and Desreumaux, 2004). Nevertheless, the collective nature of the profession, and its technical and artistic specificities, mean that cinema professions are totally different from other creative professions. There are many different trades and professional identities, even though the term "artist" is relatively generic. While every artist is part of a network of peers, the dimensions that make it possible to grasp professional identities need to be specified according to the nature of the artistic activity. Whether individual or collective, each artistic discipline has its own methods, work process, economic circuits, and distribution channels.

The transformations at work in cinematography's organizational field seem to point to a change of an era, which pre-existed the health crisis of the 2020's. After revolutionizing techniques for capturing a work and then distributing it to audiences, digital technology has led to major upheavals in media chronology and, indirectly, in the financing of projects (Benghozi, 2019). This break in financing and distribution arrangements is the subject of heated debate among professionals, particularly in France (Chantepie and Paris, 2021). What place is there for art-house cinema, the French cultural exception, in multimodal distribution? How are
viewers changing their cultural consumption choices? Cinematography professionals, whose duality between artistic and economic ambition has long been the subject of debate (Menger, 2002; Benghozi, 1989), and are once again faced with a transformation of their organizational field following the Covid-19 pandemic. There have been many such transformations in the 125-year history of cinema (Chantepie and Paris, 2021). For example, Damien Chazelle's "Babylon", released in 2022, vividly portrays the technological ruptures and industrial mutations at work in Californian studios during the transition to talking pictures in the early 1920s.

The Cannes Film Festival, the world's biggest event in the field of art cinema, is an opportunity for professionals in the field to deliver messages and guidelines for the entire sector. This event represents a global showcase for the industry's players and can help structure the sector along guiding principles. These events can help structure the field, as demonstrated by Anand and Watson on the case of the Grammy awards (Anand and Watson, 2004), or by Hardy and Maguire on the regulation of DDT (Hardy and Maguire, 2009). The positions taken can be particularly militant and orchestrated. For example, in 2018, the Cannes Film Festival decided to exclude Netflix productions from the competition, due to a dispute over media chronology. This decision leads to a boycott of the festival by Netflix. The event then became the arena for real political battles waged by committed players. These actors have a clear vision of what institutions are and how they want to shape them. Institutional work is therefore a strategic activity in the full sense of the term, involving a medium- to long-term vision of what is being sought. As a strategic activity, its specificity lies in its purpose, which is to shape a norm, which then determines the conditions under which the activity is carried out in a field (Ben Slimane and Leca, 2010). In this vein, this doctoral work aims to contribute to a better characterization of the professional identities of the creative cinematographic professions, based on an analysis of the collective aspirations of the professional group, by posing the following question:
*To what extent transformations in the organizational field of cinema, in a context of dual artistic and economic goals, are shaped at the Cannes festival? How does it affect professional identities? How an award ceremony like Cannes shape the evolution of the field?*

The aim of this work is therefore to make a modest contribution to better analyzing transformations in the organizational field focusing on the biggest film festival of the world: the Cannes film festival. Our aim is to shed light on the management of cultural activities in the film industry: what are the motivations, tensions, and paradoxes of the artist-company in the film industry, which must manage the synergy of economic, technical, managerial and artistic dynamics in the production of its works?

# I. Review of literature

## 1. Tensions and paradoxes of professional identities

The film industry operates within a project-based structure (Brechet, 2005). The film industry is organized as a project, with various stages in the value chain: creation, production, publishing, and distribution. Creation consists of designing a project, in various forms (pitch, synopsis, screenplay...) that are used to obtain financing and guide production (Chantepie and Paris, 2021). These stages involve five different professions: design, project management (production), industrialization (distribution), marketing (distribution) and sales (distribution).

The production activity is more broadly a project management activity. In addition to the risk weighing on the results of the finished film, it must deal with the risk inherent in making the film. The shooting of a film is considered to be part of a prototype economy, and each shoot is unique: it may involve the shooting of technically complex scenes or staging (Chantepie and Paris, 2021).
The professional identities of individuals and creative collectives in the film industry can be interpreted in a number of ways (Becker, 1988; Caves, 2000; Menger, 2009). Claude Dubar interprets professional identity as a construction in a double movement: "it is the result of the personal aspirations of the professional actor in terms of work objectives, task conception, career ambition, as well as the collective aspirations of the professional group to which he or she belongs" (Dubar, 2015).

Few industries offer the particularity of observing a profession where two professional identities coexist (Reyes, 2015). In the film distribution channel, the creative film crew has the particularity of having a dual status. They are trained as visual arts professionals whose main mission is to deliver a filmed artistic production. However, they are also under pressure to ensure the profitability of their project, since their economic activity depends mainly on ticket sales, and more recently on distribution on multiple streaming platforms, where competition is fierce.

The concept of professional identity, as defined by Reyes (2015), corresponds to the set of meanings by which an individual defines himself within the framework of a situated social space (Osty, 2002). This identity is the fruit of the individual's career path, his or her experience acquired through socialization bodies such as university, family, or corporations (Osty, 2002; Dubar, 1991; Zarca, 1988). It is a set of mental representations enabling the individual to find coherence between present and past experiences. It is also determined by the subject's recognition in spaces where knowledge and skills are legitimized (Sainsaulieu, 1985; Dubar, 1991). It is analyzed by adherence to systems of values, norms and cognitive logics existing in a given place (Sainsaulieu, 1985).

Tensions are the expression of perceived contradictions between several role expectations, or when the satisfaction of one expectation makes the satisfaction of another
problematic (Kahn et al., 1964). With its mixed status (artistic and economic) and evolving in
a highly competitive context, the hybridization of artistic careers can lead to conflicts linked to
the skills needed to assume both roles, but also to identity conflicts in the performance of the
roles (Valette and Burellier, 2014).

Paradoxes and tensions abound in the facets of the professional and social identity of
creative practices, with varied and multiple contours; tensions over access to resources in order
to invest in a film project; tensions in access to dissemination and distribution, with oligopolistic
positions; tensions over access to the profession, with a long and tough selection process, and
precarious situations organized or endured before accessing a stable position; financial tensions,
in accessing public funding, and remuneration imposed by a strict collective agreement;
tensions over the individual and collective meaning given to one's work, between economic
ambition and the search for recognition, between periods of intense creativity and crossing the
desert. The contradictions and paradoxes between the artistic and economic ambitions of the
artistic professions are a recurring theme in the debate on the place of the artist in our societies
(Menger, 2002, 2009, 2018). In 2023, for example, SAG-AFTRA organized the longest known
strike in the sector in the USA, to protect workers' rights in an industry turned upside down by
streaming and artificial intelligence<fnref n="1" />.

Designing an art house film is an ordeal in itself. No one today can reliably predict
whether a film will be a success or a failure, regardless of its budget. Nevertheless, streaming
platforms are increasingly using algorithms to predict consumer preferences<fnref n="2" />. What will be the
artist's place in art-house production if distribution is guided solely by consumer behavior

<footnote n="1">¹ https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2023/11/09/a-hollywood-les-acteurs-obtiennent-un-accord-qui-devrait-mettre-fin-a-leur-greve-plus-d-un-mois-apres-les-scenaristes_6199057_3210.html</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/agenda/colloque/le-travail-des-artistes-marches-reputations-remunerations/hollywood-gouverne-par-les-algorithmes-ascension-de-nouveaux-professionnels-et-transformation-des</footnote>
(Roussel, 2021)? How can we reconcile the paradox between economic and artistic injunctions?

The management of paradoxes and the study of creativity processes have been the subject of much varied research in the Social Sciences, and more specifically in Management Sciences (Josserand, Perret, 2003; Grimand, Oiry, Ragaigne, 2018; Brulhart et al., 2018). The notions of contradictions, dilemmas, controversies, conflicts, tensions, and other dialectics punctuate management science literature and are often presented as the pillars of social science theories (Astley and Van de Ven, 1983; Das, 1984; Ford and Ford, 1994; Kuhn, 1977; Poole and Van de Ven, 1989; Quinn and Cameron, 1988).

The management sciences offer a relevant framework for understanding the processes at work in the management of artistic professions. Thus, according to Guedri, Hussler, and Loubaresse: "if the angles of analysis adopted by contributions in management sciences offer an original picture where tensions would be embedded at different levels of the organization (individual, intra-organizational, but also inter-organizational), it seems particularly promising now to study further how tensions at the level of individuals within the same organization may or may not (de)generate (in) effects at the level of groups of individuals within the organization or even overflow organizational boundaries".

Recent transformations in the dissemination of works, accentuated by the health crisis of 2020/2021, controversies linked to the use of AI, issues around gender-related questions in the profession, the industry's adaptation to climate change, have further highlighted certain aspects of artistic collective action. The study of transformations in the organizational field could then complement a theoretical approach based on paradox theory to explain the phenomena at work.
## 2. The evolution of the organizational field: the contribution of neo-institutional theory

DiMaggio and Powell defined a field as “those organizations that, in the aggregate, constitute a recognized area of institutional life: key suppliers, resource and product consumers, regulatory agencies, and other organizations that produce similar service or products” (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). One of the more intriguing and unresolved puzzles in institutional theory is this: How do fields evolve? That is, how do “those organizations . . . in the aggregate” come to “constitute a recognized area of institutional life”?

Field Conferences bring together members of a range of types of organization to interact and exchange information on a given issue, providing a forum for struggles over different visions of the future. As such, they can be considered to be field configuring events (Lampel & Meyer, 2008); trade shows, professional gatherings, award ceremonies, and other types of conferences are other examples (e.g., Anand & Jones, 2008; Anand & Watson, 2004; McInerery, 2008; Oliver & Montgomery, 2008; Zilber, 2007). Field-configuring events are “temporary social organizations . . . in which people from diverse organizations and with diverse purposes assemble periodically, or on a one-time basis” (Lampel & Meyer, 2008). They provide arenas in which “disparate constituents” are able to “become aware of their common concerns, join together, share information, coordinate their actions, shape or subvert agendas, and mutually influence field structuration” (Anand & Jones, 2008). They are bound by time and space insofar as actors are co-located for a fixed duration. This temporal and spatial compression provides formal and informal opportunities for face-to-face social interaction, allowing actors to share information, establish patterns of domination, and create mutual awareness of a common enterprise (Anand & Watson, 2004).
Field-configuring events are important mechanisms for bringing about change in institutional fields (Anand & Watson, 2004; Lampel & Meyer, 2008). An institutional field constitutes “a recognized area of institutional life” (DiMaggio & Powell) in which “participants interact with one another more frequently and fatefully than with actors outside the field” (Scott, 2001).

In the famous study about the grammy awards, Amand & Watson delve into how award ceremonies, such as the Grammy Awards, play a pivotal role in influencing the evolution of organizational fields through four key processes. These processes include the distribution of prestige through performances within a specific context, the enactment of highly charged ceremonial forms to attract collective attention, the resolution of conflicts regarding the legitimacy of field participants, and the reinforcement of horizontal linkages within the field. By employing a mixed-method, longitudinal analysis, the authors explore these processes in tandem.

Using perspectives from ritual theory, the article argues that award ceremonies serve as significant institutional mechanisms in shaping organizational fields. The concept of "field" in institutional theory encompasses a broader spectrum than just industry, including various organizations that constitute a recognized area of institutional life. The article also examines the evolution of fields, emphasizing the role of resourceful social actors and transorganizational structures in influencing field dynamics.

Award ceremonies are portrayed as increasingly prominent events across various industries, serving as platforms for the acknowledgment of excellence and success. The authors introduce the concept of "tournament rituals," which are characterized by their ceremonial structure designed to garner attention within a field. These rituals involve a selective judgment
of worth bestowed upon award winners, impacting the field's activity and evolution
significantly.

The theoretical perspective presented in the article encompasses three main theses: the solidarity thesis, the agonistic thesis, and the sensemaking thesis. These theses offer complementary insights into the role of ritual in creating and maintaining social structure, highlighting aspects such as social coherence, conflict expression, and sensemaking within a field.

By examining the Grammy Awards as a case study, the article illustrates how tournament rituals shape the evolution of organizational fields. It discusses the origins of the Grammy Awards and their transformation from a local event to a global spectacle, emphasizing their role in recognizing artistic merit over commercial appeal.

Overall, the article provides a comprehensive exploration of how award ceremonies function as crucial mechanisms in shaping organizational fields, drawing from insights in ritual theory and institutional theory. Indeed, this article discusses how rituals, specifically award ceremonies like the Grammy Awards, play a crucial role in shaping the evolution of organizational fields, using concepts from ritual theory and organizational sociology. The study identifies four processes through which rituals influence field evolution:

* Distribution of Prestige: Award ceremonies like the Grammys distribute prestige within a field, establishing hierarchies and recognizing worthy peers.

* Collective Attention: These rituals attract the collective attention of field members, helping to make sense of important events and developments.
* Conflict Resolution: They provide arenas for surfacing and resolving conflicts among established and emerging actors within the field.

* Horizontal Patterning of Interlocks: Rituals strengthen horizontal connections among institutional actors, facilitating collaboration and coordination within the field.

Theoretical implications suggest that rituals are essential for understanding how organizational fields evolve, with solidarity and conflict being key factors. The study highlights the cognitive dimension of fields and suggests avenues for future research in understanding how collective cognition shapes field dynamics.

The sense making theory (Weick, 1995) can also be mobilized to understand how organizational fields evolve. In the article “Using Field-Configuring Events for Sense-Making: A Cognitive Network Approach”, Oliver and Montgomery discuss the concept of organizational fields as an intermediate level of analysis between individual organizations and the broader societal context. Organizational fields are defined as a collection of organizations that constitute a recognized area of organizational life, sharing common meanings and interacting frequently. A key aspect of organizational fields is their institutional logic, which encompasses the predominant belief systems and practices within the field.

The article explores the concept of field-configuring events, focusing on a formal meeting of members of an emerging profession. Through network analysis, the authors examine how participants at such events develop a shared cognitive understanding, influencing subsequent developments in their field. For example, the 1944 meeting in pre-state Israel is identified as a significant event for the legal enterprise. Subsequent events, such as an increase in Jewish judges, the use of Hebrew in courts, and the establishment of criteria for a formal Israeli bar
system, are attributed to decisions made during the meeting. These developments illustrate the impact of shared cognitive sense-making on organizational change within the legal profession.

The article emphasizes that organizational fields are dynamic and evolve over time, influenced by changes in the structure of the field and broader societal shifts. These changes can occur around various issues and debates, not just technological or market factors. Professional regroupings within organizational fields are highlighted as important drivers of change, involving shifts in professional boundaries and jurisdictional claims.

Shared cognitive sense-making is identified as crucial in professional evolution and field-configuring events (FCEs) play a significant role in this process. FCEs, such as meetings or conferences, provide opportunities for participants to engage in shared sense-making, shaping the direction of the field. The article proposes a network approach to analyzing FCEs, which examines the structure of cognitive fields formed by groups of actors expressing joint or independent sets of ideas.

This network-based method allows for the exploration of shared cognitions among participants, highlighting the interconnectedness of actors and topics discussed during FCEs. Despite being underutilized in literature, network methods offer a "theory lean" approach, allowing for various theoretical interpretations based on the perspective of the researchers. The article concludes by outlining a methodology for studying FCEs, emphasizing the importance of examining both content and participant relationships through textual and network analysis.

Thanks to this theoretical background, we investigate in this doctoral presentation how the rituals of the festival de Cannes participate in shaping field dynamics on specific issues:

* Media chronology

* The role of the movie industry in climate change
* The use of Artificial Intelligence in the process of creation

* Gender issues such as violence against women

* Gender equality within the profession

* Social impact of movies

## II. Methodology

Our epistemological approach differs from a constructivist approach. We do not intervene in the field of research; we do not conduct or direct an advisory or intervention operation. The epistemological positioning of this article is resolutely part of an interpretivist perspective. Indeed, our research aims to understand the meaning that the individuals, the actors of the art-house film project, give to their actions by seeking to better identify and characterize professional identities and their paradoxes that are at stake: “consciousness gives meaning... (and) the task of the Human Sciences is no longer to study facts, but meanings.” (Mucchielli, 1983). If knowledge of the French cinematographic environment is enriched in Management Sciences, since the initial work of Benghozi (1984), then of Paris (2021); the understanding of their professional identities in regard of the paradoxes they face is still preliminary. Our interpretive project does not consist in measuring or constructing a reality that “escapes” or “belongs” to the members of these networks (Chabault, 2009). On the contrary, the reality of inter- and intra-individual relations, within the framework of these projects made up of heterogeneous actors, is revealed in the behavior of the actors, in their individual or collective logics anchored in a specific "context of meaning and actions" (Girin, 1990). We consider that the study of phenomena “in situ” makes it possible to understand this complex reality. There are, in fact, a multitude of perceptions of identities (Mucchielli, 2021). This multiplicity of possibilities also raises the question of the “coherence” and legitimacy / veracity of the data and representations collected.
We put methodology into action with an active participation at the Cannes movie festival in May 2022 and May 2024. More specifically, we were invited to participate at the symposium on the future of cinema at the film market from the festival de Cannes. We observed the movie market and talked with different participants during two festivals, and we participated at the symposium of the political and financing support given to this field in Europe with the main European public actors.

Data were also collected from several professionals using the biographical method (Wacheux, 1996) in a dozen non-directive interviews, as well as a complete life story over several years with a French producer (involvement in 22 feature films between 1983 and 2016). These interviews are complemented by a compilation of secondary data from institutions (CNC, Ministry of Culture).

This doctoral workshop transcribes the partial analysis of this research in a modest attempt to contribute to a better visibility of certain components and transformations of the organizational field reconfiguring the professional identities of the art cinema professions.

### III. Results and discussion:

Presentation at Lisbon
Bibliography

Anand, N., & Watson, M. R. 2004. Tournament rituals in the evolution of fields: The case of the Grammy Awards. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 59–80.

Astley W.G., Van de Ven A.H. (1983). "Central perspectives and debates in organization theory", Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 28, n° 2, p. 245-273.

Becker H. S., Les Mondes de l'art, Paris, Flammarion, 1988 (édition originale 1982).

Benghozi P.-J., Le cinéma entre l'art et l'argent, 1989

Ben Slimane, K. & Leca, B. (2010). Le travail institutionnel : origines théoriques, défis et perspectives. Management & Avenir, 37, 53-69.

Bittmann Simon (2021) « Le travail artistique au prisme des contrats - le cas du cinéma français », colloque Sociologie du Travail créateur- Le travail des artistes - marchés, réputations, rémunérations, Paris, Collège de France, 2021.

Brechet J.-P., Schieb-Bienfait N. (2011) « L'entrepreneuriat confronté au pluralisme théorique: la nécessité d'une Project-Based View », Revue de l'Entrepreneuriat, 10(2), p.29-44.

Brulhart, Franck, et al. « Management des paradoxes. Compétences, performances et outils de gestion », Revue française de gestion, vol. 270, no. 1, 2018, pp. 65-69.

Caves R. (2000) Creative industries: contacts between art and commerce, Cambridge, Harvard U. Press.

Chantepie, Philippe, et Thomas Paris. « I / Une filière de production stable », Philippe Chantepie éd., *Économie du cinéma*. La Découverte, 2021, pp. 7-24.

Das T.K. (1984). "Portmanteau ideas for organizational theorizing", Organization Studies, vol. 5, p. 261-267

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147–160.

Dubar C. (1991). La socialisation. Construction des identités sociales et professionnelles, Armand Colin, Paris.

Dubar, Claude, Pierre Tripier, et Valérie Boussard. Sociologie des professions. Armand Colin, 2015.

Dubar, Claude, et Sandrine Nicourd. Les biographies en sociologie. La Découverte, 2017

Ford J.D., Ford L.W. (1994). "Logics of identity, contradiction and attraction in change", Academy of Management Review, vol. 19, n° 4, p. 756-785.

Girin, J. (1990), « L'analyse empirique des situations de gestion : Éléments de théorie et de méthode » in Martinet et al. Épistémologies et sciences de gestion, Economica, 1990, pp.141-182.

Grimand, Amaury, Ewan Oiry, et Aurélien Ragaigne. « Paradoxes, modes de régulation et perspectives théoriques », Revue française de gestion, vol. 274, no. 5, 2018, pp. 71-75.

Guedri, Zied, Caroline Hussler, et Élodie Loubaresse. « Contradictions, paradoxes et tensions en contexte(s) », Revue française de gestion, vol. 240, no. 3, 2014, pp. 13-28.

Maguire S.et Hardy C (2009), "Discourse and Deinstitutionalization: The Decline of DDT" Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52, N° 1, p.148 – 178.
Horvath, Isabelle, et Gaëlle Dechamp. « L'Intelligence Collective : un facteur déterminant pour soutenir la double ambition économique et artistique de l'entrepreneur créatif ? », Recherches en Sciences de Gestion, vol. 136, no. 1, 2020, pp. 383-407.

Kahn R., Wolfe D., Quinn R., Snoek D. et Rosenthal R. (1964). Organisational stress : studies in role conflict and ambiguity, Wiley, New York.

Kuhn T.S. (1977). The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change, University of Chicago Press.

Josserand E., Perret V., « Pratiques organisationnelles du paradoxe » dans V. Perret et E. Josserand (dir.), Le paradoxe, penser et gérer autrement les organisations, Ellipses, Paris, 2003, p.165-187.

Lewis MW, Smith WK. Reflections on the 2021 AMR Decade Award: Navigating Paradox Is Paradoxical. Academy of Management Review. 2022;47(4):528-548.

Lucscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. 2008. Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 221–240.

Menger, P.M., (2002) Portrait de l'artiste en travailleur, Edition du Seuil, Paris.

Menger, Pierre-Michel. « Les professions artistiques et leurs inégalités », Didier Demazière éd., *Sociologie des groupes professionnels. Acquis récents et nouveaux défis*. La Découverte, 2009, pp. 355-366.

Oliver, A., & Montgomery, K. 2008. Using field-configuring events for sense making: A cognitive network approach. Journal of Management Studies, 45: 1147–1167.

Osty F. (2002). *Le désir de métier, Engagement identité et reconnaissance au travail*, Presse Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes.

Paris, T, Ben Mahmoud-Jouini, S. The process of creation in creative industries. Creat Innov Manag. 2019; 28: 403–419.

Poole M.S., Van de Ven A.H. (1989). "Using paradox to build management and organization theories", Academy of Management Review, vol. 14, n° 4, p. 562-578.

Putnam L.L. (1986). "Contradictions and paradoxes in organizations", Organization-communication : Emerging perspectives 1, L. Thayer (Ed.), Ablex, Norwood, NJ, p. 151-167.

Quinn R. et Cameron K. (1988). Paradox and transformation : Toward a theory of change in organization and management, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA

Reyes G. (2013a). « L'ambiguïté des rôles du pharmacien d'officine française : une lecture par l'identité de métier, *Management International*, vol. 17, n° 4, p. 163-177.

Reyes, Grégory. « Identité professionnelle du pharmacien et design organisationnel de la pharmacie », Revue française de gestion, vol. 248, no. 3, 2015, pp. 77-92.

Roussel, Violaine (2021). « Hollywood gouverné par les algorithmes ? Ascension de nouveaux professionnels et transformation des choix de production », colloque Sociologie du Travail créateur- Le travail des artistes - marchés, réputations, rémunérations, Paris, Collège de France, 2021
Sainsaulieu R. (1985). *L'identité au travail. Les effets culturels de l'organisation*, Presses de la FNSP, Paris.

Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A. (1997), « Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, *Strategic Management Journal*, vol. 18, n° 7, p. 509-533.

Valette A. et Burellier F. (2014). « Quand l'habit fait le moine les chefs des pôles hospitaliers : devenir des hydrides “malgré tout” ? », *Gérer et Comprendre*, n° 116, p. 4-13.

Weick, K. F. (1995). Sensemaking in Organisations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zarca B. (1988). « Identité de métier et identité artisanale », *Revue française de sociologie*, vol. 29, n° 2, p. 247-273.

Zarka Samuel (2020). L'équipe de cinéma : genèse et portée de la qualification du travail dans la production cinématographique en France, 1895 - 2018. Sociologie. Conservatoire national des arts et metiers - CNAM, 2019. Français.