Rumbling on performativity_Frits Simon

First encounter with the joker
In preparing conclusions for the board regarding the identity-management programme
I came to ask myself whether in my position of an adviser I was a ventriloquist or a
shrewd framer of the members of the board, or on the contrary a protean chameleon
able to adapt to any sort of assignment. However, given the social contagious way
conclusions were prepared and given my input as the voter against, it became
worthwhile to examine if I hold a position of an organizational joker or fool. A quick
exploration of the subject indicated that an organizational joker is accepted in a role of
limiting the overestimating and putting into perspective of power (Kets de Vries, 1993),
being reflective and critical about the business and glamour of ambitions (Raad, 2008)
and to see things differently (Firth and Leigh, 1998). Three colleagues immediately
backed up that somehow I act a bit as a joker. At a first glance apparently I sometimes
acted more or less as an alienator, confidante, contrarian, truth seeker and mythologist
(Firth and Leigh, 1998).
In general given the touchy character of discussing the existing identity of members of
staff and their strong identification with the department they work for - which is
potentially affected in an identity-management programme - my question became:
who else as some sort of a corporate jester could have managed a programme with
that much sensitivities, and undefined but unavoidable outcomes?
The rise and fall of a corporate jester and a corporate critical friend
In reflecting upon the narrative about the performance agreements the potential of a
corporate jester was further explored. From time immemorial up to the breakthrough
of democracy in the 19th century a jester was to be found in courts of kings of emperors,
by mocking king and emperor to protect them against pride and conceit. Recently
I learned that prophets fulfilled in the ancient Middle East that role at the risk of their
own life (Achterhuis and Koning, 2014). I conjectured that from the 20th century the
seat of jesters was occupied by management consultants, which amongst others were
a protection against company blindness. The question became whether in due course
consultants have developed their own business and commercial interests instead of
being the needed critical friends of organizations. McKenna (2006) calls the growing
dominance of the consultants’ perspective the ‘McKinseying’ of organizations. Although
there are quite some new consultancy practices emerging, which proclaim
ground-breaking shifts in organizational practices (e.g. Feltman et al., 2010; Kessels,
2012; Weggeman, 2003), my question became if a foolish - globalized and McDonaldized
- world is in need of another kind of adviser, “… an indispensable amalgam of roles
which stimulates effective change and resolution in this foolish world.” (Firth and
Leigh, 1998). From different theoretical angles a corporate jester is approached as a
moderator, mediator, negotiator, arbitrator and appraiser (Csermely, 2009), a weak
link in an organization who advances some sort of stability in instable situations (Csermely,
2009; Korcsmáros et al., 2007; Mackenzie, 1998). I assumed that a corporate
jester could be helpful in a transient reality by declining the idea of effective and overall
change and final solutions, but rather by provoking reflexivity on what is at stake.
180