> Managerialist culture is founded on the notion that workers must be supervised and controlled.
That's a shallow view of the situation. What you're describing is "Taylorist" management, or "Theory X" management.
Modern management theory also discusses "Theory Y" management, in which providing context and trust is more important than supervision and control.
Many managers are unaware of this concept, even though it's Management 101. If that's the case in your company, it's not a problem with "managerialist culture"... it's a problem with your company's culture.
> Modern management theory also discusses "Theory Y" management,
Good god, "management" is so deeply devoid of any actual substance that they can't even name their prominent theories? No wonder it's a constant struggle for them to justify their own existence.
These theories are taught in an MBA program. Most managers never go through such a program. Ironically, MBAs are often mocked on HN, but now I find it ironic that you find it shocking that managers (who don't complete an MBA) don't know what the prominent theories are.
It's possible to have strongly negative opinions of both MBAs and middle managers, even if they don't perfectly overlap.
> now I find it ironic that you find it shocking that managers (who don't complete an MBA) don't know what the prominent theories are
Hard to be "shocked" anymore, since it's so normalized, but if we break it down:
- Management theory is mostly bereft of useful information
- Most managers don't learn the theory anyway
- Most managers don't bother to try to get better at their jobs, and if they do, it's by reading vapid articles like this one or going to the expensive training version of the same
- Higher-level managers earn multiple times what ACs ("actual contributors") earn
- Bad managers can, and do, sink entire teams, and may represent some of the biggest risk to most companies, and yet virtually no effort is ever made to hold any managers accountable for anything, because the only people who could do that are other, higher-level managers, whose jobs are even more worthless, and they know it, so bad managers are kept around because otherwise the entire House of Feudalism could collapse
- Good managers are frequently praised for their ability to protect their reports from the torrent of stupid bullshit coming from above them in the chain, and yet nobody ever asks why the fuck there's a torrent of stupid bullshit coming from higher-level managers, who, again, make much more than the people being protected from their wanton disregard for effective management.
As you said, most managers haven't even heard of "Theory Y" management. Mangerialism (and here I'm using it as defined by Spender and Locke) is the dominant paradigm in most parts of the business world. This is not a problem with one individual's company. It's way larger than that.
You're correct, of course. I didn't realize you were using the "managerialism" in a formal sense. And you're right that it's common... not because people are explicitly subscribing to "managerialism" as a theory, but because command-and-control Theory X management seems to be people's default mode of thinking.
That's a shallow view of the situation. What you're describing is "Taylorist" management, or "Theory X" management.
Modern management theory also discusses "Theory Y" management, in which providing context and trust is more important than supervision and control.
Many managers are unaware of this concept, even though it's Management 101. If that's the case in your company, it's not a problem with "managerialist culture"... it's a problem with your company's culture.