Volume 12, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Foucault’s notion of governmentality has been the focus of much research. However, little work provides an account of how governmentality is enacted as social practice. Using transcripts of naturally-occurring talk taken from a face-to-face coaching session and text taken from a career consultant’s website as data, the purpose of this paper is to make visible, and thus analysable, the way in which governmentality and the regulation of identities are enacted. In order to do this, we use critical discursive psychology as a method. Findings indicate that the coach is talked into being as an expert who diagnoses a ‘problem’ concerning the coachee’s career path and provides advice on how to solve the ‘problem’. This advice, drawing on wider social Discourses of happiness at work, regulates the identity of the coachee by prescribing acceptable ways of thinking about, and acting on, the self and so enacts governmentality.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Alvesson, Mats and Hugh Willmott
    2002 “Identity Regulation as Organizational Control: Producing the Appropriate Individual”. Journal of Management Studies39(5): 619–644. 10.1111/1467‑6486.00305
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00305 [Google Scholar]
  2. Benwell, Bethan and Elizabeth Stokoe
    2010 “Analysing Identity in Interaction: Contrasting Discourse, Genealogical, Narrative and Conversation Analysis”. InThe Sage Handbook of Identities, ed. byMargaret Wetherell and Chandra Talpade Mohanty, 82–101. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781446200889.n6
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200889.n6 [Google Scholar]
  3. Binkley, Sam
    2011 “Happiness, Positive Psychology and the Program of Neoliberal Governmentality”. Subjectivity4(4): 371–394. 10.1057/sub.2011.16
    https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2011.16 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2014Happiness as Enterprise: An Essay on Neoliberal Life. New York: Suny Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bondi, Liz
    2005 “Working the Spaces of Neoliberal Subjectivity: Psychotherapeutic Technologies, Professionalisation and Counselling”. Antipode37(3): 497–514. 10.1111/j.0066‑4812.2005.00508.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0066-4812.2005.00508.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Bouton, Katie
    (2015, July17). “Recruiting for Cultural Fit”. Harvard Business Review (online). https://hbr.org/2015/07/recruiting-for-cultural-fit
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Brownlie, Julie
    2004 “Tasting the Witches’ Brew: Foucault and Therapeutic Practices”. Sociology38(3): 515–532. 10.1177/0038038504043216
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038504043216 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bucholtz, Mary and Kira Hall
    2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies7(4–5): 585–614. 10.1177/1461445605054407
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054407 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cabanas, Edgar, and Eva Illouz
    2019Manufacturing Happy Citizens: How the Science and Industry of Happiness Control our Lives. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cameron, Kim and Robert Quinn
    1999Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on The Competing Values Framework. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Clifton, Jonathan, Dorien Van De Mieroop, and Prachee Sehgal
    2018 “The Multimodal Enactment of Deontic and Epistemic Authority in Indian Meetings”. Pragmatics28(3): 333–360. 10.1075/prag.17011.cli
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17011.cli [Google Scholar]
  12. Drew, Paul
    1991 “Asymmetries of knowledge in conversational interactions”. InAsymmetries in Dialogue, ed. byIvanna Markovà and Klaus Foppa, 29–48. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Du Gay, Paul
    1996Consumption and Identity at Work. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781446221945
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221945 [Google Scholar]
  14. Edley, Nigel
    2001 “Analysing Masculinity: Interpretative Repertoires, Ideological Dilemmas and Subject Positions.” InDiscourse as Data: A Guide for Analysis, ed. byMargaret Wetherell, Stephanie Taylor, and Simeon Yates, 189–228. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Edley, Nigel and Margaret Wetherell
    1997 “Jockeying for Position: The Construction of Masculine Identities.” Discourse & Society8(2): 203–217. 10.1177/0957926597008002004
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008002004 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fogde, Marinette
    2011 “Governing through career coaching: negotiations of self-marketing.” Organization18(1): 65–82. 10.1177/1350508410375644
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508410375644 [Google Scholar]
  17. Foucault, Michel
    1977Discipline and Punish. The Birth of the Prison. London. Allen Lane.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 1978 “Politics and the Study of Discourse”. Ideology and Consciousness3: 7–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 1988 “Technologies of the Self” inTechnologies of the Self, ed. byLuther H. Martin, Huck Gutman, and Patrick H. Hutton, 16–49. London: Tavistock.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 1991 “Governmentality”. InThe Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, ed. byGraham Burchell, ‎Colin Gordon, and Peter Miller, 87–104. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1997Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth. Essential Works of Michel Foucault, 1954–1984. Vol.1. New York: New Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Garfinkel, Harold
    1967Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Gee, James Paul
    1999An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2015 “Discourse, Small d, Big D.” InThe International Encyclopaedia of Language and Social Interaction, ed. byKaren Tracey1–5. New York: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi016
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi016 [Google Scholar]
  25. Goffman, Erving
    1981Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Hacking, Ian
    2004 “Between Michel Foucault and Erving Goffman: between Discourse in the Abstract and Face-to-Face Interaction”. Economy and Society33(3): 277–302. 10.1080/0308514042000225671
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0308514042000225671 [Google Scholar]
  27. Heritage, John
    2012 “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge”. Research on Language & Social Interaction45(1): 30–52. 10.1080/08351813.2012.646685
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646685 [Google Scholar]
  28. Heritage, John and Rodney Watson
    1979 “Formulations as Conversational Objects”. InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. byGeorge Psathas, 123–162. New York: Irvington.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hodges, Ian
    2002 “Moving Beyond Words: Therapeutic Discourse and Ethical Problematization.” Discourse Studies4(4): 455–479. 10.1177/14614456020040040401
    https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456020040040401 [Google Scholar]
  30. Landmark, Anne Marie Dalby, Pål Gulbrandsen, and Jan Svennevig
    2015 “Whose decision? Negotiating epistemic and deontic rights in medical treatment decisions.” Journal of Pragmatics78: 54–69. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.007 [Google Scholar]
  31. Layard, Richard
    2005Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. London: Allen Lane.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Levinson, Stephen
    1992 “Activity Types and Language”. InTalk at Work. Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. byPaul Drew and John Heritage, 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Martinussen, Maree and Margaret Wetherell
    2019 “Affect, Practice and Contingency: Critical Discursive Psychology and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick”. Subjectivity12(2): 101–116. 10.1057/s41286‑019‑00071‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1057/s41286-019-00071-y [Google Scholar]
  34. Miller, Gale and Kathryn Fox
    2004 “Building Bridges. The Possibility of Analytic Dialogue Between Ethnography, Conversation Analysis and Foucault”. InQualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice, ed. byDavid Silverman35–55. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984a “Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/ dispreferred turn shaped”. InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 1984b “Giving a source or basis: The practice in conversation of telling ‘how I know’.” Journal of Pragmatics8(5–6): 607–625. 10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90002‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90002-X [Google Scholar]
  37. Potter, Jonathan and Margaret Wetherell
    1987Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Raffnsøe, Sverre, Andrea Mennicken, and Peter Miller
    2019 “The Foucault Effect in Organization Studies.” Organization Studies40(2): 155–182. 10.1177/0170840617745110
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617745110 [Google Scholar]
  39. Rampton, Ben
    2014 “Gumperz and Governmentality in the 21st Century: Interaction, Power and Subjectivity.” Tilburg Papers in Cultural Studies. Available at: https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/sites/default/files/download/TPCS_117_Rampton2.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2000 “The Voice of Authority: The Local Accomplishment of Authoritative Discourse in Live News Broadcasts.” Discourse Studies2(3): 354–379. 10.1177/1461445600002003005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445600002003005 [Google Scholar]
  41. Reynolds, Jill and Margaret Wetherell
    2003 “The Discursive Climate of Singleness: The Consequences for Women’s Negotiation of a Single Identity.” Feminism & Psychology13(4): 489–510. 10.1177/09593535030134014
    https://doi.org/10.1177/09593535030134014 [Google Scholar]
  42. Rose, Nikolas
    1990Governing the Soul. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 1998Inventing Ourselves. Psychology, Power and Personhood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Rose, Nikolas, Pat O’Malley, and Mariana Valverde
    2006 “Governmentality”. Annual Review of Law and Social Science2(1): 83–104. 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105900
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105900 [Google Scholar]
  45. Schegloff, Emanuel
    1997 “Whose text? Whose context?” Discourse & Society8(2): 165–187. 10.1177/0957926597008002002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008002002 [Google Scholar]
  46. Seligman, Martin
    2011Flourish: A New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being – and How to Achieve them. New York: Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Stevanovic, Melisa and Anssi Peräkylä
    2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language & Social Interaction45(3): 297–321. 10.1080/08351813.2012.699260
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260 [Google Scholar]
  48. Taylor, Stephanie
    2015 “Discursive and Psychosocial? Theorising a Complex Contemporary Subject.” Qualitative Research in Psychology12(1): 8–21. 10.1080/14780887.2014.958340
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.958340 [Google Scholar]
  49. Wetherell, Margaret
    1998 “Positioning and Interpretative Repertoires: Conversation Analysis and Post-Structuralism in Dialogue.” Discourse & Society9(3): 387–412. 10.1177/0957926598009003005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926598009003005 [Google Scholar]
  50. Wetherell, Margaret and Nigel Edley
    2009 “Masculinity Manoeuvres: Critical Discourse Psychology and the Analysis of Identity Strategies”. InThe New Sociolinguistics Reader, ed. byNikolas Coupland and Adam Jaworski, 201–214. Basingstoke: Palgrave. 10.1007/978‑1‑349‑92299‑4_14
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-92299-4_14 [Google Scholar]
  51. Wiggins, Sally and Jonathan Potter
    2017 “Discursive Psychology”. InThe Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology, ed. byCarla Willig and Wendy Stainton Rogers, 93–110. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781526405555.n6
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n6 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error