The Foucauldian genre of governmentality studies has provided a number of insightful, historically informed analyses of relevance to organization and management studies. Yet sympathetic criticism has highlighted a number of significant blindpsots and silences that at times characterize the genre. Illustrating what is at stake in this debate, the discussion returns to and seeks to reframe a critical event in the 19th-century reforms to the government of public servants — the Northcote—Trevelyan report — seeking to extend the insights of relevant Foucauldian scholarship. Envisaged — after Foucault — as a contribution to the `history of the present', criticism in this instance has the aim of unsettling certain influential liberal orthodoxies that presently inform thinking about the government of public servants. The significance of concrete processes of struggle and resistance surrounding the events in question are highlighted. We seek also to offer an account that transcends the `textualist' emphasis — a focus on formal programmes and texts — that at times characterizes the genre.
Armstrong, P.2001. Ideology and the grammar of idealism. Critical Perspectives on Accounting7(5): 529-548.
3.
Barratt, E.2008. The later Foucault in organization and management studies . Human Relations61(4): 515-537.
4.
Barrow, L., and I. Bullock.1996. Democratic ideas and the British labour movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Bevir, M.1991. H.M. Hyndman: A re-reading and reappraisal. History of Political Thought12(1): 125-147.
6.
Bevir, M.1992. The British Social Democratic Federation 1880-1885 . International Review of Social History37: 207-229.
7.
Bowen, H.V.2006. The business of Empire. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
8.
Burchell, G.1996. Liberal government and techniques of the self. In Foucault and Political Reason, ed. A. Barry, T. Osborne and N. Rosel, 19-37. London: UCL.
9.
Chapman, R.A.1992. The end of the British civil service? Teaching Public Administration12(2): 1-5.
10.
Chapman, R.A., and J.R. Greenaway.1980. The dynamics of administrative reform . London: Croom Helm.
11.
Chapman, R.A., and B. O'Toole.1995. The role of the civil servant: a traditional view in a period of change. Public Policy and Administration10(2): 3-20.
12.
Claeys, G.1994. The origins of the rights of labour. Journal of Modern History66(June): 249-290.
13.
Cohen, E.W.1941. The growth of the British civil service: 1780-1939 . Woking: Unwin.
14.
Colmer, J.1959. Coleridge: Coleridge critic of society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
15.
Dean, M.1999. Governmentality. London: SAGE.
16.
Du Gay, P.2000. In praise of bureaucracy. London : SAGE.
17.
Eagle, A.2003. A deeper democracy. London: Catalyst.
18.
Embree, A.1962. Charles Grant and British rule in India. London: Allen and Unwin.
19.
Foucault, M.1977. Discipline and punish. London : Allen Lane.
20.
Foucault, M.1979. Governmentality. Ideology and Consciousness6: 1-15.
21.
Foucault, M.1982. The subject and power. In Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, ed. H. Dreyfus and P. Rabinow, 208-227. Brighton : Harvester Wheatsheaf.
22.
Foucault, M.1984. Nietzsche, genealogy, history. In The Foucault reader, ed. P. Rabinow, 76-101. London : Penguin.
23.
Foucault, M.2001. Fearless speech. New York: Semiotext.
24.
Foucault, M.2003. Society must be defended. New York : Picador.
Garland, D.1999. Governmentality and the problem of crime. In Governable Places, ed. R. Smandych.Aldershot: Ashgate.
27.
Gladden, E.N.1967. The civil service of the United Kingdom. London: Frank Cass.
28.
Gordon, C.1991. Governmentality: An introduction. In The Foucault Effect, ed. G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller,1-53. Brighton : Harvester Wheatsheaf.
29.
Gowan, P.1987. The origins of the administrative elite. New Left Review (March-April): 4-34.
30.
Grant, C.1797. Observations on the state of society among the Asiatic subjects. (privately printed)
31.
Harrison, R.1965. Before the socialists. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul.
32.
Hart, J.1972. The genesis of the Northcote Trevelyan report. In Studies in the growth of nineteenth century government, ed. G. Sutherland, 63-81. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
33.
Hinchliff, P.1987. Benjamin Jowett and the Christian religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
Hirschmann, N.2003. The subject of liberty. Princeton : Princeton University Press.
35.
Hobsbawm, E.1964. Labouring men. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
36.
Hughes, E.1949. Sir Charles Trevelyan and civil service reform . English Historical Review65: 53-88.
37.
Hughes, E.1954. Civil sevice reform 1853-5. Public Administration32(1): 17-51.
38.
Humphreys, B.V.1958. Clerical unions in the civil service. OxfordBlackwell and Holt.
39.
Hyndman, H.M.1881. England for all. London: Gilbert and Rivington.
40.
Hyndman, H.M.1883. Socialism made plain. London : W. Reeves.
41.
Hyndman, H.M.1887. A commune for London. London : Justice Printery.
42.
Jacques, R.1996. Manufacturing the employee. London : SAGE.
43.
Johnson, G.2002. Social democratic politics in Britain 1881-1911 . Lampeter: Edwin Mellen.
44.
Kerr, D.1999. Beheading the king and enthroning the market. Science and Society63(2): 173-202.
45.
Kitson Clark, C.1959. Statesmen in disguise. Historical Journal2(1): 19-39.
46.
Knights, D., and G. Morgan.1991. Corporate strategy, organizations and identity. Organization Studies12(2): 251-273.
47.
Marquand, D.2004. The decline of the public. Cambridge : Polity.
McGregor, O.R.1950. Civil servants and the civil service 1850-1950 . Political Quarterly22: 154-163.
50.
Miller, P., and T. O'Leary.1993. Accounting expertise and the politics of the product. Accounting, Organizations and Society18(2-3): 187-206.
51.
Miller, P., and N. Rose.1990. Governing economic life. Economy and Society19(1): 1-31.
52.
Moir, M.1979. The emergence of an administrative elite in East India House. India Office Library and Records, Report of the Year 1977.
53.
Moore, R.J.1964. The abolition and closure of Haileybury College . Historical Journal7(2): 240-257.
54.
Newsome, D.1961. Godliness and Good Learning. London: John Murray .
55.
Osborne, T.1994. Bureaucracy as a vocation. Journal of Historical Sociology7(3): 289-313.
56.
O'Malley, P., L. Weir, and C. Shearing.1997. Governmentality, criticism, politics . Economy and Society26(4): 501-527.
57.
Parliamentary Papers (PP).1848. Report of the committee on miscellaneous expenditure XVIII.
58.
Parliamentary Papers (PP).1854. Report on the organization of the permanent civil service IX.
59.
Parliamentary Papers (PP).1870. The civil service commission, fifteenth report XIX.
60.
Parliamentary Papers (PP).1875. Playfair first report XXIII.
61.
Parliamentary Papers (PP).1888. Ridley second report XXVII.
62.
Parris, H.1969. Constitutional bureaucracy. London : George Allen and Unwin.
63.
Perkin, H.2002. The origins of modern English society. London: Routledge.
64.
Plummer, A.1971. Bronterre. London: Allen and Unwin.
65.
Roach, J.1971. Public examinations in England 1850-1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
66.
Rose, N.1990. Governing the soul. London: Routledge.
67.
Rose, N.1999. Powers of freedom. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
68.
Rowlinson, M., and C. Carter.2002. Foucault and history in organization studies. Organization9(4): 527-549.
69.
Schaeffer, D.L., and R.B. Schaeffer.1992. Introduction. In The Statesman, H. Taylor, 1-57. Westport, CT: Praeger.
70.
Shipley, S.1971. Club life and socialism in mid Victorian London . Oxford: Ruskin College History Workshop.
71.
Skinner, Q. (1984) The idea of negative liberty. In Philsophy in History, ed. R. Rorty, J.B. Schneewind and Q. Skinner , 204-219. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
72.
Snelling, R.C., and T.J. Barron.1972. The Colonial Office and its permanent officials. In Studies in the growth of nineteenth century government , ed. G. Sutherland, 139-166. London : Routledge, Kegan and Paul.
73.
Stanley, A.P.1895. Stanley's life of Arnold. London : John Murray.
74.
Stedman Jones, G.1972. History: the poverty of empiricism. In R. Blackburn (Ed) Ideology in social science . London: Fontana.
75.
Stedman Jones, G.1983. Languages of class, 96-118. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
76.
Stenson, K.1998. Beyond histories of the present. Economy and Society29(3): 333-52.
77.
Taylor, H.1992. The Statesman. Westport, CT : Praeger.
78.
Thane, P.1984. The working class and state welfare 1880-1914. Historical Journal27(4): 877-900.
79.
Townley, B.1994. Reframing human resource management. London: SAGE.
80.
Trevelyan, C.1856. Letter to Gladstone, 7 February 1856, Trevelyan Papers CET 22.
81.
Wainwright, H.2003. Reclaim the State. London: Verso.
82.
Young, D.M. (1961) The Colonial Office in the early nineteenth century . London: Longman.
