Welcome to The Valve

Valve Links

The Front Page
Statement of Purpose

John Holbo - Editor
Scott Eric Kaufman - Editor
Aaron Bady
Adam Roberts
Amardeep Singh
Andrew Seal
Bill Benzon
Daniel Green
Jonathan Goodwin
Joseph Kugelmass
Lawrence LaRiviere White
Marc Bousquet
Matt Greenfield
Miriam Burstein
Ray Davis
Rohan Maitzen
Sean McCann
Guest Authors

Laura Carroll
Mark Bauerlein
Miriam Jones

Past Valve Book Events

cover of the book Theory's Empire

Event Archive

cover of the book The Literary Wittgenstein

Event Archive

cover of the book Graphs, Maps, Trees

Event Archive

cover of the book How Novels Think

Event Archive

cover of the book The Trouble With Diversity

Event Archive

cover of the book What's Liberal About the Liberal Arts?

Event Archive

cover of the book The Novel of Purpose

Event Archive

The Valve - Closed For Renovation

Happy Trails to You

What’s an Encyclopedia These Days?

Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Intimate Enemies: What’s Opera, Doc?

Alphonso Lingis talks of various things, cameras and photos among them

Feynmann, John von Neumann, and Mental Models

Support Michael Sporn’s Film about Edgar Allen Poe

Philosophy, Ontics or Toothpaste for the Mind

Nazi Rules for Regulating Funk ‘n Freedom

The Early History of Modern Computing: A Brief Chronology

Computing Encounters Being, an Addendum

On the Origin of Objects (towards a philosophy of computation)

Symposium on Graeber’s Debt

The Nightmare of Digital Film Preservation

Richard Petti on Occupy Wall Street: America HAS a Ruling Class

Bill Benzon on Whatwhatwhatwhatwhatwhatwhat?

Nick J. on The Valve - Closed For Renovation

Bill Benzon on Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Norma on Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Bill Benzon on What’s an Object, Metaphysically Speaking?

john balwit on What’s an Object, Metaphysically Speaking?

William Ray on That Shakespeare Thing

Bill Benzon on That Shakespeare Thing

William Ray on That Shakespeare Thing

JoseAngel on That Shakespeare Thing

Bill Benzon on Objects and Graeber's Debt

Bill Benzon on A Dirty Dozen Sneaking up on the Apocalypse

JoseAngel on A Dirty Dozen Sneaking up on the Apocalypse

JoseAngel on Objects and Graeber's Debt

Advanced Search

RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom

RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom


Powered by Expression Engine
Logo by John Holbo

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.



About Last Night
Academic Splat
Amardeep Singh
Bemsha Swing
Bitch. Ph.D.
Blogging the Renaissance
Butterflies & Wheels
Cahiers de Corey
Category D
Charlotte Street
Cheeky Prof
Chekhov’s Mistress
Chrononautic Log
Cogito, ergo Zoom
Collected Miscellany
Completely Futile
Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind
Conversational Reading
Critical Mass
Crooked Timber
Culture Cat
Culture Industry
Early Modern Notes
Easily Distracted
fait accompi
Ferule & Fescue
Ghost in the Wire
Giornale Nuovo
God of the Machine
Golden Rule Jones
Grumpy Old Bookman
Ideas of Imperfection
In Favor of Thinking
In Medias Res
Inside Higher Ed
jane dark’s sugarhigh!
John & Belle Have A Blog
John Crowley
Jonathan Goodwin
Kathryn Cramer
Languor Management
Light Reading
Like Anna Karina’s Sweater
Lime Tree
Limited Inc.
Long Pauses
Long Story, Short Pier
Long Sunday
Making Light
Maud Newton
Michael Berube
Motime Like the Present
Narrow Shore
Neil Gaiman
Old Hag
Open University
Pas au-delà
Planned Obsolescence
Quick Study
Rake’s Progress
Reader of depressing books
Reading Room
Reassigned Time
Reeling and Writhing
Return of the Reluctant
Say Something Wonderful
Shaken & Stirred
Silliman’s Blog
Slaves of Academe
Sorrow at Sills Bend
Sounds & Fury
Stochastic Bookmark
Tenured Radical
the Diaries of Franz Kafka
The Elegant Variation
The Home and the World
The Intersection
The Litblog Co-Op
The Literary Saloon
The Literary Thug
The Little Professor
The Midnight Bell
The Mumpsimus
The Pinocchio Theory
The Reading Experience
The Salt-Box
The Weblog
This Public Address
This Space: The Fire’s Blog
Thoughts, Arguments & Rants
Tingle Alley
University Diaries
Unqualified Offerings
What Now?
William Gibson

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Déjà Vu All Over Again

Posted by Sean McCann on 05/25/06 at 09:52 PM

The recognition that . . . [x] theory is a sadly neglected subdiscipline of philosophy began with an experience of déjà vu. As I plowed through my shelfload of bad . . . [x] books, I beheld a discipline that consists mainly of unverifiable propositions and cryptic anecdotes, is rarely if ever held accountable, and produces an inordinate number of catastrophically bad writers. It was all too familiar. There are, however, at least two crucial differences between philosophers and their wayward cousins. The first and most important is that philosophers are much better at knowing what they don’t know. The second is . . .

. . . money. In a sense, management theory is what happens to philosophers when you pay them too much.

From Matthew Stewart’s “The Management Myth" in the June issue of The Atlantic.  (For x, read “management.")

Of course, bashing MBA-speak is by now nearly as staple a journalistic genre as bashing MLA-speak.  (Nice not to be alone isn’t it?) But I found the version offered by Stewart, who became a partner in a consulting firm during the 90s without ever studying anything but philosophy, particularly eloquent and entertaining as I was flipping through the Atlantic today.  Thought he made one especially nice point, apart from his suggestion that, if weren’t for credentialism, a lot of MBA candidates might do better to be studying Shakespeare and Rousseau.  (Is this true?  I have no idea, but it sure doesn’t seem out of the realm of probability.) By Stewart’s ruthless reduction, all management theory can be traced back either to Frederick Taylor or Elton Mayo--i.e., either deskill and speed-up the proles or talk teamwork and humanize the workplace.  Here’s what I thought was the good part:

Mayo’s work sheds light on the dark side of the “humanist” tradition in management theory. There is something undeniably creepy about a clipboard-bearing man hovering around a group of factory women, flicking the lights on and off and dishing out candy bars. All of that humanity—as anyone in my old firm could have told you—was just a more subtle form of bureaucratic control. It was a way of harnessing the workers’ sense of identity and well-being to the goals of the organization, an effort to get each worker to participate in an ever more refined form of her own enslavement.

So why is Mayo’s message constantly recycled and presented as something radically new and liberating? Why does every new management theorist seem to want to outdo Chairman Mao in calling for perpetual havoc on the old order? Very simply, because all economic organizations involve at least some degree of power, and power always pisses people off. That is the human condition. At the end of the day, it isn’t a new world order that the management theorists are after; it’s the sensation of the revolutionary moment. They long for that exhilarating instant when they’re fighting the good fight and imagining a future utopia. What happens after the revolution—civil war and Stalinism being good bets—could not be of less concern.

Between them, Taylor and Mayo carved up the world of management theory. According to my scientific sampling, you can save yourself from reading about 99 percent of all the management literature once you master this dialectic between rationalists and humanists. The Taylorite rationalist says: Be efficient! The Mayo-ist humanist replies: Hey, these are people we’re talking about! And the debate goes on. Ultimately, it’s just another installment in the ongoing saga of reason and passion, of the individual and the group.

Oh, yes, and there’s a lot of good anecdotes about silly consultants, too.



If you haven’t seen it yet, you might be very interested in Alan Liu’s new book, The Laws of Cool, which is, among other things, a rather exhaustive history of the emergence of contemporary business “philosophy” - in particular, the two threads that you named 1) deskilling 2) team-building.

In fact, (and this is as far as I’ve gotten so far) he discusses the deployment of the “team” as a present day replacement for /sublimating simulation of class/race/gender identity. 

Anyway, I think it’d be right up your alley.

By CR on 05/26/06 at 12:42 AM | Permanent link to this comment

full excerpt

By on 05/26/06 at 03:33 AM | Permanent link to this comment

Yesterday’s verdict was deskilling with conviction?

Tyler Cowen points to selfhelp business being more or less on the same page, though it may apply to Stewart as well: Stewart’s dichotomy is too facile (and prepostindustrial), and sweeps much under the carpet (Deming falls under neither Taylorism nor Mayoism). As regards training:

“On the whole, however, management education has been less than a boon for those who value free and meaningful speech. M.B.A.s have taken obfuscatory jargon—otherwise known as bullshit—to a level that would have made even the Scholastics blanch. As students of philosophy know, Descartes dismantled the edifice of medieval thought by writing clearly and showing that knowledge, by its nature, is intelligible, not obscure.”

Current trends show that knowledge, by its nature, is monetizable; patents on business methods and algorithms have rendered the environment Scholastic.

By nnyhav on 05/26/06 at 09:49 AM | Permanent link to this comment

On the other hand, I enjoy the coincidences afforded by seemingly unrelated readings: Per note 6 to WBenjamin’s On Some Motifs in Baudelaire:

“... Around 1840 it was briefly fashionable to take turtles for a walk in the arcades. The flâneurs liked to have the turtles set the pace for them. If they had had their way, progress would have been obliged to accommodate itself to this pace. But this attitude did not prevail; Taylor, who popularized the watchword ‘Down with dawdling!,’ carried the day.”

By nnyhav on 05/26/06 at 06:14 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Well now… the Stewart piece had a certain charm, but as someone who studied philosophy as an undergrad and later started and ran a software company (without, granted, an MBA), I say “Pshaw!”

The Taylor-Mayo split proposed by Stewart is, in my opinion, neatly split by some of the counter-intuitive studies by Demarco and Lister in Peopleware--the most interesting of which was that the productivity of individuals depended on which group they were assigned to: a result political philosophers and social scientists might benefit from, no? Further, though things like GAAP rules, product marketing principles, and project management are certainly not beyond the ken of philosophy (or english) majors--they do take a fair amount of learning.

Most important, however, is the practical benefit of studying business for business--or rather, being business- oriented regardless of what you study. Herbert Simon’s principle of “satisficing” (achieving the first acceptable result to a problem rather than the best result) is a good shorthand for what you have to do every day in business. My experience in hiring/managing was that the higher degree held/the better grades achieved (past a certain minimum threshold), the least able people were to let go and just get something (possibly very provisional) done--and use that as both a concrete achievement and usable experience for moving forward in their learning (note to my future writing students: this is especially true for you).

For all that, the best part of the Stewart piece--and one he didn’t go far enough into--was the idea that the “Mayo” method of management can in fact be sinister indeed. The Fast Company subscription you see in your manager’s office is nothing if not a tool for him to get you to do more to make more (Nelson Lichtenstein’s State of the Union: A Century of American Labor goes on at some length about the corrosive history of so-called “humanistic” management methods). I would note that it doesn’t have to be sinister--just that it often is.

Finally, Sean: am about half-way through your Gumshoe Nation and it’s the best cultural studies book I’ve read since John Hoberman’s The Dream Life--and ranks up there with Davis’ City of Quartz and Slotkin’s Regeneration Through Violence on my all-time fave list. Nice work!

By joel turnipseed on 05/27/06 at 03:54 AM | Permanent link to this comment

Thank you, guys. Since I’m congenitally uncool, I probably would’ve assumed Liu’s was a how-to book.  Thanks for the recommendation, CR.

And thanks for the rejoinders nnyhav and Joel.  I suspected Stewart’s division might be some journalistic facility.  (The reason/passion bit was the giveaway.) fwiw, Joel, it was precisely the point about the discomfort re power that was the reason I excerpted that bit. 

And, Joel, you make me very happy indeed!  Thank you so much for the extraordinary generosity.  I’m painfully aware of the flaws, but am just hugely grateful for your kindness.

By on 05/29/06 at 10:06 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Fascinating exchange.  I am a former English major,former PhD candidate in economics, holder of MBA, reader in philosophy, teacher of undergrad courses in business. Joel’s comments on workers and education level is spot on; as a worker and as a manager I have experienced the same thing and have to remind myself and workers that “The perfect is the enemy of the good.” As well, most of business school is like any other program but for hard sciences: it is enculturation as much as hard facts/hard knowledge.

By on 05/30/06 at 06:06 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Or, in the words of one of my bosses in the litigation support firm I worked for: “If you can’t aim for mediocrity, then we can’t use you.”

By eb on 05/31/06 at 01:24 AM | Permanent link to this comment

Add a comment:



Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: