A Foucauldian counter-history of management
Part one defines this thesis's research questions: how has Management come to be such a powerful but unquestioned presence in Western life?; and, why does so much 'new' Management knowledge appear to be similar to earlier Management thinking? It outlines the object under investigation and determines the method by which these questions may best be investigated. In Part Two a normative tableau is developed. Three different episteme are presented as a framework against which the specificity of Managements forms, formation and subsequent ways of 'seeing and speaking' can be analysed in Part Three. Part Three examines the way that Managenzent's history encourages the privileging of certain forms and 'visibilities'. These aspects, which are widely regarded as universal, are shown to be specifically Modernist. However, their privilege is maintained by a web of links or formation of institutions that discourages their being questioned. Management is thus a particularly influential subject within Modernism. However, it is limited by appearing unable to speak or see in any manner other than Modernist. Reformulating the historical view of Management may enable it to see differently. Part Four investigates how this might be done and flags up the implications of doing so for Western society in general.