Davies 2012 - A Critical Examination of Managerialism

7/30/2019 Davies 2012 - A Critical Examination of Managerialism

1/33

1

BTh Paper E9 Special Paper

Candidate No. 30328 (Matriculated Michaelmas 02)

Oxford No. 60031208

Approved title (8.11.05)

A critical examination of managerialism and commercial thinking within the institutional

Church, its impact on church growth/development programmes and models of mission,

and its implications for a post-institutional church.


2/33

2

Introduction

In the face of declining church attendance, church leaders seem to be increasingly

reliant on the new technology, psychology and management techniques of modern

society to address this issue. This is perhaps unsurprising with successive UK

governments continuing to place managers, management education and research into how

to succeed in business near the top of what Cary Cooper referred to as the national

competitiveness agenda.1 Yet many church denominations appear to have taken on

board a flawed sociology. Instead of interpreting declining church attendance as an

inevitable result of the further secularization of the remaining nominal Christian

community, and an opportunity to rethink issues of contemporary Christian witness, the

tendency is to react as if Christianity itself is in decline. The need for denominational

preservation and clerical security, acceptance and success, drives the institution to rely on

pragmatic and formulaic solutions without proper theological reflection and analysis of

both the benefits and the costs.

While resisting the temptation to over-dramatize the situation, it could be the case

that we have allowed our churches and their structures to be taken over by the creeping

rationalization of modernist culture, such that we now find ourselves suffering all thedrawbacks of what Drane terms the McDonaldization of the Church?2 There is,

therefore, timeliness to a debate concerning the relevance and significance of

management to the institutional Churchs agenda and calling to mission. In the secular

world, continuing expectations of managers to improve the comparative performance of

UK organizations within a rapidly changing global context intensify the seductive

attraction management and commercial thinking seem to have for those struggling with

the pressures on their churches. But in tension with an apparently widely accepted

change agenda for church organizations i.e. one that persists in stressing the importance

1Cary Cooper, writing in the British Academy of Management (BAM) News, June 1999.2 Drane (2001) has sought to apply Ritzers McDonaldization of society thesis to the institutional Church.Ritzer observes: Human beings, equipped with a wide array of skills and abilities, are asked to perform a

limited number of highly simplified tasks over and over. Instead of expressing their humanabilitiespeople are forced to deny their humanity and act in a robot-like manner. People do not expressthemselvesbut rather deny themselves (Ritzer 1995: 26).


3/33

3

of quantitative growth and the efficient use of steadily diminishing resources, is the

continuing relevance of more traditional theological perspectives on the Churchs raison

dtre.3

Where once the historical church might have stressed sacrifice and martyrdom as

marks of its authenticity, now all too often the stress is on success-by-programme,

whether in personal or corporate spiritual life. An important question for debate is

whether a business-like bias denotes a merely pragmatic response to the challenges of

maintaining the Christian witness in a rapidly changing context. Or might it, instead,

denote a Church that has imbibed the more harmful elements of a managerialist ethic or

ideology, and thereby become unduly influenced by associated ideas of spiritual status,

quantitative success and hierarchy. The answer is far from simple and unlikely to be one

or the other. But in seeking to explore the nature of managerialisms influence and its

currency as a set of ideas and approaches to organizational church life, it should be stated

at the outset that scant attention is being given to assessing contemporary secular

management practices with regard to their fundamental values, let alone subjecting

widely accepted ideas and techniques to theological critique.

This essay thus places the need for assessing the assumed as central to itsconcerns. Traditions of social philosophy and social science have consistently sought to

subject received, conventional wisdom to questioning, and are drawn on throughout

because they provide an important, if neglected, source of help in examining

managerialisms apparent givenness, and the impact this is having upon the Church.

Reconciling the palpable tensions that exist between different sets of

considerations and priorities amidst rapid societal change constitutes a major challenge

3In a defining moment of his ministry, Jesus was asked which commandment was the greatest. Heanswered, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your

mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbouras yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Matt. 22:37-40 NRSV).This Great Commandment to love God and love people defines the true identity of those who are called

his church. It can be compared with and complemented by the equally important Great Commission: Gotherefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of

the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. (Matt. 8:19-20a NRSV).There can arguably be no more authoritative starting point for a definition of the Churchs role in the worldthan the Great Commission, which encapsulates what the Church does (or should do - its evangelistic


4/33

4

for clergy as they seek to live out their calling. It thus seems important to examine in

more detail the impact on the Churchs thinking of what appears to be following UK

public policy reform viz. a driven political agenda that would seek to judge the Churchs

missionary activity in similar ways i.e. according to the criteria of economy, efficiency,

effectiveness and customer quality. Recent public or human service developments are

also used throughout the discussion as a reference point for considering their Church

corollary because, just as people in many of these organizations are beginning to see very

clearly what the drawbacks of the wholesale implementation of managerialism are, the

churches seem to be falling into the same errors and mistakes:

In the Church of England, for example, many clergy are now not only poorly paid, they are onshort-term contracts that deprive them of security in the name of organizational flexibility andresponsiveness. The vicar who could stay in one place for years and say exactly what he thinks in

response to faith or conscience is now a thing of the past. Clergy are regularly appraised and ifthey do not seem to be going along with the organizational mission they can be easily removed 4

Pollitt et al are amongst a growing number of social commentators that have

argued that economy and efficiency need not be the only criteria by which the

effectiveness of human service organizations (and here one includes the Church) may be

judged, and that considerable concern is being expressed over the extent to which

greater freedom to manage may be reducing public accountability.5 Like Christianity

itself, management techniques are world-, community-, individual- and action-shaping

forces.6 It is important, therefore, that their potential to shape, influence and control is

critically evaluated before they are unthinkingly deployed within the Church because, in

Pattisons assessment:

They will have a direct and decisive influence on the nature of the (Church) community.Management techniques are not religiously innocent or neutral.7

These introductory observations have characterized the present human services as

essentially managerialist: a setting that has seen all sorts of organizations public,

injunction), and the Great Commandment, which embodies what the church is (or at least should be) - in

terms of its broader mission.4 Pattison 1997: 162.5 1998: 4.6 Pattison 1997: 161.7Ibid.


5/33

5

private and voluntary, and increasingly the institutional Church ostensibly

decentralized in order to invest managers with decision-making freedom. This will

inevitably lead, so the story goes, to speedier, more responsive and more relevant

organizations. But it is important to acknowledge the uncertainties and paradoxes that

competing understandings and expectations of church organizations create for Christian

ministers. As the UK has experienced with the introduction of management into the

public sector, managerial techniques and methods actually shape and change

organizations and groups.8

The essay thus explores the significance and impact of

managerialism in terms of the extent to which it functions as a specific ideology9

or a

meta-narrative: a conceptual and linguistic project designed simultaneously to supersede

(and therefore solve) a range of perceived ills within the Church10. It further explores

the relevance of current approaches towards church growth and mission that purport to

educate Christian leaders to function according to a largely managerialist agenda.

The main objective of the discussion is to surface emerging issues for a post-

institutional church. Variously defined, this is a term that is useful insofar as it opens up

the possibility that the Churchs missionary presence does not appear to be necessarily

locked into an institutionally managed order. Jesus is never credited with the notion thatfulfillment of the covenantal promise meant either institutional reform or expansion, but

only radical shifts in relationships and perspectives.11 Yet missiology and the institutional

Churchs definition of itself and its own survival have become almost inextricably linked.

The context for the analysis is shaped by pronouncements about the need for better

management of our churches, hence better educated clergy-as-managers, capable of

handling, or even better embracing a new, institutionally preoccupied, organizational

change agenda. It seems that the reference points for criticizing the Church continue to

derive not so much from a New Testament understanding, but from private sector

business and commercial thinking and practice (an argument developed later). The

8 See e.g. Lewis et al(1992) for an account of the harmful effects of uncritically introducing managerial

assumptions and techniques into the therapeutic, professional-led culture of the marital counselingorganization RELATE.9 See Clarke and Newman 1997.10 Pollitt et al, 1998: 1.11 Davis 1986: 110.


6/33

6

central contention of the essay is that managerialism - the doctrine and practice that

overall control by managers is both necessary and desirable12 might be unduly shaping

our churches. Questions are raised about the extent of managerialisms appropriateness

and appeal to the Churchs rle in building the Kingdom of God as the institution moves

further into a new century. Part of the discussion reflects on how Christian ministers are

coping with the often ambiguous and contradictory requirements of a managerialized

agenda and its resultant uncertainty. Commenting on recent organizational developments

Stuart and Critchley state:

A powerful and vociferous consensus has apparently been reached on how the world of changeought to be. But how is it really? What is the reality of the world of change as perceived and

experienced on the ground by those charged with carrying it out and living it. 13

The ensuing discussion is structured as follows. Firstly, the case for

managerialisms influence on the Churchs thinking about change is more carefully

established by examining recent (particularly Anglican) reports and recommendations

about growth and development. Second, the main identifying features or components of

the managerialist discourse are set out. Third, the possible impact of these components on

the education, training, identity and indeed self-perception of twenty-first century

ordained clergy is explored. In conclusion the possible implications for the Churchs

identity and mission are set out.

1. Managerial ism and the Church: churches in an organizational society

Our society is an organizational society. We are born in organizations, educated byorganizations and most of us spend most of our lives working for organizations. We spend muchof our leisure time paying, playing and praying in organizations. Most of us will die in anorganization and when the time comes for burial, the largest organization of all - the state mustgrant official permission14

Since Amitai Etzioni wrote these words (1970), the power of organizations over

peoples personal lives, over issues of life and death, has continued to increase. In the

same period old certainties about how to administer organizations have been unsettled

by a number of developments. For the world of public service and the provision of social

12 Pollitt et al, 1998: 163.13 1995: 1.


7/33

7

welfare, there has been a global quest for more efficient alternatives to the iron cage of

bureaucracy that will pare back public spending. The Church has not remained immune

from these preoccupations.

Contemporary dissatisfaction with the piecemeal evolution of management theory

and practice15 is evident in the scale and recurrence of change programmes - the so-called

rationalization, turnaround or culture management projects - taking place in so many

organizations. It is also expressed in the massive sales of management texts by the new

self-styled gurus whose espoused intention is to provide managers with fresh

perspectives on management and innovative techniques for addressing emergent

challenges.16

Once again the Christian press can be seen as having followed in their

wake.

While best-selling management books can potentially create a space for critical

thinking about established management theory and practice (some more readily than

others), it is debatable whether they provide new or especially challenging ways of

making sense of management. All too often it appears, some of the ideas that are

marketed as new, even revolutionary, are actually preoccupied with preserving

established priorities and privileges. Yet the institutional Church has warmly embracedsuch ideas, no more clearly illustrated than by the 1995 Archbishops Commission on the

organization of the Church of England, Working as One Body, which contained what

was heralded as an innovative and brilliantly conceived plan for the systematic

restructuring of the Church, thought out on the basis of an acknowledged synthesis

between theology and management theory.17

14 Etzioni, 1970: 1.15 From classical or scientific management at the beginning of the twentieth century, through the humanrelations school in the late 1920s and early 1930s, into a conception of organizations as socio-technicalsystems post Second World War, to a more social science-influenced treatment of notions power andconflict and then into so-called goal-orientated and contingency approaches in the latter half of the

twentieth century. Writers characterize the history of organizational thinking in different ways, but thesestages represent a reasonable degree of convergence. See (for example) Huczynski and Buchanan (2003),Mullins (2004) or Handy (2005) for useful summaries of developments in thinking about organizations.16 Examples would include works such as Peters and WatermansIn Search of Excellence (1982), KantersThe Change Masters (1983) and When Giants Learn to Dance (1989), Handys The Age of Unreason(1990), Peters Liberation Management (1992) and Hammer and Champys Reengineering theCorporation (1993).17 R. Roberts 1996: 1.


8/33

8

Central to what became known (for the purposes of shorthand) as the Turnbull

Report18 is a vision of the Church as an executive-led, highly unified organization, in

many respects similar to a business corporation:

Taken as whole, the proposals in the Turnbull Report properly supplemented with managerialcontrol will ensure not merely that criticism will gradually cease (as it has in universities), but thatthe Church of England will become an efficient, product-led service organisation meeting thespiritual requirements of the residually Christian part of the English population with a regularisedand marketable Gospel.19

Good order? or simply managerialism by the back door?

What is conspicuously absent from the Turnbull Report and indeed the welter of

church management publications that followed, was any warning of the dangers ofdrinking too deeply from the wells of the Management Schools. Uncritical acceptance of

secular management thinking is implicit in the notion that churches are continually in

need of new and better management. This is not to deny the urgency of a situation

characterized by diminishing church attendance and the need for radical action. Neither is

it to argue that management is intrinsically bad or evil. But, equally, it should not be

assumed that its theories and techniques are simply neutral or a sufficient basis to form

religious identity.20 While some measure of cultural assimilation is inevitable and indeed

necessary for the Church to relate effectively to its surrounding context and culture, for

this to occur at the expense of developing its own norms, ideas, practices and beliefs (that

spring from its particular faith and calling) is dangerous. It might well have been justified

that the Turnbull Report marked the culmination of a series of sustained attacks on

traditional models of church administration since the late 1970s, but it is the likely

outcomes of such a report that require more careful scrutiny. The Church needs to be

vigilant if it is not to be a net importer of a very powerful ideology that, in Pattisons

analysis may in some respects be inimical to Christian belief and identity.21

18 After the Rt Revd Michael Turnbull, then Bishop of Durham who chaired the Commission.19 R. Roberts 1996: 120 Pattison 1997: 164.


9/33

9

Power: the ideology of neutral efficiency?

(These ideas)dressed up in the language of innovation and liberationare more firmly weddedto refurbishing the status quo, with all its attendant social and ecological problems, than they areto processes of emancipatory change 22

A basic theme that permeates this discussion is the theorization of power. In one

sense, within mainstream secular managerial literature, power is taken for granted as that

which is necessary for those with the role of coordinating social systems to secure the

action of others. J. Roberts comments that this is a functionalist (Parsonian23) view of

power as a sort of system lubricant and one that is essentially problematic because it

assumes the legitimacy of control.24

One only needs to look at the history of recent public sector reform to understand

that the current status quo within UK human services was established during the 1980s

and early 1990s with an avowed New Right government attempting to rebuild the

welfare state according to its own organizational and political principles. The emerging

welfare state settlement defined itself in terms of a new managerialism regarded

somewhat cryptically by Pollitt as:

a set of beliefs and practices, at the core of which burns the seldom-tested assumption that bettermanagement will prove an effective solvent for a wide range of economic and social ills...Taken

together these beliefs envisage a large, sometimes almost apocalyptic role for management 25

Church management?

Published in the wake of the Turnbull Report, Evans and Percys Managing the

Church placed a central question before its contributors, viz. should we be looking at

management or order? The editors understood that order in the Church always has to

keep collegiality and hierarchy in balance.26

21Op cit.22 Alvesson and Willmott, 1996: 1.23 After Talcott Parsons, the famous American sociologist (1902-79), founder of the Chicago School.24J. Roberts 1996: 62.25 Pollitt 1993: 1,3.26 Evans and Percy Eds. 2000: 100


10/33

10

Perhaps the most critical treatment of the quest for a top-down, managerialized

Church is the chapter by Richard Roberts that clashes head-on with yet another

management follow-up to the Archbishops Commission27 that he regards as:

moving beyond Turnbull towards the implementation of a system of quality audit andperformance appraisal(which)will inevitably reproduce within the church, patterns of humanabuse characteristic of society at large28

The only navet in his argument is the assumption that such abuse has notbeen

present within the Church from time immemorial, and did not require any external

motivation or ill-considered publications for its propagation. But it is easy to understand

his disdain for the uncriticalincorporation into the Church of what has been referred to

elsewhere as the audit society, in which everything seems to have been reduced to

measurement and is endlessly appraised. What one academic has called the crass

Taylorite style of management of the universities29 is seen as being transferred to the

Church, with the shallow and uncritical pattern of accommodation simply repeating itself.

Once individuals and groups are committed to this model, to values that support

competition (such as the need to be profitable, effective, efficient and economical) and to

the techniques of management, accounting, marketing and so on that underpin it, there

may be little scope for presenting a different vision or creating different kinds of

community and relationship. In the tradition of Donald MacKinnons life-long concern

with the systematic abuse of ecclesiastical power,30

Roberts utters a warning:

We cannot assume that some hidden power will miraculously preserve an immaculate Churchfrom collusion or seduction with the increasing banality of life characteristic of mass consumersociety; yet we can at least question such assimilation.

27 In this case, Gill and Burkes (1996) Strategic Church Leadershi.p28 2000: 79 (my italics).29 Gerald Vinten, University of Southampton Business School. The description refers to the mechanisticstyle of management propounded by F.W. Taylor in the early days of U.S. industrialization (cf. his 1911publication Scientific Management). The dehumanizing effects of the time and motion approach are

cleverly satirized in Charlie Chaplins 1936 film Modern Times. For a full transcript of Vintens reviewsee:http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Published/NonArticle/Articles/00103806$$.002.html30 See Surin (ed.) 1989.


11/33

11

So despite their espoused intention to liberate and empower Christian leaders,

and not denying their positive benefits, it can be argued that managerialist theories and

practices have merely established new ways of regenerating management practice and

reinforcing managerial authority and hegemony, such that any resistance to the

managerial exercise of power is itself cast in the form of deviance from a carefully

constructed societal norm.

Having established that managerialism and its assumptions about the central rle

to be played by managers in organizational development is an identifiable part of the

Churchs strategy for handling the challenge of a changing context, the discussion moves

on to examine its central features.

2. The currency of management ideas

From administration to management: incursions from private sector business

Notwithstanding the argument that expressions of managerialism will vary

according to particular organizational contexts, its rapid growth and establishment as part

of public sector or human service managements taken-for-granted assumptions has

been regarded by commentators as indicating something more significant and enduring

than a mere set of pragmatic responses to the challenges of a rapidly changing

environment. It must be appreciated that it can also operate at a more profound level by

creating a qualitatively different basis by which organizational life is enacted and judged.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, organizational and managerial forms were recognized

to have emerged within the field of human services that were distinguishable, at least in

intention, from traditional Weberian bureaucratic models drawn from the public

administration tradition.

31

Perhaps mirroring the way that bureaucracy became justanother synonym for organization throughout most of the twentieth century, so

31 After one of the founders of modern sociology, Max Weber 1864-1920. The Weberian approach can besummed up as one that encourages professional specialization and maximizes effectiveness and possibleeconomy. More so, thanks to the introduction of rules, adjustments and hierarchy supervision the

bureaucratic model decreases the possibility of unintentional mistakes and adventurous behaviour of civil

servants, as well as guarantees an impartial approach to clients.


12/33

12

managerialism has become the new synonym - but within a remarkably shorter space of

time.

Perhaps when we now say organization in any sector of society, the concept automaticallyincludes output budgeting, performance indicators, separation of roles, and a contract-network

imagery.32

As a consequence of the perceived inadequacy of the old administrative order to

cope with modern demands, major shifts of power have been observed between

occupational groupings as rles and responsibilities were renegotiated. Within public

service, Pollitt points out that the power of managers was in the ascendancy, while

professional power was in decline.33

Furthermore, Gray and Jenkins argue that

managerialist developments were not confined within particular services but embodied

the central tenets of a moral crusade to change the traditional orthodoxy of the publicservice(and were)as much a doctrine or ideology as a simple neutral technique for improving

performance and service delivery.34

Amongst an array of management ideas, it is possible to single out a number of

approaches that have gained widespread credence amongst church leaders: notions of

organizational excellence, Total Quality Management (TQM), and Human Resource

Management (HRM). Concerns about the inflexibility and poor responsiveness of

established church practices have centred on the apparent ineffectiveness of traditional

bureaucratic means of church administration. In the UK (again using the public services

as a reference point) such approaches were vilified under a Conservative government as

an inevitable source of inefficiency, and continue to receive short shrift under (New)

Labours successive terms of governance.

Having outlined the general picture, this section attempts to articulate the

different discourses or strands that combine as a nexus of ideas in support of what can be

described as the organizational change imperative. It contends that these have become

so interwoven into the fabric of human service organizational experience that they

combine as elements to create an organizational zeitgeist. In looking to its secular

organizational counterparts for transferable models of management the Church may have

32 Dunleavy and Hood, 199433 Pollitt 1993passim.34 Gray and Jenkins 1993:38


13/33

13

unleashed a powerful set of underpinning expectations that are undoubtedly having an

impact on conceptions of what ministerial education is now expected to provide and

produce in its graduates. And this oft-denied, negative side of managed organizations is

certainly not a figment of the theological imagination:

Rarely is the darker side of management theory and practice acknowledged or considered and

then most often it is presented as an aberrant and avoidable deviation from the normal state ofaffairs.35

a) Neo-Taylorism

Pollitt argued that the initial period of public sector change in the UK (the 1980s),

which was preoccupied with controlling public spending through centralization, was also

dominated by what he termed neo-Taylorist management approaches that were both

functional and mechanistic:

The central theme, endlessly reiterated in official documents, is to set clear targets, to developperformance indicators to measure the achievements of those targets, and to single out, by means

of merit awards, those individuals who get results. The strengthening and incentivizing of linemanagement is a constant theme...In official terms, what seems to be required is a culture shift ofa kind that will facilitate a more thorough-going functional/Taylorist management process.36

Neo-Taylorism was based on the assumption that professionally trained peoples

productivity levels could be set and controlled through their direct and straightforwardresponsiveness to simple rewards and punishments. Associated with the so-called

scientific management principles associated with Frederick Winslow Taylor in the early

twentieth century, this particular discourse offered work rles based on the elimination of

waste, control of costs and the management of productivity (performance). The

strengthening of human service management was justified in terms of its ability to

contribute to increased efficiency and economy, its language was dominated by rational

accountancy, measurement and assessment, and its focus was on a careful and calculative

deployment of resources (inputs) to maximize quantitative outputs (rather than qualitative

outcomes). The evidence for its success took the form of centralized statistical returns

(c.f. statistical returns of the number of weekly communicants, Church quota or parish

share payments). Its leitmotifwas value for money. Ironically, rather than dismantling

35 Alvesson and Wilmott 1996: 37.36 Pollitt, 1993: 56


14/33

14

the bureaucracy that has been a consistent political target for successive governments,

neo-Taylorism tended to perpetuate it, albeit under the different guise of formalized

systems of planning and monitoring. Pollitt views the later public service reforms

(c.1989-91) in terms of a re-evaluation of neo-Taylorist principles, leading to the

introduction of quasi-markets, an emphasis on decentralization and preoccupations with

quality and closeness to the customer. These also seem to have made their mark on the

Churchs understanding of how it thinks it should be responding to a changing context.

Much of the thinking drew explicitly on Peters and Watermans 1982 text In Search of

Excellence: Lessons from Americas Best-Run Companies.

b) Peters and Watermans (1982)Excellence thesis.

Pollitt contrasted neo-Taylorism with the excellence approach enshrined in the

best selling text, In Search of Excellence.37

With its emphasis on the importance of

managing an organizations culture, the excellence ideas have a strong correspondence to

a number of related discourses: human resource management (HRM), the total quality

movement (TQM), and visionary (purpose-driven) leadership.38

As du Gay observes,39

the norms and values characterizing the behaviour of excellent organizations were

articulated in explicit opposition to those constituting the identity of bureaucratic

organizations. In order to compete, it was argued, a slow and unbending bureaucratic

culture had to give way to new approaches that require people to exercise discretion, take

initiative and assume a much greater responsibility for their own organization and

management.40 In other words, governing organizational life to ensure excellence was

deemed to necessitate the production of certain types of work-based subject viz.

enterprising, autonomous, productive, self-regulating, responsible leaders.41

The

antipathy to old style, bureaucratic church administration as a source of waste,

inefficiency and unresponsive clerical paternalism thus resonates with a range of critiques

of public sector and human service malaise. The excellence ideas found a welcoming

37 Peters and Waterman, 1982.38 C.f. the widespread popularity and currency of the Purpose Driven publications. E.g. Warren 1995.39 du Gay 2000passim.40 Morgan 1997: 69.


15/33

15

audience among government, Church and voluntary service providers alike who were

seeking to shift predominating (i.e. what were perceived as dysfunctional) attitudes.

The key ingredients of Peters and Watermans recipe for being a successful enterprise,

especially in recalcitrant churches, centred on the role of organizational culture:

Without exception, the dominance and coherence of culture proved to be an essential quality of

the excellent companies. Moreover the stronger the culture and the more it was directed towardsthe marketplace, the less need there was for policy manuals, organization charts, or detailedprocedures and rules.42

Ironically, one of the examples of excellence they used was the fast food

hamburger chain McDonalds, one of the factors that led George Ritzer to develop the

aforementioned McDonaldization thesis.

43

Applying Ritzers thesis to the Church,Drane characterized the institution as a stereotyped structure offering pre-packaged

worship to a dwindling minority.44

Writing over a hundred years ago Webers writings are remarkably insightful

about the rise of the contemporary charismatic leader. He likened the nature of the

manager to that of a prophet i.e. a purely individual bearer of charisma, who by virtue of

his mission proclaims a religious doctrine or divine commandment.45

Hence for Weber a

prophetic revelation:

involves for both the prophet himself and for his followers a unified view of the world derivedfrom a consciously integrated and meaningful attitude towards lifeTo this meaning the conductof mankind must be oriented if it to bring salvation, for only in relation this meaning does lifeobtain a unified and significant pattern.46

41 du Gay 1994: 130,13142 Peters and Waterman 1982: 7543 1995. George Ritzer has taken central elements of the work of Max Weber, expanded and updated them,and produced a critical analysis of the impact of social structural change on human interaction and identity.The central theme in Weber's analysis of modern society was the process ofRationalization; a far-reaching

process whereby traditional modes of thinking were being replaced by an ends/means analysis concernedwith efficiency and formalized social control. Ritzer suggests that in the later part of the twentieth centurythe socially structured form of the fast-food restaurant has become the organizational force representing

and extending the process of rationalization further into the realm of everyday interaction and individualidentity.44 Drane 2000passim.45 Weber 1964: 5946Ibid, 58-9.


16/33

16

In light of Webers analytical categories, Tom Peters is one who has quite clearly

established himself as a charismatic figure, indeed a self-styled prophet. Many of his

works are indebted to religious language and style drawn from the Christian tradition.47

c) Consumerism and concerns for product or service quality

More difficult to attribute is that set of ideas that have recast people attending

churches as consumers or customers of a commodified Christianity. According to

Hughes the language of consumerism and customer-centredness was a central reference

point in a range of market reforms in the UK that challenged the paternalism of

traditional welfare delivery systems.48

This change in nomenclature has formed an

important part of the modernization strategy to view service users/church attenders not as

passive recipients of bureau-professional/clerical discretionary treatment, but as an

apparently active participant in the process of defining (in the latter case) their religious

needs and wants.49 Once again, the discourse within which such ideas are framed

paradoxically serve both the new managerial regime to which they are undoubtedly

connected, andthe many professionals and clerics who, by virtue of wanting to see their

service users or congregations empowered, find themselves imbibing a suspicious-looking but nevertheless intoxicating cocktail of ideas. One of the ways this works is that

notions of quality and customer choice provide the legitimating logic for driving

through change in a similar way that an ideology of neutral efficiency provided

underpinning support for early Taylorist ideas about improving workforce productivity.50

No one would wish to position him/herself as being againstideas of efficiency, quality or

customer-centredness. To do so would be to occupy an untenable and deviant position.

Religious experience and faith itself have been profoundly affected by this culture

of consumer choice. Apparently the best-selling books in the religious sections of major

47 Perhaps the place where Peters most clearly reveals his charismatic identity and prophetic message is inhis book, Thriving on Chaos, a work replete with religious style, insights and language.48 Hughes 199849 An understanding of pick-and-mix modern spirituality for which the New Age movement seems to

successfully cater. See Peter Wards Liquid Church for a discussion of the spirituality of the shopper(2002: 59ff).50 See Hales 1993.


17/33

17

bookstores are those that examine the marketing of religion, and address such questions

as: What is it that people are buying? How are the successful religions positioning

themselves? What attracts people? A reflection of the preoccupation with customer

choice is the success of a contemporary form of syncretism: pieces of any religion may be

combined with parts of others to form endless privatized expressions of belief. These

arrangements can be altered at will, shifted as needed, or abandoned when they become

unwieldy or too demanding.51 Some describe this situation as a welcome culture of

pluralism that frees people from the tyrannies of triumphalist religion. Others embrace

fundamentalist certainty in order to liberate themselves from the tyrannies and

ambiguities of choice. What is evident is that the notion of paradox has no place in either

the culture of unlimited choice or the realm of unquestioned assurance.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s the consumerism discourse provided a powerful

imperative for human service professionals to amend their understanding of rles,

identities and relationships from merely providing services, to an enabling and

empowering interaction - a symbiotic relationship - with users. After all (and this is

where the overlapping discourse strands weave their strength) they were to be

increasingly measuredin terms of responsiveness to customers;judgedaccording to theirplace in league tables; indexed according to performance; and ranked in terms of their

competitive edge: they were, in short, to model themselves more on the entrepreneurial

images drawn from the business world than on the public servant images of the old

welfare state.52

This leads to a fourth discourse strand which, on the basis of the argument so far,

can be regarded as having fundamentally influenced the direction of management

education for the public services53

, and which has the potential for increasingly

influencing and shaping the training experience of would-be clerics.

51 Copeland reflects on this phenomenon in an article interestingly entitled The preference-drivenChurch?http://www.colleagueonline.org/june2005/preference.htm52 Newman 1998: 342


18/33

18

d) Commercial modeling: innovation and entrepreneurship

Interacting and combining with the previous three strands to underpin a wider

discourse of change, this set of ideas was based on an unremitting faith that

organizations would be dramatically improved if they remodeled their management

approaches on the techniques, enthusiasm and enterprise said to characterize private

sector management. Once again a certain logical sequence of ideas and behaviour follows

the presupposition (itself an assertion) of private sector superiority: it was to Derek

Rayner (Marks and Spencer plc) that the government looked to set up an efficiency

strategy for the civil service in the 1970s; Roy Griffiths (Sainsburys supermarkets) to

enquire into the management needs of the NHS in the 1980s; and Price Waterhouse

Coopers (the international accountancy and consultancy firm) to increase the efficiency

of the failing Child Protection Agency in the late 1990s54 (etc.). Reproduced in the text

box below is an interesting example of how the logic of private sector management

superiority and its application to the Church has spawned a particular industry viz. church

growth consultancy. The language used is significant.

http://www.plumblineministries.com/about_plumbline

What business are you in?

In this gift of Mercy season, God is raising up entrepreneurs whose business is to produce exceptional

people. It matters little whether you sell widgets or wabbits to pay for your people. The objective isstill to use the marketplace to grow people.

God has intentionally created visionary men and women with a fathering heart (fathering is not agender specific term) and He has placed them in the marketplace to raise up the next generation of

world changers.

In order to do that, we need many new paradigms. Plumbline Business Concepts exists to help

develop the paradigms that will enable the extraordinary businessman (sic) to pioneer this new field.

God has placed in each company a specific social DNA that defines the culture, the potential and allthe profit centers of the company. We can help you determine where your highest ROI55 will be basedon social DNA.

Market forces only partially define the battlefield each CEO faces. There are seven spiritual53See unpublished PhD thesis: Emerging management education issues for the human services. I. Davies(2001) University of Bristol, Faculty of Social Sciences and Law (School for Policy Studies).54 Despite the fact that, according to Newman and others, these initiatives were often based on inaccurateunderstandings of how the business world actually operated (1998: 343)55 ROI = return on investment.


19/33

19

milestones that massively influence what is done in the natural.

Each kind of spiritual DNA requires a different leadership style. In turn, that leadership style changes

measurably as you pass each milestone.

Our prime market is the lunatic fringe of the radical bleeding edge of the post institutional churchChristian businessman. If your spirit has ached for a higher level of transformation than you have seenthrough any other means, we would be delighted to walk along side you for a season.

It is an important rejoinder to prevailing myths about the singular, heroic

leadership model of the solitary cleric, that churches as organizations develop multiple

goals, have multiple stakeholders and often deal with complex and intractable

problems.56 As such, the real world of private sector management is both murkier and

closer to some issues present in public organizations than the ideal would suggest.57

In the preceding section the interpenetrating discourse strands and their

contribution to an overarching change discourse have been outlined. Those considered

here by no means comprise an exhaustive list, they merely indicate certain sets of ideas

and assumptions that seem to resonate with what the church management literature seems

to be saying.What has been argued so far is that the persistence of managerialist ideas and

justifications of particular approaches to church management might not be adequately

explained by their espoused benefits. Moreover, the raised expectations of clergy-as-

managers to solve often insuperable church attendance issues detract both from an

appreciation of how power may be operating in the institutional Church arena, and the

mission of the Church. What emerges are less determinate views and conceptualizations

of Church management than predominating managerialist views would admit - and that it

is these that form the basis of the actual conduct in our churches (i.e. what actually

happens, week-to-week). Nor are managerialist, techno-rational forms of control a

necessarily relevant, appropriate or adequate basis for constructing workable models of

theological training and education. Thus one of the keys to understanding

56 Isaac-Henry, 1999: 68.57 Newman and Clarke, 1994: 2


20/33

20

managerialisms persistence is to view the ideas contained therein as ideological; that its

appeal is in its promise to provide hope to dying churches and solutions to a widespread

organizational malaise.

In the third section the argument that managerialism is ideological is taken further

by hypothesizing its religious dimensions. In so doing the discussion revisits the central

theme of power. The model of learning that is a corollary of a top-down preoccupation

with managerial control is one that minimizes the importance of reflexivity and

collegiality and neglects the importance of critical reflection about the challenges of the

Churchs context and the time, space and risk this entails.

3. The natur e of ideology and its operation

The social construct of managerialism is almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy:

people seem to have little choice but to subscribe to the belief that more and better

management is necessary and desirable, then somehow or other it becomes a necessary

condition for Church thinking and practice. If everyone believes that buying into

managerialism is the way you have to formulate ones action as a Christian leader, then it

predetermines the outcome.

The primary focus of the discussion so far has not been about managerialismper

se, but about managerialism within the Church The Church probably had a propensity to

embrace an ideology like managerialism because of its hierarchical, top-down structure.

Yet the reality for church leaders at the local level is that despite many centrally

generated rules and sets of guidance (which seem to shift constantly), there is also

substantial discretion - and what will inform the ways that discretion is exercised, and the

extent to which these enshrine Kingdom values, are factors that will include past

experience, existing resources (minister and people), cultural belief systems (history) and

a sense of self-confidence in the clergys own abilities and theological understandings.58

Given the complexity and variety of church life it is almost inevitable that the

kinds of centrally-generated models of managerial decision making and strategic

planning that followed Turnbull tend to come out looking like a standardized product off


21/33

21

an assembly line, because the wider organizational context conspires to make it that way.

Managerialism in this sense represents a certain dogma - and to do anything which is

seen to depart from its orthodoxy requires one to able to step outside the mould, to

deviate, to be deviant. There is a paradox here because the Kingdom that Jesus speaks of

may be seen as possessing certain identifiable features that were and are always

subversive of conventional (secular) values. The upside-down nature of the Kingdom of

God will always tend to pull the rug out from under those who neglect the Kingdom in

preference for maintaining the institution. The church (ekklesia) like its Head, Jesus

Christ, is to be like the grain of wheat that dies to itself so that it may bear kingdom

fruit.59

This is essentially an organic model that is so very different from the mechanistic

ones that have been described. Managerialism does not help much in the business of

dying! Yet it has become so entrenched in public life and unconsciously assimilated intothe Churchs thinking about survival that challenging it is now intrinsically problematic.

However, an enormous amount of local, grass roots clerical discretion still remains

despite the reduction in freehold incumbencies!

Part of the difficulty with such a seemingly wholehearted embrace of

managerialism within Church structures is that this may have little to do with a consciousdesire to establish its regime. But, as above, it has become so ingrained in UK culture that

people have profound difficulty stepping outside its totality to argue that there might be

elements that need to be rethought. It perhaps does not help that the centralized structures

of the Church are very rule-bound - and managerialism as a modus operandi ironically

fits the organizational predilection towards bureaucratic behaviour and control. And this

is a huge irony: that a perceived solution to the traditional bureaucratic malaise ends up

manifesting the very characteristics of the system it is meant to be challenging.

This is the point at which it is important to explore a little more closely how it is

exactly that managerialist ideas tend to secure the commitment of senior decision-makers

within the Church.

58 C.f. Giddens 1984 notion of knowledgeable agents59 John 12:24.


22/33

22

Managerialisms religious dimensions

Pattison and Paton contend that the popularity of managerialism as a body of

ideas may be explained by its success in having acquired the characteristics of a secular

religion:

We can better understand this popularity by recognizing the religious aspects in managementthinking and practice. These include striking parallels with evangelical and fundamentalist styles

of Christianity, the claim to provide moral guidance and a commitment to values, and theprovision of a way or path to self-improvement. Above all, because the effectiveness of ideas andpractices is notoriously hard to demonstrate, management has to be a faith. Acknowledging this is(emphatically) not to criticize management, but it does cast management assertions in a different

light, and raises new questions for scholars and practitioners.60

They are careful not to claim that this conception of management-as-religion

encompasses the management beliefs of all managers, all the time, rather that it

illuminates much management thinking and activity. Neither do they offer particularly

new insights.61

But what is useful about hypothesizing managements religious

dimensions as a way of explaining why managerialism as a system of belief persists

within Church, is that these dimensions are increasingly being regarded as essentially part

of the clerics ecclesiastical responsibilities: that management itself purports to offer

meaning, purpose and direction in an otherwise threatening and uncertain organizational

world.

The whole of their radical critique is (and is meant to be) iconoclastic in tone and

is presented as somewhat of a caricature. But whilst such a caricature demonstrates how

easy it is to go overboard with religious symmetry, that management has been accorded a

particular authority and legitimacy in current assumptions about the needs of UK

churches serves to underscore the validity of their insights. Pattison and Patons short

article provides a useful springboard for identifying at least two religious dimensions of

management:

60 1999. For a more substantial working of the argument, see Pattison 1997.61 March (1988) drew attention to the symbolic dimensions of decision making some years ago. Similarly

Cleverly (1971) showed how an anthropological treatment of ritual and magic can help to debunkmanagerial pretensions, and Anthony (e.g. 1990) has provided several thought-provoking critiques ofmanagement faith and faddism.


23/33

23

1. The importance of dwindling congregations placing their trust in bettermanagement to keep their Church afloat

Management allows the Christian minister to be seen to be doing the right thing

in the face of manifold pressures and complications of public organizational life. Good

practice guidelines, codes of conduct and checklists on areas like strategic planning,

marketing and even customer satisfaction are endlessly promulgated.

2. Management provides meaning and purpose amidst perplexing uncertainty

The faith content of management has striking similarities with religious faith

because it is characterized by a forward-looking optimism. It contains elements oftechno-rational instrumentality: it breaks problems down into soluble goals and targets.

The aspiration to economy, efficiency and effectiveness within the Church is

central to the faith of the managers. These rediscovered values are a striking feature of

modern management thinking. Peters and Waterman wax lyrical in their claim that so

much of excellence in performance has to do with peoples being motivated by

compelling, simple - even beautiful - values.62 They suggest that good managers make

meanings for people, as well as money,63 and they argue instead of brain games in

sterile ivory towers, managements job is shaping values through coaching and

evangelism in this field - with the worker and in support of the cherished product.64

However, the grounds for clergy-as-managers optimism and faith in the value of

their own enterprise and its future beneficial effects, particularly in terms of more vibrant

and growing churches, is seriously open to question. After all is this not Gods mission?

in which we are participants, and is God not the evangelist?

62 Peters and Waterman 1982: 37.63ibid. p.29, my emphasis.64ibid. p. xxv.


24/33

24

Qualifications for Church leadership: corporate success or spiritual competence?

If the preceding analysis of the Churchs contemporary predicament is anywhere

near correct, the Church today not only faces some hard challenges, but is also presented

with some incredible opportunities. On the one hand is the inescapable reality that,

throughout the Western world, the Church as we know it is in decline.65

On the other

hand is the incontrovertible fact that this is a time in which the overt search for spiritual

meaning has never been more intense than it is now. All the change factors combine to

suggest that there will be no one simple and universally applicable way in which the

Church may be reshaped to face the challenges of a changing culture. There will be

different solutions for different circumstances, and even multiple relevant solutions fordifferent circumstances. Yet at a time when culture is more openly diverse than it has

been, for the most part the ways of being church and their institutional expression seem to

match the concerns of only a certain kind of person.66 Drane identifies at least seven

distinct groups to whom the Church will need to relate if it is to fulfill its evangelistic

mandate: the desperate poor; the hedonists; the traditionalists; the spiritual searchers; the

corporate achievers; the secularists; and the apathetic. And he argues that, perhaps for far

too long, ordained and lay Christian leaders have been appointed not for their spiritual

competence, but for the image that they seek to project in the corporate world:

Not only have they sometimes used the church in order to enhance their status in that world, butthey have also brought the philosophy of the corporate enterprise into the churchto bring theircongregational life into line with the latest management techniques from the world of business. 67

Furthermore, when they are present in any numbers, the corporate achievers, together

with the traditionalists and perhaps some of the apathetic (at least around the fringes

of church activity) constitute the majority of nominal Christians. These are people who

belong, but with no significant level of commitment such that, as in the rest of their life,

their church connections have little meaning beyond themselves.68

65 Although in the English churches, the numbers of older people attending church actually increased in theperiod from 1989 to 1998, in a way that roughly corresponded to the rising numbers of older people in the

general population. Although this has been seen by some as an encouraging sign (e.g. Brierley 1999: 0.3-0.4), it hardly addresses the issue of what kind of church is to be handed on to generations that will follow.66 See Hoge et al1994.67 Drane 2000: 75.68 Gibbs 1994.


25/33

25

The solution: marketable church growth models?

Just about every recent development in evangelism seems to have had as its target

the traditionalists and achievers. For example, the much publicized Willow Creek model

of seeker services arguably trades on the individualism, privatism and self-interest of

these people, by offering them a context in which they can explore aspects of Christian

faith in the same way as they might seek out information about a business competitor, by

attending trade promotions or presentations in an anonymous capacity, and then

retreating to the privacy of their own inner lives in order to assess what they have

learned69. The Alpha Course appeals to the need of such people to categorize everything

and provides them with a theology of simple cause and effect whose outcome can be

catalogued in much the same way as yearly profits may be predicted on a balance sheet,

even down to being able to tell in advance on which week of the course they can be

expected to receive the Holy Spirit, or receive healing. The previously mentioned

purpose-driven church, popularized as a result of the success of Rick Warren and his

Saddleback Community Church, provides the kind of atmosphere within which the

upwardly mobile high achievers would feel at home, because much of the thinking

behind it came from the world of business in the first place.70

These examples are cited not for the purpose of denigrating them (there is no

denying they have been hugely influential), but rather to illustrate how closely some

notions of church growth and mission are associated with the kind of organizational

thinking that inheres in the wider society that would seek to universalize a managerialist

approach and cater to the apparent needs of certain groups at the expense of others.

Conclusions: So who serves to benefi t from manageri ali sm s power as a bel ief system?

It is a sociological truism that religious and theological ideas often gain popularity

when the social order is under threat. Pattison and Paton express this is the following

way: prophets with answers based on certain revelation and personal charisma are

sought and found to fill in the anomic gaps in the superstructure of meaning and

69 Drane 2000: 80-81.


26/33

26

purpose. But the discussion in this essay has indicated that, as far as the management of

church decline is concerned, there are no certainties; that talk of such verities is fictitious.

If it is the case that management thinking and practice have, at least to an extent, become

an alternative field of religious belief and activity, a cleric-as-managers faith has to be

strong enough to accommodate doubt and embrace uncertainty, and his/her conduct able

to handle paradox, which is the antithesis of any fundamentalist certainty. Moreover, it

makes it difficult to be as unbending, dogmatic and manipulative as managerialism

implies leaders need to be in order to succeed.

In secular organizational life, managerialism is a convenient construct for

politicians in that it enables them to abdicate responsibility for political choices.71

But in

terms of its application to the institutional Church it is in danger of creating inordinate,

unrealistic and unjust expectations for struggling clergy. This has implications for

theological training. If managerialism is going to be presented as the required faith, then

this will have certain consequences. But in recognizing that managerialism does not

necessarily deliver as a viable solution to the Churchs difficulties because it is unable to

do so, we see ideology being substituted both for good organizational theory and good

theology. Arguably what it requires is a healthy degree of non-conformity in order toseriously challenge aspects of managerialism and their deleterious impact on church life.

Undoubtedly this challenge to the established orthodoxy is happening.

Drawing on the writing of the philosopher Alisdair MacIntyre, for example, J.

Roberts argues that manipulative techniques cannot work because of the endemic

unpredictability of social life and, hence, the inadequacy of the eclectic mix of bits of

social science knowledge upon which they are based. Technical managerial competence

can (in actuality) achieve very little control. The only effective control is a morality and

spirituality that derive from Christian discipleship:

Such moral forms of control will not be realized merely by insisting that staff recognize that theirinterests are bound up with the (organization) as a whole, whilst in their immediate practice,

70Ibid.71 A classic and much publicized example of this occurred in October 1995 about who was really

responsible for the failings of the UK Prison Service at the time: Derek Lewis, Head of the Prison Service andmanager, or Michael Howard, then Conservative Home Secretary and policy maker who argued that that, asmanager, Lewis was to be held personally culpable.


27/33

27

through coercion or manipulation, managers seek to deny or avoid this interdependence. Insteadwhat is required is a form ofpractice in which there is a mutual recognition of one another as

interdependent subjects; each recognizing his or her dependence on others actions, whilst at the

same time acknowledging the freedom of action of others.72

Drawing on his own research, Roberts argues that managers and management

writers are mistaken if they believe that their work is a morally neutral activity. Rather it

is the interdependence of self-conscious subjects that is, for him, the moral basis or

condition of all social life. This insight, developed from Habermas,73 is denied or ignored

by purely technical versions of management practice which, one suspects will continue to

play a pivotal role so long as they help to create and recreate a society where morality

becomes indistinguishable from the quest for an organizations survival.

74

Clergy, byimplication, are not salespersons, and the gospel is not a product to be bought and sold.

According to Drane, the beginning of all effective evangelism will be a recognition that

this is Gods world and because of that we can always expect to find God at work.75

In

other words, mission is a matter of recognizing what God is already doing (the Missio

Dei) not trying to contrive it. Moreover, the struggle to be human, spiritual and Christian

is part of the package of discipleship: following Christ should not be regarded as a mere

leisure activity, but a radical, transforming lifestyle commitment. If the Church offers

only the same things as the rationalized, mechanistic world of work:

Why should people who are oppressed elsewhere in their lives expect to find resolution byjoining a church?76

It needs to be reaffirmed that the gospel always brings a radical challenge to

change both people and structures. But the kinds of organizational approaches that have

been the focus of this discussion, no doubt born of the crisis of persistent membership

and financial deterioration, have certainly imitated the worse kinds of commercial model

in terms of the resultant disillusionment, lack of communication at grass-roots level, and

abuse of centralized power. Sadly, we are told that the Church of England is presently

72 Roberts, 1984: 301.73 E.g. 1971.74 Jackall 1988: 204.75 Drane 2000: 1076Ibid. 6, 27.


28/33

28

torn between two polarized models of collegiality the PLC with a board and chief

executive, and the medieval court with prelates presiding as feudal Lords over priests and

laity.77

The Churchs apparent over-identification with contemporary managerial theories

and methods is likely to be a threat to its identity, distinctiveness and the power of its

message. If Christianity becomes too assimilated to business culture, importing its

techniques and implicitly also its ideology, then its capacity to be prophetic and critical in

society is likely to be diminished:

Many individuals in contemporary society have been crushed and oppressed by managerialismand its negative effects. It is not unreasonable to hope that Christian groups might offer them

critical support and vision of something different, even something better, instead of more of thesame.78

Ultimately managerialism is about human mechanisms of control. The gospel is

about the power and grace of God who is against such human constructs.79 The church

will never survive by its own controlling of events. The New Testament doctrine of

stewardship (oikonomia - economy) is strong on dependency on God, not human

manipulation, and is a response of gratitude to a generous God who provides all we need.

Indeed the cross itself is a paradigm which subverts all the human powers and

principalities which stand in opposition to the kingly rule of the Most High.80 The way

for an institutional Church to reach resurrection is to drink the cup of suffering and go to

Calvary and let God give it new life. That new life will not be an institutional carry-over

from the old but will be new wineskins for the new wine; not a hierarchy of orders, but a

community of love; not a legal set of canons but a house of grace.81

77 Although Anglicanism abroad appears to have done better with more democratic and accountable

systems of governance.78 Pattison 1997: 165.79 See 1 Cor. 1:18-25 for Pauls argument about (the cross of) Christ as the power and wisdom of God.80 See Tomlin 1999.81 See Henri NouwensReaching Out(1998)


29/33

29

Bibliography

Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (1996) Making Sense of Management: A CriticalIntroduction London: Sage

Anthony, P.D. (1990) The paradox of the management of cultureor he who leads is lost,PersonnelReview, 19(4):3-8

The Archbishops Council (2004) Mission-Shaped ChurchLondon: Church House Publishing

Barna, G. (1992) Church Marketing.Ventura,

Ca.:Regal Books

Booker, M. & Ireland, M. (2003) Evangelism Which Way Now?London: Church House Publishing

Brierley (1999) Ed. UK Christian Handbook Religious TrendsNo. 2: 2000.2001

London: Christian Research

Brueggemann, W. (2002) Hope for the World: Mission in a GlobalContext. Westminster: John Knox

Cleverly, G. (1971) Managers and Magic.London: Longman

de Botton, A. (2004) Status Anxiety. Hamish Hamilton

Drane, J. (2000) The McDonaldization of the Church:Spirituality, Creativity and the Future of the

Church

London: Darton, Longman and Todd.

du Gay, P. (1994) Colossal immodesties and hopefulmonsters: pluralism and organisationalconduct. Organization, 1(1):125-128

du Gay, P. (2000) Bureaucracy: Weber, Organization, EthicsLondon: Sage


30/33

30

Dunleavy, P. and Hood, C. (1994) From old Public Administration to NewPublic Management,Public Money andManagement(July/Sept.): 9-16

Clarke, J. and Newman, J. (1997) The Managerial State: Power, Politics andIdeology in the Remaking of Social Welfare

London: Sage

Davis, K. (1986) Can Mission and the Church be Integratedin P. Turner and F.Sugeno (eds.) CrossroadsAre For Meeting: Essays on the Mission and

Common Life of the Church in a Global

Society Sewanee: SPCK

Drane, J. (2000) The McDonaldization of the ChurchLondon: Darton, Longman and Todd

Etzioni, A. (1970) Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall

Evans, G.R. and Percy, M. Eds. (2000) Managing the Church? Order andOrganization in a Secular AgeSheffield: Sheffield Academic Press

Finney, J. (2004) Emerging Evangelism

London: Darton, Longman and Todd

Gibbs, E. (1994) In Name Only: Tackling the Problem ofNominal Christianity

Wheaton: Bridgepoint

Gibbs, E. & Coffey, I. (2001) Church Next: Quantum Changes inChristian Ministry

Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press

Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society: outline of thetheory of structuration.

Cambridge: The Polity Press

Gill, R. and Burke, D. (1996) Strategic Church LeadershipLondon: SPCK


31/33

31

Gray A. and Jenkins, B. (1993) Markets, Managers and the Public Servicesin Taylor-Gooby and Lwason eds.Marketsand Managers: New Issues in the Delivery

of Welfare, Buckingham: Open UniversityPress

Hales, C. (1993) Managing Through Organization.London: Routledge

Habermas, J. (1971) Towards a Rational Society,London: Heinemann

Handy, C. (1994) The Empty Raincoat: Making Sense of theFuture. London: Hutchinson

Handy, C. (2005) Understanding OrganizationsHarmondsworth: Penguin

Hoge, D. Johnson, B & Luidens, D. (1994) Vanishing Boundaries: the Religion ofMainline Protestant Baby-Boomers

Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press

Huczynski, A.A. & Buchanan, D. (2003) Organizational Behaviour: As Introductory

Text. London: FT Prentice-Hall

Hughes, G. ed. (1998) Imagining Welfare Futures. London:Routledge/Open University

Isaac-Henry, K. (1999) Strategic management in the publicservices in S. Horton and D. Farnham(1999) eds.Public Management in Britain.London: Macmillan

Jackall, R. (1988) Moral Mazes: The World of CorporateManagers. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Jackson, B. (2002) Hope for the Church: Contemporary

Strategies for Growth. London: ChurchHouse Publishing

Lewis, J., Clark, D., & Morgan, D. (1992) Whom God Hath Joined TogetherLondon: Routledge

MacIntyre, A. (1981) After Virtue

London: Duckworth


32/33

32

March, J.G. (1988) Decision Making in Organisations.

Oxford: Blackwell.

Morgan, G. (1997) Images of Organisation. London: Sage(originally published 1986)

Mullins, L.J. (2004) Management and Organisational BehaviourLondon: FT Prentice-Hall

Newman, J. (1988) Managerialism and Social Welfare inHughes, G and Lewis, G 1998 UnsettlingWelfare: the Reconstruction of Social

Policy. London: Routledge

Newman, J. and Clarke, J. (1994) Going about our business? Themanagerialization of lublic service in J.Clarke and E. McLaughlin eds.ManagingSocial Policy. London: Sage

Nouwen, H. (1998) Reaching Out: The Three Movements of theSpiritual Life

Grand Rapids, Mi.: Zondervan

Pattison, S. (1997) The Faith of the Managers: WhenManagement BecomesReligion. London:Cassell

Pattison, S. and Paton, R. (1998) The religious dimensions of managementbeliefs.Iconoclastic Papers. Vol 1: Issue 1http://www.solent.ac.uk/sbs/iconoclastic

Peters, T.J. (1988) Thriving on Chaos: handbook for aManagement Revolution.

London: Macmillan

Peters, T.J and Waterman, (1982) In Search of Excellence: Lessons fromAmericas Best-Run Companies.

New York: Harper and Row

Pollitt, C. (1990) Managerialism and the Public Services: theAnglo-American Experience.

Oxford: Basil Blackwell

Pollitt, C. (1993) Managerialism and the Public Services.


33/33

2nd Edn. Oxford: Basil Blackwell

Pollitt, C. (1995) Justification by works or by faith?Evaluating the new public management,Evaluation, Vol.1, No.2 (October) pp. 133-154.

Pollitt, C., Birchall, J. (1998) Decentralising Public Service ManagementPutnam, K London: Macmillan

Ritzer, G. (1995) The McDonaldization of Society: AnInvestigation into the Changing Character

of Contemporary Social Life

Pine Forge: Sage Publications

Roberts, J. (1996) Management education and the limits oftechnical rationality: the conditions andconsequences of management practice, inFrench, R. and Grey, C. eds. (1996)Rethinking Management Education.London: Sage

Roberts, R. (1996) An Executive Church in New Directions

January 1996. Trushare Files No. 8

Stuart, R. and Critchley, W. (1995) Surviving trauma in the workplace,AMED/Sundridge Park ManagementCentre Research and Development

Conference, August 31 - September 1, 1995

Surin, K. ed. (1989) Christ, Ethics and Tragedy: Essays inhonour of Donald MacKinnon

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Tomlin, G. (1999) The Power of the Cross: Theology and the

Death of Christ in Paul, Luther and Pascal.Carlisle: Paternoster Publishing

Ward, P. (2002) Liquid ChurchCarlisle: Paternoster Press

Warren, R. (1995) The Purpose-Driven ChurchGrand Rapids, Mi.: Zondervan

Documents

Davies 2012 - A Critical Examination of Managerialism