Foucault on Management - Essay Example

Foucault on Management Introduction Michel Foucault a French philosopher is generally accepted as among the most influential social theorist. His theories addressed the issues of power, knowledge and the social relations among the people. He wrote many literatures that are still acceptable and being expounded by other great philosophers. His theory on power and knowledge is the main focus of this paper. Foucault on power In his early work, Foucault gives a sense that power somehow existed in institutions rather than in the individuals that run those institutions. He rejects the Marxist theory that power is an instrument of class domination in Western capitalism. He argues that power cannot be easily repressed because it has productive aspect. Power cannot be seen only in terms of economic determination though it can be exercised for economic utility on human subjects. He examined the creation of modern disciplines, their principles of order and control, and how they tends to disindividualize power, making it appear as if power exists in the institution rather than the people. He used the Panopticon model by Bentham to explain the way institutions function in that the modelmakes power automatic and disindividualized. He held that the principles of power were concentrated on a distribution of bodies rather than one person. In The Subject and Power, he explained that modern-day disciplinary organizations allow a large number of people believed to be specialist to exercise control over a smaller number. He says power exists only when it is put into action and it does not mean a renunciation of freedom or transferring of rights of majority to few. In a power relationship, power involves actions executed based on another person’s actions and reactions. In this understanding,Freedom is a condition for the exercise of power and is exercised over free subjects, but only in as far as they are free. Foucault believes that power is productive, it is not a property of the state and it operates all social relations among persons. He views the mechanisms of power to produce different types of knowledge which collects information on people’s activities and existence in order to further reinforce the exercise of power. Other than the disciplinary power, Foucault describes pastoral power as ultimate power where people discipline themselves.it applies to the everyday life of an individual and imposes a law of truth on him making him a subject. Power produces subjects but not conformity; it ensures the individuality of all persons with their differences and deviances being highlighted when control is sought (Foucault, 1982). Foucault analyses the relations between individuals and society, he does not assume an individual to be powerless as compared to an institution or state. He emphasizes that power is not concentrated but diffuse all through the society however this does not minimize the restrictions imposed to an individuals and this always creates résistance. He says that power is a volatile, unstable element, which can be always challenged and so power relations must be permanently renewed and reaffirmed (Sergiu, 2010). The notion of visibility The notion of visibility was developed based on panopticon, a concept developed by Jeremy Bentham as a circular building with an surveillancefort at the center of an open space encircled by an outer wall with occupants in the cells, these cells would be flooded with light and the occupants easily visible and distinguishable to an officer invisible to them positioned in the central tower. The occupants would also be invisible to each other. It was seen as a generalized model of functioning that defines power relations in terms of the everyday life of men. In relation to power, Foucault elaborated that the function of disciplinary instruments in such a place as an apparatus of power because the inmate was only visible to the officials and was seen as an object of information and never a subject of communication because he could not see or talk to anything or anyone else. Thus due to his lack of knowledge he could not assume responsibility for the control of power, but the possibility of permanent visibility encourages permanent self-monitoring. This in itself is power due to knowledge (Simon, 2002). Foucault’s emphasis on surveillance as one of the most efficient method controlling within a disciplinary society has emphasized on the central role of visibility in his understanding of power and control. He draws a line between visibility and isolation, arguing that isolation created by permanent visibility enables the exercise of a maximum power over prisoners. Visibility is essential to power because it is used in order to control people and also it is power’s condition of possibility. In today’s organization the notion of visibility and power is exercisable on employees by putting them in an open layout office separated only by cubicle instead of individual offices. The design of these cubicles ensure control over workers because they have no doors and are made of thin materials that are not all the way up. The workers are in constant apprehension of who might walk by or listen to their phone conversations. The permanent fear of visibility of the employee is sufficient to render them submissive. This always ensures that the company’s policies, restrictions and prohibitions are complied with diligently (Gordon, 2002).Visibility functions as a form of control where the actual visibility and sanctions is necessary to maintain power over the subject and the constant potential visibility of the subject that is sufficient to render them compliant. The subject and power/knowledge He is concerned with the development of human subjectivity; he concentrates on the way subjects have been governed. He wants individuals to discover what we are, as the way of finding out how past historical events affect the formation of modern rationality, and how this rationality establishes what we are and shapes our subjectivity at present in the process of state development. He wants to contribute to new forms of subjectivity in which human beings can liberate themselves from the manipulation of state tools and also from within brought about through the exercise of power/knowledge. Knowledge in this case is the techniques that impose on individuals by the government but self-knowledge helps us distance ourselves from the governance of these techniques ( Fendler & Bailey, 2014).  Foucault’s work showed that the subject is a product of developments shaped by official knowledge and institutionalized practices. He understands that the subject is shaped by social forces like institutions and disciplinary knowledge. Subjects are free to create their own identities and engage in practices of freedom. The human subject is not essential in the work of various governmentality theories and to impose restrictions on the subject would be an act of power and therefore dangerous Thus power, knowledge and government work together to shape the human subject. The concept of governmentality helps us to understand how the aspirations of government are connected to the actions of an organisation, and the ambitions, desires and beliefs of human subjects. According to Foucault, individuals can act objects where power is exercised on them or as subjects who exercise power(Foucault, 1991). In subjectivity, there is the ability of one individual to affect and alter others actions so as to realize certain strategic goals.  Power relationships therefore are on the condition for a possibility of change.  If the relationship is based on total domination or controlled by acts of violence there is no freedom and hence it is no longer a power (Foucault, 1991). A strong relationship exists between discourse and subjectivity. According to Foucault, subjectivity is formed in relation to and dependent upon discourse. Organizations always provide subject positions in which actors draw on to constitute themselves on how things should be done. Knowledge-based power is not established as a form of power but an imposition to those who are objectified by and subjected to it. Disciplinary power and its key practice the examination the disciplined individual in his subjection because the subject is being constantly seen, of being able always to be seen. Management through a series of examinations keeps the employees in check and moving towards the required standards. Examinations manifest managerial and disciplinary power through their ability to compare. In companies this is done through disciplinary actions like reprimands and written notices (Fougère & Skålén 2013). In the book History of Sexuality, governmentality produces more than subjects, being a subject involves more than just the actions of the state.Modern states have found a way to rely upon power rather than sheer violence. In some respects they will require the consent of the subjects and the practices of government gives people a choices, hence the people are decision-making subject (Foucault, 1985). This is the concept of democracy. Foucaulton managerial work and management power/roles Power in management is seen as between managers who act in accordance with management principles and professionals who act in accordance to professional ethics and knowledge. Managing involves functional deployment on interdependent events in ways that suggest plausible acts of coordinating and distributing in the organization (Weick et al 2005). Managerial positions require training and experience to help recognize problems and giving a guided response to the employees. Communication arises when the management taps into their experience and guides the employees without forcibly imposing on them. Knowledge is gained gradually in any organization and a stronger position realized in the coordination and information distribution among interdependent employees and management (Weick et al., 2005). The sharing of information helps to lift the equivocal knowledge from private individuals to a wider group in order to solve a relevant situation. This reduces the powers of management. In Discipline and Punishment, Foucault explains the concept of punishment as an exercise of power. Discipline constitutes a form of already existing power known as disciplinary powers. Truth and knowledge are the basis of a society social norm, inmanaging the employees in an organization the concept of the panopticon is adopted in ensuring control and obedience. The application of the concept leads to many benefits like revitalizing the company and increasing production, following instructions and forming stronger social relations among others. However over time the threat of constant supervision may lead to incorporation into the individual system and discipline and regulation become less adhered to. Any organization is a site for knowledge and power. Management is a matter of planning, inspection and correction as explained by Hume. Knowledge places the employees in the organization at a responsibility level therefore they are held accountable for their part of production and the deviation from the norms set in the organization. The contribution of an employee’s measures their efficiency and hence their relation to the organization. Through a series of examinations the compare assesses the employee’s performances. Foucault on discipline emphasized that the modern institutions require persons to be individualized bodies according to the tasks they perform, their training and education, observation, and control. This enables them to perform their duty within the emerging systems of economic, political, and military organizations.to achieve full discipline the organizations must ensure constant observation of the people they control and that these individuals internalize discipline without the use of excessive force like in the panopticon (McKinley, 2000).  The use of technology and other modern managerial technologies like the use of CCTV cameras, GPS among others have widened the scope of the term gaze as explained in the panopticon. The management can keep tabs on their employees, suppliers and even consumers at any time this increases the organization knowledge and gives them power as there is the constant supervision of their subjects without them being aware of it or a parallel gaze. Organization may come up with company objectives and execute them too their employees to help improve individual performance thereby transforming the organizations goals into individual goals this helps reduce or eliminate the powers of the organization on an individual (McKinley, 2000).  According to Foucault, Self-technologies are means used by individuals so as to transform or to work upon themselves. This is to isolate certain characteristics in them as articles of knowledge and intervention. These technologies are invented and owned by experts can monitor their usage. These self -technologies aimed at making the employee develop their personality are a reflection of pastoral powers by the management because the employee reflects on their personality in relation to the organization’s needs ( Kaspar, 2007). Analysis and assessment by the human resource is a development of a disciplinary in an organization. Disciplinary power is influenced by macro states in an organization through the behaviors of individual actors. The interaction of different macro states can lead to alternatives and the independence of individuals in their work and hence slacking. The use of appraisals and employee counselling can however be interpreted to further the organizations monarchic powers. The two seem to co-exist in the modern managerial systems. Foucault argued that in differentiating modern power from discipline or any sovereign power, the basic premise is that individuals are free and therefore they are free to shape their own actions. People should employ self-discipline rather than reprimands from the outside. In modern management it means that management should not be commanding, or exercised in a controlling or disciplinary way. Rather use a form of governance that connects to individuals self-governance.Surveillance and discipline are a deployment of definite power and knowledge (Hall, 2001). Management should work on improving their supply chain visibility. This challenge can be overcome through sharing information from multiple agencies, partners, and sources. This information helps the management make informed decisions based on visibility of the entire network. This ensures flow of information between suppliers and customers at all times. Visibility in a company can also be improved through technology to create efficiency and reduce the control of management over their employees. Social media has also been deployed as a tool to gather information by management before hiring this is an exercise of power Governmentality as defined by Foucault that may seems to critically analyze present management was found in Technologies of the self, it defines governmentality as the specific modern mentality of government, which implies that management must be directed at individuals self-governance. (Foucault 1988). Modern power should never act directly upon people to force or control them but should shape and influence the ways in which they act upon themselves. Governance should be cautious and in accordance with natural mechanisms to secure the operations of the free market and so on as explained by liberalism. (Gordon, 1991). Governmentality is understood in the ways of governmental self-formation’ relating to the ways in which organizations and authorities seek to shape and motivate the self-formation of the individual habits and capacity towards a certain end. And ethical self-formation of an individual concerning the government of the self by means that an individual seeks to know and act upon themselves. The Governmental self-formation is facilitated through a number of practices that encourage an individual to act in accordance with various regulatory, moral or pastoral norms (Foucault 1988). In this idea, Workers create ideas and experiences in an organization to help keep the business moving forward. They use their knowledge to invent new products, develop new strategies, and lead negotiation. This knowledge is gained through education and experiences. Management should encourage their employees to create, use, and share knowledge. This makes the management work easier in that they simply dont manage the workers at all because with their knowledge they know the tasks they are supposed to perform. Knowledge wields discipline and discipline is a constituent of power. Without exercise of power from the management the employees have more freedom and hence less frustrated which could lead to low productivity. Management should be open and flexible with their work resources, terms, and conditions. The information and knowledgeshared leads to a great working relationship with mutual respect. There has to be technical knowledge and organization based knowledge to achieve optimization and also to help explain why some managerial decisions fail. In different departments, there are various experts that are in the said fields. These experts have a form of power/knowledge that is only available to them for example accountants. These experts can bring a wide array of disorganized information into a constant disciplinary gaze in an instant. To an inexperienced person this information is wide and authoritative. The experts equipped with this knowledge, can offer more resistance in exposing arbitrariness and incompetence of other workers in their field. Traditionally, recruitment, development, and the methods of industrial discipline were based on direct command and control. Conflicts were resolved and considered successful after the signing of a collective agreement .These method were successful if they delivered compliance with the managerial prescribed rule that did not involve the employees. Progressive labor management by the government and companies were established and started being based on the accommodation of interests between all parties. Employers started sharing their agendas with the employees as well as investing in their training, education and development. These changes affected positively the employees and influenced how they interacted and relationships. They also helped define and constitute individuals and organization and their relationships. Conclusion This paper shows the dynamics of power in modern institutions and how different actors possess and react to knowledge and power.it has demonstrated the usefulness of Foucault’s framework of power and knowledge where there is much emphasize on the relationship between power, knowledge and the organisation of the institutional frameworks in any organization. Foucault discovered the human body as an object of power and knowledge and the formation of this knowledge as a cornerstone of disciplinary power. Power is exercised and knowledge subjects the individual to a system of surveillance through training and examination. Practices embody the relations of power and all people do what they know as explained by Foucault these practices emerged in the past and shape the obstacles and resistances found in an organization. Today the goal of management is to create an employee who seeks responsibility on their own without awaiting instructions or orders. The employee must constantly be in search of tasks that give them more responsibility. The modern employee does not carry out instructions or fulfils duties, but takes independent initiatives without request. These initiatives originate from the unique personality of different individuals. Power that is invisible shapes the mental and ideological restrictions of participation. This helps to influence how individuals think about their place in the world, thereby beliefs and values. The processes of socialisation, culture and ideologies propagates inequality by defining what is normal and acceptable. Freedomand change transforms an individual consciousness to the way they envisage future possibilities and the way they are perceived by other. This paper explains the different themes of power, discourse, subjectivity and visibility that are put forward by Michel Foucault in his works. These texts are still applicable in the modern economic, social and political arenas. The prominent theme of power knowledge and freedoms cast a light on the development of individuals as well as institutions around the world. His scholarly work has revolutionized the modern way of thinking and is regularly quoted and applied by the scholars and philosopher of later centuries. There the critical analysis of foucalt text on power and how he has interpreted the society and individuals around this concept. The issue of subjects from the basis of use of power and the non-use of violent methods has been exhausted and power described on that aspect. The paper has explored the various dynamics of the human relationships that are influenced by power and knowledge and applied these dynamics to the present day organizations and management in our companies. Reference list Burchell, G., & Foucault, M. (1991).The Foucault Effect: Studies In Governmentality: With Two Lectures. Chicago, the Univ. of Chicago Press. Fendler, L., & Bailey, R. (2014).Michel Foucault. London, Bloomsbury Publishing. Foucault, M (1982): ,The Subject and Power", In: H. Dreyfus &P. Rabinow, Foucault - Beyond Structuralism And Hermeneutics, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Foucault, M (1988 [1982]): Technologies Of The Self, In: L. H. Martin Et Al. (Eds.) Technologies Of The Self: A Seminar With Michel Foucault. Amherst: The University Of Massachusetts Press. Foucault, M (1991): Governmentality, In: G. BurchellEt Al. (Eds.) the Foucault Effect, Hemel Hemstead: The University Of Chicago Press Foucault, M. (1985).The History of Sexuality.New York, Vintage Books. Fougère, M., &Skålén, P. (2013).Extension In The Subjectifying Power Of Marketing Ideology In Organizations A Foucauldian Analysis Of Academic Marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 33(1), 13-28. Gordon, N. (2002). On Visibility And Power: An ArendtianCorrective Of Foucault. Human Studies, 25(2), 125-145. Hall, S. (2001). Foucault: Power, knowledge and discourse. Discourse theory and practice: A reader, 72, 81. Mckinlay, A. (2000). Foucault, Management And Organization Theory: From Panopticon To Technologies Of Self. London[U.A.], Sage. Sergiu, B. (2010). M. Foucaults View On Power Relations.Cogito-Multidisciplinary Research Journal, (2), 55-61. Simon, B. (2002). The Return OfPanopticism: Supervision, Subjection And The New Surveillance.Surveillance &Society, 3(1). Villadsen, Kaspar. (2007). Managing The Employees Soul: Foucault Applied To Modern Management Technologies. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 5(1) Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., &Obstfeld, D. (2005).Organizing And The Process Of Sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421. Read More