This post was initially written in French https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/87139.
Last spring, Ed Zitron published a fascinating text, and yes, a bit long, The Era Of The Business Idiot, which I only discovered at the start of the holidays (sorry). He does not just say that some organizations are badly managed, he describes a type of social selection. He explains that you climb the hierarchy because you know how to produce signs of competence, not because you know how to understand a problem and solve it. You learn to speak the right way, to present the right way, to surround yourself the right way, and then to survive any real test by shifting the discussion toward convenient metrics and flattering stories. I have always stayed fairly far from organizational issues, out of incompetence above all, but also because I think I am very bad at reading signals. What Ed Zitron reminds us is that the modern company (and I would include academia) has gradually organized itself around a signal economy. As sociology and political economy have described at length, institutions protect themselves by making value visible in the form of indicators, rankings, procedures, prizes. That gives legitimacy, it simplifies decision making, but it also transforms the nature of work. This kind of cross reading is almost mandatory if you keep in mind the way Pierre Bourdieu analyzes the academic universe as a field structured by hierarchies, forms of capital, and struggles over the definition of merit, in Homo academicus. It becomes even more natural if you follow Wendy Brown when she describes the spread of a neoliberal rationality that rebuilds institutions using a business grammar, in Undoing the Demos. Ed Zitron’s post tells, in a more vivid way, what many scholarly analyses document. I wanted to come back to his article, by summarizing his argument, and by pushing it where it becomes more general, while trying to connect the corporate world and the university.
Before we begin, a preliminary note is in order. I am not exempt from this logic, and I am not writing as an outside observer. Like many of my academic colleagues, I play the game, at least when students are involved. I will talk here about prizes and awards, and for those who do not know the academic world, one detail is worth stating, and it may be surprising. We are often asked to promote ourselves, very directly, by assembling the files that will be used to award us prizes. You have to tell your story, choose your evidence, format your merit, and sometimes even guess what kind of narrative the committee expects. It is not only value that matters, it is the ability to make it visible, to translate it into readable signals, and to produce the file that will count as proof. If I no longer put together files to chase prizes in my own name, I happily do it to support students, because I know these signals weigh on their applications, their scholarships, and their future paths. And if I publish a newsletter every six months that sums up the group’s work, it is first to highlight the students, and also because my funder asked me to. I asked myself the same kind of question on another front, climate. Seeing colleagues take planes to fly around the world, literally, to give a twenty minute talk, sometimes in front of five people, I considered banning myself from any air travel. A colleague pointed out that this would also be a way to take myself out of the game, and that the question was not simply yes or no, but finding a middle ground, setting rules, and accepting compromises. It is the same for most of the signals discussed here. You can criticize them, you can try to reduce their grip, but you also live with them, because they structure real opportunities, and because withdrawing completely often has a cost, especially for younger people.
Continue reading “The era of the business idiot”