Yearning for Control: The Origins of Managerialism

Imagine, for a moment, you're a cog in a machine. This machine, which stretches across businesses, hospitals, schools, and government institutions, is driven not by any grand sense of purpose or meaningful connection, but by a narrow focus on metrics. Your value as a cog is defined by performance reviews, KPIs, and the ability to tick boxes on spreadsheets. Welcome to the world of managerialism—a philosophy that, since the 1980s, has dominated modern work life, stripping it of meaning, creativity, and, quite frankly, human connection.

Managerialism, as Alasdair MacIntyre points out in his great book, After Virtue, is a technocratic urge that arose from the belief that every aspect of human endeavor could be quantified, measured, and controlled. From education to healthcare, politics to the corporate world, managerialism has promised efficiency and accountability. But what it has delivered, as millions of workers can attest, is a disenchanted world of targets, incentives, and punishments that often miss the deeper reality of what work should be about.

The Origins of Managerialism: A Need for Control

To understand the rise of managerialism, we must look back to the post-World War II era, when corporations were becoming larger and more complex. There was a growing belief that organizations could be managed scientifically, that with the right metrics and controls, any enterprise could be optimized. It was in this environment that the seeds of managerialism were sown, and by the 1980s, they had blossomed into full-blown orthodoxy.

Inspired by thinkers like Frederick Winslow Taylor, who pioneered 'scientific management' in the early 20th century, managerialism thrived on the belief that human beings, like machines, could be fine-tuned for maximum productivity. This mindset was supercharged by neoliberal reforms under Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, which emphasized market efficiency, competition, and the elimination of 'waste' in all forms. The rise of data, and later, the digital revolution, allowed for the kind of monitoring and surveillance that made this approach even more attractive. Everything, it seemed, could be managed with the right set of numbers.

And yet, this approach overlooked the complexity of human work. Unlike machines, people don’t function in predictable, linear ways. People are motivated by relationships, purpose, and autonomy—none of which can be captured in a KPI. But the managerialist philosophy plowed ahead, undeterred by the human cost of reducing workers to data points.

The Seduction of Numbers: Why Managerialism Appeals to Power

The appeal of managerialism lies in its promise of control, particularly to those at the top. For CEOs, politicians, and administrators, managerialism offers the illusion that complex problems—whether it's running a hospital, managing a school, or steering a corporation—can be solved with dashboards, reports, and spreadsheets. It allows them to believe they are in command, not of people, but of systems. If the numbers are right, the thinking goes, everything else must be right too.

Take the healthcare system as an example. In the name of efficiency, hospitals have become obsessed with 'bed turnover,' the number of patients treated, and reducing 'downtime.' Yet doctors and nurses often find themselves in the absurd position of rushing patients out the door, not because it's the best thing for the patient, but because it’s what the system demands. This top-down obsession with metrics ignores the actual experience of healthcare workers, leading to burnout, stress, and, ironically, worse outcomes for patients.

Or consider education, where teachers are under relentless pressure to 'teach to the test' so that schools can hit performance targets and do well in school rankings. In this system, creativity, critical thinking, and deep learning are sacrificed on the altar of testing. The most ironic aspect of all? These tests often fail to measure what truly matters: a student's capacity for independent thought and their ability to engage with the world in a meaningful way.

The Disenchanted Workplace: What Happens When Everything is Measured

For millions of workers, the effects of managerialism have been felt most acutely in the form of performance reviews and KPIs. These tools, which promise fairness and objectivity, often become sources of frustration, anxiety, and cynicism. 

Picture a teacher who loves their subject and pours their energy into inspiring students. But come review time, their value is reduced to a set of test scores and student attendance figures. Or think of a nurse whose focus is on patient care, only to find that her performance is measured by how quickly she can discharge patients, as if the complexities of human health could be reduced to time sheets and quotas.

In the corporate world, KPIs have become the ultimate measure of success. But for all the talk of innovation and empowerment, most employees find themselves playing a game of 'box-ticking.' They are pushed to hit targets that often have little to do with the actual goals of the organization, let alone their personal sense of purpose. A marketing team may be focused on social media 'engagement metrics,' spending countless hours crafting posts that rack up likes, without any real impact on the company’s sales or reputation. The number looks good on paper, but the effort is, in reality, meaningless.

The use of carrots and sticks—bonuses for hitting targets and punishments for falling short—reveals the deep distrust embedded in managerialism. This approach assumes that without incentives or punishments, people won’t do their jobs. It ignores the possibility that people might be motivated by something other than fear or greed: pride in their work, the joy of collaboration, the desire to make a difference.

The Myth of Control: Managerialism's Fundamental Bankruptcy

At the heart of managerialism is a lie: the belief that human work can be controlled and optimized in the same way you might tune a machine. But this approach is not only dehumanizing, it’s also ineffective. When people are reduced to numbers, the richness of human work—the creativity, the problem-solving, the adaptability—disappears. 

Take the example of Wells Fargo, the bank that became infamous for its aggressive sales culture. Employees were under extreme pressure to meet sales quotas, with rewards for those who hit their numbers and punishments for those who didn’t. The result? Employees opened millions of fake accounts just to meet their targets. The system may have looked good on paper, but in reality, it was a disaster, leading to massive fines and a collapse of trust in the bank.

Or look at the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. The institution had ticked all the managerialist boxes, boasting glowing financial reports and a strong public image. But beneath the surface, poor risk management was brewing. The drive for short-term gains, shareholder value, and ticking regulatory boxes masked the deeper reality that the bank was headed for disaster.

MacIntyre’s critique of managerialism reminds us that not everything that matters can be measured. Human work is complex, and it thrives on relationships, trust, and collaboration. When these elements are stripped away in the name of 'efficiency,' the very purpose of work is lost.

The Way Forward: Collaboration Over Control

There is an alternative to managerialism, and it lies in rejecting the technocratic fantasy of control. Management doesn’t need to be about targets and incentives; it can be about creating the conditions for people to thrive. This approach values leadership over management, collaboration over control, and trust over surveillance.

In companies like Spotify, for example, the focus is on empowering teams to solve problems creatively, with a minimum of oversight. Teams are given a very clear sense of direction, but also the freedom to experiment with solutions, and learn from failure. It’s a system based on trust and collaboration, not on metrics and coercion. And it works!

In healthcare, some hospitals have begun to adopt a more human-centered approach, where doctors and nurses are empowered to make decisions based on the needs of their patients, not the demands of a KPI. This shift, while still in its early stages, points to a future where the dignity of human work is restored, and where people are seen not as cogs in a machine but as capable, creative, and trustworthy individuals.

As we move deeper into the 21st century, the cracks in the managerialist fantasy are becoming impossible to ignore. Perhaps it's time we embraced a different kind of management—one that values people over processes, wisdom over metrics, and meaning over numbers. After all, isn’t that what work should really be about?