Rumbling on performativity_Frits Simon

The narrative which is presented in this chapter is about me. It was written between
October 2010 and July 2011. As presented here it is the fourth version of the narrative.
In writing the narrative I figured out and described what my taken for granted assumptions
are. Trying to get hold on one’s own taken for granted ideas is adamant
when starting radically reflexive research.
My taken for granted assumptions - or if you like values and beliefs, basic convictions
or orientations - have implications for the way I experience working in the UAS. These
assumptions have consequences for how I interpret possible shortcomings or problems
in my organization. Or even more accurate: in a certain way they produce what
I experience as a problem. What I problematize may be not the same or no problem at
all for someone else.
My experiences, the way I interpret my life, my work and my fellow human beings are
described. I elaborate on how my assumptions evolved during my life (see 3.1. up till
3.5). By acknowledging them I underline the radically reflexive stance taken. However,
as indicated before the description cannot be exhaustive and accurate, because ‘to
know thyself’ is always a selective temporarily reconstruction. To connect my taken
for granted assumptions with my initial orientation on my research I offer a brief
sketch of the way I interpret the policy of the UAS (see 3.6).
In this chapter the reader can also observe how I start to understand a complex
responsive process-approach related to my self-reflection. My appropriation of a
complex responsive process-approach still is rather analytically, but starts to weaken
my taken for granted assumptions (see 3.7). In the short reflection at the end of this
chapter I will come back to that (see 3.8). In this reflection I try to get hold on how my
thoughts moved during the first phase of my research. In chapter 7 all my movements
of thought will be brought together, flowing into some synoptic reflections and conclusions
on my research.
3.1 My paradigm in a nutshell: about default assumptions
In 2010 I was convinced that the ongoing engagement of as many as possible members
of staff and offices is necessary to be a UAS which is capable in being part of and
adapting to new developments. This engagement is indispensable if routines of members
of staff are perceived as in need of change, especially if far reaching changes are
foreseen. However, you should be aware that in situations of change someone’s identity
is at stake because an existing identity is set to music by its routines.
In my view engagement has to do with feelings of identification and responsibility for
one’s organization. Therefore bringing about enduring change should be regarded as a
complicated and delicate phenomenon. In my experience one of the main reasons for
66