Rumbling on performativity_Frits Simon

in the chapter 6 this already happened during the discussions about dissent. Reflection
enabled exploring what happened and to reflect upon the taken for granted logic of
the existing situation. For readers outside the UAS, my research may elicit some
critical self-reflection about their work as advisers. When their work is comparable
with my work: what are the implications for the work of advisers when one understands
that they operate in an educational reality which is confronted with ongoing
criticism and many reform-proposals?
Reflecting from my research on my original ideas about policy-development (chapter 3)
my acting as an adviser has changed. I entered my PhD-research with the idea of
developing some participative co-creative strategy for policy-development, based on
recent neuro-scientific insights (Damasio, 1999, 2003; Koch, 2004; Lamme, 2010) and
inspired by the notion of the wisdom of the crowd (Surowiecki, 2004). My research has
taught me to see the paradoxical character of organizing an organizational polyphony
while it is already and inevitably there. Nowadays I start working and exploring the
topics at hand together with the people involved, try to discover what works and
what not, make sense of what happens and I am prepared to discover unexpected
solutions. As a ‘member of a self-organizing process’ I am not restraint sharing my
opinion, however restraint in setting an agenda which already anticipates on the
solutions. Although uncanny and more exacting than before, nowadays I manage far
more in uncertainty, however somehow confident that something valuable will come
out of it. As far as my contributions in my working environment appeared to be connected
with the work of a corporate jester - putting into perspective the dominant
managerial discourse – I am aware that my efforts put a pressure on how our organizational
reality is conceptualised. To put this a bit boldly: sometimes I bring about that
people get hot under their collar. Moreover, I feel much more liberty to do so as a
result of the discussions and interactions my research brought about.
From a critical self-reflection on the quality of my kind of research of course quite
some ethical issues could be researched into. What is the impact if you find yourself or
your colleagues described in a research-report? Does the research harm yourself, your
colleagues or your institution or does the research enable some opening up of discussions?
Somehow these ethical dimensions of the research undertaken commute
between an opportunity to engage in triple-loop reflection by which supposedly
principles can be discussed and altered (Starr and Torbert, 2005; Torbert, 2004) and
the political hurly burly of organizational life in which it may be not wise to expose
yourself (Stacey, 2007). This still apart from the question whether it even might be
possible to change deliberately and easily your principles.
The silent community
As a final community Homan (2014) mentions the community of silent voices. From a
postmodern or emancipatory perspective my research may give helpful insight in the
way policy is developed - or better: evolves - in the interactions of - mostly - powerful
senior managers. Although paradoxical, my findings may help to hear diversity in the
198